Classic Gaming Thread

[Garteal]

Lol at that gif.

noah Wrote:I want to play the best Zelda game, and I heard it was Ocarina of Time, but I tried the beggining and it was really boring to me, unlike a Link to the Past. Am I wrong?

Yes. Very. Just keep playing and you'll see that you were wrong.

NaturalViolence Wrote:My opinion:
OoT>MM>OoS/OoA>lttp>fsa>mc>ww>tp

Oracle of Seasons and Ages are THAT good?
I never really played them, but from that I remember they weren't outstanding, especially compared to A Link to the Past which I had played before.

Here's my opinion:
Majora's Mask -> Ocarina of Time -> A Link to the Past -> Minish Cap -> Zelda 2 -> Zelda 1 -> Twilight Princess -> Wind Waker

[Zee530]

Might as well add mine as well:
Ocarina of Time > Twilight Princess > Majora's Mask > Wind Waker > A link to the past > Phantom hourglass
Still playing SS.

[LordVador]

Just to say that Zelda 1/2 on NES (The Legend of Zelda, Zelda II: The Adventure of Link) have poor graphics yeah but are really excellent. Younger players should try them (more than 5 minutes )

[Zee530]

2D is for old people

[LordVador]

2D is for old school people

[NaturalViolence]

Regardless of their graphics their mechanics are downright awful by modern standards. Anyone who seriously considers them up to par with modern zelda games must have some seriously powerful nostalgia goggles. They are a chore to play. Here have a quick reminder what playing Zelda I/II was like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZPXaSKjWzs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3ZmwQnEvew

Lttp was a colossal improvement in every way. And I actually think it had very little to do with the people who were working on it. The hardware limitations of the NES made it extremely difficult or downright impossible to implement many of the gameplay mechanics that would have dramatically improved the first two zeldas. And obviously they weren't a chore to play back when they came out because there was nothing better around in the genre back then.

Garteal Wrote:Oracle of Seasons and Ages are THAT good?

I never really played them, but from that I remember they weren't
outstanding, especially compared to A Link to the Past which I had
played before.

It might just be the nostalgia goggles at work but they were to me. Or it might be the other way around. I didn't play lttp as a kid, I played it in high school I think, after OoS/OoA. So I might not have the same nostalgia effecting my opinion as everyone who played lttp back in the 90s when it was revolutionary. To me OoX were far more creative and fun. Lttp feels bland by comparison. The mechanics are better in lttp though.

Zee53- Wrote:Twilight Princess > Majora's Mask

[Starscream]

(05-20-2013, 04:52 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: Regardless of their graphics their mechanics are downright awful by modern standards. Anyone who seriously considers them up to par with modern zelda games must have some seriously powerful nostalgia goggles. They are a chore to play.

I find it funny that you would say this. I do agree with you to a point, but seeing as you have listed "Zelda: Four Sword Adventures" in your profile as your favorite Gamecube game, that favorite game choice just doesn't line up well with your current statements. The "Zelda: Four Sword Adventures" game controls very similarly to the NES Zelda games and to you should be considered:

(05-20-2013, 04:52 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: awful by modern standards

And:

(05-20-2013, 04:52 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: a chore to play

Which leads to the question: Why did you choose to list a 2D game with horrible gameplay mechanics as your favorite game and then tell someone else that they were wrong for liking their 2D game? And, if those old 2D Zelda games do have horrible gameplay mechanics, why didn't you list one of the more "modern" Zelda games, like Wind Waker or Twilight Princess?

[NaturalViolence]

Starscream: "All 2D games are the same"

That's basically what I'm getting from this.

quality of gameplay mechanics != quality of graphics

The NES games have terrible outdated gameplay mechanics regardless of their graphics. The more modern 2D titles starting with lttp do not. This makes them far more fun to play. Out of all the 2D games FSA has the best mechanics hands down.

2D games aren't necessarily bad or even inferior to 3D games. It just so happens that those particular 2D games (Zelda I/II) are bad compared to virtually any other zelda game, whether it be 2D or 3D. I don't hate them because they're 2D, I hate them because their mechanics are retarded. For example the movement in Zelda I if I recall is really wonky and doesn't support diagonal movement. This makes combat far more tedious and has nothing to do with the fact that it's a 2D game.

Or the fact that Zelda I is full of secret caves with absolutely no indication of where they are (no cracks in the walls or such) which means the only way you could possibly find them is by randomly bombing every wall in the game or using a guide. This is another problem that they fixed in lttp.

[Starscream]

(05-20-2013, 05:55 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote: For example the movement in Zelda I if I recall is really wonky and doesn't support diagonal movement. This makes combat far more tedious and has nothing to do with the fact that it's a 2D game.

Isn't that pretty much the only difference, though? I hardly think the ability to move diagonally is enough of a difference to consider one game as having horrible gameplay mechanics and another considered as being good. They're still both really similar and basically controlled rather primitively when compared to today's games.

[NaturalViolence]

It has more of an effect than you think. It makes some enemies really hard to hit no matter what you do. Not to mention navigating through the games many puzzle rooms.

Anyways I haven't played the game in a long time (not to mention I never finished it since it was so horribly boring and tedious) so I don't really have time to go research, analyze, and write down all of the gameplay mechanic improvements made in lttp when they made the jump to the SNES. Just watch the video, johnny does a pretty good job at nailing most of them. I assure you they are completely different games in terms of mechanics. It's crazy how tedious zelda I/II feel by comparison. The bottom line is zelda I/II are not fun to play, FSA is very fun to play. I don't care if they're both 2D games, that means jack squat when assessing whether they succeed in doing what video games are supposed to do (create an engaging and "fun" experience).

Here is his lttp video for comparison purposes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiE35wvqX_g