This is the highest rated game of all time on Metacritic

the most overrated game of all time

When it came out, there was literally nothing on its level. If anything it's underrated, dozens of innovations that happened with OOT are still used to this day in multiple games, and not only by Nintendo.

Good point. I don't really understand this idea though that games shouldn't be re-rated in retrospect.

At the very least, I think there's an enemy that punishes you for using lockon at some point in the game.

Nah, Yea Forums has no valid opinion. I think it's underrated by game developers, Nintendo included.

MML came out 11 months before it and did most of what people praise OoT for.

all Zelda games are shit

t. Switch and 3DS owner

It's not overrated at all. This game is on par with Super Mario 64 in terms of "best transitions into 3D" where they actually surpassed their predecessors and made a true next-gen experience. I think the only bad thing you can say about OOT is that the game was so good that Nintendo got stuck trying to replicate it for years and years. It wasn't until 2017 that BOTW actually managed to break free from the OOT formula.

I played it last weekend for the first time at age 44 and it's in my top 5.

>metacritic
who cares

A 99% is underrated?

Wow, no shit. High IQ observation.
OoT SET a lot of standards dumbass. It's unironically revolutionary while also being a great game.

Why don't you play some non-Nintendo games, fuckboi

Absolutely not, it brought a lot of things, some of them being are now taken for granted to the extent that they are basic videogame lexicon, I remember people having one hell of a time trying to explain what was the Z targeting, thing that now everyone knows as lock targeting/lock on/whatever else.

It's not my most liked Zelda but you need to be stupid to refute that it is by far the most important game of that franchise.

20FPS on NTSC
15FPS on PAL

overrated as fuck

To be fair it was A Link To the Past that started the formula.

The formula even exists in other 2D Zelda like the Link's Awakening and the Oracle games.

playing this game as a child in 1998/1999 was like witnessing the second coming of christ

I have only given OoT an honest go, playing once on 3DS and twice on virtual console. Couldn't get into it. Maybe it's because I played it for the first time over a decade after it came out. I haven't given BotW an honest shot yet, hopefully Zelda has improved.

Game developers don't give scores, user. You're thinking about game journalists, and I care nothing about them.

because it wouldn't be fair user. making an ocarina of time today would be indie level or a AA experience. back then it was simple, today games require to have a lot of features to be considered good, since technology got better and all that. 3D was brand new back then and ocarina of time managed to do a lot of things really well.

Attached: 1494335133477.png (457x695, 363K)

>MML

Literally who?

You are delusional if you think MML is even half a game that OOT is.
And i didn't play either in my childhood so no nostalgia here.

I played it for the first at 14 in 2011 (my first Zelda game) and didn't really like it. Were you familiar with other Zelda games when you played it? I would imagine that would give a heightened level of appreciation for the environments and enemies.

t. Got stuck on the second task for multiple months and still hasn't finished the game
Zelda is god tier gaming in general

>LARGER shield design
>Those bolts or whatever they're called along the edges
>The bold and simplistic design
>The upside down triangle at the bottom
DAMN. The OoT Hylian shield is the fucking best design. Why are the future ones so tiny, cartoony, or just weirdly made?

I've never really played any Nintendo games before, is it worth emulating this or something?

Theres a difference between nostalgia blindness and it literally just being an old game, in terms of games rated relative to their release dates I would agree that it's a pretty accurate score. Keep in mind both this and majoras mask got re released for the DS with incredibly minor changes prob the QOL stuff in the water temple was the most noticable and they still blew away the competition being more or less 2 decade old games so theres something to be said about it...

I think "most influential" and "best game of all time" should be disjoint categories though. I wouldn't rate the first iPhone as the greatest phone ever created even if it was arguably the most revolutionary cell phone progression ever.

No

>pcfags have to ask if OoT is worth playing
Yikes

It's still a great game zoomer.

Majora's Mask was a better game but it came out right when the N64 was about to die off due to the Gamecube. Then Gamecube got the god awful poorly ported Majora's Mask version and it ruined its reputation.

Name a better game then.

That's why I think it makes more sense for there to be a separate category for "most revolutionary" or "best near release." If I'm to recommend a game for someone to play, I should be able to go on Metacritic and pick out the best of the best, not games that were "good at the time" or "still good but not the GOAT."

I can't really say anything more that what Metacritic and all those top game of all time listings have already said. Are you looking for us to spoonfeed you how to set up an emulator or something?

Mega Man Legends. Just type "MML video game" on Google, it's a pretty smart search engine nowadays, you just utilize it.

>Gerudo
>Human
What

See that's the thing. Not only was the game incredibly influential, itw was also really fucking good. That's why so many people are crazy about it.

no, i'm asking if it is worth playing in the current year as the reviews cite the many innovations the game made when it was released, i dunno if it still holds up now gamer, or if them innovations are impressive in 2019

Hylians aren't human. Gerudo are the human race in the future.

yeah it holds up alright. controls make sense ant it feels more like a modern game than most 3d adventure games from the time. the soundtrack is great, plot is alright, environments and locales are fun, side objectives are fun, combat and puzzles are a bit on the easy side but still enjoyable. give it a shot.

Could just buy a used Wii U and get shit on the virtual console for relatively cheap if you don't feel like emulating.

Yes it is lol what a silly question best if you dont use a guide

>what is lock-on
>what is pseudo-open world
>what are 3D dungeons

No.

Yeah, it's overrated as fuck, just like any other zelda game.

It still holds up. The "innovations" aren't what makes the game hold up.
Plenty of dungeon crawling, good soundtrack, quirky/fun moments, cool set pieces.

