/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.5941103]

Annoying enemies, you have to throw the bombs into it's mouth and it's a very specific bomb throw, I've guided these things with like 20 bombs and used like...I was down to my last bomb and you have to kill three of them. Then there's these card things, like they have the card sweets on them like club, spades, all that...there's three of them, you have to hit all three of them and time it perfectly where every single one lands on the same suit, it's really fucking annoying.

The boss of level 7 is this bird, and holy fucking shit it was one of the most annoying boss fights I've ever played. It keeps sending these wind gusts that send you over the edge, and you can use your shield to slow it down but it still pushes you, you just have to be lucky to be standing in the right spot.

[Anonymous No.5941105]

Git Gud, OP

[Anonymous No.5941110]

>>5941103
Having problems with a child's game. Whew lad.

[Anonymous No.5941124]

>>5941103
I remember playing this when I was like 10 and had no problems with it.

[Anonymous No.5941136]

Now that the remake's out, newfags are inventing this new complaint about the controls in the original being limited. Really? Everyone I knew liked the idea of customizing Link's weaponry so that he doesn't always have to have a sword & shield at all times. I get the Power Bracelet / Pegasus Shoes messages being annoying, but it seems no one had an actual problem with controls until the remake.

OP, however, is just trying too hard to complain.

[Anonymous No.5941138]

>>5941103
>..there's three of them, you have to hit all three of them and time it perfectly where every single one lands on the same suit, it's really fucking annoying.
You can hit them one at a time...

[Anonymous No.5941174]

>>5941103
>level 7 boss is hard because of wind gusts
So? Getting blown off doesn't reset the hit counter. Another extremely easy boss. The only challenging bosses (for the first-time through) are Levels 2 and 5.

[Anonymous No.5941228]

>>5941105
unironically

[Anonymous No.5941492]

>>5941174
>Getting blown off doesn't reset the hit counter
Actually, it does, at least in the original game.

[Anonymous No.5941540]

>>5941136
what gets me is there's so much room for improvement and they drew the line so low

why not have a dedicated jump button? why not have all items set on buttons, and you can customize the layout? why not add an actual dungeon, use the custom dungeons for a fully fledged zelda maker? why not add more tunics?

to think they added more heart pieces and sea shells, some bottles, and stuck link to 8 directional movement and called it a day for $60

[Anonymous No.5941591]

>>5941103
>card sweets
You have to be 18 to post here

[Anonymous No.5941607]

>>5941174
Zoomer detected. The health resets in the original but not in the remake.

[Anonymous No.5941614]

>>5941540
There's no room for improvement and I'm not even going get into how retarded a dedicated jump button is in a game where jumping is a special ability bound to a tool not just normal love link should be able to do whenever he wa

[Anonymous No.5941621]

>>5941540
>why not have a dedicated jump button? why not have all items set on buttons, and you can customize the layout?
All they really needed to do was make L and R assignable item buttons instead of just having redundant functions. That way you can assign 4 items at once and leaving Roc's Feather permanently assigned to one wouldn't feel so limiting.

[Anonymous No.5941624]

>>5941614
>There's no room for improvement
There are literally 2 unused buttons that could be turned into item buttons. There's no reason for L and ZL or R and ZR to have copied functions.

[Anonymous No.5941636]

>>5941624
this, so much this
thank you anon
>>5941621

[Anonymous No.5941640]

So if we don't give them a pass for limited technology and outdated game design (and also pretend the CD-i games don't exist) can we agree that the NES games are the worst Zeldas?

[Anonymous No.5941642]

>>5941640
That third one is a ROMhack or something?

[Anonymous No.5941661]

>>5941642
Don't think so, I believe it's just fan art.

[Anonymous No.5942298]

>>5941640
>Zelda 2 is literally about preventing Ganon's return
>Zelda 3 should be about Ganon returning ANYWAY
Fucking fanart autists, I swear to god.

[Anonymous No.5942321]

>>5942298
Actually, Zelda II about getting head from coma girl.

[Anonymous No.5942328]

>>5941640
No, just 2.
It's not bad because it's different, it's bad because it did different bad.

[Anonymous No.5942332]

I like that you can jump, and it has those underground side scrolling segments with the goombas. It's the most surreal game in the series.

[Anonymous No.5942336]

>>5942321
A game can be about two things.

[Anonymous No.5942846]

>>5941105
It's all shit James said in his video on it

[Anonymous No.5942960]

>>5942846
Who's James? Some zoomer appealing fag?

[Anonymous No.5942974]

>>5942960

[Anonymous No.5942985]

>>5941640
>outdated game design
>>>/v/, then kill yourself

[Anonymous No.5942989]

>>5942960
>not assuming its James Rolfe
your zoomer is showing

[Anonymous No.5943224]

>>5941640
>>5942328
Zelda 2 is better than Zelda 1. Honestly, I wish they'd give Zelda 2 a proper sequel, or at the very least, a remake.

[Anonymous No.5943231]

>>5942298
Game Over was Canon℠.

[Anonymous No.5943237]

>>5941110
the funniest part is how they like to publicly announce it like one of those fetishists who get off on telling you how pathetic they are. we get it; you're inept; get a job as a video game critic or something

[Anonymous No.5943238]

>>5942960
he's a charming moron. a kind of forrest gump-like character, but bad at ping pong

[Anonymous No.5943272]

>>5943224
it was cool

[Anonymous No.5943304]

>>5943238
>"My momma always said that life was like a box of ASS. You never know when a buffalo is gonna take a DIARRHEA DUMP in your ear."

[Anonymous No.5943327]

>>5943231
That's a dumb and unsatisfying way to continue or conclude a series. It's basically just a fuck you to all the players, saying nothing they did in the last game mattered and making them feel like they wasted their time.

[Anonymous No.5943331]

>>5943327
I disagree
it's a unique way to bridge games that's never been done before
there's a timeline where the player succeeds and one where their failures are canon

[Anonymous No.5943380]

>>5943224
It's funny how people say that Zelda is an RPG when the real zelda Rpg is Zelda 2

[Anonymous No.5943392]

>>5943380
it's just more blatant in its mechanics
a lot of people don't understand that Zelda was Nintendo's attempt at simplifying the genre

[Anonymous No.5943405]

>>5943331
>there's a timeline where the player succeeds and one where their failures are canon
The problem is that they did it in the most boneheaded way possible - instead of saying "getting a Game Over at any point of OoT inevitably leads to ALttP", they said, SPECIFICALLY, "If Link loses the fight to the death with Ganondorf, it leads to ALttP". Not Ganon - GanonDORF, the dopey floating wizard, not the monstrosity powered by the Triforce of Power. Which begs the question: what happens if Link gets crushed by a boulder in Kokiri Forest looking for the Kokiri Sword before his adventure begins, or is too shocked by the ReDeads in Castle Town to fight them off when he leaves the Temple of Time and gets hugged to death, or otherwise dies in any of the other numerous, numerous ways possible OoT? Why does THAT specific time frame lead to a new timeline? I'm not unopposed to a third timeline, but they should have given the explanation more thought.

[Anonymous No.5943413]

>>5943405
Not that anon but i really think at any point when link gets a game over in oot will lead to the alttp timeline because he's not there to stop Ganondorf

[Anonymous No.5943415]

>>5943405
what makes you think that it has to be a specific fight?
Link's battle with gannondorf starts when he leaves his house with navi and continues until zelda sends him backwards

[Anonymous No.5943421]

>>5943380
Why would you say something so brave yet so controversial? This will get shit on, but it's the objective truth.

[Anonymous No.5943428]

>>5943421
not hardly because if we're gonna pull the zelda rpg shtick we should at least hold out for turn based battles
it doesn't matter if he gets literal experience and literal level ups because that's what equipment upgrades are casualizing

[Anonymous No.5943430]

>>5943413
>>5943415
Hyrule Historia spells out in no uncertain terms that the fight between Link and Ganondorf is where the first split occurs. If Link loses, it leads to Ganondorf completing the Triforce and the sages sealing Ganon and the Triforce in the Sacred Realm, which later leads to the Imprisoning War and then A Link to the Past; if Link wins, he still has to escape the crumbling castle and then fight Ganon, and the second split occurs after Ganondorf and the Triforce of Power are sealed away, when Zelda uses the Ocarina of Time on Link. If the implication is that the first timeline split happened because the Triforce pieces were resonating at that moment, it's not conveyed very well.

A lot of people made bogus theories about the first timeline split due to the overview on one page being the first thing translated and not going into much detail, but I thought this was cleared up pretty quickly when the rest of the book was translated.

[Anonymous No.5943439]

>>5943430
hyrule historia isn't canon it has a lot of conflicting information with the games and isn't ordained by nintendo despite what it seems
besides 'if the hero of time is defeated' is pretty general and vague

[Anonymous No.5943453]

>>5943439
Uh, it's where info on the third timeline came from to begin with, and yes, Nintendo licensed it (even a digital Wii U copy was a bonus with The Wind Waker HD) and series producer Eiji Aonuma had significant input. Also, multiple pages go with the battle between Link and Ganondorf as the turning point of the timeline. And what conflicting information? Don't tell me you're really doing this.

[Anonymous No.5943459]

>>5943405
>>5943430
>>5943439
I always liked the theory that Link's timeskip itself created a timeline where Ganondorf went uncontested and the hero never appeared.

