Zelda: Breath of the Wild map size is 12X larger than Twilight Princess

[parallaxscroll]

E3 2016: ZELDA: BREATH OF THE WILD’S OPEN WORLD IS 12 TIMES BIGGER THAN TWILIGHT PRINCESS

E3 demo represents just 1% of the game’s world map.

Nintendo has revealed that the open world in The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild is 12 times larger than the map in Twilight Princess.

During a presentation at E3, Nintendo also revealed that the demo of Breath of the Wild shown at E3 -- which contains a large portion of open field as well as several enemies, Shrines, and more -- represents just 1% of the game’s total size.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2016/06/...light-princess
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1234095

Pretty big.

[Tanooki]

Pretty bloated. I hope the fans enjoy this one but I'm 90% certain to sit out. The changes they've announced were one turn off after another for me. Open world. Monster Hunter like crafting/collecting/part foraging and forging into new gear as the used breaks, no pointing you were to go next as it just throws you out there. It's like all my worst nightmares of a video game rolled into one. Aimless, vast, a 100 hour+ time sink, crap that breaks, having to waste time foraging for junk and making gear. I'm glad I didn't rationalize holding onto that WiiU for this as I had considered awhile back or it would be up on ebay this evening. There's no denying the game is beautiful on the art and audio side but argh.

[celerystalker]

Yeah... what I love about the pre-3D Zeldas is how they manage to convey big adventure feel without being needlessly convoluted or slowed down by simulation tropes. For someone like me, this series has just time and again moved farther away from what I personally enjoy, and this is an even bigger step away.

[Daltone]

There is nothing wrong with a big map so long as it is filled with interesting side missions, NPCs, secrets etc.

If it's just 'we can make a really big field!' Then try to pad it out with survival mechanics and fetch quests then not so much. The focus should be on varied (interactive) content, not just sheer size for the hell of it.

Other than the 3DS (re)releases I havent enjoyed a Zelda game for a while. I'm not sure a change of direction is a bad thing, but being able to make a 'big' game is hardly impressive any more.

[Tanooki]

You're right, and wrong Daltone. In general you're correct for any random game. Problem is they're fucking greviously lately with one of their 2 lead co-mascot titles to the company that by a sliver takes a back seat to Mario only since the plumber is a bit older and more all ages interesting. Zelda has had a pretty solid course in 2D short of open world link to the past part 2 on 3DS and the 3D titles have been hit and miss but still were fairly concise all things considered until the 21st century (wind waker aside as it's brief compared.) They're taking what is trendy, cool, hipster or hardcore gamer cool no less and reconstructing Zelda into something that is just Zelda by the coat of paint over the top and another beast otherwise.

They're taking parts of the Morrowind worlds from Bethesda in scope and size, throwing in some mechanics you'd almost expect in a MMO-ish type say like Guild Wars 2, tossing in some mechanics hard cores of Monster Hunter love, and sprinkling in some unknowns with some Nintendo magic.


Personally and I said it, I don't like open world games. I like variety, I can't focus on one game as my 'job' as far as games goes for a year or three and it's not just the time, but all the multiple levels of minutae and process that goes into such an intricate world. Then you have the (for many) annoyance of breakable items from use, and having to scout around and scrape up goods and parts(combat, etc) in the wild to make or improve/fix gear, it's annoying. It's one thing slashing bushes for hearts, potions, and money, it's swing and go and now they're getting very into crafting which they started to introduce on that 3DS game a bit. It would almost be better suited Nintendo making a NEW franchise in that style of look and put all these good ideas in there as something for the skyrim/monster hunter types because Nintendo lacks this without paying up a big bribe to get capcom to put a game on their system or someone else.

As celery said, not quoting him as you already read it, but that's really where Zelda sadly is going as the 3DS sequel there set the ground work and this one expanding it largely to where Zelda of the future is heading (short of this style selling like crap and getting backlash over it in large amounts which I really doubt.)

[Gentlegamer]

I'm very interested to see Nintendo's take on "open world," hearkening back to the original Legend of Zelda.

[Gameguy]

Desert Bus: Hyrule Edition. Travel across one corner of Hyrule to the other in only 8 hours real time.

[kupomogli]

When watching the initial trailer reveal, I thought it looked amazing, but then watching some gameplay the game didn't look that good. The open world is so big, but there's little actually going on in the world.

I'm tired of seeing every game going open world in the first place though. Look at Uncharted when you're in the open areas in that game. These areas are fairly big open areas, but there's literally nothing, it just wastes a whole lot of time which takes away from the experience. Now there are people who like to just mess around on these kinds of games regardless how limited they are, but that's just not me. People might complain about linearity, but atleast the game gives you a directive and it's not just a bunch of aimless wandering, or running miles back and forth to be able to progress.

