Support NeoGAF

[S0ULZB0URNE]

Hopefully

 

[Shifty1897]

People also said turn based games were a thing of the past and then Baldur's Gate 3 won GOTY so maybe just refrain from making bombastic statements.

 

[Herr Edgy]

Acting like The Wind Waker or Twilight Princess or even Skyward Sword were an on-rails experience. Both had a (mostly) linear main progression with really well thought out content, but offered plenty of side content that made the worlds feel alive and diverse, but in more meaningful ways than a lot of open world content can do.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Depends. One of the jobs costs 6x or more less. Its even in the original quote. "I do have to admit making games that way always carries with it additional development costs".

I'm pretty sure Nintendo has done that math already.

 

[AV]

Of course there's a scale but by your definition almost zero games are linear. In Time Crisis I can choose to shoot goons in different order than you.

In your opinion when is something linear and when is it not?

I get what you're saying, there's just a point where the choices in a game become so finite and granular that they're barely choices at all. Shooting different goons in Time Crisis is a split-second decision and I'm pretty sure there's 0 optional goons, every player has to kill them all to progress - that aside, a more modern example like Titanfall 2 with "optional goons" is more a linear game too because the maps push you in one direction, from my recollection there's no side objectives, all guns are freely available equally to all players. Both are more linear titles. Fast forward to shooters in 2023 and even Call of Duty is "open", with numerous campaign levels straight up just taking place in straight up multiplayer maps, shitty as it is.

It's going to be up to everyone to determine what they consider linear and not and I can probably find games that don't fit whatever given definition. You probably will too. But in the context of this interview I don't think Eiji is necessarily talking about a big open map, or the ability to Nuts 'n' Bolts paragliders together. I think he's just talking about a paradigm shift in big games giving more and more freedom to the players.

Long way to say your mileage will vary, I just don't consider Resident Evil a linear experience, and the 4 remake is even less linear than its original iteration, which points to what I'm getting at.

 

[Mozza]

Nah... fuck this guy. He's wrong.

Or does not agree with you. no definitive right or wrong with any of this, all very subjective.

 

[Thaedolus]

Except not everyone want the bolded in every game. It'll be too stupid to make every game that way. It's NOT needed at all!!

Not everyone wanted that, but the fact that these games are runaway hits and by far the most successful in the franchise kinda shows more people than not, did want it this way. Zelda’s always sold fairly well but BotW and TotK have sold gangbusters, and BG3’s success is incredible for a CRPG. I was never into that genre and I’m hooked on it right now.

And there’s a plethora of old zelda style copycats out there right now. Tunic was great. We can have both.

 

[kunonabi]

Acting like The Wind Waker or Twilight Princess or even Skyward Sword were an on-rails experience. Both had a (mostly) linear main progression with really well thought out content, but offered plenty of side content that made the worlds feel alive and diverse, but in more meaningful ways than a lot of open world content can do.

SS also had tons of different approaches to combat and plenty of interesting inventory/gear decisions to make.

I get more out a SS replay than I do most games. Meanwhile I played botw once and never want to touch it again and fell of TotK completely halfway through since so much if it was lifted directly from botw.

 

[Kenpachii]

i have no interest in lineare games. Botw was the best thing to happen to zelda, TOTK was great but got tired half way through, to much the samey.

 

[March Climber]

I feel your first example makes up for the vast majority of open world games.

The other examples I’d wish we’d see more of. Those are what make open world games shine.

Personally I have only seen a Rockstar game do #1. Most open world games I have played are the Ubisoft style, #2.

I get highly annoyed by #1 but I find #2 to be acceptable.

 

[ikbalCO]

Yeah, so is 23 fps performance…

 

[DKPOWPOW]

Ya know, I hate to go against a guy who has been heavily involved in some of my favorite games.

But he is flat out wrong.

As much as I loved Breath of the Wild, its lack of "curated moments" (which I find is a better description of what some linear games provide) never brought it to the highs of some of the previous games of the series.

And over the past few months I have really struggled to get myself into Tears of the Kingdom for mostly the same reasons.

