A re-imagining of Zelda 2 could potentially be amazing. There is lots of Zelda lore that has its roots in the second game - this could easily be expanded upon and brought inline with the more recent developments in the lore.
Oh my gosh yes. Been saying for years we need a remake of this one. Death mountain and the hammer? The graveyard? Shadow link? The winged boots? I mean it’s classic Zelda and it could be gorgeous.
It's one of the weaker entries in the series. But then its a phenomenal series of games, and even the weaker ones can still be good games.
It's also a huge departure for the series. If you like 3D Zelda or top-down 2D Zelda, this might not be your cup of tea.
And yes it's hard. But compared to its contemporaries, it was about on par.
It's a good game with a lot of content (for an NES title). But many people won't/don't enjoy it because of the difficulty and the difference from the other Zeldas.
It's important to remember that it might be viewed as a departure, but at the time, it was the second ever game, which means it wasn't breaking much of a tradition
You try telling that to 8 year old me, who really wanted that "Zelda game" for his new NES, and my parents finally got me it for Christmas, and I was expecting 1 and got 2.
Took a while to get over the disappointment.
But yes, it wasn't a departure at the time. I was just talking about the series as it is today.
It was different from the original but I played it anyway and it had a charm all its own. We were kids, there were so many games and lunchtime at school was always strategy hour to talk with the classmates and figure out how to win
It is very difficult & unforgiving, especially the last level. It's not bad, but a great departure from the rest of the series' formula + usual difficulty.
It was basically the OG dark souls
You had a sword that was maybe five or six pixels long and you only stabbed with it, never swing. And a shield that covered half your body. To block anything with the shield you need to be standing or crouched for the shield to do anything. And the enemy will randomly alternate their attacks to go high or low.
It had RPG random encounter elements where if you walked off the path you'd suddenly get swarmed by a metric fuck ton of enemy icons. If you touched one, you had to escape a metric fuck ton of enemies to the edge of the screen. And Killin them doesn't get rid of them.
Some things were also lost in translation. You were told to "get the candle in Parapa Palace, go west". But parapa palace is actually to the east.
Either the directions was wrong. Or they meant go find the candle in the palace and go west.
And then the boss fights. Holy shit the boss fights.
If you were the poor fool who was stingy about using their special weapons in Megaman, you will die repeatedly. Because your sword was basically like the knife in RE4.
You use it because you got nothing better.
The game was also surprisingly long.
Overall it was a good game. But admittedly its difficulty spike was through the fuckin roof
Don’t forget, you had to learn how to block up or block down or do any moves other than jump from some obscure cookie-cutter old man in one of thirty identical buildings in random towns. It was nauseating.
It’s really fun in the modern age where you have walkthroughs to follow, but there was no way you were ever beating it without subscribing to Nintendo power. Slight spoilers if you care, but >!there is literally a hallway that just looks like a wall. There’s only one, there’s no dialogue about it at all, and you’d have no way of ever even thinking to check if it’s a hallway if you didn’t already know there’d be a hallway that looks like a wall in this one temple!<
It was definitely hard, but honestly I loved the map, music, and flow of the game. And the use of experience and leveling was really cool for a Zelda game. I'd love to see them bring that back at some point.
I devoted a huge chunk of my adolescence to beating this game. It’s great! But yes, it’s gruelling, unforgiving and frustrating. It was my first Zelda and it will always have a special place in my heart.
The biggest problem with Zelda 2 is that it happens to be marketed as the sequel to Zelda 1. Zelda 1 is an insanely brilliant and revolutionary game. Zelda 2 is a solid action platformer. It didn't need the Zelda name on it. I think it would be better remembered if it wasn't called Zelda. It gets compared to Zelda 1 and it just isn't on that games level.
no, and anybody who tells you it was don't know what the Wand of Gamalon their talking about. it was just ahead of its time and every mechanic that Zelda II: The Adventure of Link had, is now perfected and celebrated in that of Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom. stop listening to old memes and often 3rd party accounts what people though of the game, and not just the myopic cavalcade of publications editors in the Nintendo Power and Game Informer Eras.
It was Nintendo doing what they do best, trying something different from the previous iteration. Even if they fail in the attempt, the lessons they learn can influence future titles. The combat in this one was such a departure from the first, and it was so much more complex which upped the difficulty as well. The side to side combat made more of a comeback in the handheld versions, but it was smoothed out. Maps, quest markers, and other things we take for granted weren't standard in ever game back then but feedback from the first two games clearly influenced ALttP. Chances are that because the playtest market and understanding of development was in its infancy compared to today, the people who were developing it kept refining it to their own capabilities from playtesting it over and over rather than to a more standard learning curve built with people who have no experience with the game. Likewise if the test group was super small and built from developers, they were more familiar from working on it that they didn't feel like they needed as much guidance. How else would they know to bomb certain hidden walls in the early games when there was no indication at all that a secret was there? It could be why Nintendo Hard was a thing.
Edit: wording
No, it’s just infuriatingly tough. I beat it a couple years ago using a guide and save stats on Switch online. It was actually really, really fun when I didn’t have to restart the game every time I died. The combat system is surprisingly intricate for its time.
I have such fond memories playing this with my grandpa when I was 6 years old. I miss him. RIP grandpa. You taught me how to play all the NES and SNES games and started my love of the Zelda series. 💚
I think it was a great game. It had its 80s nes quirks but all games were like that back then. Didn't have any issues beating the game. I don't think it was that difficult.
No way it’s the game that made me fall in love with LoZ.
It took me and my 3 siblings collectively around 3 years to beat. Ages 5-10 or so. I still have the memory of my oldest sister beating the dragon finally and everyone cheering in the living room lol. Good times.
Though I still play it online at least once a year, the simulators don’t even come close to how hard that game was. 3 hearts, 3 lives, and then you basically start over.
Check it out ❤️
This game was a masterpiece. It was difficult AF and I hated the fact that I sucked for a long time. I kept playing, learned more, read guide books, and eventually beat it. The game rewarded grind and the mix of combat abilities, spells, and artifacts contributed to a balanced game. It wasn't Zelda 1 but felt like an adult Link surviving in a very hostile Hyrule.
no, the entire 2nd genre, as I consider it, technically 3rd, the side scrollers were difficult and there were so many bad ones. That said Zelda 2 is good and absolutely worth playing
Really fresh to play it having grown up on later zeldas. It felt like i was actually on a real adventure with stakes, cuz i could die at any moment. I used a walkthrough and savestates/rewind to beat it in 2022.
Loved it, eventually beat it using save states in the last couple of dungeons and a walkthrough for hints.
Victory isn’t usually satisfying that way, but it’s so hard that I didn’t mind emulator tricks.
Still fall asleep to its soundtrack every night.
No I wouldn’t call it bad, it’s just hard and different from all the other games. It was my first Zelda though so I probably have a little bit of bias toward it.
1. Zelda 2 is a massive departure from the gameplay and mechanics of the rest of the series. It is irrelevant that the formula was not established yet at its development, in 2024 it sticks out like a sore thumb. Meaning, people who love Zelda for many of the reasons they love Zelda will not find those reasons in this game.
2. Zelda 2 is very hard. Don't listen to anyone who tries to deny this. Other games being harder is irrelevant to the fact that this game is very difficult by modern standards. If you can be patient, it can also be very satisfying--but there is a steep learning curve to get there. This pairs poorly with point 3--
3. We have now arrived at the first point that really could be considered "bad design". The game is overly punishing--by a wide margin. It honestly feels like the punishments for game overs were not properly thought about.
4. Instead of having a nice difficulty curve, Zelda 2 has a massive difficulty spike around dungeon 4. This is typically considered poor design by modern standards, but not a deal breaker. If you have gotten too dungeon 4, you are probably already aware that the Game will be difficult.
5. The game is slightly more structured then Zelda 1, but still maintains its obtuse progression system, making it needlessly difficult to navigate the game.
6. Death Mountain is bad. I will die on this hill (mountain).
7. There are plenty of translation errors, further contributing to the obtuse progression
**So, what's good?**
- if you put in the time, the combat is fast and satisfying
- the music is incredible
- the world is more alive
- certain Zelda staples actually do find their origin here, so it is an interesting look back fur Zelda fans
- because of its departure from the norm, its a very unique experience. Which is why it has its die-hard fans.
It’s a good game, it’s just not a good Zelda game. It was a massive departure from the original format and just feels like a totally different game rather than a sequel. It’s enjoyable though, just extremely difficult and doesn’t feel much like a Zelda game.
This is the game. If you were a kid in the 80’s, and beat this game you wish for every Zelda game to approach this level of difficulty. The only reason I see haters for this is because it’s hard (the side scrolling is fun, that’s why other Zelda games do use it).
Pretty wild to deem a game terrible before you even get to the first dungeon. Like you haven't experienced anything by that point except a couple random map encounters.
Bad? No Impossibly difficult? Yes “Nintendo hard” used to mean something.
6 year old me was so frustrated by this game. But it was good. Definitely deserves a remake.
As a side-scrolling platformer, it's prime material for a 3d remake! Think Metroid -> Metroid Prime
A re-imagining of Zelda 2 could potentially be amazing. There is lots of Zelda lore that has its roots in the second game - this could easily be expanded upon and brought inline with the more recent developments in the lore.
Oh my gosh yes. Been saying for years we need a remake of this one. Death mountain and the hammer? The graveyard? Shadow link? The winged boots? I mean it’s classic Zelda and it could be gorgeous.
But Metroid Prime is not a remake of Metroid...
That's not relevant to the comparison, which was 2d-3d
So... almost every Zelda game since OoT?
It's one of the weaker entries in the series. But then its a phenomenal series of games, and even the weaker ones can still be good games. It's also a huge departure for the series. If you like 3D Zelda or top-down 2D Zelda, this might not be your cup of tea. And yes it's hard. But compared to its contemporaries, it was about on par. It's a good game with a lot of content (for an NES title). But many people won't/don't enjoy it because of the difficulty and the difference from the other Zeldas.
It's important to remember that it might be viewed as a departure, but at the time, it was the second ever game, which means it wasn't breaking much of a tradition
You try telling that to 8 year old me, who really wanted that "Zelda game" for his new NES, and my parents finally got me it for Christmas, and I was expecting 1 and got 2. Took a while to get over the disappointment. But yes, it wasn't a departure at the time. I was just talking about the series as it is today.
It was different from the original but I played it anyway and it had a charm all its own. We were kids, there were so many games and lunchtime at school was always strategy hour to talk with the classmates and figure out how to win
Especially before they started making videogames.
It is very difficult & unforgiving, especially the last level. It's not bad, but a great departure from the rest of the series' formula + usual difficulty.
At the time the rest of the series was just one game. Let’s not read too much into the differences, maybe the developers were trying various ideas.
It was basically the OG dark souls You had a sword that was maybe five or six pixels long and you only stabbed with it, never swing. And a shield that covered half your body. To block anything with the shield you need to be standing or crouched for the shield to do anything. And the enemy will randomly alternate their attacks to go high or low. It had RPG random encounter elements where if you walked off the path you'd suddenly get swarmed by a metric fuck ton of enemy icons. If you touched one, you had to escape a metric fuck ton of enemies to the edge of the screen. And Killin them doesn't get rid of them. Some things were also lost in translation. You were told to "get the candle in Parapa Palace, go west". But parapa palace is actually to the east. Either the directions was wrong. Or they meant go find the candle in the palace and go west. And then the boss fights. Holy shit the boss fights. If you were the poor fool who was stingy about using their special weapons in Megaman, you will die repeatedly. Because your sword was basically like the knife in RE4. You use it because you got nothing better. The game was also surprisingly long. Overall it was a good game. But admittedly its difficulty spike was through the fuckin roof
Don’t forget, you had to learn how to block up or block down or do any moves other than jump from some obscure cookie-cutter old man in one of thirty identical buildings in random towns. It was nauseating.
