It's time to find out once and for all: What does Sup Forums truly think of Nintendo's two GOTYs?

It's time to find out once and for all: What does Sup Forums truly think of Nintendo's two GOTYs?
Odyssey: strawpoll.me/14883103
BoTW: strawpoll.me/14883106

I gave Mario a 9 and Zelda a 10.

You might as well have posted this on MyNintendoNews.com

Sup Forums is Nintendicksucker central. You won't get an objective results here if that's what you seek.

ahahahaha

Mario - 10
Zelda - 6

I give mario a 10 and Zelda a 9.

lol'd, have you been here for the last two days?

Genuine 10 to both. Don't care if you think I'm memeing.

Mario's an 8, Zelda's a 6.

>Odyssey
8
>BOTW
I'd give it a 7.5 if I could but 7 is the only one there

9 to oddysey, 5 to botw
So are you actually going to tally these up and do an average at some point?

Both deserve a 9

[quote]404028658[/quote]
[green]What does Sup Forums truly think of Nintendo's two GOTYs?[green]
nothin' teir both sh*t

mario 0. it's a garbage kiddy game with outdated design

haven't played zelda but it's probably garbage too

Mario - 7 I couldn't give a shit about finding all the stars/moons that shit gets tedious fast and so many are in dumb locations or non-puzzles

Zelda - 9 Got all the spirit orbs, magnificent world, some fps problems and a dog shit final boss. Ripping dungeon content out and using it as mini dungeons is a wash. You're just allocating goodness from one part to another.

Objective.

anyone who votes 0 basically has to be a troll

Odyssey: Masterpiece/10
BoTW: Glorious return to form/10

They're both padded out bullshit

obvious bait, don't reply

I think both of them suffer from too many collectibles/shrines. Getting a Moon because you ground pounded a shiny spot isn't amazing or satisfying, same with doing a shrine that takes less than 2 minutes to finish

>Sup Forums is Nintendicksucker central.
How delusional are Sonyfags that they actually believe this

Odyssey is basically 3D Mario finally catching up to Banjo-Kazooie in terms of exploratory freedom.

but you replied tho, and its not bait. A lot of people probably agree with me, look at the poll user.

the fact that you have to bring up Sony kind of proves his point though

there's plenty of users on this site that just like other companies like Sega and only use PC, not everyone thinks in a Nintendo v Sony mindset

Mario - 7
Zelda - 8

LoZ>Mario

Mario has been the same god damn thing since 64. Collect-a-thons. Levels are locked by whatever you need to collect, forcing you to do menial tasks over and over.

Zelda on the other hand, introduces death and reincarnation. Dungeon puzzles that differ vastly from previous entrees, and unique items. Although, some of those items are dungeon specific, but can be used in the world map.

All Mario has done is introduce new ways to bing bing wahoo.

LoZ is just a more in-depth game than Mario Odyssoy.

Anderson proved it was no masterpiece though.
Good try nintenbro.

I don't see masterpiece and return to form as options on the poll

>Levels are locked by whatever you need to collect, forcing you to do menial tasks over and over.

Odyssey was actually the game to finally break this trend, picking up a moon doesn't boot you back to a hub world.

Mario - 8
A bit too underwhelming and linear, the ending is everything wrong and stale about Mario, and there were some whack-ass design choices like accessing Deep Forest and the Jump Rope Challenge not accounting for maximum input lag time across all of their own fucking controllers. But it's still a fun little game that had some tangy moments.

BotW - 5
The fuck is this? No memorable music, boss battles are whack (especially the final one), all the AAA shit, who the fuck thought this was a good idea? I'm all for a more involved overworld ala Zelda 1 where you figure out your way (LA and LttP are very rote because you have fast travel) and has perils. I'm for figuring out an alternative to the dungeons, because lord knows that facing "that dungeon" during a replay is indeed hell on earth. But this abomination is not the answer.

BotW is a good 8/10 and Odyssey is a mediocre 6/10. Coming from a Nintendo fan who isn't blinded by nostalgia or fanboyism, btw. Xenoblade 2 is an 8.5/10.

>Odyssey was actually the game to finally break this trend, picking up a moon doesn't boot you back to a hub world.

It doesn't boot you back to the hub world most of the time because the level never changes and all the moons are generic. And yes, it does boot you back to the start after getting some of the unique/good moons so the level can change and load in all the shitty ones.

I don't get how people could prefer BOTW to Odyssey, but then again I guess it is apples and oranges.

