Playthrough was done using the Zelda Again: Link is Adventuresome PC version of the game. It could be debated how much of this could have affected my review, but at the time of deciding to play this version I didn't really think it would have such major changes as it does, but oh well.
The second entry in the Zelda series is a very rough one, with a complete change in gameplay and direction from the very first game (which was already bad, but at least it was innovative for its time), Zelda II goes out of its way to be an unforgiving, unfair and unfun sequel and while it brought some cool ideas to the table and that would be revisited in future entries, it doesn't really escape the feeling that Nintendo made this game this specific way because it was what was selling in the NES at the time with all of those side-scrolling, difficult action games such as Castlevania or Ghosts 'n Goblins, they tried to adapt a game that was already pretty repetitive into this form format, and honestly? It doesn't seem like a bad idea in paper, if anything it would've fixed some of the issues with the first Zelda... That if they did it right.
Zelda II excels at not being entirely good at anything, the exploration sense is fine but a bit cryptic, the dungeons are linear but are ultimately just enemy gauntlets without much personality, the movement and combat are just alright but they didn't need to lock so much of it to temporary ailments, and so on. A lot of the game would be so much better if only the game wasn't trying so damn hard to be so damn hard.
So, starting out with stating the obvious. The combat is fine? It functions, but it's plenty unfair when Link moves so slowly compared to his foes, while some of these (namely the Iron Knuckles) can defend themselves with a shield while you can't block any of their attacks if you aren't going around with the Reflect spell which you get a very late stage of the game. This, coupled with the fact that you get practically no margin of failure, there's practically no invincibility frame time that isn't used in your character jumping back from the attack(a la Castlevania) makes for a very unfair fencing game in which you cannot have an upper hand to your enemy, even knowing how to beat them is flimsy as they just can hit you at any time, with any projectile, and sure you can just deflect them using your shield, but doing so when there's 5 of them coming at you on screen makes it impossible to actually close in, so you just have to take the damage anyways. It doesn't help that your little dagger of a sword never gets an upgrade besides just damage amplification, (and the Magic Sword power when you have full health just disappears like three tiles ahead of you and can't damage most enemies) which is then again power crept on because every palace adds new versions of previous enemies with more damage. It sucks, and it is like this for the entire game. You don't even unlock useful attack methods such as downwards and upwards trusting until the middle point of it, which is even worse.
Zelda II's map exploration is fine, but it made up for there not being any enemies on screen with annoying random encounters, which would lead me to the enemy design in the game and the XP system. These random encounters were obviously made to keep you a bit busy and slow you down if you're travelling in the overworld but they also work as a mean of grinding experience points for your character to have more attack and magic, and honestly even if they are odd they wouldn't be such a pain if only when you depleted your lives they didn't take like 500 off of you, making you eventually have to scourge and kill enemies for experience points, then save and come back to it as to not lose your progress. The enemies shown across the entire game are just a nuisance to deal with in general, so the whole aspect of "kill enemies to upgrade your gear!" goes out the window when the gameplay cycle is just not fun at all. And don't talk to me about the bosses because they're either very simplistic and boring or straight up hell to deal with.
But I think that ultimately the part that makes me very sad about this game is that it should've worked out. With a bit of tweaking, all of this could've just been like it's predecessor, at least an unengaging repetitive slog of a game would've been better to play than a game that makes you get a strain every single time you play it from how unfair it is. Things like getting more attack options(a bow???? maybe???), getting permanent upgrades such as a permanent Shield Spell in the form of a tunic (like the first game???? maybe???????) or straight up getting stuff like a map in dungeons, things completely unheard of!
Some parts of the game as the middle point in Midoro Palace or Maze Island do utilize level and enemy design pretty well paired with the abilities you have at hand, and it was legitimately enjoyable up until the Ocean Palace which just brought everything down. The game is tedious and abandons you in many places to get lost and try stuff to actually advance and this is straight up shown in the Great Palace which is just a mess of a labyrinth of repeated rooms. It sucks bad, and it'll definitely make me appreciate that Zelda didn't go this direction at all.
i gotta apologize to my girlfriend and my friends for making them watch me play this for like three days straight it was Not Fun
The second entry in the Zelda series is a very rough one, with a complete change in gameplay and direction from the very first game (which was already bad, but at least it was innovative for its time), Zelda II goes out of its way to be an unforgiving, unfair and unfun sequel and while it brought some cool ideas to the table and that would be revisited in future entries, it doesn't really escape the feeling that Nintendo made this game this specific way because it was what was selling in the NES at the time with all of those side-scrolling, difficult action games such as Castlevania or Ghosts 'n Goblins, they tried to adapt a game that was already pretty repetitive into this form format, and honestly? It doesn't seem like a bad idea in paper, if anything it would've fixed some of the issues with the first Zelda... That if they did it right.
Zelda II excels at not being entirely good at anything, the exploration sense is fine but a bit cryptic, the dungeons are linear but are ultimately just enemy gauntlets without much personality, the movement and combat are just alright but they didn't need to lock so much of it to temporary ailments, and so on. A lot of the game would be so much better if only the game wasn't trying so damn hard to be so damn hard.
So, starting out with stating the obvious. The combat is fine? It functions, but it's plenty unfair when Link moves so slowly compared to his foes, while some of these (namely the Iron Knuckles) can defend themselves with a shield while you can't block any of their attacks if you aren't going around with the Reflect spell which you get a very late stage of the game. This, coupled with the fact that you get practically no margin of failure, there's practically no invincibility frame time that isn't used in your character jumping back from the attack
Zelda II's map exploration is fine, but it made up for there not being any enemies on screen with annoying random encounters, which would lead me to the enemy design in the game and the XP system. These random encounters were obviously made to keep you a bit busy and slow you down if you're travelling in the overworld but they also work as a mean of grinding experience points for your character to have more attack and magic, and honestly even if they are odd they wouldn't be such a pain if only when you depleted your lives they didn't take like 500 off of you, making you eventually have to scourge and kill enemies for experience points, then save and come back to it as to not lose your progress. The enemies shown across the entire game are just a nuisance to deal with in general, so the whole aspect of "kill enemies to upgrade your gear!" goes out the window when the gameplay cycle is just not fun at all. And don't talk to me about the bosses because they're either very simplistic and boring or straight up hell to deal with.
But I think that ultimately the part that makes me very sad about this game is that it should've worked out. With a bit of tweaking, all of this could've just been like it's predecessor, at least an unengaging repetitive slog of a game would've been better to play than a game that makes you get a strain every single time you play it from how unfair it is. Things like getting more attack options
Some parts of the game as the middle point in Midoro Palace or Maze Island do utilize level and enemy design pretty well paired with the abilities you have at hand, and it was legitimately enjoyable up until the Ocean Palace which just brought everything down. The game is tedious and abandons you in many places to get lost and try stuff to actually advance and this is straight up shown in the Great Palace which is just a mess of a labyrinth of repeated rooms. It sucks bad, and it'll definitely make me appreciate that Zelda didn't go this direction at all.
i gotta apologize to my girlfriend and my friends for making them watch me play this for like three days straight it was Not Fun