/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.10803637]

What if this had come out on the Sega Saturn?

[Anonymous No.10803639]

It wouldn't be exactly the same game. Probably would be a 2D Zelda.
Very good, but not revolutionary.

[Anonymous No.10803641]

>>10803637
If it had came out on the sega saturn only, played the exact same, had the exact same plot, with absolute 0 changes?
Barely anyone would remember it.

[Anonymous No.10803659]

>>10803637
saturn was already not our future by 1998.

[Anonymous No.10803660]

It would sell like crazy in Japan and then not get a western release

[Anonymous No.10803668]

>>10803660
Accurate

[Anonymous No.10803669]

>>10803637
This board would be able to criticize it

[Anonymous No.10804127]

/v/ and /vr/ would actually like it

[Anonymous No.10804149]

Then magic knight rayearth magically came out on n64 or what?

[Anonymous No.10804157]

>>10803637
PDS > oot

[Anonymous No.10804225]

>>10804157
Wrong, but they are not even the same genre. Why are you like this?

[Anonymous No.10804238]

>>10803639
OoT wasn't revolutionary to anything but the zelda series itself.

[Anonymous No.10804249]

>>10804238
Oh, give me a break

[Anonymous No.10804265]

>>10804238
18+ website

[Anonymous No.10804347]

>>10804249
No
>>10804265
Kek always funny to get this response from n64 babies who can't fathom anyone older than them might not share their perspective of videogame history.

[Anonymous No.10804360]

>>10804347
Not those anons but could you provide an example of what you mean

[Anonymous No.10804361]

What if "Sonic the Hedgehog" had raced onto the Amiga?
What if "Street Fighter II" had fought its way onto the ZX Spectrum?
What if "Donkey Kong" had climbed onto the Atari 800?
What if "Tetris" had aligned on the BBC Micro?
What if "Castlevania" had whipped its way onto the MSX?
What if "Mega Man" had blasted onto the Texas Instruments TI-99?
What if "Final Fantasy" had embarked on a quest on the Sharp X68000?
What if "Metroid" had explored the Commodore 128?
What if "The Legend of Zelda" had adventured onto the ColecoVision?
What if "Space Invaders" had invaded the VIC-20?
What if "Galaga" had taken flight on the Intellivision?
What if "Frogger" had hopped onto the TRS-80 Color Computer?
What if "Q*bert" had jumped onto the Sinclair QL?
What if "Ghosts'n Goblins" had haunted the Atari 5200?
What if "Bubble Bobble" had bubbled up on the NEC PC-8801?
What if "Dig Dug" had dug its way onto the Sega SG-1000?
What if "Pitfall!" had swung into action on the Acorn Electron?
What if "Bomberman" had exploded onto the MSX2?
What if "Doom" had blasted its way onto the Amiga CD32?
What if "Pokémon Red and Blue" had been caught on the Neo Geo Pocket?
What if "Resident Evil" had scared its way onto the Atari Jaguar?
What if "Final Fantasy VII" had embarked on its epic quest on the Panasonic 3DO?
What if "Metal Gear Solid" had sneaked onto the Commodore Amiga 4000?
What if "Sonic Adventure" had dashed through landscapes on the Philips CD-i?
What if "Crash Bandicoot" had spun onto the Sega Saturn?
What if "The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time" had time-traveled to the Apple Bandai Pippin?
What if "Half-Life" had unfolded its story on the FM Towns Marty?
What if "Tomb Raider" had explored the mysteries on the Atari Falcon?
What if "StarCraft" had strategized its way onto the Acorn Archimedes?
What if "Gran Turismo" had raced onto the NEC PC-FX?
What if "Silent Hill" had fogged over the Sharp X68000?
What if "Banjo-Kazooie" had sought adventures on the Commodore CDTV?

[Anonymous No.10804365]

>>10804127
Nah it would be uglier and control would be worse on the non analog pad. Also would not fix the boring gameplay, which is where the real criticism lies.

[Anonymous No.10804369]

>>10804365
>Also would not fix the boring gameplay, which is where the real criticism lies
But muh realism! Might as well be called yet another Prince of Persia clone like Tomb Raider. Will say that having a fully functional instrument in the game to be played at any time and however you want is fucking badass, however.

[Anonymous No.10804370]

Could you guys pretend there are more video games than OoT for a few days at least?

[Anonymous No.10804378]

I don't think the Saturn could handle ocarina of time

[Anonymous No.10804451]

>>10804360
not really excited to do that given this topic has been coming up every other week for years.
But yeah, by the time Ocarina of Time came out in 1998, most of 5th generation's revolutionary ideas in 3D game design had already been introduced (this includes automatic cameras and target lock/unlock, analog movement and 3D environments with interactive features). Ocarina just was a big-budget Nintendo game that spent a long time in development combining those pre-existing innovations with a huge amount of hand-crafted content to consume.

