I'll say.AshPox said:Oh, Ocarina of Time is winning, what a surprise.
Last time one of these was done, A Link to the Past emerged victorious.
[sub]No, your sarcasm was not lost on me
I'll say.AshPox said:Oh, Ocarina of Time is winning, what a surprise.
Because the title of this is "Favourite Zelda Game". If you don't like or haven't played Zelda, you probably don't have a favourite.Pararaptor said:Why isn't there a poll option for this?Jonesy911 said:I have never played a Zelda game, i think they are fail games
IndeedHaseo21 said:majoras mask FTW
Firstly, you're the one starting arguments by calling people "trolls"Xandus117 said:Since you can't tell that you are, perhaps someone needs to educate you on what a troll is.Jonesy911 said:Ooooh aren't you brave. I gave an opinion and I even elaborated it lower down on the page, don't let your crushing love for Zelda make you think you have to defend it at all times. I'm not a bloody troll, grow upXandus117 said:Reported. Please take your trolling elsewhere.Jonesy911 said:i think they are fail games
A troll is an idiot who tries to create conflict and flame wars by insulting or ranting about something online. They are generally stupid and use lame insults.
So in other words, YOU ARE A TROLL.
Burnout54 said:What about phantom hourglass and minish cap? I loved both of them!
malestrithe said:Twilight Princess.
![]()
No kidding. I wasn't a big fan of Minish Cap, but Phantom Hourglass might be my favourite top-down Zelda game ever.
I love both games, but for it's time, Twilight Princess was only a "pretty good" game, whereas Ocarina of Time was ground-breaking, breath-taking, and many other compound words. Basically, you have a game that revolutionized adventure games, had spectacular graphics, won multiple game of the year awards, and posed a fair challenge (my 12-year-old mind got stuck quite a few times trying to figure out the next step).I do not care of people think OoT is better. They are wrong. This game had a better story, better development and better puzzles. Midna is far better than Navi for no other reason that Midna did not fucking talk.
What's the point of comparing games if you don't compare them in context? The sad thing is, even comparing them out of context and ignoring the graphics, I still enjoy playing Ocarina of Time more than Twilight Princess. The general story is far more compelling (it's the sword-in-a-stone, where Arthur is a young orphan who helps an evil man take over the world), the game is more original (introduces, I think, Zoras, Gorons, Dekus), has better gameplay in some respects (switching between the past and present, the overall challenge and incredible dungeon design...
But perhaps what makes me most sad about Twilight Princess is the loss of certain Zelda staples. No magic bar? No unique magical spells? No impressive power-ups? No magical instrument to fool around with? Twilight Princess is more cinematic and has great combat that is as intuitive as you'd expect from a Zelda game, but that's close to the only thing it does right.
Oh, and no diving?! I still have no idea why the Zora Tunic doesn't make you swim like a Zora in Majora's Mask. So many little touches could have made Twilight Princess a true epic - instead, it's just a mildly original Zelda game that goes back to the basics. Pretty much the only thing that reminded me it was a Zelda game was when you randomly had to race a Yeti on a piece of ice (and that wasn't as fleshed out as it could be). Zelda is best when it switches between being dark and goofy.
More and more I wonder whether Nintendo (or maybe Miyamoto himself) has lost it's touch.
In other words, Nintendo decided to make a different game that had a more mass appeal and not cater solely to fanboys of the series and it sucked for not other reason than that? So what that Twilight Princess had no magic in it. This Zelda game is more orientated to battles and is not really concerned with magic.CapnJack said:I love both games, but for it's time, Twilight Princess was only a "pretty good" game, whereas Ocarina of Time was ground-breaking, breath-taking, and many other compound words. Basically, you have a game that revolutionized adventure games, had spectacular graphics, won multiple game of the year awards, and posed a fair challenge (my 12-year-old mind got stuck quite a few times trying to figure out the next step).
What's the point of comparing games if you don't compare them in context? The sad thing is, even comparing them out of context and ignoring the graphics, I still enjoy playing Ocarina of Time more than Twilight Princess. The general story is far more compelling (it's the sword-in-a-stone, where Arthur is a young orphan who helps an evil man take over the world), the game is more original (introduces, I think, Zoras, Gorons, Dekus), has better gameplay in some respects (switching between the past and present, the overall challenge and incredible dungeon design...
But perhaps what makes me most sad about Twilight Princess is the loss of certain Zelda staples. No magic bar? No unique magical spells? No impressive power-ups? No magical instrument to fool around with? Twilight Princess is more cinematic and has great combat that is as intuitive as you'd expect from a Zelda game, but that's close to the only thing it does right.
Oh, and no diving?! I still have no idea why the Zora Tunic doesn't make you swim like a Zora in Majora's Mask. So many little touches could have made Twilight Princess a true epic - instead, it's just a mildly original Zelda game that goes back to the basics. Pretty much the only thing that reminded me it was a Zelda game was when you randomly had to race a Yeti on a piece of ice (and that wasn't as fleshed out as it could be). Zelda is best when it switches between being dark and goofy.
More and more I wonder whether Nintendo (or maybe Miyamoto himself) has lost it's touch.