 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in General Gaming. |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - General Gaming - Zelda II |
New poll |  |  |
| Pages: 1 2 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
To be or not to be?| Suck |
6.7%, 2 votes | Not Suck |
70.0%, 21 votes | meh |
23.3%, 7 votes | Multi-voting is disabled. 30 users have voted.
| |
| User | Post | ||
FreeDOS + Giant Red Koopa Legion: freedos = fritos                    Since: 11-17-05 From: Seattle Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
The Sonic Genesis thread is really off topic, mainly because I said a comment about rather playing Zelda II (implying that it's bad, which is my opinion of it). So basically the idea is to spew off praises and complaints here 
Personally, I don't care for the game. It's definately not the worst game ever, but it's not my preferred mix of side-scrolling and Zelda. My own personal order of Zelda games (which I have actually played) is as such: Zelda 3 > Zelda 4 > Zelda Oracles > Zelda 1 > Zelda OoT > Zelda WW > Zelda 2 |
|||
Rydain Sir Kibble Blaze Phoenix Runs with the Dragon Within   Since: 11-18-05 From: State College, PA Last post: 6304 days Last view: 6300 days |
| ||
| I voted meh because my opinion is a mixed bag. I think Zelda II is a decent game, but it could stand to be more player-friendly.
Back in the day, I liked Zelda II enough to put in a ton of play time. I enjoyed the exploration, I looked forward to finding the new ability in each town, and the Freakytown glitch was good for hours of fun. I never beat it because the one time I got to Thunderbird, I was on my last life and went kersplat. Also, the core game engine is well-programmed. The hit detection and controls always felt solid to me. That's a major improvement over other NES platformers I've played. 
With that said, Zelda II has characteristics that annoyed me then and would certainly annoy me now. The difficulty curve is unforgiving. In my opinion, the very beginning of a game should be easy. The first dungeon in the first Zelda game was a piece of cake, as it should have been. I remember renting Zelda II and getting through the first castle enough to get killed by the orange Ironknuckle. Of course, once I knew how to spam high and low attacks and crouching jump attacks to get around his shield, he was easy, but to a new player, he seemed invincible. As someone pointed out in the other topic, you don't get healing for a while, and when you do, it gobbles up a crapload of MP. MP is oftentimes in short supply because you have to refill it from random enemy drops or statues that you can only hit once during that particular dungeon crawl. There are way too many instant death pits and far too few extra lives, and those extra lives can only be picked up once in that entire game save. You can grind 1-ups once you max out at least one level (every 8000 points gets you one), but that only works late in the game, and it takes forever. |
|||
Hiryuu Sword Maiden Retired Admin  Since: 11-17-05 From: Nerima District - Tokyo, Japan Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
| Another meh from me.
Honestly, Zelda II was the first Zelda I ever beat. It also made me wonder why I put down the NUMEROUS hours required to beat it (which, back then, we weren't really caring about doing speedruns or tool-assists). Some of the game was good and some of it was error. Sure I liked having a game that was wide open, but it soon became a gigantic prick to go against. I think I was a gamer like everyone, I don't really care about difficulty curves too much, but to pick it up, go a little ways and then go to the one mountain range with all the caves in the south and literally yell 'what the fuck?!' makes me a little uneasy as an eight-year-old. So anyways, it's down the line. It's probably a must-play, but only in the up-bringing of a next-gen gamer in the ways of the art. Same can be said better for some of the games like Megaman, in which case there are collections for them and they're likely a ton better than the ones we have out now. If a recollection of Zelda games ever made it, sure, I would think Zelda II should be part of it...but I would think LttP would be the bar none better over it. LA and the original as well. |
|||
|
Alastor Fearless Moderator Hero  Since: 11-17-05 From: An apartment by DigiPen, Redmond, Washington Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
Originally posted by RydainLearning curve? Learning curve? You mention Iron Knuckles, but that's silly; many enemies are hard in many zelda games before you learn what to do (lol boss fights). Iron knuckles are merely the first hurdle. Not a problem at all. Dying in pits when I jumped and enemies hit me was a much greater frustration, but really, if there are bats around the bottomless pit, perhaps you should kill them before you make your jump. So in the end that wasn't a problem at all. It's not even like it's the only Zelda that plays that way - Lord knows the 3D zeldas have plenty of running up and attacking and backflipping out of the way, and they have platforming, and they have... But I digress. It's very Zelda, it just plays differently than most. It's a great game, and definitely not the worst of them. In my opinion, Majora's Mask > Ocarina of Time > A Link to the Past > The Legend of Zelda > The Adventures of Link > Link's Awakening > Oracle of Seasons/Ages > Wind Waker > Minish Cap. Opinion of Twilight Princess to come when I finish it. So yeah, I like it. (P.S. lol, grinding for 1-ups) (edited by Alastor the Stylish on 11-21-06 12:41 AM) (edited by Alastor the Stylish on 11-21-06 03:38 AM) |
|||
Xeo Belmont Wiiiiiiiiiiiiin  Since: 11-17-05 Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
| I loved it, and still do. That's really all I can think of to say. However, I never thought it was that hard at all. Jump + Duck + Attack is funny and works well. Although at some parts later in the game, it sometimes gets hard to know what you're supposed to do next to progress the game.
