This game reignited an existential crisis in me that often comes from older games, does using a walkthrough, even for just one small thing, ruin the experience?

With this game I am conflicted, going in completely blind is definitely not recommended, at the very least look up the manual which contains some tips and a partially complete map.

But what about hidden caves? There is no visual or audio indication which parts of the map can be bombed/burned and the only hint is that the old man will give a usless cryptic hint that basically just implies that you should bomb/burn every single bush or wall. Does this feel like adventure? is this exploration? No, not when extremely important items are hidden in these caves, if it was only keys, bombs and rubies in these caves I think it would be fine, but a vital part of the game is behind some random bush.

In this game I would say that to get the intended experience, play for a while exploring naturally, it doesn't take too long to see most of the map, then when you hit a wall, look up what you have missed and then play through the rest of the game with a guide. I got to level 4 and missed level 2 and a massive amount of items in the overworld (some of which were literally essential to continue) but I had seen most of the map, and discovered a few secret areas and items on my own, so I believe I got the intended experience in a few hours, but to see the ending and the rest of the content in the game, a walkthrough was needed.

Anyway the game is incredibly influential and of such high quailty it basically defined what a post-arcade video game is, the dick sucking the Zelda series gets is (mostly) well deserved and despite how comparatively 'not fun' the first entry is by modern standards, this is like criticising the Ford model T by saying it's not as fast as a Ferrari