My Criticisms of Breath of the Wild

The following write-up consists of my criticisms of The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. There are some spoilers, so look sharp.

Last time I talked on Breath of the Wild, I gave my general impressions separated from what might be considered spoilers. Today's post is a reflection of the things that I found questionable, misguided, or that needed to be improved. I initially thought that this would be a spoiler heavy write-up, but I can safely say that, outside of the portion where I talk about Ganon in the Maintaining Tone section, it's pretty clean. Enjoy!

Technical Issues

Let's get this out of the way to start. I'm not going to sugarcoat it, and I'm not going to exaggerate:

There are framerate issues.

These drops aren't usually extreme or frequent throughout the majority of play time and haven't degraded my personal enjoyment of the game, but they are absolutely worth noting. I’ve found that slowdown is most prominent at two major villages, some parts of Death Mountain, and in the Great Plateau, the latter of which is particularly unfortunate considering that it’s where the game starts. Sending a Moblin rag-dolling will typically cause stuttering or a momentary freeze, and that’s definitely the worst kind of performance dip in the game. Fortunately, Breath of the Wild keeps reasonably stable most of the time and patches have been released that make it so that frame drops are even less common than before.

The handheld mode on the Switch version allegedly ran with little to no problems even before patching, so that's great. However, I can't help but find it odd that, with a sizable GPU speed boost, the docked mode doesn't run just as smoothly when resolution’s been bumped up. With handheld mode already running well, I'd think that doing this would at least allow for parity of performance assuming that there weren’t somehow an increase in CPU dependent processes or disproportionate graphical changes. Maybe there's some other bottleneck causing this? Regardless, it’s unfortunate, and I feel there should have been an option to allow docked mode to run at 720p instead of 900p if this were the case.

It's important to mention that the game actually hasn’t been optimized for the Switch when looking at its peformance. This means that there’s a great deal of potential for improvement moving forward for Breath of the Wild and that further work can easily benefit future titles that use the new engine. Personally, I'm playing primarily on the Wii U, and it’s worth noting that the game was designed with that hardware in mind. Because of this, there aren’t any obvious avenues of improvement I can really point to. There's a chance that there'll be tweaks where possible until the second content pack from the expansion pass releases, so we'll see how things are changed by then. 

Otherwise, though not perfect, things are pretty good right now.

Voice Acting

Voice Acting is a weird topic.

There have been two very clear sides of the fence on whether or not proper VA should be introduced to the Zelda franchise, and Nintendo's first foray into this is a compromise between both. This is to say that the game’s cutscenes feature full-VA, but Link himself is as quiet as ever.

I think that functionally, Voice Acting can allow for more expressive and deliberately paced interactions that better reflect the emotional state of the characters speaking than plain text typically would. Fortunately, Nintendo leverages this potential in helping define the turmoil Princess Zelda experiences and reinforcing the personalities of other characters much more respectably when considering the limited screen-time they're given.

I don’t believe that anyone was necessarily miscast, and I was actually pleasantly surprised by how fitting I came to find the voices by the end of the experience. Though this much is true, I do have a problem with the delivery of some lines. Mipha in particular is a notable case, as I found that her actress maintained a general consistency that ironically made at least two scenes sound very unconvincing within their emotional context. I don’t know if this is partially a shortcoming on the Voice Actors’ side, but I do recognize the difficulty that could have come from Nintendo’s secretive nature during production and how that allegedly results in very constrained context to work with for VAs.

Another problem I have with the delivery of many lines comes in through unfortunate pacing. This undermines the impact of their content even further, not to mention that some of the lines seem a little odd to begin with. Thinking through this, I realize that these things are likely the result of the localization team attempting to write within the constraints of particular timing and work with the Voice Actors to match set lip-sync. I appreciate that this was likely very challenging to do, but I’m doubtful many will consider these qualifiers when their immersion is broken or when they feel that something is off. In the future, I hope that things change to facilitate better delivery and that there are less constraints on everyone involved.

Maintaining Tone

In two ways, the game seems to have trouble sticking to what it wants. The first problem is how the game portrays Link and what that means for how players engage with him throughout their adventure. The second is inclusive of certain aspects of how the game portrays the need to face Ganon. These may seem like they wouldn't constitute much of a problem on the surface, but for a game that is centered so heavily on facilitating a certain kind of experience, I feel that they're important to consider. Link in particular is worth noting as I feel that how they handle his character is something that can easily go beyond this title and affect the entire series moving forward.

Link

Link is typically supposed to be a stand in for the player. He's mostly blank so we can plant ourselves into the world with little to no problem or sense of disconnect. Though it seems like this is still the aim with the character in Breath of the Wild, there are unfortunately a few things that undermine and conflict with it.

To start, players could usually use their own names when playing a Zelda game. That isn't the case this time around due to the introduction of voice acting requiring characters to refer to Link by name. It's a small, necessary change, but it seems stranger than it might otherwise because Link himself still doesn't have an active voice. This was a decision that reflects the goal of maintaining his connection with the player as indicated by the following quote:

"If Link said something the user doesn't agree with, that relationship between the user and Link would be lost" -Eiji Aonuma

However, the way that NPC interactions are handled stand in stark contrast to this. While funny, many of these engagements imply that Link has an eccentric, often sarcastic personality and, time and time again, would say things in ways that most players would not themselves. It doesn't help that these responses also don't seem to match Link's mannerisms in cutscenes.

Taken in terms of the full package, all of these things seem to indicate a conflict of intent. Link is kept a silent protagonist and is even given a specific reason for choosing to hold his tongue, but the game has been made in a way that makes that seem true in only the most superficial sense. I can't help but feel that this could have been dealt with a little more carefully. As it stands now, the compromises make it so that Link is either a meagerly characterized individual and/or a partially jarring conduit into the world. 

Not ideal on any terms.

Ganon

While Breath of the Wild is constructed to facilitate and encourage exploration at every turn, certain things go against that almost universal direction.

The primary objective marker text, Impa, The Great Deku Tree, Princess Zelda, and a few lines from other characters will egg you on to face Ganon whenever you make major progress. You aren't forced to do so, but a fair number of things make it seem like it’s what you should do. Ganon himself was designed to stay out of the way of the adventure to avoid piling on additional, unnecessary narrative and constraints that would reduce player freedom. This makes how he's presented by these subtle nods particularly odd, as it does precisely what the developers were trying to avoid with little to show for it at the end of the day.

Encouraging players to cut their adventure short by posing the dire nature of confronting Ganon in these ways could easily end up taking away from the enjoyment of the experience, as he doesn't represent the same purpose as a more traditional boss fight in other games.

Facing him isn't climax: It's closure.

In much the same way that the rewards in Breath of the Wild aren’t really the treasures at the end of the road but the journey itself, Ganon is more of a garnish than anything else. Dropping everything to be the hero with the expectation of the greatest challenge yet and the satisfaction of overcoming insurmountable odds will leave you wanting for something far more fulfilling than you'll end up getting. Ganon isn't difficult to face if you're prepared, and while the game is designed to allow you to fight him whenever you’d like, the ending doesn't represent any sort of major payoff.

I think that these little nudges were made in an attempt to strike a balance on basis of how different players approach the game. Yes, this is an enormous open world built for exploration and discovery, but there are those who’ve come in with the expectation of, or an interest in, a more linear experience and won’t feel that the conclusion is impactful without having this monstrous enemy colored as an imminent threat. Unfortunately, I think the payoff is limited on these terms as well.

With no real post-game, swaying players to seek this narrative conclusion early might have them feeling disconnected from the world when returning to complete other content and explore, and that's not something I think should be humored when it comes to an experience of this nature. Unfortunately, parts of this are necessary to make for a compelling narrative, and the nature of massively open-world games that give you this much freedom doesn't exactly mesh well with doing that. Regardless, I still feel that pulling a few punches would have allowed the story to be just as effective while easing the sense of urgency that goes against the experience it's been set in.

Final thoughts

If you've read this far, you might have seen my criticisms and thought "These are really mundane things to nitpick. Where are the real complaints?". The fact of the matter is that these really are the most notable problems I have with Breath of the Wild. 

This is a great game that succeeds in the majority of its endeavors, and though it will be refined and improved on in the future, what is here is a brilliant experience with a strong foundation that's ripe to be learned from and well worth enjoying. I think that the shrines are extremely enjoyable, that the combat is superb, that the attention to detail is awe inspiring, and the degree to which the game respects player intelligence and choice to be notably appreciable.

That doesn't mean there aren't other things I didn't like, but those are more a matter of preference as opposed to flaws in execution or failures in design. On that note, I'd like to list a few things I want to see in the future, whether they be in a sequel or through the content packs coming later this year. I think we'll be getting some tweaks and changes in the Expansion Pass, so maybe I'll get lucky and find that one or two of them happen.

A more robust map marker system              

Breath of the Wild is a brave game in providing an open-world full of content that its willing to let you miss or find on your own terms. The map isn't filled with pre-configured markers that tell players where to go; instead, players are given 100 map markers and 5 way-points to assign and save themselves when on their adventure.

Though I appreciate this implementation, I can't help but think that they could take it farther and provide more robust charting options. I'd love the ability to attach notes to markers and save secondary overlays  with my own supplementary material drawn on top. The touch screen is already on both consoles the game is available on, so I don't doubt this sort of things could be added in an intuitive way.

Full Silence, Full VA, or a more thoughtful implementation of both

While the first attempt to bring Voice Acting to the mainline Zelda series has been quite commendable, I think giving players the option to change audio tracks or turn off VA outright would be a great feature.

I'd also like them to consider how they go about Voice Acting a fair bit more carefully moving forward. Link doesn't have a speaking voice, yet interactions with those that do indirectly characterize him to avoid making things seem unnatural. I don't personally think the story in Breath of the Wild necessarily gained enough from voice acting to call it an undeniably great inclusion, and the balancing act played for Link's character probably didn't do it any favors. Ultimately, I hope that whatever's done next is planned in conjunction with all aspects of Link and the player in mind from start to finish and that the direction taken is communicated internally to ensure a cohesive result.

A real Post game

The nature of Ganon and how pivotal he is to the world means that a real post game isn't a simple thing to set up. For the story DLC, I'd like to see the constraints that make this true somehow overcome, if even in a meager way from a player content standpoint. Enemies would have to permanently disappear from the game world, certain recipes would become much harder to make, and the dialogue and routines of many NPCs would need to be modified to reflect Ganon’s defeat. Unfortunately, all of this would require a great deal of work and realistically would add little content overall. I’d be pleasantly surprised if Nintendo actually went this route, but I hope that they at least keep the possibility of this in mind for future games that adopt the open-air format.

