I think both viewpoints are valid. Those who wanted a 1:1 remake updated to modern day standards will be happy, but it's also okay to have hoped for a more ambitious remake. (More of a reimagining than remake.)
The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (Switch 2)
8,045 Views |
121 Replies |
Last: 2 days ago by Super Aggie 64
AggiEE said:AozorAg said:AggiEE said:AozorAg said:AggiEE said:
Disappointed it's basically just a reskin
And the visuals don't look great. Characters look weird and the lack of anti aliasing is a huge eye sore
Looking like I'll pass on this
This is for sure not just a reskin. There are similar aspects because it's the same game, but it is clearly rebuilt and redesigned. I've played through this game 50+ times, and I can immediately tell from the trailers it is not a reskin. Halo Campaign Evolved is a reskin.
They stated that it was intended to be a faithful re-creation.
What makes you think it's anything more than that? Halo Campaign Evolved had new mission. Granted, they weren't good, but that was more than just a reskin.
Yeah, there are *minor* differences, obviously the town being the big one based on just being in 3D and differences in NPCs, but I am not expecting any major changes (more dungeons, massive new secret areas, etc).
If you think Halo Campaign Evolved was not a reskin but this is, I truly do not know what to tell you. The opposite is objectively true.
I know they added some awful new "prequel" missions to Campaign Evolved, but the actual campaign itself was just a reskin. It was literally the same game. Same dialogue. Enemies in the same places. Weapons in the same places. Exactly the same map layouts other than The Library.
They are both reskins
Halo is less, due to the new levels added
Nothing like that here
That is objectively false. The only explanation here is that you never played either original game, Halo or Zelda.
AozorAg said:AggiEE said:AozorAg said:AggiEE said:AozorAg said:AggiEE said:
Disappointed it's basically just a reskin
And the visuals don't look great. Characters look weird and the lack of anti aliasing is a huge eye sore
Looking like I'll pass on this
This is for sure not just a reskin. There are similar aspects because it's the same game, but it is clearly rebuilt and redesigned. I've played through this game 50+ times, and I can immediately tell from the trailers it is not a reskin. Halo Campaign Evolved is a reskin.
They stated that it was intended to be a faithful re-creation.
What makes you think it's anything more than that? Halo Campaign Evolved had new mission. Granted, they weren't good, but that was more than just a reskin.
Yeah, there are *minor* differences, obviously the town being the big one based on just being in 3D and differences in NPCs, but I am not expecting any major changes (more dungeons, massive new secret areas, etc).
If you think Halo Campaign Evolved was not a reskin but this is, I truly do not know what to tell you. The opposite is objectively true.
I know they added some awful new "prequel" missions to Campaign Evolved, but the actual campaign itself was just a reskin. It was literally the same game. Same dialogue. Enemies in the same places. Weapons in the same places. Exactly the same map layouts other than The Library.
They are both reskins
Halo is less, due to the new levels added
Nothing like that here
That is objectively false. The only explanation here is that you never played either original game, Halo or Zelda.
Please point to new content (dungeons, new areas of Hyrule, etc) that was revealed in Zelda and please point to where there isn't new content in the Halo CE remake
I completed halo last month and played through the new missions that weren't in the original game
You are factually wrong with your take
I wasn't able to get one of the Pro Controllers, so if anyone sees them in stock anywhere, could you please post on this thread? I've been checking Deku Deals, but haven't seen them come available anywhere.
You're getting tied up in semantics.
By definition, I wouldn't call this a "reskin". They didn't take the base game/engine and just apply HD textures and whatnot to it. They built this entire game from the ground up on a different engine. They've altered the zones they've already shown to look and feel newer.
And, YET AGAIN, you have no idea what other new content they may or may not have added to the game. Everything you say is pure conjecture.
By definition, I wouldn't call this a "reskin". They didn't take the base game/engine and just apply HD textures and whatnot to it. They built this entire game from the ground up on a different engine. They've altered the zones they've already shown to look and feel newer.
And, YET AGAIN, you have no idea what other new content they may or may not have added to the game. Everything you say is pure conjecture.
Things are tense in here, so let's find some common ground. I think we can ALL agree on hopefully allowing the player to skip through Kaepora Gaebora text, or getting him to STFU.
