While the first Legend of Zelda is still widely praised, opinions on Zelda II: The Adventure
of Link are generally more negative.
In a 2013 interview in-fact, Miyamoto himself half jokingly referred to it as the only bad
game he's ever made.
The distaste for the sophomore Zelda effort usually falls into one of two categories.
Zelda II's gameplay is too different from the franchise norm, or the game is simply
too difficult to play.
So is Zelda II: The Adventure of Link a bad game, or is it misunderstood?
Let's take a look.
Zelda II takes place a few years after the events of the first game.
While Ganon is gone, Hyrule still isn't thriving and some are waiting for the death
of Link, so Link's blood can be dispersed on the ashes of Ganon, reviving him.
Pretty dark.
One day, Link notices a mark on his own hand, and he immediately notifies Impa.
Impa determines the mark is a key to the door that does not open.
Behind the door, is a sleeping Princess Zelda.
The manual states she has been locked away in eternal sleep for a long time, meaning
this is a different Zelda than the one the first game.
It turns out, all princesses born since the curse, would be named Zelda until the curse
is broken.
Anyway, Impa tells Link of a Prince long ago who attempted to persuade Princess Zelda into
revealing the locations of the triforce pieces, but she refused.
A magician then threatens to place her under a sleeping spell if she didn't reveal their
location.
Princess Zelda wouldn't budge, and was put into eternal sleep.
Impa now realizes it is up to Link to break the spell and she gives him 6 crystals and
a letter.
The 6 crystals are to be placed on 6 statues hidden in 6 palaces.
Doing this will lift a spell on the Great Palace found in the Valley of Death.
Conquering this challenge will reward the Triforce of Courage.
With all three triforces, Link will have the power to lift the curse on Princess Zelda
and bring peace to Hyrule.
The adventure then begins with Link at the altar of the sleeping Princess at the North
Castle.
The mission for the player is clear, visit the 6 palaces to unlock the 7th, and obtain
the third Triforce to free Princess Zelda.
While the backstory is considerably more elaborate than the first game, the premise remains the
same.
Explore the overworld for dungeons, now called palaces, beat the bosses in said palaces,
and save the day.
However, while the structure is similar, the game mechanics are completely different.
The Legend of Zelda takes place in an overhead view with complete freedom of movement in
both the overworld and the dungeons.
At first, Zelda II appears to have full movement in the overworld, but this is a facade.
The overworld is now a grid of sorts, with Link moving from space to space.
The Palaces, and all action areas for that matter, are now side scrolling.
This change offers some advantages and disadvantages.
On the positive side, sprites are generally twice as big and therefore twice as detailed.
Second, and I think what the designers were most interested in, the sword play is deeper.
Link can attack high and attack low and also block high and block low.
Enemies then follow suit, attacking high and low, blocking high and low, or some combination
thereof.
Because the sprites are significantly taller, the designers were also able to properly animate
enemies so the appropriate telegraphs are given to the player.
The disadvantage is Link is limited to one plane of movement.
In the first game, Link had the freedom to move in two planes, offering a more 3D-like
sense of freedom and movement.
In Zelda II, Link can only move vertically by jumping, limiting the movement offered
to the player.
Another major change is the overall structure of the adventure.
In the original Legend of Zelda, the entire world was open to the player, giving endless
possibilities as to where one could go.
This had the negative effect of not giving the player enough direction on where to actually
go to complete the mission at hand.
NPC characters were few and far between, and their guidance was often vague or non-existent.
Zelda II addresses both of these issues.
First, there are towns to visit and they are filled with people actually seeming to embrace
Link's quest to wake the sleeping princess, rather than express indifference.
While some are not helpful, none hinder the player either.
While some clues are still vague, others give direction into how the game actually works.
When first starting Zelda II, there are two towns to visit, and some caves.
The game dissuades venturing off the beaten path by making the caves dark.
A boulder blocks another path, again limiting exploration before being properly equipped.
While some may view the lack of freedom to explore wherever they want and suffer the
consequences as a negative, one of my biggest pet peeves in any video game is getting stuck
and not knowing how to progress.
In this regard, Zelda II does a surprisingly good job using the layout of Hyrule and items
to nudge the player along avoiding the dreaded, "where do I go now" feeling.
This doesn't mean there isn't room for exploration though.
In order to expand Link's health bar, the player will need to explore the overworld.
Different grid spaces may contain goodies, while others could contain a trap.
This another design element I don't particularly care for in Zelda II.
