Table of Contents
Page 1 - Production Background
"But how do they play?!" I hear you scream. Well, they play a lot like most Zelda, Metroid and other adventure games, though with some rather clever ideas thrown in (and yes, they could retrospectively be considered a Metroidvania-type pair of games).
Gameplay for both is the same: you start with a large map (too large to fit in a single screenshot) and three selectable areas. Choose one to start that stage. Finishing a stage involves moving to the end and striking a triforce symbol. Doing so ends the stage, opening up a new one on the map, and so you progress. Occasionally instead of a triforce there will be a boss to defeat.
You can scroll backwards and forwards at will. Killed enemies drop items (such as snowballs and fire crystals) and rupees which can be used to buy essential items like lamp oil (for dark areas, useable once you've found an oil lamp), rope (for climbing to high platforms), and bombs (for killing enemies and breaking rocks).
Some enemies can only be killed with specific weapons, while some areas can only be passed using certain items. There are also NPCs who request you bring them items in exchange for other valuable things (such as jars to hold fairy water which restores health, the ability to shoot from your sword, and so on).
Progress is staggered, and all of this makes it very comparable to the first two Zelda games and also the Metroid titles. You're shunted to-and-fro, acquiring items which each time enable you to progress a little further. This style of design is hugely satisfying and is pulled of really well. The only flaws found in the games are due to inherent hardware problems, not sloppy design or structuring - the actual pacing and structure is impeccable.
The biggest problem is control, in that you only have 4 direction and 2 action buttons (less options than even a NES pad). Jumping is done by pushing up, which takes time to master, though a winged helmet later on enables bigger jumps and makes things easier. This doesn't stop the game from being enjoyable, but you need to learn its subtler nuances to make movement easy. Sword attacks are done via button 1. Accessing the inventory meanwhile is done by ducking and pushing button 2, the same button assigned for using special items. This genuinely can be annoying, since it means you can't use items such as bombs or anything else while ducking. Still, not a major problem once you're aware of it.
Some people complain it's impossible to avoid enemy projectiles without getting hit, resulting in repeated deaths. Not so! If you had read the booklet, you'd know that Link or Zelda's shield only become active if you stand still. That's right. Do nothing, and all those enemy axes, rocks and spears will simply bounce off. Once I started doing this, I found it possible to traverse stages without taking any damage - you must resist the temptation to constantly move.
Another complaint is the flying enemies, which people claim harass you relentlessly. Not so! If you stand still and continuously kill them (resulting in a lot of useful rupees), they will eventually stop. Between twenty to thirty need to be killed, but once done there are no flying enemies until you change stages. Furthermore, you can buy loaves of bread which will distract them, and you can also later acquire a bell which allows you to freeze them in mid-air (making them ripe for a quick, easy killing).
A general problem encountered by people playing LZ for the first time is one of difficulty. In truth, once you know the weak spot for certain things (enemies, jumping areas, and other sticking points), the game becomes fairly easy. There's also the jars which can hold fairy water and restores your hearts, plus also the ability to shoot from your sword and items to jump further, all of which makes things easier still. Finally, even if you die in a stage, there is no such thing as game over. You're simply placed back on the map with all the items you've collected so far in that stage. This was a brilliant move, since it means that no game time is ever a waste. If you play through an area only to die at the boss (I only ever found one boss to a major challenge), you'll still keep all the rupees and special items you've collected up to that point. This means it's possible to load the game up for fifteen minutes, dive right into a really difficult monster-filled area, kill a few brutes to rack up some rupees, then let yourself die so you can try a different stage. It ensures the gameplay remains painless.
Overall the atmosphere is one of a grand adventure, with great excitement as new and exotic areas open up. The first time you board the Viking longboat, or venture through the Harlequin Bazaar, is quite special. It feels satisfying as progress is made and, thanks to some beautiful backgrounds and unique music, makes for some memorable gaming. It baffles me how people could have such hatred for these games, and I can only assume that they've never reached later stages, or were blinded by Nintendo loyalty.
