Zelda Ocarina Of Time is still number 1 ranked game

Originally Posted by Yamari

Same here. There are games I consider to be better than OoT myself as well. I think SMG deserves to be number one. It's fresh, unique, and has great gameplay and characters, not to mention a great storyline as well. OoT is just ALttP's storyline over again with a few twists and differences. TP is the same, though I consider that game to be a bit better overall.

Honestly, which do you think a real fan would pick? A game with a milked storyline and other similarities aka OoT, or a game with a new, fresh storyline, gameplay, etc aka SMG?

That entire post is almost making cry a little bit. I almost can't take your post seriously. =\

OoT revolutionized the series, Z targeting anyone? The combat itself was also significantly better since you were able to set 3 separate items to the C buttons, plus the ability to quickly roll out of the way or bring up your shield.

Even OoT's plot was a lot deeper than ALttP, the NPCs were just a lot more memorable and the game in general was more cinematic. (Mostly due to the 3Dness) And it sure as hell is better than SMG's excuse for a plot. How could you possibly even mention a Mario games plot? Its just beyond me.

If you think that SMG is more revolutionary than OoT then you need to be slapped. Its just that simple. I think you may be thinking Twilight Princess, and not OoT.

So ****ing what? So OoT was the first 3D Zelda game and had the new Z targeting. Big deal. That doesn't have any effect on how good the game is overall. Too many OoT fans nowadays are basing their so called opinions on OoT mostly or even solely for that reason. SMG introduced a lot more new features, such as Mario's new forms, flying through space, spinning, co star mode, shooting star bits with the B button, and I could go on. And like I said above, the game has a fresh new storyline, unlike OoT.

OoT, while it is still a very good game, is extremely overrated. SMG beats it nearly every way. No doubt.

So ****ing what? So OoT was the first 3D Zelda game and had the new Z targeting. Big deal. That doesn't have any effect on how good the game is overall. Too many OoT fans nowadays are basing their so called opinions on OoT mostly or even solely for that reason. SMG introduced a lot more new features, such as Mario's new forms, flying through space, spinning, co star mode, shooting star bits with the B button, and I could go on. And like I said above, the game has a fresh new storyline, unlike OoT.

OoT, while it is still a very good game, is extremely overrated. SMG beats it nearly every way. No doubt.

*sigh* Yes, SMG had an incredibly fresh and original plot, too bad it sucked.

Give me a moment while I think of everything that OoT did new for the series.

Here we go: Z targeting, Ocarina songs, horseback riding, shooting galleries, fully 3D environments, deeper combat, significantly more side quests, and many, many other things.

So OoT was the first 3D Zelda game and had the new Z targeting. Big deal. That doesn't have any effect on how good the game is overall.

Hehe, yes it does, imagine playing OoT without Z targeting? Imagine playing any Adventure game since OoT without some form of targeting?

I'm not going to argue with your opinion on SMG being a better game than OoT. (Because that is purely opinion) but SMG sure as hell isn't more revolutionary.

Originally Posted by Pyrodan55

I agree. I don't really see what's so great about Mario. But Brawl could dethrone them

No, it can't.

As excellent and popular as Brawl is (or will be), it's not going to rightfully earn a spot on anyone's "Top 5 Games of All Time" list, unless the list belongs to a raging fanboy. Why? Because it's not revolutionary. Brawl brings nothing new to the table when it comes to the video game industry as a whole, unlike Super Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time, which revolutionized and set the standard for 3D gaming and the action-adventure genre.

There's no question that Brawl will be great, but claiming it deserves the "Greatest Game of All Time" title is pretty ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Yamari

So ****ing what? So OoT was the first 3D Zelda game and had the new Z targeting. Big deal. That doesn't have any effect on how good the game is overall. Too many OoT fans nowadays are basing their so called opinions on OoT mostly or even solely for that reason. SMG introduced a lot more new features, such as Mario's new forms, flying through space, spinning, co star mode, shooting star bits with the B button, and I could go on. And like I said above, the game has a fresh new storyline, unlike OoT.

OoT, while it is still a very good game, is extremely overrated. SMG beats it nearly every way. No doubt.

and SMG is not overrated??? lmao nice joke.

Originally Posted by Sinoda

No, it can't.

As excellent and popular as Brawl is (or will be), it's not going to rightfully earn a spot on anyone's "Top 5 Games of All Time" list, unless the list belongs to a raging fanboy. Why? Because it's not revolutionary. Brawl brings nothing new to the table when it comes to the video game industry as a whole, unlike Super Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time, which revolutionized and set the standard for 3D gaming and the action-adventure genre.

