Poll of the Day > Why are people upset about the Tears of the Kingdom gameplay

(+) Yeah! (+)

papercup posted...

Apparently the day 1 patch already went out and people are reporting big performance gains.

can confirm

went from chugging from a swarm of keese in a field to buttery smooth, making any sort of attached creation of more than 2 things doesn't chug anymore either

ConfusedTorchic posted...

the headline is

Everything Were Learning About Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom

later they changed it to

Everything Were Learning About Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom From The Leaks

That's a good change, then. The former is indeed inadequate spoiler warning.

4 days! @_@

You guys remember that scene in Windwaker where Link stabbed Ganondorf in the fucking head

Blightzkrieg posted...

You guys remember that scene in Windwaker where Link stabbed Ganondorf in the fucking head

I was thinking about that recently Fond memories

Blightzkrieg posted...

You guys remember that scene in Windwaker where Link stabbed Ganondorf in the fucking head

And he dies again in Twilight Princess and loses the Triforce.

There's no real Zelda timeline, Nintendo just makes it up as they go along because it isn't important to them.

papercup posted...

There's no real Zelda timeline, Nintendo just makes it up as they go along because it isn't important to them.

Makes sense. All that matters is they make a game thats fun

papercup posted...

And he dies again in Twilight Princess and loses the Triforce.

There's no real Zelda timeline, Nintendo just makes it up as they go along because it isn't important to them.

I still can't fucking believe they made a "link just dies" timeline for OoT, what absolute legends, we should have that for every game

is there even a triforce in botw

Nintendo DMCA'd tools to extract validation keys from Switch hardware to use in emulators, and people are losing their minds over it. You people have been openly bragging about illegally pirating a game that hasn't even officially released yet, streaming it, rubbing it in people's faces, dumping spoilers at every opportunity, and you act fucking shocked when Nintendo slaps back. And this is fresh off the heels of Nintendo turning Gary Bowser into a wage slave for doing exactly what you're doing. No, pirating TotK is not "game preservation", it's not "sticking it to the man", it's not "morally right", it's theft. You can *maybe* make the argument that older Nintendo games that they don't sell anymore are okay to emulate, that's *possibly* preservation, but anyway you slice it, it's still theft.

WW and TP are separate Timelines, thus separate Ganondorfs.

Blightzkrieg posted...

I still can't fucking believe they made a "link just dies" timeline for OoT, what absolute legends, we should have that for every game

Which makes no sense. It is supposed to be several timelines, that can come from the actions of 1, not a multiverse.

If anything "The hero died", should be a discarded timeline and from what I remember, enough is changed in the past, later in the game, to excuse the original future being replaced, but that original future obviously has no Link then, with G still alive.

papercup posted...

Nintendo DMCA'd tools to extract validation keys from Switch hardware to use in emulators, and people are losing their minds over it. You people have been openly bragging about illegally pirating a game that hasn't even officially released yet, streaming it, rubbing it in people's faces, dumping spoilers at every opportunity, and you act fucking shocked when Nintendo slaps back. And this is fresh off the heels of Nintendo turning Gary Bowser into a wage slave for doing exactly what you're doing. No, pirating TotK is not "game preservation", it's not "sticking it to the man", it's not "morally right", it's theft. You can *maybe* make the argument that older Nintendo games that they don't sell anymore are okay to emulate, that's *possibly* preservation, but anyway you slice it, it's still theft.

Copyright infringement is copying. Theft is taking.

papercup posted...

Nintendo DMCA'd tools to extract validation keys from Switch hardware to use in emulators, and people are losing their minds over it. You people have been openly bragging about illegally pirating a game that hasn't even officially released yet, streaming it, rubbing it in people's faces, dumping spoilers at every opportunity, and you act fucking shocked when Nintendo slaps back. And this is fresh off the heels of Nintendo turning Gary Bowser into a wage slave for doing exactly what you're doing. No, pirating TotK is not "game preservation", it's not "sticking it to the man", it's not "morally right", it's theft. You can *maybe* make the argument that older Nintendo games that they don't sell anymore are okay to emulate, that's *possibly* preservation, but anyway you slice it, it's still theft.

Yeah, as much as Nintendo's definitely been excessive about trying to clamp down on leaks, there's absolutely zero room to complain about them wanting to stop people from straight-up pirating a game that isn't even out yet. Old games that aren't sold anymore are fair game (and in fact should outright be public domain, but that's beside the point), but in this case they're just being entitled pricks who don't want to have to pay for something they want.

