True Zelda Fans

Originally Posted by Hell Hawk

I find it stupid that so many people are so fixated on OOT. It was a good game, but is is not the best of the series. OOT is basically the Final Fantasy VII of the Zelda series. It was an amazing game game, but most of the fans don't realize that numerous better games have come along since.

Or maybe they don't have the same taste as you. Just a thought.

Originally Posted by Abyss Master

I think there's more to the table than "change/NO CHANGE ARRRRGH GET AWAY FROM ME AND MY ZELDA".

Change can be bad just as it can be good, don't be fooled. You can't simply slap something different onto a Zelda game and say "OKAY, IT'S ALL GOOD NOW, IT HAS CHANGE!!". Putting in a different name for the world you are traversing does not make it that much better. If Link was given a gun, that wouldn't necessarily be a good change.

At the same time, Zelda games have always needed to distinguish themselves. Especially when adapting that classical "save the princess" plotline that the series is constantly accused of. The series uses variation and change to mark their games as different. If it was up to me I'd slap any person who dares say that TP is basically OoT - the two feel nothing alike.

Change is not the ultimate recipe for perfection. Zelda is established - messing too much with it is going to prove fatal. A futuristic Zelda game? You'd get a disaster at your hands. It would be the slaughter of the established Nintendo franchise. This is why people are responding negatively to the train in Spirit Tracks. Wind Waker was met with doubt upon seeing the boat and the massive ocean. It was rather different from the Zeldas that they had known.

Majora's Mask was different too. In theory. But in truth, it was rather much the same. A fantasy world that needs to be saved, requiring you to traverse dungeons and gain items. It presented itself in a very different way, but at the same time the familiar Zelda "spirit" was there (I myself don't believe in a "Zelda spirit" outside the fantasy setting).

I believe "good change" is what people associate with Majora's Mask. It was very different, but was still attractive as a Zelda title and managed to hold onto the familiar elements that has created the Zelda universe. "Bad change", or perhaps we should say "risky change", is something like the train in Spirit Tracks. It derails from the elements in the Zelda universe, thereby feeling un-natural and somewhat out of place.

So true! This is pretty much how I feel about it. I mean, I'm not one to say who a "true Zelda fan" is but I don't think the people using the phrase are using it for the right thing. If you are a Zelda fan, you should trust the creators since they are the ones who define what Zelda is. You love what the other games have to offer for whatever reason, and want to see the legend develop even further. I do, however, get annoyed with the people who just wish to change everything about Zelda and claim to be Zelda fans. Does anyone know what I mean? I guess it depends on what makes you a Zelda fan. But I feel many people are asking for a game with a Zelda-like feel, but in the end a different game. You can really only change the series so much before it isn't really Zelda anymore. If Majora's Mask had a sequel in either Termina or some other universe, it would be more of a Zelda spinoff if you know what I mean....

And there is no "one true Zelda" so anyone who believes in such a thing needs to wake up. Each game, though introducing new elements, takes ideas from the games we grew to love and develops them into something. The reason rumor of an ocean and boats freaked people out is because they didn't know the story behind it, they thought their beloved kingdom of Hyrule had been completely done away with. Some may argue it had been done away with... but I believe it was just reborn under a different light, through a different story or legend. I can't really explain it. But it is ok to be protective of what you feel is the "Zelda spirit", and it is ok to hope for more refreshing ideas that take the story to a new height. I guess what is important is that you trust in the creators-dear god this sounds like a religious doctrine... and I'm freaked out so I'm stopping here...

Originally Posted by eiyuu_004

So true! This is pretty much how I feel about it. I mean, I'm not one to say who a "true Zelda fan" is but I don't think the people using the phrase are using it for the right thing. If you are a Zelda fan, you should trust the creators since they are the ones who define what Zelda is. You love what the other games have to offer for whatever reason, and want to see the legend develop even further. I do, however, get annoyed with the people who just wish to change everything about Zelda and claim to be Zelda fans. Does anyone know what I mean? I guess it depends on what makes you a Zelda fan. But I feel many people are asking for a game with a Zelda-like feel, but in the end a different game. You can really only change the series so much before it isn't really Zelda anymore. If Majora's Mask had a sequel in either Termina or some other universe, it would be more of a Zelda spinoff if you know what I mean....

