Zelda II - AoL appreciation thread
- Thread starter SantaC
- Start date
Shikamaru Ninja
任天å ã® å¿è
The game was directed by Tadashi Sugiyama. The same man who directed F-Zero X, Pilotwings (SNES), Super Mario Kart (with Hideki Konno), and F-Zero Xpansion Kit.
Definitely one of my favorite Zelda games.
Definitely one of my favorite Zelda games.
Shikamaru Ninja
任天å ã® å¿è
Last I saw, he became a producer. Mario Kart: Double Dash.
I don't understand the obsession with everyone sorting the Zelda games into some sort of pecking order. I like them all. But I will say that Zelda 2 gets overlooked too much, it's just as much of a Zelda game as an other. I love that Minish Cap has a downthrust, even if it is useless.
Z2 still has some of my favorite Zelda tunes, I wish some of the newer games use the Z2 music more, isntead of just recyling the same old LTTP crap.
Is Battle of Olympus any good for NES? It looks almost exactly the same as Z2, but I never had a chance to play it in-depth. Is it worth playing?
Z2 still has some of my favorite Zelda tunes, I wish some of the newer games use the Z2 music more, isntead of just recyling the same old LTTP crap.
Is Battle of Olympus any good for NES? It looks almost exactly the same as Z2, but I never had a chance to play it in-depth. Is it worth playing?
There is one screenshot that displays this new camera angle but it has been stated before in a few interviews. Whether it is confirmed or not, I cannot be sure.jett said:Where is this overhead camera thing coming from? You aren't all deducing that from that one picture, right?
hooded pitohui
Member
AoL rocks. I picked up the Famicom Mini release this month and finished it three times. If only this game could get the Zero Mission treatment!
Red Scarlet
Member
It's still fun to play on the GBA. The GBA version seems easier than the NES one though, for some reason. But at least they didn't mess with it like with part 1 (don't know if that was fixed in the US release of Zelda 1 for the GBA).
Always loved this game. I don't remember the hints for any NES game being that helpful back then, AoL was certainly better then Castlevania 2, but I seem to remember my first time through the game finding out most things by just exploring instead of using the hints.
I remember bring in awe when my friend beat the last dungeon while only being at level 6 for everything.
I remember bring in awe when my friend beat the last dungeon while only being at level 6 for everything.
As a 12 yr old boy, this game was a huge disappointment for me. It wasn't a failure, because I played all the way through it .. and had some fun moments. But, at the time, so much more was expected from Zelda, and it failed to deliver. That is why it gets a bad rap.
It would be like Bungie releasing an above-average Light Gun (or RTS) game for Halo2. It would still be Halo2 and it would be a solid game .. but you bought the game wanting a Halo style game.
My biggest gripes for it back then was that the Overworld was hideous looking. The townspeople were basically signposts (no interaction) .. and then the Dungeon levels felt like uninspired Metroid.
After about 3 dungeon levels, you figure out to level yourself up before the next one, and it makes the game pretty easy. Zelda 1 took me 3 weeks of playing to beat it ... Zelda II took about a week. I didn't feel like I got my money back.
The evidence that Zelda II was a failure, was that Nintendo NEVER tried that playstyle again. Although, I agree with a previous poster that OoT shares more with Zelda 2 then it does Zelda 1. It's like Nintendo had a vision of how they wanted Zelda to be .. but the constraints of 2D didn't allow them to achieve this. So they had to wait.
I'm not bashing .. it is a solid game, and better than 75% of all the other NES games at that time. But a higher level was expected.
It would be like Bungie releasing an above-average Light Gun (or RTS) game for Halo2. It would still be Halo2 and it would be a solid game .. but you bought the game wanting a Halo style game.
My biggest gripes for it back then was that the Overworld was hideous looking. The townspeople were basically signposts (no interaction) .. and then the Dungeon levels felt like uninspired Metroid.
After about 3 dungeon levels, you figure out to level yourself up before the next one, and it makes the game pretty easy. Zelda 1 took me 3 weeks of playing to beat it ... Zelda II took about a week. I didn't feel like I got my money back.
The evidence that Zelda II was a failure, was that Nintendo NEVER tried that playstyle again. Although, I agree with a previous poster that OoT shares more with Zelda 2 then it does Zelda 1. It's like Nintendo had a vision of how they wanted Zelda to be .. but the constraints of 2D didn't allow them to achieve this. So they had to wait.
I'm not bashing .. it is a solid game, and better than 75% of all the other NES games at that time. But a higher level was expected.
The AoL power blast can, for most intents and purposes, be ignored -- it has hardly any range AND it fails to damage most enemies. AoL allows for actual swordplay -- limited, but more than simply pressing the A button. LttP return to mostly simplistic slashing, while Ocarina brought in more battle mechanics. Both AoL and Ocarina seemed to have more emphasis on the swordplay itself.goompapa said:In AoL Link has a powerblast from the sword. Use of magic in Oot is about as deep as in ALttP and nowhere near AoL. So yeah, I think you are nuts.
Thematically, AoL and Ocarina are both darker than LttP, and both deal with an "adult Link." Both Ocarina and AoL have healthy amounts of character interaction -- yes, it's rather limited in AoL, but it's still a focus of the game. Character interaction seems more scaled back in LttP -- less emphasis on interaction and more on item quests.
Ocarina and Adventure of Link seemed to use "spells" more often while Link to the Past only used magical items (okay, this is a lousy comparison, I admit).
Eh. Personally, Ocarina always felt more like a 3D Adventure of Link than it did a 3D LoZ/LttP/Link's Awakening.