Oracle of Ages Review

Written by Zelda_freak

First Impressions: 5/5

Though I don't know much about when this was in the making or when it was released (I barely knew what the Internet was), I gave it a 5/5 because I am always psyched about Zelda games.

Gameplay: 8/10

As always this Zelda game has great game play. It is of good design and has nifty puzzles; the changing time was a great idea, and having restrictions on the time travel that slowly minimized throughout the game flawlessly was a work of genius. But having only two (Well three) worlds to explore was a slight downfall compared to OoS. The game link was also a great idea but was a bit too hard to do (it always said that the code was wrong), so I had to take away points for that.

Graphics: Now, 3/5, Then, 5/5

Then the graphics were, of course, great, with the same design from LA, but with color, the game looked even better. But that was then, this is now, though they looked great when OoA came out, now they are only so-so when compared to the GBA's graphics. The change of colors when you went from one time to another was very well thought out and looked extremely good with the "swirling" effect from the actual traveling.

Story: 18/20

It had a very good story, but the problem is that you need to have both games to understand the whole thing, and thus you had to do the dreaded "game link" *shivers*. Otherwise I found the story to be very good and a nice change for the series.

Challenge: 5/5

This game really challenged me the first time though. Its puzzles are hard to figure out but not as hard to do, and the bosses got very hard as you progressed though the game, but the final boss was far harder then the other bosses in comparison. A mistake, perhaps, but the great challenge in everything else more then makes up for it.

Interaction: 13/15

The interaction in this game was just slightly better then that of OoS, but still not as much as one would hope. The traveling through time worked well, and was a ingenious way to interact with the world. The only new addition to the interaction in the Oracle games (aside from changing the time/seasons) was being able to name a small child and watch him grow as the game progresses.

Side-Quests: 4/5

Though there aren't as many side-quests for OoA as there are for other Zelda games, there is the "game link", which allows you do a lot more in the game then before, thus adding more side-quests. If the "game link" was not as hard to do, or more side-quests were normally in the game, then it would be a lot better.

Continuity: 3/5

If the game told you where in the timeline OoS and OoA took place (or at least hinted at it), it would have done better here, but there is no indication as to when it takes place. Rather, it just leaves you to a lot of speculation...

Music: 8/10

Though the GBC is limiting technology-wise, I still feel it could have been better. The ideas for some of the songs were good, but they just could not do them justice on the GBC; they should have gone with something simpler, in other words. Not bad, but still not great.

Overall Feel/Originality: 17/20

The feel of OoA is definitely that of a Zelda game; the classic weapons are there, along with new ones, all the great bosses are there, etc. Basically, everything you know and love is there. And the game was original, the plot being great, not to mention a breath of semi-fresh air (reviving Ganon has been done before, but at least they disguised it). The new or improved items and weapons are also nice. However, I did not enjoy this game as much as OoS, for some unknown reason.

TOTAL: 86/100; a B

Buy this game! If you have any GB system (excluding the original GB), then this game is a must for your collection! But, if you have a choice, I suggest you buy OoS first, or better yet, both at the same time. Just try to play OoS first.

Buy It?

Yes!