Gaming The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]Okay, so I checked out N-Sider.com just now, and what did I find? An interview with some of the game's developers about The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords +, that's what! You can find the article [url=http://www.n-sider.com/articleview.php?articleid=276][u]here[/u][/url] on N-Sider.com, and though I'll also be quoting bits farther down, you'll definitely want to read the entire article if you're interested in the game. Pretty much all the info I'll be posting, I got from that article. (I love N-Sider. ^_^)

First off, Four Swords + will actually be three games in one. That's right, not just two, but now a third game is being included. These games are Hyrule Adventure, Navi Trackers, and Shadow Battle, and I'll talk about each seperately.

[b]Hyrule Adventure[/b]

This would be the "main game," it seems, and according to Toshiaki Suzuki, the director of Hyrule Adventure and Shadow Battle, "The Hyrule Adventure alone is a full scale 2D Zelda!" This is something that I'd been hoping for ever since I heard that a GameCube version of Four Swords was in development. I dreamed of a Zelda quest with an overworld, dungeons, and a full-fledged story, only with the ability to have multiple people all cooperating/competing like in the GBA Four Swords. So, I'm extremely happy about this, and my excitement and anticipation for the game just went up yet another notch.

Another thing, Suzuki also says that, "We were sure not to make the game multiplayer only either." This is another thing I was hoping for because, as a sort of side game, Four Swords on the GBA being multi-player only was okay since A Link to the Past was there as a singleplayer mode, but not being able to play the game at all single-player would be very annoying.

I'm kind of wondering how save files will be handled for multi-player, though. In the GBA Four Swords each person had their own game with their own file, but doing that with memory cards could get rather cumbersome if each person has their file on a different card. This issue, from the start, has actually been my biggest concern about a Four Swords GCN game. If each person is going through in single-player mode by themselves, and then they get together to play multi-player together, will they be able to use their own save file with all their upgrades and whatnot?

Finally, Suzuki also says that, "For many reasons, we spent a lot of time making the Hyrule Adventure huge." This adds further weight to the quote about Hyrule Adventure being a full scale 2D Zelda, and I'm hoping that the game truely will be huge. They could do a lot of cool stuff with a 2D game on the GCN; they've got a lot more room on a GCN disc than a GBA cartridge, so I doubt space will be a limiting factor. So far, The Wind Waker seems to be the longest Zelda game released, and I'm hoping that Hyrule Adventure will be able to top it.

I'm expecting this to be the next full, original 2D Zelda game that I've been waiting for ever since the porting of A Link to the Past to the GBA. . . . And from what I've heard so far, I think it's going to be, with multi-player thrown in to boot. I can't wait to play this game; I'm looking forward to it even more than the sequel to The Wind Waker.

[b]Navi Trackers[/b]

From the sound of it, not a whole lot besides the name (formerly Tetra's Trackers) has changed since this game was shown at the last E3. It still appears that the game revolves around searching out and collecting pirate medals (formerly stamps, though I don't see that it matters a whole lot what the things are) on your GBA screen while Tetra, on the TV screen, gives you hints and clues as to their whereabouts. Sounds like it could be amusing, but it also sounds like it could get old really fast.

Apparently, though, Navi Trackers is based on a game that was developed for the Satellaview add-on to the Super Famicom (Japanese Super NES) eight years ago. Eiji Aonuma says, "We developed a game called Marvelous which used the Satella View almost eight years ago. In that game, we had a quest where you would collect stamps while listening to a radio which gave you clues. We took that idea and reproduced it by using connectivity instead." Personally, I find it a bit odd that they'd just decide to take an eight year old game, slap Zelda on it, and release it, but I dunno. It seems like not a whole lot has actually been said about the game, so there could be more too it than I know. I'm sure hoping there is.

[b]Shadow Battle[/b]

This would be the third game that's going to be included in the package, one which I previously hadn't heard about. Suzuki says, "The game is a straight forward single screen set-up where all the Links duke it out. However, we thought we needed to add something extra. So there are several clever GBA connectivity elements within it," while Aonuma also says, "It's not only a battle game, but part hide and sneek."

