I dont understand the legacy of Ocarina of Time. I grew up with the game and it was pretty good...

Not so easily. I want to discuss Ocarina of Time for a while before I go casting pearl before swine. You're jumping the gun and wouldn't even care about superior games.

People wouldn't get it but the Z snap targeting was the biggest innovation in OoT. I think a game called Syphon Filter on the PS1 may of had it sooner for its taser grappling hook thing but only for when that was used.

I rate Half Life above Halo and that would piss Microcucks off but those are just facts they have to live with. Rechargable shields wasn't an innovation with all the mods I used to play back in the day that had similar systems.

Also people have no concept of what a real MOD was. They were stand alone entirely new games to play.

not sure about best ever because its pretty subjective but its up there for sure. no matter how much you hate it, the game is composed in a really great fashion. pacing, music, temples, side content, you name it. there is simply very little room for criticism

But anon you are the swine

Because that's what the Zelda games do best. And it would be an unsatisfying answer if you had just listed better Zelda games, that's why I said the Zelda series.
I know there's games with better fighting mechanics and better stories. But that's not why I play Zelda games. It's the dungeons.

The corner stone of the game is a journey that justifies exploration of an entire world map. Game is dated as fuck graphics wise but successfully has a style that keeps immersion of the world intact. All characters are highly likable or interesting. Sound isn't neglected, story isn't neglected and level design isn't neglected.

It would be better to judge most games by Gymnastic standards and deduct points for failures and set reasonable scoring against the competition of its time. If not you would have to evaluate its importance of their achievements between titles separated by years. i.e you would think later innovations would improve greatly on the old or even replace it.

You better be writing a thesis OP or we can just consider you like that anti OoT schizo who has baseless reasoning.

It’s the best game of all time because it is. That’s it. It insists upon itself.

Nah you can't lead a discussion with

I have played superior games

and not list them. You fucked up the very premise of your thread because that will now be the focal point until you name something, and then as soon as you name something everyone will shit on it regardless of whether they actually agree or disagree.

But you knew all this, because you were making a bait thread rather than a discussion thread. This is also the reason you're dragging your feet on naming anything - you're waiting for the net to catch more people.

You lack context. Go play a bunch of 3D adventure games before OOT and a bunch that came after. Obviously you can't compare a 1998 game to a 2025 game directly, brainlet.

Was that just a lock on in Syphon Filter? because Z-Targeting is also used to recenter the camera, talk to NPCs from a distance even while on the mount, and to switch between combat movesets. It's also all telegraphed with the support character Navi.

For sure, Halo had better combat encounters in my opinion, but the recharging shield was a regression.

Zelda games do have satisfying dungeons, but those are not the end all be all to video games. It's incredibly pedantic for someone to be a stickler for a Zelda dungeon in the face of a dozen or more superior designs in a different game. "yeah but does that game do *everything* Ocarina of Time does??" of course not, it's a different video game. However OoT is not *perfect* and everything it does should not be held in such a regard as to be perfect.

I sure as shit have played superior games in 3 decades time,

too much of a coward to list them.

You are approaching this subject matter from a very biased perspective to already consider me schizophrenic and baseless. It feels painfully ironic too, because OoT is not a perfect video game, and yet you treat any apprehension as if to denote someone's shaky mental state.

Nah you can't lead a discussion with "I have played superior games", and not list them.

It's warranted, is this your first day on Anon Babble video games? I want to discuss OoT first and foremost, we can get into other games as they appear. It would be very counter productive to list games and for you to blatantly disregard them. First we establish a precedent of OoT not being perfect.

This is faulty logic. By your own admission, OoT is better than games that came before it; AND you're 'not allowed' to compare it to what came after it. The elephant in the room is that it's not the greatest game ever made right now. yet you are here treating it like it's perfect

dozen or more superior designs in a different game

Like...?

I'll I'm asking is for one game. Just name one.

