Has Zelda painted itself into a corner with Breath of the Wild?

[Casual Shinji]

So Breath of the Wild has been out for a while now and, being the first true open-world Zelda, has been met with nearly universal acclaim. And rightfully so.

But now that the hype and praise have settled I've kind of been wondering where the franchise can actually go from here.

The main reason BotW was so lauded was because of how it handled its open-world. Obviously there are dissenting opinions, but the majority, myself included, fell in love with how the gameworld made you want to go explore. Not to find loot or secrets, but just for the sake of it.

Now that the audience has tasted this type of Zelda gameplay and loved it, can Nintendo go back to making a linear Zelda? Will the audience accept that, or will it feel like a massive downgrade from the freedom that BotW provided? And if it doesn't go back to being linear, will it just be another open-world Zelda set in Hyrule? I mean, the concept behind BotW's open-world seemed to be exploring the wilds of a Hyrule that's mostly bereft of civilisation due to 100 years of Calamity Ganon -- What would the gimmick of another open-world Hyrule have to be to not feel immediately trite?

I ask this because Nintendo tends to not retread the same gameworld concept, certainly not when it involves Zelda. There are exceptions I'm sure, but usually they go for a new type of gameworld with each new installment.

So, has Breath of the Wild put the franchise in an awkward position, and where do you think it can actually go from here?

 

[Yoshi178]

Breath of the Wild is a fantastic game. but it's nowhere near the best Zelda. i prefer the previous more story driven approch provided by previous 3D Zeldas like Wind Waker, OoT and Twilight Princess.

Nintendo will probably want to keep it open world going forward though.

 

[DrownedAmmet]

So Breath of the Wild has been out for a while now and, being the first true open-world Zelda, has been met with nearly universal acclaim. And rightfully so.

But now that the hype and praise have settled I've kind of been wondering where the franchise can actually go from here.

The main reason BotW was so lauded was because of how it handled its open-world. Obviously there are dissenting opinions, but the majority, myself included, fell in love with how the gameworld made you want to go explore. Not to find loot or secrets, but just for the sake of it.

Now that the audience has tasted this type of Zelda gameplay and loved it, can Nintendo go back to making a linear Zelda? Will the audience accept that, or will it feel like a massive downgrade from the freedom that BotW provided? And if it doesn't go back to being linear, will it just be another open-world Zelda set in Hyrule? I mean, the concept behind BotW's open-world seemed to be exploring the wilds of a Hyrule that's mostly bereft of civilisation due to 100 years of Calamity Ganon -- What would the gimmick of another open-world Hyrule have to be to not feel immediately trite?

I ask this because Nintendo tends to not retread the same gameworld concept, certainly not when it involves Zelda. There are exceptions I'm sure, but usually they go for a new type of gameworld with each new installment.

So, has Breath of the Wild put the franchise in an awkward position, and where do you think it can actually go from here?

One thing I would like to see in the next Zelda, if they do stay open world, is the shrines and temples being a part of the world, as opposed to separate instances. I loved the shrines in BotW but they felt a little disjointed from the main game. Plus it got kind of boring when they had the same interior and had the same enemies and similar puzzles all over the map. Doing a shrine in a desert was the same as doing a shrine on a snowy mountain, and they would have fit in better if they were more distinct
Honestly I just want them to plop down the temples from Ocarina of Time into parts of the open world. (I think that might have been the original plan but ran out of time)

 

[Casual Shinji]

Breath of the Wild is a fantastic game. but it's nowhere near the best Zelda. i prefer the previous more story driven approch provided by previous 3D Zeldas like Wind Waker, OoT and Twilight Princess.

I'd say it's the best Zelda in that it achieved something the previous ones (as well as most if not all other open-world games) didn't. That being the aforementioned exploration. But it falls completely flat in terms of character and narrative. If it had the charisma of Wind Waker or even Twilight Princess I'd be compelled to call it the best game ever made.

Nintendo will probably want to keep it open world going forward though.

Yeah, but how?

Is it just going to be open-world Hyrule again, with the usual Kakariko, Zora, and Gerudo zones? They'd have to come up with some sort of event that throws the lay-out in disarray so that it doesn't feel like the same blimmin' world. Or set it somewhere completely different. Otherwise I feel the next console entry is going to be extremely samey, to the point where it could almost be classified as an expansion pack.

