>>16517235
>False-dilemma fallacy
It would be if you weren't so transparent. Most your criticism does indeed boil down to "It's not like the previous games, it should be more like the previous games" and you'll even hold anything past Ocarina of Time to the same standards.
>cringe
Oh fuck, we've got underage NEET trash here, it seems.
>I somewhat agree but wish they were more fleshed out
Some of them are a bit too niche, agreed. Time stop takes a lot of effort most of the time to be effective, Magnetism requires specific items around and even then it's still weak. Bombs are infinite but as a result also considerably weak and their knockdown the best part of the effect.
It's a nice start, but I really want to see them expanding powers more too.
>Because that shit doesn't make for a memorable boss fight. It just makes bosses standard enemies with a lot more health
There's nothing memorable about solving a puzzle 3 times before you can hit a weak point. Especially when you already spent an entire dungeon solving the exact same puzzle and many variations of it as well.
It's fun and pretty cool most of the time, but not really memorable, especially when you know the gimmick so well the cutscenes take longer than the actual fight.
>I like that. Zelda does need more of that
It's one of the advantages of having an open world and one that's very rarely actually used. Cool shit that's actually a challenge just hanging around ready for you to challenge it. It's one of the reasons I like the genre itself.
>Ideally we could have a Zelda game with both traditional bosses and tough enemies like Lynels
I'd rather have puzzle-like ways to deal damage that are more efficient than swinging swords but take some effort to figure out and several of them are available at any time, it's up to you and your gear to decide what you use.
This could allow you to take on dungeons in any order you want since it's boss can be killed in several ways using any item from any dungeon including the one you just passed. This does give better progression since the more you explore, the more options to finish tough fights you get.
Having the same principle applied to tough enemies like Lynels would be great too. Health sponges aren't particularly interesting.
>Yeah and then make all the weapons out of fucking paper because you need a reason for the player to cycle through weapons
The only time I ever had an issue with the durability was when I went inside a Shrine of Combat against a buffed up Guardian where I broke all my shit before I finished the fight. And that was a very good clue that I should have brought specific weapons to kill it instead of smashing everything I had at hand.
The rest of the time, I just pick random swords and spears and use them on trash mobs since that's more than enough. I only ever need to carry 3-4 actually good weapons for some tough fight and pacing my usage like this nets me a net positive in cool shit to the point I can't even pick up most weapons I find. If only you weren't going around swinging your Flaming Greatsword at random Moblins and just used a regular sword or Lizal Boomerangs instead, you'd have it for when you need it.
Start looking at weapons as consumible items and you'll understand it a lot better.
>there's really only 5 weapon typed and they're all just reskins of these 5 types
There's Swords, Spears, Greatswords, Boomerangs, Rods, all of each have different uses and gameplay. If it sounds like it's not enough, consider the fact that the previous games had Sword and that was it. (Boomerangs and Rods in previous games were not weapons, they were items)
Also consider that their variations aren't just "reskins" since they do act in very different ways. Cold weapons actually freeze your enemies, Fire weapons can set things on fire and Thunder weapons harm armored foes a lot more and can disarm them too.