In the original game, a player was tasked with bombing walls or burning bushes if they
wanted to locate all of the extra heart containers.
There were some unwritten rules though, like only burning bushes in the middle of the screen,
or bombing southward facing rocks.
In Zelda II, one will need to visit every grid space on every screen.
While some locations feature different tiles to grab the player's attention, others do
not.
Zelda II takes this a step further by hiding a mandatory item in an unmarked grid space,
which is extremely annoying.
Continuing on with the changes, Zelda II introduces magic.
Each of the villages in the game contains a hidden wise man who will teach Link a new
spell.
The first of these is Shield, which will reduce the amount of damage Link takes when getting
hit.
My favorite part about the magic is effects are not limited by time or use.
Instead, they last until the next time a segment of a level is loaded.
The palaces are not a screen-by-screen affair like in the first game.
Instead, they may scroll left and right for a while before loading a new area.
This allows the player to get decent use out of each effect and not feel like they are
wasting the precious resource.
As expected, a player is required to fully explore each Palace as they contain mandatory
items necessary for progress.
Parapa Palace contains the candle for example, which illuminates caves allowing for progression
through Hyrule.
Another thing gating progression is side quests.
With the ability to see in caves, the player can explore the nearby caves in the Tantari
Desert and earn a magic container, expanding the magic bar similar to the health bar, and
find a trophy.
The trophy is an item needed in the next town.
A women thanks Link for saving the Trophy, which allows the player to enter the home
and learn a new spell, Jump.
Jump is necessary in the next cave system.
If the player doesn't have the jump spell, they'll eventually reach an impassable platform.
I like how this limits the amount of area the player needs to backtrack to and explore
in order to find the missing trophy, unlocking the missing spell.
This is perhaps my favorite part about Zelda II, how it guides the player forward while
rarely being to vague.
Another thoughtful touch in Zelda II is giving the player the Life Spell before the second
Palace.
As everyone knows, Zelda II is a difficult game, so I appreciate the game offering the
ability to heal early on.
Enemies don't drop health either, so the only way to heal during Palaces or battles
is with this spell.
Enemies will randomly drop Magic Jars which can replenish the magic needed to restore
health, so this works well enough.
Another nice bit of design I appreciate is in the second Palace.
The item obtained is the Handy Glove, allowing link to punch through designated blocks.
Again there is a moment in the Palace requiring this ability in order to proceed, and I appreciate
little touches forcing the player back if they haven't fully explored the area up
to a certain point.
Unfortunately, it is around this point players will likely discover one of the most annoying
aspects of Zelda II: The Adventure of Link.
Link has a life count of 3, and getting a game over does not return the player to the
beginning of a palace or cave , but rather all the way back to the North Castle where
the sleeping princess lies.
This means after three deaths the player has to retread through the overworld, and caves,
to reach the point where the game over was received.
On my first playthrough this was a massive pain as I couldn't make it back to the second
Palace with a full stock of three-lives, putting me at a disadvantage on every attempt.
After the second Palace, the player needs to venture through Death Mountain.
The overworld portion is a maze of sorts, with some paths leading the player away from
the eventual exit.
As best as I can tell, there is no NPC character offering clues at how to navigate this maze
either, which is a shame because there is a pattern, but it only makes sense in hindsight.
A ton of brutal enemy encounters are also featured in Death Mountain and again on my
first playthrough I died dozens of times before reaching the exit, receiving a game over,
and then having to start all the way back at the princess.
It is a brutal gauntlet and in my opinion, the most difficult section found in the The
Adventure of Link, on a first-time playthrough.
If a player only has one life left, they are better off just dying before venturing out
so they have a life stock of three.
I don't find this style of difficulty progression to be correct.
Having such a brutal section of the game be featured so early is discouraging, and it
wouldn't surprise me if this is where many players simply put the controller down and
played something else.
Thankfully, the reward at the end of death mountain is the hammer, which breaks overworld
rocks.
This allows the player to bypass death mountain on all future game overs, which is wonderful
to say the least.
Most of the breakable rocks are found in the same section of the overworld as well, giving
the player a little sidequest obtaining another necessary trinket for the next town, in addition
to heart and magic containers.
In the next town, the player is introduced to a new type of upgrade, a new attack: the
downward stab.
Again I'm thankful this is presented early because it is such a useful attack.
As enemies are stunned after receiving damage, the downward stab can be used to sort of infinitely
stunlock enemies until they parish, a great reward for skillful jumping.
The trinket obtained earlier will also reward the player with another spell needed for progression,
Fairy.
This turns Link into the mythical creature allowing for flight.
Similar to the Jump spell, as Zelda II locks new areas of Hyrule behind abilities, there
are only so many places a player can go to find the missing item needed to move forward.
The third palace, like most of the palaces, follows the similar pattern of walking down
corridors finding keys, unlocking the next area, obtaining an item, and ultimately arriving
at a boss, which needs to be defeated so a crystal can be placed into a stone statue,
bringing Link one step closer to unlocking the Great Palace to obtain the Triforce of
Courage.
What I most like about The Island Palace is there is one moment where I felt like I was
being clever.
There is an interesting room filled with breakable blocks, where enemies are lurking.
In the cramped corridors, these enemies are especially tough.
However clever players can actually cause both enemies to drop into a pit, allowing
them to be bypassed completely.
As best as I can tell, after nearly 4 playthroughs, this is the only moment in the entire adventure
where there is a moment like this.
Whether this was an intentional puzzle, or a happy accident as the player isn't supposed
to be able to break bricks above yet, I can't be certain, but I thought it was noteworthy.
Anyway, after obtaining the raft from this palace, yet another area of Hyrule is unlocked.
Again the player needs to visit a couple of towns, retrieve and return a trinket, get
a new spell, learn the upward stab, and hunt down the next palace.
It is also about this time in Zelda II where I have fallen behind on XP and have to start
grinding.
In addition to expanding the Health and Magic bars, these attributes can be leveled up.
Along with the attack, each can be leveled up 7 times, to level 8.
XP is earned by defeating enemies and bosses, though enemies will randomly drop treasure
bags containing XP, and there are some hidden in caves.
Even better, after placing a crystal in a stone statue, the player's XP will automatically
round up to the next value, assuring something is leveled up upon completion.
Unfortunately, getting a game over resets the player's XP back to 0.
This might not seem like a huge deal, but this is my biggest pet peeve with Zelda II.
For example, take this moment from my recorded playthrough.
The boss of the third palace rewards 300 XP, and I am less than 300 XP away from leveling
up.
This means when I beat the boss, I'll level up, and I'll level up a second time when
I place the crystal in the stone statue.
Except I die on my last life, sending me back to Zelda.
As all of the keys and the raft in the Palace have been obtained, there is little incentive
to revisit the entire Palace.
Treasure Bags containing XP are also gone, making it even harder to get back to the previous
XP value.
When I make it back to the boss, I am well short of XP needed to level up when defeating
the boss.
Now, I am all for a player being punished when they play poorly and die.
Without some sort of consequence for death, there is little incentive for proficient play,
which decreases player engagement.
But in my opinion, taking away experience is too harsh of a punishment in Zelda II.
This game design decision then forces the player to grind for XP.
You see, leveling up Attack, Magic, and Health is incredibly important.
As the adventure progresses, enemies dish out more damage and take more hits to go down.
Some might even require the use of magic in order to defeat them, or avoid them.
As the player's magic level increases, the magic requirement of each spell is reduced
allowing a player to cast more spells.
If a player falls behind on experience, the already difficult game will begin to feel
impossible.
This is where grinding comes in.
As the player wanders the overworld, three icons will randomly appear on the screen.
One icon represents an easy encounter and the other a tougher one.
The enemies contained in these battles changes depending on where the player is in Hyrule,
along with the terrain Link is currently standing on, be it swamp, woods, cemetery, grassland,
etc.
Certain encounters are more fruitful than others, with enemies being far easier than
the amount of XP received for defeating them.
Additionally, each town in Hyrule contains a character which will fully restore Link's
health and a second to restore magic.
This means careful players should be able to grind through enemy encounters for XP and
then restore their health before dying, assuring one can level up when needed.
But defeating the same enemy over and over and over for 30 to 60 minutes, at a few key
points in the adventure, isn't fun, just tiresome.
Had the designers allowed the player to keep their earned XP, the grinding element could
have been reduced, and instead be an optional component for inexperienced players looking
for an advantage in the later stages of the game.
Another element I eventually grew tired of are the side scrolling segments found in the
overworld.
Crossing a bridge will generally trigger a side scrolling segment for example.
Maze Island is filled with cave sections.
Making one's way to Darunia Mountain Town triggers mountainous sections.
This stone dodging area is repeated three times.
And of course, there is death valley, filled with incredibly challenging side scrolling
segments.
The worst part is, some of these sections have to be repeated a second time as one backtracks
from their destination.
And of course, a game over means they will have to be repeated.
Needless to say, repeating segments do to the game over system or just the design of
the overworld in general, and the resetting of the player's XP, makes Zelda II feel
padded out.
If the player retained their XP after a game over, and respawned at the last visited town
rather than at the North Castle, the overall gameplay experience would be much smoother
and less exhausting.
Moving on, I should talk about the graphics and presentation.
It is clear the developers were going for a more mature look when designing Zelda II.
Link is proportioned more accurately as are the enemies.
The side view presented also allowed the developers to animate legs and arms more realistically,
with the sword motions being smoother.
And of course, the sideview is needed for the high/low combat system.
Even more impressive is how the artists worked within the 3-color limit for sprites.
Despite most enemies being twice as big, the artists did a wonderful job working within
the hardware limitations and delivering detailed models with reflections, weapons, and facial
features always looking natural rather than compromised.
However I must say Link's walking animation is weird.
His inside leg never fully extends making him look like he's skipping about the palaces
and side scrolling sections.
I found it extremely awkward at first and I still don't find it very appealing, but
after a while I got used to it.
Still, this is definitely not my favorite walking cycle found on the NES.
For as strong as the sprite work is, the tile work is decidedly not.
The overworld looks every bit like the grid of squares that it is.
The first game actually features rounded corners and other angled tiles, helping the world
feel somewhat organic and less like a grid of squares.
The palaces are even worse.
Occasionally there are visually appealing areas, with pillars and windows given some
semblance of detail.
But a vast majority of the time the Palaces are just the same two or three tiles repeated
over and over and it looks basic, boring, and uninteresting.
The outdoor areas are not any better.
Just compare the wooded areas in Zelda II, to Mega Man 2.
The depth and detail is severely lacking in Zelda II and I find the visuals have aged
poorly.
What hasn't aged poorly is the soundtrack.
The overworld theme is a remix of sorts of the iconic original but extended.
The more varied instrument selection and more complex composition offer something more pleasing
than the original, even if it isn't as well remembered.
The palace music is also excellent, with an old world vibe.
The composition is lengthy and deep, with quiet moments building tension before a whole
orchestra is let loose.
This is far superior to the quick looping melody found in the original game.
The towns themselves have a laid back lazy tune, which is fitting for areas almost void
of any danger.
The battle and cave music is the opposite, with a quick beat offering a sense of danger
and excitement.
While the style hasn't really been replicated in the future instalments of the series, I
do think the slightly more mature soundtrack is terrific and matches the grown up Link
character.
This brings us back to the question asked at the beginning of the video, is Zelda II:
The Adventure of Link a bad game, or is it misunderstood?
In my opinion, the quality of Zelda II: The Adventure of Link comes down to the combat.
The reason Zelda II is considered a difficult game is because of the sword play.
In theory, the gameplay here in Zelda II should be excellent.
The large sprites and detailed animation make it easy to understand when to block high or
low, and when to attack high or low.
Unfortunately, the execution isn't good.
Attacking the way the designers seemed to intend will result in slow, clumsy, and downright
frustrating encounters.
Don't get me wrong, it works fine on some enemies, like the Stalfos skeletons.
But on a vast majority of enemies, the best way to defeat them is by jumping and slashing
on the way down.
If timed correctly, Link's sword will strike the enemy regardless of their shield position,
bypassing the combat system entirely.
In fact, once a player gets the timing down, a vast majority of Zelda II becomes far less
frustrating and infinitely more playable.
However a part of me can't help but feel like avoiding the intended combat system,
and instead abusing strange collision behavior, is poor design.
Enemies with projectiles do present a conundrum too.
I noted earlier enemies will be briefly stunned when taking damage.
Well the same goes for Link.
When hit, there is a brief period where he cannot attack.
This means there are plenty of times when the jumping strategy simply doesn't work,
and the normal swordplay is inadequate.
Needless to say, when the simple act of attacking an enemy is nearly impossible, something is
wrong.
There are other oddities as well.
The Goriyas are particularly difficult in the beginning of the adventure because if
the player fails to deflect the boomerang with their shield on the initial throw, it
comes back around to the other side.
This means the player has to dodge in front, and behind, all while trying to attack.
The Dairas are another early problem enemy.
Their axe does a massive amount of damage and the window to strike is extremely brief.
The red Dairas are even worse as they throw axes.
There appears to be a randomness to their throwing as well, and jumping over an axe
won't always lead to a window to attack.
Thankfully, the reflect magic can repel axe and mace projectiles, but the spell isn't
offered when the player first encounters these enemies, which would have been helpful.
It feels like a missed opportunity as I feel magic management is one of the stronger aspects
of Zelda II: The Adventure of Link.
Determining when to use a life spell to restore health, a shield to reduce damage, reflect
to take down wizards with high XP, jump to avoid enemies, or even fire, which is necessary
for a few enemies, is engaging.
It offers a layer of depth to the gameplay and is a nice evolution of the relatively
basic item management offered in the original game, where not wasting bombs was about as
deep as it got.
Therefore, my biggest gripe with Zelda II: The Adventure of Link isn't that it is too
different from the rest of the series.
I'm all for experimentation and evolution and sometimes wonderful experiences can be
found despite gameplay not matching a fan's expectations.
My issue with Zelda II is the difficulty is just absurd.
It feels like yet another 80's game where the designers felt they needed to crank the
difficulty up to 11, fearing series veterans might get bored or something.
There is no reason to restart players back at the North Castle after three deaths, and
resetting the XP to zero, other than to artificially increase the difficulty through unfair design
choices.
Another lackluster feature are the bosses.
Some of these are actually alright.
The first boss, Horsehead, requires the player use a jump and slash in order to hit the head.
Combining two skills to perform an attack is exactly what one would expect when fighting
a boss character.
It also clues the player in to the fact a jump and slash can be incredibly effective
in other situations.
Helmethead works in much the same way, requiring a jumping attack to inflict damage.
This concept is further expanded upon with Boss Gooma and Barca.
While I'm not certain if it's required, both are much easier to fight when casting
a Jump Spell.
The jump spell makes timing a leap over the mace attack quite reliable.
Just jump when the mace first comes out, and Link should land just in time to get in a
strike.
Barca is an interesting dragon, and the high jump and downward stab do a great job inflicting
damage to the dragon's head without Link taking touch damage.
However, many bosses can be cheesed at the side of the screen.
Ironknuckle can be downward stabbed when pinching him at the edge of the screen.
Carock can easily be defeated by crouching at the edge of the screen, as he rarely appears
there.
The final two bosses feature similar edge of screen weaknesses.
Thunderbird hovers near where Link is, so by staying at the edge, the player can avoid
most of its projectile attacks as half the bird is off screen.
And most infamous of all is Shadow Link, who is easily defeated with more edge of screen
shenanigans.
These odd boss behaviors make Zelda II: The Adventure of Link feel unpolished.
Overall, I come away from Zelda II with mixed feelings.
On one hand, parts of the adventure are very thoughtful, specifically progression and magic
usage.
As a first time player, I appreciate the game slowly revealing new areas of Hyrule through
items and spells.
The candles lights up caves, the hammer breaks immovable rocks, the raft crosses a sea, and
the flute calms the river devil.
While it limits the players ability to explore the entirety of the overworld upon turning
the game on, it also prevents first time players from getting stuck.
The palace designs are also fine.
While I think forgoing an in-game map is a step backwards, these are relatively straightforward
with far fewer branching paths.
The most creative gameplay moments are also found in these 7 palaces, and they are significantly
better than the other side scrolling action areas.
But for all of the structural things Zelda II gets right, the game mechanics are substandard.
The game is best played ignoring the sword and shield mechanics and instead rely on jumping
and abusing the game's odd collision detection.
There were numerous times where I downward stabbed through an enemy, instead of actually
engaging in combat.
This isn't a game where an average player can pick up and play, but rather, it may take
hours of trial and error before one can get a good feel for the combat and finally make
progress.
The learning curve is so steep, Zelda II is almost unapproachable.
It just lacks the Nintendo playability and polish I've come to expect from the developer.
And this is where my expectations for Zelda II are not met.
I can get over the switch from overhead to side-view, this isn't a deal breaker to
me.
I welcome the experimentation.
What I can't get over is the lackluster combat, knock-back into death pits from respawning
enemies, limited life counter, restarting back at the North Castle, and the way the
game resets the player's XP after a game over.
All of these elements add up to a frustrating gameplay experience.
There is nothing friendly about this game and it would be difficult for me to recommend
Zelda II to anyone outside of fans of 8-bit hard games.
I certainly wouldn't call the game bad, but as a whole, Zelda II is definitely, not,
very good.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét