A biased review: The Legend of Zelda

[S.Peelman]

Some random comments;

The comment about Zelda "being about puzzles" wasn't a total lie though. Even in this first game there's plenty of puzzling and you mention it. I don't feel it's all that relevant that they only consist of 'destroying all enemies' or 'pushing a block', because I doubt they would have been able to create puzzles that are much more elaborate than that with the game mechanics on NES hardware. The draining of the pool is a puzzle, as well as finding several dungeons. The Lost Woods is a puzzle. I do agree with the basis of the point though, back then the focus was more combat versus puzzles while in the latest games the balance has shifted.

I do agree about A Link Between Worlds. It's why I didn't like the 'renting-system'. The way the original, A Link to the Past and Ocarina of Time (to a lesser extent because your freedom is limited) treated open world and non-linearity was much better.

Lastly, this is a perfect example of a game that must be played in it's original form, on an NES, with you having the original cartridge, booklet and the printed map that came with it. I suppose you'd only need the booklet and the map, but if you have those I'd expect you also have the cartridge. Anyway, with my original NES copy, I could figure out all the exploring and beat the game without ever needing to resort to a walkthrough. There's enough hints and help between that map and the booklet to beat the game. Adventure of Link didn't come with a map, but that game is much easier to figure out and I never needed a walkthrough to beat that game either (though it's of course much harder still because of the relentless combat).