Talk:Zelda II: The Adventure of Link

Zelda II GA review

Here are the areas to improve to meet GA status and included are FA notes;

• Super vague rationales on the images, say exactly what they are demonstrating and why it is important that it be demonstrated.
• Is TASvideos a reliable source?
• wikilink all publishers in the references.
• replace the gamefaqs reference, don't think they are a reliable source.
• reference 8 is improperly formatted
• The Kasuto reference is of questionable reliability check and if it isn't reliable replace it
• The last image doesn't seem very important to demonstrate that town, perhaps replace it with an image for the gameplay section that shows him battling his evil twin in the game? That becomes a recurring feature in the zelda series, shows up in Ocarina of Time as well.
• Sales data, for america and/or japan if possible.
• expand out the reception section, more detailed account of the games failings, as its good side seems well represented.
• Try to find more music development information and more development information, especially for FA
• Add more references to the experience levels paragraph, the music section, the versions section, and the legacy section. As a general rule, they should not go too long without a reference and sometimes it does.
• check gamerankings for a rating and if there is one add it.
• as a bonus, as it may come out in FA, try to find Japanese reaction at release and or sales data.
• For FA, focus on having a well developed Development section and copyedit well.
• That will get you an FA and a strong GA. Do that, and let me know how it goes :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Just found this in the archived peer review, here are some suggestions as to the kind of information to hunt for for the development section;

• Did it have any effect on the console wars?
• Did Miyamoto take any flack for it?
• How involved was he?
• Explain the process of developing this particular game, like how the story was written.

Good luck! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:26, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• I just remembered, make sure to put references next to each of the scores in the video game reception box. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
• Sorry to bother you with another one, but a great thing to remember is when the game was released and what reviewers were around and popular then. Good job having Nintendo Power, see if Game Pro and/or another then-popular popular video game reviewer reviewed it. It's good to have initial release reaction. Great job so far! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:31, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Alright, all done pretty much. Let me know what you think. I'll see if this article even has a chance of going through WP:FAC. Gary King (talk) 05:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• Passed, good job! This article has been transformed lately, and you have been a big part of that :) Let's look at what to do for FA;

1. About two one more sentences should be added to the reception section, hopefully from reviewers like Gamepro, highlighting the games pros and cons.
2. Try to make sure that the reviews that came out during the games release come first.
3. legacy section probably needs 2 more references in it.
4. find japanese reaction to the games release, such as what its Famitsu score was, or if it was on a Famitsu top 100 list or something.
5. build up the development section and the music section, see the above suggestions for information to find; also, if there is any music reception, like peoples opinions for good or bad, put that in the reception section
6. When this goes to FA candidacy, be prepared to switch out some of the references, because some of them are of uncertain reliability.
7. Finally, focus on copyediting to get your brilliant prose, league of copyeditors, Tony's Guide, peer review, or just do it yourself once you get the hang of it :) Good luck! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:31, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

The Missing Link -- Shortage of Computer Ships Delay Zelda II

I know this has been mentioned before but it would be cool to fit this info into the article. Nintendo ran into a shortage of computer chips, delaying the North American release date of Zelda II. This info is cited in (I think) the second issue of Nintendo Power, but is also referenced in the June/July issue of Nintendo Fun Club on page 11 (the precursor to Nintendo Power and the last issue ever published. Here's the text:

"Where's Link? All the fun of The Legend of Zelda conintues in Zelda II - The Adevnture of Link, right? Righr! But When? As soon as we can get more computer chips! There has been a shortage. But we have used the waiting time well by making Zelda II - The Adventure of Link and even more xicting, more challenging game - coming this fall!".

That's verbatium from the magizine.

I think the shortage came, after it had been released. I had wanted this game really bad in 4th grade (88-89), but I couldn't get it until late February. It says on the page that it was released in the US in December of 88, which I think is correct. I knew someone who had managed to get it back then (in the US) but mine, as I said I got a few months later. They must have sold out and they had a shortage of chips and couldn't make more so quickly. The snare (talk) 20:58, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree - Zelda 2 was technically released in the US in 1988, but it was virtually unobtainable. There was a lot of hype and expectation surrounding it but almost nobody in the US actually saw this game outside of magazine screenshots until 1989. I don't have a source to add other than the Nintendo Power article referenced in the comment above, but to anybody who was around back then it was plainly apparent that there was a severe production shortage of this game title in December of 88. Nintendo wasn't in the habit of posting apologies for game shortages in their magazine, so the fact that they did this for Zelda 2 is rather remarkable. If anyone has the information, then some background detail about this shortage could be interesting. For whatever reason, they seemed to not be able to ramp up production of mask ROMs for this particular game in time for the Christmas 88 shopping season. Super Mario Brothers 2 was also in very short supply, but even that game seemed (I don't have a source) more feasible to obtain than Zelda 2 was.

