The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild Wild West - The Bear and Badger

Escape

Chocka with spoilage:

Climbing and gliding really saves its openworld play, 'cause I realise when watching that how much sightseeing there is.

stonechalice

I can barely tell the difference. Looks a bit darker. This stuff is a bit pointless. The game looks stunning as it is.

dynamiteReady

60 frames is always welcome though.

Escape

And Sanic

stonechalice

Again, dark as fuck. I've no idea what the point is.

hylian_elf

Why even bother? Looks fine as it is.

three1ne

Loving the immediate start to this game. Not too much hand holding. Great making your way to the first village and exploring as much or as little as you wish. Dialogue is still slow, find myself skipping though it.

Playing this along side Mario is really odd. Totally different gameplay and controls. Might stick with Mario for another few weeks before I get solidly back into this.

hylian_elf

Sod Mario, play this.

mistercrayon

I found Mario to be structurally very similar. Both games are almost two interpretations of a single aim.

Dark Soldier

mistercrayon wrote:

I found Mario to be structurally very similar. Both games are almost two interpretations of a single aim.

YES

Raiziel

mistercrayon wrote:

I found Mario to be structurally very similar. Both games are almost two interpretations of a single aim.

How so?

Escape

The little men run around.

[Deleted User]

I see very little similarity in structure.

mistercrayon

Raiziel wrote:

mistercrayon wrote:

I found Mario to be structurally very similar. Both games are almost two interpretations of a single aim.

How so?

Both are games about exploring. The framing of each scene ensures you see something that makes you want to go there and both will reward you for going to the place you think looks interesting. The games both carry this loop of

ooh shiny
Go there
Ooh another shiny.
...

And so on.

There are differences,the way you move and the rewards (zelda is slower and often rewards going somewhere with a challenge shrine, while Mario has the challenge as part of the getting there and the ends with a token)

Raiziel

That sounds like an awful lot of games to me. So they’re only alike in the broadest of definitions. In my opinion obvs.

mistercrayon

I could be underestimating other games do this (hey if you can tell me more - I guess Skyrims and Fallout?!), but, I disagree that it’s something a lot of games do.

I specifically said “framing” and by that I mean the enticements are visually crafted in game, using the scenery to filter out most and highlight one or two max interesting thing. This is also coupled with zero explicit instructions.

All of this is within the architecture of the world as opposed to a dot on a map.

It’s interesting that both came out this year from Nintendo.

dynamiteReady

Andy wrote:

I see very little similarity in structure.

More info, perhaps?

three1ne

I agree there is a great similarity visually, within framing. Although Mario has immediate reward Where as Zelda is about stamina and patience.

And also the fucking controls. I'm too old to adapt to a different jump button in any one evening.

[Deleted User]

dynamiteReady wrote:

Andy wrote:

I see very little similarity in structure.

More info, perhaps?

Odyssey is divided into set levels, which must be progressed linearly. Sure, you can backtrack, but you cannot progress to the next area until you’ve done a specific number of things, some of which are set in stone. BotW is an open world which can be roamed as you please. You can abandon tasks mid way, pick up side quests, then return to those half completed tasks as you see fit. You can have multiple pending tasks at any time. With Odyssey, you can’t really do that. If you are sidetracked, you have to see it through, or start again. The gameplay structure is built on trial and retrial until a result is achieved in a set way. There is no emergence like we see in BotW

As such, the signposting Crayon is referring to is, imho, totally different in the two games. As has been discussed, in BotW it is designed to funnel you towards things in a manner that feels like you found it. In Odyssey, it is simply the case of starting each level with the camera showing you your ultimate goal; it’s no different from 1001 other 3D games in that respect. The clever funnelling is absent, it’s a sledgehammer knocking your face to look in the direction of your main objective.

The structural similarities begin and end at ‘navigate avatar around environment in order to complete objectives’, at which point we’d be as well saying that all videogamedom is structurally the same.

Raiziel

Andy taking the long way around to say...