Everyone could tell gaming was heading toward this kind of interactive 3D world design. Later PSX games like Spyro and Harry Potter reflect this. Spyro came out at the same time as Ocarina, for the record, just to reinforce how late to the party OoT actually was. Ocarina does have more world interactivity than Spyro, but this was not due to any special innovation. Nintendo just brute-forced the large volume of this type of content and other devs didn't, either because they lacked the resources or because they were focused on very different genres.

[Anonymous No.10804458]

>>10804361
Literally all of these would interest me as to what the end product is like

[Anonymous No.10804607]

>>10803637
it would have looked like this

[Anonymous No.10804727]

>>10804451
>glance over this TL;DR
>Basedro and Harry fucking Potter
oh you clown

[Anonymous No.10804746]

>what if
>what if
>what if
all these threads should go to /v/

[Anonymous No.10804828]

>>10804370
>Nintendo just brute-forced the large volume of this type of content and other devs didn't

Of course, which is why you see tons of Ocarina-like games produced by outsourced dev farms, because it's simply a matter of 'brute-force', right? I mean of course you're talking bullshit, OoT is a highly refined game with so many elements working together carefully in combination simultaneously, such that not other dev has been capable of producing anything else with such a lasting level of critical acclaim. You have to reduce everything the game does to a series of bare concepts of basic features, and then act like all it's doing is assembling a list of these pre-existing features, which isn't remotely doing justice to what the game actually achieved.

No dev has successfully brute forced an actual approximation of Zelda. If anything we're at a point where its merits in their totality aren't quite appreciated enough, as the flaws it does have have done a decent job at obscuring a number of the game's more brilliant aspects, which would shine out more if given just a bit of polish.

[Anonymous No.10804832]

>>10804828
For >>10804451

[Anonymous No.10804842]

>>10803637
uhh, it would've had better graphics, more content, and cd-quality audio?

[Anonymous No.10805050]

>>10804828
>Of course, which is why you see tons of Ocarina-like games produced by outsourced dev farms, because it's simply a matter of 'brute-force', right?
You're getting way too butthurt about my point leading you to sputter incoherently. Typical reaction of a sheltered Ocarina fanbaby. Yes it was a volume of high-quality content, not pajeet dev-farm content. I never said otherwise. The point is that it doesn't amount to innovation.
>You have to reduce everything the game does to a series of bare concepts
No, I didn't reduce anything. I'm not taking any credit away from Ocarina (in these posts) EXCEPT the meme that it was "revolutionary."
>No dev has successfully brute forced an actual approximation of Zelda.
Yeah because most developers aren't Nintendo and can't slap the "Zelda" brand name on the result and therefore can't justify the massive expense on making an inferior clone.
> it does have have done a decent job at obscuring a number of the game's more brilliant aspects
What are it's "more brilliant aspects"?

[Anonymous No.10805061]

>>10804727
>didn't read the post
>doesn't get the point
>shitposts a lazy attempt at humor anyway
Ocarina babies are always so stimulating.

[Anonymous No.10805065]

Daring Synthesis, next figure out how to incorporate a Y2K era shooter or Banjo Kazooie.

[Anonymous No.10805132]

One of the most retarded threads ever

[Anonymous No.10805284]

>>10804265
>>10804238
>>10804451
Ocarina's best theoretical quality is the actually kinda deep combat mechanics—it's a shame they're horrifically unutilised by the battles themselves.

That aside, Ocarina isn't extremely exciting at any one thing, but it does coalesce a lot of concepts into a singular game and for the most part does it competently (often painfully competently), but competently nonetheless. Sure, there were plenty of games with stealth scenes, sure, there were plenty of games with horseriding, and sure, there were plenty of games with fishing, but how many had all three?

Undoubtedly, part of Ocarina's legendary reputation is due to N64 owners going apeshit over finally experiencing things that had already stopped impressing PC/PS1 owners funnily enough, Ocarina was technically outdated in several respects like unskippable cutscenes, but another part is how it was viewed as a sort of "you can do anything" game.

[Anonymous No.10805308]

Personally I plan on denying reality until I the day I die!

[Anonymous No.10805408]

>>10803637
It would have been the *ultimate* Zelda game ;)

[Anonymous No.10805590]

>>10803637
that one obnoxiously loud sega kid wouldn't have shut up for the rest of high school

[Anonymous No.10806063]

>>10804361
Street fighter 2 was on the spectrum lol genuinely

[Anonymous No.10806079]

>>10804361
Thanks for the suggestions. I'll make these threads later.

[Anonymous No.10806092]

>>10803637
What if you were a saturn?

[Anonymous No.10806734]

>>10805050

>>10805284
>Ocarina's best theoretical quality is the actually kinda deep combat mechanics—it's a shame they're horrifically unutilised by the battles themselves.