>implying games are timeless
>ishygddt

>making an ocarina of time today would be indie level or a AA experience.

Name a current indie/AA game that's as good as OOT

Majora's Mask was better. OOT ran at like 15FPS in the Yuro version and it used too many 2D backgrounds for assets. Majora's Mask fixed the framerate and pushed more polygons on screen due to the expansion RAM pack.

Like half the AAA games that come out today
Fine, there can be a "Best game at launch/most influential" category, or maybe they can be their own separate categories.

When's the last time you played it m8 gameplay wise theres definitely newer games that hold up worse, there's also older games that hold up better. Story wise it's a classic

Why is ganondorf so intelligent in child timeline?
>Pretend to be ambassador to Hyrule
>want triforce
>cant get into sacred realm because of door of time
>would be considered a threat and shot down by everyone if I were to start taking the stones to get in
>I’ll just make the kings daughter seem paranoid of me and go behind her fathers back
>she has to have some connections that can gather the stones without seeming suspicious
>Holy shit that fucking fairy boy is actually doing it, soon I’ll have the triforce
I got into the door of time, now I can get the triforce and stop that evil ma-
>GET FUCKED KID, ITS ALL MINE

Yes, the graphics/mechanics/innovation/etc doesn't fucking matter. The adventure is a unique experience that has yet to be copied. It's like how Citizen Kane is great even though movies today have more cinematography teckniques and use 4k cameras.

good as music? or gameplay? or innovation? or just a simple game that feels the same?

If you decide to play it, don't get your expectations up just because of what the other replies say. I really didn't like it.

People will see this post as bait, but it's literally true. Games ain't timeless, especially if you take out nostalgic value, which not everyone has.

no, review scores must be viewed within the time they were given. Was OoT a masterpiece in 1998? Probably. Today? Nope

>metropolis
>the Beatles
Yeah but there's lots of shit that isn't that good in retrospect but was so good at its time, and it's influence is still felt everywhere so it gets well deserved credit.

this game looks like ass

> review scores must be viewed within the time they were given
That's stupid. If the horse and carriage were given a 10/10 rating for transportation, I'd say it was overrated, even if it was a 10/10 when it was widely used. The game rating system needs to be revamped.

Yes, but that should be a separate category, not the main one.

Transportation is an objective option where some are just plain better than others. Video games are art/entertainment. Just because Miley Cyrus has more computers and autotuning doesn't make mozart less good.

It looked ugly as shit back then too.
I hated the faces.

Sure and tell Beatles fans they actually aren't that good, they were just influential.

like 6 months later dead or alive 2 came out which looked like CGI quality at the time and ran at 60FPS

No, it really is that good.

It has never been surpassed by any other game, so it remains at the top as it should.

>can unknowingly softlock in water temple
>if you save while softlocked your save file is unplayable and 4+ hours are wasted
Good job Nintendo

>what's the difference between rendering two characters at a time or an entire map
You surely are a smart one, champ

>Super Metroid is impossible to softlock
>OoT isn't
Fucking sugoi Nintenbro

What game should be in it’s place, OP?

The problem isn't that OoT is rated too high, it's that many equally as good and better games are rated too low.

Pong
It set precedent and inspired many devs

doesn't matter. 320x240 resolution @ 15FPS was awful when one year later consoles were already moving onto 640x480 @ 60FPS

>surprised that most Yea Forumsermin are tech-illiterate

Really? How? Where?
Like, there's no way to kill yourself and get back to the entrance?

>entire map
FOV is shit in that game and the grass and fields are flat planes.

Pong had literally nothing to judge it against at the time. Not a valid game to replace OoT’s position.

Seething

>later consoles
N64 is capable of both 640x480 and 60fps, see F-Zero X.
OoT needed a lower resolution and a lower framerate due to the big map and all the other effects (light, particles, etc).

imagine playing nintendo's port of majoras mask to gamecube and having the one game where save points are very limited hardlock your console every 30 mins.

for when it was released it was absolutely perfect
it has aged a bit but the fact that one of the first large 3D adventure games from 1998 is still playable in 2019 and hasn't been btfo by the passage of time is amazing

>doesn't hold up to today's standards
What do people unironically mean by this, graphics aside?

>do you have opinion
no
>you wrong
ok good talk

Yeah but that's not how games should be rated. Ocarina of time has been surpassed by countless other games at this point so it shouldn't be getting all this praise. I know it's like one of the most influential games ever but come on

You can use a key somewhere where not intended to/before using it in a different spot.
In other words there’s a part where you use a key to ultimately get two keys. If you use that key early by fucking with the water level you’re fucked.

Only graphics matter.
The actual large amount of content that still holds up and may be higher than the content of some AAA game now doesn't matter.

No idea what you’re talking about user

Ocarina of Time is a masterpiece, so it's hard to call it overrated. But I like TP and probably BotW more. I think OoT should get a 96 or 97 out of 100. I wouldn't call it the best game of all time like a lot of people do, so I guess you could say I consider it slightly overrated but I like it regardless.
It's the go-to answer when you ask people what the greatest game of all time is.

Literally anything you just listed

The terrain is not flat at all and there are a variety of locations that were larger than most 3D games at the time were rendering. DoA had a small, flat ring with basic backgrounds (and none of it was interactive beyond collision). The scope of the two games is not even close to similar.

Attached: 72D63524-DD88-4909-A3D7-C0422CF1E8B5.jpg (1470x1470, 380K)

I think that may have happened to me on one of my many play throughs as a kid.
Can't remember if I restarted the game over that or not.

It was a big deal ushering Zelda into 3D while retaining the soul of the older games

Skyrim and MW2 are much, much more overrated.