And there is no "one true Zelda" so anyone who believes in such a thing needs to wake up. Each game, though introducing new elements, takes ideas from the games we grew to love and develops them into something. The reason rumor of an ocean and boats freaked people out is because they didn't know the story behind it, they thought their beloved kingdom of Hyrule had been completely done away with. Some may argue it had been done away with... but I believe it was just reborn under a different light, through a different story or legend. I can't really explain it. But it is ok to be protective of what you feel is the "Zelda spirit", and it is ok to hope for more refreshing ideas that take the story to a new height. I guess what is important is that you trust in the creators-dear god this sounds like a religious doctrine... and I'm freaked out so I'm stopping here...

Lol, it sort of does sound like a religious doctrine

But I agree with you and Abyss.

Originally Posted by Horny Dog Matt

Like I said, City in the Sky and Twilight Palace were both very futuristic elements. City in the Sky was a mysterious city literally above the skies of Hyrule using advanced technology to keep it above the clouds, nd the Twilight Realm also felt like an amazing combination of fantasy and sci-fi. Sci-fantasys. I loved those dungeons because they had new elements.

Not really, they were advanced when compared to Hyrule. Really, a city that is kept afloat by gigantic fans wouldn't be the same as a high-tech base ala what you see in Metroid.

The Twilight Realm is just a different realm, I didn't really feel that there was technology unbefitting a Zelda game that could be found there (most of the dungeon was based around light and darkness).

I mean, City in the Sky even made me question who actually created it and why above the clouds. Don't you ever wonder who actually created the city? It looked futuristic and abandoned, and I doubt the Oocca would have created it...

It's mysterious, yes, but I don't consider the City in the Sky futuristic, at least not in the aspect that I'm talking about. It just uses different technology (and I sincerely doubt the City in the Sky can be compared to the likes of Skytown in Metroid Prime 3).

Originally Posted by Horny Dog Matt

change is good, and you are not a true Zelda fan if you do not accept it.

There would be a lot of changes to Zelda as we know it that I would support, but I do not like the idea of trains in Zelda or Link turning into a wolf. I guess I'm not a real Zelda fan.

You chastise others for defining what a real Zelda fan is, then you tell them that THEY are not real Zelda fans. I like OoT, and I don't see why everyone on the internet flames people who think that OoT is the best game ever or whatever, then they turn around and drool and praise ALttP (Don't get me wrong, that's an amazing game too.)

Different people are Zelda fans for different reasons, and we all have the right to express and discuss our preferences. That's why I'm on this forum. (I'm a noob, see post count)

Originally Posted by AuroraBoreality

There would be a lot of changes to Zelda as we know it that I would support, but I do not like the idea of trains in Zelda or Link turning into a wolf. I guess I'm not a real Zelda fan.

Yeah, you're not, because you're BAWWWWWWING about completely unimportant things. Christ, who cares if there's a train, I mean really.

O U NO WAT, I DONT LIKE WIND WAKER COS IT HAS A BOAT
O U NO WAT, I DONT LIKE MAJORAS MASK COS IT HAS TIME LIMIT
O U NO WAT, I DONT LIKE TWILIGHT PRINCESS COS IT HAS WOLF
O U NO WAT, I DONT LIKE PHANTOM HOURGLASS COS IT HAS BOAT
O U NO WAT, I DONT LIKE SPIRIT TRACKS COS IT HAS TRAIN
O U NO WAT, I DONT LIKE OCARINA OF ... I love Ocarina of Time!

Originally Posted by Mandrag (below)

We should, as a group, stop all of this senseless fighting.
Let us simply agree that Link's Awakening is the best Zelda ever made, with the possible exception of Link's Awakening DX.

Failed, bye.

We should, as a group, stop all of this senseless fighting.
Let us simply agree that Link's Awakening is the best Zelda ever made, with the possible exception of Link's Awakening DX.

Originally Posted by Mandrag

We should, as a group, stop all of this senseless fighting.
Let us simply agree that Link's Awakening is the best Zelda ever made, with the possible exception of Link's Awakening DX.

Sorry, but no.
OVER GAME

Originally Posted by Horny Dog Matt

Like I said, City in the Sky and Twilight Palace were both very futuristic elements. City in the Sky was a mysterious city literally above the skies of Hyrule using advanced technology to keep it above the clouds, nd the Twilight Realm also felt like an amazing combination of fantasy and sci-fi. Sci-fantasys. I loved those dungeons because they had new elements.

