So to summarize Nate's post:
LOZ not so good because it's too non-linear.
SMB1 not so good because it's too linear.
LOZ is an awesome awesome game. I remember spending hours and hours playing it growing up, and I still do. (I'm extremely fortunate that the battery in my Zelda1 and Zelda2 cartridges hasn't died yet.) Great music, great graphics, great everything. And I never had a strategy guide for that game. As I recall, I would find a doorway, walk through it, and if it was a dungeon, I would look at the top of the screen that would say "Level 1" or whatever. If I found Level 5 and I had only beat Level 2, then I would keep searching for Level 3.
As for Mario, I agree that I like Mario3 better than Mario1, but I think a lot of that is the diversity the game added. More levels, more themes, and flying. And most importantly for a guy with a brother, a more reasonable two-player mode. As I mentioned in my fiver of SMB1, it was annoying to play a 2P game and just have to sit there until the other player finally dies on World 5. SMB3 switched off every level, and that made things more fun for two people. Especially with the sewer-mode.
Of course, that's not really to say anything bad about SMB1, which I still play frequently enough on my NES.
__________________
"Please, Aslan," said Lucy, "what do you call soon?"
"I call all times soon," said Aslan; and instantly he vanished away and Lucy was alone with the Magician.
|