The Legend of Zelda: Tri Force Heroes is now out in the wild and while there are definitely positives to the experience, it doesn't seem to be up to the usual standards of the series. The game is obviously designed to be played with two other friends locally and while there is online functionality and a single player mode, these admittedly have flaws that significantly hamper the general experience. However, in a recent interview with lead developers of the series, it was revealed why the single player experience wasn't nearly as fleshed out.
Eiji Aonuma and Hiromasa Shikata – the producer and director, respectively – recently talked with Time Magazine about the co-op adventure game. One of the things inevitably brought up was the single player mode and Shikata revealed that he was initially against it. Aonuma suggested that they include one and they eventually figured out how to make it work. Here's the relevant quote:
When we started, I [Shikata] didn't have any thoughts of creating a single-player mode, because I was focused on a three-player mode that's fun. So one day, Aonuma-san steps in and says 'Can you make a single-player for this?' And I was thinking 'Oh no, no, that's not . . . All of a sudden? Wow, can we?' And so we went back and forth about it.
What do you think? Did you enjoy the single player mode? What do you think of Tri Force Heroes? Drop us a comment in the section below.
[source time.com]
Comments 87
To those who own the game, would you recommend it for someone who plans to play solo?
@rockerztonight1 No. The game really only shines in multiplayer. Both online or local is fine, but multiplayer is the only way to enjoy this game.
Should of been an eshop exclusive for like 20-30 dollars for just multiplayer. Kinda thought it looked rushed too...
Still doesn't explain why no 2 player options!?!
Such a strange pattern to which games are multiplayer focused from Nintendo this last generation. Some game's only local, no online/ others all online and rubbish/no local (I'm looking at you splatoon) and all this while some single player experience games like Zelda and Mario 3d have been watered down to add multiplayer reducing options for immersive single player games.
I really do not know what the current Nintendo multiplayer stance is, they are just so inconsistent!!!
That's ok I guess, however lately there is starting to become more online focused games like Splatoon and Mario Maker that has small offline play and big online play, not sure how to feel about that when ya got no online connection, at least this game got offline, however if it was just to be online, they would need to improve it more then it currently is right now I would say.
The addition of single player is good for people like me who do not have friends who owned the 3DS. Local multiplayer is thus no-go for me.
However, I'm more than sure that when I get the game next week I'll be playing online multiplayer only and thus focus on playing other games when on the train.
Should've been a $10-15 multiplayer only eShop game.
I am happy that they included it, and it does work in my opinion. Without the single-player I wouldn't have bought it. Its very worrying though that Nintendo is drifting more and more away from the single-player experiences. But what ISN'T worrying about Nintendo nowadays anyway!
This game should have been a Multiplayer DLC for A Link Between World.
The single player experience definitely feels like an after-thought. The multiplayer experience is very fun, and I personally think the lack of chat/voice chat made the game more accessible. Sure, sometime it's tricky to solve puzzles when no one in the team figured it out yet, but slowly we can always solve the puzzle in the end, and that process is what make the experience so fun. I can easily give this game a 9 for the multiplayer, but only 6 for single player.
@Nintendian Yeah!! Man that would be awesome!
This game finally brought me to the realization that I dont have to play every game of a franchise that I really enjoy. Im glad a game like this released, but it just isnt for me.
I think the SP mode is awesome, it feels pretty challenging when having to switch between doppels or making sure the right item is at the top of the totem. Love the MP too, havent tried the arena yet though.
This is kinda what I always wanted in an LoZ game, 8/10 for me. Kinda weird that there's no amiibo functionality though.
honestly learning that you dont have the ability to play 2 player was very disappointing. My son and I still play Four Swords on the 3DS and were looking forward to playing it together and now hearing about the single player i would consider it a challenge so it doesnt really bother me but i expected more from Nintendo...but i am impressed b/c 128 levels is nothing to laugh about especially in this day and age of ridiculously priced DLC and seasons passes
Single player definitely feels like an afterthought and it seems more frustrating than fun. It would have been nice if they spent a bit more time working on it so that those who don't have any 3DS friends and don't want to play with strangers can still enjoy the game. Just making the dopples follow you would have been enough.
@AVahne True, but by slapping on a half-assed single player option, they can sell it for 3 times the money, a sneaky, but uncharacteristically clever trick for Nintendo
I asked this question on the review but nobody responded so I'll ask again: Can you have 2 players playing together locally, and a 3rd player playing with them online?
Jirard the Completionist said that the soulless dopples from single player are the remains of hero's who tried to beat all the challenges in single player.
Honestly, I don't know how you could do a better singleplayer with a game like this (not to say I like the SP a lot, I don't but that's okay, I'm just playing online with strangers/friends). The thing is simply that the levels and its enemies and puzzles are designed around playing with two other players. Nintendo would have had to create entirely new levels/redesign those from the MP. Otherwise you just have to control all three Links at once and that's just tedious to me.
Besides all that, though, I'm thoroughly enjoying TriForce Heroes thus far. I might have had a lag here and there and some teammates leaving in the midst of a level. The 40€ I paid for it is an okay prize as the 32 levels do have a lot of replay value when you wanna get all the clothes and stuff. Or just replay a level in a different costume with different teammates - that's fun, too.