I mean, City in the Sky even made me question who actually created it and why above the clouds. Don't you ever wonder who actually created the city? It looked futuristic and abandoned, and I doubt the Oocca would have created it...

You mean, Magic kept it afloat, and magic created it. Maybe, some long-dead sorcerer? And a cannon isn't too "technological."

I consider my self a true Zelda fan, because I like all of the Zelda games, and I think that they all are good.

Originally Posted by romanomnomnom

Or maybe they don't have the same taste as you. Just a thought.

Or maybe Hell Hawk is compleatly right.

I agree, the other 3 3D games have all improved on OOT, with better graphics,better story, more innovative gameplay, etc. People tend to do this with alot of games, not just zelda. They get fixated on one game in the series and ignore the improvments the rest made.

Originally Posted by SheikahSage

Or maybe Hell Hawk is compleatly right.

I agree, the other 3 3D games have all improved on OOT, with better graphics,better story, more innovative gameplay, etc. People tend to do this with alot of games, not just zelda. They get fixated on one game in the series and ignore the improvments the rest made.

Or maybe when Hell Hawk says that OoT definately is not the best of the series, that is his/her own opinion.

I never disagreed that some people hold onto the concept of OoT like they're a two year old and the game is their blankee. Actually, I've posted in other thread before agreeing with this completely, and also saying that people should accept new games for what they are.

For example: some people read a book, and when a movie is made, they nit-pick at the movie and judge it for not containing every little thing. And the same things happen with the Zelda games. "Well this is too different" and "This will never compare to OoT." I do believe that people should look at the other games' differences and respect them instead of relaying everything to Ocarina.

On the contrary, Ocarina is a favorite game for a lot of people, and there is nothing wrong with that. There is also nothing wrong with people not liking newer, more advanced or technologically advanced games as much, either. It's a person's own business if the concept of Zelda means swords & sheilds & faeries & forests to them.

Just as some people don't like things to stay the same, others don't like uber advancement, and respect Zelda for it's medieval feel, or whatever else it means to them (maybe due to nostalgia, or whatever.)

Everyone has different tastes, opinions, and favorite Zelda games, and it's no-ones job to say who is or isn't a true Zelda fan. That's all up to the player. So I really don't understand what's trying to be gained here. You're all just different.

Originally Posted by romanomnomnom

Or maybe when Hell Hawk says that OoT definately is not the best of the series, that is his/her own opinion.

I never disagreed that some people hold onto the concept of OoT like they're a two year old and the game is their blankee. Actually, I've posted in other thread before agreeing with this completely, and also saying that people should accept new games for what they are.

For example: some people read a book, and when a movie is made, they nit-pick at the movie and judge it for not containing every little thing. And the same things happen with the Zelda games. "Well this is too different" and "This will never compare to OoT." I do believe that people should look at the other games' differences and respect them instead of relaying everything to Ocarina.

On the contrary, Ocarina is a favorite game for a lot of people, and there is nothing wrong with that. There is also nothing wrong with people not liking newer, more advanced or technologically advanced games as much, either. It's a person's own business if the concept of Zelda means swords & sheilds & faeries & forests to them.

Just as some people don't like things to stay the same, others don't like uber advancement, and respect Zelda for it's medieval feel, or whatever else it means to them (maybe due to nostalgia, or whatever.)

Everyone has different tastes, opinions, and favorite Zelda games, and it's no-ones job to say who is or isn't a true Zelda fan. That's all up to the player. So I really don't understand what's trying to be gained here. You're all just different.

Exactly

Originally Posted by SheikahSage

Or maybe Hell Hawk is compleatly right.

Thank you.

Originally Posted by romanomnomnom

Or maybe when Hell Hawk says that OoT definately is not the best of the series, that is his/her own opinion.

Well of course that is just my opinion, just like OOT being the best is yours. I was just saying that even if you believe OOT is the best, you shouldn't bash the other games just because they aren't OOT because they have advantages as well.

And I'm a guy by the way (come on, the logo is right there).

I love how the OP talks about all the 'advances' that the other non-OoT Zelda have, no matter how insignificant, yet completely diminishes all OoT brought to the table as 'just 3D'.