Fortunately, I do think that there’s room for an expanded resolution in the second DLC pack considering that Princess Zelda wants to go to Zora’s Domain at the end of the game. This is something that I would more than welcome instead if it were on the table.

My Impressions of Breath of the Wild

The following write-up represents my personal perspective on The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. There are no story spoilers and only minor references to principle mechanics. 

141 hours, 125 Korok seeds, 59 shrines, 15 hearts, a little over 2 stamina bars, and 1 Master Sword later, I've defeated Ganon and completed Breath of the Wild. Of course, reading that, you probably know that there's actually a whole lot more in the game for me to do and see. Regardless, I've decided to share a few thought and impressions of my experience so far, as I feel like I've finally put enough time in to have a solid, well-rounded perspective.

Gameplay

Breath of the Wild presents the most varied toolset ever seen in a Zelda title. Through the massive selection of weapons and a few extremely versatile runes, the efficient, multifaceted design of the game encourages and rewards players for unconventional ideas and experimentation, making for problem solving and combat that have never felt so satisfying or open ended. 

Taking advantage of this are shrines, small puzzles and challenges that litter the land to test the player’s wit and understanding of the tools they’ve been provided. There are also the hidden Koroks, your standard sidequests, and riddles. These things are all optional, diverse, unafraid of providing a challenge, solvable at your own pace, and, in most cases, completely respect your intelligence.

The introduction of free-form climbing and paragliding are the game’s not-so-secret weapons with regards to really driving home the amount of freedom available to the player, allowing you to scale almost any surface and make your way to anything you can see in the distance. The added sense of verticality isn’t superficial either, as the tools lend themselves to varied play-styles and the discovery of content in unusual places.

Breath of the Wild also embraces weapon degradation in a much more all-encompassing, intelligently implemented way. Link himself doesn’t grow latently more powerful outside of stamina and heart upgrades, meaning that, in the typical Zelda context, there are no functional means to adjusting difficulty that wouldn’t undermine a sense of progression or result in a permanent imbalance later down the line when facing old foes in familiar locations. The application of weapon degradation works to make Breath of the Wild's open world successful by ensuring that players can, through a few successful engagements, match the enemies in a given location, but won’t stay that capable for long when returning to less taxing areas.

When starting the game, the initial selection of weapons is deliberately fragile, functioning as a passive tutorial that ensures players understand and apply the core aspects of the combat-loop in a low-risk environment and a condensed context. This is done while coaxing them to engage with a variety of weapon types and appreciate their advantages and disadvantages. Players learn to adapt, experiment, and strategize early, which gets them ready for the world and possibilities that’ll be experienced later, even when the weapons become more varied and less feeble.

Overall, the gameplay in Breath of the Wild is extremely well thought out and diverse. Almost all of the systems in the game are integrated with each other in a way that means it’s unlikely any one player will have the same experience as another and that most folks will feel intelligent when they come up with their own unique solutions and strategies. 

Story

This is a part of the experience that I have a lot of thoughts about, but -to avoid spoilers- I’ll leave those aside and speak in more general terms instead.

The short of the long of it is that the primary narrative in Breath of the Wild is fairly barebones. It’s minimalist, exacting only the details necessary to make it sensible and justify the journey the player embarks on. It trades its heartier origins for subtlety, and while that isn't necessarily a bad thing, it feels less fulfilling as a result when considered individually.

The fact of the matter is that the story was built to best compliment the type of gameplay experience Breath of the Wild is meant to provide without compromise. On that front, the developers were successful, presenting the narrative through a combination of an interesting mechanic and a less typical plot-structure, allowing it to sit well with the open nature of the game.

As an aside, it’s worth noting that this is the first mainline title in the Zelda series to implement Voice Acting in a prominent way. Though I don’t think anyone is miscast, I do have to say that I’m not entirely a fan of a lot of the deliveries. I think that there are a few possible reasons for some of these issues, but I’ll get into that another day. 

World

In Breath of the Wild, the world is the real star of the show. More accurately, your journey through Hyrule is at the heart of the experience.

It’s true.

Every facet of the world is configured to encourage exploration. There are towers in each region that give you the opportunity to get a lay of the land from above and provide you with relevant segments of the map. These segments don't, at any point, contain direction or overt indicators of where to go. Instead, you're allowed up to 100 markers and 5 waypoints to place as you see fit. This alone is a pivotal design decision that encourages players to forge their own path, but the developers don't just stop there. 

From these towers, interesting landmarks and key shrines are visible. The shrines are deliberately placed in areas that are typically dense with things to do, at the ends of paths with points of potential interest along the way, or close to the border of neighboring regions to pique your curiosity. 

Though these things are true and the world is built to entice you, it’s also built to be believable. As such, it doesn't have everything just checker-boarded conveniently and evenly for you to find. A fair number of the more interesting things are spread out and require a trek to get to even if you know where they you're going. With this daunting spacing in mind, Koroks are hidden in large amounts across the land. This ensures that the plausibility of the world isn't sacrificed to satiate impatient players and that the attentive are always being rewarded for keeping an eye out for oddities.

