Breath of the Wild - Not Enough Zelda
Video Statistics and Information
Channel: Joseph Anderson
Views: 2,425,869
Rating: 4.6633496 out of 5
Keywords: video game, joseph anderson, critique, analysis, breath of the wild, zelda, criticism, review, nintendo
Id: T15-xfUr8z4
Channel Id: undefined
Length: 112min 35sec (6755 seconds)
Published: Sat Apr 15 2017
Please note that this website is currently a work in progress! Lots of interesting data and statistics to come.
Every top voted comment in this thread are people that either skimmed over the whole video or completely ignorant to the points he made in the first place.
400 upvotes for
when he specifically addresses this, really makes me wonder if people want to legitimately engage with his analysis, or just simply reject it because they don't like the overall sentiment of the video.
From what I've seen so far, I think I'm just going to have to agree to disagree with the author that many of the shrine puzzles are badly designed.
They are supposed to be short so that they don't interrupt the game flow. They're not the typical Zelda dungeons that act as destinations, they're stops on the highway that provide a break from exploring to allow the player to stretch their brain muscles in a different way.
Once the player figures out the basic premise for a particular shrine (e.g. that boulders need to be dropped by shooting ropes with arrows), there's only so much expansion that can be done on such a simple concept before it gets exhausting.
The shrines often have multiple solutions because a player finding her own way to solve a puzzle is much more fulfilling than struggling until she finds the "one true way" that the game designers decided she must use to solve the puzzle.
For example, at 41:00, the author talks about how you can bypass the "intended" solution for the shrine's puzzle by using Stasis. That's not bad puzzle design, that's fantastic puzzle design.
The game designers could have prevented the use of Stasis somehow, but they didn't, because they understand that when the game starts taking away the player's tools (which she has previously been encouraged to use creatively), solving puzzles feels less like genuinely interacting with the world in a satisfying manner, and more like jumping through hoops and trying to "mind read" how a game designer would have built the solution.
"Okay, my way didn't work, not because my solution wasn't valid, but because the game designers want me to solve it a different way. Ugh, well, how would they have intended for me to do this?"
If you've ever played D&D, you'll know what I'm talking about. When the DM has already decided what the "one true" solution to a puzzle is going to be, and shuts down all other ideas, it's obvious. And it makes the world feel less authentic, and a world that feels real is a critical part of what this Zelda is going for.
The game avoids this issue by realizing that an "easier" solution devised by the player is not a failure on the part of the game designer, but a celebration of the player.
Seems to be a bit of a mixed reception to Joseph Anderson's videos in here. I must admit, I'm a huge fan. His videos pretty much inspired me to set up my own channel and make similar videos myself (albeit, I'm nowhere near his level both in terms of viewers and quality).
He does nitpick, but I like that. In fact, I think nitpicking is important for a few reasons. (1) while the odd minor gripe isn't a huge deal, if there are lots of things to nitpick at, then there's a very real chance it could have a big impact on the player's enjoyment.
(2) One man's nitpick is another man's immersion breaking experience. Some people think it's nitpicking to complain about the story in Fallout 4 (the problem of you looking for your son, while simultaneously doing random shit for Preston Garvey, etc). I don't think that's nitpicking at all, but if you look at Joseph's videos you'll often see comments like "Why can't you just enjoy the game and have fun in the world?"
(3) Nitpicks are often easy to solve problems which can make their presence in the game all the more difficult to justify.
I also like many of the other YouTubers mentioned here, but they're all different. Joseph Anderson is good at picking out plotholes, but he also goes into depth with combat mechanics in a way I find educational. MatthewMatosis and Noah Gervais are incredibly deep thinkers. I love watching their videos, but my own experiences playing games rarely lines up with theirs. Basically, they're far cleverer and more philosophical than me.
The length of Joseph's videos doesn't bother me at all. I watch in chunks or put it on in the background. I find that once you've watched one 10 minute review of x game you've watched them all. I go to people like Joseph for far more in-depth discussion. It also helps that I don't watch Let's Plays or anything like that which probably frees up some time. I know I'd much rather watch a heavily edited analysis video than than a Let's Play.
