Ocarina of Time... what do you think of this game 24 years later?

[Prowler]

Ocarina of Time was the first ever 3D Zelda game and one of the most iconic games for the Nintendo 64. Hell, one of the most iconic games from its generation.

I was 8 when I first played it. Before that my only experience with Zelda had been the original NES game. I didn't even get to play A Link to the Past until 2001 or so. So it was quite a jump for me to go from NES Zelda to Ocarina Zelda.

Ocarina of Time was a whole new experience for me at the time. Since I didn't grow up playing RPG games, I hadn't played any plot heavy games until then. Games like TMNT, Mega Man, Mario, Sonic, Tetris and DKC weren't exactly plot heavy. I mostly grew up playing platformers. And hell, even the original Zelda had pretty much no plot.

Ocarina was the first 3D action adventure game I played. Also the first game that had properly developed NPCs that made me empathise with them.

I definitely felt gaming had peaked with Ocarina at the time. It seemed so massive and epic at the time and like I truly was trying to save the world and myy friends from evil.

For years I considered Ocarina the GOAT game. Until I replayed it around 2013 or so and noticed it had not aged that well. I still liked it but no longer loved it. Nor did I bother getting all the gold skultullas.

In 2017 I finally bought the 3DS remaster of the game and my love for the game sort of rekindled a bit... but still nowhere close to what I felt in 1998. Plus I beat the game in like 2 weeks which is crazy considering I spent coj tless hours on that game back in the 90s. When did Ocarina become such a small game?? Took me less than 30 hours to beat it!

Ocarina will always hold a special place in my heart like many other games from its time do, but just like them, it clearly aged and I'm aware it's no longer great and let alone cutting edge. I used to love Mario 64, Star Fox 64 and Banjo-Kazooie as well. I think Banjo aged the best out of those. But it still isn't as magical as it was back then.

Ocarina and its world and cast of characters will forever be something I like to reminisce about. Saria will always be Links best friend to me.

What about you? Thoughts?

[Leo656]

It was one of the first heavily story-based games I'd played, as well, although I did play "Link to the Past" shortly before that, like a few weeks before Ocarina came out. I'd played the first two NES Zelda games in the past but it was the one-two punch of the SNES and N64 games that solidified me as a fan of the series. After I beat them, I went back and fully dove into the NES games again, finally beating the first game which I'd never managed to do as a kid.

It definitely was of epic scale for its time. I wasn't even really a "casual fan" of the series, but the massive multi-page EGM cover story previewing Ocarina got me so interested that I went and pre-ordered it right away. Just reading about all the different things you could do, it sounded like the most amazing game ever made. And it probably was, up to that point.

I've beaten it a few times, but I haven't played it for a few years honestly. And I admit that it's no longer as "epic" as it felt back then, but that's hardly the game's fault considering how many games like Elder Scrolls and even the rest of the Zelda games since have completely eclipsed it in scope and scale. Things evolve, that's what happens.

I don't often get hung up on how games have aged. Obviously I notice, but I generally still feel the same sense of fun and wonder I did as a kid because I still have very vivid memories of playing them then, and all the old feelings tend to come flooding back. Much of it feels "quaint" nowadays, but I never fail to remember how ahead of the curve it was at the time.

I still remember what a revelation the Z-targeting was, for example. It seems like such a little thing but it completely changed the way games would be played forevermore, like Mario 64's adjustable camera.

It's smaller than it felt at the time and the graphics are obviously of their time. But otherwise it's still pretty great to me, and those other things don't even really bother me much anyway.

I did know a few people who hated it when it came out, though. As I recall, they weren't fans of the inventory system, for some reason. I don't really remember, their complaints seemed really bizarre even at the time. Like, there'd be a bunch of us sitting in the cafeteria talking about playing it, and how awesome it was... but there'd always be the one kid who was like, "I thought it sucked, they ruined Zelda." :lol: I remember them giving reasons, but they didn't make any sense and so I don't even really remember them at all. We'd all just be like, "...Okay, weirdo" and go back to our conversation.

[Mad Dog McMutt]

It is still my 2nd favorite game of all time right under Final Fantasy 7. Ocarina of Time is a masterpiece and I play it at least once every 2 years.

[Prowler]

In some ways, your experience was similar to mine.

The Z targeting and the automatic jumps really made the game better. Without them it would probably be a mess to play.

I remember being shocked Sheik was Zelda all along. But I was 8. Had I been some years older I would have predicted that from the very first time I met the guy.

1998 was a pretty strong year for games though. Didn't FF7 come out around the same time as Ocarina as well? But I didn't have a PS1 so I couldn't compare both games.

I don't remember anyone I knew who had the N64 back then hating the game. I first began seeing several people online claiming OOT was overrated around the late 2000s and early 2010s. That was when Twillight Princess was considered the best 3d Zelda game to date and people had begun feeling nostalgia for Wind Waker.

Well I'm yet to play TP, but I'm not big on WW tbh. Even if graphically and mechanically is better than OOT nowadays I still find OOT much more fun.

