The Zelda community is the only gaming community to defend such a lazily designed map for a sequel

Submitted by Prince_Targaryen t3_126m50w in gaming

The Legend Of Zelda community is the only gaming community I've seen to defend so harshly a sequel using the same map as it's predecessor. And that's kind of crazy to me.

Don't get me wrong, I'm buying TOTK on day one. And I'm hyped AF. But I'd be lying if I said I wasn't disappointed in the (what seems to be) the lack of changes to the map.

I've never, in all my years of gaming, seen a community defend such lazy development decisions in a triple-A game like this.

Historically, far more often then not, when a developer uses the same map again, they call it a DLC or an expansion. And they sell it for a portion of the price of the original.

Look at Far Cry: New Dawn.

It's a decent length game. And it changes the map up a lot from Far Cry 5. But even Ubisoft knew to call it a spin-off/expansion.

The same came be said with Spider-Man: Miles Morales.

It uses the same map as it's predecessor, but changes things a bit. And Sony still calls it a spin-off/large expansion and sells it for 40$ instead of 60$.

Nintendo is doing the exact same thing, but they are selling it for MORE than the original.

And again, I'm buying it. And I don't judge anyone else who buys it. But you shouldn't act ignorant to the fact that Nintendo are being lazy and greedy simultaneously.

I saw a comment on a post on their sub, that promoted me to make this post.

The comment said something along the lines of -

"Exploration was such a huge focus of Breath Of The Wild. I fear TOTK won't have the same affect, since we've already explored the map."

That's a genuine critique. And it had around 200 downvotes. That's just insane.

Why does that fanbase refuse to admit that Nintendo took the lazy route when it comes to map design in TOTK?

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

untenable681 t1_je9om0w wrote

It's really hard to take your complaint seriously when you're buying the game anyway. With your purchase, you're saying, "Eh, it's fine," and adding your voice to the chorus of fans who defend the lack of map design update with their money. All a corporation cares about are their profit margins, and if those look good, their choice in game design gets a pass as far as they're concerned. If it's a problem, don't support it.

41

Novel_Source t1_je9tyx3 wrote

Buying the game and expressing a negative opinion of the design choices are not mutually exclusive. The post is well articulated in explaining exactly that.

1

untenable681 t1_je9uzia wrote

I agree that the two aren't mutually exclusive, but that doesn't change the rational inconsistency of feeling strongly enough about it to rant on the internet and then buying the game anyway. One can be well articulated and still be full of rationally inconsistent bs -- look at politics.

9

Then_Assumption_1278 t1_jeazuhr wrote

Quit it.

The OP clearly loves Zelda and doesn't want to miss out on the next installment. They have a fair gripe with the game, but you saying that they're part of the problem for buying it is unfair.

Gran turismo sport was fucking bullshit, but I still bought it because I love Gran turismo, and I just dealt with the shittiness so that I wouldn't miss out on an installment. They made a lot of money but also heard the complaints and made Gran turismo 7 much much better.

−4

untenable681 t1_jeb2b2r wrote

No, I will not quit it.

How I vote with my dollar and intellectual accountability are both important enough to me that I'll miss a thing because I have a gripe with it. I refuse to use Twitch because I have gripes with Amazon. The gaming industry generally isn't about pleasing the player. Like any other corporatized industry, it's about making as much money as it can while offering as little substance as it can. Yeah, we have some gaming studios that are passionate about their craft, but they are subject to publishers who want to rush deadlines and push profits. This is one more example of that. They aren't here to give Zelda fans much. They're here to take Zelda fans' money, and if we don't like what they're giving us, we shouldn't give them our money.

5

Ed666win t1_jebllde wrote

Dude really said “yeah fuck this game but here is my money so you can keep doing the same thing”

7

Crazy_Canuck78 t1_je9pou3 wrote

Fact is... you don't know what the map looks like. This whole post is moot.

19

Charybdeezhands t1_jea31bj wrote

Lmao, I just can't understand some people...

Oh my god this field is still a field!? 0/10

2

Prince_Targaryen OP t1_je9qsdn wrote

We don't know the fine details of the map, that's true. But we do know the layout and the general design. And it's the same as BOTW.

−24

Manjorno316 t1_je9wci0 wrote

Well does the layout and design being the same matter if they add a bunch of new stuff throughout it? Especially considering how empty the world was in BoTW.

Taking that same world but actually filling it with stuff this time would make for a great return to that world if you ask me.