While my final judgment on the game has not been made, I can say it's probably one of the most frustrating games I have played in a long time.

A big part of that has to do with my want to love the game, and the fact that it just doesn't seem to be what I was wanting it to be.

Spoiler

A great example is what I played last night. I found a part of the depths with the Mineru section that guides you to the Spirit Temple. While the puzzles were enjoyable, I often found the solution to be mostly the same. I was excited to find out I had reached the Spirit Temple (which is usually a highlight of previous Zelda games).

Come to find out all that's there is a simple, pathetically easy boss fight. Common sense with the robot you gathered the pieces of is thrown out the window.

When you use it, it takes battery charge. But when you don't, it's fine without it running around the world. During the boss fight, the battery meter is magically gone. It's attacks are basic, it doesn't even have combos, and for the most part or feels like you are better off just being Link most the time.

Even the most basic dungeons in every single 3D Zelda since 1998 had more elaborate and complex set ups than this. The dungeons in this game so far have been nothing but a straight up tease, and in some ways an insult.

On top of this you have your abilities, that are supposed to carry the game. Unlike in BotW where they felt completely organic, these feel almost like a jumbled mess.

It's not that they don't work, they do. You can totally tell the effort and hard work that went into getting all of these systems working together in place of this massive game.

It's just some don't work at a level of polish or fun you expect from this game. Ultrahand for example, the game's main crux. It's often a struggle to get things that you build working right, and even then they don't last.

And once they are working right, there is no grand spectacle that makes it special. They all control and feel mostly the same, like tacked on toys in a Zelda game. The Spinner in Twilight Princess was more fun than just about every creation I have made so far.

You are forced to teleport around the map to gather the Zonai balls so you can create again, instead of organically picking things up. The objects you find among the map are merely there to guide you to a solution nearby, not save them for later. It like they tried to add in a layer of "curated moments" without the the thought and care behind it in past games.

Recall on the other hand is amazing, but because it's so good you can use it solve almost any of the complicated puzzles in a very cheap way.

Ascend is cool, when it works. There are a lot of objects you can't pass thru, and the height limit is often annoying.


Fuse helps makes things you pick up feel more valuable, but it doesn't cover up the fact that the main combat system is exactly the same as BotW's. Not even a single new move for any of the weapons.

Wind Waker, Twilight, and even Skyward all had more enjoyable combat systems.

As I said, I continue to withhold judgment on this game until I am finished. I am not using a guide so I am taking my sweet time. But when I see Aounuma say this, it makes me sad. Really sad. Because there is a place for traditional Zelda games, and Ocarina is way overdue for a beautiful remake.

But he makes it sound like they are uninterested, and if a remake were to be made it would probably not be made in house. I question then if it would ever live up to expectations.

I hope at least in the next Zelda adventure, they go a whole lot deeper in some of the most basic aspects of the game. Combat, dungeons and abilities.

 

[Azelover]

I'm fine with it. As long as OoT gets remade for the Switch 2.

 

[Mozza]

Ya know, I hate to go against a guy who has been heavily involved in some of my favorite games.

But he is flat out wrong.

As much as I loved Breath of the Wild, its lack of "curated moments" (which I find is a better description of what some linear games provide) never brought it to the highs of some of the previous games of the series.

And over the past few months I have really struggled to get myself into Tears of the Kingdom for mostly the same reasons.

While my final judgment on the game has not been made, I can say it's probably one of the most frustrating games I have played in a long time.

A big part of that has to do with my want to love the game, and the fact that it just doesn't seem to be what I was wanting it to be.

Spoiler

A great example is what I played last night. I found a part of the depths with the Mineru section that guides you to the Spirit Temple. While the puzzles were enjoyable, I often found the solution to be mostly the same. I was excited to find out I had reached the Spirit Temple (which is usually a highlight of previous Zelda games).

Come to find out all that's there is a simple, pathetically easy boss fight. Common sense with the robot you gathered the pieces of is thrown out the window.

When you use it, it takes battery charge. But when you don't, it's fine without it running around the world. During the boss fight, the battery meter is magically gone. It's attacks are basic, it doesn't even have combos, and for the most part or feels like you are better off just being Link most the time.