A lot of people also prefer Majora's Mask to OOT nowadays but I dunno. I liked Majora and all, but I never felt the same connection to it as I did to OOT. I wouldn't say it disappointed me, but it just feels so different from other 3d Zelda games with its time limit mechanic that it makes it frustrating at times.

BOTW really impressed me. Made me feel like I was playing a huge epic game as well even if the plot is broken down into some memory videos scattered across the world map in random order. But it definitely felt like the next step in Zelda games kinda like OOT did back in the day.

[Prowler]

It is still my 2nd favorite game of all time right under Final Fantasy 7. Ocarina of Time is a masterpiece and I play it at least once every 2 years.

Sad to say, it's no longer in my personal top 10. Perhaps not even in my top 20.

I'd feel more compelled to play it every 2 years or so if it wasn't for the awful dungeon that Jabu Jabu is. I really don't want to go through that horrendous dungeon again...

[Original TMNT Cartoon Fan]

1998 was a pretty strong year for games though. Didn't FF7 come out around the same time as Ocarina as well? But I didn't have a PS1 so I couldn't compare both games.

Video game release dates:

Final Fantasy VII
Japan: 31 January 1997
North America: 7 September 1997
United Kingdom: 14 November 1997
Continental Europe: 17 November 1997

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
Japan: 21 November 1998
North America: 23 November 1998
Europe: 11 December 1998
Australasia: 18 December 1998

[Prowler]

Video game release dates:

Final Fantasy VII
Japan: 31 January 1997
North America: 7 September 1997
United Kingdom: 14 November 1997
Continental Europe: 17 November 1997

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
Japan: 21 November 1998
North America: 23 November 1998
Europe: 11 December 1998
Australasia: 18 December 1998

You could have just simply said FFVII came out in 1997. Instead, you copy and pasted dates from Wikipedia as always.

[neatoman]

I've played this game more as an adult than as a kid, I don't even think I finished it as a kid. Not sure why, maybe I just found it less interesting as a kid?

[Leo656]

Man, FF7 was another life-changing game for me. I think I messed with Super Mario RPG first, but otherwise I'd never messed with RPGs at all but when I saw my friend playing FF7 I was totally blown away. He'd just gotten a PS1 and didn't even have a memory card yet, so he couldn't even save it, he just kept playing the first part of the game over and over for a few days without saving it until he could finally get a memory card. :lol:

That game and WCW vs. The World were the entire reason I wanted a PS1 at all. I still remember all the days I came home from school and immediately fired up FF7, then played for hours until like 3am. The graphics (cutscenes especially) blew me away and the gameplay was addicting as hell. After that, I was never exactly what you'd call a "big" RPG guy, but I definitely started playing a ton more of them.

I think my non-wrestling game Top 4 of the late 90s year-by-year would be Super Mario 64, Final Fantasy VII, Ocarina of Time, and Metal Gear Solid. There were other games I spent more time with, mostly the N64 wrestling games, but setting that genre aside each one of those I've listed were especially impactful and life-changing. The top "Holy SH*T, I've never seen anything like this before!" games, for me, of that specific period.

I still remember little things, like what clothes I'd have been wearing when I was playing those games, what time of year I was apt to play each of them (Super Mario 64 was my annual Christmas Break game of choice for many years), which CDs I'd be listening to when I wasn't in the mood to listen to a game's soundtrack while playing... stuff like that. To this day, whenever I hear "Juke Joint Jezebel" by KMFDM, for at least a second or two my brain immediately thinks, "FF7 Boss Fight".

Good times. Great memories.

[neatoman]

Speaking FFVII, I didn't finish that one until I got it for the Switch, but for that one I have a more concrete answer for why.
The Switch version has a fast forward function as well as an auto battle function.
Can you really blame me though? It takes forever to complete, especially when you have to account for loading times on the PS1.

[Prowler]

The N64 was very special to me back in 1996-2001.

Ocarina was definitely the cream of the crop to me but I also loved Super Mario 64, Banjo-Kazooie, Blast Corps, Star Fox 64, Diddy Kong Racing, GoldenEye, Mario Party 2, Mario Kart 64 and F-Zero X.

I think Banjo aged significantly better than Mario since it came out a few years later and thus had more refined mechanics. In Super Mario 64 you feel like you're constantly walking on ice. You jump and land on a platform... and you have to move the joystick quickly as you land to avoid Mario walking 5 steps forward and falling off the platform. That's frustrating. Banjo doesn't have that problem.

Star Fox has good mechanics still but rails on shooters is a very outdated type of game nowadays which makes SF64 feel like a very short game from the arcade era.

F-Zero X besides the graphics, has aged pretty well imo. The controls are still good.

Mario Kart 64 is fine and all but seems rather bland compared to other MK games that came out since then.

Diddy Kong Racing aged pretty well because an overworld and adventure like mode in a racing game isn't a concept that's ever been used since then. I'm surprised Mario Kart hasn't tried something similar yet.

The others I haven't played in like 20 years. So I can't say how well they've aged.

