The Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild – how do you rate it? (pic: Nintendo)
The Tuesday letters page thinks it’s a publisher’s duty to make more non-sequels, as one reader is confused by online-only requirements.
To join in with the discussions yourself email [email protected]
Incumbent champion
With Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom out very soon now, I think it’s time for the obvious question: is Breath Of The Wild still the best game of all time? I realise that’s a very subjective term, but I think the easiest way to answer the question is what games have come out since that could surpass it?
Elden Ring is one, but I feel Zelda is more innovative and, despite probably having just as big a world, feels less bloated. I think the only real rivals are the Sony games God Of War and The Last Of Us Part 2. They’re very different games, so comparisons are difficult, but in my opinion they don’t prioritise gameplay enough to be counted as the best of all time.
You may argue that Breath Of The Wild was never the best but I certainly don’t see anything in the last six years that has as good a claim as it does to the ‘best ever’ crown. We’ll see if Tears Of The Kingdom can take it way from it though…
Tomta
Time investment
My thoughts on Game Pass, although I’m a PlayStation owner, not Xbox, I haven’t paid for the PlayStation equivalent, nor would I unless that’s the only way to play.
Games are so big these days it takes me a couple of months, normally, to play through just one, meaning I try to make sure it’s something I really want to play. I’d much rather pay for the games I want than pay a
monthly fee to choose from a list of games that I may or may not have an interest in, knowing I’d never get the time to play even 1% of them.
Even then I manage to have a small backlog, therefore I just don’t see the point of a Game Pass service unless somehow everything new appears on it and it works out cheaper than paying for six or so titles a year.
Anon
Clear lenses
Well, having played the original for thousands of hours, Advance Wars has finally landed and I’m certainly not disappointed. I’m actually quite surprised that it’s even better than I remember it. It’s like a reverse rose-tinted specs effect.
So many jobs got delayed over the weekend due to the game’s ‘one more move’ appeal, I just fell straight back in love with it. It’s the simplicity of it that grabs you, then the gradual complexity of strategies is what keeps you.
It’s been a great few months of games for me, even though my two hot games are both reboots (Advance Wars and Resident Evil 4). I’m really looking forwards to reclaiming all of those S ranks on Advance Wars 1+2, it’s going to take something special to beat this for my game of the year. Zelda has got a very high bar to match here.
Flemmo
E-mail your comments to: [email protected]
It’s all computers
I have recently observed a widespread issue in the video game community that I feel compelled to address. In various podcasts, discussions among fans, and even some game developers’ communications, I have noticed the term CGI (computer-generated imagery) being used incorrectly when the appropriate term should be ‘pre-rendered graphics.’ This is especially evident when people refer to pre-rendered video game trailers as ‘CGI trailers.’ While it might seem like a small mistake, I believe that using accurate terminology is crucial to maintaining a clear understanding of the technical aspects of the games we all love.
It is important to clarify that all in-engine graphics are also CGI, as they are generated using computer software. However, within the context of video games, ‘pre-rendered graphics’ are a more specific and appropriate term to describe visuals that have been created and rendered ahead of time, rather than being generated in real-time by the game engine.
CGI is easier to say and type than pre-rendered Graphics, but what is more important? Having to speak less syllables? Or not sounding like an idiot?
Cryptonic
GC: You’re not wrong but… does it really matter? It seems to us the term CGI trailer is merely equating them with CGI animated movies.
Try forcing it
I’ve seen the Mario movie and I did enjoy it but I would absolutely hate the idea of the same people making a Zelda film. To be honest though I don’t really see a movie working at all. Zelda games don’t have much of a story and the fantasy world is pretty generic. Those aren’t criticisms, they’re just things that aren’t important to the game.
I suppose you could play up the puzzle-solving and make it almost like a detective movie but with dungeon puzzles. Or maybe get more into the idea of Zelda, Link, and Gandorf being part of this immutable triangle, each in control of a third of the Triforce. That could be interesting if they’re all feeling the same temptations and problems but I dunno, I just don’t see Hollywood putting anyone on the movie that would get that kind of nuance out of it.
Handsom
Cheap and cheerful
I just wanted to message again and say thank you for finding the time to review Lunark, sorry for not expressing my gratitude earlier, two young children and work leaves little time for things like games.
Despite getting a 6/10 I’m definitely going to take the plunge and play Lunark, your review scores have always been spot on for me and the body of your review described exactly what I thought and hoped the game would be. Of course, I’d prefer Lunark to be better than described but going in after your review I know to temper my expectations.
Anyway, thanks again and keep up the good work.
Beastiebat (PSN ID) – add me for infrequent co-op and versus
Still playing: Shadow Of The Colossus PS4, Box Boy 3DS, Within The Blade PS4 (another cheap and cheerful game, definitely worth the couple of quid it cost), and Soul Calibur 6 PS4 – probably my favourite fighter ever, Inbox magic for a 7 please. And more time to play games.
Inexplicable requirement
I don’t get why all these publishers keep putting online only requirements in their games. They know that it infuriates players and they always end up having to take them out anyway, so why bother?
I’m not even sure what the benefit is supposed to be. Is it a DRM, anti-piracy thing? I thought that was proven never to work? And why does it take so long to take out? The way they’re talking about Suicide Squad it’s going to take six months to remove the option. Why is it that hard? I don’t understand.
Lafa
GC: We’re not sure ourselves. We think it’s a piracy thing but at this point it must be very counter-productive.
Publisher duty
I knew it was obvious they’d be doing it anyway but I really wish Sony would give it a rest with the Horizon games. Yes, the graphics are great, and the robot designs are cool but the game is probably the least interesting thing they do, behind only Days Gone.
I don’t know what Sony is going to announce as part of its Phase 2 for the PlayStation 5 but I hope it’s some new franchises. Both them and Nintendo seemed to be doing really well in terms of new IP at the beginning of the last generation but they quickly gave up and just went back to doing sequels, including of the new stuff.
I really think all publishers should see it as their duty to have at least one original project on the go at all times. Don’t make it your most expensive and I’m sure the benefits will greatly outweigh the risks. No one’s going to make the next Fortnite or the next Minecraft or whatever, they have to be the ones to make the first one of these games and that’s not going to happen when all you rely on is sequels.
Horizon is quite successful but it’s never going to be a monster hit and will only trail off with time, so just let it run its course and move on. Or maybe that’s what they’re trying to do? Bashing out so many sequels and spin-offs so soften that everyone get sick of them extra quick.
Doshin
Inbox also-rans
That’s a good point about NieR 3. Considering all the rubbish Square Enix has put out lately it seems long overdue that they at least tease about it. A tease that, hopefully, will make no sense whatsoever.
Garnish
I see Jeff Grubb has backtracked on his comments. Not that it won’t stop the Game Pass is dead stories. But why let the truth get in the way of a good story, eh?
Anon
GC: All he really does is talk about Hi-Fi Rush, which was the least significant part of his discussion.
This week’s Hot Topic
The subject for this weekend’s Inbox was suggested by reader TheTruthSoul (PSN ID), who asks how often you play a video game to completion?
What is it that inspires you to finish some games and not others? Are there common elements which influence your decision, or does it depend purely on the quality of the game and external factors?
Do you usually aim to complete a game, and do you have any examples of times when you unexpectedly changed your mind, one way or the other? What do you consider completing a game to mean, and how often do you try to 100% one?
E-mail your comments to: [email protected]
The small print
New Inbox updates appear every weekday morning, with special Hot Topic Inboxes at the weekend. Readers’ letters are used on merit and may be edited for length and content.
You can also submit your own 500 to 600-word Reader’s Feature at any time via email or our Submit Stuff page, which if used will be shown in the next available weekend slot.
You can also leave your comments below and don’t forget to follow us on Twitter.
MORE : Weekend Hot Topic: Rebooting your favourite video game series
MORE : Games Inbox: Justifying a PS5 Pro purchase, Beyond Good And Evil 2, and Mega Man Battle Network 7
Follow Metro Gaming on Twitter and email us at [email protected]
To submit Inbox letters and Reader’s Features more easily, without the need to send an email, just use our Submit Stuff page here.
For more stories like this, check our Gaming page.
Sign up to all the exclusive gaming content, latest releases before they’re seen on the site.
The Tuesday letters page thinks it’s a publisher’s duty to make more non-sequels, as one reader is confused by online-only requirements.
