Is OOT really THAT good?

If you didn't enjoy it then, you definitely won't enjoy it now.

That user has already played OoT and circlejerks it constantly, he's just a pathetic human being who lives based on metacritic scores and various best of lists and has to constantly reaffirm that what he likes is critically acclaimed and popular. He's a literal NPC with no thought process of his own.

>All of the femanons on this board come out of the woodwork when the game is mentioned.

Do you think that's a part of why the game is still beloved by some? Because ladies of a certain age get their panties wet over the design of Link? Interesting theory.

Its pretty dang fun with the randomizer

It really is that good.

Attached: ぐるぐるおじさん.png (1026x629, 796K)

What makes you say that? Is liking something popular that horrible nowdays?

I think it was more of a pleasant surprise than anything else... nobody was sure how the 3d transition was going to go. Even back in the 90s, 3d adaptations were already known for being shit

Of course not, the problem is when you shit on EVERYTHING that isn't widely acclaimed and in your mind believe that no one talks about it. You call people seething contrarians but yourself are in fact a contrarian

I couldn’t even make it past the elf village level. Such a boring ugly game, too much text. A elf kept blocking the way out so I just went back to breath of the wild.

I was going to make this thread but it seems two anons decided to for me. Thanks bros, keep on shit posting and making people use words like SEETHING and SNOY.

Attached: 1064588_665241720157515_346689736_o.jpg (507x676, 38K)

while it was an example of a decent early 3D action/RPG type game, it really is overrated, even during its time. Games like FF7 came out an year earlier and Metal gear solid was released around the same time OOT was. The leap in quality and innovation in FF7 and MGS was mind blowing where as OOT looked more like a prototype of a game they wanted to build in the future.

Most of my favorite games are niche that never gets mentioned, i fucking wish they were mainstream enough to be considered cliche shit like OOT or FF6

>Twilight Princess was soulless trash on a soulless console.

you could not be more wrong in one sentence

Attached: 200_s.gif (400x200, 66K)

Ahhh yes TLoZ Twilight "Easy as shit, enemies do no damage, 3 hour tutorial borefest, empty as fuck big overworld, linear as hell, have to return to dungeons for heart pieces, played it safe, no room for more rupees as reward, no NG+, boring ass princess Zelda,forced repetitive bug killing sections" Princess

>backlash from Zoomers & Boomers alike whenever it's mentioned

Gee, it's almost as if you had to be just the right young, impressionable age in order to enjoy it.

It was good for its time. Most things aren't timeless. 20 years from now there will be people fondly looking back on Fortnite.

it's the best 3D Zelda but not the best game of all time

Attached: 58478bd142f8bcc118be754e94e14989-d84ag2a.png (700x617, 816K)

That whole generation has aged like milk.

nobody ever has any actual arguments as to why they call it bad, it's always some inane shit like saying it looks ugly or x game is better

As I said in another thread just now, just because Don Quixote is influential doesn’t mean it’s the best book. Don Quixote is appreciated for the value it has today as a work of fiction, making it an experience worth reading even without the context behind it. OOT has great gameplay making it a really good game that’s worth playing, but it is not nearly as good as everyone says it is because they only focus on the context behind it not the actual gameplay.

Don Quixote is a fantastic book, but I never heard anyone say it was the best

This, i hate Witcher 3 but i can at least explain why i think it's garbage

it has so much soul

Good game not great not high tier not godly not 10/10

Actually OOT is the TkAM book equivalent, it's not the most influential but everyone considers it the best regardless

it was a great game, and still is, but once you remove the rose-tinted glasses you realize it isn't the masterpiece a lot of people like to praise it as. though it was the defining game of my childhood, upon replaying it the issues are pretty apparent. empty overworld, lack of any real content outside of the MQ, dungeons that are linear as fuck (outside of, coincidentally, the one people complain about the most). took everything that made the series what it was and focused on it with tunnel vision, much to its detriment.

after finally playing A Link to the Past last year, it's a very similar experience while being far superior.

>TkAM
Only normalfags who read middlebrow trash say that’s the best book, no one in academia does. TkAM is the COD:MW of books. There isn’t really anything at all which is influential about TkAM

Of fucking course not. I can't think of a single thing it even really excels at. Even in the same year you had vastly superior action adventure titles like MGS and Thief.

Yup, it's one of my personal favorites, but Majora's Mask is better
also I'm 21

Attached: shrektacular.png (1136x640, 922K)

It’s called Ocarina of Time, not OOT you fucking retard

here, and although i feel it is a bit overrated i'm here to tell you that's a ridiculous fucking comparison to make. aside from being "action adventure", which let's face it, is a pretty broad spectrum, OoT has next to nothing in common with MGS nor Thief. such a comparison is asinine, honestly.

>in the year 2019, people are saying a 1998 game is shit
Great thread. Post honkers

Attached: 1552203195231.gif (607x609, 754K)

Yes
t.someone who played it 9 years after release

It's the staple, go-to "favourite game / best game of all time" for normies (women) who have barely even played anything else.
It's nothing special, it's just well known.

And yet I make it and would prefer to play those games any day of the week. Ocarina is a fart in the wind to me. I'd sooner play Bethesda RPGs.

>And yet I make it
as long as you're content with you're argument making no sense whatsoever, that's fine with me.

>FF7 and MGS are innovative and represent a "leap and quality".
>One uses prerendered backgrounds with 3D character models made of 7 polygons.
>The other has the same framework of a 2D game.

Meanwhile, OoT is a true 3D open-world game that laid the groundwork for every subsequent 3D game. It's insulting you even mention those 2 games in the same sentence as OoT.

Attached: SaysomethingNICE.png (584x717, 377K)

What makes no sense is why anyone would praise it considering it's an unremarkable game, even if compared only to games that released in the same year.

now you're just being a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian. even funnier considering you think your opinion is worth a shit lol

you can compare it to other games all you want and wish it had done thing differently or had done more but it's hard to think of genuine flaws it has, a couple boss fights come to mind but not much else

the only flaw OOT has is that you can't do Dodongo's Cavern and Jabu-Jabu in either order like you can with the Fire/Water and Spirit/Shadow temples making the child segment a lot more linear than it needs to be

How is thinking MGS and Thief are better games contrarian? Anyone who's played all 3 of these games, besides the social reject forum dwelling retards that praise OoT to hell and back, will choose those games over OoT. Tenchu as well, another from 1998.

Both FF7 and MGS were highly influential and represented major milestones for the rest of the industry to follow. OoT was the first to truly define the 3D action-adventure, but that doesn't make it directly comparable to two other games that had completely different goals in mind. It's fair to say these three + Half-Life were all ground-breaking early 3D games.

none of those beliefs are, but

>What makes no sense is why anyone would praise it considering it's an unremarkable game
that is. fuck outta here and come back when you'd like to have an actual discussion.

>OoT was the first to truly define the 3D action-adventure
No it wasn't, you had Resident Evil a whole 2 years before it.

Imagine thinking Fortnite tops all that, we live in the worst timeline. I pity this generation

They are niche games, whereas OOT, MM, ALTTP or BOTW are universally considered among the 5-10 best games of all time regardless of demographic or populated part of the internet you are in, including Yea Forums who always had it in the top 10 until Egoraptor made it popular to hate on it

Resident Evil isn't even in the same genre.

Everyone on the internet who knows anything about journalism & game design already outright called OOT the standard for 3D Action games. Including FromSoftware & Rockstar

It's an important game. Now shut the fuck up.

It's a 3D action adventure game. It's the same genre. OoT is not an open world game like GTA.

Zoomers don’t care, they’re doomed anyway

Resident Evil is a survival horror game, King's Field is more similar to OoT than RE.

Attached: King's Field.webm (640x480, 2.91M)

I love seeing people with no knowledge of what's being discussed join in lol

Survival horror isn't a genre, dumbass. It's an action adventure subgenre with a horrror theme. And if you want something that plays a little closer to OoT, Tomb Raider was also 2 years before it.

Both FFVII and MGS do little to use the 3D environment. Whereas the likes of OoT and Mario 64 were gameplay revolutions.

>Your old enough to where people are claiming OoT isn't one of the greatest games of all time and not immediately being dismissed
I TOOK MY LOVE, I TOOK IT DOWN
CLIMBED A MOUNTAIN AND I TURNED AROUND

Attached: 1522044960009.png (1920x1080, 3.95M)

It's a clear statement that Nintendo hates muslims

Tomb Raider was also complete shit. Only reason people latched onto that was Lara.

>Resident evil: survival horror, fixed camera, tank controls
>OoT: 3D adventure game, real 3D environments, z targeting
>Same genre

Are you simple?

