A question to all you Zelda (NES) fans

[Ernster]

Im trying to think back to the NES era and how Zelda was a big seller and favourite with the kids. I just have a question and that is why?

I mean, I find it hard to belive that an adult let alone a kid, could enjoy a game that has really simple graphics and is so hard and confusing....please help me out :/

[Jibbajaba]

All games had really simple graphics back then. Have you played the game? Are you saying that you don't see what the appeal is?

Chris

[Ernster]

Of course Ive played it, and I dont see the appeal in it at all. I know all NES games, have simple graphics, but Zelda had "extra" simple graphics. Compare it to say SMB, and that game has enjoyable graphics, but Zelda...hmm not so much. Anyway the graphics aint the main point, I just dont see how a kid can enjoy a game were its almost impossible to know were to go.

[TRM]

I think most of us had maps of some sort. I even had Zelda maps in some of my guides, and I didn't get the Zelda game until 1998 or 1999. I love that game, btw. Some spots are tough, but it is a good game none the less.

[stevec1636]

back on the nintendo it wasn't about the graphics it was about the game itself. The story and gameplay were more important. I don't care how many games i play in the future Zelda is one of the best games that has ever been made and your not playing it just because of the graphics your crazy.

[pineapplehead2]

I didn't really like it at all, moany ppl did, I can't see why, Every time I put the game on I end up turning it off, I much like The Adventures of Link way much better,

[Ernster]

back on the nintendo it wasn't about the graphics it was about the game itself. The story and gameplay were more important. I don't care how many games i play in the future Zelda is one of the best games that has ever been made and your not playing it just because of the graphics your crazy.

Uh...read my posts again @_@ Im a NES fan..graphics is the last thing I care about. :hmm: Sry if I didnt make that clear enough.

[pineapplehead2]

I don't care for graphics, aslong as the game is playable and joyable

[Jibbajaba]

Of course Ive played it, and I dont see the appeal in it at all. I know all NES games, have simple graphics, but Zelda had "extra" simple graphics. Compare it to say SMB, and that game has enjoyable graphics, but Zelda...hmm not so much. Anyway the graphics aint the main point, I just dont see how a kid can enjoy a game were its almost impossible to know were to go.

I for one don't really know what to tell you. I freakin loved this game when I was a kid, and when I got stuck I would just ask someone who had already beaten the game. The map really isn't THAT big, and the fact that you aren't sure where to go only encourages exploration. Maybe you are the type who isn't patient with these kind of games.

I don't know what kind of games you are into, so I don't really know what to say beyond this. I also don't think that the graphics are particularly bad for an early NES game.

Chris

[lendelin]

I mean, I find it hard to belive that an adult let alone a kid, could enjoy a game that has really simple graphics and is so hard and confusing....please help me out :/

That is a very legit question, and a Q which N asked themselves before releasing the game in the US.

1. Graphics: you are right, the graphics even by the standards back then were not impressive, the overworld looked like munchkin land whereas the dungeons had better detailed garaphic quality. The appeal: gameplay! A lenghty massive adventure full of twists and surprises, the possibility to explore, and the requirement to figure things out makes a great game. Every good game lets you figure things out and explore, from a shmup to a puzzler.

2. hard and confusing: N tested the game with American gamers using a Zelda prototype. The result: the game had great appeal once the gamers understood what was going on and were told certain gameplay requirements. At first, some gamers lost interest getting stuck and somewhat confused because of the games non-linearity. Most gamers were used to arcade-style games, not complex adventure games.

Nintendos answer: First, the battery save made it much easier to finish the game; second, a phone hotline for the game was introduced where gamers could get hints how to finish the game (the hotline was soon overwhelmed, and N had to employ ten times as many people to answer the phones after six months) ; third, the Nintendo Fun Club newsletter (the forerunner of Nintendo Power) provided hints and startegies for the game; fourth, a very aggressive marketing strategy with paper and TV ads.

One to four plus the exceptional gameplay made Zelda a smash hit. Furthermore, the success of Metroid (released in the same year) proved that complex games like Zelda and Metroid can be huge sellers not only in Japan, but also in America.

Therefore, 1987 is one of the milestones in gaming history for America.

[Aussie2B]

I'd argue that the graphics aren't much worse than anything else from that time period. Keep in mind that it's an early title. Most early titles similarly lacked detail. In fact, I can think of titles that looked even worse than Zelda.

I personally love the game. I'd probably rank it as my favorite Zelda game. I had a lot of fond memories watching my brother play through it as a child, but I never really seriously played it myself until not all that long ago. I played through both quests back to back and got everything. It's great fun. :)

[Red Warrior]

It's funny to hear a talk about the graphics of the original Zelda. I guess they really aren't that good, but I never noticed before... even after all these years. Played through the game when I was 9 and loved it. I s'pose when the puzzles and gameplay are as good as they were in Zelda, the graphics aren't even a glint in your eye. The sheer mystery of the game itself was also a big attraction for me. Never before had I played a game that required such exploration. My little 9-year-old mind just ate it up.

Maybe it appeals more to those that played it in the 80's... because we had never seen anything like it before at the time. I dunno. To each his own I guess.

[Daria]

I just dont see how a kid can enjoy a game were its almost impossible to know were to go.

I got to the last dungeon when I was six years old. Would have beat it too if the memory hadn't of wiped. Lets just say kids aren't as stupid as you give them credit for.

[shopkins]

The fact that you had to figure out what to do and where to go is why I loved it. I really got the feeling that I was exploring this new world.

[-hellvin-]

The game ruled and still does. All I can say is I personally majorly enjoy the gameplay. The sequel is great as well, I made it through that game when I was about 9 and felt like I had conquered the most impossible task ever. That game was pretty damn hard.

[Graham Mitchell]

Zelda was tough because it didn't give you directions, and it gave you hints in the form of badly-translated cryptic messages. For me, therefore, Zelda was this cultural phenomenon among kids at my school; it was a big mystery and everyone was trying to figure it out. I learned how to perform some of the more complicated tasks (what block to push where in what dungeon) by talking to other kids. It was a "Word-of-mouth" way of playing the game.

Other games after Zelda were all pretty explicit in what tasks you needed to perform or where you needed to go in order to complete the game, and as such I never really noticed another game with that sort of phenomenon, which is probably just as well, really, considering that I don't want to spend time being stuck while hunting for a single block to push out of thousands. But at that time, this was a good, even if accidental, way to get people excited about playing the game.

[NintendoMan]

Well the whole simple graphics thing really makes no sense to me because basically EVERY game was like that on the NES.
But, I do get the question as how a kid could like the game if they had no damn clue were they were going. I was one of those kids. Even in like 4th and grade I didn't know what I was doing, hense that is why I didn't like Zelda, even though I owned the game. (Pretty pathetic that I didn't really know what to do) Now my friend on the other hand was awesome at the game and beat it easily, I loved watching im play it though.

[charitycasegreg]

It was just a gerat game. I don't even play it but I have and it was fun. YOu have to go around and figure things out. When I was 6 or so I played Myst, and had to figure things out. I'm pretty sure if I could do that at 5, a 9 year old could figure out some things in Zelda. Maybe not all kids could figure things out, but many of us could. :D Maybe they didn't care about beating it, they just wanted to have fun. It was fun to walk around killing bad guys to kids maybe. And I liked the simple graphics, and the great music. Some people don't like some games, some people, or in this case, at least 75% of people do. It is a great game.

[Lady Jaye]

Well, to say that the graphics sucked is actually false. For us kids of the late 80s, especially the pre-teens whose previous console was the Atari 2600, the NES and especially Zelda had great graphics with a huge world to explore. How did we know where to go next? Well, remember that the original release of TLoZ was shipped with a map and hints regarding the early dungeons. That certainly helped.

And the early issues of Nintendo Power must've helped. Even though The Adventure of Link was released by the time NP was launched, I'm sure there must have been some kind of "tips and tricks" article about TLoZ. (plus add to this the numerous "How to win at Nintendo" books published at the time, and you were never truly lost).

Back when Zelda was first released, we had wild imagination. Heck, we used our imagination to fill in the gaps in the 2600 games, so it's only normal that we'd find TLoZ to be an immersive experience, even though it wouldn't seem to be so nowadays.

[Kroogah]

Im trying to think back to the NES era and how Zelda was a big seller and favourite with the kids. I just have a question and that is why?

I mean, I find it hard to belive that an adult let alone a kid, could enjoy a game that has really simple graphics and is so hard and confusing....please help me out :/

So if you're an NES fan, you'd know that the "really simple graphics" are not nearly as bad as you seem to think they are, especially when compared to hundreds of other NES titles.

You'd also know that lots of NES role-playing or adventure games didn't hold your hand and walk you through the game like you seem to require.

[Pantechnicon]

Perhaps this may shed some light on your question.

Some time back on cable I caught one of those "Legends of Gaming" shows or whatever they call them on TechTV. They got to a segment about Shigeru Miyamoto - Zelda's designer. Miyamoto was describing how as a child he used to go exploring in the woods around his house and one day he came upon this lake he never knew was there. It was a fascinating dicovery, and later in life it gave him the idea for how he wanted Legend of Zelda to play out...and notice the prominence of the lake in the game; how it really jumps out at you when you first find it.

That's the answer you seek right there; The patient naturalistic discovery and exploration of this game world. Regardless of graphics, this is the component that I believe keeps people coming back to the series. I've only dabbled in LoZ I, but I've played all the Gameboy sequels and this beautiful "lake-finding" element is there in all of them. It has become a staple for so many RPG games from simply-rendered older ones like the Zelda series all the way up to the Grand Theft Auto series.

If you are the NES fan you purport to be, you must learn to see virtuous gameplay in spite of "inferior" graphics. But if you're basing the entire question of Zelda's entire merit on graphics then I really must :hmm:.

[Ed Oscuro]

Miyamoto was describing how as a child he used to go exploring in the woods around his house and one day he came upon this lake he never knew was there. It was a fascinating dicovery, and later in life it gave him the idea for how he wanted Legend of Zelda to play out...and notice the prominence of the lake in the game; how it really jumps out at you when you first find it.
A bit OT here, but that's the second time this has been mentioned, seemingly from a different source too. I heard the exact same thing a year or so back during a documentary about games, as well. It seems everybody knows this story by now...wonder who first interviewed Miyamoto to get that? Hmm.

Now I actually have felt, at times, that Zelda is a bit too simplistic - but then I remember how much fun the dungeons are. The look is actually pretty classic, especially the screen scrolling. The only area I really don't like going through is along the upper right hand corner of the first map (outside the hidden map square, that's cool to find), with the caves you keep losing money at when you bomb them. Ugly and not much to do there besides lose money and health (along the area with tektites and falling boulders).

[imanerd0011]

When The Legend of Zelda was released it was really a one of a kind game. I think it did so well because it was heavily marketed, and came out at the right time. The NES was just becoming a huge success in 1987, and when LOZ came out many people bought it. As a kid it was my favorite game (along with Super Mario Bros 1,3 and Crystalis), I used to get help from my Mom (who was a mega gamer and had beat the game before I did) and from my friends. If you don't like the game by now, chances are you aren't going to. Many people like it so much now adays, because they enjoyed it so much as a child, and it brings back fond memories. I personally love the graphics, but I can see how many people would think they are too simplistic, since LOZ isn't a very colorful or flashy game like SMB.

[Graham Mitchell]

I personally love the graphics, but I can see how many people would think they are too simplistic, since LOZ isn't a very colorful or flashy game like SMB.


You know, I'm reading all these gripings about LOZ's graphics, and I'm in opposition to it. I always thought that LOZ had this nice, brightly-colored sheen to it. Plus the flashing effects on the swords, bubbles, and damaged characters still look pretty cool. Compare it to any of Capcom or Taito's NES games at that period and Zelda looks like the freakin' Mona Lisa.

[lendelin]

And the early issues of Nintendo Power must've helped. Even though The Adventure of Link was released by the time NP was launched, I'm sure there must have been some kind of "tips and tricks" article about TLoZ. (plus add to this the numerous "How to win at Nintendo" books published at the time, and you were never truly lost).


It was actually the Nintendo Fun Club News which covered the game and provided essential game tips. The first issue of NP (July/Aug. '88) covered the second quest of Zelda with maps of the dungeons and a great overworld map. In the classified Information and Counselors' Corner sections were a lot of Zelda hints and tips, though. (seven altogether in the first year of NP)

What really helped to master the game was predominantly the Fun Club News, the 800-phone hotline (which was put in the instruction booklet), and as you mentioned also the map which came with the game; in particular the phone hotline helped to spread word-of-mouth for at the time unusual obtacles encountered in games (Lost Woods, the hidden last levels, where to play the flute, etc.)

All of these obstacles seem nothing special today, but back then they were new for the vast majority of NES gamers. Remember, still in 1989 and 1990 RPGs had to be introduced, explained, and were given a big marketing push by Nintendo Power. The successful Zelda strategy was the recipe for the marketing push for Dragon Warrior and Final Fantasy by NP...but it didn't work out so well for the two RPGs.

(all of this applies to America, not Japan, Europe or Australia)

[Bloodreign]

Yes Zelda had old graphics, but growing up with these NES games after playing Atari 2600 for so long you learn to appreciate them. I never had trouble with LoZ at all (had the Fun Club map of course, but still not confusing) the dungeons weren't confusing, the overworld was easy to get around.


LoZ to this day still stands as one of the best first gen NES titles to hit the U.S. shores, and as far as I know the first battery backed game too ( hugs his old Zelda 1 box and game and manual tight).

[Lady Jaye]

It was actually the Nintendo Fun Club News which covered the game and provided essential game tips. The first issue of NP (July/Aug. '88) covered the second quest of Zelda with maps of the dungeons and a great overworld map. In the classified Information and Counselors' Corner sections were a lot of Zelda hints and tips, though. (seven altogether in the first year of NP)

That's exactly what I said: that the hints and tips were disseminated through the early issues of NP. You see, by the time my best friend had gotten a NES, NP had been launched. In fact, I remember that a free one-year subscription to NP was included with the NES he got (his mother refused to renew when it was no longer free). Since we did not have the Internet back then and no "How to win at Nintendo" books, it figures that our LoZ knowledge came from the pack-in map (and small hintbook) as well as Nintendo Power, even though NP did not provide as much info as the Fun club newsletter has had.

[odysseyzine]

I think many have hit the nail on the head by mentioning the exploration & surprise in Zelda. The sense of place in Zelda is very convincing and enjoyable because of all the great surprises you run across. That's why I was so surprised and a little bit pissed when the GBA release didn't include the original pack-in map.

I wrote a little article on the GBA Zelda last summer that summarizes my feelings about it. You can read it here if you'd like: http://www.odysseyzine.com/articles/zeldagameboy.htm

[lendelin]

It was actually the Nintendo Fun Club News which covered the game and provided essential game tips. The first issue of NP (July/Aug. '88) covered the second quest of Zelda with maps of the dungeons and a great overworld map. In the classified Information and Counselors' Corner sections were a lot of Zelda hints and tips, though. (seven altogether in the first year of NP)

That's exactly what I said: that the hints and tips were disseminated through the early issues of NP. You see, by the time my best friend had gotten a NES, NP had been launched. In fact, I remember that a free one-year subscription to NP was included with the NES he got (his mother refused to renew when it was no longer free). Since we did not have the Internet back then and no "How to win at Nintendo" books, it figures that our LoZ knowledge came from the pack-in map (and small hintbook) as well as Nintendo Power, even though NP did not provide as much info as the Fun club newsletter has had.

Sure, I just wanted to clarify that it was not so much NP which helped with tips because Zelda preceded NP by 8 months. It was the Fun Club newsletter and more importantly the phone hotline.

[SoulBlazer]

But Nintendo DID publish a guide for the game.....Tips and Tricks. I found mine just yesterday after digging through my old stuff and I plan to take pictures of it with my digital camera and sell it here in the B&S forum. Good guide, has maps and trips, and almost the whole game covered. (I have the one for Super Mario Brothers also).

[NESaholic]

Mmm i always liked the game, why cause it was one of a kind,when i played Zelda 1 i'd never b4 played a game in this style.
For me there was a new world that opened up,i loved the music the graphix and i can remember it took me a while to figure it out.
If you look at games that came out later they look graphicly better, but not as much fun as the first Zelda if you ask me.

[rbudrick]

But Nintendo DID publish a guide for the game.....Tips and Tricks.

I believe that was Tips and Tactics. :-) If I remember correctly there was no level 9 map in that, and it really ticked me off as a kid. Level 9 was freaking HARD.

As for the graphics, they were pretty damn good for the time. You have to understand that going from Atari 2600 to NES was a huge leap. The music is still great and really added to the adventure feel. And the game really wasn't that hard. Every kid I knew with a Nintendo had eventually beaten it.

-Rob

[Lady Jaye]

Yeah, the only thing was to know where was dungeon #8 (the dungeon hidden underneath a bush). Of course, that one was probably one of the oft-repeated tips of the game.

And I remember that we were impressed with the fact that a second, more difficult, quest started upon finishing the game. (and of course the fact that you can skip over the first quest by using the name Zelda for your character)