Support NeoGAF

[Tritroid]

***SPOILERS!!!***
|
|
v



So I ended up finishing Four Swords Adv. last night. For what it's worth, it was very impressive considering it being centered around a multiplayer game. The overall size of it was a shock, and the puzzles were remarkably well thought out. As a result, the classic Zelda gameplay was flawlessly applied to a multiplayer experience. My problem however, is with the story.

From the beginning, Nintendo had a wonderful opportunity to take this game and set it off in a completely different direction from the part of the Zelda Legend that involves Ganon and the Triforce. With a new villian already established in the first Four Swords, and having him return to once again bring destruction to Hyrule was such a promising premise that could have been used to fuel future Four Swords titles. (Because God knows they probably aren't going to end this series with FSA, which is a good thing.) Once Ganon was introduced into the picture however, everything fell apart for me. Yes it's good to see Ganon in his LttP-ish form again (although much more menacing), but haven't we seen a little too much of him? Does Ganon really have to be tossed in last minute to make the game 'feel' like Zelda? The answer is definitely NO.

Link's Awakening, Majora's Mask, and Four Swords (original) all had excellent storylines with villians other than Ganon which gave the series a sort of fresh feeling. A chance to step away from the usual plight of fighting Ganon to regain the Triforce. Four Swords Adventures was on the verge of doing just that, until the story did a complete loop midway and began focusing on Ganon instead of Vaati. I was highly disappointed when Vaati didn't even have any lines before or after his battle and was treated as nothing more than a common dungeon boss.

Everything from the Gerudo talking of the 100 year 'gaurdian', to the explanation of Ganondorf becoming Ganon, we have been through before. There was no need for a recap of this again. The only thing remotely interesting regarding Ganon was the explanation of how he got his Trident. Everything else though, felt like such a retelling. I wanted to see more regarding Vaati, not Ganon.

I realize that I shouldn't put much thought into this since it's a multiplayer branch of the Zelda series and not a 'true' chapter in the legend, but it needed a story to match the awesome gameplay, and because of the Ganon rehash (among other things) it really just wasn't there for me.

 

[john tv]

How did he get his Trident, anyway? After about halfway through, we just started skipping through all the story sequences.

 

[Tritroid]

How did he get his Trident, anyway? After about halfway through, we just started skipping through all the story sequences.

Apparently Ganondorf travels to the temple in the desert where the Trident was hidden. It's a dungeon you have you go through. You end up running into the alter where it previously was, and read a little inscription that details how the possessor of the Trident automatically becomes the King of Darkness.

 

[AniHawk]

I also thought it was pretty good up until DUN DUN DUN... GANON IS BEHIND IT ALL!

It had this nice feeling to it being original, but using other familiar characters, where Link's Awakening succeeded, and where Oracles failed. There was a genuine touch of it being just plain "old-school," but when Ganon was revealed, I wasn't too thrilled. Turned the game into A Link to the Past all over again.

Also not sure what to think of the ending. I mean, it's a 2D game, but that doesn't mean we can't have a little something. Since the Four Sword story is obviously not of the Hero of Time timeline, it'd have been nice to see something different from the rest of the series. Instead we got a one-dimensional story and characters. Probably the biggest throwback to ALttP of all.

Oh well. The story was only a fraction of this game, and didn't bring down the overall experience. I just hope it's as well told in The Legend of Zelda XII as it was in The Legend of Zelda VI and IX.

 

[Drinky Crow]

Zelda games have plots?

 

[AniHawk]

Zelda games have plots?

Yes, but only three or so have been well told.

 

[Drinky Crow]

They have? And if so, who cares?

 

[AniHawk]

They have? And if so, who cares?

Fans of good games, obviously.

 

[Drinky Crow]

Last I checked, the stories in Zelda games had next to NOTHING to do with them being great.

 

[AniHawk]

Last I checked, the stories in Zelda games had next to NOTHING to do with them being great.

Well welcome to the new century.

Anyway, there are only three Zelda games I'd consider to have well told stories (not great plots): Link's Awakening, Majora's Mask, and The Wind Waker. Go ahead and pick them apart since you will.

 

[Drinky Crow]

Why would I waste my time? If you're looking for story in a frickin' Zelda game, that's YOUR kink; to me, it's like trying to find a plot in Tetris or Mario. It's just cute trappings to give the mechanics a specific sense of context and to define an art style.

 

[AniHawk]

Why would I waste my time? If you're looking for story in a frickin' Zelda game, that's YOUR kink; to me, it's like trying to find a plot in Tetris or Mario. It's just cute trappings to give the mechanics a specific sense of context and to define an art style.

I think there actually was a story written for Tetris.

Still, you don't have to "look" for anything. It's all right there. Majora's Mask is done in the most subtle way, the way I've heard it explained. Besides, I think you're confusing "hidden meanings" with story.

 

[Drinky Crow]

No, I'm talking about STORY. I don't CARE that Zelda has a plot, because solving dungeon puzzles, fighting bosses, and traipsing about an overland is all I need to have a great time. Zelda's fundamental mechanics are sterling enough that I don't NEED (or CARE) aboout any sort of NPC interaction, linear plot dispensation, or the presence of specific characters -- it could be about Bumfrey the Clown and the bosses could all be giant colostomy bags and I WOULDN'T CARE ONE WHIT.

If there's a plot, I only acknowledge its existence inasmuch as it provides a context for the art direction -- for example, a location is called a "desert temple" and looks like ruins. That's about it. Why Link is at said temple outside of his need to solve puzzles and whack the boss is something I really don't care about, and would PREFER they didn't tell me.

 

[AniHawk]

No, I'm talking about STORY. I don't CARE that Zelda has a plot, because solving dungeon puzzles, fighting bosses, and traipsing about an overland is all I need to have a great time. Zelda's fundamental mechanics are sterling enough that I don't NEED (or CARE) aboout any sort of NPC interaction, linear plot dispensation, or the presence of specific characters -- it could be about Bumfrey the Clown and the bosses could all be giant colostomy bags and I WOULDN'T CARE ONE WHIT.

If there's a plot, I only acknowledge its existence inasmuch as it provides a context for the art direction -- for example, a location is called a "desert temple" and looks like ruins. That's about it. Why Link is at said temple outside of his need to solve puzzles and whack the boss is something I really don't care about, and would PREFER they didn't tell me.

Hey, I could give two shits less than that too. But like I said, it's how the story is told. I don't care that Link has to gather the mystical walnuts to restore the magical dragon to its full power so he can get the Four Sword and defeat Ganon. What I enjoy about Link's Awakening, Majora's Mask, and The Wind Waker, is the whole apocalyptic feel (or in TWW's case, post-apocalyptic feel) that the story brings on. It's what sets the mood for the game, and makes things a bit more immersive than the standard "search for item. Get item. Kill boss. Save princess. Kill Ganon."

 

[MrCheez]

Eh, I thought it was cool when Ganon showed up and ended up being a big part of the story. I love Ganon, he rocks! He's Link's true arch nemesis, and their struggle against one another is both traditional and classic. Although I would like to know more about Vaati. It'd be nice if they gave him some sort of humanoid form as well, I always thought his big floating eye form was kinda dumb. (Haven't gotten to him in the game yet, so maybe they do?)

My problem though is with continuity issues (and I know, continuity in the series is very poor... but there are examples of it). Locations, geography, and many creatures seemed to be Link to the Past era, but then you also have Malon, Talon, the Gerudo, and a few other elements from Ocarina of Time (a game that takes place thousands of years before OOT).

So yeah... a little weird.

Also thought the focus on Ganon's trident was way cool. He needs to use it again in the new 3d Zelda.

 

[MrCheez]

Why would I waste my time? If you're looking for story in a frickin' Zelda game, that's YOUR kink; to me, it's like trying to find a plot in Tetris or Mario. It's just cute trappings to give the mechanics a specific sense of context and to define an art style.

Keep in mind we're on an internet gaming discussion board...

 

[cvxfreak]

I just hope it's as well told in The Legend of Zelda XII as it was in The Legend of Zelda VI and IX.

Translation please.

 

[DDayton]

What I found weird was the fact that there were several themes or characters used for just one level of one world in the game... horses, Malon & Talon appear in a total of one level, for example. I'm wondering if there were to be a few more levels that were opted against... but given the number of levels currently in the game, that seems doubtful.

I can't believe I'm about to agree with Lord Crow de Drinky, but story was never really a very important part of the Zelda games... and I think it is much LESS important (and relevant) in a multiplayer Zelda game than in a "real" Zelda game.

I liked Ganon. I've been wanting a good "kill pig Ganon" for a while now... call me petty, but I never liked the silly monster Ganon in Ocarina of Time...

 

[AniHawk]

What I found weird was the fact that there were several themes or characters used for just one level of one world in the game... horses, Malon & Talon appear in a total of one level, for example. I'm wondering if there were to be a few more levels that were opted against... but given the number of levels currently in the game, that seems doubtful.

I can't believe I'm about to agree with Lord Crow de Drinky, but story was never really a very important part of the Zelda games... and I think it is much LESS important (and relevant) in a multiplayer Zelda game than in a "real" Zelda game.

