Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Which is the better game?

Furthermore, which deserves the title of "best game in history".

OOC sucks. Zelda games are boring.

Originally posted by cdtm
OOC sucks. Zelda games are boring.



Anyway, once again hard to compare these games. They are very different. Though, I prefer OoT.

Originally posted by ares834


Anyway, once again hard to compare these games. They are very different. Though, I prefer OoT. What would you consider games that are easy to compare?

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Which is the better game?

Furthermore, which deserves the title of "best game in history".

No one can truly answer that objectively, because even though they are great games, they are very different. OoT was better received though.

Neither imo.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Which is the better game?

Tie. Both SotC and OoT are great titles that revolutionized open world gaming with fantastic combat.

Did SotC revolutionize open world gaming? I haven't seen many games using it for inspiration. More's the pity.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
What would you consider games that are easy to compare?

Okami's an obvious one.

And I liked that game. Probably partly because of the quirkiness, but it didn't bore me to tears with slogging through dungeons or back tracking ad nauseam like every Zelda ever..

And ftr, I hated the tedious exploration in Shadow of Colossus, too. But the series of unique, imposing, and fun boss encounters more then made up for it..

Originally posted by cdtm
Okami's an obvious one.

And I liked that game. Probably partly because of the quirkiness, but it didn't bore me to tears with slogging through dungeons or back tracking ad nauseam like every Zelda ever..

And ftr, I hated the tedious exploration in Shadow of Colossus, too. But the series of unique, imposing, and fun boss encounters more then made up for it..


+10 e-cred for mentioning Okami.




Okami > LoZ

Yeah, Okami is > both these games, although I love SotC and like OoT.

SOTC and OOC have the same formula, with different graphics.

How do SotC and OoT have the same formula? Because you fight giant bosses in both?

Originally posted by ares834
How do SotC and OoT have the same formula? Because you fight giant bosses in both? See, you're looking at it too deep.

IMO, games of the same genre should be allowed to be compared.

If you're comparing a Fighter to a Mage, you're able to come up with reasons why one is better then the other.

Its not about which is the better system, its about which is the better game.

Naturally, you'd compare any Action RPG with any Action RPG.

You guys throw in superficial stuff like the graphics, art style, and formula, when its the gameplay that matters.

Even if its objective, its not really objective, and there will always be a bias for a certain game.

Like, for me, as long as they are in the same genre, its enough for ME to compare them.

I've compared Assassin's Creed to ****ing Skyrim before, and I was able to come up with strengths and weaknesses for each game.

It doesn't need to be super similar to be compared, just vaguely similar.

SotC and Zelda don't play anything remotely alike, though. Shadow is more comparable to Monster Hunter then anything.. No, never mind, nothing alike. SotC is in a league of it's own, incomparable.

You've got to look at games like Darksiders to compare with Zelda..

Originally posted by cdtm
SotC and Zelda don't play anything remotely alike, though. Shadow is more comparable to Monster Hunter then anything.. No, never mind, nothing alike. SotC is in a league of it's own, incomparable.

You've got to look at games like Darksiders to compare with Zelda.. You walk around an open area, and fight stuff, with a sword, and a bow.

Thats as similar as it needs to be for me.

Graphics, Formula, and Art Style are meaningless.

If the COMBAT is remotely the same, then they deserve to be compared.

I literally can't see how you can't see the similarities.

You are basically comparing apples to oranges. Sure they are both fruits (games), but their nuances and wildly differing characteristics mean that they cannot be objectively compared.

Originally posted by Demonic Phoenix
You are basically comparing apples to oranges. Sure they are both fruits (games), but their nuances and wildly differing characteristics mean that they cannot be objectively compared.

Thats the thing, no games can be compared objectively because there is always bias thrown into something.

You'll always be like "Yeah, that game was pretty good, but honestly, this game is ****ing awesome."

Even TotalBiscuit himself said its impossible to do an objective review of any game you've played, and that bias will always be thrown in based on your experience.

Originally posted by ares834
Did SotC revolutionize open world gaming? I haven't seen many games using it for inspiration. More's the pity. Any game where you can climb on the bosses.

Dragon's Dogma, God of War, etc.

Inspired a lot of games.

Shadow gets the nod from me. Also I was under the impression that Elder Scrolls revolutionized open world gaming. Don't agree? Anyone remember Morrowind?

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Any game where you can climb on the bosses.

Dragon's Dogma, God of War, etc.

Inspired a lot of games. God of war predates it bruh.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Any game where you can climb on the bosses.


I don't want to be that guy but OoT wanted you to climb all over ganon but the hardware couldn't load a boss big enough. OoT best.

Really, REALLY different games. Both are fantastic. OoT was probably a bigger game and I remember the hype surrounding it was incredible. It blew me away in 1998. That being said Shadow of the Colossus is incredible and one of my all time favorite games too. If I HAD to pick it'd be OoT. But I'll always have fond memories of both.

Two different games that can't be compared. The features that made each game so great aren't shared.

On innovation alone, shadow of colossus is superior.

You think SoC was more innovative?

Originally posted by ares834
You think SoC was more innovative? Probably. It's so innovative that no one makes games like SoC because of how hard it is to make a game like it succeed. A game where there are no normal enemies, only bosses, that succeeds off of the strength of its atmosphere and minimalistic yet very potent narrative. OoT is a very important game, but as a piece of art SoC is honestly superior IMO.

Frankly, SoC has aged considerably better than OoT. OoT's formula has basically been copy and pasted in Zelda and beyond by so many games, and other games have arguably done that formula better.

I can't think of a single other game just like SoC.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Probably. It's so innovative that no one makes games like SoC because of how hard it is to make a game like it succeed. A game where there are no normal enemies, only bosses, that succeeds off of the strength of its atmosphere and minimalistic yet very potent narrative. OoT is a very important game, but as a piece of art SoC is honestly superior IMO.

Frankly, SoC has aged considerably better than OoT. OoT's formula has basically been copy and pasted in Zelda and beyond by so many games, and other games have arguably done that formula better.

I can't think of a single other game just like SoC. Monster Hunter is like SoTC.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Monster Hunter is like SoTC. Uh, no, it's not, lol.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Uh, no, it's not, lol. Yes it is.

You said "There's nothing thats really like it, where the enemies are only bosses".

Answer = Monster Hunter.

Originally posted by Jmanghan
Yes it is.

You said "There's nothing thats really like it, where the enemies are only bosses".

Answer = Monster Hunter. So what, did you just stop reading my post after "bosses".

Also, this is patently untrue. There are, in fact, normal enemies in MH, like the varieties of raptor and insect enemies.

The games are only similar in the sense that both feature big monsters that you can kill. You don't even kill them the same way.

OoT.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Probably. It's so innovative that no one makes games like SoC because of how hard it is to make a game like it succeed. A game where there are no normal enemies, only bosses, that succeeds off of the strength of its atmosphere and minimalistic yet very potent narrative. OoT is a very important game, but as a piece of art SoC is honestly superior IMO.

Frankly, SoC has aged considerably better than OoT. OoT's formula has basically been copy and pasted in Zelda and beyond by so many games, and other games have arguably done that formula better.

I can't think of a single other game just like SoC.
Isn't the fact SOOOO many games want to be OoT a testament to how much better it is though?

Originally posted by NotAllThatEvil
Isn't the fact SOOOO many games want to be OoT a testament to how much better it is though? There are a lot of games that wanted to be SoTC, Dragon's Dogma, Monster Hunter, pretty much any game that you can climb bosses in after it came out.

Tbh, in my opinion, Dragon's Dogma got the closest though.