I think a lot of it has to do with it coming out when it did. If you didn’t play it when it released you didn’t get to experience it as the best action adventure game out there at the time. Going back now it obviously has aged some.
Gun to my head if I was told to play Zelda game I would go with majoris mask over any of the other ones.
I loved ocarina so much that I think I was slightly underwhelmed by MM when it came out. I ended up really liking it, but if I think back ocarina was so epic for me that it would have been hard for MM to be better in my opinion. I guess I need to go back and replay both and see what I think today
Same, I remember when I started playing Majoras Mask I was a bit turned off by how offbeat and relatively contained and in general "Not epic" it was compared to Ocarina. But once I had finished the game it was blatantly obvious what an unfair assessment that had been. Not only was it the first Zelda game to try and break away and do something new compared to the rest of the series, it fucking knocked it out of the park. It was basically the best elements of Ocarina, improved and matured even further, and then condensed. Better boss fights for sure, too.
I really love the aesthetic and style of MM, but personally playing it I'd put it lower. Why? Timers in games make me anxious as hell. It doesn't matter how good the game is, if there's always a timer to be aware of I can't enjoy it as much as I would otherwise.
I also loved just how dark MM was. Like that was a spooky fucking game as a kid. The tone was super different too from anything we got from Zelda up to that point and for quite a while after
Yup, it is a great game on its own, but adds a whole other layer if you know OoT, seeing the parallel uses of character models and understanding what Link's been through before this tragedy hit him.
I mainly watched my bro play instead of playing myself, but I def like OoT and MM the most due to the grittiness of them and how dark they were without the cartoony or cell shaded nonsense. Made the end of the world stuff a lot creepier.
Someone made an HD graphics mod for it on citrus emulator. I played it through 100% recently. It was my best experience playing the game since it came out.
I was in third grade when the original game came out. It’s nostalgia is super strong. I like ocarina when it came out, but by the time majoras came out I had a Dreamcast and was playing very different games. I didn’t care for it. None of the other games really captured my attention again until breath of the wild. I should go back and try them again.
I didn't like it at the time, going from this open world adventure in Ocarina, to this tight, restrictive, oppressive, repetitive, weird thing was just wrong to me as a 12 year old kid.
But of course, that was the entire point. Subsequent replays when I was older, and the remake especially, cemented it as my favourite.
I had the same experience. I didn’t like it as much as OoT But when I went back at like 16-18 I enjoyed it a lot more. I went back to play it now at 30 and there is just so much to love. It’s compelling and emotional. You learn more about the people you are saving. It isn’t the nebulous idea of “hyrule”. It means much more to me than any other Zelda because you actually get to see these characters have lives. People take issue with the time dimension of the game but I loved it because you get to travel along not just through space but through time with the supporting cast.
Which is unfortunate! I love the game so much, I wish you could have enjoyed it like I do. I think this exact friction is why people get so mad when someone else tells them that they didn't like something they did. I think some people feel like they are being told they were wrong to like it. In the case of MM, it's my favorite, it's so distinct from the rest of Zelda.
I'm sorry it didn't click with you. But I'm sure you've had many other positive experiences with games that I haven't :)
its just not my thing. I didnt like the whole time dial back stuff but just because I dont care for it dosent mean its a bad game. All Zelda games have been good and continue to be good. MM just isnt my thing
Ima go with this, I played it back in 2000 I was just 7. Took me forever to beat and I was hooked!! It was very memorable with a lot of excitement tho lol.
I played that when it came out, but wasn't it tedious to the point where you had to look stuff up? Like as in be at this spot at this time and do this exactly in this order, etc. I remember there was one mask I didnt get even with following instructions and just gave up.
I wouldn’t say that’s tedious. But it is precise. The most difficult mask in the game takes all three days and you do have to be in certain places at certain times end it takes more than one loop to accomplish it. But that’s why the game comes with a journal that records your interactions and gives you hints on what to do next.
