I think it's better than the Wii game.Kong Wen wrote:Doom II was my easy first vote.
For my second vote, I chose Zelda II, which is a woefully under-rated entry in the franchise. This is a wonderful platforming action RPG, from back before Symphony of the Night redefined the genre.
For my third choice, I went with Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance. It's easily just as good as the Wii entry, maybe slightly better, and alongside that entry (its direct sequel), the pinnacle of the series.
The Wii game is more difficult and I do like some of the gameplay improvements they made. Their ideas for elevation and crossbows were cool...they then proceeded to stupidly discard these changes in later games, as is typical of Nintendo franchises.
I really disliked how generic the supports were and the pacing of Radiant Dawn, however. I thought it was dumb that most of the characters were unavailable for a large portion of the game. It made no sense to me that the best characters tended to be pre-promotes or/and late game characters. So many characters were completely useless because of that.
Aside from these gameplay gripes, I also thought the story was totally crappy in comparison to Path of Radiance.
Believe it or not, Zelda II is the first Zelda game I played. I played the original Zelda game a bit later. Zelda II is probably the worst introduction to the series ever since it is a departure from the formula. However, although some people hate it, I thought it was a decent game overall. I wouldn't rate it higher than a lot of other Zelda games though. I voted for it in this poll, but for me it loses to other stuff like Link's Awakening (zelda dx being the version I played), A Link to the Past, and the Oracles games.