Also, since everyone's doing it, for me ... Link to the Past >>>> Ocarina of Time >>> Legend of Zelda > Links Awakening > Majora's Mask > Zelda II > Minish Cap > Wind Waker. Never played Ages and Seasons, and I've for some reason never really bothered to even try and play them (buy them or whatever). Haven't played the CD-i games, if those count. And like Kraw said, I don't have a full opinion for Twilight Princess since I'm in the middle of playing it. Ran-kitty: Well, Zelda II made the cut to be put in the Collectors Disc for the Gamecube. |
|||
|
Rydain Sir Kibble Blaze Phoenix Runs with the Dragon Within Since: 11-18-05 From: State College, PA Last post: 6304 days Last view: 6300 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Alastor the StylishWhy is it silly to expect the first dungeon of the game to be easy (up until the boss), especially because the first dungeon of the original Zelda was an absolute joke designed to ease players into the process of dungeon puzzle solving? It's good to introduce more difficult enemies as the game progresses, but I thought Iron Knuckle was overkill for the very first dungeon, especially because I remember him being more annoying than the dungeon boss, who didn't move as quickly and was easier to dodge and hit. The 3D Zeldas don't have instant death pits. There are pits that hurt you, but given the ample supply of health in those games, they were never that aggravating to me. As I just mentioned, the 3D Zeldas also have much more opportunity to stockpile and refill health, and they give you an easy way to get back to the point you were at when you died. The dungeons are designed so that when you unlock the boss door, you can quickly get back to the boss from the entrance of the dungeon, so getting killed by the boss doesn't set you back at all. Even if you want to leave to go fill up your fairy stash, there is some sort of warping feature available to lessen your travel time to and from. In Zelda II, if you get to the boss and lose your last life, depending on which boss you were dealing with, it can be a hell of an ordeal to get back there. I never beat the game because I didn't feel like going all the way back through all those passages to the Great Palace and finding my way through the palace all over again. |
|||
MathOnNapkins  1100  In SPC700 HELL Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
| I think I was a gamer like everyone, I don't really care about difficulty curves too much, but to pick it up, go a little ways and then go to the one mountain range with all the caves in the south and literally yell 'what the fuck?!' makes me a little uneasy as an eight-year-old.
Yeah, that's exactly what I said when I finally got there last year - "what the fuck?!" I've been trying to play this game for probably 14+ years. I first played it at my cousin's house when it was new, but never bought the game. I later played it on emulator but didn't get too far. many enemies are hard in many zelda games before you learn what to do (lol boss fights). Alastor, that's something totally different. Let me put it this way, boss fights in modern Zelda games are RIDICULOUSLY easy once you figure out the "trick" to them. Ocarina, Majora's Mask, and Windwaker are all guilty of this. The enemies in Zelda 1 and Zelda 2 are consistently challenging even if you find a strategy for them. e.g., there is no way to predict whether the ironknuckle will aim high or low, you just have to be careful. A room full of Zelda 1's darknuts is also challenging to face no matter how much Zelda 1 you play. And to think of a nonzelda example, one might be SMB1's hammer brothers. Facing off against one of those in level 5-2 without a fireflower, with no block underneath it to smash was quite a challenge when I was a kid and would still probably require a bit of concentration. Also factor in that they start walking towards you eventually if you don't make a move. Having said all that, I can't think of any enemy in other Zelda games that compares to those in Zelda 2 in sheer difficulty. This is because other games were not as focused on combat, but rather exploration and puzzle solving. And again, that's not necessarily a bad thing, but it can be quite offputting at first. And this is not unique to Zelda 2, many NES games suffered from a very fast learning curve. |
|||
Cynthia Uh-huh. Since: 11-17-05 From: LaSalle, Quebec, Canada Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
| Zelda II was the first Zelda game I played. Now, there's actually a reason for that - I got both Zelda and Zelda II for Christmas but after one sitting, Zelda broke so I was stuck with Zelda II.
