A port of Zelda II: The Adventure of Link
Zelda II: The Adventure of Link is an action role-playing game, and a sequel to The Legend Of Zelda. The gameplay alternates between a top-down view (when traveling the land) and side-scrolling perspectives (when fighting, in a temple, or town). In the top-down view, Link cannot do much except for walking: in the side-scrolling action view, however, he can fight, cast spells, collect items and talk to people.
Reviews View More
Zelda II: The Adventure of Link is the rare video game that begs the player to not play the game in order to play the game.
By that oxymoronic phrasing I mean that due to the absence of checkpoints, it tempts the player to not interact with the systems of the game properly, if at all. Zero checkpoints hinders the combat, leveling and exploration, all because the punishment of a game over wastes so much time.
The worst part about this is that if not for that major blunder, I think I would really like this game. The side-scrolling combat and platforming is fun, the spells you learn are varied and interesting, the pixel art is charming, and the music is great. It has some obtuse moments, but for an NES game I can forgive some of that. The agonizing lack of checkpoints on the other hand, is unforgivable.
Postscript
I should clarify myself before anyone reading this (if anybody ever reads this) thinks that I am just complaining that the game is too hard. I like that the game and its enemies are difficult. I think its unique since most Zelda games are typically easier. My problem is that the game tests your patience more than it tests your skill. Most of the time when I died, I wasn't upset that I died but rather annoyed that I would have to spend 10-15 minutes getting back to where I was.
Also, technically I lied about there being zero checkpoints. At the final palace if you die you restart at the entrance. This exception was appreciated as I would have not been able to finish the game without it. However, it effectively taunts the player by showing them that it could have given them checkpoints the whole time but just didn’t due to some sadists at Nintendo in 1986.
By that oxymoronic phrasing I mean that due to the absence of checkpoints, it tempts the player to not interact with the systems of the game properly, if at all. Zero checkpoints hinders the combat, leveling and exploration, all because the punishment of a game over wastes so much time.
The worst part about this is that if not for that major blunder, I think I would really like this game. The side-scrolling combat and platforming is fun, the spells you learn are varied and interesting, the pixel art is charming, and the music is great. It has some obtuse moments, but for an NES game I can forgive some of that. The agonizing lack of checkpoints on the other hand, is unforgivable.
Postscript
I should clarify myself before anyone reading this (if anybody ever reads this) thinks that I am just complaining that the game is too hard. I like that the game and its enemies are difficult. I think its unique since most Zelda games are typically easier. My problem is that the game tests your patience more than it tests your skill. Most of the time when I died, I wasn't upset that I died but rather annoyed that I would have to spend 10-15 minutes getting back to where I was.
Also, technically I lied about there being zero checkpoints. At the final palace if you die you restart at the entrance. This exception was appreciated as I would have not been able to finish the game without it. However, it effectively taunts the player by showing them that it could have given them checkpoints the whole time but just didn’t due to some sadists at Nintendo in 1986.
This is one of the weaker points in the series for me. I don't really like the gameplay or leveling of it. The art style also hasn't aged very well. I also think it is needlessly difficult at times and I really don't find the obtuse puzzles that fun.