>little
It's highly overrated. I won't say it's bad, because it isn't, but it is distinctly overrated by the fanbase.

That would be GTAIV or Skyrim.

I'm pretty sure that's only in the Master Quest version of the temple

I wish more people knew the difference between overrated and bad.

I literally don't get what's supposed to be so great about it. I know that Z-targeting was an innovation unique to this game, but that was really just a solution to the limitation of the asinine control scheme of consoles.

>I know that Z-targeting was an innovation unique to this game
That shit was in the 3D Mega Man game that came out almost a year before OoT

It’s on the GameCube version at the very least. In any case it’s bullshit and a clear oversight. The only way around it is to use a guide or not save at all in the Water Temple and hope for the best.

>Starcraft, diablo, Tetris, MGS, FF6 are all shit because there's new games that apred their designs but are newer so they have more bells and whistles

That's why the Hobbit movies are better than LOTR movies; the CG and more actors.

Yes, but you're stationary in that game, very different.

Nintendo stealing from Sony? Wow that’s unheard of

Attached: 22F40973-B001-4BF3-AC1C-624A50A3585E.jpg (800x796, 199K)

what was the point of the ice arrows in the game

It's still good to this day despite it being one of the first 3d games. It's a fucking masterpiece

>projecting this hard
Ocarina of Time literally spells out everything you need to do for the entire game, it's the people who get stuck that love the game

>despite it being one of the first 3d games
console 3d games*

It's also technically not full 3d.

>Mega Man
>Sony

BASED retard.

It's a cool reward for an optional challenge.
Getting an extra bottle would objectively be more useful but also much more underwhelming

FPBP

Attached: 2AEE70EFA6214D0B80C7D771FD4A1BAA.gif (246x208, 747K)

Helps prove our point actually. If innovation was the only thing anyone cared about then why did MML not revolutionize the industry but OOT did? It's because OOT was actually an amazing game and served to both show the quality of game that could be made with these features, as well as bringing them into the public eye through its popularity.

What are the best settings to use for the randomizer?

Attached: 1527370195464.png (470x600, 191K)

Nice reading comprehension retard.
I'm saying that other games have surpassed OoT in terms of storytelling, level design, characters, everything. When the fuck did I bring up CG and actors you stupid retard

You weren't there. The jump from 2d action adventure to 3d action adventure felt like being transported and evolving for billions of years within the span of a decade.

Now it's just another old 3d adventure game that sucks shit compared to minecraft.

Attached: reepee.png (164x163, 57K)

I still don't get whats so great about it.

And yes, I played it as a kid.

OoT is shit but the drones on this site will tell you it's anything but a clunky, ugly mess of a game

The first graphic card was a bigger deal than a releasing a new model today. That was the first 3d zelda on nintendo's first 3d console. It was thereby a much bigger deal.

not really a cool reward since its useless. you get fire arrows much earlier and later you get light arrows which destroys everything.

>he fell for the 3D meme

this
>ywn be between 6 and 11 y.o kid and play OoT for the first time again
it so fucking sad, there not a single game to fill up the big ass void this game leaves you

If they really do hold up today, then what is the harm in having a separate category for influence? They would still rank high on the "best of all time" list, no?

You are a fucking retard of you dont cant comprehend why you dont re rate games

>Bath Ruth couldn’t keep up in today’s Baseball so he’s overrated.
You’re a real ding-dong head, aren’t you?

>cant undersand metaphors

I'm explaining that just because newer games copied what they did and then added a bunch of shit only possible because those games are made with newer technology doesn't make them better games. Just newer. Of course I don't know why I'm bothering since you're a blithering retard obviously who is easily impressed by developers adding useless bells and whistles, and copying earlier, more original products

This. It's unfair to re-rate a 1998 game against a 2019 game because it was nobody's fault they had worse technology.

I was about to say you're retarded cause I did do this, but I realized you said Google, and I was using Duckduckgo. I looked it up on Google, and it came up. So one point to you Google.

Attached: pic-window-190322-1159-46.png (920x997, 167K)

But what if someone doesn't value getting from points A to B in the fastest, safest possible way? Just like some people don't value the highest quality graphics/frame rate/story/etc.

That's fine, I don't get why everyone loves FF6 so much. Sometimes shit doesn't click, but to say you don't appreciate what it did well is different than to say it didn't do those things well. Nothing wrong with having an opinion and tastes, just so long as you aren't being a contrarion for no reason.

not him but Hyper Light Drifter is at least as good as LttP if not better, dunno how comparable it is to OOT but I like it more

I don't understand what it supposedly did so well, other than solving the problem of dynamic movement in a 3d environment using an inferior control scheme.

>The reviews praised multiple aspects of the game, particularly its level design, gameplay mechanics, sound, and cinematics.

Pretty much all of those would still hold up since they are largely timeless. The issue is that nobody would. They would compare it to dark souls and say that dark souls having better graphics and QoL improvements makes it a better game and thats it.

I don't really feel comfortable choosing any game for that spot. It certainly wouldn't be OoT though, that game wouldn't even be in my top 1000, probably.

It's the most overrated video game of all time
That's an indisputable fact.

Level design, sound/music, large draw distances gave a sense of scale and world building. Tone and story moved nicely from melancholy to dark to happy pretty seamlessly. Lots of side quests and shit to do.

I want to call you based for you using duckduckgo but you didn't even play Mega Man Legends.

Frame rate. Limited equipment options. Lame combat (especially the targeting system). Uninspired hub field regardless of graphics. Annoying as shit fairy and annoying Link voice.

I'd say I like 7/10 games. You can still think highly of a game even if you think it's overrated.

What exactly is your argument?
People always where primarily looking at graphics and your first "3d game" certainly must have had a big impact.

Except OoT is far from a simple horse and carriage in this analogy. Very few if any elements of it's design are outdated or antiquated.

I honestly can't see it, there were so many much, much better games both contemporary to and preceding OOT. I think for the argument to work you really need the stipulation of "console game".

Attached: 1449592064618.jpg (1214x816, 508K)

>duck
I never heard the phrase *MML* before. My friend would talk to me about MML however, so I might as well give it a try.

Attached: qwe_download.jpg (800x611, 39K)

Those have always gotten plenty of criticism, even near release (OP Commando/One Man Army/M1887/Ranger/UPS, etc. and poor voice actors/glitches/poor quest options, etc., respectively). Meanwhile, half of people still suck Ocarina's cock regardless of all its apparent flaws 21 years later.

Nothing. It's just the zoomer way to pretend that their games are somehow better

All of the 3D Zelda games are horribly overrated.

Don't get me wrong, I know the difference between overrated and bad.

It's the only argument contrarians have left to shit on OoT but fail to actually understand what makes a game age poorly and just assert that old = outdated

yeah it’s totally overrated considering majoras mask was the better game. not to mention all the games (non zelda) that came out after that were better than both

>lock-on system is not as fluid as OOT
>open world is not so seamless
>dungeons are not as interesting as OOT (esp in the puzzle dept)

underrated opinion
i think that it deserves all the praise it gets and I still like it as much as the first time I played it two decades ago

It literally wrote the book on how 3D action games are made.

It is, because majora is the better game.
>hurr durr you're just a contrarian
I played both of them as a kid before even using the internet and I preferred MM then and still do.

>>little
I definitely agree that it's highly overrated, I just think the fact that it's #1 is ridiculous and a bigger issue.

The reason I'd consider MW2 more overrated than OoT is because OoT is good enough to justify over 95% of the praise it gets. I think 99 is like 2 or 3 points too high. But MW2 got a 94 which is like 50 points too high. I do agree that OoTfags ignore any flaws but the flaws aren't anything game-breaking and MW2 has much more flaws but gets a lot of praise anyway.

It's impossible for anything that is consistently rated at #1 to not be overrated.

>still good = a fucking masterpiece
Is this how low people's standards are?

>uses that gif
>thinks a 21 year old game deserves the title "best game ever made"
I'm not at all surprised.

Posting best review
youtube.com/watch?v=fLhtMeeIhEk

Ocarina of Time is underrated and should be considered mandatory reading for school children.

Fuck The Catcher In The Rye, Fuck The Great Gatsby, Fuck To Kill A Mockingbird. If you haven't put 100 hours into a blind run of Ocarina of Time - you are not worth knowing.

Attached: Médaillon_de_la_Forêt.png (263x278, 23K)

Not him, but LOTR was boring as shit anyway.

I can respect that opinion, even though MM is my least favorite 3D Zelda. I still like it though.

>MW2 has much more flaws but gets a lot of praise anyway.
Because it does so much more good that those flaws are worth overlooking.

it's not the best game ever made but it's one of the most influential and one of the most flawless

>greatest game ever made is about a lazy sleepy boy aryan who one day saves the world from a large nosed desert man from a matriarchal society with two lesbian moms.

"But user you're just gasping at straws!"

>his weapon is literally a luftwaffe sword

Attached: LUFTWAFFE-SWORD-WITH-HANGER-GERMAN-WWII-SWORD-EXCEPTIONAL-ORIGINAL-CONDITION_100892009_17740_3E93F60 (1600x1200, 336K)

>Now it's just another old 3d adventure game that sucks shit compared to minecraft.
Hence why Metacritic's rating system is flawed. Ocarina of Time should be able to be compared 1 on 1 with any other game and be better if it is to be #1.

You weren’t alive when this game came out so I don’t think you really get to decide. It was an epic adventure at a time when there really wasn’t a lot else in the 3D environments. I think gex1 and that n64 donkey Kong game.

>You are a fucking retard
What? You say that as if there is some universal law that old games must have a place on this list or "it wouldn't be fair." That's fucking stupid, our technology is constantly improving, it's only obvious that old games will be surpassed.

You were in diapers and couldn’t even say eff pee ess when this came out you stupid fuck. There wasn’t anobsessoon over “most realistic graphics” and “800 FPS” back then.

Yes, he would be overrated when compared to every other baseball player ever. He was good for his time specifically; that's why people talk about him. But he does not hold up today, famous or not.

+1

Personally I thought it was nothing special. To me it was honestly pretty generic.

Literally all of those aspects were inferior to what we have today. The very technology the game was produced on did not allow for what we are accustomed to today.

It's true that old games will be surpassed, but that doesn't magically make OoT become less good by itself.

>every race in Hyrule is nestled peacefully in their own ethnostate

>hero "falls asleep for 7 years" and allows evil to infest the land. He then wakes up (becomes redpilled) and cleanses the kingdom of evil, with most townspeople oblivious and complacent to their current situation.

>There wasn’t anobsessoon over “most realistic graphics” and “800 FPS” back then.
Oh yes there absolutely was, getting the best graphics in particular were extremely important back then.

Attached: 2008627152135_9606_1[1].jpg (400x300, 28K)

Everything but the story is outdated.

meant UMP, not UPS

Don't know what to say to such a painfully bad opinion.

>gerudo symbol is originally an Islamic Moon and Star

>quranic chants in the fire temple

>first temple medallion is a swaztika, changed in later versions

>swastikas appear at dungeon designs in the first Zelda game

>early concept art is pic related

Attached: f469c31b4b1cc609920458de91c5677d-imagepng.png (550x720, 151K)

Yes but like you said, it was "best graphics" not "most realistic" ones, games like Sacrifice or Giants: Citizen Kabuto were often praised for them and you won't disagree that they are far from being photorealistic or even trying to be.

updooted

>t. George Lucas
Based zoomer opinion

>tfw /pol/ appears in every Zelda thread

Attached: 35651729111_0dbe2a317e_o.gif (427x240, 2.97M)

But thing about the influence, my dood. Hand grenades are the GOAT because of how influential they were, while thermonuclear bombs don't hold a candle because they were only a small step up from atomic bombs....
Makes sense.

It’s properly rated.

Ape escape was better.

Since when was that my point?
I'm talking mainly about the story telling and character depth side of things.
I doubt OoT's story is so generic and lame because of technology at the time.
I never fucking brought up the bells and whistles shit you seem so fixated on. I couldn't care less about that shit

It has always been pretty good, but the randomizer has made it even better to be honest

Allsanity, Quad Damage, Ice Trap Mayhem, set low health to mweeps

>wouldn't even be in my top 1000

Attached: xi.jpg (416x416, 17K)

Literally fell asleep all three times I tried to watch it. I guess corny fantasy environments are just really not my thing.

>you weren't alive
I was two years old.

Right, but the original guy you quoted said nothing about graphical fidelity, but more so that of performance which was indeed very important at the time, not sure if you were doing it on purpose but this is what is meant by moving goalposts.

Not even a bit, it and MM are the only games that never get old for me

Have played through each at least a dozen times

>that doesn't magically make OoT become less good by itself
You're absolutely right. It's not that OoT is getting worse, it's that many other games are getting better. Which is why OoT doesn't belong at first place.

nope, it's just THAT good

That are shit tons of games that have come out since that we haven't even heard of. Tons with better technology behind them. Lots of even older 2D games hold up better than OoT does, since visuals aren't really the main focus for 2D games, but gameplay.

Give me a fucking example then. I've answered you multiple times and all you do is move the goalpost and make general statements of newer games doing things better. Fucking troll.

There are shit tons of games that have come out since that we haven't even heard of. Tons with better technology behind them. Lots of even older 2D games hold up better than OoT does, since visuals aren't really an important focus for 2D games, but gameplay.

Not him, but the story is shit because the game was made for kids. It's a Nintendo game, of course that's going to be the case.

If you really believe there are 1000 games better than OOT then there's no point arguing with you.

youtu.be/GyUcwsjyd8Q

Feel sad for you then

Attached: 1521467248713.jpg (512x384, 57K)

>Babe Ruth
typo. my bad.

I've seen kids movies with better story telling than Game of thrones.

This sort of thing is tough

Obviously most 5th gen console games have aged terribly (far worse than 3rd and 4th gen imo) but they were also very important in the evolution of gaming.

as a PC+SEGA+Sony+Nintendofag who has played literally thousands of video games since 1989 I can easily say NO.

The sum of all its parts is executed flawlessly. It has no weaknesses, it's the most well rounded, polished gaming experience anyone can hope for.
It is rightfully ranked as the highest rated game to this day.

Attached: 1352212168493.jpg (790x993, 170K)

that's... what I'm saying? Should his legacy be diminished because athletes play at higher levels than they used to?

Yes? Like I said, there are a ton that have come out since that have better technology behind them. I bet a bunch of flash and io games are more fun than OoT. You aren't thinking big enough.

name a pre-2000 game that does hold up then.

Novels have nice lore but non-existent gameplay. Poor argument.

>no weaknesses
What? Almost every part of the game is a weakness in comparison to what we have now.

>to what we have now
I've heard that a hundred times in this thread. Give examples.

>legacy
It has nothing to do with legacy, everything to do with how good they were. Babe Ruth doesn't hold up, that's just the truth. Fuck legacy and its stranglehold on weak minds.

Probably none of them.

Graphics
Sound
Voice acting
Grandness
Options
Probably a bunch more

Once again you can't compare an objective thing like best hitter or fastest runner against subjective things like best story or music. For a subjective thing to be the best can't be objectively measured. It's a matter of taste and when the overwhelming majority agree that something tastes good then it tastes good and that's it.

Wow. So those are things you're saying other games are better at. I want examples of those games. Jesus son.

>weak minds.
bro, I'm not the one that needs a disclaimer in front of everything that things are subject to time.

here's another analogy... Rome was the greatest empire of its time, but would get BTFO by the USA's army today. Not to mention its society was brutal and had slaves and no medicine and shit. USA is an objectively better place to live. Is Rome overrated? Would the world be the same if Rome was never founded?

I mean, look at the OP. It's not saying
>who has the best graphics, or...
>what's the objectively best map
It's making a broad ass statement yo. Why're you here splitting hairs about it?

Attached: tone.jpg (295x171, 10K)

Maybe you kids see it overrated because you merely look at the game but don't know the context of the time. This was the first game ever to truly have an open, interconnected 3D world. The jump of technology back then from Snes to N64 was as if someone right now would throw you into a perfectly immersive VR world. Also you're jaded because now the market is saturated with empty "open worlds".

>44 years old
>Still posting on the objectively worst on this website
Why?

and yet they all still work flawlessly within the game's own set rules and limitations that were bound by the time it was made.
you didn't even think this through. it's like trying to critizise Tetris just for the sake of finding some flaws with it so you can later boast proudly how you dismantlet and deconstructed Tetris which was always bad anyway. People like you are desperate for validaiton and having the last word gives you the biggest boner.
giving Tetris 4k textures with HDR support and DTS HDMA sound won't make it a better game as it already is.
you don't need to reinvent the wheel. despite being a 10k year old invention our cars still use them.

> The game does not hold up to today's standards at all.

name a game that came out in the past year which is better.

Graphically things have obviously got better but other than that I still think most games don't live up to OOT. It's more than the sum of its parts.

>Literally everyone except contrarian central agrees it's the undisputed GOAT
>Is it worth playing?

Attached: 1552920170512.jpg (336x365, 89K)

Why not?

y-yes?

> when the overwhelming majority agree that something tastes good then it tastes good and that's it
That's the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard

At the time it was a legit 100. It doesn't hold up as well now, but it's still like a 96.

I'm not giving you examples because it's obvious. You're either just playing dumb to defend your favorite game or have a fucked up brain.

I love MML, but it's a fucking slog compared to OoT.

Give me a fucking objective measurement that can be used to quantify fucking best song, best tasting meal, best painting then you colossal retard.

Yes, Rome was overrated. What's so hard to understand?

Yes user, it is. Very much so.

>I want you to defend your position but refuse to defend my own

Fucking confirmed for zoomer

Attached: 1542752760847.gif (493x342, 480K)

I should say Rome IS overrated. Rome was the GOAT but it is no longer. Now it would be a joke.

>you kids
>context of the time
Nothing worse than an idiotic oldfag trying to lecture people

1. The wheel has improved. It is not the best of its kind.
2. The wheel isn't the greatest invention of all time, regardless, influential or not

Maybe MML 2 could compare to OoT.
But MML definitely doesn't push as far as OoT does. It's more akin to Mario 64.

You called me a retard when you said that a majority can turn an opinion into a fact. Look at yourself, holy shit.

There is no objective measurement for best song or painting, and that's OK.

There's nothing to defend. You've outed yourself as an idiot when you said that an N64 has never been surpassed in any of its elements.

Of course it is. The world doesn't feel alive, and you spend most of your time trudging through annoying puzzles.

Try a good game that gets the blood pumping and actually feels alive, like the Witcher 3.

why? because its the highest rated? some game HAS to be

it's not the best game ever made but it's still the best 3D Zelda by virtue of it having non-linear dungeons without sacrificing progression. It's the most well-rounded game in the series

Attached: OoT linearity map.png (1169x4226, 522K)

And youve been pushing some idea that a subjective majority opinion can be objectively overturned by the passage of time and technology.
Literally never said that but OK. Just strawman harder I guess if it makes you feel like you're not a retard. If it's so easy to find examples I want you to give me one.

No, how is that would you took out of that?

A little, but not by much.

There's a lot about OoT that people overlook that is truly genius work. Flawless it is not, but overall it is still a game that is more than just an old classic.

I haven't played it once. Also not really planning on, because Zelda games suck dick.

Hyperlight Drifter is kinda B-C class in the AA AAA ranking system.
Its good, but its also limited in content.
If HLD was A or AA, it wouldn't be so limited in scope.

Thats a bit ignorant.
One of the reasons Ocarina is Ocarina is that amount of content and polish it has.
As you play more games, you realize that a lot of games that should be in the same class(similar development cycle and devteam) has jankier core mechanics, less polish, and worse structure. Or generally worse stack of content.

Its one thing to compare SNES/NES games with modern games. Back then WYSIWYG-editors wasn't a thing, and a lot of content had to be handmade or converted by hand into metadata, and then the testing could happen. On top of limited storage space.
Which means manpower might not translate to content.
But once you hit the 3D era, that changes. Manpower == content
That applies to 2D as well, because WYSIWYG editing was suddenly possible to massive hardware improvements.
Today its possible for a small indie team to create things that is superior to SNES and NES games because they are not limited by the toolset(if they have some good coders and research).
Something like Hollow Knight is what happens when a team of non coders end up making something that works, which wasn't possible back then. Something like FEZ wasn't really possible either, due team size constraints to produce quality and content.

For 3D its a bit different. Past some point of the N64/PS1 dev cycle, those constraints starting going away.
And if you ever worked with primitive 3Dmax/Milkshape/other software or early 2000s map tools, you would know that you get to the point where extremely impressive things are only constrained by team size, research, pixels/frame and scripting limitations of the used engines. And the limitations of the content creation tools.
Zelda OOT and Mario64 was made at the time where it turns out more modern tools might not increase productivity enough to compare.

>Still cares about review scores.
You must be 18 or older to post here.

>And youve been pushing some idea that a subjective majority opinion can be objectively overturned by the passage of time and technology.
No I haven't. I pointed out that Babe Ruth has been surpassed at what we was intended to be doing, just like OoT has been.

The most influential game for 3D adventure games is overrated? Don't be a contrarian, OP.

> It has no weaknesses, it's the most well rounded, polished gaming experience anyone can hope for.
Literally all of its parts (save maybe level layout) are outdated, so how can they come together into the GOAT? Look who's retarded now.

A lot of early 3D games had:
1. Unbearable cameras
2. Janky weird unpolished combat
3. Janky 15-20fps framerates
4. A lot of games went for fog/fade out without any artistic reasons/intent
5. Some games had some extremely weird tech problems. I.e Bloodomen PS1 where you wait for CD tracks to end, so the game can load the menues

Meaning if a game is only dazzling because it has new technical or never seen before features, it might not be good once compared to later games with similar features and actual polish.
There is also a lot of Saturn/Megadrive/SNES games thats extremely janky, but survive on gimmick factor alone.

Babe Ruth's greatness was based on objective measurements and scores, best hitting average and the like. Ocarinas greatness is based off of shit that is purely subjective such as best story and music. The only one thing it was highly regarded for that can be argued in some type of measurable way is level design. So yes you are trying to compare a quantifiable measurement to a subjective taste, which is fucking impossible. Makes more sense to try and say Harry Potter is better than chronicles of Narnia for reasons x y z as at least that is a matter of taste, and would have been a relevant comparison to the discussion at hand.

Then do you think older games should degrade in scoring as time goes on because other games that come out improve on the formula?

Who are you quoting and why are you moving goalposts so much. My God are you even more retarded than I thought. Hey man I heard that Captain marvel had better CG than citizen kane? Does that make it a better movie? Dumbshit.

Except this game is rated highly out the ass, so either people must admit that they love almost everything about primitive 3D environments, or they're suffering from nostalgia blindness.

Yes, just like IQ functions. As people get smarter (or dumber), the new average is shifted so that 100 remains average. That way, we can accurately compare scores. It makes perfect sense.

>Who are you quoting
Retard, go up the reply chain. Anyway I'm pretty sure you're just trolling me at this point. Citizen Kane? Are you kidding me, dude? Influential does not equal good. Sitting someone down to watch that movie blindly and asking them if it was the GOAT should be the standard, not "hurr durr, it was influential in cinematography, so it's amazing."

the fog from ocarina of time was very comfy. it was used to reduce draw distance but it also created an aesthetic presentation.

played the 3ds version on citra

maybe a bit

>Graphics
A lot of Euro and US games for PS1 and N64 features polished programmer art.
Its generally ugly. This is somewhere near your point, but the problem is that the good looking games of the generation looks pretty nice.
Actual things like contrast of shapes exist when its not programmer art.
For a modern example, Kenshin is basically 'programmer art'. Its somewhat ugly, some weird choices here and there, and a lot of tracing ideal source material
>Sound
???
MIDI with good soundfonts is generally higher quality than large MP3s or poorly designed orchestra music.
>Voice Acting
Generally adds nothing but NARM when its poorly done.
Makes the experience 10/10 when you get stuff like Brit Xenoblade.
By itself it doesn't add anything, when Pingu jibberish is generally better to impact people.
>Grandness
Grandness is contrast between small and big.
If a game is only big, it has no grandness. I.e a lot of Space games.
A gazzilion area of space is worthless if you have no meaningful way to gauge what the minimum movement is like.
Skyskrapers is bland unless it can be contrasted with cabin's and smaller spaces IRL.
>Options
Basically a meme, because 'options in combat' generally means that you have a optimal playset that ruins gameplay diversity.
Options in gameplay results in moral system's with no impact.

Attached: 3DMap_LegendOfZelda-OcarinaOfTime-Future-DeathMountainCrater(Side).jpg (2254x1634, 635K)

I once had a girl rim my asshole while I played the water temple

You aren't quoting me, and yet you linked to me. So other you're a retard or a newfag. Either way just stop.

And what if people do admit they love it? Then what? I mean people think the classic fallout is the best despite all the technological advancements in fallout 76. Go argue with those people.

>>Sound
>???
The annoying fairy and the sound of kid Link's voice when doing strenuous tasks. Not really related to the game's age though.
>Voice Acting
I don't value it much myself, but when done properly, it can add to the game's quality.
>Grandness
At the very least, there are games today that feature large spaces that are actually filled with content. Hyrule Field was pretty darn bland. Of course I shouldn't expect more because of how old the game is, but I'm not arguing about OoT being the best for its time, but the best for now.
>Options
So you mean like a small number of weapons/techniques being so OP that they ruin the actual diversity? True, but not every situation calls for the same tactics. Sometimes, you must force yourself to become a master of all trades to be good enough at all aspects of the game. I don't like moral systems myself, wish they weren't so common.

Sounds interesting. There are a lot of stories like this, huh? I've heard a bunch of Yea Forums or reddit posts talking about women doing weird sexual acts on them while they play video games.

>Hyrule Field was pretty darn bland
I don't agree. Most games have problems with longer walking segments.
Games like Darksiders have you pass trough even larger areas(once), which basically waste them.
And Xenoblade is Hyrule Field x100 is terms of design once you go past Bionis Leg, with complimenting design decisions.

Hyrule field also have a lot of smaller things going on that worse game developers have failed at. For one, the day/night cycle is extreme in saturation and contrast.
Another is the enemy variety as you walk along, and you go from being hunted by peacock plants during daylight to undead nightwalkers.
The music is also really good, meaning you kinda get into the right tones.
Another important thing is how the game handles day/night cycle transition, where its deliberately only a feature in some over world areas

Hyrule Field in a game by a worse developer would be 'why'-tier for a lot of the reasons people describe when talking about it.
But since people are dishonest with critique they often fail to mention what it contrasts, or how its used to impact the players.

Attached: 3DMap_LegendOfZelda-OcarinaOfTime-Future-HyruleField(Side).jpg (8000x3000, 2.92M)

Blame Yea Forums for that, not me.
I'm not saying they're incorrect if they do, because opinions can't be invalid or valid. The question I have is, do people actually enjoy this type of primitive game, or are they only tolerating its flaws being of nostalgia/the fact that they're supposed to like the game? It's not like a primitive SNES game, where things are more competitive with today's 2D games, primitive 3D games look really bad in comparison to today.

based. zoomers and psx cucks on suicide watch

I'm specifically talking about SOME modern grand environments not being empty. Some sure as hell are lackluster.

The day and night cycle of Hyrule Field is something I take issue with. The length of a day and night is not long enough to really impart a sense of urgency on you to get to your destination quickly, because the prevalence of zombies doesn't last long enough to be a real threat. Hyrule Field is a hub to many different areas and creatures, sure, but it's mostly just a big bland field. I always hear people talk about how TTYD is boring to backtrack in though, but I personally like the environments enough not to care, so maybe it's just a matter of taste here.

>whale
Jabu-jabu is a fish.

>1996 born and Nintendo is the only gaming company I actually care for
ocarina sucks

Eh, even for it's time it was kinda empty and boring.

Not OP but I never got what was so great about this game. Majora's Mask in my opinion was a much better, more innovative game than OoT. I never have or will understand why this game is considered the best game of all time

Looking at a picture of it now. It does look a lot like a fish but its tail fin is horizontal. Maybe that's what made me think it was a whale.

Just because the PSX was better than the N64 doesn't mean I can't like Ocarina of Time.

What other 3D games had targeting in them before OoT? Or was it truly the first to do so? Did any 2D games have any of the same kind of targeting in them?

Attached: 1389925684936.gif (288x227, 820K)

Mega Man Legends had it first

Nope, I'm wrong, it's a "whale-like creature".

It's a 9 out of 10. If it split the child/adult timelines to separately upon replay like a tanker/big shell kind of thing, it'd be 11 out of 10 and I'd replay it a bajillion times.

Looks like a chimera of a fish, whale, and crocodile. Pretty weird.

Yes, if you don't have the nostalgia for it then it's unplayable trash.

I forced myself to get relatively far but when a slight bit of difficulty arose, I took that as an excuse to nope out of that shitty game.

Name 10 games better than OoT

It's no fucking surprise the farther we get from OOT's release the more voices start shouting its overrated. Now who could that be? Surely not the people who have already been discussing the game for 20 years.
It's a bunch of fucking zoomers screeching and wondering why an old ugly game on a console they never even knew existed could be so much better than the shit they play today. It's fact, it's in the books: Ocarina is one of the best if not THE best game of all time. Even Yea Forums's idol Miyazaki has outright admitted he would never compare himself to Zelda due to how much Ocarina shaped the industry. It's release was an atom bomb the likes we may never see again. Deal with it.

>Have a opinion
>Click on a random post and skip past a 10 line opinionated opinion
>Write barely one line

Attached: 1338073489235.jpg (202x162, 28K)

I read the whole thing. A lot of those don't do much to reconcile the flaw of being barren and empty. It's size is fine for the game it's in, but it doesn't have much to actually do in it. Only 2 enemies in the area, both of which are replaced by poes in the future, and all 3 can be easily ran away from and don't offer anything unique insofar as being exciting encounters beyond your first meeting with them. Day/Night is a nice touch, but I was never a fan of having to roll your way to Hyrule castle if you wanted to go there first right out the gate otherwise it'd be too late. Plus it's mostly turned useless once you get the Sun's Song.

No that shit blew my fucking balls off at the time it came out. I think you had to be the right age range at the time for it to have maximum impact.

I did play it and think its score should be 95-97 out of 100. It's great but it's not flawless, which a lot of people can't admit. I actually liked TP and BotW more.

>replayed it in master quest mode
>got to experience the magic of the game all over again without knowing all the solutions
>remembered exactly why it's the GOAT

The only reason it might start seeming overrated is if you've played it to death and know everything

Overrated but not bad

I think they are boring as fuck aswell. I really wanted to like zelda games, and it seems like they have everything i like, but they are so boring.

They have
Slow start with bad stories
Shallow repetitive combat which is like half the game
The other half is boring dungeons, solving boring puzzles, were even if you know the answer you have slowly move 6 blocks or something
Also add the slow traversal in something like wind waker

A good zelda game to me would be were each individual element was good enough to stand on its own. Where the combat was good enough to be its own game. Wheres the dungeons were fun with maybe less emphasis on puzzles and more on platforming
a story that didnt suck etc

yes, considering that there are many zelda games that are better. 3D zelda sucks

What are you, 50?

Have you tried Breath of the Wild? It's probably the new 'formula' for the series and it addresses pretty much every problem you have with the games aside from bad story and the combat is still middling.

It's not anything to do with the game itself, you can have the same amount of fun playing OOT now as you could back then, but those sorts of sites don't take the passage of time into account. Super Mario 64 is also considered like the greatest game of all time despite being essentially archaic compared to shit that came afterwards in a lot of aspects.

I don’t know I think Mario 64s controls and physics still hold up today even if the level design isn’t amazing. Oot I could never enjoy it’s too slow for me, the only Zelda games I liked were Wind water and Botw.

Literally came ITT to post this

Good taste

It's sad that Nintendo hasn't done anything revolutionary since the N64

nope

But it adds all the boring shit of modern open world games

>what is the Switch

More than anything else, super-high average scores (95 and up) indicate that few people dislike it, rather than that everyone thinks it's the best.
So it's not that Ocarina of Time is better than every single other individual game, it's that it's good in a way that just about everyone can enjoy.
That's just how averages work.

No, it's bad. The game is doesn't tell you where to go and the combat is too slow. And anyone who disagrees with me is blinded by nostalgia.

t. Arin Hanson

>implying Arin Hanson isn't based

I was going to ignore this, but i just wanted to point out that arguing age is a detractor from the title of "best game ever" doesn't make any freaking sense. Like, what are you even saying, that it could only a current gen game? What happens when that game eventually becomes 21 years old then?

Not that i even necessarily think the "best game ever" is/should be even a thing, just saying

Attached: You.webm (880x495, 1.02M)