Why is this game treated like it was brought down from the heavens. I recently played this game for 5 hours and i hated it. I just can't see the hype behind this game.
Same happened to me with other sacred cows like Half-Life.
The game is just not for you OP, you don't need to like every single popular or acclaimed game, once you learn that and accept it, you will get angry less often and make less shitty threads like this.
God damn, no one cares if you don't like one of the most beloved games of all time.
What was your motivation for making this thread? Did you just want to talk shit? Did you want the lovers of this game to rally to its defense? Against your utterly insubstantial argument?
There should be a rule against this. I don't even really like Ocarina of Time either (greatly prefer other Zelda titles), but I really wish you'd just kept this shit to yourself.
Fuck you, OP, and the shithorse you rode in on. >>2915190 Here's your (You|OP) you nigger
Op here. I prefer more modern games like Asscreed and GTA. For retro I like stuff like Caveman Ughlympics, anything by US Gold, old Acclaim NES stuff (Total Recall, Simpsons) Ghost Busters and Burning Force.
For the same reason Citizen Kane is treated like it was brought down from the heavens.
It was innovative for its time.
i have to agree.
i don't get why people like it.
i never completed the damn thing. i never even got to the point he became an adult.
i just couldn't get past certain parts of the game
I don't remember what it was, but one of these fuckers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39HwCcwzbmY
The thing is this. OoT is a game where you're supposed to encounter times where you don't know what to do next. If you're the kind of person who expect the game to hand something to do, instead of wanting to discover things for yourself, Ocarina isn't really for you.
I remember back when I got this for x-mas way back when I just... underwhelmed.
Maybe it was my add or something but treking across the field was really annoying.
It discouraged me from really exploring because 90% of the field was just pointless.
Sure Epona made it slightly tolerable but even that was annoying as it would get hung up on every rock and uneven ground.
was about to rain on you, but
>brave fencer musashi
you have a point
>couldn't beat a game designed for kids
>"i don't get why people like it"
Wow. OoT isn't hard, but you do need to use your head at certain points and pay attention to the environment.
Anyways OoT is underwhelming by today's standards but it was ground-breaking at the time. A big world to explore, good graphics, and an excellent transition from 2D to 3D, not to mention an amazing atmosphere in general.
I prefer Majora's Mask but if OoT was too hard for you you may need to switch to edutainment games instead.
It was the first 3D Zelda. It was hyped to shit. It wasn't completely terrible but it did a lot of things badly - so of course given that 1996 was the year that modern gamers would be playing it like it was LoZ and shit they would devour things done badly - hence why modern gaming is dogshit. So yeah there's your answer. Modern gamers. People who grew up with it are now in their early twenties.
>They'll swear through the teeth it's great but you can play that shit through again and yeah not so much.
I completed Goldeneye recently and I can tell you that the single player (on 00 Agent mode at least) is a true classic and still just as good as Doom's.
Great level design, a real feeling of tension, and encourages creative approaches to completing levels.
>Burning Force is bad
Suck my big red rocket dude.
It really is, and for exactly the same reasons. The combination of open levels and mechanics that leave you to run and gun and use stealth freely along with the solid hit reactions that allow you to avoid taking damage if you're skilled enough, with AI that's the right mix of random yet predictable, leaves the game with one of the best campaigns ever made.
most people (who love it and hate it) just dont put this game into context. sure, if you're 15 years old and have grown up playing xbox 360 games then it would seem like nothing to you, but if you bought this game when it came out and there's nothing else like it, whatsoever, then you're going to be pretty amazed by it.
then again this is probably a troll thread anyway
>exactly the same reasons
One of the main reasons why Doom is so great is because it is fast as fuck. Goldeneye like most N64 games run like dogshit 20fps, not to mention the controls are inferior. Also all the later Goldeneye levels that had infinite respawning enemies was annoying as hell. Only level in Doom that did that shit was Icon of Sin. Don't get me wrong for a console FPS it isn't bad but saying it is as good as Doom is topkek my friend.
