• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Seasons or Ages?

Seasons or Ages

  • Seasons

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Ages

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Haven't played them both

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • One sucks worse than the other

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • They're both equally amazing

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters


Zelda Dungeon's Critic
Jan 13, 2009
I don't want to say.
I'll have to go wit ages simply because it had a lot of well done puzzle elements. Though seasons challenged me when it came to my button pounding skills, I prefer to be stumped in a situation because of my mind not being in the right place rather than just lacking button skills.
I also preferred Ages for the much more developed story that it had and that actually could be attributed to an interesting history for Seasons.

Seasons was actually meant to start out as a remake of the original legend of Zelda (which was evident in the first two dungeons) but as the game progress moved on the game became a trilogy that eventually became two games. So this would sort of explain why Seasons had a weaker plot than Ages.


May 24, 2009
Paranaque City, Metro Manila, Philippines
I choose both. Seeing them separately is not right. I treat games as One BIG game.

Seasons had the remake of the Original Loz. It had the works, the same map structure with a major difference in the story line and characters. Though the Dungeons are the same, it is a game of new adventure and nostalgic gameplay. What makes Seasons a good game is all the powerful creatures that roam about, from the golden monsters to the incredibly hard bosses. It's a game of strengths and quick thinking.

Ages on the other hand, is a game of wits and strategy. The story was in a completely different land, away from Holdrum. It has a past and a rich story. One can find themselves immersed in the story line and the unique puzzles around the map. People say Ages is the most abundant game when it comes into puzzles. I say this is true, the map had a specific path, and you must explore and think carefully as you trudge on. Though the water dungeon was a killer on the brains, it had a nostalgic feeling of OoT's water temple.

So that's the reason I treat both games as one.


Ages -- I liked the system a lot better, and Nayru just holds a special place in my heart! :)
I remember being younger and wishing I could be her, hahaha. I'm replaying the game right now and it's brought back so many great memories! <3


Jan 31, 2008
Amherst, MA
Didn't I already answer this one?
Oracle of Ages all the way. It was the first of the two that I played, and it was amazing. Oracle of Seasons wasn't bad, but it wasn't anywhere near better than Ages. I absolutely loved how Ages required quite a level of thinking, too. It was more of a game where you really had to think, there were a lot of puzzles to it. In fact, one of the dungeons was like one big puzzle with how many times you had to travel through time, and Jabu Jabu was more of a puzzle as well. Seasons was a great game, but I believe that Ages set a huge example for what a Zelda game should be like. A challenging game with plenty of skill-testing puzzles.
Oct 18, 2008
In my coffin
I personally like Oracle Of Ages more then Seasons. I feel that it has a better story then Seasons. It's puzzles are alot harder then OOS. Some parts of the game really made me want to tear my hair out(dancing Goron minigame). I felt that Veran is a intersting villain then Onox.
Last edited:


Flat The Court Composer
Aug 18, 2010
Ages rules. Way Better In my mind because I prefer music rather than a staff


Jan 31, 2010
a place of settlement, activity, or residence.
I liked Ages better for the following reasons:

1. I enjoy a temporal theme more than a seasonal theme.
2. Seasons was far too easy compared to Ages.
3. Ages seemed to have a deeper storyline.

However, I did enjoy Seasons. It was especially interesting in the later levels, and a few parts that were exciting.

Alex Arbiter

That Random Guy
Aug 4, 2010
Both, to me a nice throw back to the eight-bit styled Zelda game was nice n seasons. With the addition of ages it felt to me more challenging and was quite enjoyable for the most part


I am a Person of Interest
Jul 12, 2010
Ganon's Tower
They are both worth it. They are very original to me, and OoA is my favorite handheld game so far. The time travel aspect of the game was far better than that of OoT.


Ages definitely. Better story line, good bosses, and a great ending. Loved seasons too, but ages had a more "sense" to it.:)


Apr 18, 2010
Definitely Oracle of Ages.

It has better puzzles, better gameplay and story, in my opinion. Some puzzles were very hard, yet really fun to solve and gave me the satisfactory feeling when I sholved them. Gameplay wasn't much different from OoS, but I feel like it's better. Traveling through time is awesome. The people, the trees and the environment in the future were all effected by what Link did in the past. That is really cool. Also, the sidequests in OoA were a little better than the ones in OoS. I enjoyed all of them (save for the seed-shooting one).

OoA's story was more in-depth imo. The people's lives were more detailed. They actually gave NPCs their own characters and habits (I really liked Ralph for some reasons). Some are funny, some are sad, some are evil, etc... =D


Quid est veritas, Claudia
Feb 9, 2010
I honestly did not like Ages and it's probably my least favorite Zelda game to date. It was good but one complaint, it was WAY too hard. Every dungeon in it was unfairly difficult. Especially Jabu-Jabu's Belly, and Mermaid's Cave :( And Crown Dungeon.

Seasons on the other hand, I loved the concept of changing seasons, and hope that Nintendo does it again. Seasons was unique in a way like MM was, becuase it had something that no other Zelda game had. It also was a little challenging, but not like Ages. The final boss was EPIC and hard.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom