Ocarina of Time Is It Really the Best Zelda Game Ever?

[Seth]

We all have opinions, I agree with you on the control scheme part. But I think that the atmosphere in TP was better than the one in OoT. And the secondary characters in both TP and WW are very deep. I love the progression of Midna and Ilia in TP. But as I said, we all have opinions, mine is that OoT is not the best Zelda game. I think I may be done with this thread.

I agree the other games had great atmosphere and characters, I just felt OoT did it better. But your right it is just an opinion and yours is no worse/better than mine.

 

[Big Octo]

Okay, Forlong, how about this: If OoT isn't your favorite, than what is?

 

[MightyGhirahim]

Okay, Forlong, how about this: If OoT isn't your favorite, than what is?

If you are talking to me, then the answer is Twilight Princess

 

[Big Octo]

I wasn't asking you. The key word would be Forlong.

 

[bobersonsmith]

I did my research, 3 games sold more than oot JUST on the N64
Super Mario 64 (11.62 million)
Mario Kart 64 (9 million)
GoldenEye 007 (8 million)
With oot coming in 4th.
The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (7.6 million)
As I said that is just the list for the N64, all the games that I saw for the Wii sold much more than OoT. I looked at the list of the best video games, yes OoT up there. But guess who beat it? Call of Duty. Call of Duty 4 beat OoT on several of the gaming lists I saw, which I was actually REALLY surprised about. Now don't think I'm a big cod nerd D: I am just pointing out that other game series can in fact beat oot. For example Half-life 2, and Tetris were 2 other series rated above oot. Also with Resident Evil, Halo, and Mario. All were rated above OoT.
All these surveys clearly show that OoT is not considered that good anymore. For example the cod games are based TOTALLY off of gameplay, no story what-so-ever. And yet it beats Zelda, because it is so danged addictive. OoT's story isn't that good, although better than cod, and is not as addictive as the modern games. Which is something modern games usually need to have to be successful. I am not saying OoT is a bad game. I am saying that it is horribly out-dated. And it is not the best game in the world anymore.
I did not even bring all my points to hand, I could've brought TP into this. A game that is clearly better than OoT, and sold just as many copies as it. But I'm only gonna do that if necessary. I really hope you understand my points.

Do you understand that the population is rising and many new people are just getting into gaming who have never heard of Ocarina of time and all they know are these new games. Just because these games sold more doesn't mean they're better. No matter what it is in history, new things always sell more than old things simply because of growing populations and people being introduced to newer things rather than older things. Also, a lot of sales has to do with advertising to more people and more places.

 

[OcarinaofTime]

Ok this thread isn't really going anywhere a pretty munch all the comments are just opinons

 

[Seth]

Ok this thread isn't really going anywhere a pretty munch all the comments are just opinons

When it comes to rating anything, it's all opinions.

 

[bobersonsmith]

Ok this thread isn't really going anywhere a pretty munch all the comments are just opinons

Agreed.

I have one last thing to say. What difference does it make if its the best or not. Just play all the zelda games and enjoy them or not. You can have a favorite and have an opinion on whats best, but just realize other people think different and you can't make them change their mind. Play your favorite and enjoy it the most and enjoy the other games as well, but Nintendo did not create this amazing series for us to argue which game is best. They made it so we can enjoy it which we all do so why don't we all just stop arguing (including me) and just keep on playing zelda and worry about other, more important problems.

 

[FLUDDzone]

Too many side quests with too little pay-off
There were so many side quests in "Ocarina of Time", but so few of them have any satisfying pay-off. The trading side quest was great, and fishing was fun. But that was about as good as it got. Hunting those gold skullalas was a pain and you weren't given enough for it to be worthwhile. The mask shop was okay, but I felt like the rewards were completely pointless. Hunting those big poes was also annoying. And the less I say about marathon man, the better. These problems don't exist in "Wind Waker" and "Twilight Princess".

These are options. You don't have to do them. I enjoyed completing OoT 100%. It's all meant for fun, not greed.