Raiziel wrote:

That sounds like an awful lot of games to me.

But well said, Andy.

hylian_elf

I was just ignoring it. Yes, well done Andy for taking the time.

mistercrayon

never mind.

mistercrayon

never mind.

Raiziel

None of those things are new.

Dark Soldier

I'm with ya Crayon, sod em.

dynamiteReady

Andy wrote:

I see very little similarity in structure.

More info, perhaps?

Odyssey is divided into set levels, which must be progressed linearly. Sure, you can backtrack, but you cannot progress to the next area until you’ve done a specific number of things, some of which are set in stone. BotW is an open world which can be roamed as you please. You can abandon tasks mid way, pick up side quests, then return to those half completed tasks as you see fit. You can have multiple pending tasks at any time. With Odyssey, you can’t really do that. If you are sidetracked, you have to see it through, or start again. The gameplay structure is built on trial and retrial until a result is achieved in a set way. There is no emergence like we see in BotW As such, the signposting Crayon is referring to is, imho, totally different in the two games. As has been discussed, in BotW it is designed to funnel you towards things in a manner that feels like you found it. In Odyssey, it is simply the case of starting each level with the camera showing you your ultimate goal; it’s no different from 1001 other 3D games in that respect. The clever funnelling is absent, it’s a sledgehammer knocking your face to look in the direction of your main objective. The structural similarities begin and end at ‘navigate avatar around environment in order to complete objectives’, at which point we’d be as well saying that all videogamedom is structurally the same.

I mostly agree with that, but you have to concede that there are some similarities in some of the challenges offered by both games.

To liken Korok seed placement in many instances to the location of a good number of Mario moons, is an undeniable one, for sure. Another parallel can also be drawn between the function of Mario's 'hat doors' and the shrines in BotW.

These are pretty large components of both games.

So yeah, on a superficial level, I definitely agree with you. They are as different as you have explained...

But both games are also doing very similar things to encourage prolonged play, and in that, it's fair for people to confuse some aspects of both experiences.

three1ne

Nice to have caused a mild argument. Proud of myself.

[Deleted User]

dynamiteReady wrote:

I mostly agree with that, but you have to concede that there are some similarities in some of the challenges offered by both games. To liken Korok seed placement in many instances to the location of a good number of Mario moons, is an undeniable one, for sure.

No, I can deny that fairly easily.

dynamiteReady wrote:

Another parallel can also be drawn between the function of Mario's 'hat doors' and the shrines in BotW.

I’m a little more minded to agree with this, but I still don’t think it’s sufficient to support some unifying theory that doesn’t just come down to ‘videogames’.

dynamiteReady wrote:

These are pretty large components of both games. So yeah, on a superficial level, I definitely agree with you. They are as different as you have explained... But both games are also doing very similar things to encourage prolonged play, and in that, it's fair for people to confuse some aspects of both experiences.

Again, they’re not doing anything so similar to each other that doesn’t also make them similar to all games with collectibles.

[Deleted User]

dynamiteReady wrote:

I mostly agree with that, but you have to concede that there are some similarities in some of the challenges offered by both games. To liken Korok seed placement in many instances to the location of a good number of Mario moons, is an undeniable one, for sure.

No, I can deny that pretty easily.

dynamiteReady wrote:

Another parallel can also be drawn between the function of Mario's 'hat doors' and the shrines in BotW.

I’ll give you that one. But I don’t see that it supports some unifying theory that somehow doesn’t include all other videogames.

dynamiteReady wrote:

These are pretty large components of both games. So yeah, on a superficial level, I definitely agree with you. They are as different as you have explained... But both games are also doing very similar things to encourage prolonged play, and in that, it's fair for people to confuse some aspects of both experiences.

The similar things they’re doing to encourage prolonged play are collectibles. Again, ‘videogames’.

[Deleted User]

That’s what happens when you think you’ve lost a post to the ether, redo it, then find out it did save.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories