• 59 results
  • 1
  • 2
Posted by Hailinel (23702 posts) 6 months, 1 day ago

Poll: Would you want to play a new Zelda game in the vein of Zelda II? (129 votes)

Yes! 57%
No! 33%
See Results! 10%

I just spent the past few hours watching a longplay of Zelda II: The Adventure of Link (suck it, Golden Globes), and while the game certainly has its issues (Obscure pathways, obtuse, Castlevania II-style puzzles and hidden items), it's at least a little surprising to me that Nintendo never tried revisiting this particular style of Zelda game after their first attempt. The mix of overworld exploration, side-scrolling towns, dungeons and combat, an RPG-style experience system and the traditional manner of item gathering is actually a really cool mix that, if it were done today with more polish, it could be a fantastic game. So given that they had success revisiting A Link to the Past with A Link Between Worlds, would you be interested in playing a new Zelda II?

#1 Posted by Video_Game_King (35851 posts) -
Not really.

Online
#2 Posted by AMyggen (2464 posts) -

Why not? I've always preferred the ALttP style of 2D Zelda, but Nintendo could do some really interesting things with a Zelda II style.

#3 Edited by HatKing (5795 posts) -

Yeah, I think you're right, done today with more polish and the lessons learned from other modern 2D outings, I think it could be something special.

#4 Posted by ArtisanBreads (3721 posts) -

I would be very interested in seeing them take another crack at it.

Nothing wrong with switching things up a bit.

#5 Edited by SteadyingMeat (1105 posts) -

I mean, I'd definitely like a Zelda game with a lot more RPG stuff in it, but I don't really think I'd be into one that was mostly side scrolling. I'd be cool with neat little side scrolling parts, though, like in Link's Awakening. (A game which I just spent the last few hours watching watching an LP of :P).

#6 Posted by afabs515 (1005 posts) -

I mean, I'd definitely like a Zelda game with a lot more RPG stuff in it, but I don't really think I'd be into one that was mostly side scrolling. I'd be cool with neat little side scrolling parts, though, like in Link's Awakening. (A game which I just spent the last few watching watching an LP of :P).

This is pretty much how I feel. I definitely think Zelda would benefit from more RPG elements, but I'm not sure how I would feel about the side scrolling parts.

#7 Edited by Uppercaseccc (85 posts) -

Yes because it would not be a puzzle game, and if you ask me it's the puzzle game nature of Zelda that holds it back for me.

#8 Posted by BisonHero (6055 posts) -

Maybe.

I could never tell if I was just complete garbage at the game, or if it just gets wicked hard after like the first temple, because I think there was some cave shortly after beating the first temple that just completely destroyed me every time.

So as long as it was properly modernized (Link Between Worlds style), and gave you a wee bit more guidance than in the NES days, I'd give it a shot.

#9 Posted by TruthTellah (8436 posts) -

I think a modernized version released for the 3DS could be super cool. I still have fond memories of the original.

#10 Posted by crithon (3059 posts) -

even the combat of zelda 2 was interesting. RPG elements, new game plus on a NES game was pretty mind blowing at the time.

I'm starting to think of the Zelda series is just weird experimental series where anything can change on the next game.

#11 Edited by Nightriff (4866 posts) -

No

Online
#12 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11423 posts) -

Zelda II is such a weird, one-off experiment that I'd really be interested in seeing what the Nintendo of today would do with a game like it. Probably tell you to take a break every 30 minutes...

#13 Edited by Bane122 (783 posts) -

Hell yeah, I love Zelda 2.

Online
#14 Posted by Hailinel (23702 posts) -

No

Why not?

@afabs515 said:

@steadyingmeat said:

I mean, I'd definitely like a Zelda game with a lot more RPG stuff in it, but I don't really think I'd be into one that was mostly side scrolling. I'd be cool with neat little side scrolling parts, though, like in Link's Awakening. (A game which I just spent the last few watching watching an LP of :P).

This is pretty much how I feel. I definitely think Zelda would benefit from more RPG elements, but I'm not sure how I would feel about the side scrolling parts.

I think part of the reason I like the sidescrolling is that in some ways, it makes the game feel like a proto-Valkyrie Profile with the way exploration is handled. A modern Zelda with that sort of style could be really cool.

Online
#15 Posted by Rabidlamb (20 posts) -

I would really like to see a sequel to a Link between worlds where the 2d on walls part had similar gameplay to zelda 2. That way you get a good mix of both.

#16 Posted by Tajasaurus (786 posts) -

Yeah. That Adventure Time game was pretty fun.

#17 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

I hate this style so damn much.

#18 Posted by Video_Game_King (35851 posts) -

Probably tell you to take a break every 30 minutes...

Maybe they'd make it a Majora's Mask spin-off where you can only progress through the game in thirty minute intervals that constantly repeat themselves.

Online
#19 Posted by TechHits (1365 posts) -

Yes because it would not be a puzzle game, and if you ask me it's the puzzle game nature of Zelda that holds it back for me.

what else is there to zelda?

#20 Posted by Hailinel (23702 posts) -

@techhits said:

@uppercaseccc said:

Yes because it would not be a puzzle game, and if you ask me it's the puzzle game nature of Zelda that holds it back for me.

what else is there to zelda?

Exploration, combat, story, all generally presented in different amounts depending on the game in question.

Online
#21 Posted by TheHT (10816 posts) -

I'd play a Zelda Metroidvania. Dunno if that's exactly in line with the way Zelda 2 played, but it sounds like you could still have towns, an overworld, levelling up, along Metroidvania-esque-like dungeons.

#22 Posted by Taku128 (789 posts) -

Zelda II is my favorite 2D Zelda, so yes.

#23 Posted by Hailinel (23702 posts) -

@theht said:

I'd play a Zelda Metroidvania. Dunno if that's exactly in line with the way Zelda 2 played, but it sounds like you could still have towns, an overworld, levelling up, along Metroidvania-esque-like dungeons.

It's a little like that. Zelda II doesn't actually require you to revisit dungeons, but there's definitely a sort of back-and-forth to the exploration and the way certain paths are closed off until you have the right item for the job.

@taku128 said:

Zelda II is my favorite 2D Zelda, so yes.

This impresses me, actually, because I can't recall a time when anyone else I know of has said that.

Online
#24 Edited by tread311 (352 posts) -

I would find it pretty interesting if they took another shot at it. That game has some charm that still holds up.

#25 Posted by Rafaelfc (1311 posts) -

I never really liked Zelda II but I think they could bring some interesting new ideas to the format.

#26 Posted by BeachThunder (11652 posts) -

Yes, but really, I just want more 2D Zelda games, it's been a long time since Minish Cap ;__;

Also, I think Zelda II really gets a bad wrap. I really enjoyed it once I started using save states.

#27 Posted by MildMolasses (3213 posts) -

Yes. That is all I've ever wanted out of the Zelda series

#28 Posted by JackSukeru (5899 posts) -

Sure. Together with the original it was one of the two Zelda's I played a lot growing up and I've thought about what a remake (or something like that) would look like many times. It's tough though because I'd want them to do something to enhance the combat, add some variety, yet its mechanics are so simple and pure that it's hard to imagine them adding anything without having to also greatly change the pace of how it is played.

Should they add a shield button so that actively defending could have a bigger role? A second row that you and enemies can move between in the 2d sections? Different weapons?

Things I really like about Zelda II is stuff like the spells system, where you had a limited, but farm recoverable, pool of magic that you had to manage so you had enough for stuff like the "Jump" spell that made platforming easier, "Shield" spell for tough sections with strong or plenty of enemies, and the all important, but costly, "Life" spell. There's just something about being given a set of tools and using them to find your own way.

Lives could certainly stand to go, unless you were given a set number of "retries" upon entering a section (like a dungeon or the series of caves that make up Death Mountain) and when you ran out you would only end up at the sections entrance, though even that'd probably be too harsh by Nintendo's current standards. I'd still like it though, ha ha.

#29 Posted by Hailinel (23702 posts) -

Sure. Together with the original it was one of the two Zelda's I played a lot growing up and I've thought about what a remake (or something like that) would look like many times. It's tough though because I'd want them to do something to enhance the combat, add some variety, yet its mechanics are so simple and pure that it's hard to imagine them adding anything without having to also greatly change the pace of how it is played.

Should they add a shield button so that actively defending could have a bigger role? A second row that you and enemies can move between in the 2d sections? Different weapons?

Things I really like about Zelda II is stuff like the spells system, where you had a limited, but farm recoverable, pool of magic that you had to manage so you had enough for stuff like the "Jump" spell that made platforming easier, "Shield" spell for tough sections with strong or plenty of enemies, and the all important, but costly, "Life" spell. There's just something about being given a set of tools and using them to find your own way.

Lives could certainly stand to go, unless you were given a set number of "retries" upon entering a section (like a dungeon or the series of caves that make up Death Mountain) and when you ran out you would only end up at the sections entrance, though even that'd probably be too harsh by Nintendo's current standards. I'd still like it though, ha ha.

It's really interesting to think about, because after nearly twenty-five years, there are so many ways that they could improve on the concept without fundamentally altering the core structure. More buttons on the controller allow for more actions, which could do a lot to enhance the combat. Also, whether such a game was made for the 3DS or Wii U, the second screen would be perfect for a map display. The maps wouldn't even need to be strictly one 2D plane, either. They could go for layers within a single plane, or perhaps town/dungeon layouts that have multiple layers to them, akin to Valkyrie Profile. And like you said, the magic system allowed for plenty of diversity in approaching obstacles while forcing the player to not rely on it too much.