Other games I liked such as Yoshi's Story aged OK because it's a 2D game. It was always going to age fine.

I think the Mario Golf and Tennis entries for the console still are good games nowadays but you'd honestly have more fun with the more recent ones which have improved graphics and mechanics.

As for Final Fantasy, I didn't grow up playing RPGs on the SNES and then my brother didn't get us a PS1 therefore I missed out on the prime years of the franchise.

The only FF game I've played to this day so far was X. I liked it but there's others that are generally considered better.

7, 8 and 9 are available for the Switch for cheap but I'm not sure they aged well enough for me to pull the trigger on them.

And yes I'll play 6 someday too.

[Leo656]

Actually neatoman, when I made it a point to finally complete Final Fantasy VII back in 2019 or whenever, I was actually very shocked at how short it actually is. At least compared to how I remembered it. I mean, I tend to play games in 8-10 hour blocks almost every day, anyway, at least when I have time.

But the whole reason I never finished it, despite taking multiple tries, was because I'd inevitably hit that Chocobo breeding part, and I always got frustrated trying to breed a Gold one, and then I'd get distracted. This time, I got a Gold Chocobo very quickly, and that alone removed a few hours of repetitive gameplay.

Then again, I didn't bother going after the super-hard Weapons Bosses either, and that probably took a few hours off, too. I imagine had I bothered with that, the game would have taken me a lot longer to finish. I just personally really suck at those so I generally avoid them.

Anyway, yeah, it's not actually THAT long. But it did feel like it back in the day. As it is it took me maybe a week of playtime to finish it, which for me is practically nothing. That includes several days where I played after work and thus only had like 4 hours or so to put in.

As for RPGs in general, oh man did I love Super Mario RPG and FF7, to the point where since then I've played quite a few, but only finished a couple. I've beaten Final Fantasy I and II, FF7, Super Mario RPG, all the Paper Mario games pre-Wii U, Dragon Quest/Warrior for NES, Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic I and II, and I'm sure there's a few I'm forgetting. But I've played a lot that I've gotten distracted from and never finished, such as Final Fantasy X, Blue Dragon, Elder Scrolls: Morrowind, Lunar: Silver Star Story Complete, and a ton more. I also own a TON that I've never played but fully intend to One Day.

I really love RPGs of all kinds, now, and it's all thanks to Super Mario RPG and FF7. Turn-based or "action" style, JRPG or otherwise, I just really love them. Not my favorite type of gameplay but they're just so f*cking addictive, and occasionally immersive too. Like, I always say that KOTOR is low-key the Very Best Thing about the entire Star Wars franchise, and I actually do believe that. Nothing else of the brand that I've experienced ever gave me so much joy while also completely making me feel like I'm living in that universe. You can do things ANY way you want to and it's just so goddamn immersive and fun, even if it's a little stiff nowadays.

So glad I let my buddy talk me into renting Super Mario RPG (same buddy I watched play FF7) once upon a time. I'd never given a single sh*t about RPGs - they were totally "for nerds" before then - but ever since then I've never looked back. FF7 is the game that made RPGs "cool" for everyone, but anyone who played Super Mario RPG knows that game was its own revelation, even if it wasn't as widely celebrated.

And of course Final Fantasy II and III (or correctly, IV and VI) and Secret of Mana were played and adored by many SNES owners, but they weren't actually all THAT popular in America if we're being totally honest. It was still considered "Nerd Sh*t". People can take shots at the cutscene graphics in FF7 for not having aged incredibly well, but we gotta be real, those cutscene graphics were what blew people away enough to make them play a "nerd game". The same kids who used to make fun of the kids playing FFII on SNES were the ones popping FF7 into their PS1. That's huge, any way you look at it. People who couldn't even tell you what an RPG was, were now saying one of them was their new all-time favorite game.

Pretty wild, man.

[neatoman]

Sure, it's probably shorter than it feels, it's just that being able to play the game at triple speed helps with grinding and other tedious bits. They wouldn't have included that feature if the game didn't tend to feel pretty sluggish.

There are definitely games where it comes across like there is a lot of it than there really is because of various factors. If you play MGS1 (or the GameCube remake that I'm more familiar with I guess) as intended, it will take you a very long time to complete. But if you skip over the cut scenes and go through the stealth as fast as possible, it won't be very long at all, almost surprising how little gameplay there actually is.

Then there is Wind Waker, which is a pretty tedious game in it's original form, which is why the Wii U edition added an optional fast sail and drastically reduced the fetch quest towards the end.
And this might be blasphemy to some, but I wish Half-Life 2 was updated so you could skip the segments where characters just talk. The commitment to never having any real cutscenes worked fine in HL1 but in HL2 it just fails miserably, I don't care about listening to Mossman and Alyx bicker everytime I play the game.

[Leo656]

WHY would a person ever skip the cutscenes in a MGS game?!

I openly admit that especially as the series went on they got pretty overwhelming but to a degree it's just part of what that series is.

It's like going on the bumper cars and refusing to crash into anyone. Why are we even here, then? WHY ARE WE EVEN HERE?!?!