Revelation34 posted...

Copyright infringement is copying. Theft is taking.

It's availing yourself of a service without paying for it. It's not as clear-cut as theft because there aren't concrete losses, but it's no less entitled and on a broad scale it does have financial consequences for the producer (at least for current products).

the dmca against lockpick rcm seems to have been dropped, actually

because it's very much still there on github

Am I the only one who thinks a sequel should be similar but with improvements? Why change the main part of the overworld if it is a sequel? It's not like your in a new land.

As someone who has never played BotW because of the broken weapon system, this fusion system isn't enough for me so I'm not buying it anyways, I think the game looks like what a sequel should be.

Yeah game studios reusing assets is WAY more common than people realize. Textures, animations, models, skeletons rigs, sound effects, music, and maps all get reused all the time. God of War Ragnarok reuses the map from the first game. Red Dead Redemotion's map is contained inside the RDR2 map. From Software has been using the same models and animations and skeletons for 15 years now. All of Call of Duty. Nobody cares when those games do it. But when Zelda does it, all of a sudden it's a massive issue.

botw has a massive world that is woefully barren, them reusing it in the direct sequel is fine and expected lol

Tora_Sami posted...

As someone who has never played BotW because of the broken weapon system

Honestly, the durability issue is grossly overblown. I'd call it a mistake to include it, since it doesn't really add anything of value to the game and is more annoying than anything else (to say nothing of how thematically out of place it is for Zelda), but it ultimately doesn't really hurt the game. It's definitely not enough to avoid the game entirely over it.

ConfusedTorchic posted...

botw has a massive world that is woefully barren

I've never really understood this criticism, as often as it comes up. Sure, it didn't pepper the landscape with dozens of events, sidequests, and setting-appropriate "bandit camps" like Ubisoft has established as the standard for open-world games, but I don't really see that as a bad thing. The world was scenic enough to be worth exploring on its own merits, and exploration was routinely rewarded with shrines, environmental puzzles, and other fun little things that helped to scratch that operant conditioning itch (though that is one area where the durability system held the game back, since finding a cool new weapon loses a lot of its lustre when you know you'll only be able to use it for like an hour tops). I honestly wouldn't really want more than that, since trying to cram in more content like an Ubisoft open-world game tends to just result in a bunch of busywork to pad out the game.

the durability definitely hurts the game now

adjl posted...

It's definitely not enough to avoid the game entirely over it.

Everything in this post.

Is durability annoying? Sure. Is it a major issue that should stop someone from playing the game? No. You'll always have a weapon that's 'good enough' if you're halfway competent. You just might not have your favorite.

As for 'empty world' again agreed that doesn't fit. I found it rather boring to explore Skyrim/etc after discovering the major cities/etc. I never got to that point in BotW: I was always interested to see what was in areas I had never been to before. A lot of it is shrines, towers, and koroks, sure, and they get repetitive after a while...but they're fun for a long time. I was perfectly happy to solve the small puzzles at each of them for more hearts/weapons/maps/etc - it felt like things were progressing (as opposed to other games where there are aren't so many puzzles - just more of the same stuff). And there were other quests/challenges/fountains/memories/NPCs/etc to find as well. Good world.

Although there are way too many combat shrines and more enemy variety would have been nice.

adjl posted...

Although there are way too many combat shrines and more enemy variety would have been nice.

And longer/more Divine Beasts would have been nice, sure.

adjl posted...

It's availing yourself of a service without paying for it. It's not as clear-cut as theft because there aren't concrete losses, but it's no less entitled and on a broad scale it does have financial consequences for the producer (at least for current products).

I was only responding to the theft part.

adjl posted...

Although there are way too many combat shrines and more enemy variety would have been nice.

Anything is better than a motion control shrine.

adjl posted...

Honestly, the durability issue is grossly overblown. I'd call it a mistake to include it, since it doesn't really add anything of value to the game and is more annoying than anything else (to say nothing of how thematically out of place it is for Zelda), but it ultimately doesn't really hurt the game. It's definitely not enough to avoid the game entirely over it.

I've never really understood this criticism, as often as it comes up. Sure, it didn't pepper the landscape with dozens of events, sidequests, and setting-appropriate "bandit camps" like Ubisoft has established as the standard for open-world games, but I don't really see that as a bad thing. The world was scenic enough to be worth exploring on its own merits, and exploration was routinely rewarded with shrines, environmental puzzles, and other fun little things that helped to scratch that operant conditioning itch (though that is one area where the durability system held the game back, since finding a cool new weapon loses a lot of its lustre when you know you'll only be able to use it for like an hour tops). I honestly wouldn't really want more than that, since trying to cram in more content like an Ubisoft open-world game tends to just result in a bunch of busywork to pad out the game.