Examined in isolation from their source material, and acknowledging the inherent faults with the hardware, there isn't actually any complaint which can be raised against the raw design of the two games. They contain fun and unusual ideas, while making clever use of a well implemented item system (the feeding Glutko bombs puzzle is a personal favourite, and mimics the Grumble Grumble boss in the first Zelda).
When I played LZ, my internal save-state battery was dead, and if memory serves me correctly, it took me about four or so hours to complete each game (about eight in total) in a single sitting. There were no overly difficult sections once I'd worked out to get around certain aspects, and with the exception of a single boss both games proved fairly to be quite finishable and very enjoyable.
A few characters:
Gameplay Development
When considering the gameplay of LZ, you need to realise that
development began in early 1991, with only two previous Zelda games having been
released on the NES. Link to the Past on the SNES was only released in
the November of 1991 in Japan (hitting the U.S. roughly 6 months later
in 1992), and prior to release would only have been viewable deep
within Nintendo's R&D lab in Kyoto. This means that, due to not much source
material to work from and little if any information about LttP
available, LZ collectively was developed to be the third game(s) in the series.
By the time the team would have had access to LttP, development of LZ
would have already progressed a fair amount. Though Mr DeSharone did
explain that the entire team had been fans of the first two Zelda titles.
The level of influence which Philips, AIM and Nintendo had was insignificant, and I provide for you here an unedited interview segment with Dale DeSharone, regarding development.
JS: Did Philips, or AIM, or anyone else have specific influence in terms of design regarding the games? Did Nintendo contact you when you began development?
DD: Um, no... We came up with the design for Philips and then...Did you ever look at the other Zelda game, that the different developer produced?
JS: Zelda's Adventure? Yes.
DD: They went with a very different type of design look. No, Nintendo's only input was we ran the design document and character sketches past them for their approval. They were mostly interested in the look of the Link and Zelda characters. I think the Link and Zelda characters were in somewhat of a formation stage back then. Because really, the characters didn't appear very detailed in the Nintendo game. They were mainly visible, you know, on the box covers. (Author's note: I believe he was referring to the Japanese box art, which featured character designs, in comparison to the low resolution graphics found in-game on the NES)
JS: So, quite a lot of creative freedom then?
DD: Yeah, there was quite a bit of creative freedom. And Philips, they didn't have a lot of input into the design either. One of your questions was why we didn't go with the top down, and I think Philips would never have approved that. Because they would have thought that looked old, and wasn't making use of the CDi capabilities.
JS: Of the previous two Zelda games one was top-down and the other was side-on. I was wondering why you went with one style over the other.
DD: If Philips had seen a top down design, they would have said that it didn't... They would have looked at it just visually, as opposed to gameplay. And that was what they were most concerned with. Does the CDi game look visually different from other game or computer systems, and are we making less use of the graphics? The possibility that the top down might have been more fun for gameplay, wouldn't have affected them. So we definitely pushed for the side view.
JS: What kind of source material did you use during development?
DD: Really we only had... of course the two Nintendo games that had come previously from Nintendo, and um... Then box art from Nintendo in terms of the design of the characters, and booklet artwork. Otherwise there wasn't anything that came from Nintendo.
Considering this situation, it would be unfair to criticise LZ for being unlike LttP or other Zelda games. The series' identity was still only forming, and Nintendo gave little direction in how they wanted it to be. In isolation, the creativity shown by Mr. DeSharone's team works well.
Conclusion
I have a lot of sympathy for LZ and those who developed them, since much of the criticism is unfounded, written by people who've never played the games, and this has no doubt resulted in people avoiding them. The facts need to be clarified and documented.
I explained my motivation for the interview to Mr. DeSharone, asking if he was aware of the intense criticism LZ had received and what his reaction was.
Dale DeSharone: Yeah, we had been aware of criticism following the release of the games. I can understand that people were disappointed, I think probably in terms of... I guess they made comments about animation, but also in terms of gameplay and design. Given the amount of time we had, and what we were creating at the time in terms of company infrastructure, I thought we did a good job. You know, we weren't Nintendo. And Nintendo makes fantastic games, which are exceptionally well tuned in terms of gameplay. And they have amazing game designers. So, I would imagine that anything was going to fall short of that, in terms of the amount of time and energy that Nintendo puts into gameplay. Given the amount of time we had, and the fact that we were developing two at once, on a platform that was pretty limited, although the Nintendo machine at that time was also pretty limited and they did a great job with it... At the same time Philips was expecting, and I think we were all expecting, more graphics, more production values in terms of music, visuals, animation... So there was a lot of push there. You put effort into that, and it doesn't go elsewhere. I felt that, given the circumstances, we did a good job. It could have been better, of course it wasn't Nintendo.
