The Legend Of Zelda Dungeons Vs. Divine Beasts [Debate]

Debate: Divine Beasts Vs Dungeons | The Legend of Zelda | Nintendo | Video Games | Gaming | DoublexJump.com

krismii
There was some controversy regarding the Divine Beasts — and, I suppose, the shrines — in The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild replacing the traditional dungeons. Many fans of the franchise miss the traditional dungeons and, I’ll admit, it was a bit jarring to me as well to have the Divine Beasts instead. I’m probably in the minority here when I say that I wouldn’t mind if Divine Beasts, or mini-dungeons, were featured in future Zelda games instead of the traditional dungeons.

rachmii
I did enjoy the Divine Beasts and the Shrines. It was a nice change of pace. However, I’d be lying if I said I didn’t miss the dungeons or temples in the other Legend of Zelda games. There aren’t nearly as many dungeons in the games as there are shrines, but they’re all unique from one another and can take some time to complete. There’s a lot of exploring involved and once you get to the end, it’s satisfying.

krismii
It can be satisfying to explore and complete the Divine Beasts as well. The Divine Beasts are, essentially, a big puzzle with a boss at the end. They’re the reward after exploring the main area of the over world and, unlike the traditional dungeons, you have more freedom of how to complete them. Traditional dungeons tend to have the obligatory dungeon item, no matter how awesome they are, while Divine Beasts give you more rein on how to defeat them.

rachmii
True, though while you have more freedom, they’re usually smaller. There are a lot of shrines and, after completing a bunch of them, you start to repeat some ways to go through them. You get a new item in each dungeon while you only have the Sheikah Slate to get through all the shrines. Also, each dungeon has an awesome boss at the end while the Divine Beasts had a different form of the same boss. Plus, there’s only four of them. In other Zelda games, there’s usually about seven give or take.

krismii
I disagree that you “only” have the Sheikah Slate in order to help you get through the Divine Beasts and the shrines. You do also get plenty of different types of weapons — swords, clubs, axes, various arrows, the paraglider — to help you navigate the Divine Beasts and shrines, as well as the abilities compacted into the Sheikah Slate. It’s an extra challenge that the weapons and shields break as well. Having four Divine Beasts and over a hundred shrines, most with unique puzzles with multiple ways to solve them, makes up for the seven or so traditional dungeons.

Rachel Mii Double Jump
Fair enough, but because the weapons break so often it’s harder to hold onto your resources if you have trouble at a certain spot. Also, I like quality over quantity. I enjoyed going searching for the shrines and all, but again, I like the variety of the dungeons. The Divine Beasts were the same except they were different shapes. The puzzles are cool, but there are no stakes. There are no enemies to really get through or anything. You just wander around until you figure it out. There’s a lot more to do in the dungeons.

krismii
Being able to have all sorts of different weapons, abilities, and ways to complete a Divine Beast — or shrine — gives you more replayability. The Divine Beasts did have some enemies, and the stakes were the Champion’s ability that you gained after defeating whatever Ganon-Blight was at the end of it as well as helping you against Calamity Ganon in the final match. Not only that, you can explore the Divine Beasts and the world in whatever order you want. It’s not linear like traditional dungeons, giving you more freedom and ways to explore and go through the story however you want.

Rachel Mii Double Jump
I see your points, but I still think the dungeons are better than the Divine Beasts, as clever as they were. I guess we’ll let the readers decide this one.

Which side are you on? Let us know in the comments below! If you like this post, please share it around.

Connect with us:
Twitter | Instagram | Tumblr | Twitch

One thought on “The Legend Of Zelda Dungeons Vs. Divine Beasts [Debate]

  1. Kris and I have talked about this before in passing. But since it’s here as an official debate, I’ll throw in my official vote.

    Going #teamrachel again, since I’m pretty sure I sided with her on the last debate I chimed in on.

    Divine Beasts are a clever solve to a problem that the Zelda series inherited with A Link to the Past. By designing them to be more open-ended, players can take them on in any order, or avoid them completely. I love having that freedom to approach the game seemingly any way I want.

    That said, their openness does lead to experiences within the Divine Beasts that feel more generic and not as interesting as a traditional Zelda dungeon. I like getting new stuff and using it within that dungeon in ways that weren’t available to me before. Divine Beasts leverage the same tools you learn from the beginning of the game. While they do make you use them in an assortment of ways, I prefer the way in which traditional Zelda dungeons reward you with new stuff and new ways to play, versus finding every possible use for the handful of tools you got 100 hours ago. I also prefer how dungeons also had more combat in them than Divine Beasts, but that would presumably be an easy fix if Nintendo did Divine Beasts or something like it again.

    All that said, can I give Kris a point for also taking the side of shrines? Having these “mini-dungeons” was a fantastic addition to the formula and I’d love to see them come back, regardless of whether a future Zelda game goes with Divine Beasts or dungeons.

    Nevertheless, Rachel wins this one for me. However, she’s got her work cut out for her in the inevitable Fire Emblem vs. Cattails debate.

    #chromvscats #futurebabiesvsfuturekittens #warriorspart29897321 #noroomforsappyinadebate

Leave a Reply