If it was just other weapons I would be fine, but the fact the master sword has durability as well is dumb to me and I refuse to play it because of it.

Tora_Sami posted...

If it was just other weapons I would be fine, but the fact the master sword has durability as well is dumb to me and I refuse to play it because of it.

While it has durability, it doesnt break. Its just unusable for a short time 10 minutes, IIRC

Revelation34 posted...

I was only responding to the theft part.

Responding only to a tiny part of the things people say while ignoring the broader context is almost always going to be utterly useless and contribute nothing of value to the conversation. You should really stop doing that.

Tora_Sami posted...

If it was just other weapons I would be fine, but the fact the master sword has durability as well is dumb to me and I refuse to play it because of it.

I kind of agree, or at least feel that trying to shoehorn the durability system into working with the legendary blade that is a series staple was stupid and contrived, but it's also really not enough to be worth avoiding the entire game over it. It never actually breaks, just has to "recharge" periodically, during which there's no shortage of other weapons you can use (some of which are actually stronger anyway, since against regular enemies the Master Sword is pretty unremarkable). It's definitely dumb, but it doesn't stop the game from being fun.

adjl posted...

Responding only to a tiny part of the things people say while ignoring the broader context is almost always going to be utterly useless and contribute nothing of value to the conversation. You should really stop doing that.

I kind of agree, or at least feel that trying to shoehorn the durability system into working with the legendary blade that is a series staple was stupid and contrived, but it's also really not enough to be worth avoiding the entire game over it. It never actually breaks, just has to "recharge" periodically, during which there's no shortage of other weapons you can use (some of which are actually stronger anyway, since against regular enemies the Master Sword is pretty unremarkable). It's definitely dumb, but it doesn't stop the game from being fun.

There is no context that would make calling it theft accurate. It's is just flat out wrong.

Ill be honest, my issue with the weapons in BotW wasnt the durability. It was having to pick and choose which weapons to leave and take. The inventory simply wasnt big enough

Revelation34 posted...

There is no context that would make calling it theft accurate. It's is just flat out wrong.

See, you're saying this because you're thinking strictly in terms of of the exact, rigid definition of "theft" that you've chosen to work with and not about the practical implications, feelings/rationale involved, or anything to do with questions of morality. That's exactly what I'm talking about when I say that you're responding only to a tiny part of the things people say while ignoring the broader context.

papercup posted...

Ill be honest, my issue with the weapons in BotW wasnt the durability. It was having to pick and choose which weapons to leave and take. The inventory simply wasnt big enough

Arguably, that was because of the durability system. If not for the durability system, there wouldn't need to be so many different weapon drops to consider picking up and the inventory limit generally wouldn't have been a problem.

papercup posted...

Ill be honest, my issue with the weapons in BotW wasnt the durability. It was having to pick and choose which weapons to leave and take. The inventory simply wasnt big enough

This was probably my only problem with the weapons system, as well

adjl posted...

Arguably, that was because of the durability system. If not for the durability system, there wouldn't need to be so many different weapon drops to consider picking up and the inventory limit generally wouldn't have been a problem.

Idk Even without durability, I feel it would be an issue Many weapons had many different uses Especially since many of them acted differently Unless unless they were going to expand the inventory enough for you to carry one of each type of weapon Tbh, durability probably helped me more when it came to that. Haha.

LinkPizza posted...

Idk Even without durability, I feel it would be an issue Many weapons had many different uses Especially since many of them acted differently Unless unless they were going to expand the inventory enough for you to carry one of each type of weapon

For the most part, there were only like 5-6 different weapon types (I can actually only think of 4 off-hand, counting bows), with most weapons just being reskins of those types with different stats. There were a few versions that had some kind of special gimmick to them, like the elemental weapons or the boomerangs, but all in all I don't think you'd need more than about 15-20 slots to hold one of everything, and if memory serves that's quite attainable. You could even cut down that number by quite a bit by offering elemental enchantment options for weapons instead of having a fire/ice/electric version of each one, which would probably be the most sensible option if they were going that route.

adjl posted...

