Posted June 16, 2016 It, like all data, is open to interpretation. And that's what we're doing. Interpreting. Nobody is shitting on Zelda or Nintendo. They're merely discussing. Nobody has said it's not a big deal, of course it is. Plenty of people have said it's not a big deal, that it's expected etc... And technically speaking it didn't get "more than double anything from the rest of the show". Sigh. Ok, to allow for pedantry, it got more than double anything from the rest of the show with the exception of Battlefield 1 (which had the benefit of 3 days in the spotlight, as opposed to Zelda's 1 day), which it only beat by 190%. But the thing is, nothing that was shown for Zelda is ground breaking or anything different to what we've seen in other open world titles. "Other openworld titles" + Zelda gameplay = win Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2016 (edited) Plenty of people have said it's not a big deal, that it's expected etc... Sigh. Ok, to allow for pedantry, it got more than double anything from the rest of the show with the exception of Battlefield 1 (which had the benefit of 3 days in the spotlight, as opposed to Zelda's 1 day), which it only beat by 190%. Stop making baseless comments. Show me where someone has said its not a big deal. I've just read through the last few pages and I can't find anything like that. People have explained what factors they think might have influenced this result, but I can't see anyone saying its no big deal. Saying its to be expected is not saying its not a big deal. Allow me for some pedantry. If one number is double the previous it is 100% extra. So if you have 2 apples and got 100% more apples you'd have 4. Thus as it has been proven Zelda did not have double what Battlefield had, it did not beat Battlefield by 190%. It beat it by a number less than 100%. Edited June 16, 2016 by Ashley Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2016 Three days of Battlefield 1, Zelda beat that by 90%, in a third of the time. There we go. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2016 Well done. After a number of posts and some help with the maths you posted something verging on factually correct. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2016 Add 'condescending' to the bullying and insulting way you speak to me. Still, at least we've wasted half a dozen posts arguing about the exact percentage Zelda trumped Battlefield 1; that's message board gold dust right there. Well done. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2016 Add 'condescending' to the bullying and insulting way you speak to me. Still, at least we've wasted half a dozen posts arguing about the exact percentage Zelda trumped Battlefield 1; that's message board gold dust right there. Well done. Well considering how concerned you are about double standards and an anti-Nintendo bias I think it's only fair where needed it is made clear what the facts are and if I feel you (or anyone else) is misrepresenting or misinterpreting them I think it is right to call it out. After all, Dr Bob really needs to know about that crown. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2016 Someone mention a crown? Anyone know who's getting it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2016 Someone mention a crown? Anyone know who's getting it? Zelda of course. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2016 That's exactly it. It's the interactivity with the environment that sets it apart from the more scripted openworld games like Witcher 3. Its gameplay is far more varied than the usual stuff. What do you mean by scripted? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2016 [tweet]743541292202762241[/tweet] Hopefully this will expand his views on gaming and get his creative juices flowing once again. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 16, 2016 Add 'condescending' to the bullying and insulting way you speak to me. Only if you add rude and petulant to the way you speak to most people on here. Seriously...what gives? Why are you always moaning about perceived slights against Nintendo? I don't get why it seemingly means so much to you what people may or may not think about Nintendo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 17, 2016 Eurogamer decided not to go with just one game as Game of Show, but said this about Zelda: It's perhaps ironic that we decided not to nominate a single game of the show this year, when it would have been an easier choice than usual. Despite a bungled livestream reveal and Nintendo's almost embarrassing focus on this one game in the absence of anything else to talk about, Breath of the Wild was easily the sensation of the E3 2016 show floor, with console-rivalling queues, and it dominated internet buzz too. That's the sheer nostalgic power of the Zelda name, making its first all-new appearance on a home console in five years. But that's not the whole story. This was also a bold new direction for the series, which has gone full open-world and full RPG in ways that not only seemed to imitate, but actually to exceed in intricacy, the likes of Skyrim and The Witcher 3. Even PC Gamer weighed in to declare it the model of a systems-driven sandbox game - only delivered with the sturdy playfulness and density of design that we expect of Nintendo. In terms of generosity, openness and entertainment value, Breath of the Wild's demo wiped the show floor with all-comers; our own Tom Phillips played it four times without getting close to seeing all of it. Simply magical stuff. (OW) http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-06-17-eurogamers-best-of-e3-2016 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 17, 2016 Oh no...this will not end well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 17, 2016 Oh no...this will not end well. Haha, it's just talking about the world itself obviously, given how the demo was void of story and that they removed the towns etc from it... but for just a demo that was said to show just between 1-2% of the game, man they've built the world right! My post is only meant to allay any worries people may have over the game as opposed to stoke any fires in debates. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) I really hope that the wording in the article won't be used to continue/intensify this stupid score keeping. I fear that this sentence will be quoted a lot whenever someone says something about how great The Witcher 3 (or any other open world game) is. By the way, @Hero\-of\-Time, still waiting for your post in that thread :p My post is only meant to allay any worries people may have over the game as opposed to stoke any fires in debates. I know. Didn't mean to insinuate that you wanted to provoke something. Edited June 17, 2016 by drahkon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 17, 2016 Fantastic comments about the game, great find @kav82. Fears that it couldn't live up to Witcher 3 appear misplaced now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 17, 2016 Fantastic comments about the game, great find @kav82. Fears that it couldn't live up to Witcher 3 appear misplaced now. Except we know nothing of the story or side quest amount/quality, two of the The Witcher 3's best aspects. Whilst it is definitely a huge leap in the right direction and what little we have seen is looking fantastic I feel, until we see more of those aspects, it's still too early to properly draw comparisons. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 17, 2016 I really hope that the wording in the article won't be used to continue/intensify this stupid score keeping. I fear that this sentence will be quoted a lot whenever someone says something about how great The Witcher 3 (or any other open world game) is. By the way, @Hero\-of\-Time, still waiting for your post in that thread :p I'll get around to it soon. Been too busy playing games and watching the footy. There's some other bits and bobs that have came about the game that I'm not keen on at all, so I'll slam it all down in one piece. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 17, 2016 You could take a site like NintendoLife saying that it exceeds the intricacies of Skyrim and Witcher 3 with a pinch of salt, but coming from Eurogamer is high praise indeed. Still can't get over that stampede of people rushing to play it. And to think, we've only seen 1% of the game according to Miyamoto. It's the equivelent of E3 in 1998 going mad over a tiny corner of Hyrule Field from Ocarina of Time and nothing else, without having seen anything of the rest of the game. So exciting... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 17, 2016 You could take a site like NintendoLife saying that it exceeds the intricacies of Skyrim and Witcher 3 with a pinch of salt, but coming from Eurogamer is high praise indeed. Still can't get over that stampede of people rushing to play it. And to think, we've only seen 1% of the game according to Miyamoto. It's the equivelent of E3 in 1998 going mad over a tiny corner of Hyrule Field from Ocarina of Time and nothing else, without having seen anything of the rest of the game. So exciting... I absolutely adore both Witcher 3 so if this new Zelda comes anywhere close to this in terms of general plot and side quests along with the usual Zelda magic then I will be a very happy man Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 17, 2016 (edited) I really hope it exceeds Skyrim and Witcher 3 in terms of quest, story, sidequest stories, lore, towns and cities. I just don't see why people are so certain that it will. From what I saw, and as far as I've read, nothing has been shown or seen except from the opening segment. Yet it already exceeds Witcher 3? Why, because Nintendo purposusly hid it? Again, I'd love for it to be the best open world game there is, I'm just a bit sceptical considering past Zelda that are, no offence, a bit minimalistic and basic in terms of story and sidequests. One thing is creating a huge open world with tons to do, but I wonder if it is maybe creating a story around it all is a little bit out of Nintendo's comfort zone? They haven't done anything the likes of Skyrim and Witcher 3 in terms of story and sidequests stories before as far I know. Anyway, don't mean to bash the game or anything. Only watched some of the first hour at the live stream before going to bed and then a few glimpses here and there. It looks great. I hope it turns awesome. Should and will watch more. Have seen nothing of the puzzles and temples, which not many people speak of weirdly. Looking forward to Zelda, but for me, my game of the E3 is, as last year, Horizon. I just hope it won't be that three years running. Edited June 17, 2016 by Tales Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 17, 2016 What exactly did Eurogamer play? Did they see towns, villages or did they manage to meet NPCs and embark on quests? Or was it similar to the livestream stuff? I think they're mega-brave to be making bold claims like that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted June 17, 2016 What exactly did Eurogamer play? Did they see towns, villages or did they manage to meet NPCs and embark on quests? Or was it similar to the livestream stuff? I think they're mega-brave to be making bold claims like that. From what I hear, no more than was shown during E3. Thus just the plateau. In no ways do I this as a slight to Tom or the site because I adore them both, but he's a Nintendo fan. Not to say that's wrong or bound to influence his opinion, but Zelda is exciting as a Nintendo fan and Nintendo has knocked it out of the park with expectations. It's bound to be game of the show for that reason amongst many others that make it deserve that declaration. Many other titles on show were great, but there's just this palatable buzz about Zelda that is intensified if you're a Nintendo fan But it is one game of the show amongst many others in that article and we should appreciate that we are fortunate enough to be in a position where there's so many great titles people can't agree on just one. Zelda will be great and Nintendo took a gamble showing just that one and it seems to have largely paid off. It's fantastic. Other games are fantastic. Those looking to prove who was 'best' are trying to undermine the industry and what is great about it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
