It has to be appreciated for its historic value; this is not only the very first cartridge in video gaming history to include a battery save--a feature we take for granted nowadays--but it's also a phenomenal adventure game with a complex storyline and a captivating atmosphere, at least for 1986 standards. Let's just say we're light years ahead of Adventure on the Atari 2600 in that regard. Miyamoto indeed successfully managed to emulate the grandiose childlike feeling of natural exploration and it feels like you've never truly found everything that the map has to offer.
The screens perpetually get filled with challenging enemies that have some of the most complex battle styles and advanced AI I've seen in that era of video gaming. It requires a lot of strategy to just clear some of these screens. The frequent "fight or flight response" feelings that this game brings upon the player makes me see it as the first great shift away from traditional mindless fighting styles (shooter/jump on top of the enemy), and therefore, in a way, this game is the grandfather of all RPGs in the way that it brought upon complex enemies, numerous different items and weapons, as well as experimental battle styles.
However, despite how much we owe to this game, it goes without saying that it has aged considerably. Firstly, it's an excessively cryptic game. The Legend of Zelda is practically impossible to complete without some sort of strategy guide. The map that comes printed in the manual is practically useless in terms of progressing through the game. An authentic playthrough would at least require hours of scavenging every single screen in the map, of walking back and forth between screens with the horrendous candle that can only be used once per screen transition (who thought this was a good idea?) and wasting bombs, which are a very scarce commodity, trying to blow up unmarked walls. A game that requires further reading in a book or on the web to complete will inherently leave a sour feeling in my mouth. Titles like Castlevania II and Milon's Secret Castle are often harshly criticized for the very same type of cryptic secrets that are required to make progress through the story. Yet, Zelda, in all its praise, is guilty of the same crimes.
Furthermore, I was disappointed in how some of those dungeons are designed. Having to perpetually and arbitrarily light up some the rooms is tedious and redundant. Enemies like Darknuts and Wizzrobes are some of the most annoying I've ever had to deal with. If Like Likes touch you, they destroy your Magic Shield, which is one of the most expensive items in the game. This annoyed me to no end. Some of the rooms are so saturated with random enemies that there are framerate issues with the original NES. Bosses are reused between dungeons. A bit more thought could have been put in how these dungeons are designed.
So, is NES Zelda still worth playing? Most definitely if you have interest in retro gaming or video gaming history, but otherwise, you can probably skip that one. I got a fair bit of enjoyment out of it but it's most definitely an aging game. I might come back for the second quest at some point if I'm brave enough.
The screens perpetually get filled with challenging enemies that have some of the most complex battle styles and advanced AI I've seen in that era of video gaming. It requires a lot of strategy to just clear some of these screens. The frequent "fight or flight response" feelings that this game brings upon the player makes me see it as the first great shift away from traditional mindless fighting styles (shooter/jump on top of the enemy), and therefore, in a way, this game is the grandfather of all RPGs in the way that it brought upon complex enemies, numerous different items and weapons, as well as experimental battle styles.
However, despite how much we owe to this game, it goes without saying that it has aged considerably. Firstly, it's an excessively cryptic game. The Legend of Zelda is practically impossible to complete without some sort of strategy guide. The map that comes printed in the manual is practically useless in terms of progressing through the game. An authentic playthrough would at least require hours of scavenging every single screen in the map, of walking back and forth between screens with the horrendous candle that can only be used once per screen transition (who thought this was a good idea?) and wasting bombs, which are a very scarce commodity, trying to blow up unmarked walls. A game that requires further reading in a book or on the web to complete will inherently leave a sour feeling in my mouth. Titles like Castlevania II and Milon's Secret Castle are often harshly criticized for the very same type of cryptic secrets that are required to make progress through the story. Yet, Zelda, in all its praise, is guilty of the same crimes.
Furthermore, I was disappointed in how some of those dungeons are designed. Having to perpetually and arbitrarily light up some the rooms is tedious and redundant. Enemies like Darknuts and Wizzrobes are some of the most annoying I've ever had to deal with. If Like Likes touch you, they destroy your Magic Shield, which is one of the most expensive items in the game. This annoyed me to no end. Some of the rooms are so saturated with random enemies that there are framerate issues with the original NES. Bosses are reused between dungeons. A bit more thought could have been put in how these dungeons are designed.
So, is NES Zelda still worth playing? Most definitely if you have interest in retro gaming or video gaming history, but otherwise, you can probably skip that one. I got a fair bit of enjoyment out of it but it's most definitely an aging game. I might come back for the second quest at some point if I'm brave enough.