A Link to the Past VS Ocarina of Time

[imported_AJ Middleton]

Two topics people will kill over: Is Zelda an RPG, and OoT vs. LttP. The world will never know why...

Originally posted by Mr. Fusion:
Show where exactly these cheap graphics and sloppy music lie, because I honestly don't know what the heck you're talking about. For 1992, its look is quite sophisticated, and the end credits is one of the most magnificent video game music compositions I've ever heard.

OoT was better plot-wise and graphics-wise (obviously), but that's about it. Definitely not adventure-wise, in my opinion. The dungeons and puzzles in LttP are so much better and addicting.

In OoT, I've found all the skulltulas and pieces of heart, and the idea of running around Hyrule Field all over again in another file sounds like a chore. In LttP, I've found all the items and pieces of heart, but the idea of running around the Light and Dark Worlds all over again in another file excites me.

Cheap graphics. Deformed, pink-haired Link; short, wobbly guards; bright, colorful landscapes, need I go on? Sloppy music. It all sounded re-recorded and simple. Even the sound effects weren't crisp. Honestly, I've heard better sounding stuff on the NES.

The dungeons in LttP aren't fullfilling. How can you not enjoy a 3D dungeon, with all 3 dimensions explorable? With twists and turns that make you feel as if you're actually there? The birdseye stuff stopped working with LoZ. It loses effectivness. Especially since every room in every dungeon, more or less, has to have the same basic outline. OoT was something that Zelda had never seen. That's what, IMO, made the OoT adventure that much better.

Excites you, heh? Slow down pardner. I admit, OoT's Hyrule Field was a little...open. Ok, it was very open. The worlds in LttP were a lot more restricted, and I liked that. But still, I find it more appealing the second time to have the open world than the one that you can only explore a sector of until you beat a ceratin dungeon.

[imported_AJ Middleton]

As I said, people will KILL over this topic. Ross proves me true.

Originally posted by Ross:
To Wacko Bolt Dragoon:
Are you even on the same page with everyone else? You could have said (Note to all that I don't agree with this.) bad synthesized music, poor graphics by today's standards, boring etc. But how the hell could you say that the music, graphics, or game altogether were 'poorly constructed.' Any damn gamer could play LttP and tell you (even if they didn't like it) that it had good qualities. Whatsmore, anybody can realize that a lot of effort and talent went into that game!

Don't remember the storyline? How about this for OoT: It's a run of the mill backstory BASED ON LttP you cretan! LttP was cool, you had to retrieve the Master Sword (rather than it being 'oh look it's there' in OoT), you have the whole maidens story, Agahnim, the Dark World... heck even many of the different locations have their own little stories! I'm not saying that OoT's story is bad. But it's rather simplistic compared to LttP.

Oh and PS to the guy who said that many of the locations in OoT come from LttP: Yes and no. OoT wasn't based too terribly on LttP beyond that it was the backstory, (I hear that WW does quite a bit of that, so that's one hell of a good thing!). Like I mean there's a castle (I know, first castles appeared in ZII), a Kakariko village... that's about it. Lake Hylia, Death Mountain, and yes the Lost Woods first appeared in LoZ.

People, people! Fine if anyone has their own opinions. But you know what? I think the smart people could agree that they're both great games. If you don't admit to that, then I'd call you crazy.

So I'm wacko? Good grief, everyone has differing opinions. Take a deep breath and count to three. I do not deny that it has good qualities, nor that work did go into it. I never said that. But ever since I first saw the game, I was not impressed by its graphics or music. Sorry. Like I said above, I've seen better on the NES.

Now I'm a cretin! Yes! Anyone who knows me well will tell you that I'm a plot freak. The fact that I don't remember LttP's storyline in full detail says something. Now, I remember enough to counter your points. You had to get three somethings in LttP to get the Master Sword, right? You also get three somethings to get it in OoT. The whole maidens' story is the same as that of the Sages'. Agahnim, Ganon's alter-ego, could be translated into Ganondorf, the pig beast's human form. The Dark World exists in both games. Individual storylines? Adult Link's trading sequence. Ok, there's not many direct sub-stories, but you can find info and piece it together: The Kakariko odd family, Mido and Saria, the fishing pool owner. So what was OoT lacking again? It was somehow more simple? OoT may appear to be a clone of LttP, but face it, it follows a basic Zelda, 3 part story. If anything, OoT was more complicated with its dealing with time and more personalities and so on.
*On a side note, I've noticed that Nintendo likes to put in the necesities whenever they bring a new installment of a game to a new system. You have to see the Master Sword at least once on the SNES. You also have to see it on the N64. Gamers want to see elements that represent the series on the new console in the new graphics. This does result in similarities and repetition. But I wouldn't say OoT is too close to LttP.

