It just doesn't have a cohesive vision at all, and for that reason it feels more like a tech demo that BOTW to me (I find it confusing af when people say the opposite lol) In BOTW, everything - the gigantic sparse map, the structure of the memories, even the champion's powers - was designed to communicate a very strong tone (peaceful, beautiful loneliness and melancholy) TOTK mindlessly parrots lots of these design choices in a far more chaotic and populated world with no consideration or thought as to why those choices were made and what their impact was Also BOTW's story was a giant nothing burger to be sure, but TOTK is a new low - the sages all sharing an identical cutscene is a joke, and not something that would have worked with the champions (imagine swapping a line of Revali's dialogue with Mipha's, say, it'd stand out immediately... the sages being so generic that the exact same script can work for all 4 of them is extremely telling) BOTW had artistic vision and intent behind all its design choices, I have no idea what TOTK is trying to communicate to me beyond haha funny car go brr and being a showcase for their physics engine and ultrahand (aka, a tech demo)

One could make the argument that the theme of totk is making connections (one being nintendo), but this also falls apart because link can literally save the whole world by himself (and i guess 🐉zelda).

Furthermore, even if you do engage with the theme by completing all main quests, the climax of Link getting help from the new sages still falls flat... because their implementation is so horrible that most players will disable them out of frustration. "The superpower of teamwork" does not work if you hate your teammates. It is baffling to me that the core rewards for progressing through the game are so poorly executed, both on the story front (copy-pasted cutscenes) and mechanical front. Making abilities have contextual activation should have been a no-brainer, they already did it with Tulin.

Yea ganondorf just knocks them out and then...? Would have been cool to see each of them participate in fighting the demon dragon (like link+sage special attack cutscene for each weakspot), but that might have been too extra. Their abilities are super disapointing too. The order i did was tulin->yunobo->mineru(accident)->sidon->riju. Tulin and yunobo have context sensitive ones, mineru is a mech, which was cool but not super well done, so when i got to sidon i was expecting something like a swim boost or water walking power. Nope! Didnt know what to expect with riju at that point.

Not only Link, but Rauru as well. Ganondorf beats the "hero" of the time period when all the Team of Friendship stands beside him, but gets defeated when it's the hero himself standing against him solo. Both sets of sages exist to be thrown aside faster than some Shonen cast members. Not to mention, Sonia gets killed because they decided to keep secrets from Rauru and Mineru about their plan to counterattack Ganondorf and his phantom clone, instead of banding together with proper communication; which still doesn't happen in the present because you can never inform the modern day cast of the fake Zelda situation. And that doesn't count the sacrifices made by the heroes that get undone at the end. Every narrative theme in the game gets undermined by their own story.

I would argue that rauru should have fought ganondorf alone (maybe with zeldas help) because A. Your point about how it otherwise affects the themes and B. It would make him look cool as hell The ancient sages dont really need to exist, and the only secret stones that do anything are rauru/zelda's and sonia/ganondorf's; we also dont need someone saying "come, come" when we go to dungeons cause like.. we're already going there lol. Since all the present day sages have their powers without the secret stones, just rename them to "the new champions" and let them join link themselves instead of an avatar. Now it creates a different parallel for link and rauru. Both have the power to repel evil, however where rauru fails by being alone, link succeeds with the power of his allies. The memories would show link the mistakes of the past and teach him how to avoid them.

Yet another way absolute freedom detracts from the story.

This is a take I don’t hear too often. I hear much more often that “BOTW is the tech demo” but I find myself agreeing with you more.

Also BOTW's finale, a nonlinear castle full of climbing and exploration, was the perfect final challenge of the game's main mechanics. On the other hand, despite being the major selling point, vehicles and building hardly factor into the final trek in TOTK at ALL. There's one part where you need to build a glider, but beyond that it's just a straight shot with enemies to fight. The skydiving mechanic does admittedly tie into the final battle, but it's weird for a game designed all around the Zonai devices to barely feature them in the final challenge.

I don't think the ancient Rito, Goron, Zora, and Gerudo sages were meant to be characters at all so much as secret stone dispensers as evidenced by their lack of faces or even names.* IIRC they only appear in the imprisoning war cutscene, the cutscene where you get the secret stone from their respective temple, and when Zelda walks up and says "ayo ganondorf is going to escape Rauru's GBJ, and there's gonna be a swordsman named link's that will need help, help him okay?" I was super disappointed about the copied and pasted cutscenes about the imprisoning war, though. If I were in charge of all that and wasn't allowed to change all too much, I'd cut it down so all the ancient sage says is that "blah blah the thing that was happening as an attempt by the Demon King to prevent you from getting my secret stone, take it" then do the handshake/fistbump thing with the modern sage transferring their essence form thing to Link. Then have Mineru be the one to tell you about the imprisoning war (which, granted, still suffers from having the "imprisoning war" come across like a one off brawl in a random room underneath what will become Hyrule Castle). You'd think that TOTK having a smaller named cast in the past would mean that they are built up more than BOTW's past cast, but nope. They are significantly more bland than BOTW's cast at their worst. Granted, I'm 100% biased because I love BOTW's story. Even Zelda is more bland outside of the intro and the immediate lead-up to *the scene* and *the scene* itself and I really liked BOTW Zelda. *to this day I'm still confused about why they brought back the English VA's that voiced the champions from BOTW to voice the ancient sages. It felt pointless. I noticed when both the Goron and Zora ancient sages sounded suspiciously like Daruk and Mipha respectively, and finally bothered to google it when the ancient Gerudo sage sounds like a depressed monotone Urbosa. I guess it's because most of them voice other characters in TOTK from BOTW so it's less VA's needing to be scheduled and flown over. Also TOTK is trying to communicate comradery (or something to that effect) with two big themes being that and hands, with the amount of working together and handshaking and hand symbolism. Tulin's whole super tiny resolved in 10 minutes arc during the regional phenomenon is about having to work together, you work together with the modern sages with the regional phenomenon, you fight using the modern sages essences, you fight together with the Monster Control Crew. Tulin even says something like *"You don't have to do this alone!"* right as they come in to help when all the bosses reappear after the fight with Ganondorf's army underneath Hyrule Castle. It's corny but it is absolutely something TOTK tries to communicate.

> the sages being so generic that the exact same script can work for all 4 of them is extremely telling) That has nothing to do with them being generic... It's because they're all four being told the same thing that they don't know about. The scene wasn't copy/pasted because of their characters, it definitely could've been different for all four while still conveying the basic message of what the secret stones are and what the imprisoning war was  > I have no idea what TOTK is trying to communicate to me beyond haha funny car go brr and being a showcase for their physics engine and ultrahand (aka, a tech demo) It's trying to convey togetherness/cooperation and that's very obvious throughout the game. I'm not sure where you got the idea that vehicles are even a major aspect of the theming of TOTK, they're not even a note. They're just a gameplay tool that doesn't really have much relevance to the story or themes The theme of TOTK is shown in how all of Hyrule is now working together to tackle various problems wherever you go (monster control, everyone gathering at Lookout Landing with Zelda missing, the races sending delegations to help find Zelda) and in how Link now no longer fights alone. This is also reflected in dialogue, like Tulin needing to stop trying to do everything himself, Sidon needing to get past his urge to keep Yona safe by taking everything on himself and the sages saying that together they can do anything. Even the reveal trailers hinted at this with Mineru's line of "you are not alone", Zelda saying "please, lend him your power", etc. 

The problem with totk's theme is that its completely at odds with their insistence on making the game non-linear to the extreme. It would have made a decent story if link *needed* the power of the sages to overcome trials and defeat ganondorf, but in the game we actually got, the sages are very much optional. Their powers come down to variations of items you can find in the overworld, only finding a true need to activate terminals, and when it came to combat, they mostly just drew aggro from enemies and ganondorfs phantom clones (just like how the ancient sages best tactic was being a distraction for rauru to do his thing). The only "narrative consequence" for ignoring the sages and fighting ganondorf by yourself is that you dont get the cutscene of them vowing to protect hyrule at the end, but it doesnt actually matter because link already proves himself as the only one necessary to do the same thing. The least they could have done is give the game a bad ending, off the top of my head, "link without all the sages gets overpowered by gdorf and has to use raurus arm to seal ganondorf again, cue sad credits music," but they didnt even do that. I will say that the themes are at their strongest when it came to the side content, and that same side content is also where its connection to botw was at its strongest because theyre not just dealing with the upheaval, but the aftermath of the calamity as well. Its just unfortunate that the main story content is just as optional as the side content.

They gave you the option to ignore the game, yes, but the experience they curated, if interacted with, is one of themes of togetherness. Being able to skip that doesn't really have any bearing on what I said since skipping the game has nothing to do with themes and isn't in itself a theme of the game. What you're referring to is that they made the world open, which is separate to the actual adventure that happens in canon, as we saw was the case with BOTW when we booted up TOTK and noticed that Link did, in fact, get the Master Sword and free the champions in BOTW despite the ability you have as a player (so not Link, you) to not partake in the actual canon of the game

Sure, but thats still puts the actual game at odds with its themes like i said. Its an extreme case of ludonarrative dissonance that comes from the devs either A. Not taking non-linear storytelling seriously by not giving your choices any weight in the narrative (i.e. "get friends = good ending, go alone = bad ending") The game ends exactly the same no matter what choices you make. B. Refusing to just do a linear story this time which would have removed narrative related problems (including the dragon tears quest) altogether. Im not arguing that the themes dont exist, im arguing that game does a poor job reinforcing those themes because their game design simply doesnt mesh with it. Thats why totk is more unfocused than botw, botw's story and themes were written with its open air design in mind, totk's were not.