Pulling back a bit and looking at the big picture, the geography in this game is incredibly interesting. For a fan of the franchise and its world, seeing such a detailed and cohesive map of Hyrule is an amazing thing. Not only is finding familiar places exciting, but seeing how they exist in this post-apocalyptic era is especially engrossing. The names of areas, landmarks, and lakes are all painstakingly detailed and many offer appreciable references to the history of the series, which I think will have some players grinning ear to ear. It really is a love letter to and a culmination of everything that makes up the Zelda universe.

If you end up playing Breath of the Wild, old fan or not, be sure to take the time to explore and enjoy the well-constructed world, as having your own personal adventure in it truly is a special experience.

Where Does it Stand?

Coming right down to it is a question that I think a lot of people have: Is this the best Zelda game ever made?

The cop-out answer is maybe.

It really does depend on what you want out of a Zelda game. For better or worse, Breath of the Wild really pursues the core of the original Zelda on the NES and pushes it farther, perhaps a lot more than some folks realize. It doesn’t hold your hand in an excessive manner, it’s built with the intent to allow players to discover at their own pace, and even lets you miss wonderful things unabashedly. 

Breath of the Wild honestly seems to have been developed in a similar way to Super Mario 3D World: by looking back at the early days of its franchise and considering what made it special to begin with. However, while the Mario franchise had its whole 2D legacy to observe, things were different for the Zelda franchise, which experimented heavily from its inception.

The earliest Zelda game is unique in that it’s the only title that truly embraces exploration without any reservations. Zelda 2 was mostly a side-scroller, and while A Link to the Past returned to its roots in principle gameplay, it was designed to guide players and give them a relatively more pleasant, specific, and mostly defined experience as opposed to asking them to discover things on their own and make the adventure a personal one. A Link to the Past is the game that became the core of the franchise moving forward, and, though A Link Between Worlds rethought those conventions before it, Breath of the Wild is the first game in the series that puts those conventions —and the ones built on top of them— aside entirely to ask an important question:

What really makes a Zelda game a Zelda game? 

The answer, fortunately, has resulted in a title that is unrestricted, enormous in scope, generous in content, respectful of player intelligence, welcoming of unique solutions, and that gives you the space to have an adventure on your own terms, all while staying true the spirit of the franchise. 

With that in mind, I’d say that anyone who wants to go on an adventure, explore, get lost, or be challenged will very likely enjoy Breath of the Wild. Zelda fans that are looking for the return of those things after all these years might be pleasantly surprised and find that this does so in a big way and that it IS their favorite game in the Zelda series. However, fans who are looking for the next big tale in this universe might find themselves dissatisfied with what’s been put on their plate. 

The standard, linear story that’s been seen in most Zelda games is gone, and what is there with regards to the overall narrative really takes a back seat. To be fair, the world is filled with smaller stories to be made and had through sidequests and general NPC interaction that may ease the worries of escapists wanting to experience life in Hyrule. Unfortunately, that likely won't leave those who are mostly interested in a meatier, more typical narrative from this world feeling like Breath of the Wild is near the top of their lists. 

At the end of the day, most people lie somewhere in the middle with regards to what they’re looking for in a Zelda experience. There are those who will consider this their favorite Zelda game and, I’m sure, a fair number of folks who won’t. With such a well realized world, incredible gameplay, and design that succeeds on all intended fronts, I think that most fans who play Breath of the Wild will hold it in exceptionally high regard, even if it isn’t their number one. 

Every title brings something special to the franchise or has its own spin on beloved characters and conventions, so no matter where Breath of the Wild ends up ranking with Zelda fans, I’m sure that they’ll look back fondly on it in much the same way as they did its predecessors.

Tips for playing

When playing the game, I noticed that there were a few things that really contributed to my enjoyment of the game or would have made things better. These are my recommendations for an ideal Breath of the Wild experience. I'm fairly confident in their importance, so please keep them in mind.

Go in as blind as you can

This is a game of exploration and discovery. If you want to get the full experience, find things out about the game yourself when playing and not from friends, articles, or videos before hand.

Fight Ganon only when you feel like you're done

Consider fighting Ganon a means of closure. He's there for you when you've decided that you've done everything you want to in the game and that you're ready to move on. I think that it's extremely important to keep that in mind and that playing with this mentality will, more likely than not, leave you more satisfied with your overall experience after completing this major, overarching goal. 

Experiment constantly

This is a game bursting with possibilities. The deeply integrated systems mean that the potential methods of engagement in combat and puzzle solving are hard to count. Don't be afraid to do strange or even reasonable things you'd like to see work. The game might end up surprising you.

Don't rush

Do. Not. Rush. I put in about 130 hours before deciding that I'd rush to the end and be a hero. I don't think that there is any case in which this was smart, and if I could do it again, I'd do play the way I was before those last 10 or so hours and really enjoy the experience.

There's a whole world out there waiting for you. It's not going anywhere, so don't feel compelled to end things abruptly or before you've really taken in everything you want to.

No guides

No guides. No tutorials. No walkthroughs. 

As I've said earlier, this is a game of discovery. So Discover.

Every puzzle you can't solve or thing you can't find is so much more rewarding when you finally succeed, so give yourself the pleasure of experiencing that personal satisfaction instead of sacrificing it for convenience or ease. Believe in yourself. It's worth it.