4

Iffykindofguy t1_je9zreu wrote

For all you know the surface area on the islands in the sky is twice as big as the surface on the ground, why are you so excited to be angry?

1

Crazy_Canuck78 t1_jeae38l wrote

The only thing you know or any of us know... is there's THAT mountain... and THAT mountain... and the Castle.

Since we know that there are a lot of floating islands.... its safe to assume that that land came from the surface... essentially changing the topography of Hyrule as we knew it.

You literally just want something to complain about... and you know it. You just expected people to agree with you and rather than admit you're wrong for making assumptions. You'll just double down on your assumption and pretend you're correct in a lame attempt to save face.

0

Flat_Implement5838 t1_jed70yw wrote

Going through a second time and seeing what is new is not what made me love BoTW, I cared about exploration and re exploring can't compare. Everything they show of the surface looks 90% the same,
That said hopefully the sky islands/underground gives just as much to explore as the first map did.

2

Crazy_Canuck78 t1_jee7nlr wrote

But they showed almost nothing... the quickly spun the camera around and you couldn't see details other than major locations like the twin mountains, goron mountain, the castle.... what other location were you able to see?

For all we know the desert is now covered in water... the snowy mountains might no longer be covered in ice & snow.

What I said stands... we don't know what the map looks like. Calm down... if it turns out to be mostly the same I will join you in complaining. But you don't know anything yet.

3

Flat_Implement5838 t1_jefeuwy wrote

Death mountain covered in snow does little for me, I want brand new mountains and hills, not changed biomes.

1

Jesterace77 t1_je9okf1 wrote

Meh, I'll wait until the game is released and I actually play it before jumping to conclusions.

18

IncognitoSlug123 t1_jed94ro wrote

It is getting a little weird just how many people are complaining about a game they've never played.

6

CommanderSabo t1_je9o3z2 wrote

> never have a seen a community defend such lazy development decisions

Please see EA with sports games.

10

NotSoPersonalJesus t1_je9ow93 wrote

Hey, don't forget that EA also screwed Battlefront/Battlefield series

4

CommanderSabo t1_je9p2qo wrote

I actually never played the newer Battlefront games l, and based off your comment I am glad I didn't lol.

2

NotSoPersonalJesus t1_je9qa7q wrote

They're not bad but coming from DICE, it was very disappointing. They built it heavily like bfv but left out what made battlefield good.

2

MrTomDawson t1_je9qge0 wrote

> I'd be lying if I said I wasn't disappointed in the (what seems to be) the lack of changes to the map.

What changes were you expecting? It's set in the same place, not long after the first game. It was unlikely to have been gentrified and filled with artisan coffee places in the interim.

Obviously there are going to be differences in what things/monsters/adventures you find in what place, probably few ne locations and some changes made to existing ones etc etc, but expecting an entirely new map is just strange.

10

bingbongbungbeng t1_jeba9u8 wrote

Proving the point

1

MrTomDawson t1_jebag8a wrote

...which point?

1

bingbongbungbeng t1_jebat0d wrote

The fans will defend the series to the ends of the earth. Even if they changed the map, it still wouldn't be worth 10 dollars more. There's just no way they added enough changes to warrant the price hike.

1

MrTomDawson t1_jebb2kt wrote

Which....wasn't at all the point?

The dude complained, based on practically nothing, that the developers were being lazy in reusing the same map.

1

bingbongbungbeng t1_jebb7ol wrote

That was his first point if you actually cared to read the post before reacting to it, lmao.

1

MrTomDawson t1_jebbgut wrote

Maybe take your own advice? He repeatedly talks about the map, several times, before making an offhand side reference to the price.

Maybe you just honed in on your personal bugbear and ignored all the context, hm?

1

bingbongbungbeng t1_jebcop5 wrote

Lmaao i can smell the soy

1

MrTomDawson t1_jebdpjd wrote

Oh, you're one of those people. Sorry, it was unfair of me to expect you to be able to read.

1

bingbongbungbeng t1_jebdw17 wrote

Says the one who can't even read the title of the post. You're so focused on defending the game you can't even read. Hoes mad ig.

1

MrTomDawson t1_jebe23b wrote

Alright man. If you want to keep embarassing yourself that's on you, but don't make me part of your humiliation fetish. Buhbye!

1

Kengfatv t1_je9u8ih wrote

They could have given us a whole new map. They could have given us the entirety of the old one, and 50% more to explore.

