51 replies to this topic

[UZF]

I didn't really like Zelda 2 that much, it was hard to know where you had to go to next. I also really didn't enjoy having to fight like seventy-five battles to get to the destination I needed to be at. Zelda was never meant to be an RPG in my opinion. It was a pretty nice idea though, and I imagine a lot of people liked it, it just wasn't a fun Zelda to me.

[Moosh]

I feel that I should advise you to just cancel this now. A top down version of Zelda II just isn't something that can be done without re-envisioning most of the game. The thing is, the perspective most commonly used in Zelda Classic is technically 2.5-D in that it gives the perception of depth whereas other games like Mega Man or Mario 3 that take on the side view perspective and as a result feel rather flat. So when you try to make Zelda II in Zelda Classic, you're essentially remaking a 2-D game in 3-D which is a very difficult feat for anyone to accomplish without changing the design of the game almost entirely. I would recommend that you either keep the 2-D perspective and work around the Zelda Classic engine's limitations using scripting or just stop trying to remake it altogether and make something completely original. Did I mention that this is the umpteenth planned Zelda II remake and none of the others ever really got off the ground?

[Chakaa]

I don't exactly like the sideview aspect, but I love that it's an RPG. And I can't wait to see how this turns out in ZC.

[Moosh]

I don't exactly like the sideview aspect, but I love that it's an RPG. And I can't wait to see how this turns out in ZC.

If I understand him right, he's planning on unsideviewing it somehow. I can't see how it could come out the same game without being godawful terrible, but miracles happen sometimes, I guess...

[Rabnix]

I didn't hate zelda ii cuz of the difficulty, it just never felt right to me. Personally, I'd welcome a complete revamp of the gameplay engine with the same storyline

[Mero]

I feel that I should advise you to just cancel this now. A top down version of Zelda II just isn't something that can be done without re-envisioning most of the game. The thing is, the perspective most commonly used in Zelda Classic is technically 2.5-D in that it gives the perception of depth whereas other games like Mega Man or Mario 3 that take on the side view perspective and as a result feel rather flat. So when you try to make Zelda II in Zelda Classic, you're essentially remaking a 2-D game in 3-D which is a very difficult feat for anyone to accomplish without changing the design of the game almost entirely. I would recommend that you either keep the 2-D perspective and work around the Zelda Classic engine's limitations using scripting or just stop trying to remake it altogether and make something completely original. Did I mention that this is the umpteenth planned Zelda II remake and none of the others ever really got off the ground?

I understand your point of view. But I disagree. It's not impossible. Especially now that we have scripting.

[Radien]

I discovered a trick to defeating the bird knights. The upward thrust! Block their beams and when they jump, run under them and do a upward thrust. They'll get hit for damage and you probably will too. But hey, that's what shield is for.

Blocking sword projectiles from Blue Ironknuckles and Fokkas is not that hard if you're standing still. Just wait there, blocking them as they come, and when the Fokka eventually tries to jump over you, upward thrust it, aiming for... its toes, I guess you could say.

Fokkas actually become easier to kill than Blue Darknuts if you exploit this specific weakness to its fullest extent. But only when you fight them defensively. It takes patience. If you go on the offensive you completely give up your advantage.

I think the upward thrust is horribly underrated. I even sometimes forget to use it. Now the downward thrust is a different story, I abused the heck out of that move.

When upward thrust is useful, it is very useful. But downward thrust is useful about 5 times more often. The problem is that when upward thrust doesn't work, you usually end up hurting yourself by hitting your head on the enemy. Downward thrust, however, is useful even against enemies that are immune to it -- like those giant scorpions -- since you can bounce on them to avoid getting hurt.

Of course, none of this is relevant to ZC, so...

The hammer could have the same effect as a bomb. It would take a lot of work though.

Why would it take a lot of work? There's a Hammer flag, just like there's a Bomb flag. They basically work the same way. Use Hammer flags for breakable walls, rather than Pound combos.

I feel that I should advise you to just cancel this now. A top down version of Zelda II just isn't something that can be done without re-envisioning most of the game.

I fail to see why this is a problem. Re-envisioning is fun.

I don't exactly like the sideview aspect, but I love that it's an RPG. And I can't wait to see how this turns out in ZC.

Eh. I felt that the RPG aspect of Zelda II was poorly implemented. It was like the designers had a vague idea of what an RPG was but had never made one before, and they didn't research it much.

I like action RPGs, but Zelda II is only just barely what you could consider an "action RPG." Even the modern Castlevania games have more RPG to them than Zelda II.

I understand your point of view. But I disagree. It's not impossible. Especially now that we have scripting.

A lot of things could be said to be possible with scripting. But practical?... That's a different story. Some of the things you can do with scripting are almost as difficult as programming them from scratch.