There's no doubt that OoT follows the LttP template, but to say OoT is just LttP in 3D is like saying Film is just T.V. but with a bigger screen. In one sense, I can't really blame the OP for being ignorant on this, simply because I feel gamers nowadays take 3D for granted. I bet most think that the developers write code designed for 2D and then tell the computer 'okay, now just make it in 3D' and call it a day. This is of course, sorry to say, completely idiotic thinking. Ocarina introduced Z-targeting which was revolutionary at the time, and a system that every 3D Zelda afterward utilized. Ocarina was the first game to utilize time travel, which was used in Majora's Mask, which so many people seem to retroactively love nowadays. Not to mention it introduced new races, amazing music, and a completely different way of exploring dungeons and the land of Hyrule. I don't give a damn if you don't like it, but seriously, let's not brush the game off as something any semi-competent coder could have created in his basement in a weekend.

Also, for those of you that think every Zelda after OoT is better. Well, that's your opinion, and it's nice and all, but there's still so many things that OoT does better that its sequels still haven't replicated, despite having better tech.

Majora's Mask - Time and save system was irritating, low amount of dungeons, and absolutely awful boss fights.
Wind Waker - Ugly ass character designs (though the environment graphics were nic), awful sailing, and also didn't have too many dungeons.
Twilight Princess - Story falls apart at the end, wolf form isn't very fun to use, garbage music.

So yeah, basically it's not nostalgia. The sequels really fail in many parts. OoT just seemed like a tighter package overall. Just my opinion, everyone has their own.


Oh, and just to be kind of a jerk, Eiji Aonuma's favorite game is Ocarina of Time too and he doesn't think any of its sequels are better either. So nyah nyah!

Originally Posted by Hell Hawk

Thank you.


Well of course that is just my opinion, just like OOT being the best is yours. I was just saying that even if you believe OOT is the best, you shouldn't bash the other games just because they aren't OOT because they have advantages as well.

And I'm a guy by the way (come on, the logo is right there).

I apologize if I came off rude. I guess your post just came off rather matter-of-factly, if you know what I mean. I'm just so tired of people who like...claim thing, you know? Like claiming what game IS the best, what a "true Zelda fan" REALLY is. Maybe I just misinterpreted.

But I agree with the whole "bashing" thing.

(I just didn't go back to look at your gender. 'M lazy.)

Originally Posted by Parallax

Wind Waker - Ugly ass character designs (though the environment graphics were nic), awful sailing, and also didn't have too many dungeons.

I thought that the character designs were really creative and cute.

Originally Posted by Parallax

Twilight Princess - Story falls apart at the end, wolf form isn't very fun to use, garbage music.

I thought the story was WONDERFUL, liked wolf form and thought it was unique, and enjoyed the music.[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Parallax

So yeah, basically it's not nostalgia. The sequels really fail in many parts. OoT just seemed like a tighter package overall. Just my opinion, everyone has their own.

It was totally nostalgia for me. Maybe not Twilight Princess since it was so recent. But WW was the first game I beat, and it was VERY nostalgic.

Originally Posted by Parallax

Oh, and just to be kind of a jerk, Eiji Aonuma's favorite game is Ocarina of Time too and he doesn't think any of its sequels are better either. So nyah nyah!

That's nice...but that's his deal.

Well I'm at least glad that you referenced that this was YOUR opinion. But there was a lot of bashing here.

Originally Posted by "GK: 5895/9999

Yeah, you're not, because you're BAWWWWWWING about completely unimportant things. Christ, who cares if there's a train, I mean really

Wow, I've been on ZU for about 5 seconds and I'm already pissing people off.

Actually, I think the train and the wolf are kinda important. It's not like I shun TP because it has the wolf- I love TP! (It's not as if I despise the wolf either, I just don't think it was a good choice.) The point I'm trying to make is that not all change is good, and I don't have to like every little thing Nintendo comes out with to be a Zelda fan.

You may disagree, but what I am is not for you to decide.

Originally Posted by Parallax

I love how the OP talks about all the 'advances' that the other non-OoT Zelda have, no matter how insignificant, yet completely diminishes all OoT brought to the table as 'just 3D'.

When, really 3D was one of the only things it brought.

Originally Posted by Parallax

There's no doubt that OoT follows the LttP template, but to say OoT is just LttP in 3D is like saying Film is just T.V. but with a bigger screen.

And it essentially is.

Originally Posted by Parallax

Ocarina introduced Z-targeting which was revolutionary at the time, and a system that every 3D Zelda afterward utilized. Ocarina was the first game to utilize time travel, which was used in Majora's Mask, which so many people seem to retroactively love nowadays.

