koobio

[koobio]

The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom: When Freedom Becomes a Double-Edged Sword

We all know about the direct sequel The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom and how it managed to use the same game world and similar gameplay mechanics as its predecessor, yet still make enough differences that it warrants a whole new game. One of those additions are the new mechanics brought by Link’s new hand, allowing him to freely explore the upgraded game world through building, merging, and reversing time. These innovations enhance player agency, enabling nearly endless creativity when it comes to problem-solving. However, this abundance of freedom increases the risk of players encountering the paradox of choice, where an overload of options can lead to indecision or reliance on the most efficient solutions, bypassing the creativity the mechanics are designed to inspire. When players gravitate toward familiar or straightforward approaches, they may fail to explore the full potential of these new mechanics, diminishing their overall gameplay experience. As a result, Tears of the Kingdom (TOTK) risks being perceived as a mere extension of Breath of the Wild (BOTW), rather than a completely separate game.

Before going in-depth about what TOTK did wrong, I will go into what it did right. The main complaint was the lack of traditional dungeons that were typical of all the other past Zelda games. BOTW did have dungeons, but not like the typical ones avid fans of the franchise were looking forward to. As discussed in the Journal of Geek Studies, this design decision aligns with Nintendo’s broader efforts to innovate within open-world game structures, allowing for a more interconnected environment where the entire map acts as a “meta-dungeon” (Schut, 2020). One could say that the whole map in itself is one big dungeon for Link to explore and the shrines also provided some more specific challenges. While BOTW did have some more themed dungeons in each region, TOTK made significant upgrades to the types of puzzles and bosses found within its dungeons. Additionally, TOTK added major affordance upgrades, and therefore increased agency within the game, with Link’s new abilities. As Macklin and Sharp (2016) note, affordances empower player creativity and enable new problem solving strategies. The possibilities for exploration in TOTK seem endless, but as Schwartz (2005) explains, too much freedom can lead to decision paralysis, leaving players unsure of where to start or what path to take.

Agency is a key feature in open-world RPGs. Without agency, player’s may not feel like they are in total control, which can significantly hinder immersion and gameplay satisfaction, as supported by research on player choice in open-world games (Macklin & Sharp, 2016; Iyengar & Lepper, 2000). TOTK is not short of agency and affordances so player’s are allowed to do what they want, when they want, wherever they want. Allowing players to freely interact with a variety of objects and NPCs makes the game feel more personal and allows the game to introduce game mechanics in an organic way.  Additionally, agency gives players the opportunity to experience the same game differently, depending on the choices they make during gameplay. Although, these choices may not always be as straight-forward as you may think. Having an abundant number of choices to choose from can lead to a phenomenon known as the paradox of choice. 

The paradox of choice occurs when one is faced with too many options and they must choose one. As Schwartz (2005) explains, an abundance of options can overwhelm decision-makers, often leading them to default to more familiar or efficient choices.I frequently faced this when playing TOTK since I just wanted to do everything because I loved playing the game so much. In the end, all those choices made me feel overwhelmed and so I just ended up doing the main quest or one of the side quests that I had already started instead of starting a new one. This is a clear example of how choice overload can lead players to fall back on a “default” option (Iyengar & Lepper, 2000). Players may become paralyzed from all the things they are able to do in the game (B. Schwartz, The Paradox of Choice, 2005), but this does not last very long since the player can always go back to finishing up the main quest. Instinctively going back to the main quest may be a result of choice overload and cause one to fall back on the “default” choice, which in TOTK is the main quest. Choice overload can also occur during combat, since Link’s new abilities allow for more creativity in defeating enemies. Players are often faced with a dilemma when choosing what strategy to use when defeating enemies and completing puzzles. While dilemmas make the game more challenging, players frequently choose the more effective or familiar option (S. Lyengar & M. Lepper, When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing?, 2000), making the game seem predictable and “boring”.

Efficiency and creativity are strategic factors that are commonly sought after by players when faced with choice overload. A sense of familiarity is commonly faced when returning players engage in combat, since the combat mechanics that are in BOTW were brought over to TOTK. While familiarity is unavoidable as TOTK is a direct sequel to BOTW, it also created an extra obstacle for players to use new mechanics. TOTKs added mechanics allow for more creative ways to defeat enemies and complete puzzles, but because of choice overload, players often choose the more familiar or efficient option (S. Lyengar & M. Lepper, When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing?, 2000), leading players to ignore, whether consciously or unconsciously, the more creative strategies. For instance, when exploring, players may encounter enemies where they have to think on their feet very quickly so that they don’t die. Creative options may be deemed more risky as opposed to familiar options, such as using a sword while spamming the “Y” button. If the player had more time to think, they could’ve made a more elaborate contraption that could defeat the enemies by itself or create a weapon that is tailored to the type of enemy they will be facing. Sometimes, players simply do not have the time to do this nor the patience, unless they are a hardcore gamer.

 The level of dedication players give to a game can affect their overall experience of said game, both negatively and positively. Harcore gamers will choose creativity over efficiency, especially in systems with robust affordances like those in TOTK, which were intentionally designed to accommodate various playstyles (Nintendo Co., Ltd., 2023; Macklin & Sharp, 2016). Casual gamers on the other hand will choose the “safest” or the most efficient option to save time, potentially overlooking the creative opportunities TOTK’s new mechanics offer (Iyengar & Lepper, 2000). While hardcore gamers experience the game in its entirety, casual gamers are only experiencing a portion of what TOTK has to offer. This consequence leads to casual players thinking TOTK is too similar to BOTW or is boring, not knowing that it is due to their own decisions that made them have that experience. Although, the blame cannot be placed entirely on the players since they are simply playing the game. They did not create the game and therefore do not know exactly how the developers intended for players to play through the game. 

We should not play the blame game when it comes to TOTK having too much freedom, we can only give suggestions, as players, that can help balance out the level of agency and amount of affordances given to players. Developers and players alike must find ways to navigate this balance to ensure the game is both exciting and satisfying. For developers, the challenge lies in providing enough freedom to allow for creative exploration while also guiding players to ensure they make use of the game’s mechanics. The addition of Link’s new abilities in TOTK, such as building, and merging, increases player agency but also introduces complexity (Nintendo Co., Ltd., 2023). Developers have provided guidance in the beginning of the game where Link must navigate the Great Sky Island and restore his hands’ powers, but including more areas in the game that force the player to really use these new found powers, even as the game progresses, will surely help integrate these mechanics in players’ strategy pool. As Macklin and Sharp (2016) suggest, clear affordances that communicate the potential of the game’s mechanics can help players avoid feeling lost or unsure of how to proceed. By offering players freedom, but also subtly nudging them towards new strategies or goals, developers can enhance creativity while minimizing the frustration that comes with choice overload (Schwartz, 2005). Furthermore, developers should implement systems that make failure or experimentation feel rewarding rather than punishing. Schwartz (2005) notes that a fear of failure cna discourage players from trying more creative solutions. In TOTK, failure can be part of the fun, especially with the ability to reverse time or build tools, but ensuring that players feel safe to explore these options is key. Therefore, providing a safety net or a forgiving system can encourage creativity, especially for players who might shy away from riskier, more imaginative solutions (Iyengar & Lepper, 2000). For players, navigating the balance between the freedom and guidance means actively choosing how to engage with the game’s systems. Players can combat choice overload by focusing on one aspect of the game at a time, rather than trying to master everything at once. This approach can help alleviate the feeling of being overwhelmed and allow players to appreciate the depth of the game’s mechanics. It’s also important for players to embrace the concept of experimentation. A Lyengar and Lepper (2000) emphasize, creativity often emerges when players feel empowered to try new things without the burden of choosing the “right” path. By accepting that failure is part of the creative process, players can experience TOTK in a more fulfilling and inventive way. Ultimately, the key to enjoying TOTK lies in striking the right balance between exploration and guidance, both from developers and players. A well-guided, yet free experience ensures that players can fully engage with the game’s rich mechanics and world.

The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom aimed to build upon the success of its predecessor, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, by expanding its open-world experience and introducing innovative new  mechanics. However, the game’s abundant freedom also brings challenges. While its design encourages creativity and player agency, the lack of constraints risks overwhelming players, causing them to default to familiar and efficient strategies rather than exploring the game’s full potential. This phenomenon, tied to concepts like the paradox of choice and choice overload, highlights how excessive freedom can inadvertently hinder engagement with the game’s new systems. A careful balance between freedom and guidance is essential when crafting a compelling open-world experience. Developers can mitigate these issues by incorporating subtle guidance mechanisms, encouraging experimentation through forgiving failure systems, and promoting exploration without overwhelming players. Similarly, players can embrace creativity and experimentation, recognizing that the joy of discovery lies in trying new approaches and learning from mistakes. By addressing these dynamics, Tears of the Kingdom and other open-world games can find harmony between open-ended exploration and structured engagement, allowing players to fully immerse themselves in both the mechanics and the narrative. This balance ensure that freedom enhances, rather than diminishes, the player’s gaming experience, maintaining the allure of The Legend of Zelda franchise.

Bibliography

Barry Schwartz. (2005). The paradox of choice. TED Talks. Retrieved from TED Official Website.

Lyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 995-1006.

Macklin, C., & Sharp, J. (2016). Affordances and agency in video game environments. International Journal of Role-Playing, 6, 56-71.

Nintendo Co., Ltd. (2023). Ask the Developer: Chapter 5 - The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom. Retrieved from Nintendo Official Website.

Schut, K. (2020). Immersion and alienation in The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. Journal of Geek Studies, 7(1), 15-28.

Schwartz, B. (2005). The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less. Harper Perennial.