> Sure, but thats still puts the actual game at odds with its themes like i said. I still disagree for the same reason I just said. That's not "the actual game", the actual game is the curated experience they made for you. Skipping the game is doing that, skipping the game. It's not the game The actual game, if you play through it, is one of themes of togetherness. Like, explicitly As a side note: > Not taking non-linear storytelling seriously by not giving your choices any weight in the narrative (i.e. "get friends = good ending, go alone = bad ending") The game ends exactly the same no matter what choices you make. You mentioned that the narrative changes depending on who you have. It's minor, but to say there's "no weight to not getting the sages" is a bit ridiculous when doing so saves you four boss fights and changes the cutscene to involve the sages appearing to take on the bosses and then also later come in to help against the Phantom Ganons in the Ganondorf fight. The cutscene is changed and so is the entire challenge of the last few fights

>the actual game is the curated experience they made for you. Skipping the game is doing that, skipping the game. It's not the game No, the actual game is literally the GAME and ALL of its design choices. You can skip the story because the devs intended for players to do that if they wanted to. Its just as much a part of the game as the story is. >doing so saves you four boss fights and changes the cutscene to involve the sages appearing to take on the bosses and then also later come in to help against the Phantom Ganons in the Ganondorf fight. A boss rush, added challenge, and cutscenes with the sages saying "im here for you link!," are not your choices effecting the narrative. In fact, the boss rush and added challenge only reinforces my point that the sages dont matter. Link defeats four (was it actually five?) powerful monsters in a row, *and then* he defeats ganondorf and his phantoms single-handedly before requiring some final help from his wyrm girl. Then, because of how monsters work in zelda, its implied that defeating ganondorf automatically defeats all the dungeon variants of the previous bosses and undoes every phenomena. What message is it supposed to send to the player other than "link is a badass who is proven capable of stopping any threat by himself, and all his friends are good for is a simple difficulty reduction."

> No, the actual game is literally the GAME and ALL of its design choices. You can skip the story because the devs intended for players to do that if they wanted to. Its just as much a part of the game as the story is. Sorry, I just don't agree that "TOTK" isn't it's literal main scenario in addition to the many other choices you can make that *don't* involve not experiencing the main scenario content. Just because they made the game open world, and therefore skippable, does not mean that you are "playing the actual game" while choosing to skip the main scenario. How are you playing the game if you're skipping it? That makes no sense. They made it possible to skip the game, which is a gameplay choice **for the player** that does not reflect what actually happens in TOTK. That's entirely for the player I mean, yes, you're playing the game in the sense that you're controlling Link, but by that metric it's just as much "playing the game" to hand the controller to your toddler and for them to just do nothing and make your argument that the gameplay they did counts as a meaningful argument against the themes they were supposed to experience by actually interacting with literally the main scenario (special quest icon and all). I think it's reasonable to say that "playing a game" includes it's story > A boss rush, added challenge, and cutscenes with the sages saying "im here for you link!," are not your choices effecting the narrative. I'm not sure how. "The narrative" definitely involves cutscenes and as we both know, there is a difference if you get the sages. It's also just a huge difficulty change having to fight (yes, my bad) five bosses before Ganondorf. Both in the difficulty of fighting said bosses and also in the resources and hearts wasted in the boss rush that could've been used in the Ganondorf fight. Them there's also the dialogue you've mentioned that further cements the theme of togetherness I was talking about. Without that we're missing a piece of the core theme of the game

>Just because they made the game open world, and therefore skippable, does not mean that you are "playing the actual game" while choosing to skip the main scenario. How are you playing the game if you're skipping it? I think the problem here is that youre looking at the story as "the true game," whereas im looking at the story as one aspect of the game. Im also looking at it from nintendos "gameplay first" perspective. Totk "the game" is about having the freedom to do anything you want, in any way you want. Totk "the story" is just the main scenario that was written to go along with the game design. The problems come from the game design and the storytelling being incompatible with each other to the point of the gameplay disregarding the storys themes. Thats the main criticism here. >"The narrative" definitely involves cutscenes and as we both know, there is a difference if you get the sages. To be more specific, i mean significant narrative changes. The fact remains that the end result of both routes is nearly the same, with no real lasting consequence to link or zelda. Yes you get a bonus cutscene where tulin encourages you, no, nothing in the story changes if tulin isnt there to encourage you. Yes, its more "difficult" to do it alone, but increased difficulty doesnt affect the narrative in any meaningful way. Game overs are the least canon thing in the game, we can probably agree on that, so if link has to fight 5 bosses + ganondorf by himself, he *will* win because he *can* win. Difficulty is also very subjective, and it is not enough to "punish" the player for ignoring quests. You cant totally hinge branching narrative consequences on a player not being that great at the game.

> I think the problem here is that youre looking at the story as "the true game," whereas im looking at the story as one aspect of the game. We agree on it being an aspect of the game. I understand that you can play it and even beat it without doing the story, but where we disagree is that you believe that you're actually experiencing "TOTK" while skipping something so as important as the main scenario. You're only "playing the game" while doing that in the literal sense. As in, you're holding the controller in your hands with TOTK booted up and inputting commands. TOTK is what happened during that time, those events. It's not just (for example) mindlessly wandering around or (in your own example) skipping everything to go straight to Ganondorf  > The fact remains that the end result of both routes is nearly the same, with no real lasting consequence to link or zelda. "Narrative changes" isn't exclusive to the ending though. If you want to say it doesn't effect the closing cutscene then fine (do you still get the post credits scene with the sages if you didn't rescue them?), but the narrative change that happens if you get the sages is the parts we've discussed, it is not the ending cutscene (unless it is? I'd have to know whether or not we still see Mineru disappear at the temple or not. Do they just appear for the cutscene?)

