Daily Debate: Are Handheld Zelda Games Lesser Experiences?

Call me crazy, call me ignorant, call me foolish, but I’ve long thought of handheld Zelda games as pocket-sized versions of a more authentic experience that only home consoles can deliver.

Consider the titanic hype drummed up when the then-untitled Twilight Princess was announced at E3 2004 to roaring crowds. I’ve long believed that fans in 2004 weren’t just stoked to see an adult Link return with an art style more realistic than Wind Waker; fans were happy to see the Zelda franchise return to home consoles after what felt like a drought of Zelda games.

But how could the span of time between the release of Majora’s Mask in 2000 and Twilight Princess in 2006 feel like a drought? In addition to The Wind Waker, Nintendo released five other Zelda titles in these six years.

I think that time felt like a drought because Oracle of Ages, Oracle of Seasons, A Link to the Past/Four Swords, and The Minish Cap were all handheld games. Plus, Four Swords Adventures was a GameCube release, but it provided gameplay and graphics evocative of a handheld Zelda title. As great as those games may have been, none of it felt quite as fulfilling as the experiences Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask provided us with.

As a longtime fan of Link’s Awakening, I know that handheld Zelda games can be boatloads of fun. But the question remains: Are handheld Zelda games ultimately lesser experiences than home console Zelda games?