There was somebody who was working on a complete clone of Zelda II in ZC, but it required scripting for pretty much every step of the way. It even had smooth scrolling. I've seen it in motion, but I have no idea how he created screens. That project fizzled, probably because he burnt himself out. I haven't heard or seen from him in about a year. It's in the forum archives if you want to track it down.

[Mero]

The problem with using hammer flags is that It takes up the secret slot on the screen and I can only have one smash-able wall per screen. As for your comments on scripting. Trust me I know how you feel. Sometimes scripting is more work then it's worth. But hell most of it makes great practice. And the rest, well gives you a migraine...

Oh, and I agree with Radien. Re-evisioning is freaking fun as hell.

[Radien]

The problem with using hammer flags is that It takes up the secret slot on the screen and I can only have one smash-able wall per screen.

This is true. But if you use pound combos, each individual combo needs to be pounded separately. This is a problem you need to work around in ZQuest no matter type of item you are using at the time. Why do you need more than one smashable wall on one screen, though? The original Zelda 2 didn't even have smashable walls.

As for your comments on scripting. Trust me I know how you feel. Sometimes scripting is more work then it's worth. But hell most of it makes great practice. And the rest, well gives you a migraine...

Since I learned a lot of scripting from IRCscript, I understand, but... zscript is a weird enough language that I'm not sure it's really the best way to learn such skills.

Oh, and I agree with Radien. Re-evisioning is freaking fun as hell.

[Cukeman]

Like: Everything

Dislike: the "OMG TOO HARD" whiners.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I am trying to envision Zelda II remade in the Zelda 1 style,
and I am having trouble because when Zelda II eschewed the top-down style, they basically
abandoned all the puzzle elements for action (fighting enemies to get keys). The palaces are
basically empty hallways filled with enemies. Unless you are adding your own puzzle elements
and expanding overworld exploration it could turn out like Zelda I without the puzzles.

[Mero]

I couldn't have said it better myself. I am trying to envision Zelda II remade in the Zelda 1 style,
and I am having trouble because when Zelda II eschewed the top-down style, they basically
abandoned all the puzzle elements for action (fighting enemies to get keys). The palaces are
basically empty hallways filled with enemies. Unless you are adding your own puzzle elements
and expanding overworld exploration it could turn out like Zelda I without the puzzles.

Yeah, I'm still trying to envision how to go about the puzzle elements. Two things I plan to do is first make a more complicated multi floor maze out of maze island where you have to go up and down and second making the hammer one of the most useful items for puzzle solving you have. Do those sound like good ideas?

[Cukeman]

Yeah, I'm still trying to envision how to go about the puzzle elements. Two things I plan to do is first make a more complicated multi floor maze out of maze island where you have to go up and down and second making the hammer one of the most useful items for puzzle solving you have. Do those sound like good ideas?

I think that sounds good.

As for the original, I only have three gripes:

1) Losing Exp. if you don't level up before taking a break.

2) Having to walk all the way to the Great Palace from the starting point.
It would be nice if you could save in a town or something.

3) I always felt that I could've used more magic. As soon as you cast a spell, you lose it in the next 'screen',
I think you should enable certain spells to last 'longer' or be able to increase your magic meter beyond what
they give you in Zelda II.

Edited by Cukeman, 08 July 2011 - 10:43 PM.

[Mero]

I think that sounds good.

As for the original, I only have three gripes:

1) Losing Exp. if you don't level up before taking a break.

2) Having to walk all the way to the Great Palace from the starting point.
It would be nice if you could save in a town or something.

3) I always felt that I could've used more magic. As soon as you cast a spell, you lose it in the next 'screen',
I think you should enable certain spells to last 'longer' or be able to increase your magic meter beyond what
they give you in Zelda II.

1.Don't plan to have an experience system so this isn't a problem.

2.Yeah, I plan to allow you to continue from the last dungeon you've been to. Or the beginning of the path of fire Whichever was last. I might include towns but not caves since that would make death mountain way to easy.

3.Good point. I've already set it up so magic lasts for 1 screen only. Fortunately I'll allow for both 16 hp and mp containers so far that's the plan at least.

Edited by blackbishop89, 08 July 2011 - 10:53 PM.

[Nathaniel]

While Zelda 2 was probably not among the best designed of the Zelda series according to most who have played much of the series, I liked it a lot mainly because of the memories of me playing it. I played in first in the 1980s, before any of the Zelda games that followed it were created. For its time, while I didn't like it as much as The Legend of Zelda, I still thought it was a pretty good game. If I didn't, I wouldn't have wanted to replay it again and thus win it many times over. Many say it's a difficult game, but after playing it enough times, it actually isn't that hard. Just have to be good about building the experience, and not everybody has the patience for that.

[randy]

The original Zelda 2 didn't even have smashable walls.

Well it did have the boulders on the overworld that blocked your path....My guess is that he plans to recreate that.