Essentially yeah, I think your assumption was correct. Those things that you point out are basically much worse in any other popular open world game. The real estate in BOTW is used up much more effeciently. With the exception of the snowy mountains in the north west area of the map (which I fortunately didn't stumble upon until very very late into the game anyway) there's almost always something new to find everywhere. If you're playing Witcher 3, Skyrim, Ghost of Tsushima, Red Dead Redemption, Horizon Zero Dawn, etc. what you'd get instead is endlessly repeated mixups of the same elements you've already seen innumerable times. And having to climb/paraglide/actually navigate your way to most locations in BOTW is a pretty huge difference from those other games that just lets you walk/ride in a straight line until you get to your destination.mamboFoxtrot wrote: Granted, I've generally avoided "open world" games, so I don't have any perspective on how it compares there. Personally I find it weird how often I see people say something to the effect of "normally I don't like these open-world games but BotW was different" but all their complaints about "those other open-world games" just sound like BotW to me. Maybe these games I've been avoiding are even more miserable than I assumed.
I have a laundry list of complaints with the game, but the big problems that stands out to me after having finished the game is that a lot of the real-estate doesn't seem to serve much purpose, and there's not much sense of "progression". I guess it's a consequence of their commitment to such an absurd level of non-linearity; other than some "extreme weather protection", you're never really required to do or have something before you can go somewhere or do something. When combined with the Bill-Rizer/Spider-Man universal climbing and the paraglider, I would argue against Sumez and say that you definitely can just freely beeline to wherever; to the point that I think it gives the game world something of a silly "sandbox" feel in the most "child's playground" sense of the term.
Part of that might also be because of the general lack of "interior areas", such as caves. This leaves most of everything just kinda laying out more or less in plain sight.
It's not a Dark Souls style interconnected level design of course, and it's also no way as gated off as Dragon's Dogma, but that is also clearly intentional. At the end of the day, BOTW is a sandbox game, which is a pretty massive shift from the tightly designed mechanics of earlier Zelda games.
But what I think really makes the map design feel like a huge step forward compared to all other contemporary open world games, is how it's designed to make sure every individual area is uniquely identifiable, and there are always multiple distinct landmarks visible from any location, theoretically making navigating the game without a map entirely feasible.
I agree though the game could have used more interior areas, that would have been a massive bonus to the sense of exploration.
I also agree that if you aim to completely 100% the game it's unavoidable that you will run into a lot of repeated content, making that less satisfying. But I think that is an expected tradeoff for a game of this sort, and kind of necessary if you want to be able to let the player just run around on their own accord and still get a complete experience out of playing maybe 40% of it. How long it takes until such an open world game starts feeling repetitive is really what sets them apart, and I still think BOTW manages to last a lot longer than the other games I mentioned. Outside of combat, which like I said does grow stale quite early on.
It might have been fun with more areas like Eventide Isle, acting kind of like its own little microcosm of the the game's core survival mechanics.