Because OoT comes before LttP, yes, it WILL have some of the same places and elements.

Don't give the opinion speech after you tried to kill me already . LttP is a GOOD game. That's why I finished it. OoT is a GREAT game. That's why I finished it and kept coming back. That's also why it won Game of the Year. I don't hate LttP, I just think it's not that great and it's overrated beyond belief.

Sloppy music? Cheap Link?!

ATTENTION BOLT: THIS GAME WAS MADE LONG AGO WHEN GRAPHICS LIKE THESE COULDN'T BE MUCH BETTER.

OoT was made, oh... 5 years after its SNES rival? You CAN'T compare the sound and graphics to OoT. It's stupid because you know OoT's is better... But to say OoT is better because of them is idiotic. What happened to gameplay? A Link to the Past had a fine storyline. They just laid out the basics for you. You could learn more about it in bits and pieces, if you talked to people. One of the things that annoyed me about OoT was the 50 5+ minute cinemas that all told me the same exact thing in someone else's words. That is not storyline. It is repetition.

A Link to the Past is much longer than OoT. All OoT has to add to it after you've beaten their miniscule supply of dungeons is to hunt *yawn* for the Skulltulas, get the Biggoron sword, which isn't worth any of the frustration, the Happy Masks *yawn* or to get Epona, which takes not much longer than 5 minutes of play. A Link to the Past spares you of this BS. You don't need a horse because you have boots. There are more dungeons, and the only "side" quests for you are getting the heart pieces and upgrading your bombs and arrows. You don't have to go out of your way for the majority of them, either.

A Link to the Past had much better items. With OoT, you needed your goddamn flute everywhere. Attp actually did something useful with it- easy transportation. I loved that bird. OoT didn't have any of the canes, both of which were cool. Don't get me started on the Fire and Ice Rods.. I would have wanted them to be staples in EVERY Zelda game. Attp had much harder dungeon puzzles, and cooler for that matter. The enemies could actually be a pain. OoT, once I've beaten it the first time, I can do it every time with ease. Even the water temple now only takes about 45 minutes. And I've only played the game through about 4 times. With Attp, I still manage to trip myself up at places like the Desert Palace. That key sitting on top of the statue.. I ALWAYS overlook that thing.

OoT's rendition of Ganon's Tower is pathetic to say the least. Attp's.. now that's a real dungeon.

The Four Swords only made the game better, sans Young Link's voice. And even though OoT's was awesome, Attp has much catchier boss music. I love it.

Did I mention the bosses were harder? Phantom Ganon was just a matter of staying in one spot to avoid being hit (dropping the challenge by 90%), and Twinrova was simply moving your shield. And nothing.. NOTHING can EVER ****ing compete.. with Trinexx.

[ April 23, 2003, 11:47 AM: Message edited by: Wobbegong ]

Bosses? Harder in LttP? Oh please, I can beat the LttP bosses in a matter of seconds.

LttP longer than OoT? Ha...

[ April 23, 2003, 11:47 AM: Message edited by: That one dude ]

Yes. That is what I said. Harder. You can read.

No i cnat reed, m'i dislecksik!!111

[imported_AJ Middleton]

Can we stop the yelling? PLEASE!?

Tub, no. Incorrect. For the third time, I've heard better sounds and seen better on the NES. I'm not comparing LttP's graphics to OoT's directly! I'm comparing them to the technology of their times! LttP's sound sounds low quality. I've heard clearer in, oh I dunno, Super Mario World. The graphics were nothing amazing either. OoT had a great soundtrack for its time, and the same goes with graphics. That's why it was such a landmark game.

Why is my opinion idiotic? I'm not understanding this hostility. One thing I liked about OoT was that feeling of guidance. The story was always there. It wasn't a wander-luck game. I suppose OoT was taking on the shape of a more modern RPG (OH NO!!111 I CALED TeH ZLEDA EN RPGEE!!111 HAR COMS AnoTH3R FALME!!!11,) while LttP was still in the original feel.