Shrines I guess are arguable, but I'm sick of people ripping mario moons out of the context of explorations. The point of the groundpound moons are to chase the sparkles when you find them while exploring the map, or to groundpound a particular spot after figuring out where the spot is based on the picture hints in the game.

Not to "test how well you groundpound." or some other dumb shit. The games about finding moons while exploring, not JUST the act of executing aquiring the moons. Games are always more than just the sum of their parts. Its asinine to write these off as just "Moons you get by groundpounding."

Mario managed to stick to its series roots whereas Zelda just hopped on the open world train with all the other series, I'd rather have another new Mario game instead of an open world game with Zelda characters and locations slapped in

Gave a 9 to BOTW and gave an 8 to Odyssey

BOTW was fantastic with the Sheikah slate abilities, and while filled with a lot of creatures, it lacked a bit on the enemy side, hopefully a new game under the same engine will add some of the classic ones

As for Mario, its freaking Mario sandbox world exploration and being able to possess creatures and objects overall is freaking amazing, there really is nothing stopping me from having given it a 10, considering it holds no flaws, but the optional controls should have worked better, and the waggle wasnt always accurate for me

No he didn't. He vocalized a terrible opinion piece he made to appease his toxic stream and discord regulars. The only thing he proved is how severely streaming and interacting with his fans has depreciated his youtube content.

>It doesn't boot you back to the hub world most of the time because the level never changes
>it does boot you back to the start after getting some of the unique/good moons so the level can change

Which one is it? In all seriousness, it is true in that it does boot you back for the major, world-changing moons but I fail to see how the levels not changing every time is a bad thing, it gives you one big level to explore at your pace instead of loading up a version of the same level for every moon/star/McGuffin. It's more seamless, but it's also something Rare accomplished 20 years ago.

>Every shit post thread against Nintendo is deleted in 5 min
>While shit post thread for Xbone,pc and ps are archived

Makes you think senpai

Meant for

Mario Odyssey - 8/10. It's fun, but most of the moons aren't all that challenging to get.

Zelda BotW - 6/10. If this game was some no-name open world Skyrim clone I'd be more forgiving, but I expect more from a Zelda title, and this doesn't deliver.

Why not cut all the filler ones out?

Awwww are you still mad none of your exclusives got an award las Xmas, sweetie? Don't you have more wojaks to draw?

>BoTW just hopped on the open world bandwagon
What the fuck are you on about? Did you never play TLoZ? Miyamoto directly stated in several interviews that the original open world of TLoZ was the direct inspiration for the design schema for BoTW. If I'm not mistaken his exact words at some point was "returning to zeldas roots." It was built from the ground up around the feeling of adventure that spawned the very first zelda game.

Breath of the wild is quite literally (and I hate using this word but its the only one that fits) a return to the series roots, not "Hopping on the open world bandwagon."

>but it's also something Rare accomplished 20 years ago.

Not true. Rare came up with jiggy ideas and then designed the level around them. Nintendo made a level and then threw moons all over the place.

Saying it's the same thing is ridiculous for anyone with a brain.

The "filler" ones are to let kids finish the game without driving their parents crazy.

But they are the same thing. Banjo just did it better and with more focused design.

People say that, but no one actually cares about the original Legend of Zelda and it shares a lot more with modern open world gaming than the NES classic. Let's be frank here.

Plus, the inventory management kind of sucked in hindsight.

Emergent gameplay. The act of discovering a collectible through exploration is inherently satisfying and fun, so dotting the map with simpler ones that appear through exploration and different angles is a perfect way of executing this concept.

they even tested it out with a Zelda 1 simulator game to test the mechanics of BOTW, it is certainly the way Zelda was meant to be

>once and for all
How many times have we decided once and for all by now?

>a faggot "proved" something subjective
>so i'm going to suck his dick
The only thing he proved is how much he sucks at the game

We have to keep deciding until Mario accepts it's a 6/10

I mean I don't care that you're backpedaling because you're right about BoTW having a good bit in common in modern open world games, but BoTW took the best aspects of that genre(Opening up reference maps with weenies, allowing removal of quest markers, guiding players with directions from NPCs and signposts), subtracted the worst (forced breadcrumbs and visible arrows on screen) and executed flawlessly. Secondly, I can't think of anything that would have improved the inventory management of BoTW.

What kind of ideas do you think would have been better for inv management in BoTW?

I get that this is a bit trickier than it looks in execution but even then that's fucking pathetic.

I love them both, but Zelda was more engrossing. Mario was fun, but it didn't take over my life for weeks the way Zelda did.