I liked Ganon. I've been wanting a good "kill pig Ganon" for a while now... call me petty, but I never liked the silly monster Ganon in Ocarina of Time...

This was the first Zelda since Link's Awakening where solving those simple yet difficult puzzles was all that I needed. In fact, this is the first console Zelda in 6 years I felt the story slowed things down (but didn't ruin my overall enjoyment of the game).

 

[TheUnknownForce]

To me, Four Swords Adventures is the prequel to ALTTP. They don't know who Ganon is when they first mention it, and they refer to Ganondorf in the beginning of ALTTP. They also have the background to his trident. However, it has too many references to the OoT universe to work. Part of me thinks that OoT is just a variation of ALTTP's story. I mean, you need to get three things to enter the dark world, where you have to save Sages or something from Ganon's grasps. Then, you go to his tower (which the Sages are needed to remove the barrier) and have two final fights. They seem rather close to each other. Another thought is that there are many different dimensions of Hyrule.

But when you think of it, only the two four sword games together, OoT-MM-WW together, and the Two Oracles together seem to make sense as one whole plotline. Trying to tie all Zelda games together will only result in an blood clot in the brain.

 

[AniHawk]

To me, Four Swords Adventures is the prequel to ALTTP. They don't know who Ganon is when they first mention it, and they refer to Ganondorf in the beginning of ALTTP. They also have the background to his trident. However, it has too many references to the OoT universe to work. Part of me thinks that OoT is just a variation of ALTTP's story. I mean, you need to get three things to enter the dark world, where you have to save Sages or something from Ganon's grasps. Then, you go to his tower (which the Sages are needed to remove the barrier) and have two final fights. They seem rather close to each other. Another thought is that there are many different dimensions of Hyrule.

But when you think of it, only the two four sword games together, OoT-MM-WW together, and the Two Oracles together seem to make sense as one whole plotline. Trying to tie all Zelda games together will only result in an blood clot in the brain.

If you're going to tie them all in, OoT is a prequel to ALttP. I'm almost certain it is.

 

[DDayton]

Ocarina of Time is the story referenced to in Link to the Past during the opening story... Ocarina, Link to the Past, and Wind Waker have stories which do manage to fit together, somehow... trying to shoehorn the Oracle games, Link's Awakening, or the originalt two Zelda games just makes things more difficult.

 

[AniHawk]

Ocarina of Time is the story referenced to in Link to the Past during the opening story... Ocarina, Link to the Past, and Wind Waker have stories which do manage to fit together, somehow... trying to shoehorn the Oracle games, Link's Awakening, or the originalt two Zelda games just makes things more difficult.

I personally think ALttP is a "reimagining" of the original Legend of Zelda, with Zelda 2 being the final (and only) sequel in the series. Link's Awakening also has the best chance of any of the GB games of fitting in. Even though the artstyle is clearly that of ALttP's, several characters show up in OoT. Oracles and Four Swords have their own timeline which is fine. Trying to fit them in would be too damn confusing.

 

[Ecrofirt]

I've had Four Swords since the release date, and I haven't opened it up yet.

I don't have anyone to play it with. Is it still worth playing, or should I just return it?

 

[AniHawk]

I've had Four Swords since the release date, and I haven't opened it up yet.

I don't have anyone to play it with. Is it still worth playing, or should I just return it?

If you're just a casual fan of the series, I can't recommend it to you for full price. When/if it goes PC, you should pick it up for single player only. $20-$30 seems like a good price for it.

 

[Ecrofirt]

I'm a hardcore Zelda fan.

I just didn't want to start a ruckus by asking if I should just leave it sealed with the rest of my sealed Zelda games.

It just seems that this game is meant to be played by four people, and I'd be playing the single-player if I opened it up.

 

[AniHawk]

I'm a hardcore Zelda fan.

I just didn't want to start a ruckus by asking if I should just leave it sealed with the rest of my sealed Zelda games.

It just seems that this game is meant to be played by four people, and I'd be playing the single-player if I opened it up.

Well, if you liked ALttP, and loved Link's Awakening, there's a good chance you'll enjoy Four Swords Adventures. The puzzles are clever, but there really is something added to the game when there's someone else with you to help.

 

[Ecrofirt]

ok, cool. I might end up opening it up.

Arrgh, but then I'll need more money to buy another copy.

 

[DDayton]

Arrgh, but then I'll need more money to buy another copy.

You are seriously keeping an entire set of sealed Zelda games?

Good grief... I'm worried.

 

[Ecrofirt]

I have sealed of over half of the games. I still don't have the NES ones, or LttP sealed, though, althought I have a very nice mint Japanese Zelda 1 for Famicom.