Judging from the trailers we’ve seen thus far, Breath of the Wild 2 is going to be rather similar to its predecessor - at least in terms of moment-to-moment gameplay. The version of Hyrule we explored in the last game is making a return, with Link stumbling across familiar landmarks and enemies with an outfit and movements we recognise from the last game. I imagine towns have been rebuilt and the region is a little more alive now Calamity Ganon has been vanquished, but the layout is likely similar. Because of this, the way in which we explore this world should remain recognisable, so returning players feel welcome and newcomers aren’t alienated by a sequel that challenges some of its younger sibling’s most daring and creative ideas.

Back in 2002, Capcom developed a remake of the first Resident Evil game , which was led by series creator Shinji Mikami when he was still employed at Capcom. The remake was first released to the Nintendo GameCube, however, which proved to be a fatal move on Capcom's part given that most Resident Evil games were always released on a PlayStation console. Given this, most fans of Resident Evil were transitioning from the original PlayStation to the PlayStation 2, which is a key factor as to why the game had lackluster sales during its initial rele

If Zelda goes back to 2D, it stands alongside the indie scene. It showcases that these older takes shouldn’t be abandoned due to their age. Many other games are doing this already, but none have the clout of Zelda. Going back to 2D with its next main entry - not a remake, remaster, or spin-off - would set a major precedent: not every new triple-A title needs to splash out to make a big blockbuster. It could be a hybrid like Octopath Traveler with its 2D sprites on top of its paper-like background, or it could go the full mile and be completely 2D. Whatever it does, going back would be refreshing for gaming and it could pave the way for other studios to do similar things with their own catal

Regardless of which direction Capcom chooses in its design trajectory for a possible Resident Evil 4 Remake , it will certainly have much to live up to, given Resident Evil 4 is considered among the best the Resident Evil series has to offer, which is no small feat. Simply re-envisioning Resident Evil 4 or upgrading its core hallmarks along the framework of Resident Evil 2 Remake and Resident Evil 3 Remake will not be enough. Given what Resident Evil 4 accomplished and was remembered for originally, Capcom will either need to set the bar for action gaming, set a new trajectory for survival horror, or both, depending on its chosen direct

It is also possible that Capcom could tune-down the action in comparison to the original, and create an experience more akin to the Resident Evil 3 Remake, or a unique experience that truly attempts to mend the survival horror and action genres in innovative ways. This could certainly put to rest the historical controversy among some die-hard Resident Evil fans pop over to this website whether or not Resident Evil 4 took the series in the right direction or not, or whether Resident Evil 4 could still be considered a survival-horror ga

Firstly, graphical overhauls are to be expected, and if M-Two is leading the development of Resident Evil 4 Remake , it is possible they may also be using the same game engine that was used in Resident Evil 2 Remake and Resident Evil 3 Remake , as well as other Capcom games. Though the original Resident Evil 4 is more action-packed than the smooth and precise controls offered by those two recent Resident Evil remakes, the new engine could certainly accommodate and scale it in order to ensure it can still keep up in a more action-driven environm

You also can’t climb in the rain, with Link being encouraged to find another route up a mountain the moment a drop of water falls from the sky. These are all polarising mechanics, and for good reason, but they also help define Breath of the Wild as a special experience that always changes things up, seldom having you repeat the same tasks in order to complete your objective. If it wasn’t different, it wouldn’t be Zelda.

The removal of design decisions previously viewed as irksome would undermine so much of what Breath of the Wild managed to achieve, and the last thing I want to see is Nintendo steering its formula in a direction that abides by more traditional genre conventions. Assassin’s Creed and similar games of this ilk are arguably more akin to content mill, built to draw you in for hundreds of hours even if much of that time is filled with uninspired busywork. The time you spend with the game is what matters, and Breath of the Wild managed to challenge a system that has become increasingly tired in the eyes of players. Its sequel needs to continue chasing that ambition, and not compromise on its own design ethos.

However, neither of these games encourage experimentation like Breath of the Wild does, so it’s much easier to provide us with an easier mode of traversal instead of artificially increasing the time required to reach our destination. However you slice it, these games viewed climbing in the rain and weapon degradation as negatives, choosing to build upon Nintendo’s vision by removing them entirely. I understand why games that adopt so many of the ideas pioneered by Breath of the Wild opt to change them, because every game is different and it’s unfair to tar them all with the same brush. That being said, I don’t want the upcoming sequel to follow in their footsteps. Nintendo needs to stick to its guns, favouring clumsy wet traversal and obscenely delicate weapons over an adventure that simplifies things to the point of triviality.