There's a lot you can expect, when they expect us to be paying the same price for the sequel as we did for the original. Yet they feel they can put less work in.

−4

MrTomDawson t1_je9vy80 wrote

>They could have given us a whole new map

Wouldn't make much sense in context, given that it's called Tears of the Kingdom, which is what the first map was.

>They could have given us the entirety of the old one, and 50% more to explore.

It looks like we have the original map plus a bunch of floating islands and such. So probably more to explore.

>There's a lot you can expect, when they expect us to be paying the same price for the sequel as we did for the original. Yet they feel they can put less work in.

Again, though, how do you actually know that if you've not played it? You don't know what's on the map, or above it, or under it. You don't know what has or hasn't changed.

3

Kengfatv t1_je9wvmc wrote

if there was more to show, they'd have shown more than phasing through ceilings, and a single floating island.

Was BOTW your first zelda? There is so much more to hyrule than what we got. They could have given us a twilight realm version of the entire map.

−7

MrTomDawson t1_je9y3ga wrote

>if there was more to show, they'd have shown more than phasing through ceilings, and a single floating island.

Yes, because games that try to encourage exploration love to show you the entire map in the trailer.

>Was BOTW your first zelda?

Oh, my sweet summer child.

> There is so much more to hyrule than what we got.

How do you know? At various points this world floods, flies, falls apart etc etc so it's clearly subject to major changes. After a world-ending cataclysm we have no way of knowing what survived.

7

Kengfatv t1_jea00sp wrote

Games that try to encourage exploration normally show you that there's anything to explore.

−2

MrTomDawson t1_jea08g4 wrote

Like floating landmasses newly arrived in the sky, for example?

4

Kengfatv t1_jea1tib wrote

Sure, if there's an entire hyrule sized area worth of them. but it looks like it's more like a skyloft sized area to explore. I'd pay 10$ for that as a DLC for BOTW.

1

MrTomDawson t1_jea2nri wrote

Alright. You seem pretty determined that you know the map will remain unchanged, so I'll stop trying to bring logic into this.

2

Siendra t1_jea6wqg wrote

The entire reveal cinematic and multiple shots in the trailers also take place below ground.

Fact is we don't know shit about the world just like we didn't know shit about anything off the Great Plateau before BotW released.

1

Siendra t1_jea6pnf wrote

They didn't show much of anything before BotW launched. Almost all of the gameplay footage was from the Great Plateau plus some establishing and action shots off of it.

2

[deleted] t1_je9x0jg wrote

[removed]

9

FoolsandCorpses t1_jebhfi0 wrote

Lol, take your own advice. People can buy something and still complain about it, it happens all the time.

−1

MatsThyWit t1_jebhmnp wrote

>Lol, take your own advice. People can buy something and still complain about it, it happens all the time.

Complaining about something being lazy and bad before you buy it while admitting that you're already planning to buy it despite those complaints is stupid. Period.

3

MajinBuuMan t1_je9o900 wrote

They've been developing the game for 5-6 years. AND they're reusing assets???

If it was a smaller studio I'd think trouble. But because it's Nintendo I think, "This is going to be amazing, imagine how much time they had to polish things and add that Nintendo charm!"

See Capcom farting out amazing game after amazing game in Resi Evil reusing assets and everything.

8

Greensssss t1_je9qkzv wrote

Did Capcom reuse assets? Didn't they build everything from the ground up? Like what Square enix did with FF7?

2

MajinBuuMan t1_je9rdvr wrote

7, REmake2, 3, 4, and Village all share tons of things if you look closely enough. Bolt cutters, and lockers the two most obvious.

But they dress everything up and create enough new models to make things unique.

−2

hdcase1 t1_je9zf34 wrote

I mean why on earth would they need to make new models for bolt cutters and lockers? That would be a tremendous waste of time and manpower.

3

Froggo-Brush1007 t1_je9qcwl wrote

I'm assuming that since this game takes place post-Breath of the Wild, that the major draw based off one of the complaints I read online about BotW (aside from the vast, empty world of Koroks, and the lack of dungeons) was the fact that no one was rebuilding aside from Tarrey town.

My big hope is that Link is going to be running into loads of towns building back up and he'll have lots of side quests tied to ferrying resources back and forth. I'm hoping to see Hyrule returning to its glory. IF that's the case, then yeah don't mind and in fact EXPECT Nintendo to re-use the same map.

