/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.924909]

Honestly curious: how many of you consider the original Legend of Zelda to be better than A Link to the Past, or for that matter, any of the other Zelda games?

It wasn't until earlier this year when I replayed the game that I realized how great the non-linearity and feeling of discovery feels. You actually feel like you're going on an adventure, and the fact that you can play it in any way you want with little consequences for exploring and trying new things adds to the experience in a big way. It's a sensation that the later Zelda games, which are very Point A to Point B, don't live up to.

[Anonymous No.924926]

I agree with you, OP. Nintendo went to shit starting with the SNES. That's when they began catering to children and casuals.

[Anonymous No.924927]

I absolutely consider it better than ALttP. I don't even like ALttP that much.

[Anonymous No.924930]

Although i do love the non-linearness of LoZ1, it's far too cryptic, unless you've played it before or have a guide, it's very easy to get totally stuck. (understandably though, it was an NES game)
I also found my self spending more time grinding for rupees to buy key items and healing potions than i spent in dungeons.

[Anonymous No.924929]

>>924927
agreed

[Anonymous No.924943]

I agree, it takes some doing getting used to the controls and the flow, since later Zelda games are lot more relaxed with many empty squares, easy enemies and items everywhere. There's no time to relax and running out of bombs and rupees is a pain.

I really like how organically Hyrule opens up after you get upgrades, it's not arbitrary shit like a door that needs a specific key, set behind dialogue heavy scene after you completed a bunch of linear events. You just go and explore.

also that feeling of being a badass after pulling a spin attack.

[Anonymous No.924950]

>>924943
>spin attack
>first Zelda

Huh?

[Anonymous No.924959]

>>924930

LoZ 1 and 2 were meant to be the kind of games where you scour every inch of the game world, which I think they suceeded best in OoT, where getting even the most trivial gossip stone text felt awesome.

I see the rupee grind as training, to be honest, It really helped me get better at the combat, just killing octorocs and getting used to enemy patterns.

[Anonymous No.924965]

>>924909
>It wasn't until earlier this year when I replayed the game that I realized how great the non-linearity and feeling of discovery feels. You actually feel like you're going on an adventure, and the fact that you can play it in any way you want with little consequences for exploring and trying new things adds to the experience in a big way. It's a sensation that the later Zelda games, which are very Point A to Point B, don't live up to.

Well OP, the thing is LoZ was one of the first games released on the NES. Over the NES's lifespan, games were increasingly "user-friendly". Compare the pause menu hints and tips in Kirby's Adventure to any early release NES game like Double Dragon(which never said in-game what the stars did) or Punch-Out!!!. It was a general trend for games to be more straight-forward and accessible to newer gamers, to the point when the SNES came out many games had on-screen control diagrams and what-not.

If gamers actually wanted that or not is debatable, but on the Nintendo side it seems to me more of a design philosophy change after Castlevania 2 and LoZ 2. Both games had a solid marketing press with Nintendo Power, but still were not as popular as their predecessors. While this was due to unexpected genre shift, Nintendo probably took it as a sign that gamers wanted more straight-foward games.

At least, that's my theory on why there was a change.

[Anonymous No.924975]

>>924950

you can do a spin attack by holding the sword button and circling the D-pad, timing has to be perfect though, or you can do a similar attack to Gameboy Zelda standard sword swipe attack as well, they are easier to pull off and more effective since they cover a bigger range than the standard stab.

[Anonymous No.924978]

>>924965
>but still were not as popular as their predecessors

what? LoZ1 sold more than Alttp

[Anonymous No.924986]

>>924950

You can change direction with your sword out and effectively attack in multiple directions with one swing.

Striking in two directions is easy, three a lot harder, and it takes frame perfect timing to strike all four directions.

Also bear in mind for tactical purposes- the sword beam is be released at the end of the animation, not the start.

[Anonymous No.925817]

I dont only consider LoZ1 the best Zelda game. It may very well be my favorite game of all time.

[Anonymous No.925828]

Zelda 1 is best Zelda

[Anonymous No.925830]

[Anonymous No.925835]

>>924909
>needing a second joypad to save the game without suicide

[Anonymous No.925903]

>>925830
Is it wrong that I was bothered more by the filter than anything else?

[Anonymous No.925936]

>>924909

I honestly can't rank the Zelda games because I love each one evenly (with the exception of the unholy triforce and Zelda 2 which comes at a close second).

With that in mind, I though Zelda1 was a great game, exploration was magnificent, the hidden areas were great, the dungeons were awesome, and the overworld was fucking huge for an NES game.