>you're old enough to now realize not everyone shares your opinion
crazy world we live in huh

average game 7-8/10
nothing special

FF7 and MGS weren't more influential than OoT, and they weren't fully 3D. You've made it clear you don't know what you're talking about and are showing how young you are. I'm going to bed, so I'm not going to do your research for you, but here's a quote from Dan Houser. There's plenty of quotes from Warren Spector, and other legends on how much OoT influenced games moving forward.

>“Anyone who makes 3D games who says they’ve not borrowed something from Mario or Zelda is lying — from the games on Nintendo 64, not necessarily the ones from today.”

>both 3D
>both action games
>both have adventure game elements
Are you?

It’s one of the greatest games that has ever existed and will ever exist. Nothing anybody on this board says will change that. It’s merits have been talked to death and it’s flaws are either minimal or misconstrued out of ignorance. Ocarina of Time is like Citizen Cain, The Wire, or The Great Gatsby. A work so competent and inspired that it will live on for decades to come as a standard that other games will be measured against.
Keep seething about it retards, you won’t change shit.

Zoomers just like their games fast, like sex.
Boomers on other hand like to finger, use their tongue a lot and then have sex in multiple positions while sipping white (lighty spakling) wine

>Is OOT really THAT good

yes, for a console game it was pretty much the pinnacle of 32/64-bit 3D action-adventure games. Alundra is about as good as an action-adventure, but it's 2D, a souped-up 16-bit game

however, it does not fare as well against PC games. i played OoT around the same time as Outcast and as much as I love Zelda, Outcast was the superior experience

I love MGS but it's barely a game compared to OOT. It's literally the first Sony movie game.

joke post

>Prerendered backrounds
>3D

Nah

user, he knows what hes talking about and you so clearly do not. You're only digging a deeper hole here.

>Ocarina of Time is like Citizen Cain, The Wire, or The Great Gatsby.
Yeah it's basically that. All generic crap hipsters who like to feel important shove in everyone's faces every chance they get.

Survival horror is a genre you dumbass.
>And if you want something that plays a little closer to OoT, Tomb Raider was also 2 years before it.
Which is why I made this to demonstrate how much of a leap forward OoT was.

Attached: Z targeting vs TR.webm (640x480, 2.92M)

OoT just ripped off a bunch of ideas from quest 64

OOT was a huge leap forwards for 3d action games due to making a game that had the most outrageously intuitive controls ever seen that resulted in a game who's gameplay is still so fluid and well designed that you can copy it in 2019 and still make a game that plays well.
>targeting/aiming
>targeting strafing
>first and third person view and aiming
>context sensitive A button commands
>assigned hotkey C buttons
>auto-jump/ledge grabbing context sensitive actions
Just Link's basic movements alone would be a game each by the standard at the time, and OOT came with all of them in a single game. It helps that the game was pretty long and that there was a ton of visual progression (something else not really done before and something that even Twilight Princess doesn't get right).

It just sucks that younger people adopt this mindset of "if old people like it then I will hate it" without actually having some real criticism (of which there is some to be had). The game is still a great and timeless game that holds up well, the 3ds remake is pretty damn good and the new layout is terrific. Kinda wish they didn't go with the overly vibrant color scheme in the new one but nothing's perfect.

>while it was an example of a decent early 3D action/RPG type game, it really is overrated, even during its time. Games like FF7 came out an year earlier and Metal gear solid was released around the same time OOT was. The leap in quality and innovation in FF7 and MGS was mind blowing where as OOT looked more like a prototype of a game they wanted to build in the future.

Attached: Han-Solo-star-wars1.jpg (1900x800, 338K)

Holy fuck you are an idiot. Guess you never even played RE before?

Not an argument moron.

>Is it good?
Yes
>Is it influential?
Yes
>Does it hold up?
Surprisingly so
>Is it one of the best games ever made?
No

Opinion invalidated

Lol played every RE game, prerendered backrounds are 2 dimensional, you are really dumb son

Saying "not an argument" is just admitting that you're wrong and backed into a corner. I need no argument when others have plainly outlined why you're wrong, you're just being willfully ignorant in continuing to try and prove your inane point.

Name a single game better than OoT that came out after it.

I'm ready to laugh

All three of those works have huge universal appeal you moron. What separates a good work from a legendary work is that when something is good, scholars and critics praise it. When something is legendary everyone who watches it from a virtuoso to a laymam, recognizes the brilliance of what they are experiencing.

Survival horror isn't a true genre because it has no mechanical basis. It's just action adventure, with a horror texture on top.

OoT added the manual lock on but didn't add z targeting. You can even see that Lara is doing that on her own in your clip.

inb4 he names niche PC games that nobody has ever heard of

Nice troll, cunt

By its own merit and not by some magical bonus point that comes from being "revolutionary"? There's tons. I'll go with Katamari Damacy as a prime example of a fantastic game that is great on its own without the need to rely on comparisons to other games OR some faggy "relevancy and influence" copout.

This user really has run out of arguments. Didn't take long lmfao

Universal appeal in the hipster universe only.

user that guy is dumb for comparing RE to OoT but RE1 is a 3D game, yes the backgrounds are two dimensional but your character can technically move along three axes even though vertical movement is mostly limited to context sensitive actions

>3d characters moving on a 3d plane
>hurrr it's not 3d because prerendered backgrounds
If you aren't trolling you're a literal retard.

Not him but on what planet are these two games in the same genre? Exhibit A.

Attached: OoT ride.webm (640x480, 2.93M)

Your argument would have merit if not for the fact that people didnt look back in 2008 and decide that OOT was a game that had a lot of influence. In 1998 people played the game and had fun and critics recognized what a leap forward it was. The fact that it holds up to modern standards is exemplified with the 3DS rerelease that saw massive success even among younger gamers who hadn’t been around during release

>katamary
>Better than oot

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHSHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHSHAHSHAHSH

Attached: 14c2af8efbbd446efbb3b10cce595b43.jpg (236x233, 12K)

as someone who loves OOT and considers it one of my favorite games of all time Dark Souls

Attached: inktober_15_day_04_color1.jpg (1024x635, 440K)

It's not a full 3D game-- that's what he's arguing, and he's right. You can only interact with the world in a 2D space. Do you understand?

Exhibit B.

Attached: Resident Evil(20181002-0508) 2.webm (640x480, 2.84M)

Great argument moron

Again, I never said it was bad. Hell, I said even said that it was good. It's a game that has held up very well, despite being two decades old. I think the game is given more credit than it deserves due to both the legacy it's built and that "shock factor" that comes from a game holding up so well.

>No point to be made besides frogposting
Nice.

OOT was extremely groundbreaking, appealing to new and established players, and has aged extraordinarily well.

There is a very good reason it is so beloved. Just try comparing it to FFVII aesthetically, for example.

Bottom of well is way creepier. DS controls are ass

How can you possibly believe this, 7 looked like fucking legos compared to ocarina

On our planet where action refers to games involving the reflexes like timing and precision presses, and adventure refers to games involving puzzle solving and interacting with environments in order to progress along a narrative based trajectory. Hence these games are both action adventure.

OoT was not this mindblowing invention that suddenly pushed video games far into the future. This is bullshit that just isn't true. You can enjoy the game but fuck off with this nonsense.

>he collects trash

Zoomers I swear

RE is not a 3D plane, it's a 2D cgi image with the character scaling as he moves to and from the camera to create the illusion of depth. Where as ocarina of Time is a truly 3D dimensional game where the entire environment is made of polygons.

>Discover the dodge roll gives you I-frames
>Game becomes boring and simple as fuck

>Bottom of well is way creepier.
I disagree
>DS controls are ass
maybe the PC version

>better zelda game than any zelda game
>not made by nintendo so Yea Forums hates it

Attached: 220px-Alundra.jpg (220x218, 22K)

>action refers to games involving the reflexes like timing and precision presses, and adventure refers to games involving puzzle solving and interacting with environments in order to progress along a narrative based trajectory.
You know the point of a description is to actually describe something, not just make the most vague general statement that can be applied to literally hundreds of games that play completely differently.

did you tune out of Ocarina when you realized the shield blocks all damage?

Bottom of the Well, and the Shadow temple were literally concentration camps.

You just had to be there.

>shrug macro

>OoT was not this mindblowing invention that suddenly pushed video games far into the future.

It literally pushed games into the future, as evinced by other developers and studios, journalists, and consumers.

>2D cgi image with the character scaling as he moves to and from the camera to create the illusion of depth
I hate to burst your bubble but that's how 3D works. Your monitor is not a portal into a 3D space, it's all 2D imagery creating the illusion of 3D depth. Objects in RE were interacted with in a 3D conceptual space so it's a 3D game, not a 2D game. The other guy made a better point in bringing up that vertical movements are dependent on context sensitive actions but even still, I would classify it as 3D.

