Oracle Of Seasons/Ages Ages Much Better Than Seasons

[Tetra's Wink]

I hear so many people say that both OOA and OOS are pretty much on par in terms of how good they are and/or where people rank them. But I'm different to this - for me, I much prefer OOA to OOS.

For me, OOA was better than OOS in just about every category - better story (I felt that OOA had more of a story, whereas OOS was lacking), better bosses (more original, and not re-used from TLOZ), better locations (I loved the restoration wall, can't really remember many locations from seasons), and all in all less frustrating. I died so many times on Seasons, whereas Ages was far less frustrating for me (maybe I'm just better at puzzles than combat, who knows).

One cool thing that Seasons had going for it was the underground temple and subrosia. That was a nice, unique touch, and the most distinguishing feature of the game IMO. But still, it isn't enough to compare to all the good things I mentioned about OOA.

Does anyone else feel the same?

 

[Dimooshky]

I agree Ages is far better than Seasons in effort and quality more than anything. The bosses in Seasons are just re-appearances from TLOZ and LA, whereas in Ages they are new and brilliant. It does depend on what you prefer however, combat or puzzles. I like puzzles, and Ages' were much more thought out in my opinion.

Despite this, I actually view them as a single game due to the Linked ending. It's a perfect climax to what went on in both lands and both the Twinrova and Ganon fights are much harder than Onox and Veran, which really adds to the end of the adventure.

While I love the ed ending, the Twinrova fight was quite frustrating. Scent Seeds!? Whaaaaaa--?

 

[Doc]

I agree. I recently completed those games, playing Ages first. I was rather disappointed when playing seasons. The story was much more...lacking. In Ages, we as a character encounter Veran so much more often and are trying to STOP her plans. Onox succeeds in moments so the only thing left to do was fix it. I had actually forgotten Onox's character design and was only reminded at the end, which is really disappointing because his sprite was Bad***. In Ages, we get characters like Nayru's friend, Ralph I believe. Ages was just so much more immersive and interesting.

 

[Salem]

I preferred Season better, it felt more fast paced to me.

 

[JamesBond007]

I disagree. In Ages, you have two version of Labrynna - Present & Past. Although this is similar to Light & Dark World from ALttP, you can explore a majority of LW before even going to the DW in that game. In OoA, it's impossible to explore the majority of the Present before going to the Past. This makes the game harder.

In Seasons, Holodrum is divided into Spring, Summer, Autumn and Winter, but unlike OoA, all four seasons takes place on the same map, not two. OoS also features Subrosia, but unlike OoA, map of the "underground" is much smaller. This makes the game easier.

 

[RegalBryant]

I prefer Ages because A. Easier to get Moosh, and B. The time changing mechanic changed the world much more than the seasons. The seasons just affected the environment, but the time change affected the people.

 

[Justac00lguy]

I have not had the chance to play Ages just yet so I'll probably repost once I have done so and come to a final conclusion.

Anyway, from what I've heard and observed, both games are quite similar but have subtle changes which differentiate them from one another. Obviously they differ in story (however brief it may be), characters, locations, dungeons, bosses etc. The main difference though, as far as I can tell, is that Ages seems to be more puzzle-focused while on the other hand, Seasons is more combat orientated.

Now I played through the latter game and throughly enjoyed it, I wouldn't say it's a truly amazing game but it's a what I define as a proper Zelda game. So a lot of the positives that I found in OoS will likely follow through on the the former game, but about the changes... Well I actually didn't think OoS was that heavy on combat or overly challenging in the same way - so maybe I'll find Ages lacking in that department. However, the proposal of more puzzles is intriguing and I thought Seasons was great in this department, so by all means if this site the case, then I'm all for it.

One common problem I see with Seasons is lack of story. This is very true there is almost no real plot line and it's absent from pretty much the entire game. I heard Ages has slightly more story? Well good if that's the case. One final thing would be the gameplay mechanics, I'm of course talking about overworld navigation and puzzle solving -- Seasons focuses on alternating, well, seasons and Ages focuses on time travel. However, I feel Seasons has the better variety as you can alternate through 4 different settings of the same overworld compared to the two in Ages.

---

Overall, even though I haven't played Ages, I feel both are going to rather similar so my ultimate opinion will probably be an equal one. However, I'm a big fan of puzzles so when I finally get a chance to play the either game then maybe it will just sneak ahead.

 

[Mudora]

I prefer Ages over Seasons myself. They both were great games, but I agree with the points that are mentioned in the OP. I feel that Ages did have a better story, better bosses, and I better overworld. I also love puzzles, which are more focused in Ages.

 

[SinkingBadges]

So far I'm this close to finishing Ages (last essence, trying to figure out how to reach the past graveyard) but finished Seasons several weeks ago. I appreciate Seasons' faster pace even if its way to introduce dungeons may have been a bit of a double-sided blade. It's nice to be just "find the dungeon and get to work" for the most part, although that might have made the dungeons look to me more like random caves that just so happened to be large enough to have their own maps. Not complaining, but I did get that feel a lot.

Ages feels like a nice change of pace after Seasons with its bigger focus on story, except that I didn't find Nayru as interesting a character or her scenes as fun as Din's, which makes it a shame that Din was barely seen in Seasons compared to how much Nayru is on-screen in Ages. Veran has also felt like a more interesting villain than Onox to me, being around more often and whatnot (I feel it's unfair to say more than that until I've seen her final battle so, eh... might add when I have something on that).

 

[Not Take Mirror]

I may be in the minority here but I slightly prefer Seasons although both were great games.

I agree that Ages did some things better than Seasons such as the story, the final villian, more original bosses, and the puzzles.

As to why I prefer Seasons
1) First, I felt the changing seasons was more original than time travel, considering time travel was already done in Ocarina of Time.
2) Seasons had Subrosia
3) Ages felt tedious in some parts such as the Crescent Island section with the Tokay. Seasons seemed to have less slower moving sections.
4) The real clincher though was that Seasons did not require you to play mini-games in order to proceed with the game. Ages had the Tuni Nut ceremony, the Tokay Toss, and worst of all the Goron dancing which you had to beat twice. I found it really frustrating because your rhythm had to be so exact and there were times I was sure I had it perfect and still didn't pass. After about 50 times trying and failing I finally got my sister to do it for me. I don't think beating a mini-game should ever be a requirement to beat the main quest of a game. It's fine if you want something optional like an upgrade or an extra heart piece.