I have always been a fan of the Zelda franchise. I started
of course with the original 1986 title on the Nintendo. Even though I was not
necessarily in to RPG or Action-Adventure games, the original game still
captivated me. It was unlike anything else I had seen before. I primarily
remember a few really boring text adventure games from the Atari home computer,
and as such adventure games generally didn’t appeal to me. I remember hearing
friends talk about Zelda, and eventually saw it firsthand at a friend’s house.
To be quite honest, it wasn’t until years later that I would really come to
truly appreciate what that original Zelda was, and what it did for the video
game franchise as a whole.
The success of that original game of course led to an NES
sequel, the Legend of Zelda 2: The Adventure of Link. With a few more RPG
elements thrown in, I was never really as captivated by this one as I was the
original, but I digress. What followed next were Zelda titles being developed
and released on every subsequent Nintendo console that would be released thereafter.
This included games for each of the portable handheld consoles. The Gameboy,
Gameboy Color, and Gameboy Advance systems all had Zelda titles released on
them.
I remember borrowing and playing Link’s Awakening on the
original Gameboy when I was in Jr. High, but never got much of a chance to
complete it. With the game not being in full color, I never really had enough
of a desire to play it after returning it, and as a result I never bought it
for myself.
Years later I learned about the two games that had been
co-developed released for the Gameboy Color (GBC). I didn’t realize, mostly due
to the fact that I never owned a GBC system, that these two games were, in
fact, designed to be played in succession, and that they could be linked
together using a system of passwords. This means that the two games themselves
were actually connected, and could technically be considered one single mega
game. Certainly this would be the first time in my memory that something like
this had ever been done. Making it even more intriguing is the fact that it
didn’t matter what order you played the games in. In fact, the replay value for
them was that much higher when you consider that you would experience a slightly
different game experience depending on whether or not you chose to play Ages or
Seasons first. In all, these two games provided up to 4 different gameplay
experiences depending on your choices.
So what kind of gameplay experience does one get with these
two games? To be completely honest, I haven’t played through all four of the possibilities,
so I cannot speak to every single aspect. I have played through both games,
however, starting first with Oracle of Seasons, and finishing with Oracle of
Ages.
I didn’t expect much from these games in terms of storyline
or depth. After all most games developed for the handheld consoles were
shorter, and less developed than what was available on the original NES or
Super Nintendo consoles. I always attributed this to the lack of physical
memory available on the smaller cartridges.
Boy was I ever surprised to find out just how deep and rich
these games ended up being. Seriously, there are some very complex and
sophisticated dungeons found in both, although I would argue that Ages has the
most. When you consider that both games not only include overtly impressive
overworlds (Holodrum and Lynna), plus their own additional storyline worlds
(Lynna past, and Subrosia the underworld), you end up with a very deep,
enriched, and highly fulfilling game. I am very, very impressed with just how
much there actually is to these two portable games. They would honestly give a
good run to quite a few of the “bigger” games found on the main NES and Super
Nintendo consoles.
Like most Zelda games, these two games feature non-linear
exploration and puzzle solving in order to advance the storyline, and open up
new areas of the world map. The added wrinkle of having to traverse the same
world in different seasons or timelines in order to unlock or complete a puzzle
just makes it that much deeper in terms of exploration. Sometimes you cannot
access a doorway, cave, or dungeon, unless you have first travelled back in
time, or changed the season to aid you in gaining an advantage. Examples include
planting a seed in the past that in turn sprouts in to a climbable vine in the
present, or using snow drifts in winter to bridge an otherwise impassable gap
present during any of the other three seasons. A Link to the Past on the Super
Nintendo included a few of these types of puzzles, where you would first need
to traverse an area in the dark world, in order to surpass some immovable
obstacle or boundary in the light world. The major difference between a Link to
the Past and these two games is that these kinds of problem solving are a lot
more prevalent in these games design. Meaning the game was designed with these
added wrinkles being a bigger part of the overall game play and storyline.
If you are still not sold on just how large and expansive
these games are, then please consider the fact that both games also include
what is affectionately referred to as the trading game or fetch quest. Some
people dislike this aspect of these games, as well as the one found in the GBA
title The Minish Cap. While they are somewhat time consuming and vague, they
add an additional level to the overall experience, and there is usually a nice
reward at the end. Besides, it’s a lot more satisfying and fun to complete
these games knowing that you have gotten 100% of the items and have also
completed all of the additional side quests.
To sum things up: The two Zelda games found on the Gameboy
Color provide a surprisingly deep, enriching game experience, and when you play
them linked together, the game gets even deeper. Anyone who is a fan of the
Zelda series is strongly encouraged to play them. Hell, even if you aren’t
necessarily a fan of the franchise itself, you do owe it to yourself to play
through what is probably the best game(s) found on the GBC.