Players would revisit old locations and think "Oh yeah, this was that marshy, flooded town! Let's rebuild!" If it turns out it's desolate again then I'm just gonna sell the game on Kijiji once I'm done.

8

MrTomDawson t1_je9x7gi wrote

>no one was rebuilding aside from Tarrey town.

Being honest, what would have been the point? At that point the world is overrun by monsters which, if you kill them, come back a day or two later.

>My big hope is that Link is going to be running into loads of towns building back up

Which would be cool, though the impression I got from the trailer is that the monsters are also back. Hopefully it doesn't go in an annoying Minutemen direction...

2

Froggo-Brush1007 t1_jea3f39 wrote

You're right that the world was still dangerous with Calamity Ganon around, so a full on city is probably too much to ask for anywhere besides the place Tarrey town is situated.

But it would have been interesting to see more than just the occasional adventurer getting smacked around by bokoblins, i.e. a group of adventurers that forms temporary camps. Something neat to spot in the distance.

​

>Which would be cool, though the impression I got from the trailer is that the monsters are also back. Hopefully it doesn't go in an annoying Minutemen direction...

My hopes are not high, but we'll see!

2

aaronite t1_jea450f wrote

That's like calling the Yakuza games lazy for reusing Kamurocho. It's not the map that matters. It's what you do with it.

8

bingbongbungbeng t1_jeba6f0 wrote

Except Yakuza never charged you extra for the same map

−1

aaronite t1_jebipar wrote

They charge you for every single game in the series.

5

Greensssss t1_je9qdff wrote

Did nintendo confirm theyre using the same map from the first game? I dont follow the news so I have no idea.

3

MajinBuuMan t1_je9rwla wrote

Yes. In the 10 minute gameplay demo. Same world but with many changes we don't have time to cover today, we hope you explore and go see for yourself, or something along those lines.

6

jc726 t1_je9saaa wrote

You haven't played the game. You have less than 15 minutes of footage of what is presumably another 200+ hour game.

You are jumping to some awfully uninformed conclusions about what has or hasn't been changed about the map.

3

XSmooth84 t1_je9vne1 wrote

  • brand new giant land masses in the sky all over the world of the game

  • “wHy iZ tEh MaP eXaCtLeE tHe SaMe”

🤪

3

Mando_the_Pando t1_je9zz4d wrote

Im not sure how people would expect it to be any different given that the sequel is a direct sequel set in the same place.

Also, key point, we dont know how big both the underground (hinted at in the first trailer with Ganon being sealed under ground with the green miasma and shit) as well as the sky islands. If both of those are reasonably big and the map itself is completely repopulated, perhaps some new villages added for example, to show the passage of time. Then I dont think it would be an issue.

That said, come day one and it is just the same shit with what amounts to a few new shrines? Yeah, that would be REALLY bad.

3

Setstream_Jam t1_jeabng6 wrote

It’s a direct sequel continuing the events of BOTW. Of course it’s going to be on the same map.

Why does it even matter as long as the game is good?

Good for Ubishit to change their location with each FarCry, but their games are still shit and boring.

3

ThePreciseClimber t1_jeddkbv wrote

>It’s a direct sequel continuing the events of BOTW. Of course it’s going to be on the same map.

What kind of argument is that? Horizon Forbidden West is a direct sequel to Zero Dawn. Gothic 2 is a direct sequel to Gothic 1. AC Brotherhood is a direct sequel to AC2. DX Mankind Divided is a direct sequel to Human Revolution. Arkham Knight is a direct sequel to Arkham City. Witcher 2&3 are direct sequels to Witcher 1. And so on.

And they all had new maps.

1

Deman-dred t1_jeawa00 wrote

The fans defend breakable weapons…too makes no sense. Not buying this regurgitated nonsense.

3

Elephant_Alarmed t1_je9q167 wrote

tbh I really don't care about the map as long as there is stuff to explore and find I'm fine.

and from what I've seen they changed everything at least a bit and the main game will play in the sky anyway.

thing I'm curious about the most are heartpieces and stamina upgrades since the shrines are gone so they'll propably have 120 new challenges/minidungeons/skyislands/whateveritscalled that will give you a sense of progression, so yeah, I think there is enough new stuff.

2

MrTomDawson t1_je9qm4f wrote

>120 new challenges/minidungeons/skyislands/whateveritscalled that will give you a sense of progression

Korok Hunt 2: Electric Boogapoo

6

Elephant_Alarmed t1_je9r4q9 wrote

god i totally forgot them.

IF they still have 900 koroks and 120ish shrine-like-somethings in new locations it will be fucking massive.

1

[deleted] t1_je9qw2k wrote

[deleted]

2

Prince_Targaryen OP t1_je9rqfb wrote

The latest Battlefield and Halo games were clearly lacking when compared to their respective series high points.

But imagine how much worse they'd be if they reused the same maps as the previous games? Just with slight tweaks?

5

naemenforfaen t1_je9vo2b wrote

People are defending it because it's Zelda, it's the Zelda team, some of the most talented developers in the industry. They have been developing this game for 6 years now, that should speak volumes. We also know they've been very secretive about the game and not showed us much.

People know twists are coming, maybe an entire new world underground etc.

2

hdcase1 t1_je9z5g5 wrote

Saints Row 2 is one of my favorite games of all time and it largely used the same map from Saints Row 1 (although changed and expanded.)

Your argument is invalid.

2

scypheroth t1_jea2dss wrote

I didn't even like the last Zelda game so this means nothing to me...

2

Jonathan11197 t1_jea3qau wrote

Its a direct sequel, did you seriously expect it to be a completely different map?

Also, its not even out yet! We've seen like 15ish minutes of footage.

2

LucasTheYeti t1_jeanhed wrote

Volition did that twice with Saints Row. 1 and 2 had the same map, and 3 and 4 had the same map. I don't think it's a problem if the game feels different. Yakuza uses the same map throughout the entire franchise, and the games don't feel that different; they're still great games.

2

Malenheim t1_je9svku wrote

Yakuza. And it is fantastic.

1

rivalgaz t1_je9t1ay wrote

I played the game in one hit over 7 days in stream and don’t remember nothing about the map. So I’m wondering if there are others like me who just won’t be so…. Let down? Like played the first only a few times or just clocked it once and put it down.

But I get it most are probably very experienced with the game. In a way it sounds like what you said is better lobbed at Blizzard for being like the market leader at reusing maps in new games/expansions and getting away with it.

1

Room234 t1_je9tqki wrote

Obvious troll is obvious.

1

OokySpookums t1_je9v2p4 wrote

We can't really fully observe what the changes and additions are yet.

We know that at least some things haven't changed like area locations. But as for for the moment by moment changes and experiences are, it's a big question mark.

1

trippypees t1_je9xhfo wrote

I'm gonna enjoy it thoroughly but I've seen enough in the demo to know that it won't be nearly as good as BOTW

1

bideodames t1_je9z76n wrote

Seems to be more Y axis exploration in this game

1

Iffykindofguy t1_je9zne6 wrote

Its not a genuine critique, you havent played the game. You dont know what the actual map is like.

1

Mysterious-Counter58 t1_jea17cn wrote

Aren't the sky islands, totaled together, somewhat equivalent in size to Hyrule from the first game? I mean, check out the scene of Link falling from the most recent gameplay demonstration, they're everywhere. Not to mention that there's bound to be some very real, tangible changes to Hyrule itself, and the new will most likely total up to about as much content as the first game. That's not even mentioning how the new abilities provide so many new ways of interacting with the environment. Should the game have come out sooner? Yes. But since Nintendo seems to be one of the few major studios that doesn't have a track record of crunching their devs, and with how hard COVID seemed to have hit the team, I'd rather be getting it in a complete state now than a broken mess a year or so ago.

1

Equisapien004 t1_jea18f7 wrote

I really fail to see how there isn't gonna be similar exploration. The sky islands are there, obviously, but also it's not gonna have all the same shrines and stuff. You'll be exploring in the exact same way, just to find new things. The fun of the exploration wasn't literally just seeing the landmass itself, it was the things or challenges you actually discovered. You admitting you're still buying it and hype for it really deflates your critique here too. But yeah, my point is, "it wont have the same exploration effect" is not actually a genuine criticism. It's a foolish one.

1

Dry_Pool_2580 t1_jea1fe3 wrote

From what ive seen, lots of OLD zelda fans aren't happy. It seems to specifically be BotW fans

1

HumphreyBlodart t1_jea1ugd wrote

I think part of the fun of breath of the Wild was discovering the map. And I feel like part of the fun of Tears of the Kingdom will be seeing how that map that we all know has changed. Those of us that know breath of the wild well will come across so many moments where we just stop and go oh my God, the such and such is now thingy majig. I hope that will be enough to give the same sense of wonder.