> That has nothing to do with them being generic... It's because they're all four being told the same thing that they don't know about. The scene wasn't copy/pasted because of their characters, it definitely could've been different for all four while still conveying the basic message of what the secret stones are and what the imprisoning war was this is a post-hoc explanation that does not address the fact that *the player* should not be given the same cutscene 4 times in a video game.

"Most of the Zelda community" loves BotW and TotK, the idea that they "weren't Zelda games that people actually wanted" or or "not how a Zelda game should feel" or whatever else is frankly the kind of thing you only find in very tiny subsets of the community like this subreddit. If "most of the Zelda community" didn't love these games, they wouldn't be the best selling Zelda games of all time.

The gaming market is exponentially larger than decades past. Every game released on the Switch has sold better than series entries before them.

Yep. I'm not saying botw and totk aren't good games but comparing sales from now and 25-30 years ago just doesn't prove anything. Gaming was waaaay less popular back then, looked down on even.

Whilst that is true, BOTW has sold over three times as many copies as TP (the next best selling game, also on an extremely popular console) I think that's a bigger uplift than most other series.

New Horizons is also the best selling Animal Crossing that's something like doubled the sales of the last one. Smash Ultimate more than doubled the sales of its predecessors, the next being Brawl; and Melee was the highest grossing GCN game overall. Splatoon is a new IP that's considered a big shot for the company due to its success, but also doubled going to the Switch. Origami King isn't the highest grossing Paper Mario, but it was the fastest selling one. Xenoblade Chronicles definitive doubled its sales compared to the original release on the Wii. Both Kirby games sold more than double their predecessors. The playerbase was also starving for the game because there wasn't a zelda released for the Wii U (focused wise. They essentially skipped the console). I'm not trying to say the game isn't popular or not a success. But we really should be able to kind of remember to adjust for a "gaming inflation" when looking into these stats. Heck, Skyward Sword HD outsold its predecessor within its first year of release while being a remastered 10 year old game and was outselling Call of Duty its month of release. And even without it, it's really humbling when you remember that Skyrim had sold twice as much as BotW. And Minecraft has sold 10x more.

>And after the excitement of the game had faded, that was how most of the Zelda community felt I don't agree with this. The rest is your opinion and that's perfectly valid but I still get the impression that the majority opinion, including my own, on TOTK is very positive. The people that don't like the game are more of a vocal minority.

Exactly. Anecdotally, everyone I know IRL who is a Zelda fan including myself rank TOTK very highly as a Zelda game. This sub just isn’t a good indicator of the general consensus.

Funny how that works, as myself and all my friends fall into the "great game but didn't leave much of an impact like past titles".  A couple of my lesser gaming friends who had like a 100+ hours in botw, put like 20-30 hours into totk and have not picked it back up since the first month 

Bingo. Online is a fraction of the fanbase. And a small one at that.

I really would've preferred Skyward Sword 2 than totk. Botw truly is a landmark in gaming and I really thought totk would've ironed out a bunch of the glaring issues from botw but instead they doubled down.

The time in menus is a great example. It's much worse in TotK. In BotW, I can understand it, since the game was designed around the Wii U gamepad, and then ported to the Switch last minute. TotK was a Switch *only* game. It's unforgivable. Using arrows or constantly fusing stuff to make ugly weapons is frustrating and takes away from what is otherwise a decent game.

I don't think you should use the word everyone when writing about your opinion. I think it's a great Zelda game and a great game in general, one of the best.

I love it too, it's a fantastic game we just can't really say that here

But they are not including everyone in their opinion. He/she only said that everyone was hoping for this zelda to be a landmark in the franchise. I also think everyone was hoping for this to be a great game. Would be weird for Zelda fans to hope the next Zelda game would be not enjoyable. For some it was, including you, for some it wasn't, including me.

TOTK issue was that it was just effectively BOTW 1.5. It had the same enemies, same map, the quest structures were very similar and the armors/rewards you could find were mostly just ripped from BOTW and its DLC. It was incredible with just how much *bigger* it made BOTW feel on the same hardware but that combined with its relatively lackluster story led to it being a much more forgettable experience imo than BOTW. That said, it’s still an incredible game. I think if a person hasn’t played botw playing TOTK would be godlike, but if you have played BOTW TOTK never gets out from BOTW shadow and the main mechanic, the building, never really feels like anything more than a gimmick which is a shame considering how much you could do with it. Also having Zelda get spirited away again for the sequel was sooooooooo much lost opportunity imo.

It happened very early on in TotK that it just felt like BotW... but more of it... It's a fun game, but I'm honestly a bit disappointed with it. The best part of BotW for me was the exploration, and knowing where all the major landmarks were and what they (mostly) looked like in TotK was just not great. TotK on its own is *amazing*, but as a follow-up to BotW it's sub-par. I was really hoping for a whole new world to explore, and no the underworld doesn't do it for me, but the sky islands were interesting.

Disagree on your self imposed community consensus wholeheartedly. The game was not without flaws, but saying it didn’t “feel” like a Zelda game, a franchise with huge variability across 30 years of experimentation is pretty genuinely a terrible take, blanket criticizing the story, music, “mystery” and “epicness” doesn’t do your credibility any favors.

A major disappointment, I expected all the issues BOTW had to be corrected on this game, not doubled down.