These circles are actually the hardest part of the game, tbqh. I one shot Darker Side, and it took me like 3 tries on one of the invisible circles.

It only shares surface level comparisons with Zelda 1 though
related, it focuses solely on a few aspects of the original being exploring the overworld and trying out items on objects to see what happens. If they were true to recreating a Zelda 1 experience then they would've added dungeons, unique bosses, and less overall filler to the world

It's a good game but it's not really a Zelda game

BOTW is a 9 and Odyssey is a 7 (on a scale where 5 is the actual average instead of 7.5)

Odyssey a 7/10
BotW a 9/10

BotW at least let you do missions in the order you chose and you could leave at any point. Oddysey didn't pick up until after you beat the campaign.

BotW has higher/permanent rewards for doing harder things
Odyssey gives you everything at the same value

BotW had flaws too, of course. Memorability for enemies and the Champions is poor, weapons are a poor reward sometimes, and not enough reason to switch weapons like a traditional RPG. Give me thought out bosses, a slew of unique items to make exploration even more detrimental, and characters who I'm supposed to love help me directly.

Odyssey had some really enjoyable moments and surprise kept me playing, but movement felt like shit sometimes and I didn't always feel like the gymnast I should. Fix the railroading, give items better worth, add a few permanent upgrades, and add a way to mix captures together more.

Agreed so fucking hard with that pic. BotW would've been amazing if each region had its own Hyrule Castle-level area to explore.

...

>no one actually cares about the original Legend of Zelda
pic related
I'm actually glad they didn't just try to directly copy TLoZ in BoTw and attempted to experiment with new ideas...

...But god DAMN a direct lift from 2d to 3d TLoZ would be fucking amazing. Hopefully they return to thematic dungeons in the next installment. Would probably take forever to develop though.

I'm not backpedalling, because I was not the guy you originally replied to. If I came across as backpedalling, it is probably because I jumped in haphazardly and was talking more or less out of my ass.

Better inventory management probably involves a restructure of the entire system. I personally understand how important weapon degradation is to the reward structure of the game, but clearly people hated it. So, we need some other way to reward people with the contents of chests and shrines. Because people hate having to constantly swap weapons out as they shatter. An overhaul of the "food" and "potion" system might need to be considered, as there was no means by which to consume them without having to stop the action entirely and go into a very large menu to retrieve them.

The game has some poor design that doesn't actually suit the gameplay very well simply because it is a big part of the open-world, exploration heavy world. Why should you explore? Well, for weapons and ingredients obviously! But to achieve that, they had to make weapons suck and ingridients super complicated despite the fact that 90% of any cooking is completely worthless and is just flavor.

I liked BOTW, don't take me wrong, but people aren't understanding its issues.

Why is it that any variation of this image that adds a "what I actually got" section fails to make a good comparison?
>open-ended maze with no unique enemies that you can just fly over and reach the shrine inside
>a shrine in a cave compared to ruins that could hold anything
Shrines were a mistake, they work as appetizers but shouldn't have taken priority over actual dungeons, especially since the Beasts were really lacking in every area aside from puzzles

I agree wholeheartedly with the notion the game could have done with a better way of using food and potions to restore health, preferably in either active time during combat or even blocked out and forced to be used outside of combat.

But I think you're missing the point with "Why should you explore." Its a whole lot deeper than "For weapons and ingredients." There's an inherently satisfying feeling of giving into wanderlust and traveling to interesting looking points in the world. The act of exploration itself is whats the real meat of the game, and its damn near new york strip. Could have done with more ways to traverse though, even though BoTW has more ways of traversal than most if not ALL other open world games. I didn't expect the bike to scratch that itch honestly but its a good step in the right direction. I also think you're a bit off-kilter with writing off the cooking given its also satisfying to find recipes in the world and use them to make better and unique foods, though I have to admit its very barebones and simple and once you realize which foods add more hearts and gold hearts it becomes easy to make insta-full over powered food items that clog your food inv.

>>open-ended maze with no unique enemies that you can just fly over and reach the shrine inside

Sounds like a Zelda 2 temple to me

>That you can fly over and reach the shrine inside
user, I....

I do agree that there should have been more main thematic dungeons but I still think BoTW was a good one without them. If BoTW had 8 full-sized dungeons like TLoZ did ala then
1. I probably would have taken at least a decade to develop
2. It would probably break the industry because nothing could ever top a fully realized TLoZ in 3D.