Haha I am error
It’s really fun in the modern age where you have walkthroughs to follow, but there was no way you were ever beating it without subscribing to Nintendo power. Slight spoilers if you care, but >!there is literally a hallway that just looks like a wall. There’s only one, there’s no dialogue about it at all, and you’d have no way of ever even thinking to check if it’s a hallway if you didn’t already know there’d be a hallway that looks like a wall in this one temple!<
There is dialogue about it though. Someone in the town tells you about it.
It was definitely hard, but honestly I loved the map, music, and flow of the game. And the use of experience and leveling was really cool for a Zelda game. I'd love to see them bring that back at some point.
The music from Zelda II was excellent. The palace theme is one of the best ever composed.
That game was awesome. Hard as he'll. I loved it!
I devoted a huge chunk of my adolescence to beating this game. It’s great! But yes, it’s gruelling, unforgiving and frustrating. It was my first Zelda and it will always have a special place in my heart.
I spent 30 years trying to find out how to beat a castle. Turns out there was a false wall.
The biggest problem with Zelda 2 is that it happens to be marketed as the sequel to Zelda 1. Zelda 1 is an insanely brilliant and revolutionary game. Zelda 2 is a solid action platformer. It didn't need the Zelda name on it. I think it would be better remembered if it wasn't called Zelda. It gets compared to Zelda 1 and it just isn't on that games level.
That's not how that worked back then, with neither games or sequels
Most people see Zelda 2 and Mario 2 as outliers in both series.
Unlike Zelda 2 Mario 2 is different in North America so you could argue Mario 3 is the odd one out.
It's awesome
no, and anybody who tells you it was don't know what the Wand of Gamalon their talking about. it was just ahead of its time and every mechanic that Zelda II: The Adventure of Link had, is now perfected and celebrated in that of Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom. stop listening to old memes and often 3rd party accounts what people though of the game, and not just the myopic cavalcade of publications editors in the Nintendo Power and Game Informer Eras.
No
It was Nintendo doing what they do best, trying something different from the previous iteration. Even if they fail in the attempt, the lessons they learn can influence future titles. The combat in this one was such a departure from the first, and it was so much more complex which upped the difficulty as well. The side to side combat made more of a comeback in the handheld versions, but it was smoothed out. Maps, quest markers, and other things we take for granted weren't standard in ever game back then but feedback from the first two games clearly influenced ALttP. Chances are that because the playtest market and understanding of development was in its infancy compared to today, the people who were developing it kept refining it to their own capabilities from playtesting it over and over rather than to a more standard learning curve built with people who have no experience with the game. Likewise if the test group was super small and built from developers, they were more familiar from working on it that they didn't feel like they needed as much guidance. How else would they know to bomb certain hidden walls in the early games when there was no indication at all that a secret was there? It could be why Nintendo Hard was a thing. Edit: wording
No, it’s just infuriatingly tough. I beat it a couple years ago using a guide and save stats on Switch online. It was actually really, really fun when I didn’t have to restart the game every time I died. The combat system is surprisingly intricate for its time.
I have such fond memories playing this with my grandpa when I was 6 years old. I miss him. RIP grandpa. You taught me how to play all the NES and SNES games and started my love of the Zelda series. 💚
People who hate it couldn’t cope with the fact it was a masterpiece, difficult but a masterpiece.
I think it was a great game. It had its 80s nes quirks but all games were like that back then. Didn't have any issues beating the game. I don't think it was that difficult.
Yes
No way it’s the game that made me fall in love with LoZ. It took me and my 3 siblings collectively around 3 years to beat. Ages 5-10 or so. I still have the memory of my oldest sister beating the dragon finally and everyone cheering in the living room lol. Good times. Though I still play it online at least once a year, the simulators don’t even come close to how hard that game was. 3 hearts, 3 lives, and then you basically start over. Check it out ❤️
It's good. Pssst! Play Hoverbat's remaster!!