>3 hours dialog intro
I just threw my pirated copy out the window

Hey, that's a pretty funny way to describe it. Who knew a game about rolling up garbage could be so good?

No, because I didn't play Zelda for the combat.

and Duke's Archives experiments on innocent people turning them into abominations, what the fuck is the argument here, both games present despair well when they need to

>Good but niche game
>Fanbase blows it way out of proportio
Every time. It's like those retards who call Okami the best 3D Zelda game when it's even more of a slog to get through than Twilight Princess, and damn is that game a fucking slog at times.

OoT is a kids game

But they don't all play completely differently. That's my fucking point.

Resident Evil and Ocarina of Time do not play similarly.

okay?

Yes. think of any popular game made after 1998. It objecively will have been inspired by either Ocarina, Mario 64, Street Fighter II, Super Metroid, Castlevania: SOTN, Half-Life 2 or Resident Evil 4

Okami is far better than TP though

Yes

Attached: 338-1229185609.jpg (321x285, 21K)

What inspired Ace Combat?

Divinity Original Sin
Any Sid Meier game
Any RTS

> Popular
Also Star Wars: TIE Fighter, even though Ace Combat is niche & nobody cares about it

'better'? Sure you can argue that. 'FAR better'? Nah.

what inspired Forza?

Early Zoomers took over the Internet and are now posting nostalgia on social media for the 7th gen. Those "if u remmeebr 360 ur childhood wuz awesum" shitposts from 2012 came true. The dream is over.

Attached: p1299918_e_v8_ab.jpg (960x1304, 239K)

> Divinity
Not popular
> Sid Meier
X-Com, also still not mainstream popular
> RTS
Not popular outside of StarCraft which released IN 1998, thus proving my point that you are incapable of reading

>Ace Combat is niche & nobody cares about it
Wouldn't have it any other way

Attached: 1549346043297.png (710x656, 360K)

They play much more similarly than XCOM, hence why that is given a different genre label.

Super Mario Kart, yet another Mario title.

My idea of popular isn't your idea of it apparently.

Need to add Assassin's Creed, as every game uses AC shit in their games now

I cannot stomach the Witcher games. Any of them. The story seems to take itself way too seriously for what it is, the gameplay is a chore to get through, and absolutely none of the characters make me give a damn about them. I play the games, ask "What am I supposed to love here?" and then drop them 10 hours in.

Attached: 1522541693695.gif (400x224, 1000K)

They play just as differently from one another as XCOM plays from either of them. The point of genres is to describe how something plays, when you hear survival horror you instantly think Resident Evil.

>Mario Kart inspired Racing Sims or Simcade games

Attached: 1547169943526.png (592x831, 933K)

Good for what companies had to offer during that time.

People called it overrated years ago.Same with FF VII. They're both great, super popular games, so there've been contrarians since day one.

The gulf between RE and OoT is much, much, much smaller than between XCOM and OoT buddy. If you don't see how the genres work though, I can't help you.

>Your monitor is not a portal to 3D
Obviously, but you skipped the part where I said OoT environments are all made of 3D polygons. The only polygons used in RE are for the characters. Prerendered backrounds are not fully 3D. You can't swing the camera around in a RE.

>If you don't see how the genres work though, I can't help you.
How about a little self awareness, you're the one arguing a commonly accepted genre isn't real.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_horror
Maybe this will help you.

>You can't swing the camera around in a RE.
No but you can rotate your character 360 degrees and attack at an upward or downward angle against enemies that will be below you, above you, or on the same level as you, within a 360 degree range.

>Wikipedia
It also says it's a subgenre, i.e. not a true genre. And even better, under definition it says action adventure. Because that's what it is.

>Tryhard zoomer LARPing as a boomer forgets about pic related
By the way, both it AND its sequel sold more than Super Mario Kart 64, so I don't wanna hear anything about "muh relevancy" either.

Attached: i1SulfefpFRXLb.jpg (1280x960, 300K)

>OoT environments are all made of 3D polygons
There are actually a couple prerendered backgrounds in OoT. Just a couple of them though.

Attached: 1512075862260.webm (920x518, 1.28M)

Thanks for the laugh. I never said they were more influential. Hope your reading comprehension recovers when you wake up.

Twilight Princess was so fucking bad it made me drop the series all together.

Attached: 1482042420596.png (810x688, 455K)

Gran Turismo doesn’t exist without Mario Kart popularizing the racing genre in the first place

PFFFHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Its a sub genre that exists for a reason, that reason being describing how a game plays more clearly. What is even the point of this argument? Do you actually think for a moment that Resident Evil and Ocarina of Time are comparable outside of their most abstract aspects?

Starfox
irrelevant niche games
Mario Kart

Your right shouldn't of said all, I was actually thinking of the screen right after you walk past the drawbridge after I posted that lol.

>Mario Kart popularized the racing genre
>Not arcade racers like Outrun, Daytona USA, Sega Rally, and Ridge Racers, who were doing gangbusters during the Arcade Renaissance
Jesus, you've gotta work a little harder if you're gonna try and convince ANYONE you lived during these days.

Survival horror doesn't describe how a game plays at all. It describes the theme. Until Dawn is a survival horror game, which is really nothing like RE or Silent Hill, no conservation of resources, etc.

They are definitely compatible but Tomb Raider more so. The point is that Nintendo wasn't the only dev making 3D action adventure titles at the time. GTA3 was the more mindblowing release anyway.

it is good, but slow to start/poorer pacing at the start (basically thinking of everything as kid link after the deku tree), and the overworld is boring. Just mostly walking/riding a horse doing nothing. I will never understand why people think wandering through empty fields/forests is fun, the problem is even worse now with BOTW and Sony template games.

>Sid Meier games are irrelevant
kys

Mario Kart is infintely more popular then all of those now & when it first came out.

you're an utter joke, stop posting

They are, nobody cares about them. Action Adventure, Shooters, JRPGs, Open World, Movie shit, Horror & Party games are the only genres that ever get mainstream attention. Any other genre is irrelevant

>Mario Kart is infintely more popular then all of those now
No shit, Arcades are dead in the West
>& When it first came out
No it wasn't. You underestimate how fucking important arcades were at that time, even with the Console market picking up.

Resident Evil, Alone in the Dark, Silent Hill, Clock Tower, Fatal Frame, Carrier and Deep Fear all play similarly. Until Dawn is a shitty movie game so who gives a fuck what its classified as?
>The point is that Nintendo wasn't the only dev making 3D action adventure titles at the time
And my point is that OoT was a huge step forward compared to every other 3D action adventure game at the time.
>GTA3 was the more mindblowing release anyway
"Anyone who makes 3-D games who says they’ve not borrowed something from Mario or Zelda is lying — from the games on Nintendo 64, not necessarily the ones from today..." -Dan Houser

>my zoomer friends never heard of them so they don't matter
again, kys

Not an argument, Mario Kart is objectively the most mainstream & recognizable racing franchise ever. There isn’t a single person who couldn’t instantly recognize any Mario Kart game, nobody would know what those other games are. Especially casuals.

The randomizer has been pretty fun. I've learned plenty of new things about the game in general ever since I started playing it. I'm hoping it makes it into SGDQ this year so that it gets some well deserved attention.
The Majora's Mask one just came out recently too. It'll be interesting to see if it gets some more development to bring it in line with the OoT one.

Attached: Tsun Shark.png (635x468, 487K)

Still haven’t tried to refute it, because you are seething too hard. Name one game that has reached mainstream normie popularity this decade that doesn’t fall under one of those genres

he's right though. post sales from each

>Post sales numbers
>From Arcade games
That's not how it works, you stupid Zoomer.

> Mario Kart (5.2 Billion Grossed)
> Need for Speed (4 Billion Grossed)
> Gran Turismo (4 Billion Grossed)
> Forza (1 Billion Grossed)
No other racing franchise even cracked a billion except these 4

Not an argument since Pac-Man & Space Invaders have a recorded 10-16 billion grossed

How does a wizard like to play his games then?

mario kart has arcade games, and you can track sales of cabinets shipped. Not to mention plenty of those have home releases. Nice try though.

We're talking about the sales at the time anyway. Lots of those arcade racers didn't have a console release until a few years later. My point is racing games with an emphasis on a more realistic car model approach used games like Ridge Racer and Sega Rally as an influence over Mario Kart.

>We're talking about the sales at the time anyway
I'm not, too bad for you.

That doesn't mean Gran Turismo owes its existence to Mario Kart as you imply in . The whole point of Gran Turismo is to succeed where arcade racers of the day failed and strive for realism in car driving and simulation. It's a direct response to arcade racing games and only superficially has anything to do with Mario Kart and its success.

It's like Chrono Trigger, FF5-7 etc etc. You would think it's that good if you played it back then. If not then it's still a great game and all but I don't think it's better than Majora's Mask.