Even the most basic dungeons in every single 3D Zelda since 1998 had more elaborate and complex set ups than this. The dungeons in this game so far have been nothing but a straight up tease, and in some ways an insult.

On top of this you have your abilities, that are supposed to carry the game. Unlike in BotW where they felt completely organic, these feel almost like a jumbled mess.

It's not that they don't work, they do. You can totally tell the effort and hard work that went into getting all of these systems working together in place of this massive game.

It's just some don't work at a level of polish or fun you expect from this game. Ultrahand for example, the game's main crux. It's often a struggle to get things that you build working right, and even then they don't last.

And once they are working right, there is no grand spectacle that makes it special. They all control and feel mostly the same, like tacked on toys in a Zelda game. The Spinner in Twilight Princess was more fun than just about every creation I have made so far.

You are forced to teleport around the map to gather the Zonai balls so you can create again, instead of organically picking things up. The objects you find among the map are merely there to guide you to a solution nearby, not save them for later. It like they tried to add in a layer of "curated moments" without the the thought and care behind it in past games.

Recall on the other hand is amazing, but because it's so good you can use it solve almost any of the complicated puzzles in a very cheap way.

Ascend is cool, when it works. There are a lot of objects you can't pass thru, and the height limit is often annoying.


Fuse helps makes things you pick up feel more valuable, but it doesn't cover up the fact that the main combat system is exactly the same as BotW's. Not even a single new move for any of the weapons.

Wind Waker, Twilight, and even Skyward all had more enjoyable combat systems.

As I said, I continue to withhold judgment on this game until I am finished. I am not using a guide so I am taking my sweet time. But when I see Aounuma say this, it makes me sad. Really sad. Because there is a place for traditional Zelda games, and Ocarina is way overdue for a beautiful remake.

But he makes it sound like they are uninterested, and if a remake were to be made it would probably not be made in house. I question then if it would ever live up to expectations.

I hope at least in the next Zelda adventure, they go a whole lot deeper in some of the most basic aspects of the game. Combat, dungeons and abilities.

Once again, personal subjective opinions, passed off as facts...

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Ya know, I hate to go against a guy who has been heavily involved in some of my favorite games.

But he is flat out wrong.

As much as I loved Breath of the Wild, its lack of "curated moments" (which I find is a better description of what some linear games provide) never brought it to the highs of some of the previous games of the series.

And over the past few months I have really struggled to get myself into Tears of the Kingdom for mostly the same reasons.

While my final judgment on the game has not been made, I can say it's probably one of the most frustrating games I have played in a long time.

A big part of that has to do with my want to love the game, and the fact that it just doesn't seem to be what I was wanting it to be.

Spoiler

A great example is what I played last night. I found a part of the depths with the Mineru section that guides you to the Spirit Temple. While the puzzles were enjoyable, I often found the solution to be mostly the same. I was excited to find out I had reached the Spirit Temple (which is usually a highlight of previous Zelda games).

Come to find out all that's there is a simple, pathetically easy boss fight. Common sense with the robot you gathered the pieces of is thrown out the window.

When you use it, it takes battery charge. But when you don't, it's fine without it running around the world. During the boss fight, the battery meter is magically gone. It's attacks are basic, it doesn't even have combos, and for the most part or feels like you are better off just being Link most the time.

Even the most basic dungeons in every single 3D Zelda since 1998 had more elaborate and complex set ups than this. The dungeons in this game so far have been nothing but a straight up tease, and in some ways an insult.

On top of this you have your abilities, that are supposed to carry the game. Unlike in BotW where they felt completely organic, these feel almost like a jumbled mess.

It's not that they don't work, they do. You can totally tell the effort and hard work that went into getting all of these systems working together in place of this massive game.

It's just some don't work at a level of polish or fun you expect from this game. Ultrahand for example, the game's main crux. It's often a struggle to get things that you build working right, and even then they don't last.

And once they are working right, there is no grand spectacle that makes it special. They all control and feel mostly the same, like tacked on toys in a Zelda game. The Spinner in Twilight Princess was more fun than just about every creation I have made so far.