AggiEE said:AozorAg said:AggiEE said:AozorAg said:AggiEE said:AozorAg said:AggiEE said:
Disappointed it's basically just a reskin
And the visuals don't look great. Characters look weird and the lack of anti aliasing is a huge eye sore
Looking like I'll pass on this
This is for sure not just a reskin. There are similar aspects because it's the same game, but it is clearly rebuilt and redesigned. I've played through this game 50+ times, and I can immediately tell from the trailers it is not a reskin. Halo Campaign Evolved is a reskin.
They stated that it was intended to be a faithful re-creation.
What makes you think it's anything more than that? Halo Campaign Evolved had new mission. Granted, they weren't good, but that was more than just a reskin.
Yeah, there are *minor* differences, obviously the town being the big one based on just being in 3D and differences in NPCs, but I am not expecting any major changes (more dungeons, massive new secret areas, etc).
If you think Halo Campaign Evolved was not a reskin but this is, I truly do not know what to tell you. The opposite is objectively true.
I know they added some awful new "prequel" missions to Campaign Evolved, but the actual campaign itself was just a reskin. It was literally the same game. Same dialogue. Enemies in the same places. Weapons in the same places. Exactly the same map layouts other than The Library.
They are both reskins
Halo is less, due to the new levels added
Nothing like that here
That is objectively false. The only explanation here is that you never played either original game, Halo or Zelda.
Please point to new content (dungeons, new areas of Hyrule, etc) that was revealed in Zelda and please point to where there isn't new content in the Halo CE remake
I completed halo last month and played through the new missions that weren't in the original game
You are factually wrong with your take
You must be confused. A remake of a game doesn't necessitate new areas and new content; it means remaking the things that were already in the original game, as opposed to simply enhancing the way they already look. Please point to something in the Ocarina of Time trailer from the original game that is not obviously completely reimagined and remade. The Castle Market might be the only thing you could argue.
Here is a list of things from Halo Campaign Evolved that are obviously not reimagined and remade:
1. The entire campaign, with the exception of The Library being laid out differently.
They did add some poor quality prequel missions. Those are accessible separately from the original campaign in the main menu. The original campaign itself, which is what I was referring to, is reskinned. Other than visuals, if you have played the original Halo CE many times as I have, there is no reason to play the new version. I can't count the number of times I walked around a corner or through a door hoping to have some kind of new combat experience…nope. Enemies in the exact same place. Exact same layout. Exact same dialogue. Exact same game, with the exception of a couple of weapons recycled from later Halo games. They just enhanced the way it already looked.
Nobody with any intellectual honesty can say that this Zelda game is a reskin, and in the same breath claim that Halo Campaign Evolved is a true remake.
AozorAg said:AggiEE said:AozorAg said:AggiEE said:AozorAg said:AggiEE said:AozorAg said:AggiEE said:
Disappointed it's basically just a reskin
And the visuals don't look great. Characters look weird and the lack of anti aliasing is a huge eye sore
Looking like I'll pass on this
This is for sure not just a reskin. There are similar aspects because it's the same game, but it is clearly rebuilt and redesigned. I've played through this game 50+ times, and I can immediately tell from the trailers it is not a reskin. Halo Campaign Evolved is a reskin.
They stated that it was intended to be a faithful re-creation.
What makes you think it's anything more than that? Halo Campaign Evolved had new mission. Granted, they weren't good, but that was more than just a reskin.
Yeah, there are *minor* differences, obviously the town being the big one based on just being in 3D and differences in NPCs, but I am not expecting any major changes (more dungeons, massive new secret areas, etc).
If you think Halo Campaign Evolved was not a reskin but this is, I truly do not know what to tell you. The opposite is objectively true.
I know they added some awful new "prequel" missions to Campaign Evolved, but the actual campaign itself was just a reskin. It was literally the same game. Same dialogue. Enemies in the same places. Weapons in the same places. Exactly the same map layouts other than The Library.
They are both reskins
Halo is less, due to the new levels added
Nothing like that here
That is objectively false. The only explanation here is that you never played either original game, Halo or Zelda.
Please point to new content (dungeons, new areas of Hyrule, etc) that was revealed in Zelda and please point to where there isn't new content in the Halo CE remake
I completed halo last month and played through the new missions that weren't in the original game
You are factually wrong with your take
You must be confused. A remake of a game doesn't necessitate new areas and new content; it means remaking the things that were already in the original game, as opposed to simply enhancing the way they already look. Please point to something in the Ocarina of Time trailer from the original game that is not obviously completely reimagined and remade. The Castle Market might be the only thing you could argue.
