> This is even more apparent with BOTW/TotK where despite these being different from Zelda, an open world with zelda skinned on it, I still need to play it.
A more charitable read of the situation is that you've grown attached to the lore, characters and aesthetics (both visual and musical cues/themes) such that you're looking forward to the next installment of this work of fiction.
That's just Nintendo being good stewards of a franchise. There's millions of alternate pathways Nintendo could start making gobs of money (look at what The Pokemon Company turned that franchise into these days, yeesh!) But by taking their time it signals to me they really do think hard and long about every aspect of the design (naturally, nobody and no game dev team is perfect though).
> Zelda, an open world with zelda skinned on it
That's being deliberately reductive. And whatever the point, according to the creators BotW/TotK is the future direction of the franchise (similar to Link to the Past setting up OoT, WW, TP and SS). I'm not a fan of this "not MY Zelda!" attitude. Zelda II was shit on but it had a lot of cool ideas, and now thanks to the Zelda Cycle it's back on people's radar. Same for Major's Mask and Wind Waker to an extent.
BotW is a triumph and it'd be hard to convince me otherwise. (I did lose interest in TotK after leaving the starting area, but I blame that on the reuse of Hyrule. I don't want to hunt hundreds of Koroks again, I already did that!)
I didn't get the Link's Awakening remake because I'm extremely sensitive to frame stutter and Nintendo never fixed it, but it's an easy recommendation for 99% of Zelda fans who don't like the new direction. I'm hoping they tackle the Oracle games next and include the cut content from the cancelled third game.
A more charitable read of the situation is that you've grown attached to the lore, characters and aesthetics (both visual and musical cues/themes) such that you're looking forward to the next installment of this work of fiction.
That's just Nintendo being good stewards of a franchise. There's millions of alternate pathways Nintendo could start making gobs of money (look at what The Pokemon Company turned that franchise into these days, yeesh!) But by taking their time it signals to me they really do think hard and long about every aspect of the design (naturally, nobody and no game dev team is perfect though).
> Zelda, an open world with zelda skinned on it
That's being deliberately reductive. And whatever the point, according to the creators BotW/TotK is the future direction of the franchise (similar to Link to the Past setting up OoT, WW, TP and SS). I'm not a fan of this "not MY Zelda!" attitude. Zelda II was shit on but it had a lot of cool ideas, and now thanks to the Zelda Cycle it's back on people's radar. Same for Major's Mask and Wind Waker to an extent.
BotW is a triumph and it'd be hard to convince me otherwise. (I did lose interest in TotK after leaving the starting area, but I blame that on the reuse of Hyrule. I don't want to hunt hundreds of Koroks again, I already did that!)
I didn't get the Link's Awakening remake because I'm extremely sensitive to frame stutter and Nintendo never fixed it, but it's an easy recommendation for 99% of Zelda fans who don't like the new direction. I'm hoping they tackle the Oracle games next and include the cut content from the cancelled third game.