You are forced to teleport around the map to gather the Zonai balls so you can create again, instead of organically picking things up. The objects you find among the map are merely there to guide you to a solution nearby, not save them for later. It like they tried to add in a layer of "curated moments" without the the thought and care behind it in past games.

Recall on the other hand is amazing, but because it's so good you can use it solve almost any of the complicated puzzles in a very cheap way.

Ascend is cool, when it works. There are a lot of objects you can't pass thru, and the height limit is often annoying.


Fuse helps makes things you pick up feel more valuable, but it doesn't cover up the fact that the main combat system is exactly the same as BotW's. Not even a single new move for any of the weapons.

Wind Waker, Twilight, and even Skyward all had more enjoyable combat systems.

As I said, I continue to withhold judgment on this game until I am finished. I am not using a guide so I am taking my sweet time. But when I see Aounuma say this, it makes me sad. Really sad. Because there is a place for traditional Zelda games, and Ocarina is way overdue for a beautiful remake.

But he makes it sound like they are uninterested, and if a remake were to be made it would probably not be made in house. I question then if it would ever live up to expectations.

I hope at least in the next Zelda adventure, they go a whole lot deeper in some of the most basic aspects of the game. Combat, dungeons and abilities.

This was an interesting write up but I have to ask...

Isn't it (obviously) easier to add "curated moments" and more intricate dungeon design to the open world formula than it is to shed the player of the feeling they're being forced down a narrow path in the linear formula?

To me, it seems obvious that open world design has a creative cieling that's unbelievably high. There are so many more things you can add to and improve upon with that canvas. Linear design feels like it's been stuck in the mud for 20+ years at this point.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

Or does not agree with you. no definitive right or wrong with anu of this, all very subjective.

He's objectively wrong. There's a clear market for linear games.

Said market may not be as large as for open-ended design games (that's debatable), but it's still a sizeable market of gamers that will buy the products if you make and sell them.

His claim that linear game design is somehow outdated, is frankly horseshit.

 

[Robb]

He's objectively wrong. There's a clear market for linear games.

Said market may not be as large as for open-ended design games (that's debatable), but it's still a sizeable market of gamers that will buy the products if you make and sell them.

His claim that linear game design is somehow outdated, is frankly horseshit.

I don’t think he said any of the things you imply here though. He even acknowledges that there’s a clear market for linear games, if only because non-linear titles tend to require a lot of additional development costs.

I think it’s more that in past Zelda games you could only solve a puzzle a fixed way, for example moving a box from point A to point B to activate a lever. Now you can do that exact same solution if you want to in addition to any number of other solutions you can possibly think of. So why would you want to go back to that extremely linear option?

A lot, if not all, of past Zelda games would’ve benefitted from this imo. In most titles you get an item that you use in a dungeon and then barely ever touch again outside of very specific instances. Being able to use the spinner in Twilight Princess to solve puzzles in the Water Temple would’ve been super cool, for example.

 

[Mozza]

He's objectively wrong. There's a clear market for linear games.

Said market may not be as large as for open-ended design games (that's debatable), but it's still a sizeable market of gamers that will buy the products if you make and sell them.

His claim that linear game design is somehow outdated, is frankly horseshit.

From sales and critic/player reception, there is clear evidence that the open world route is the right way to go. Now of course if they want to build more linear quests within this, it's up to them.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

I don’t think he said any of the things you imply here though.

Errr...

Games which have a strict order of events are "kind of games of the past," Aonuma said, whilst modern games "can accept a player's own decisions and give them the freedom to flexibly proceed"

"Games which have a strict order of events" is not talking about mechanics. It's about the game structure. So no you're wrong. It's exactly what he said.

He's wrong. There's nothing inherently "of the past" or dated about games with a linear structure. These are still some of the most popular games.

Heck, even games like GTA still have very linear structures to their main questline, and GTAV doesn't even do open-ended gameplay nearly as well as previous games and yet it's the highest-selling game of all time.... ever.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

From sales and critic/player reception, there is clear evidence that the open world route is the right way to go. Now of course if they want to build more linear quests within this, it's up to them.