It's different but I honestly think that a lot of people's perceptions of the game are skewed by other Zelda games. At the time, the game was obviously different. It didn't play like the original, but you have to remember that the adventure genre was relatively new then. There weren't many games out there like Zelda II. Some aspects of it don't age well, like the EXP system (could have been more balanced) and the difficulty of some enemies (I never had a problem with Orange Ironknuckles, but Red ones were a bit too tricky and Blue ones are ARGH)... but overall, it was an important early game in the genre and is still worth picking up and playing again. I'm not saying it's the best Zelda game or the best NES game, but it's quite good. The graphics and sound was good for its time, the controls are responsive, and there's enough variety throughout the game. |
|||
|
Alastor Fearless Moderator Hero Since: 11-17-05 From: An apartment by DigiPen, Redmond, Washington Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
Originally posted by RydainFine, fine. Iron Knuckle was never a problem for me - I saw what he could do as I died on him the first time, then played a careful game from then on and did pretty well. And then spamming attacks on them makes it very easy, though I didn't know it at the time.Originally posted by Alastor the StylishWhy is it silly to expect the first dungeon of the game to be easy (up until the boss), especially because the first dungeon of the original Zelda was an absolute joke designed to ease players into the process of dungeon puzzle solving? It's good to introduce more difficult enemies as the game progresses, but I thought Iron Knuckle was overkill for the very first dungeon, especially because I remember him being more annoying than the dungeon boss, who didn't move as quickly and was easier to dodge and hit. Instant death pits are no problem because they're always clearable if you don't blindly leap. And besides, of course later games are going to do it better - they have all the experience of the previous games to back them. But just because later games do it better doesn't mean earlier games aren't fun.The 3D Zeldas don't have instant death pits. There are pits that hurt you, but given the ample supply of health in those games, they were never that aggravating to me. As I just mentioned, the 3D Zeldas also have much more opportunity to stockpile and refill health, and they give you an easy way to get back to the point you were at when you died. The dungeons are designed so that when you unlock the boss door, you can quickly get back to the boss from the entrance of the dungeon, so getting killed by the boss doesn't set you back at all. Even if you want to leave to go fill up your fairy stash, there is some sort of warping feature available to lessen your travel time to and from. In Zelda II, if you get to the boss and lose your last life, depending on which boss you were dealing with, it can be a hell of an ordeal to get back there. I never beat the game because I didn't feel like going all the way back through all those passages to the Great Palace and finding my way through the palace all over again. (edited by Alastor the Stylish on 11-21-06 01:12 AM) |
|||
|
Xeo Belmont Wiiiiiiiiiiiiin Since: 11-17-05 Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
| Its not that difficult at all, once you've played something like Y's III.
(edited by Racer Xeo on 11-21-06 01:12 AM) |
|||
|
Cynthia Uh-huh. Since: 11-17-05 From: LaSalle, Quebec, Canada Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
| Ys 3... ouch. Not a bad game but the difficulty level is just off the charts there. The game lets you know QUITE CLEARLY if you haven't leveled up enough or if you're missing something. | |||
|
Xeo Belmont Wiiiiiiiiiiiiin Since: 11-17-05 Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
| Pretty much. Just thought I'd bring that game up, since I'd say the gameplay is pretty similar when compared to Zelda II. In just about everything.
But again, to take out Iron Knuckles pretty easily just Jump + Duck + Attack at their face. I'm pretty sure you could get in more than one attack if you were fast enough at it also. Well, if it makes everyone happy I'd say its by far the 'harder Zelda' game out there. (edited by Racer Xeo on 11-21-06 01:16 AM) |
|||
asdf Link's Awakening ಠ_ಠ  Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6301 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
| The 3D Zeldas don't have instant death pits. There are pits that hurt you, but given the ample supply of health in those games, they were never that aggravating to me. As I just mentioned, the 3D Zeldas also have much more opportunity to stockpile and refill health, and they give you an easy way to get back to the point you were at when you died. The dungeons are designed so that when you unlock the boss door, you can quickly get back to the boss from the entrance of the dungeon, so getting killed by the boss doesn't set you back at all. Even if you want to leave to go fill up your fairy stash, there is some sort of warping feature available to lessen your travel time to and from. In Zelda II, if you get to the boss and lose your last life, depending on which boss you were dealing with, it can be a hell of an ordeal to get back there. I never beat the game because I didn't feel like going all the way back through all those passages to the Great Palace and finding my way through the palace all over again.
This is the problem with games these days. They're become easier and easier. If you look back to the middle generations of gaming, you'll notice that games were quite harder back then. But now? You get tons of perks and bonuses that make passing through easy. Is it less frustrating? Yes. Is it more friendly toward new gamers? Yes. But for the rest of us who want some challenge out of a game. And I'm talking about a fair, natural challenge - not "build yourself up so you can defeat this optional boss harder than the final boss" or the so-called CHALLENGES&M (stupidly frustrating extra things, and in some cases standard things). I mean a game that is challenging in the normal course of the game, that gives you a fair shot at winning. A steep difficulty curve is an issue at times, but that's just another obstacle. Some games don't just spoon-feed you all the information you need to succeed, you know. When that happens, it's up to you to think of a way to succeed yourself. Because not all thinking in games is puzzle-related.
Remember the number 1 rule of arguing on the internet (and anywhere in general for that matter): 99.9% of the time, your words will fail to change another's opinion. The best you can do is state your opinion and say you respect theirs, even though you may be the complete opposite of it. So in this case, I know not everyone likes the sort of challenge others might do, and that some are kempt about sticking to traditional gameplay in a series. If the former doesn't like challenge, be it that they can't take the heat or just prefer easier games, they don't need to like something. And I can understand that. If the latter prefers games not to change their style, that's all right too. |
|||
Ten Flurry Since: 12-09-05 From: Denver Last post: 6306 days Last view: 6300 days |
| ||
| I had to wait for the advent of the gameFAQs.com to finally find out where that goddamn mirror was. Have you ever tried beating Zelda II with the LIFE magic. IT'S FRICK'EN HARD!!! | |||
Moppy Red Goomba  Since: 09-26-06 From: Rochester, NY Last post: 6318 days Last view: 6302 days |
| ||
| I have to say, though this game strays from the typical "Zelda model" (which, mind you, consisted of only one game at the time), it's still one of the most enjoyable NES games out there. Bottom line: It took skill and practice to play Zelda 2 decently. While this is true of many NES games, it was usually a result of frustrating controls, senseless restrictions, or just general programming laziness. Zelda 2 suffered from none of these, but it still took time and practice to become good at it. Zelda 2's control flexibility (Upthrust and Downthrust were a nice touch), nearly flawless combat engine (Dark Link is the only thing I can think of offhand that I'd consider "bugged"), and wide range of overall difficulty (Level 7 anyone?) make it stand out in my mind, not as the mistake of the Zelda series, but as one of the few NES games I can still stand playing for hours on end.
I do have a few issues with the game, though. The level-up system, for one, wasn't implemented very well. It would have been nice if I could actually choose which stat I'd be increasing, rather than having a little arrow that would point only to one of three choices at every level. Also, once you grabbed the item and killed the boss of a "palace," you couldn't go back in. While this didn't affect anything terribly important, the ability to backtrack is always a fun thing to have. Once you get to the end of the game, there really isn't much of anything to do except step through the horrible gauntlet that is the path to Level 7 and finish the game. Zelda 2 also suffered a bit from Zelda's typical linear-dungeon-progression syndrome, where the item you find in Level N would allow you to enter/complete Level N+1. It did have a bit of freedom in terms of general exploration, but the "palaces" basically had to be completed in the order given, unlike most other Zelda games. For the record, if I had to sort Zeldas from "best" to "worst", as many of you did, I suppose it would look like... Zelda 1 >> LTTP >> Ocarina >> Adventure >> Wind Waker >> Awakening >> Minish >> Majora. Which isn't to say that Majora's Mask is bad, just HORRIBLY frustrating in parts. But that's neither here nor there. (edited by Moppy on 11-21-06 02:19 AM) |
|||
|
Alastor Fearless Moderator Hero Since: 11-17-05 From: An apartment by DigiPen, Redmond, Washington Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
Originally posted by MoppyDude, I fucking loved Majora's Mask 
Also, you CAN pick what stat you want at levelup - pick not to improve anything, then you keep what EXP you have and then the next time you get enough EXP you can select from basically whatever you can afford. Basically, just wait until you have enough EXP for the more expensive stuff. |
|||
Ailure Mr. Shine I just want peace...  Since: 11-17-05 From: Sweden Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
Funny, Majora's mask is my favorite Zelda. Something with the dark nature of it that I enjoy.  |
|||
|
Sweet Kassy Molassy Out of ice cream and PB. Would KILL for a milkshake right now.  Since: 06-17-06 From: LoozeeAnna Last post: 6300 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
| I like Zelda II. It could definately use some polish... but the selective level up and some of the ideas were the cool. It was something different.
And it's not a bad game anyway. The only thing I'd change is that place toward the last dungeon that you have to go thru with all the flying eye thingies and pits. It's too hard. |
|||
|
Kailieann Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
| I didn't particularly care for it.
But then, I didn't particularly care for the original, either. |
|||
Adamant Buzz Blob Staff Wii have Wii  Since: 11-17-05 From: Norway Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Moppy Uh, don't you mean "like all other Zelda games"? While the original game has a couple dungeons you didn't have to do in order, you needed the raft from 3 to access 4, the ladder from 4 to beat most (all?) dungeons with a higher number, the recorder from 5 to access 7 and I think to beat some other dungeons (Digdogger appeared as a mini boss later, right?), the bow from 1 to beat 6, and the red candle from 7 to access 8 unless you knew exactly where it was or had way too much time on your hands. Hardly nonlinear. Sure, you didn't have to complete the dungeons to access story events which would take you to the next dungeon, but that was not the case with Zelda 2 either. |
| Pages: 1 2 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - General Gaming - Zelda II |
| |
