Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

VR Labo headset

I feel as though the VP update for the article is appropriate. Anyone have a good narrative with citations?

Divine Beasts

Should the divine beasts be mentioned in the gameplay section? They seem important enough to be given at least a sentence. 22090912l (talk) 00:00, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

The abilities gained from completing the Divine Beasts should be mentioned, yes. Neocorelight (Talk) 08:17, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

"Direct sequel"

This seems to have already been resolved, but since we're on the subject I'm going to dump in some thoughts I have on this term.

TLDR: It's nerd jargon with no coherent meaning, and doesn't help readers.

Consider this example, from an old version of the Final Fantasy X-2 page:

Final Fantasy X-2 is a direct sequel to 2001's Final Fantasy X, the first game in the Final Fantasy series to receive such a follow-up.

This requires the reader to understand a lot of things. What is a "direct" or "indirect" sequel? If Final Fantasy X-2 is a "direct sequel" to Final Fantasy X, was Final Fantasy X not a "direct sequel" to Final Fantasy IX? What makes X-2 a more "direct" sequel than any of the previous Final Fantasy sequels? None of these things are obvious.

What the sentence is getting at is this: Final Fantasy games don't usually continue stories from previous games. That makes Final Fantasy X-2 a "direct sequel". But the uninitiated reader has no way of puzzling that out.

When Final Fantasy X-2 was Wikipedia's article of the day, the sentence was summarized like this:

The game was the first to be a sequel to a previous Final Fantasy game.

Wrong! Final Fantasy II was the first sequel to previous Final Fantasy game. Games don't have to use the same story and characters to be sequels (see Quake and Quake II). Lots of games don't even really have stories or characters in the first place — that doesn't mean they can't have sequels.

The solution? If it's important to explain that a sequel continues the story from a previous game, then write that. If it isn't important, then don't. Popcornfud (talk) 18:19, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with the term in a general sense, I just didn't particularly think it applied to these two titles. I think "direct sequel" is a fine term for something like Trails of Cold Steel and Trails of Cold Steel 2. I just don't think it belongs in these scenarios where its games that "occur in the same world/universe but are largely telling a new story". Doubly so for game's that aren't particularly plot-driven. I do agree that its better to simply write it out as you say though, especially when its a point of contention like this. Sergecross73 msg me 18:41, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Only unbreakable weapon?

Should the master sword be considered the only Unbreakable weapon in the game despite the one hit obliterator being in the game? 2600:1006:B326:CFFC:8173:3C8E:805C:3183 (talk) 16:39, 29 April 2024 (UTC)