>>715558038I completely agree. I really love BotW in the same way I love a bunch of games that I know aren't perfect, but they're so concise and simple that they're enjoyable. Sonic Colors comes to mind, as a "good" Sonic game, that I know isn't that great, but I really love it for its vibe and just getting more out of replaying its levels.
BotW is like that to me. I find depth in the game out of starting new playthroughs and taking a different approach or creating fun rules for myself, and then I enjoy how basic it is.
But the idea that it's a "masterpiece" always rubbed me the wrong way. I see missed opportunities and "things Nintendo DIDN'T do" everywhere in Breath of the Wild.
>Hyrule Castle has elements of what a proper dungeon could look like in BotW styleBut it's really slim design, and you can skip 99% of it very easily which doesn't make it feel like great design.
>Calamity Ganon is just some centipede monster with 50% HP if you did the main storyImagine if the game actually culminated in a majestic dungeon, and a dramatic confrontation with Calamity Ganon instead of this crap
>Everywhere you go just leads to ShrinesYou start the game suspecting each corner of Hyrule to have really cool and secret stuff, but it's always Shrines at the end of the path.
It's "Boilerplate: The Game" and it suffers for it. It feels like a tech demo but you can see them attempt to create Old-Zelda puzzle encounters using the new physics-based engine they've made, and i still hope they intend to iterate upon this way of creating Zelda until they make actual "old-Zelda" using real physics and seamlessly connected locations like BotW. It has potential but TotK also shows a temptation of Nintendo to just create "more content" using the same cheap boilerplate systems, so that the game is technically "bigger" and longer. The same crap approach we've seen from Ubisoft, and that's what always bothered me about the conception of Breath of the Wild.