Wind Waker honestly never bothered me either. I can see how it would bother some but it didn't bother me.

[neatoman]

WHY would a person ever skip the cutscenes in a MGS game?!

To see how much actual gameplay there is. It's the same reason I tried playing Bioshock with the color turned off or System Shock 2 with a controller, I am just curious like that.

[Leo656]

I guess. I sure couldn't do it.

[Andrew NDB]

Honestly it was just OK to me. Memorable, but not transformative. But I came late to the party in playing it.

[Mad Dog McMutt]

[QUOTE=Prowler;1929651]

As for Final Fantasy, I didn't grow up playing RPGs on the SNES and then my brother didn't get us a PS1 therefore I missed out on the prime years of the franchise.

The only FF game I've played to this day so far was X. I liked it but there's others that are generally considered better.

7, 8 and 9 are available for the Switch for cheap but I'm not sure they aged well enough for me to pull the trigger on them.

You are really missing out by not playing 7. Sure the graphics look dated, but everything else is superb. In my opinion it has the best storyline out of any game I have ever played. Each song they use is so appropriate for each scene. The characters are likeable (which they aren't in FinalFantasy 8 ) and the battle mechanics are simple and satisfying. Final Fantasy 6 is good as well, but FF7 blows everything else away. I realized I messed up with this whole quote thing.

[Andrew NDB]

7, 8 and 9 are available for the Switch for cheap but I'm not sure they aged well enough for me to pull the trigger on them.

There is remastered versions of 8 and 9 on Playstation Network. Probably elsewhere, too.

[Mad Dog McMutt]

There is remastered versions of 8 and 9 on Playstation Network. Probably elsewhere, too.

That was actually a quote of what the other guy said, but I accidently deleted the last part of the quote command. I actually own Ff 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 all for the ps 1. I have collected hundreds of old school games throughout the years. I have beaten at least 95 percent of them.

[Prowler]

I don't have any modern Sony consoles...

Anyway, the remastered versions of FFVIII and FFIX are available on the Switch. VII's isn't. It's just the original ported.

Anyway the 3 of them are sold cheaply on the Nintendo eshop and even cheaper when they're on sale. It's only a matter of time until I finally get them.

Itndirs seem like 7 gets all the love form the PS1 FF games. Okay, 8 seems to get some appreciation as well but 9 seems to get rarely talked about.

I feel like the most talked FF games after 7 are 6 and 10. But maybe that's just my impression.

[Leo656]

To me, it always felt like Final Fantasy IX got lost in the shuffle partly because they went back to an "old school" JRPG aesthetic after VII and VIII were both much more futuristic.

It got great reviews, but not a lot of press or advertising, and I'd be shocked if it sold all that well compared to its predecessors. I remember that it was a divisive choice of aesthetic when it came out; some people found it quaint, others just felt like it was a step backwards.

I still need to get around to that one, too.

[Mad Dog McMutt]

The biggest gripe about FF9 that I have is that abilities come from weapons and the best weapons are usually stolen from boss battles. So every boss battle was just me attempting to steal then missing over and over while the boss attacks and I'm trying not to kill it. I remember the boss battles taking forever because of this. The rest of the game was ok.

[Prowler]

I see. I guess that explains it.

When did Final Fantasy began losing steam BTW? It seems like people generally haven't cared as much about the latest ones and would rather play remakes and remasters of 90s ones and X.

I mean I'm sure they still sell very well, but the franchise no longer is taking the world by storm like it did back in the PS1 era, I feel. Nintendo is no longer suffering for not having modern day Final Fantasy games on their systems.

I can't tel you anything about the series after X. And that was the first game of the series for the PS2! It's about 20 years at this point.

[Andrew NDB]

I see. I guess that explains it.

When did Final Fantasy began losing steam BTW? It seems like people generally haven't cared as much about the latest ones and would rather play remakes and remasters of 90s ones and X.

Ironically, right there. Final Fantasy X. That's when they largely abandoned open world with tons of sidequests and this and that. You know, the ability to hop in an airship and pilot it around a map, going wherever you want (poof, gone). FFX is when "go down a tight corridor from one point A to point B, then do it again" with big expensive FMV stuff became the norm with FF, and that's when it died a little bit. And boy did FF XIII and FF XV double-down on that. FF XV is even worse in that it teases you with open world in your face but it is just the illusion of that.

Fortunately FFX's story was pretty neat, so there's that. But FF definitely stopped being a thing you could lose yourself in exploring right then and there and became music videos you only somewhat control. It's really unfortunate. Since FF7 you can see Square itching to make the Final Fantasy series more and more like an interactive anime movie or music video, which as a fan of FF 1-6, couldn't be further from the direction I'd prefer to see them go. Square finally had their dream come true with FF XV and nobody showed up for it. FF XVI looks like more of the same, just with a Game of Thrones flavor and maybe the emo dialed back a smidge.