For the most part, there were only like 5-6 different weapon types (I can actually only think of 4 off-hand, counting bows), with most weapons just being reskins of those types with different stats. There were a few versions that had some kind of special gimmick to them, like the elemental weapons or the boomerangs, but all in all I don't think you'd need more than about 15-20 slots to hold one of everything, and if memory serves that's quite attainable. You could even cut down that number by quite a bit by offering elemental enchantment options for weapons instead of having a fire/ice/electric version of each one, which would probably be the most sensible option if they were going that route.

Maybe. I just know I was dropping weapons constantly because I wanted different kinds. And not just due to strength, but because they were different Which could help me prepare better

It was basically sword - greatsword - spear - bow. Then there were rods, boomerangs (throwable swords), and a bunch of goofier things that were gimmicky versions of the main four. The different versions were stronger/weaker, had elements or special (crushing) abilities, etc...but that was basically it.

I don't know how fusion works in Tears, but I wouldn't be shocked if they gave you a 'Master' version of the big four and you fused something to it to give it one of the added abilities either temporarily or until such time as you wanted something else. You would also have to be able to make them continually stronger (probably through fusion) for some sort of progression over time. That could work.

The main problem with doing something like that is that they added durability to BotW primarily such that you would want/need to find weapons in the world. There are many fewer interesting things to find in that big world if you don't need new weapons constantly. Can fusion materials be exciting enough to fill that the void? Something else?

"you'll never actually run out of weapons" is unrelated to why the durability mechanic sucks.

It's not about running out, it's about constantly needing to go to the menu to swap weapons mid fight because your shit is made of paper.

wpot posted...

The main problem with doing something like that is that they added durability to BotW primarily such that you would want/need to find weapons in the world. There are many fewer interesting things to find in that big world if you don't need new weapons constantly. Can fusion materials be exciting enough to fill that the void? Something else?

As much as that's apparently the reason for adding durability (and it works well in the very early stages of the game when it functions as a survival mechanic, though that quickly falls off because it stops being a resource that needs serious management), I don't know that simply taking it away would actually be that much of a problem. Plenty of RPGs have duplicate or inferior equipment drop from enemies or show up in chests you find. The weapon power scale would need to be adjusted so that you could still find upgrades frequently enough to be satisfying, without getting to the point of there being nor more meaningful upgrades too quickly, but there's also plenty of precedent for that in other RPG's.

Alternatively, the weapon and armour systems could have been swapped: Craft and upgrade weapons using materials you find around the world (possibly including weapons that drop from enemies), while armour pieces (most of which have some kind of unique effect, and all of which have fashion value) could be found in chests, drop from unique enemies, or be awarded from sidequests. That way, you're always getting something meaningful (not necessarily something you will use, but something that has a use) as a reward for exploring, but nothing has to end up depleting (creating a chore to upkeep it) to generate a need to keep finding new armour.

In practice, a system like that will often mean looking up the armour sets on a wiki, beelining to the one you want most, and not caring about the rest, but that's basically how Dark Souls et al already work (people will grab the gear they want to use for that run and maybe replace them with upgrades once or twice, but otherwise ignore every other drop/find), and it works great there.

Blightzkrieg posted...

"you'll never actually run out of weapons" is unrelated to why the durability mechanic sucks.

It's not about running out, it's about constantly needing to go to the menu to swap weapons mid fight because your shit is made of paper.

Is that even much of a problem? Dont they have the quick select?

Maybe. One of my primary complaints about modern RPGs is that many have forgotten why it used to be fun to explore: occasionally you would find a Sword of Awesomeness or something and it would all be worthwhile. You WANTED to go to the dead end first. BotW went to the lengths of adding an annoying durability mechanic in order to preserve some of that, which I can appreciate (while still being annoyed by durability).

So no, it wouldn't be a big problem for swords to remove durability so long as there is some other improvement mechanic. Could armors be fun enough to find? Maybe, but without some sort of armor durability...I rather doubt it. There are only so many gimmicks that could be added to keep them interesting, or it would be the Dark Souls result like you said.

I might vote for a system similar to the heart/stamina systems where you find "+1 sword strength" fusion boosts in chests around the world. Each one you find makes your sword stronger than it has ever been before, which should keep it interesting for awhile. The net effect of the +1 would drop off over time (similarly to the hearts) so you may or may not need to pump up the power boost (+3) after a while...but whatever.

The main problem with that it that you would need to explore significantly to beat later game enemies/bosses, but you could work around that. Maybe the Master Sword still 'awakens' for truly difficult fights again...or something.

Blightzkrieg posted...

it's about constantly needing to go to the menu to swap weapons mid fight because your shit is made of paper.