Because it was a good game, simple as. Played the game properly some time ago and was impressed by how well it used the atmosphere, storytelling and cinematic direction of cutscenes to give you a proper sense of a mature adventure with some dark, bittersweet themes but also the excitement of exploration and overcoming challenges on your quest to defeat great evil. Controls may be a bit odd, especially if you emulate with a gamepad and have to do c-button inputs with the right stick, but it is a solid adventure game that aged pretty well. I especially enjoy how back then Nintendo knew how to give your sword attack some satisfying feedback, something that gets ignored by a lot of games that just make your sword phase right through enemies while they go "oof" and your character swings the weapon around like a pool noodle
Also this nigga refuses to give any examples of these supposedly "superior games", inb4 TLOU, RDR2, Elden Rang and Skyrim

Because it pioneered a bunch of stuff, you absolute buffoon. Things you take for granted today and itt in most action games.

(using an xbox controller) I map A to A, B to X. And I map the item C buttons to Y, B and R1 (this is more or less how the Gamecube zeldas did it)
bam, barely gotta use the right stick at all. the emulator I use lets you map the buttons to multiple different ones on your controller so you can still use the stick for playing the ocarina

It was the best game ever made by then, nothing compared to it and I owned both a N64 and a PSX

Zelda OOT is kind of bad, really, except for the level design of the dungeons, which is competent. But that's it when it comes to pure gameplay.
The game's strength lies more in its structure, it's relatively decent as an audio visual product, and that's all that matters for normalfags.
But in terms of the game itself, there's not much there, and as a child in 1998 I could already see that (but to my advantage, my older brother was fascinated by computers so I had ample access to more sophisticated games that made OOT seem like a game for children).
There's no depth to the battle. There's nothing really worth exploring. There's nothing interesting for you to discover in that world.

As a kid what I enjoyed the most is re-playing the game and re-doing the puzzles/dungeon so I'd say its strength was for sure level design, and even by looking at them with today's standards and eyes I can still confirm this, it was really good from that point of view

And what are those sophisticated PC games in 1998? Can you list them?

list one 3D game with better puzzles and dungeons.

I sure as shit have played superior games in 3 decades time,

Such as?

Anon Babble couldn't even name a single game that was Ocarina-adjacent at the time

Zelda games do have satisfying dungeons, but those are not the end all be all to video games.

It's incredibly pedantic for someone to be a stickler for a Zelda dungeon in the face of a dozen or more superior designs in a different game

Apparently a lot of people do happen to think that satisfying dungeons is pretty close to being the end all be all for video games; at least in terms of adventure games. Maybe you should try listing what you determine as superior games and designs so we have an actual reference in what your criteria of comparison is for OoT being a lesser game.

Compare the level design of the dungeons in Ocarina of Time with the levels in Mario 64 and you can see how much Nintendo's teams have evolved in just two years. Mario 64 is super experimental and although it's a fun game (in my opinion superior to Ocarina of Time, by the way), the level design is simply terrible in certain parts. OOT, however, already has a level design compatible with modern games.
Mario 64's levels don't exploit the game fun things very well, but OOT's dungeons make good use of the OOT's mechanics.

Why 1998? In 1992 there were already things like Ultima 7, which has a scope and complexity in its world that is not only infinitely greater than OOT, but than many modern games.
As I always say, Ocarina of Time is the "Back to the Future" of games. That movie is fun, it has charismatic characters, it tells a story that, despite its holes, is enjoyable, everyone likes it, but if someone says that Back to the Future is their favorite movie, you already know that they're someone who doesn't see cinema as something really artistic, just as mindless fun.
OOT is exactly the same.

Are you talking about games before Ocarina of Time? Or all the games ever released?

The Ultima games fucking suck. I don't care about the "complexity" of a game with the shittiest nongameplay and worst camera angle to ever exist.

