• WarmSoda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Breath of the wild had two maps. The world, and the shrines.

    Tears of the kingdom has four maps. The sky. The over world. Caves. And the depths. Not to mention the temples that replaced the four beasts are much larger than those beasts. They went back to OoT size temples.

    The over world is very much different than it was in BotW. The number of quests is vastly more than in BotW.

    Yeah you get heart containers again. Just like in every single Zelda game ever made.

    The graphics, lighting, and especially the physics are improved a huge amount from BotW. (Although strangely the rain effect is worse). Like those are the things every game dev have been drooling over since it was released. And it runs at a smoother consistent frame rate than the previous game as well.

    Sure you could argue BotW should have been TotK. You could also argue Super Mario Bros 3 should have been Super Mario World.

    • Dandroid@dandroid.app
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Gonna have to agree to disagree here. There just wasn’t enough different for me to enjoy it as a whole new game. It was just too similar, and playing them back to back detracted from how much fun I had rather than adding to it.

      Though I want to be clear about one complaint I had. I wasn’t annoyed by getting heart containers again. As you pointed out, that’s in every game. I was annoyed that I had to do shrines again. The reward could have been anything from the shrines, and I would have been annoyed. Shrines were the worst thing of any Zelda game imo, and they brought it back essentially unchanged from BotW. The fact that the reward was exactly the same as the previous game was just extra annoying.

      Edit: btw, I really don’t like that you keep putting words in my mouth. I’m not even talking about Mario games. This has nothing to do with them. The complaints I have about the similarities between these two games do not apply to those games.

      • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’ll agree to disagree. But I think you’re really missing everything special in the game. It’s a pure sequel, and that something we’ve never had in the series. It literally quadruples every aspect of BotW.

        Edit. I never put words in your mouth. I’m not sorry you can’t understand how some things can be like other things. You not being able to grasp relations between concepts in a conversation pretty much makes you being unable to grasp the concepts and improvements between these games moot.

        So idk, learn to think more. It’s pretty stupid you got insulted somehow by comparing games.

        • Felix Green@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The point is Nintendo fans start to look like fifa fans. So, besides content blocking, Nintendo is trying to one up EA in the scummy department. Why isn’t totk a dlc? Why did it take 6 years then? They had the same thing with majoras mask but that took just one year wtf. This sounds insane and the cherry on top is that people think it’s the best game of the year. Gaming is doomed, there is no more demand for quality+inovation. Everyone big in the industry is playing it super safe and instead of being humble for not taking riscs they act like dicks. Which is mirrored in the fans tribalistic defense of the games. Totk is bad from a philosoficaly stand point and you can’t stop people from comparing the game with what it could of been! Better availability, better story as a sequel, real inovation rather than ticktock gimics and so many more things. It’s sad that its game of the year material due to lack of competition.

              • Felix Green@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I feel like a game should be universal, like anyone can play chess. Or tic-tac-to. But shit Nintendo pulls of is clear tribalistic marketing, and I don’t hate you when I say it’s philosoficaly bad on multiple fronts. The game quality and quantity wise is ok, great actually, but one or two goods doesn’t balance 1000 sins. One of them is availability, its very simple, I can’t buy the game, I can play the game but I can’t buy it and because of this sol fact I won’t play it, it’s a form of protest, same with the rest of Nintendo ip that isn’t nes or SNES. And I’ll take it further, game of the year should be available for purchase for all people that have a high power gaming device, if it’s not it doesn’t matter how good the game is, it shouldn’t hold the name “game of the year” and thus get niched to the hells of which it came. “Game of the year for X platform”. And not a general thing, if baldurs gate can’t run on switch why would you compare it to a Zelda game that launched in the same year that cant officialy be purchased for PC …fundamentally broken. My mid tier PC can play totk in 1440p 60 fps can your switch do that ? Achieve high frame rate without distorting the shit out of the image ? Or not looking like a slide show when resolution is high? me not playing the game is fair play, you not saying it’s game of the year would also be fair play in contrast. But if you say it’s game of the year, or most of you nintendiots say it’s “game of the year period” I’ll play the game and tell you it’s shit on the switch compared to PC ? Same unavailable game, different quality … Fundamentally broken. Also instead of having 1 huge dlc for 70 bucks released after 6 years of waiting how about a better version of 5 normal sized dlcs priced at 20 bucks with year to year release and a minimum of 10 hours main story with 20 hours completion game play and at the end have a free one that ties all of them toghete if you purchased all of them, this is the same content presented in a more inovative way that actually makes sense and would explain the recycled nature of the content inside it.