Agreed that was one of the most annoying things about it, quick menus or not.

wpot posted...

Could armors be fun enough to find? Maybe, but without some sort of armor durability...I rather doubt it. There are only so many gimmicks that could be added to keep them interesting, or it would be the Dark Souls result like you said.

The easiest solution to that problem would be to randomize them to a certain extent, dividing them into a few different tiers to allow them to scale as you progress through the game (similar to how enemies and the weapons they drop scale with your character already in BotW). Armours would probably need to have multiple effects for that to work, along with a pity system and/or guaranteed spawns for certain effects that are particularly essential for game progress (like cold/heat resistance, though with the option to use food to work around that it's not the end of the world if you don't have the armour). That way, beelining the drop location for the "best" armour isn't an option, you get rewarded for exploring by getting something potentially useful, and that reward remains relevant through the whole game. That does potentially hurt speedrunning, though, since it creates a chance that you simply won't find something build-enabling quickly enough to have a competitive run. But nothing's perfect.

Of course, the Dark Souls "problem" isn't necessarily that much of a problem. I usually go into Soulslikes with a definite build in mind and rarely make any gear changes once I complete that build, but I still enjoy exploring every corner of the world and finding everything I can, often for the sake of learning what's there and experimenting with it so I can get some ideas of new builds I might like to try for future runs. Even if it's not something that's immediately useful, finding things when I explore is still fun enough to make that exploration feel worthwhile. As such, trying to artificially forcing those things to be useful by making the things I already have run out isn't really necessary and honestly just makes the exploration feel less rewarding. Whatever I find will run out in the not-too-distant future, my inventory is too limited for hoarding it indefinitely to be a real option, and in virtually every case it's just another copy of a weapon I can already get (or will soon be able to get) somewhere else. It only has value because the game's been designed to give it value, which is technically true of all in-game rewards, but in this case it's really obviously contrived in a way that just feels "gamey," for lack of a better word.

adjl posted...

See, you're saying this because you're thinking strictly in terms of of the exact, rigid definition of "theft" that you've chosen to work with and not about the practical implications, feelings/rationale involved, or anything to do with questions of morality. That's exactly what I'm talking about when I say that you're responding only to a tiny part of the things people say while ignoring the broader context.

Arguably, that was because of the durability system. If not for the durability system, there wouldn't need to be so many different weapon drops to consider picking up and the inventory limit generally wouldn't have been a problem.

Morality is subjective. Everybody use to pirate so it would definitely be hypocritical of me to denounce it.

Revelation34 posted...

Morality is subjective.

Doesn't mean there isn't room or need to defend your opinions on it.

Revelation34 posted...

Everybody use to pirate so it would definitely be hypocritical of me to denounce it.

Denouncing something that you have done isn't necessarily hypocritical, provided you recognize that it was harmful and have committed to not doing it anymore. There's also plenty of room for nuance in piracy: pirating a brand new game that isn't out yet because you don't want to pay for it but feel entitled to play it anyway is very different from pirating a 20-year-old game that isn't officially for sale anymore. Denouncing some piracy while being okay with other piracy isn't hypocritical, provided you've put some thought into the distinction and are able to explain and justify it.

adjl posted...

The easiest solution to that problem would be to randomize them to a certain extent

That would work well for a while. The problem is that, without breakage, you'll hit a limit where they stop being interesting fairly quickly even with a gradation and gates. Weapons were at least somewhat interesting all of the way through BotW given breakage, although - no - most weren't great by the end. And really, I think BotW had several armor gates already (to say nothing about how armor 'crafting' converted the rarer field items into tangible armor rewards).

I'm not saying I liked BotW's durability partial "solution" to their "what to put in the world" problem, but I do appreciate what they were trying to do.

Of course I play differently also: I don't go in with a set build in mind. I like to keep exploring and building my character to be better and better...so long as that's fun to do. BotW allowed for that mindset better than Skyrim/Souls IMO.

wpot posted...

That would work well for a while. The problem is that, without breakage, you'll hit a limit where they stop being interesting fairly quickly even with a gradation and gates.

You would, but it would introduce the question of trading off better defense from higher-tier armour for bonus effects from lower-tier stuff, and allow a lot of flexibility to adjust how you play based on what you find first (vaguely roguelike-like, in that regard), more so than I think weapons do (you get access to all four main types pretty much immediately and can change that up any time you want because drops of all kinds are so plentiful). The system that exists now allows for armour customization based on what you choose to upgrade first, gated behind having to find certain materials, and I just think that putting weapons in that position (since there are fewer broad weapon types with more room for upgrade paths) and making armour the thing that's randomly found in the world (because there's greater variety and therefore potential to make every exploration reward unique) makes more sense.

wpot posted...

