LogFAQs > #975471315

GeneralKenobi85 posted...

The game isn't padded out though. What they did was fill the world with a lot of stuff and let the player decide whether they want to engage with it or not. You still do have to adhere to certain gameplay mechanics, but everything else is up to you. You can do just the main quest, or do all the shrines, or try and 100% the entire game. Ultimately, whether this content is meaningful or not is highly subjective. But clearly there are many more people who do think it is meaningful than those that don't.

I do heavily agree that if Nintendo does continue in this direction with Zelda, they should also continue making traditional Zelda games. There's no reason multiple Zelda games can't be worked on at once, especially if you assume the second series would be a 2D Zelda.

Open world collectathons are always padded. Compare side quests now to how side quests used to be. In the SNES Final Fantasies, there are only about 5 side quests in each, but they are mostly pretty good and all give you something useful, like a new summon, the Paladin Shield, etc. In Final Fantasy 16 there are probably 50 side quests, but most of them will suck and give you nothing but Potions and Gil. Breath of the Wilds quests are no different. A few of them are good, most of them arent. A small number of Shrines are good, most of them arent, etc.

I dont even so much mind it being open world, but I think it would be a much better game if the world was a quarter of the size and they put a lot more effort into fleshing it out.

What you said though is correct. This is especially true when the TotK sequel will probably cost a thousand times what it would cost to make a 2D Zelda and would take multiple times longer to make, so making a 2D Zelda carries no risk.