So obviously it's going to be a sort of 'Zelda deathmatch' thing, but what I'm wondering is just how they're going to pull it off. I could possibly see 3D Link vs. Link fighting, with combat adapted from The Wind Waker engine maybe, but how they're going to make it work well in 2D is beyond me. The only thing that even comes close to that so far is the boss of the Palace of the Four Sword in the A Link to the Past remake, where you fight the four color Links, and they had some special moves, but I can't see that really being all that fun for player vs. player.

For now, like with Navi Trackers, I guess we'll just have to wait and see what they do with the game. I'm hoping that a good amount of info will be released at E3 this year about all three of these games. A release date would also be nice.[/color]

[Semjaza]

I'm really looking forward to this game. The single player mode sounds rather fleshed out... far more than I'm sure most were expecting. Apparently the single player game can take upwards of 20 hours to get through. I don't feel so bad about spending $50 on this (although it apparently is bundled with a link cable).

Just so you know, word is that NOA is leaving Trackers out of the US release. I'm not sure what the reasoning is, but I can't say I'll miss it. Recent impressions make it seem like it was geared towards very young children as it was. It also has some sort of system for pronouncing simple Japanese first names... something that would be incredibly difficult to fix for a US release. In any case, I doubt I'd play it more than once just to see what it was like. Didn't look all that interesting.

I'm surprised by the comparison to Marvelous: Another Treasure Island though. I've never gotten to play the game, but what I've seen of it never game me that impression.

[Zidargh]

I'm not anticipating this game to a certain extent considering [b]Hyrule Adventure[/b] is the only game that appeals to me so far. [b]Shadow Battle[/b] sounds interesting but as said, it is difficult to see where they are going to go with this game. The lack of different enemies would bore me fast making the game seem tedious to play

[b]Navi Trackers[/b] on the other hand, is a whole different story. Even when I first heard of the previously named [b]Tetra's Trackers[/b], it did not appeal to me. Having to search for pirate medallions over and over again isn't my idea of fun, but who knows?

[b]Hyrule Adventure[/b] would do me just fine if it is as fleshed out as said to be. If it was a long game then obviously I'd look into this even more, but as of yet, I'm just going to wait for more news until I get my hopes up.

I think I'll just wait to see where these games are going to go, simply because I pose no serious interest as of yet.

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]Hmm, that's kind of a shame, if NOA really isn't going to include Navi Trackers. I mean, I don't really see any reason why they should take it out. It's on the same disc, so it's not like they'd be trying to sell something extra that people wouldn't buy. Even if it isn't all that great, it can't really detract from the other two games on the disc.

And if Hyrule Adventure can take 20 hours to complete, I'm going to be in heaven when I get the game. That's exactly what I was hoping for; I nice, big, [i]long[/i] 2D Zelda game. And then there's multi-player to even further extend the gameplay. From the sound of it so far, I think I'd pay the full $50 even if only Hyrule Adventure were on the disc.[/color]

[Shinmaru]

Yep, this is definitely a game that I have my eye on...I'm actually thinking about breaking out the wallet for this one :p

I'm looking forward to playing a new 2D Zelda. Don't get me wrong, the 3D Zeldas have been great, but I want to see what can be done on the 2D plane with the power of the GameCube. Should be a real treat, especially if it's 20+ hours...ooh baby.

Navi's/Tetra's Trackers never really struck me as interesting, but it might've been an interesting diversion for a few minutes. I would've at least liked the chance to play it for a couple minutes, but eh...there's still a slight chance that the game might still be included, I suppose.

Shadow Battle could potentially be fun, if done right, but I'm not sure I see that happening. Again, it could be an interesting diversion for a while, though. Obviously, Hyrule Adventure is the main draw of the disc and the other two games are just meant to be supplements, so I'm not expecting anything [i]amazing[/i] from the other two games on the disc.

[James]

[color=#707875]If I were to be spammy, I'd just say "Yeah! I agree w/ u!"

Basically, Four Swords + is something that I'm becoming increasingly interested in, the more I hear about it.

I don't really know what else I can add, other than to point out one important thing; the graphics.