[Prowler]

Ironically, right there. Final Fantasy X. That's when they largely abandoned open world with tons of sidequests and this and that. You know, the ability to hop in an airship and pilot it around a map, going wherever you want (poof, gone). FFX is when "go down a tight corridor from one point A to point B, then do it again" with big expensive FMV stuff became the norm with FF, and that's when it died a little bit. And boy did FF XIII and FF XV double-down on that. FF XV is even worse in that it teases you with open world in your face but it is just the illusion of that.

Fortunately FFX's story was pretty neat, so there's that. But FF definitely stopped being a thing you could lose yourself in exploring right then and there and became music videos you only somewhat control. It's really unfortunate. Since FF7 you can see Square itching to make the Final Fantasy series more and more like an interactive movie, which as a fan of FF 1-6, couldn't be further from the direction I'd prefer to see them go. Square finally had their dream come true with FF XV and nobody showed up for it. FF XVI looks like more of the same, just with a Game of Thrones flavor and maybe the emo dialed back a smidge.

So that's why FFX, while popular, is also somewhat of a mixed bag among Final Fantasy fans? They mostly complain about Tidus and the cast of characters though.

I don't care much for Tidus or Yuna. But I like Auron and Lulu. Don't mind Rikku either. Khimari and Wakka are fine for what they are as well.

Ever played X-2? It comes with the X HD remaster with a download code. I haven't tackled it yet. From what I understand it only has Yuna and Rikku from X and has some new character which is a punk rock looking chick? Also I know it has Blitzball still. But are there any significant diffetences between it and X? Is it set in the same map?

Btw what about FF 12? What do you think of that one?

[Andrew NDB]

So that's why FFX, while popular, is also somewhat of a mixed bag among Final Fantasy fans?

Basically FFX is where Final Fantasy stopped being Final Fantasy. And mostly that's on the gameplay/freedoms/world side of things. And I remember FFX being very unpopular at the time in the then-existing fandom. I'm sure there's a new fandom that grew up playing FFX that sing a different tune.

They mostly complain about Tidus and the cast of characters though.

I don't care much for Tidus or Yuna. But I like Auron and Lulu. Don't mind Rikku either. Khimari and Wakka are fine for what they are as well.

Well, we can get into the ongoing feminizing of the male leads that kind of has a certain trajectory beginning maybe with FF IX into FF XV. That's probably taken a toll on your average male gamer wanting to play them.

Ever played X-2? It comes with the X HD remaster with a download code. I haven't tackled it yet. From what I understand it only has Yuna and Rikku from X and has some new character which is a punk rock looking chick? Also I know it has Blitzball still. But are there any significant diffetences between it and X? Is it set in the same map?

Yeah, I've played through X-2. Definitely add that to the "guilty pleasure" pile. I enjoyed the gameplay and how you can switch jobs on the fly though it had an embarrassingly easy final boss. I wouldn't have minded an X-3.

Btw what about FF 12? What do you think of that one?

XII is actually an anomaly in X-XV in that DOES have an open world and a lot of side quests. The bad: people used to complain that Tidus looks like Meg Ryan, but the main character in XII might as well be her twin in a belly shirt. Too many characters and way too much world-building going on in short spans of time. The heart was in the right place but I couldn't get all that interested in it. It plays like a single player mode of like a massively multiplayer online game, if that makes sense. Something isn't right there.

[Prowler]

Yes, X was the first Final Fantasy game of people whose first console was the PS2.

It was also my first ever Final Fantasy game but I was already 18 or so when I first played it and I also got a PS2 a bit late(2005). Since I didn't have a PS1 naturally there were no Final Fantasy games for me to play in the late 90s.

Yes Tidus is very effeminate looking. I was never a fan of the bishounen androgeneous look for male characters in anime, manga and games. Usually that stays in shoujo which is works that target female audiences, but a series like Final Fantasy doing that seems bizarre. Did they do it to get more female fans or something?

Anyway I spent like 150-200 hours on the FFX HD remaster on the Switch back in 2020. I'm sure 30% of my gameplay time was Blitzball though. :lol: I must have played about 15 full leagues with it. In the last 5 championships I won, Brother and Wakka were now scoring more than Tidus. Brother... holy hell, he can score 7 goals per match right after the kick off. So many goals from the middle of the stage I scored with him.

I'm a big football fan, so that's why I enjoy Blitzball. But I know plenty of Final Fantasy fans hate that minigame. If I wasn't a fan of the real life sport it's based on, I probably wouldn't have liked it either.

Definitely a top 5 RPG minigame of all time. What are the minigames like in other Final Fantasy games?

Anyway FFX has very good gameplay and mechanics. I really liked the XP and ability grid map it had. It's funny how Khimari eventually ended up being my strongest character instead of Auron though.

[Andrew NDB]

To me, it always felt like Final Fantasy IX got lost in the shuffle partly because they went back to an "old school" JRPG aesthetic after VII and VIII were both much more futuristic.

That and the "big head, little feet" aesthetic. And the main character has a cat tail.

FF IX was pretty great, though. A pretty pleasing storyline.