That's kind of the problem with this always being set in Hyrule; Now that it's an open-world, and one that people really love, how can they follow that up without going back to a linear structure and very likely disappointing fans, or making another open-world Hyrule that has the risk of feeling like a carbon copy of BotW's?

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Maybe. Reminds me of how Mario painted itself into a corner with Mario Galaxy. Going by that comparison we'll get a Breath of the Wild 2 followed by several "3D with 2D level layouts" retreads and eventually, hopefully, a Zelda Maker.

 

[09philj]

Where else do you go when there's nowhere left to go? Outer space motherfuckers!

 

[BarkBarker]

Didn't Aonuma say the next Zelda will follow the Breath of The Wild Open world concept at the very least? I swear he did like 5 months ago. Either way, open world design bores me, it's got so much empty land just to get the world large I'd rather a smaller tighter more fundamentally enjoyable map design if anything. Zelda has split itself yet again with the newest entry on the styles of the franchise.

 

[sanquin]

I have no doubt that it will be open world again, considering how popular or at least well liked BotW is. (I personally got it 2 days ago and loving it so far.) I'm guessing they have one of two options.

Option 1:
Another time skip of after Ganon was defeated and civilizations has partially rebuilt again. But the difference this time is that the races have decided to join hands or something and build a new civilization together rather than having their own zones. And, although this has been done to death, maybe the plot will be that someone is trying to revive Ganon, and that will be the big baddy for the next game?

Option 2: A reboot. They keep the open world and general concepts of BotW, but start from scratch again.

 

[Bedinsis]

Maybe. Reminds me of how Mario painted itself into a corner with Mario Galaxy. Going by that comparison we'll get a Breath of the Wild 2 followed by several "3D with 2D level layouts" retreads and eventually, hopefully, a Zelda Maker.

Beat me to the punch.

Well, almost. My major point would be that Odyssey releases soon; whatever form that take would then be similar to whatever form the Legend of Zelda: The Next Major Game takes.

 

[CritialGaming]

So Breath of the Wild has been out for a while now and, being the first true open-world Zelda, has been met with nearly universal acclaim. And rightfully so.

But now that the hype and praise have settled I've kind of been wondering where the franchise can actually go from here.

The main reason BotW was so lauded was because of how it handled its open-world. Obviously there are dissenting opinions, but the majority, myself included, fell in love with how the gameworld made you want to go explore. Not to find loot or secrets, but just for the sake of it.

Now that the audience has tasted this type of Zelda gameplay and loved it, can Nintendo go back to making a linear Zelda? Will the audience accept that, or will it feel like a massive downgrade from the freedom that BotW provided? And if it doesn't go back to being linear, will it just be another open-world Zelda set in Hyrule? I mean, the concept behind BotW's open-world seemed to be exploring the wilds of a Hyrule that's mostly bereft of civilisation due to 100 years of Calamity Ganon -- What would the gimmick of another open-world Hyrule have to be to not feel immediately trite?

I ask this because Nintendo tends to not retread the same gameworld concept, certainly not when it involves Zelda. There are exceptions I'm sure, but usually they go for a new type of gameworld with each new installment.

So, has Breath of the Wild put the franchise in an awkward position, and where do you think it can actually go from here?

There are a lot of things for Zelda to improve on. Especially if they stay with this open-world format.

1. Understand that not everything has to be a puzzle, in a huge world sometimes it is nice to be told about where a few things are. I felt too many of the quests were vague, and many side quests involved figured out a puzzle in the environment to open up the shrine, or treasure or whatever it was. Not to mention the big story scenes were locked behind finding the location in a photo album and returning to that point, which if you aren't familiar with the world or the lore you have no idea where to even begin looking for that stuff.

2. Realisim is nice and all, but there comes a point when you aren't making the game immersive, you are just annoying your players. Weapons breaking far too often, lighting killing you out of nowhere if you have a metal weapon out during the rain, rain making climbing harder/impossible, etc. I'm not saying that having features like this isn't fine, it is. But tone it down a bit. A game this huge doesn't need to be flooded with so much menu management.

3. Entertain different ideas for the series as a whole. Maybe make a Zelda game where you actually play as Zelda, and as the princess and guardian of Hyrule it is up to her to save it (Sheik origin story perhaps?).

4. Bigger/more isn't better. Yes Breath of the Wild is huge, but it doesn't need to be so huge that there are large sections of map where literally nothing or interest or value is there. 900 seeds is too much, and there is no reward for it, tone it down or make it meaningful. I guess that could be said about everything in the game, tone it down or make it meaningful.

 

[Ravenbom]

How could it possibly have painted itself in a corner? I LOVED Breath of the Wild, but if you haven't started it up in a while, or if you've been playing it recently for a good while, you forget that there are a TON of problems with it.


I love how big it is and shrines were great, usually just the right amount of puzzle when I was traveling for 2 weeks earlier this month.
BUT... it's completely flawed in so many ways.

First, the controls are a mess. Who actually used (X) to jump instead of remapping it? (The ONE button you can re-map) If you don't play the game for a week or two you will inevitably throw away your uber sword with that shoulder button and forget how to block.

Second, climbing, even with the climber's bandanna is sssssllllllloooooowwwwww and mostly awful. It's a central skill and unlocking the map is a series of towers which are usually climbing puzzles and it's super unclear how far you can climb or if the climber's bandanna is helping. (Yes, I did all the towers without adding to my stamina meter, but it's one of many very nebulous central systems in the game)

Third, the lack of Temples and with it the environmental (location, not political activist) themes were noticeably missing.

Fourth, the lack of Temples also meant that the larger "ah-ha!" moments that bigger environmental puzzles can provide as you were definitely absent.

Fifth, being given the abilities: bombs, cryonis, magnesis, and stasis right at the beginning and having nearly all puzzles work around these 4 abilities was great... but it also meant that you never have a sense of progression and if you're using a guide or just very intuitive, it kills the Metroidvania progression because you conceivably never have to backtrack.
Personally, I'm glad we didn't get the same tired old tools, but at the same time, I miss having tools that don't take up inventory...

Sixth, inventory. Torches and Korok Leaves and other tools shouldn't take up weapon slots. At least give separate, expandable inventory slots.

Seventh, inventory. There's A LOT of it and the screens are kind of a UI nightmare. If you have a lot of food or ingredients, you can't just move past that page by pressing shoulder buttons as you instinctively would in any other game.

Eighth, crafting. Horizon Zero Dawn had an amazing system where you could craft by bringing up an in-game, in-battle weapon wheel which slowed down time but didn't stop it and lets you see what you can craft and how much of each item you need/have for crafting as well as limits on ammo. It's an amazing in-game system. The crafting system in Zelda is garbage if you hold it side by side.

Ninth, Zelda has often used a dual worlds mechanic (A Link to the Past, Ocarina of Time, Oracle of Ages/Seasons, A Link Between Worlds, Twilight Princess, Minish Cap) is something that is both classic Zelda and something that is absent in Breath of the Wild. (Thankfully so, the world is so big in Breath of the Wild)

Tenth, The VO sucks in 2017. It would have been amazing in 2001, but, in English and North America, it sucks. We wait 3 decades for a mainline Zelda voice-over it's mildly cringe-worthy.

Eleventh, In fact, the writing in general is at the very least, weird and fan-service-y. EVERYONE wants to bone Link. I'm not the only one who noticed this. If I criticize the writing, I'll be told it's the translation and if I criticize the translation (which is what I originally was typing up) I'll be told I need to experience it in Japanese.

Twelfth, I was thinking back on the shrines and realized that while traveling, I did love that each shrine was combat, or cryonis, or stasis, or one other type of puzzle, but every shrine was ONE thing. This hurts the inventory problems. I can deal with weapons breaking, but since I was flying without a guide, I went LONG periods without using weapons and leaving markers on the map that I left weapons behind in chests because I wasn't running into enemies and using up my weapons.
THEN, I went long periods where I was down to my last weapon (before I got the Master Sword) and trying to use bombs to save my last weapon but mostly running past enemies.
Mixing enemies and puzzles instead of always keeping them separate might have promoted a more natural use/break/grab new weapon cycle. I doubt everyone had this problem, since it's an open world, but it was definitely an uneven experience for a big chunk of the game.


