Hogwarts is fun for about 30 hours roleplaying as a wizard, as a casual potter fan. I got really bored of it after that and never finished the game. At its core it really is very generic, it's really propped up by the IP. That's not to say it's bad by any means but its not got the depth of Zelda.

[–] Voytrekk@lemmy.world 12 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think the biggest issue for me was how large the map was. They did the castle and hogsmede very well, but then threw in a bunch of filler content in the other towns. If they had stuck to the more core areas only, the game wouldn't have gotten so stale later on.

[–] HerbalGamer@sh.itjust.works 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's because they needed somewhere for you to fly your broomstick since it was the most fun part of the game.

[–] Voytrekk@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Sure, more room is nice, but the map could have been 1/3rd the size and still have a good sense of speed with it. A better option would have been to put in some fun mini games with the broom, but that would have been required then to make flying the broom more engaging.

[–] jacksilver@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I'm kinda curious in what way Zelda (assuming TOTK) has more depth. Combat wise HP has stealth, an attack typing system, comboing, special moves, and more if I recall correctly. TOTK does have a variety of weapons and you can craft weapons, but it generally boils down to just whacking away at things. You could also mention the ability to make vehicles/automaton, but the time to build things (until you find ultra hand?) mixed with limited resources made that more of a pain/chore than fun.

I could go into other mechanics, but ultimately I think TOTK would be rated worse if it wasn't for the Zelda branding carrying it.

[–] yamanii@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You aren't wrong, there was an unpopular opinion thread some weeks ago and several zelda fans called both BOTW and TOTK just ubisoft open worlds with a zelda skin. They are both carried by their IP (even though I love these 2 zeldas), the worst Zelda (Skyward Sword) still sold 4.15 million units, just counting the HD version, the Wii version sold 3.67 million.

[–] jacksilver@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Haha I appreciate the comment and the ability to call them out even though you like them.

I just wish I felt the same. The longer they've been out the more I realize that we probably won't get a more traditional zelda ever again. I think the thing I liked about zelda up to BOTW was that the world itself was a puzzle. Figuring out how to navigate and open up new areas was part of the fun and challenge to me. Not to mention dungeons being larger and more intricate puzzles than anything you come across in BOTW and TOTK.

[–] 520@kbin.social 13 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Zelda is the better game. Problem is (sales wise) the Zelda franchise isn't nearly as popular outside of gaming circles, and access to this game is locked to those that own a Switch, whereas HL is on all platforms

[–] zkfcfbzr@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I played both. Both are excellent games, and both also have flaws.

I think Zelda was by far the better game - HL isn't really on the same level as it at all, design-wise, story-wise, or or in terms of things to do.

HL's strength is definitely the world itself - the Hogwarts and Hogsmeade areas in particular are both incredibly well done and very faithful to the source material. The other areas are just alright.

I'd say HL's weaknesses become most apparent if you're a completionist. Things can get very repetitive if you're going for 100%. I did, and I honestly think you'll like it a lot more if you just don't.

It's still lots of fun though. Zelda was my most played game in 2023 and HL was kind of far behind, and everything else combined would still probably be a distant third.

I absolutely agree with the other people saying HL is generic and propped up by the IP. But for me that was enough.

[–] winety@lemmy.zip 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The story of HL is also one of its weaknesses. It's a generic chosen one story with unmemorable characters.

[–] jacksilver@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I'm really confused by all of the story comments in this thread. It's fair to criticise HL's story, but at least there is a story and characters. What story does TOTK even have? What characters have more than a line or two? While Zelda has never been big on complex narratives, at least previous entries (before BOTW and TOTK) could develop a story since they could have a linear progression. A couple of flashback scenes really doesn't tell a great or compelling narrative and really disconnects the gameplay from the events going on.

[–] winety@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 months ago

Disclaimer: I haven’t played TOTK. I only played a bit of BOTW.

It’s all about expectations. I never thought of Zelda as a game with a story, so BOTW not having one doesn’t bother me. Harry Potter, on the other hand, I’ve always associated with memorable characters and a bonkers world. HL translates this bonkers world into a game quite well, but its story doesn’t (in my opinion) fit that world nor does it have memorable characters. (Some of the characters look and feel like Lidl versions of the characters from the original books.)

[–] simple@lemm.ee 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I have. Hogwarts Legacy has really good graphics but it's honestly pretty generic, it only sold so well because there are millions of harry potter fans out there.

[–] CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works 0 points 9 months ago

I mean clearly that’s not the only reason, right? If it were, every previous Harry Potter video game would’ve sold just as well.

[–] morphballganon@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

Zelda has tighter gameplay and holds your attention longer.

HL is decent.