If this comment didn't exist:

"But the nature of a game such as OoT, where you explore in 3D, makes it harder on the eyes than a [mostly] static game such as FF VII. Doesn’t help that N64 games had muddy visuals due to the AA solution that most games used"

Then I'd say you would have a case. But since you said that, I will say you got exposed and you're desperately trying to save your ass xD

You will believe whatever you want. I am bringing up flaws for a game you wank to, so of course you’ll bring up anything to try to discredit my view of it. Interesting to see you can’t approach this in an objective manner. And that you disregard the rest of that comment in which I mention how it is difficult to play older FF games without a speed booster because they are incredibly slow paced.

Interesting too that you cannot see how a low frame rate doesn’t affect every types of game the same way. You would be able to understand this if you weren’t so eager to jump at my throat for not thinking your golden game is perfect the way you think it is.

Dude you are playing a revisionist role here. In 1998 a steady 24 fps, felt as good as a steady 30fps game feels today. That's how the big world N64 game adventures played, and no one made a big deal of it, because that was a standard. The argument is OoT vs FFVII, the frame rate in both games is what was expected of them in that era, and the positive reception to both, especially Ocarina (given how that game rendered a 3-D world in real-time) showed this.

Oh, don't worry. I don't wank to OoT. I think is the worst 3D Zelda ever made (yes, even worse than Skyward Sword). I'm here because I think both FF VII and OoT are very beloved games among fans and I want to see where this discussion goes.

You are missing the point of me quoting your comment. You said you were not comparing them. But the moment people called you out for the framerate thing, you started directly comparing them. You could have simply said to the other user that you were not comparing OoT framerate to FF VII just like you did with me and you would have seem "innocent". But you didn't. You compared them, confirming you were indeed trying to downplay OoT from the begginning. What follows after that is not important for the point I was trying to prove.

No, I can definetily see that. However, what you don't see is that while it would seem that in a game that does not require quick imputs, framerate is not that important, I don't think that's true. I think an already slow gameplay system as is a turned based combat with tons of long animations gets even slower an painful with a lower framerate. Just as an action game that relies in real time actions is hindered by a lower framerate.

You're making a mistake if you think I'm trying to put OoT on a pedestal an FF VII on the floor. I can see what's wrong with both games and I marry with none. Unlike you.

Whatever you say.

I really don’t give a shit what you believe I think or what my intentions are.

Dude, let me refresh your memory, unless you didn’t even read the OP.

The OP asks: Which you you prefer, and why?

It isn’t asking us to question their rightful place in gaming history, or attempt a wanking contest about which is objectively better than the other. 

If you aren’t capable of accepting that someone sees flaws in something, or that something that doesn’t bother you may bother someone else, then you should definitely try maturing up a little. Simply because others don’t see exactly the way you do, doesn’t make them wrong. 

I managed to articulate some of the things that bothered me with OoT. And somehow, you can’t fathom it.

I would suggest you get over it. 

Your articulations are opinions, not facts. A fact is that you are in the minority regarding the game. They are not wrong in your view, but they are in mine. This is a place for debate and as such I will debate your opinion with mine. If you aren't capable of being contradicted, then that's your issue.  

“Rarely is there such a perfect mixture of graphics, sound, and gameplay that even the most cynical players will admit that Zelda 64 is poised to shape the action RPG genre for years to come.”-IGN

“The control really holds the game together. Most 3D game designers still haven't mastered the art of controlling characters in a 3D environment, but that's not the case here. Link moves beautifully, and controlling his various actions is a breeze. “ -Gamespot

That was the general consensus in 1998. If the framerate was so "headache" inducing, and the controls clunky, I can't see how the game would be recieved so well by so many. You seem to have a deep issue with that fact for some strange reason. 

What are you trying to achieve by bringing up others views on the game?

Are you telling me that I should change my opinion to fit with that majority you speak of?

The OP isn’t asking for the hive’s opinion, but for our personal view on those games. That’s what I did. And somehow, you can’t let that fly. 

You really need to let it go.