This is part of what I was getting at. The game, mechanically, and as an action game, is every bit as rich as anything released afterwards, but people don't think of it as such because it does such a poor job of showcasing what is actually possible when its systems are utilized well. Like, just the dodging system it has alone is more sophisticated than tons of well regarded action games, most people understandably don't get that, say, the point of the backflip is to raise your hit cylinder above attacks that would hit your legs, rather than simply to move you backwards.

[Anonymous No.10806745]

>>10806079
You're doing God's work, son. I'll make sure to reply to them and pretend to be very angry and stupid to try to draw some heat.

[Anonymous No.10806756]

>>10804369
Ok, sure but different target audience though. I find Elder Scrolls more my speed but it has no freestyle instrument playing, which is actually a great idea and a missed opportunity.

[Anonymous No.10806760]

>>10803637
>OH MY SCIENCE COULD THIS HAVE SAVED THE SHATURN!?

[Anonymous No.10806794]

>>10806079
I'd actually recommend continuing to post about OoT. Maybe we can get a "What if OoT on Playstation/Saturn/3DO/Windows 98WonderSwan" going simultaneously

[Anonymous No.10808152]

>>10804361
Gem

[Anonymous No.10808224]

>>10805284
>Undoubtedly, part of Ocarina's legendary reputation is due to N64 owners going apeshit over finally experiencing things that had already stopped impressing PC/PS1 owners
lLMAO, I wasn't poor like you and had access to a gaming pc and a ps1 and I was still blown away by OoT.

[Anonymous No.10808594]

>>10803637
>mfw just finished OoT again
I only get this feeling when I beat a Zelda game.

[Anonymous No.10808630]

>>10804746
more like /trash/

[Anonymous No.10808674]

>>10804361
>What if "Space Invaders" had invaded the VIC-20?

[Anonymous No.10808950]

>>10803637
would have been a footnote in game history next to Mr Bones

[Anonymous No.10808958]

>>10806063
>sperg fighter 2

[Anonymous No.10808982]

>>10804727
Basedro? Wouldn't it make more sense to say ꜱoyro?

[Anonymous No.10808991]

Thread hidden

[Anonymous No.10809106]

>>10808224
You probably didn't play the psx and pc much because they were too old for you. Your older brother or dad picked out the games and played them while you were having your mind blown by the deku tree and jabu jabu.

[Anonymous No.10809454]

>>10809106
Like, seriously dude, this is such tryhard copium of an argument. OoT wrecked the balls of the Playstation, where the closest thing to it it legitimately had was MML.

[Anonymous No.10809462]

>>10809454
MML is a much better game, but /vr/ has proven they're not ready for that sort of discussion just yet. It comes down to a far better interconnected world, more rewarding and useful exploration, better growth, more effective atmosphere, far better examples of heroism where you actively rebuild the world around you and see it change from how it treats you as a stranger to a friend to a legend. Not just that, but the fact that every dungeon is inter-connected with the overworld? A master-stroke of design. The fact it came out in 1997 just shows how far ahead Capcom were. Ocarina only has that retarded warp from the lake to the forest which makes ZERO sense and is almost entirely worthless. No wonder the game is so reliant on fast travel like it's some ubishit crap.

[Anonymous No.10809495]

>>10809462
The way OoT uses fast travel via musical warps, as opposed to basing everything around a single interconnected labyrinth, results in a far more rich atmosphere and greater sense of distance than what MML pulls off, so it has serious advantage there.

But it's like, for all the things that MML DOES do better than OoT, in that there's much greater emphasis on NPC interaction in a single town, MM focuses on those much more heavily and handily beats it out on those particular aspects anyway, so that's how the games ought to be matched up together pound for pound.

So even though MML is legit good and a high tier PS1 game MML1+MML2 together are beaten out by MM+OoT so easily overall the competition is hard in Zelda's favor.

[Anonymous No.10809509]

>>10809495
>teleporting gives a greater sense of distance than personally making the trek
Man, I can't wait for 2030 when 7th gen is allowed here.
Anyhow, MM is a bloody fantastic game, but it's also not OoT. OoT is not as fun as either MML.

[Anonymous No.10809532]

>>10809454
Alundra has better dungeons designs, better music, better plot, an actual world map instead of a desert with four trees. And in terms of puzzles, Alundra just plain rapes Zelda. I've never been able to take the Zelda series too seriusly and Alundra might be the main "culprit". Zelda ALTTP felt like primitive shit because I played it coming from Alundra.
Even in terms of 3d adventures, Soul Reaver had once again a much better world map that you can explore without fades to black, a more agile character who can actually jump and swim, better framerate, levels with a much higher level of verticality... It feels more like a 3d game than Zelda Ocarina.

[Anonymous No.10809557]

>>10809495
>The way OoT uses fast travel via musical warps, as opposed to basing everything around a single interconnected labyrinth, results in a far more rich atmosphere
How? It skips over the potential for any progress to represented along the way. MML achieves the same thing with the scout car which has far more gameplay interconnectivity between upgrades, a hub for progress, chatter, character events and it's even used in gameplay scenarios. Did you forget that? The song transports feel so weird and closed off in Ocarina. You're the only one that can use them...why exactly? The world is awfully devoid of life and these massive holy ruins are completely undisturbed solely for gameplay reasons. >>10809532 goes onto mention Soul Reaver which has its own fast travel in an intricate system of clan symbols and locales, often times locations are sealed off between the netherworld and the material one which is directly tied to lore that only enhances the atmosphere.

If anything OoT is undercooked in this regard.

[Anonymous No.10809574]

>>10803637
Saturn had really bad draw distance.... I doubt something like Hyrule Field or most big dungeons would work

[Anonymous No.10809576]

>>10809574
This. Saturn is quite underpower compared to the N64 when it comes to the 3D processing.

It did have the edge of audio quality and CD music but graphics? Forget about it.

Always look at even Playstation and how visually it is compared to N64 for like Mega Man Legends to the N64 counterpart.

[Anonymous No.10809580]

>>10809557
>You're the only one that can use them...why exactly?
You're the only one with the Oscar of Time

[Anonymous No.10809598]

>>10809454
>Like, seriously dude, this is such tryhard copium of an argument.
So it's true lmao. It's not even my argument. You appealed to personal experience in the first place because you couldn't make an argument from principle.

[Anonymous No.10809630]

>>10809462
>MML is a much better game
I'm the guy that the guy you responded to is losing his mind about, and I would not say that MML is a "much better game" than Ocarina.
It does a better job of getting the player into action, but sacrifices a lot of the detail and subtlety that OoT has. And Link's movement is far better and more satisfying than 3D Mega Man's.

But yes the general point is that people who had been playing games on Playstation and PC were far less likely to be "mindblown" by Ocarina. Largely because a game like Ocarina is just not what they were looking for in a videogame (something Ocarina babies just cannot fathom). IF Ocarina had been more focused showcasing the combat mechanics and the game had been a more challenging, DarkSouls-like, combat-heavy adventure, maybe the older PSX/PC crowd would have been legitimately impressed. But completing tasks in 3D such as "collect fish from the pool and put them in the bottle you got from rounding up chickens then empty that bottle in front of Jabu Jabu's mouth" just wasn't mind-blowing gameplay to people with more experience playing games outside the Nintendo garden.

[Anonymous No.10809709]

>>10809598
If you have to resort to conjecturing that the only reason OoT would have knocked the socks off of someone who'd experienced what the PS1 had to offer is some nonsense about them not being old enough, like they couldn't have just honestly been more captivated by it for any other reason, despite many older critics acknowledging it as the best thing to come out of '98, then that is cope.

>>10809630
>DarkSouls-like
That's the thing though. There was no 'Souls' at the time. It actually amazes me how long it took anyone to do what Souls did, implement Zelda 3D style combat in a more dangerous world all in all. To be fair, OoT should have, and could have easily made its enemies much more dangerous to really push home how advanced its mechanics were, and it's unfortunate it didn't, but thankfully it had so much other stuff to make up for that.

>But completing tasks in 3D such as "collect fish from the pool and put them in the bottle you got from rounding up chickens then empty that bottle in front of Jabu Jabu's mouth" just wasn't mind-blowing gameplay to people with more experience playing games outside the Nintendo garden.
There wasn't any PS1 title with interactivity that extensive, it genuinely was bloody awesome that you could something in a bottle and carry it across the world to release it into the environment, that wasn't a common possibility at all. It's like, you couldn't do this kind of stuff in a Final Fantasy except in very pre-set ways. You can look at stuff like how all the individual NPCs have different dialogue for the various masks and how that kind of effort was put into the individual quests etc. and see how all this stuff adds up to such a cool experience.

[Anonymous No.10809903]

>>10809709
>despite many older critics acknowledging
So now you're appealing to definitely unbiased game critics?
I also never said Ocarina wasn't a good game. I'm not insulting your childhood, except to say that it wasn't "mind-blowing" to everybody the way it was to you.
>There was no 'Souls' at the time.
No shit, but there were many 3D fighting games with lock-on combat mechanics, including Bushido Blade which is weapons-based and in many ways much closer to what Dark Souls would eventually become than Ocarina. Then there were action games that actually focused on the action, which people chose to play rather than a 3D playground for kids.
> it genuinely was bloody awesome that you could something in a bottle and carry it across the world to release it into the environment
>It's like, you couldn't do this kind of stuff in a Final Fantasy except in very pre-set ways.
Leaving aside Final Fantasy as it's a very different genre, my whole point is that that OoT wasn't anything but a whole lot of "pre-set" interactivity. There isn't some underlying simulation engine driving Jabu Jabu to respond to the presence fish, there's nothing to actually explore or experiment with. It's a hard-coded sequence. There isn't some simulated physical property of spiderwebs that allow them to be burned by a deku torch, specific webs are coded to be burnable by the torch. There's no simulated ice, red ice blocks are hard-coded to be melted by the blue fire you put in your bottle, which you get from hard-coded locations where only that happens. It's a pre-set gimmick. There's nothing innovative or mind-blowing about cucco roundup it's just a 3D navigation puzzle with a flight gimmick (tons of games had floating and flight physics by that point).

Ocarina emphasized all these pre-set, hard-coded environmental "puzzles" and left the combat as rather an afterthought. Combat encounters were treated more like just another puzzle.

[Anonymous No.10809905]

>>10803637
that would be stupid and impossible, because its a Nintendo game. Have you ever seen SMB on a Master System, dumb ass?

[Anonymous No.10810009]

>>10809709
>It actually amazes me how long it took anyone to do what Souls did, implement Zelda 3D style combat in a more dangerous world all in all.
Look at what actually happened in 6th gen:

1. The 3rd person Action-Adventure genre absolutely exploded in popularity: Grand Theft Auto, God of War, Devil May Cry, Lego Star Wars, Ninja Gaiden, Star Fox Adventures.
2. 3rd person ARPGs grew strongly as well with games like Kingdom Hearts, Morrowind and Fable.
3. Meanwhile the 3D Zelda games themselves declined over this same time period.

Given how many successful 3rd person action-adventure and combat games there were during 6th gen, it seems reasonable that devs would just keep doing what they were doing. One of the main things that Dark Souls did was slow down the combat animations. Even if Ocarina's combat system seems nearly identical in terms of lock-on and waiting for openings, the emphasis on animation delays did not come from Ocarina and shows more influence from a game like Bushido Blade. Most of the other Action-Adventure games I mentioned above like DMC and GoW took a faster-paced, Hack&Slash approach to combat (and was very successful at the time).

[Anonymous No.10810028]

>>10803637
Ah yes, the argument that OoT was just a mediocre experience outclassed by MML never gets old.
In reality the only game that could compete with OoT was MGS.

[Anonymous No.10810270]

>>10804238
>he doesn't understand why oot is a good 3d game and why it changed things.
I've never seen a more wrong faggot

[Anonymous No.10811453]

>>10810270
cope. I made arguments, you didn't.
OoT changed nothing

[Anonymous No.10811469]

>>10811453
Wait, where?

[Anonymous No.10811483]

>>10811469
You didn't read the thread and obviously have nothing to say that's why I sage'd my last post. If you want to make an argument, read the subsequent chain of posts until you understand them, then respond.

Alternately, if you're too lazy to read, you could at least make a proactive argument for what Ocarina actually changed instead of just flinging a mindless insult.
Especially since this topic comes up every fucking week anyway so the fact that you don't even have some stale memes to parrot (Z-targeting!) doesn't say much about your potential.

[Anonymous No.10811490]

>>10811483
I'll confess I've been halfassedly lurking this thread on and off the past few days. This is my first reply in the thread specifically. I'm not here to throw insults, but seeing as I've posted I may as well throw my own two cents on all this bullshit.

I'm not sure if OoT can be considered revolutionary in any sense, seeing as a lot of its more standout mechanics had been introduced in other games previously. But it sure as hell was influential. I also wish people would shut the hell up about the game seeing as most people here are using it as a platform to make shitty threads where a handful of people get into the same pointless autistic bickering time and time again.

[Anonymous No.10811502]

>>10811490
Indeed, the general reception of the game at release is enough proof on why it's so highly regarded and influential to later games.
People trying to argue it's mid-tier are just trolling.

[Anonymous No.10811578]

>>10810270
>>10805284
>>10804265
>replying to contrarian bait thats been used since 1998

[Anonymous No.10811593]

>>10811490
i think people misunderstand how OoT was revolutionary because its not about the mechanics but the way that they were used. i.e. the lock on feature, games before OoT had lock on but none of them controlled the same way. During development they got the idea for how the lock on in OoT would work by seeing two circus performers tied together with a rope and one of them was swiveling around the other, thats what made OoT's lock on control so smoothly combined with free analog movement that set it apart from games like Tomb Raider and Megaman Legends with similar mechanics that came before it. People will bring up those two a lot when trying to talk about games that did OoT first but if you play those two games and then play OoT after it is pretty immediately apparent how much more smoothly OoT lets you maneuver Link. OoT controls so smoothly it feels like a modern adventure game and barely feels like a 5th gen 3D game, most of which the controls are unwieldy and take a lot of adjustment.

Also this is the retro games board and OoT is one of the most revered games ever so that will always make it controversial by definition due to contrarians or even people going "oh well its not THAT great". We are going to be having the same dumbass argument about it until the end of time. I plan to be here in the retirement home, and if 4chan doesn't exist I'll just find whatever other antiquated 2000s message board is still around.

[Anonymous No.10811613]

>>10811502
>Indeed, the general reception of the game at release is enough proof
No it's not. That's why the topic is interesting to discuss and why retards like you have no business trying to participate.

