Neither, really. Both just made very good games within the boundaries of their genre.
Neither of them innovated, they just refined.
Name literally one innovative feature in either
>>381717905
Yeah. These games really put the "fine" in refine.
>>381717684
>either of those
>innovated
???????????????????????????
????
??????
??
?
?
?
??
???
??
?
?
??
>AAA games
>innovation
Both are shit so nothing
>>381717684
BotW blew me away and the multifaceted interactivity and lack of artificial barriers set the bar for how I think games should work.
But I still haven't played Witcher 3. I'm picking it up over the summer sale. What did it do differently that makes it so good?
>>381718376
Literally nothing, even if its fanbase admits the gameplay is shit, people like it for the story.
>>381717684
The Witcher 3. It basically set the gold standard for videogames from now on.
>>381718376
It's decently written, and for a game apparently that deserves 10000 game of the year awards.
>>381718376
>the multifaceted interactivity and lack of artificial barriers set the bar
Neither of those are innovations though.
>>381717998
weapons break in botw
Breath of the Wild, easily.
>>381717783
>>381717905
>>381717998
Sony ponys still in shitpost denial mode over BotW.
That ass sting will never go away, will it?
>>381719761
how is that innovative? there's other games that do that
>>381717684
for video games in general or for their respective franchises?
>>381719140
They are though. The concepts have probably been attempted but innovation is in execution and making an idea work. Engineers still innovate even if they work with principles that scientists discover.
It's another 'BotW-doesn't-do-anything-that-hasn't-been-done-before' shitpost denial extravaganza.
BotW made a mockery of this board. It's beyond hilarious. Keep crying kiddies, I will never tire of your salty tears.
>>381717684
Good question. Both were fine games. I'm glad that both exist.