1

Gerti27 t1_jea2hoh wrote

Idk if people are defending it or not. I agree with you though, OP. I watched the demo, and it looked like a DLC. Nothing major seemed to have changed. I’m also pretty convinced there won’t be any big dungeons in this either, if there were Nintendo would have talked about it already. Oh well, maybe the next game 6 years from now will have that.

1

Guardian5985 t1_jeabw5r wrote

Even Zelda: A Link Between Worlds adjusted the map from A Link to the Past. Though not identical, it did make plenty of changes.

1

IIZORGII t1_jeadois wrote

Wait until you find out about sports games

1

Sofaris t1_jeaknwt wrote

I find it odd that people complain so much about games that are not even released yet.

1

ParticleDetector t1_jebp5td wrote

Hmmm I think that’s because you value fresh map exploration very highly.

There are many other aspects of the game, like interaction (fusion and ultra hand etc) and plot progression, that people are interested in way more than the map itself. I think there are also fans who would rather it be still Hyrule and see what they can do differently with the same map + new land masses.

I think it’s ok for you to like new maps, but I’m not sure if your use of ‘lazy’ is warranted all things considered.

I mean let’s say, they give Link all the powers from BOTW but throw him in a new map, would you prefer this over new powers in semi-old map with new land masses? What if the old map has changed in their locale? Or is the location that it is hyrule what is putting you off?

Of course the best case scenario for you is new map and new powers.

But you know, exploration isn’t the same for everyone, and maybe the fans you think are defending it for being lazy aren’t actually caring so much that it has to be an entirely new map, but may even be excited to explore the same Hyrule they love in a very new way.

I also think you should consider that development for new mechanics such as this is actually quite intensive, and a lot of focus is placed there. And these new mechanics have to interact with the land in new ways such that the same ‘map’ you see has to be changed in code to fit the new game.

The examples you gave like Far Cry and Spider-Man, you say they changed things up a bit. Do you think TOTK mechanics is equivalent to ‘change things up a bit’? So in this case are they fair examples to use as comparison?

I’m speaking from a gamedev perspective here, not as a Zelda fan, because I’m also interested in the overall design decisions and direction Nintendo made.

1

Seth4044 t1_je9o1a6 wrote

Ageeed; we haven't seen it all yet so I'll bite my tounge, but I certainly feel it will be less of "Wowe" factor compared to it's prior for only the sky boxes being new.

0

Ameph t1_je9ro4h wrote

It's too early to say. We haven't seen the map and if it's a direct copy of the BOTW map.

0

-Lord-Wombat- t1_je9std8 wrote

It was literally states it in the 10 minute demo

0

gothpunkboy89 t1_je9w23q wrote

They also state that things have changed. So the full extent is unknown.

3

emi_yagami t1_je9s0eh wrote

I think everyone is just still fresh on the pokemon sv hate train. It makes sense they wouldn't show us all the changes they've made before the game is out because that would kill a lot of the hype for exploration which was a key part of botw. Can we not wait before we accuse them of just reusing everything and not adding much?

0

NimanderTheYounger t1_je9stvk wrote

> Don't get me wrong, I'm buying TOTK on day one. And I'm hyped AF.

confused.meme

0

Kengfatv t1_je9ts95 wrote

I was ready to buy a switch just to play this game, and then I saw the map.

Despite not liking the new art direction that Zelda has taken, and hating weapon durability, I still wanted to give it a chance. But if they're going to release a sequel without even giving us a new map, that's a joke.

On top of that, the music was a major part of what made zelda so great for me, and ever since skyward sword, its just been massively downhill. There were a few great songs in skyward sword, but only a single memorable song in BOTW.

It's not even the same game anymore, and it's not a good thing. I wish they would have just made a new IP for this shit, and continued to make more traditional zelda titles.

0

Highlife29 t1_jea9neo wrote

Yet your buying the game still on day 1 . I can’t take you seriously I’m out .

0

TheMuffin2255 t1_jeapd3h wrote

This is just a bullshit take. It's fucking fine for a sequel to use the same map, ffs. Have you fucking played A Link Between Worlds? It using a familiar map allows it to go balls to the fucking wall with hidden stuff for you to find. Easter eggs, upgrades, fun.

I don't think anyone is upset about defending a reused map, because a reused map is part of the bit.

0

hail_goku t1_je9ve37 wrote

wait they are re-using the map from the previous game? lmao

−1