The one thing I don't like is the combat, always seemed as though I would always get overwhelmed by enemies such as the dark nuts and wizzrobes if I'm stuck in the room with several of them at once.

Also, that three headed dragon boss was a bitch and a half to beat.

[Anonymous No.925956]

>>924965

The main problem with Zelda 2 and Castlevania 2 was that, a lot of times, there were moments where your progression was blocked due to cryptic hints and a lack of conveyance.

While the games started to become straight forward, they also made it so progress wasn't halted because you either missed some important hint or failed to stumble upon the answer (such as the infamous red jewel tornado from Castlevania 2).

In fact, an anon from another thread summed it up like this.

Linearity is being told where to go next but leaving the way to get there entirely up to the player (Metroid Fusion).

Forced Linearity on the other hand is being told where to go and being forced down a single path that must be followed without any input needed or required from the player (Metroid: Other M).

[Anonymous No.925968]

I like the original LoZ because it really feels open world and you can do most of the dungeons in any order. It's something I wish would return to the series but it seems like Nintendo don't have the tech or capabilities to pull it off.

[Anonymous No.925998]

I really didn't like a link to the past. The whole game is trying to sneak past guards. I don't think that's fun.

[Anonymous No.926019]

>>924930
>it's very easy to get totally stuck
Really? Levels 1 and 2 are given to the player via the included map, Level 3 is obvious, Level 4 is real easy to find, the way to access Level 5 is given to the player by a NPC right next to it, Level 6 stands out, Level 7 is both revealed by a NPC and through experimentation of the recorder, Level 8 might be the toughest to find but as a tree to burn it still stands out, and Level 9's location is explained by a NPC.

[Anonymous No.926029]

>>925998
Huh?

[Anonymous No.926118]

>>925998
What the hell are you talking about?

[Anonymous No.926142]

I love the first 3 Zelda about equally, but
>you can only move in 4 directions
really ticks me off. Also the fact that the sword comes out directly in front of you as opposed to LttP's sweeping motion makes combat tricky.

[Anonymous No.926149]

I do, OP, and for the exact same reasons.

The pure openness of the game is why it's the best. There are only two screens on the overworld you can't reach from the beginning of the game, and that's only because you don't have the raft yet.

You go where you want to go and try to survive while doing it. It's fantastic.

[Anonymous No.926150]

I put it above a number of other games in the series. It has a degree of freedom and difficulty which are seen separately in few zeldas and together in almost none.

[Anonymous No.926157]

>>924909
The combat is fun, the difficulty is perfect and it's a great Zelda game.

The exploration of an open world is fucked though. You spend 9/10ths of the game walking through the same screens defeating the same enemies until you memorize how many and what kind there are. It's just too cryptic to not get a migrain from playing.

And finding the next path isn't even those satisfying "Oooh!" moments, it's just like "Wow, I passed that statue eleven times what the fuck."

It's still a fantastic game, but rating it above EVERY other Zelda is moronic.

[Anonymous No.926170]

The first two Zelda games (along with Link's Awakening) are the best, in my arrogant opinion. I'm not too big on A Link to the Past or Ocarina of Time, both of which seem to garner an excessive amount of praise considering the quality of the games themselves.

I like the eerie, almost post-apocalyptic atmosphere the first game had to it. The map is densely populated with monsters and the few people you encounter tend to be either hiding in caves or waiting for you in the dungeons. The labyrinths themselves have a pretty sinister feel to them, as well.

The intensity of the combat sets it above most of the other games in the series, The Adventure of Link being the only exception. Few of the others have that same feeling of tension going against the odds you get from being stuck in a room with a group of darknuts or wizzrobes, for example. the lack of hand-holding and player-coddling in general is one of the biggest things setting it above its successors.

I don't think the arrangement of the music was quite as great as some of the later games (likely due to cartridge constraints or system limitations), although the dungeon music was pretty good and I love the ragtime-y end theme.

That's, it's probably my favorite Zelda game and shits all over anything Nintendo's been putting out in years.

[Anonymous No.926179]

The first two Zelda games (along with Link's Awakening) are the best, in my arrogant opinion. I'm not too big on A Link to the Past or Ocarina of Time, both of which seem to garner an excessive amount of praise considering the quality of the games themselves.

I like the eerie, almost post-apocalyptic atmosphere the first game had to it. The map is densely populated with monsters and the few people you encounter tend to be either hiding in caves or waiting for you in the dungeons. The labyrinths themselves have a pretty sinister feel to them, as well.

The intensity of the combat sets it above most of the other games in the series, The Adventure of Link being the only exception. Few of the others have that same feeling of tension going against the odds you get from being stuck in a room with a group of darknuts or wizzrobes, for example. the lack of hand-holding and player-coddling in general is one of the biggest things setting it above its successors.

I don't think the arrangement of the music was quite as great as some of the later games (likely due to cartridge constraints or system limitations), although the dungeon music was pretty good and I love the ragtime-y end theme.

That aside, it's probably my favorite Zelda game and it easily shits all over anything Nintendo's been putting out in years.

[Anonymous No.926214]

The open world approach is cool, but the game is distinctly lacking in decent NPC interaction - it IS a post-apocalyptic world, with only a few old men hiding out in a world hostile to human habitation. There's a graveyard, but no city, there's tension, but no light-hearted moments.

For people who like this atmosphere, it's awesome. Personally, I prefer the more light-hearted approach of Link's Awakening or - later - Wind Waker.

As a consequence, while I do think LoZ did a lot of things right with its design (Though then again, whether a completely nonlinear approach is even possible with a greater focus on story and NPC interaction is debatable), it's nowhere even near my favourites.

[Anonymous No.926216]

The non-linearity of the game is fine, but every time I play it I never find all the hint people. So some of the stuff I do know I wonder how I even know it in the first place. Like using the whistle at the lake. I have problems finding burnable bushes as well so I don't even try going for those. The only obvious one was level 8.

Not my favorite Zelda by a long shot but still a good game. Especially for early NES. Favorites would have to be Alttp, LA, and MM.

[Anonymous No.926247]

>>926179
I just want to mention that this is one of my favorite pieces of Zelda art. It perfectly encapsulates the first game.

[Anonymous No.926268]

>>924909

>Honestly curious: how many of you consider the original Legend of Zelda to be better than A Link to the Past, or for that matter, any of the other Zelda games?

I for one don't and i played it when it came out. ALttP did everything Zelda 1 wanted to do but just so much better.

It's not just the graphics or the gameplay, i feel the story is just so much bigger and more fleshed out than in the first Zelda. An usual point is that earlier games leaves more to your own imagination than later games but that is just not true here.

[Anonymous No.926281]

>>926157
>The exploration of an open world is fucked though. You spend 9/10ths of the game walking through the same screens defeating the same enemies until you memorize how many and what kind there are. It's just too cryptic to not get a migrain from playing.
>And finding the next path isn't even those satisfying "Oooh!" moments, it's just like "Wow, I passed that statue eleven times what the fuck."

Have you ever considered that maybe the concept of finding things on your own isn't fun to you? Zelda obviously isn't for you.

[Anonymous No.926285]

[Anonymous No.927516]

Problem with 1 is that it is designed for those perfectly fine with going back again and again for years and figuring it out mostly by sharing stuff with other players they meet and having moments of clar. Trying new things and so on. These kinds of games are not uncommon in this period. Just look at games like Zork, that´s something you are supposed to get from a friend at work which you play every once in a while when you are bored at work. Same with things like Rubrick´s Cube.

Once you give these things to players that want to finish games on weekend, problems arise. These are people that play skill-based games like gradius or contra. These are games that you only beat by legitimately getting good at playing them. The solution is always "avoid enemy fire and kill enemies".

When given a games like Zelda 1 they sit in front of the game for hours trying to figure it all out in a single sitting, failing to realize that these are puzzles specifically designed to be such that you have to put down the controller, do something else for a day or two before returning and trying something new. You are supposed to take notes, draw maps, talk with friends about their progress and so on.

[Anonymous No.927520]

>>927516

When these people get their hands on RPGs like Fallout, Baldurs Gate, Elder Scrolls, etc. the results are even more startling. They sit down and pour hundreds of hours into a game within the first month. They don´t understand that you are supposed to put perhaps a few hours a week into the game and that it´s something you come back to over and over, gradually building your character up and discovering more and more about the game for years. If you end up playing through most of the game within a month you´ve done something very wrong. It´s like buying a bottle of 25 year old whiskey and drinking it all in a single weekend, completely misunderstanding that you were supposed to take it out on christmas and perhaps pour yourself and a very close relative a glass or two and then put it the cap back on.

The worst is probably their reaction to games like WoW. Games which are basically designed to be games you play with your RPG friends a few times a month over several years and where the max level is supposed to be an absurdly high level which should take you years to reach. Instead these people just stepped in and plowed through the game and then when they find themselves at the end point of the game, which you are supposed to have taken probably the better part of a decade to reach, they whine about how there isn´t any end game and how the game lacks content for the "hardcore players".