Open-world =/= open-ended gameplay mechanics or non-linear game structure.

Most open-world games have very linear game structures. There is a linear string of main quests that you complete one after the other, wherein in most cases you complete a linear sequence of tasks that more often than not can't be completed with different approaches or different mechanics.

The above describes the prevailing majority of openworld games, meaning most openworld games are in fact very linear games in terms of structure and mechanics. Zelda is an exception to the rule.

You're speaking about something completely different to Eiji and the rest of us in the thread.

 

[Robb]

Errr...

Nothing in that quote says anything about there not being a market for linear games.

 

[Mozza]

Open-world =/= open-ended gameplay mechanics or non-linear game structure.

Most open-world games have very linear game structures. There is a linear string of main quests that you complete one after the other, wherein in most cases you complete a linear sequence of tasks that more often than not can't be completed with different approaches or different mechanics.

The above describes the prevailing majority of openworld games, meaning most openworld games are in fact very linear games in terms of structure and mechanics. Zelda is an exception to the rule.

You're speaking about something completely different to Eiji and the rest of us in the thread.

You are confusing yourself at this point. I was talking specifically about BOTW, it has a pretty much do what you like approach to it's gameplay, you can just run around and explore, or be more focused on the main quest and shrines etc. I am not bothered in the slightest what other open world games do, as Aonuma was not talking about them.

 

[PSYGN]

This is like saying buffet is automatically better because you have the freedom of choice.

 

[mckmas8808]

Or does not agree with you. no definitive right or wrong with any of this, all very subjective.

No this isn't subjective. He's objectively wrong. Not every company even has the budget to make an open world game. Plus not every creator wants to make that style of a game. Making a linear game is a design choice. It can't be a thing of the past.

 

[Mozza]

No this isn't subjective. He's objectively wrong. Not every company even has the budget to make an open world game. Plus not every creator wants to make that style of a game. Making a linear game is a design choice. It can't be a thing of the past.

You and others seem to be misunderstanding the word objective, in relation to what you all personally feel or want. As I said Aonuma is speaking about the Zelda franchise here, rather than linear game design in a more generalized way. He is basically saying why would people want to go back to the older Zelda games like OOT, which were far more a product of the technical limitations of the time, when you can now have the open world, go anywhere/explore type adventure that's possible now. He also mentions nostalgia, which of course is very strong with retro games, as we tend to have fond memories of them based on our initial thoughts when they were released, and of course were for their time cutting edge. And he also does not seem to be saying half of the things some are accusing him of here.

 

[Mozza]

This is like saying buffet is automatically better because you have the freedom of choice.

What if the buffet gave you a choice of all your favorite things to eat, would that not make it better. With BOTW and TOTK, their is still a main objective, and side quests etc, you just can decide to tackle it in youe own way. Many core hobby gamers forget that not everybody has an insane amount of time to dedicate to playing videogames, even more so with the wider demographic of Switch owners, this approach means everyone can get something out of the game, in their own personal way.

 

[GigaBowser]

What if the buffet gave you a choice of all your favorite things to eat, would that not make it better. With BOTW and TOTK, their is still a main objective, and side quests etc, you just can decide to tackle it in youe own way. Many core hobby gamers forget that not everybody has an insane amount of time to dedicate to playing videogames, even more so with the wider demographic of Switch owners, this aproach means everyone can get something out of the game, in their own personal way.

this post is genius i award you

 

[Mozza]

Nothing in that quote says anything about there not being a market for linear games.

Or that other deveolopers should stop making them, and also not sure of the point some are making about certain developers not being able to afford to make expansive open world games, as this has no bearing whatsoever on them being better or worse than more linear type gaames.

 

[Danjin44]

I can enjoy open world game when its done well but even then I eventually get sick of it......I highly enjoyed both BotW and TotK but at same time I dont want every Zelda game to be open world, it just gonna burn us out.

In my opinion they should do both style of Zelda game to keep it fresh and interesting.

