The Legend of Zelda needs a new yardstick (Not Ocarina of Time) or maybe no yardstick at all

[Spiritual Mask Salesman]

It just seems like OoT is the standard to surpass which is why every Zelda game ends up being compared to OoT. Personally I would like every game to be unique in it's own way and compared to a game prior. But people are always looking to compare one thing to something else. For Zelda that thing everyone looks back to is OoT. It's just how it is.

 

[Guest_1]

It just seems like OoT is the standard to surpass which is why every Zelda game ends up being compared to OoT. Personally I would like every game to be unique in it's own way and compared to a game prior. But people are always looking to compare one thing to something else. For Zelda that thing everyone looks back to is OoT. It's just how it is.

There is no question that it's how it is right now, but we're saying that it isn't how it should be. When it comes to the profound impact OoT had on the series, there's no other Zelda game in the series that comes close. However, it's time to pass the torch on. I think comparing every game to OoT at this point is setting both the fans and the developers up for failure. OoT has set the bar far too high, and I think part of the way to combat that is if we, the fans, simply lower our expectations.

The Zelda fandom has in recent years become the epitome of the "unpleasable fanbase", and with good reason. We're so diverse and varied in our opinions and expectations that it seems like we send mixed signals to Aonuma and Nintendo. I would like the series to grow and evolve and not be chained to the past, and the first thing we need to do is not expect every Zelda game to be "the greatest game ever".

 

[CrimsonCavalier]

I don't necessarily agree with your entire post. I think that The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time is seen as a measuring stick or gold standard for a reason: it's one of—if not the—greatest game ever made.

On that note, it isn't healthy for us to expect every Zelda game to meet the lofty standards set by Ocarina. There will never be another Ocarina, and that is something we do have to accept. However, using Ocarina as a measuring stick is not a bad thing, in my opinion.

If we're talking about comparing new games to Ocarina in terms of story-telling/narrative, gameplay mechanics, music, etc., then I feel that this is acceptable. There are a few aspects of Ocarina that have not aged well, but narrative, gameplay mechanics, and music are not among them. The level of immersion that was created by that game is something that should be replicated.

If we're talking about mimicking Ocarina, on the other hand, in all gameplay elements, then I think that's when we start getting into trouble. Nintendo shouldn't be trying to remake the game. I think that what Nintendo should be doing is attempting to achieve some sort of check-list in terms of what makes a good game, and trying to reach the lofty standards set by Ocarina, but not by trying to copy the formula set by the game. There's a difference between those two. And I think @Deus hit the nail on the head: The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess did it nicely. It captured a lot of what made Ocarina great, but didn't actually try to replicate the formula.

Naturally, a lot of what went into Twilight was also in Ocarina, but that's simply because Ocarina is good game design. Though in my opinion, it can't be said that Twilight is a better game than Ocarina, it was still probably the next best installment.

If Zelda NX completely breaks away from the Ocarina formula, I feel, it will only be good for the series.

...but we have got to get Aonuma and Miyamoto waaaay back on the backseat. Love the folks for their dedication and creation of this god tier series, but they are really eating at its ability to flourish.

I agree completely with this. I feel that Aonuma, and especially Miyamoto, are both great game creators, but I feel that they're too stuck in their ways. On the other hand, the first time that neither Aonuma nor Miyamoto directed a Zelda game, we got Skyward Sword, so there's an argument for keeping them around.

There is no question that it's how it is right now, but we're saying that it isn't how it should be. When it comes to the profound impact OoT had on the series, there's no other Zelda game in the series that comes close. However, it's time to pass the torch on. I think comparing every game to OoT at this point is setting both the fans and the developers up for failure. OoT has set the bar far too high, and I think part of the way to combat that is if we, the fans, simply lower our expectations.

The Zelda fandom has in recent years become the epitome of the "unpleasable fanbase", and with good reason. We're so diverse and varied in our opinions and expectations that it seems like we send mixed signals to Aonuma and Nintendo. I would like the series to grow and evolve and not be chained to the past, and the first thing we need to do is not expect every Zelda game to be "the greatest game ever".

True enough. There is always a high expectation when it comes to Zelda games. However, I feel that our expectations have been artificially heightened because of what Zelda is. It's very much like what happened with Star Wars. When Episode VII was announced, I made it a point to not watch any previews or learn anything about the movie. I wanted to have zero expectations when I eventually went to go see the movie.

As such, I actually enjoyed it immensely. I feel that had I had some sort of exposure to any previews, teasers, articles, or anything of that nature, my experience would have been different. I still think Disney is going to ruin Star Wars (they ruin everything they touch [see: Marvel]), but as of right now, I am still pleased.

I think that's the sort of thing we need to do with Zelda. I think Nintendo need to not release as much information, and then, a few months before launch, start throwing television and internet ads at us. Then, we'll all have the same expectations: none.

 

[the8thark]

I don't necessarily agree with your entire post. I think that The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time is seen as a measuring stick or gold standard for a reason: it's one of—if not the—greatest game ever made.

On that note, it isn't healthy for us to expect every Zelda game to meet the lofty standards set by Ocarina. There will never be another Ocarina, and that is something we do have to accept. However, using Ocarina as a measuring stick is not a bad thing, in my opinion.

I am not talking about how good a game Ocarina was. Ocarina was a masterpiece of it's time. That fact is totally off topic to my original point here. My point is that nothing, no matter how good it was should be the yardstick forever. In 50 years time we should not still be thinking of new Zelda games in terms of making the player playing the new Zelda game like others did when they first played Ocarina. There has to be a time when enough is enough. Ocarina was great but it's history now. Zelda developers should be looking to more modern inspiration for their Zelda games, not always Ocarina.

There is a saying that your last movie/game/album/whatever created should be your best work. And most of the time it is. For Zelda games, with a few exceptions that is the case. Sure all the games had individual flaws, but each game improved on the past games and did things differently, and brought new depth to the series. Not every game will be perfect. That's the risk you take. But looking at the recent past for inspiration and not the ancient past (decades ago) is also a good thing.

 

[CrimsonCavalier]

I am not talking about how good a game Ocarina was. Ocarina was a masterpiece of it's time. That fact is totally off topic to my original point here. My point is that nothing, no matter how good it was should be the yardstick forever. In 50 years time we should not still be thinking of new Zelda games in terms of making the player playing the new Zelda game like others did when they first played Ocarina. There has to be a time when enough is enough. Ocarina was great but it's history now. Zelda developers should be looking to more modern inspiration for their Zelda games, not always Ocarina.

There is a saying that your last movie/game/album/whatever created should be your best work. And most of the time it is. For Zelda games, with a few exceptions that is the case. Sure all the games had individual flaws, but each game improved on the past games and did things differently, and brought new depth to the series. Not every game will be perfect. That's the risk you take. But looking at the recent past for inspiration and not the ancient past (decades ago) is also a good thing.

I agree with that point. I think we shouldn't be looking at Ocarina in terms of what a game should remind us of when we play it. Nor should developers look to emulate the formula. But I think we should be looking at it in terms of trying to reach the same standards of immersion, gameplay mechanics, music, etc..

I think for the most part Ocarina aged fairly well, so it's not a surprise it's still being used as a measuring stick. If it hadn't aged well, that would be different. Like, Metroid didn't age well. That's why no one talks about it. But Super Metroid aged very well, and so games like Metroid: Zero Mission and Metroid Fusion emulated the formula.

 

[Zonda]

Everybody I know uses either MM or WW as a benchmark for the series tbh.

 

[Mipha]

Everybody I know uses either MM or WW as a benchmark for the series tbh.

I use TP

 

[DeactivatedUser2]

Honestly, if we're going to go by a 3D Zelda game as the yardstick, it would be either MM or WW, as they represent the series formula the best.

 

[Zonda]

I use TP

Solid title ay fam

 

[the8thark]

I agree with that point. I think we shouldn't be looking at Ocarina in terms of what a game should remind us of when we play it. Nor should developers look to emulate the formula. But I think we should be looking at it in terms of trying to reach the same standards of immersion, gameplay mechanics, music, etc..

I think for the most part Ocarina aged fairly well, so it's not a surprise it's still being used as a measuring stick. If it hadn't aged well, that would be different. Like, Metroid didn't age well. That's why no one talks about it. But Super Metroid aged very well, and so games like Metroid: Zero Mission and Metroid Fusion emulated the formula.

I agree with you 100%.
OOT has aged in parts (mainly graphics and some gameplay elements). But apart from that OOT plays well even today. The saving grace of OOT surprisingly is Navi. Hving the lock on camera and other camera modes makes OOT enjoyable today. SM64 on the other hand plays well still but the camera modes are fixed and after being used to newer 360 degree torating cameras, the limited fixed camera angles the game has feels limited to the point of hurting the experience. DK64 has the same problem. OOT was the first N64 game to work a way wround the camera angle issue, a while before 360 degree free rotating cameras were invented for games.

Everybody I know uses either MM or WW as a benchmark for the series tbh.

I use Skyward Sword . . . or whatever Zelda game is the most recent. This does mean my personal Zelda yardstick is forever chamging to say with the latest Zelda game.

 

[Soul]

A problem I see with only using the newest game as the yardstick is that it makes it easy to forget the series' roots. On that note, Zelda 1 should be the yardstick. It's what invented the series after all, and if you stray too far from what made that game special, you might lose what Zelda is about in the process.

 

[CrimsonCavalier]

A problem I see with only using the newest game as the yardstick is that it makes it easy to forget the series' roots. On that note, Zelda 1 should be the yardstick. It's what invented the series after all, and if you stray too far from what made that game special, you might lose what Zelda is about in the process.

As true as that is, many people (myself included) feel that the recipe was perfected with Ocarina. What the Original did, Ocarina did, but better. The same feeling of adventure, but on a much grander scale. In many ways, I feel A Link to the Past also took what made the Original good and expanded upon it.

On that same note, however, there are elements from the Original that never made it past that first installment, and I think some of them need to make a come back.

 

[AncientPoe]

There will never be another Ocarina, and that is something we do have to accept.

Good sir or madam, you are incorrect.

In every game made, every console generation, there will always be the opportunity to make a game as pivotal as Ocarina of Time. In fact, now that most of gaming seems to have devolved into a samey slog of remakes, remasters, and sequel numbers approaching or exceeding 5, the gaming world is truly ripe for such innovation.

I believe the spirit of Aonuma's quote is that they intend for this game to break ground and be very unique in its execution in much the same way that Ocarina of Time was, not that it will simply be like that game. I mean obviously that won't be easy, since OoT came out in the heyday of 3D gaming, it was well poised to set the bar on how half of gaming's genres would be constructed. I don't know if that particular niche is open nowadays, but I am confident Nintendo will find something to innovate on. The last few (non-remake) games have been very educational for the Zelda dev teams, some serving as examples of what to do and some serving as examples of what not to do. If there's a Zelda game to finally "get it right" then I think Zelda U has a very good chance of being the one to do it.

now if only they'd release the damn thing so we can know for sure.

 

[Terminalprp]

Each Zelda is its own snowflake, amazing in its own unique way...



... except Phantom Hourglass

 

[zerudanodensetsu]

Hey, Phantom Hourglass was fun... on the first playthrough.
It does get repetitive, so I see what you mean :p