Now you're being ridiculous to stab at me. OoT was shorter than LttP (most N64 games are,) but don't say the dungeons were small or boring. You can't say that, cause they weren't. If OoT had any more dungeons, it would have gotten annoying. Maybe that's what threw me off abot LttP- too many. Skulltulas, hearts, and the other things are SIDEQUESTS. I have never heard "sidequest" be used as a negative term. If anything, they give you more to do and give the game depth. And if you don't like them, DON'T DO THEM. What's wrong with the horse? It is definitely different. Would you rather the series never change at all and stay the same FOREVER? You talk about boring now, but oh boy, if that happened, you wouldn't be a Zelda fan anymore. The OoT sidequests don't take 5 minutes. Now you're being extreme.

"Much better items" is entirely subjective. I'm not understanding how you can like the Ocarina less then the Flute. THEY DID THE SAME THING! And they both were useful! They both provided easy transportation! One used a bird and the other colored sparklies! That was a baaaaaad point. Yes, alas, OoT lacked the canes and the rods, which were lovely. But we sorta made up for the rods with the elemental arrows. Then you have to realize that the items that OoT DID have took on a new dimension as well. The Hookshot, for example, gained a new use. Also, OoT had its share of new items. None of them as unique as the cane that made blocks, but nevertheless, interesting. Come on, if every Zelda had the same items, you would be complaining about the lack of diversity.

The fact that LttP has remained difficult and that OoT is easy is FOR YOU. I may find it different. It's not a game's fault that you, or anyone, forget the location of a key. I could say the same about OoT.

Don't remember the tower in LttP.

MQ made the game better .

Phantom Ganon was a matter of 1)hiting the right one, and 2)reflecting the energy back. Twinrova consisted of 1)reflecting the elements back at the opposite sister, 2)avoiding getting hit by the elemental blast, and 3)absorbing the same element 3 times in a row. Now, sans Ganon, what boss in LttP had that many phases? I don't remember anything amazing at all.

[Wyborn]

The biggest problem with LttP, for me, was this....well, there are two.

1. The plot wasn't as involving. It had a good plot (for an adventure game, not period; don't make me laugh at that hilarious exclamation again, when 80% of it was laid out before you in the beginning of the game) considering everything and all, but face it, and be honest with yourself: Ocarina of Time kicked the crap out of this thing in every way, shape, and form. Character development, presentation, number of characters, scope of the events...for God's sake. Take Malon, one of the most minor characters in OoT, and compare the depth of character that can be derived from her to that of anyone in LttP, even the (in)famous flute boy. I didn't feel a sense of attachment to anyone in the whole damn game except for Link himself, and the sense of satisfaction I got from obtaining the entire Triforce, the only truly satisfying moment in the game (I hated Ganon's death) was short, albeit very sweet. There was no deep involvement here, no massive and shocking plot twists I couldn't predict less than an hour into the game....there was nothing to surprise me. Or move me. Or make me cry. Or anything. This caused me to eventually begin to plow through the game; I beat it with thirteen hearts and three bottles, if that's any indication of how much the story inspired me to explore.

2. The dungeons were too short, dammit! When I can breeze through the last dungeon in an hour and a half and all the ones before that in shorter times (some skimming under the forty-five minute mark, some under twenty, dammit, on my FIRST TIME THROUGH!) then it means that everything is too short. I spent the better part of a day just exploring the dungeons of Ocarina of Time on my first time through - that's not including the time actually spent solving puzzles. Why? because they were BIGGER! because they were LONGER! Because there were more imaginative. And probably because they didn't rely on contrived puzzles to inspire length. The atmosphere of the Ocarina of Time dungeons...

*shades of the Forest Temple*

God.

I'm not going to say that, in its own right, Link to the Past isn't a masterpiece. That would be a false statement. I will, however, say that it did not meet my expectations, much less surpass them in the way that Ocarina of Time did. What can I say? Link to the Past was overhyped for me. Maybe that's part of it. But all that it still amounts to is the fact that I see Link to the Past as existing in Ocarina of Time's eternal, industry-changing shadow: as it should be. I'm not gonig to be an ass like Bolt and say that LttP is mediocre, and I'm sure and Hell not going to be an idiot like Kaeru and say that I'm "sick" of Link to the Past after one play through it (I never finished my second time through, granted, but I have my own reasons for that) because none of those thigns are true. Link to the Past is a wonderful game. It's just that...you know. Ocarina of Time changed how I looked at games in a way that no other game ever has. No Super Mario Bros. 3, not Kirby Super Star, not Super Mario 64, not Earthbound, not Eternal Darkness....not any of them. In a way the game changed my very life.

I still say Ocarina of Time, and no one will ever get me to say otherwise.

....though Wind Waker still tops them both. Marginally, but assuredly

*claps*

^^ Holy hell and my Weisheit close his ears... That's the exact same thing for me...

[imported_Kaeru 7]

You're right. OoT had much better character development and plot than LttP. But I still think the gameplay in LttP is far superior. That's what inspired me to complete the game--the fact that it's just plain fun, not its storyline.

Under twenty minutes? So was the Inside of the Great Deku Tree. Fire Temple took me, say, a half-hour. If you thought something like the Ice Palace or Turtle Rock was too short your first time through, then you are indeed a master gamer.

The final dungeon in OoT was a pathetic excuse compared to the one in LttP. Run around through six relatively small rooms and then run up a staircase? Please. Give me my eight floor masterpiece on Death Mountain.

Puzzles are bad?

I'm an idiot just because I have a different opinion?

Just so you know, I've played through OoT about five times, not one. I still think it's a great game, just lacking in replay value.

[ April 23, 2003, 10:27 PM: Message edited by: Mr. Fusion ]

[imported_AJ Middleton]

Originally posted by WYBORN:
I'm not gonig to be an ass like Bolt and say that LttP is mediocre,

No Super Mario Bros. 3, not Kirby Super Star, not Super Mario 64, not Earthbound, not Eternal Darkness....not any of them. In a way the game changed my very life.

[ April 23, 2003, 10:42 PM: Message edited by: Sir Bolt Dragoon ]

[Wyborn]

*cackles* I alienated them both at the same time. I am so the man.... *has a flashback to that chat about why FF6 made him cry* Heheheheh.

[ April 23, 2003, 10:56 PM: Message edited by: WYBORN ]

Something wrong with your eyes, Bolt? Were you gonna actually say something?

First off, Wobbegong is as stupid as his username sounds. And Mr Fusion, no-one can beat the Fire Temple in 30 mins, not on their first go anyway.

I certainly prefer Ocarina of Time over LttP. I consider OOT to be one of three greatest games ever made, alongside Super Mario 64 and Banjo-Kazooie.

Now when comparing these two games together (OOT and LttP) one has to account for the advancements in technology, as they were created a good 7-8 years apart.

I must agree with Bolt when he says the SFX and music in LttP is ordinary. It does sound very much like a cut-and-paste job, and doesn't always flow nicely from one area to another. If you listen music from some of the higher quality NES games (Tom and Jerry, for example ) you'll see that LttP really was quite average in the sound department even for its time. Compare to other RPGs that would later grace the SNES (Secret of Mana, Terranigma, Super Mario RPG) and the music is anciently primitive.

Graphically, I find LttP very much standard for its day. It does not stand out from the crowd at all, I can't see where or how anyone could say it does. Gees, even look at game like Super Mario World (which was released at roughly the same time) and LttP looks smaller, less detailed and nowhere near as vibrant. The locations look okay, the characters look typical of the technology of the time. There were better graphics back then, there were worse. LttP is just about in the middle.

In terms of gameplay, OOT thumps LttP for miles. I can't see why anyone would enjoy screwing about in the digitised, squared-off dungeons found in LttP over the expansive, domineering and engaging romps to be found in OOT. Seriously, what are some of you guys on? There's no comparison. Yes, OOT has the benefit of far superior technology at its disposal. The idea of using these advancements is to make the experience more lifelike, enjoyable and engrossing. Thats exactly what OOT was; how can anyone argue otherwise?

On top of this, OOT was more innovative. The whole system was completely orginal, and now look how many games have tried to imitate its perfect control. LttP was simply using a top-down RPG system that had been flogged silly by dozens of games before it, but it didn't really add anything new. There's nothing wrong with the top-down playing perspective, but look at the things that games like Terranigma and Harvest Moon managed to incorporate into it. They were inventive, whereas LttP was stagnant. Really, Terranigma was a class RPG on the SNES that conquers games like FF and LttP ten times over.

LttP isn't a bad game, I don't actually dislike it. Its neato, there are some quite fun things to do and its enviroments are intriguing. But we're comparing it to one of the kings of videogaming here. Even next to games of the same genre that would arrive later on the SNES, I don't think it stands up. Its been bettered by many a game along the way.

OOT is a game that I still enjoy talking about and playing over to this very day. I've never had an experience with a game quite like it. For me, the world it presented was very real and truly memorable. There are things in it that are subtle yet genial; things like the way things changed ever so nicely over the course of time, things like the personalities of the many characters you encounter, things like the mind-boggling puzzles of the marathon runner and the guy in the tower in Kakariko. OOT captured all these things and more like I've never really seen any game do before or since. Thats what makes it so wonderful.

~Tee

[imported_AJ Middleton]

^I agree completely (except with the namecalling >_< )

And you can't even say that LttP's dungeon's were innovative, because they weren't. It tried to stick to the LoZ feel. OoT's were way more involved and more of an experience.

All I can say, is that if OoT is such a great game, why do I get bored silly whenever I try to play it? I never remember that happening during LttP. I'm no where close to beating OoT.

LttP was a fun game. OoT always seemed like work to me whenever I "played" it. Too much of a hassle to do anything.

I've always liked Majora's Mask more then OoT, simply because 1) I think the "3 Days Till Doom" is the most innovative plot line I've ever seen in a video game (reminds me of Groundhogs Day, an awesome movie) and 2) The mask changing was cool. The only thing that pissed me off about MM is the fact that Nintendo was too damn lazy to make the gameplay and graphics nothing more then a complete OoT clone, and lazyness always bothers me.

So yeah, give me LttP anyday. I can never get bored with that game.

And I still have no idea where you people are getting the idea to call the graphics and sound in LttP ordinary. I mean, when I was a kid way back when and I played LttP, the graphics and sound where pretty freaking SWEET. So yeah, I don't what you've been smoking.

But Link's Awakening is probably still my favorite. MMMAAARRRIIINNN!!! Damn, I love and hate that ending so much...

And Wind Waker has to be given kudos to the fact that I actually beat it, pretty fast too. I was kinda unsure at first if I would ever beat it, concidering my record for beating new Zelda games was 0 and 2 up to that point.

But yeah. LttP all the way.-jay

(Plus, the name Link to the Past is the most awesomest lame pun ever.)

Originally posted by Sir Bolt Dragoon:
And you can't even say that LttP's dungeon's were innovative, because they weren't. It tried to stick to the LoZ feel. OoT's were way more involved and more of an experience.

Link to the Past's dungeons were innovative.-jay

[imported_AJ Middleton]

But Jay, that's YOU.

MM WAS great, I must agree. I just wish it was longer. I had no problem with the graphics and gameplay, because it was supposed to be like that- a true sequel to OoT.

Link. Look at him! A pink haired, wobbly, short munchkin! What's up with that? All of the characters looked ridiculous. And for the last time, the music and SFX weren't clear. They sound scratchy.

lol. I actually liked LA more than LttP.

[Ross]

I would consent that LttP's graphics are nothing special. The unfortunate thing is that the same is true for OoT. I understand their limitations on making smooth and great looking graphics... but that doesn't change the fact. The character's hands look awful, gesticular movements are bad, faces look painted on (which in a 3D programming sense they literally are). I'll admit it was a good 3D world, just not the most beautiful looking one. Still I'll also admit it beats LttP just for a few choice areas like the Forest Temple (I think you've caught on now that I really enjoy that one). But sorry fellas, OoT's graphics are far from the be all and end all.

As for music... I don't hear OoT's music being a helluva lot better in sound quality. It still sounds fairly synthy to me.
But enough about the quality of the sound, nobody has been talking about the music itself! The orchestrations in LttP are far superior. OoT's Hyrule field theme is ok, a bit boring. I've known some people to go crazy over the Gerudo Valley theme, and it is a good jingle, but after a while I actually get sick of it. And what lovely songs does LttP have?
-Hyrule Castle
-Overworld (classic theme with best orchestration ever!)
-Lost Woods
-Dark World
-King's Return
-End theme
-Not to mention the 3-4 awesome dungeon themes!

For the sake of arguing, we'll say OoT has better sound quality. As far as the quality of the music itself, I find LttP's much more enjoyable to listen to, it's much more beautiful. What would I go for in the end?... LttP. I want the quality of the music itself.