*Without reading the surely heated replies, my own two Lincolns in regard to what was said above:*
I like Ocarina of Time a lot. I always have a lot of fun playing it and I can see why it has so many ardent fanboys/fangirls who claim it as the bestest game evar! It was groundbreaking and formed a lot of what came afterwards in the series. That said, coming from someone who first played the older games (LoZ/AoL/ALTTP) and then played Twilight Princess before hitting Ocarina, I can see weaknesses in the game. I'm pretty forgiving of them, though - since I figure "the technology of the time was a certain way/ the 3D style was new/the original cartridge could only hold so much data." I think OoT was doing a lot of finding its feet, so I find myself forgiving a lot that I might not be so forgiving of in a current game.
As for the points given:
1. Weak Narrative - I would say that you have a point. I think it had a pretty strong narrative given games of the time, but standing up to the kind of very story-heavy games that gaming companies are trying to give the world now, it's not really on par with the whole "fleshed out as a novel" thing. The story of OoT also hits just about very High Fantasy/Fairy Tale cliche there is. If it were a novel, OoT would probably be seen by most literary critics as a bad novel, even as it's a good game. Even within the series, later titles improved on the story, I think. Majora's Mask improved on NPC characterization and themes... it tried to make you care a little more about what happened to the people of the world you were trying to save. Twilight Princess had an epic story of a betrayed people and two torn kingdoms. Skyward Sword had a great myth of ancient lands and ancient gods. Now, they still aren't exactly epic novels, being that Nintendo series tend to be more about the gameplay and the player discovering things, but I think there has been improvement in narrative since OoT. Some see this as good, some as bad... depends upon how story-heavy you like your games.
Sometimes, a simple story is best. Take my very favorite game - a Sony title. Shadow of the Colossus. You really couldn't get more simple than that game's story. Your character is trying to resurrect a dead girl by slaying sixteen giants in a ritual for a death god/demon. No NPCs to interact with, just you and your horse in vast, empty land, fighting boss-monsters. Its sister-game, ICO, is similiar - your character is a little boy who has been left in a ruined castle as a human sacrifice to the evil queen and her dark spirits and you meet a strange girl there - the objective is to solve architectural puzzles and get out of the castle. Very simple stories that invite the player to mentally add to them, yet both games, with their stark, stripped-bare stories that are arguably even simpler than that of OoT consistently make "Videogames can be High Art" lists. A simplistic story isn't bad - it's all in how it is executed.
2. - Basic Gameplay. I don't know. I think it depends upon what you're looking for in a game. I don't mind the fairly straightforward gameplay of Zelda titles. I suppose after you've played a particular game many times, the things that were meant to surprise you just don't anymore, which is why you might want to reach for a different game / different series every once in a while. Maybe I just don't have much of a problem with this. Another favorite of mine is We *Heart* Katamari and you don't get gameplay simpler than "roll a big ball around and collect stuff."
3. - Music. I just don't really compare early Zelda music to latter titles. I do think they've really improved. The only exception to this is maybe the Dark World Score from ALTTP... I like hearing remakes of it in orchestration, because even the Midi version of it is awesome. That's just a bit of genius that Nintendo hit upon early-on.
4. - Empty Field. I can both agree and disagree... mixed feelings on this. On one hand, I mentioned my favorite game, Shadow of the Colosuss. It takes place in NOTHING BUT "empty-field." However, the setting it takes place in is HUGE. OoT's field is... small. Hyrule is a puny kingdom in that era. I've never like that about OoT. Even the 2D games beat it out on that aspect. LoZ and AoL had lots of overland and varied country. AoL had lots of towns. I forgive OoT because of the "new technology and limited storage space" aspect, but am glad that Twilight Princess tried to improve upon Hyrule Field by giving it more country and an illusion of greater depth. Wind Waker, too, has an awesome overworld - lots of little islands to explore. Nintendo has definitely improved on the aspects of field and space since OoT, in my book.
5. - Rupees. I actually found them more useless in Twilight Princess and Phantom Hourglass. It was like they were giving money away. TP had the magic armor, which I'd use money for when doing the Cave of Ordeals to save on potions (and I found it hilarious to have Link wear it when almost out while riding Epona, only to get bucked off HARD when the money ran out)! But, still... it seems like most if not all Zelda games have "Money for Nothin' and your Cuccoos for Free." I don't really find it any more annoying in OoT than I do in any other Zelda title.