They weren't Nintendo games and they are by no means perfect (is any game?), but if people look past this, and accept them for what they are - fun, challenging, 2D adventures, albeit with poor cinemas - then they provide a lot of enjoyment, especially when you consider their infamy. To find a hidden gem is a wonderful experience, but finding a hidden gem in something regarded as terrible is even better!
To enjoy the games you need to ensure a few things:
I rank both on my personal Top 100 Games of All Time. It's a shame that due to licensing problems they will never be included in any future compilations or be made available for download on the Wii. I guarantee that if the controls were adapted to include separate jump, inventory, attack and special item buttons, plus the cinemas were redrawn in a Hayao Miyazaki style by professional Japanese artists, recorded with new voice actors, then both Zelda: Wand of Gamelon and Link: Faces of Evil would surprise the gaming community with their quality. Too bad the only way to now play them is to buy expensive hardware which is prone to breaking and has a notorious tendency to lose its ability to save data. Emulation is possible, but is far more hassle than it's worth. Oh, and don't forget that three-button CDi control pad!
Special thanks to Dale DeSharone for answering questions, and www.quebecgamers.com for supplying images.
Links
Black Moon CDi resource with info and interviews
Link: Faces of Evil
Link: Faces of Evil
Link: Faces of Evil
Link: Faces of Evil
Link: Faces of Evil
Link: Faces of Evil
Link: Faces of Evil
Link: Faces of Evil
Link: Faces of Evil
Link: Faces of Evil
Link: Faces of Evil
Link: Faces of Evil
Zelda: Wand of Gamelon
Zelda: Wand of Gamelon
Zelda: Wand of Gamelon
Zelda: Wand of Gamelon
Zelda: Wand of Gamelon
Zelda: Wand of Gamelon
Zelda: Wand of Gamelon
Zelda: Wand of Gamelon
Page 2 - Audio and Visuals
Page 3 - How They Play
How does LZ actually play?
Link
The hero of the series, his in-game incarnation seems strikingly similar to that in Link's Adventure.
Zelda
The heroine of her own quest, this is the first game where she played the main role.
Impa
This old woman guides Zelda through her quest, also offering various tips.
Gwonam
This old man carries Link to Koridai Island and offers various tips during his quest.
Ganon
The main villain and, rather interestingly, can only be defeated through usage of one particular item. Some people grumbled it wasn't in keeping with the series, but I found it quite original.
Flying Enemies
Annoying at first, dispatch all of them before continuing with a stage, or acquire either acquire a loaf of bread or magic bell in order to stop them.
Ice Wolves
Easy to defeat despite their fearsome appearance, killing these will yield snowballs. Stock up on as many as you can.
Fire Dairas
Only vulnerable to snowballs, defeating these will not only gain you the much needed firestones, but also enable the completion of a cave section.
Ice Monkeys
These annoying scoundrels can only be defeated with firestones, thereby finishing off this triangular piece of Metroidvania-style design. Once past them, you can scale the mountain and reach a special item.
Glutko
This one-eyed glutton is one of the coolest enemies in the two games; in Link's version, residing inside an HR Geiger-inspired skeleton and requiring special kind of "food" to defeat.
1) Ignore all the cinemas
2) Make sure you have a fully working CDi with functioning save state support (on some systems, if the internal battery dies, saving is forever disabled as the battery can't be replaced with a lot of work)
3) Get a hardwired three-button action controller
4) Have an open mind. Don't play them thinking they must be compared to Miyamoto's work, rather think of them as a pair of 2D side-scrolling adventures, released at the beginning of the 1990s, that have nothing to do with Nintendo.
Quebec Gamers.com Screens and movies from Zelda and Link games.