This being said I like the game and the first Dark Souls is one of my top 3 games of all time and Dark Souls is DEEPLY flawed and a UI item management nightmare, on top of the fact that confusing menus don't pause the game.
Zelda Breath of the Wild is great, but it has a lot of problems, the biggest being that most of the controls and UI are not at all modernized towards a typical game experience. It's very idiosyncratic in it's game design, for better and worse.

 

[Cycloptomese]

I haven't played a Zelda game in decades, but I'm pretty sure that the last one I played was indeed open world. I believe the original Legend of Zelda was likely the first open world game that I ever played.

 

[Casual Shinji]

snip

snip

I'm not refering to what has room for improvement though. I don't mean BotW is perfect, but that it has placed the franchise in a awkward position of 'Where to now'.

Can it go back to a linear structure now that the last game was so highly praised primarily for its open-world? Or can it continue on with an open-world structure (most likely set in Hyrule again) without feeling like a retread of BotW?

You look at nearly every other open-world franchise and they'll change the setting with each new entry to avoid that retread. Even Ubisoft with all its homogenization knows to do this. If the next Zelda is going to be another open-world game it would have to be set somewhere besides Hyrule. And will Nintendo actually do that, considering how much they like to stick with tradition when it comes to their characters and the worlds they inhabit?

 

[CritialGaming]

snip

snip

I'm not refering to what has room for improvement though. I don't mean BotW is perfect, but that it has placed the franchise in a awkward position of 'Where to now'.

Can it go back to a linear structure now that the last game was so highly praised primarily for its open-world? Or can it continue on with an open-world structure (most likely set in Hyrule again) without feeling like a retread of BotW?

You look at nearly every other open-world franchise and they'll change the setting with each new entry to avoid that retread. Even Ubisoft with all its homogenization knows to do this. If the next Zelda is going to be another open-world game it would have to be set somewhere besides Hyrule. And will Nintendo actually do that, considering how much they like to stick with tradition when it comes to their characters and the worlds they inhabit?

Mario games are always in universe versions of the mushroom kingdom aren't they? It wont matter to Zelda fans, they'll eat up whatever comes next. Hell take that same map and give it a giant rebuild (like add majors cities and shit) and show how life comes back to hyrule after ganon is dealt with. Only to have it get shit on again.

 

[Erttheking]

I doubt it. Wind Waker had a great big open world and they happily went back to the old formula for Twilight Princess. Nintendo is no stranger when it comes to going back to basics, or when trying new things. Hell, they just put Mario in an XCOM style game and Fire Emblem in a Dynasty Warriors game.

 

[Cold Shiny]

Aonuma already said that all subsequent Zelda games will most likely be open world. We don't know how much he meant it, but there you go. I hope they don't totally ditch the more linear style. As awesome as games like BOTW and H:ZD have been, I'm kind of open worlded out.

 

[Saelune]

Zelda was always open world. Really all it did was become more RPG.

 

[CritialGaming]

Hell, they just put Mario in an XCOM style game and Fire Emblem in a Dynasty Warriors game.

I am okay with both of these things. Fire Emblem warriors is sooooooo fucking fun.

 

[Yoshi178]

Hell, they just put Mario in an XCOM style game.

actually that was entirely Ubisoft's idea.

Miyamoto and Nintendo simply approved it.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Mario games are always in universe versions of the mushroom kingdom aren't they?

The setting is the same, but the gameworld usually has a different twist. Mario Sunshine isn't the same gameworld as Galaxy, which isn't the same gameworld as 3D World.

Zelda was always open world. Really all it did was become more RPG.

Not really. I'm not familiar with every Zelda, but despite the world seeming open in certain entries there are blockers forcing you into a linear state of progression. Not so in BotW.

I doubt it. Wind Waker had a great big open world and they happily went back to the old formula for Twilight Princess. Nintendo is no stranger when it comes to going back to basics, or when trying new things. Hell, they just put Mario in an XCOM style game and Fire Emblem in a Dynasty Warriors game.

Breath of the Wild feels like way more of a game changer for the franchise than Wind Waker though. Not to put WW down, because I absolutely love it, but BotW made this world come to life in a way that it really hadn't before. Again, opinions may differ, but that seems to be the consensus.