The Way I See It: Splatoon's Voice Communication & Motion Controls

The Way I See It is a category of pieces that represent my personal opinions or reasoning on subjects I enjoy or have a lot to say about. Though I attempt to build these write-ups on on well-researched and verified information where relevant, as a general statement, I do not speak with absolute authority on any given matter covered. Thank you for your time.

With the relatively recent announcement of Splatoon 2, I've seen a fair bit of discussion on whether Nintendo will go back on their decision to leave out Voice chat from their online shooter.

Upon its release, the original Splatoon faced its fair share of controversy due to the decision to create a competitive Third-Person Shooter of this sort and take away what could be considered a staple of the genre, not to mention the focus on a gyroscopic control scheme that many had seen as an unnecessary gimmick. After purchasing the game and putting hours and hours of time into the single and multiplayer, I've come to the conclusion that things aren't as simple as they've been made out to be by some detractors.

These are my thoughts.

Voice Chat

Voice chat has been a well loved tool in the era of modern games. Whether to guide, goad, gloat, or greet, voice communication has been considered so valuable to general play experience that it's become an industry standard for any games with online functionality and even externally fostered by dedicated gaming hardware through party chat.

Knowing this, it's no surprise that folks weren't too happy about the idea of an online game -a shooter at that- not including chat as a feature.

For context, Nintendo had particular goals with the development of Splatoon, going through a selection process of features that they wanted to incorporate into a title in this genre. Voice chat didn't make the cut. One reason for this included the negativity that sometimes accompanied an open communication system between more capable and less capable players, leading to potential experiences that Nintendo avoids fostering with their products. Another was the imbalance that could come into play by including the feature.

Designing a game that rewards coordination in a way that can be bolstered through external communication may allow some players to enjoy greater awareness of their situation, but it also opens the door to an inequilibrium when their opponents don't take advantage of it. As a result, the game was intended to ensure that the only advantages one player may have over another are matters of skill: that all players operate with the same inputs and outputs, enjoying the game in the same way without any potential advantage or disadvantage from one another.

With these things in mind, Nintendo developed Splatoon to not only communicate its terms of engagement and functions without necessitating external means of communication, but to the ends of actually subverting the value of VC outright.

This ends up meaning that VC actually doesn't pose a great advantage to players even if they do communicate through external software. Here are a few reasons why:

• Matches are only 3-5 minutes long barring overtime, making communication that isn't concise more detrimental to active play than helpful.
• Matches are 4 vs 4 affairs, so complex strategies from either side aren't very likely, especially considering the breadth of corridors and traversal options.
• Map design is deliberately considerate of VC not being available. They're built with cues to ensure all necessary info for decision making is available.
• The start of every match shows off enemy and team weapons, allowing players to consider the most effective play-style with which to proceed.
• The map shows off teammate positions and the ink coverage of both sides.
• Sound design indicates the distance and weapon type of enemies and friendlies.

As you can see, the ingredients are there for any team of well-seasoned players to not only perform well under typical circumstances, but actually operate on the same level as those who might try and coordinate through direct communication. In fact, if put up against a team who relies explicitly on voice communication to coordinate, those who pay attention to the indicators the game provides will usually be at a distinct advantage.

Gyroscopic Aim

A lot of the time, when people think Nintendo they think motion controls. The age of the Wii was very profitable, but also opened the door to half-hearted implementations of motion controls derogatorily referred to as 'waggle'. There's still a stigma around these controls today among the more traditional core gaming market.

Unfortunately, the idea of motion being an inferior input method for games hasn't been good for the perception of Splatoon's focus on gyroscopic rotation to aim. Though this has been true throughout general conversation from those who haven't tried it, I think that there are some more than reasonable arguments for how Nintendo's execution of the motion controls in Splatoon is a great success.

For one, the use of gyroscopic aim is actually optional. If your preference is a typical analog stick configuration, you're free to turn off motion controls and enjoy a more traditional console experience. Some would argue that the regular aim doesn't feel all that good, and I wouldn't disagree with them. The reason for this is a lack of aim-assist, which is fairly standard in most shooters on console. This may seem annoying on the surface, but it means that, on a fundamental level, Splatoon is one of the few titles in the genre on console that can functionally be played on a serious competitive level in any configuration.

Gyro controls allow for small corrections in a way that brings it far closer to a mouse and keyboard level of accuracy without the need for a handicap to ensure that the aim experience isn't frustrating. It also contextualizes shooting in a novel new way that can be enjoyed by those who would otherwise be daunted by the complexity and stigma of quickly managing aim through conventional means. The appeal of this can be seen directly in the immense size and sustained engagement of the competitive and casual community of the game, which launched almost two years ago on a console with an extremely small install-base. This leaving aside the already staggeringly impressive 1/4th attach rate.

I can only hope that this was deliberate, as seeing this sort of implementation compromised in the sequel would undermine the more recent message from the Switch reveal trailer that the game is being pushed with a competitive experience in mind.

Conclusion

Complaints about Nintendo's decisions with regards to the aiming and communication are, on the surface, very appreciable ones for a traditional shooter experience. However, Splatoon is not a traditional shooter and is designed with the differences that make that true at its core. This not only helps ensure that such exclusions and changes aren't detrimental to the game, but actually bolster the overall play experience, contributing to the novel and well loved title we know today.

