"as the series progressed and grew it became more story-focused" which is why i called it a return to form. You could say botw is the true zelda game and the others you named are the ones which arent in the spirit of the series. But thats a stupid argument to have because which games are 'more zelda' is dumb and im only humoring the discussion because you think its important.
"Other games, like The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess, were far more linear, but that wasn't necessarily a bad thing."
Absolutely, so we agree. Being different from the standard zelda formula is NOT automatically a bad thing, even though your entire original post was about how botw is worse specifically because it is different.
"I strongly dislike being dumped with barely any direction or help; there's not even any map markers to guide me, aside from the inaccurate ones I place myself based on what I can see (which inevitably means missing content)."
Thats a valid opinion, but many people would disagree on this. For example, games like Dark Souls have become popular specifically BECAUSE they drop you in a world with no guidance. Different people enjoy different things, if you dont like it thats fine, but you have to understand theres a very large subset of people who enjoy that and we can see thats factually true by the success of dark souls, botw, and various other recent games that follow dark souls lead.
"To me, this game is quite similar to Shenmue 3; it tries to mimic a game from decades ago, but in the process failed to learn from the myriad of quality-of-life and gameplay improvements the industry has obtained over that time."
I think claiming that botw failed to learn quality of life and gameplay improvements over zelda 1 is a laughable idea. Zelda 1 was a good base but was terrible by modern gaming standards. Botw fixes all of its major issues, such as being too cryptic or having a map with no identifiable featured.
"As for "breakable weapons forces the player to experiment", that's a horrible counterargument - games like Assassin's Creed Origins have plenty of different weapon types the player can try out, but it negates the potential frustration caused by weapons breaking - AND the resulting loss of interest in equipment rewards because the player knows said "rewards" will just break eventually anyway so what's the point - by simply leaving that crappy mechanic out."
But players will ALWAYS just get the best weapon and choose not to experiment because players generally prioritize being powerful in a game over fun. This is a constant problem across all games. In card games people play the best deck even if everyone hates playing both with and against it because they want the best chances of winning. Botw, unlike a card game, has a way of forcing players to experiment, and i believe on average it increases players enjoyment, even if on the surface it comes across as annoying. As for the rewards being diminished, i would agree but having a diminished reward is better than getting a weapon thats just worthless to begin with due to being inferior to already existing weapons, which is the alternative.
"As for "the game would have to be radically redesigned in such a way that would alter it for the worse", that's incorrect - all they would have to do is simply include a toggle or something. What would it change about the inherent gameplay?"
Because the games map is designed around not being able to climb infinitely, theyd have to redesign the entire map structure to make it impossible to sequence break by just climbing to places you arent intended to reach yet and also because higher level items are put on high locations with the expectation you need to be far in the game to get the stamina to obtain them. Ill agree on infinite sprinting though, i see no issues with that being added in the game.
"and the shrine orbs only being used to increase Hearts instead of having a stupid choice between Hearts or stamina."
I like having to choose, it increases engagement when I have the option of how to strengthen my character instead of the game telling me.
All your arguments here come down to "I personally dont like X thing" but you present them as "X is inherently bad game design and makes the game bad." If you refuse to recognize that other people dont agree with all your personal opinions then theres no point in having this conversation.
Duuude...have you not heard of "paragraphs"? At least make your reply easy to read.
I'd call BotW not a "return to form" (because the "form" is that of a more-linear closed-world game focused on story and dungeons, not that of an open-world with typical open-world mechanics that hinder the experience, since the "form" is based on what the series has come to be over the last three decades), but a ruined "return to origin".
BotW has definitely failed to learn from the past three decades, as I stated, since what have open-world adventure games gained over that time? Fast and fluid combat, map markers to help guide the player, and no stamina. Instead of incorporating these improvements, Nintendo decided to just reimagine the first game with barely any noticeable improvements - it's only when the player finds certain monuments that they get permanently added to the map, meaning the player is as lost and stranded as they were in the NES game. However, while this might've been somewhat acceptable for that more-basic and less technologically-advanced era, it certainly is no longer acceptable now, nor was it a couple of years ago when BotW was first released.
As I've repeatedly written, Skyward Sword at the very least had the premise of a true Legend of Zelda game; as mediocre as it was, it was still passable. BotW lacks even this baseline quality.
What do card games have to do with open-world adventure games...? And anyway, forcing the player to "experiment" by having their hard-won and powerful weapons and shields break is horrible game design, leading to awful player experience - they no longer have the agency to decide whether to try out something new, or just stick with a liked weapon.
Assassin's Creed Origins provided that option. If you wanted to experiment with new weapons, you can; if you wanted to stick with one weapon, that's also entirely possible. The lack of this agency, tied with the slow and clumsy combat, makes fighting an absolute chore with little, if not
entirely negative, rewards - there's no reason to beat up enemies due to the fragility system, and all the reason to avoid them.
How is that "fun"?
Further, in AC
r, new weapon rewards were rarely, if ever, truly "worthless" as you state; they handily and clearly kept up with your growing strength. Indeed, it's BotW with the "worthless" rewards, since the developers decided to obfuscate the power advancement and not give the player anything worthwhile to start with, bringing down the entire experience right off the bat.
The freezing cold would prevent players from being able to freely explore mountaintops and gain powerful (though fleeting, due to the moronic fragility system) gear; infinite - or non-existent, rather - stamina would be nothing but a boon for how the game feels to play, not to mention feels to explore.
I find it counterintuitive how you praise the game for being so free to explore, yet you decry against it being
more free to explore...
If the developers truly wanted climbing to be limited, why not make it more natural and built into the terrain? Ghost of Tsushima (which admittedly came out years after BotW) only allowed Jin Sakai to climb up specially-marked footholds, meaning they could prevent sequence-breaking without artificially making the game feel worse to play.
Or how about Link being able to clamber over small hills, but needs to obtain actual climbing gear to scale taller mountains - all without a hint of an arbitrary gauge?
That would be a good compromise, since it also wouldn't needlessly limit swimming or gliding or spin attacking or anything else.
Finally, if stamina really *must* be included - which, as I've shown, is incorrect - the shrine orbs should increase both stamina and Hearts to reflect a truly-growing Link, to reflect real advancement.
