Support NeoGAF

[Limedust]

Playing the game in single player, and the mechanics are great, but I'm curious to know whether the difficulty ramps up at all. I understand the premise of the game was multi-player, and playing as a single player allows you to efficiently control all four Links instead of bantering back and forth with your buddies, but were the puzzles changed at all between single player and multi-player modes?

For reference, I'm in the middle stage of Level 3.

 

[Azure Dream]

As I understand it, the game scales back some puzzles for 1 and 2 player mode that would've otherwise required a fair bit of backtracking or repetitive work. Logically it gets a little tougher as you get to the later stages (and requires one or two things that were new for Zelda games, so you may not first think to try them), but it's not like FF:CC where some sequences in single player require you drop your protective bucket on a switch and run out into the miasma, taking damage.

Quite liked Four Swords (GCN), even in single player. It felt like a follow-up to Link's Awakening in many ways, probably my favorite Zelda title of all time. Especially the multiple side-scrolling sequences.

 

[Johnas]

As I understand it, the game scales back some puzzles for 1 and 2 player mode that would've otherwise required a fair bit of backtracking or repetitive work. Logically it gets a little tougher as you get to the later stages (and requires one or two things that were new for Zelda games, so you may not first think to try them), but it's not like FF:CC where some sequences in single player require you drop your protective bucket on a switch and run out into the miasma, taking damage.

Quite liked Four Swords (GCN), even in single player. It felt like a follow-up to Link's Awakening in many ways, probably my favorite Zelda title of all time. Especially the multiple side-scrolling sequences.

What he said. I finished the game in two or three decent-sized chunks of playtime, and I got hung up pretty close to the end, so badly in fact that I spent two hours staring at this one puzzle, then finally buckled and checked GameFaqs for the solution. It's a great game, but something in general feels off, I guess it's the fact that there are levels in a Zelda game, I don't know. I have never played multiplayer Four Swords on GBA Link to the Past either. On a side note, I am rather glad the DS title is NOT another Four Swords game.

 

[Limedust]

I was going to complain about the inability to collect different items for use and switching in and out at will, which could add to the complexity of the puzzles... but that would take away from the pick-up-and-play design of the multiplayer game (levels to complete, and characters being reset after each stage), which pushes the players to differentiate their secondary item. I guess I can't complain too much since I have the Oracle games and Minish Cap to fill that void.

 

[Parallax Scroll]

One thing that I have found is that unlike Crystal Chronicles, Four Swords Adventures does not work very well with 3 people. So far that's the only way I've played FSA, and some of the puzzles were a big hassle when we had one dummy character to worry about.

 

[worldrunover]

I have a question about this game too:

Why is it still $50???

 

[Speevy]

I bought it for $35 used. Fun game.

 

[golduck342]

One thing that I have found is that unlike Crystal Chronicles, Four Swords Adventures does not work very well with 3 people. So far that's the only way I've played FSA, and some of the puzzles were a big hassle when we had one dummy character to worry about.

My group had no problem playing it 3 players, except that nobody liked the purple guy (aka "gay guy"). Whenever we did a puzzle where he had to stand on a switch by himself, nobody ever wanted to take him back. I think it made the game slightly more fun, the possibility of picking him up by mistake. My cousin came in as 4th player for a couple of levels, but he sucked anyway, we liked gay guy better.

I have a question about this game too:

Why is it still $50???

I think it's because it comes with a link cable, but I could be wrong. I have a feeling there's two versions, and the one that comes with the cable is $60. IMO, it's well worth $50 if you can play the multi.

 

[Brandon F]

I'll easilly admit that myself and frends whom played it through got stuck on several puzzles, enough even to draw the white flag and delve into a faq on a few occasions. Some of them were truly inspired and wonderfully structured.

We all agreed that the action bits felt quite hollow and in most cases pushed our interest further away from loving the game. The teamwork and gratification of solving a creatively obtuse puzzle rarely bled into combat, and that is a shame.

Battle mode was surprisingly a fun way to cool down from a session; the push for unlockable maps actually propelled our desire to finish the adventure moreso than it would have otherwise.

 

[Ironclad]

There were a few puzzles that caught me and my friends completely off guard as well. Granted my friends haven't played a LOZ game since the SNES but I have and there were just some puzzles where we had to set the GBAs down and stare at the screen for a while before we got ahead. The puzzles are definitely different from what you would from an LOZ game. Battle mode was fun and some of the maps were imaginative but I wish it gave you some more options. All in all it was a great game and the game looks beautiful in its own right.

 

[ImNotLikeThem]

I think it's because it comes with a link cable, but I could be wrong. I have a feeling there's two versions, and the one that comes with the cable is $60. IMO, it's well worth $50 if you can play the multi.

No. Theres only one version, the box with the link cable. and its only $50. always been that way too.