Originally, the GameCube version was just the same as the GBA edition, including the new sprites. But as you can see if you look at the pictures over time, more and more has been added.

And I must say, I am really liking the visuals on this game. It's great to see some of the subtle effects they've added to the backgrounds (I think the grass even looks pretty cool) and the particle effects are very pretty. It'll be really intense to play this game with four people.[/color]

[Semjaza]

Game is due in June. I can't remember if that was said or not yet.

[url]http://www.sbgi.net/template/entertainment/gamerz/graphics/other/fourswordshires.jpg[/url]

That's the supposed box art as well. The art is the same as on the Japanese version, which is nice.

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]June, June...I must make sure that I have $50 available by then.

And that box art is possibly the best box yet for a Zelda game -- if that is what's going to be used for the final release, anyway. It's perfect for Four Swords, and it's more than just a gold background and the logo, heh. (Though TWW got away from that a bit, along with MM being purple-ish). It even sort of fits my personalities for the Links. Green's looking to bust through with a grand charge, Red has that look of "come on, try me," Blue's gritting his teeth with a look of desperation, and Purple is on guard and prepared, looking determined to win. . . . Or maybe I'm just taking this a little too far. :toothy:

Either way, I love it, and the guards surrounding the Links also look really cool. Anyone else notice that they kept the same basic design as the guards from A Link to the Past, though? Besides just the armor/shield, the green and blue ones have swords while the red ones have tridents. I just hope that the entire game can live up to A Link to the Past...and maybe even surpass it as my favorite Zelda game. I have very high hopes for this game.[/color]

[b]Edit:[/b]
[color=seagreen]Wow...I just found a site with some official art and some screen shots, and I have to agree with you James. The graphics are a huge step up from A Link to the Past, but they also use elements from LTP, so it looks sort of like a cross between LTP and TWW. And the new official art, I love it. Especially the first one of the page. Which also, coincidentally (or is it?), fits with my personalities. Red Link is such a backstabber, heh.

Official art and screen shots [url=http://www.z64planet.com/news/news.php?page=newsjan04#01282004][u]here[/u][/url], brought to you by Zelda Planet ([url=http://www.z64planet.com][u]www.z64planet.com[/u][/url]).[/color]

[Semjaza]

I think the original video that sold me on the game was way back at E3. It showed the four links defending a bridge and there were over 25 knights just running at them with no issues whatsoever. What isn't shown in the screens too well is how often the camera zooms in and out of the action, which I think is rather cool. Makes up for issues that could arise when someone gets too far away.

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]Yeah, I thought that was cool too. Absolutely no slowdown or anything with all those guards not only running about getting killed by the four Links, but the smoke animation that they made when they died, like enemies in The Wind Waker. Even if it isn't in 3D, still...dang that looks awesome.

Oh, and I found some commercials on the [url=http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ngc/g4sj/index.html][u]Japanese Four Swords Adventures page[/u][/url], the three of which show some more gameplay. Click the left button with the little "New!" text that's flashing on it, up towards the right corner of the page, and it'll open a pop-up window with links to three commercials. Seeing the Fire Rod burn through a big field of grass in mere seconds. . . . Can't wait to play this game and do that myself, heh.

And yeah, the zooming is also shown in the commercials, though mainly in the first, biggest one. I'm glad they did that, so that they didn't have to make it so you'd have to switch to the GBA screen just from going a little ways away from the main group. Also, how the connectivity works between the GCN/GBA is shown, for entering buildings and such. Looks pretty cool. Like in one part showing Shadow Battle, one Link went inside a cave on the GBA screen and started hitting a Cucco with his sword, and then it switched to the GCN view outside where a swarm of Cuccos were mercilessly beating the other three Links. I can't wait to see all the different little intricacies of how the connectivity is used. It looks like it'll be put to even better use than for FF Crystal Chronicles.[/color]

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

Well, I'm angry about the GCN Four Swords game requiring GBAs for multiplayer, just like FFCC. It's stupid. Everyone and their dog would be better off if the game allowed use of Gamecube controllers in addition to the GBAs. Seriously, the GBA sp is the damn worst controller a console can ever hope to have. For all their ingenuity, Nintendo has really let me down with Four Swords.

[NorykoAngelcry]

[color=darkred][SIZE=2][font=verdana]Most of the people that I know that are really interested in this game already have a GBA SP. . so, I'm not too worried about this game. I do agree with you though Sciros, that for younger gamers, this may be a bit high priced to partake in the game, however, I see so many people running around with GBAs. . that it doesn't seem as far fetched as some may believe.

As for being a bad controller? . . I have played the GBA on a drive to Texas (16 hrs to, and from). . I didn't mind it at all. Want a bad controller? Go with a PS1 or PS2. . I can't play with one of those for longer then a few hours before I get cramps in my hand. . So, GBA SP might not be the BEST, but it sure beats out a lot of them! [/SIZE][/color][/font]

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

Well, as much as I dislike the PS1 and PS2 controllers, I gotta say that I think the GBA sp is still worse. For one thing, it has so few buttons that any game with the GBA as a controller has no choice but to be a bit simplistic as far as UI goes.

And yeah, I already have 2 GBA sp's and 2 link cables for FFCC, but I still wish I didn't have to use them. The GBA-GCN link cable is too damn short. And the GCN controller is 1000 times more comfortable.

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]Well, the thing is, a game like Four Swords Adventures just couldn't be done without the GBAs for multiplayer. And I mean it's [i]really[/i] required, not just "It'd take longer to go through menus one at a time," like in FFCC. There's just no other way to do what FSA does, without each person having their own screen. I guess they could've done made it so a quarter of the TV screen splits to show the Link that's left the main area, but I think that would get [i]really[/i] annoying for anyone else playing on the TV screen.

And about the controls, there isn't that much you need for a 2D Zelda. Really, they made A Link to the Past and the original Four Swords on the GBA -- why can't they do another 2D Zelda using it? Unless you wanted multiple secondary items -- something you don't get in Four Swords anyway -- there's no need for any more buttons than the GBA has.

For the issue of the GBA/SP being uncomfortable, well, that really depends on the person. Myself, I find the SP just as comfortable as, say, a SNES controller. Maybe not as comfortable as a GCN pad, but it's not bad. I've played FFTA on my GBA SP for twelve hours straight without any discomfort.[/color]

[Shinmaru]

So sad that nobody has resurrected this thread yet :(

Anyway, I bought Four Swords Adventures a little less than a week ago and I've really been enjoying it. I've only had the opportunity to play the game single-player, but I'm happy to say that it's still worth your time even if you don't have access to multiplayer. The system used for taking control of all of the Links is very good, though it does take a few tries to get used to. However, once you're able to memorize which direction on the C-Stick corresponds to which Link Formation (because, face it, using the C-Stick is leaps and bounds easier than the other options lol), forming your Links on the fly to deal with different puzzles and enemy attacks becomes second nature.

I read EGM's review of FSA and heard some griping about the game's graphics, but I honestly cannot see what they're talking about; the graphics are by no means flawless, but they are still very nice to look at. Perhaps they're speaking of areas in the game that I've not reached yet (I'm at Hyrule Castle in Level 4 right now), but I doubt it lol. I've also been impressed with the sheer amount of enemies that the game can pack onto one screen without any hint of slowdown whatsoever. You go through some really crazy battles in this game and the game keeps up with all the action just fine.

One complaint that I do (sort of) agree with is that it's annoying to start at square one at the beginning of every single level in FSA. One of the more enjoyable aspects of the Legend of Zelda series is acquiring the different items spread throughout the dungeons and using them whenever you feel neccessary. However, one aspect of this system that is kind of nifty is that it adds a bit of strategy to which weapon that you choose to pick up (you can only handle one weapon at a time). Will you choose the Pegasus Boots or the Magic Hammer for the journey ahead? Trust me, there are a few points in the game where, if you don't choose the right weapon, you'll be screwed lol.

Hopefully, someone (Desbreko? lol) will be able to comment more on the multiplayer aspect of the game, because I'm sure that playing FSA multiplayer is even more fun than playing FSA single-player.

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]I was waiting for someone to bring this thread back. About time, heh.

