With that as a mission statement of sorts, IGN Retro is taking a look at videogames that are possibly overrated. And what better game to launch this exercise with than one of the most celebrated Nintendo games ever made: The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time for the Nintendo 64.
By late 1998, Nintendo understood the Nintendo 64 needed a shot in the arm. The insurgent PlayStation was no longer just a competitor -- it was a serious threat. The previous holiday season was successfully salvaged with the release of Rare's Diddy Kong Racing, a stand-in for the delayed Nintendo 64 entry in the Zelda canon. However, it was crucial that Ocarina of Time launch that holiday season and remind gamers around the world that Nintendo not only knew how to create a great game, but also craft a revolution.
Ocarina of Time performed admirably. By the end of the year, Ocarina of Time sold 2.5 million cartridges. The game went on to move over 7.9 million units around the globe, making it one of Nintendo's biggest successes for the Nintendo 64. But the genesis of Ocarina of Time's reputation as one of the greatest games ever created does not come from its sales figures. The game's multiple innovations, such as the introduction of Z-targeting for locking on to an enemy in a 3D environment, and the scope of the adventure were lauded. Almost every review for Ocarina of Time praised the game as a milestone for videogames. IGN gave the game a prefect 10 score and stated in our review that:
Z-targeting Ocarina of Time shaped more than the action-RPG and adventure genres going forward. Many outright action games adopted the Z-targeting feature because it is a simple, elegant solution for managing multiple targets. Targeting is taken for granted now, but Ocarina's achievement was a huge advancement for videogames in 1998 as developers struggled with interface in the early days of 3D gaming. For this technological triumph, Ocarina of Time undoubtedly deserves kudos.
However, one significant game mechanic is not enough to explain Ocarina of Time enduring legacy. Many gamers still applaud the pacing and epic qualities of the game. Ocarina of Time "connected" with players in a way that few other adventures did at the time -- or do now. Some of this is understandable considering the still-unexplored frontiers of the 3D gaming. For some gamers, the move into 3D was decidedly not a step forward for gaming.
"While games had come to a point of incredible detail in 2D with stuff like Donkey Kong Country and Chrono Trigger, seeing Mario walk around in a giant green plain with a bush or a pipe every ten feet looked totally gross to me," says IGN Insider's Michael Thomsen. "I know it was a great technical feat to get over the initial hurdle of rendering 3D graphics on a consumer-level piece of electronics, but if the only way to do this was sap the personality out of the play environments to such a dramatic degree, what was the point?"
Thomsen's point is reinforced by scores of games in the mid- to late-nineties that revealed a development community thrashing about, trying to make 3D as playable as 2D. The anticipated Star Wars: Shadow of the Empire on the N64 struggled with navigating wide open environments. Lining up jumps and shots were handled as if the player could count on 2D precision in a 3D environment. SEGA's solution with NiGHTS into Dreams on the Saturn was to keep the action on a linear field and then direct it through 3D environments.
What Ocarina of Time accomplished was to make the open spaces of 3D meaningful. So many games (still to this day) create environments that are tilted far too much toward "show" elements. Ocarina of Time did not dangle intriguing real estate in front of the player and then rope it off. New sights and experiences in these promised locations are the reward for exploration.
"Nintendo used the third-dimension to create a videogame that gives you the sense that you're really in the middle of a huge adventure," comments Peer Schneider, Publisher of IGN. "Backdrops -- as blurry as they look today -- aren't just for show. You step into a fully realized game world where a smoldering volcano in the background doesn't just put you into Hyrule, it becomes a teaser of future things to come as you dive deeper into the quest."
Diving deeper However, the means of accessing these new areas is hardly revolutionary -- and this is where Ocarina of Time deserves some criticism. Unlocking new locations (or sub-areas of previously visited locations) by obtaining new items is a total cliché now... and it was in 1998, too. Nintendo's own Metroid franchise and 8-bit Zelda games really wrote the lasting rulebook for this console adventure gambit. Ocarina of Time makes zero effort to expand on it. It just feels new due to advances in technology. When you unlock a new location in Metroid for the NES, for example, Samus just blasts open a panel and moves into a new room. But when Link is able to test out new gear and push into unknown territory in Ocarina of Time, the game really sells the experience through the use of atmosphere.
"What really heightened the game were the times when you made pivotal discoveries. Like, when you realized that you could ride a horse and jump over a broken bridge. Or you discovered the Lens of Truth and realized a reason to look at familiar places a second time to find hidden places," says Schneider. "Or how about when you dropped to the bottom of the lake and walked around, boots clanking loudly?"
These are indeed clever moments. But they are not terribly different from the mechanics that powered adventure games in the NES era. So why does Ocarina of Time get away with it? The second N64 Zelda game, Majora's Mask, really took the series in a different, darker direction and tried new things via time manipulation and the approach of certain doom. Yes, Majora's Mask uses the masks as the means of unlocking new areas, but the masks also affect how other characters and enemies interact with you.
So, if Majora's Mask takes the exploration elements of Ocarina of Time and uses them in a new way, why does it not succeed Ocarina in the pantheon of greatest games of all time?
The use of new items to open up new areas is not Ocarina of Time's only reliance on battle-tested game mechanics. Consider the boss battles. The scope of the fights is larger due to the physical size of the monsters, such as the spider Gohma in the Great Deku Tree. But these skirmishes are, at their core, the same pattern and memorization contests that define any other boss battle.
The ability to ride Epona across Hyrule Field is often cited as one of the best features in Ocarina of Time. Why doesn't the emptiness of Hyrule Field get more attention? The vast oceans of Wind Waker on the GameCube were criticized as unnecessary time sinks, but Hyrule Field is really not all that different.
At some point, it must be acknowledged that the franchise's reputation is a central influence on Ocarina's of Time's beatification. There is no point in being contrary about the value of the entire Legend of Zelda series. It remains one of the most important franchises in videogames. The original NES adventure is a genre-definer and Link to the Past for the Super NES is a brilliant refining of said game. By the time Ocarina of Time launched on the N64, not only was the game hotly anticipated, but it had over a decade of good will behind it. Good will has a tendency to paper over shortcomings.
Using the Ocarina of Time However, good will is not a suitable enough explanation for Ocarina of Time's continued resonance. There is a substantial difference between "overrated" and "dated" and it's defined by context. To be sure, Ocarina of Time has aged. The constant evolution of videogames gives us new frameworks through which we view a ground-breaker. Ocarina of Time survives the march of time in ways that other landmark games such as Tomb Raider do not because of the way its pieces fit together -- even the pieces that are not revolutionary. The boss battles may still be "hit here three times" contests, but they are themed culminations of inventive puzzle-based dungeons, such as the Water Temple. Music is the unseen character in Ocarina of Time, from the use of ocarina itself to specific themes tied to locations not as an afterthought, but as a way to evoke specific moods for different points in Link's life. The playful music of the Kokiri village stands in marked contrast to the claustrophobic theme of Jabu Jabu's belly.
And then there is the simple sense of accomplishment, which is what Ocarina of Time excels at delivering. It isn't just the move to 3D and the size of a few boss monsters that makes Ocarina of Time epic. It's the reward for finishing tasks both large and small. Catching your first fish is given similar weight to saving the Gorons. Because everything matters, no moment of Ocarina of Time feels superfluous -- including crossing Hyrule Field. As Schneider points out, despite the fact it is physically empty, it's the place that "connected all the dots." And there's no way you can overrate a game that manages such a feat.
Thomsen believes the game remains as golden as the first batch of Ocarina of Time cartridges. "Other games have played around with the balance of exploration, combat, and sensory immersion, but none have gotten it as pitch perfect as Ocarina. It's the only game made in the last 20 years that genuinely deserves to be called a masterwork."
But you get the last word. Hit the comments section below and tell us if you think Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time is overrated. Your best arguments will be heard on next week's RetroCity podcast.