@Vaasman said:
BOTW is nothing like system shock or thief, and it isn't even slightly a simulator, what the **** is this shit. Having general survival and resource gathering mechanics doesn't suddenly make you a "sim" anything. BOTW is very much rooted in wacky physics interactions, simple but varied combat, and silly interactions with the world that are tons of fun and indeed often immersive, but don't fall anywhere in the realm of believe-ability.
Next you'll tell me Infinity Ward went to the school of Square-Enix design, because they added experience and progression systems to Call of Duty.
No, its an immersive sim. The game simply out relies on system based gameplay and the combination of these systems create an emergent gameplay experience. This is what games like Ultima Underworld, System Shock, and Thief pioneered. BOTW follows this perfectly.
Lets go over the list that Giant Bomb made about the genre and apply it to BOTW, being aware that a game does not have to meet all these conditions (as Thief does not for example).
Immersion in an elaborate and believable game world: Yep, more so than usual. can put most other immersive sims to shame.
But it's not immersive because it "simulates" anything. It's immersive because the attention to detail and interactivity sell you on what is happening. It's not simulation just because a game offers unique interaction with the world. If that were the case you could basically call a million games simulation. Oblivion is not simulation just because the AI started to have a routine to their day that you could disrupt.
Simulation: physics and AI are used to create believable behavior in objects and characters which the player can freely interact with, resulting in 'emergent gameplay': Ummmm....yep. Big YEP
If this were a simulation, you would only be able to carry what a normal person could reasonably carry, and you'd only fall 10 feet before dying. Instead your inventory is unlimited with regards to components. As for physics and AI, you literally have shield surfing, handheld paragliding, and jumping 10 feet off a horse into the air to slow-mo bow attack with a bow. This is fun, but it isn't simulation. These mechanics are outside the realm of plausibility and typically don't fit into the rest of what you've been told about the world. Link can only jump about 3 feet in the air when he isn't riding a horse, and no one else in the game uses a paraglider to get around.
First person perspective so as to truly look through the eyes of the protagonist: Ok, its third person, so it fails this check.
Yes indeed it does, and I'd like to further push this point by saying that you have no control over the character's appearance outside of clothing options. This is effective for the purpose of making Link a distinct and emotive character, but it robs the factor of self-insertion from the game entirely.
Game design that allows for multiple paths and/or multiple solutions in every situation: Unlike the rest of the series, BOTW bucks the trend and fulfills this aspect wonderfully.
I fail to understand how this makes anything an "immersive simulation." Is DnD an "immersive simulation" because my players decide to knock down the entire building rather than solving the puzzles inside? I somehow doubt it. It's certainly fun but by the vagueness of the logic you could call nearly all games "immersive sims" by checking this point, and indeed the whole list, off. Crysis, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Far Cry, Deus Ex, Dark Souls. The list is endless really. And I'd like to also point out this mainly applies to combat and exploration, very very few puzzles have more than one solution.
A systemic game world that keeps track of the player's actions, which can affect the "whole" game: Yep, new quests open up based on what you do, and what you do and don't do affect the endgame
This is true of this game and it is impressive, but again that generally is true of many games. In Skyrim the NPC's take note of whether or not you've done certain side quests. In Dark Souls NPC's change dialogue and location based on how far you are in the game. This doesn't make these "simulation" by any reasonable standard.
Open-ended/non-linear game design with an emphasis on choice and consequence: Yep, you can play the divine beasts in any order, go wherever you want, and even fight the final boss right away. Even has Deus Ex beat here.
Not only is choice/consequence largely independent from immersion or simulation, but BOTW mainly allows choice in direction more than anything else. You aren't dictating the outcome of most quests, you are simply playing through them in the paces you desire.
Full control over the player's character in every situation: Yep, and very little of the game is a set piece, really, only divine beast approaches are more scripted.
I mean the game regularly pulls back for longer and more story driven cutscenes if you do the main questing so this point simply isn't true.
A world with consistent rules that the player can interact with: Best in the business here.
This point basically bleeds into the discussion of physics and interaction, and largely the game is successful on this front. But there are occasional imperfections. NPCs fighting monsters for instance, can't die as far as I've seen, and they nor the monsters ever break there weapons. But again, these rules don't make it a "sim" of any description. Largely what makes the game fun is how ridiculous and satisfying it is to pull off the less plausible of any outcome.
Narrative that is not always forced on the player, but instead can be told through exploration and gameplay at that players will: Check here as well, you have find the cutscenes, they aren't just delivered to you.
Yet another point that could be applied to many games and has very little bearing on Zelda's classification or inspirations.
No fail states, beyond player death: As far as I know, check.
There are at least a few shrines you have to reset when you **** them up. One including lighting five torches on a cube, but you can douse all the torches. But I'd like to also point out that, yet again, this can be applied to a zillion games that wouldn't come close to the ideal of simulation. Is mario a simulation because you only fail by dying?
Out of all the aspects Giant Bomb listed, BOTW only misses one, while in others, its the best right now.
Log in to comment