Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 12 January 2022 and 4 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jduran16 (article contribs).

Miyamoto was originally gonna make OoT like Super Mario 64

Ganon's castle was originally gonna be a hubworld very similar to Peach's Castle. Link would travel to different stages, like in SM64 Complete idiocy (talk) 19:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

To be included in the article, this needs a reliable source that verifies it. Do you have one? Sergecross73 msg me 20:24, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Miyamoto said that in an interview. Complete idiocy (talk) 13:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

I have no idea when it was, or who interviewed him. I can't find the article that said this anymore. I'll look further into it. Complete idiocy (talk) 13:15, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Okay, feel free to post it here if you find it. Until there's a source, we can't add it to the article though. Sergecross73 msg me 14:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Alright. Complete idiocy (talk) 16:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Wait, it's in the article. Complete idiocy (talk) 16:15, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Oh, yup, it is. The article seems to cover it pretty well as is. Sergecross73 msg me 16:23, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:OOT (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 12:21, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

"Zelda 5" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Zelda 5 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 14 § Zelda 5 until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 15:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

GameCube on "releases" on Infobox, is it necessary?

In general I think Wikipedia articles can be kind of inconsistent on what it considers a release of a game on other consoles, and here, I'm not so sure. Because wasn't the GameCube release just originally a pre-order bonus and then later on simply part of the "Collector's Edition" compilation disc? And it's known that the GameCube version is just emulated, which raises my question, how would this be different from the versions on the Wii Virtual Console, Wii U, and Switch Online Service? I feel like either all of that needs to be included, or none of it at all (including removing the GameCube version from the infobox) for consistency sake. I mean if you look at the page for Super Mario 64 for example, There was the Super Mario 3D All-Stars compilation on Nintendo Switch, but Nintendo Switch isn't listed as a platform the game was released on. Effectively how is that different from the Ocarina of Time Collector's Edition disc which was also a compilation?

tl;dr, I think it's inconsistent, feel free to discuss with me if you disagree. Just my suggestions, I didn't want to edit without posting here first. Toadguy64 (talk) 02:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

I think the difference may have been that it actually released as a separate game on its own disc on GameCube? Sergecross73 msg me 15:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

I made the case years ago to keep it since it did have some UI updates to reflect the GameCube controller, which meant it wasn't a drag-and-dropped N64 ROM. But if others find that too weak of an argument to keep then I'm fine with its removal. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 02:57, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, honestly, this is one of those things that gets tinkered with so much I'm not 100% certain which version even had a consensus to begin with. Sergecross73 msg me 03:02, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

My general rule of thumb is that if a game received a standalone physical release, even if technically running through emulation, then it should be placed in the infobox. I figure if Super Mario All-Stars, a featured article, lists its emulated physical Wii release in its infobox, then there are probably cases like that where the inclusion makes sense. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 15:38, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

That makes sense. I would say I agree with this approach. Sergecross73 msg me 15:45, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

I also agree with this. It should be added to the MOS if we're already doing this sort of thing. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 18:04, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Then shouldn't the Super Mario 64 page also list Nintendo Switch as a release platform if we're going by this standard? Toadguy64 (talk) 18:35, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

SM64 was only ever released as part of a compilation, not a standalone, unlike Ocarina. But that is one of those cases where it's not entirely certain and probably needs to be hammered out through a larger discussion. I've proposed the matter over at the MOS talk page; I think getting as many eyes on the proposal as possible would help in the interest of ensuring we set down something more concrete we can refer to going forward. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 18:55, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

I guess my argument then hinges on the fact that the main release of OoT on GameCube is just a compilation and that the standalone release (which also included Master Quest) was a pre-order bonus. But I know I'm obviously being pedantic here and others disagree, but I really do appreciate you posting that on the other talk page. Toadguy64 (talk) 16:25, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

It was still edited to account for the GameCube UI, so it was technically ported to the platform and not just a ROM emulation. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:52, 14 January 2025 (UTC)