Anyway, yes, the more people you have playing FSA together the better it gets, just like the original FS. I've played through most of the game in two player mode, and I like it more than single player. Not to say that playing by yourself is bad -- I've also had a lot of fun playing in one player mode -- you just don't quite get the "full experience." When you're playing by yourself, it's more like a normal one player Zelda game, since the game loses the cooperative/competetive elements.

Even when you're playing in multiplayer mode, however, all four Links are always present. In two player mode, each player gets control of two of the Links. But the thing is, you can also steal the Link that the other player isn't permanently controlling. So say I was 1P controlling Green Link, with Blue Link tagging along behind, and 2P was Red Link with Purple Link following. I could walk up and pick up Purple Link, and then he'd be following me so that I'd have control of three of the Links. And there are actually times when this is required, and more when it's just generally helpful.

I've yet to be able to play with three or four players, though, so I can't comment on those modes yet. I'd think that, in three player, one person would control two Links while the other two would control one, and you could pass around the extra Link when needed.

Really though, there isn't a whole lot to say about the multiplayer that you can't include in single player mode other than, obviously, you have multiple people controlling the Links. While it is more fun to play with friends, it's not a huge step up from single player or anything. So if you don't have GBAs to play the game in multiplayer mode, it's still more than worth the purchase soley for single player.

I suppose I should also mention Shadow Battle while I'm talking about multiplayer. I've only played a few matches so far, since I've been concentrating on Hyrulean Adventure, and I've only played with two players. And while Hyrulean Adventure is still a ton of fun with one or two players, Shadow Battle really needs at least three players to be all that fun, I think. Just going one-on-one with my brother wasn't all that great, but I think if you were to get three or four people in there, it could get a lot more chaotic and fun. I'm really looking forward to getting four people together to try out Shadow Battle again, so we'll see what that's like when it happens.[/color]

[BlueYoshi]

[color=teal]I've only rented FSA so far; I haven't got the cash for anything these days. Single player isn't all that considering I'm only on the first level, and hopefully my experience with FSA right now will draw the line that tells me whether to buy it or not.

I don't find the controls to be that much of a nuisance because after all, it's great to finally see a game that's both deep and optimistic. Call me a perfectionist, but I don't want to dwell too much into the game through one player mode since I'm more determined about playing it with friends as I lack the amount of SP's and brothers, heh.

One thing I'm yet to find out about multi is essentially the amount of freedom that each player has and what say they have in the progression of the dungeons. I'm aware that once one Link enters a house or underground cave, a GBA screen will appear on the screen that lets Link move about in that certain place whilst the others are still scattered around doing their own things. But does that really combine equality with gameplay? The Chalice ordeal in FFCC was a let down for the multiplayer mode but the game was reasonably good, it may have lacked a few things but there weren't really any inadmissible flaws that I or anyone else noticed about it. Anyway, that's beside the point.

I like what I've heard about each Link having the ability to only carry one weapon at a time; having four fully tooled up Links would make the battle aspects of the game a walkover... but I can't help but notice how much of a side quest-esque style of gameplay has been adopted. Many side quests in games share the same properties as FSA, because you theoretically start fresh at the beginning of every dungeon. I mean, FSA has side quests and mini games of its own, but that's a rather naff statement because that's not what I see the overall game to be at all.

What's most impressive about FSA though is how it's covered almost [i]every[/i] angle in terms of multiplayer. There's co-op, competition, a selection of nice mini games, and even a deathmatch. The game is a very dilute sample of what Nintendo can offer us in total, and for those who actually prefer 2D graphics, you [b]know[/b] you wouldn't mind seeing at least a 3D version of FSA. ~_^

Sadly, I'm just as stuck as you guys are when it comes to multi player mode. I haven't had the honour yet and simply put, I can't wait. I'd really appreciate any feedback from someone who's had the full experience.[/color]

EDIT: I just saw how the camera zooms out to reveal the entire perimeter of the area you're in, and it looks real sweet. It tells you what to expect whilst there, so to speak, you won't be as wary as you would be not knowing, but none the less it seriously enhances the graphics by far.

