Why is Zelda OoT so populare?

im not a hater or anything but when i played this game (about 10 years after it was made) i really didnt get why it was so impresive, and im not counting the visuals since i think it was great 10 years ago. i must say i didnt finish thu.

please hear me before trashing me.

1st of all i found the writings great for under 15 years old, so thats why i guess i found the story childish, i mean the princes told a stranger from the forest al her secrets in the 1st meeting, not to mention he sneaked in the royal palace.

the combat wasnt very fun but i guess it would get better later on.

but i got to say the level design was great.

i guess it isnt fair to judge a game when u havent finished it but, it didnt get any better after 3-4 hours into the game.

Phenomenal music.

Great visuals.

Great story and pacing.

A nicely realized world.

Great characters.

Good difficulty curve.

Revolutionized 3rd person control, at the time.

Lengthy quest.

...the list really goes on and on.

...the real question is what the game would have been if the 64dd wasn't scrapped in a few regions.

I got it for the Wii because at the time, I wasn't into the N64. I was all about Playstation, and spent most of the time playing the Final Fantasy games.

To me... siiigh.... I can see why people loved the game so much. I've just always been a bigger fan of the SNES Zelda a Link to the Past. I like that style of Zelda. That's always been my favorite. I'm going to purchase a 3DS soon so I can play Zelda OoT again and finish it, because I didn't for the Wii.

Ocarina was great when it came out but it's not my favorite Zelda game. I like A Link to the Past and Wind Waker both better.Eikichi-Onizuka

I'll give you Link to the Past, but Wind Waker was just too easy. I do love Wind Waker though--very very fleshed out world, and a well told story.

The first time I played this game, I sort of felt the same way you did. However, I gave it more of a chance and it just keeps on getting better and better in every way. By the end of the game I knew it was one of my favorite games ever made. If I were you I'd try hanging in there and see if your opinion improves, especially after you become adult Link. While I think this game is near perfect, I wouldn't expect others to feel the same.

I recently tried to get into the game and couldn't. I owned a PSX and then a Dreamcast at the time, and my best friend had a Sega Saturn. So I had very little experience with the N64 back then. But now I own one and made it a point to get Ocarina of Time because I've heard so much about it. I wasn't impressed at all. I so much more enjoy the 2D Zelda entries on NES, SNES, and the various Gameboys.

That's not to say I think it's a bad game, I just felt like it was an average game.

Different people have different tastes :shock:

Because it redefined the fantasy action-adventure genre and because it was the first Zelda in 3D. There was nothing that could come close to it when it came out. Of course today it's not that good anymore (which goes for pretty much any game btw) but back then it made a great impression on the gaming crowd and is justly considered a classic.

Because it redefined the fantasy action-adventure genre and because it was the first Zelda in 3D. There was nothing that could come close to it when it came out. Of course today it's not that good anymore (which goes for pretty much any game btw) but back then it made a great impression on the gaming crowd and is justly considered a classic.

nameless12345

I disagree. I think the game holds up rather well. The graphics are dated of course, but it still has a consistent look to it in the same vein as Mario 64 does. What continues to impress me about Ocarina is just how "right" the game felt. Everything from the music, visuals, sound effects, and story mesh together perfectly. The closest thing I could compare it to would be a classic disney movie. Also, the level(dungeon) design is rather brilliant--that is something that remains timeless. So when you say that "any" game, after time, isn't any good? That's the furthest thing from the truth I think i've ever read on this forum. Mario World remains good to this day because of its brilliant level design. Same goes for Link to the Past and Super Metroid.

ps. All these ZElda threads need to die down because they are making me want to replay Ocarina, but I must hold off until my copy of Ocarina3D arrives.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Because it redefined the fantasy action-adventure genre and because it was the first Zelda in 3D. There was nothing that could come close to it when it came out. Of course today it's not that good anymore (which goes for pretty much any game btw) but back then it made a great impression on the gaming crowd and is justly considered a classic.

Heirren

I disagree. I think the game holds up rather well. The graphics are dated of course, but it still has a consistent look to it in the same vein as Mario 64 does. What continues to impress me about Ocarina is just how "right" the game felt. Everything from the music, visuals, sound effects, and story mesh together perfectly. The closest thing I could compare it to would be a classic disney movie. Also, the level(dungeon) design is rather brilliant--that is something that remains timeless. So when you say that "any" game, after time, isn't any good? That's the furthest thing from the truth I think i've ever read on this forum. Mario World remains good to this day because of its brilliant level design. Same goes for Link to the Past and Super Metroid.

ps. All these ZElda threads need to die down because they are making me want to replay Ocarina, but I must hold off until my copy of Ocarina3D arrives.

Well of course it's by no means bad and like I said is justly a classic. But it does feel feel woody and choppy today. The camera also isn't very good and you have no control over it, the day and night cycles are too fast and hyrule feels a little empty and not nearly as epic as it did back then. The graphics are also technically outdated (if still aestetically consistent). I agree the level design is still very good though.

Of course SMW ALttP and SM are timeless classics but they also couldn't pass as new games for a full price anymore.

Ocarina was great when it came out but it's not my favorite Zelda game. I like A Link to the Past and Wind Waker both better.Eikichi-Onizuka

Of course today it's not that good anymore (which goes for pretty much any game btw) nameless12345

Wow, I couldn't disagree with a statement anymore than I disagree with this. There are so many classic games that are still good today. SOOOOO MANY! I can't even believe I read this statement from you, since you're a regular on the Legacy Forum.

BTW, Resultsmayvery is using my last avatar, lol. Green Lantern rules! I'm huge fan, hence my username.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]Of course today it's not that good anymore (which goes for pretty much any game btw) Emerald_Warrior

Wow, I couldn't disagree with a statement anymore than I disagree with this. There are so many classic games that are still good today. SOOOOO MANY! I can't even believe I read this statement from you, since you're a regular on the Legacy Forum.

Well do you think legacy games should be judged by today's standards?

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]Of course today it's not that good anymore (which goes for pretty much any game btw) nameless12345

Wow, I couldn't disagree with a statement anymore than I disagree with this. There are so many classic games that are still good today. SOOOOO MANY! I can't even believe I read this statement from you, since you're a regular on the Legacy Forum.

Well do you think legacy games should be judged by today's standards?

You mean by someone else's standards. Because I would much rather play a lot of classic games over a lot of modern games, and there's plenty of other people that feel the same. Of course there's exceptions (Oblivion for sure), but I can name a lot more great classic games that I love than I can modern games.

im not a hater or anything but when i played this game (about 10 years after it was made) i really didnt get why it was so impresive, and im not counting the visuals since i think it was great 10 years ago. i must say i didnt finish thu.

please hear me before trashing me.

1st of all i found the writings great for under 15 years old, so thats why i guess i found the story childish, i mean the princes told a stranger from the forest al her secrets in the 1st meeting, not to mention he sneaked in the royal palace.

the combat wasnt very fun but i guess it would get better later on.

but i got to say the level design was great.

i guess it isnt fair to judge a game when u havent finished it but, it didnt get any better after 3-4 hours into the game.

mf1986

At the time the game was revolutionary. It was one of the first console games to give you as much freedom as the game did, and successfuly brought a beloved franchise into 3D. Also about the story I'm pretty sure Zelda had a vision about Link so she knew he was the good guy and beleive me it gets better. Also the game has great level design (some of the later dungeons are near ingenious) and the game intriduced Z targetting. Where would we be without Z targetting? Akthough I would agree with you if you said it wasn't the best game ever.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

Wow, I couldn't disagree with a statement anymore than I disagree with this. There are so many classic games that are still good today. SOOOOO MANY! I can't even believe I read this statement from you, since you're a regular on the Legacy Forum.

Emerald_Warrior

Well do you think legacy games should be judged by today's standards?

You mean by someone else's standards. Because I would much rather play a lot of classic games over a lot of modern games, and there's plenty of other people that feel the same. Of course there's exceptions (Oblivion for sure), but I can name a lot more great classic games that I love than I can modern games.

Same here but I'm not blinding myself that, for example, TES: Arena or Daggerfall can compete with Oblivion or Morrowind. Legacy games should be judged on their own merits, period.

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Well do you think legacy games should be judged by today's standards?

nameless12345

You mean by someone else's standards. Because I would much rather play a lot of classic games over a lot of modern games, and there's plenty of other people that feel the same. Of course there's exceptions (Oblivion for sure), but I can name a lot more great classic games that I love than I can modern games.

Same here but I'm not blinding myself that, for example, TES: Arena or Daggerfall can compete with Oblivion or Morrowind. Legacy games should be judged on their own merits, period.

Well yeah, in fact I used Oblivion as my example for an exception. But on that same token, Super Mario World is 10x the game that Super Mario Sunshine is. As is Super Metroid compared to Metroid: Other M. I could go on, but you get the idea. There are exceptions like I said, but I still disagree that modern games are better. Some are, but a good majority of older games are better, IMO.

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

You mean by someone else's standards. Because I would much rather play a lot of classic games over a lot of modern games, and there's plenty of other people that feel the same. Of course there's exceptions (Oblivion for sure), but I can name a lot more great classic games that I love than I can modern games.

Emerald_Warrior

Same here but I'm not blinding myself that, for example, TES: Arena or Daggerfall can compete with Oblivion or Morrowind. Legacy games should be judged on their own merits, period.

Well yeah, in fact I used Oblivion as my example for an exception. But on that same token, Super Mario World is 10x the game that Super Mario Sunshine is. As is Super Metroid compared to Metroid: Other M. I could go on, but you get the idea.

Well that's debatable. You could say SMW and SM were so good in their time that they still appear "better" than their successors but in terms of complexity, lenght and many other things they certainly aren't better.

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

[QUOTE="nameless12345"]

Same here but I'm not blinding myself that, for example, TES: Arena or Daggerfall can compete with Oblivion or Morrowind. Legacy games should be judged on their own merits, period.

nameless12345

Well yeah, in fact I used Oblivion as my example for an exception. But on that same token, Super Mario World is 10x the game that Super Mario Sunshine is. As is Super Metroid compared to Metroid: Other M. I could go on, but you get the idea.

Well that's debatable. You could say SMW and SM were so good in their time that they still appear "better" than their successors but in terms of complexity, lenght and many other things they certainly aren't better.

Yes, they are better. The fact that most 3d games have at least some form of control glitch, whether it is the control under certain circumstances or the camera,proves this.

Heirren

We can just go on and on

[QUOTE="Heirren"] Yes, they are better. The fact that most 3d games have at least some form of control glitch, whether it is the control under certain circumstances or the camera,proves this.

JuarN18

We can just go on and on

No you are wrong. Technical issues arise, something which is not subjective, with a lot of 3D games. Mario 64 is probably my favorite game of all time, but Super Mario World is the better game because there aren't any technicalities that get in the way of its gameplay.

[QUOTE="JuarN18"]

[QUOTE="Heirren"] Yes, they are better. The fact that most 3d games have at least some form of control glitch, whether it is the control under certain circumstances or the camera,proves this.

Heirren

We can just go on and on

No you are wrong. Technical issues arise, something which is not subjective, with a lot of 3D games. Mario 64 is probably my favorite game of all time, but Super Mario World is the better game because there aren't any technicalities that get in the way of its gameplay.

Actually there is a lot of slowdown in some stages in SMW (especially the underwater ones).

[QUOTE="Heirren"]

[QUOTE="JuarN18"] No, the 3D games are better you can make everything 2D games could and more.

We can just go on and on

nameless12345

No you are wrong. Technical issues arise, something which is not subjective, with a lot of 3D games. Mario 64 is probably my favorite game of all time, but Super Mario World is the better game because there aren't any technicalities that get in the way of its gameplay.

Actually there is a lot of slowdown in some stages in SMW (especially the underwater ones).

Ocarina was great when it came out but it's not my favorite Zelda game. I like A Link to the Past and Wind Waker both better.Eikichi-Onizuka

It's the same thing with the movie Citizen Kane. It is widely regarded as the best film ever made, but if you watch it for the first time nowadays (as i did a few yrs ago) it's nothing special at all. But if you look at it from the perspective of what it was WHEN it was released you can understand how it did things no film before it did and how it redefined the way films were made. I'm not a Zelda fan in general, but that's what OOT did for video games and that's why it's so beloved