Additionally, can't help but notice the graphics. The game had some noticeable drops in frames, especially when you get to a higher area and they're panning across more of the world. It's sub20, like 15fps or lower it looks like. The lighting and shadows are great, but the graphics just aren't very detailed. I know this is a Nintendo staple, but time and time again Nintendo gets a pass for making their games extremely budget with a huge lack of detail. You have games like GTA5 which are massively detailed and do have dropped frames on the PS360 between 20-30fps, but the amount of detail and how great these games look really pushes the consoles to their limits and looks far and away better than Zelda. After the initial wow factor of how beautiful the style is, it's something that wore off and it doesn't really look that great afterall. Graphics aren't the reason to play a game, but why release newer consoles if you're just going to push half assed graphics for all your games every gen?

I'll probably eventually get it, but I'm not really impressed with what I saw.

[Tanooki]

I don't get people always saying stop complaining about open world zelda as the first was that. Sorry, it wasn't. Areas of it were open, but it also was even in its day not a HUGE map, easily walked across in not much time at all, and you couldn't go into good parts of it, let alone couldn't do many of the dungeons out of order without the hidden tool within them. Feels like a cop out saying Nintendo is going back to the roots, but sorry it's not. They're going Zelda meets Skyrim meets Monster Hunter with this one. I loathe large open wasted space worlds too much like kupo there, as he's right, it's taking away from the experience as much as pissing wasted time with no form of linearity with it so you go in circles trying to figure out what to do let alone where to go in large open vast spaces. Woopdeedoo your hardware can make a huge world time for a golf clap, shame at least in this early rendition the fps is low and chuggy and the detail is last gen.

[celerystalker]

I just feel like a lot of the fun of exploration gets lost in the name of freedom and simulation. I prefer a smaller map that's dense with secrets to a larger map that's mostly just scenery. Graphics improve, backgrounds become pedestrian after you settle in... it's the payoff of finding those hidden secrets that makes exploring a video game world fun for me. I can't fathom that payoff being all that great in a world so big, whereas in a world like the first Zelda, I felt the drive to bomb every wall and burn every tree to see what I'd find next, and more often than not, I was rewarded with something to see and get. Same with Super Metroid of Castlevania: Symphony of the Night. When you feel like going anywhere might be rewarding, the game has done something right.

[Tanooki]

I'd agree with that because I DID do that in the 80s, 90s, and I didn't even hit NITM(SOTN) until the 00s and even busy with my game job I still did it and more than once. Age didn't change that, and this rough look at the game so far doesn't inspire me at all. I know I"m negative on it, but at the same time I'm not writing it off 100% for certain until far more is exposed and known, but I think it's pretty safe to say it's not a day one buy either.

[Gentlegamer]

I don't get people always saying stop complaining about open world zelda as the first was that. Sorry, it wasn't. Areas of it were open, but it also was even in its day not a HUGE map, easily walked across in not much time at all, and you couldn't go into good parts of it, let alone couldn't do many of the dungeons out of order without the hidden tool within them.

The original LoZ was "open world" for its time. You could explore almost the whole overworld from the start and do many of the dungeons out of order.

[Tanooki]

Kind of a stretch, it really did limit you on the map, not largely mind you but it did. I know what you're saying but I really don't classify that old game as open world in the aspect of what it is truly considered as today. Zelda was a decent size but it wasn't HUGE nor was it totally open to do anything and everything you wanted from the get go. It had locks and steps needed to be done to widen the areas to go, you couldn't just wander over to like stage 5 and die immediately being beaten to hell for being too weak. Sure you could approach I think half the dungeons if you got a blue candle or found the power bracelet but it was laid out so the normal person playing it wouldn't even realize that as that level of exploration wasn't even advertised. Nintendo themselves pushed doing the dungeons in order and finding gear to go a bit further. They just didn't make it totally linear in disguise like some later titles.

[Graham Mitchell]

I honestly don't like it when they cram this much crap I a game. I'll never see it all, it takes forever to get through it, and honestly they just get old after awhile. Beyond 20 hours is too much for me. It took me over a year to beat alien isolation. It just got ridiculous after awhile.

That said,I must admit that despite my love for them, the Zelda games have been kinda stale over the past few years. They repeat the same stuff over and over again with minimal new features. It's cool to see them doing something with it.

[Tanooki]

It is good to see them try something partly new, problem is they're catering to the open world crowd which while is a new group, they're going to alienate people who have been with it awhile who don't want some 100 hour adventure or more to see it all. Kind of damned if you do or don't in that respect as there had to be a better way to freshen it up. Hell, ape the CDi game, make Link the prisoner and have Zelda with a mix of old and a new set of tools for her rescue the dude.

[RARusk]

[Eternal Champion]

Good lord, what a pointless slog.

[Ogreatgames]

This is exciting news! If the map is 12X bigger than this could mean a side quest could be 6X longer. I wonder if there will be any online modes, thus combining each game world together which would multiply the current size exponentially?

[PreZZ]

The game world and music looks and sound exactly like xenoblade chronicles X.