32_Footsteps's Full Review: The Legend Of Zelda: A Link To The Past for Game B...
To quite a few people, “Legend of Zelda: a Link to the Past” is the greatest game to come out during the 16-bit era. While I wouldn’t quite go that far, it certainly is a worthy addition to the line, and a ton of fun to boot. Thus, it was a no-brainer that Nintendo would get around to releasing it for the Game Boy Advance when the time came, right? Well, given that nobody sensible ever held their breath for a portable version of the original Legend of Zelda, it’s a bit of a miracle that this version ever came out, complete with a new side to the game.
First, let’s cover the classic game here. This game is actually a prequel to the first two Zelda games, and thus it involves the predecessors to Link and Zelda. Of course, for marketing purposes, they are also named Link and Zelda. I’d complain about creativity in names, but every first-born male on my father’s side of the family has Edward somewhere in their name, so I’m not allowed to, I think. At any rate, this Link is trying to prevent the wizard Aganihm from opening a portal to the Dark Realm, where the powerful artifact known as the Triforce lies in wait, corrupted by the wishes of the thief Ganondorf.
Yes, we are dealing with the classic “save the princess and the world” plot. “The Legend of Zelda” series has never been about its creative plot arcs. Indeed, the Zelda series has always been about epic adventures, and epics, since the time of the ancient Greeks, have been about doing the simplest stories in a larger-than-life fashion. I think that fighting across two dimensions, a normal one and a mutated and twisted Dark World, more than qualifies.
In fact, an astute gamer will notice that many details in this game were later taken wholesale for future games. All genres too – for example, the survival horror entry “Silent Hill” borrowed the ‘twisted alternate dimension’ idea to the extreme. Honestly, after playing this game, you can go over about a dozen different games that borrowed concepts, major and minor, from this game. Perhaps that is the true measure of a classic.
The control scheme of the game is very strong, although it by default isn’t as strong as the original’s controls. Since the GBA only has two action buttons in reach of the right thumb, instead of the Super Nintendo’s four, the shoulder buttons on the system actually become required usage. This can be a bit of a problem if, like me, your hands are too large for the system, but for someone who can’t, say, hold a whole bridge hand in a single hand, this isn’t an issue.
The graphics are tweaked only slightly, but rather fortunately so. At first, you’ll think that the graphics are exactly the same as the original version. Indeed, the smooth frame rate and the sharp details are all still there from the original. It translates well into the pocket size. The tweak, though, is only noticeable if you compare the two versions together. The Game Boy Advance version actually uses a brighter color palette. In other words, Nintendo and Capcom (who worked together to bring the game to the GBA) made everything lighter so that you can more easily see what is going on in the game. Given that the GBA often suffers from darkness problems, this is an absolutely brilliant maneuver and probably deserves a reward of some kind.
The music is where things get a little strained. I know that the Game Boy Advance is a huge step forward from the earlier portable incarnations, but the simple fact remains that the system is still reliant on the same mini-speakers that come with Radio Shack “build your own radio” kits for kids. Even though the music is restored note for classic and glorious note, you are still listening to it on 50 cents worth of engineering skill. If you are so lucky as to have, say, a pair of Sennheisers, pop those babies in, but otherwise, deal with the best this poor system can handle.
Of course, this is just the old hat portion of the package. Nintendo and Capcom quite wisely decided that just rereleasing this game, with graphical tweaks, is simply not enough. Instead, they came along with the additional presentation, Zelda: Four Swords. This addition is probably the greatest idea to have come from one of these rerelease packages.
This game also features Zelda and Link, but no clue as to which generation. Not that it matters, really. Zelda brings Link to see the mysterious Four Sword, which supposedly has the power to divide a soul. It is sitting there sealing Vaati, the Wind Mage… until it naturally comes loose. You know, if the person who last used the Four Sword had only bothered to use epoxy or duct tape, Vaati would never get loose and kidnap Zelda. Link, seeing little other option, picks up the only weapon handy, the Four Sword, and splits into four versions of himself.