I can see where people come from when wanting their standard controls and features, but when said concerns are put towards Splatoon in general terms, I think that does a disservice to the careful and unconventional design that is the basis for the game in the first place. Take some time with Splatoon and drop your preconceptions of what needs to be in a shooter or how a shooter plays. Take in the depth of the game and really give those motion controls a chance.

Who knows? You might find that you enjoy it much more than you expected to.

Potential Features for Animal Crossing on the Switch

Hello again!

As some of you may remember, and in some cases be annoyed about, mainline Animal Crossing skipped the Wii U.

But why?

Financially lucrative, appealing to most demographics, and genuinely adored, having this franchise pass over Nintendo's last home console seems like a wasted opportunity to many. Personally, I believe that a big part of why this didn't happen was that the principle novelty of the hardware was dual-screen play.

Though unique among home consoles, dual-screen functionality has been leveraged as the primary means of moving the Animal Crossing franchise forward on Nintendo's handhelds. Wild World on the DS saw a more intuitive interface and expanded feature set that later carried over into New Leaf, alongside a plethora of other additions and adjustments. In many ways, Animal Crossing games tend to be improved iterations of each other as opposed to full-blown sequels, so releasing a title on the Wii U might not have only seemed a little redundant but also as a less convenient way to play as well.

It doesn't help that the development team was quite busy coming off of New Leaf, having a hand in building the Wii U's interface, Nintendo Land, and four other projects: two of which were Animal Crossing related and one being Splatoon, the first entry in Nintendo’s wildly successful new IP .

However, with the release of the Switch, we now have hardware that’s abandoned dual-screen play as its core feature, instead finding its novelty in being functional as both a handheld and console. Because of that, I believe that an Animal Crossing made on this platform won't be disadvantaged by losing the pivotal boon of playing anywhere or held back by the technical limitations of a traditional handheld, making it a strong place to push the series forward with little compromise.

Today, I thought it'd be fun to consider what interesting innovations or mechanics could be implemented on a Switch version of Animal Crossing to provide a unique, interesting play experience.

Here are just a few that I’ve come up with.

Tablet Notifications

I think an external notification system that allows players to receive more notable updates on what's going on in their game would be pretty useful.

.

Something like this could be integrated into the standard notification system of the Switch or an external app. Whether available on the cartridge, through the eShop, or even on mobile, a lean secondary application would be a great alternative to help conserve battery life in portable mode. A mobile application in particular, perhaps integrated through the Animal Crossing mobile game, would provide the benefit of a notification system you'd always have on hand. Being optional would mean that only those who really want to keep up with their game would have updates coming in, respecting players in a way that most apps typically don't.

StreetPass-style Trading

Though Nintendo's confirmed that StreetPass isn't a feature of the Switch, I feel that a means of hypothetically connecting it, the 3DS, and mobile platforms in some way could have interesting interactive uses.

Trading in particular is something I think would be fun. Imagine putting items that you don't personally want out for a new home. Passing by folks playing New Leaf or the upcoming mobile game would allow you to give away these things alongside accompanying letters, and maybe receive something unique for yourself.

Maybe an expansion of shops would allow you to design your own items to sell and provide a means for passersby to show their approval later on or even buy something for themselves! I think that this could be a really cool way to make bells and expand social engagement in a safe, rewarding way.

Window Mode

In much the same way that the introduction of handhelds has been an excellent fit for allowing us to enjoy Animal Crossing in short bursts, I think that the application of a secondary mode for home use might also provide an interesting means of increasing efficiency and respecting the player's time.

Window Mode would be an immersive feature that would be like, well, a window into the game's world. Functioning like an informative, interactive screensaver, it would intuitively allow players to see what's going on in their towns.

You could see what the weather's like, if you've got mail, perhaps a hint of whatever festivities may be happening on a given day, and more. You might even get friendly villagers saying hello, dropping things off, or wanting to talk! Of course, some folks might not like having too much socialization come their way, so you would be able to adjust your —customizable— blinds and/or curtains to make it so that other villagers know you're looking for a little privacy.

Personally, I think this would be a really fun little touch that could also help players who tend to get lost figuring out what to do and allow those at home to passively engage with the game while still being productive instead of dedicating the time to sitting in front of the television and turning the console on and off when wanting to play.

What I Want from Breath of the Wild

Originally published on February 27th, 2017

Hey folks! With the release of the Switch being just a week away, hype is in overdrive all around. What excites me most about next week isn't the Switch, however, but the release of Breath of the Wild.

Yes, after years of waiting, speculation, and anticipation, the 3rd of March will finally be the day we get our hands on one of the most ambitious titles in the Legend of Zelda franchise yet, and I'm very ready to sink my teeth into the massive open world of Hyrule for myself.

Being the last week until the game's release, previews have started to pour out of the press. Though I've been avoiding these write-ups and videos with the aim of immersing myself entirely in the game without knowledge of anything that'd be pleasant to discover on my own, that hasn't stopped me from having my own hopes for what it'll be like to play.

Today, I've decided to gather up all of the things I'd love to see Breath of the Wild do to highlight what I personally think would be an amazing experience.

Here's what I want from the game.

