The first game is praised

>The first game is praised
>The sequel is shit on constantly despite not being bad
Why

Literal children who haven't played it but saw that it's a sidescroller and equated it with Simon's Quest like fucking dumbasses.

Is Simon's Quest "bad" either or just mediocre?

I mean yeah it was kind of a disappointment but it was still probably the best game that came out that year.
I don't know why people act like it's actually a terrible game.

those people should watch a speedrun of it

it's only 'bad' to people because they have no idea where the fuck they are going and just get raped everywhere

People cant get good and grind

Tedious is probably the proper word for Simon's Quest. It's not abhorrent, broken or offensive, it's just naturally a slog to get through because the game encourages grinding, sets you back quite a bit if you die, has that cumbersome day/night cycle, and is cryptic as all hell.

AoL is great. You actually get the sense that the land is wasting away into nothing and you HAVE to go on perilous journey where danger abounds with each step, and even the towns have this sense of foreboding and dread and hopelessness to them.

Remember that one game that you hated despite it being decent just because you were expecting something else?
Well there you go

No. I don't remember anything like that at all.

Then play more games you dick sucking faggot

What is FF13?

I do play video games. Hating something because it's different is bad, but if it's something FF13 and legit bad and different, then it's fine to hate it.

compared to what came after it, it was a masterpiece.

Zelda II isn't bad, most people were just bad at playing it. The final treck to death mountain was a bit too punishing though and I wish it was a little longer.

>The final treck to death mountain was a bit too punishing though and I wish it was a little longer
I can do this in my sleep. Played it last year and got through it from the start in one attempt. To make things easier, before heading to the hammer I go right and then get the downward thrust and come back. It's weird that people say this game is hard. I guess I had no other games to play back then, no backlog, and lots of time to get gud

Correction, I get the candle first and the heart container and magic container near the first dungeon. Not immediately from the start

I think what throws people off is they don't realize even when you get a game over, a lot of your overworld progress remains. At least I think. Its been a while since I last played.

That's actually not true. Time has been kind to Zelda II. It think most people would now consider it a (flawed) classic.

>hammer
fuck I'm an idiot. Thought death mountain was the area leading to the final temple. still death mountain was a little tough. I played through the game for the first time about a month ago.

Zelda 2 is literally the equivalent of Batman Forever for the SNES, as in imagine if you played a beat em up and every single fight you had to go in a separate slow and tedious Tekken mode to kill the guys.

zelda 2 needed more shortcuts on the overworld

because it was a step down in every aspect compared to Dark Souls

>more choices of exploration from the start
>many more viable builds in both pve and pvp
>new content in NG+
>option to fight bosses multiple times without having to beat the game or start a new game
>better armor variety
>more character customization options
There might be more i'm missing, but you need to give credit when credit is do.

There are only two kinds of people people when it comes to Zelda II:

Those who think it's great and those who haven't played it enough.

>The final treck to death mountain was a bit too punishing though and I wish it was a little longer.
Death Mountain is super early in the game.

>BotW will never even at least fall into this category

>get ganked on the overworld map too many times while I'm still learning how Link controls
If it was more intuitively designed I'd keep playing.
The dungeons seem neat.

The nes literally has 4 buttons you mong.

Intuition should have had you try every button in under a minute

If zelda II got rid of the grinding and barrage of enemies on the overworld it would honestly be one of the NES best games

basically just give me castlevania: zelda

fuck off, retard

>Being this bad

Plebs, that's why.

Although I feel the game would have been more enjoyable if you had the down and up jumping attacks from the start.

Stay on the paths if you don't have the skill to survive against slimes.

It already is one of the NES's best games.

No, that's that game you liked but everyone else sane saw it for being terrible.

Zelda 2 is better than the original game.

FF8. But there were a lot of FF before it. This was only one Zelda in.

I dont remember people hating though at the time. Just a lot that couldnt beat it as kids

Controls are stiff and awkward, reach is piss poor shitty, and a host of other minor details which all work against the game. It's a good idea that wasn't done well.

But it is bad, the gameplay isn't fun at all.

It was a good game. Sure, starting from the beginning sucked dick. It was not like the first Zelda, though it had many items the first one had.

However, shadow link will always be one of my favorite boss fights ever in a game.

>not abhorrent, broken or offensive

Maybe not now you child, but those "riddles" were fucking impossible back in the day if you didn't have a guide, human or otherwise. Needing to find dracula's eye and then a break a wall to find a secret book to give you a hint so vague it means literally nothing as the ONLY WAY TO PROCEED IN THE GAME is beyond bullshit.

Alundra and alundra 2 are like day and night.
The first is basically 2d zelda for ps1 and the sequel a more linear 3d action rpg with a different plot.

Banjo Tooie