>>713026964
>If you haven’t played either of them then play botw. Then wait 5 years and play totk.
This is my biggest problem with Tears of the Kingdom.
It's such a massive rehash that, despite the fact that I like it more than Breath of the Wild, I feel there is absolutely no reason to play it if you've played Breath of the Wild anytime recently before it.
It's weird, because I can string together multiple Yakuza games in a row, and they similarly rehash and recycle.
I think the different is, though, is that in Yakuza entries you have an actual engaging all-new storyline to go through, all-new minigames crammed in, and all-new sidequests at every corner -- so most of your time is spent doing things you haven't already done in the previous game despite heavy asset reuse since the core combat is the main mechanical carry-over and even that gets overhauled enough every Yakuza game to feel completely different. 4 largely doesn't feel like DLC to 3, and 0 certainly doesn't feel like DLC to 5.
Meanwhile Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom are just the same game.
There's new side content, but side content is so sparse in these games that it makes up a tiny fraction of your game time.
You're doing the same korok seeds, same shrine loop, same tower loop, same enemies, the same overworld traversal (since the sky and underground aren't really interesting to traverse), going to the same locations only slightly changed, the combat itself hasn't really changed -- It's just the same sandbox but with some added bells and whistles here and there, and a story also too sparse to consider it transformative from the previous entry.
So I guess the difference between the two is a matter of proportional retread for the player's experience.
>>713027929
It's not better, technically.
If you've played TotK you'll find BotW is the same thing, but has less and more tedious.
The overworld fits BotW better, but BotW to TotK feels like a fighting game in year 1 compared to year 6.