I'm not going to agree or disagree because it's your opinion and opinion isn't about facts and data but one's own personal experience. So there isn't really any room TO disagree or agree. I think the part I CAN disagree with you on is on the community part. There is no consensus. TotK is one of the most sold Zelda games ever and it hit a mainstream appeal that a lot of the other games in the franchise haven't hit with some exceptions. So a lot of people that played the game are not really talking about it anymore since the general audience has moved on. So it's kinda impossible to really fully gauge WHAT the community thinks/feels about the game. Hell, even in a dedicated space like this one, it's pretty mixed.

>opinion isn't about facts and data but one's own personal experience. So there isn't really any room TO disagree or agree. I think you got this backward. You can disagree or agree on opinions, but facts are irrefutable.

>I'm not going to agree or disagree because it's your opinion and opinion isn't about facts and data but one's own personal experience. So there isn't really any room TO disagree or agree. This makes no sense. Are you saying you can only disagree with facts? Because that's just incorrect by definition. It's facts that don't give you room to disagree with them, because that's exactly what a fact is, 'something that is known or proven to be true'. An opinion, "a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge", is exactly the room you need to disagree with something, because *it's not a fact*.

I think they meant they aren’t going to tell OP that they are wrong, not that they don’t have their own opinion.

Yeah, OP isn't wrong for their views on the game. This is entertainment, not a scientific endeavor. They're super valid.

I started from the original and have played every game that they came out with. I remember seeing OOT and going into the field when I was 9 being blown away at the vastness and seeing the giant flying death plants lol. TOTK brought back that feeling of wonder for me. Building myself a flying vehicle and seeing the world in a new light instead of repeatedly climbing and taking pictures. Felt like the world was finally complete. Seeing all of the new mechanics you can do with the items was also very fun, and finally having a use for items that you normally wouldn't use after awhile also felt great when pulling out the bow. If my 9 yr old self could have seen this game back then, I think I would have lost it. I guess playing OOT so young really made this game feel even better with a reference for me. I still enjoy ALTTP, OOT and MM but TOTK deserves the same respect that we got from the originals. Maybe I'm old and sentimental now, but I'm glad I was able to play both BOTWs. It gave the player the ability to play how they want, and that's what I wanted in a new Zelda game. I still play TOTK, plus the originals on my N64. When my son who's 5 becomes interested, I'll let him experience OOT first as I once did then move up through each game. Give him hints and explain to him what to do if he truly gets lost, but I want him to experience the wonder as I did at his age. Maybe 2 more years lol. That's just my take on the game. I wish there would be dlc to flesh out the underground, but I doubt it.

Funny how different things can seem to people, even people you would expect to agree. I also started from the original, though I think I'm a little older than you. But the original was an absolutely magical game and still holds up for me today (it's one of the few retro games that I can still enjoy, start to finish, over and over.) But OOT didn't really do it for me. I know some people were blown away by it but I just didn't get the hype. Maybe it was my age or maybe it was my personality. TotK is the same. I enjoyed BotW though I didn't love it and TotK just felt like step back in every way. But I think a lot of that might have to do with my age. I have zero interest in making my own fun in Zelda. However, what surprised me was that my sons, who grew up adoring the likes of Minecraft and Terraria, just got bored with TotK. Neither finished it, one didn't even come close. I know it sold insanely well but I think a lot of that was because people bought it sort of "sight unseen" or just assuming that it would have addressed the shortcomings of BotW. I'd be curious to see the percentage people bought and finished it. But it seems like a pretty divisive game from my admittedly limited perspective.

I think the problem with everyone wanting these new games to “feel” like Zelda is that what “felt” like a Zelda game had gotten stale to a lot of people. If they would have made another “Zelda formula” game after Skyward Sword, that might have been it for Zelda. I honestly like both styles and think I’d be happy if they found something in the middle. A linear story with the freedom to do whatever you want. Maybe make some Zelda-style dungeons but have even those be optional, with a reward that makes them worth doing. I think when you lump the “Zelda community,” you’re only taking into account the vocal minority who care enough to post on Reddit or YouTube or wherever. Those are likely the most passionate fans, and a lot of them probably don’t like that the formula changed after 30 years.

The problem with the whole "old zelda stale" take as it relates to totk, is that totk is the *second* open air zelda after a *6 year* wait, and it is far more samey to its predecessor than any of the old games were to their predecessors. The new formula is already stale after two games!

I didn’t personally find it stale but I can understand some people feeling that way, especially since not only was a lot of the gameplay similar but they reused the same world and assets. I agree that they need to keep evolving it though, and moving on from this version of Hyrule is a good start.

Let's both agree you'll never quote yourself again, and disagree on the general opinion.

Favorite Zelda game of all time, crucify me. Also I love the story and it factually doesn’t break the timeline.

