Zelda II - Why all the hate?

[skaar]

Found this today, been enjoying watching them:

http://speeddemosarchive.com/Zelda2.html#UPaDa

[Boltorano]

What the…

The only place that takes more than a couple minutes to walk to is the final palace. If you avoid the random encounters (easily done by following the roads), it probably takes the same amount of time to walk to a dungeon in the second game as in the first! Maybe less time!

My mind is seriously blown. Is this what "Halo checkpoints" have done to newer gamers?

I've never played Halo actually, and strangely enough I finished Final Fantasy on the NES around the same time I was playing Zelda II (1994 or so), so I was no stranger to grinding or games that felt like a chore at times. For some reason Zelda II just felt all the more worse in the regard.

[TonyTheTiger]

I love how poor design choices get so easily justified with the completely irrelevant argument "new gamers suck." It falls apart from every angle. It is the always fail worthy argument from age (old=good), it's begging the question (assuming that it's new gamers who are the ones who dislike it), and most of all it's a blatant red herring (diverting the issue to new/young gamers).

It's really like going "I could try to defend the game for what it is and the specific design choices within but look at all this other stuff over there!"

It really doesn't matter who likes or doesn't like having to walk back to where you were after loading a save, or that Link's sword is so short, or that the experience system works the way it does. If you're going to try to justify it working the way it does then you can't do that by presuming it's obviously good and then attacking some other issue, presuming that issue is the reason people have a contradictory opinion.

It's just a pet peeve of mine because this happens a lot, especially with old RPGs. Somebody inevitably attacks the existence of random battles and/or grinding and a popular response is something along the lines of "new gamers can't handle anything anymore." What if everything worked this way? "Man, sure glad dentists use Novocaine these days." "Psh, modern society is so coddled."

[heybtbm]

Zelda II is amazing.

If you can't handle it, go play Farmville.

Agreed.

Love Zelda II. I like it better than the original. Always have.

[Berserker]

It is a hard game, and it does have some poor design choices. The most egregious one to my mind is the hammer quest.

You need the hammer to progress in the game, and the hammer is in Death Mountain, which is filled with these awful hatchet monsters. There's no way to block their attack (at that point), and they back up when you try to jump over them. The only way to really kill them without getting your ass handed to you is to use the downward thrust... which is in a town you need the hammer to get to.

That's a design error. Yes, you can eventually master the exact timing between their attacks, but that happens over a long period of time and usually with repeated playthroughs. It's a design error.

Having said all that, I love it regardless. It's one of my favorite NES games. It has its lumps, but there's just something about the fluidity of the gameplay in particular that keeps me coming back to it. If I ever got a serious inclination to make video games, one of the first things I think I'd make would be a Zelda II with roguelike elements. Same gameplay, different overworld/dungeon maps on every playthrough. That would make me one happy gamer.

[sheath]

Zelda II is the only Zelda game with real action gameplay, once you learn it the game is easy, until you learn it the game is hard. Subsequently, Zelda II is the only Zelda game I actually enjoy.

[skaar]

There's no way to block their attack (at that point), and they back up when you try to jump over them. The only way to really kill them without getting your ass handed to you is to use the downward thrust... which is in a town you need the hammer to get to.

That's a design error. Yes, you can eventually master the exact timing between their attacks, but that happens over a long period of time and usually with repeated playthroughs. It's a design error.

See, I disagree. I think that you learn to FEAR the axe guys at that point - they only really give you two (maybe three) dark red ones you HAVE to go through to get to the hammer - and they're set up like minibosses. The orange ones are no challenge.

Once you have downthrust there is nothing more to fear from this enemy and they lose their effectiveness - bouncing off a head or two feels more like a triumph after you've had to fight without the option.

I really need to look now and see if he played Zelda II on Gamecenter CX.

[heybtbm]

It is a hard game, and it does have some poor design choices. The most egregious one to my mind is the hammer quest.

You need the hammer to progress in the game, and the hammer is in Death Mountain, which is filled with these awful hatchet monsters. There's no way to block their attack (at that point), and they back up when you try to jump over them. The only way to really kill them without getting your ass handed to you is to use the downward thrust... which is in a town you need the hammer to get to.

That's a design error.

I got around this by grinding. It was the first game where I recognized that killing a bunch of minor monsters would pay off later by leveling up and making me borderline invincible. At the time I thought I was a genius.

[heybtbm]

One other thing, Zelda 2 gave us one of the best Zelda music pieces of all time...

http://youtu.be/gBgFH27e4Dk

[spongerob]

Don't expect Zelda I and Zelda II probably won't disappoint you. I enjoy it to this day. It's different, and came after a game everyone loved. The hate is almost guaranteed in a situation like that.

I just hate the psychotically difficult final areas. Some of those dungeons are just flat out unfair. It'd be one thing if that was the whole MO of the game, or if I was eased into it, but you go from easy, easy, easy, easy, OMG MIND FUCKINGLY IMPOSSIBLE in one dungeon.

Still...love it though. Even with some of the most dull, boring grinding ever.

[Wraith Storm]

I used to play Zelda II at my cousins house when I was younger. I loved it then and I love it now.

Back in 2001 my friend and I each bought our own copies of Zelda II. We played through the game simultaneously. We would call one another and ask where the other was and it provided motivation for me to keep playing so I could beat it first.

The game is certainly harder than other Zelda games but regardless it is my favorite of the series. I love the experience system and how you can actually cast spells. To me it is a perfect blend genres and is a "true" action RPG.

I will say I am surprised to see so many people having issues (or at least hating on) getting the hammer at Death Mountain. I don't remember myself or my friend having problems there. Sure, it is a complex maze of caves and quite a long stretch but I enjoyed the challenge. I always considered it a fairly iconic section of the game. I don't remember it being any harder or easier than any other part the game.

[spongerob]

One other thing, Zelda 2 gave us one of the best Zelda music pieces of all time...

http://youtu.be/gBgFH27e4Dk

Agreed. I love this.

[treismac]

I actually think it gets more love because it's a Zelda title. If it were some random NES Adventure RPG like Faxanadu, Hydlide, or whatever I doubt it would have nearly as many fans. It being a Zelda game is what drives a lot of people to actually stick it out and put up with the BS.

I agree. For all we know in North America, Zelda II was originally some Doki Doki Panic game in Japan that got the Super Mario Bros. 2-esque makeover to get more sales.

[kainemaxwell]

I think the hate stems mostly from the difficulty. This is, at the moment, the only Zelda game I have not beaten yet, other than the Game and Watch one. I've made it to Death Mountain, but just have so much trouble there. I imagine it would be very off-putting to the Zelda fan who might die only a handful of times in an entire playthrough.

Never got past the final bosses either. Trying to get through Death Mountain even at the end was too annoying and tedious.

[Berserker]

See, I disagree. I think that you learn to FEAR the axe guys at that point - they only really give you two (maybe three) dark red ones you HAVE to go through to get to the hammer - and they're set up like minibosses. The orange ones are no challenge.

Oh, and fear them I did. The orange ones are no challenge now, but initially I found it pretty difficult to get the timing down. But yeah, at least when you run from those guys it's not all flyin' hatchets up the ass.

Have you gotten the hammer without the candle yet? That's when you know you play this game too much.

[Aussie2B]

I think Zelda II would get more love if it weren't so damn annoying. Losing experience from being hit, the way ambushes work, the distance you have to travel and how uninteresting the world map is, etc. It's the little things that really bog it down and make the game much harder and more tedious than it needs to be. And it's long.

But... I beat the game for the first time just a few months ago, and I did so over a few days of casual playing. o_O It's not remotely a long game. Frankly, I didn't encounter any of the problems you're stating here. Not all of the enemies drain EXP and those that do aren't a big problem (and anyone complaining about anything to do with the level up system needs to man up because it was actually changed to be made easier than the Japanese original). I don't even know what you mean about "ambushes" (unless you're just complaining about battles on the world map, which are usually easy to avoid). The distance to travel on the world map is miniscule. It's set up in such a way that you're always acquiring new items that let you skip past what you did before. It probably doesn't take more than a minute to walk from Zelda to the final segment of the game once you have the items to do so. In fact, I'd say the game is very streamlined, the opposite of bogged down and tedious. It's structured in such a way that you're always moving forward at a good clip.

Anyway, overall I think the game is good. I'd probably rank the first four Zelda games all roughly on par because each serves its own unique purpose, so it just comes down to what type of game experience you crave at any particular moment. I do like like other adventure games more than the Zelda series, though.

[wingzrow]

It was different. That scares and anger people.

Case in point, majora's mask, wind waker, final fantasy 12, breath of fire dragon quarter, chrono cross.

It's mostly an RPG thing.

[spongerob]

It was different. That scares and anger people.

Case in point, majora's mask, wind waker, final fantasy 12, breath of fire dragon quarter, chrono cross.

It's mostly an RPG thing.

So true. The populous fears change. At least the Japanese are open about it and embrace the fact they're comfortable with what they know. We pretend to want innovation and new shit but when we get it, we just want The Old Feeling again.

[TonyTheTiger]

But... I beat the game for the first time just a few months ago, and I did so over a few days of casual playing. o_O It's not remotely a long game. Frankly, I didn't encounter any of the problems you're stating here. Not all of the enemies drain EXP and those that do aren't a big problem (and anyone complaining about anything to do with the level up system needs to man up because it was actually changed to be made easier than the Japanese original). I don't even know what you mean about "ambushes" (unless you're just complaining about battles on the world map, which are usually easy to avoid). The distance to travel on the world map is miniscule. It's set up in such a way that you're always acquiring new items that let you skip past what you did before. It probably doesn't take more than a minute to walk from Zelda to the final segment of the game once you have the items to do so. In fact, I'd say the game is very streamlined, the opposite of bogged down and tedious. It's structured in such a way that you're always moving forward at a good clip.

Just because the EXP drain isn't incredibly devastating doesn't mean it isn't annoying. Just because the level system is easier than the Japanese version can just as easily mean the Japanese version was worse as it could mean the American version is "wussified." Just because battles are easy to avoid doesn't mean it isn't stupid design.

All of that isn't especially relevant to what makes the game good. At best it just proves the game isn't so bad.

See, that's what I've been saying. If I bring up a game that has an actual flaw (let's imagine a glitch that can corrupt your save file) the mere fact that said issue is "easy to avoid" or "only happens once or twice" or "is easily corrected with X, Y, Z" does not absolve it of being a flaw.

It's kind of like if I order a burger and it comes to me with a little bit of mold on the bun. And then if I bring it up I'm told, "At least it wasn't a big cockroach." I never understood the style of defending a game by pointing out how "not bad" the flaws are as a way of justifying their presence. If you're going to justify their presence then tell me why it's good that it's structured like that, not tell me "it could be worse."

Why is it good that some enemies drain experience? Why is it good that loading a save puts you in a completely different place from where you saved (attributable to Zelda in general)? Why is it good that enemies simply pop up on the map and charge at you?

[Hep038]

So true. The populous fears change. At least the Japanese are open about it and embrace the fact they're comfortable with what they know. We pretend to want innovation and new shit but when we get it, we just want The Old Feeling again.

Japan is so awesome and America is so lame.