Do you expect Zelda Switch to be bigger than BotW?

[Spirit]

Breath of the Wild is a line in the sand for the series, jusy ad OoT was in 98, BotW is giving the franchise its next big push into new territory for the series.

While we cant say for sure if BotW will trump the size of FF15 and XCX's overworlds but its definitely huge...

But will Zelda Switch (if it even makes the Switch >.>) keep the huge overworld theme? Will it be bigger than BotW, will the physics engine be a mainstay in future titles now?

 

[Azure Sage]

I certainly hope so. Honestly, anything less than what BotW is will feel like a demotion from now on. BotW has really set the bar high for future titles. I don't expect all of them to live up to it, but I think they should definitely be aiming high enough that they don't feel like downgrades.

 

[Scribear]

I imagine just an updated copy of the way OoT and MM were. Using the same principles with all the kinks worked out. In a developmental standpoint it would make sense to use many of the same features as BotW (map size, item and weapon organization, open world) but with updated Switch capabilities.

In a less serious note -- BotW: Termina ftw.

 

[Ventus]

How can we even talk Bout zelda swirch when it hasnt even been confitmed yet

 

[Amy Lu Minati]

If they make it co-op multiplayer with an open world... Yes. They mentioned that they were trying to incorporate this at some time in the future, so we'll see.

 

[Dio]

I dont know how big BoTW will be but as Azure said I think if they gave us a smaller Hyrule after we experience this it would feel like a downgrade.

Up until now (maybe not even now) they have been unable to create a Hyrule to a size which represents how big the country is supposed to be. Let's face it, OOT's Hyrule is comparable to a back yard and yetit is supposed to represent an entire Kingdom. However the reason it is actually so miniscule would have been because of technology

Now they can create a Hyrule that feels like the size of a proper Kingdom I see no reason they would go backwards.

I do think we could get Zelda games with smaller worlds in future though, just not set in Hyrule itself. I imagine they will do a 3D title set somewhere else soon as it has been a long time since they did and if they want to mix things up a bit, then that is one way of doing it.

 

[Justac00lguy]

I'm not sure we'll get one. Hypothetically though, I'd like to think so. Games later down in the console's life cycle tend to get the best out of the hardware. And if open world Zelda is a successful concept, then they can go all out in then act instalment.

 

[the8thark]

Up until now (maybe not even now) they have been unable to create a Hyrule to a size which represents how big the country is supposed to be. Let's face it, OOT's Hyrule is comparable to a back yard and yetit is supposed to represent an entire Kingdom. However the reason it is actually so miniscule would have been because of technology

In 1997 Hyrule did feel massive though. Compared to ALTTP and Zelda 1, OOT was a massive game. No one in 1997 said, look how small OOT is. People said the opposite. People were amazed at how big OOT was in 1997. What is considered big always changes as the technology to create it does.

If Zelda games are around in 2037 (the same 20 year gap OOT and BotW have), I am sure that Zelda game will seem huge compared to BotW as well.

Now they can create a Hyrule that feels like the size of a proper Kingdom I see no reason they would go backwards.

Every Zelda game feels like a proper kingdom though. What we expect to be proper just increases every game.

I do think we could get Zelda games with smaller worlds in future though, just not set in Hyrule itself. I imagine they will do a 3D title set somewhere else soon as it has been a long time since they did and if they want to mix things up a bit, then that is one way of doing it.

That would be a good idea as a 2nd title for a console.

 

[Dio]

In 1997 Hyrule did feel massive though. Compared to ALTTP and Zelda 1, OOT was a massive game. No one in 1007 said, look how small OOT is. People said the opposite. People were amazed at how big OOT was in 1997. What is considered big always changes as the technology to create it does.

If Zelda games are around in 2037 (the same 20 year gap OOT and BotW have), I am sure that Zelda game will seem huge compared to BotW as well.


Every Zelda game feels like a proper kingdom though. What we expect to be proper just increases every game.


That would be a good idea as a 2nd title for a console.

Bigger doesn't necessarily equal better. If you create a massive world you need more content to fill it and I dont think getting bigger and bigger is the way to go for Zelda. I dont know how big BoTW really is but with something like The Witcher 3 I felt that world was big enough and it being bigger wouldn't have improved the experience. I'm sure they have the ability to make bigger games but really what's the point?

