Zelda II: The Adventure of Link = Underrated Classic

[The Manimal]

I still think it's a shame this game gets badmouthed as the weak link of the older games. It was a departure from the gameplay of the first game, but although different, it was NEARLY equally as good. The first game was a bit too easy. However, I still have not beaten this game....(haven't beat the Thunderbird). The palaces are well thought out, the music is one of the best ever in a video game, and the challenge is definitely there. If there is a Zelda game that could be classified as an Adventure/RPG...this is it. Talking to villagers, finding hidden items, which you bring back to them for help in reward. Overworld map, brought down to random battle scenes. Very much an RPG, though battles are based on dexterity rather than wit. Also, the increasing levels of life and magic strength, use of spells. I really believe that there should have been at least one more Zelda game made in this 'vein'. Maybe some letters to Nintendo could convince for a GBA title?

For the record, this was my actually my first NES game, other than the SMB/Duck Hunt that came with the system. Another favorite of mine is the artwork for this game. The drawings of Link walking down the road with the sword...classic. The drawings of the Ironknuckles..great.

[Arqueologia_Digital]

In my opinion, it´s not a bad game and i don´t think it´s the weakest of Link saga, but i don´t think it´s a CLASSIC

[Buyatari]

You know its funny you should say that.

Having never really played it much growing up I just poped this game in today. My first thought was man this game is easily the worst Zelda game in the series. After I died I just didn't fell like playing again and turned it off.

I much rather liked Neutopia II as the rip-off sequel than the Adventure of Link.

The graphics are bad..real bad. Why is the over-head map built out of perfect squares?

I didn't enjoy it at all. If you took out Link and inserted a generic character into his role would you still enjoy this game? Or do you only stick with it because it is a "Zelda" game.

Q- What is the legend of Zelda?
A- Well basiclly the legend states that this girl will get into trouble and some poor sucker has to risk life and limb to save her butt. Only then does he learn that she has a habit of doing this every 100 years or so.

I would like to see a Zelda game. One where Zelda is the leading character. A girl can only be rescued so many times before re realize she is actually running away.

Ever think Zelda just has a thing for Gannon and doesn't want anyone to think less of her. The secret is out. The Legend of Zelda Gannon's love child gone bad.

Adam

[badinsults]

I loved the music, and the play control... however the enemies are far too unforgiving for my taste. I couldn't get past the second dungeon, even after about 50 tries. I prefer Super Adventure Island II (just got it today) which plays much like Zelda II, but is much more fun.

[NE146]

I think you will find that a lot of Zelda fans DO in fact like Zelda II and rank it pretty high actually. I know it's one of my favorites. Matter o' fact I'd rate it above even games like Oracle of Ages/Seasons.

It really is a good game. Yeah it's not 'classic Zelda', but think of it as "ZELDA GAIDEN" maybe. It still rocks. Would I still like it without Link as the lead character? I think so! I know when I first played it I had no such "Zelda" loyalty or expectations. (I played Zelda 1 next after enjoying 2 so much).

But if the guy were an arabian character or whatever, there is still definitely something more to the game. Don't forget it's classic Nintendo... actually even better, it's MIYAMOTO Nintendo... so there is that very noticeable quality and evolving gameplay and discovery that reveals itself more and more the further you get into the game. It's hard to judge it by the first couple of stages.

Let's not forget the outstanding soundtrack (still one of the best imho.. i wish they'd revive it outside of Super Smash Bros. x_x ) and the swordplay in the game (especially later on when you battle the darknuts with shields) gets fast and furious. I really do enjoy this game although I will admit that time has taken a small toll on it and you can see the age here and there. But it's really minimal. I still wouldn't have a problem playing through it again even today.

[kainemaxwell]

I could never get past the Thunderbird either myself...

[Raccoon Lad]

Leveling up SOOooooo BORING.....

I give it a thumbs down.

[Raedon]

I'd rather play Popful Mail.

[The Manimal]

If it was another character besides Link, would I enjoy it? Yes! NE146 has points. Early on you are restricted on what you can do...and I guess that might discourage a player. But as you move on, you can do so much more. You start with a wimpy jump, but will get a spell that will make you jump really high. Also, gameplay improves 300% when you get the downward strike and upward strike. The palaces, caves, and mazes are just fantastic. The action IS fast...especially when you pretty much have to run through the latter palaces attacking baddies in the meantime.


The palace music is my second favorite VG 'tune' next to MM2's 'intro'.


As far as levelling up..maybe I am used to it? Same as going back and forth in Dragon Warrior fighting Goldmen for hours on end, trying to build up my gold

[BenT]

So, back in 1989 or whatever, I was stuck on the shadow link at the end of the game. I called Nintendo's gameplay counselors, hoping for a good tip.

"How do I beat the shadow at the end of Zelda II?"

"Use your sword."

"Um... alright, bye."

That was my first and only phone counseling experience.

[calthaer]

The game is fun but it's nowhere near as fun as the other ones. First off, there are very few secrets in the game. No bushes to burn down, no caves to blast open, nothing. The only thing they have are some places on the map that are otherwise unmarked where you can go in and get an EXP bag or something. Secrets and exploration are far more integral to a Zelda classic than all the sword-swatting, and killing things is just about all that Zelda 2 is about. The palaces are just not as fun as the underworld, and having to stab up and kneel and stab and all that crap to kill the knights just gets old. Better far are the Zelda enemies that require a bit of ingenuity to kill.

Finally, many items seem lackluster because they're only used a few times. Like the raft - you cross the ocean with it. Great. What about crossing to an island to get a heart piece or something? It has one use, and that's it. Boring.

I certainly would not rate it higher than the Oracle duo. The Oracle duo at least has hidden things that you can discover by using the harp of ages / rod of seasons in clever ways. Zelda 2 is still somewhat fun, but I agree - it's no classic. It tries to do action as compelling as Mega Man and Contra, and it's not as good as them. Tries to do RPG elements like Final Fantasy / Dragon Warrior and it only slows the game down. Didn't even try to do one of the first things that made the first Zelda so fun, which was the sheer number of secret things to discover. Meh.

[YoshiM]

I thought it was a pretty sweet hybrid that is still enjoyable today. It kicked the difficulty up a notch (or 5) and the platforming elements injected the necessity for some more skill. It was different, it was fresh. It took me a while to beat that sucker. I'd rank it up there with the original, along with Link to the Past and OoT. I've never played the Oracle games (no GB), I found Majora's Mask unappealing, Wind Waker was good but the ocean exploring was too drawn out, and Link's Awakening (when I had a GB) was okay but the item quests just seemed like so much fluff.

[Sylentwulf]

I liked it myself, I'd have to rate Zelda games as follows:
#1 - Zelda 1 + 3 - Both REALLY GREAT, Flawless.
#2 - Zelda 2 - Good Game, something different
#3 - All of the other Zelda games (ALL GB Zelda games, N64, and GC Zelda games, didn't care for any of them.)
#4 - CDI Zelda games... OK, I haven't played em, but come on, look at them.