Legend of Zelda Do you think that OoT is the 'greastest game ever'?

[The Good Doctor]

I think it has slipped from today's standards. Action/Adventure games were pretty big I believe back when the N64 first game out. Since then, shooters and sandbox games have taken over I believe. At least when I think of games like assassin's creed or halo/call of duty. The really popular stuff.

In my mind, I would say OoT might be the greatest game. I had a lot of fun with it when it first game out, and discovering the game has a ton of viable glitches to abuse everywhere, it makes the game more interesting at a later age when I seem to prefer faster games.

Seriously, those glitches in the game can speed it up considerably. Best I have done is about 4 hours. Reverse bottle adventure stuff makes it even more insanely fast (around an hour to link wakes up to ganon's death)

There are many things I didn't like about OoT, starting with the annoying camera. I also didn't like the rushed story. There was no build-up to the final fight IMO either. The best part of the whole game is the scene were Ganondorf transforms, that was bad ***.

Keep in mind, I play fighting and retro games.

 

[finalark]

I think it has slipped from today's standards.

Attention retro elitists: This happens to your beloved old games. Suck it up. Also, you are a horrible judge of quality as a kid.

That said, I really enjoyed OoT when I played it as a kid. Then Twilight Princess and Wind Waker came by and I really enjoyed both more.

 

[StealthyGunnar]

Because of this topic, I actually played through OoT
I found it didn't live up to to hype.

this sooo much. i read everybody's comments about how great OoT was so i thought id try it. it was a GOOD game, but it was hyped way too much...

Best Games Evar:
Godzilla: Destroy All Monsters Melee
Mario Kart 64
Fzero: GX
Arctic Thunder and Hydro Thunder

 

[The Good Doctor]

Attention retro elitists: This happens to your beloved old games. Suck it up. Also, you are a horrible judge of quality as a kid.

That said, I really enjoyed OoT when I played it as a kid. Then Twilight Princess and Wind Waker came by and I really enjoyed both more.

To some, I still play

the orignal Mario games
Punch-Out
Turtles in Time
Little League Baseball
Super Castlvania 4

and many others and I still feel they are just as good as they were when I was young. Hell, even SM64 is kick ***.

OoT is feel is trying to tell a story, of an epic legend. It doesn't help that Zelda spoils the WHOLE "story" the first time you see her. Like by god, tease me a little....

 

[etecoon]

Attention retro elitists: This happens to your beloved old games. Suck it up. Also, you are a horrible judge of quality as a kid.

That said, I really enjoyed OoT when I played it as a kid. Then Twilight Princess and Wind Waker came by and I really enjoyed both more.

people say the exact same thing about FFVII and I still loved that when I played it nearly 10 years after its release. the "anyone who thinks old games are better are just slaves to nostalgia" argument is pretty unsubstantiated, it does happen, but not on as wide a scale as you think. if it were only nostalgia, why isn't the original zelda more popular? AoL? OoT was the fourth zelda game I played, MM(my favorite) was the fifth, if it's just nostalgia why are the N64 games so much more popular than LTTP or LA? very one dimensional way of looking at things IMO

WW I can see a case for, if they fixed a few things it could be one of the best games in the series

I'm completely lost when people mention TP in this discussion. it's an ok game, but I just don't see what it really does better than other zelda games aside from having a much larger sense of scale(which WW outdid).

edit: and midna come to think of it, she serves as a good template for how you can give the game a dynamic main character while continuing to allow link to act as an avatar. I like this approach a lot more than WW link's exaggerated expressions. the problem is that it's incongruent with how the game is actually played, TP gives you no choices. it gives a good idea of how link can still be an avatar in a more involved story, but it doesn't actually allow link to act as an avatar, the game is completely linear

 

[finalark]

people say the exact same thing about FFVII and I still loved that when I played it nearly 10 years after its release. the "anyone who thinks old games are better are just slaves to nostalgia" argument is pretty unsubstantiated, it does happen, but not on as wide a scale as you think.

This isn't always true, as you said. For instance, I played MGS1 for the first time in 2010 and found the game to be surprisingly enjoyable despite its age.

f it were only nostalgia, why isn't the original zelda more popular? AoL? OoT was the fourth zelda game I played, MM(my favorite) was the fifth, if it's just nostalgia why are the N64 games so much more popular than LTTP or LA? very one dimensional way of looking at things IMO

I think that the N64 Zelda tended to have a long lasting impact over the 2D ones on people when they initially played them. Especially since the early 2D Zeldas were pretty unremarkable when compared to the initial "wow factor" of how well the formula transferred over into 3D. In other words, the reason why the older 2D Zelda aren't as fondly remembered is because of how much they were overshadowed by OoT.

WW I can see a case for, if they fixed a few things it could be one of the best games in the series

For me the only thing that sucked was the Triforce hunt at the end of the game.

I'm completely lost when people mention TP in this discussion. it's an ok game, but I just don't see what it really does better than other zelda games aside from having a much larger sense of scale(which WW outdid).

I just found TP to be more enjoyable. I thought the dungeons were more creative and more enjoyable, the bosses were funner, the game play was better and over all felt like a much more satisfying and enthralling game to me. I think most people were underwhelmed by it due to unrealistic expectations that Nintendo set up for it.

the game is completely linear

The Zelda games have always been pretty linear (outside of early installments). Nintendo simply stopped trying to hide it.

@The Good Doctor:

I agree that some games do age well (Castlevania IV is awesome, and I played it for the first time two years ago). However, time is less kind to others, such as a lot of early 3D games.

 

[etecoon]

I think that the N64 Zelda tended to have a long lasting impact over the 2D ones on people when they initially played them. Especially since the early 2D Zeldas were pretty unremarkable when compared to the initial "wow factor" of how well the formula transferred over into 3D. In other words, the reason why the older 2D Zelda aren't as fondly remembered is because of how much they were overshadowed by OoT.

I suppose there is some truth to this. I remember I got OoT for my birthday and I was playing it with my friends and the hyrule creation scene actually made one of them say "this was only put here to show off the graphics". it's funny when you look back on that now : )

For me the only thing that sucked was the Triforce hunt at the end of the game.

that is probably the most common complaint but other things I had issue with

sailing was slow and frequently uninvolved, I literally set my course and walked away from the game to make a sandwich once and I didn't die(or get hit at all). even when you get the warp, I feel like it's too little compared to other zelda games

I also feel like the island distribution was too sparse, few islands and most are extremely small. in typical fashion that has become all too tiresome in this series, the reward for exploring these islands is frequently meaningless. rupees that you may never spend except for tingles maps, and heart pieces that you never need because it's nearly impossible to die anyway. so happy they're trying to do something about this in SS

dungeons are extremely simple and tend to have weaker atmosphere than the other 3D zelda's as well.

first 3D zelda game to feature only 2 swords and 2 shields, this was repeated in twilight princess unfortunately. maybe they started to think it was contradictory that the master sword wasn't actually the best sword in LTTP or OoT, but I'd really prefer to have more weapon upgrades. no tunic changes either, at least MM had mask transforms. WW really gave us the static link, there's very little sense of progress in the game

I just found TP to be more enjoyable. I thought the dungeons were more creative and more enjoyable

I thought MM had the most creative dungeons, particularly great bay and stone tower, you really don't see anything that intricate anywhere else in the series. but I do think TP's dungeons were a big step up from WW's at least, and I can see where people would dock MM for only having 4 dungeons

the bosses were funner

not across the board but I do really like how they borrowed from SotC, having giant larger than life creatures to slay is great

the game play was better

the swordplay was improved, I'm not really seeing where it improved otherwise. in a lot of ways I see backwards steps, the spinner is probably the most egregious example of them introducing a cool item that you then never get another chance to use, can't call epona from anywhere on the field until very late in the game, continuation of static link...

I think most people were underwhelmed by it due to unrealistic expectations that Nintendo set up for it.

this I can agree with somewhat. nintendo massively overhyped the game for what it actually was, it received more hype than SS has gotten in spite of being far less ambitious

The Zelda games have always been pretty linear (outside of early installments). Nintendo simply stopped trying to hide it.

true enough, but I'd still prefer them to at least humor me a bit. I'd like it if they could take the better aspects of newer zelda and then make it really wide open like the original zelda was

 

[finalark]

sailing was slow and frequently uninvolved, I literally set my course and walked away from the game to make a sandwich once and I didn't die(or get hit at all). even when you get the warp, I feel like it's too little compared to other zelda games

I actually kind of liked the sailing. For me it was atmospheric and gave me the impression that I was in a massive world (something that OoT never really did for me). Regardless, I can see what you mean by it being really slow and boring.

I also feel like the island distribution was too sparse, few islands and most are extremely small. in typical fashion that has become all too tiresome in this series, the reward for exploring these islands is frequently meaningless. rupees that you may never spend except for tingles maps, and heart pieces that you never need because it's nearly impossible to die anyway. so happy they're trying to do something about this in SS

We've always had problems like this, nothing exclusive to WW. And how is SS fixing the "Rupees for nothing" problem? I haven't heard anything on that.

dungeons are extremely simple and tend to have weaker atmosphere than the other 3D zelda's as well.

I felt that a decent amount of the dungeons were fairly complex, but I can agree on having weaker atmosphere.

first 3D zelda game to feature only 2 swords and 2 shields, this was repeated in twilight princess unfortunately. maybe they started to think it was contradictory that the master sword wasn't actually the best sword in LTTP or OoT, but I'd really prefer to have more weapon upgrades. no tunic changes either, at least MM had mask transforms. WW really gave us the static link, there's very little sense of progress in the game

That's not really important for me but I see where you're coming from.

I thought MM had the most creative dungeons, particularly great bay and stone tower, you really don't see anything that intricate anywhere else in the series. but I do think TP's dungeons were a big step up from WW's at least, and I can see where people would dock MM for only having 4 dungeons

MM sadly felt pretty short. Thankfully, it made up for that in the sheer amount of side quests if you're a completionist.

not across the board but I do really like how they borrowed from SotC, having giant larger than life creatures to slay is great

I second that. I really liked the scale of the boss fights in TP, I really don't think I'll ever forget fighting the Giant Skeleton at the end of the Arbiter's Grounds.

the swordplay was improved, I'm not really seeing where it improved otherwise. in a lot of ways I see backwards steps,

I felt that it played (as in controlled) better than the N64 titles. Although I personally think that WW surpass it in control. And I can't help but feel that the only reason why they removed the controllable camera was for the sake of the Wii version.

the spinner is probably the most egregious example of them introducing a cool item that you then never get another chance to use, can't call epona from anywhere on the field until very late in the game,

Yeah, Spinner was cool at first until you realize that you'll never use it ever again. And I recall being able to call Epona pretty early on. Although my memory might be faulty.

continuation of static link...

Forgetting the Zora Armor and the Golden Armor.

this I can agree with somewhat. nintendo massively overhyped the game for what it actually was, it received more hype than SS has gotten in spite of being far less ambitious

I think that's the reason why Nintendo is downplaying SS. Not to mention that after being delayed so many times most of us were expect a lot more out of TP.

true enough, but I'd still prefer them to at least humor me a bit. I'd like it if they could take the better aspects of newer zelda and then make it really wide open like the original zelda was

It would be interesting, I agree. Seeing how the original LoZ basically invited the sandbox style game world.

 

[etecoon]

We've always had problems like this, nothing exclusive to WW. And how is SS fixing the "Rupees for nothing" problem? I haven't heard anything on that.

one of the vids I've seen said they had a new item system where you scavenge the materials to build new weapons and armor and that this was going to replace a lot of the abundant rupees

MM sadly felt pretty short. Thankfully, it made up for that in the sheer amount of side quests if you're a completionist.

yeah, MM was more an expansion of the overworld and NPCs, if you only play zelda games for dungeons it wasn't likely to be your favorite. but what it was able to do with NPCs and short stories I feel like would still be ahead of its time if it were to have come out today

Yeah, Spinner was cool at first until you realize that you'll never use it ever again. And I recall being able to call Epona pretty early on. Although my memory might be faulty.

you can call epona with reeds that are scattered about hyrule field but sometimes you have to walk around a lot to find them, you don't get the item to call her until much later

Forgetting the Zora Armor and the Golden Armor.

it's better than WW in this regard but it's still a far cry from past games IMO, zora armor is only to help you swim, it's a hinderance otherwise, and gold armor is basically there to drain your excess rupees, you probably aren't in danger of dying at any point for not using it. it helps but you still have 2 swords and 2 shields, and your base tunic never changes which is something all 3D zelda games have been guilty of so far(at least WW lets you play pajamas link on new game+...and OoT doesn't give you a defensive penalty for using a different color).

