True Zelda Fans

What are you babbling about? I'm talking about the influence in GAMEPLAY. I absolutely despise the argument that because one game had a different story, that it brought more to the series. I'm not saying Majora's Mask is bad. I'm saying that at least as far as what was 'brought to the series', OoT shows way more influence than either Majora's Mask or Wind Waker have shown.

I honestly don't know how one could argue that.

Originally Posted by Parallax

Correction: I'm using sarcasm because your point is faulty.

Correction 1: You weren't talking to me with that quote.
Correction 2: No, because what he said was right. It did something innovative within the game itself, not this innovation you're talking about because it was 3D. That was the hardware.

You used sarcasm to avoid the point.

Aha, as I expected. You're one of those people that obviously hold things like a different setting being far more important than ACTUAL gameplay innovation.

Are you ****ting me? Really, you have absolutely no idea at all, do you?

So your argument is as follows:

OoT is nothing more than LttP in 3D because Ganon is in it and there is a master sword included in the game.

Oh wow, you kind of missed pretty much what everyone in the Zelda community other than you thinks there, didn't you? The whole game is the same. collect some items from mini dungeons, plot twist, do more temples, kill Ganon with Master Sword. If you don't know about this, then you can just stop posting.

Whereas, Majora's Mask TOTALLY deserves more credit than OoT because, although it used Ocarina's engine

You mean that modified Super Mario 64 engine?

battle system, graphics,

Right so far, it did use those with a few tweaks.

music

It used some, not all. It also had primarily an original OST.

time travel mechanic

LLLLLLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

characters

Character models, not characters. The very few characters that were reused (Link, Skull kid and HMS) were needed since this was a sequel.

it had the audacity and the VISION to have a different final boss than Ganon. And because of that fact, it is the REAL innovator of the 3D games, right?

You have not got a clue what you are talking about. Neither Ocarina of Time nor Majora's Mask made any drastic improvements at all from being 3D. However, Majora's Mask had very different gameplay from anything else used before such as the time mechanic / time travel (seriously, play the game because you obviously haven't if you think this is anything at all like Ocarina of Time's time travel, or you're incredibly ignorant), vastly superior character interaction compared to any other Zelda title, transformation and many sidequests and many stories besides the main one, which wasn't save Zelda.

Oh, and Wind Waker. Sure, it had the same template where you fight Ganon and get the master sword, but OOH LOOK AT THE NEW GRAFIX? Oh and instead of Hyrule field, you travel across a sea instead! INNOVATION!

Idiot again. Sailing around and controlling the wind in different ways was different from anything else in the series. I mean, the whole part where the whole games is at sea and everywhere is an island is enough change alone. I imagine that's not change enough for you though, is it?

Ocarina of Time's being a replica of A Link to the Past was enough though!

Yeah, anyone could have made it. Clearly. Obviously. Why I bet you could have too!

You need some sleep. What are you even saying here.
/rhetorical

And were 2D platformers needed?

Yeah, because it's a ****ing great genre and is one of the biggest in the industry today.

What influence do you see them bring exactly?

Originally Posted by GK: 5895/9999

Correction 1: You weren't talking to me with that quote.
Correction 2: No, because what he said was right. It did something innovative within the game itself, not this innovation you're talking about because it was 3D. That was the hardware.

You used sarcasm to avoid the point.

Eh, things slip when you're arguing with someone. Whatever, it was him and not you, congrats.

The point is still retarded however because the hardware ENABLED 3D to occur, but you kinda still have to, you know, design and program it? By his (or yours or whatever) logic, no piece of software should get any credit for anything because it's all because of the machine they were running on.

Are you ****ting me? Really, you have absolutely no idea at all, do you?

PLEASE. Elaborate for me. Because no, I don't see all the huge innovations MM brought to the table.