Here is a list of things from Halo Campaign Evolved that are obviously not reimagined and remade:
1. The entire campaign, with the exception of The Library being laid out differently.
They did add some poor quality prequel missions. Those are accessible separately from the original campaign in the main menu. The original campaign itself, which is what I was referring to, is reskinned. Other than visuals, if you have played the original Halo CE many times as I have, there is no reason to play the new version. I can't count the number of times I walked around a corner or through a door hoping to have some kind of new combat experience…nope. Enemies in the exact same place. Exact same layout. Exact same dialogue. Exact same game, with the exception of a couple of weapons recycled from later Halo games. They just enhanced the way it already looked.
Nobody with any intellectual honesty can say that this Zelda game is a reskin, and in the same breath claim that Halo Campaign Evolved is a true remake.
You appear to be the one that is confused.
All I said was that both were examples of games that were largely reskins. Basic game structure, some modernizations here and there, with the big feature being the revamp in visuals.
Same for Halo, same for Zelda. Halo is mostly the same other than new missions, tweaks to AI, tweaks to guns, they re-did the library to be less cumbersome. Enemies are NOT in the same exact place because they completely re-did the enemy encounters to the point of them being extremely annoying with how many they throw at you. That is a common complaint.
The main draw in both these titles is the visuals. Everything from Campaign Evolved is a new graphical asset in UE5, just like Zelda. Please explain the difference, because you're not making any lick of sense.
Zelda is a faithful remake, using the same game structure and same areas and characters and enemies. It's a reskin. They are not dissimilar at all, and you cannot explain how they are supposedly different and how the Zelda remake is a massive expansion. It's not.
Lathspell said:
You're getting tied up in semantics.
By definition, I wouldn't call this a "reskin". They didn't take the base game/engine and just apply HD textures and whatnot to it. They built this entire game from the ground up on a different engine. They've altered the zones they've already shown to look and feel newer.
And, YET AGAIN, you have no idea what other new content they may or may not have added to the game. Everything you say is pure conjecture.
They didn't build the entire game from the ground up. The base code is probably what they built around in a modern engine like many other remakes.
Not that it matters even if they did rebuild it from the ground up. It's using the same characters, same locations, same enemies, same dungeons, same basic combat, a few modernized tweaks here and there, but the structure of the game is the EXACT same. It's not a re-imagining. It's a re-skin. The draw is the visual uplift and modern controls.
Nintendo themselves announces that they were doing a faithful remake. I'll take them at their word and their history. Anyone counting on massive differences other than visuals is just setting themselves up for disappointment. Nothing they showed was an expansion to the existing game in any way whatsoever other than the town section being 3D this time with some more shops and NPCs which isn't game changing.
There is of course nothing wrong with a reskinned remake either, I'm just calling it what it is. Not what I wanted as I prefer games that are that old to have a little more new content to them.
I think the issue people are having here is the term reskin.
Take a look at OoT on the 3DS. That is really what a "reskin" is. Or, Metroid Prime Remastered vs the original Metroid Prime.
Compare that to say, Resident Evil 4 vs Resident Evil 4 Remake.
If we're looking at this game on that spectrum, it's considerably closer to the RE side of things.
Take a look at OoT on the 3DS. That is really what a "reskin" is. Or, Metroid Prime Remastered vs the original Metroid Prime.
Compare that to say, Resident Evil 4 vs Resident Evil 4 Remake.
If we're looking at this game on that spectrum, it's considerably closer to the RE side of things.
AggiEE said:Lathspell said:
You're getting tied up in semantics.
By definition, I wouldn't call this a "reskin". They didn't take the base game/engine and just apply HD textures and whatnot to it. They built this entire game from the ground up on a different engine. They've altered the zones they've already shown to look and feel newer.
And, YET AGAIN, you have no idea what other new content they may or may not have added to the game. Everything you say is pure conjecture.
They didn't build the entire game from the ground up. The base code is probably what they built around in a modern engine like many other remakes.
Not that it matters even if they did rebuild it from the ground up. It's using the same characters, same locations, same enemies, same dungeons, same basic combat, a few modernized tweaks here and there, but the structure of the game is the EXACT same. It's not a re-imagining. It's a re-skin. The draw is the visual uplift and modern controls.
Nintendo themselves announces that they were doing a faithful remake. I'll take them at their word and their history. Anyone counting on massive differences other than visuals is just setting themselves up for disappointment. Nothing they showed was an expansion to the existing game in any way whatsoever other than the town section being 3D this time with some more shops and NPCs which isn't game changing.
