OoT is better than TP. This is fact. You are wrong if you think otherwise.
Saria's farewell, the bustling castle town, pulling the Master Sword from its pedestral, post-apocalyptic Hyrule, duets with Shiek, Volvagia's terror, the majestic Water Temple, the bottom of the well, Gerudo Valley, climbing Ganon's Castle and finally the epic showdown with the Gerudo King.
What possibly has TP done that has oudone OoT? Midna? Don't make me laugh.
Wind Waker is great, although it seems a bit rushed. I haven't quite finished it yet (two triforce pieces to go!), but it throws you from one dungeon to another as quickly as possible in the first chunk of the game and saves most of the required overworld exploration for the second chunk of the game.
That doesn't bother me very much, though. Either part of the game is pretty great; the overworld/dungeon gameplay segments just aren't broken up as evenly as they are in the other games in the series.
Is there really a point to debating whether one Zelda game is better than another? Aren't all simply must-play games and instant classics (apart from the DS ones, obvs)? Why does it have to be a competition?
Good grief, some people get all bunched up as soon as you dare criticise their childhood.
I found nothing charming, memorable or interesting to explore in the multiple times I've attempted to play OOT. The world remains bland, blocky and featureless; the characters hideous. Maybe it's because I didn't play it until I was an adult and it therefore lacked magical childhood fairy dust. I don't know. What I do know is that when I played Majora's Mask, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess subsequently they had everything it lacked.
Is there really a point to debating whether one Zelda game is better than another? Aren't all simply must-play games and instant classics (apart from the DS ones, obvs)? Why does it have to be a competition?
Because time is finite and what if you wasted it playing the wrong one?!
Is there really a point to debating whether one Zelda game is better than another? Aren't all simply must-play games and instant classics (apart from the DS ones, obvs)? Why does it have to be a competition?
Because there is good game-making and bad game-making, and since it's so obvious as to why Darksiders is worse than Zelda, one has to compare two almost-equal games in order to more easily ascertain the finer points of game-making.
For example, the sages in TP detracted from the experience because their appearances were inexplicable and detached from the mythos, the sages in OoT were more lively and were referenced in WW, thus adding to the mythos.
People delve into fantasy literature and DnD because they love nerdage, references, immersion, lore and details. Blizzard realized this long ago, Nintendo sometimes seem to wish we would quit with the nerdage altogether, which is just retarded. I can fully accept a Zelda with trains - what I don't like is how they throw new races, villains, lands adn whatnot everywhere without a thought about how it all fits together.
Why the flip do fans have to make up their own theories regarding the Stone Temple or the Midna crown/Majora's Mask link? And why the hell are said theories sometimes more exciting and satisfying than the paltry mythos references Nintendo deigns to include? Leave the "novel" little quirks and ideas to the Mario and Pikmin games. Zelda is about exploration in a daunting, detailed and mysterious overworld. I'm honestly not that excited about new ways to move Link around, but sadly the creativity process over at Nintendo seems to be about what they like, not what the people who grew up with the series like.
Edit: I agree that OoT's graphics are very very dated. I also agree that OoT is, to a point, featureless, but I think it has a quite surreal, mysterious and vaguely threatening appearance, and I like that.
Good grief, some people get all bunched up as soon as you dare criticise their childhood.
I found nothing charming, memorable or interesting to explore in the multiple times I've attempted to play OOT. The world remains bland, blocky and featureless; the characters hideous. Maybe it's because I didn't play it until I was an adult and it therefore lacked magical childhood fairy dust. I don't know. What I do know is that when I played Majora's Mask, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess subsequently they had everything it lacked.
See Majora's mask used the same damn engine as OoT this is why we have no clue why you've formed such an opinion.
Also Magical childhood fairy dust? Oot came out when I was like 15. I was a cynical hardened teenager.
King Riptor on
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
Good grief, some people get all bunched up as soon as you dare criticise their childhood.
I found nothing charming, memorable or interesting to explore in the multiple times I've attempted to play OOT. The world remains bland, blocky and featureless; the characters hideous. Maybe it's because I didn't play it until I was an adult and it therefore lacked magical childhood fairy dust. I don't know. What I do know is that when I played Majora's Mask, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess subsequently they had everything it lacked.