Yes Tidus is very effeminate looking. I was never a fan of the bishounen androgeneous look for male characters in anime, manga and games. Usually that stays in shoujo which is works that target female audiences, but a series like Final Fantasy doing that seems bizarre.

With Tidus it isn't just the look, either. He is constantly whining and moaning about everything under the sun.

Did they do it to get more female fans or something?

Or the creators living out their fantasies. Who knows.

Anyway FFX has very good gameplay and mechanics. I really liked the XP and ability grid map it had. It's funny how Khimari eventually ended up being my strongest character instead of Auron though.

I was always partial to Auron.

[Leo656]

Yeah, I do remember them saying that a big goal of FFX was to get more girls into the franchise, and X2 was obviously an extension of that. It does seem to have worked, to a degree.

I definitely remember FFX being a big fracture point for the fans of the series, despite its general popularity. Definitely the start of, "It's a very good game... it just doesn't feel like Final Fantasy", which has more or less been the case to a degree with every subsequent FF game. Again, X2 pretty much doubled down; a lot of people found it fun, but they were outspoken that it pretty much wasn't even a Final Fantasy game at all. This was partly on purpose, since as the first sequel/spin-off game in the series the developers felt like it was a good place to experiment. It did well, but it had people pretty split,

Some of my friends take Final Fantasy pretty seriously, so whenever a new game comes out and they start talking about it (usually negatively), I'm like, "I understand if it's 'not a Final Fantasy' game... but is it at least a GOOD game, otherwise?" Because I totally understand why people get hung up on what's "proper" for a game, or what a band should sound like, or whatever... "This is NOTHING like _______!" and so on. But at the end of the day, if I'm entertained and enjoy it, I usually don't care as much if it breaks from tradition.

Usually most of them will be like, "I mean, technically, yeah, it's good. It's just not Final Fantasy at all." And that's fair, but in such case I will still make it a point to play the game at some point. If it's a good game, I want to play it.

I really gotta get back to FFX again, I got the X/X2 collection a while back I just didn't start it. Way back when it came out for PS2 I started it, but then I got distracted. I was definitely having fun with it, though.
--------------

Perhaps I or one of us should start a General RPG thread to continue this conversation? Just a thought. I'm having fun but we lost the Ocarina of Time plot pretty quickly and I'd hate to drop either conversation.

[Prowler]

Well, I dunno what else to say about OOT. Does anyone have anything else to add regarding the game?

[Leo656]

I still remember the very first screenshots of "Zelda 64" in the magazines, pictures of what turned out to be more or less just a proof-of-concept demo and had no resemblance to what OoT would eventually turn out to be. Even then, though... there was this feeling of excitement about it. The actual game took years to come out and did not look anything like those screenshots, but I remember how excited people were. No matter how much people complained about how thin the N64 lineup was - much of that completely justified - you'd just be like, "Yeah, but... Zelda 64 is coming!" And that just superseded everything else.

I remember how much people were bewildered and even a bit concerned about how exactly a Zelda game, of all things, would work in 3D. Some people were convinced that it wouldn't work, especially because of the combat. Now sure, one way they worked around any issues with the combat was to barely have too many enemies onscreen at the same time, so you rarely ever got swarmed the way you did in the NES and SNES games. But the Z-targeting was just SO essential, and it really changed action games forever overnight. Such a little thing, but it had every other developer who was working on a 3D action game at the time go, "Holy sh*t, why didn't WE think of that?!"

And then that huge Preview cover story in Electronic Gaming Monthly. That just completely sealed the deal. Pages and pages of screenshots, in-depth descriptions about the first few hours of gameplay, talk about the controls and how intuitive the entire experience was... they even put over the fishing game huge, and that was one of the things people were the most befuddled by when they heard about its inclusion. "A f*cking FISHING game? Are they for real?" But that article just made every single thing about the game sound so amazing; I wasn't even a "fan" of the series, per se, but I went from "Eh, maybe" to "I'm pre-ordering this tomorrow" very quickly.

The whole thing was basically like, "We know some people aren't sure how Zelda will work in 3D. But guys... this is seriously the best game ever made, and here's why." And they'd only played like the first couple of hours of it, but even THAT was enough to make me believe it was indeed the greatest thing ever. And when I finally played it... yeah, it kinda was that. Other games superseded it very quickly, because the late-90s was an amazing time for innovation in gaming and so many all-time classics were coming out at a rapid-fire clip... but for a minute, you could very much say that Ocarina of Time was simply the best console video game ever made and not too many people would argue with you.

Even the strategy guides were awesome. I kind of collect strategy guides, I just think they're neat even when I don't need them, so I have a lot of them. And I have a few different ones for OoT and the other Zelda games (for one thing, a lot of them came with AWESOME posters! :tgrin:). The ones from Nintendo were always fun, because they were presented like an in-universe storybook chronicling the various adventures of Link. Rather than just explain to you plainly what to do, they'd be like, "Legend has it that Link went here and did this in order to proceed," and it was just a neat little way to add to the immersion. They also expanded quite a bit on the lore and mythology, covering stuff the games themselves never mentioned, such as reasoning behind the various fashions worn by the different races of people in Hyrule, what the weather was like in different parts of the world, all that stuff. There was even an in-depth guide on playing the Ocarina and how to come up with your own songs using the notes. Pretty wild.

