I know you guys love to shit on it because of the lighting, but this is honestly a great remake. It makes the game feel fresh without but doesn't try to "fix" the original's game design like other remakes do. I'd recommend it to first time players over the original any day.
Ocarina of Time 3D
Meh
Low quality post
It's obviously better than the original
>30fps as opposed to 20fps
>quick access to items instead of opening the menu (fixes the water temple and other tedious sections)
>gyro aiming
Yes the Ganon fight looks worse and muh blood isn't there, but as a game it's an objective improvement unlike MM3D
Yeah, that's what I'm thinking, but pretty recently I've seen threads with tons of people shitting on it seemingly just because of the bright and anime-like aesthetic which I honestly prefer to the original
Sorry, it's just that I just replayed it and I wanted to get this off my chest.
It's a decent remake. Still not better than the original, and it should definitely not be the first version of OoT you play
I honestly disagree. I mean obviously you'd like the original better if you have preference or nostalgia for N64 games but for someone playing it for the first time the 3DS version is way better to pick up. It's not like you're really missing out on much by playing the remake. The original isn't as easily accessible legally and some parts are downright ugly. Plus the water temple is more tedious and the aiming sucks.
It's not a remake, it's a port too
And also, this is just opinion, but I think the game works way better portably. I think it's just so old that it's kinda underwhelming to first time players if a whole TV screen is dedicated to the relatively small-scale of the game.
How? Remake doesn't mean "reinvent the whole game"
Understandable opinion. I didn't play OoT as a kid, so no nostalgia here (I only played it a few years ago on an emulator). I just really like the atmosphere in the original. OoT was my introduction to Zelda, and I was expecting some kids game. Instead, what I got was something more dark and melancholic, which I really liked. I'm actually in the middle of the 3DS version right now, and it's not the same.
Yeah it's definitely my favorite way to play it. My only real problems is that the Forest Temple isn't as atmospheric, the original Master Quest isn't in it, and the Ganon fight looks terrible. Other than that it's a fantastic remake and leaps and bounds better than MM3D.
Yeah, I can understand how the original would feel darker and how that would effect the experience. It's just not something I'm particularly touchy about. Any version of OoT is good to me, I just appreciated the QoL in the remake more than the more serious look of the original.
What's the difference between remake, remaster and ports then?
See this is what I'm concerned about. Considering I prefer OoT3D to the original, mostly just because it's portable and has prettier graphics, I'm really tempted to play MM3D, but I'm aware of the changes and how everyone who played it says it's worse.
I'd over the original recommend it if only for the better framerate, but the QoL stuff makes the two games incomparable.
Let's just say that there's good reasoning why that video is always posted in MM3D threads.
Remake: Significantly improved soundtrack, redone textures and models, and changed level design. It can keep most things the same like the Pokemon gen 1 and 2 remakes or be wildly different like the Resident Evil 2 and 3 remakes.
Remaster: The original game reworked to run on and take advantage of better hardware. Graphical upgrades, particularly with resolution or lighting, are a given, and there might be a few QoL changes but it is largely the same game.
Port: The original game running on different hardware. No changes except for maybe resolution or aspect ratio or something.
OoT3D could maybe be argued to be a remaster, but the totally overhauled graphics make me think it's a remake. Either way it definitely isn't a straight port. A straight port is something like Mario 3D All Stars.
The only big problem is the lighting, but that's only a huge issue in the Shadow Temple and final battle IMO. It's not like MM where overly brightened lighting ruins the tone of the entire fucking game.
>remake
new gameplay, new models, new animations
>remaster
upscaled textures, better sound quality, better graphics
>port
same game, different platform
I played the original first and i honestly wouldn't even notice these lighting change comparison people love to post, the atmosphere is still intact
Idk why I said soundtrack when describing remake, my bad. I assume I meant graphics.
Wow
Is right supposed to look worse? What's so bad about a happy safe place looking brighter?7
I know this is supposed to show how the remake messes it up but honestly I think the brighter colors work a lot better for Kokiri forest especially, where everything is childlike and happy.
I only ever played OoT on the 3DS on Master Quest mode
Should I bother trying the original mode? I'd like to play the different puzzles, but I feel like it'd be ruined by the combat being even easier than it already is
Not the guy who posted the image, but the remake has too much of a piss color to it. There can be a point where color becomes a bit gaudy. Zelda is not Mario. It can have more muted tones.
Is OoT3D a remake or a remaster? They did entire new UI and Greezo remodeled literally everything.
Depends on how you define a remake/remaster. Oot3D is actually built on the original N64 code so you could call it a remaster, rather than a full ground-up remake.
Honestly if you have to resort to small lighting changes affecting the tone of a few scenes to complain about the game, you should take that as evidence that it's a good remake.
I think someone could easily darken the game once 3DS game modding is more prevalent. As it stands, the remake is the best way to play Ocarina your first time. There's too many small QOL improvements that make it better.