See Majora's mask used the same damn engine as OoT this is why we have no clue why you've formed such an opinion.
Also Magical childhood fairy dust? Oot came out when I was like 15. I was a cynical hardened teenager.
Art style, not graphics engine.
MM had a good art style.
OOT had a hideous one.
It's very simple.
Good grief, some people get all bunched up as soon as you dare criticise their childhood.
I found nothing charming, memorable or interesting to explore in the multiple times I've attempted to play OOT. The world remains bland, blocky and featureless; the characters hideous. Maybe it's because I didn't play it until I was an adult and it therefore lacked magical childhood fairy dust. I don't know. What I do know is that when I played Majora's Mask, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess subsequently they had everything it lacked.
See Majora's mask used the same damn engine as OoT this is why we have no clue why you've formed such an opinion.
Also Magical childhood fairy dust? Oot came out when I was like 15. I was a cynical hardened teenager.
What Xagarath says boils down to saying you love The Godfather II, Goodfellas and the Sopranos but hate the first Godfather. I am not sure it makes much sense in either this or any other dimension.
We might as well ask a new mother to tell us which baby is the most beautiful.
A game is a holistic experience when it comes down to it. If we were to remake all 3D Zelda games in the same engine with the same art style etc., we would probably not be able to make more than sketchy judgments as to how well everything is put together or how satisfied we are. Pacing, quality of items and side-quests may be a different affair.
We simply don't have a perfectly comprehensive list of the different content parts of a 3D Zelda.
I thought the OoT NPCs were charming, despite their ugliness. There was some good dialogue.
It's about the small details that remind us that we are playing a game that cuts to the root of enjoyment. I can still remember exactly how goddamn awestruck I was when one of those creepy mummies asked for Magic Beans. "Preferably five of them". I can't stop grinning when I think about it. Zelda needs to reaffirm that sense of screwball comedy.
I agree with you Xagarath. I attribute our opinions to one of two things. We've both played the game at a later age, which according to Riptor, means squat. Thusly, I think it comes down to the fact that we're both whores for aesthetics (which doesn't necessarily mean OMG! PRETTY! WANT! atmosphere is important).
Well, Tiberian Sun is much uglier than CnC 3, but beats it into the tarmac when it comes to atmosphere. I sound like an art student, but "holistic" is the only way I can describe the impressions of the experiences.
Just think about how many things they got perfect on the first try. This was their first 3D Zelda game, where truly 3D games were in their infancy (at least on consoles, but even on PCs they had only been around a little while). They had to figure out how attacking would work, how jumping would work, how to design 3 dimensional dungeons that remained true to the 2D style yet capitalized on the new possibilities of an extra D. Remember that twisting hallway? That shit was crazy in 1998. The graphics were great too, and I still think they look good to this day. I have a hard time playing the first Half-Life because of the early 3D ugliness, but I'm fine with OoT. If the low resolution bothers you then play the Collector's edition on Gamecube or on an emu (if you own the cartridge). The colors are great and nothing is too blocky. The music is still the best in any game, the sound effects are extremely memorable. They absolutely nailed everything.
Play Twilight Princess, then play OoT. It's the same goddamn thing, because it worked then and it still works.
Well, Tiberian Sun is much uglier than CnC 3, but beats it into the tarmac when it comes to atmosphere. I sound like an art student, but "holistic" is the only way I can describe the impressions of the experiences.
I absolutely agree, and the atmosphere is an extremely holistic dynamic of any game. WW is far from graphically impressive, but it's charm is what makes it easily my favorite Zelda.
...and it doesn't necessarily mean that the look is everything, but I think it means a lot more to, well, at least me in these kinds of considerations (I won't speak for Xagarath).
You know what I always liked about Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask that was kind of lost in the following two games? This is, uh, kind of hard to explain, but the font the N64 games used, in addition to the little tone when you advanced the 'dialogue'/text, was particularly haunting.
...I really don't know how to explain it. I kind of got the same feeling from Link's Awakening - the actual font + sound effect when reading text just kind of generated a somber, hollow feeling that really worked for the games. It probably doesn't make any sense to anyone else, though.
You know what I always liked about Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask that was kind of lost in the following two games? This is, uh, kind of hard to explain, but the font the N64 games used, in addition to the little tone when you advanced the 'dialogue'/text, was particularly haunting.
