Obligatory mention of the Zelda formula, but I'm always of the mind that a video game series that has gone on for so long that it has been coined a formula and whose entries can be described as "traditional" is in desperate need of changing.
That's a probematic viewpoint of core video game elements, the more of a reason to address everything accordingly.
Not everything new is automatically better than traditional things. You like Soulsborne games? Now scrap everything related to it very chaotic, change many things - not in terms of progression - and you would basically play a game which has just the Soulsborne name but doesn't actually feel as much as them.
Elden Ring did the right thing of changes; they didn't cut things out completely, the developers
improved it. That's why Elden Ring has many new mechanics whilst loyal to the original series. That's how you do it. Not the Ganon Ganons and their mega maximum boring to dead mechanism, sorry but I don't see how it is objectively remotely good tbh.
The biggest difference between the stun-lock stratefy and the weakpoint strategy with every other Zelda boss is that you choose to stun-lock them.
You have not that much of a choice to stun them with an arrow to the face - glowing eyes???? - or hack&slaying them out of existence if there is not much of another creative alternative choice and that's the prime issue: They are simply bland, all humanoid, similar to fight, similar design and similar aesthetics.
I've been very clear in plenty of threads that I think the aesthetics of the Blights are underwhelming, but that they are mechanically more interesting than other Zelda bosses, since they don't follow the same "formula".
I already know what you were referring for and I just told you they are mechanically as bland and uninteresting as their design.
In addition, in terms of design, boss designs are important too, you know? You can't keep the same fighting style to a gigantic boss creature who has a massive defence on its body. Try slaying Stone Talus without aiming his weakspot, try to shot it randomly with the fire rod, it won't work that well. So you can't just arbitrary make "everything go work" coz of "freedom". Restrictions will always be there and
they have to.
As I said, a few gigantic bosses, similar to Morpheel, Stallord or other kind of bosses, need a different kind of tactic to be fight off - and that's when dungeon items performed the best. Or make a good hybrid out of both things in which you can use several items against the boss.
Even if you dislike the whole premise of using dungeon items to beat bosses - again, I see no issue in it, just make it more of a challenge like I described in my previous post - because of the lack of challenge or feeling, where is the fun of battling 4 very identical humanoid bosses with identical fighting style? Thunderblight Ganon feels quite different when fighting but even this boss still has too many similarities with the other 3 bosses - that's an issue.
I don't like the idea of a dungeon item being the key to beating each boss, because I think that each boss should be a challenge to fight. It shouldn't come down to the same stunning it three times and then smacking it with the sword routine that they've been using ever since they moved to 3D
That's quite a generalization, you know?
Did you stun Bongo Bongo with the Lens of Truth or the Hover Boots? No. The same with the majority of Majora Mask bosses. The same with A Link to the Past, again. But it kinda started with Wind Waker and Twilight Princess of the specific use of a certain item to beat boss xyz but that's more a battle design issue instead of the formular.
Don't blame the formular, blame the performance. The dungeon boss formular was always presented ever since Zelda 1. BotW has a new physics engine but the bosses are not tied to it at all. And no, the "You're free to battle it as you like" isn't working because again, boss design still matter and there will automatically be restrictions if you fight a gigantic non humanoid boss with some kind of armor, then you automatically have to use other tactics to deal with it. For startes, using the item most common in a specific dungeon.
I also cannot the grasp why some people curse on the "Using one dungeon item for a dungeon = bad" formular, especially when it comes to bosses. Many dungeon items are key elements because they are associated with the dungeon theme itself, so of course it will be a key element to it, just like magnetism in Vah Naboris. And if a specific item is especially effective on a dungeon boss being tied to the dungeon structure and design, I don't see the reason to not implement core or at least many gameplay elements in favor of the item - or in combination to other items being very useful or effective in a specific dungeon.
The creativity is the key, not extra unnecessary restrictions which led to the Ganon Ganons (still the Zelda dev team's biggest mistake imo).
I would much rather have a boss that you just have to outfight versus a boss with a specific win condition that you won't have to think about.
I see this battle (not Zelda):
You have to find an opening to the defence via using the item + the environment to move around the boss and to trigger the button. Now scretch all of that and use the boss battle design you're fond of; now you'd just have a huge enemy to bash on. You have to look out for attacks but when you get the pattern, you basically have to repeat: attack, dodge, attack until the boss is done.
As I said, when the difficulty and enemy AI is highly advanced, like Soulsborne games, it will be a huge challenge - and entertaining - experience of a boss battle but any less performance will hurt this experience a lot. And on games like Zelda and Metroid in which the use of items is crucial, being solely focused on such boss battle designs doesn't do the game justice, it's the contrast.
Until BotW released, I would jokingly refer to Dark Souls 1 as my favorite Legend of Zelda game due to a structure that I more associated with Zelda games.
How does that work?
Dark Souls 1 is a game of its own with its own gameplay mechanics and rules, it is already very different to any other Zelda game since the devs are a bunch of sadists pushing the player through near insanity due to its difficulty, lol. I love the Dark Souls series and although Dark Souls have some things with Zelda in common in terms of gameplay, it is not that wise to compare those games 1:1 and expecting that one game has to exactly work like the other one.
Zelda is popular due to its own unique traits, imo it doesn't even need to be so forcefully about being so open-world focused or changing the formular since its core fandom will always stan the Zelda games for its unique traits. But of course, BotW was a fresh start to improve the series, I agree but it really went overboard with the whole "You can do whatever you want to do in the game", ie directly going to the final boss. It hurts the narrative quite much.
But this is off topic. What I mean is, Dark Souls has a very focused gameplay, focused on weapon arts, attack pattern, skills, enemy ai and world building,
meanwhile Zelda is more about exploration, a vast variety of items to use with different environmental functions, adventuring, unique themed dungeons, many puzzles, puzzles tied to the dungeon interior and its design and needing specific keys to solve puzzles - you cannot ignore all of that and say "Screw boss battles making a use of this connection! Make Zelda bosses more similar to Dark Souls bosses".
Again to Dark Souls, it wouldn't work that well either if you force the Zelda boss battle formular to theirs. There is a reason why games have to be consistent in its correlation.
Now Dark Souls is my second favorite Zelda game
I am quite curious: What is your top 10 of all Zelda games?