underappreciated nes games

[SKTTR]

I have A Link to the Past on GBA and SNES.
I have Ocarina of Time on N64 as well as the Gamecube Master Quest disk and the Collector's Edition disk.
The Collector's disk is also known to have Zelda I and II (and Majora).
So I already have Zelda II, why of all the Zelda games on the VC did I download it again?

Because it's challenging again and again, and I love it, that's first.
Second, I can pause/save the game without losing all experience points.
That makes the game easier and more playable, without having to sit for hours in front of it.

A nice Wii feature that makes sense in games like Zelda II. This is why I paid 500 points.

[Refa]

Originally Posted by SKTTR

I have A Link to the Past on GBA and SNES.
I have Ocarina of Time on N64 as well as the Gamecube Master Quest disk and the Collector's Edition disk.
The Collector's disk is also known to have Zelda I and II (and Majora).
So I already have Zelda II, why of all the Zelda games on the VC did I download it again?

Because it's challenging again and again, and I love it, that's first.
Second, I can pause/save the game without losing all experience points.
That makes the game easier and more playable, without having to sit for hours in front of it.

A nice Wii feature that makes sense in games like Zelda II. This is why I paid 500 points.

Which is why the game is actually better on the new school console rather than the old school one. That's a first, at least until we get more old school action/adventures or RPGs.

[Mr. Cheez]

Originally Posted by SKTTR

I have A Link to the Past on GBA and SNES.
I have Ocarina of Time on N64 as well as the Gamecube Master Quest disk and the Collector's Edition disk.
The Collector's disk is also known to have Zelda I and II (and Majora).
So I already have Zelda II, why of all the Zelda games on the VC did I download it again?

Because it's challenging again and again, and I love it, that's first.
Second, I can pause/save the game without losing all experience points.
That makes the game easier and more playable, without having to sit for hours in front of it.

A nice Wii feature that makes sense in games like Zelda II. This is why I paid 500 points.

Oh yeah, that's the other reason why I hated Zelda II: Losing all your experience points when you lost your last life, even when you were a mere 30 points away from your next level. And that bag of 5000 experience points I stumbled upon while randomly wandering the level all of a sudden becomes COMPLETELY REDUNDANT! Grrr....

Oh, and the suspend points don't exactly help you when you die...

EDIT: Though I suppose the suspend points would help somewhat.

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Zelda II is indeed a great game.

Another game that is sadly under-appreciated is Castlevania II: Simon's Quest. I had never played it before yesterday, when I played it through from start to finish. It's really pretty good. I know people complain about the villagers giving useless clues, but that's kinda the point... just go explore on your own. The world is not all that big, so exploring on your own is easy and intuitive. The false blocks are no big deal, and the day/night system is annoying but not a big game flaw. It's also extremely easy. Some may see that as a flaw, but I don't. If you want to challenge yourself, you can try to beat it faster or at a lower level.

[hippiecrite]

Originally Posted by Jogurt the Yogurt

Zelda II is indeed a great game.

Another game that is sadly under-appreciated is Castlevania II: Simon's Quest. I had never played it before yesterday, when I played it through from start to finish. It's really pretty good. I know people complain about the villagers giving useless clues, but that's kinda the point... just go explore on your own. The world is not all that big, so exploring on your own is easy and intuitive. The false blocks are no big deal, and the day/night system is annoying but not a big game flaw. It's also extremely easy. Some may see that as a flaw, but I don't. If you want to challenge yourself, you can try to beat it faster or at a lower level.

Castlevania II is indeed a great game. Like any other NES game it's hard at first but once you know where to go and what to do it's not hard at all and very enjoyable. Same is true with Zelda II. I never got the 'oh it's so hard' criticism. Then again I've been playing it since '88 so I know it inside and out.

[Fierce_Deity835]

Crystalis
Faxanadu
Metal Storm
Kickle Cubicle
A few more that I forget.

[hansolo350]

Originally Posted by The shoemaker

Zelda ll

I don't get it, it was only the second game in the series, and yet people were already complaining it was straying from the formula! Nintendo was simply trying something new, and from what I've seen, Zelda ll looks alot better than the original. Yes, it might have been hard, but weren't most games pretty hard back then? It still had quite a bit of exploration in it, and some great music too. I don't think it deseverd all of the crap it got.

When Zelda II came out it was pretty popular, most of the complaints come from people who just hate that it was titled 'Zelda'.

[slangman]

Well I own Zelda II on collector’s edition. Too bad I didn't like the game much, I just think level grinding is boring, the game is too hard and the town people turn into bats to hurt you, just because you talked to them.

[SKTTR]

Originally Posted by hansolo350

When Zelda II came out it was pretty popular, most of the complaints come from people who just hate that it was titled 'Zelda'.

Most of the complaints come from people who started with Zelda III or later ones ... you compare and see clearly Zelda II is lost. It's different, it's hard, it has boring graphics. That's true. To really appreciate Zelda II you had to know this game back in 1987 for it was an outstanding game that inspired games such as Battle of Olympus, Faxanadu, Castlevania II, Dragon's Curse/Wonderboy to name a few.

I didn't know it in '87 cause I was 6 years old and lost in hundreds of C64 games. The only NES games I knew and loved were Ice Climbers, Donkey Kong and Mario Bros. But I can set myself back into time, remember all the other games around this point in time, then I see the good things in these retro games. Zelda II was extremely big (the overworld was full of hidden places) extremely polished (YES! I mean it!), and you could save the game (very unusual in 1987 where long passwords dominated). I could go on forever you see but we oldboys can only hope the younger generations try to respect our old retro games and don't bash them like little a**holes. I'm talking about Gamers Woodstock, know that! RETRO FTW!

[enigmaopoeia]

I was one of the few who grew up playing The Legend of Zelda and I was very excited for Zelda II. I used to remember my father and I actually drawing out maps of the dungeons so we can get through them easily as we each try to find secrets. It was a pretty deep game and feels rewarding the more you progress. Then again I was only 7 years old when I played it, so what do I know! But I still thoroughly enjoy this game.

Besides SKTTR took most of the words out of my mouth.

[sponge]

hahaha i drew maps too!

i loved this game when it came out, but thought it was extremely difficult too. i was so happy to finally crush it. never played it through again. eventually will on VC, and looking forward to the suspend feature.

[sponge]

Originally Posted by locke

Crash N The Boyz: Street Challenge, fans of River City Ransom should check out this weird multi-event competition game (same publisher/sprite style). Great multiplayer, and the game just oozes with creative ways to kick the **** out of your opponents (piranas in the swimming pool for example)

so i have every rom you could have, and never played many of them. i am a HUGE fan of RCR. never even HEARD of this game!! haha surprise, i already had the rom! FANTASTIC GAME! thanks so much! hope this comes to VC, but i guess thats a dream, right? but thanks again, i missed this one for sure. !!!!

[sponge]

sorry zelda 2 PS: i dont remember ever having to 'level grind.' it just didnt happen. i was too young to care about that, i just played the game. and eventually completed it. i think i would enjoy it even MORE as an adult, and appreciate all the extra stuff they threw in. it was just lost on me then. and i still loved it.

[Mickeymac]

Originally Posted by SKTTR

To really appreciate Zelda II you had to know this game back in 1987 for it was an outstanding game that inspired games such as Battle of Olympus, Faxanadu, Castlevania II, Dragon's Curse/Wonderboy to name a few.

Faxanadu was a Zelda II type game? Now I am interested in that game! Same with that Battle of Olympus.

[Refa]

Originally Posted by Mickeymac

Faxanadu was a Zelda II type game? Now I am interested in that game! Same with that Battle of Olympus.

Sorry Zelda II fanboys, but I prefer Faxanadu more myself. Not saying it's better than Zelda II, it's just my opinion.

Originally Posted by SKTTR

Most of the complaints come from people who started with Zelda III or later ones ... you compare and see clearly Zelda II is lost. It's different, it's hard, it has boring graphics. That's true. To really appreciate Zelda II you had to know this game back in 1987 for it was an outstanding game that inspired games such as Battle of Olympus, Faxanadu, Castlevania II, Dragon's Curse/Wonderboy to name a few.

I didn't know it in '87 cause I was 6 years old and lost in hundreds of C64 games. The only NES games I knew and loved were Ice Climbers, Donkey Kong and Mario Bros. But I can set myself back into time, remember all the other games around this point in time, then I see the good things in these retro games. Zelda II was extremely big (the overworld was full of hidden places) extremely polished (YES! I mean it!), and you could save the game (very unusual in 1987 where long passwords dominated). I could go on forever you see but we oldboys can only hope the younger generations try to respect our old retro games and don't bash them like little a**holes. I'm talking about Gamers Woodstock, know that! RETRO FTW!

You could save in the first Zelda game. Just saying. Zelda II is a great game, but it's the weakest (or at least one of the weakest) Zelda games, and it didn;t live up to the standards of the first Zelda IMO. It's still a great game and all, but it's not a top tier Nintendo title. I'd put it up there with the original Metroid, but not as high as say... Blaster Master or Super Mario Bros.

[Mickeymac]

Originally Posted by Refa

Sorry Zelda II fanboys, but I prefer Faxanadu more myself. Not saying it's better than Zelda II, it's just my opinion.

Nobody ever said Zelda II was better. I just like that type of game.

Originally Posted by Refa

You could save in the first Zelda game. Just saying. Zelda II is a great game, but it's the weakest (or at least one of the weakest) Zelda games, and it didn;t live up to the standards of the first Zelda IMO.

Eh, in my opinion, there are worse Zelda games than Zelda II, like Oracle of Ages and Phantom Hourglass, to name a few. I've always considered it to be more middle-quality as far as the series is concerned.

Originally Posted by Refa

It's still a great game and all, but it's not a top tier Nintendo title. I'd put it up there with the original Metroid, but not as high as say... Blaster Master or Super Mario Bros.

Considering the fact that the only condition a game needs to fulfill in order for me to consider it a "Top-Tier" game is that I had a s***-ton of fun with it, I'd say Zelda II is definitely top-tier.

[lordbowser]

You can count me as one of the people who like Zelda II. Despite having a Genesis at the time, I was amazed at how big the map was. I had to learn how to use spells effectively and create a battle strategy for each of the tougher enemies. It was tough but I had loads of fun playing it.

[Refa]

Originally Posted by Mickeymac

Nobody ever said Zelda II was better. I just like that type of game.





Eh, in my opinion, there are worse Zelda games than Zelda II, like Oracle of Ages and Phantom Hourglass, to name a few. I've always considered it to be more middle-quality as far as the series is concerned.



Considering the fact that the only condition a game needs to fulfill in order for me to consider it a "Top-Tier" game is that I had a s***-ton of fun with it, I'd say Zelda II is definitely top-tier.

Oracle Of Ages was one of the best Zelda games. End of discussion.

Well, I dunno about you, but I didn't have a s***-ton of fun when I played the game. Glad that you did, though.

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Originally Posted by Mickeymac

Faxanadu was a Zelda II type game? Now I am interested in that game! Same with that Battle of Olympus.

Yes, but it didn't have an overworld. The whole game was PlatfoRPG. This is a good thing!

Do you like the Wonder Boy PlatfoRPG games?

Cadash is another game similar to this that wasn't mentioned here yet. We want Cadash on the North American VC!

[The shoemaker]

Originally Posted by Mr. Cheez

Oh yeah, that's the other reason why I hated Zelda II: Losing all your experience points when you lost your last life, even when you were a mere 30 points away from your next level.

I would usually level up, and if I lost a life in the process, I would go and die until it's game over. This way I don't lose any EXP, but gain my lost lives.

But it's ridiculous how crazy the level grinding is. You need about 6000 points, and you get roughly ten points for killing someone.

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Originally Posted by The shoemaker

But it's ridiculous how crazy the level grinding is. You need about 6000 points, and you get roughly ten points for killing someone.

Level grinding is super, super easy against the statue knights at the beginning of a couple of the dungeons. Walk in, kill knight, walk out, walk in, kill knight, etc. Those knights are worth like 250-300 experience. And sometimes it's not a knight in the statue, but a magic jar, so you can cast heal on yourself and then refill your magic.

[The shoemaker]

Originally Posted by Jogurt the Yogurt

Level grinding is super, super easy against the statue knights at the beginning of a couple of the dungeons. Walk in, kill knight, walk out, walk in, kill knight, etc. Those knights are worth like 250-300 experience. And sometimes it's not a knight in the statue, but a magic jar, so you can cast heal on yourself and then refill your magic.

It's not as simple when you're in the last few dungeons . But yeah I know what you're syaing, that's actually what I was doing in the beginning. There ought to be a few point givers in the temple I'm in now.

[Mr. Cheez]

Originally Posted by mickeymac

eh, in my opinion, there are worse zelda games than zelda ii, like oracle of ages and phantom hourglass, to name a few.

blasphemy!! Complete, utter blasphemy!

@Jogurt. I did do that. Fighting those knights was a pain, but it was a great way to gain experience in the early dungeons. Unfortunately, it wasn't as effective in the later ones...

@The Shoemaker. Yeah, I did that a little bit too, but not nearly as much as I should've. Most of the time, I would stupidly enter a boss's room with only a few EXP left from my next level, get murdered by it, and have to start all the way over at Zelda's temple.

[segasonic]

1.Destiny of an emperor
2.City connection
3. Destiny of an emperor II

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Originally Posted by segasonic

1.Destiny of an emperor
2.City connection
3. Destiny of an emperor II

As far as I know, Destiny of an Emperor II wasn't released in English, which may contribute to it being underappreciated in the West. The first one is excellent, though—one of my favourite NES RPGs.

[brooks83]

I don't think it has been mentioned yet, but Abadox is an excellent NES shmup. I would download that in a heartbeat if it were released.

EDIT: Ok it was mentioned already, but its still a great game!

[RetroNL]

Zelda II: The Adventure of Link

and

Totally RAD