I stopped reading the Ocarina 3D review at the line "the ps1-2 had better graphic capabilities than the N64 or Gamecube ever had".

Strong statements indeed considering both are false. The N64 was the better machine in terms of pure rendering power. It's only hindrance was the cartridge format. But Zelda couldn't be done on PS1, not Mario 64 for that matter. In terms of 3-D rendering capabilities, it wasn't until the Dreamcast that the N64 was surpassed. At least console wise. The GameCube was also a bit more powerful than the PS2. RE4 took a noticeable downgrade in graphical quality when it was ported over to the PS2. Metroid Prime would have been impossible to run on PS2 hardware at that type of quality and frame rate.

Yeah I wrote that years ago and don't know what I was thinking with that statement, but it didn't really impact my review. I gave the game 9/10 in graphics so I still thought it looked spectacular for the time.

I understand. However when you made the statement you were referencing the Original title which in 1998...there wasn't a 3-D playstion game that could match Ocarina and OoT was universally praised for its visuals. It was one of the first games to feature real light sources on Consoles, the open areas featured long draw distances and the character models looked spectacular.  The game is probably the most well rated game of all time because every aspect of it was spectacular. Again I think you will FF more enjoyable story wise because VI-X did a great job on that regard (VIII being a possible exception) but Zelda has always been excellent at what it does, a Link to the Past was truly a great game. I will agree that Skyward while not my personal favorite did a very good job regarding its narrative.

Zelda and Final Fantasy are my two favorite series by far.  For a long time I would have put FF at #1, but due to recent entries by both series, I might have to give the slight edge to Zelda.  I mostly play them for different reasons though.  For me Final Fantasy games have great stories and turn based combat, while I really love the action + exploration + rpg elements of a good Zelda game.

I have a feeling, Dulfite, that we'd have pretty similar tastes in Final Fantasy games, but drastically different taste in Zelda games.  Here is how I'd rank the games that I've played

Final Fantasy

Fantastic
FF7
FF Tactics (awesome story and deserves to be part of main series)
FF9
FF10
FF12
FF11 (hard to rank since it's MMO)
FF6
FF4
FF10-2
FF1

Decent
FF13 
FF13-2
FF13 Lightning Returns
FF5
FF3
FF8 (great story, terrible gameplay)

Sucks
FF2

Zelda

Fantastic
Zelda 1
Breath of the Wild
Zelda 2
Link to the Past

Decent
Twilight Princess

Sucks
Wind Waker

If you are interested in Final Fantasy 1&2 I know they are available on both GBA and PSP.  FF1 is also available on the NES mini.  Personally I didn't like the GBA version (too easy?), but I've heard the PSP version is good.  I have played the NES mini and it is extremely faithful to original game play.  At any rate, Final Fantasy didn't really become story oriented until Final Fantasy 4 & 6.  (FF5 is not story oriented.)  I really like the game play of FF1, but it is very story light compared to what the series eventually turned into.

You know what I just remembered as I was reading your reply? I own a GameCube with that GB/GBA player on the bottom of it! I may go to a GameStop and see if I can find those original games so I can play them on my Gamecube haha. Or I could get the minis (isn't one of them on the SNES mini as well?).

Zelda

Fantastic
Zelda 2

Sucks
Wind Waker

O... o... ok. I guess... everyone... has... an opinion...?

So FF11-15 aren't worth playing in your view? I am hoping to play them all, but I want to look forward to it haha.