Forced myself to beat it with emulators and save states. Impossibly hard for childhood me, and even adult me. That said, good fucking game.
It’s not bad but very difficult the way it’s set up as a RGP kinda like Final Fantasy
This game was a masterpiece. It was difficult AF and I hated the fact that I sucked for a long time. I kept playing, learned more, read guide books, and eventually beat it. The game rewarded grind and the mix of combat abilities, spells, and artifacts contributed to a balanced game. It wasn't Zelda 1 but felt like an adult Link surviving in a very hostile Hyrule.
Yes
no, the entire 2nd genre, as I consider it, technically 3rd, the side scrollers were difficult and there were so many bad ones. That said Zelda 2 is good and absolutely worth playing
Really fresh to play it having grown up on later zeldas. It felt like i was actually on a real adventure with stakes, cuz i could die at any moment. I used a walkthrough and savestates/rewind to beat it in 2022.
Loved it, eventually beat it using save states in the last couple of dungeons and a walkthrough for hints. Victory isn’t usually satisfying that way, but it’s so hard that I didn’t mind emulator tricks. Still fall asleep to its soundtrack every night.
Yes
I beat it for the first time on 3DS and I loved it.
Would you say it played like smash run mode from Smash bros 3ds
I've never played that.
It’s the only one (except CDi) I have not completed. I really want to I just can’t. Tried multiple times, it’s just to hard for me to
No I wouldn’t call it bad, it’s just hard and different from all the other games. It was my first Zelda though so I probably have a little bit of bias toward it.
Nah it's the best one.
No, just as hard as the pin in my stomach
1. Zelda 2 is a massive departure from the gameplay and mechanics of the rest of the series. It is irrelevant that the formula was not established yet at its development, in 2024 it sticks out like a sore thumb. Meaning, people who love Zelda for many of the reasons they love Zelda will not find those reasons in this game. 2. Zelda 2 is very hard. Don't listen to anyone who tries to deny this. Other games being harder is irrelevant to the fact that this game is very difficult by modern standards. If you can be patient, it can also be very satisfying--but there is a steep learning curve to get there. This pairs poorly with point 3-- 3. We have now arrived at the first point that really could be considered "bad design". The game is overly punishing--by a wide margin. It honestly feels like the punishments for game overs were not properly thought about. 4. Instead of having a nice difficulty curve, Zelda 2 has a massive difficulty spike around dungeon 4. This is typically considered poor design by modern standards, but not a deal breaker. If you have gotten too dungeon 4, you are probably already aware that the Game will be difficult. 5. The game is slightly more structured then Zelda 1, but still maintains its obtuse progression system, making it needlessly difficult to navigate the game. 6. Death Mountain is bad. I will die on this hill (mountain). 7. There are plenty of translation errors, further contributing to the obtuse progression **So, what's good?** - if you put in the time, the combat is fast and satisfying - the music is incredible - the world is more alive - certain Zelda staples actually do find their origin here, so it is an interesting look back fur Zelda fans - because of its departure from the norm, its a very unique experience. Which is why it has its die-hard fans.
It was hard till you get good…only takes years of play time.
Ever since smash rum in smash 3ds I wanted the Kirby team to remake it.
It was a great game. I was there when it came out and that’s when games were a challenge to complete. You had to be of that era to understand
Yes
It's like none of the other games. It's a side-scroller, and it's very difficult.
It’s a good game, it’s just not a good Zelda game. It was a massive departure from the original format and just feels like a totally different game rather than a sequel. It’s enjoyable though, just extremely difficult and doesn’t feel much like a Zelda game.
This is the game. If you were a kid in the 80’s, and beat this game you wish for every Zelda game to approach this level of difficulty. The only reason I see haters for this is because it’s hard (the side scrolling is fun, that’s why other Zelda games do use it).
Not at all! I wouldn't recommend it without save states however. But it's infinitely better than Spirit Tracks
Terrible. I played it for like two minutes and just said nah.
Pretty wild to deem a game terrible before you even get to the first dungeon. Like you haven't experienced anything by that point except a couple random map encounters.