A reader argues that Zelda: Twilight Princess strays too far from the series’ original vision and is far inferior to Breath Of The Wild.
I can bite my tongue when people say they don’t like The Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild, but when someone is comparing it unfavourably with my least favourite 3D game in the series, Twilight Princess (as reader Bronson did in his Reader’s Feature last week), then I can’t help myself trying to defend it.
Breath Of The Wild isn’t my favourite Zelda game, but that’s only really because of nostalgia for other titles. It is dynamite. The shrines are a change of pace to dungeons for sure, but they’re fantastically inventive. The gliding around is a joy, the physics engine is rock solid, it implements more modern conveniences and tendencies into the series, and there’s so much to see and do. Where Breath Of The Wild really excels isn’t just in letting you discover its huge world though, it’s in letting you discover what you can do in it.
When you first roll a boulder down a hill to take out some enemies, set fire to some grass to create an updraft, or attach a balloon to something to make it float off, you feel like you’re the first person to ever find out you can do this. The way the game chooses not to spell out the fact you can do all these things, rather than burying them under a mountain of tutorials, is so stunningly confident.
The great Dolly Parton once said: ‘It takes a lot of money to look this cheap’ and that is basically the design ethos at work with all these little mechanics. They feel so organic, off-the-cuff and understated but that’s because Nintendo put a meticulous amount of effort into implementing them so seamlessly.
The breakable weapons upset people, but you can see what
Read more on metro.co.uk