...I really don't know how to explain it. I kind of got the same feeling from Link's Awakening - the actual font + sound effect when reading text just kind of generated a somber, hollow feeling that really worked for the games. It probably doesn't make any sense to anyone else, though.
I understand what you mean. You're wrong about Wind Waker though, WW was awesome and had it's own atmosphere that was just a little more lighthearted. I think Twilight Princess is where they kinda lost it.
You know what I always liked about Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask that was kind of lost in the following two games? This is, uh, kind of hard to explain, but the font the N64 games used, in addition to the little tone when you advanced the 'dialogue'/text, was particularly haunting.
...I really don't know how to explain it. I kind of got the same feeling from Link's Awakening - the actual font + sound effect when reading text just kind of generated a somber, hollow feeling that really worked for the games. It probably doesn't make any sense to anyone else, though.
I understand what you mean. You're wrong about Wind Waker though, WW was awesome and had it's own atmosphere that was just a little more lighthearted. I think Twilight Princess is where they kinda lost it.
A lot of that probably hinges on whether or not you dig the Twilight aesthetic, incl. the Twili as a race of characters (Midna, Zant etc.) and the final dungeon in the Twilight world. I personally think it's gorgeous. It reminds me of the second chapter of Paper Mario 2. I also really like Link's Zora outfit in TP from an artistic perspective.
You know what I always liked about Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask that was kind of lost in the following two games? This is, uh, kind of hard to explain, but the font the N64 games used, in addition to the little tone when you advanced the 'dialogue'/text, was particularly haunting.
...I really don't know how to explain it. I kind of got the same feeling from Link's Awakening - the actual font + sound effect when reading text just kind of generated a somber, hollow feeling that really worked for the games. It probably doesn't make any sense to anyone else, though.
Just think about how many things they got perfect on the first try. This was their first 3D Zelda game, where truly 3D games were in their infancy (at least on consoles, but even on PCs they had only been around a little while). They had to figure out how attacking would work, how jumping would work, how to design 3 dimensional dungeons that remained true to the 2D style yet capitalized on the new possibilities of an extra D. Remember that twisting hallway? That shit was crazy in 1998. The graphics were great too, and I still think they look good to this day. I have a hard time playing the first Half-Life because of the early 3D ugliness, but I'm fine with OoT. If the low resolution bothers you then play the Collector's edition on Gamecube or on an emu (if you own the cartridge). The colors are great and nothing is too blocky. The music is still the best in any game, the sound effects are extremely memorable. They absolutely nailed everything.
Play Twilight Princess, then play OoT. It's the same goddamn thing, because it worked then and it still works.
In its infancy? If anything, OOT etc represented a step backwards from System Shock and Ultima Underworld, as far as 3D gaming went.
And do bother to read my posts. It's nothing to do with resolution and everything to do with artstyle, which I wouldn't find attractive in OOT no matter how much they prettied it up.
Good grief, some people get all bunched up as soon as you dare criticise their childhood.
I found nothing charming, memorable or interesting to explore in the multiple times I've attempted to play OOT. The world remains bland, blocky and featureless; the characters hideous. Maybe it's because I didn't play it until I was an adult and it therefore lacked magical childhood fairy dust. I don't know. What I do know is that when I played Majora's Mask, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess subsequently they had everything it lacked.
See Majora's mask used the same damn engine as OoT this is why we have no clue why you've formed such an opinion.
Also Magical childhood fairy dust? Oot came out when I was like 15. I was a cynical hardened teenager.
Art style, not graphics engine.
MM had a good art style.
OOT had a hideous one.
It's very simple.
That, and Majora's Mask actually DID have marginally better graphics (due to using the Expansion Pak). It's not much of a difference, but the NPCs and Link especially look a bit less blocky.
It's been a while since I've been into a Zelda game.
I loved Minish Cap, now that I have a DS, should I get Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks or is one of them actually terrible?
You didn't like OoT's artstyle, yet you don't seem to have any problem with MM's?
Apart from the boss enemies and some of the locations, both games look the same!
edit: looks like the point was already made.
I don't agree with him about OoT being "hideous", but this isn't true. The only things that do look the same between the two are the things that they explicitly re-used. Which, all things considered, wasn't a whole lot.
mntorankusu on
0
Alfred J. Kwakis it because you were insultedwhen I insulted your hair?Registered Userregular
You didn't like OoT's artstyle, yet you don't seem to have any problem with MM's?