Pioneer effect, and deservedly so. One of the first games to bundle up all the technical advancements made possible up to that point into one fantastic package.
It set the standard for a long-ass time and arguably still does today

At this point I don't care when it came out. I just want you to list one fucking game.

What makes Mario 64 superior to OoT

That's me, I'm here

You aren't a special snowflake for saying this shit
You can say that about any game ever created

Half Life 1 released same year. It was better than OOT on all levels but didn't get as much coverage as Nintendo since no console release (until PS2).

I dont understand the legacy of Ocarina of Time.

It’s very possible that you’re just stupid, and that’s why you don’t understand it

Name a game in 1998, fully 3D, Action Adventure game, open world, with main quests and side quests, "realtime" day and night cycle with different events and enemies in the day and in the night, quest events with heavy in-game cutscenes, Z-targeting enemies, while your player could block with the shield and swing the sword in multiple styles, flip side to side, flip backwards, jump and roll forward etc. Ocarina pioneered Z-targeting in Action games.

Name one Anon Babble, any platform. Name one. In 1998.

Jackie Chan

I prefer RPGs to FPS so I would have said the exact opposite

TRUE

Ultima 7

lol
lmao

that doesn't play like Zelda, you might as well compare BG3 to Elden Ring

Sim City was also better. PC exclusive too until Sim City 2000 which was still better on PC.

What do I win?

Solid game then.
Solid game now.

ocarina of time/majora's mask just hit different, there weren't any other games like them around at the time. it's easy to say now "old game bad" when for some of you the game came out a decade before you were born but it's harder to be sincere about criticizing such an old game when your standards are set way, way higher with modern gaming. you had a lot of rpgs back then but nothing quite like oot/mm and that's why the legacy of oot especially lives on, it's not that it was the greatest game ever made it's just at that time it was and nothing came close in terms of what the game itself had to offer to players

If you're really interested in dungeons + puzzles, and not Zelda clones, then there are endless options. Here's just one example, go play and have fun:
nintendo.com/pt-br/store/products/potato-flowers-in-full-bloom-switch/

Note: I've only played on PC, I don't know if the Switch version runs well

If you want Zelda Ocarina of Time clones, then I don't know about that, nor do I know if these games exist in the first place, because I don't think it makes sense to clone a game like OOT when the gameplay itself is extremely poor and the thing that carries the game in the first place is the brand. Nintendo itself isn't trying to replicate the OOT formula in its own Zelda series, which says a lot about the original game.

Everywhere I look 30 years later people act like it's the best game ever made

There are arguably acts and bands that are better than the Beatles at everything they did but that doesnt negate the impact they had on popular music just because Ringo doesnt play double bassdrums and advanced polyrythms and the majority of their recordings are in mono.

"Best Game ever" sort of implies that it's a product of it's time and while there was obviously room for improvement, what they managed to do with the first 3D Zelda at their first go was nothing short of miraculous.

This shitty platformer is so overrated, like most Playstation games.

that doesn't play like Zelda

Games don't usually play like Zelda OOT because OOT isn't a good game mechanically speaking. People say that OOT inspired the whole industry, even some devs say that, but I personally don't know any OOT-clones, while I know several Doom-clones, Half-Life-clones, Super Mario-clones, Tetris-clones, Smash Bros-clones, etc.

Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon is the superior game and came out before OoT.

3d zelda occupies a blind spot in the industry and nintendo's talent/culture overrides most of what competition there is. the intuitive assumption that every type of game and every genre has been iterated to a point where an obvious new high watermark will emerge doesn't necessarily hold. in terms of a 3d adventure game focused on tight puzzle/dungeon design I struggle to think of anything that would definitively dethrone zelda without going into the weeds and reaching with something like an rpg that really isn't the same thing,
is tomb raider better than ocarina? no.
is legacy of kain? no
is darksiders? no
is shadowman? no
is okami? there's an argument there, certainly it has more sophisticated artistry in some aspects but as an overall game I don't think it holds up.

I mean I'm with you that it's dumb to talk about any game as a definitive goat but in terms of a pioneer coming up with a niche and somehow not getting dethroned n64 era zelda is pretty impressive.

I think its fair to say its easily outclassed by offerings today, but its undeniable the game still holds up despite its age. It's simple sure, but it had a goal in its creation and it achieved it and its still fun to play to do this day. It's certainly wouldn't be everyones cup of tea nowadays but I think anyone who likes adventure games like LoZ could find themselves enjoying the game even today with fresh eyes, and that I feel is noteworthy.

didn't get much coverage

lmao

I don't think you know anything. Half Life 1 was big even on release date. I got into CS because of Half-Life. I played them on release too. Most homes more likely to have PCs than consoles back then. The actual console that was popular in my place was the PS1. So if anything, people didn't know fucking Zelda in my place.

They simply don't compare, it's apples to oranges. So you know the legacy of Half Life is, but it's a fucking FPS game. Ocarina is that, but for Action Adventure, in full 3D.

As much as I love Half Life, OOT has a bigger impact. HL is pretty linear, and constrictive. You can only go forward or back in a rectangle tunnel, for instance. You can't just stand in a spot.

In Ocarina? It's a whole wide open world. Go hunt some poes. Go fucking fishing. Go hunt secret passages and puzzles for hearts. Go do the mask side-quests. Hunt Skulltulas. Some of them only appear at night. I don't think people realize how big this is in 1998. It's a "realtime" "sandbox", you could just save at anytime, leave the game and return later anytime.

Most games at the time, even the 3D ones, are mission based, stage based, constricted map with time limit or objective limit. There's no sandbox, you have to keep moving, clearing objective and finish the stage. Even farming sims like Harvest Moon had a time limit.

Not full 3D, not open world, stage/cell based constrictive gameplay, some of them are on-rail shit.

Souls, DMC, Ninja Gayden, God Of War holy fucking shit dude. Every action games with targeting ever.

The reason there's barely any Zelda clones is because they're fucking hard to make. Just creating a dungeon in the vein of OoT (or even BotW/TotK) is beyond most devs.

or even BotW/TotK

Portal-likes have existed for years as well as Portal and it's sequel.

Who gives a fuck if 30% of the game is pretty good as you spend time doing decent dungeons that are moderately engaging when the rest of the time the gameplay is walking through empty fields doing nothing?
the 70% being dogshit is not made up for by 30% being pretty good

Yeah its actually kinda nuts how elaborate the puzzles and dungeon layouts are and how hard it is to softlock yourself in a dungeon, there is some bullshit still like the Water Temple and some vague puzzles here and there but you can get through the game easy enough once you figure things out.

I hate this, really wish this wasn't true now that TotK has hone 82 IQ. I'd love a dark and gritty adult Zelda clone.

Name ten, also name the technical achievemnts and legacy. Half-Life 2 not allowed, it's too obvious. Otherwise, shut the fuck up and sit down.

None of these games are Zelda clones. What people often do is find a single similarity in the gameplay and say: "look, that's Zelda's legacy!" even when it's not necessarily true. If I'm not mistaken, the creator of the Souls games himself said he wasn't inspired by Ocarina of Time, after all the Souls games have a clear evolutionary line that comes from the dungeon crawlers of the same company but which people ignore because they like to see Zelda everywhere.
OOT as a game style died when Nintendo itself realized that trying to replicate the game didn't work.

How many better open world games were there before 1998? Ocarina of time was probably the first decent open world game people ever experienced.

Valve aren't "most devs", they btfo most of the industry when they get off their asses and make something.

Why do you have the fairy ocarina

This is basically what I was going to say, it's a very concentrated experience.
The pacing is really good, and the gameplay is solid and builds upon itself, the progression doesn't feel jank or like it's limiting you in bullshit ways.
Even if I like WW better, it's pacing is far worse, especially in the later half.

