[Chefelf]

Okay I love Nintendo. Even more than Nintendo I love the Legend of Zelda. The original Legend of Zelda for the NES is probably my favorite video game of all time. When they released this new Zelda bundle for the GameCube I was finally sold. I had finally decided that I would join the legions of others and purchase a GameCube for myself.

The Zelda bundle is great because it contains four classic Zelda games and some documentary style "making of" type stuff. That sounds great except for one problem. Four classic Zelda games? FOUR? There are five classic Zelda games. They decided that they would include Legend of Zelda, Legend of Zelda II: The Adventure of Link (not a Zelda game in my opinion--barely a game at all). Legend of Zelda: The Ocarina of Time and Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask.

Any Zelda fan worth their weigh in rupees will recognize a sizeable hole in the middle of this collection. Where this hole is there should be a game entitled Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past.

Why leave it out? It's a great Zelda game. Far better than that steaming pile of turd called Legend of Zelda II. Nintendo has simply dropped the ball. Only laziness can account for this game not being included on the bundle. A Link to the Past was a superb game. It reclaimed the brilliance of the Zelda franchise after the utter failure of Zelda II. It brought back the feeling of the original game while building on it and making it into something leaps and bounds more engrossing than the original.

There is nothing I can really do. The damage has already done. The most I can really do is complain on a forum like this.

This is just another in a long series of disappointments from Nintendo. Yet again they create something that, on the surface, sounds like a dream come true yet a simple silly oversight on their point prevents it from being truly great. Instead we're left with something which falls short of the mark and is just plain disappointing due to its incomplete nature.

[Jordan]

Legend of Zelda II: The Adventure of Link IS this the side scroller one?

Link to the past was the best zelda game ever. I Rank it in my top 5 all time greatest games ever made (this goes for any genre and system).

I remember being blown away with the time travel capabilites. That game was the first EPIC game ever made, or at least the first epic game I ever played.

That is odd, why would Nintendo drop it off the list? Keep in mind Nintendo targets the brain dead youth of today, ages 8-16 to be exact.

[Heccubus]

I never got far with Link To The Past (or any Zelda game, for that matter) but I greatly enjoyed it. Zelda II wasn't a favourite of mine. And yet I went out of my way to purchase it. Odd.

[Chefelf]

Yes, Zelda II was the sidescroller one. The one that sucked and would be lost in the piles and piles of crappy forgotten Nintendo titles if not for bearing the Zelda name.

[Chefelf]

Okay, I picked up the Zelda bundle. The games are what you would expect but the "retrospective" video sucks ass. If anyone thinks they will get it because the videos would be cool (I heard they would have behind the scenes, interviews and a documentary on the making of Zelda--not the case) then save your money. At least I have all the Zelda games and a GameCube now.

[looktothesky]

They don't have Link To The Past because it is on GBA... they're money grabbers, so no way they'd put that on disc!

I liked Zelda II though, it was one of my favorites, along with OoT and Majora's Mask.

[civilian_number_two]

I'm not really qualified to get in on one of these video game discussions, but this is me saying that I agree that Link to the Past is a fantastic game. I think that was just the right size for a game to be, not so large that you feel like reading a help book, and not so tiny that it's really obvious what to do all the time.

Zelda II I thought was ok when I first played it, but then again, I don't play many games, so I had no greater experience to compare it with. I thought the side scrolling made it distinct from the first one, which I will admit I enjoyed more. But in general, it shared several of the same silly details endured by the first one, such as endless dumb creatures hanging around to give link experience points. Link to the Past was less obvious in this matter, and really felt like a story.

Ocarina of Time seems great, but I haven't owned a console game since the Super NES, so I never took the time to finish it. I haven't even seen the other games.

[Enhasa]

The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past was probably omitted because of its recent re-release to the GBA.

[Reader]

I liked Zelda II though, it was one of my favorites

I liked Zelda II as well! Mind you i'm not a die-hard Zelda fan, so my standards are pretty low when considering if it's a worthy title in the series. At least you can't deny it has cool music!!

[Chefelf]

I hate Zelda II. I found it to be a really annoying game. What's more is that it doesn't fit in as a Zelda game. I am all in favor of games being new, different an innovative (even within a franchise) but when put side by side with other Zelda games it doesn't have the elements a Zelda game has come to promise (such as non-annoying combat).

I don't know. Maybe it's just me.

[Enhasa]

I hate Zelda II.  I found it to be a really annoying game.  What's more is that it doesn't fit in as a Zelda game.  I am all in favor of games being new, different an innovative (even within a franchise) but when put side by side with other Zelda games it doesn't have the elements a Zelda game has come to promise (such as non-annoying combat).

Personally, I like Zelda II: The Adventures of Link better than the first game, because Zelda II carries far more RPG-style elements than other titles in the series. Perhaps because of this many fans don’t like the second Zelda game.

Sometimes I wonder whether those who despise Zelda II would have been happier with a re-release of the original, with the number “two” tacked on the end....