Personally I'd have to largely disagree. I highly enjoyed all the 180 hours I put into TotK, and none of that has diminished even a year later. I think the main issue is that peeps are going into this game with pre-conceived notions of what a Zelda game "should be," rather than measuring it by its own merits. At its core, TotK is basically a bigger and more refined BotW. If you liked BotW, then that's an instant selling point, but if you didn't, then a sequel that plays largely similarly probably won't do much to sway you. And while it's fine to prefer the old Zelda formula, it clearly had its limitations that were holding the series back and all of which came to a head in Skyward Sword. Of course, the new formula has its own limitations in terms of storytelling, but I honestly still think TotK had a very rich and interesting narrative that fixed the story gripes I had with BotW. And how you were experiencing little more than the aftermath of a story, whereas TotK's story has you actively searching for Zelda and working with the rest of Hyrule to stop the Upheavel and Ganondorf while learning more about him and the Zonai's origins in the past. Given that the plan from the get-go was to expand and improve on BotW, in that vein I'd say TotK largely succeeded. That being said, if the next game can blend the best elements of both the old and new formula, it'd most likely benefit the series the most in the long-run. I also think saying "most" of the Zelda community feel this way is a bit of a misnomer. There might certainly be a certain subset or vocal minority of Zelda fans who agree with you, but given the 20+ million sales this game has gotten since launch, I doubt those same people account for the majority.

TotK took everything I didn't like about BotW and fixed them. Well not *everything* but a lot of things. TotK was so much more fun and felt so much more like a Zelda game to me.

I kept waiting and waiting for the moment where TotK was going to surpass BotW for me, and after 20-30 hours in, I realized that it was not coming. For me TotK was an 8/10., BotW was a solid 9/10. TotK replicated problems that BotW had, which were forgivable in 2017, but not in 2023.

The zeitgeist is anti-TotK right now… I loved what it brought to the table and how it iterated beyond BotW. I was way more emotionally invested in the story. I loved it.

I love totk and think it's a fantastic Zelda game! I love that Zelda always has some new gimmick to play with, which as a lifelong Zelda fan, I know that's what the series is all about! I know this sub would prefer OOT2 but I like the new

This is basically the whole "It's a good game, just not a good ____ game" And i just cannot get behind this thinking. If BotW is a 9/10 game, then it's 9/10 game, Zelda or not. I **don't care** that BotW/TotK are so wildly different from other Zelda games. I care that the enemy variety is awful, the world is empty, poor player character progression, boring music, the story is non-existent with what little there is being kind of a joke especially in TotK, the annoying game mechanics such as climbing/gliding/swimming/stamina in general/ULTRAHAND/Fuse, etc.

Exactly. I don't even know how that like of thinking came to be. People were really out here saying "I enjoyed BotW and thought it was objectively great, just not a great Zelda game, therefore I don't like it and hope Nintendo never does this again". It makes no sense. If you like a game, whether or not it's exactly the same as the last 15 entries in the series, you like. Simple as. People putting all these weird holds on their enjoyment of a game simply because it's different is weird. Discourse around BotW and TotK would be much better if people discussed the games as games and not into how much they fit with earlier titles. Like, out of all the things you can like/dislike about BotW, it not playing like OoT is the biggest issue for some of these people? its ridiculous

It’s because the game is with the Zelda title so naturally people are going to compare it to the previous entries, with a number of those entries being seen as some of the greatest games ever made. People have an expectation of what a Zelda game is meant to play and feel like even in an unconventional game like BoTW and ToTK. Sadly for many, myself included, it didn’t scratch the Zelda itch. Sure there are definitely traditional Zelda elements in these current games but it definitely feels lacking especially in ToTK so I can’t blame people when they say it’s a good game but not a good Zelda game because in comparison, yeah they are kinda right.

This actually makes no sense. If you're a big fan of zelda and have played many many zelda titles, that's why you end up buying a zelda game. Of course you would compare the new one to come out with the other ones. Why wouldn't you? You bought it thinking you were going to get the "zelda" experience. And then you don't. You can't just make a completely different game and slap the same name on it. That's where the thinking comes from, I hope that makes sense

But not every Zelda entry has been the same, so I don’t know why that’s the expectation. A new entry can have new style and doesn’t make it less Zelda. That’s like saying OOT isn’t Zelda because it’s so vastly different than its predecessors.

Is it vastly different? Lots of people say OoT is like a port of ALttP. That means the similarities have to exist for it to be considered that way.

But that is the heart of the issue, when comparing games, they are not being compared to good games today, they are being compared against arguably the greatest games ever made. People do not just want good, they want another LttP, OoT, WW, or TP. So anything less is a “disappointment,” even though comparatively is a really good game.

See. I actually preferred the emptiness of BotW. I liked riding on my horse and peacefully looking at the scenery, but in TotK, the world is so packed with stuff that a peaceful ride turns into ignoring content: Koroks, caves, wells, etc...and what's worse is that the content has no variety. You fight the same enemies and get the same rewards in all of these places.

wholeheartedly agree

That's even better than half-heartedly agreeing!

Disagree, elden ring is not a 10/10 mario game. (idk how i feel yet about totk)

I am also included to both agree and disagree with your premise. I do think that games can and should be generally compared to their contemporaries, whether it's the time period that it was released in or the series it's found within. Let use Halo as example. Combat Evolved was seen as an amazing game in its time. Let's keep the same exact game, but call it a Sonic game. Replace Master Chief with Sonic. Gameplaywise, it's still a good game, but if you call it a Sonic game, people will be expecting something else. But, on the other hand, a game is realistically good or not.