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]Yeah, when in multiplayer mode, the camera will zoom in and out on the TV screen to keep all of the Links in view at once. However, it won't zoom out beyond the area/room that's currently on screen, so the Links can't totally split up and go their seperate ways throughout the level. But, when you're on your GBA screen, you're totally independant; you can go anywhere you want on the GBA, seperate of the other Links. So while the game makes you progress through the levels together, there are still quite a few opportunities to duck into your GBA and do stuff by yourself to get ahead of the other players.

Myself, I think this system provides a nice balance between having the freedom to go and explore by yourself, while also keeping all of the Links together so people don't just wander off and get lost. Before I actually played the game I was hoping it would switch to the GBA screen if you went out of the area that the TV screen was currently showing, but there are enough "GBA areas" that it isn't needed, and I'm now glad that they didn't make it that way. Some of the levels are quite large, and having four people splitting up and running around every which way, all running into puzzles that require multiple Links and wanting the others to leave what they're doing and come complete the puzzle they're at. . . . It would just get frustrating.

And yeah, I can imagine a 3D Four Swords game being fun, but it would lose the charm of simplicity that Four Swords Adventures has. Because really, that's one of the main reasons I prefer most 2D games to their 3D counterparts.

Taking combat in the 3D Zelda games, for example: There's no way you could fight near as effectively without Z/L targeting, which allows for precise movement and aiming while fighting in a 3D environment. So to fight in 3D, you need the targeting to partially automate that, since there's just no way you could manually aim your bow up at a Keese that's about to dive-bomb you while you're in the middle of a battle with a bunch of other enemies surrounding you. If you were to try, you'd find yourself getting hit from all sides simply because can't aim that fast and precise.

With combat in the 2D games, however, everything's on you. Aiming is simple enough in 2D that you aren't going to be getting any targeting help, so you'd better be able to peg that Keese on your own, or you're going to get hit. Movement is simple enough, and the 3/4 view lets you see enough around you, that you can move completely on your own, without the aid of targeting, to take out anything that the game throws at you.

Not to say that the targeting in the 3D games is bad -- I don't think there's any better way to do combat in the 3D games -- but I prefer the simple freedom of a 2D world. So yes, a 3D Four Swords could be fun, but the multiplayer aspect of it would only add yet another layer of complexity to the gameplay. And personally, I like the simple fun that FSA provides. In the end, I guess I'm not really adverse to seeing a 3D Four Swords, I just don't think it would be as good as FSA.[/color]

[BlueYoshi]

[quote name='Desbreko][color=indigo']And yeah, I can imagine a 3D Four Swords game being fun, but it would lose the charm of simplicity that Four Swords Adventures has. Because really, that's one of the main reasons I prefer most 2D games to their 3D counterparts.[/color][/quote]

[color=teal]I agree. The medieval style or a cel-shade would look pretty and all, but that would just complicate the matter because other things like split-screens would have to be introduced. That would slaughter every bit of the simplicity you were on about, especially the freedom that FSA enables.

To me, LoZ was always about puzzles and making the player think. I always saw the monsters and stuff as distractions to add a challenging effect and to prevent boredom, so with that in mind, combat isn't really all that important, thus there's no need for fancy combos and command lists... only the odd three or four slashes every now and then, heh.[/color]

[Rachael]

For me I have always loved Legend of Zelda:ocarina of time and majora's mask. I thought the graphocs were outta this world untill ps2 and gamecube came along. I was tempted to buy Legend of Zelda: The Windwaker until i saw the graphics. I thought they were terrible. N64 did better than that, it looked so childish to me and so does the four swords, I think the developers should've kept to the old graphics and improved on them instead of changing links face so it looks like a huge sideways oval that his body shouldn't be able to hold up.

[SonicSlash]

[quote name='Rachael']For me I have always loved Legend of Zelda:ocarina of time and majora's mask. I thought the graphocs were outta this world untill ps2 and gamecube came along. I was tempted to buy Legend of Zelda: The Windwaker until i saw the graphics. I thought they were terrible. N64 did better than that, it looked so childish to me and so does the four swords, I think the developers should've kept to the old graphics and improved on them instead of changing links face so it looks like a huge sideways oval that his body shouldn't be able to hold up.[/quote]

I just wanna pull off topic for oneeeeeeeeeeeeeee second to take care of this.

Don't judge a book by its cover. Unless you have played WW, don't say its childish, because it is by far my favorite 3D zelda game.

Now, back to topic, how long is the single player mode? I know before the game came out they said 20 hours, but is it really that long? I don't want a game that would be short, seeing I don't have four people to enjoy the game with.

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]Well, unless you're fumbling around trying to cooperate with multiple people, the single player mode is just as long as multiplayer. It is, after all, the same game; it just depends on how many people are controlling the four Links.

I guess the game could stretch out to 20 hours, but probably not unless you're slow, or you die a lot and have to replay levels. And I mean a [i]lot,[/i] heh. (If you have Force Fairies -- and you get a lot of them -- they revive you mid-level, and if you're playing with multiple people, all four Links have to be dead at once to even use Force Fairies). It is a full length 2D Zelda game, however. There are 24 areas in the game, broken up into 8 levels of three areas each, and I'd say it probably took me somewhere between 10 and 15 hours to beat the game.

So Four Swords Adventures isn't exactly long compared to other 2D Zeldas, but it's by no means short. For me, I think it takes about as long to play through FSA as it does A Link to the Past.[/color]

[Shinmaru]

Yeah, like Desbreko said, Four Swords Adventures isn't a 20 hour game, but it's by no means short; in fact, I've been pleasantly surprised with the length of the game. Eight worlds with three decently sized levels each was actually a bit more than I was expecting, heh.

Right now, I'm close to beating the game, as I'm on the last level. I was playing it yesterday, but ran into a room that I simply [i]could not get out of[/i], unless I had a certain item, which pissed the hell out of me, so I stopped playing lol. But I'm going to go back to it today, just because I want to finish it off and see if the final two boss fights live up to my high standards of Zelda boss fights.

[Petie]

[font=Verdana][color=blue]I just have a quick comment on the differences in the number of players playing. I have tried one player and it does have it's interesting points. The fact that there are two more formations in one player is what I like, You get your standard horizontal and vertical lines but you also get a box with all of the Links facing the same direction and a diamond with all of the Links back to back facing like the directions of a compass.[/color][/font]
[font=Verdana][color=blue][/color][/font]
[font=Verdana][color=blue]In two player, as mentioned before, you can each have two links or one player can have three and the other can have one. I've played through most of what I've done with two players and only did one level in one player to try it out.[/color][/font]
[font=Verdana][color=blue][/color][/font]
[font=Verdana][color=blue]In three (and four but I've only done up to three) player, an interesting new feature is added. That is the voting at the end. After you complete the area, it brings up a vote where you vote for the most bothersom player (the hero of darkness) and the most elpful player (the hero of light). And you can't vote for yourself. Then, it goes on to the normal hero rankings. It works the same way with three and four player except that in three player, one person gets an extra Link.[/color][/font]
[font=Verdana][color=blue][/color][/font]
[font=Verdana][color=blue]Just thought I'd mention that. I'm not sure if any of this was allready said because I didn't read [i]all[/i] of this thread but either way, it's in one post now.[/color][/font]

[Erika]

[size=1][color=purple]I played this last month at a friend's overnight birthday party. I f***ing hate the GBA's and cables!!!!! MARGH! Yeah, it was fun using my SP as a second screen, but I mean, damn. I'd rather use the GC controllers. O__O

Anywho, I love the graphics. When I first went into Hyrule w/my buds, it was like early 90's all over again, lol. Ahhhh. . .good 'ol days. *goes into a trance for a brief moment*

We quit playing after we got stuck on Death Mountain. I don't know why none of us could figure out how to light those 4-5 cannon-thingys, and none of us had a Fire Wand. :cross: I guess 'cause it was midnight, lol. Either that or we're just retarded people. Or both. >.>

And I hated the 1P/2P mode only because it was annoying for me to switch with the Links.

And what is it with overlooking the obvious in Zelda games? Lol, I do everything, try everything, and sometimes the answer's right in front of me. Or always.

. . . .or whatever, lol. :whoops:[/color][/size]