So yeah, it doesn't all hit me at once but I definitely have a lot of memories and things to say about this game. :tgrin:

[Prowler]

I was too young to be afraid of 3D Zelda going wrong. Fortunately, all Nintendo properties transitioned well into 3D. The only one you can argue didn't was Donkey Kong, but even saying that, I did enjoy Donkey Kong 64 back in the day. Would love to see them making a new 3D DK game sometime again. Plus, back then the DK games were made by Rare. Rare is no longer under Nintendo. Hasn't been so since the GameCube days.

[Andrew NDB]

OoT was probably the last "pure" Zelda game. After that they kind of got to be all about some kind of gimmick or another.

[Prowler]

OoT was probably the last "pure" Zelda game. After that they kind of got to be all about some kind of gimmick or another.

Wouldn't using the ocarina to travel through the world map, change the weather to rainy, turning night into day instantly and solving dungeon puzzles also qualify as being a gimmick? Wind Waker doesn't sound more gimmicky with the changing the direction of the wind feature.

BOTW is about some kind of gimmick or another? Weapons breaking counts? Besides that, what else is gimmicky about it?

Speaking of which, I really like BOTW, but I'm not ready for the idea of it bricking the standard for Zelda games from now on...

[Turo602]

OoT was probably the last "pure" Zelda game. After that they kind of got to be all about some kind of gimmick or another.

Not since Breath of the Wild anyway, which is pretty much the new benchmark for the series.

[Prowler]

Not since Breath of the Wild anyway, which is pretty much the new benchmark for the series.

I wonder what the sequel is going to be like. It's the same map again but this time with no shrines? How's that gonna work out?

[Turo602]

I wonder what the sequel is going to be like. It's the same map again but this time with no shrines? How's that gonna work out?

It's the same map, but they have been expanding it beyond just the new sky stuff. I don't think they ever confirmed there'd be no shrines, though I'm sure whatever they're doing with the sky will be its answer to them and how you'll fast travel. But I wouldn't expect the overworld to be identical either. I'm sure they've found many ways to alter the land after this much time.

[Prowler]

It's the same map, but they have been expanding it beyond just the new sky stuff. I don't think they ever confirmed there'd be no shrines, though I'm sure whatever they're doing with the sky will be its answer to them and how you'll fast travel. But I wouldn't expect the overworld to be identical either. I'm sure they've found many ways to alter the land after this much time.

I think they should simply do something similar to what they did with Majora's Mask. Same engine and graphics as Ocarina but set in an alternative dimension of Hyrule.

[Turo602]

I think they should simply do something similar to what they did with Majora's Mask. Same engine and graphics as Ocarina but set in an alternative dimension of Hyrule.

I don't think that would be necessary. Breath of the Wild already created such a rich and lore filled world that pulls from all over the series' history that shifting it to another dimension would be a huge disservice to its story. They've planted too many seeds to do another Majora's Mask, which itself was hastily put together.

[Andrew NDB]

Wouldn't using the ocarina to travel through the world map, change the weather to rainy, turning night into day instantly and solving dungeon puzzles also qualify as being a gimmick? Wind Waker doesn't sound more gimmicky with the changing the direction of the wind feature.

I was going to mention that, but no, not really. Not to the extent of the gimmicks of later games. I mean, technically you could say the Light World/Dark World is a gimmick in "A Link to the Past," but it's not really a game mechanic it's just a place you can go to... same as the present/future in OoT.

BOTW is about some kind of gimmick or another? Weapons breaking counts? Besides that, what else is gimmicky about it?

The sail, largely. And I'm aware this wasn't its first appearance. Also it's just not very Zelda-like to me.

A Zelda game... with only 4 small dungeons? Are you kidding me?

Not since Breath of the Wild anyway, which is pretty much the new benchmark for the series.

Based on what? I'd be surprised if they kept the model from the game intact beyond it. It'll be interesting to see what the Breath of the Wild 2 will look like. What I saw months back, it looks like the new gimmick will be Link has some arm gadget, I think?

Majora's Mask: You have X number of time to save the world... GO! HURRY!

Twilight Princess: You can turn into a wolf!

Skyward Sword: Fly around! To disconnected sky islands. And obviously if you're playing the original Wii version the swinging around of the remote and nunchuk is the big gimmick. Which I enjoyed! I'd just rather they not build a game around said gimmick.

Breath of the Wild: Sail! Sail to all the disconnected islands. Get ready for lots of sailing.

And so on.

And it's a little bit hard to describe but the original Zelda on NES and "A Link to the Past" and "Ocarina of Time" give me the purest sense of "oh yeah, this is Zelda." In its purest form. No frills and little gimmicks.