Gameplay

Starting with gameplay, there are some things in particular that I'd like to see in this release.

The folks at Nintendo always seem to love hiding secrets in their games, whether they be references to other franchises like the animal masks in Majora's Mask or mechanical obscurities like getting in a Koopa shell in Super Mario 3D World, these oddities never fail to make me feel like there's more to a game than meets the eye and that I'm in on something special. I'd love to see more of these in Breath of the Wild. I Know that it's pretty much a guarantee that we'll get to see these warm little touches regardless considering the precedent, but the fact that Breath of the Wild has such a massive world only excites me so much more about the possibility of find numerous things that I'd never expect to see, whether in a Zelda game or otherwise.

Another thing I really want is challenge. Because this game has an open world in the truest sense, I don't want to be held back from progressing by artificial walls of any sort. Within reason, I want my successes to reflect my skill more than they do the quality of my inventory: I want to be a better player, not have a better character. I love the idea of doing something that seems restrictively difficult and knowing that I can overcome it instead of being forced to turn around and take a different path until Link is somehow numerically more capable. Things like this would mean that I can make my own challenges by approaching dire situations on my own terms. The pinnacle of that sort of design would be defeating Ganon right from the get go, and I fully intend to give it a try to satisfy my own curiosity before really delving into the rest of what the game has to offer. Knowing that this is technically possible already has me wondering what incredible things a skilled player could pull off on their adventure, and I look forward to becoming that player myself.

Just imagine beating down Bokoblin by flailing around a piece of meat with Magnesis!

On the other end of things, I want the simple, obvious things to be entirely in my hands to figure out. I'd love to get a fuller sense of satisfaction from recognizing what's necessary through my own observations and experimentation. Essentially, if the game is put together in a way that respects my intelligence instead of telegraphing what needs to be done before I get the opportunity to engage with the situation, I'll be a very happy camper. I'm not actually too worried about things on this front, as it seems very clear that most situations are designed to be open ended with regards to how players approach them. It's even been said that there isn't a typical companion character in the game because they want to grant players the complete freedom to forge their own path, and that is very encouraging to know.

Story

Though I know that the freedom of Breath of the Wild is also established in a way that allows players to have their own personal stories to tell at the end of their experience, I'd really like the primary narrative of this Zelda game to be as fully featured as the ones we've seen in previous entries of the franchise. I recognize and appreciate that we can defeat Ganon without contextualizing our play-throughs with the cutscenes in the game, but I hope that those of us that do pursue them get a rich background to paint the picture of what happened leading up to our adventure.

I also would really love smaller plot threads being explored through side-quests. These could be especially memorable if Nintendo approached them with the kind of depth and variety we've seen in Majora's Mask.

Something else I've really been wanting from a Zelda game, though not necessarily this one, is an exploration of the "Era Without a Hero". This is a part of the Adult timeline that takes place after Ocarina of Time but before Wind Waker and is the period in which the flooding of Hyrule occurred. I think it'd be compelling to experience that Era, especially if things weren't necessarily as simple as we might think.

What if the Legend only says that the hero was nowhere to be found because he failed?

Though the Link from Ocarina of Time disappeared from this timeline, the Link in Wind Waker still had the Spirit of the Hero. Why would it simply be gone in the intermediary time, especially when the royal bloodline still continued and Ganon broke his seal? What if this doesn't mean that there wasn't a hero, but that he failed? After all, failure isn't unprecedented in the Zelda universe continuity, as the Decline timeline is dedicated to a scenario in which Link does not succeed in defeating Ganon.  In that case, it would make sense that the legend of his time would ignore him as the chosen hero destined to save Hyrule. In their eyes, if he fails, how could he be? I think it'd be incredibly interesting to see a game like this that, ultimately, would be more of a tragedy: justifying the need to call upon the Goddesses to flood Hyrule.

Lore

Relevant to the story front, I'd love to see more strong world-building in Breath of the Wild. The immense size of the game lends itself to an enormous amount of potential with regards to painting a richer picture of Hyrule than we've ever seen before.

I want to learn about past tragedies through the rubble of architecture and the remains of civilization. I want to enter ruins and be able to trace the path a guardian might have taken as it left destruction in its wake. I want geography to show me why certain groups live in certain places and how that reflects on their way of life.

Translating Hylian glyphs or running through tapestries like this would be a great way to flesh out the world.

Even side-quests could build on this front, indirectly helping expand our understanding of the world. Just imagine learning about the various cultures of Hyrule, whether through the remains of what was or through the new villages and communities that exist in the present.

Going back to respecting player intelligence, I'd also love to have much of this done in a way that indicates thoughtful design as opposed to directly feeding the player through optional exposition. There's nothing wrong with doing things in that way, but I think that primarily presenting the lore through deliberate choices with the geography, ecology, architecture, enemies, and NPCs would be all the more enriching to those of us who want to put a careful eye forward, thus making the experience feel all the more cohesive and the world more alive.

The Way I See It: Marketing the Switch as a Handheld

The Way I See It is a category of pieces that represent my personal opinions or reasoning on subjects I enjoy or have a lot to say about. Though I attempt to build these write-ups on on well-researched and verified information where relevant, as a general statement, I do not speak with absolute authority on any given matter covered. Thank you for your time.

Returning once again to the topic of the Nintendo Switch, a common complaint I've seen again and again is that the hardware isn't being presented well to potential consumers. A whole lot of folks have insisted that Nintendo's not being smart about the Switch by marketing it as a console first. "Why sell it as a weaker console that you can take with you when you could advertise it as a really powerful handheld that you can hook up to the tv?" they say. I believe that there are a lot of reasons for why they wouldn't want to do that. In fact, looking at things as a whole, there's little to no value in presenting it in that way at all.

Here are some of my thoughts and an elaboration on my perspective.

Price

Let's start with the money factor.

I'll put it bluntly: At 300 dollars, the Switch is not priced to sell as a handheld.

Looking back at a relevant and recent example, the 3DS entered the market at 250 US Dollars. By the second quarter of the hardware’s availability, it had become apparent that this was not a wise move. Sales so solidly plummeted that they didn't just fail to meet projections, but they also contributed to Nintendo's first quarterly loss in about 8 years. Nintendo quickly turned around on this and heavily dropped the 3DS's price, aiming to encourage sales, regain their market momentum, and build their player-base to convince developers and retail partners that the handheld could achieve a degree of success comparable to its predecessor.

The Switch retails for 50 dollars more than the 3DS did before its price drop with no pack-in game or holdover distractions like AR to speak of.

Advertising the Switch as a handheld first and asking consumers in the same market group as the 3DS - one that has shrunken by about a 3rd if we're being generous - to pay 300 dollars for it is utterly untenable. On top of this, potential buyers from the console market would likely balk at the prospect of putting that much money down for a handheld when the same amount could buy them a PS4 or Xbox One with a game included and the assurance of an already expansive software library instead.

Speaking of software, the pricing there is also a glaring issue that would need to be addressed.

Typically, the roof of handheld game pricing is about 40 US dollars. Full-scale Switch games cost the standard 60 associated with new console games. When posing the Switch as a handheld, every market would find problems with this amount.

Many console gamers looking from the outside would ask why they'd have to pay the same price for a handheld game as they would a standard console release, seeing it as a lower value proposition. On the other side of the spectrum, the financially minded handheld gamer, who already has the price of the device to consider, would only be further detracted by a perceptible cost increase for software. Things get even worse when looking at mobile gamers who do most of their shopping on app stores: through their frame of reference, they'd be apprehensive of paying 10 dollars for a single game, let alone a solid 60.

Where money is concerned, Nintendo needs to set the right context to justify the investments that they and their partners expect consumers to make, and no part of telling the world that the Switch is a 300 dollar handheld with 60 dollar games succeeds in doing that.

Practicality

On top of pricing concerns, let's consider the functional value of the Switch being a handheld-first device. Sure it'd look like a step forward to the handheld gamer, but what about the other market groups?

To everyone else, its console functionality wouldn't seem all that attractive would it?

3DS games and the like tend to be smaller, bite-sized experiences that are made with the consideration that the hardware has a limited battery life and will be used in unstable settings. A lot of games in various genres designed in terms of those parameters would likely feel shallower, shorter, less engrossing, and less meaningful to those who primarily play games on consoles and personal computers. Implying that Switch games are like this adds unnecessary apprehension of the quality of experience that console gamers would end up finding on the hardware; it goes against the appealing current messaging that you can take your full-featured console game with you anywhere you go.

Calling this a handheld device you can hook up to your tv raises a further, possibly more potential stifling, marketing issue: the mainstream audience doesn't associate the 3DS with handheld games, but the titles they get on their phones. Take a walk in their shoes. Would you at all want to play a majority of those games on a television given the opportunity? Mobile games are almost universally centered around basic mechanics and aren't graphically intensive. Folks playing on a phone have a convenience that isn't found anywhere else in that they can play their games in any environment and usually still have a hand free to do other things. They can play while on the train, waiting in line at the store, running their errands, and even while watching tv. Giving mobile gamers something that seems to take that all away doesn't sound like an alluring kind of novelty, does it?

Closing

The long of the short of it is that Nintendo marketing the Switch as a console that you can play on the go is a stronger strategy when compared to the presented alternative. It allows Nintendo to pose the hardware and software in a way that's more palatable to all markets in terms of price as well as easily manage the expectations of the kinds of games it's been built to facilitate. Console and PC gamers will very clearly understand the concept of the hardware and consider the allure of playing upcoming games in the same capacity that they usually do at home wherever they'd like. Handheld gamers will be able to look at the Switch and recognize that it's an even bigger leap in scale and graphics than they might typically expect. The mobile market will very immediately understand that the software and hardware are not directly comparable to things like their phones and app-store games, allowing them to appreciate the device’s merits on its own terms.

As far as I can see, marketing the Switch as a handheld first would only be smart if all that mattered for its success was its perceived power. I'm sure that it's clear to those who really think about it that things aren't that simple, and the overall value of pushing the Switch under those extremely specific terms isn't just low; it's actually potentially very damaging to the success of the hardware.

Nintendo has never released the most powerful handhelds on the market, yet they've always succeeded in the face of their competition. They've done this by pricing their hardware competitively, providing great battery-life, and, more recently, having novelties that turn heads. As a handheld, the Switch offers none of these things. Is it then still worth it for Nintendo to pose their latest flagship device under this marketing context, just to look more powerful?

If you asked me, I'd say no.