 

[finalark]

one of the vids I've seen said they had a new item system where you scavenge the materials to build new weapons and armor and that this was going to replace a lot of the abundant rupees

That actually sounds pretty fun. Good job, Nintendo.

yeah, MM was more an expansion of the overworld and NPCs, if you only play zelda games for dungeons it wasn't likely to be your favorite. but what it was able to do with NPCs and short stories I feel like would still be ahead of its time if it were to have come out today

I don't think it would be ahead of its time today, but for an eleven-year-old N64 game they did a pretty good job at creating an active world. Sadly, they had to sacrifice a lot of space for dungeons to do it.

you can call epona with reeds that are scattered about hyrule field but sometimes you have to walk around a lot to find them, you don't get the item to call her until much later

Oh yeah, now I remember. Oh well, it was never a problem for me.

it's better than WW in this regard but it's still a far cry from past games IMO, zora armor is only to help you swim, it's a hinderance otherwise, and gold armor is basically there to drain your excess rupees, you probably aren't in danger of dying at any point for not using it. it helps but you still have 2 swords and 2 shields, and your base tunic never changes which is something all 3D zelda games have been guilty of so far(at least WW lets you play pajamas link on new game+...and OoT doesn't give you a defensive penalty for using a different color).

Yeah, a Zelda game that allows for a verity of swords, shields and armors is something I wanted to see for a long time.

 

[etecoon]

reminds me of one of spire's drawings

hylian spear? YES PLEASE

 

[Luigitoilet]

I didn't read like any of this page lol

so forgive me.

I think if I really had to pick an "objective" ""greatest"" game in the franchise, it would undoubtedly be Link to the Past, and not Ocarina of Time, and not Majora's Mask (which is my personal favorite). Ocarina takes so many notes and cues from LttP, while also creating a much less involved and enriched overworld.

 

[etecoon]

I don't think LTTP is the best game in the series, but I do think it did a lot of things very well that future zelda games failed to retain. for instance all my talking about equipment, LTTP had 4 swords, 3 shields, and 3 tunics(actual upgrades not just circumstantially useful), as well as a variety of equipable weapons that were actually useful throughout the game. wtf happened to that?

 

[finalark]

as well as a variety of equipable weapons that were actually useful throughout the game. wtf happened to that?

Here's my theory: When ALTTP was original created, the SNES cartridge simply couldn't hold a ton of data for a million different items. And thus, rather than making you get new, dungeon specific items that you only used once you got a handful of items you used throughout the game. As the amount of data you could put onto a disk/cartridge increased Nintendo decided to experiment by giving you a lot of items you only used once instead.

Well, that's what I think happened anyway.

 

[The Star King]

^If that's true, it's ironic that a system limitation led to a better (IMO) weapon system.

 

[Luigitoilet]

Lots of great things are created under limitations. I think it helps to inspire creative thinking.

I totally agree too. Imagine if Nintendo built Twilight Princess' overworld to make extensive use of ALL the items you get. That could possibly rival LttP's overworld. I hate how the areas you aren't supposed to go to at first are literally blocked off with a wall in TP. Instead of stimulating my imagination and problem solving skills, I see a wall and think "oh, I'm not supposed to be here until I hit a specific scripted sequence." Sure, all the Zelda games are like that but TP is just so obvious and uncreative about it.

 

[kupo15]

Some quick notes. MM even though it had 4 dungeons I felt was pretty cool for giving you a challenge to actually get in the dungeon. I don't feel any other zelda game requires such effort to get into the temples. It was awesome.

Anything past the N64 titles took a step back in control. Excluding camera (I don't mind the z target camera) you can't control your jumps at all. You can't really go on things or backflip over things like you used too. You can't drop items by putting up your shield (Something I'm loving more and more) you can't do side step/backflip arrow shots (I'm pretty sure??) Momentum is not preserved anymore. Basic sword techniques are removed such as the power stab. TPWII has a charge up for spin attack.

I've already mention this about TP but there isn't enough collectables and overall the game, while extremely massive, is not packed with things to do which makes it quite stale and boring. I'd rather have a smaller world that uses every inch of space cause it feels bigger.

 

[T-block]

I'm really not understanding how people can compare MM to OoT. I'm playing through MM right now (never got a chance to when it came out) and it just feels...nowhere near as good as OoT. It seems like for a lot of the tasks (both in dungeons and for the outside story) are just... not obvious, and in a bad way. I'm all for a challenge, but I'd much prefer it in the form of a hard-to-solve puzzle, rather than a giant hide-and-seek game. For example,

Spoiler

in order you get to Ikana canyon, you need to walk by this one spot with the Garo's mask on. I didn't even have Garo's mask at the time, and it took me forever to progress

.

I guess you could say that makes OoT more linear, but if being non-linear means "wander around until you happen to stumble on an event that lets you progress the story", then I'm completely fine with linear.

Am I approaching this game all wrong?

 

[Luigitoilet]

The internet has created a huge bandwagon for Majora's Mask over the years. It has become the game to like if you want to look cool and unique. It is not a perfect game, and I'm not even sure if it's better than OoT from a gameplay perspective.

The first section where you're stuck as a Deku scrub is terrible. No johns, it's just terrible, especially if you are playing for the first time and don't know exactly what to do. It's not fun, it's just tedious. There are a couple sections like that in the game.

But, as for the Ikana section I can't say it gave me that much trouble. Tatl explicitly tells you you need a specific mask. The Garo spirits appear all over Ikana, not just specific spots, and they look just like the Garo mask lol. I found the underground Gibdo maze part a lot more tedious and annoying.

 

[T-block]

Well... glad I'm not completely crazy.

Tedious is the perfect word though. A lot of the things you have to do are "hard" because they are tedious, not because they are actually challenging.

 

[etecoon]

do I seriously see someone saying that people only consider MM better than OoT because it's "a bandwagon"

really?

OoT might be the single most bandwagoned game of all time, this is an absurd angle to take

 

[Luigitoilet]

Oh, I didn't mean EVERYONE who thinks it's better is being insincere. I myself prefer MM.

I DO think that a lot of the recent rabid MM fanboyism is directly in backlash AGAINST the widespread acclaim of OoT. From a gameplay perspective, I really can't see how people would prefer milling around stuck inside Clock Town playing hide and seek with some little kids, doing fetch quests for Gibdos in Ikana, running around with hot spring water for the Goron elder, etc etc. to the more streamlined and stimulating gameplay of OoT.

MM has artistic merit that OoT (and honestly, the majority of video games) is missing, and that goes a long way. However, they're still videogames and gameplay and fun is the number one priority.

I'm sure there are a lot of people who think that stuff I mentioned is the pinnacle of video gaming. I just have to disagree there on a fundamental level.

 

[etecoon]

I'd agree, OoT is a much more refined game(MM did have a short development cycle) and offers better instant gratification. I think it's more than OoT backlash though, I also think WW and TP borrowing so heavily from OoT has made it trite to some extent, MM is still fresh because the series(and games in general really) haven't gone in that direction again.

I don't think I'd call OoT more stimulating though, excessive streamlining makes a less involved game if anything IMO

 

[Spire]

Wow, this is a good thread. Also, Etecoon quoted my artwork and that's just so awesome

I'll say this much about OoT and MM: I love OoT more but in terms of game design, I hold them on the same level. I'll also say that the MM temples are some of the best in the series, hands down. Not just in my opinion either—the methods by which people go about navigating said dungeons are astronomically more complex and interesting than perhaps the whole of OoT's dungeons. TP drove a hard bargain with the Goron Mines, but effectively fell off from there. Though I would like to argue that Zelda is not just about gameplay, it's about atmospheric immersion. Games and their respective temples based in Hyrule are typically far more immersive than those from MM because the latter feels almost too much like a game, which is neither a good or bad thing ultimately. To put it better, I enjoy running through the MM temples because of the gameplay involved, but I enjoy going back and re-exploring TP's temples because of how scenic and lore-inspired they are. MM did not have three Termina-based games before it; OoT had LoZ, AoL, and ALttP to shape up Hyrulean lore.

MM did a lot for a one-year produced ZELDA game; the developers may have come up with the parallel world concept to mask their reusage of OoT's character and enemy models, but they filled it with plenty of enjoyable lore and creativty even unrivaled by certain aspects of OoT and every game that follows to date. I've a feeling that Skyward Sword will effectively defeat MM (so to speak) as it is already looking to rival OoT for spot #1.

 

[T-block]

I don't think I'd call OoT more stimulating though, excessive streamlining makes a less involved game if anything IMO

But when "more involved" means wander the whole world until you find some way to progress, it's just...not as fun ._.

Maybe I'm just bad at this game lol

 

[etecoon]

good point about atmosphere, I think MM had the best overall atmosphere but OoT probably did the dungeons better than any game in the series in that regard

I really can't get into most of TP's temples in the same way, goron mines, lakebed, and city in the sky are good but I still think I prefer OoT's overall collection of dungeons. then again I'm one of the few people that actually likes the water temple(great bay is great too!)

I think MM's dungeons being unnaturally intricate went with the theme of the game though, the entire experience is very dreamlike, everything about termina is unreal

 

[Luigitoilet]

I agree about MM feeling much more "videogameish". The way Termina is explicitly segmented into four very different reasons is extremely blatant. It reminds me of a child fantasy. There's a good reason for all of the Alice in Wonderland/Through the Looking Glass comparisons the game gets.

 

[etecoon]

and it's not even as if they're separated by vast expanses of land either, you literally walk the distance of a football field and you go from ocean to frozen mountain, or from swamp to scorched valley. the surrealism of MM was a lot of its appeal to me

 

[kupo15]

I think both are equally great games though I find OOT a little more annoying going back to from MM and to an extent replay wise. There is so much explanation of how to play thats not found in MM and Imo much more cutscenes that are not skip-able. The game is also slower from a processing perspective.

Don't forget that not only did MM use the same chars but also the same physics engine...though they did tweak some things but the fact that the physics engine was stolen saves the dev team tons of programming time which allowed them to come out with the game quickly. OOT however, has the better bow and arrow.

 

[The Good Doctor]

I think both are equally great games though I find OOT a little more annoying going back to from MM and to an extent replay wise. There is so much explanation of how to play thats not found in MM and Imo much more cutscenes that are not skip-able. The game is also slower from a processing perspective.

Don't forget that not only did MM use the same chars but also the same physics engine...though they did tweak some things but the fact that the physics engine was stolen saves the dev team tons of programming time which allowed them to come out with the game quickly. OOT however, has the better bow and arrow.

It's called being lazy as ****.

 

[Luigitoilet]

I don't think so. Remember by this point the N64 was just starting to die out. It would have been a mistake to try and make a whole new Zelda experience for the 64...and plus, why not? It's a great game and the gameplay mechanics are not lazy at all. In many ways it's far more complex than OoT.

 

[Spire]

The N64 was closing in on the end of its life. Majora's Mask debuted a year before the Gamecube launched. It's mighty impressive that they produced what they could in such short time. Skyward Sword could be seen as the spiritual successor to Majora's Mask, in that its consolean predecessor Twilight Princess started Wii gamers off with a Hyrulean adventure just as Ocarina of Time did back with 64 gamers. Both OoT and TP introduced the Hyrulean Zelda while Majora's Mask and Skyward Sword take us a bit out of context (in different ways). However, the difference is Skyward Sword is being made from the ground up (um, for 5 years now) and will probably punish Majora's Mask for being a resource leech.

As a lover of both OoT and MM for different reasons, I hate the MM internet bandwagoning that's been going on since TP's release. I hope SS shuts it down.

 

[The Good Doctor]

The N64 was closing in on the end of its life. Majora's Mask debuted a year before the Gamecube launched. It's mighty impressive that they produced what they could in such short time. Skyward Sword could be seen as the spiritual successor to Majora's Mask, in that its consolean predecessor Twilight Princess started Wii gamers off with a Hyrulean adventure just as Ocarina of Time did back with 64 gamers. Both OoT and TP introduced the Hyrulean Zelda while Majora's Mask and Skyward Sword take us a bit out of context (in different ways). However, the difference is Skyward Sword is being made from the ground up (um, for 5 years now) and will probably punish Majora's Mask for being a resource leech.

As a lover of both OoT and MM for different reasons, I hate the MM internet bandwagoning that's been going on since TP's release. I hope SS shuts it down.

Well, when did development start?
I personally think the reuse of everything is more lazy than anything.
They also could have launched it on the gamecube, then they could have done much more.

 

[T-block]

I suppose I can appreciate the artistic aspects of MM, now that you bring it up. It's definitely a unique experience.

Gameplay wise though, I can't compare it to OoT.

 

[Spire]

Development started in early '99 for Majora's Mask. Development for Skyward Sword started before the release of Twilight Princess.

There are a ton of sources on the net so find 'em if you don't believe me.

@T-Block: I see the games quite oppositely. I enjoy the varied gameplay of MM over OoT, while I enjoy the atmospheric immersion of OoT over MM. Again, because MM feels like a game, OoT like a controllable cinematic storybook.

 

[The Good Doctor]

Development started in early '99 for Majora's Mask. Development for Skyward Sword started before the release of Twilight Princess.

There are a ton of sources on the net so find 'em if you don't believe me.

@T-Block: I see the games quite oppositely. I enjoy the varied gameplay of MM over OoT, while I enjoy the atmospheric immersion of OoT over MM. Again, because MM feels like a game, OoT like a controllable cinematic storybook.

So they were making two Zelda games at once?
In two years they could have done more than use leftover sprites from OoT.

 

[Spire]

They began work on MM soon after OoT's release and immediate success. They were also working on Ura Zelda (Master Quest). They had about a year to develop MM with the remaining time before release spent on localization. I'm surely impressed by how much they put in the game.

 

[The Good Doctor]

They began work on MM soon after OoT's release and immediate success. They were also working on Ura Zelda (Master Quest). They had about a year to develop MM with the remaining time before release spent on localization. I'm surely impressed by how much they put in the game.

I'm done logically trying to reason with people that have Zelda for breakfast, lunch, and dinner

 

[SkylerOcon]

I'm done logically trying to reason with people that have Zelda for breakfast, lunch, and dinner

Or we could just look at this from the business viewpoint and realize that it'd be a lot easier to market a Zelda game that looked and played just like OoT right after OoT became the multi-million selling smash hit that it was. Wouldn't say it was lazy at all, really, especially considering that the game still came out looking very nice. It allowed more emphasis on gameplay and story during the design period, which is a definite plus. Nintendo had plenty of reasons for not making new models and textures from scratch.

I know you said something about Nintendo possibly doing a lot more if they were to do MM for the Gamecube, but the physics engine and graphics suited MM just fine. MM ended up coming out as a masterpiece, reused physics engine and graphics or not.

 

[The Good Doctor]

Or we could just look at this from the business viewpoint and realize that it'd be a lot easier to market a Zelda game that looked and played just like OoT right after OoT became the multi-million selling smash hit that it was. Wouldn't say it was lazy at all, really, especially considering that the game still came out looking very nice. It allowed more emphasis on gameplay and story during the design period, which is a definite plus. Nintendo had plenty of reasons for not making new models and textures from scratch.

I know you said something about Nintendo possibly doing a lot more if they were to do MM for the Gamecube, but the physics engine and graphics suited MM just fine. MM ended up coming out as a masterpiece, reused physics engine and graphics or not.

I'm not saying it wasn't, I'm just pointing out that the approach was incredibly lazy and reminds me of the Madden series.