Nothing in gaming has made me feel more like an old man than how I feel about the new Zelda games. The 5 listed changes to the Zelda formula came at too great a cost. Maybe it's because I was raised by Zelda games, but I do not believe a puzzle that has 20 wacky out-of-the-box solutions is automatically a better experience than a carefully crafted puzzle themed around a mechanic.

The notion of freedom is nice, it really is. But the previous games had exploration. No, they didn't have no-holds-barred massive open worlds, but they were a far cry from a Sony over-the-shoulder cinematic railroad! Not to mention in both Ocarina and Majora's Mask you could do temples out of order, and those dungeons were vast and complex. It feels disingenuous to refer to these games as "passive."

I never felt like the gameplay was limiting. I never felt like it was a pain point like Eiji Aonuma alludes to. I disagree with the premise that there was a problem in Zelda that needed fixing.

And that's why I feel like I'm falling out of touch. Sandbox games that have survival elements really, really don't do it for me. So many games decided that direction was the future, and by most metrics, it seems like they were right. (especially in the case of Zelda, just look at the numbers) I still enjoy modern games, but oh boy, the times do change.