the original zelda is a game so good they remade it 9 times. the reason was it sucks
Submitted by twovests in killallgames
The Legend of Zelda is the NES original. Now we have
- "A Link to the Past", a spiritual remake of the original. (Super Mario World and Super Metroid are also spiritual remakes of the original, but "Super The Legend of Zelda" doesn't have quite the right ring to it.)
- ALttP was re-released for the Gameboy
- "Four Swords Adventures" for the Gamecube counts. You can't prove me wrong, because nobody has ever played it
- "Ocarina of Time" for the Nintendo 64 was a spiritual 3D remake of ALttP. I won't even count the Master Quest on the Gamecube...
- ... But I WILL count the OoT remaster for the 3DS.
- AND Twilight Princess.
- Now, surely you would agree ALBW is a remake of ALttP, and by the transitive property, it's a remake of the original.
- And Breath of the Wild is famously inspired by the original.
- twilight princess hd
Now, of these 9, which one would you most rather pick up and play again? If your answer is the original, would you still say that if you couldn't use save states?
That's right: The original game sucks ass. "NES games aren't as fun 40 years later" is not a very original take. But "Zelda was remade a dozen times" is an original take.
Now, why do I post this?
I have it on good authority they are releasing an even worse remake of the original Zelda by the end of this year. They are calling it "Super The Legend of Zelda".
emma wrote
if only there were a better zelda on the nes
oh wait, there is. it's called Zelda Ⅱ: The Adventure of Link®, and has been unfairly maligned by babies for nearly 40 years
"i will progress in this dungeon by bombing this wall that looks like all the other walls. let me go around bombing every mountainside. this game is a masterpiece." <-- actual beliefs held by actual zelda 1 fans
zelda 2 otoh doesn't rely on obscure item placements or sequences of events to progress, and just has way better combat. idk how zelda 1 got to be the favourite