I also agree that lives really don't need to be in such a game. They obviously added that extra bit of stress and challenge to Zelda II, but there are definitely ways to hinder the player for dying that are at least somewhat more forgiving (though you're right in that modern Nintendo would probably err on the side of taking it easy on the player).

Online
#30 Posted by ripelivejam (3473 posts) -

a lot of people kinda want zelda to be something it isn't, and there really aren't that many games out there that does what Zelda does so why take away what is unique to it?

i wouldn't mind SOME changeups ala ALBW, but to try to turn it into an also-ran RPG would just be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. ALBW showed you can keep the traditional Zelda framework and add some truly unique mechanics to it.

#31 Posted by Hailinel (23702 posts) -

a lot of people kinda want zelda to be something it isn't, and there really aren't that many games out there that does what Zelda does so why take away what is unique to it?

i wouldn't mind SOME changeups ala ALBW, but to try to turn it into an also-ran RPG would just be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. ALBW showed you can keep the traditional Zelda framework and add some truly unique mechanics to it.

That's the thing, though. Zelda II isn't "something Zelda isn't." It's history and a part of the series, just as much as A Link to the Past and Ocarina of Time are.

Online
#32 Edited by Zeik (2195 posts) -

It's the only Zelda I flat out do not like, so not really. Maybe they could take the core concepts and make a better game now, but I don't think I'd enjoy it beyond a one-off thing.

#33 Posted by chrissedoff (2075 posts) -

That would be a good idea. Lose the tendency toward having reams of boring expository dialog that has infected the series. I like Zelda II a lot. It's one of the first games I ever finished and probably the third best Zelda game in existence.

#34 Edited by EuanDewar (4694 posts) -

id love to see a Zelda done like Dark Souls/Demon's Souls. To me the Souls series is in many ways a different manifestation of the same principles that drive the Zelda series. I dunno, just shootin the shit really. i dont really play zelda games that often so i realise im pretty much just saying "make zelda so its like this other game i love" but its all a bit a fun innit

#35 Posted by crithon (3059 posts) -

I don't know, nintendo has an interesting philosophy when it comes to making each game unique. You don't see 2 mario spin off games identical, which why I wonder, at what point would making Zelda 2 into metroid or castlevania? Because those are the two biggest influential 2d games out there and it's been close to 25 years since Zelda 2 don't know how to imagine what Zelda 2 might look like. Maybe Order of Ecclesia? Because that had a better combat system with more difficult bosses. But using more magic in zelda games sounds a nice change of pace.

#36 Posted by Demoskinos (14524 posts) -

Nope. Never been a fan of Zelda.

#37 Posted by The_Ruiner (986 posts) -

#38 Posted by crithon (3059 posts) -
#39 Edited by Sinusoidal (1268 posts) -

I hated Zelda 2 mostly because it wasn't more Zelda 1, but the format definitely has potential.

#40 Posted by Slag (3923 posts) -

if it had a more generous save system than yeah I probably would. When I think about it that was the only thing that really turned me off the game. I hated having to remake that incredibly long run to end of the game everytime I messed up on the final boss.

Definitely prefer my Zeldas top-down though.

#41 Posted by Hailinel (23702 posts) -

@slag said:

if it had a more generous save system than yeah I probably would. When I think about it that was the only thing that really turned me off the game. I hated having to remake that incredibly long run to end of the game everytime I messed up on the final boss.

Definitely prefer my Zeldas top-down though.

Just the act of giving the game a more generous save system would go a long way toward improving the formula. It's easily one of the most punishing things about the game.

Online
#42 Posted by Soapy86 (2619 posts) -

I really like Zelda II a lot. I would say I probably have more fond memories of that one than I do the original. However, I'm not sure I would like to see the series go that route again. I think it had a lot of cool things going for it that I would like to see implemented here or there in future games, but I don't really have a desire to see Zelda become more of an RPG type of game.

Random aside: I think the side-scrolling sections of Link's Awakening were pretty cool.

#43 Edited by Slag (3923 posts) -
@hailinel said:
@slag said:

if it had a more generous save system than yeah I probably would. When I think about it that was the only thing that really turned me off the game. I hated having to remake that incredibly long run to end of the game everytime I messed up on the final boss.

Definitely prefer my Zeldas top-down though.

Just the act of giving the game a more generous save system would go a long way toward improving the formula. It's easily one of the most punishing things about the game.

Definitely.

and it doesn't really add anything positive to the experience other than being difficult for the sake of being difficult.

Games Like Rogue Legacy and Dark Souls have demonstrated much better ways to handle being challenging while not making players endlessly repeat long sections of the game for no benefit other than a faint hope of making it to the next rare save opportunity. My gaming time is limited these days, I have little desire to make the same 45 minute platforming run over and over just for a shot at a boss.

My evidence-less speculation is the save system was function of NES hardware memory limitations and game design theory at the time. I really doubt Nintendo would do it the same way today.

It's an interesting thought to consider, imo if there is any Zelda that could be remade significantly better than the original version it definitely would be Zelda II (as opposed to ALttP which was and still is pretty dang great). There was a lot of unrealized potential there.

#44 Posted by Hailinel (23702 posts) -

@slag said:
@hailinel said:
@slag said:

if it had a more generous save system than yeah I probably would. When I think about it that was the only thing that really turned me off the game. I hated having to remake that incredibly long run to end of the game everytime I messed up on the final boss.

Definitely prefer my Zeldas top-down though.

Just the act of giving the game a more generous save system would go a long way toward improving the formula. It's easily one of the most punishing things about the game.

Definitely.

and it doesn't really add anything positive to the experience other than being difficult for the sake of being difficult.

Games Like Rogue Legacy and Dark Souls have demonstrated much better ways to handle being challenging while not making players endlessly repeat long sections of the game for no benefit other than a faint hope of making it to the next rare save opportunity. My gaming time is limited these days, I have little desire to make the same 45 minute platforming run over and over just for a shot at a boss.

My evidence-less speculation is the save system was function of NES hardware memory limitations and game design theory at the time. I really doubt Nintendo would do it the same way today.

It's an interesting thought to consider, imo if there is any Zelda that could be remade significantly better than the original version it definitely would be Zelda II (as opposed to ALttP which was and still is pretty dang great). There was a lot of unrealized potential there.

I want to say that the way that the save system was handled in Zelda II was likely a holdover from the original game. If you died in the overworld, you were always forced to restart at the first screen every time, even if you were running toward the final dungeon. It's at least more lenient in that if you died inside a dungeon, you could continue from that point, but if you saved and quit, as far as I recall (it has been a long time since I played the first Zelda) you always started back at the very first screen and had to make your way back to the dungeon. Even A Link to the Past made some improvements in that regard.

Online
#45 Edited by Brackynews (4039 posts) -

<metalgearawesome>Hellllllllll yeaaaaaa!</metalgearawesome>

Speaking as someone who wrote Clayton Walnum letters about corrections to his guide in VG&CE.... I might be a little biased towards Z-II.

I honestly feel bad for anyone who didn't play it with an Advantage though. Not just the turbo (which was, as the Klepeks say, "clutch" for farming XP) but the combat nuances of a frame-perfect downthrust+lowstab made short work of Iron Knuckles.

Also Iron Knuckles.

Also please play Zelda II FPS right after taking Destructoid's quiz.

#46 Posted by JJOR64 (18894 posts) -

Heck yeah! While I never got very far into Zelda 2, I did enjoy what I played of it.

#47 Edited by JackSukeru (5899 posts) -

@brackynews: The downward thrust and fighting Iron Knuckles are the best parts of the game! Fighting Iron Knuckles practically IS Zelda II.

Y'know, what Nintendo really should do is pull a Bravely Default and make a Zelda II-2 game with evolved mechanics under a brand new franchise name, with a different setting, plot and characters. It's different enough from what's become established Zelda conventions at this point that reviving it as something different might be the way to go.

#48 Posted by xyzygy (9871 posts) -

It's my least favorite Zelda game and so I picked no because I would rather play another overhead or 3D Zelda, but really, if they actually do make one like this, I'd probably play it.

#49 Edited by Slag (3923 posts) -

@hailinel:

Bumping this thread since I've been thinking about it lately.

I've been playing through Guacamelee of late and it really struck me how much of that game draws from Zelda II. There are some stark obvious differences (such as the Luchador theme of course and the focus on combo melee combat), but there are some heavy influences such as the town and dungeon designs.

It may be the closest to Zelda II done right I have ever seen and boy is it fun! Given the easter eggs and achievements in the game it's clear Zelda II was a conscious influence for the designers.

#50 Posted by Hailinel (23702 posts) -

@slag said:

@hailinel:

Bumping this thread since I've been thinking about it lately.

I've been playing through Guacamelee of late and it really struck me how much of that game draws from Zelda II. There are some stark obvious differences (such as the Luchador theme of course and the focus on combo melee combat), but there are some heavy influences such as the town and dungeon designs.

It may be the closest to Zelda II done right I have ever seen and boy is it fun! Given the easter eggs and achievements in the game it's clear Zelda II was a conscious influence for the designers.

That's pretty cool! Not having played it, I had heard that Guacamelee had a very strong Metroidvania vibe, but it's interesting to hear that it pulls a lot from Zelda II.

Online