 

[Morbid Minish]

I think they'll probably continue to make other Zelda games with huge overworlds after BotW, but I'm not sure if every future Zelda game will be as big or bigger. Making huge worlds takes a ton of time, as we've seen with delays of BotW, so I don't think Nintendo will want that long of a wait between the release of every new Zelda game. Even though BotW was supposed to be the WiiU Zelda game, it'll be bigger on the Switch, so they might try to make the Switch Zelda (if there actually is one) different from BotW. Maybe more like ALBW since the Switch is also a handheld.

This might be an unpopular opinion, but I honestly don't mind if future Zelda games aren't bigger, or are ever smaller, than BotW. The size of the overworld doesn't matter much to me. A game can still have a lot to do in a smaller world.

 

[Tibari]

It depends on what the Zelda fans want. I mean, a lot of people hated the linear world of SS, so Nintendo made a huge open world for BoTW. If the majority complains about something in this kind of overworld, they will adjust the next Zelda game. So, maybe bigger, maybe not (Probably considering that many people like open overworlds.)

 

[PalaeoJoe]

Bigger doesn't necessarily equal better. If you create a massive world you need more content to fill it and I dont think getting bigger and bigger is the way to go for Zelda. I dont know how big BoTW really is but with something like The Witcher 3 I felt that world was big enough and it being bigger wouldn't have improved the experience. I'm sure they have the ability to make bigger games but really what's the point?

I completely agree, just like the graphical capabilities of tech can only get so detailed before the human eye can't experience the extra pixel density, an open world game can only get so big before it becomes unreasonable for the player to explore, traverse and experience or for the developers so build and fill with content. I don't think BotW will be the largest Zelda game that is made but we are close to the reasonable upper limit. Games 20 years from now won't be much bigger then modern games, baring infinitely generated worlds or **** like No Man's Sky.

It depends on what the Zelda fans want. I mean, a lot of people hated the linear world of SS, so Nintendo made a huge open world for BoTW. If the majority complains about something in this kind of overworld, they will adjust the next Zelda game. So, maybe bigger, maybe not (Probably considering that many people like open overworlds.)

I don't think SS's linear world was necessarily what made them decide to make a huge open world. Zelda games were pioneers in large open worlds, but they didn't evolve at the same pace as other open world games due to the limitations placed on them by Nintendo's hardware. Aonuma had to wait till Nintendo developed a console that could handle a Huge world and Wii U was that opportunity. Regardless of how SS's world was revived or what they did with it Zelda-U was going to be an open world because they finally could make it one. Not because they were reacting to the fanbases perception of SS.
I do think though that if once we get BotW it feels too empty or takes too long to traverse then the next Zelda may have a smaller world. I am betting though that the world will feel fulfilling to move through and explore.

 

[Amy Lu Minati]

The only thing I can think of that they really have left to do in a Zelda game is to further the time period to the far future or something similar, Zelda in a futuristic setting where everyone uses guns except Link who still has the master sword would be pretty cool (we did get trains in ST, that was almost steampunk, but not really). And turn his horse into a motorcycle and we are talking business!
But really though, what else could they even do to make it new and exciting or "bigger?" :/ Multiplayer co-op? Different setting? Any ideas? How could this game change the franchise, while keeping it a Zelda game, enough to make a bigger/better one?

 

[Dio]

The only thing I can think of that they really have left to do in a Zelda game is to further the time period to the far future or something similar, Zelda in a futuristic setting where everyone uses guns except Link who still has the master sword would be pretty cool (we did get trains in ST, that was almost steampunk, but not really). And turn his horse into a motorcycle and we are talking business!
But really though, what else could they even do to make it new and exciting or "bigger?" :/ Multiplayer co-op? Different setting? Any ideas? How could this game change the franchise, while keeping it a Zelda game, enough to make a bigger/better one?

Going the cyberpunk or full blown steampunk route would change things up a bit and they could still maintain the essence of Zelda whilst doing it. Like you said we have had a train. We have also had elements of steampunk and advanced technology but the civilisations we have actually seen in the series so far have been rather primitive. I personally want to see a Hyrule which has not been ravaged by Ganon for thousands of years featuring more advanced civilisations and settlements.

If we take a look at the Final Fantasy series it explores a variety of different settings whilst still maintaining the essence of what the series is about. I know they can make it work for Zelda.

 

[el :BeoWolf:]

I imagine they'll either stick with the usual "console" title followed by two "handheld" titles then another console one.