Egoraptor made a new Sequelitis yesterday, and the topic was about A Link to the Past's ideal gameplay vs. Ocarina of Time's new 3-D gimmick. He clearly did NOT like Ocarina of Time's gameplay mechanics, wait time, or overload of dialog, and just likes the simplicity of ALTTP's mechanics of exploration. Since there's almost nothing really stopping you to go wherever you'd like. Although the map is kinda stopping you from solving that yourself. But enough of his opinion here, watch the video for that.

Here's my Opinion, OoT is revolutionary and it doesn't seem THAT bad of a game. (Especially his bashing of Skyward Sword) but it does give a LOT of demand on the plot is, ala Navi. You can easily ignore her in the 3DS port, but last I checked, I don't think you could in the N64 version. I didn't play too much of the original port, so forgive me if I'm wrong. A Link to the Past is basically the original in 16 bit with a built in map, which is a god-send. It was so easy to get lost in the original, and made the game very hard in the process. Although it gives you a good sense of exploration there. Same with ALTTP, you don't HAVE to use the map, but it's there if you're tired of finding Point B yourself instead of looking at Nintendo Power or the internet. OoT doesn't really give you a sense of exploration, as it shoves the plot in your face. There's still somewhat of an open-world, but it's blocked out until you have to do the task at hand first, which can be mind numbing.

Overall, I can say ALTTP is pretty much a superior game since it has the traditional layout from the original, with Open World exploration, tons of creative weapons to use anywhere, and it feels more natural.

What's your opinion.

Well...for me would be a link to the past I personally like it as I have not played ocarina of time before....I know that also is a good game but I have yet to play it. So that's why I choose link to the past. Though it is a very old game it has a good standard of a gameplay that some people would enjoy. But I know not all people would like this game...

I have never played either game for more than an hour in total, but I understand what they are getting at. In addition to the short time played and watching others play, I can agree. In my opinion, a games mechanics are really what measures out the difficulty of a game, and from the looks of it, I did not like what I saw.

I didn't watch the video.  I didn't like the guy's tone, and don't really feel that's appropriate for Vizzed.  But here's my opinion on the games:

It largely boils down to a matter of preference. Each game features unique puzzles, a largely open world to explore, and a distinct art style. Ocarina's style fit its tone well.  It was a lot darker than A Link to the Past in tone, and darkness plays a major role in Ocarina of Time.  Certain enemies spawn and thrive in the darkness, and are very creepy in design.  Link's future (at first) is so much darker than his past.  Darkness also plays a role in A Link to the Past, but in a different way.  The theme of darkness is largely explored through the Mirror World.  This specific mechanic is often what separates those who love A Link to the Past more from those who love Ocarina of Time more.  Some may argue that freedom of exploration is greater in this game than in OoT.  I argue that the freedom is nearly the same, but is expressed in different ways.

But for me, I like A Link to the Past more because there's no Great Fairy.  I don't know how Ocarina of Time got away with an E rating when there's basically nudity in it.  I no longer play OoT because of this.

I prefer Ocarina Of Time. I saw Egoraptor's video, and it was amazing, and made good points and such, but there is one thing.

Nostalgia.

I feel that nostalgia blind the view points of many people. They played ALTTP, and liked it, and now they want Ocarina of Time to be exactly like it, and since it's not, they don't like it as much. You need to see the games without nostalgia, like two different games. Ocarina of Time was revolutionary, and it became a hit, because it was a good game, even better than ALTTP.

It was 3D, new, exciting, and amazing.
No, I am not saying ALTTP wasn't revolutionary nor good, I am saying that Ocarina Of Time was better, but I feel like Nostalgia makes people dislike old games they played during their childhood, and want every game of that series to be the same.

But, just my own opinion.

pacman1755 : Ah, thanks for making this thread, you did a better job on it that I would have done plus I forgot to read Alex his challenge for today

I have seen a few of Egoraptor his videos. He makes cool videos and I like his drawing style but he is a bit arrogant in my opinion though. Still, I liked this video (but I watched just 1/3 of it as I didn't have much time).

Now about the games. I have played A Link to the Past. I never finished it, but it was classic, good and enjoyable. You felt there was a lot of time put in that game. They thought on the best ways to recreate a NES sequel. 

I have never played Ocarina Of time. Still, I could see what Egoraptor meant with some of his opinions. Waiting for enemies and bosses is a horrible thing indeed, you always want to rush with those things as they are time taking. 

He also said that the 3D of the game was praised but that there was some kind of 3D in A Link to the Past as well. I personally, don't like 3D that much in games. It can be quite cool but most games just have a ton of air with nothing or you constantly have those annoying fences or mountains to block your way. 

He commented out that he liked the boss Iron Knuckle since you had to react with him and the location around him to survive as you could get hearts from pillars. I have to say, boss battles where your surroundings are important are often the best boss battles, that's why many Mario games use this. That would be something I would like about this game.

So all in all, this was a great video and it really made me have to think deep about this.

I like A Link to the Past better for all the reasons I called above but I have to say, Ocarina Of Time sounds quite amazing for a N64 game.

My opinion on egoraptor's video is that he was a little too hard on Ocarina of Time just bashing it with all he could without even saying anything bad about Link to the past. He should have talked about them fairly and said the bad things and good things about each game. Though he did bring up some good points on what A Link To The Past did better than Ocarina of Time on.
 
Now my opinion on which I like better, Well I have never played either for that long but I have played Link Between Worlds and it was a big hit for me. 
 
I usually like the 2d games better than the 3D ones anyways because the puzzles are hard to find in Ocarina of Time instead of you always seeing the puzzle knowing that you have to do something at least.
 
I have watched gameplay of both games and Ocarina Of Time does seem it would get boring after playing for just a few hours.
 
So in my opinion I prefer A Link To The Past to Ocarina Of Time.
 

Here is my preemptive counter argument.

I've never been a huge follower of "The Legend Of Zelda" games however I actually enjoyed "A Link to the Past" quite a bit. I enjoy birds eye view style of gameplay. I'm not really sure what the official term is for the genre though. I agree completely with his opinion on the sandbox concept. I don't see the point in making such a large world when we're restricted to one destination. It would have been nice if we could have gone anywhere we wanted, do what we wanted and whenever we wanted. Just like he said the game is basically holding your hand the whole way through.

Maybe if it wasn't so on rail it would have been much better "Ocarina of Time" in my opinion. The 3D open world concept is what makes OOT the revolutionized game. The concept of the surrounding affecting your battle like the Iron Knuckle battles if what Ocarina definitely needed more of instead of swing or miss.

I just prefer ALTP over OOT purely because it was more enjoyable and aside from the lack of open world it worked a lot more. Just like Egorapter I really disliked all the waiting in OOT. It's like that with a lot of games for me. I get very impatient and I just want to continue on with the game.

Well, I'm going to say OOT.

One reason, is sword fights.

In LTTP all you ever fought was monsters, that's what the game was and what it had.

But In OOT there are actually enemies with shields and swords, able to fight fluently and it was a really cool feeling.


In LTTP, there were the guards, but come on, those weren't real sword fights. they always had their sword sticking out, and some how, if you swung at them and struck their blade, you got knocked back like the ground was slippery or something.

LTTP's graphics are weird.

OOT's I wish more games had that style.

OOT actually had more of a story. . .. though it still wasn't the greatest. I mean, seriously, Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 had way better stories, and come on, Is sonic Something that came across to anyone as having a great story before those two games?

No.

Zelda really has never done anything better for the story at all.

In ANY game.

And it's the action RPG here, not Sonic.

*sigh*


LTTP had a better overworld and weapons were more open ended. In OOT magic is useless save Din's fire, which is spammy, and Ice arrows which come late. It sucks. MM did it right at least. . . but I would still like to see more special magic consuming attacks, like, you know, all those cool badges from Paper Mario and the Thousand Year Door. Head Rattle, shrinking powers, attack boosters etc.

Zeld has no imagination when it comes to the use of Magic in ANY major game.

Music, I liked OOT's better.

LTTP had just as good dungeons, probably better ones.

in fact, the only thing OOT really has going for it is the new 3D environments and what was made available because of it.

One thing you should remember is that there's a lot that goes into a 3D game as well.

In the End I like OOT more, simply because of 3D environments scarier, more realistic environments, and sword fighting, but not epona, she really needed to be more useful, as awesome as it was to have a horse like that in a game.

LTTP did weapons better though.

Neither game give you something useful to spend money on really. in fact, I can't think of a Zelda game where money actually has a use other than easy to find supplies and potions. No new weapons, or special attacks. 

Oh well, Ioved these games when I first played them, then I played Mount & Blade Warband.

OOT could have been, and was going to be a lot better, then the disk drive was canceled.

Since then Nintendo has been keeping a lot of the Zelda games pretty much the same.

Dat filler doe. My favorite one is where he questions why he’s even doing it. His rant could have easily been condensed a little more than it was IMO. And really, I get this video is for entertainment but if you attempt to compare two games take off your nostalgia glasses. Now, since I couldn’t access my computer for most of the day I can’t type up a long winded argument like I wanted to when I saw the video this morning. This is a little shorter than I would have liked, but oh well. TO THE NON-REDUNDANT ARGUMENT YOU WANTED!
Right off the bat I knew this was going to be a rant and nothing more, so I expected some disagreeable things to be said and be repeated. I was right. More than a few points were repeated multiple times unnecessarily, but he did make some good points: if you’re an adult gamer playing an RPG meant for a young audience mind you.

I’m going to find three points I agree with, and three I don’t.
Points I agree with.
1* Wonky combat system in the 3d tloz games (especially the Wii ports (- _ -*) ).
2* Frustrating puzzles (although I was never one for puzzles anyways).
3*… Nope. Babysitting is required for some younger players, although it is freaking annoying at some points.

Points I disagree with
1* The series losing its ‘zeldaness’ over the years. Yes, mucka tucka (will not even attempt to spell his name) may have said the inspiration for the first game came from exploring local caves but that cannot carry a series by itself, game depth needs to exist to some extent for a series to be successful.
2* The Zelda series adopting story driven gameplay being a bad move for the end game experience. I like open world games, you can do whatever the heck you want, and I don’t like when your forced to do stuff. But when it comes down to it Zelda is aimed towards younger audiences and clear-in-your-face direction is necessary for a kid playing an RPG. First time I played Metriod 3 I was what six? Seven? The lack of clear direction threw me for a loop. I turned back to Super Mario where it was quite obvious what is required of the player: move whatever direction the stage requires you to, avoid bad guys, go ham when you glow, and most importantly jump over stuff and eat shrooms. Now that I have a longer attention span and am capable of sitting down and exploring without quickly becoming board I can play Zelda without Navi to babysit me. But when I was a little kid, I needed that constant reminder of what to do.
3*Adopting 3d graphics being bad move. Yes, this changed perspective. Yes, this drastically changed combat. Yes, the developers made more detailed environments because of this. 3d is just different. Some things could have been better designed for a 3d environment (looking at you targeted combat system) but 3d environments also give room for a lot of improvement as well.

Aside from the combat system I would say OoT is superior to ALTP in many ways. -EDIT- gack I clicked ALTP instead of OoT in the poll.

Ooh, well, especially after watching Arin Hanson rant for thirty minutes about them, I really have no absolute opinion.

I do know that ALttP was the first LoZ game I'd ever played, and one of the toughest, while OoT was, like, the third I'd played, and THE easiest I've ever played. I used to love the crap out of it even more than ALttP for reasons I probably couldn't have even answered then.

However, after hearing his rant, I can now see exactly where he's coming from. ALttP, no matter how you look at it, was just challenging, but fun, and interesting all in its own right. OoT, no matter how you look at it, was just plain simple. Especially after you got into the groove of things. Like he said, there wasn't ever much wonder, especially for a seasoned player, or gamer in general. It is a pretty predictable game, all in all. ALttP wasn't, it isn't. It was simple, but not, especially for its time.

OoT, I still love it for its general system, music, its way of playing. But... ALttP gets my vote of the two. (Sorry if any of this sounded... confusing, lack of proper sleep does this to me sometimes)

A link to the past for me, But Ocarina of time was very close, I just like the play style of link to the past a bit more than the one in Ocarina of time.

I love both for different reasons and I think saying 1 is better than the other would be hypocrite of me, since I find non of them is perfect but both are really good  

I have to go with Ocarina of time since that was the first game I was introduced to, and that was the first game I fell in love with. I also think of course basic knowledge here the graphics are by far better, the story is more intriguing and less linear than a link to the past. Another plus for the Ocarina of time is the music, I like the music so much more than A link to past. Also the side quests are more abundant in Ocarina of time than A link tot he past. And finally character development in my opinion is also better in Ocarina than in A link to the past. 

Allright, I will share, in my opinion, on this subject.
I really enjoyed both of these games tbh. They are positive and fun. To decide between them though...

I would have to go for Ocarina of Time. I find the way that they played this card overall brought more a sense of feeling. I mean we really got to see how characters were just actually feeling, their goals, and the overall sense of purpose. It is just more in depth. While classically yes the "you have to do this to get to this" is a point in the zelda series but, I would have to say there is more a sense of accomplishment in Ocarina as we get not just visual but, the overall sense of gratification that comes with being the "selfless hero". While gameplay, how this works for us players to say pointedly is important, I want to say has just been more of an overall progression in the zelda series but, not the only progression. They have given players an overall everything progression from making friends, to enemies, and then there were the chickens..HAHAHA.

Everyone has there thing, and that is respectable. To say the least though Ocarina of Time really hit the spot for me.

I love both games, but I have to go with Ocarina of Time. It gave the characters more depth than in earlier games, and there was quite a bit more to do in Ocarina of Time. The graphics, environments and overall feel of the game made it feel epic, mainly because the N64 was a giant leap for the gaming industry.  The attacks and special effects were awesome for it's time.

Now I'm feeling the need to swing a giant sword around and make sound effects... and maybe slay some monsters, or chickens, whichever I find first.

I'd have to say that Ocarina of Time is better than A Link to the Past because OOT in my opinion has a better story, a better soundtrack, and the fact that Ocarina of Time was the first 3D Zelda game makes me say it's the superior game.

I would choose Ocarina of Time because it just is better than A Link to the Past in my opinion. I also think Ocarina of Time has better story and soundtracks than A Link to the Past.

I know that both of these have huge acclaim but after playing both, I've found that Ocarina of Time excels even more in every aspect compared to A Link to the Past. Link to the past feels a bit dated nowadays, and Ocarina still plays like a charm.

I like Ocarina of time better. But, that is probably because that is the only one i have played between the two.