There is of course nothing wrong with a reskinned remake either, I'm just calling it what it is. Not what I wanted as I prefer games that are that old to have a little more new content to them.
This is what i'm talking about. You are completely talking out of your ass. In two adjacent sentences, you make an absolute claim. In your next sentence, you're now saying "probably".
You have no idea. This is what I keep saying. You DON'T know what's in the game or how it was created yet you continue to make claims based in no facts.
Lathspell said:AggiEE said:Lathspell said:
You're getting tied up in semantics.
By definition, I wouldn't call this a "reskin". They didn't take the base game/engine and just apply HD textures and whatnot to it. They built this entire game from the ground up on a different engine. They've altered the zones they've already shown to look and feel newer.
And, YET AGAIN, you have no idea what other new content they may or may not have added to the game. Everything you say is pure conjecture.
They didn't build the entire game from the ground up. The base code is probably what they built around in a modern engine like many other remakes.
Not that it matters even if they did rebuild it from the ground up. It's using the same characters, same locations, same enemies, same dungeons, same basic combat, a few modernized tweaks here and there, but the structure of the game is the EXACT same. It's not a re-imagining. It's a re-skin. The draw is the visual uplift and modern controls.
Nintendo themselves announces that they were doing a faithful remake. I'll take them at their word and their history. Anyone counting on massive differences other than visuals is just setting themselves up for disappointment. Nothing they showed was an expansion to the existing game in any way whatsoever other than the town section being 3D this time with some more shops and NPCs which isn't game changing.
There is of course nothing wrong with a reskinned remake either, I'm just calling it what it is. Not what I wanted as I prefer games that are that old to have a little more new content to them.
This is what i'm talking about. You are completely talking out of your ass. In two adjacent sentences, you make an absolute claim. In your next sentence, you're now saying "probably".
You have no idea. This is what I keep saying. You DON'T know what's in the game or how it was created yet you continue to make claims based in no facts.
I have a good suspicion based on the statements by Nintendo that it's a remake that's faithful rather than a reimagining
Believing anything else is hopium
Generally speaking I think reimagining is a bad idea. Especially if it's not a radical shift in format (2D or isometric to 3D). You don't need the framework of the Ocarina of Time story to make a great Zelda game. If you want something new make something new.
Also think that companies should be bringing their games forward to modern gaming architectures either through emulation or remakes.
Also think that companies should be bringing their games forward to modern gaming architectures either through emulation or remakes.
.
There is no way you can look at this Ocarina of Time trailer and rationally conclude that they built it around the "base code."
Also, that terminology betrays that he is just making things up. I assume by "base code" he means the codebase, which is what the industry generally calls it. The codebase includes things like:
Game engine/framework code (rendering, physics, input, animation systems, networking, etc.)
Gameplay code (weapons, enemies, movement, AI, health, vehicles, missions, etc.)
UI and menu code
Networking/multiplayer code
Platform-specific code for Xbox, PlayStation, PC, etc.
None of those things from the N64 or DS version were used. This is a brand new game. If anything, they used the TOTK codebase for this game.
Also, that terminology betrays that he is just making things up. I assume by "base code" he means the codebase, which is what the industry generally calls it. The codebase includes things like:
Game engine/framework code (rendering, physics, input, animation systems, networking, etc.)
Gameplay code (weapons, enemies, movement, AI, health, vehicles, missions, etc.)
UI and menu code
Networking/multiplayer code
Platform-specific code for Xbox, PlayStation, PC, etc.
None of those things from the N64 or DS version were used. This is a brand new game. If anything, they used the TOTK codebase for this game.
Exactly. And he's so confident in his ignorance.
Most remakes tend to re-use some previous iteration for core game logic (event triggers), especially in a game like Zelda which is based around dungeons.
Visually everything else is modernized into whatever engine they are using on modern titles.
It's not really the point though. They could re-do everything from scratch, and if they were basically following the main structure of the game in terms of characters, enemies, dungeons, then it's exactly what I described as a re-skin.
There's no evidence whatsoever we are getting new tribes, new dungeons, new areas to explore that weren't otherwise in the base game.
Visually everything else is modernized into whatever engine they are using on modern titles.
It's not really the point though. They could re-do everything from scratch, and if they were basically following the main structure of the game in terms of characters, enemies, dungeons, then it's exactly what I described as a re-skin.
There's no evidence whatsoever we are getting new tribes, new dungeons, new areas to explore that weren't otherwise in the base game.
Actually it has been confirmed that various areas that were just background in the original version are now open for exploration, so that's false.
AozorAg said:
Actually it has been confirmed that various areas that were just background in the original version are now open for exploration, so that's false.
I'm not talking about relatively minor changes. There's no new massive areas. Of course within each existing area there are differences, the town is a clear example.
And the goalpost moves, again...
Brian Earl Spilner said:
Things are tense in here, so let's find some common ground. I think we can ALL agree on hopefully allowing the player to skip through Kaepora Gaebora text, or getting him to STFU.
Speaking of this, what was up with Link flying with Kaepora Gaebora over Lake Hylia? I could have sworn the only place Link flew with Kaepora was down Death Mountain into Kakariko?
Also, there sure is a lot of bull**** arguing going on in this thread. Play it or don't play it.
It is possible to both criticize the game/Nintendo for objectively playing it safe and still appreciate the game for what it is and look forward to playing it.
I will enjoy the game. I will also be disappointed by the fact they could have (SHOULD have) added more to the game.
Both can be true. I think Nintendo was too caught up in modernizing the experience to be more approachable to the BOTW/TOTK generation whose first exposure to the franchise was through those games. I get it but I don't love it.
Base code or not, at the end of the day every scene Nintendo showed yesterday existed in the original release 28 years ago (except for maybe the Kaepora flying scene over Hylia, I don't exactly remember that).
It is possible to both criticize the game/Nintendo for objectively playing it safe and still appreciate the game for what it is and look forward to playing it.
I will enjoy the game. I will also be disappointed by the fact they could have (SHOULD have) added more to the game.
Both can be true. I think Nintendo was too caught up in modernizing the experience to be more approachable to the BOTW/TOTK generation whose first exposure to the franchise was through those games. I get it but I don't love it.
Base code or not, at the end of the day every scene Nintendo showed yesterday existed in the original release 28 years ago (except for maybe the Kaepora flying scene over Hylia, I don't exactly remember that).
AggiEE said:AozorAg said:
Actually it has been confirmed that various areas that were just background in the original version are now open for exploration, so that's false.
I'm not talking about relatively minor changes. There's no new massive areas. Of course within each existing area there are differences, the town is a clear example.
Well, the game they are making is Ocarina of Time, which is a game that was already made. If you're looking for major new content, new areas, new tribes, new characters, new dungeons, and new plot, then you're looking for a new Zelda game. This is a remake of an existing Zelda game. The fact that your definition of "remake" is apparently "a completely new game" does not change the fact that this is a remake, and objectively not a reskin.
Ghost of Bisbee said:Brian Earl Spilner said:
Things are tense in here, so let's find some common ground. I think we can ALL agree on hopefully allowing the player to skip through Kaepora Gaebora text, or getting him to STFU.
Speaking of this, what was up with Link flying with Kaepora Gaebora over Lake Hylia? I could have sworn the only place Link flew with Kaepora was down Death Mountain into Kakariko?
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's new. Couldn't tell if that was a cutscene or gameplay.
AozorAg said:AggiEE said:AozorAg said:
Actually it has been confirmed that various areas that were just background in the original version are now open for exploration, so that's false.
I'm not talking about relatively minor changes. There's no new massive areas. Of course within each existing area there are differences, the town is a clear example.
Well, the game they are making is Ocarina of Time, which is a game that was already made. If you're looking for major new content, new areas, new tribes, new characters, new dungeons, and new plot, then you're looking for a new Zelda game. This is a remake of an existing Zelda game. The fact that your definition of "remake" is apparently "a completely new game" does not change the fact that this is a remake, and objectively not a reskin.
Let's lay this out. There are three terms here being thrown around, and they are very much NOT interchangeable. Here are the actual definitions, from Google.
Reskin - A reskin takes an existing game's functional framework, rules, and code, and swaps out the art, character models, sounds, or text to give it a totally different look or theme. The gameplay, level layouts, and math under the hood remain exactly the same.
Remake - A remake treats the original game as a blueprint and constructs a brand-new version from the ground up using modern technology, assets, and design standards. Developers often redesign the controls, camera angles, user interface, audio, and graphics. They may also alter or expand the story and levels to fit contemporary expectations.
Reimagining - A video game reimagining is a complete creative overhaul of an older title that takes major liberties with the original story, design, and mechanics while keeping the core premise.