When people look at OoT for inspiration they should look at the progression, since that's what it nails. Since then, with more power to process games, they've lost a lot of brevity, often not in service to being that much better.

creator of Souls didn't get inspired by Zelda

*citation needed*

find my this proof, I double dare you

I know for a fact that Zelda and ICO were some of Miyazaki's inspiration

You don't need to make something mind blowing to top BotW/TotK.

earth to anon, it's 2025

OOT has been called the best game ever since it released. I didn’t even think it was the best game that year (that was MGS).

is because they're fucking hard to make

no, retard, it's because most gamers do not want isolated puzzle environments in empty ass overworlds

even in the same series of games there's superior dungeons

Ha no

That is a level headed take, I award you the thread.

It does what it does really well and its pacing is pretty smooth, plus dungeons that are more Tomb Raider-y puzzles than just enemy combat. It feels like the quintessential adventurous hero journey, that's the appeal.

Yep, there aren’t even any Zelda clones because none of them even try to compete on anything but combat.

Notice how he didn't name any of those games. He just said ,"there are better games"

he thinks Ocarina of Time is open world

who is going to tell him

In 1998.

hello, anon, it's 2025

I would rather play OOT over “offerings today.” Hyrule field is enough time wasting bloat for me, and games just became worse about this.

Playing oot when I was 7 was so god damn cool.
Playing it now feels lame.

Look at how many people ITT who have ignored the 30 years and desire a game in 1998. How bizarre is that

I still play it daily and enjoy myself.

spot on

That is not what I asked at all.

he thinks X is open world because there's always a border limiting your movement, there's always new cells loaded without you knowing, cleverly hidden between pathways, tunnels, cave, doorway, cutscenes etc

so there's no open world games then?

Because it was a good game, simple as.

It's not quite so simple. People treat it as if it's perfect, not just good, but an untouchable behemoth.

OP asked what the legacy was. And retard keeps comparing it to games that came after it.

Notice how anon implies the game is the greatest game ever made and there's no competition.

and?

it's relatively decent as an audio visual product, and that's all that matters for normalfags

Can we go a single post in this godforsaken website without pseuds cumming their brains out at shit like "le ludovisual normies reee"?

There's plenty of open world games, most of them are better than Ocarina of Time.

It's been like a decade since I've last played but I've played through OOT probably a dozen times in my life. Should I emulate the 3DS version for the Master Quest or just the N64 version?

I think any cause to flame pre botw zelda for being overrated or too vanilla is muted by how stagnant the modern industry is. with all the combat loot simulators with lazy quest compass design a quaint non open world adventure game primarily focused on puzzles would be a breat fresh air, I would have no reason to attack that game.

Ocarina of Time still is the best game ever made, in terms of what it brought to the medium. That's unlikely to ever change. It also holds up extremely well compared to modern games in every respect.

I've played basically everything under the sun, and there's no game that's a straight improvement over Ocarina. Lots of games do better in one way or another, but none excel in all the ways Ocarina does to the same extent.

Sure, Elden Ring has better combat, a better world, better controls, better boss fights, better graphics... but it lacks Ocarina's emotional heft, the music is worse, the puzzles are worse, the story and characters are worse, it's less varied and less interactive.

Sure, Xenoblade has better characters, better music, better story, better graphics and world... but the combat is worse, the interactivity and variety are worse, the controls are worse.

Sure, Okami has better characters, better visuals, better music, more variety... but the dungeons are worse, the world is worse, the combat is worse.

None of the more recent Zelda games surpass it either. BotW and TotK don't have dungeons anywhere near as good, have less variety in equipment and items, the writing and characters are worse and the stories are worse.

Ocarina just hit every single aspect perfectly.

Everywhere I look 30 years later people act like it's the best game ever made. I sure as shit have played superior games in 3 decades time, how the fuck hasn't anyone else.

most of them are better than Ocarina of Time.

not really.

It also holds up extremely well compared to modern games in every respect.

Not true, the game lacks in the controls department by a lot.

I've played basically everything under the sun

I doubt it, if that were the case you're just nostalgiafagging.

Sure, Elden Ring has better combat, a better world, better controls, better boss fights, better graphics...

It's prudent that you take the next step and declare it superior. Call a spade a spade.

Sure, Xenoblade has better characters, better music, better story, better graphics and world...

a spade is a spade

Sure, Okami has better characters, better visuals, better music, more variety...

spade is a spade is a spade

Ocarina just hit every single aspect perfectly.

it's a jack of trades and master of precisely none

Okay, name five, that came out in <=1998. Fully 3D. Go on.

But I don't understand the legacy

in 30 years how have you not played a better game?
This is what the topic of the thread is. I am finding that you people are stuck in the past, unwilling to detangle your nostalgia lense.

I do not grasp why people hold onto OoT as if it's perfect. In 30 years I have experienced masterpieces which outclass OoT in every way.

I didn't say those examples were or weren't superior. Learn to read.

better game better game better game better game

but uhhhh OoT is better?

nah, it's time to move on

get asked to name five

can’t even name one

So… there are no games better?

Are there anon, have you managed to play any? I am curious as to how you haven't in three decades.

a spade is a spade

lists some aesthetic aspects with the only substantive thing being 'world'

Why are you are deliberately ignoring the the portions of the post that line out the cons of the games that might have certain better individual aspects

And whatever those games are (since you can’t name any), they owe everything about their existence to OoT

Two hours and a half of thread later and still rings true

And yet, you haven't refuted me, because I'm right and all that's left for you to do is to use feminine strategies of trying to embarrass the other side, like a total faggot fanboy retard who has discovered that he has taste comparable to that of a normalfag, lol.
Try to guess why the game runs at an unplayable 20 frames per second, anon. It's because Nintendo had to compromise the gameplay to deliver the game's visuals.
The second stage of the final boss is pure spectacle, with zero challenge, telling you "you've already beaten Ganondorf in the PONG match, now you can kill him without risk" precisely because the experience intended there was purely to be contemplated by the player.
If you remove all the cutscenes, and the character interactions, you get a shitty ass game where you have a few competent but easy dungeons with puzzles for 8-year-olds, and that's it. OOT is an easy game for normalfags wrapped up in a package to impress normalfags.

people hold on to oot because the modern industry for the most part is severely maladjusted, sacrificing any kind of design integrity or charm to instant gratification stream lining.

It's a very well rounded game with fluid gameplay, great presentation, spectacular pacing, and an ability to imply more exists in its world than it shows on screen. It's not "perfect" but it's a very "complete package" game and a great one on top of that. Perfectly respectable to be uncomfortable saying some other game is "better", even if you like it more, because that's a pretty sweeping judgement.

the empty parts of hyrule field is 70% of the game

5/10 got me to reply

MNSG

I know for a fact

for a fact

you are the one who needs to provide a source for that.
Souls games are not "inspired" by anything you think they are, they are direct sequels to kings field, kings field, which is older than oot, kings field which was 3d before zelda was

do you know what zelda took notes from for its gameplay? kings field
you seem to have it backwards and zelda has been cribbing from souls games

Try to guess why the game runs at an unplayable 20 frames per second, anon

Because it ran on N64. Kind of irrelevant when two PC recomps exist, but there's an optimization patch that enables 30FPS on real hardware.

But alttp is beet than oot

I played OoT on release as a kid and I'd say Elden Ring is the best spiritual successor to it
It could have surpassed OoT if they had added puzzles to the dungeons and made the quest design less obnoxious but as it is there's nothing to do in the game but to basically kill everybody in the entire world and it kind of feels like wasted potential

Then why did BotW and TotK sell so well?

muh king's field

People are really still doing this in 2025.

There was an OoT romhack that was cancelled and is now being reworked into its own game, Dark Hyrule Fantasy it was called, can't remember what it's called now

Why don't we all just call OP a faggot and move on

Since then, with more power to process games, they've lost a lot of brevity, often not in service to being that much better.

One of the few reviews I saw criticizing FFVII Remake was that the original was able to fit all of its many locations into a 50-hour story and not feel rushed, so there's no excuse except padding to make a new version that spends 50 hours in only the first location.

kings field, which is older than oot,

King's Field is younger than AlttP and the original LoZ

You sound autistic. Were you dropped as a child?

the only reason people think the water temple is hard is because there's a hole that opens up in the center tower when you raise the water level that's easy to miss, and there's a key down there you need.
in the 3DS remake they added glowing shit on the wall that points to it, also the camera swooshes down and points right at it

Yeah, they are dungeon crawlers inspired by dungeon crawlers
which is exactly what souls games are as well

Have you played any of the games you are talking about and experienced their combat?
have you seen how zelda 1 and 2 play?

remember, there was THREE kings field games before oot came out, you are comparing kings field 1 to oot when you should be comparing it to zelda 2 and kings field 3 or 4 to oot for games that came out at the same time and on similar systems.

I see a snakely figure of Amorpho with huge tits and Links between them in the thumbnail.
Is my brain so far gone...?

From Software made like 10 shovelware first person RPGs and nobody gave a single fuck. And with good reason.

i want an adventure game that's not brown n bloom combat slop with some charm and classic design sensibility

outside of nameless indies that game doesn't exist. that's why ocarina is still valued.

yeah and the first 3 zelda games were 3d lock on based games right? right? right?
all their ideas for combat gameplay were exactly the same prior, right?
link to the past was the first one with anything even resembling the dungeons of later games.

oot did not inspire or invent the style of combat that anon is claiming it did, it took it from other games.

He's also asking to help him understand the legacy of OoT. Explain to him how and what OoT pioneered in gaming industry.

Nothing else was like it in 1998, I don't have to drill that in your anons head any more. Now, how many "open world" games are out there today, more or less being the same? How many are revolutionary, in the past fucking 30 years? How many Far Cry clones? How many Souls wannabe? How many gacha weebtrash?

Games are still being made following the same OoT formula. That formulaic standard has been stagnant for awhile, even the actual mainline game from the actual series has strayed off the OoT formula. There's really nothing new and groundbreaking really with 3D Action Adventure w or w/o the Open World aspect in modern games anymore. So hardwarer are better, so maps are bigger, graphics prettier....and?

Souls was iconic and groundbreaking and revolutionary not because of it's Z-targeting (which was OoT's legacy), but because it emphasized on grounded gameplay - brutally unforgiving to mistakes, pushing you to well, git gud. Combine that with multiple combat styles, enemy / boss designs etc,
movesets and you get an engaging gameplay. The obscure and scattered narrative and lore, often riddle-like, the Zanzibart thing is another Souls unique signature.

If you think Miyazaki isn't Zelda-inspired, think again. How many dusk- references are in the franchise? The dusk princess, Manus, the abyss in Artorias DLC is a reference to Twilight Princess you retards.

link to the past was the first one with anything even resembling the dungeons of later games

Zelda 2

but you don't get the items IN the dungeons!

Shut the fuck up

You are being pedantic. OoT's combat has almost no dissimilarities from its predecessors barring its extra dimensional space. Also from the mouth of Miyazaki

If there are similarities (between Souls and Zelda), they probably stem from the fact that The Legend of Zelda became a sort of textbook for 3D action games

your argument that oot inspired every other action game after it is like saying botw invented open world games.

its fucking objectively wrong and retarded.
there are a billion examples of games before it with the game combat design, it cribbed from other games, not inspired them, they came before it.

[citation needed]

did you even bother to read you dumb retard monkey?

oot had a massive dev effort behind it, and still has details not present in shit today. hell, compare the amount of enemy types to botw. current games just feel lazy.

you have to ignore graphics.
like literally just imagine if oot had amazing graphics and a bigger hyrule field.
it would still be a goty contender.

TLDR

Zelda 2 actually has extremely interesting combat for a 2D game, people just hate it because they played it as kids and it was too hard for them.

It may not seem much today, but it definitely has an appeal in 2025

Beautiful graphics with an aesthetic that still holds up, especially if you use an HD texture pack

Timeless music

The young link's light age/grown up link's dark age contrast

The creativity in every temple

The exploration

Yes, lots of devs took inspiration from this N64 zelda games and delivered a more "polished" experience, but all of them still failed to deliver such masterful atmosphere in their games. Not even Nintedo themselves havent managed to surpass the N64 zelda and mario games

yo noid 2 has a cool dungeon level

there are a billion examples of games before it with the game combat design

such as?

I am not saying its combat is bad or good, I am saying it is not the same as the chunk of zelda games coming after it so it cannot have been an inspiration for these other games.
oot took inspiration from others games of the time, not from zelda 2, saying all of these games are inspired by zelda because zelda is older them its retarded when oot is the first game with that type of combat which came after many of these games not before.

Souls aren't sequels to King's Field you retard. Miyazaki didn't join the company until 2004.
Miyazaki didn't make King's Field.
Demon's Souls wasn't a King's Field sequel.

forbes.com/sites/olliebarder/2016/10/05/hidetaka-miyazaki-talks-about-demons-souls-and-kings-field-in-a-new-interview/

Why would they ditch KF's First Person Perspective over OoT's Z-targeting then? Mind you DeS had initial planning back in 2004, and in development hell since 2006. Oblivion was huge at the time and if they're really making a King's Field sequel, it would stay FPP, not the TPP Z-targeting Souls we have till today.

You're such a pretentious faggot lmao. Everything you just posted is a lie.

billions and billions of examples people, billions of better games no one knew about, and OoT stole from them all, it's crazy, completely shameless what they did. I get people asking me "what are these games? can name some games" well people, you know them, I know them, and they know them

It's funny to see him dig his own grave by being completely unable to answer questions that were made three hours ago already like

"its not a direct sequel!!!!! that means nothing was taken from it or it wasn't the inspiration of the games!!!!"

demon's souls was directly as a project started to be a successor to kings field and miyazaki was given his first chance to a direct a game after specifically asking to do exactly that.
How about you actually go read that interview? not a journalist for another rag summing it up, its a rolling stones interview, not by forbes, its even linked in that article about the interview, he clearly is saying he was doing his own spin on the series and didn't feel like he should try to follow kings field exactly as that was someone elses games and would rather do what he thinks works in the current day than imitate someone else he respects and enjoyed the games of.

you're absolutely fucking retarded anon.

Yeah, faggot OP really fucked up and he’s dodged every single question asking for the alleged better games

I’m just going to put words in his mouth and say he’s talking about Ubisoft slop. What’s he going to do to stop me?

Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon

Not just in the tower, there's like two more places that are affected by the water levels at each stage/height. And it's not just glowing, the walls are painted differently in the 3ds. IIRC the walls in N64 is just fucking brown, ground texture in the central area. I hated the Shadow temple more when I was a kid. I still do today, even with the 3DS remake.

How about you actually go read that interview?

its a rolling stones interview, not by forbes, its even linked in that article about the interview

You can't, Rolling Stone's page for it doesn't exist anymore and it doesn't appear to be archived. It's also the source for the prior stated quote

If there are similarities (between Souls and Zelda), they probably stem from the fact that The Legend of Zelda became a sort of textbook for 3D action games

you wanted a citation for.
rollingstone.com/culture/news/dark-souls-creator-miyazaki-on-zelda-sequels-w443435

Square's very mediocre 2.5D PS1 platformer