Topic: Good or Bad: Zelda II?

Its become a trendy thing online lately to think Zelda 2 is actually great, one of the best in the series, better than most people think, etc.

All the hate the game gets is worth it. It was essentially a failed experiment sandwiched in between the 2 games that established the frakework for the rest of the series. Zelda1 was the skeleton, Lttp added sme meat on them bones.

Take it from an old guy like me that was there when it release- Zelda2 was hard in the wrong way, had a bland overworld, non-Zelda-ish side-scrolling, etc.

Miyamoto himself listed it as the game he was most disappointed in throughout his career. Google it. There's opinions, and then there's Miyamoto's word, aka law, lol.

I personally love the game. I've maxed out my stats in it and have beaten it numerous times. However, I can see why it's regarded as the least popular Zelda game though. It's a huge departure from almost every other game in the series. Just know this: Link would have no Upward or Downward Thrust in Smash Bros w/o Zelda II.

I tried playing that game, and gave up due to its poor control, and steep difficulty. Honestly, its probably the worst in the series.

Have you ever noticed during the NES era that a lot of the 2nd games in each of the series were huge departures? Metroid 2 was portable, could save, and was differant in gameplay. Super Mario 2 for the US was a literally different game. Same with this Zelda. Chibi-Robo to Park Patrol. The list goes on and on.

Yeah, I have noticed that too. It was one of the great things of that era of gaming — companies were more willing to take risks and switch things up with sequels, as opposed to today, where sequels just tend to be more of the same (which isn't always necessarily a bad thing, either).

On another note, I love how some people seem to equate a game being hard with it being bad. Silly.

And I don't think "being trendy" is the reason the game is finding more defenders — it's more likely that people are actually giving it a shot (rather than listening to the "worst in teh seriez!!!" nonsense), and realizing that it's a good game. Also, calling it "non-Zelda-ish" (or whatever) isn't justified — when it came out, there was one other game in the series. There was no established "formula" for Zelda games at the time, so it was just as much "Zelda-ish" as the first game.

I don't like it.
The Zelda audience was not carved with this game to boot. Its a game, most Zelda games won't accept because its not too much like Zelda.

Other then the difficulty it is a good game. I don't recommend getting an original NES cart though. My reason for this (As pathetic as it sounds), you'll need restore points for this.

i like it. and you guys, seriously? zelda ii is a lot easier than half the NES library. it isn't hard, it's tedious. maybe it's just how i play it, but zelda ii is seriously not that hard. i like it. and, it's the only direct sequel to the original zelda game!

@TheOneHacker I can see what you mean. Now that think about it, you're right. It isn't as hard as it is tedious. I think what brings people (including myself beforehand) to think it's hard, is starting at the beginning, even when in a palace. (Exception of the last)

Also, something I want to say... why does everyone think the music in Zelda II is good? Really, be honest. The ONLY good music was the palace theme. Other then that, you could torture someone with the music.

Zelda 2 was a ok game but it would be my last choice of Zelda games to play...expect for the CD-i ones of course but I don't really count those as Zelda games.

I definitely don't call it a bad game since I managed to enjoy what it intended, even if it is mostly unmerciful.

this is what makes the game tedious. in actuality, i think the game is only hard if you've never played an NES game before. but anyone will find the game tedious, regardless.

i only died 111 times in my initial playthrough (without even making it to the final palace) before restarting with a different strategy in mind. then i only died 22 times in my second playthrough (more than half of that was at the final palace, where i really didnt care about dying because i wouldn't have to start the game over).

It's good, but not as good as the original. And much more challenging.

This is fine, but I think it's more Final Fantasy than Zelda. It isn't really my favorite, standing by the fact that you are sent to the beginning when you die, and this is a classic, meaning it's very hard. And I mean VERY HARD. Combat in this game, which it uses side-scrolling, isn't easy. So if you want a challenge, but if you want a challenge that respects your progress, buy Zelda. If you are a street-rules "I don't care if I start again" person or if you just want a plain old classic, buy Zelda II.

Zelda 3 was a combination of the first two Zelda games, albeit mostly from the first Zelda due to the gameplay. Still, little instances, such as the magic meter, the town and homes, the hammer, glove and boots, returned in Zelda 3. Also, Zelda 2's music, especially the town theme, is still very memorable, in a good way, and probably the best in the series along with Wind Waker's.

Zelda 2 was ahead of its time and limited by the NES, which Miyamoto stated as his regret with the sequel (e.g., he wanted bosses to be larger, but moving characters could only be about as large as Bowser on SMB). Plus, Zelda 2 (along with Zelda 1) motivated groups like From Software to make Demon Souls and Dark Souls, which are what I imagine new Zeldas would be if they kept the gameplay style of Zelda 2 with polygon graphics. Instead we have Zelda 3 repeated with most polygon-based Zeldas; not inherently bad, but predictable and less inspiring each time.

Even with its dated visuals and tortuous difficulty I appreciate Zelda 2 as an experiment much in the way Majora's Mask was, but more so (MM was still basically OOT in gameplay, but with timed events). The Zelda experiments now seem to be only superficial (e.g., motion controls, cel-shading, modes of transportation, 3D mixed with Flatland Link), akin to putting new labels on a can of cola. Play Zelda 2 if you want to see how the series once was and dream of what it could be.

Because ya'know taking your one unique game and turning it into a side scroller like ALMOST EVERTHING ELSE ON THE NES is taking a HUGE risk and TOTALLY not playing it safe. * biting sarcasm *

Zelda II: The Adventure of Link! Great game!!

Without it the video gaming world would not have Dark Link, Upward/Downward Thrusts, or this dude.

I don't get why people think the game is so difficult. It isn't if you level up. Don't try Death Mountain until all your stats are at least 4, and you'll be fine.

BTW, Zelda II is getting released today on Wii U Virtual Console in NA.

http://www.nintendo.com/games/detail/cG5yRiBn0KqqiqMdx11pxwRk...

Even if all your stats are maxed out, there are still knock backs into pits and of course the final dungeon.