Link to the Past fans: Did you play LttP before or after OoT? I found LttP to be fun enough but not very satisfying, having played a lot of OoT and MM beforehand. Something about 3D made the locations and characters much more memorable.
But, fuck the water temple.
Edit: On further thought, the location and atmosphere put it ahead if you go into the two fresh without any previous experience.
I played Link to the Past first, back in 1992 when I got it bundled with a used SNES for my first console system (that bundle also came with Super Mario World and Final Fantasy Mystic Quest, which still remain my three favorite games on the system). I'm not going to deny that nostalgia plays a lot in my putting LttP at the top of my list. But there are some definite reasons that I can list off.
1) In a lot of ways, LttP has aged better than OoT has. Graphically, LttP still looks good because it's all sprites, and sprites innately have a charming quality when they're done well. OoT looked amazing for the time, but it does look kinda crap compared to what we have in 3D today. Also, it still seems like there are gameplay mechanics from LttP (which are really just perfected versions of the original's) that you don't see a lot of games doing these days. The 3D versions do carry on the traditions, but they don't feel the same, if you know what I mean. You know, a LttP or Link's Awakening boomerang doesn't have the same feel or use as a OoT or Wind Waker boomerang.
2) LttP is a really good length. I can pick it up and be done with the game in two or three days, if I'm playing leisurely. OoT and other 3D Zeldas have the great aspect of having bigger and more interesting worlds, but there's also a lot of traveling time which can make the games boring at times.
3) It's kind of weird to count this as a positive, but I actually like the fact that LttP has very few sidequests compared to later Zelda games. I'm sure that for a lot of people, that's not a problem, since they can just skip those sidequests, but I'm a bit of a completionist when it comes to certain games. In LttP, it's very easy to get everything in the game without it having to take a bunch of extra time. In OoT, getting all the Pieces of Heart can be a pain to do, and I never bother to capture the 10 big Poes to get the fourth empty bottle.
Now all that being said, OoT certainly has a lot of things better about it. It's true that OoT has much better characterization, and the game is genuinely funny at times. The world is also much more interesting to explore, and most of the time I don't mind doing the side stuff for that reason. Also, most of the boss fights in OoT and other 3D Zeldas are very well imagined and provide some unique strategies to complete. LttP by comparison is really just hack until dead for most bosses.
So I'm not going to say that LttP is "SO MUCH BETTER" than OoT, cause I think both games are excellent and well worth playing, as is Twilight Princess and Link's Awakening IMO. But, given a choice, I'm much more likely to put in LttP.
I'm still putting it down to which one you play first and your personal likes, If you really liked Shadow of the Collosus, you're probably an OoT person, you like the first Zeldas you're probably an LttP person.
That said, I have to say: Point 2, both games have teleportation, and going to new areas on the horse is part of the atmosphere and, point 3, the side-quests in OoT, while more numerous, you are likely to run across them at some point. That cape in LttP.. and what's that item where you need the cape and a magic potion to get over all the spikes?
I started with ALttP as well, and nostalgia probably blinds me. But I don't care. I think it's better because it has more items, technically more dungeons, and the fact that OoT basically is a 3D remake of ALttP in terms of the overall plot progression. I mean seriously, they both wind up having you save Zelda trapped in a crystal, it's like they weren't even trying to cover up their copying of themselves.
You do know that almost every Zelda game has the same plot with a different theme added to top, right? As in, utilize magical mcguffin to wake ancient power to save the world from generic evil force. Though there are some deviations, Link's Awakening being the first that comes to mind.
Come to think of it, Link's Awakening is one of the few times "It was all just a dream." actually worked as a plot.
Lies. I knew someone would say that, and it's a lie. Zelda I and II both didn't use the formula. ALttP was the first to have you get three McGuffins, find the Master Sword, then unlock a new area/world. Link's Awakening followed Zelda I and II's formula in terms of dungeons. OoT copied ALttP, Majora's Mask was different, the Oracle games were similar to Link's Awakening, Wind Waker was similar to OoT and ALttP but without the additional world added, TP was like OoT without the time travel and a different world, etc. ALttP and OoT are the only two that use a different world to access the new dungeons (Dark World/Future), and they share way too many other basic plot points that I don't have time to point out at the moment.
I'm still putting it down to which one you play first and your personal likes, If you really liked Shadow of the Collosus, you're probably an OoT person, you like the first Zeldas you're probably an LttP person.
That's not necessarily true. I loved Shadow of the Colossus, and I think it's because of that that I actually like Twilight Princess more than Ocarina of Time. TP and Shadow have a similar style that I dig.
That said, I have to say: Point 2, both games have teleportation, and going to new areas on the horse is part of the atmosphere
I think the main contention I have with OoT is that it still takes a long time to get those abilities. You don't get the horse until adult Link, the teleportation is spread out over the course of the game, and OoT has a huge fundamental lack of one of my favorite items from LttP and Link's Awakening: Pegasus Boots. Having those makes it feel like you can move through the game much faster.
and, point 3, the side-quests in OoT, while more numerous, you are likely to run across them at some point. That cape in LttP.. and what's that item where you need the cape and a magic potion to get over all the spikes?
You're thinking of the Cane of Byrna. Which really has the same effect as the Magic Cape, but doesn't make you invisible, yet decreases the magic meter less (if I recall correctly). And you are right, it is easy to come across the sidequests in OoT, my problem is that some of them just take way longer than they seem to be worth. Some of the Pieces of Heart can be attributed to luck or just take a lot of time to complete. The Poes in Hyrule Field for the fourth bottle, completely not worth doing. The quest for the Biggoron Sword, also kinda pointless since I only use that weapon against one kind of enemy. Doing the beans, getting all the skulltulas, the fishing, the dozens of mini-games. I don't really like doing them, yet I still do because I want to see those 20 hearts on my screen, and the 100 skulltulas in my menu screen.
And to Axel's point, I agree that when you look at each game side by side with each other, LttP and OoT are closest to each other in terms of game structure. But there's nothing really wrong with that, I'm sure it was a conscious decision. LttP was the most popular of the four original 2D Zeldas, so it makes sense to take most of the inspiration from there. OoT took other good elements from the other ones though. Combat-wise, OoT probably owes more to Zelda II, as well as the basic town structure. The trading sidequests come straight from Link's Awakening, as does the use of the flute to affect changes in the world rather than just teleportation. So, yes, OoT pulls a lot, but I think it's going a little far to say that OoT is a straight up remake of LttP. The storylines aren't even close to each other at all.
The storylines aren't even close to each other at all.
Oh really now?
Link has a dream about Princess Zelda, tries to go help her but finds he can't. He collects three McGuffins that are Red, Green and Blue and then gets the Master Sword. He then goes to another world/time. After getting 6 more McGuffins, Zelda is trapped in a crystal and must be rescued. Upon her freedom, Ganon goes to his true form and Link must defeat him. Then Ganon is sealed away in the Sacred Realm.
Plots of both ALttP and OoT, right there. None of the other games follow this that closely.
The storylines aren't even close to each other at all.
Oh really now?
Yes, really. See what you're really getting confused here is what constitutes a plot point and what constitutes game structure. Yes, it is true that in order to get the Master Sword, Link has to get three McGuffins that are RGB based. As far as I'm concerned, that's not a plot point. It could have very well been four McGuffins (add a white gem that is associated with wind), and it wouldn't have made any real difference. These are what I consider plot points:
Who is Link? LttP: Some guy who has an uncle and happens to live right next to the castle. OoT: A young boy who is an orphan that was left in the care of the Great Deku Tree and lives with the Kokiri.
How does Link find out about Zelda? LttP: Zelda telepathically contacts him and asks for his help. OoT: Link has a dream about a future event, where Zelda is escaping the castle.
What happens to Zelda? LttP: Zelda is imprisoned at the beginning of the game, escapes with Link, spends some time in a church, gets recaptured, and then sent to the Dark World where she spends most of the game inside a crystal. OoT: Zelda is freely moving about the castle until a quarter through the game, where she has to flee. She goes into hiding for most of the game, helping Link along the way, and then gets captured at the end of the game.
Who is Ganon? LttP: Evil guy who got the Triforce somehow and looks like a big blue pig (and actually, he just dies in this game). OoT: Evil guy from the desert who betrays the King, uses Link to the get the Triforce, and is otherwise a normal guy until the end of the game. He does get sealed up.
Do you see what I'm getting at here? Number of objects to collect/girls in crystals to save has no effect on the actual story. I mean, in the original Zelda, where it was eight dungeons and each dungeon had a piece of the Triforce of Courage, exactly why is there eight? It doesn't have to be eight. There is no story reason for there being eight. It just so happens that an equilateral triangle can be split up into eight equally sized triangles, thus there are eight dungeons. In both OoT and LttP, they have three early McGuffins because they represent three main colors (not the primary colors, but the three main colors in display technology). In OoT there are six later McGuffins because they can now represent all the different colors of the rainbow. In LttP there are actually seven McGuffins, the fact that Zelda is one of those has no effect on that aspect of the game. You still need all seven regardless.
Thematically similar, structurally similar, but the stories are different.
Kirby Air Ride is amazingly under-appreciated. It's as good as any Smash Bros. game.
I had the same amazing experience with City Trial on Air Ride that I did with SSBM - Unlocking everything with my friends. My friend might give me his old GC and copy of Air Ride, so maybe some epic Air Ride shenanigans will go down this fall at RIT.
The quest for the Biggoron Sword, also kinda pointless since I only use that weapon against one kind of enemy.
What? The Biggoron's Sword was the all purpose ass kicker. Simple to use, did double damage and had a larger range (Particularly the jump attack.). I don't think there's been a Zelda game where getting 100% completion was fun, I can't think of any game that stays fun up until that point. If you're going for 100% completion of any game, you're probably not doing it for the enjoyment.
What? The Biggoron's Sword was the all purpose ass kicker. Simple to use, did double damage and had a larger range (Particularly the jump attack.). I don't think there's been a Zelda game where getting 100% completion was fun, I can't think of any game that stays fun up until that point. If you're going for 100% completion of any game, you're probably not doing it for the enjoyment.
There was only once, maybe twice, where I didn't use the Biggoron sword after I got it - To put in the final strike on Ganondorf, and to put the final strike on Ganon.
Well, It seems you like Zelda, and I too like Zelda.. as though it's been that way forever. So if you still like Zelda, and I still like Zelda, why not all just like it together?
The quest for the Biggoron Sword, also kinda pointless since I only use that weapon against one kind of enemy.
What? The Biggoron's Sword was the all purpose ass kicker. Simple to use, did double damage and had a larger range (Particularly the jump attack.).
I'm just saying that's the way I viewed it. I could basically say the same for the three spells in the game, since I never used those either. Just a matter of preference. I like having a shield.
Playing Ace Attorney Investigations: Miles Edgeworth. An interesting new twist on the Ace Attorney game system. I'll also be getting New Super Mario Bros and Front Mission for my DS later this week.
Having never played the original, I rented Final Fantasy IV out of curiosity. I've discovered how utterly useless the characters are. It seems that every hour or so I'm reporting back to the Dwarf King about how the party failed to defend the crystals. The storyline is best enjoyed as a comedy. Other than that, it is a fairly standard Final Fantasy game, complete with level grinding and dungeon exploration. Normally, I wouldn't have time for this in a game, but because it's portable, I've decided to try it out, Why? Might be (I was looking for an excuse to post this jpeg up :-p) I've also been playing Plants Vs. Zombies on the iPhone btw.
I've also been playing Plants Vs. Zombies on the iPhone btw.
It's SO GOOD.
IV and VI are the best Final Fantasy games ever produced....