I'm not saying everyone should love his videos, but I think they improve the overall discussion around games in a world where the huge gaming sites just chuck up 5 min video reviews full of fancy prose and no critique.
Most of the criticism here seems directed at the reviewer and review style(length) and not much of what he said (other than a few defending the puzzles).
Having never played breath of the wild I'm curious about his criticisms on the combat. I've always considered Zelda games to be very casual and kid friendly. Here he seems to be seeking a combat system with the depth and challenge of a soulsbourne game. I'm just curious what people think about that.
I'm going with a pretty random complaint here, but something I don't see mentioned much at all:
Lack of music.
Zelda is a series that has long been defined by it's classic tunes. They increase immersion, and are beautiful. It's just wonderful running or horsing around Hyrule and hearing the favorites.
But for some reason BotW has virtually no music. The overwhelming majority of your game time is spent in silence, outside of random game sounds. And for me, it never really hit me how bad this loss was until I got to Hyrule castle, and suddenly a lot of the old classics started showing up in brief spurts, and it was wonderful. But it made me despondant that I had played the last 40+ hours without them.
Wasn't he supposed to do a video on Mass Effect or the Witcher series? I think he even ran a poll on Twitter or something. Did he scrap that idea? It's been many months.
I'm here to talk about the begging of the combat just what he says about the Lynel when he started. I think that's what made BOTW so great. That you could stumble upon that early and can basically do nothing to kill it with what you have. That's like real life. That is real. At this point it's either go around or go back, I don't get how doing that could turn you off of moving through the game and not try stealth.
I hate when games purposely set it up in open world that everything will always workout for the player. Saying they should have set up enough weapons around the Lynel so you could beat him, is easy to see and takes me out of games. I'm like "oh yeah. Here is a game telling me to load up here then take this guy on." I love that you go from very fragile to having the ability to destroy most things attempting to mess up your journey.
I like that you have no idea what weapon any particular enemy is going to be holding. You have to be able to pick out the monster, the color, the weapon type and then make sure you know the area you're going to be fighting on. They come in varied groups all with different styles because of the things listed above. Sometimes I still get caught off guard. You go from an amateur to pro in this game like I've never experienced. I think it's amazing. The best part is there are things you could add to make it better or deeper. Easily but it might be almost to much of that was added at this point. But everything in here seems real in how it's laid out.
This gets closer than anyone else so far to hitting my huge pain point with BotW - it's way too structured. The exploration is really satisfying, as he says in the video, and at first the things you discover through exploration are really cool too. But eventually you realize that the things you're finding aren't unique and cool discoveries; exact copies of what you've found are littered across the world.
Killing a Hinox, fighting that "test of strength" enemy, raiding that giant skull camp, picking the fruit off the trees for a Korok seed, picking up a lone rock for a Korok seed, following a flower for a Korok seed, dropping a fruit on a tray for a Korok seed, all of these things get old after a few times. It starts to feel no different from Ubisoft open-world games where you just have checklists for a few different types of optional content, and you know that any optional content will fall into one of those categories. No surprises.
I distinctly remember finding my first Stalnox early on in a seemingly random corner of an area. I was amazed that I had found something so significant and fun by exploring. But after about 8 hours I had seen all the different world bosses already. If there had been more types of world bosses, more significant and unique content instead of some of the worst shrines (as Joseph mentions using one of the maze shrines as an example), and more interesting quests better hidden in the world (similar to how you find NPCs in the first Dark Souls), this game could have been a masterpiece. I don't care if that would have required the game to be half or even a third as big; it would have been one of the most consistently thrilling 40+ hour games out there.
Haven't watched the video yet, but I'm looking forward to it. Joseph Anderson has a way of nitpicking that really works for me. Like he manages to always be pretty much right about whatever he's talking about even while I still disagree with him. For example he's very harsh about Darkest Dungeon's very real flaws but I still like Darkest Dungeon and can enjoy it despite having no arguments about his complaints. Mathewmatosis is also very good at this.