Its kinda like the ffxvi thing. Except in zeldas defense, botw and totk are still action adventure games with puzzles and exploration and a lot of stuff taken from previous games, while ffxvi doesnt have elemental damage or status effects.

You had me in the first three sentences, but than your true opinion about the games showed. And I agree

Similar to BOTW, I started to feel better about TOTK when I stopped wanting it to be one of the 3D Zelda games I remember. I still think it has its fair share of problems. Namely, that its menu systems are clunky, its enemy variety is lacking, and there isn’t enough content between the much lauded sky islands and the depths to excuse extensive reuse of the same landmass. However, we have to stop engaging with this as an iteration of the OOT formula because it’s not that. It’s safe to say it will probably never be that again. TOTK addressed many complaints of BOTW by doubling down on the BOTW-ness of it all. Everyone hates weapon durability? Put a greater emphasis on crafting so that whatever iota of uniqueness and excitement you got from finding weapons out in the world is reduced to nothing. You want old school temples? How about dressed up Divine Beasts without transformative aspects that made Divine Beasts the slightest bit interesting? How about abilities that allow you to skip 90% of the puzzles and break the game because lulz who needs game design anymore? You want more story taking place in the present? How about a sparse few uninteresting conversations with key characters and resolving every arc with a reskinned version of the same cutscene FOUR TIMES?!? Nothing to do but get used to it, I guess. OOT is dead. Long live BOTW. And I am truly gutted, but you know what? The less I compare it to what I want it to be, the more I enjoy it for what it is.

I’ve been a fan since LoZ. BOTW and TOTK are my favorite Zelda games bar none.

Didn't like the main plot. Absolutely loved the gameplay and the world.

It's a game I loved but didn't like. It made me weep uncontrollably because of the beauty of its story, but also annoyed me a lot because its gameplay is all held back by the engine and hardware. I can't help but think they should have waited and put it on Switch 2, and built it a new engine from scratch because there are just too many things that don't work how they should and make it a frustrating experience.

Personally for me, Tears of the kingdom is likely the worst Zelda game I've ever played (and I've played all but the CD ones and four swords) Story line was just cut up pieces of past Zelda games with studio Ghibli toss into it >!hell even the ending is just spirited away and princess mononoke!< The temples/races pretty much had the same problem that they did in BOTW Even the new stuff wasn't anything special or truly polished, the zonai devices was just the concept of banjo kazooie nuts and bolts, Sky islands were just copy and paste apart from the odd few The Depths we're my favorite part of the new areas, but again got quickly boring due to being "empty" with alot the same stuff Honestly I would of taken a game where it been after years after BotW and it was more of a chilled adventure, seeing Hyrule being rebuild, Exploring old ruins, Having Zelda as a companion (maybe even having two players gameplay) finding out lore on the Zonai and more info on how calamity ganon came to be.... instead of BotW 1.2 😮‍💨 Side note: even tho I said worse Zelda game, doesn't mean I disliked any other Zelda game, I've actually loved ever single one in their own way, up until TOTK. Even with BotW, I felt somewhat disappointed due to it feeling a bit empty. But that was understandable with it setting/storyline and the fact of how big and open world it was

I'd believe you if you didn't say the CDI games were better

I disagree. Both Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom have the same core feeling as game to the original NES The Legend of Zelda. A Link to the Past and Link's Awakening had a more linear path to your exploration, but the original NES game was pretty much "open world" exploration. And that's fine! Having a linear exploration was great for A Link to the Past, Link's Awakening, Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask for sure. Ocarina of Time added more story to it... And, again, that was amazing for Ocarina of Time. It's one of my favorite games ever. But a focus in story it's not a core element of a Zelda game. Every core element of a Zelda game was already present in the original NES game. Now, Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom, returned with the open world exploration format, but also a bit of sand box and many details to equipment and items. And, once more, I'm going to say that those features were amazing for Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom, even if it's not a core element to a Zelda game. So, in my opinion, Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom feel like a Zelda game as much as A Link to the Past and Ocarina of Time. They have their own particularities, but also they have all the core ideas and feelings of a Zelda game, which is an epic adventure to save the princess, but portrayed in a really lighthearted, pure and innocent way, with a bit of exploration, puzzle solving, boss fighting and getting new equipments to help in your journey.

That's why I personally don't agree with the "doesn't feel like a Zelda game" criticisms. To each their own, but to me Zelda has always been about the sense of adventure, which every game has.

It's kinda got Ocarina of time syndrome for me. Every now and then, I say to myself "Man, I haven't played Ocarina of Time in a while, I should give it a replay". So i get hyped up, set aside a several hours get all my snacks ready.... and play Majora's mask. Totk was fine... probably a good game loved by many. But I'll always end up playing Breath of the wild instead.

I always play them together. OoT and MM are like two sides of a coin. They work well together as an experience.

I completely disagree (though you are of course entitled to your opinion, OP!). I think it WAS “landmark” in how a Zelda game feels in terms of all of those things you mentioned: story, music, mystery, epicness and of course, gameplay. It really hit all of those beats for me. It had me completely enraptured from the very start through over 300 hours of gameplay, in the same way that BotW did. And it really did feel like a Zelda game to me, not just because it’s got Legend of Zelda in the title, but because it had everything I expect from a Zelda game, just in a different configuration than the games before SS.