Oh wow, you kind of missed pretty much what everyone in the Zelda community other than you thinks there, didn't you? The whole game is the same. collect some items from mini dungeons, plot twist, do more temples, kill Ganon with Master Sword. If you don't know about this, then you can just stop posting.

Those are inane simplifications. Yes, I'm aware it used the template from LttP. What the hell's your point? I'm trying to say that you could still borrow a template and create something new out of it.

Hell, let's simplify things even more, to: "Good guy beats bad guy".

Congratulations, now you've got the plot for every Zelda ever made, and 99% of video games ever made. Obviously, they're all the same, right?

You mean that modified Super Mario 64 engine?

I don't know what you're implying here. Yes, I know OoT used a modified Mario 64 engine. What of it? Or are you now trying to say that the Mario 64 engine is more similar to OoT's engine than OoT's is to MM's?

[quote]It used some, not all. It also had primarily an original OST.

I didn't mean the songs. I meant it used the ocarina mechanic. Utilizing songs the same way you did in OoT.

LLLLLLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Don't know what you're LOLIN at. You had the ability to travel through time in both games, though it handled differently.

OH BUT WAIT, THAT WAS TOTALLY DIFFERENT BUT OOT'S DUAL MECHANIC WAS EXACTLY LIKE LTTP'S! IT'S OBVIOUS RIGHT?

Bet you wouldn't complain about that lol.

Character models, not characters. The very few characters that were reused (Link, Skull kid and HMS) were needed since this was a sequel.

So? I could also argue that Link, Zelda and Ganon all have personalities quite a bit different than in LttP.

You have not got a clue what you are talking about. Neither Ocarina of Time nor Majora's Mask made any drastic improvements at all from being 3D. However, Majora's Mask had very different gameplay from anything else used before such as the time mechanic / time travel (seriously, play the game because you obviously haven't if you think this is anything at all like Ocarina of Time's time travel, or you're incredibly ignorant), vastly superior character interaction compared to any other Zelda title, transformation and many sidequests and many stories besides the main one, which wasn't save Zelda.

Yeah, this argument is becoming (moreso) idiotic. I know how MM works. I don't know how it influenced other games in the series even remotely, compared to Ocarina. All the other excuses you made, about story and character interaction, I don't see how no one else would have come up with that.

Idiot again. Sailing around and controlling the wind in different ways was different from anything else in the series. I mean, the whole part where the whole games is at sea and everywhere is an island is enough change alone. I imagine that's not change enough for you though, is it?

LOL. Oh, I think it's different enough, actually. But AGAIN, I'm laughing at how you seem to think a different landscape to move across is a bigger innovation than an entire ****ing dimension.

Tell me, if Ganon in OoT was renamed as Majora or Zant, Zelda was renamed Malon or Midna, and Hyrule was called Termina, would OoT THEN deserve more credit?

I'm sorry, but you're kind of a moron.

Your logic honestly makes no sense mister special. How is he a moron when all he's doin what your doin, just better. MM was totally different and all the MM fans that see all the influences see what they want to see

Oh, I agree with both of you! You see, the third dimension is nothing special. ANYONE could have done it. But it takes REAL skill to make something like MM, which is so unique because it only borrows Ocarina's engine and mechanics, and a host of other things, but it DOESN'T have Ganon. AMAZING!

Thats cause ganon sorta go in trouble in oot and Link left lookin for his buddy

Originally Posted by Parallax

Oh, I agree with both of you! You see, the third dimension is nothing special. ANYONE could have done it. But it takes REAL skill to make something like MM, which is so unique because it only borrows Ocarina's engine and mechanics, and a host of other things, but it DOESN'T have Ganon. AMAZING!

Your ignorance is hilarious.

If you cannot figure out why tWW and MM have new innovative things than, you don't belong here.

EDIT: Oh wait! Silly me! I forgot! You can't.

-Masks. That itself is so massive and innovating it counts for all of the others I've forgotten.
Btw, that wasn't in OoT.

And if you can't figure out why OoT is innovative, well...