[Prowler]

Sailing on a raft? Well, that's not as big of anaort of BOTW as it was sailing on a boat in WW lol. It's not like sailing is a huge part of BOTW.

As for the pure Zelda experience... well I personally think the most important part of a core Zedla experience is exploration. And for that you need a large world full of mystery. BOTW definitely made me feel like a kid again in that sense. Plus, early in the game you are so weak and can easily die with one hit only. And you're confined to a decent sized area that's just a tiny spot in the middle of the world's map. And you gotta climb up towers in each region to unlock the map for each region. Until you do that you just see a black spot on the map without telling you the names of any towns or places.

I agree the dungeons in BOTW weren't that great. But due to the 120 shrines, they couldn't do a bunch of large dungeons like they usually do.

Majora's Mask only had 4 dungeons as well but decent sized ones. Remember when people complained the game only had 4 dungeons?

Anyway I really like BOTW and certainly feels like a new step for Zelda. Let's see what Nintendo does with it. Will they expand upon the concept?

Mario on the other hand, I didn't love Odyssey. Didn't wow me like Mario 64 did in 1996 and has very low replay value compared to the Galaxy games, which are 3D Mario at its best still.

Odyssey has great ideas and concept and great gameplay... but doesn't fully live up to its potential. Good game but not a masterpiece.

[Andrew NDB]

But due to the 120 shrines, they couldn't do a bunch of large dungeons like they usually do.

Those can be basically boiled down to "quick puzzle rooms." Not dungeons at all.

And hey, Breath of the Wild is brilliant at large. If they could take that whole engine, that whole system and game mechanics (sure, maybe lighten up the sword damage... I'm no metallurgist but I'm pretty sure a halfway decent sword will last more than 3 quick battles) and bake that into a Zelda game with a "world," feel and scope (story-wise) like LttP or OoT, that'd 100% be the way to go.

[Turo602]

Based on what? I'd be surprised if they kept the model from the game intact beyond it. It'll be interesting to see what the Breath of the Wild 2 will look like. What I saw months back, it looks like the new gimmick will be Link has some arm gadget, I think?

Based on the fact that they purposely went out of their way to discard everything they established back on the N64 that has been iterated on to death with gimmicks. Breath of the Wild was about rethinking the conventions they've been mindlessly sticking to since Ocarina of Time despite it being developed for primitive hardware.

A lot of people are hung up about specific aspects of the series that they refuse to acknowledge the way in which Breath of the Wild has returned to its roots and evolved the franchise. The original Legend of Zelda was their inspiration when developing Breath of the Wild that they even recreated the original game and added elements from Breath of the Wild to it during development.

People may find it hard to accept, but Breath of the Wild is the new standard for Zelda games. They don't make all this progress just to go back on it and make games like they did on the N64. We could definitely see familiar elements return, but they'll be integrated into this new version of Zelda. Saying Breath of the Wild is just another gimmicked Zelda game for how it redefined what a Zelda game is, is like saying 3D is a gimmick in Ocarina of Time.

[Andrew NDB]

So Breath of the Wild used the same animal-themed maps for the four micro dungeons from LoZ1 (this time literal)... totally bringing things back. And even if that's true, I'd say that's bringing it back too far.

I'm just saying a LoZ game using the basic engine of Breath of the Wild, mechanics and all is the way to make a killer next generation Zelda game. But it doesn't seem like Breath of the Wild 2 is going to do that. It is on to the next gimmick.

[Turo602]

So Breath of the Wild used the same animal-themed maps for the four micro dungeons from LoZ1 (this time literal)... totally bringing things back. And even if that's true, I'd say that's bringing it back too far.

I'm just saying a LoZ game using the basic engine of Breath of the Wild, mechanics and all is the way to make a killer next generation Zelda game. But it doesn't seem like Breath of the Wild 2 is going to do that. It is on to the next gimmick.

More like ignored everything that streamlined the series after the original by giving the player total freedom. Adventure was the point of the original game. Exploration and discovery are in Breath of the Wild's DNA more than any other game in the series since the original.

I mean, Breath of the Wild 2 is literally using the original game as groundwork. It's gonna have all the same physics and mechanics and more. We still have no clue what the game entails outside of the new sky stuff. Link having a new magical or cursed arm is hardly worth calling a gimmick either unless the game is entirely designed around it, like the time limit, sea, wolf, and motion controls. It may have a functionality and be important to the story, but THE GIMMICK of the game? Unlikely.

[Prowler]

I didn't mean to say shrines were dungeons. They certainly are not. I'm just saying that with 120 shrines in the game, having 5-8 normal sized dungeons in addition to that would have just been too much. The game is already long enough with 120 shrines and 4 dungeons.

Plus, there's so much stuff to do between them that it doesn't feel like the game is lacking in dungeons. I was already 35 hours in the game when I beat my first dungeon. And 70 or so hours in when I beat my 2nd one. 100 hours when I beat my 3rd dungeon, etc.

I've beaten all 4 dungeons but still have about close to 20 shrines left and some sidequests to beat. So I haven't beaten Ganon or the game yet.