Apart from the boss enemies and some of the locations, both games look the same!
edit: looks like the point was already made.
I don't agree with him about OoT being "hideous", but this isn't true. The only things that do look the same between the two are the things that they explicitly re-used. Which, all things considered, wasn't a whole lot.
And I'm pretty sure all the reused things still got new better textures to fit with the rest of the game.
-SPI- on
0
Alfred J. Kwakis it because you were insultedwhen I insulted your hair?Registered Userregular
You didn't like OoT's artstyle, yet you don't seem to have any problem with MM's?
Apart from the boss enemies and some of the locations, both games look the same!
edit: looks like the point was already made.
I don't agree with him about OoT being "hideous", but this isn't true. The only things that do look the same between the two are the things that they explicitly re-used. Which, all things considered, wasn't a whole lot.
I honestly don't know how Termina looks so much different from Hyrule. Sure, you visit other places, but imo there is very little in the game which I could say stands out from the rest. Like Ikana Canyon, the Deku Palace or some parts of Clock Town maybe.
Alfred J. Kwak on
0
mntorankusuI'm not sure how to use this thing....Registered Userregular
You didn't like OoT's artstyle, yet you don't seem to have any problem with MM's?
Apart from the boss enemies and some of the locations, both games look the same!
edit: looks like the point was already made.
I don't agree with him about OoT being "hideous", but this isn't true. The only things that do look the same between the two are the things that they explicitly re-used. Which, all things considered, wasn't a whole lot.
And I'm pretty sure all the reused things still got new better textures to fit with the rest of the game.
I'll grant you all that TP had pacing issues in the beginning, but once you finish gathering the little light spheres (which doesn't take very long after the first playthrough) the pacing is overall better than OoT. TP also fixed several other smaller problems that had plagued Zelda since OoT that had still not been fixed in WW. For example, Epona actually felt like riding a horse. Epona in OoT/MM just don't really feel like a horse to me. I also give TP a lot of credit for some really spectacular (if underutilized) items.
I won't say that TP is a better game than OoT, but I'm of the opinion that it's equally good. Both games had different problems, but despite those problems I have played through both of them several times and enjoy both of them equally.
Posts
That doesn't bother me very much, though. Either part of the game is pretty great; the overworld/dungeon gameplay segments just aren't broken up as evenly as they are in the other games in the series.
I found nothing charming, memorable or interesting to explore in the multiple times I've attempted to play OOT. The world remains bland, blocky and featureless; the characters hideous. Maybe it's because I didn't play it until I was an adult and it therefore lacked magical childhood fairy dust. I don't know. What I do know is that when I played Majora's Mask, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess subsequently they had everything it lacked.
Because time is finite and what if you wasted it playing the wrong one?!
Because there is good game-making and bad game-making, and since it's so obvious as to why Darksiders is worse than Zelda, one has to compare two almost-equal games in order to more easily ascertain the finer points of game-making.
For example, the sages in TP detracted from the experience because their appearances were inexplicable and detached from the mythos, the sages in OoT were more lively and were referenced in WW, thus adding to the mythos.
People delve into fantasy literature and DnD because they love nerdage, references, immersion, lore and details. Blizzard realized this long ago, Nintendo sometimes seem to wish we would quit with the nerdage altogether, which is just retarded. I can fully accept a Zelda with trains - what I don't like is how they throw new races, villains, lands adn whatnot everywhere without a thought about how it all fits together.
Why the flip do fans have to make up their own theories regarding the Stone Temple or the Midna crown/Majora's Mask link? And why the hell are said theories sometimes more exciting and satisfying than the paltry mythos references Nintendo deigns to include? Leave the "novel" little quirks and ideas to the Mario and Pikmin games. Zelda is about exploration in a daunting, detailed and mysterious overworld. I'm honestly not that excited about new ways to move Link around, but sadly the creativity process over at Nintendo seems to be about what they like, not what the people who grew up with the series like.
Edit: I agree that OoT's graphics are very very dated. I also agree that OoT is, to a point, featureless, but I think it has a quite surreal, mysterious and vaguely threatening appearance, and I like that.