[Anonymous No.927523]

>>927520

These are people see grinding as challenge which they take on the zeal that might come with a job or a study of a beloved subject rather than as a sign that says

>AS A DEVELOPER I HAVE MADE THIS PART OF THE GAME EXTREMELY BORING AND REPETITIVE SO THAT YOU CAN USE YOUR BRAIN TO THINK ABOUT HOW THIS IS TOTALLY NOT SOMETHING YOU SHOULD SPEND YOUR ENTIRE SUMMER DOING!

They are like those that have to finish the entire package of ice cream once they pop it open, failing to realize how sad it is that they won´t even stop eating even after they are well past the point at which they feel physically sicker with every bite.

Also, how many people typed in Zelda as their save name as a kid and just became confused as the game changed?

[Anonymous No.927535]

>>927516
>These are people that play skill-based games like gradius or contra. These are games that you only beat by legitimately getting good at playing them. The solution is always "avoid enemy fire and kill enemies".

I´d just like to add that I don´t think these kinds of games are designed poorly, rather than the method required to beat them is not a good template for how one plays video games. They are designed to be hard to master for a reason, to eat your quarters at the arcade. Once you introduce them to your living room and try to beat them, they don´t eat your money but rather your life.

[Anonymous No.927539]

I'm playing Zelda 2 right now and as of today I decided that it's not cheating to use savestates since you can save anywhere in the NES version with the second controller anyway.

Was that feature even mentioned in the manual?

[Anonymous No.927540]

>>924909
I can see that view. Alttp was a bit grander, but more linear, though strangely had more side stuff to do as well.

NES invented games, SNES just made them prettier and longer you could say.

I still like anything in the sprite era of gaming.

[Anonymous No.927549]

>>927540

>NES invented games

Please elaborate on this statement.

[Anonymous No.927580]

>>927539
It is. It's the very last thing at the bottom of the last page.

[Anonymous No.927612]

>>927549

For the record, I am not >>927540

I think a better term would've been "revived" as opposed to "invented."

Back in the day, video games were considered a loss for retailers to market due to the video game crash. It was thanks to Nintendo's efforts (and a little help from the unsung hero of gaming, ROB) that the video game industry was revived and allowed to flourish into the media juggernaut that it is today.

[Anonymous No.927641]

>>927612
inb4 eurobros and their msxes and pc98s

[Anonymous No.927642]

>>927549
A lot of game ideas came out of the NES.

Atari before it was often very limited to single screen score based games. So NES was what popularized the idea of level based games and larger worlds, at least on a home console anyway.

Zelda, MegaMan, Contra we really hadn't seen this on a home system before. Where as SNES we had seen them before on NES, just not as large, colorful, or a long.

Good example being anything with Super in the title, it was just a NES game with more stuff.

Not saying 16bit didn't creative with what a game could be like say Act Raiser, but so many styles of gameplay were very new to us during 8bit.

[Anonymous No.927648]

>>927612
No not revived. There were many types of game play invented during that time frame just due to having the memory to have more than one screen in a game. And if not invented then completely redefined into something nearly new.

[Anonymous No.927653]

>>927641
>>927648


Okay, how about I rephrase it to "revived the video games industry in the west"?

[Anonymous No.927669]

>>927653
That'll do nicely thanks

[Anonymous No.927679]

>>927669

Thank you very much.

On a related note, what do you think the industry would be like if Europe revived the industry as opposed to Japan?

[Anonymous No.927701]

>>927679
It's funny because I'm pretty sure Microsoft at least expected the MSX to be more of a European system but the Japanese just ran with it. The European market was an important component of it but it was really all Japan.

Euro games from that period are much slower paced and cerebral than either Eastern or Western games so if Europe had defined the return of video games there probably would have been a lot more simulators and "western" rpgs, also puzzle games an point and click adventures.

[Anonymous No.927760]

>>927701

Hmph, the more ya know.

So I guess if Europe was the super power we would've had more games Starcraft and Monkey Island?

[Anonymous No.927763]

>>927760
Pretty much, Man.

[Anonymous No.928305]

>>927760

>So I guess if Europe was the super power

OT but the EU actually is a super power, it's just very fragmented so it isn't very powerful. Google it. Speaking of that, i wonder what games we'll get from China...

[Anonymous No.928673]

>>927701

The thing about Europe is that we never really had any big arcade movement. At best there were some japanese or American import machine of some shmup and there were a few at theme parks.

