JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Yes, but no other Zelda game references/copies moments from OoT like TP does. It basically tried to recreate OoT via a carbon copy.
The Degree of Difference
- Thread starter Spirit
- Start date
Yes, but no other Zelda game references/copies moments from OoT like TP does. It basically tried to recreate OoT via a carbon copy.
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2008
...No. In most Zelda games you save the world from an invasion of evil, not a permeation of evil. In both Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess, the kingdom is under complete control. It is "corrupted", not under threat of corruption. You purge; you don't prevent. Perhaps I could have worded it better.
Zorth
#Scoundrel
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2011
So OoT should've been the only title in the series having this setting and TP should've copied the other titles instead of OoT? :S
JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
...No. TP should have done its own thing, lol.
Zorth
#Scoundrel
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2011
Just like PH, ST and SS should've too, no?
They all have the good 'ol invasion of evil setting going on?
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2008
You took the statement completely out of the context I said it in; it's one of many similarities to OoT, and one of the only reasons people complain about it is because there are so many. I was only noting the sheer volume of what would otherwise be arbitrary similarities.
Again, just one thing, and both games set themselves apart from OoT in many other ways.
Cfrock
Keep it strong
Most of the points in your list are superficial similarities and almost every Zelda game is guilty of doing that. I do understand your point though, that while all the games make references, Twilight Princess seems to reference Ocarina more than anything else. However, for me, Twilight Princess did more things which were different than were similar and never felt even remotely like Ocarina.
The game is set in a continuation of Ocarina's world so of course areas will return. Their placements being similar is something to expect because of that. Similar placement of locations is also true for The Wind Waker but you can defend that by saying the areas were totally redesigned. That is also true for Twilight Princess. Kakariko Village was entirely different, Death Mountain was entirely different, Zora's Domain and the desert were entirely different, Lake Hylia, Zora's River, Castle Town and the castle itself were entirely different and Hyrule Field was immensely different. The entire kingdom of Hyrule had changed so even though named locations may be placed similarly geographically they bore no resemblance to their Ocarina counterparts. Their differences outweigh their similarities.
So to say that Twilight Princess "makes no attempt whatsoever to be fresh with the shape of Hyrule or its locations" is false since the shape and locations changed a lot. That attempt to be different is there, whether it paid off or not.
The concept of the Forest Temple was totally different to Inside The Deku Tree. The Deku Tree was just a series of rooms that had little to no relation to each other. The Forest Temple was based around rescuing monkeys and using wind to redirect platforms and open doors. Their similarity begins and ends with the superficial idea of both being set inside a tree.
The Water Temple was based around the concept of raising and lowering water levels while The Lakebed Temple was about redirecting water flow and using the clawshot to avoid being swept away in the current or falling into huge chasms.
The only thing the Arbiter's Grounds takes from Ocarina's Forest Temple is the Poe chase which, as I've talked about before, is completely different in Twilight Princess. The only similarities I can recall between Arbiter's Grounds and the Shadow Temple are the presence of Stalfos and ReDeads and that one rotating blade thing. Lots of dungeons throughout the series feature similar things so holding it against Twilight Princess doesn't seem fair. The only similarities to the Spirit Temple I can recall are purely aesthetic. Since the Arbiter's Grounds is traversed mostly as a wolf and then by the unique Spinner, I'd say it has far more differences than it does similarities.
As for the Temple of Time, it's two mostly barren rooms in Ocarina while it is an ornate and lavish puzzle driven dungeon in Twilight Princess. Again, what's different outweighs what's similar.
I disagree that any part of Midna's character can be found in Ocarina's Princess Zelda since she kinda doesn't do anything, even as Sheik. She's not even present for the vast majority of the story, except at the start to tell Link something he already knew and at the end to be captured by Ganondorf to provide motivation he already had.
Midna is right there with you from the moment you meet her, driving the story along and you develop a real bond of affection with her (unless you're one of the people who found her annoying, but even then, clearly she's very far removed from Ocarina's Princess Zelda). Their personalities and involvement in their respective games is very different and so, once more, I feel the difference outweighs any similarity.
I don't dispute that Twilight Princess references Ocarina of Time a lot and I don't dispute that, because of this, there are people who feel the games are very similar. I just believe that Twilight Princess did more to be different than it did to be similar. I've talked about items and combat, story, tone and even mini-games as examples of this in this thread so I won't go over it all again but I think I understand a bit more now why these two different viewpoints exist.
I wonder, would it be fair to say that you feel this sense of repetition because you focus on the similarities whereas I don't feel it because I focus on the differences?
The game is set in a continuation of Ocarina's world so of course areas will return. Their placements being similar is something to expect because of that. Similar placement of locations is also true for The Wind Waker but you can defend that by saying the areas were totally redesigned. That is also true for Twilight Princess. Kakariko Village was entirely different, Death Mountain was entirely different, Zora's Domain and the desert were entirely different, Lake Hylia, Zora's River, Castle Town and the castle itself were entirely different and Hyrule Field was immensely different. The entire kingdom of Hyrule had changed so even though named locations may be placed similarly geographically they bore no resemblance to their Ocarina counterparts. Their differences outweigh their similarities.
So to say that Twilight Princess "makes no attempt whatsoever to be fresh with the shape of Hyrule or its locations" is false since the shape and locations changed a lot. That attempt to be different is there, whether it paid off or not.
The concept of the Forest Temple was totally different to Inside The Deku Tree. The Deku Tree was just a series of rooms that had little to no relation to each other. The Forest Temple was based around rescuing monkeys and using wind to redirect platforms and open doors. Their similarity begins and ends with the superficial idea of both being set inside a tree.
The Water Temple was based around the concept of raising and lowering water levels while The Lakebed Temple was about redirecting water flow and using the clawshot to avoid being swept away in the current or falling into huge chasms.
The only thing the Arbiter's Grounds takes from Ocarina's Forest Temple is the Poe chase which, as I've talked about before, is completely different in Twilight Princess. The only similarities I can recall between Arbiter's Grounds and the Shadow Temple are the presence of Stalfos and ReDeads and that one rotating blade thing. Lots of dungeons throughout the series feature similar things so holding it against Twilight Princess doesn't seem fair. The only similarities to the Spirit Temple I can recall are purely aesthetic. Since the Arbiter's Grounds is traversed mostly as a wolf and then by the unique Spinner, I'd say it has far more differences than it does similarities.
As for the Temple of Time, it's two mostly barren rooms in Ocarina while it is an ornate and lavish puzzle driven dungeon in Twilight Princess. Again, what's different outweighs what's similar.
I disagree that any part of Midna's character can be found in Ocarina's Princess Zelda since she kinda doesn't do anything, even as Sheik. She's not even present for the vast majority of the story, except at the start to tell Link something he already knew and at the end to be captured by Ganondorf to provide motivation he already had.
Midna is right there with you from the moment you meet her, driving the story along and you develop a real bond of affection with her (unless you're one of the people who found her annoying, but even then, clearly she's very far removed from Ocarina's Princess Zelda). Their personalities and involvement in their respective games is very different and so, once more, I feel the difference outweighs any similarity.
I don't dispute that Twilight Princess references Ocarina of Time a lot and I don't dispute that, because of this, there are people who feel the games are very similar. I just believe that Twilight Princess did more to be different than it did to be similar. I've talked about items and combat, story, tone and even mini-games as examples of this in this thread so I won't go over it all again but I think I understand a bit more now why these two different viewpoints exist.
I wonder, would it be fair to say that you feel this sense of repetition because you focus on the similarities whereas I don't feel it because I focus on the differences?
Last edited:
Sir Quaffler
May we meet again
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2012
...Ok fair enough. The gameplay might be what I'm referring to when I'm saying I feel like I've done everything in TP before.
JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
I wouldn't say that Axle is focusing on the similarities. He's just pointing them out because they're very clearly there. He no doubt notices the differences, too, and would also point them out just as easily.
I do think you're focusing on the differences, though. It's best to focus on both. When you do that, you get the whole picture: a game that tried to relive the experience of a beloved and revolutionary classic while trying to improve on the ideas it established. It obviously succeeded at the former, but just as obviously failed at the latter.