It's an objective fact that this game is a remake. It is neither a reskin, nor a reimagining.
AgiEE is incorrect in using the term reskin for this game. (And probably not understanding how much work they actually did on this game. You could argue they did their job a little TOO well as far as recreating the original, but it still remains a remake.)
But I do want to re-emphasize that having hoped for a full-on reimagining is also valid, especially considering this is now the second remake of this game. (And the 3DS one can definitely be termed a reskin.) Something more along the lines of the RE4 of FF7 remakes, which were almost entirely new games at times.
All that said, I don't think having those high expectations should prevent anyone from appreciating the amount of work they actually did on modernizing this game.
He offers you a ride to Hyrule Castle Town from Lake Hylia. Most people miss it because there's really no reason to go to Lake Hylia at that point in the game
You're right. I've played this game so many times but I completely forgot about that.
Granted, there's a whole ton of stuff I never really bothered to do again.
Granted, there's a whole ton of stuff I never really bothered to do again.
Pretty good analysis. A lot of cool stuff not shown in the direct.
To clarify my position
My definition of Reskin/Remake is the same
Remaster is what you think I am talking about when I say "Reskin"
Obviously a lot has changed with the visuals and modernization that has gone into OOT, not discounting that at all.
But certainly we agree it's not a re-imagining. It's looking to stick very closely to the source material. Some will like that. I don't think it's bad necessarily. But for a 30 year old game that's being built again, my preference is that more liberties to be taken to make the experience feel fresh. Mainly because the original OOT is still a great game to play to this day on its own.
My definition of Reskin/Remake is the same
Remaster is what you think I am talking about when I say "Reskin"
Obviously a lot has changed with the visuals and modernization that has gone into OOT, not discounting that at all.
But certainly we agree it's not a re-imagining. It's looking to stick very closely to the source material. Some will like that. I don't think it's bad necessarily. But for a 30 year old game that's being built again, my preference is that more liberties to be taken to make the experience feel fresh. Mainly because the original OOT is still a great game to play to this day on its own.
Heads up, there's a new promo code on Wal-Mart for $10 off. (SAVE3X)
You can buy the physical for $49 now. So even cheaper than digital.
Just did a new preorder and cancelled my first one.
You can buy the physical for $49 now. So even cheaper than digital.
Just did a new preorder and cancelled my first one.
Then you're using both words incorrectly.
A remaster is the exact same game and assets, with technical performance improvements such as better resolution, audio, frame rate, etc.
You're welcome to use whatever definitions you want of course, but it won't make them true.
A remaster is the exact same game and assets, with technical performance improvements such as better resolution, audio, frame rate, etc.
You're welcome to use whatever definitions you want of course, but it won't make them true.
SAVE3X? Promo code not valid.
There is no "formal" definitions for any of this, specifically not of the term "reskin"
You are thinking that Reskin = Remaster, that is not what I am saying at all. Reskin to me is the same thing as a Remake.
You are thinking that Reskin = Remaster, that is not what I am saying at all. Reskin to me is the same thing as a Remake.
Super Aggie 64 said:
SAVE3X? Promo code not valid.
Same, this is likely why. My account is old and has lots of orders.
I thought mine wouldn't work but it did for some reason.
Definitely not a new account.
It's worth a shot if you have an account.
Definitely not a new account.
It's worth a shot if you have an account.
AggiEE said:
There is no "formal" definitions for any of this, specifically not of the term "reskin"
You are thinking that Reskin = Remaster, that is not what I am saying at all. Reskin to me is the same thing as a Remake.
I'll give you that, but as far as remaster, that wasn't even in the equation for me as far as this thread.
Here's my counter though.
Looking at Ocarina of Time 3D, and now Ocarina of Time 2026, would you call them both a "reskin"? You would make no differentiation between the two? (3D is not a remaster btw.)
3D:
2026:
Featured Stories
See All
51:52
15h ago
3.8k
Basic objective is moving the ball to move forward
by Olin Buchanan
Aggies beat McNeese in 12-inning exhibition, 13-10
by Richard Zane
Key Matchups: Texas A&M vs. The Citadel
by Olin Buchanan
6:02
11h ago
1.2k
Angry Beaver
Here's another example of why we should be looking at my nephew-
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
5
EliteElectric
Here's another example of why we should be looking at my nephew-
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
4
MigratingCoconuts
Florida and Miss St could do us all a favor this weekend
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
4