There's no question that Brawl will be great, but claiming it deserves the "Greatest Game of All Time" title is pretty ridiculous.

You're cool, I like you. Good post.

Originally Posted by Ender

You saw one that didn't have OoT or SMG as the top game? I doubt it.

I have, but I can't find the link.

Originally Posted by Link*HeroOfTime

and SMG is not overrated??? lmao nice joke.

It's not VASTLY overrated, like OoT, but id definitely is overrated to some extent in my opinion. I mean, there were no sex scenes at all.

Just kidding (about the sex). The game really is amazing, but I still think it's not AS good as people are saying it is.

I honestly don't care if a game brings innovation or not. You have to realize the point of video games is to have fun. If Brawl is more fun than every other game, then I think it should be #1.

Originally Posted by Ender

*sigh* Yes, SMG had an incredibly fresh and original plot, too bad it sucked.

How so? I personally think SMG had an excellent plot and storyline. Having to travel through space and visit a bunch of galaxies in order to stop Bowser from taking over the universe is simply epic, not to mention the attack in Toad Town was simply epic as well. However, you have your opinion and I have mine, so fair enough if you disagree.

Originally Posted by Ender

Give me a moment while I think of everything that OoT did new for the series.

Here we go: Z targeting, Ocarina songs, horseback riding, shooting galleries, fully 3D environments, deeper combat, significantly more side quests, and many, many other things.

Well, here are the things that SMG introduced: New forms Mario and Luigi can take, new enemies, shooting star bits, flying through space with launch stars, sling stars, and pull stars, star spinning, riding on top of a ball containing a power star, swimming through the water on a Koopa shell, ray surfing, and much more.

SMG might not be as revolutionary as OoT, but it certainly introduced a hell of a lot of new features and was much more original.

Originally Posted by Ender

Hehe, yes it does, imagine playing OoT without Z targeting? Imagine playing any Adventure game since OoT without some form of targeting?

No it doesn't. TWW had it, TP had it, does that immediately make them good games? No. True OoT introduced it, but that does not mean it is a good game.

[QUOTE=EnderI'm not going to argue with your opinion on SMG being a better game than OoT. (Because that is purely opinion) but SMG sure as hell isn't more revolutionary.[/QUOTE]

Fair enough.

Originally Posted by MyTeamLevel100

I still think it is the best game ever and many professionals agree. It came first in Edges top 100 best games ever. and it still wins most stuff. No game can be compared to it not even on this very day.

I'm sorry but I skipped everyone after this. Many professionals? Professionals at what? Games? They are just gamers that are good, so that doesn't matter. Professionals at reviewing? Anyone can review, a review is based off of opinio. I hope you explain this. Most professionals. That's very ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Pyrodan55

I honestly don't care if a game brings innovation or not. You have to realize the point of video games is to have fun. If Brawl is more fun than every other game, then I think it should be #1.

Then you're not making a credible "Greatest Games of All Time" list. Whether a game is "fun" or not is almost entirely subjective, while true quality and innovation are not. Some people might enjoy Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing and that's fine, but to even suggest it deserves a spot on a "Top Five Games" (or even a "Top 1000 Games") list is ludicrous.

At the same time, some people like myself don't particularly enjoy games such as Halo, God of War, or Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, yet can easily admit that they're great games regardless.

It's this absence of bias that seperates a "Greatest Games of All Time" list from a "My Favorite Games" list.

Originally Posted by Ender

You're cool, I like you. Good post.

Much obliged, good sir.

Originally Posted by Yamari

So ****ing what? So OoT was the first 3D Zelda game and had the new Z targeting. Big deal. That doesn't have any effect on how good the game is overall. Too many OoT fans nowadays are basing their so called opinions on OoT mostly or even solely for that reason. SMG introduced a lot more new features, such as Mario's new forms, flying through space, spinning, co star mode, shooting star bits with the B button, and I could go on. And like I said above, the game has a fresh new storyline, unlike OoT.

OoT, while it is still a very good game, is extremely overrated. SMG beats it nearly every way. No doubt.

SMG i find boring. I got 40 stars and cba to get any more its a ture. Oot changed how games are played. It is amazing no other game not even a zelda game has the same magic the same feel it does. Its perfect no game can or ever will match ocarina of time. Thats why its just won Edge top 100 best games ever and it was obviouse it would win. I think its underrated if you ask me.

