The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdomis a mostly universally beloved title and yet another Nintendo Switch title worthy of praise. At least, that’s how I felt when I very first played it, gliding through the skies above Hyrule at breakneck speeds, watching as the untold potential of a new world whizzed by me, filling me with excitement. However, after a long time away from it and the pre-release hype, I’ve come to a completely different opinion.
It’s fair to say that my opinion differs significantly fromTOTK’sinitial reviews, although it’s not like I hate it. In fact, I rather enjoy a lot aboutTears of the Kingdom, although much of that is what I enjoyed aboutBreath of the Wild. After months of reflection and figuring out exactly what it is aboutTOTKthat I don’t enjoy, I’ve come to one conclusion. Nintendo prioritized its love of mechanical creativity in a game that simply didn’t need it.
Tears Of The Kingdom Isn’t As Good As It Should Have Been
It Is Iterative Rather Than Innovative
I want to stress that I don’t believe, like some ofTears of the Kingdom’sdetractors, that it is merely a glorified DLC. In fact,Tears of the Kingdomdoes precisely what a sequel should by expanding upon the original experience with new mechanics, stories, and characters. I also appreciate its attempts at fleshing out Hyrule as, while I believe that thenextZeldagameshould move to a new location,Tears of the Kingdomdid the best it could at making Hyrule feel new again.
Tears of the Kingdom, likeAnimal Crossing: New Horizonsbefore it, felt like a game with limitless potential on the surface, but the more I interfaced with it, and the more I tried to piece together its core components, the shallower it began to feel.
However, it is clear that both fans and Nintendo knew that this wasn’t enough for the sequel to one of the greatest and most influential games of all time. It had to be bigger and better, introduce brand-new industry-changing ideas, and push the Switch to its absolute limit. So,Nintendo did what it does best and pulled out its most creative ideas and poured them intoTOTK. It did so byintroducing the gimmicky Ultrahandand a slew of other gameplay-driven features, integrating all of them into practically every facet ofTOTK’sDNA.
On my first playthrough, I delved as much into these mechanics as I could, approached each new piece of new and old content as if it were entirely fresh, and did my best to immerse myself in the game’s somewhat paper-thin plot. Unfortunately,no matter how much I tried, something felt off.Tears of the Kingdom, likeAnimal Crossing: New Horizonsbefore it, felt like a game with limitless potential on the surface, but the more I interfaced with it, and the more I tried to piece together its core components, the shallower it began to feel.
Crucially, a good sequel expands upon what makes the original great without disrupting it. I believe that while it is important to add new content and ideas to a sequel, it shouldn’t mess with its core identity. TheMarvel’s Spider-Mangames, as iterative as they are, manage this perfectly, as the tenants that structure its exploration, narrative, and characters remain intact between sequels. However,TOTKpushed aside almost everything that madeBOTWso great, its atmosphere, its sense of wonder in the face of hopelessness, and the importance of exploration in favor of Nintendo’s creative endeavors.
Nintendo Is Prioritizing The Wrong Features
While many were able to come up withridiculously creative Ultrahand creations,I quickly realized that it, and its similarly creativity-driven gameplay mechanics, were bogging down the elements that madeBOTWsuch a groundbreaking gamein the first place. Nintendo had placed such importance on its new ideas that, while perhaps in the spirit of the originalZeldagames, didn’t really fit withinTears of the Kingdom’sopen-world model. Ultrahand, for example, was used to make puzzles and exploration more interesting by breaking the rules established in the first game.
Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom Still Has One Big Unanswered Question
Zelda TOTK gave players a lot of context and lore with the time-traveling plot line, but there is still one unanswered question from BOTW.
Link can build a car to zip around Hyrule which, while cool, robs the game of its atmosphere completely. Flying around in a mech built out of haphazardly glued-together Zonai parts is novel, and certainly helps sell the brilliance of Ultrahand, but it doesn’t really fit in with the desolation and apocalyptic atmosphere that made Breath of the Wild’s world feel truly unique. Every time I was forced to use this mechanic,there was the initial excitement that come with feeling like I was breaking the game, followed swiftly by the crushing realization that I didn’t really want to.
Puzzles are made worse by adding far too many variables, making genuine solutions feel incorrect if not pulled off to perfection. Weapons feel absurd thanks to the unlimited potential of combinations. Exploration feels overwhelming when it’s possible to make any creation so long as you have the patience and the aptitude to make it.I do genuinely believe that Ultrahand adds a lot toTears of the Kingdom, but I also feel that it takes far too much awayto be worth it.
In my opinion, these creative ideas came at the expense of other much-needed gameplay mechanics that could have improved upon the already-established formula, rather than disregard it.
I hate criticizing Nintendo for trying something new, for creating a mechanic so brilliantly unique that it allows players to break such a finely tuned game and build amazing creations that feel completely out of place. It is, after all, Nintendo’s bread and butter, something it has always excelled at from the originalMarioall the way untilBreath of the Wild’sbrilliant reinvention of the open-world formula. However, in my opinion, it came at the expense of othermuch-needed gameplay mechanicsthat could have improved upon the already-established formula, rather than disregard it.
The Switch 2 Needs To Move Away From Nintendo’s Creativity
It Risks Feeling Gimmicky
As aforementioned,I believe thatAnimal Crossing: New Horizonssuffers from this same issue. Itditched compelling villager interactionsthat had served as the defining trait of what is often regarded as the best life sim in favor of creative freedom to customize an island. It’s a fun twist on theAnimal Crossing formula, but one that feels better suited to a spin-off rather than a mainline title as it completely removes the one core tenet of theAnimal Crossinggameplay loop that made it such an iconic and beloved series in the first place.
While perhaps not quite as extreme as this, it does feel tantamount to aStardew Valleysequel completely removing romance options and meaningful character interactions for a deeper farming simulation experience akin to theFarming Simulatorgames.I firmly believe that Nintendo should continue pushing itself to come up with these wonderfully creative ideas and build games around them, but I also fear that it’sestablishing a negative trend- especially within theZeldafranchise as similar mechanics popped up withinEchoes of Wisdom- that could carry over into the Switch 2 era.
The One Thing Echoes Of Wisdom Does Better Than Tears Of The Kingdom
Echoes of Wisdom is a much different Zelda game compared to Tears of the Kingdom, but one key feature they share it does better than its predecessor.
It isn’t so much that Nintendo should stop doing what it has been doing well for so long, but rather separate its mechanics-driven experiences from its more atmospheric and narrative-driven games.Tears of the Kingdomshouldn’t have been a game about creative mechanics, but instead one with a far deeper narrative that further examines the fascinatingZeldalore while building upon the Hyrule established inBOTW. Nintendo failedTears of the Kingdomin this respect, but hopefully, it is better able to distinguish between games that should embrace atmosphere and worldbuilding over those that should be built around mechanical freedom.