 

[Robb]

also not sure of the point some are making about certain developers not being able to afford to make expansive open world games

In relation to this interview I think the point is that open-ended game design is very time consuming, and especially so for a big open-world game (given that you aim to iron out all the issues that can occur). Something like BotW/TotK must have been hell to develop, we know from past interviews that they had a finished product one year prior to release but spent an entire year solely to playtest it - for example. I can’t imagine many developers having that time, or the luxury of being able to delay their game to that extent.

Just look at GTA, their mission structure is super simplistic relative to something like modern Zelda. You go to a starting circle for the mission, then do everything exactly as instructed, or do the linear shooting or car chasing parts. Deviate in any way from the norm and you fail the mission. Structuring their missions non-linearly would take way more effort and thought behind all the possible outcomes, which is likely why they don’t bother. Their games sell insane amounts either way, so it’s not like they have any pressure to improve. But I think it’s hard to argue that a non-linear design wouldn’t be a drastic improvement.

 

[Banjo64]

Zelda producer Eiji Aonuma thinks linear games are "games of the past"

Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom producer Eiji Aonuma has responded to fans' hopes of a traditional linear Zelda game, sayin…

www.eurogamer.net

"It's interesting when I hear people say [I miss traditional linear Zelda]," Aonuma revealed, "because I'm wondering 'why do you want to go back to a type of game where you're more limited or more restricted in the types of things or ways you can play? Games which have a strict order of events are "kind of games of the past," Aonuma said, whilst modern games "can accept a player's own decisions and give them the freedom to flexibly proceed". This is the design philosophy of the Zelda team at Nintendo, he stated, though he added "I do have to admit making games that way always carries with it additional development costs".

Go for A Link Between Worlds philosophy then.

Traditional Zelda but you choose the order of the dungeons and items.

 

[fersnake]

sure Aonuma, thanks for this.

 

[Robb]

sure Aonuma, thanks for this.

 

[Mozza]

Deal or no deal?

 

[fersnake]

i grabed all 900 in BoTw not gonna do it in ToTk fuck it.

 

[Robb]

i grabed all 900 in BoTw

I didn’t even bother getting 1/3 of them in any of the games. I just did the ones I happened to stumble upon.

 

[Madflavor]

If that’s his attitude then Zelda is no longer for me, but that’s completely fine. Zelda isn’t the definite high fantasy adventure game anymore. Other franchises have rivaled or surpassed it over the years.

If they make a 3rd BotW style game for the Switch 2, I think there will be a fair amount of fans asking for a change in formula by that point.

 

[Robb]

I think there will be a fair amount of fans asking for a change in formula by that point.

Doubt it’ll matter either way. I feel they got a lot of critique on BotW and a lot of its systems that they barely acknowledged in TotK.

With 32M sold of BotW and 20M+ sold of TotK I guess those games represent what Zelda is supposed to be to most fans these days, not the other way around.

I mean, BotW alone has sold more than every mainline 3D Zelda combined since OOT which means it’s very likely that the vast majority of Zelda fans have not played any of those past games in the series.

It’s weird to think about..

 

[PSYGN]

What if the buffet gave you a choice of all your favorite things to eat, would that not make it better. With BOTW and TOTK, their is still a main objective, and side quests etc, you just can decide to tackle it in youe own way. Many core hobby gamers forget that not everybody has an insane amount of time to dedicate to playing videogames, even more so with the wider demographic of Switch owners, this approach means everyone can get something out of the game, in their own personal way.

He gave a blanket statement so I gave a blanket response. Not everyone is at the level of quality as BOTW or TOTK, and so it's just a non-memorable buffet experience.

 

[DKPOWPOW]

This was an interesting write up but I have to ask...

Isn't it (obviously) easier to add "curated moments" and more intricate dungeon design to the open world formula than it is to shed the player of the feeling they're being forced down a narrow path in the linear formula?

To me, it seems obvious that open world design has a creative cieling that's unbelievably high. There are so many more things you can add to and improve upon with that canvas. Linear design feels like it's been stuck in the mud for 20+ years at this point.