Shrines are just small dungeons. These sorts of complaints are only on a flavor basis, a tiny dungeon found in the mountains would not be any bigger in terms of scope than a shrine's puzzles.

"Ruins that could hold anything" can't happen unless you suddenly revert back to a kid mentality and stop seeing the brickwork that they necessarily need to make the game out of.

Oh, trust me, when I was playing, I was cooking loads of foods and travelling for its own sake. But that shit doesn't fly after the spell is gone. In hindsight, you see why it is all there and how little it ultimately ends up playing into the gameplay unless you let yourself STAY as romantic as you were when you started the game.

Agreed
>Odyssey - 7
>BotW - 9

>Shrines are just small dungeons

But they aren't. Dungeons have themes and mechanics that build on themselves until the very end. Shrines are like the first room of a dungeon.

Themes as in flavor? Because as for mechanics, most proper shrines DID have mechanics that carried over throughout the entire shrine. Like the Ball-in-a-cup shrine or the Circuitry shrine.

Odyssey is an 8, BotW is a 7

Some of them.
Other's take a mechanic and build on it over a few small connected puzzles.
Like Blue Flame in the crab on death mountain, The shire of power in Hyrule field, the one where you have to use both remote bombs at once, or the wind one in the hole in Tabantha, off the top of my head.

both games are solid 7/10
only have so much metacritic score because are nintendo exclusives

Zelda 2 at least required you to sacrifice magic and didn't give you the fairy spell from the start, plus it was extremely limited as you would revert back to normal Link after each screen

>implying people care enough about xbone enough to even shitpost about it

I would be perfectly fine with a Ruins mini-dungeon reusing recolored assets from a main dungeon since at least then it's a step above shrines in that it actually gives you something visually different

The starting sized stamina wheel isn't enough to climb a labyrinth wall either. You'd need to use a consumable.

Really though, my point was that in both cases, the content is about the same (maze with enemy ambushes and some treasures), and in both cases you can be a power gaming faggot and skip that content to go straight to the end if you really want to.

However, I don't know why anyone would be complaining about the lack of content and then actively skip the content that exists, it's like they want to be unhappy.

Except you can't skip the Zelda 2 palaces, that was my entire point. Labyrinths in BOTW serve no purpose since the Shrine they have can be easily accessed and the rest of the maze can be forgotten unless you really want the weapons or other collectibles scattered in there

>Except you can't skip the Zelda 2 palaces
You can fairy spell your way straight through locked doors dude.

see It only works for one screen and costs a significant amount of magic, plus you can't just cheese a Palace in Zelda 2 by going straight to the boss, the item inside is mandatory

>since the Shrine they have can be easily accessed

this is bullshit. all of the shrines in the labyrinths are well hidden

>every shrine is in the middle of the labyrinth
>the only one that isn't Lomei, which you can see while gliding to it

BK was actually a game though that requires some sort of concentration and obstacles to overcome with the possibility of your character dying if you played at too low a skill level. Certainly an easy game but it's at least a game with some fucking resistance. Oddysey makes it look like Ninja Gaiden by comparison.

BotW 10
Mario 8

I agree with ProJared, Odyssey didn’t quite live up to the expectations.

Odyssey gets a 9. Way too short for its own good if you take out all the filler content, but the good content that's there is REALLY fucking good, probably the most fun I've ever had with the series.

BotW gets a 10. It may not be perfect, but that's not really what a 10 means to me and so many of the common "flaws" I see pointed out are absolute hogwash to me. I really don't get the empty complaints because it's objectively one of the densest, most intricately designed open worlds I've ever experienced. Most of the 3D Zeldas feel emptier in comparison, honestly.

hard to rate them. since I'd never want to play either of them again.

gave mario a 6 and zelda a 5

Yes I played TLOZ, it couldn't be a more different game. You might as well say Fallout and Civilization are the same game since they bother feature turn based grid combat on an open plane.

Odyssey: 9
BotW: 7

Hard to rate them. Gave them TEN OUTTA TEN

>every shrine is in the middle of the labyrinth

so? it would be retarded to not put the shrine in the middle due to the non linear approach. the point is finding the entrance to the shrine's room and that entrance is well hidden

this. also according to joseph anderson BOTW is an 8.5 and odyssey is a 6/10

They're still inferior overall to an actual dungeon where you can't just bypass everything in it to reach the end

Zelda 11/10
Mario 9.9999999/10

Mario: 9
Zelda: 10

Botw is fucking boring and empty

they're not even trying to be dungeons you fag. they're fucking labyrinths