See Majora's mask used the same damn engine as OoT this is why we have no clue why you've formed such an opinion.
Also Magical childhood fairy dust? Oot came out when I was like 15. I was a cynical hardened teenager.
Art style, not graphics engine.
MM had a good art style.
OOT had a hideous one.
It's very simple.
What Xagarath says boils down to saying you love The Godfather II, Goodfellas and the Sopranos but hate the first Godfather. I am not sure it makes much sense in either this or any other dimension.
Just been thorougly outclassed, and it was always ugly.
We might as well ask a new mother to tell us which baby is the most beautiful.
A game is a holistic experience when it comes down to it. If we were to remake all 3D Zelda games in the same engine with the same art style etc., we would probably not be able to make more than sketchy judgments as to how well everything is put together or how satisfied we are. Pacing, quality of items and side-quests may be a different affair.
We simply don't have a perfectly comprehensive list of the different content parts of a 3D Zelda.
I thought the OoT NPCs were charming, despite their ugliness. There was some good dialogue.
It's about the small details that remind us that we are playing a game that cuts to the root of enjoyment. I can still remember exactly how goddamn awestruck I was when one of those creepy mummies asked for Magic Beans. "Preferably five of them". I can't stop grinning when I think about it. Zelda needs to reaffirm that sense of screwball comedy.
But Twilight Princess drives like this - DOO DOO DOO DOO
Just think about how many things they got perfect on the first try. This was their first 3D Zelda game, where truly 3D games were in their infancy (at least on consoles, but even on PCs they had only been around a little while). They had to figure out how attacking would work, how jumping would work, how to design 3 dimensional dungeons that remained true to the 2D style yet capitalized on the new possibilities of an extra D. Remember that twisting hallway? That shit was crazy in 1998. The graphics were great too, and I still think they look good to this day. I have a hard time playing the first Half-Life because of the early 3D ugliness, but I'm fine with OoT. If the low resolution bothers you then play the Collector's edition on Gamecube or on an emu (if you own the cartridge). The colors are great and nothing is too blocky. The music is still the best in any game, the sound effects are extremely memorable. They absolutely nailed everything.
Play Twilight Princess, then play OoT. It's the same goddamn thing, because it worked then and it still works.
...and it doesn't necessarily mean that the look is everything, but I think it means a lot more to, well, at least me in these kinds of considerations (I won't speak for Xagarath).
...I really don't know how to explain it. I kind of got the same feeling from Link's Awakening - the actual font + sound effect when reading text just kind of generated a somber, hollow feeling that really worked for the games. It probably doesn't make any sense to anyone else, though.
I understand what you mean. You're wrong about Wind Waker though, WW was awesome and had it's own atmosphere that was just a little more lighthearted. I think Twilight Princess is where they kinda lost it.
Man. I know exactly what you mean.
dream a little dream or you could live a little dream
sleep forever if you wish to be a dreamer
In its infancy? If anything, OOT etc represented a step backwards from System Shock and Ultima Underworld, as far as 3D gaming went.
And do bother to read my posts. It's nothing to do with resolution and everything to do with artstyle, which I wouldn't find attractive in OOT no matter how much they prettied it up.
You didn't like OoT's artstyle, yet you don't seem to have any problem with MM's?
Apart from the boss enemies and some of the locations, both games look the same!
edit: looks like the point was already made.
That, and Majora's Mask actually DID have marginally better graphics (due to using the Expansion Pak). It's not much of a difference, but the NPCs and Link especially look a bit less blocky.
I loved Minish Cap, now that I have a DS, should I get Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks or is one of them actually terrible?
Most people seem to think Spirit Tracks is better than PH, though.
猿も木から落ちる
I don't agree with him about OoT being "hideous", but this isn't true. The only things that do look the same between the two are the things that they explicitly re-used. Which, all things considered, wasn't a whole lot.
What is it then? I'm just curious, haven't played it yet.
I honestly don't know how Termina looks so much different from Hyrule. Sure, you visit other places, but imo there is very little in the game which I could say stands out from the rest. Like Ikana Canyon, the Deku Palace or some parts of Clock Town maybe.
Most of them did, yeah, but not everything.
I won't say that TP is a better game than OoT, but I'm of the opinion that it's equally good. Both games had different problems, but despite those problems I have played through both of them several times and enjoy both of them equally.