I think the potential for there to be amazing "curated moments" within an open world is like you said... Very high, but it seems to be difficult and rare for this to be pulled off for whatever reason.

I often think of the pacing in the OG RE4 as a great example of the ability for linear based games to just throw you on this rollercoaster and keep going. It reminded me a lot of how Ocarina felt in 98, there is something about it. Something special, no game is perfect.

But it's something about these games and how they craft the ways you go, that has been very hard to find in open world games.

Breath of the Wild did have that feeling though, it's approach to exploration and kind of a blank slate approach gave the game a very breath of fresh air feel to it.

In TotK it almost feels like too much though, there is so much to check off. Too much to regain, go thru again. But, I am being patient with it.

I've been continuing to play TotK over the past few nights since the last post. I can say it's grabbing me a bit more since obtaining...

Spoiler

The Master Sword and Auto Build. I can see some of my issues with building are definitely eased with this new ability. I had been looking for it from the start, but the game is so huge it's easy to get sidetracked.

And the Master Sword kicks ass, more than in BotW. I do feel though that I would have enjoyed the game more from the beginning had these 2 things been there from the start. Though at the same time, it does add to a real sense of progression which is hard to find in a game like this.

I feel like Nintendo very obviously could have gone in this direction where they went very in depth with Dungeons, combat, abilities while still maintaining an open world. There are a lot of scenarios where it feels like there should have been more going on when you get to specific events in quests. Instead it's usually just a mini boss.

I take it as perhaps the game was just a bit much to have running on the Switch, there are obvious limitations for how much the game can pull off. Despite that, it's still very impressive. I still find the ability to jump off from the Sky and dive all the way down into the depths as an amazing achievement. The verticality feels great.

But there are just certain design decisions that rub me the wrong way. Maybe they will grow on me, time will tell.

 

[bender]

Open world has opened up the design possibilities that wouldn't be afforded in Zelda's traditional formula which I'm sure is refreshing for the development team. BOTW and TOTK check the three major checkboxes that made me love open worlds in the first place and that are largely ignored in most open world designs: a sense of exploration, a sandbox that let's players have creative expression and fun traversal mechanics.

 

[amigastar]

For the most part I agree. Open Biomes are the new linear. Also, no one really followed Doom nor Goldeneye's examples when it was in regards to linear design. They should have.

If you look at the Doom 1 map closely it kinda looks like a strange robot showing the right thumbs up, lol.

 

[peronmls]

If only he was actually involved with the games instead of overseeing the production like SS/BOTW/TOTK. It is not like he is a creative director anymore. He directed OOT,MM,WW,TP. Until he actually directs again, I won't take his comment seriously.

 

[Mozza]

He gave a blanket statement so I gave a blanket response. Not everyone is at the level of quality as BOTW or TOTK, and so it's just a non-memorable buffet experience.

People have interpreted it that way, and of course there will always be nuance lost in the translation, I feel he was discussing the Zelda series in isolation. Still not sure your buffet analogy has a lot to do with this.

 

[Rhazer Fusion]

I really hope this future never happens, but who knows since so many companies are only trend chasers. There is space for linear and open world. I don’t really mind open world experiences in RPG’s because in my eyes most of them have were semi open or open world. I just don’t want every game to be open world because imo it doesn’t benefit certain games and genres. Most open world games get repetitive, are bloated with pointless side quests and usually don’t feel as structured as a good, well designed linear game.

 

[mckmas8808]

You and others seem to be misunderstanding the word objective, in relation to what you all personally feel or want. As I said Aonuma is speaking about the Zelda franchise here, rather than linear game design in a more generalized way. He is basically saying why would people want to go back to the older Zelda games like OOT, which were far more a product of the technical limitations of the time, when you can now have the open world, go anywhere/explore type adventure that's possible now. He also mentiones nostalgia, which of course is very strong with retro games, as we tend to have fond memories of them based on our initial thoughts when they were released, and of course were for their time cutting edge. And he also does not seem to be saying half of the things some are accusing him of here.

If he's only talking about the Zelda series, then I take back everything I said in this thread. Seems like this thread was created in bad taste then.