Not enough dungeons
I counted, there are only 8 dungeons in this game, and 3 "sub-dungeons". That's how many dungeons were in "Link's Awakening"! This was supposed to be N64, cutting-edge technology! Why do we only get 8 dungeons? In comparison, "Link to the Past" had 11 dungeons and only 1 "sub-dungeon". A far more extensive game.

"Sub-dungeons"? The last time I checked there where 12 dungeons. Three were just a little easier and sorter for beginners.
Does Link to the Past have six side quest, 3D rendered graphics, 30 areas (12 of which are dungeons). Link to the Past only has seven main characters while OoT has over 40. LttP also only has 67 while OoT has 71. How is Link to the Past more extensive?

Less than stellar final battle
The fight with Ganondorf was good. If they stuck with that, I wouldn't complain. But that's not what they did. They had to have him transform into Ganon. But that fight was pathetically easy. It was cool to be able to use just about all your equipment in one fight, but the difficulty seemed far to low. "Link to the Past" had a far better final battle, and the final conflicts in "Wind Waker" and "Twilight Princess" are far beyond that.

Who cares if the fight with Ganon was easy? Ganondorf was a good fight, so why should you cry about having to beat another thing? Nintendo knew that people would complain if you only had to beat Ganondorf because that'll not be enough to beat the most powerful mortal in the land.

With these issues, I fail to see how anyone can say that "Ocarina of Time" is the best Zelda game there is. I understood when it first came out, although I thought "Link to the Past" was better. But "Wind Waker" and "Twilight Princess" clearly blew that game out of the water. "Ocarina of Time" is a fantastic game, but falls short in comparison to other Zelda titles. Can someone explain this die-hard opinion of it being the best of the best?

It is the best because of these reasons:
The Ocarina function, the music is memorable, the characters are unforgettable, the storyline is purely mythological. You don't see a storyline so rich and organized in Twilight Princess. Though I love all Zelda games, Twilight Princess seemed life-less. It never had the beauty that OoT had. Twilight Princess was the first Zelda game I played and when I played OoT I instantly became a much bigger fan of Zelda.

[Twilight Princess] had a more distinct art style than OoT.

It was impossible to make that sort of art style even a year after they finished making OoT.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------<
Two more reasons Ocarina of Time is the best video game ever made:
1. It was the first of it's kind and it will be kept and preserved for hundreds of years because of that.
2. In the Guinness World Records it is the highly rated video game ever.
Edit:

I did my research, 3 games sold more than oot JUST on the N64
Super Mario 64 (11.62 million)
Mario Kart 64 (9 million)
GoldenEye 007 (8 million)
With oot coming in 4th.
The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (7.6 million)

And Osama Bin Laden was a better person because more people searched his name than Jesus.
Edit2: What bobersonsmith said too.
Edit3:

I was thinking... Best ever is an opinion, and there is no use arguing opinions on something this silly. I rest my case, will post as many mroe times as Erebrea, and unsubscribe from this thread.

Silly? You want to see silly?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jGxpPi6yak
People get famous for taking silly things seriously.

 

[Forlong]

You're still not realizing that it used the best if the N64's abilities. The reason why everyone says it it's the best is because it is the perfect combination of all aspects.

What is your favorite Zelda anyway?

Being held back by the console it was for doesn't make it better than the other games. The content of WW and TP are better. What OoT did good, they did better. What OoT did not so good, they did well. Thus, they were better games. But they wouldn't be the games they were, if not for OoT.

"Link to the Past" happens to be my favorite.

OoT may not be the best Zelda in your opinion, but to the grand majority it obviously is.

By calling this argument ridiculous, stupid, idiotic, whatever else you want to say, you're just showing that you are afraid. By calling us fanboys, you're showing that you can't argue correctly (although we ARE fanboys, majority of the ones who say OoT is the best). There weren't any real hiccups in the game at all. I mean, a couple of glitches were so good, Nintendo purposefully left them in OoT3D!

I'll use the high end aggregate reviewer - Metacritic(you know, the site that actually 'matters') and also IGN as another people's opinion:

Metacritic OoT: 99/100
Metacritic TWW: 96/100
Metacritic TPWii: 95/100

IGN OoT: 10/10
IGN TWW: 9.6/10
IGN TPWii: 9.5/10

Based on those reviews, is OoT NOT the best scoring out of those 3D titles? I believe not. You just can't argue with things that are set in stone, can you?
They're porting LADX and FS to the Virtual Console/DSiware services xD

I'm calling you "fanboys" because you obviously are fanboys. Otherwise, you won't bring up game ratings. You put forth that the 3DS remake was just as good as the original, I totally agree. It does a few things a tad bit better, but not enough to say that it more worth it than the original. You're not missing much and your not gaining much. And what is OoT3D's rating? 9.5. Whoops! The fact is, those ratings are based on the limitations of the consoles the games are for. When the reviewers heard that OoT pushed the N64 to it's absolute limits, they were impressed. That skewed the scoring a bit. In fact, I think all the Zelda games have a slightly skewed scoring. All I've been doing is comparing the games to each other, ignoring the limitations of consoles as much as possible. Hey, LttP has better ratings than TP, but I don't argue that my favorite Zelda game is better than it. I think that shows how objective I strive to be.

I'm sorry but they didn't remake OoT just because it had simple coding, that's ridiculous. OoT is obviously the most popular and that is why they remade it. Look at even TWW and TP, TWW has OoT as it's back story and references to it in game (the stained glass windows in the castle for instance). TP is one giant reference to OoT and it was obviously a spiritual remake of it. Heck SS is a prequel and will probably have a lot more references to it. No other Zelda games get that kind of treatment except for maybe ALttP but that one not as much.
OoT was a breathtaking game, it was pretty damn close to perfection as any game I have ever played. I say that not as a fanboy, I love the other Zelda's too and sometimes I put games like Final Fantasy IX first on my list of favorites depending on my mood as well, but OoT was definitely special. I remember when it came out and it was THE game. Sure it's all based on opinion but few games have held up this long or had two remakes (MQ and 3D). Not even FFVII.
If one doesn't see OoT as great as me or someone else, that's just fine there is no way there will ever be a consensus top video game but OoT has come close.

Popular=/=better. E.T. is more popular than most Atari 2600 games, does that make it the best? OoT is popular because it was groundbreaking. One of the first truly great 3D games. With time, opinions of it have become a little more critical, hence the ratings for the remake being slightly lower.

In my opinion?

It had a much better atmosphere.
A better plot.
Better secondary characters (Malon, Saria, Darunia, Ruto, Zelda/Sheik, even Mido etc etc the list goes on)
A masterpiece of a control scheme, all later 3D titles mimic this control scheme, OoT started it and it still runs so smooth today.

Just a few of the reasons, keep in mind this is an opinion and I love TWW and TP a lot.

1: Isn't atmosphere enhanced with graphics?
2: The plot to OoT has holes in it big enough to drive a pick-up truck through. Why didn't Shiek reveal that he was Zelda after Link defeated Ganondorf? Why didn't Ganondorf capture Link too? How were those Hylian girls supposed to be descendants of a goron, a zora, and a kiriki? Nintendo made two "Author Saving Throws" to get out of that one: the split timeline and "Twilight Princess". How many plot holes can you find in WW and TP? If they are truly lesser plots than that of OoT, there should be more.
3: The characters are far more in depth in WW and TP. They actually help Link. I don't mean giving him maps to treasure, they actually save his life. Yeah, where were you on that, Shiek?
4: This is an extremely good point. WW does have a good control scheme, but the Gamecube controller is a bit awkward. TP suffers from the same problem on the Gamecube, but the Wii controls for it are just an embarrassment. That's probably why TP tends to get a lot of flack.

These are options. You don't have to do them. I enjoyed completing OoT 100%. It's all meant for fun, not greed.
"Sub-dungeons"? The last time I checked there where 12 dungeons. Three were just a little easier and sorter for beginners.

Dungeons have BOSSES. No, the White Wolfos and creepy...white...zombee...thing don't count. The bosses in the game have title cards, thus those are incomplete dungeons. Pathetic in comparison to LttP, which had extremely extensive dungeons. MM, WW, and TP showed us that dungeons weren't everything, but the state of the dungeons is a problem for OoT.

Does Link to the Past have six side quest, 3D rendered graphics, 30 areas (12 of which are dungeons). Link to the Past only has seven main characters while OoT has over 40. LttP also only has 67 while OoT has 71. How is Link to the Past more extensive?

That, I will admit, is totally my subjective opinion. I just love LttP so much, but I'll be willing to admit that OoT is truly superior.

Who cares if the fight with Ganon was easy? Ganondorf was a good fight, so why should you cry about having to beat another thing? Nintendo knew that people would complain if you only had to beat Ganondorf because that'll not be enough to beat the most powerful mortal in the land.

When it's a pathetic loser I can. Now, there are factors in WW and TP that make the final fight easier, but there is also more emotion in the fight. You actually can feel how angry and frustrated Ganondorf is. That's not as predominate in OoT. Ganondorf is well developed in that game, but more developed in the later titles.

It is the best because of these reasons:
The Ocarina function, the music is memorable, the characters are unforgettable, the storyline is purely mythological. You don't see a storyline so rich and organized in Twilight Princess. Though I love all Zelda games, Twilight Princess seemed life-less. It never had the beauty that OoT had. Twilight Princess was the first Zelda game I played and when I played OoT I instantly became a much bigger fan of Zelda.

TP is much more "real" than OoT, for lack of a better term. The NPCs actually seem like real people. In OoT, when you go to the future, hardly anyone seems worried that their kind is dead and a force a pure evil is trying to kill them all. In TP, it's clear that everyone is worried about what is going on and trying to do something about it. Navi was annoying and barely useful, while Midna was charming and invaluable. King Zora just sat on his tooshe, while Queen Rutela tried to save her people after she died. In OoT, Zelda seems to handle the fact that Hyrule was screwed because of her rather well, while the TP Zelda felt incredibly guilty over the whole thing. Memorable=/=better

Two more reasons Ocarina of Time is the best video game ever made:
1. It was the first of it's kind and it will be kept and preserved for hundreds of years because of that.
2. In the Guinness World Records it is the highly rated video game ever.

It is not the best video game ever. That's just so wrong it's not even funny. Also, it wasn't the first of it's kind. Anyone with an "A" in "obviousology" could tell you that. "3D Monster Maze" and "Dungeons of Daggorath" were the first 3D video games. OoT wasn't even the first 3D console game. "Doom" and "Wallenstein" were the first 3D console titles, if memory serves. "Doom" is still remembered, despite "Halo" being clearly better than it.

Also, on your second point: "Avatar" is the highest grossing movie ever, does that mean it's the best? No, not even close.

 

[Big Octo]

I think your arguments are still dry, I believe OoT had much better content than WW or TP. No matter how much you fight it, it's still the best Zelda game made. And no, atmosphere has nothing to do with graphics. The atmosphere is the feel of the game, how it connects to you and how you feel about it. Graphics don't really make a game.

 

[Fede-hime]

It's most likely already been said, but it's probably from the overall vote of gamers that have played it. Is it really the best Zelda game ever made though. Probably so. If it weren't then it wouldn't have been ported to the GC and 3DS. A game has to be GOLDEN to be be remade and reported not once but twice.

 

[FLUDDzone]

Dungeons have BOSSES. No, the White Wolfos and creepy...white...zombee...thing don't count. The bosses in the game have title cards, thus those are incomplete dungeons. Pathetic in comparison to LttP, which had extremely extensive dungeons. MM, WW, and TP showed us that dungeons weren't everything, but the state of the dungeons is a problem for OoT.

1. Deku Tree 2. Dodongos Cavern 3. Jabu Jabu's Belly 4. Forest Temple 5. Fire Temple 6. Water Temple 7. Shadow Temple 8. Spirit Temple 9. Ganondorf's Castle...*facepalming myself*
Sorry about that.

When it's a pathetic loser I can. Now, there are factors in WW and TP that make the final fight easier, but there is also more emotion in the fight. You actually can feel how angry and frustrated Ganondorf is. That's not as predominate in OoT. Ganondorf is well developed in that game, but more developed in the later titles.

I see no emotion in the characters in LttP either and you say that's your favorite...:/

TP is much more "real" than OoT, for lack of a better term. The NPCs actually seem like real people. In OoT, when you go to the future, hardly anyone seems worried that their kind is dead and a force a pure evil is trying to kill them all. In TP, it's clear that everyone is worried about what is going on and trying to do something about it. Navi was annoying and barely useful, while Midna was charming and invaluable. King Zora just sat on his tooshe, while Queen Rutela tried to save her people after she died. In OoT, Zelda seems to handle the fact that Hyrule was screwed because of her rather well, while the TP Zelda felt incredibly guilty over the whole thing. Memorable=/=better

That's an opinion. I believe TP did have more emotion, but I feel less hero-like emotion in TP. I think King Zora was meant to be a a lazy king a or he knew that he'll save his kingdom because he trusted you. I also don't think he'll get killed if he got in a fight with a few Keese.

It is not the best video game ever. That's just so wrong it's not even funny. Also, it wasn't the first of it's kind. Anyone with an "A" in "obviousology" could tell you that. "3D Monster Maze" and "Dungeons of Daggorath" were the first 3D video games. OoT wasn't even the first 3D console game. "Doom" and "Wallenstein" were the first 3D console titles, if memory serves. "Doom" is still remembered, despite "Halo" being clearly better than it.

Also, on your second point: "Avatar" is the highest grossing movie ever, does that mean it's the best? No, not even close.

3D Monster Maze and Dungeons of Daggorath? You call that free roaming 3D with over 30 unique areas and tons of enemies and characters? I haven't even heard of these until now. Doom and Wallenstein I think are both shooting games, it took me a while to find videos of them, and they don't look as in depth as OoT. I never said OoT was the first 3D game. You're taking things too literal . It was the first of its kind.

On the second point, that's just a fact to support my opinion.
Here a third fact, it's been remade twice and can be played on five different platforms. I haven't heard of TP or TWW being remade yet. It only took five years for it to get a remake while it's been nine year since TWW came out.

 

[Forlong]

3D Monster Maze and Dungeons of Daggorath? You call that free roaming 3D with over 30 unique areas and tons of enemies and characters? I haven't even heard of these until now. Doom and Wallenstein I think are both shooting games, it took me a while to find videos of them, and they don't look as in depth as OoT. I never said OoT was the first 3D game. You're taking things too literal . It was the first of its kind.

Even going by that, you are completely wrong. You obviously never played any games released before OoT, or you would know that it didn't present anything new. "Super Mario 64", "Final Fantasy VII", and "Doom" had the elements you described, just not to the extent of OoT (well, FF7 did). OoT did nothing new, it did what was done before better. There is a distinct difference there. What makes it a great game is how ahead of it's time it was. Hey, the problems I pointed out could have been easily solved, if not for the limitations of N64.

On the second point, that's just a fact to support my opinion.
Here a third fact, it's been remade twice and can be played on five different platforms. I haven't heard of TP or TWW being remade yet. It only took five years for it to get a remake while it's been nine year since TWW came out.

"Adventure of Link" was re-released three times, so is it better than "Wind Waker" as well? The games were remade because they were popular and because the new generation wanted a chance to play them. The number of releases OoT had do not make it better than any other game.

 

[Big Octo]

three[/i] times, so is it better than "Wind Waker" as well? The games were remade because they were popular and because the new generation wanted a chance to play them. The number of releases OoT had do not make it better than any other game.

You don't seem to get it. Those weren't remakes, those were all ports. OoT was actually been redone than any other Zelda. So yeah, it does matter.