From our other sites
The story
A thread on 5ch’s hardware/industry (Geha) board heated up over whether an Ocarina of Time remake should go open world. It started with criticism that the original’s field areas are flat and empty, splitting posters into a cautious camp who argued that going open world would mean “it’s no longer Ocarina of Time,” and a reform camp who countered that bold remakes—like Resident Evil RE2 or the FF7 Remake—are what remakes are for. Concrete points also came up, like the two-part structure of switching between child and adult eras, loading between areas, and the sparse enemy placement in the field.
What people said
Resident Evil's remake ditched tank controls and the fixed camera and got huge praise for it, so there's zero need to stick to the original's specs.
So, did Resident Evil's remake become open world?
Isn't that just because the original was a trash game?
The point is that going open world doesn't necessarily mean it stops being Ocarina of Time.
Re: #10
So, did Resident Evil's remake become open world?
It's exactly because it's a remake that it should change from the original — if it's the same as the original, you might as well just play the original.
Keeping it as empty as the original is just dumb, honestly.
Clear flaws like this really need to be properly redone.
If you make it open world it becomes a different game, so it's not a remake anymore, I keep telling you.
Don't let them wing it on vibes like they did with FF7.
Ocarina of Time already did that too.
Using that as an example to demand an open-world overhaul that changes the whole gameplay is off base — that's a completely different level of change.
The Resident Evil remake has no fixed camera or tank controls ("radio-control" style movement) — the gameplay itself changed completely.
Changing exactly that kind of original spec is what a remake is for.
So that's why they shot themselves in the foot turning an RPG into an action game, lol
And the result of that is the FF7 Remake.
Just a reminder that RE2 changed a ton from the original and is a universally-praised masterpiece.
That's basically the level of doing two Ocarina of Time dungeons and calling it done — just picking up a key and opening a door.
The bar for getting praised is so low, lol
Demanding Ocarina of Time go open world is missing the point.
That basically means they wanted it to be open world though…
Zelda is the one whose system is so complete it doesn't need a gameplay overhaul.
Ocarina of Time does need an overhaul too — playing it now, it feels dated.
It's sad that Capcom and Square Enix clearly got that, but only Nintendo didn't.
Still, I think there's room to improve the puzzles and the controls.
I'd want the bow's stick-aim switched to gyro aim.
I'd also want jumping to be doable with a single button.
Though jumping would change the core gameplay, so if they want to keep changes to the content minimal,
that part might be a bit tricky.
Huh?
Unlike Resident Evil and FF7, it's not dated at all.
Nintendo themselves must have thought it was dated too, since they added a jump-anywhere feature…
Lol, that's basically admitting Re: #67 was a lie.
Genuine question, but what specifically do you think needs fixing?
Things like the loading between areas or how empty the field is — there's plenty that should be fixed…
The only dated parts are that and the camera controls.
It's on a different level from trash games with tank controls and painted backdrop backgrounds.
Not the whole game being open, but an open structure split into two parts, child and adult.
It doesn't have to be that way,
but if they did make it open world, that's what it would inevitably end up being.
Open world has to express that through actual travel, which means you need to build huge connecting map areas.
They probably judged that would hurt the original's pacing.
More than that,
I think Nintendo just wanted to make the classic look pretty.
Same with Star Fox —
they just want to do it with the best possible visuals right now.
There's probably no going further up from here anyway.
Why on earth would you do that
Because in Ghost of Tsushima it loaded so fast you couldn't even read the tips.
Background and Key Points of This Discussion
The “Resident Evil RE2” remake was highly praised even after ditching the fixed camera and tank controls, while the “FF7” remake split opinion by shifting from turn-based to action combat — posters repeatedly cited these two as a yardstick for “how far bold changes should be allowed to go.” N64-era software tended to have simplified field areas due to hardware constraints, and the empty plains of Ocarina of Time, despite their size, were brought up as one example of this. On the other hand, going open world doesn’t just mean making things bigger — it means altering the original’s core structure itself, such as the fixed order of puzzle-solving or the child/adult switching mechanic. Where to draw the line between “improvement” and “turning it into a different game” is what split opinion, and that’s arguably the heart of this debate.
※This article is compiled as an excerpt and summary from the 5ch (Hardware/Industry (Geha)) thread “Why didn’t they make Ocarina of Time open world?“
Leave a Reply