14 replies to this topic

[Wolf O'Donnell]

I just went to GameFAQs to look something up, when I noticed they were having another Game of the Decade poll. Thing is, I couldn't help but notice that this time round Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask stands a good chance of winning and that Ocarina of Time is nowhere to be seen in the finalé. Has Internet opinion changed about this dark little number? Are you going to vote for it or Super Smash Bros. Brawl?

Don't know about you guys, but I'm voting for Majora's Mask. Of the two, only one was innovative.

[Kwicky Koala]

Ocarina was not made in the last decade, that's why it wasn't included. I'm sure a lot of people are voting for MM as a deferred OoT vote, but I'm still pleasantly suprised my favourite game has a chance of winning one of these polls for once.

Yesterday it beat Final Fantasy X, and for a while FFX was in the lead by about 3%, I thought it was all over then, but somehow it fought back. It also beat Wind Waker, though who knows which way Zelda fans would've voted if Twilight Princess had beaten Brawl for the other final place.

[Ikiosho]

Personally I voted for Brawl. I honestly didn't pick which was the "better" or "more innovative" game, just the ones I liked better. Majora's Mask was fun and all, but I didn't care for it. The whole everything you do is constantly erased and needs to be repeated was really annoying.

[Sir Deimos]

GameFAQs does nothing but piss me off when it comes to this stuff. Of the choices left I hope Majora's Mask takes it, but at the same time, while a great game, is not my game of the decade.

[Egann]

Ditto Synile and Catterick. GameFaq's sudden-death voting set-up isn't exactly set up to be the most meaningfu-...


....HOLY SHIT! Final round?! WENT HEAD TO HEAD WITH SNAKE EATER IN THE QUARTERFINALS AND WON?!?!

(Stays up to see the end)

Majora's Mask won.

Majora's Mask is in the unique position of being this close to winning because it is one of the few games with some real emotional depth to it AND its memory ages well. Most games are fun at the moment, but years later you think back and think "yeah, that was kind of stupid." OoT is the perfect example; the more I played it, the more I felt stupid for enjoying it and the more I look back on it as a stupid thing. Same thing with Twilight Princess and just about any Resident Evil title.... Majora's Mask always felt like more than that, though.

All of the Zelda games try to use an "echo" of a personality mechanic, where you never really see Link's personality straight on, you see everyone else's and then have to infer Link's based on what he does in the story. That kind of protagonist is actually rather common in games, actually; the idea is if you tone down the protagonist's personality enough, the player can project his or her own into the story. Usually, it egregiously backfires because the echo is just too weak. Majora's Mask was the one game I feel I can safely say "did it right." What did it do right? Deep personalities in NPCs. Cremia and Pamela especially had their personalities painted against some darker colors and came out well. It feels wrong to not think of Link as having as much personality as anyone else, so you don't.

That said, it doesn't mean anything, but it's an interesting result that the game that won the 00-10 poll was made VERY early on in the decade.

Edited by Egann, 24 December 2010 - 12:14 AM.

[Toan]

Majora's Mask is seriously one of my favorite games of all time, mostly for every reason Egann just listed. I'm pleased with this result.

[Nevermind]

I also agree. I enjoyed the psycho-analytical undertones and the more sinister type of malice at play in both the antagonist and the catastrophe itself.

[Fin]

I don't agree that it's the best of the decade, but it's certainly one of the best. And considering this is GameFAQs, I'm quite pleased with the result.

[joeymartin64]

I don't have anything against Majora's Mask, but... really? Game of the decade? I don't follow the gaming scene as closely as a lot of people, and even I can tick off several games I'd say were better.

Why and when did Majora's Mask suddenly become the fanbase's darling, anyway? Did that happen at the same time it became cool to hate Twilight Princess? Again, nothing against it, but I don't understand why it's been so popular lately.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

I don't have anything against Majora's Mask, but... really? Game of the decade? I don't follow the gaming scene as closely as a lot of people, and even I can tick off several games I'd say were better.

Why and when did Majora's Mask suddenly become the fanbase's darling, anyway? Did that happen at the same time it became cool to hate Twilight Princess? Again, nothing against it, but I don't understand why it's been so popular lately.

Don't know about everybody else, but I really like it. The game is the first Zelda game (unsure if it is the first game ever) to incorporate flowing time. Things change over the time period and certain characters only appear during certain times. You get to learn about the NPCs, their motives, their personalities and see the how the falling moon affects them. Unlike Ocarina of Time or Twilight Princess, you can actually see how the main villain's evil plans are affecting them and the threat seems far more immediate.

Also... it features the Stone Tower Temple. How cool is that? In your search, you literally turn the temple upside-down!

[Egann]

^ Going off what Wolf said.

I think that we can all agree that MM is a great game -possibly even the game of the first half of the decade- but that it doesn't really deserve the honor of "game of the decade." I've played FIVE Zelda titles and only two MGS titles, but on any pairing of a Zelda game with a MGS game, I would totally vote for the MGS. ANY pairing.

So why did MM win? Two reasons. One, the vote against. Games tend to garner stigmas for certain gamers, and so may get voted against. I'm sure MM picked up some steam from that. Two, MM's memory ages well. I've played the game within the last year and I think that it's a great game in many ways, but I can also see how my memory has become idealized in a few ways. It's great, but not AS great as I remember. Sure, there's tension from the time remaining, but there's also childish speech. Sure there's deep characters, but the dungeon-grinding and questing can be outright boring. The fact that it was so early on in the decade played to MM's advantage because the game is memorable; you tend to remember the good and innovative parts of the game, while you forgave the faults while you were playing it and have long since forgotten all about them.

[joeymartin64]

I think that we can all agree that MM is a great game -possibly even the game of the first half of the decade- but that it doesn't really deserve the honor of "game of the decade." I've played FIVE Zelda titles and only two MGS titles, but on any pairing of a Zelda game with a MGS game, I would totally vote for the MGS. ANY pairing.

I don't even know about that. It's subjective, obviously, but I'd say that both of the other major console Zeldas were better, and TWW was 2003, I believe. And I wouldn't even call TWW my personal GotD; that would probably go to Tales of Symphonia, if I really have to choose. It just strikes me as very odd that an N64 game beat out the entire libraries of two generations.

So why did MM win? Two reasons. One, the vote against. Games tend to garner stigmas for certain gamers, and so may get voted against. I'm sure MM picked up some steam from that. Two, MM's memory ages well. I've played the game within the last year and I think that it's a great game in many ways, but I can also see how my memory has become idealized in a few ways. It's great, but not AS great as I remember. Sure, there's tension from the time remaining, but there's also childish speech. Sure there's deep characters, but the dungeon-grinding and questing can be outright boring. The fact that it was so early on in the decade played to MM's advantage because the game is memorable; you tend to remember the good and innovative parts of the game, while you forgave the faults while you were playing it and have long since forgotten all about them.

I think someone else suggested that people may have considered a vote for MM sort of a de facto vote for OoT, and I guess I can see that. I think it may also have to do with the nature of some Zelda fans, who hate whatever games are more recent, but love the ones before that, unless (sometimes) they're toon-style. I only say that because of MM's rise in popularity after TP had been out for a few years. Instead of latching onto TWW (because it's toon-style?), everybody suddenly realized they loved MM. Could be wrong though; I don't follow the fandom as much as I used to.

Honestly, I'm not trying to be a fly in the ointment about this, but I didn't find MM as deep and immersive as others seem to, even ten years ago. Some of the NPCs had depth to them (the Sun Mask quest springs to mind, as do the ranch characters), but really, filling the notebook felt more like completing a checklist to unlock parts of the ending than really interacting with the characters, even to 14-year-old me way back when. And since it's basically typical Zelda fare otherwise, and stripped down at that, it didn't leave as much of an impression with me as OoT did. I will admit that younger me suffered a real-life Heroic BSOD when I found out about the Deku Butler's son, though.

Wolf, Shenmue had similar and better dynamic NPCs before MM did. Check it out if a) you own a Dreamcast and b) you can find it.

Edited by joeymartin64, 29 December 2010 - 04:23 PM.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

I forgot to mention that, in comparison to what it was up against (I only participated during the final round), there is no contest. As for whether it should have won against the other games, definitely not. I've had a look. There's games with far more innovation in that list.

[Showsni]

The game is the first Zelda game (unsure if it is the first game ever) to incorporate flowing time. Things change over the time period and certain characters only appear during certain times.

Actually, the Satellaview game did that too. (Kind of had to, since you played it live.)

Best game of the decade? I'm not really in a position to comment, since I haven't played every game; but as for Majora's Mask, I'm glad it won. One of my favourite Zelda games for sure.

[Egann]

I think that we can all agree that MM is a great game -possibly even the game of the first half of the decade- but that it doesn't really deserve the honor of "game of the decade." I've played FIVE Zelda titles and only two MGS titles, but on any pairing of a Zelda game with a MGS game, I would totally vote for the MGS. ANY pairing.

I don't even know about that. It's subjective, obviously, but I'd say that both of the other major console Zeldas were better, and TWW was 2003, I believe. And I wouldn't even call TWW my personal GotD; that would probably go to Tales of Symphonia, if I really have to choose. It just strikes me as very odd that an N64 game beat out the entire libraries of two generations.

So why did MM win? Two reasons. One, the vote against. Games tend to garner stigmas for certain gamers, and so may get voted against. I'm sure MM picked up some steam from that. Two, MM's memory ages well. I've played the game within the last year and I think that it's a great game in many ways, but I can also see how my memory has become idealized in a few ways. It's great, but not AS great as I remember. Sure, there's tension from the time remaining, but there's also childish speech. Sure there's deep characters, but the dungeon-grinding and questing can be outright boring. The fact that it was so early on in the decade played to MM's advantage because the game is memorable; you tend to remember the good and innovative parts of the game, while you forgave the faults while you were playing it and have long since forgotten all about them.

I think someone else suggested that people may have considered a vote for MM sort of a de facto vote for OoT, and I guess I can see that. I think it may also have to do with the nature of some Zelda fans, who hate whatever games are more recent, but love the ones before that, unless (sometimes) they're toon-style. I only say that because of MM's rise in popularity after TP had been out for a few years. Instead of latching onto TWW (because it's toon-style?), everybody suddenly realized they loved MM. Could be wrong though; I don't follow the fandom as much as I used to.

Honestly, I'm not trying to be a fly in the ointment about this, but I didn't find MM as deep and immersive as others seem to, even ten years ago. Some of the NPCs had depth to them (the Sun Mask quest springs to mind, as do the ranch characters), but really, filling the notebook felt more like completing a checklist to unlock parts of the ending than really interacting with the characters, even to 14-year-old me way back when. And since it's basically typical Zelda fare otherwise, and stripped down at that, it didn't leave as much of an impression with me as OoT did. I will admit that younger me suffered a real-life Heroic BSOD when I found out about the Deku Butler's son, though.

Wolf, Shenmue had similar and better dynamic NPCs before MM did. Check it out if a) you own a Dreamcast and b) you can find it.

Well, perhaps some of the vote was deferred from OoT, but a game 11 years old? Nah. Couldn't explain the victory.

I have played TWW and TP both, and I do enjoy and applaud them both for being good games, but they each have their faults. I loved TWW's art style, but I wound up resorting to the Nintendo Power to finish it because I didn't feel like writing down all of the fish's comments. That, and even seeing Link's family didn't seem to bring Link to life once he left Outset; he was a generic do-gooder. Much the same is true with TP; the gameplay is even better than TWW, the realism is nice (Artsy or realistic, I really don't care. Just give me something that looks good.) but Link still came across as another generic do-gooder.

And, in case you haven't figured it out, my fault with OoT Link is exactly the same; generic do-gooder. MM Link is completely different.


Throughout Majora's Mask, you see Link do good, don't get me wrong, but we understand him, now. As gamers, we see Link empathize with the people suffering around him and how that motivates him to help, but we also see how Link sees them through a detached distance. The gamer plays the game with two things always in mind; how much time is left, and if I screw up I can always play the Song of Time and go back. Those are exactly the same two things in the back of Link's mind. He is almost forced by circumstances to look down on the NPC's; he is in the here and now, but his ability to travel back in time means that he is not truly of the here and now. This makes his empathy with the NPC's all the more meaningful; Link is rebelling against his human impulse to look down on them by lowering himself out of his conflict with Majora outside of time to the level the level of the here and now the NPC's live in to help them.

Put another way, Majora's Mask is Link's story of how he resisted Majora's temptation to look down on others when he was given eyes which required him to do so.

I said earlier that it was the deep NPC personalities that sold MM. That's true...to an extent. Without the deep, empathizable NPC personalities this could never have worked, but it's Link -and his view of others from outside of time- we come to understand, not the NPC's. It's meaningful because Link is the one character we never hear speak, and yet we still come to understand him.

Do I think Nintendo did this on purpose? No. This isn't the kind of thing that sells too well (MM didn't sell as well as OoT, remember) and Nintendo has never shown interest on trying anything like this ever again. Either this was a lucky accident or some exec producer snuck it past the board.

Edited by Egann, 29 December 2010 - 08:41 PM.