Basically, this is a simplified version of the classic Zelda games, with the bonus that it is a multiplayer game. To be honest, its biggest flaw is immediate – it is only multiplayer, and every player has to have a copy of the game. So pester your friends until they actually get a copy as well, and then pick your Link. The first player gets to wear green – Classic Link. The second player is clad in red, and becomes Fire Link. The third player dons blue, and becomes Aqua Link. Finally, the fourth player wears purple, and becomes Broadway Loving Link. For some reason, few people want to play as the fourth player.
Anyhow, once you figure out who gets stuck loving Julie Garland, you take your team of Links into action. The premise is simple – you and your companions have to collect enough rupees to bribe the raja… er, fairies, into giving you the keys to Vaati’s demesne. Once there, you beat upon his Wind Mage behind like you caught the red-headed stepchild in the cookie jar. Simple enough – you work as a team, get cash, and try to beat any enemies that come at you.
The interesting dynamic that develops is a cooperative competition. You are all trying to get as many rupees as possible, with the winner getting a token to designate his victory. However, it costs you rupees to revive anyone. Not only that, but if everyone has full life, all rupee collections are doubled. So you do have decisions… like do you let the enemy delay your friend so you can collect the cash, or do you save him to preserve the double cash prize? It does make the game interesting.
Of course, the flip side is that since this kind of cooperative competition isn’t common, people will have a hard time grasping part of the concept. More often than not, this will result in some number of Links sword fighting over rupees. However, that is not a function of the game so much as a function of you needing to find friends who actually get the concept of “cooperation.” Either that, or just tie them down and force them to watch classic Sesame Street – the pre-Elmo days.
The graphics of the game, while strong, do fall slightly short of the main presentation. In this one, Link appears even more cartoonish, as if the programmers think people will like the look of the upcoming cel-shaded Zelda installation. The enemies and backgrounds are also simpler, albeit very clean. Most likely, in order to make the game flow more smoothly, the designers used a simpler scheme. While I wish Link’s head wasn’t shaped like a football and twice the size of the rest of his body, I guess having the game run smoothly is a fair trade-off.
The control of the game is where this really shines, though. First, the game moves absolutely smoothly, no matter how many people are hooked up. Second, the controls are kept deliberately simple, which results in two different nice parts. First, the controls are actually much easier to handle than Link to the Past’s controls, and as such it’s actually more comfortable for us large-handed folk to play Four Swords. Second, stripping down the controls means that the various Links can only have one item other than the sword, and they have to work together to use them well. Indeed, there is quite a bit of strategy needed just to get through the levels, and nobody really has a monopoly on the action.
As you might expect, the sound is a bit of a problem. Perhaps the biggest problem is that the systems typically do not synchronize the music, so if more than one person has the volume on, you’ll hear a roundelay version of the theme, and if you’re lucky, you’ll all be on roughly the same beat. Given that is a huge amount of luck required, be kind and only have one person, at most, with the volume on. In all truthfulness, the designers probably should have stuck with effects only, which would not have been nearly as distracting during play.
Of course, the big question that many people will have is, how much effect does one game have on the other? Sadly, very little. The only effect to carry over from Link to the Past to Four Swords is that, once you get the Master Sword (pretty early in the game), you can fire a beam from your weapon in Four Swords when your life meter is filled. You’d think that there would be some benefit to beating the game, but sorry, no. On the flip side, a new dungeon opens up in Link to the Past once you clear Four Swords, but it appears somewhat late in Link to the Past, and doesn’t really add anything to the classic game. Truth be told, you really could stand to skip it and not really miss anything.
In the end, this game is best for two types of gamers. One group is those who, for some reason, do not have a copy of the original version. Whether you never bought it, or lost it (and should perform seppuku right now for that), or watched as radioactive seagulls ate it, you should take this opportunity to own it now. The other group of people is the one that don’t mind shelling out for a new, and excellent, four player game bundled with a decent facsimile of a video gaming classic. Maybe nostalgia isn’t what it used to be, but at least it’s still fun.
Epinions.com periodically updates pricing and product information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it.
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.