Imported from the "Hardest NES Games and WHY" thread because I fucking love talking and everything about Zelda 2.
Originally posted by: NostalgicMachine
Originally posted by: gunpei
Maybe this is just from the stance of an experienced player but I don't think in Zelda 2 "leveling-up is expected of you in the early game". Sure, you will stumble around in the beginning. And probably avoid all the caves until you run out of options. But I think it gives you a lot more than the first game, with safe paths, towns to recover health and get the shield spell, and the lone square of forest that contains a 50pt bag giving the first level up for free. But I don't remember ever needing to specifically grind until much later.
I understand what you're saying here, but I have to respectfully disagree, sir!
Leveling up is kind of the entire point of the gameplay mechanic in Zelda II. If you don't level up, you won't make it very far. While it's debatable that the game "expects" grinding from the get go, it's without question that you're required to level up ASAP to get far at all. For me, how each of us personally feel about leveling is irrelevent, because it's a required portion of the game.
Waiting until the end to grind absolutely sucks because it takes forever, hence why most of us opt to leave the Palace Crystals alone until the end to max out. Perhaps the difference in our opinions/experience is due to the fact that you may just use the Crystals immediately?
In the original LoZ, there are fairy locations that are stable and there every time you turn the game on. You can plan paths through Hyrule so you can get them when needed, and typically your heart meter is pretty resiliant less than halfway through the game. In Zelda II, fairy locations appear randomly on the board, with secure fairy locations being sparse. Yes, they're there, but they're a pain to get to in most cases.
In most instances, you get to a fairy, refill your meter, then take a ton of damage anyway on your way to wherever it is you're going next.
In Zelda II, even with max health and magic, you're using resources like crazy just to make it to places. The patterns of some enemeis (fence-hiding bastards on the way to Palace 6) will absolutely rape your health and magic if you don't know how to navigate those asinine fireball patterns. In the first LoZ, you really only had to be careful around Darknuts and Lionells.
In LoZ, you just need a full heart meter and you're pretty set. In Zelda II, your life meter can be full, even on the highest level attainable, and you're still going to get your ass kicked.
On leveling, I get what you're saying. Aside from the crystals, I typically level naturally through combat and rarely avoid encounters. I guess this does lead me to need dedicated grinding for a couple of levels towards the end. But I enjoy it. At levels 6 or 7, I am powerful and I can walk all over the land kicking monster ass! I feel like an adventurer! I feel like the dude in a kung fu movie during the climactic training sequence, when he is gearing up for final battle with the big bad guy! To me that's awesome. I get to spend more time with the game before heading to the end and finishing it. Sometimes I don't even stop when I'm all maxed out because I am having too much fun. Two different approaches, and that's all good.
In Zelda 2, there are definitely stable locations to replenish health, and magic. In most cases, you do not even have to plan a path, you can just follow the yellow dirt road that's already there. Follow the yellow dirt road!
And then, you said something key. I do know how to navigate those asinine fireball patterns. It took time to learn, don't get me wrong.
They're not even patterns and I think this is something cool. Unlike many parts of games that get easier with memorization instead of reaction (as arch_8ngel detailed in the Hardest NES Games thread) there is nothing to memorize here. You just use jump (and maybe shield) spell and you dodge.
Maybe you're still going to get your ass kicked. I'm not.
Fair enough. But at that point, the entire conversation/debate falls apart because then it becomes more about player skill than anything. Of which, I readily admit this is my first time seriously trying to beat this game, and hence why I'm posting my experiences in this thread.
I propose an experiment where we get someone who's ages 8-14ish, and see how they navigate this game for the first time with zero help, zero online assistance, etc.
Originally posted by: arch_8ngel
I think you guys are muddying the issue when the notion of saving the crystals for later comes up.
If you KNOW to save the crystals for later, then you COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND how leveling works in the game, and how to optimize it.
At that point, it can't be considered "hard" due to not understanding you need to level, at all.
The leveling (or not realizing leveling is crucial) can ONLY apply to new players of the game that might not understand the mechanics (assuming they didn't read the instructions that pretty clearly lay out the importance)
The NEW player is going to grab the crystal and get an auto-level. They will also naturally level up a few times just from palace-based combat.
By the time they hit the first plateau of Death Mountain, they will understand that leveling is useful and that it's important to be able to hit harder.
I think we started out arguing separate points at first, but now I feel like we're saying the same thing from different sides of the fence. My point is the game is still challenging no matter how you play it. We can argue skill etc, but I still feel Zelda II is challenging regardless of how you choose to level up. I chose to take on the brunt of grinding upfront, as oppossed to gradual leveling via Crystals. That was my choice, and I accept that my experience as such will be different from someone who levels evenly.
This is also my first serious shot at trying to beat the game completely, which has a huge impact on my perception of what's going on in the game.
I think you guys are muddying the issue when the notion of saving the crystals for later comes up.
If you KNOW to save the crystals for later, then you COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND how leveling works in the game, and how to optimize it.
At that point, it can't be considered "hard" due to not understanding you need to level, at all.
The leveling (or not realizing leveling is crucial) can ONLY apply to new players of the game that might not understand the mechanics (assuming they didn't read the instructions that pretty clearly lay out the importance)
The NEW player is going to grab the crystal and get an auto-level. They will also naturally level up a few times just from palace-based combat.
By the time they hit the first plateau of Death Mountain, they will understand that leveling is useful and that it's important to be able to hit harder.
I think we started out arguing separate points at first, but now I feel like we're saying the same thing from different sides of the fence. My point is the game is still challenging no matter how you play it. We can argue skill etc, but I still feel Zelda II is challenging regardless of how you choose to level up. I chose to take on the brunt of grinding upfront, as oppossed to gradual leveling via Crystals. That was my choice, and I accept that my experience as such will be different from someone who levels evenly.
This is also my first serious shot at trying to beat the game completely, which has a huge impact on my perception of what's going on in the game.
I completely agree that the game is still challenging, even when you understand it, simply because based on the gameplay mechanics some of the enemies are made to be genuinely tough (high damage absorption and high damage output) leaving little room for error.
It is unforgiving. That is what makes it hard.
I'm just disputing the leveling system (being unexplained in-game) and first time players not "knowing to grind" as an actual legitimate source of challenge.
I think you guys are muddying the issue when the notion of saving the crystals for later comes up.
If you KNOW to save the crystals for later, then you COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND how leveling works in the game, and how to optimize it.
At that point, it can't be considered "hard" due to not understanding you need to level, at all.
The leveling (or not realizing leveling is crucial) can ONLY apply to new players of the game that might not understand the mechanics (assuming they didn't read the instructions that pretty clearly lay out the importance)
The NEW player is going to grab the crystal and get an auto-level. They will also naturally level up a few times just from palace-based combat.
By the time they hit the first plateau of Death Mountain, they will understand that leveling is useful and that it's important to be able to hit harder.
I think we started out arguing separate points at first, but now I feel like we're saying the same thing from different sides of the fence. My point is the game is still challenging no matter how you play it. We can argue skill etc, but I still feel Zelda II is challenging regardless of how you choose to level up. I chose to take on the brunt of grinding upfront, as oppossed to gradual leveling via Crystals. That was my choice, and I accept that my experience as such will be different from someone who levels evenly.
This is also my first serious shot at trying to beat the game completely, which has a huge impact on my perception of what's going on in the game.
I completely agree that the game is still challenging, even when you understand it, simply because based on the gameplay mechanics some of the enemies are made to be genuinely tough (high damage absorption and high damage output) leaving little room for error.
It is unforgiving. That is what makes it hard.
I'm just disputing the leveling system (being unexplained in-game) and first time players not "knowing to grind" as an actual legitimate source of challenge.
Well said, and I agree. I think I got lost trying to make a point somewhere in this thread, lol. Good stuff, sir!
Now to finish the 6th Palace after two days of exploring
Out of curiousity, how many times have you completed Zelda II, arch?
Fair enough. But at that point, the entire conversation/debate falls apart because then it becomes more about player skill than anything.
You're right. I am just continuing the discussion from the other thread.
Of which, I readily admit this is my first time seriously trying to beat this game, and hence why I'm posting my experiences in this thread.
I just didn't want to hijack the the other thread, because I really could talk about this specific game all day. And in that light, thank you for this thread btw. (EDIT: I just realized you're not the OP, lol) I've been following it and it has been very interesting to see it through new eyes.
I propose an experiment where we get someone who's ages 8-14ish, and see how they navigate this game for the first time with zero help, zero online assistance, etc.
That would be awesome. I actually have someone. He just turned 11, smack in the middle of that age range. He's been playing Zelda 1. As far as I can tell, he's not using the internet for it. One day I was visiting his dad, and the kid asked me how to get to the second labyrinth. I told him, of course. For this experiment, I would like to recreate conditions accurately. I say the manual is allowed, and so is asking an older sibling or friends on the playground. (I will substitute)(I will not tell him everything)
I remember when he found Error, his mom posted about it on facebook. He was was really excited. I'll ask him about Zelda 2 next time I'm over there.
I think we started out arguing separate points at first, but now I feel like we're saying the same thing from different sides of the fence.
Fair enough. But at that point, the entire conversation/debate falls apart because then it becomes more about player skill than anything.
You're right. I am just continuing the discussion from the other thread.
Of which, I readily admit this is my first time seriously trying to beat this game, and hence why I'm posting my experiences in this thread.
I just didn't want to hijack the the other thread, because I really could talk about this specific game all day. And in that light, thank you for this thread btw. I've been following it and it has been very interesting to see it through new eyes.
I propose an experiment where we get someone who's ages 8-14ish, and see how they navigate this game for the first time with zero help, zero online assistance, etc.
That would be awesome. I actually have someone. He just turned 11, smack in the middle of that age range. He's been playing Zelda 1. As far as I can tell, he's not using the internet for it. One day I was visiting his dad, and the kid asked me how to get to the second labyrinth. I told him, of course. For this experiment, I would like to recreate conditions accurately. I say the manual is allowed, and so is asking an older sibling or friends on the playground. (I will substitute)(I will not tell him everything)
I remember when he found Error, his mom posted about it on facebook. He was was really excited. I'll ask him about Zelda 2 next time I'm over there.
I think we started out arguing separate points at first, but now I feel like we're saying the same thing from different sides of the fence.
Yup
Your idea for the Zelda II experiment is spot-on, and I'd love to hear the results, lol. We tend to become blinded by the fact that BITD, we didn't have much besides manuals and friends to strategize with. Now, you can see the entire game before you even know how to play it.
Well said, and I agree. I think I got lost trying to make a point somewhere in this thread, lol. Good stuff, sir!
Now to finish the 6th Palace after two days of exploring
Out of curiousity, how many times have you completed Zelda II, arch?
I've probably only take the time to actually beat it 4 or 5 times, I think.
LoZ I can sit down and beat in an hour or two, tops, so it used to be tough to motivate to replay a game as long as Zelda 2.
But I've played through large portions of it enough to have a firm understanding of how the game works, and how to play it well.
I'm the same way with LoZ; I can do a run through in a day or two. This is my first time really giving Zelda II a go, so I'm interested to see how I feel once I complete it once.
The NEW player is going to grab the crystal and get an auto-level. They will also naturally level up a few times just from palace-based combat.
By the time they hit the first plateau of Death Mountain, they will understand that leveling is useful and that it's important to be able to hit harder.
Exactly. The reason I was never able to get very far in this game as a kid was because I didn't understand all the intricacies of the experience system...most importantly, just how easy it is to tread water and not get anywhere. For the new player, arrival at Death Mountain demonstrates that first real lesson to the player that says: "You probably need to level-up a bit before you move forward" (It probably also didn't help that my copy of Zelda II was a hand-me-down and didn't come with the manual, and with no internet back then, I pretty much had to learn the game on my own).
This concept in itself wasn't new to me, even back then, as I was an avid Dragon Warrior player (and Dragon Warrior is a game almost entirely comprised of: "enter area, grind levels, repeat"). The biggest difference (and biggest frustration) by comparison is that Zelda II can set you back and waste your time. In DW, when you died, you lost gold. Yeah, that sucked a$$ because gold was important for buying better weapons and armor but you kept all your experience points, so at least you were always making forward progress and could get stronger (and there were no instant-death pits). In Zelda II, if you're not careful and end up getting slapped around, you could lose all XP (and thus, all the time spent acquiring them). Also, you can't quit and save your game in the middle of a leveling session because even saving your game zeroes out your XP!
At lower levels, this doesn't mean much because the caps are low and you can level quickly. However, when you're trying to get into the upper levels (say levels 4+), it takes thousands of XP. This means you either spend a lot of time grinding smaller enemies to stay safe, or you go hunting some of the tougher foes but risk getting yourself killed. It's reasonably safe to go hunting the big guys when you have a spare life or two, but don't dare go risking your neck on your final life, or that 3760 XP you spent the last 30 minutes working on to level up Health will suddenly disappear (this one happened to me).
Regardless, as a more experienced and observant adult (and thanks to a few tips from folks here), I was able to go into the game much more informed. I found a lot of fun and success in clearing out the first palace and grinding levels of Attack Power there until reaching Level 6, then using the first crystal to boost me to 7. With that out of the way early, I was able to proceed through the rest of the game without any more grinding at all, saving the crystals for levels 7-8 of each of the stats as I got there. The other levels just came through natural exploration of the overworld and palaces and the game was so much fun!
Anyway, I maintain that the section of the game from the 2nd Palace to Death Mountain is the biggest obstacle for the un-researched player. Not surprisingly, that's where most people seem to stop playing the game (and that's as far as I got as a dumb kid). But if the game were just a little less unfair about XP-theft (for f*ck's sake, at least let us save the damn game without robbing us blind), I honestly think more people would have gotten a fuller appreciation of it as an excellent action/adventure game on the NES.
Your idea for the Zelda II experiment is spot-on, and I'd love to hear the results, lol. We tend to become blinded by the fact that BITD, we didn't have much besides manuals and friends to strategize with. Now, you can see the entire game before you even know how to play it.
I have made it part of my personal challenge to play retro games this way whenever possible: without gross internet assistance. I'll read the game manual (scanned copies mostly since I own almost no physical manuals anymore), I'll refer to my collection of Nintendo Power issues or Nintendo Power Player's Guides if I'm really stumped on something, or I'll seek advice through the online forums here (much like this thread )...but I won't consult internet walkthroughs, FAQs and the like. Especially if a game is one that I never really got to experience properly in its time, I want to try to capture as much of the original experience as possible. This heightens both the sense of wonder in exploring a game as well as the sense of accomplishment when I finish it.
There are a few games I've "cheated" on because they were proving frustrating for whatever reason and I was simply ready to move on but, for the most part, I like it when it's just me, the manual and the game.
Here's another thought about leveling. When you game the system by upping your attack early*, all the enemies in the beginning of the game are ridiculously easy. I believe attack level 8 takes six of Horsehead's health bars away in one strike‡, and he only has eight to begin with. As you get further into the game, the enemies are tougher and there are very few one-hitters any more. On one's first-ever play, theoretically, it sounds like now the game would become more difficult, than it would be if you "train" by starting leveling without grinding, and are forced to learn how to handle enemies before you can so easily smack them around. I think this training aspect was intentional in the design.
*I am not saying there's anything wrong with it. In fact this is exactly the kind of thing I meant when I said an artificially hard challenging game offers variation.
‡When you finish the game, you get to start over. Your containers are reset, but your levels stay. It is indeed fun to start over and be so powerful after I have completed a traditional run.
However, when you're trying to get into the upper levels (say levels 4+), it takes thousands of XP. This means you either spend a lot of time grinding smaller enemies to stay safe, or you go hunting some of the tougher foes but risk getting yourself killed. It's reasonably safe to go hunting the big guys when you have a spare life or two, but don't dare go risking your neck on your final life, or that 3760 XP you spent the last 30 minutes working on to level up Health will suddenly disappear (this one happened to me).
Some places are safer than others to pursue big points. Find terrain or a cave near a town, so you can cut and run and go see that nice young lady when you need a rest. How was your health already? Had you heavily unbalanced your stats in favor of attack?
Originally posted by: Webhead123
I have made it part of my personal challenge to play retro games this way whenever possible
Hell yeah dude, me too. You're right about how awesome it makes the whole experience.
Some places are safer than others to pursue big points. Find terrain or a cave near a town, so you can cut and run and go see that nice young lady when you need a rest. How was your health already? Had you heavily unbalanced your stats in favor of attack?
I made two attempts during my recent run. In the first, I tried leveling Attack Power and Health simultaneously. This worked up to a point (about level 3 or so) but I found it ultimately felt like it was holding me back, especially when I reached Death Mountain. So, I deleted my save and started again, this time focusing solely on Attack Power until using the first crystal to get it to level 7. Once Attack Power was at 7, that's when I began leveling up Health (which was cheap and easy, especially since tougher, higher-experience yielding enemies became less threatening). This worked out much better for me in the long run.
Here's the reason why I've generally come to prioritize "Attack Power" in many games of this sort: Higher damage output means enemies require fewer hits and thus die more quickly. The more quickly you defeat an enemy, the fewer opportunities they have to land hits on you (in Zelda II, this example is particularly well-represented in the Ironknuckles). Health only exists to give you a larger "window of error", meaning it gives you more opportunities to screw up before you die. But the object is really to learn how "not to get hit" in the first place. So, taking out the enemy quickly and skillfully means a better chance of avoiding hits entirely, thus negating the need for more health.
Now, there are a few segments and enemies in Zelda II where it is very difficult not to get at all, mostly toward the end of the game, and that's when Health starts becoming important. But, especially in the early-game, if you have a high Attack Power, you'll dispatch enemies and bosses too quickly for them to land hits on you anyway (and you get the Shield and Life spells fairly early), making extra health less important up-front.
It wasn't a lack of health in the few instances that caused me to lose precious XP...it was being knocked into instant-death pits. There was one case where one of the blue Ironknuckles in the depths of one of the Palaces did me in and cost me 1500 XP or so, but far and away the most troublesome were those encounters that sent me into a lava pit or sinking beneath the waves. And no amount of health will save you from those.
I have made it part of my personal challenge to play retro games this way whenever possible
Hell yeah dude, me too. You're right about how awesome it makes the whole experience.
Totally! Doing it "authentic-like" just increases the enjoyment for me. It gets me back into that late-80's/early-90's mindset and becomes a lot of fun. Plus, it makes me break out and remember all the cool stuff buried in the manuals and old gaming magazines and that in itself is a treat!
Health only exists to give you a larger "window of error", meaning it gives you more opportunities to screw up before you die. But the object is really to learn how "not to get hit" in the first place. So, taking out the enemy quickly and skillfully means a better chance of avoiding hits entirely, thus negating the need for more health.
This doesn't seem consistent to me. If you take out the enemy quickly, you have less chance to learn. You decrease the number of possible strike attempts rather than increasing your ability to control your character and dodge the other character. Truly learning how not to get hit means greater chance of success against tougher enemies regardless of how many health points they have.
If your downfall was into pits I suppose it's moot. I'm just speaking theoretically. Although, if you can successfully not get hit, then you won't get knocked into them.
Health only exists to give you a larger "window of error", meaning it gives you more opportunities to screw up before you die. But the object is really to learn how "not to get hit" in the first place. So, taking out the enemy quickly and skillfully means a better chance of avoiding hits entirely, thus negating the need for more health.
This doesn't seem consistent to me. If you take out the enemy quickly, you have less chance to learn. You decrease the number of possible strike attempts rather than increasing your ability to control your character and dodge the other character. Truly learning how not to get hit means greater chance of success against tougher enemies regardless of how many health points they have.
If your downfall was into pits I suppose it's moot. I'm just speaking theoretically. Although, if you can successfully not get hit, then you won't get knocked into them.
If I were a perfect player, I would agree. I'd like to think I have at least decent reflexes, memory and game-playing skills but I'm certainly not on the level of some others I've seen. But with keeping my personal faults in mind, the longer I'm engaged with an enemy, the more likely I'll make a mistake (whether mis-timing a jump, misreading a pattern, rogue button-input due to over-eagerness/poor dexterity/twitchy nerves). Thus I try to minimize the length of the engagement to reduce the likelihood of getting caught by those mistakes. I still open up with "test" engagements when I encounter a new enemy type to learn how and when they attack and the proper counter-strategies.
And granted, my experience with the late-game of Zelda II is relatively limited. I don't know it as well as Contra, say...a game which I've studied every stage by trial and error since I was young. As such, I've tried to learn the enemy patterns and figure out the best strategies to avoid taking hits, but I haven't really gotten there yet. It's mostly a few of the later segments that prove really difficult to avoid damage (and a few that seem almost *impossible* to get through without taking at least one hit). So, yeah, Zelda II is still pretty tough for me in that respect but only in a few spots and against a few enemy types. I'm still a newb when it comes to that game.
If perfect means never ever getting hit, then I'm not either. But I think it's very possible to get capable enough to the point where difficulty isn't a complaint. On the other hand, I don't think I've ever gotten past the 4th level of Contra myself, so there ya go. That'll be on my list of games to learn and seriously tackle later.
-----------------------
So, here's a little something I just remembered and haven't seen mentioned ITT. If you level up after you're already maxed out, you get extra lives. I see limited lives are a pain point, so that might be helpful. You can get as many as you want if you put the time in. ofc it also requires grinding more, another pain point for some but I say, seriously, it's fun!
This thread is awesome, and you guys both rule for that in-depth input! I'm nearing the end of the 6th Palace; I didn't get to play as much as I wanted to yesterday. It's Saturday, though; after I train my client this morning, it's all Zelda II lol.
You guys know you don't have to kill every foe you face. I still have trouble with that mentality (I *LIKE* killing my foes, damnit), but stabbing them in the head and moving on is sometimes the best bet. Or flying past them like a little fairy also helps.
You guys know you don't have to kill every foe you face. I still have trouble with that mentality (I *LIKE* killing my foes, damnit), but stabbing them in the head and moving on is sometimes the best bet. Or flying past them like a little fairy also helps.
Yes, running away or bouncing over enemies can really save your bacon, especially in the last two palaces.
You guys know you don't have to kill every foe you face. I still have trouble with that mentality (I *LIKE* killing my foes, damnit), but stabbing them in the head and moving on is sometimes the best bet. Or flying past them like a little fairy also helps.
Yes, running away or bouncing over enemies can really save your bacon, especially in the last two palaces.
Especially those hawk guys in the final dungeon. They wrecked me everytime I actually tried to fight them.
You guys know you don't have to kill every foe you face. I still have trouble with that mentality (I *LIKE* killing my foes, damnit), but stabbing them in the head and moving on is sometimes the best bet. Or flying past them like a little fairy also helps.
Yes, running away or bouncing over enemies can really save your bacon, especially in the last two palaces.
Especially those hawk guys in the final dungeon. They wrecked me everytime I actually tried to fight them.
Yeah, I'm on the path to the final dungeon, and I've skipped a lot of enemies, lol.
So I've developed a strategy for making it through the final stretch before the final Palace, and I'm able to make it inside consistently. Very big Palace, and the music is awesome. I'll be stoked when this one is over! I predict within the next day or two it will happen.
Seriously though, how many lives did you gather up before making the final journey? And how many did you have left at the end?
Congraturation!
I collected 0 extra lives throughout the entire playthrough of Zelda II. I had one life left when I defeated Shadow Link. I died/game overe-ed 60 times during the entire playthrough.
Really, you never picked up any of the dolls? That's interesting. Sometimes I leave stuff in case I need it later, and might never get around to it. Was it that kind of thing?
Originally posted by: NostalgicMachine
I died/game overe-ed 60 times during the entire playthrough.
Probably less than my first time beating it, lol
I feel like if there were, you would have said already, but... any other thoughts about the game? You made a thread about this
Really, you never picked up any of the dolls? That's interesting. Sometimes I leave stuff in case I need it later, and might never get around to it. Was it that kind of thing?