I'm not saying I liked BotW's durability partial "solution" to their "what to put in the world" problem, but I do appreciate what they were trying to do.

Yeah, whatever my opinion on the system, I do understand why they went with it. As I've said on other occasions, I did actually like the durability system in the very early game (and, by extension, on Eventide Isle), since it does contribute well to the theme of "you're helpless, good luck scavenging the things you need to fight your way out of here." It just grows out of that relatively quickly and becomes a simple maintenance task instead of a really interesting mechanic. That's why I'm optimistic about fusion: It turns that maintenance task into an opportunity to try something new based on what you can improvise from the environment. Is it going to be better than doing away with durability and coming up with a better way to incentivize exploration? I honestly kind of doubt it, but I am definitely interested in trying it out myself and I expect there to be some fun there.

wpot posted...

Of course I play differently also: I don't go in with a set build in mind. I like to keep exploring and building my character to be better and better...so long as that's fun to do. BotW allowed for that mindset better than Skyrim/Souls IMO.

That's very true. Of course, it managed that by simply not having any sort of meaningful "build" system beyond "do you want health or stamina first?", which isn't necessarily the same as allowing flexible build creation, but there is something to be said for games that don't require forethought to avoid screwing up your character.

They should have made elemental weapons unbreakable so you would only need have one each in your inventory. Or else improved the inventory since there's not enough slots even when fully maxed. Weaponwise at least since you really don't need max shields.

Also Eventide is impossible if you go to it before the camel. There are not enough arrows to find to deal with the hinox.

Revelation34 posted...

Also Eventide is impossible if you go to it before the camel. There are not enough arrows to find to deal with the hinox.

You don't have to kill the hinox to beat Eventide.

adjl posted...

The system that exists now allows for armour customization based on what you choose to upgrade first, gated behind having to find certain materials, and I just think that putting weapons in that position (since there are fewer broad weapon types with more room for upgrade paths) and making armour the thing that's randomly found in the world (because there's greater variety and therefore potential to make every exploration reward unique) makes more sense.

....maybe! There are several linked issues (armor swapping was always awkward both mechanically and logically and I want that fixed, it seems weird to find armor laying around but not weapons, etc) but in a pure gaming sense I see where you're coming from.

adjl posted...

That's why I'm optimistic about fusion: It turns that maintenance task into an opportunity to try something new based on what you can improvise from the environment. Is it going to be better than doing away with durability and coming up with a better way to incentivize exploration? I honestly kind of doubt it, but I am definitely interested in trying it out myself and I expect there to be some fun there.

I thoroughly agree with that. It'll be fun to try something different and it might be good, although I'm not expecting it to be the end-all fantastic solution to the issue.

adjl posted...

Of course, it managed that by simply not having any sort of meaningful "build" system beyond "do you want health or stamina first?", which isn't necessarily the same as allowing flexible build creation, but there is something to be said for games that don't require forethought to avoid screwing up your character.

Agreed with that as well: I do think Zelda could benefit from broader build options. Given that they already have a precedent for changing build decisions there's no reason that flexibility couldn't be expanded to strength/agility/skills/other growth should any of those be added.

The more potential you add for growth the more difficult it becomes to speedrun or play 'out of order', but I think that's a price worth paying...to an extent.

i will say that the combining mechanic opens up to a lot of neat shit once you actually get some good shit to play with

not like, weapon wise (although), but just like, building things

Welp, the reviews couldn't be much better. We'll see when I feel I have enough time to buy/play...

If I'm gathering correctly durability is still a thing, although the ability to create your own weapons takes away a lot of the fear of losing some unique functionality because the items you carry around allow you to give most weapons whatever characteristic you want (including strength, by and large). And you can save favored designs to quickly whip together something you like. That could work: we'll see how it feels.

https://www.nintendo.com/whatsnew/ask-the-developer-vol-9-the-legend-of-zelda-tears-of-the-kingdom-part-3/

What a weird way to announce that there are dungeons in this game. It feels like some marketing person at Nintendo either isn't doing their job, or the dev team is just doing their own thing and ignoring the advice from the marketing people.

papercup posted...

dungeons

True "temples" with unique designs (and some story) as I understand...sounds good.

no comment