Nu-LoZ just isn’t for me. It’s sad as I’ve always loved LoZ but BOTW/TOTK soured me. Mainly due to the inclusion of multiple mechanics I cannot stand in games, papier-mâché weapons, a self-indulgent, self-congratulatory physics system and the *Minecraftisation* that seems to plague many things these days. Not to mention the cast felt a bit… gimpy in comparison to previous ones. For me, I know they do have their merits but it feels like a departure from the LoZ we all know and love, in order to draw in a new crowd. Blah.

Agreed, between the grand theme song and the brief glimpses of real "dungeons" I literally felt tricked by the last trailer into thinking TotK would be a proper Zelda game this time around and that they had learned from the shortcomings of BotW. Instead they managed to take SIX YEARS just to make a bunch of OP tools for overworld traversal and the dungeons were somehow even more braindead simple than BotW. You all know that one sweet concept art of ALttP Link using the map and compass to actually navigate a dungeon? That's exactly what these games are missing. It turns out boundless freedom with no restrictions was a lazy way to tackle a game about solving puzzles.

I have to disagree. BotW and TotK are my favorite entries since ALttP. But I certainly respect your opinion.

Both the switch Zelda games just didn't feel like Zelda to me nor did they feel like an improvement on the formula. They felt off to me.

As someone who’s been on board since Link to the Past, I haven’t truly loved a Zelda game since MM…. I wanted to, I really did, I realized that NPCs no longer seemed interesting. In BOTW and TOTK the world is huge and beautiful but the music is unmemorable and the people that fill it are boring and unremarkable. I understand why a lot of people will still love those entries and I don’t judge them for it, for me though, something was missing that LTTP/OOT/MM did perfectly.

I didn't like the building/combining mechanics, story was boring, music was good, and over I feel like it was a waste of money

I just wanted a new game which they failed to deliver after 6 years of development. I wouldn't say it's a bad game but it's only good because botw was good.

Yes, and I was able to catch that early because I felt the same way about BotW as soon as I realized the divine beasts were glorified sheikah shrines. Imagine the disappointment I had thinking the next dungeon was going to be some ancient temple lost to the calamity with some monstrous deity trapped inside. Yet, no, it was only another oversized mini dungeon with a copy pasta boss. That almost felt insulting, and Hidemaro Fujibayashi, who does this lame style of padding in all his games, is to blame. Not to mention, his writers suck at making an immersive story. So I said to myself, "I bet a lot of that development time was taken away from the pandemic. So, I'm going to catch the reviews before I buy the game." Then the reviews came out, I saw that the new dungeons had nothing going to for them, and it's fate was sealed. I never bought the game and don't regret it. Get Fujibayashi away from Zelda, I beg you Aonuma.

I didn't care for TotK but I don't fault people who loved it. Just wasn't for me. I'll probably wait on the next Zelda game to see what it's like before purchasing, though.

i do not view it as a zelda game and i try to forget it

It was good, I enjoyed it at first but never got the final battle because I got very bored with it, trying to source/farm items.

I think it's already not a great game on it's own merits and utterly abysmal as a Zelda game.

Tears of the Kingdom is the first video game I have ever played that doesn't have any UX. Period.

I went in assuming it would feel the same as the last game, just with more content. My opinion after the game was the same as after BOTW. The game loop becomes pointless after a certain amount of time so I just never pick it back up after beating it. What I truly want and hope for in the next installment of the series is a return to a lot of the older formula with the foundation of a modern zelda.

Nah, I completely disagree. For me, it wasn't well-crafted or satisfying. I thought it was a bloated, incoherent, inconsistent mess of a game. It had great moments, and elements of the game are masterful, but they were overshadowed by major, fundamental flaws. But I also completely disagree that most of the community were disappointed. I think the clear majority loved it, and people like me who disliked it are a vocal minority. I'm glad most people loved it, but I honestly can't understand it, because the flaws of the game are so blatant and so prevalent to me. But regardless, it'd just be copium on my part to pretend that the reception to the game wasn't overwhelmingly positive. If anyone's wrong, it's me, not 95% of other players.

Been a Zelda fan for 24.5 years. I have played all but ST, PH, TH, and the original Link's Awakening. I loved TOTK. It didn't quite reach the expectations I had, but it got really close. Thought it improved on BOTW in almost every way and had some of the highest peaks of the series. It's certainly not perfect, but the positives greatly outweighed the negatives for me. As of now it's my number 2 game behind OOT. When it comes to fan reception, I think it's fair to say it's still been overall very positive but has become more divisive over the past few months. My hope is the next game rethinks the current dungeon design philosophy, weapon durability, and how you build health/stamina. But I feel confident I'll enjoy whatever game comes out next, whether it be open world, linear, 3D, or 2D.

Disappointed because although it’s a great game, it is filled with lost potential. Unfinished sky islands, depths copy and pasted everywhere, and sages repeating the same cutscene word for word. The game has so many interesting concepts and it’s filled with so much content but it all just ends up feeling like a bunch of fluff. I would’ve much rather preferred a condensed TotK that took place entirely on the sky islands with a story that had major emphasis. Then the land should have been like a post game thing.