Originally posted by: NostalgicMachine
I died/game overe-ed 60 times during the entire playthrough.
Probably less than my first time beating it, lol
I feel like if there were, you would have said already, but... any other thoughts about the game? You made a thread about this
Well, I was aware of them, but consciously avoided them because I was sick of grinding and just wanted to give the last Palace a shot.
Just read through the thread and it was fun to hear of everyone's experience with Zelda II! I'm still a big fan of A Link to the Past but this may be my next favorite in the series.
It's interesting that almost everyone has done the strategy of skipping the crystals because I have never done it that way ever. I've probably finished Zelda II a dozen times all the way through and every time I grab the crystal the first time through the palace. As I play I try to manage it where I level up upon killing the palace bosses so that I get the most out of grabbing the crystal at that time, and even though it isn't the optimal method for grinding I always end up fully leveled up prior to the final palace.
Comments
Imported from the "Hardest NES Games and WHY" thread because I fucking love talking and everything about Zelda 2.
Maybe this is just from the stance of an experienced player but I don't think in Zelda 2 "leveling-up is expected of you in the early game". Sure, you will stumble around in the beginning. And probably avoid all the caves until you run out of options. But I think it gives you a lot more than the first game, with safe paths, towns to recover health and get the shield spell, and the lone square of forest that contains a 50pt bag giving the first level up for free. But I don't remember ever needing to specifically grind until much later.
I understand what you're saying here, but I have to respectfully disagree, sir!
Leveling up is kind of the entire point of the gameplay mechanic in Zelda II. If you don't level up, you won't make it very far. While it's debatable that the game "expects" grinding from the get go, it's without question that you're required to level up ASAP to get far at all. For me, how each of us personally feel about leveling is irrelevent, because it's a required portion of the game.
Waiting until the end to grind absolutely sucks because it takes forever, hence why most of us opt to leave the Palace Crystals alone until the end to max out. Perhaps the difference in our opinions/experience is due to the fact that you may just use the Crystals immediately?
In the original LoZ, there are fairy locations that are stable and there every time you turn the game on. You can plan paths through Hyrule so you can get them when needed, and typically your heart meter is pretty resiliant less than halfway through the game. In Zelda II, fairy locations appear randomly on the board, with secure fairy locations being sparse. Yes, they're there, but they're a pain to get to in most cases.
In most instances, you get to a fairy, refill your meter, then take a ton of damage anyway on your way to wherever it is you're going next.
In Zelda II, even with max health and magic, you're using resources like crazy just to make it to places. The patterns of some enemeis (fence-hiding bastards on the way to Palace 6) will absolutely rape your health and magic if you don't know how to navigate those asinine fireball patterns. In the first LoZ, you really only had to be careful around Darknuts and Lionells.
In LoZ, you just need a full heart meter and you're pretty set. In Zelda II, your life meter can be full, even on the highest level attainable, and you're still going to get your ass kicked.
On leveling, I get what you're saying. Aside from the crystals, I typically level naturally through combat and rarely avoid encounters. I guess this does lead me to need dedicated grinding for a couple of levels towards the end. But I enjoy it. At levels 6 or 7, I am powerful and I can walk all over the land kicking monster ass! I feel like an adventurer! I feel like the dude in a kung fu movie during the climactic training sequence, when he is gearing up for final battle with the big bad guy! To me that's awesome. I get to spend more time with the game before heading to the end and finishing it. Sometimes I don't even stop when I'm all maxed out because I am having too much fun. Two different approaches, and that's all good.
In Zelda 2, there are definitely stable locations to replenish health, and magic. In most cases, you do not even have to plan a path, you can just follow the yellow dirt road that's already there. Follow the yellow dirt road!
And then, you said something key. I do know how to navigate those asinine fireball patterns. It took time to learn, don't get me wrong.
They're not even patterns and I think this is something cool. Unlike many parts of games that get easier with memorization instead of reaction (as arch_8ngel detailed in the Hardest NES Games thread) there is nothing to memorize here. You just use jump (and maybe shield) spell and you dodge.
Maybe you're still going to get your ass kicked. I'm not.
Fair enough. But at that point, the entire conversation/debate falls apart because then it becomes more about player skill than anything. Of which, I readily admit this is my first time seriously trying to beat this game, and hence why I'm posting my experiences in this thread.
I propose an experiment where we get someone who's ages 8-14ish, and see how they navigate this game for the first time with zero help, zero online assistance, etc.
I think you guys are muddying the issue when the notion of saving the crystals for later comes up.
If you KNOW to save the crystals for later, then you COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND how leveling works in the game, and how to optimize it.
At that point, it can't be considered "hard" due to not understanding you need to level, at all.
The leveling (or not realizing leveling is crucial) can ONLY apply to new players of the game that might not understand the mechanics (assuming they didn't read the instructions that pretty clearly lay out the importance)
The NEW player is going to grab the crystal and get an auto-level. They will also naturally level up a few times just from palace-based combat.
By the time they hit the first plateau of Death Mountain, they will understand that leveling is useful and that it's important to be able to hit harder.
I think we started out arguing separate points at first, but now I feel like we're saying the same thing from different sides of the fence. My point is the game is still challenging no matter how you play it. We can argue skill etc, but I still feel Zelda II is challenging regardless of how you choose to level up. I chose to take on the brunt of grinding upfront, as oppossed to gradual leveling via Crystals. That was my choice, and I accept that my experience as such will be different from someone who levels evenly.
This is also my first serious shot at trying to beat the game completely, which has a huge impact on my perception of what's going on in the game.
I think you guys are muddying the issue when the notion of saving the crystals for later comes up.
If you KNOW to save the crystals for later, then you COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND how leveling works in the game, and how to optimize it.
At that point, it can't be considered "hard" due to not understanding you need to level, at all.
The leveling (or not realizing leveling is crucial) can ONLY apply to new players of the game that might not understand the mechanics (assuming they didn't read the instructions that pretty clearly lay out the importance)
The NEW player is going to grab the crystal and get an auto-level. They will also naturally level up a few times just from palace-based combat.
By the time they hit the first plateau of Death Mountain, they will understand that leveling is useful and that it's important to be able to hit harder.
I think we started out arguing separate points at first, but now I feel like we're saying the same thing from different sides of the fence. My point is the game is still challenging no matter how you play it. We can argue skill etc, but I still feel Zelda II is challenging regardless of how you choose to level up. I chose to take on the brunt of grinding upfront, as oppossed to gradual leveling via Crystals. That was my choice, and I accept that my experience as such will be different from someone who levels evenly.
This is also my first serious shot at trying to beat the game completely, which has a huge impact on my perception of what's going on in the game.
I completely agree that the game is still challenging, even when you understand it, simply because based on the gameplay mechanics some of the enemies are made to be genuinely tough (high damage absorption and high damage output) leaving little room for error.
It is unforgiving. That is what makes it hard.
I'm just disputing the leveling system (being unexplained in-game) and first time players not "knowing to grind" as an actual legitimate source of challenge.
I think you guys are muddying the issue when the notion of saving the crystals for later comes up.
If you KNOW to save the crystals for later, then you COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND how leveling works in the game, and how to optimize it.
At that point, it can't be considered "hard" due to not understanding you need to level, at all.
The leveling (or not realizing leveling is crucial) can ONLY apply to new players of the game that might not understand the mechanics (assuming they didn't read the instructions that pretty clearly lay out the importance)
The NEW player is going to grab the crystal and get an auto-level. They will also naturally level up a few times just from palace-based combat.
By the time they hit the first plateau of Death Mountain, they will understand that leveling is useful and that it's important to be able to hit harder.
I think we started out arguing separate points at first, but now I feel like we're saying the same thing from different sides of the fence. My point is the game is still challenging no matter how you play it. We can argue skill etc, but I still feel Zelda II is challenging regardless of how you choose to level up. I chose to take on the brunt of grinding upfront, as oppossed to gradual leveling via Crystals. That was my choice, and I accept that my experience as such will be different from someone who levels evenly.
This is also my first serious shot at trying to beat the game completely, which has a huge impact on my perception of what's going on in the game.
I completely agree that the game is still challenging, even when you understand it, simply because based on the gameplay mechanics some of the enemies are made to be genuinely tough (high damage absorption and high damage output) leaving little room for error.
It is unforgiving. That is what makes it hard.
I'm just disputing the leveling system (being unexplained in-game) and first time players not "knowing to grind" as an actual legitimate source of challenge.
Well said, and I agree. I think I got lost trying to make a point somewhere in this thread, lol. Good stuff, sir!
Now to finish the 6th Palace after two days of exploring
Out of curiousity, how many times have you completed Zelda II, arch?
Fair enough. But at that point, the entire conversation/debate falls apart because then it becomes more about player skill than anything.
You're right. I am just continuing the discussion from the other thread.
I just didn't want to hijack the the other thread, because I really could talk about this specific game all day. And in that light, thank you for this thread btw. (EDIT: I just realized you're not the OP, lol) I've been following it and it has been very interesting to see it through new eyes.
That would be awesome. I actually have someone. He just turned 11, smack in the middle of that age range. He's been playing Zelda 1. As far as I can tell, he's not using the internet for it. One day I was visiting his dad, and the kid asked me how to get to the second labyrinth. I told him, of course. For this experiment, I would like to recreate conditions accurately. I say the manual is allowed, and so is asking an older sibling or friends on the playground. (I will substitute)(I will not tell him everything)
I remember when he found Error, his mom posted about it on facebook. He was was really excited. I'll ask him about Zelda 2 next time I'm over there.
Yup
Well said, and I agree. I think I got lost trying to make a point somewhere in this thread, lol. Good stuff, sir!
Now to finish the 6th Palace after two days of exploring
Out of curiousity, how many times have you completed Zelda II, arch?
I've probably only take the time to actually beat it 4 or 5 times, I think.
LoZ I can sit down and beat in an hour or two, tops, so it used to be tough to motivate to replay a game as long as Zelda 2.
But I've played through large portions of it enough to have a firm understanding of how the game works, and how to play it well.
Fair enough. But at that point, the entire conversation/debate falls apart because then it becomes more about player skill than anything.
You're right. I am just continuing the discussion from the other thread.
I just didn't want to hijack the the other thread, because I really could talk about this specific game all day. And in that light, thank you for this thread btw. I've been following it and it has been very interesting to see it through new eyes.
That would be awesome. I actually have someone. He just turned 11, smack in the middle of that age range. He's been playing Zelda 1. As far as I can tell, he's not using the internet for it. One day I was visiting his dad, and the kid asked me how to get to the second labyrinth. I told him, of course. For this experiment, I would like to recreate conditions accurately. I say the manual is allowed, and so is asking an older sibling or friends on the playground. (I will substitute)(I will not tell him everything)
I remember when he found Error, his mom posted about it on facebook. He was was really excited. I'll ask him about Zelda 2 next time I'm over there.
Yup
Your idea for the Zelda II experiment is spot-on, and I'd love to hear the results, lol. We tend to become blinded by the fact that BITD, we didn't have much besides manuals and friends to strategize with. Now, you can see the entire game before you even know how to play it.
Well said, and I agree. I think I got lost trying to make a point somewhere in this thread, lol. Good stuff, sir!
Now to finish the 6th Palace after two days of exploring
Out of curiousity, how many times have you completed Zelda II, arch?
I've probably only take the time to actually beat it 4 or 5 times, I think.
LoZ I can sit down and beat in an hour or two, tops, so it used to be tough to motivate to replay a game as long as Zelda 2.
But I've played through large portions of it enough to have a firm understanding of how the game works, and how to play it well.
I'm the same way with LoZ; I can do a run through in a day or two. This is my first time really giving Zelda II a go, so I'm interested to see how I feel once I complete it once.
The NEW player is going to grab the crystal and get an auto-level. They will also naturally level up a few times just from palace-based combat.
By the time they hit the first plateau of Death Mountain, they will understand that leveling is useful and that it's important to be able to hit harder.
Exactly. The reason I was never able to get very far in this game as a kid was because I didn't understand all the intricacies of the experience system...most importantly, just how easy it is to tread water and not get anywhere. For the new player, arrival at Death Mountain demonstrates that first real lesson to the player that says: "You probably need to level-up a bit before you move forward" (It probably also didn't help that my copy of Zelda II was a hand-me-down and didn't come with the manual, and with no internet back then, I pretty much had to learn the game on my own).
This concept in itself wasn't new to me, even back then, as I was an avid Dragon Warrior player (and Dragon Warrior is a game almost entirely comprised of: "enter area, grind levels, repeat"). The biggest difference (and biggest frustration) by comparison is that Zelda II can set you back and waste your time. In DW, when you died, you lost gold. Yeah, that sucked a$$ because gold was important for buying better weapons and armor but you kept all your experience points, so at least you were always making forward progress and could get stronger (and there were no instant-death pits). In Zelda II, if you're not careful and end up getting slapped around, you could lose all XP (and thus, all the time spent acquiring them). Also, you can't quit and save your game in the middle of a leveling session because even saving your game zeroes out your XP!
At lower levels, this doesn't mean much because the caps are low and you can level quickly. However, when you're trying to get into the upper levels (say levels 4+), it takes thousands of XP. This means you either spend a lot of time grinding smaller enemies to stay safe, or you go hunting some of the tougher foes but risk getting yourself killed. It's reasonably safe to go hunting the big guys when you have a spare life or two, but don't dare go risking your neck on your final life, or that 3760 XP you spent the last 30 minutes working on to level up Health will suddenly disappear (this one happened to me).
Regardless, as a more experienced and observant adult (and thanks to a few tips from folks here), I was able to go into the game much more informed. I found a lot of fun and success in clearing out the first palace and grinding levels of Attack Power there until reaching Level 6, then using the first crystal to boost me to 7. With that out of the way early, I was able to proceed through the rest of the game without any more grinding at all, saving the crystals for levels 7-8 of each of the stats as I got there. The other levels just came through natural exploration of the overworld and palaces and the game was so much fun!
Anyway, I maintain that the section of the game from the 2nd Palace to Death Mountain is the biggest obstacle for the un-researched player. Not surprisingly, that's where most people seem to stop playing the game (and that's as far as I got as a dumb kid). But if the game were just a little less unfair about XP-theft (for f*ck's sake, at least let us save the damn game without robbing us blind), I honestly think more people would have gotten a fuller appreciation of it as an excellent action/adventure game on the NES.
Your idea for the Zelda II experiment is spot-on, and I'd love to hear the results, lol. We tend to become blinded by the fact that BITD, we didn't have much besides manuals and friends to strategize with. Now, you can see the entire game before you even know how to play it.
I have made it part of my personal challenge to play retro games this way whenever possible: without gross internet assistance. I'll read the game manual (scanned copies mostly since I own almost no physical manuals anymore), I'll refer to my collection of Nintendo Power issues or Nintendo Power Player's Guides if I'm really stumped on something, or I'll seek advice through the online forums here (much like this thread )...but I won't consult internet walkthroughs, FAQs and the like. Especially if a game is one that I never really got to experience properly in its time, I want to try to capture as much of the original experience as possible. This heightens both the sense of wonder in exploring a game as well as the sense of accomplishment when I finish it.
There are a few games I've "cheated" on because they were proving frustrating for whatever reason and I was simply ready to move on but, for the most part, I like it when it's just me, the manual and the game.
*I am not saying there's anything wrong with it. In fact this is exactly the kind of thing I meant when I said an artificially hard challenging game offers variation.
‡When you finish the game, you get to start over. Your containers are reset, but your levels stay. It is indeed fun to start over and be so powerful after I have completed a traditional run.
However, when you're trying to get into the upper levels (say levels 4+), it takes thousands of XP. This means you either spend a lot of time grinding smaller enemies to stay safe, or you go hunting some of the tougher foes but risk getting yourself killed. It's reasonably safe to go hunting the big guys when you have a spare life or two, but don't dare go risking your neck on your final life, or that 3760 XP you spent the last 30 minutes working on to level up Health will suddenly disappear (this one happened to me).
Some places are safer than others to pursue big points. Find terrain or a cave near a town, so you can cut and run and go see that nice young lady when you need a rest. How was your health already? Had you heavily unbalanced your stats in favor of attack?
I have made it part of my personal challenge to play retro games this way whenever possible
Hell yeah dude, me too. You're right about how awesome it makes the whole experience.
Some places are safer than others to pursue big points. Find terrain or a cave near a town, so you can cut and run and go see that nice young lady when you need a rest. How was your health already? Had you heavily unbalanced your stats in favor of attack?
I made two attempts during my recent run. In the first, I tried leveling Attack Power and Health simultaneously. This worked up to a point (about level 3 or so) but I found it ultimately felt like it was holding me back, especially when I reached Death Mountain. So, I deleted my save and started again, this time focusing solely on Attack Power until using the first crystal to get it to level 7. Once Attack Power was at 7, that's when I began leveling up Health (which was cheap and easy, especially since tougher, higher-experience yielding enemies became less threatening). This worked out much better for me in the long run.
Here's the reason why I've generally come to prioritize "Attack Power" in many games of this sort: Higher damage output means enemies require fewer hits and thus die more quickly. The more quickly you defeat an enemy, the fewer opportunities they have to land hits on you (in Zelda II, this example is particularly well-represented in the Ironknuckles). Health only exists to give you a larger "window of error", meaning it gives you more opportunities to screw up before you die. But the object is really to learn how "not to get hit" in the first place. So, taking out the enemy quickly and skillfully means a better chance of avoiding hits entirely, thus negating the need for more health.
Now, there are a few segments and enemies in Zelda II where it is very difficult not to get at all, mostly toward the end of the game, and that's when Health starts becoming important. But, especially in the early-game, if you have a high Attack Power, you'll dispatch enemies and bosses too quickly for them to land hits on you anyway (and you get the Shield and Life spells fairly early), making extra health less important up-front.
It wasn't a lack of health in the few instances that caused me to lose precious XP...it was being knocked into instant-death pits. There was one case where one of the blue Ironknuckles in the depths of one of the Palaces did me in and cost me 1500 XP or so, but far and away the most troublesome were those encounters that sent me into a lava pit or sinking beneath the waves. And no amount of health will save you from those.
I have made it part of my personal challenge to play retro games this way whenever possible
Hell yeah dude, me too. You're right about how awesome it makes the whole experience.
Totally! Doing it "authentic-like" just increases the enjoyment for me. It gets me back into that late-80's/early-90's mindset and becomes a lot of fun. Plus, it makes me break out and remember all the cool stuff buried in the manuals and old gaming magazines and that in itself is a treat!
Health only exists to give you a larger "window of error", meaning it gives you more opportunities to screw up before you die. But the object is really to learn how "not to get hit" in the first place. So, taking out the enemy quickly and skillfully means a better chance of avoiding hits entirely, thus negating the need for more health.
This doesn't seem consistent to me. If you take out the enemy quickly, you have less chance to learn. You decrease the number of possible strike attempts rather than increasing your ability to control your character and dodge the other character. Truly learning how not to get hit means greater chance of success against tougher enemies regardless of how many health points they have.
If your downfall was into pits I suppose it's moot. I'm just speaking theoretically. Although, if you can successfully not get hit, then you won't get knocked into them.
Health only exists to give you a larger "window of error", meaning it gives you more opportunities to screw up before you die. But the object is really to learn how "not to get hit" in the first place. So, taking out the enemy quickly and skillfully means a better chance of avoiding hits entirely, thus negating the need for more health.
This doesn't seem consistent to me. If you take out the enemy quickly, you have less chance to learn. You decrease the number of possible strike attempts rather than increasing your ability to control your character and dodge the other character. Truly learning how not to get hit means greater chance of success against tougher enemies regardless of how many health points they have.
If your downfall was into pits I suppose it's moot. I'm just speaking theoretically. Although, if you can successfully not get hit, then you won't get knocked into them.
If I were a perfect player, I would agree. I'd like to think I have at least decent reflexes, memory and game-playing skills but I'm certainly not on the level of some others I've seen. But with keeping my personal faults in mind, the longer I'm engaged with an enemy, the more likely I'll make a mistake (whether mis-timing a jump, misreading a pattern, rogue button-input due to over-eagerness/poor dexterity/twitchy nerves). Thus I try to minimize the length of the engagement to reduce the likelihood of getting caught by those mistakes. I still open up with "test" engagements when I encounter a new enemy type to learn how and when they attack and the proper counter-strategies.
And granted, my experience with the late-game of Zelda II is relatively limited. I don't know it as well as Contra, say...a game which I've studied every stage by trial and error since I was young. As such, I've tried to learn the enemy patterns and figure out the best strategies to avoid taking hits, but I haven't really gotten there yet. It's mostly a few of the later segments that prove really difficult to avoid damage (and a few that seem almost *impossible* to get through without taking at least one hit). So, yeah, Zelda II is still pretty tough for me in that respect but only in a few spots and against a few enemy types. I'm still a newb when it comes to that game.
-----------------------
So, here's a little something I just remembered and haven't seen mentioned ITT. If you level up after you're already maxed out, you get extra lives. I see limited lives are a pain point, so that might be helpful. You can get as many as you want if you put the time in. ofc it also requires grinding more, another pain point for some but I say, seriously, it's fun!
You guys know you don't have to kill every foe you face. I still have trouble with that mentality (I *LIKE* killing my foes, damnit), but stabbing them in the head and moving on is sometimes the best bet. Or flying past them like a little fairy also helps.
Yes, running away or bouncing over enemies can really save your bacon, especially in the last two palaces.
Originally posted by: Webhead123
Originally posted by: Ozzy_98
You guys know you don't have to kill every foe you face. I still have trouble with that mentality (I *LIKE* killing my foes, damnit), but stabbing them in the head and moving on is sometimes the best bet. Or flying past them like a little fairy also helps.
Yes, running away or bouncing over enemies can really save your bacon, especially in the last two palaces.
Especially those hawk guys in the final dungeon. They wrecked me everytime I actually tried to fight them.
You guys know you don't have to kill every foe you face. I still have trouble with that mentality (I *LIKE* killing my foes, damnit), but stabbing them in the head and moving on is sometimes the best bet. Or flying past them like a little fairy also helps.
Yes, running away or bouncing over enemies can really save your bacon, especially in the last two palaces.
Especially those hawk guys in the final dungeon. They wrecked me everytime I actually tried to fight them.
Yeah, I'm on the path to the final dungeon, and I've skipped a lot of enemies, lol.
Seriously though, how many lives did you gather up before making the final journey? And how many did you have left at the end?
Congraturation!
You used shield? Wuss
Seriously though, how many lives did you gather up before making the final journey? And how many did you have left at the end?
Congraturation!
I collected 0 extra lives throughout the entire playthrough of Zelda II. I had one life left when I defeated Shadow Link. I died/game overe-ed 60 times during the entire playthrough.
I died/game overe-ed 60 times during the entire playthrough.
Probably less than my first time beating it, lol
I feel like if there were, you would have said already, but... any other thoughts about the game? You made a thread about this
Really, you never picked up any of the dolls? That's interesting. Sometimes I leave stuff in case I need it later, and might never get around to it. Was it that kind of thing?
I died/game overe-ed 60 times during the entire playthrough.
Probably less than my first time beating it, lol
I feel like if there were, you would have said already, but... any other thoughts about the game? You made a thread about this
Well, I was aware of them, but consciously avoided them because I was sick of grinding and just wanted to give the last Palace a shot.
It's interesting that almost everyone has done the strategy of skipping the crystals because I have never done it that way ever. I've probably finished Zelda II a dozen times all the way through and every time I grab the crystal the first time through the palace. As I play I try to manage it where I level up upon killing the palace bosses so that I get the most out of grabbing the crystal at that time, and even though it isn't the optimal method for grinding I always end up fully leveled up prior to the final palace.