I whole-heartedly agree. I will also say that IX and XII are the best out of the post-VI games. I really like XIII, but it has some problems with pacing.
Like ColombianShadow, I've been playing PvZ for the iPhone. It's disappointing, as always, at how badly it draws on the battery. I've also been playing Heroes of Might and Magic V. A coworker suggested it and it's pretty fun. It distracted me for about....15 hours. At least that justified the $10 I spent on it.
On a related note, I'm trying to decide between buying an Xbox or PS3. From a purely gaming perspective, the PS3 seems a better option but the 360 has better controllers and better social aspect in Xbox live. Thoughts, anyone?
On a related note, I'm trying to decide between buying an Xbox or PS3. From a purely gaming perspective, the PS3 seems a better option but the 360 has better controllers and better social aspect in Xbox live. Thoughts, anyone?
What games are you interested in? Any ones that are exclusive for that particular console?
The 360 has a higher number of high quality exclusives, but most multiplatform releases (except for Bayonetta) work perfectly fine on both systems.
60 has better controllers
No it doesn't. The Playstation controller is much better (just as long as it's the Dual Shock 3 and not the Sixaxis).
better social aspect in Xbox live
While Live is better, you do have to pay for it. I don't know what your economic standing is at the moment, but it's a good point to remember. You also will need to either buy the rediculously expensive XBox wireless router or have an ethernet cord to play online. The PS3 has wireless out of the box.
Comments
But, fuck the water temple.
Edit: On further thought, the location and atmosphere put it ahead if you go into the two fresh without any previous experience.
1) In a lot of ways, LttP has aged better than OoT has. Graphically, LttP still looks good because it's all sprites, and sprites innately have a charming quality when they're done well. OoT looked amazing for the time, but it does look kinda crap compared to what we have in 3D today. Also, it still seems like there are gameplay mechanics from LttP (which are really just perfected versions of the original's) that you don't see a lot of games doing these days. The 3D versions do carry on the traditions, but they don't feel the same, if you know what I mean. You know, a LttP or Link's Awakening boomerang doesn't have the same feel or use as a OoT or Wind Waker boomerang.
2) LttP is a really good length. I can pick it up and be done with the game in two or three days, if I'm playing leisurely. OoT and other 3D Zeldas have the great aspect of having bigger and more interesting worlds, but there's also a lot of traveling time which can make the games boring at times.
3) It's kind of weird to count this as a positive, but I actually like the fact that LttP has very few sidequests compared to later Zelda games. I'm sure that for a lot of people, that's not a problem, since they can just skip those sidequests, but I'm a bit of a completionist when it comes to certain games. In LttP, it's very easy to get everything in the game without it having to take a bunch of extra time. In OoT, getting all the Pieces of Heart can be a pain to do, and I never bother to capture the 10 big Poes to get the fourth empty bottle.
Now all that being said, OoT certainly has a lot of things better about it. It's true that OoT has much better characterization, and the game is genuinely funny at times. The world is also much more interesting to explore, and most of the time I don't mind doing the side stuff for that reason. Also, most of the boss fights in OoT and other 3D Zeldas are very well imagined and provide some unique strategies to complete. LttP by comparison is really just hack until dead for most bosses.
So I'm not going to say that LttP is "SO MUCH BETTER" than OoT, cause I think both games are excellent and well worth playing, as is Twilight Princess and Link's Awakening IMO. But, given a choice, I'm much more likely to put in LttP.
That said, I have to say: Point 2, both games have teleportation, and going to new areas on the horse is part of the atmosphere and, point 3, the side-quests in OoT, while more numerous, you are likely to run across them at some point. That cape in LttP.. and what's that item where you need the cape and a magic potion to get over all the spikes?
Come to think of it, Link's Awakening is one of the few times "It was all just a dream." actually worked as a plot.
Zelda I and II both didn't use the formula.
