395
Is this true? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/greentext@sh.itjust.works
121 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 2 months ago (3 children)

BotW was empty only if you didn't know how to look at it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

    If you look at it without having ever seen Elden Ring, it's pretty impressive.

    If you look at it after having seen Elden Ring, BotW is dogshit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I disagree. Especially because you have to put in context: BotW came out five years before Elden Ring, as an exlcusive bridge title between consoles, and still rocked a degree of interaction with the world (its physics/elemental system and the use of stamina as an advancement barrier) that ER still dreams of. IIRC Miyazaki himself said that the team was heavily inspired by LoZ's work with the formula.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    The physics thing is a good point. But my experience with BotW is that I would see something in the distance, I'd go to it, and then there'd be a shrine with no meaningful reward or a Korok seed, and that's it. The reward is that a number ticks up.

    Elden Ring, I'd see something in the distance, I'd go to it, and then there'd be a whole, actual dungeon to complete. And the reward would be unique every time. Even if I didn't end up using it, it'd be a weapon or a spell that would give me ideas for a different build.

    Breath of the Wild is empty. The weapons are destructible, which makes them meaningless.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent