Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D

Merging?
Why should this be merged if there's a separate article for Super Street Fighter 3D Edition? This is a new version of a game while SSF3D is just a 3D version of an updated version of a game. If this gets merged, than SSF3D should definitely be merged too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.52.190 (talk) 21:35, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:OSE. Each article should be considered on its own merits. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:19, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It was a random IP who tagged it to be merged. I would remove it, but I think the discussion should still happen to form a consensus. Blake (Talk·Edits) 23:23, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - It has its own separate development, and will no doubt have loads of reception. Super Street Fighter IV: 3D Edition exists because of its huge development and reception sections. Blake (Talk·Edits) 23:23, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - It has plenty of exclusive, sourced content. Sergecross73   msg me   00:14, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. User:New Age Retro Hippie/OoT has a fair share of references to demonstrate how much content would exist (and this is only a limited selection of reliable sources, and obviously, none of which are what is considered traditional video game reception). - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 00:34, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. In time, there will probably be more information on development (Iwata Asks, interviews, etc.). It is also important to note that Ocarina of Time is one of our longer articles already, and covering Ocarina of Time 3D in it as well could possibly make it excessively long. Prime Blue (talk) 11:44, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. This has not been released yet and we are talking about merging? I think, once the game hits the stores then we'll see if the page is worth merging or not. SimpsonsMan1234 (talk) 11:59, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I imagine it doesn't really matter, as consensus is to keep, and you agree with that, but why would its release be relevant to whether we keep or merge? Sergecross73   msg me   13:04, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, I actually take back the last sentence but I still agree with keeping it either way. SimpsonsMan1234 (talk) 06:14, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I wasn't trying to start trouble or anything, I just wondered if I was missing something... Sergecross73   msg me   13:07, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * This should not be merged, this should be its own independent page I think. TheBradford   msg Bradford  02:53, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

File:1765468-zeldaoot3deurobox1 super.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

 * Honestly, I have to say that this box art would be much better than the US one. It shows Link on his horse a lot more clearly (which is a very defining element of the game). Really, the NA box art does so much less than the EU one, and when we're trying to keep fair use images to a bare minimum, making every single image as strong as it possibly can be is very important. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 07:21, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Images
I feel both images should be replaced. In one respect, the box art is fairly generic; using the European box art better illustrates a huge aspect of the game, the horseback riding. As for the gameplay image, we should really use an image that shows both screens. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 20:46, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Not saying I'm in favor of either of the regional box arts...but there's horse riding on both. Prime Blue (talk) 21:06, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It's so faint, though. The image of Link riding through the fields is a very iconic image, I'd say. Both images serve as a main image for the game, but the EU image demonstrates a whole lot more (and as such, reduces the need for more images). - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 21:24, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree that it is a better representation of the protagonist and the game world. It may also be the most common cover of the game, given that it is used in Japan and Europe (Australia uses the North American box art with an orange tint). Unless there are any other objections, I'd say go for it (as long as the image is not uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, heh). Prime Blue (talk) 06:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright, coo'. If you can find any images of the two screens, that'd be cool; I haven't been able to find any without the "this image is a 2D image of a 3D game" notice. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 06:45, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Claiming a certain aspect is iconic (among the many that could be subjectively iconic to the series) seems rather bias. I say it's not necessary. if you want to add images, it should be over a gameplay. For example, the current image doesn't exactly provide a clear example of the graphical changes.Bread Ninja (talk) 05:00, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Claiming that someone's statement is bias is a bit random and baseless, don't you think? How in the world would adding an image of the horseback riding not enhance the visual understanding of the game for readers? - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:13, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree. If someone just said "Use the box because it's iconic" or something, that's arguable, but there were a number of reasons stating why it's iconic/better to use. (Better exemplifies the game versus the NA version, used in multiple other major regions, etc.) I too support using the European one. Sergecross73   msg me   19:26, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Soundtrack
I have decidede to add information involving the free soundtrack that was compiled specifically to celebrate this release as well as the 25th anniversary of the original Legend of Zelda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colliric (talk • contribs) 19:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Breaking of the Australian street date.
Hi there.

Something I noticed isn't covered on this page has been the fact that the street date for LoZ:OoT 3D was broken early in Australia, and I feel this is a topic that should be worth having added to this page.

For those people who are unaware, Nintendo set the release date of the game as the 30th of June. Yet what happened iwas that the retailers began selling the game (if under the counter for "pre-orders", as seen here http://www.vooks.net/story-20252-Ocarina-of-Time-3D-sold-early-through-EB--first-receipt.html ) from the 24th of July. Now while Nintedno of Australia stated the game was still set to come out on the 30th, nothing stopped the retailers from going early with it. The why of this looks to be because GameTraders started to import UK versions of the game and sell them over the counter before the Australian street date (a write up on this from the Australian kotaku site is here http://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/06/the-retail-cold-war-an-investigation-into-the-strangest-street-break-in-australian-history/ ).

I do feel that this issue is worth adding onto this wiki page, since the break in the street date looks to have been done in a way that Nintendo really would have not liked to have happened, and might actually lead to a change in how Nintendo of Australia deals with the Australian marketplace following this. Why I haven't done a write-up on it is I do not feel I would be able to write it up in such as way as to git the tone of what the page needs, or what wikipedia wants. Still, if anyone wants to take it up, might be a worthy extra. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Squato (talk • contribs) 20:42, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The Kotaku link was an interesting read, but I'm not sure how much of it could really be added to the article without giving it undue weight. I feel like going into it would be kind of veering off-topic, and most regions the game was released in were not affected. It has more to do with strange business tactics and laws than this game itself... Sergecross73   msg me   20:54, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh I agree that any write-up that comes from that (picked since it looks to have been the best written article about it) needs tp be done in a way to not given any undue weight (hence I feel it is best for someone who has more skill in these to be the one who adds it on). Saying that, since it has had an impact on the marketplace and has left Nintendo of Australia with egg on their faces is a reason I feel means it is worth adding this on. More so if more links can be found which could be of use. Also, I don't think this does need too much info to it, but having something to it does enrich the games impact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Squato (talk • contribs) 05:03, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Majora's Mask
I think this article is "missing" discussion over the potential sequel re-release. Yes it's on the Majora's Mask page already, but I think there should be a brief mention here too, as well as mention of the next 3DS Zelda being "A Link Between Worlds". From what I am aware of privately, Majora's Mask 3DS is one of Nintendo's "unannounced titles" currently already in development for a release near Christmas 2014, while the "New" Zelda Wii U game is due early-2015. Nintendo are planning a Zelda release every year, and are reviving the 2D top down Zelda in similar manner to New Super Mario Bros. Majora's Mask is pencilled in for next year, followed up by the Wii U title.Colliric (talk) 00:24, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Merge Request - 2015
Now that it's been 4 years since OOT3D's release, and we know the full extent of the "new" content in the game, I think the time is right to have another discussion about merging this into the main article.

In my very humble opinion, adding a boss rush, hero mode, hint system and minor gyro controls does not warrant the creation of a separate article. The plot section is basically just a link to the original. I think a lot of material under "development" and "marketing and release" would be considered fancruft (such as preorder bonuses in every country - most articles don't have this), more appropriate for 3rd party fan wikis like ZeldaWiki than a general use encyclopedia. And as for reception, most critics reviewed it as a standalone game so reception is very similar to that of the original. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.248.181.22 (talk) 07:13, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

First or third million seller?
The beginning of the article says OoT3D was "the first 3DS game to hit the million mark in sales" but the Sales section says "the third 3DS title to breach the million units sold mark". Which is correct? Janj757 (talk) 22:29, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It's third. Eurogamer published an article stating it was the first: .  But I think that's incorrect.  Numerous other reliable sources state that Super Street Fighter IV was the 3DS title to surpass 1 million, Nintendogs + Cats was second (Nintendo's first first-party title), and Ocarina is third. --The1337gamer (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Removal of composers request.
It has come to my attention that Kondo is credited despite the fact that he did NOT compose for this particular remake. Koji Kondo composed music for Ocarina of Time... NOT Ocarina of Time 3D. His compositions are simply reused/remastered and unless more than one compositions are new then no-one should be credited in accordance to wikipedia standards. Thank you. 27.96.204.95 (talk) 02:03, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * This is not the correct way to handle this. See the consensus about it here. Unless a new consensus is found, your approach is against consensus, and editing against consensus will get you blocked from editing. Thanks. Sergecross73   msg me  03:23, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Remake, enhanced port or remaster?
I'm not clear on the terminology that appears in this article versus the main OoT article, as they have on occasion contradicted each other. OoT3D appears to be an enhanced port, not an outright remake. The overall structure of the game remains nearly identical to its original counterpart, but has touched up graphics detail and rearranged menu elements. I'm not even sure what differentiates a 'remaster' from an enhanced port, assuming these terms aren't entirely interchangeable. Maybe another editor could shed some light on this. 75.63.209.97 (talk) 01:11, 19 July 2018 (UTC)