Timeline 1:
>Child Link obtains the stones and the ocarina of time, pulls out the Master Sword, and is whisked away into the Light Temple.
>From the perspective of everyone in the world, Link has vanished.
>Light Temple exists outside of normal time and Link has effectively been removed from Hyrule's timeline.
>This leaves behind a ruined timeline where the population of Hyrule assumes Ganondorf killed child Link and the hero never reappears to stop him, thus creating the idea that the hero was defeated.

Timeline 2:
>Rauru returns adult Link to Hyrule, creating a new timeline where adult Link reappears.
>He cleanses the temples and defeats Ganondorf.

Timeline 3:
>Victorious adult Link is transported back in time and is a child again but with all the knowledge of Ganondorf's future misdeeds.
>He and Zelda convince the king to be suspicious of Ganondorf and they are prepared when Ganondorf attacks, repelling the invasion and imprisoning Ganondorf.

I know it's not what the Hyrule Historia presents and is probably not what Nintendo has in mind, but I think it works way better. I like the idea that there's this unintended ruined timeline left behind by all the time travel shenanigans rather than just saying, "This is what happens if Link dies!"

[Anonymous No.5943481]

>>5943439
I thought HH was specifically mentioned by Nintendo to be canon, despite a bunch of fuckups on the details. Maybe you're confusing it with the Encyclopedia, which was way less strictly regulated, contains some bizarre fan theories and contradicts the HH on several points.

>>5943430
>>5943459
Those times where we only had that vague translation were fun. My favorite theory has to be the one that used magic bean logic to explain how every time Link moves backward but not forward in time, an alternate version of Hyrule is created where Link has been effectively removed from the original. If you're playing glitchless you have to at a minimum go into child form a single time, so there's always going to be a timeline that will lead into ALttP from OoT.

[Anonymous No.5943482]

>>5941103
Yea, real games don't play themselves.

[Anonymous No.5943492]

>>5943481
>despite a bunch of fuckups on the details
The only fuckups I can think of (besides maybe a sage might've been accidentally paired with the wrong medallion) are in the Skyward Sword manga, but that was never explicitly stated to be part of the timeline. You're right about Encyclopedia though, Nintendo Dream was given free reign to print their own theories in it. The Historia follow-ups in general were lazy and iirc didn't even have Aonuma return. Not sure why the Zelda Wiki loves them so much - it's almost like they think if they suck up to them so much, one day they can have their own fan-theories published. Pathetic.

[Anonymous No.5943516]

>>5943492
The medallion fuckup is indead the major one I remember. The only other nitpick off the top of my head would be that it doesn't specify where the interloper event is supposed to take place when all the details perfectly line up for a conclusion to the chaos age. Manga's are never and will never ever be canon though, they're their own thing and for good reason.

[Anonymous No.5943534]

>>5943459
>I always liked the theory that Link's timeskip itself created a timeline where Ganondorf went uncontested and the hero never appeared.
that sounds right, if you teleport forward then you leave behind the location you left
but I think the game affirms that you went on unconscious and slept in stasis in the sacred realm

[Anonymous No.5943543]

>>5943516
>Manga's are never and will never ever be canon though, they're their own thing and for good reason.
I always interpreted that the mangas weren't canon because they were retellings/adaptations of the games, not because "lol manga".

[Anonymous No.5943552]

>>5943459
>Light Temple exists outside of normal time and Link has effectively been removed from Hyrule's timeline.
Pretty sure seven years is supposed to have passed both in the temple and in real-time, but I'd have accepted this explanation. In this scenario, we can assume that Sheik eventually realized that the Hero of Time wouldn't return and reawakened the sages instead, but Ganondorf managed to steal the other parts of the Triforce before they could confront and seal him.

[Anonymous No.5944062]

>>5941103
i beat that game when i was a kid, git gud

[Anonymous No.5944506]

James and Mike are also the idiots who think Sonic games are too hard because they can't predict springs and can't figure out how to spindash

[Anonymous No.5944919]

>>5941103
I beat this game when I was 9 it can't be that hard

[Anonymous No.5944940]

>>5943534
>I think the game affirms that you went on unconscious and slept in stasis in the sacred realm
Yeah, but if you were to consider the sacred realm outside of normal time, the act of Rauru interfering with the timeline by plucking you out of Hyrule and then re-inserting you into a later point could be said to create new timelines. It's admittedly a stretch, but it only requires a minor tweak to the mechanics of how the Temple of Light and Sacred Realm interact with Hyrule, and it wouldn't be too outlandish to say it works that way.

[Anonymous No.5945027]

>>5944940
I see it more as going to another country and then coming back to notice all your old friends are utterly fucked by your absence.