The Legend of Zelda

To do an honest review of this game, I think you need to make an effort to ignore this game's legacy and try to see it for what it was at the time of release.

Nintendo had originally designed the Famicom as a way to play arcade-style games at home, but many of the system's early hits turned out to be ports of PC games like Hudson's Lode Runner or Chunsoft's Portopia. Audiences were showing that they were interested in more complex and long-form experiences, and many developers were striking gold by catering to this desire. It was to keep up with this shift in audience expectations that Nintendo designed the Famicom Disc System, and Zelda to go along with it.

So, while many contemporary accounts of this game focus on the elements that later became tokenistic to the series like the open-ended world, or the dungeons, or adventure-like progression, these aspects aren't really what made the game special at the time of release. After all, they had already been done in western PC RPGs like the Ultima series, and in Japanese adaptations like Hydlide and Dragon Slayer. Instead, what was actually groundbreaking in Zelda was how these tropes were rethought not just to be simpler to accommodate the Famicom's limitations, but redesigned in order to play to the system's more arcade-oriented strengths.

For example, while the swordplay may seem clumsy to the modern player, but when contemporaries like Dragon Buster or Tower of Druaga, you will see how much more effectively Nintendo was able to apply arcade-like speed and collision detection to the RPG format. Believe it or not, having a single button-press result in Link extending and then retracting his sword in a single slash with a discernible hit box was a notable innovation that made this game stand out from its contemporaries.

But perhaps the most important and influential change was how the designers decoupled character growth from combat. In the traditional RPG game loop you fight enemies to gain experience until you are strong enough to venture further into the world. Nintendo scrapped this system, and instead tied character growth to discrete items (like heart pieces) which you would find by exploring the world. Now, instead of grinding to gain the means to progress, you would be rewarded for using your mastery of the game's mechanics to venture out into the world and discover secrets. It was a re-contextualization of the format that resulted in a dramatically more accessible and dare I say, "fun" experience, and has probably touched every modern action-adventure game in some distant way.

Again, Nintendo weren't the first to attempt to marry reflex-based arcade mechanics with RPG progression, but they were certainly the first to do it in such an elegant and concise way, while retaining or even adding to the depth of the genre. And though the game may not hold up the expectations of modern gamers for 'quality of life' (although I have much to say about that as well) I think if you can ground your expectations in a historical context and let go of your idea of what makes a game easy to play, it still holds up quite well.

If someone were to argue against Mario’s golden boy status in the echelons of Nintendo’s back catalog in favor of The Legend of Zelda, I would not voice a dissenting opinion against it. It’s telling how much of a monolith Nintendo is in the realm of video games that the two greatest gaming franchises of all time are both their properties. The Mario and Zelda franchises have been dueling for the prestigious status of being Nintendo’s top franchise since the golden years of the NES era. Games from both franchises have been the brightest shining examples on their respective Nintendo consoles. Mario may have more mascot potential and wider general appeal, but there has always been something grander about The Legend of Zelda. When a new Zelda title is released, it feels like a monumental affair. The Mario series is consistently adequate, but we as gamers have always expected much more from Zelda. Every subsequent entry to the Zelda franchise is expected to be the crowning achievement for Nintendo, the pinnacle of gaming for each generation. Considering Zelda’s track record, expecting this for each game is understandable. This standard for Zelda was set incredibly high as early as the first Zelda title on the NES, the only game that can rival the first Super Mario Bros. in terms of influence on the video game medium.

In essence, The Legend of Zelda is the archetypal fantasy story in video game form. All of the elements from the oldest of fantasy tales are present in Zelda such as the hero’s quest, a damsel in distress, a wicked villain from some nether realm, magical aid, swords, and shields, etc. The makeup of Zelda should be familiar to anyone who has even the slightest knowledge of the fantasy genre, regardless of what medium. The key difference is the endearing source of inspiration that separates The Legend of Zelda from its fantasy sources. Shigeru Miyamoto has claimed that the prime inspiration to create The Legend of Zelda was to capture the wondrous sense of adventure he would get galavanting around the woods near his house as a child. I wouldn’t know this feeling because I spent my childhood playing video games (just kidding), but I can use my imagination. It’s the sensation that the world is vast and life has no clear objective. It’s the sense of freedom and appreciation for the beauty of the world that one only has time to explore when they are young. This is the core of The Legend of Zelda with the fantasy makeup and its relatively discernable fantasy quirks as secondary aspects. Old fantasy tropes are most likely what Miyamoto conjured up when he was playing in the woods, and this elevated his experience and sense of excitement.

Nintendo committed to this sense of getting lost in the wonderment of nature by making The Legend of Zelda free-flowing by design. The game begins with a young boy in a green tunic brandishing a small shield in what appears to be a forest setting (or at least from what I can tell from the 8-bit graphics) with no context. People who are at least somewhat familiar with the game know to enter the cave on the beginning screen and talk to the old man to receive the sword, but even this isn’t made very clear. I’d imagine plenty of kids in 1986 venturing off without ever entering the cave, wondering why they are rendered defenseless against all of the enemies. There is absolutely no facilitation when it comes to directing the player through The Legend of Zelda, and that’s the underlying magic of it. Mostly all of the entire map of the game can be explored as soon as the player starts it. The world map is designed like a grid in that each part of it occupies the same rectangular space no matter where the player is. There is also a loading sequence whenever the player enters another space on the grid, a minor foible common in the NES era. With this foible in mind, I’m thoroughly impressed that the developers could render this spacious, non-linear world on an early NES game, so the minute hiccup of loading through each screen is understandable. The lack of concrete direction intertwined with the vastness of the game’s world expertly conveys the feeling of getting lost in a fantasy setting. The world of Zelda consists of marshy plains, craggy mountain paths, deep blue lakes, etc., and is something to be in awe of. Sure, one has to use their imagination a bit due to the 8-bit graphics, but the scope of the world presented here gives it that spectacle. The Legend of Zelda’s world design was something to marvel at.

One could argue that the lack of guidance or assistance on the game’s part gives the game a sense of aimlessness, but that isn’t true. It also doesn’t have to come with negative connotations. Little direction gives the player the incentive to dig through every nook and cranny in Hyrule. There is a secret seemingly in every square inch of the world map. The player can burn bushes with the candle, blow up a wall with a bomb, play the flute in a designated area, etc. to unveil the world’s secrets. It’s always incredibly satisfying to discover something new in this game. The secrets also come with a plethora of rewards. Uncovering these hidden areas will reward the player with extra rupees, shops with special items, a gambling mini-game that can earn the player tons of rupees (or drain them), etc. The most valuable items the player has to search for are the heart containers which increase Link’s maximum health. Heart containers are earned through beating the game’s bosses, but this won’t be enough to unlock the hidden sword upgrades in the recesses of the overworld. This gives the player all the more incentive to scrounge around Hyrule to get the most out of it.

This is when I have to play devil’s advocate. While I greatly appreciate the non-linear direction and lack of stringent progression, the game verges into being cryptic all too often. The secrets are located in very specific places on the map and it would be quite surprising if anyone found these secrets on their own without using a guide. This was even more concerning when this game initially came out due to the lack of resources available to aid the player. I’m convinced the guides in Nintendo Power were created because of The Legend of Zelda. Using a guide sort of diminishes that sense of gratification with exploring, but many of these secrets are much too difficult to find. Most of the items are perks rewarded with exploration, but some items like the bait are found in secret shops. Finding these secrets wouldn’t be too much of a hassle if the player’s bomb inventory was infinite. As it stands, the player only has access to eight bombs, and this number is only increased by four near the end of the game. Attempting to uncover a wall with a secret in it will most likely result in having to pay gobs of money refilling bombs. The game even has the nerve to fine the player a sum of rupees for destroying a wall which is cruel and unusual. This also extends to navigating through the dungeons as progression is often furthered through placing a bomb in the center of a wall. This isn’t nearly as hard to pinpoint due to the enclosed spaces, but I often found myself having to exit the dungeon prematurely to restock on bombs. While we’re on the subject, another unfair aspect of the game is being revived with only three hearts. At the beginning of the game, this isn’t much of an issue because the player might not have more than three to five heart containers, but this becomes an issue as the game progresses. The enemies will most likely obliterate the player soon after being revived, and heart pickups aren’t common enough to be relied on. This makes venturing out to buy potions and or locating a fairy fountain to replenish one’s health after dying in a dungeon just as much of a hassle as restocking on bombs.

Claiming that The Legend of Zelda is a directionless excursion wouldn’t be telling the whole truth. There is still one main objective in this game and it is presented to the player even before the first screen. An evil beast named Ganon has taken a mystical, powerful artifact known as the Triforce of Power. Princess Zelda has scattered the other part of the Triforce, the Triforce of Wisdom, into eight pieces and has scattered them all over Hyrule away from Ganon’s keep. The main objective is to find all eight pieces and then defeat Ganon to gain back the stolen Triforce of Power from him. These eight pieces of the Triforce are kept in eight dungeons, colossal architectures found in eight corners of the Hyrule overworld. Inside each dungeon is a maze of enemies in close corners, hidden switches and passageways, and a foreboding music track that accompanies the player’s trek through each dungeon. While the dungeons may all have the same core objectives, they are all designed differently which in turn makes each one as enjoyable to traverse through. Each of them offers different enemies, different challenges, different routes, etc., providing variety for the player and compensating for the graphical restrictions. My only complaint with the dungeons is that there is a specific order they have to be completed in. Each dungeon is numbered and each subsequent dungeon is more difficult than the next (mostly). The problem here stems from the game’s non-linear world design. The first dungeon is a little more conspicuously located, but it’s common for players to accidentally stumble into a number of the dungeons unknowingly. This makes me wish that the player could complete the dungeons in any order they wanted as I feel it would be more appropriate for the game’s overall direction. Because the dungeons have to be completed in a certain order (made so by the progression of items), it negates the core design of Zelda’s world.

