>>53789842It's not just you, it's graphically identical to BotW. I gave it the benefit of the doubt because it was a launch title WiiU port, but TotK has been cooking for a long time, costs more than normal nintendo games and still hasn't managed to visually improve beyond color saturation.
I know people get tired of the comparisons with these games, but look at Xenoblade. It had a launch year title that came out later than BotW, had the same visual quality, had the original game remastered and another sequel that both looked better within 5 years.
Now with Pokemon, they have to shit out content for core series games every year so it's never even going to reach mediocre visuals, but they also have way less staff and budget than Aonuma's street gang, so the odds are stacked against them producing meaningful content. If SV are an indefensible mess when they get less than half the time and money, then TotK isn't far off that mark. Don't get me wrong, this doesn't make SV not shit, but it pisses me off when they slate a game with clearly glaring flaws on day 1 and then when another franchise does it, it gets the best reviews in the last 12 months, it's fucking infuriating.
With how much investment Zelda gets for its core entries, even just looking a how long the dev time is allowed to be, it's not acceptable for it to look and run as bad as it does, but don't expect Zeldroids to lynch Aonuma to the extent this place crucifies GF, they're whipped. Unlike SV, TotK is a really good game in terms of shit to do, story, gameplay, etc but the performance issues aren't negligible and the visuals are nearly SV tier. That, and as I said before, they get way more money and way more time to make these games than GF ever will, Zelda is more important to Nintendo because they own it outright and don't have to split anything with anyone.