UNDERRATED?! Are you crazy? I think many of us agree that OoT is overrated, no doubt about that.

OoT is a good game, but to me it can never match up to SMG. SMG will forever be an excellent game in my eyes.

Mario 64 was better then SMG. I don't know how SMG managed to become the second best rated game ever. But its all opinion if you like it or not reviewers just check the gameplay and stuff.

I actually agree with Yamari, OoT is really overrated.

Yeah, it's a great game and all, but about half way through the game you knew what was going to happen from there until the end of the game. Sure, there were a few details that you couldn't have guessed, but the main plot was kinda obvious--as it was supposed to be.

SMG is kinda overrated, but not as much as OoT. I haven't played much of SMG, but--unless there's a sudden outburst of hardcore gaming hidden somewhere--I doubt it'll do much for me.

In short: I don't rate either games very well--neither come close to being the best game of all time, for me.

So I piss off most people in this thread! Yhey! :D

Originally Posted by MyTeamLevel100

Mario 64 was better then SMG. I don't know how SMG managed to become the second best rated game ever. But its all opinion if you like it or not reviewers just check the gameplay and stuff.

I've never played Mario 64, but I don't want to because SMG makes me happy enough to play over and over.

Originally Posted by Sinoda

No, it can't.

As excellent and popular as Brawl is (or will be), it's not going to rightfully earn a spot on anyone's "Top 5 Games of All Time" list, unless the list belongs to a raging fanboy. Why? Because it's not revolutionary. Brawl brings nothing new to the table when it comes to the video game industry as a whole, unlike Super Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time, which revolutionized and set the standard for 3D gaming and the action-adventure genre.

There's no question that Brawl will be great, but claiming it deserves the "Greatest Game of All Time" title is pretty ridiculous.

I think it does.
So a game has to bring something revolutionary to be better? I don't get that, most people love oot because it brings 3D, and that is wrong. That's not seeing how good the game is but only what it bring's along. I just rate a game on how good it wil be and not if a game brings something revolutionary. If it brings something revolutionary, I rather praise the console for being able to do that. So yes, I think brawl will be in my top 5 list(maybe even nr1)

EXACTLY. You just said everything I've been trying to point out, Qnez. Too many OoT fanboys love the game simply because of those reasons you stated above. Well said, man.

I, too, think Brawl will be in my top five.

Originally Posted by Qnez

So a game has to bring something revolutionary to be better? I don't get that, most people love oot because it brings 3D, and that is wrong. That's not seeing how good the game is but only what it bring's along. I just rate a game on how good it wil be and not if a game brings something revolutionary. If it brings something revolutionary, I rather praise the console for being able to do that. So yes, I think brawl will be in my top 5 list(maybe even nr1)

For a game to be considered a "Best Game of All Time", yes, it needs to be revolutionary. Why? Because if a game is not different and innovative, it's just a tweaked and polished version of a game that we've played before. What separates a generic racing game from another generic racing game other than a different name, graphics, layout, and car models? What separates two generic fighting games?

Nothing. Their face remains the same; only the mask is changed.

If you call any generic racing game the "Best Game of All Time", you might as well call all generic racing games the same, because little separates them from being almost identical. Same with generic fighting games, generic first-person shooter games, and any individual game that's just a rehash of something we've seen, played, and completed before.

A game that deserves to be called "One of the Best" needs to be unique; it needs to offer something new that you didn't expect; and it needs to push the envelope of what the video game industry can accomplish as a whole.

I've already mentioned that Brawl will be an excellent game, but does it deserve the spot on a credible "Best Games of All Time" list? No, because to the trained eye, it's little more than a tweaked, polished version of Melee with a handful of new features. This, however, will not stop it from being a great game, which I cannot stress enough.

There's a colossal difference between an excellent game, and a game worthy of being called the best.

Originally Posted by Pyrodan55

I agree. I don't really see what's so great about Mario. But Brawl could dethrone them

It doesn't deserve to.

BTW, I agree with you 100% on Brawl, Sinoda. It's not enough of something new to say it belongs in the best game ever category. It's really just a rehash of Melee with some new characters, stages, and a story mode. (and some more, but overall pointless additions)

Originally Posted by Zelda forever

sheesh why make this thread
to many zelda lovers here
tp beats oot
ww beats oot
San andreas beats oot
SMG beats oot
do I need to go on

The only game that beats OOT IMO is not even on that list. It's called Majora's Mask.