ALttP was the first to have you get three McGuffins, find the Master Sword, then unlock a new area/world. Link's Awakening followed Zelda I and II's formula in terms of dungeons. OoT copied ALttP, Majora's Mask was different, the Oracle games were similar to Link's Awakening, Wind Waker was similar to OoT and ALttP but without the additional world added, TP was like OoT without the time travel and a different world, etc.
ALttP and OoT are the only two that use a different world to access the new dungeons (Dark World/Future), and they share way too many other basic plot points that I don't have time to point out at the moment.
And to Axel's point, I agree that when you look at each game side by side with each other, LttP and OoT are closest to each other in terms of game structure. But there's nothing really wrong with that, I'm sure it was a conscious decision. LttP was the most popular of the four original 2D Zeldas, so it makes sense to take most of the inspiration from there. OoT took other good elements from the other ones though. Combat-wise, OoT probably owes more to Zelda II, as well as the basic town structure. The trading sidequests come straight from Link's Awakening, as does the use of the flute to affect changes in the world rather than just teleportation. So, yes, OoT pulls a lot, but I think it's going a little far to say that OoT is a straight up remake of LttP. The storylines aren't even close to each other at all.
Link has a dream about Princess Zelda, tries to go help her but finds he can't. He collects three McGuffins that are Red, Green and Blue and then gets the Master Sword. He then goes to another world/time. After getting 6 more McGuffins, Zelda is trapped in a crystal and must be rescued. Upon her freedom, Ganon goes to his true form and Link must defeat him. Then Ganon is sealed away in the Sacred Realm.
Plots of both ALttP and OoT, right there. None of the other games follow this that closely.
Who is Link?
LttP: Some guy who has an uncle and happens to live right next to the castle.
OoT: A young boy who is an orphan that was left in the care of the Great Deku Tree and lives with the Kokiri.
How does Link find out about Zelda?
LttP: Zelda telepathically contacts him and asks for his help.
OoT: Link has a dream about a future event, where Zelda is escaping the castle.
What happens to Zelda?
LttP: Zelda is imprisoned at the beginning of the game, escapes with Link, spends some time in a church, gets recaptured, and then sent to the Dark World where she spends most of the game inside a crystal.
OoT: Zelda is freely moving about the castle until a quarter through the game, where she has to flee. She goes into hiding for most of the game, helping Link along the way, and then gets captured at the end of the game.
Who is Ganon?
LttP: Evil guy who got the Triforce somehow and looks like a big blue pig (and actually, he just dies in this game).
OoT: Evil guy from the desert who betrays the King, uses Link to the get the Triforce, and is otherwise a normal guy until the end of the game. He does get sealed up.
Do you see what I'm getting at here? Number of objects to collect/girls in crystals to save has no effect on the actual story. I mean, in the original Zelda, where it was eight dungeons and each dungeon had a piece of the Triforce of Courage, exactly why is there eight? It doesn't have to be eight. There is no story reason for there being eight. It just so happens that an equilateral triangle can be split up into eight equally sized triangles, thus there are eight dungeons. In both OoT and LttP, they have three early McGuffins because they represent three main colors (not the primary colors, but the three main colors in display technology). In OoT there are six later McGuffins because they can now represent all the different colors of the rainbow. In LttP there are actually seven McGuffins, the fact that Zelda is one of those has no effect on that aspect of the game. You still need all seven regardless.
Thematically similar, structurally similar, but the stories are different.
'Til the day I die.
I don't think there's been a Zelda game where getting 100% completion was fun, I can't think of any game that stays fun up until that point. If you're going for 100% completion of any game, you're probably not doing it for the enjoyment.
So if you still like Zelda, and I still like Zelda, why not all just like it together?
(I was looking for an excuse to post this jpeg up :-p)
I've also been playing Plants Vs. Zombies on the iPhone btw.
On a related note, I'm trying to decide between buying an Xbox or PS3. From a purely gaming perspective, the PS3 seems a better option but the 360 has better controllers and better social aspect in Xbox live. Thoughts, anyone?