First of all, **** off being so cocky. It's weak.

Jesus, you're worse than Double A. At least he knows when to stop.

Those are inane simplifications. Yes, I'm aware it used the template from LttP. What the hell's your point? I'm trying to say that you could still borrow a template and create something new out of it.

It's a copy of the game, for the the last time for **** sake. It made nothing new out of it if the same crap happens, and it happens in the same way.

Hell, let's simplify things even more, to: "Good guy beats bad guy".

Congratulations, now you've got the plot for every Zelda ever made, and 99% of video games ever made. Obviously, they're all the same, right?

Pathetic.

I don't know what you're implying here. Yes, I know OoT used a modified Mario 64 engine. What of it? Or are you now trying to say that the Mario 64 engine is more similar to OoT's engine than OoT's is to MM's?

I'm giving more evidence that Ocarina of Time isn't so great as you think. It used a modified SM64 engine. That point wasn't relating to Majora's Mask at all.

I didn't mean the songs. I meant it used the ocarina mechanic. Utilizing songs the same way you did in OoT.

Sometimes, yes. Slowing down time, reverting back to day one, no.

Don't know what you're LOLIN at. You had the ability to travel through time in both games, though it handled differently.

In Ocarina of Time, you time travel in one way, you go from child to adult via a cutscene, and the worlds are different. In Majora's Mask, the time travel is completely and utterly different in every way possible. You have a three day cycle to which you have dozens of NPCs going around doing different things and interacting with them at different times actually matters. There are deep sidequests cleverly interwoven into this, and Clock Town us primarily the favourite town from any Zelda game to the fans because of this. On top of that, as well as manipulating time with the songs, you have a constant feeling of 'oh man, I better hurry and finish this dungeon before the time runs out'. You're always having to stay active, because if you run out of time the moon will fall and you get game over. The sheer amount which is connected to time is really impressive, and how it works when you go back to day one is impressive too.

Man, they're completely different. If you're going to argue this particular section, then really, get out of this thread and stop posting.

OH BUT WAIT, THAT WAS TOTALLY DIFFERENT

I've just explained how it was.

BUT OOT'S DUAL MECHANIC WAS EXACTLY LIKE LTTP'S! IT'S OBVIOUS RIGHT?

Bet you wouldn't complain about that lol.

Pathetic.

So? I could also argue that Link, Zelda and Ganon all have personalities quite a bit different than in LttP.

They all have very bland personalities which is ironic since they're supposed to be the main characters, but they're petty much the same. Every character model that was used in Majora's Mask from Ocarina of Time was a different character. Every one.

Yeah, this argument is becoming (moreso) idiotic. I know how MM works. I don't know how it influenced other games in the series even remotely, compared to Ocarina.

It didn't, it was just different which is good. Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess weren't different. We don't need three versions of one game.

All the other excuses you made, about story and character interaction

RAAAAGE. You have no idea. Everyone knows that Majora's Mask has by far the best character interaction and great sidequest story lines out of any Zelda game by far. Everyone apart from your outstandingly ignorant self of course.

I keep saying you're ignorant, and I'm sorry for doing so so much, but by god you are.

LOL. Oh, I think it's different enough, actually. But AGAIN, I'm laughing at how you seem to think a different landscape to move across is a bigger innovation than an entire ****ing dimension.

RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE.

What the **** are you on? It isn't, and I never said it was. Make sense when you post. Having islands and sea is different from running around fields.

*breathes*

Ocarina of Time is the same as A Link to the Past, only it's in 3D. Wind Waker is no other game but in 3D. It's an original take on the series.

Tell me, if Ganon in OoT was renamed as Majora or Zant, Zelda was renamed Malon or Midna, and Hyrule was called Termina, would OoT THEN deserve more credit?

Absolutely not, for ****ing obvious reasons, because you just changed some names. Are you insane.

I'm sorry, but you're kind of a moron.

