Ocarina of Time Would OoT Have Been As Revered in 16-bit?

[basement24]

Would OoT have been as revered as it was if it were just a 2-D 16-bit sequel to ALttP on the SNES? I know a lot of people follow OoT almost with it's own fandom than that of Zleda as a whole, but I wonder if it's mainly because of what it did for 3-D gaming as opposed to the overall content.

It's got some similarities to ALttP's story layout, and I wonder if it were just a 16-bit follow up if more people would have been more aware of this and unwilling to let it pass? People seem to be harsher on sequels of games if they are on the same system over being moved up to the next generation of consoles.

Don't get me wrong, I love the game through and through. It's a great title and is worthy of praise as it stands now, but if it were a second game on the previous console, do you think it would have surpassed ALttP in terms of greatness or would it have fallen behind as a quick ALttP sequel?

 

[Midna666]

I don't think so.
OOT is mostly revered because it was the first 3-D Zelda game.
I think that if OOT had been a 16 bit game then there would not be much difference between it and ALTTP(which is a game that OOT took a lot of things from).

 

[linebyline]

I don't know if I'd go that far. Yes, the game was so similar to LttP in structure that if it had been a SNES follow-up it probably would have been too similar to be "revered." I still think it would have been a good game, though.

But I wouldn't say that the 3D thing is the only reason. Look at the other improvements: While LttP had an incredible story, it also had next to no characters who actually mattered. Pretty much the only memorable NPCs other than the obvious (Zelda, Aganimh, etc.) were the Sanctuary guy, the running man, and the lady with the broom. (In my mind, at least; your milage may vary.) And what do we know about them? That they are a guy in the Sanctuary, a timid man in a hat who runs away (and the man also runs away) and a lady with a broom.

Compare and contrast the characters in OoT: Sure, there are characters just as inconsequential, like those two gossiping guys (they show up in MM as jugglers). But many more of them have at least shreds of backstory, and some of them (partly because of the trading sequence) are connected with the gameplay. Some actually get quite a bit: we actually get to know all the sages of OoT--one is even Link's lifelong friend--whereas in LttP they were just some random girls you saved, none of whom has any importance except as plot coupons.

This was of course taken up a few more notches in MM when everyone had at least a few shreds of story and many characters--even rather unimportant ones--have well-thought-out daily schedules. There's also an even deeper connection with the gameplay in the form of the Bomber's notebook and the many side quests.

I guess my point is that OoT was a crucial step in the evolution of storytelling in the Zelda series, so it is revered for far more than just being the first 3D installment. It still probably wouldn't have been quite as good in 2D.

Also: carina:

 

[Niko Bellic 817]

I like the thread, the topic is interesting. First of all, I can't even imagine how OoT would look in 16-bit. I really don't think it would get as much praise. The reason people see it as "the greatest game of all time" is due to the lock-on targeting, the graphics, the camera controls, and the cinematic storyline are all things that are not possible on the SNES.

Look at A Link to the Past for example, the storyline, items, and music in the game is what influenced OoT. Yet even though the majority of gameplay elements in Past is used in OoT, it didn't really show what the Super Nintendo was truly capable of in terms of graphics and controls. I don't understand why people think OoT delivers something that is totally new when it really doesn't.

Also, pulling off games on the N64 was much more impressive than pulling them off on 2-D consoles. You have less room for gameplay data on the cartridge than on a SNES cartridge because you have to deal with preventing the camera from obscuring gameplay and also for platformers making jumping controls "work".

There's the issue of time trave as well in Ocarina of Timel.
Making Link look older is much easier in a 3-D game because there isn't a top-down view. Since the camera is positioned behind the player it shows how tall Link is. Yes, there would be a difference in items you can use, but in terms of appearance, not much of a difference. So therefore, if OoT were on the SNES it wouldn't be incredibly groundbreaking in many people's opinions.

 

[Dabombster]

Ah. An excellent question.

No, I do not think that Ocarina of Time would have been as 'great' as it was/is if it had been in 16-bit. I believe it originally started out as a 3D version of A Link to the Past, but was changed up enough to make it so it was an entirely new game. It was a good game because it brought a more in-depth story to the Zelda franchise, but other than that I find no reason why Ocarina of Time is a better game than A Link to the Past whatsoever. I personally don't revere it anyway, but I still don't think it would have been if it had been in 2D.

 

[Kazumi]

I would probably be neutral. I don't like OoT much right now. But I still must respect it because of what it supposedly did for 3D gaming. Now, if it was a 16 Bit sequel to ALttP? I probably wouldn't like it any more or any less then I do right now. ALttP was a great game. And I'm sure that in my opinion 16 Bit OoT would be similar to my view of MM. I like MM much more then OoT, just because of the sheer content, and story, and gameplay. So, maybe I would like 16 Bit OoT more then 3D OoT. But then, what would revolutionize 3D Zelda gaming? I don't know. MM doesn't seem like a game that would do that.

In closing, I suppose I would probably like 16 Bit SNES OoT more then 64 Bit N64 OoT...

 

[knowlee]

Honestly, no I don't think that OoT would have been so popular if it was a 16-bit game. It would have just seemed like it was a remake of ALttP.

Although the game does have some similarities between the two, it would've been noticed and criticized (spelling?) a lot more if it were in 16-bit style instead of being 3-D. Being in 3-D form probably helped it a great deal by having it not seen as a remake.

 

[Juxtor]

as basement has already stated how OoT was a landmark game in terms of what it did for 3D gaming.

If it was to be made in 2D, it would still be a good game but there are alot of important aspects in the game that wouldn't have been been posible in 2D and therefore my overall opinion is that the game would have had alot of praise in 2D but not nearly as much as it did in the original 3D version.

 

[Immortal_One]

Honestly, I don't think it would have been as loved if it were just a 16-bit game on the SNES. I understand why though, I'll admit that I wouldn't have loved it as much as I did if it were released on the SNES. The thing is, the Zelda series isn't the only series that had their most famous game on the N64. Super Mario 64, Star Fox 64, Donkey Kong 64, and countless other games hit the apex for their series just from the leap from 16-bit to 64-bit.

Graphics may not be all we judge the greatness of a game on, but graphical innovation plays a big role in judging a game. The N64 did a great job of bringing the 2D characters we fell in love with to the 3D era. The fact that we could see our favorite characters in a 3D environment played a huge role in how we feel about a game.

 

[Chrono]

Ah. An excellent question.

No, I do not think that Ocarina of Time would have been as 'great' as it was/is if it had been in 16-bit. I believe it originally started out as a 3D version of A Link to the Past, but was changed up enough to make it so it was an entirely new game. It was a good game because it brought a more in-depth story to the Zelda franchise, but other than that I find no reason why Ocarina of Time is a better game than A Link to the Past whatsoever. I personally don't revere it anyway, but I still don't think it would have been if it had been in 2D.

No it was originally an AoL sequel.

And no it would not have been as great. Zelda 64 aka OoT was THE most hyped Zelda game of all time due to it being the first Zelda ported to 3D. This game went through a lot of development (more so than any other Zelda) and the final product was truly an epic master piece.

 

[Brandikins]

That is an epic game. It has won several awards, and is nominated by most gamers even today to be the greatest game of all time. It's one of the only games on gamespot that truely deserves a 10. I don't know anybody that hates that game, but if someone does, it's something wrong with them, not the game.

 

[basement24]

That is an epic game. It has won several awards, and is nominated by most gamers even today to be the greatest game of all time. It's one of the only games on gamespot that truely deserves a 10. I don't know anybody that hates that game, but if someone does, it's something wrong with them, not the game.

This doesn't really relate to the question posed at the beginning of the thread. I wasn't debating that there was anything wrong with OoT, but rather was wondering it would have been as successful as a SNES ALttP sequel. I just wondered if the reason why it was so revered was due to it being such a breakthrough 3-D title, and less about the overall content.

 

[Brandikins]

Probably would be. ALTTP was 16-bit, and people always thought they were making a sequal to ALTTP, which turned out to be OOT. It would still be awesome, but not as awesome without 3D graphics, because that's what makes OOT special. It was the first game to jump onto a 3D platform.

 

[rohr2]

So your saying that the game is so great because it's the first Zelda in 3D. Still IMO majora's mask is better.

 

[Hanyou]

That's like asking, "would a 16-bit Super Mario 64 be as revered?" It's so hypothetical that it's pretty much impossible to know the answer. A 16-bit Mario 64 would have been an entirely different game. Its nature as a 3D game is part of its identity.

It is admittedly less so with Ocarina of Time, because it is still a conventional Zelda game at heart. But the structure of things--the field, for instance--are different, and perhaps most importantly the mechanics are different. The mechanics determine everything, from how natural combat feels to how the puzzles are structured. The Water Temple would either be impossible or very different in two dimensions. Yes, ALttP certainly deals with water levels in one of it's dungeons, but it's not as devious or complex as Ocarina. And if it were, it still wouldn't feel a thing like a 3D Water Temple.

So my answer is: "probably, no." As far as I can tell, it would feel like just another Zelda game. As things stand, however, not only is Ocarina the greatest Zelda game (in my opinion) because of how fluidly everything functions, it is also my all-time favorite game. I've never liked the combat of any of the 2D games except Zelda II, for example, so what would have been a detriment to me in two dimensions is a benefit in three dimensions. Not all players agree, of course. But that's my take.

Do keep in mind I have the very same opinion of The Wind Waker, released five years later, and it's my second-favorite Zelda game.