And Goldeneye is slower because it's about setting up your shots and simulating light gun gameplay in a 3D world instead. The controls are the way they are so that quickly and steadily aiming is hard.
>and ran at 30fps
35fps. Doom (and most DOS games of that time) ran at 400p (as line doubled 200p), which on a 31kHz VGA monitor gives 70Hz refresh rate, so you didn't get pulldown judder like you would with 30fps.
>having to reneg the argument to technical aspects
A bit weak my friend. Goldeneye didn't try to be Doom, it is it's own game
>infinite respawning enemies
I can see that you didn't into stealth
>i recently (2016) "played" this game (1998) nad i hated it!
what the fuck is context, the same shit with half-life, Doom, AoE, the godfather, jimmy hendrix and everything else, you're just a 12 years old seeking for attention, please stop this cancer mr contrarian
I owned Link to the Past as a child. Tried it a couple times, never really liked it and never beat it. I tried a couple other Zelda games including Ocarina of Time years ago but I just lose interest halfway through with all of them. I don't know what it is about Zelda but I can't seem to enjoy the series for whatever reason. They're not bad games but they're just not my thing I guess.
You do realize that's not a perjorative. Saying it like it is only makes you look like a fucking twelve year old moron yourself. Using as it as if disagreeing with the majority is a bad thing is about as retarded as you can get given that well, for the most part, that's usually the case most of the time.
Also, if it requires context to be good it's actually just shit. Doom doesn't even need context, it was good then and it's still fucking good now.
Being a contrarian edgy kid is a sign of being a 12 year old though
>Doom doesn't even need context, it was good then and it's still fucking good now.
Tell that to the kids who can't stand the original Doom and need to play Source mods of it.
>He doesn't sound fucking mad in the least, it sounds like you guys are buttfrustrated
How are these guys mad? At least the first guy you quoted doesn't sound made at all, just telling OP that it's okay to not like popular games just because they're popular.
OP on the other hand made a thread about it, he must be some degree of mad. Although I'm sure it's most likely bait.
You know, I never enjoyed the original Doom (and haven't tried any Source mods or the likes). I did not own it, but when I tried it the view bobbing effect made me feel nauseous as fuck. I'm guessing this can be disabled?
Ocarina of Time is a great game. You aren't always going to like everything.
I'm quite tired of seeing this sort of thread.
>"Why don't I like X game when a shit ton of people do?"
Why is OP always a faggot?
You aren't alone. I love both too. People are just edgey faggots so ignore them.
Recently played through ALTTP and had 36 deaths but that didn't sit well with me, so I replayed it all over again and only got 9. Feels good.
It was a good game for its time, and it's still decent enough, but it's been surpassed in so many ways. Honestly, the main thing I'd want to have if I were to play OoT again is full camera control. The 3DS rerelease probably has it, but I don't know for sure.
Mind you sourceports can kind of change the game. For example, at resolutions higher than 320x200 spectres are increasingly visible. In the original Doom spectres blend in so well that you can have 20 of them on the screen and not even know it in some cases. Almost all sourceports outside of chocolate doom will basically turn spectres into simple novelty pinkies.
Back in the day Ocarina of Time was like a $100 in Elementary or Middle School playgrounds. It was the gold standard on which value was based.
Why, because it was that good.
Nintendo games retain their value by quality and OoT was the first game in history that tried to be more than a video game for one time period. And it succeeded.
In 1000 years, people will still remember the name "Ocarina of Time." Nobody will remember anything else from the N64/PS1 era.
I have a theory, but it'll just start up a massive cry baby fit across the whole board, so here's the somewhat non-insulting version:
>OoT was a fairly fun game, but became less remarkable over time as the same thing was genuinely done better and better
>we hit a certain point in time, when FPS and TPS mechanics began to take over everything, and gaming is turning into a normalfag hobby
>oldfags ran to their pasts to hide, where OoT was dug up
>it was just simple nostalgia at first, but it grew and became perverted from it's true form, due to oldfags saying things like "they don;'t make them like this anymore!" and "no modern game is this good!"
>while true, endless amounts of arguably better games are overlooked, an even lost to time and OoT clings to fame solely becase of the word "Zelda" on the box. And the game's popularity became a meme of Star Wars proportions
>What happened next, is that the retro fad hit us harder than puberty hits a trannie. Hipsters of various varieties trying their hardest to look cool needed cred, and FAST! So they went for the easy target.
>N64 was less successful than PSX was, but was successful enough that general knowledge is out there. So it became their flagship console of "le epic retro meme!" and OoT, the console's Zelda title, became one of their flagship meme games
The sad reality is, that even though I'm sorta being a jerk about it, this isn't all that far from what actually happened.
More popular and generally better games from the past are being over looked, because there's no "cred" in that. So people go with the most popular games on the second most popular console of the era in order to save face and not look like hipster faggots. (good job, BTW)
That's about all there is to it.
OoT was given some of the highest videogame scores period, that stand to this day in some gaming magazines. There was no retrospective glorifying as you imply. If there's anything to feel sad about it's you and your shit-talking nonsense, hope you get over it some day and realize people just have very different opinions.
Here's my take on it as a kid that grew up on nothing but nintendo during what we now consider the retro days.
>Grow up watching older bro and his friends play Zelda on the nes, too young to really be able to play it so you stick to duckhunt/mario bros and the first levels of contra
>get older and a new system comes out, and that shit is cash yo
>LttP was one of the best adventure games released during the era, everybody who was anybody either owned it or borrowed it and beat it
> New console comes out and all the games are in 3D and holy shit i dont get how someone could even make a game in 3d it must take years
> You get your grubby little hands on a copy of OoT and slap it in.
>Words cannot begin to explain what its like to go from an overhead view of link to ACTUALLY SWORDFIGHTING
>you can dodge, leap attack, aim the slingshot or use this bad ass targeting system
>holy hell you can even play music and ride a horse its got freakin everything! Wait... wtf the suns actually goin down thats pretty cool
>OH SHIT NIGGER THERE'S SKELETONS!!!!
And so on throughout most of the game.
So yes, the reason we who grew up on the 8, 16, and 32 bit consoles treat it like it came down from the heavens is because it did so many new things in such an awesome way.
For a lot of us, its the first game where a swordfight was more than watching a sprite swish a sword in the exact same way for the thousandth time against the thousandth enemy whose only difference from the previous was a color swap.
Sure there were some good sidescrollers where you'd have some neat combos and different attacks, but it isn't the same as doing a backflip to dodge an attack, flank to the side to avoid the other enemies attacking from the rear, slashing a dude then swapping over to your ranged weapon to nail another guy in the face, then autotargeting a third and leap slashing your way to glory.
You're looking too deep into it, which is usually a sign that something is deeply wrong with your view of something. It's a form of argumentum ad ignorance. You're trying to talk yourself into your own viewpoint, when a sparse number of people may actually be ascribed to it. How it actually went:
>N64 was failing in Japan.
>Nintendo had an ace in the hole in Rare; plus Mario's continued popularity made N64 a hot seller in America.
>This gave Miyamoto the leeway he needed to delay OoT for a whole year, as Nintendo was rushing it to be a cinematic masterpiece.
>OoT came out in a time when video games were headed down a dark alley into all cinema games. Evidence: Half-life and Project Dream documentaries. The games were supposed to be super linear and very rushed before Nintendo showed Super Mario 64 and Rare's Goldeneye 007 which turned their world upside-down.
>OoT came out. Was the first nonlinear adventure 3D game. Innovated the industry and showed people what video games could be rather than a shadow of what was possible like PS1/PC games at the time.
>suddenly sudden burst in nonlinear games, all because of OoT, but all of which failed to topple it because they lacked its solidarity in production value and attention to detail.
>5 years later TWW included MQ which rocketed OoT back to public eye if they missed out on the GCN.
>Another influx of sandbox games came out, but like a soggy pancake with too much syrup, the luxury of hindsight shows they all sucked. As evidenced by the fact you didn't want to bring any of them up to demonstrate.
>Ocarina of Time holds strong its mythical status.
>people with good taste always default to it when judging what a good game should be. In time that made it the gold standard.
>/v/ and sites alike can't be asked to believe that something mainstream can be right because contrarianism is a way of life to some people.
>OoT's reputation fosters a seeming Love it or Hate it mentality that you and OP are helping.
Someone who grew up with 6thgen or latter I don't know. They have shit taste regardless and very little was innovated. What was innovated generally didn't sell well.
Outside of cancer like DLC, QTE, and movie/walking sim games.
How the fuck is OoT nonlinear?
Also, Hello. Beat OoT by a year.
Different anon. I like Legends and Trone Bonne but cmon. It's not near as good as OoT.
Also you can do different stuff in OoT. The dungeons for the most part are linear though. For the time it's not linear.
OoT wasn't the first non-linear 3D adventure game, there's Megaman Legends and (even earlier) Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon.
It would be better to argue that OoT was the first without any poorly implemented 3D mechanics (for example, the targeting system in Goemon is virtually non-existent, and in Megaman Legends it is quite limited)
>invented/first =/= innovated
I might be able to agree with "made popular", but as far as "innovated". Nigga, do you actually know what "innovate" means, or do you just listen to nintendo give E3 speeches and think that "innovation" is some sort of magic powder that Iwata used to fart out on the reg?
I mean, srs fucking question: do you actually know what innovate means?
Was it the first time you played OoT ?
When it came out, it was really the Messiah. Then, i guess nostalgia did the rest.
Of course, it's kinda difficult today, cuz it's kinda "ugly". I guess a teen today wouldn't even lay his eyes on it.
But that was the real deal, back then. I still love it like a mad man.
>and showed people what video games could be rather than a shadow of what was possible like PS1/PC games at the time.
>this is what Nintoddlers actually believe
Also, you're really overestimating that game's worth in the industry anon. If anything bout half of its popularity came from the fact it's part of an already well established franchise.
>OoT really did do that much more than anything else that had been accomplished up till then.
For the most part it didn't do anything the previous Zeldas already did. Pretty much the only elements that stood out was a properly implemented 3D targeting system (like that other anon mentioned) and camera, introducing controllable transportation to the series (in the form of Epona), and that's it.
Now don't get me wrong, I like the game myself (though not as much as I used to), but let's not ahead of ourselves here.
It's almost as if you know next to nothing about video games, which wouldn't be a surprise given the audience this thread attracts. OoT was very nonlinear. The game has something like 14 realizable routes after you become an adult to complete the dungeons in. That only includes main dungeons and doesn't include side-quests that can enhance that (like buying Blue Fire and using it in Ice Cavern). Add those and you would probably not be able to find a more nonlinear game than OoT short of Star Fox 64.
Also, MML doesnt have targeting. It has one-time vector calculation. It pivots the camera towards the enemy along the X-axis. So innovative. Not.
Following in the footsteps of Zelda 1 and A Link to the Past's innovations, Ocarina of Time was the first game to feature:
- Context-sensitive Action Button
- 3D lock-on targeting.
- Designed with rumble as a gameplay mechanism (fishing, Stone of Agony)
- An interconnected 3D overworld map.
- Geolocational foreshadowing (this may not seem big, but imagine being the first game to attempt a world with this).
- Real-time measurement (clocks), time-keeping (the game keeps track of how many days pass until you shut it off for Biggoron quest/fishing hole), day/night transitions, actor schedules.
- A dual 3D world.
- Vehicular control that expands nonlinearity.
- 3D tile alteration and precision-based model swaps (signs, deku sticks, butterflies, Bean Sprouts, Gohma eggs, Iron Knuckles, Ganondorf's cape, freezing enemies/vice versa)
- Feet level detection (it's a staple expected in all modern gen games).
- Dedicated instrumental orchestration and music playback (both Scarecrow songs)
literally all of those routes except two require the abuse of bugs, glitches, or going into a dungeon to get it's item and then specifically leaving to go tackle another one.
Basically, you're full of shit.
Forest, Fire, Water are all interchangable up to Dark Link. Spirit can be completed at any time. Shadow any time after Forest, Fire, Water.
In case that image was too confusing.
There's only one deliberate exploit in that image. Not a bug. An exploration of the game's elements.
The only one there is the Golden Gauntlets glitch, which thanks for pointing out, since it just shows OoT is even more nonlinear. Doing that is the only way to show Zelda the Mask of Truth without first entering Dodongo's Cavern.
>getting a dungeon's item and specifically leaving
There's only one instance of that. Isn't that the definition of nonlinearity anyways? You can do whatever you want. Try to move the goal post more, and you might have an argument.
>Following in the footsteps of Zelda 1 and A Link to the Past's innovations, Ocarina of Time was the first game to feature:
>- Context-sensitive Action Button
Wow, first one and you already fucked your list up. Too bad.
It mystified me from the time it came out to now
The best I can think of is it was pounced on by the influx of new gamers at the time who cared about nothing but the fact that it was the first "real 3d game" they'd ever played. It was arguably one of the first large, competent 3d games, but that doesn't make it good
>I don't know what a context-sensitive action button is.
OoT was the first game where you could attack, roll, jump, dive, drag, push, mount/dismount, dash, pick up, toss, talk, check, cancel, take out (fairy), put away; and more with one button.
RIP in Peace OP.
You had a thread going until you hit this iceberg. >>2920821
They had that shit as far back as game likes Renegade, and Resident Evil was definitely using the concept of assigning one button to do what makes sense given the current context before OoT was. Hell, Link to the Past was doing that shit. Its like you haven't played anything prior to 1999.
You can only shoot and do menial things in Resident Evil unless you want to refresh my memory. Same with every game before it. OoT was the first game to say "what if this button did multiple things at once at any moment."
I have no idea what Renegade is, but unless you show some proof I'm inclined to disbelieve it, since it's an accomplishment attributed to OoT historically.
>3D lock-on targeting.
Cyber Troopers: Virtual on had lock-on in a 3d enviroment in 1995. I have never played OoT so could you tell me what makes its lock-on different? Why is it a new thing when OoT does it?
That's exactly what a context-sensitive action button is - it's for all the stupid shit you don't need to dedicate a whole button for.
>I have no idea what Renegade is
It was a beat em up where you have a left attack and a right attack - and depending on which way you were facing, would perform either a punch or a kick. You know, like a context-sensitive button does. A more famous version of this control scheme was in Double Dragon 2 NES.
>it's an accomplishment attributed to OoT historically.
By who, video game historians? If they existed, they would tell you that the only accomplishment OoT did in terms of context-sensitive buttons was that it was the first to DISPLAY what the action was.
>You can only shoot and do menial things in Resident Evil unless you want to refresh my memory.
Climb stairs/ladders, open doors, examine objects, pick up items were all mapped to one button. Link to the Past had even more: dive, drag, dash, pick up, toss, talk, check: and more with one button.
>since it's an accomplishment attributed to OoT historically.
2 things. First, On Screen Prompts for the action button are what you're thinking of. OoT was allegedly the first to flash up on the screen what the action button would do in any particular circumstance. Can't think of anything off the top of my head that contradicts that.
Second, you're setting yourself up for failure there. All anyone has to do is take anything you listed and point out an example of someone doing that before OoT, and you're only defense is "Well, I don't consider that an example of xxxx because..."
Oh wow, I have never heard of this game. It looks like it does do what OoT did with some key differences.
First, it doesn't stay locked on. If the opponent moves out of your view you have to dash and lock-on again. This is no doubt because the game is software-3D and not Real 3D rendering like N64 games (only the 3DO was before the N64 in this, I know that much), so you could still say that it accomplished it first I will give you that. Howbeit it looks like even the Xbox Live version of the game (which looks like it was remade in Real 3D), still requires you to constantly keep jumping so as to keep the opponent in your peripheral no doubt. It's a good illusion to make it look like it's 3D lock-on, but I would say it's more on-rails lock-on. You jump up, and the game keeps you vectored unto an enemy's position before locking you down again.
I'll let you have this one though. It's a lot closer to OoT than MML.
>All anyone has to do is take anything you listed and point out an example of someone doing that before OoT, and you're only defense is "Well, I don't consider that an example of xxxx because..."
But neither of you listed anything to the contrary. You could do all those things in OoT except open doors by locking on or they needed no button. And sprite flipping isn't context sensitive.
Am I being trolled or are these real examples?
An invention is an innovation.
OoT was still the first 3D game with lock-on targeting. You can't lock-on to something an keep moving how you want to in any games that have been listed in this thread until Ocarina of Time was released on November 21, 1998 in Japan and two days later in the US.
You have all made valiant efforts to disprove, worthy of applause, but it's time to put down the computer. History is not on your side.
It was also very inventive. Hence why it was the first to do all these things >>2920821
We're just going around in circles now because you can't admit how wrong you were.
An ad hominem is the first sign that the person you're arguing with is ill-equipped to continue because they lack understanding into the topic at hand.
>But neither of you listed anything to the contrary
RE, LttP, and Renegade, how dense are you being?
>Am I being trolled
Am I? You've ignored all our points and offered no reasons why.
>You could do all those things in OoT except open doors by locking on or they needed no button
What are you even trying to say here? That because these games didn't do the exact same actions as OoT, then they aren't context-sensitive? Do we need to brush up on what a context-sensitive button actually is, because I suspect you don't actually know now.
Jesus, that would explain everything - you don't even know what the fuck the term means and yet you're arguing about it.
This is an odd troll. I can only imagine you're either mentaling defeciant or some child.
Anybody can read a dictionary man. How can you possibly say.... You know what. Like I said above. This is a troll or you're fucking idiot.
People are still going to fling shit over it though. I don't know why; it's still the best game in terms of excelling in control, art style, exploration, and combat. There might be games that do one of those individual elements better by now, but no game since OOT has mqde innovations in all those qualities at once.
If you think about it, OOT is the Star Wars of gaming. It's not perfect, but it blew everyone away when it came out and there hasn't been much since to evoke the same positive player experience.
Those aren't context-sensitive. At this point I'm convinced you both are giving up, which is indicative of the fact why you would support this thread. You have shit taste and opinions.
Sprite-flipping? Really? A convention of video games since they were born?
OH DAMN, HOLD THE PHONES AND STOP THE PRESSES! I guess Mario was context-sensitive because you could jump left and right and for the duration that you held the button!!
You've provided no examples. you're just listing the same three games that are non-sequitors to this argument in a vain attempt to bring down the quality of discourse.
I admit, my ladders/doors nitpick against RE was a contradiction since I listed it in OoT, but the fact is, it doesn't do those things like OoT did.
I've just written you off as an idiot, but you're being intransigent about the whole thing, so talking to you is pointless. I've said my piece, so anyone reading this thread will at least not be suckered in to your bull shit.
Besides, some of these points brought up, like "3D interconnected overworld map" or "model swaps", even if it was the first to do it in 3D, which may be the case or not, I wouldn't consider "innovations" because many 2D games were getting the same features for a long time before.
You're being over-precise for the sake of finding "innovations", except in those cases your innovation is that it was the first to do some 2D things in 3D, and it's not like the game invented 3D either.
Also I bet my left nut we could find a game from the 80's with "real-time measurements".
Finally, using non intended glitches to skip to another dungeon doesn't make the game more unlinear by design.
I think this game is really cool for what it is. Great graphics for N64.
Played it with a friend for the first time about a year ago, and while we were usually frustrated with how slow it was, it's got a lot of imagination and cool stuff.
The only Zelda I've played all the way through is the NES game, so I guess my opinion doesn't mean much.
As for "gameplay related rumble", it's not like it was a landmark that inspired the entire industry. What I mean is, yeah it's a cool little thing it probably did first, but it didn't exactly catch on. Plenty of games have small things like this which they are the only ones to do.
And for " Vehicular control that expands nonlinearity.", the horse in OoT pretty much works like any other item that expands the possibilities and lets you access new areas. Like the hookshot, or the feather in Link's Awakening. So instead of a feather, you get a horse, big fucking deal, it's not like OoT invented vehicules either.
It had much less to offer than the PS1 and its predecessors (except the Virtual Boy) admittedly, but I thought most of the games on there were decent. I can still see why one wouldn't like it much though.
>- Real-time measurement (clocks), time-keeping (the game keeps track of how many days pass until you shut it off for Biggoron quest/fishing hole), day/night transitions, actor schedules.
I've been trying to find the name of a game for the last few mins but I can't remember for the life of me, but here goes: Pretty old isometric game, late 80's early 90's, on PC but was also ported to other platforms, you played the role of a monk in a monastery. The entire game took place during a single week, and the game kept track of time, days, and NPCs would do certain things at certain times of certain days that you had to figure out.
So there, if only I could remember the name of the game.... Another game exactly like that was made that took place in a prison, which was obviously the main inspiration for the non retro game "The Escapists".
IIRC it didn't have a day/night circle because it took place indoors, but as for that you can check Isle Of The Dead as a random example.
>software-3D and not Real 3D rendering like N64 games
WTF would that have to do with it? Vector math works the same way regardless, unless you're talking about a lack of floating point operations or something.
I played OoT for the first time this year. It was the first Zelda I've ever played, the franchise just never really interested me. I can honestly say it was one of the most enjoyable gaming experiences I've had in a while.
Did you beat it?
My favorite section of the game is the every passed getting the Master Sword. It's my favorite game of all time, but I think I may be in the minority when I say that the game doesn't truly pick up until then.
I often find that /v/ users and such play it until they beat the first dungeon or so, decide they hate it, and then think they know enough to constantly bash it on 4chan with the purpose of infuriating its fans.
Disregarding the novelty of the game when it was released, the game still presents a very explorable world with a lot to do and see, fun engaging combat, very memorable boss fights and dungeons, a generic but well-presented story, and great music throughout. I can understand it not being your favorite Zelda game (it's not mine), and I can understand disliking it. But if you can't "see the hype" you're not looking very hard.
Software 3D and Real 3D are two different worlds. Software 3D is the appearance of a 3D plane projected unto a screen that lacks a Z axis. Real 3D like the N64 and 3DO, was actual 3D. This is extremely relevant 3D camera control. However I don't know enough about technology to go over it with you so I'll just quote it verbatim.
>High performance low cost video game system with coprocessor providing high speed efficient 3D graphics and digital audio signal processing
>US 6239810 B1
>A low cost high performance three dimensional (3D) graphics system can model a world in three dimensions and project the model onto a two dimensional viewing plane selected based on a changeable viewpoint. The viewpoint can be changed on an interactive, real time basis by operating user input controls such as game controllers. The system rapidly produces a corresponding changing image (which can include animated cartoon characters or other animation) on the screen of a color television set. The richly featured high performance low cost system gives consumers the chance to interact in real time right inside magnificent virtual 3D worlds to provide a high degree of image realism, excitement and flexibility. An optimum feature set/architecture (including a custom designed graphics/audio coprocessor) provides high quality fast moving 3D images and digital stereo sound for video game play and other graphics applications. Numerous features provide flexibility and capabilities in a system within the cost range of most consumers.
What I was saying is that the reason you have to dash again to lock-on to the enemy in Cyber Troopers is because there is no 3D environment. The game has to generate it anew if it leaves your view. I presume the enemy keeps attacking you based on a timed algorithm if this happens and you opt not to. In any
>What I was saying is that the reason you have to dash again to lock-on to the enemy in Cyber Troopers is because there is no 3D environment.
holy shit way to be clueless about wtf you're talking about
>Software 3D is the appearance of a 3D plane projected unto a screen that lacks a Z axis
Seriously, what the fuck. Software is capable of performing any calculations hardware is, though different systems may use different algorithms or techniques to achieve a given effect. An older system without 3D hardware support for it might 'cheat' by performing cheaper or more limited perspective calculations (like the PS1 did) among other things. But that has jack shit to do with "(having to) generate it anew if it leaves your view" which happens each frame anyway, save techniques that limit the render rate for static or far away objects. Which has nothing to do with lock-on logic.
Ok, the thing about generating it anew was stupid. But everything else was right.
That's why PS1 games have to be modified before they can be released in HD as it reveals the lack of perspective because the games are flat. Yeah it can tell where you and the enemy are because it's still an actor on a flat plane. But it's not real lock-on because the camera cannot generate a 3D environment.
>That's why PS1 games have to be modified before they can be released in HD as it reveals the lack of perspective because the games are flat.
No, it's due to a lack of sub-pixel precision which becomes more obvious the higher resolution you go because normally on PS1 vertices skip from 1 pixel to the next. If you upscale 4 times, the polygons skip 4 pixels at a time which is stupidly jerky.
>But it's not real lock-on because the camera cannot generate a 3D environment.
There's some merit in this argument, because if you have a z-buffer you can extrapolate extra scene information to do particular styles of special effects (like anti-aliasing) but I think it would be a bit of a stretch that you'd need z-depth to do a lock-system. It's possible, but where's the evidence?
Z-targeting I thought would only need the renderer to set up a camera with a particular style projection.
>But it's not real lock-on because the camera cannot generate a 3D environment.
Dude, stop. You have no idea what you're saying. The positioning data allows you to calculate camera co-ordinates and orientation, period. This is entirely logical. That has jack shit to do with how the game ends up doing the perspective transform or actually rasterizing the image, which is what I assume you're confused about.
Unless the original version of Cyber Troopers can only properly render the game from fixed angles (which, I have no clue about), I have no idea what you're trying to say, but that is not a limitation of 'software 3D' or whatever you think that is.
Sub-pixel precision is only why actors in the game change shape or jitter around. The real problem is this which goes into your second comment.
But I've exhausted the limits of my knowledge and had to research even this, so let's just agree to disagree as it doesn't sound like either of us knows what we're talking about.
Affine texture mapping doesn't have issues with scaling into higher resolutions - it only becomes more noticeable, but not worse.
>i don't know what i'm taking about so neither do you! neh neh neh
To fully understand it you had to play it back when it released in 1998 , it was the quantum leap for gaming, the first game to be able to tell a story on a grand scale whilst enjoying an enormous sense of 3d open world freedom. every aspect of this game is executed flawlessly and even today with a HD port for the 3ds this game has stood the test of time better than any other in history!.
3D Zeld<<<<<<<2D Zeld
All 3D Zeld is fucking trash.
>Some anonymous kiddie gets fucking ass shattered because I left the letter a out of Zelda
Jesus christ, you poor, autismo fucking mongoloid.
if you play it as a kid or adult now a days then you won't see what's so great about it. Back in it's time this game was amazing. I remember having friends sleep over and playing this when I was a kid along with super smash 64, mario kart 64, conkers bad fur day, donkey kong 64, paper mario, pokemon stadium, majora's mask, Pokemon snap.
Idk how to explain it man. But you just had to be born at the right age and time to enjoy this
Ur wrong, not dead wrong but wrong. I have many friends playing this for the first time and acknowledging it as a really gr8 game. Its not just nostalgia, this game is stll very good and unique. Dont lose your faith son your not blinded by nostalgia
There's an owl that actually STOPS you from progressing so it can babble at you about what you should be doing next, and prevent you from having a chance to figure it out yourself.
>It literally looks like a Wii U game... literally
I more liked the original look, this texture pack adds makes look like Toon Zeldas more.
>it kinda sucks now but you had to be there, OoT was revolutionary because it brought this world into 3D when gamers of the time were going apeshit over this 3D fad.
I was there, and I wasn't going apeshit over 3D. All OoT did was justify my fears that Zelda couldn't work in 3D.
Super BunnyHop had interesting commentary on this very topic a number of years ago as part of a retrospective of the whole franchise :
OFFICIAL /VR/ STRAW POLL
We need to decide this once or for all /vr/
I really liked the 3DS version. The only thing I hated that the original game doesn't have and the 3DS version could've made is a mode where you could play any Dungeon, like a "Dungeon Rush" mode.