So the platform most european developers designed for were basically games you installed on the office PC which mostly adults owned and played games on.

[Anonymous No.928683]

>>924909
I enjoy it in a way that's somewhat different from Link to the Past.
I enjoyed Link to the Past more because of how accessible (and similar to Ocarina of Time, my first Zelda game) it was.
I'm getting the proper gold cartridge in the mail soon, so I'm going to try playing it like it should be.

I like what the developers are saying when they talk about changing the formula of the next Zelda to try to get out of the "routine" nature of the games.

[Anonymous No.928780]

>>926179
>I love the ragtime-y end theme
I haven't played Zelda I in ~20 years and just nostalgia'd hard.

[Anonymous No.928840]

>>924909
Nine dungeons,, five of them are dungeon item dependent. Four of them can be done without dungeon items.
You can't beat it 'any' way you want. You can only beat it some ways you might want, without cheating that is.

[Anonymous No.929523]

>Honestly curious: how many of you consider the original Legend of Zelda to be better than A Link to the Past, or for that matter, any of the other Zelda games?

For me it's probably second behind Ocarina. However, I'm only referring to the first quest. The second quest is just ridiculous. Come to think of it, OoT Master Quest is inferior to the original as well...the remixed versions are harder but just not as well-designed IMO.

[Anonymous No.930124]

The original LoZ is my favorite Zelda game without a doubt. There's no nonsense, just hacking and slashing.

[Anonymous No.930134]

>>925998
wat.

[Anonymous No.931395]

>>925956
I dunno man. I never played Other M, but Fusion got pretty hand-holdy at moments.

[Anonymous No.931434]

>take Zelda 1
>make Link a samurai
>make the enemies ninjas
>make the gameplay fast-paced instead of puzzle-oriented

Nazo no Murasamejou confirmed for best Zelda game

[Anonymous No.933920]

>>925998
Nani itten da yo?

[Anonymous No.935618]

I've never beaten a Zelda game. I have A Link to the Past and The Windwaker. Which should be my first Zelda game? Or should I start from the first one?

[Anonymous No.935634]

>>924909
I love Zelda 1 for the pure amount of time and effort I put into drawing maps and writing down solutions to all the puzzles. It felt like a real adventure to me. And finding all the heart containers was a lot of fun.

[Anonymous No.935637]

>>925998
Youtube pls

[Anonymous No.935638]

>>931434
>Zelda 1
>puzzle-oriented

What game were you playing?

[Anonymous No.935659]

>>924959
yeah ocarina sure had a lot of fun stuff to explore!!!

[Anonymous No.935729]

>>935618

Link's Awakening, it's the first game in the series that's actually any good.

[Anonymous No.935742]

>>935729
What did you not like about the ones before it? I thought they all have some redeeming qualities.

[Anonymous No.935763]

I love the controls of Zelda 1. So solid.

[Anonymous No.935767]

>>924909
My opinion:
ALttP>LoZ=AoL>WW>MM>the other games in the series.
Again, just my opinion. I played ALttP first (on release), so that may have something to do with it.

[Anonymous No.935779]

>>935742
They do. He's just being one of those people.

>>935618
In reality, they are both good, you can't really go wrong. The original Zelda is hella fun too, but is undoubtedly the hardest in the series. Though even that's not BRUTALLY difficult or nearly impossible. If you have enough perseverence probably anyone could beat it. Like >>935634 said you might want to jot down maps and the like, or at least get ahold of the instructions and partial map that came with the game, which is over in this thread >>931880.

[Anonymous No.935846]

>>935779
I don't know, Zelda 2 could give it a run for its money in the difficulty department. Damn if dungeons 6-9 aren't a shit though.

[Anonymous No.935871]

>>935779
I had so much fun marking all the secret rupee locations and the bomb expansion dudes.

I was an easily amused child.

[Anonymous No.935903]

>>935846
Zelda 2 is definitely difficult, but in my opinion 1 is harder. In 2 there wasn't really anything that seemed to want me to be psychic or suspect every single tile. I felt it did a really good job of giving sufficient clues and cues as to what to do next, while not being too obvious. Introducing towns and NPCs really helped there. The most difficult part is probably finding Bagu, but even that's only 20 minutes wandering aimlessly in the marsh, tops.

[Anonymous No.936036]

I think Zelda 1 is too difficult, in terms of knowing what to do. The manual tells you how to get to Dungeon 1 (and Dungeon 2, right? I forget) but most of the game, it's just absolutely ridiculous.