Zelda II - Why all the hate?

[Baloo]

As I sit here playing through Zelda II on my NES for the very first time after owning the game for years now (And subsequently cursing at my TV for its difficulty), I wonder: Why is Zelda II most hated amongst Zelda fans? The game is a challenge and not in the same style of gameplay as the original, but I think this is a game just as compelling as the original when it comes to gameplay, depth, and overall fun. The graphics are great as well, and the music is good too, if not as memorable.

Anyone else here a fan of Zelda II?

[bangtango]

No hate here. It was and still is my favorite Zelda game. Loved the music, loved the environment of the palaces and loved talking to people in the towns.

I do think the side-scrolling, higher difficulty, cheap deaths, difficult enemies, three lives and experience points systems were all big factors in the lukewarm opinions about Zelda II today.

At the time, though, it was well received and didn't it still sell a shitload of copies, even being named as a catalyst for a (phantom) "chip shortage" Nintendo used to talk about during that time period?

[dap9984]

I love this game I admit I wasn't a fan of it until I sat down one day and played all the way through it. My appreciation for it's insane difficulty is at a new level and has become one of my favorite NES games. The game starts off pretty difficult which makes it hard to want to get into. But once you start leveling up and you find that Hammer (oh God, the pain) then the game is quite fun! I think I might try and beat again here soon

[jimpoleshuk]

I think that the second one was too much like a platformer with it primarily side scrolling. It just didn't have the charm of the first one. It would appear that Nintendo thought that too, subsequent Zeldas were top view until 3D became available.

[TonyTheTiger]

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.

It's just not worth putting up with all the bullshit to find the somewhat enjoyable game underneath when there are so many better entries in the series.

[jimpoleshuk]

It's just not worth putting up with all the bullshit to find the somewhat enjoyable game underneath when there are so many better entries in the series.

Well put, there's a good game in there but you do have to put up with some BS to find it

[kupomogli]

This is my favorite game in the Zelda series and also one of the most enjoyable platformers out there. Like someone else said, it's a difficult game at the start and only gets harder the further into it you get. Death Mountain is everyone's least favorite part of the game, but I've always through it was pretty manageable.

I think that the main reason that most people don't like it is because it's not your standard Zelda type. A lot of Zelda fans now probably played the later Zelda titles, and Zelda 2 being the only game in the series with different gameplay isn't liked as much because of just that. It's not what they're used to playing as a Zelda title. I could be wrong, but that's probably the reason.

[TonyTheTiger]

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.

[Suikoman444]

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.

[Cobra Commander]

I beat this game when I was 11. I guess gamers these days can't handle that kind of a challenge.

[bangtango]

I beat this game when I was 11. I guess gamers these days can't handle that kind of a challenge.

I used to beat it soundly when I was in my NES "zone" between ages 10-14 or so. Used to play NES several hours a day most of the week. I can still beat it today, but it is more difficult to me than it used to be.

Maybe ten years ago, I remember reading a Zelda retrospective in a really popular publication (probably Game Informer or EGM) and they wrote a couple paragraphs about Zelda II, one of which was something like:

"To this day, still arguably the most difficult in the Zelda series, if you can master Zelda II, then consider yourself a pretty good gamer."

[Sunnyvale]

IMHO, the hate has its roots in the release of Zelda II. Any of you other greybeards remember the 'microchip shortage' that kept it off the shelf for an extra year +? (strange how other games got cranked out then. I guess Zelda uses mystical chips?) Damn game was in my strategy guide, but I didn't see it for a year or so later. After all that wait n hype, it was pricey ($60-80, if memory serves). And like so many other hyped-up things, it had some mammoth expectations to live up to. I know that has nothing to do with side scroller complaints, but that game has never had a day it wasn't in the crosshairs. After 25 years of people bitching about it, it became part-n-parcel of 'gamer-geek' opinion.

[skaar]

Zelda II is amazing.

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

[Icarus Moonsight]

I'd rather Wonderboy Monster Land or Dragon's Trap thanks. Better games that do the same thing without the fuss. I don't dislike Adventure of Link, more like "meh". It is the only Nintendo console Zelda game I'm fine owning ports of and not the original. I haven't decided on Spirit Tracks yet, but it's not looking favorable either. The NES-Mini GBA cart and GC Collection disk is more than enough Zelda 2 for me.

Error still rules, regardless.

[Cobra Commander]

Zelda II is amazing.

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

I've never done this before, but....THIS ^^^

[Boltorano]

Zelda II was the 3rd game in the series that I played, after A Link to the Past and Link's Awakening, and I actually did enjoy it for a while.

I probably would have finished it to if it weren't for having to restart at the same place whenever you loaded your save.

[DDCecil]

I love Zelda II. Ever since my parents rented it for me back in 1988 as a surprise, I've always enjoyed it. Today, it and Link's Awakening are the only 2 in the series I can go back to and not get bored within 5 minutes.

[Zing]

And it's long.

I recently replayed through both with zero outside help and the second game was a significantly shorter play-through. The over world is basically a map screen, and the dungeons take about the same amount of time as in the first game.

[cynicalhat]

its not that hard of a game people. seriously. beat the first palace, slog through death mountain using some good old fashioned platforming skills and get the downward thrust. then grab the hammer, grab a few extra pieces of life and beat palace 2 and on. Cake. oh yeah and beat the aligators by "duck n' slicing". jump over the only red one you don't meet one step up and take your lumps and love it.

[Zing]

I probably would have finished it to if it weren't for having to restart at the same place whenever you loaded your save.

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?

[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.