Another disappointing aspect of the dungeons is the bosses. The range of enemy types in The Legend of Zelda are incredibly diverse and make up the foundation of Zelda’s character just as much as the three main players do. Their pack-like nature also adds challenge to the game. The bosses on the other hand are indicative of how early this game was made in the NES library. Boss battles were still in the primitive stages at this point, so many of them were either too simple to defeat or were used continually to pad the game (take the slew of Bowser encounters from Super Mario Bros. for example). The Legend of Zelda is guilty of both of these. Aquamentus is an exciting, yet simple boss as an introduction, but after this there are so many bosses that either die with one precise hit or end up being a gimmick. The only boss that offered a substantial challenge is Gleeok, the only foe that made me feel inclined to utilize the maximum health sword blaster move. Whether the boss is laughably simple or the Gleeok wild card, there are numerous encounters with all of them. Some of them even repeat their role as guardians of a Triforce piece and are just as underwhelming as they were the first time. Even the fight against Ganon, the mighty king of darkness, is a combination of the gimmicky, simple aspects from the previous bosses. The final dungeon is a royal pain in the ass, so I guess I can be relieved that Ganon is relatively stress-free, but it feels so unsatisfying all the same.

I always thought that my relatively positive opinion of the first Legend of Zelda was the same I had for Super Mario Bros. Like the first NES venture with the Italian plumber, its unparalleled influence on the medium of gaming is enough to warrant my respect while I feel lukewarm about the game as a whole due to its primitive qualities. Upon playing the first Legend of Zelda, I enjoyed it much more than I did when I first played it years ago and have gained a newfound appreciation for it that extends beyond a point of respect. The Legend of Zelda is an incredibly ambitious game for an early NES title or any NES title in general. Its open-world design might be a tad askew with progression, but I greatly appreciate that the developers were willing to make the game atypical to convey the feeling of walking through nature. While it isn’t perfect by any means, the developers did the best they could with what they had, and this ambition created a monumental wave of influence that cannot be overlooked. I thoroughly enjoyed my time getting lost in The Legend of Zelda.

Playing this game once again in 2016, i realize how much the whole Souls franchise is based on it.

I was surprised at how much I enjoyed this game considering its age, but it was actually enticing pretty much the whole way through. I would have enjoyed it more if I had played while reading the official manual, since that adds more to the story and makes some things less cryptic. Or perhaps if I was playing back when it released alongside friends we'd all assist in decoding where to go at various points, unfortunately, that isn't how I experienced this. Instead it felt like a confusing mess.
That is the major drawback of this game though, the fact that an external manual is almost necessary for proper enjoyment, but I think it could be attributed to the times with the cartridges only capable of holding so much on them. That being said, there definitely could have been more strides to make the game world more informational, and the hints more understandable.
Overall, it could use some more in-game story and less cryptic "hints".

Zelda is fantastic for its time. There was really nothing like it in its day, and it's difficult to imagine the current gaming landscape without it. Indeed, if Zelda had never been made, with time another game likely would have adopted many of the same features.

The world is colorful and immersive, and I can really feel the tension building as I collect the items needed to progress through the world. That being said, I played the Switch port, so I didn't have an NES, a Nintendo Power, and friends in the schoolyard who knew the secrets to rely on, so I had to use a guide to make it through several portions of the game.

Navigating the overworld became easy enough as I learned the enemy patterns, but there were many important items hidden in obtuse places (for me). The dungeons, on the other hand, were very challenging in certain points, with unmarked walls needing to be bombed, and certain enemies in the final two dungeons that felt unfairly balanced (For example, the Wizrobes, which cannot be damaged by anything but the sword, and cannot be blocked except by the magical shield). The final boss, Ganon, turns invisible immediately, and damages you if you touch his multi-tile invisible body. I almost threw my Switch on the ground at some point. When I finally beat Ganon, it felt like almost pure luck, but was exhilarating nonetheless.

The game can be made much more enjoyable by stocking up on the Red Potion, and by going on a collection quest around the overworld before entering the dungeon.

I guess that's what they call Nintendo Hard.

While massively overshadowed by A Link to the Past, The Legend of Zelda is still a charming romp and even with how primitive it looks and controls, still hearkens to that sense of adventure you would get as a kid playing in the woods during those dog days of summer. Indeed the world map of this feels vast but also small enough to feel like you are constricted into a county sized, barren wilderness. Hyrule isn't this grand fantasy kingdom beset by evil in this game, it is a forlorn and drab environment and links diminutive size further sells the illusion of a 10 year old on a grand adventure. The game, though, definitely suffers from the "Nintendo power" effect from games of the period, especially in confusing over-worlds and locations of items (Im sure we've all been there, burning random bushes or pushing innocuous blocks to find secret passage ways).