THE INSULT IS BURNS. I'm not even being sarcastic. That, coming from you, is an absolutely huge insult.


FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF ZELDA SECTION NEWBIES DO MY HEAD IN.

All right, this is bullet-to-the-head-inducing level of stupidity. I'll just try and wrap it up.


1. I never said MM didn't have compelling character interaction or whatever. I said it wasn't significant compared to other innovations done by OoT.
2. It's funny how you try and defend your position on Majora's Mask saying that the Zelda community agrees it has the best story/character interaction, but seem to refuse to acknowledge that the community thinks that OoT wasn't 'just' LttP in 3D.
3. Wind Waker used the exact same main cast as LttP did as well, except that it was on a boat so I guess that excuses it. :rollseyes
4. While a game doesn't have to be influential to be great, the fact is, OoT brought more to the table for 3D Zelda than either MM or WW could ever hope to achieve, despite how much you might wanna cry.
5. Even Eiji Aonuma, the director of Majora's Mask and Wind Waker doesn't think any of those games were that different. Enjoy being in the minority with your completely retarded opinion.

Originally Posted by Parallax

4. While a game doesn't have to be influential to be great, the fact is, OoT brought more to the table for 3D Zelda than either MM or WW could ever hope to achieve, despite how much you might wanna cry.
5. Even Eiji Aonuma, the director of Majora's Mask and Wind Waker doesn't think any of those games were that different. Enjoy being in the minority with your completely retarded opinion.

Hahaha! Are you a ****ing idiot? Just about EVERYONE here is arguing AGAINST you. No one agrees with you. You sir, are the minority.

Oh, I didn't know that what, 3 blatantly biased, people of questionable intellect on a Zelda forum means that the reality is EVERYONE agrees with you. Oh, lawd, do you also think that Majora's Mask is the most popular and best selling Zelda as well, cutie pie?

Originally Posted by Parallax

All right, this is bullet-to-the-head-inducing level of stupidity. I'll just try and wrap it up.

Thanks for admitting that.

1. I never said MM didn't have compelling character interaction or whatever.

Originally Posted by lol yes you did

All the other excuses you made, about story and character interaction

I said it wasn't significant compared to other innovations done by OoT.

Ocarina innovated nothing. You could have had any other 3D Zelda game as the first 3D game. That wouldn't innovate anything either. Innovation comes from changes in gameplay, for example what Majora's Mask did. If Ocarina of Time wasn't so incredibly similar to A Link to the Past, it might have had a chance to be innovative. Of course then, it would have been a different game.

You're confusing Ocarina of Time and the 2D to 3D movement in gaming. There's your problem hit on the head. If you ignore the graphics and think about what happens in the games, Ocarina of Time and A Link to the Past are exactly the same. OoT could have been the 2D game, ALttP could have been the 3D game and you'd have had pretty much the same as what we do today.

2. It's funny how you try and defend your position on Majora's Mask saying that the Zelda community agrees it has the best story/character interaction, but seem to refuse to acknowledge that the community thinks that OoT wasn't 'just' LttP in 3D.

Haha, but they really do think that. Most of the people who love Ocarina of Timed do because of nostalgia, and because it was the first 3D Zelda game. It didn't matter what the game was, it was the first 3D one, so it's their favourite from nostalgia. There are plenty of people who didn't play it when it came out and only did recently, and they say they don't like it anywhere near as much as the other 3D titles. Why? No nostalgia.

3. Wind Waker used the exact same main cast as LttP did as well, except that it was on a boat so I guess that excuses it. :rollseyes

I don't know what to say. How are they anything alike, whatsoever, apart from Link, Ganondorf and Zelda being in them? Even Zelda was Tetra for most of Wind Waker. If of course you're talking about how they both used the same main characters as I just listed, well of ****ing course. It's a Zelda game. Who do you expect to be the hero and princess? Chris and Sarah?

4. While a game doesn't have to be influential to be great, the fact is, OoT brought more to the table for 3D Zelda than either MM or WW could ever hope to achieve, despite how much you might wanna cry.

Oh dear. I think he's finally lost it. I need some help here guys, you get the legs I'll get the arms.

5. Even Eiji Aonuma, the director of Majora's Mask and Wind Waker doesn't think any of those games were that different. Enjoy being in the minority with your completely retarded opinion.

LOL. Get the **** out of this thread, forum, website and fanbase.

You know, I want to go. I really do, but it's like turning away from a train wreck. You just have to take a look...

Originally Posted by GK: 5895/9999

Ocarina innovated nothing. You could have had any other 3D Zelda game as the first 3D game. That wouldn't innovate anything either. Innovation comes from changes in gameplay, for example what Majora's Mask did. If Ocarina of Time wasn't so incredibly similar to A Link to the Past, it might have had a chance to be innovative. Of course then, it would have been a different game.

You're confusing Ocarina of Time and the 2D to 3D movement in gaming. There's your problem hit on the head. If you ignore the graphics and think about what happens in the games, Ocarina of Time and A Link to the Past are exactly the same. OoT could have been the 2D game, ALttP could have been the 3D game and you'd have had pretty much the same as what we do today.

This is some bizarre rationale. As I said, the template is the same, the main characters are the same, but they play nothing alike.

You're comparing a car to an airplane and claiming they're pretty much the same thing.

Haha, but they really do think that. Most of the people who love Ocarina of Timed do because of nostalgia, and because it was the first 3D Zelda game. It didn't matter what the game was, it was the first 3D one, so it's their favourite from nostalgia. There are plenty of people who didn't play it when it came out and only did recently, and they say they don't like it anywhere near as much as the other 3D titles. Why? No nostalgia.

Oh, it's all nostalgia! Of course! And to think, the reason that I didn't care for stuff like Majora's Mask was its stupid save system, awful bosses, and a mechanic that just didn't appeal to me. Thanks for clearing things up!

Though I do wonder, Majora's Mask came out a whole 2 years after OoT did. Why is that not immune to nostalgia? Oh, right. No ganon...

I don't know what to say. How are they anything alike, whatsoever, apart from Link, Ganondorf and Zelda being in them? Even Zelda was Tetra for most of Wind Waker. If of course you're talking about how they both used the same main characters as I just listed, well of ****ing course. It's a Zelda game. Who do you expect to be the hero and princess? Chris and Sarah?

Haha. And here gentlemen was the whole crux of my friggin argument. It's baffling how this seems to escape you.

LOL. Get the **** out of this thread, forum, website and fanbase.

LOL u mad? Would this help?

Originally Posted by Eiji Aonuma

"I'm happy that a title I worked on some time ago remains highly praised to this day, but that also shows how none of the subsequent games in the series have surpassed it," Aonuma said in an interview with Nintendo Power (via Nintendo Everything). "As someone who is still working on the series, I have mixed feelings about that. Because I haven't yet surpassed it, I can't quit. Surprisingly, that simple motivation may be the reason I continue to work on the Zelda series."

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3171527

No need to thank me.

Originally Posted by Parallax

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3171527

No need to thank me.

You mean, just because a creator of Zelda doesn't think the other games are as good, everyone should? That's like saying, okay, the President hates computers, so that means we all should hate them too. So, we should just admit that OoT is better than every other Zelda game, just because one of the creators thinks so.

Wow....

....

That's all I have to say, is wow. Something's wrong with you.

Uh, you guys are the ones that are saying crap like people only like OoT cause of nostalgia or whatever.

Originally Posted by Parallax

This is some bizarre rationale. As I said, the template is the same, the main characters are the same, but they play nothing alike.

Yeah, they play like 2D and 3D games. Ocarina of Time is no different from say, playing Final Fantasy VI then Final Fantasy VII. Just look how hyped to **** that game is (VII).

Oh, it's all nostalgia! Of course! And to think, the reason that I didn't care for stuff like Majora's Mask was its stupid save system, awful bosses, and a mechanic that just didn't appeal to me. Thanks for clearing things up!

Though I do wonder, Majora's Mask came out a whole 2 years after OoT did. Why is that not immune to nostalgia?

It isn't immunte to nostalgia, but Majora's Mask is so different from any other Zelda game that it has its own appeal. I played Ocarina of Time when it first came out, when I was 8. I remember it distinctly, and I absolutely loved it. I never played Majora's Mask until 2006 or something, despite it coming out in 2000. Why do I like Majora's Mask more? It's the better game (subjective, but it's original), and I don't feel like I've played it before. I don't have nostalgia with Majora's Mask, yet I have nostalgia with Ocarina of Time and think it's by far the weaker game.

Oh, right. No ganon...

****ing, ****ing fool. I seriously never even mentioned, anywhere, that Ganondorf being in the game has any bearing on anything. Please, shut up.

Haha. And here gentlemen was the whole crux of my friggin argument. It's baffling how this seems to escape you.

What? I certainly wasn't arguing this. It seems you're slipping things in that I'm not even talking about, then using them in the argument as if I was arguing against them or something. Please, quote what I said in my last post again and answer it properly. Like, really. You totally avoided it just now.

LOL u mad? Would this help?



http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3171527

No need to thank me.

I wasn't saying that because of what he said, it has nothing to do with this argument. I said it because you stated that I was in a retarded minority, when it's the complete opposite. Overall, gamers agree that Majora's Mask and Wind Waker are different and original, whereas Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess are copying the whole layout of A Link to the Past.

This argument is especially annoying because you're going against what the ****ing mass opinion is. You're such a mess. What else?

An Ocarina of Time fanboy.

We caught another one daddy! Yey!

Originally Posted by Parallax

Uh, you guys are the ones that are saying crap like people only like OoT cause of nostalgia or whatever.

Uh, we didn't say that. We're saying that OoT is not as innovative as your making it out to be. And, that tWW and MM are games that introduced something new to the Zelda series.

Originally Posted by Parallax

Correction: I'm using sarcasm because your point is faulty.

Now your using lies to avoid the point.

Aha, as I expected. You're one of those people that obviously hold things like a different setting being far more important than ACTUAL gameplay innovation. So your argument is as follows:

OoT is nothing more than LttP in 3D because Ganon is in it and there is a master sword included in the game.

Whereas, Majora's Mask TOTALLY deserves more credit than OoT because, although it used Ocarina's engine, battle system, graphics, music and time travel mechanic, characters, it had the audacity and the VISION to have a different final boss than Ganon. And because of that fact, it is the REAL innovator of the 3D games, right?

Oh, and Wind Waker. Sure, it had the same template where you fight Ganon and get the master sword, but OOH LOOK AT THE NEW GRAFIX? Oh and instead of Hyrule field, you travel across a sea instead! INNOVATION!

Make up your mind! Are you saying OOT revolutionized Zelda or revolutionized 3D gaming? You keep switching which point your trying to make.
I'll address both points in this case.
1. No, OOT did not revolutionize 3D games much besides introducing the lock on targeting system.
2. Yes, MM and WW were both more innovative to the series. Never before had the zelda series had 20 some sidequests in one game. Never before had it had a clock system with characters doing scheduled events. Never before had it had the ability to change between diffrent races who each had diffrent abilities and move sets. Never before had zelda had cel shaded graphics. Never before did it have sailing. Never before did it have the ability to pick up dropped weapons. Never before did it....

You get the point. Meanwhile all OOT added to the series was 3D environments, a playable instrument, and time travel.

And were 2D platformers needed?

2D platformers made up about 95% of the NES library. Without the NES's success the video game industry likely would never have recovered from the video game crash of 1983. So yes, 2D platformers were needed.