explain to me the charm of zelda

[christianscott27]

so its been a really yucky month, thunderstorms and humid 80 degree days, which keeps me in the air conditioned game room. this week i decided to try taking on the zelda series. i've never actually played thru a zelda game so i decided to start with the NES and work my way up. at first i almost quit but then got fired up as i found some mazes and stuff. i'm still on the fence, not quite sold on devoting my time to this game but liking some things about it. i know millions of people swear by this series but what is it about the game everybody is so hooked on, especially the NES titles?

enlighten me please.

[Raedon]

shhh..

burn every bush..

[ubersaurus]

http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view.php?id=105053

I think that video is enough to make anyone think zelda is at least halfway good LOL

[atomicthumbs]

"Help yourself to anything in the fridge."



I thought I was going to piss myself!


However I am easily amused.... Ohhhh LOOK! I have toe hair!!!

[WiseSalesman]

If I have to explain the charm to you you'll never get it.

At least try to understand its influence. You can at least respect the legend of zelda for basically pioneering adventure games as we know them today.

[NE146]

Do yourself a favor and don't start on NES Zelda. Yeah it was totally groundbreaking at the time, but it probably hasn't aged QUITE as well (especially graphically etc). It's still a very worthy game, but I think to try and "get" Zelda, you'd probably be much better served playing either SNES Zelda (the best imho), or even Zelda DX on your GBC. :)

Again, I personally dig 'em all. But I'd recommend those two particular Zelda titles above first.

[WiseSalesman]

Again, I personally dig 'em all. But I'd recommend those two particular Zelda titles above first.

Seconded. Although, if you manage to appreciate those two, definitely go back and try the first again later, to see where they came from.

[Nespit]

I think it is still good. Get urself an nice load of beer and chips, wait untill dark, turn on ur nes with zelda 1. Sit back, and get started!

After zelda1, u have to play zelda 2. Awesome games. Still.

[kainemaxwell]

Start with Zelda for the SNES. That game has plenty of charm and fun along with all the stuff you can do to keep you busy.

maybe the charm comes with the simple plot and all the twists and turns, or the exploration factor, who knows.

[Oberfuhrer Hamm]

Okaaaaaay, that movie was seriously fucked up (just like everything else at newgrounds ;) ).

*Does chicken dance* Anyone remember the commercials? Hehehe....

Anyway, I third SNES Zelda and Zelda DX. I had both of them (I sold Zelda DX along with everything Game Boy Colour I had). As for the attraction, I think it was the combo of a good story, good action execution (what can be easier than swinging a sword?), and it is easy to understand. There are probably lots more reasons but I am too lazy to think of more.

[TRM]

I prefer Zelda NES over Zelda SNES and I had neither "back in the day." If you are going to start with a NES Zelda, start with part 2. Even though lots of people don't like it, I thought it was good, and it is quite a bit easier then part 1.

[1bigmig]

I dont think it's a bad idea to start with the first Legend of Zelda. However, I would recommend getting the locations of the labyrinths off the net. I went through the first and second quests recently and while I found the game still very enjoyable, it's not worth searching three hours for level 5 like when I was a kid. I wouldnt recommend getting too many other hints (or any) as solving the puzzles is where the charm is. Play until you get stuck and frustrated, get a hint then game on!

[christianscott27]

so i take it you dont need to play them in order for the storyline to make sense? that was my concern...part of my motivation is that windwaker looks so good i want to play it with an appreciation for the series. the graphics and clunkiness of NES zelda dont bother me, what bugs me is that link is such a weak character and i'm not building up power like in a traditional RPG.

[Nature Boy]

If I have to explain the charm to you you'll never get it.

My thoughts exactly.


However, I would recommend getting the locations of the labyrinths off the net.

Which is why nobody should bother starting at the first one. Try the others first, and if you feel like seeing where it came from, go back to it. But without some guidance it can become a chore, especially now that games have evolved greatly from that humble beginning.

My personal favourite is Link to the Past. I'd recommend starting there - SNES or GBA version, doesn't matter. The Game Boy Zeldas (all 3 of 'em) are also a really good, solid, 2D experience.

Once you've got that down I'd say check out Ocarina of Time. The series doesn't miss a beat in the transition to 3D. Unless you're a 3D hater that is - then don't bother.

[The Manimal]

My favorite is actually Zelda IV (or DX version, which I don't have).



I like how they made it look like the SNES game. I wonder if they did a GBA port of the original Zelda game, they would spruce it up to look like the latter games? Eh...maybe they shouldn't. Might not look right...



As for an answer to the main question:



I heard she has nice boobies LOL

[MarioAllStar2600]

Im alot different from my friends. I usually think that the older games are better. Can't agree with Zelda. For the NES and gameboy I hate it. For the N64 and gamecube it's good. So in the old games I havn't quite found the charm either.

[Sotenga]

I'm tied between the first and the third as to which Zelda game is my favorite. I can say that Zelda 2 is highly underrated. However, I wouldn't get acquainted with that as your first Zelda game. You'd be baffled as to how you stumble through the rest of the series! x_x

[Jorpho]

I also found Link's Awakening to be superior to the SNES Zelda. Link's Awakening provides a lot more to do between dungeons, I find.

Incidently, the original NES Zelda was remade for the Bandai Satellaview SNES peripheral. The remake is often simply referred to as BS Zelda and has improved graphics (though the music is pretty much the same). Various hacks exist to reenable some of the functionality that is lost when playing it on emulators.
________
Free themes (http://themesfree.org)

[NE146]

so i take it you dont need to play them in order for the storyline to make sense? that was my concern...

Others may disagree.. but I don't think that storyline has any real significance to the Zelda series. Others may struggle to try and piece each game together in some cohesive "story" but the truth is.. there aint much at all. LOL It's an action/adventure game, not really a story game

Basically in each Zelda you visit and complete dungeons and acquire a powerup which eventually makes you well equipped and more powerful. Along the way you find various little cool secrets in the overworld. Oh and generally the long term goal is you gotta "rescue" some princess/girl named Zelda (or some other name.. whatever) :P There's your storyline ;)

[Chunky]

It's by far the best game you never want to play again.

[Nature Boy]

Others may disagree.. but I don't think that storyline has any real significance to the Zelda series. Others may struggle to try and piece each game together in some cohesive "story" but the truth is.. there aint much at all. LOL It's an action/adventure game, not really a story game

Somebody posted a link here awhile back where they *had* linked all the storylines together. Pretty cool stuff actually, and the Wind Waker seems to agree with some of the speculation.

If I find it I'll edit this post and include it (assuming I have time).

EDIT: And here it is (thanks go to Kaine who was the original poster).
http://www.n-sider.com/index_content.php?page=features/legendsofzelda.htm

[hezeuschrist]

Yeah, I'll pan out the 2 NES Zelda stories to you so you can jump right into Link from the Past (easily one of the best games ever).

Zelda 1: Zelda is captured, link must save her from Ganon. Complete dungeons 1-7 anywhere from 3 to 19 times due to Ganon's terrible powers of saved game erasing.

Zelda 2: Zelda is captured, link must save her from Ganon.

Link to the Past: Zelda is captured along with a bunch of other bimbo's and... well I wont spoil the ending!

I definitely say start with Link to the Past.

[ubersaurus]

Yeah basically the "storyline", such as it is, is very convulated. That link that put them all together, however, Wind Waker really f-ed up...cuz wind waker is supposed to be after ocarina by a few hundred years...but the ending implied that it was at the tail-end of the zelda series.

[hezeuschrist]

Eh, not really. Link vanquishes Ganon, and somehow he gets free. No suprise there.

[The Manimal]

CORRECTION:



The Legend of Zelda: Zelda is captured by Ganondork and you (Link) must save her.


Zelda II-The Adventure of Link: Zelda is asleep under a spell, and you must remove her from the spell/awaken her.



If as I said before is true about Zelda being a hottie, couldn't link have been a 'sleep bandit' and had a little action with her limp body.


I'll stop here so I don't sound like a troll and get banned, or gross anyone out 8-)

[bargora]

CORRECTION:

The Legend of Zelda: Zelda is captured by Ganondork and you (Link) must save her.

Zelda II-The Adventure of Link: Zelda is asleep under a spell, and you must remove her from the spell/awaken her.

If as I said before is true about Zelda being a hottie, couldn't link have been a 'sleep bandit' and had a little action with her limp body.

I'll stop here so I don't sound like a troll and get banned, or gross anyone out 8-)
Sounds like someone's been watching "Snow White: Director's Cut" a little too much.

[SecretAgent007]

If I had to pick any zelda for you to start with it would be Zelda II: Adventure of Link. I started with that one, and it is still the one and only one I go back and play over and over and over again (not that I don't the others, just not nearly as often as Zelda II). The Original Zelda is good, but I really only play it for nostalgia.

A Link to the Past is an amazing game, and that should be your second if not your first. And Ocarina of Time is an amazing transition into 3D, and should not be considered for anything else but brilliant.

The Wind Waker, personally, was an amazing game. sometimes it can get monotonous with all the sailing, but still, it was amazing. I loved the graphics, despite what others had thought. However: The story for Wind Waker really doesn't get into its "Zelda roots" until about halfway through, and for that reason alone, I would save it, not neccassarily for last, but until you have more appreciation for the older Link-Zelda-Ganon storylines. (Ocarina of Time and then Wind Waker would be a good combo).

[NE146]

Yknow what's sad.. is I've played the Zelda games so many friggin times. But I'm still at the point that whenever someone mentions the NAME to me.. I still sometimes get lost as to which Zelda it is!

Like "Link to the Past".. I can't remember if that was SNES or GBC. Or Ocarina of Time.. is that SNES? LOL

I stick to the old "NES Zelda 1/2", "SNES Zelda", "GBC Zelda DX", "N64 Zelda".. Much less confusing for me :P

'Course the exception is right now: I know Wind Walker.. (or is it Wind Waker?) ;)

[calthaer]

NE146 has it right: Zelda games are not story games. The plot is a loose excuse to spool together the gameplay elements.

Zelda's appeal for me is probably :

-Interactivity. You can do stuff to the trees, rocks, etc. Makes things a lot more interesting than just having a pretty screen full of nothing when it comes to gameplay.

-Discovery, exploration: they've hidden stuff all over the place and you get to find them. The GBC games had lots of this stuff.

-No stats, no numbers, no experiece, none of that dumb "RPG" stuff (except for Zelda II, which is my absolute least favorite of the series

-Simple to use and understand.

I would say that Zelda III (SNES) is the best one, largely because there's no jumping. It made things a bit more complex in a way that isn't quite as accessible. I would put OoT (N64) next. Then the GBC games. The original after that. The rest of them aren't that great although Zelda 2 is an OK game. The dialogue is just plain stupid in Zelda 2: "I AM ERROR" "PRIZE IN CAVE SOUTH OF TOWN" "COME SEE MY FATHER BEFORE YOU LEAVE TOWN" Not that it was all that great in Zelda I "ITS A SECRET TO EVERYBODY!" You weren't bothered by it all the time though.

[Anonymous]

The most interesting part of Zelda lore is that it can be (and has been) placed in chronological order, but it really doesn't matter, since no game has any bearing on the games before after it. Also, the 'completing' of the storylines has been done by fans using official text regarding the zelda series, but no such link (pun intended) is made or implied by Nintendo or Shigeru Miyamoto. Miyamoto himself went so far as to publically state that the games are essentially retellings of the basic storyline, and Wind Waker's story (every X years a boy comes to wear the legendary green suit and become a hero) goes on to confirm that statement.

On more practical terms, however, I think it is best to play the games chronologically (in terms of release date, not storyline) just so you can see how the games evolved. Part of the joy of playing a good sequel is getting to see the same characters, and getting to see items, places, and people become more fleshed out as the series moves on. Additionally, video games have the added benefit of the player feeling the control scheme and game play mechanics evolve over time, which is a lot of fun for me.

In conclusion, I'd say you could skip the NES zelda, but if you're already halfway through it, all you have to do is get the dungeon locations (a suggestion made earlier in the thread that I heartily agree with). The game itself is quite short by current standards. skip zelda II if you find it frustratingly difficult. Then play through the rest as they were released.

[The Manimal]

I don't know, man...


Zelda I and II are related as far as I remember. I preceeds II. And III takes place BEFORE the first two, and is a different Link. IV has a totally different Link also, and doesn't take place in Hyrule at all.

[Anonymous]

Yes, the games don't interfere with each other's history, and they can be placed chronologically, but think for a minute about Impa. In the first game Impa is an old servant of Zelda who finds link. In OoT, Impa is the member of a tribe of warriors that is protecting Zelda. The same characters arise and their roles change. The Master sword is always missing and must be found with no indication or desire to resolve why or how it is where it is. Even Hyrule has changed drastically from game to game (look at I and II for the best example of this). People, Places, Items, and even events recur thematically in the game, which I think adds to the appeal of the game.

[kevincure]

I'd play TooT and Majora's first - play them and then try SNES or NES Zelda nad you'll be amazed how seamlessly the game was brought into 3d.

[WiseSalesman]

bleh.....i'd pass on majora if I were you.

[Oberfuhrer Hamm]

Yeah. With Majora's Mask, Nintendo introduced the 3-days-until-destruction bit. That was a hit or miss, meaning you either like the new challenge or you find it interferes with the gameplay. It was the latter for me and I hated the game so much, I sold it even though it was one of those neat gold carts.

[Nature Boy]

Yes, the games don't interfere with each other's history, and they can be placed chronologically, but think for a minute about Impa. In the first game Impa is an old servant of Zelda who finds link. In OoT, Impa is the member of a tribe of warriors that is protecting Zelda. The same characters arise and their roles change. The Master sword is always missing and must be found with no indication or desire to resolve why or how it is where it is. Even Hyrule has changed drastically from game to game (look at I and II for the best example of this). People, Places, Items, and even events recur thematically in the game, which I think adds to the appeal of the game.

I *really* like this analogy Fluke. Thanks. Reminds me of the Arthurian legend. There are a great many takes on the same basic storyline and characters, but each is done in it's own way.

[kainemaxwell]

I've once beaten the first quest of Zelda 1 in a day myself actually. Was there ever a 2nd quest to Zelda 2? I remember an old NP issue with something in the Classified Informations ection regarding it...

[ubersaurus]

Yes, the games don't interfere with each other's history, and they can be placed chronologically, but think for a minute about Impa. In the first game Impa is an old servant of Zelda who finds link. In OoT, Impa is the member of a tribe of warriors that is protecting Zelda. The same characters arise and their roles change. The Master sword is always missing and must be found with no indication or desire to resolve why or how it is where it is. Even Hyrule has changed drastically from game to game (look at I and II for the best example of this). People, Places, Items, and even events recur thematically in the game, which I think adds to the appeal of the game.

I always just assumed in Zelda 2 they were farther north then where the first game took place. That would explain Zelda's resting place as the North Palace, and why Death Mountain and Spectacle Rock were both to the southern end of the map.

[kainemaxwell]

Appernetly according to the fanmade timeline Zelda 2 is the last game in the timeline.. *shrug*