Zelda II: The Adventure of Link

The Good

Employs a unique mixture of top-down world exploration, sidescrolling combat, and RPG level-up elements

Filled with an abundance of rewarding secrets

Features a strong, memorable soundtrack that’s arguably better than its predecessor's

An interesting game world that rewards player progression with consistent novelty—I particularly love crossing into the island region of Hyrule for the first time with the raft

The Bad

Mandatory, overly cryptic side quests between dungeons

Weak platforming and level design—many of the sidescrolling areas are flat, simple hallways with minimal deviation, particularly early on

Towns, though novel, feature extremely clunky, immersion-breaking dialog

Some of the dungeon solutions are almost unguessable

The final dungeon is ludicrously difficult, to the point where the player is practically compelled to avoid combat and rely on cheap, exploitative tricks (like the one commonly used against the final boss, who would be virtually unbeatable otherwise)

The Bottom Line

Zelda II is obviously very different from its predecessor in terms of both its sidescrolling gameplay and comparatively linear world progression, though the two games do align more closely in their bountiful creativity, multifaceted world design, and cruel proclivity for abrupt difficulty spikes. It's in this final regard that Zelda II unfortunately outdoes the original Legend of Zelda, with its endgame in particular standing out as almost comically unwinnable. Both games are, however, very different experiences, and though I'd gladly recommend the first to many a determined player, I find it somewhat harder to recommend this tough-as-nails sequel.

The Good
Very, very challenging game. The side-scrolling parts make things much more difficult, especially later in the game; although, by dungeon #2, things have gotten pretty hard. This made for a very enjoyable game, especially when overcoming obstacles and accomplishing various objectives (getting items, raising levels, finishing underworld dungeons).

The Bad
Some parts of the game were just TOO difficult (i.e., Death Mountain -- getting the hammer...took me at least a week). The final dungeon (end of the game) is also very hard. By the time you get to the Thunderbird, you'll be lucky to have any life and magic left. Good luck beating him. I was never able to finish this game on the NES. It took me about 15 years from the time I bought it until the time I used cheat codes on a NES emulator to finish it. Using the original NES controller was almost impossible for this game. The NES Max helped a lot. The music is this game was also a little sub-par. Zelda 1's music was better, I thought.

The Bottom Line
A great sequel for Zelda 1. Play that game first (play it to death, since that is one of the greatest video games of all time), then get a hold of this. A step-up in challenge and graphics. Classic game.

The Good
Zelda II is a pretty big departure from the first Zelda in the series. So, kudos to Nintendo for trying to do something different. Unfortunately, “different” isn't synonymous with “good” or even “adequate”.

I'll give the game that had an interesting combat system. Fighting the shielded foes by attacking high and low was a neat idea. Unfortunately it isn't really possible to tell where they will block, so you’ll often find yourself flailing at them.

The leveling system was also not a bad idea. You still had to find heart containers, but you also gained experience and leveled up to gain new spells. The spell system was also decently implemented, but really it just replaced the (superior) item system. There is decent exploration. Some characters in the towns will give you hints on the locations of special items. There are some side-quests, but they’re usually little more than fetching.

My favourite moment in this game is when you had to find someone’s child. When Link picks the kid up, he does it in classic above-the-head-Zelda-style. “You got someone’s child!”

The Bad
I’d never have finished Zelda II if it hadn't been for my goal to play though every Zelda game, in their original format, in order of their release. This game is also the reason I’m never going to try that again.

First off, this game has an extremely inconsistent difficulty. Most of the time, the game is far too difficult. It isn't challenging, it’s cheap. Inversely, the boss battles are extremely easy. It appears to me that the difficulty was used to artificially lengthen the adventure. Without the extremely frustrating cheapness, the game would be over and done with rather quickly.

As mentioned earlier, the item collection from the first game has been replaced by learning new spells. This is not only unoriginal; it is also far inferior to the old system. The new random battles are also extremely annoying, as usually they include pester enemies, such as birds.

The Bottom Line
I know there are people who believe this game doesn’t deserve its bad reputation, but it does. Praising it for deviating from the Zelda formula is a little cheap, as there had only been one in the series before it. Guess which style of gameplay they decided to stick with. As it stands, Zelda II is not only a poor Zelda game, but it’s also a BAD game.