At the Time. A nostalgia statement. I highly doubt that Ocarina of Time was the first game ever to introduce time travel.

Originally Posted by Parallax

and a completely different way of exploring dungeons and the land of Hyrule. I don't give a damn if you don't like it, but seriously, let's not brush the game off as something any semi-competent coder could have created in his basement in a weekend.

Because it was in 3D.

Originally Posted by Parallax

Also, for those of you that think every Zelda after OoT is better. Well, that's your opinion, and it's nice and all, but there's still so many things that OoT does better that its sequels still haven't replicated, despite having better tech.

And that's your opinion.

Originally Posted by Parallax

Majora's Mask - Time and save system was irritating, low amount of dungeons, and absolutely awful boss fights.

Your opinion. But, I disagree, the boss fights were fun, and the dungeons were amazing.

Originally Posted by Parallax

Wind Waker - Ugly ass character designs (though the environment graphics were nic), awful sailing, and also didn't have too many dungeons.

Sailing got tedious, but the amount of islands you can visit is amazing, and the characters looked fine, to go with the environment they were in. Again, your opinion.

Originally Posted by Parallax

Twilight Princess - Story falls apart at the end, wolf form isn't very fun to use, garbage music.

Twilight Princess had some music from OoT. So, your calling OoT's music garbage. Wolf form was fun at time. And the story is fine.

Originally Posted by Parallax

So yeah, basically it's not nostalgia. The sequels really fail in many parts. OoT just seemed like a tighter package overall. Just my opinion, everyone has their own.

Yup, everyone does. Although, I think the sequal does not fail. The, implying that OoT only has one sequal, which was just as good.

Originally Posted by Parallax

Oh, and just to be kind of a jerk, Eiji Aonuma's favorite game is Ocarina of Time too and he doesn't think any of its sequels are better either. So nyah nyah!

That's an OoT fanboy response.

Originally Posted by Ben

When, really 3D was one of the only things it brought.



And it essentially is.

If you don't think that 3D was you know, kind of a big deal, well it's pretty much pointless trying to explain it to you.

Course, I somehow feel that I would be correct in thinking that you're among the people who feel that having a non-Ganon main villain is the type of thing that helped progress the series farther than something like 'mere' 3d could ever hope to achieve.

At the Time. A nostalgia statement. I highly doubt that Ocarina of Time was the first game ever to introduce time travel.

When did I say it was the first game to introduce time travel? I said it was the first Zelda game to use time travel.

Because it was in 3D.

Ignored.

And that's your opinion.



Your opinion. But, I disagree, the boss fights were fun, and the dungeons were amazing.



Sailing got tedious, but the amount of islands you can visit is amazing, and the characters looked fine, to go with the environment they were in. Again, your opinion.

REALLY? MY opinion you say?!?! Oh wow, thanks for pointing this out because I totally didn't say anywhere in my post that such was my opinion!

Consider me schooled!

Twilight Princess had some music from OoT. So, your calling OoT's music garbage.

LOL. Actually, that's the funny thing. The OoT remixes were the few songs in the game that WEREN'T garbage. Almost every piece of original music for TP was dull, unmemorable tripe.

Yup, everyone does. Although, I think the sequal does not fail. The, implying that OoT only has one sequal, which was just as good.

I'm not sure what exactly you're trying to say here.

That's an OoT fanboy response.

Sigh. That was mainly me joking around, but at the same time addressing that such an opinion isn't as outlandish as some are making it out to be.

Zelda didn't make 3D. The PS1 made 3D, and it was only a matter of time before Zelda got a 3D game. People should stop acting like Ocarina of Time revolutionized everything as if it was the first 3D game ever made. Zelda being 3D is nothing special. It wasn't the game that brought all of these amazing innovations, it was the console.

REALLY? MY opinion you say?!?! Oh wow, thanks for pointing this out because I totally didn't say anywhere in my post that such was my opinion!

Consider me schooled!

You should consider yourself schooled. It is obvious that it is opinion. Just because you didn't say that it is your opinion doesn't mean it can't be. There is a distinct line between fact and opinion, and what you said was definetly opinion.

LOL. Actually, that's the funny thing. The OoT remixes were the few songs in the game that WEREN'T garbage. Almost every piece of original music for TP was dull, unmemorable tripe.

Well then you are alone in this thread because I liked almost every bit of music in TP. The only thing I didn't care for was Zora's Domain. That's my opinion though.