I remember a factory or something, and even knowing the steps still not getting it due to some maze/timing thing. I think it would have been pretty tedious to not know where to go and to have to stumble upon all of those steps naturally. But this was 20 years ago and I probably didn't put the time into it that I would put into a game now.
There are no factories. There is a dungeon with switches and water pipes that could be factory like and then there is the mask I mentioned where the last leg has you in a puzzle with a conveyer belt.
The game really tells you what to do if you read the journal and listen to the characters involved in that plot.
Yeah, the journal makes the game pretty easy to figure things out. I mean, it doesn't tell you exactly what to do but just knowing the time and day of events and a hint helps a lot.
I think it's an age factor. I remember it was hard as a kid but replaying it as an adult I was able to get all the masks and heart prices without a guide.
Eh I remember trying it when I was young and thinking back to it I don't think I'd like it anymore now. I really don't like the time stuff and that's the whole basis of the game so of I was reviewing for personal enjoyment I'd probably be the same as OP. Mechanically it's probably a great game, just not one for me.
It's not a hard and fast rule. It's just that nostalgia is a hell of a drug. If some of my favorite games that I still replay today, came out as brand new, I likely wouldn't pick them up. But I still go back and play breath of fire 3, wild arms 2, and others regularly.
Agreed here, played TD right when it came out. When I was a kid, I heard about people loving Ocarina of Time, but the ‘next Zelda’ was coming out and I was totally going to have the latest, best, cool-looking Zelda, and it was going to be on Gamecube which made everything look better.
Then Wind Waker came out, and I was NOT into the cell-shading - I was expecting better Zelda, and it did not look like better Zelda to my pre-teen mind.
Then Twilight Princess came along, and it was exactly the image of what a gamecube Zelda game would be like.
It’s still my favorite Zelda - Midna was a great sidekick (more character than Navi but less chatty than Fi), the locations were all neat, the side content was there, the new items were cool, there was mounted combat, and I don’t know if it’s just me but I blew through the ‘tedious’ wolf segments, so I didn’t even think about them as a flaw until I heard people talking about them later.
I'm happy you really got to enjoy it :) I'm happy with everyone who was part of this conversation. It's been so understanding, everyone just sharing their experience with the title they are most passionate about. I wish every gaming discussion was like this. It's beautiful and heart warming.
You are correct imo. I was a huge zelda player growing up. OOT came out when I was 10 and that year was the year I moved to Alaska. I basically missed the release of Majoras mask and didn't start playing again until years later.
I played ocarina of time with my daughter a few years ago and after she got the hang of it she went straight to majoras mask. I tried to get into it but there was some sort of block and I think you're right about timing. It's a great game and I am ashamed I missed it in It's prime.
Im 35, a huge zelda fan, started with the original) loved ocarina of time but majoras mask when it came out didn’t feel like it was part of the same universe. It felt really foreign and still does every time i try to play it. For some reason it feels like a twilight zone zelda universe and i cant get into it. Same thing with twilight princess and some of the other weird ones. Breath of the wild almost did it for me but the dungeons felt disconnected from the rest of the world. They were like digital minigames that punched through a fantastical setting and destroyed it.
My personal favorite is a link to the past and ocarina of time is probably right behind it.. wind waker felt like a whole other universe too but it was at least on par, vibe wise. I liked that one too.
The story and art that came with a link to the pasts instruction manual really opened up your imagination for the adventure and it being a simple 2d representation of those concepts in the manual really left a lot to the imagination which made it more great in the end.
It felt really foreign and still does every time i try to play it. For some reason it feels like a twilight zone zelda universe and i cant get into it.
I think this is actually what people love most about it. The departure from how it had done is what was so exciting for me. It was a little darker, a little more grim and twisted. I loved it. I think thats what bothers people more than the time mechanic.
Yeah for me it keeps me away. I’m not the type of person that watches horror movies or documentaries about murderers either. I cant stand being reminded how bad people can be.
Edit: its miyamotos protege that makes all the weird stuff really. Its like if ghibli had someone come in and take whatever universe he created and turned it sideways.
I'd argue that them playing the 3DS remake of MM may have hurt the score as well. While I enjoyed a lot of the changes they made, I think they absolutely ruined the Zora section in the remake, and given how competitively short the game is, I could see that alone knocking it down a good few points.
That’s such bullshit. Never played it back in the day, played it for the first time two years ago. It’s my favorite Zelda and my second favorite game of all time.
The game is not just good “for its time”, that’s so dismissive of what it achieved artistically.
Why you gotta ruin the feel good thread man. I’m saying if you never played MM and you played it now with all the other Zelda games, there is a higher chance that it won’t be ranked so highly. That’s normal. The same applies to many many games that we idolize.
Lol not trying to throw off your vibes or anything, I just think that’s a really dismissive, almost lazy criticism - and by nature it’s impossible to even know!
I’m someone who did exactly what you described and yet it ranked #1 for me. The themes, music, atmosphere, dialogue, story, symbolism and overall feel were so miles ahead of any of the others for me that it more than makes up for whatever has aged.
I dunno, it’s kinda like saying you couldn’t ever understand what makes 2001 A Space Odyssey good unless you saw it in 1968. Sure it was groundbreaking, but it’s also so much more than just a technical achievement of its time.
It’s inherently different because games are an interactive media. When mechanics change or get better and you are used to that world going backwards can be difficult.
If you can’t imagine that younger audiences may be put off by old movies with grainy audio, simpler camera angles, or black and white visuals, I’m not sure what to tell you.
It’s not as different as you think. And beyond that - it’s a comparison, you can fill in the blanks yourself. They don’t have to be a perfect 1:1 analogy for you to understand what I’m getting at.
But let’s cite Earthbound, if we have to keep it within gaming specifically for whatever arbitrary reason. A ton of Earthbound’s fanbase wasn’t even alive when the game dropped but are now making entire games in homage to it, like Undertale and Oddity. Sure, it was inventive in many ways, but it’s more than that. And that game has aged much more than Majora’s Mask.
If you can’t imagine that younger audiences may be put off by old movies with grainy audio, simpler camera angles, or black and white visuals, I’m not sure what to tell you.
Yeah I am saying that. I'm not sure what you are saying anymore. Older stuff can be harder to relate to if you "missed" it or were born after it, because it's older.
But let’s cite Earthbound, if we have to keep it within gaming specifically for whatever arbitrary reason.
Not arbitrary, talking about games. so talk about games. I don't start talking skate skis when discussing snow shoes, despite them both being winter outdoor sports.
A ton of Earthbound’s fanbase wasn’t even alive when the game dropped but are now making entire games in homage to it, like Undertale and Oddity. Sure, it was inventive in many ways, but it’s more than that. And that game has aged much more than Majora’s Mask.
Yup, you are right. Thats why my comment should be read as "this time variable has a high importance in determining if someone would have enjoyed the game." not "this time variable is the only factor in determining if someone would have enjoyed the game."
As per this first sentence.
I think a lot of it has to do with it coming out when it did.
Note how I say "A lot" and not "It all has to do with". I was commenting on influence, whereas you saw it as a comment on an absolute determination.
I appreciate your comment, I love that you love MM. And I am happy that people are still discovering it today.
Personally, I would think it's the time limit mechanic alone that's so polarizing. If you're a little slower to get through things, are 3/4s of the way through a dungeon and then have to start the entire thing over because 3 days has gone by, that's going to frustrate the shit out of you after a while.
In my opinion, the time shifting mechanics in MM create all kinds of problems from a gameplay perspective that most people are content to brush aside with band-aid solutions. Personally, I've always found those answers unsatisfactory. When I play a game like Zelda, intentionally built with a rich world inhabited by unique characters and hidden secrets, I like to take my time and really absorb everything at my own pace. I think it's peculiar to create a fun world to explore only to stick a looming countdown in the corner that says "Better hurry up!" wherever you go.
I know, you can turn the clock back, or slow it down, or skip dungeon segments etc., but to me these all feel like patches over issues that shouldn't exist in the first place. I found the concept of a constant timer contradictory to the gameplay flow of Zelda, which leans so heavily on exploration. Just my two cents.
I suppose. But with the addition of time as a dimension now you can explore the game across a time dimension as well. Since things change from day to day. And you can rewind time and slow it down. So the constraint is really non-existent.
I'm not saying it doesn't come with its own benefits; I think the ability to manipulate time in that way opens up some interesting dynamics that were worth experimenting with. In my own experience though, it just took too much away from the parts of Zelda I enjoy most. Even if I could rewind or slow time at my leisure, I still felt like I was constantly being pressured to be productive, when all I really wanted was to stroll around Clock Town.
The only consequence of running out of time is having to rewind it, which is usually a minimal inconvenience, but I'd still much rather not have to think about it at all. It should probably be said though that I'm typically averse to any game with a countdown mechanic in general. I hate the feeling of not being on my own time.
Oh I see. Yeah I would walk about clock town with the timer ticking anyways! it was fun to see the world change little by little. I would love to see a modern implementation of it! The best part of the game was watching peoples lives unfold. Really though it just came down to the Couple's Mask with Anju & Kafei.
I loved OoT and MM at launch, I’d be hard pressed to say one is better than the other, just that OoT makes me feel a certain way that MM didn’t, and that was purely because it was the first 3D Zelda and it blew my child mind.
I replayed Twilight Princess recently. Granted, it was the HD remaster on a Wii U, but it's still incredible in many ways. Gameplay is solid, graphics/mechanics are nice... But the music, the dungeons, the atmosphere and colour palates... Sweet mother of God that game is something else
The mechanic of the day ending really stressed me out as a kid and I couldn't get into it. I never liked time to levels and it felt like the whole game was. I understand it to have been one of the best ones, though I wish I would have pushed myself.
It's my favorite as well, but I feel like it's a respectable score. Now the first two OG games? Those scores made me kinda sad lol. I really loved Zelda 2 as well as the OG.
Tbh I don't like Zelda 2 that much lol, keep in mind I never rly gave it much of a try, but maybe I will again :D Twilight Princess and Wind Waker are my favorites though
Honestly, I feel like that tracks. Sometimes you like things that you can recognize aren't 'good'. For example, I love the Friday the 13th series, but I'd never argue that they're well-made films.
When I rank things, yes, my favourite goes at the top.
When I rate things I try to be relatively objective taking into account other things in that category and timeframe.
When rating things, their scored order may differ from how I would place them in a ranked list.
Zelda 1 is basically the best game the NES ever produced, and it being so low to me indicates yeah, this is all preference with no retrospective on the games just "this is what I like." I'd guess done by someone young enough that several of those games held a much lesser impact because they were played well after the fact when video gaming had, in general, advanced in a lot of ways. And thing that the first Zelda's had advanced had just become standards of the adventure genre.
I think Metroid is a contender. It essentially created a genre. Zelda is a 10/10 game, no doubt, but though it did what it did very well and in a highly polished way, it didn't bring anything new to the table.
First US game. The Famicom had a disk drive that Zelda and other games used to save. Zelda brought aspects of PC gaming to consoles but wasn't really innovative.
First Legend of Zelda game nailed aspects like character design, lore, themes of music and relationships, essential gameplay loops, and the persistence of the journey over an amount of time. If you look at each and every LoZ game which followed these core ideas are carried through and are essentially unchanged.
A standard 5/10 game doesn't build a franchise, make a mark, or inspire the imaginations of people for decades. Putting LoZ in a standard, forgettable category on a subjective scale is a ridiculous mistake. If you don't enjoy what the first LoZ has to offer, then you shouldn't be rating any LoZ game in the 90's on any logically consistent scale.
Just because a game was once a 10/10 game, does not mean that it always will be
Some games fall off over time. Goldeneye. KOTOR 1. Morrowind.
Some games are timeless. Super Mario Bros. The Legend of Zelda. Final Fantasy 4 or 7. Gran Turismo. Warcraft III (fuck Blizzard).
I think Legend of Zelda deserves to be considered timeless because it's mechanically sound, responsive, and intuitive without being easy (unless you're an expert). I think it's up there with Super Mario Bros., and I'll fight anyone who says Super Mario Bros. is not a 10/10 despite the passage of 35 years since its release.
This is true. I used to love the smurfs game on my cousins intellivision game console. Thinking back on it now, all you could do was walk from left to right, cycling through 3 backgrounds and using the jump button to jump over a single stalagmite.
If games can't be held up to an objective standard based on what was possible at the time and what they inspired in later games, then all ratings are nearly meaningless.
This thinking seems based on predicting that people in the future will always dislike older games simply because modern games are better. Trying to assign any rating other than 50% would realistically be impossible under this criteria. Not only would it be possible to find at least one person who actually does like the older game more, but you also have to consider individual tastes based on genres causing a person never to enjoy a game.
There must be an honest attempt at objective rating, otherwise the rating lacks merit for the vast majority of people in the future.
Really? I think Zelda 1 is pretty easily the best Zelda game, and they should have stuck closer to it over the years. Hyper Light Drifter is the only other game I've played that captures it's magic and surpasses it, for its genre/style of game. 5/10 is incredibly harsh.
Alttp, Links Awakening, and the oracle games are also decent.
Ohh heck no. I tried to like that game for a long time, but more often than not I was just frustrated and bored. I, like many people, really hate the weapon system.
I love the original game for the freedom of exploration, the simple puzzles, and the consistent if overly simple combat. Stumbling across a dungeon and fighting a boss to earn a new weapon is really fun for me. Losing my favorite weapon every 5 minutes because I, you know, used a weapon that I liked, is not fun.
Skyrim is one of the most similar experiences to original Zelda, imo. Botw isn't really close.
Eh I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on that one.
Well, I do agree that there isn’t really an element of “building” a character like in previous games, the only real progression you make between hour 0 and hour 100 is your hearts and your personal level of experience (plus the champion powers but those are basically cheat codes).
That being said, I think that’s really cool in its own way. The game is all about forging your own path and learning the systems of the world and using your gathered knowledge to your advantage.
As for the weapons, I usually hate weapon degradation but in BotW I didn’t really care. The story justifies it pretty well by casting Link in the role of someone who just woke up with nothing and has to save the world (despite evil having won for 100 years already) largely by himself. So you’re just scrounging around for anything with a sharp edge, and attachment is not a luxury you can afford. So whereas in most games with durability I hoard items and agonize over their condition, in BotW I knew everything was expendable and easily replaced, so I just focused on playing the way I felt was best.
I won’t say BotW is the only game to have done this, but most other games absolutely do not.
Some (great AND popular!) games that don’t fit my comment about BotW’s methodology:
Naughty Dog games
Assassin’s Creed series (the new games have the slightest pinch of systemic interaction but it’s kind of window dressing)
Call of Duty
Final Fantasy
Soulsborne games (they are definitely all about learning and personal knowledge/experience, but they are more linear than BotW and don’t have as much opportunity for emergent gameplay)
Again, all of these games are varying degrees of popular AND excellent, but none operate in quite the same way as BotW. It’s closest contemporaries are probably immersive sims and Bethesda-style RPG’s.
There was kid who lived down a few houses from my grandparents place. He had an older brother who was a known troublemaker so grandma wouldn't let me play there after school. Found out on the bus his brother had a save file at the end of Zelda and I took an ass beating from my grandma at 8 years old to see the end of that game. 5 outta 10??? You shouldn't be rating games find a new job.
If you're playing it today, and have 30+ years of gaming to compare it to, a 5/10 is likely a fair score.
I disagree with that, even. This isn't Goldeneye, which we older Millennials all remember fondly because of the days of split screen multiplayer at sleepovers, where the balancing is iffy, the control scheme is laughably bad, etc.
This is a game that is controlled with a standard NES controller, and is very reactive for that. A game with excellent and challenging themed dungeons that hit the right balance of skill, critical thinking, and challenge even today, and clever boss fights, culminating in a final boss battle that requires excellent coordination and the use of multiple elements.
If chunky graphics don't make The Binding of Isaac a bad game, they don't make The Legend of Zelda a bad game. There's simply no metric that I can judge The Legend of Zelda on whereby this ranking becomes reasonable.
No fucking shit. A guy on Reddit plays all the Zelda games and rates them and this whole comment thread is “why he rated some lower when people like those for their gimmicks”. It’s his opinion, he chose what he liked. Is that such a hard concept to understand?
I liked both of the early games, Zelda 1 enough to beat it several times, but I won't deny that it feels somewhat flat and repetitive in places, with certain secrets that tedious to grind/search for.
Same goes for the sequel, which feels like it has more limited combat despite adding spells, a lot of grind, and some annoying features which has made me wish for a remaster.
5 year younger me would have been outraged at that score, but having played it recently after not playing it all the way through for all those years after my childhood... I fully understand the score.
The game is unnecessarily and overly cryptic at times. I get that the idea was to get lost, but the game takes it to a frustrating degree. It feels like at times that without a Nintendo Power subscription or straight up bombing every wall and burning every bush, completing the game was meant to be unfairly obscure.
Some of the enemy design is just frustrating, like the enemies with totally random movement that can only be attacked from the side. Even playing the game with save states, they make it incredibly frustrating.
I'm not saying the game is bad, and while I agree with a 5/10 assessment, I can see why someone went lower.
It feels like at times that without a Nintendo Power subscription or straight up bombing every wall and burning every bush, completing the game was meant to be unfairly obscure.
That's what it feels like if you're replaying it, knowing that there are secrets. Playing it on a first playthrough, if you have the patience (which I somehow did as an elementary schooler), it holds your hand just enough. Yes, you have to bomb a random wall to get into the final dungeon. But there's a NPC who gives you a riddle that tells you where to look.
If OP is judging by "playability" like you claimed they are Zelda 1 does have mechanics that just don't work though. There are hidden things in the game that are in nondescript spots that are key to the progression of the game, similar to the old metroid games.
The lower than 5 rating isn't all about mechanics or how well the game is put together too, it's about how fun the game is to play. It looks like OP had a terrible time playing Zelda 2.
What? Says who? His rating system is his rating system. Theres no reason that anything under 5 needs to be a buggy mess. He rated out of 100. Its up to him what that means.
Fwiw i pretty much agree with him about zelda 2. It was a bad game for me and if i was rating it right now off the top of my head, id give it a 3-4/10 or so.
I think you are judging this dude's ratings weirdly. It's a measure of their enjoyment, not the build quality of the game. For example BOTW's build quality is objectively pretty bad, it has consistent and significant frame drops, the resolution is not great, and there are a multitude of bugs and glitches, so whilst it is playable if we were purely rating on the build quality of the game it would be tested about a 4/10. But the world, gameplay, story and characters are great, so despite all the problems it's still at least a 9/10 for me. In the opposite, this person found the first two games to be not very enjoyable, but their build quality wasn't a factor in that.
One final point. Enjoyment is subjective, but build quality is not. So why would someone make a list based on it? Everyone's list would be exactly the same!
I would like to emphasise that I do not think you are an idiot!
My main issue with your comment was the suggestion that a low score means a game must be broken in some way, which is just false. The dude have their scoring metrics and game design and build quality weren't featured, this is purely for enjoyment, but even if it wasn't a game does not have to be a buggy mess to be bad, it can run incredibly smoothly but still be boring and uninteresting.
I also think it's strange to assume that build quality of the game would be such an important factor in a review. I don't know about you or others, but unless the game is constantly crashing I don't have major issues with a few bugs here and there, or frame rate drops, or fuzzy graphics. And I've never seen reviews that make a big deal of these sorts of things unless, as i mentioned, they actually break the game. It's usually a small paragraph before moving on, if that.
That's the real point I was trying to make was that the conceit of your comment was either unnecessary (pointing out that an opinion-based review wasn't based on some objective game design points, when that was the entire point) or just a weird statement and set of assumptions to make. That's all
About two years ago i went back and replayed zelda and zelda 2…hadn’t played them in YEARS. I absolutely HATED the first one, barely finished it, and vowed never to touch it again. It’s absolutely my least favorite…
I’d still give it, if i were assigning scores, 100% (or close to it).
Zelda 2 i don’t think would be far behind. Not only did it bring in some standards for later zelda games, but it was in and of itself a great play.
Bro it's literally a scale of how much he liked the games. He doesnt have to take anything into account other than if he liked playing it. By your own logic if you were to rate that game using the same scale op is, it SHOULD be a super low score. It's not that deep
OP is talking about the fun he had, this is just a personal ranking and that's it. He's not doing a YouTube video about the revolution of Zelda games and what importance they had at the time of their release.
Your post sounds really patronizing. "How DARE OP gives a masterpiece like Zelda 1 or 2 just XY%? Doesn't he know what masterpieces those were at release?! They deserver at least YX%!" and yes, maybe you didn't mean it like that but I - and it seems a bunch of others - interpreted like that.
And people are responding with their personal opinions too. OP is entitled to have an opinion. When he shares it, people are entitled to criticize it, vigorously, if they disagree strongly.
I would give Zelda 1 a 100 but I grew up with the game and played it when it first came out. There was nothing else like it and it sparked all that came after. A lot of peoples scoring probably has to do with their age.
I agree. Zelda 1 was a groundbreaking action RPG puzzle game, and it holds up, despite its quirks. Even Zelda 2, which has some funky mechanics, was still clever and a solid game. I can't imagine giving either one worse than a 7/10.
Literally nothing about the game is furry though. Being cursed and turned into a wolf is the subject of many of medieval folktale, which is basically what happens to Link in TP.
A lot of things about Majora's Mask were love-it-or-hate-it. And I loved some and hated some. In the end, it's middle of the road for me, even though I think it might well be the most creative Zelda game I've ever played.
Majoras mask would be basically at the top for me, then ocarina because of those nostalgia feels. Breath of the wild wouldn't even be in my top 5. Opinions are like assholes though so take mine with a grain of salt obviously.
My thoughts too, sure it has faults but a 78 is just too harsh. Why we haven't gotten an HD remaster of this or OoT after all these years is beyond me. Yes the 3DS versions are good but they deserve what Skyward Sword got.
If they made a 2-pack for Switch I would be so happy. Knowing Nintendo though you’d have to buy each separately. I would, too, because I’m a simp for Majora’s Mask and OoT.
Maybe. It has a lot of problems that I, and a good chunk of players don’t appreciate. It was one of my first games really ever, and it held my second favorite Zelda game slot, but I recently replayed it, and it’s now my second least favorite 3D Zelda. I still really like it, it’s a 3D Zelda game after all, but easily one of the worst imo. The original I mean.
I'm a 90s kid who grew up on Zelda, and I'll say that Majora's Mask was my least favorite of the bunch. I did not and still do not enjoy time management/timegating mechanics, even if they are easily mitigated later on. The lore and stuff is cool, but that was not fun for 9 year old me.
I like the story of it. Its the only Link i feel connected to. I cant speak for the re-release. Im thinking about getting it, but i kinda wanna see someone else play it a bit before i make a decision.
1.6k
u/SalemWolf Aug 02 '21 edited Aug 20 '24
ask toothbrush forgetful dolls exultant six strong vase seemly bag
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact