HOME | GAMES | LIBRARY | STORY | MUSIC | FAN | CONTACT

In Defense of Zelda II

By Ice

Okay, guys. Before I begin, let me tell you that I am not crazy, or on drugs, or anything. But I'm kind of fed up with the way everyone treats Zelda II: The Adventure of Link. Sure, it was different, but Zelda 64 is different, and as far as I can tell, no one hates it. "Yeah, you say, "but Zelda 64 is a good different. Zelda II was just... weird." Define "weird". My definition of weird is "different in appearance or content, usually projected in a negative way." I should write a dictionary. Anyway, Zelda II was different. Very different. So different and out of character for Zelda, that everyone hated it. Take it out of the Zelda series. What do you have? A great game!

I've gotten several e-mails bashing Zelda II. One of then said, "On your latest poll, you should have an option that says All of them but Zelda 2". Eat rocks. Another said, "You talk about Zelda II like it was a good game or something. Now, Ice, you and I both know that this is not true." And then he continued on with some pathetic "Rey-caliber" cut-downs. Give me a break. Zelda II was a great game, like it or not. "Yes, it was a great game," many of you admit, "but just not fit for the Zelda series. There's nothing more to it." Wrong. Now if we were talking about the CD-i games, that would be different. But we're not. We're talking about an official one.

To see the true quality of Zelda II, we're going to have to break it down into small pieces. That's something that I don't mind doing to defend such a great game. So here we go:

-Graphics: The graphics were certainly much nicer in the second version of Zelda than they were in the first. End of story.

-Sound: Zelda II had some of the best tunes ever, like the cave and last temple pieces. However, it's the only game to date without the traditional Zelda theme song. Despite that, I think it pulls ahead of the original in this category also, due to the variety and actual sound quality.

-Play Control: The overhead view was pretty shabby, but the side view was sharp. But since the play control types are so different, there's really no way to compare them. Tie.

-Challenge: Both of these games had awesome puzzles and amazing dungeons, but I think the original wins here.

-Fun Factor: This is more a matter of opinion, but I think most of us would agree that the original wins here, too.

-Overall: The original Zelda wins, but Zelda II doesn't fall too far behind. Both of the games are innovative, captivating, and challenging.

After reading that, you're still probably not all that convinced. The term I repeatedly hear associated with Zelda II is "different". Yeah, it's different. Another word is "innovative". Miyamato himself said th at his goal for the Zelda games was to introduce new technology and new ways of game play never dreamed of before, in such a way that could never be reproduced. So Zelda's creator wants the Zelda games to be "different". Trust me, Miyamato made Zelda II how he wanted it to be made. Isn't that good enough?