There is a comment towards the end of the article that cites the game's popularity by virtue of it being sold out in 1988. This comment comes with a reference to a Chicago Tribune article, but that reference does not support the statement. That article is talking about a shortage of NES consoles. It only makes passing mention of the Zelda 2 cartridge and does not support the notion that this game was actively flying off shelves. Rather, it just reflects the fact that the game was unavailable to start with.

Zelda 2's lack of availability in 1988 is not an indicator of it being a popular game. I don't dispute that this game was popular, but the reference given is inappropriate. To make that argument, data needs to be cited from 1989 after this game was widely available for purchase. In 1988 this game title was a gamer's fantasy, not something they had played.Shamino22 (talk) 02:21, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

I AM ERROR.

Probaly needs to be mentioned.JIMfoamy1 (talk) 23:18, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

What about it needs to be mentioned? Where does this phrase come from? JasonHockeyGuy (talk) 06:09, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

JasonHockeyGuy, in Zelda II there is a townsman named Error who says, "I am Error." It's considered a classic video game quote much like "Eastmost peninsula is the key." I think it's listed in some Greatest Video Game Quotes lists, but I don't know if it's significant enough to mention in the article. Belasted (talk) 06:37, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Version differences - inaccuries, and a few ideas

I noticed that the "Versions" sub-section under "Development" contains a few inaccuracies. I'm not sure how to go about improving the section myself, so I'll leave an outline of what these differences actually are here, and maybe another editor can include and source them in the article.

First off, the current article inaccuries:

• "In the English release, the dungeons each have different colors, whereas in the FDS version they are all gray."

Incorrect. About 60% of the palaces use the gray palette, while some of the latter ones use a blue palette. The final palace uses a yellow / orange palette. The palaces also tend to alternate with different elements of the palace. For example, all palace entrances use the gray palette, but the inner-palace areas may use a different one. This generally starts to occur around the 4th palace, I believe. The main thing with the overseas version is that the game features a different block set for every palace, along with a palette swap. In the FDS version, all palaces use the same block set, but a few them still use palette swaps.

Now, a couple of other version differences that weren't mentioned: (not necessarily consideration for inclusion, but this is left to the editors' discretion)

• Gooma, the 5th palace boss, is not present in the FDS version. Instead, another version of the helmethead boss takes his place. (maybe this could be used to elaborate on the sentence that mentions dungeon changes)

• the difficulty was slightly increased for the overseas release. The experience values were switched around somewhat, making certain areas / encounters more tedious, and some enemies no longer give experience altogether. In addition to this, the level-up system makes it easier to increase Link's levels (this is already mentioned in the article) and thus makes the game easier. This is mostly based on my playthrough of each version, and how the overall difficulty compares. The FDS version feels substantially easier to play through. (this is based on having played through each version many times to compare them)

I hope this information helps! I wouldn't know where to find the appropriate references to include this info in the article, however. (although, I would point out that the article currently does not cite any of its version differences claims) 74.242.104.128 (talk) 22:15, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Oops! I need to ask you people something: In the Melee and Brawl remixes of the Palace tune, I heard some kind of chorus singing near the end of the songs before the "loop." Was this actually in the FDS version of Zelda II?!68.28.67.227 (talk) 17:17, 20 September 2009 (UTC)Zack M.

Bias of Reviews

Aggregate review scores are unusually low because they mostly account for Virtual Console reviews written in 2008. Virtual Console reviews are mostly concerned with whether the download is worth your money. The more important scores are the ones written in 1987 in Japan and 1988 in the U.S. Please include those, and list them first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.15.229.184 (talk) 02:46, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Silver cartridge?

Hi people! I just came into the possession of an original cartridge of this game. The thing is, it is silver. Distinctively silver. I'll take a photo of it, so you can see with your own eyes. I tried a google search, but I couldn't find anything substantial, except for a discussion at GameSpot, with a user claiming the same thing. [1]. Does anyone have any info about this? --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 11:26, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

P.S. In case you were wondering what this might have to do with the article, it might be something worth adding, right? :-)

There is no silver cartridge. There is a GRAY cartridge and a GOLD cartridge of this game, but no silver. You must have mistaken the gray one for a silver one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doshindude (talk • contribs) 05:01, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Take a look at this. It's a gold cartridge that looks silver because the "gold" rubbed off (according to Soetermans' link). -sesuPRIME ^{talk • contribs} 08:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I, unfortunately do not still possess, but did have a very chrome Zelda II Cartridge. I don't know if it was an official Nintendo product, but it did exist. No, it was not faded gold, nor grey (Seriously? Who mistakens flat grey for silver?) It was a white base silver/chrome color, and was quite glossy. Again, don't know if it was official or not. 184.0.234.52 (talk) 01:19, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

That cartridge looks like gold one

Screenshot

I think there should be a screenshot of the sidescrolling view insted of the overworld shot that is used currently. After all sidescrolling view is what separates this game from other main series games. --Mika1h (talk) 22:45, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Action

"The Adventure of Link plays out in a two-mode dynamic. The overworld, the area where the majority of the action occurs in other The Legend of Zelda games, is still from a top-down perspective, but it now serves as a hub to the other areas. Whenever Link enters a new area such as a town, the game switches to a side-scrolling view. This mode is where most of the action takes place, and it is the only mode in which Link can take damage and be killed."

Where does all of the action take place now? o.O; —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.209.221.33 (talk) 13:43, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Redirect

"The Legend of Zelda 2" should redirect to this page. I checked it, and it doesn't. 72.241.19.67 (talk) 02:50, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Fan 3D remake

Should it be noted maybe under the legacy section that a fan 3D remake of the game has been made which has caught the attention of gaming websites such as gamespy http://au.gamespy.com/articles/109/1094741p1.html. The game is browser based and FPS. Most parts havn't been included in it however such as the towns, most dungeons, caves and items. --Victory93 (talk) 08:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Genre and Extra lives

Firstly I'm happy that Wikipedians are smart enough to distinguish Zelda games from RPGs, unlike the considerable portion of the gaming media and indeed the gaming public. Zelda II, however, constitutes an exception - it has a clear experience and a stats system which I think is a minimum requirement for a game to be classified as an RPG. I agree it's not much of a difference from the rest of the series but a rather integral gameplay deviation.

Also a little technicality from the article:

Link has extra lives; no other game in the series includes this feature.

This claim is clearly false. Both Wand of Gamelon and Faces of Evil on the CD-I had extra lives. Regardless of whether or not they're considered official Zelda games, they are Zelda games which makes the statement erroneous. --TheHande (talk) 14:09, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Image

I feel that the sidescrolling image should be replaced by something that shows off the sidescrolling gameplay better. I don't think uninformed readers get much out of the image in its current state. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:35, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Agreed. But which would be a better addition, one of the towns, a dungeon, or a random encounter? _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 17:47, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

I think a dungeon would accomplish everything that the random encounter could; we don't really have anything related to combat yet. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 18:17, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Missing Japanese subtitle

As shown on a youtube video uploaded by a user from the Famicom Disk System, the game's true title is "Rinku no bouken: The Legend of Zelda 2", but the subtitle is missing from the description. Please change it. Thank you. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPnq8Izw8ws — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CFD3:2EE0:E42C:7D5E:31CA:82A0 (talk) 05:18, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Zelda II: The Adventure of Link. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.computerandvideogames.com/98090/news/mario-kart-double-dash-ithe/i-interview/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070323055155/http://uk.gamespot.com/gamecube/action/zeldacollectors/index.html to http://uk.gamespot.com/gamecube/action/zeldacollectors/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070325172916/http://uk.gamespot.com/gba/rpg/famicomminithelegendofzelda/index.html to http://uk.gamespot.com/gba/rpg/famicomminithelegendofzelda/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927190242/http://wii.vggen.com/news/news.php?id=5231 to http://wii.vggen.com/news/news.php?id=5231

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:58, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

I AM ERROR

Hi, I just noticed that there is no mention of the famous line of dialogue "I AM ERROR," commonly thought by stupid westerners to be an actual error but no, the man is just saying that his name is Error. This is unacceptable. Let us vote and decide wether or not this line of dialogue should be there or not.

Thank you, Jason Funderburker — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.127.166.26 (talk) 19:09, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

GA concerns

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria because there are a lot of uncited statements, particularily in the "Legacy" section. Is anyone interested in fixing up this article, or should it go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 14:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Zelda II: The Adventure of Link

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Delisted. Hog Farm _Talk 00:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

There is a lot of uncited text in the "Legacy" section, and some uncited text in other parts of the article. The "Gameplay" section has subjective statements that are quoted to the game itself, such as "The Adventure of Link has a more complex combat system than its predecessor" and "This mode has most of the action and danger." Z1720 (talk) 20:34, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

• Delist Per nominator. Also, most GA articles nowadays cite third-party sources in the Gameplay section. There are also some questionable sources used in the article (Tumblr, Video Games Blogger, Spong). Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.