1. The reception of Ocarina was heavily driven by children, manchildren and kid-targeted marketing (meaning game journos).
2. The reception of Ocarina was heavily driven by sheer production value and polish of the game, not innovation.
3. Ocarina might be the first decent 3rd person action-adventure game. It did a solid job of combining the various 3D gameplay innovations developed during the 90s into a single coherent game. But simply being first doesn't earn you credit for being the revolutionary.
4. Most 6th gen Action-Adventure games did not actually take much from Ocarina (despite whatever that smoke blowing GTA dev claims) while Ocarina's most obvious legacy (Twilight Princess) was underwhelming. It was not Ocarina that sparked the revolution, it was the hardware finally advancing enough to make big 3D games viable.

Super Mario Brothers was revolutionary (physics/momentum). Street Fighter 2 was revolutionary (entire 2D fighting genre). Wolfenstein and Doom were revolutionary (FPS genre). Virtua Fighter and Tekken were revolutionary (3D fighting genre). Everquest was revolutionary (viable 3D MMORPG). Minecraft was revolutionary. Those games sparked entire new genres or approaches to gameplay mechanics that had never been considered before-- genres that were entirely possible given the hardware at the time but nobody did it because they didn't realize it was a good idea or how to make it work. Ocarina didn't do that. Nintendo used their position in the industry and first-party access to hardware to make the kind of game everyone else was waiting for the next generation to attempt.

[Anonymous No.10811616]

>>10811490
>I also wish people would shut the hell up about the game
dude you're the one who bumped the thread

[Anonymous No.10811623]

What if OP dies? Would the world be a better place? That's the real question.

[Anonymous No.10811638]

>>10811593
>People will bring up those two a lot
I brought up Bushido Blade.
Released March 14th, 1997, 1 year and 252 days before Ocarina. Had target lock and unlock. Free movement while unlocked, target-centered movement while locked. It just wasn't an action-adventure game. Didn't try to build an entire world with these mechanics, focused on 1v1 combat instead.
>free analog movement
This was not Ocarina's innovation, though. This was the N64 in general and demonstrated first by Mario 64. Ocarina was Nintendo exploiting their already-proven advantage on the analog stick before the competition caught up (surpassed, really, as dual-analog proved to be the superior design in the end rather than the weird-ass C-buttons on the N64).

[Anonymous No.10811645]

>>10811578
it's never been wrong though

[Anonymous No.10811646]

>>10811613
>The reception of Ocarina was heavily driven by sheer production value and polish of the game, not innovation.
>Virtua Fighter and Tekken were revolutionary (3D fighting genre).
Making both statements in the same post makes zero sense.
Also your point 3 (being the first to do it right) is exactly why it is revolutionary to begin with. Ideas are cheap, proper execution on the other hand is gold.

[Anonymous No.10811652]

>>10811646
>Ideas are cheap, proper execution on the other hand is gold.
Yes however
>Also your point 3 (being the first to do it right) is exactly why it is revolutionary to begin with.
You seem to not understand what revolutionary means. Revolutionary means it changed things. Ocarina didn't change anything. Spread of 6th gen hardware is what finally finished off the 3D revolution.

[Anonymous No.10811653]

>>10811613
HIGHLY REGARDED/POPULAR GAMES OR GAME SERIES OOT DIRECTLY INFLUENCED IN 6TH GEN THAT WERE NOT ZELDA
>Okami
>Devil May Cry
>God of War
>Shadow of the Colussus
>Kingdom Hearts

and this isn't /vr/ but one of the biggest ones is Demon's Souls/Dark Souls later on which went on to also create its own genre of games.

This post wasn't made in good faith though because of the seething anger about nothing in your first point, clearly OoT just makes you irrationally angry for some reason. If children had that much power over public opinion then Fortnite and Roblox would be considered holy grails of gaming.

>>10811638
I haven't heard of bushido blade before but this shit just looks like Soulcalibur? Because if you're counting this then I think Soul Edge definitely did all of this shit first so I'm not sure why you're using this relatively obscure example. And yeah I guess you're right for the lock on feature specifically but again OoT is influential due to how its mechanics link together not due to individual mechanics being entirely new. Fighting games use digital movement not analog, the controls are very different.

[Anonymous No.10811668]

>>10804361
>What if "Castlevania" had whipped its way onto the MSX?
It did.

[Anonymous No.10811669]

>>10811653
>HIGHLY REGARDED/POPULAR GAMES OR GAME SERIES OOT DIRECTLY INFLUENCED IN 6TH GEN THAT WERE NOT ZELDA
Massively overrated influence. Those games would all still exist if it wasn't for Ocarina.

[Anonymous No.10811672]

>>10811490
>>10811613
>>10811652
Ocarina didn't effect the industry in the same way other various 'influentially innovative' games did because most of what makes it great was a product of one off genius that doesn't offer a model that could easily be copied.

Other devs can't just take what OoT offered with its extensively thought out interactions and produce other overall derivatives of it the same way that worked with Doom, as it seems that the talent required to do such a thing was rare enough that it was rarely even attempted, and even then barely anything succeeded at combining relatively open and organic feeling exploration with extensive but also very tightly scripted interactions in the way it did.

>>10811638
>>10811653
Bushido Blade, as innovative as it was, suffers from similar problems to other pre-OoT targeting systems, in that motion while targeted was highly restricted, especially when side stepping, as opposed to Ocarina's very smoothly integrated circle strafing.

Fortnite, and presumable Roblox, are also pretty good games for what they are, and most of the hate for them seems to be a manufactured attempt at generational divide.

[Anonymous No.10811676]

>>10811653
>I haven't heard of bushido blade before but this shit just looks like Soulcalibur
It's not. You should play it.
One-hit kills and maiming. Subtle movesets derived from combination of weapon choice and character stats.
>obscure example
It's only obscure to N64 babies.
>OoT is influential due to how its mechanics link together not due to individual mechanics being entirely new.
Nobody needed OoT to demonstrate how, they needed the hardware and developer resources to make it happen.

[Anonymous No.10811689]

>>10811669
come on anon, this is huge reach especially for Okami. You could argue the others but definitely not that.

[Anonymous No.10811696]

>>10811672
well Roblox is actually technically old enough to be considered /vr/ by board rules. I don't really hate roblox it would be like hating on LEGO, its basically just g-mod but with legos, its g-mod but even more for kids. It's not terrible its just there's not really value in it if you're a grown man, most of its value comes from being a social game and since the average age is 10 if you're playing it as an adult i'm going to assume you're a pedophile.

Fortnite has genuine reasons to hate on it because of the perpetuation of the battlepass so I wouldn't say thats entirely manufactured but that's not a /vr/ topic.

[Anonymous No.10811701]

>>10811676
I named 5 PS2 games and you're crying about n64 babies, seek mental help.

[Anonymous No.10811703]

>>10811653
>Devil May Cry
Devil May Cry's combat is nothing like Ocarina, never mind that it was inspired by a bug in Capcom's earlier Onimusha, which itself is Resident Evil with a knife that actually hurts enemies without hurting you in the process

[Anonymous No.10811709]

>>10811696
Battle passes had already fully infested full-price games by the time Fortnite was doing it; asking people to pay $15 once every 3 months or whatever seems pretty inoffensive to me as long as it's contained in a free game/entirely cosmetic.
Obviously I wish the MTX beast didn't exist but from what I've seen, Fortnite is a pretty harmless implementation. Also I love Chrono Trigger

[Anonymous No.10811729]

>>10811703
DMC would not function without the target lock which is exactly like OoT

[Anonymous No.10811942]

>>10811701
>I named 5 PS2 games
Yeah and? Gamecube flopped I assume you had your mind completely blown away by Ocarina when you were 9 and then when you were in your early teens had a ps2 like everyone else in 6th gen.

[Anonymous No.10811960]

>>10811729
Yeah and anyone who thinks nobody would have fucking figured it lock-on in a 3rd person action game without Ocarina is retarded. That's the whole reason I keep bringing up 3D fighting games. Take away the N64 entirely, sure. Anyone's guess how long it would have taken someone to demonstrate the importance of analog movement. But Ocarina wasn't critical there.
>>10811689
>come on anon, this is huge reach especially for Okami. You could argue the others but definitely not that.
Maybe, but one directly-inspired game coming out 8 years later doesn't really strike me as a revolution.

[Anonymous No.10811993]

>>10811960
>nobody would have fucking figured it lock-on in a 3rd person action game without Ocarina

We know that other games would have likely done something similar, and did, so you're not wrong here. However, nobody has yet achieved anything like a successful 'rip off' of Ocarina, despite many clearly wanting to, and failing, and so there's no reason to believe that that anyone would even try to make something like it were it to not already exist and demonstrate simply through that that what it did was even achievable.

[Anonymous No.10812003]

>>10811729
DMC's lock on actually functions identically to the earlier Virtual On's, since locking on is a byproduct of pressing the attack button, and attacks will always go in the direction the game thinks a target is—this is REALLY FUCKIN ANNOYING when you want to zip past an area with the stinger move, but the stinger instead automatically directs you to the goon behind you.

[Anonymous No.10812006]

>>10811960
>>10811993
>y-yeah OoT did it first but SOMEONE ELSE would have done it anyways so it doesnt count!!

This line of thinking is asinine and could be used to discredit any innovation ever made to anything, you're just asshurt simple as.

>oh yeah the airplane is just a simple machine based off of a bird and we already could fly before that with hot air balloons so really anyone would have done it eventually the wright brothers just got lucky

[Anonymous No.10812024]

>>10812006
>This line of thinking is asinine and could be used to discredit any innovation ever made to anything
We already know OoT didn't invent anything, though. Admittedly, modern devs always talk about how they're inspired by OoT, but the quality of their games reflects this and these games also came out 15+ years after Ocarina, making all the wankery throughout the 2000's unwarranted and in hindsight destructive.

[Anonymous No.10812064]

>>10812024
>non sequitir
Fuck off fag

[Anonymous No.10812101]

>>10812006
>This line of thinking is asinine and could be used to discredit any innovation ever made to anything
No, you can't, not without applying slippery slope logic, which only retards do.
So yes, that is exactly the relevant metric. What did other devs do BECAUSE of Ocarina, that they would not have done without Ocarina. That's what it means to be revolutionary. If that's not how it happened, don't use the term, it's that simple. I'm not saying Ocarina was a bad game, or even that it had NO innovation at ALL. It's just not revolutionary.

>>10811993
>However, nobody has yet achieved anything like a successful 'rip off' of Ocarina
Yeah because Ocarina capitalized on a unique moment in history.
>Talented, first-party developer access to the most suitable console (technically).
>Isolated but large N64 kid market on said console (Ocarina had no real competition on the N64)
>Substantial dev resources and very strong brand (Zelda) to sell the game under.
So it made sense to go all-in on the "3D gimmicks and walking simulation" gameplay experience that no one else could do. Nintendo capitalized on the novelty of being able to just do mundane shit in 3D like smashing pots and swimming and climbing, in the context of a larger high-stakes adventure game (vs just a goofy platformer). Kids loved it and that generation forever considers it the GOAT.

But even if another game were to do everything that Ocarina did just as well as it did back in 1998, they wouldn't enjoy it as much, because novelty was playing such an oversized role. There's a poster above gushing over taking fish to Jabu Jabu, which is just a basic quest mechanic in any other game. But because it was part of someone's first immersive 3D experience, they imagine it to be something amazing.

[Anonymous No.10812107]

>WHAT IF HISTORY WAS DIFFERENT! WHAT IF HISTORY WAS DIFFERENT! WHAT IF HISTORY WAS DIFFERENT!
why do zoomers make these garbage threads

[Anonymous No.10812148]

>>10812006
And to reiterate, my argument is that the bulk of 3D innovation in 5th gen happened before Ocarina in 1998. But most big players were waiting for 6th gen hardware to consolidate and integrate everything they'd learned before going all-in on fully 3D game design-- at least for genres that involved 3rd person adventuring in a 3D world.

So, Ocarina beating other players to the bunch on a bunch of subtle specifics and combinations of prior innovations that were about to happen anyway as 6th gen hardware was unlocked, does not justify calling the game revolutionary. That's my argument.

I never dispute, for example, when people claim Ocarina was "ahead of its time." That has very different connotation than "revolutionary."

[Anonymous No.10812151]

>>10812148
>>10812101
Autism

[Anonymous No.10812165]

>>10812151
yeah and?
If you don't want arguments, just don't bump threads with your shallow half-assed opinions. Pretty simple.

[Anonymous No.10812175]

>>10812165
Im not going to read your essay of verbal diarrhea

[Anonymous No.10812789]

>>10812175
I read it

[Anonymous No.10812902]

>>10812101
>There's a poster above gushing over taking fish to Jabu Jabu, which is just a basic quest mechanic in any other game.

I explained specifically why it was a genuinely cool thing that other games weren't doing. In any given RPG you'd get a "do you want to use this item?" dialogue on Jabu and otherwise not be able to do anything with the fish, in OoT you are releasing creatures into the environment from your inventory and having them move around however they are able to in context, and the game then having other things respond to their presence.

The only response I got wasn't to dispute this, but to just criticize the game for having set puzzles instead of being a more open ended 'sim', when it's the precise balance between freedom and hardcoded constraints that the game pulls off that specifically makes it so impressive.

[Anonymous No.10812910]

>>10812902
Releasing a fish doesn't do anything apart from feed jabu jabu though. Resident Evil also had you presenting items to objects

[Anonymous No.10812914]

>>10804842
>better graphics
lol

[Anonymous No.10812926]

>>10803637
Then it would be a Sega Saturn game.

[Anonymous No.10812928]

>>10804157
PDS is a must-play B-tier RPG.

[Anonymous No.10813059]

What if SHIT came out of my PENIS

[Anonymous No.10813131]

>>10813059
And i had DICKS on my NIPPLES

[Anonymous No.10813925]

>>10812902
>I explained specifically why it was a genuinely cool thing that other games weren't doing.
Adventure games have had "use X" mechanics since the 80s. Doing it in 3D isn't special or mind-blowing, except to kids who were easily impressed.

[Anonymous No.10813927]

>>10812175
They are arguments. You are a typical ocarina fanbaby who gets seething mad at any criticism of your beloved game.

[Anonymous No.10814210]

>>10804607
Kek this.

[Anonymous No.10814224]

>>10804361
>What if "Pokémon Red and Blue" had been caught on the Neo Geo Pocket?