Online play was unplayable laggy for me.
@rockerztonight1 No. I've had a lot of fun with friends so far. Then I tried out one of the first few stages in solo mode, and it gave me a headache because of how awkward it feels.
@Dogorilla yes
I take it multiple copies are required for local multiplayer?
@DarthNocturnal I agree, it should have been stayed as a multiplayer eShop release for €10 or something like that. As it is, it's a questionable The Legend of Zelda retail title with a questionable single player mode and a questionable price tag. I think it will sell well just because of its name, nothing more. The story will repeat soon with Metroid Prime: Federation Force.
@belfastgonzo For 3-player local multiplayer there's Download Play available which only requires one copy.
Maybe they could've added a short, little exclusive single player campaign. But it's fine the way it is imo..
To the surprise of absolutely no one.
Really should've look at what they did in 4 swords and used that for single player it worked well in that!
@Hyperion Cool, thanks
The first Zelda game I'm skipping, if the single player was better I would've bought it by now.
Seems that way. I tried doing one of the Ice Temple challenge (orb time run) and it seems almost impossible. I would compare single player in this to playing MH3U: soloing a high rank monster in multiplayer and in some cases in low rank gears. It good to show how skilled you are but it'll be a lot easier to fight with other hunters.
It is difficult to go in alone.
I probably wouldn't have bought this if it didn't have a single player option. Like others, I don't have access to three people locally with 3DS's or the games. So good call on them actually including one...
i definitely will not by this if it didnt have singleplayer
@ULTRA-64 - "I really do not know what the current Nintendo multiplayer stance is, they are just so inconsistent!!!"
I feel that way about Yoshi's Wooluy World. For about the first 2 years it was being discussed I was complaining that a 2D side scrolling platfermer that looked just like LBP was 1 person only. Then months before release they announced the 2 player, and I was very happy. But my kids, who really enjoy gaming together, can' tplay 2 playe ryoshi. They saythye interefere with each other too much and it' smor etrouble then it's worth.
So reading this, now I'm wondering if co-op was tacked on later for Yoshi, rather than just revealed later as a surprise,and they spent 2 years making a single player game that had couch co-op tacked on. Kirby was similar, but the multlayer helped, it was just weird and different.
Of course looking at multilayer on Wii you had things like Mario Galaxy, were while the game was labeled as 2 player, it was really 1 player and somebody to help, so they've been down the weird road for awhile now.
Oh, Splatoon is great BTW, despite the horrible offline and the lack of voice chat. Just shows how the good the game is that it's still great despite those 2 big shortcomings. Which I'm very much looking forward to be rectified in Splatoon 2 on NX. Somehow.
Why didn't they add a single player mode akin to the one seen in Four Swords Anniversary? It wouldn't be as hard as they'd wish us to believe it to be.
So much of this seems so ill conceived. I live in a house where it's actually practical to play with 2 others local play pretty much anytime I want to, and I still find this game's gimmick unappealing. Especially when 4 Swords already existed, and they let us download it for that one day a couple years ago.... ? Shaking my head...
"didn't originally have a single player mode"
And it shows.
Not planning to buy this due to the bland single-player experience, but I will check the game out from my library in a couple months to see if my mind can be changed.
@rjejr @SanderEvers I was referring to the local multiplayer being rubbish in splatoon to clarify, I love the game overall. The single player is good but lacking a bit (dlc?) But the local mp is an insult to the gameplay in general, balloon popping isn't why anyone plays the game and offers a really poor substitute in terms of gameplay experience I feel.
To summarize the point I was trying to make, there's no consistency in offering local/online/co-op multiplayer in Nintendo games right now. This has effected pretty much all of the big games in some way or other. Using sm3dw as an example, the scope of level design, viewing angle, size of maps and general gameplay had to be altered in some way to accommodate 4 players. I love the game single and multi, this isn't a complaint, but the spreading of resources I mentioned means compromise also has to happen and something is lost from the game in the process as well as added. As there was no online, in a game now tailored for mp , it didn't offer the complete mp experience or single player. In other words the game could imo have better still if they made their mind up in design.
As rejr pointed out, some games have mp forced in, even at the detriment of the gameplay.
This 1 or 3 player Zelda game is a prime example of why make a decision to remove an option just because they feel consumers wouldn't want it. If in 1 player you get 2 computer controlled links why couldn't they gave 1 in 2 player mode. The game is supposed to be mp oriented to why not finish the job...
1- Then it should be released at half price or in a 3 pack bundle so it would make people get friends to play with
2- If not, then download-play should give full access to multiplayer with the ability to save the progress in SD card for people who don't have the cartridge
3- There should be a two player mode and a three player mode, even a four player mode
4- Would be even better if this multiplayer was included as a part of ALBW2 or something, I mean, it uses the same graphic assets from the first game, so why not make a full single player mode with only one link and exclusive dungeons, maybe even a story?
That's just lazy. This game will fail hard for taking such bad design decisions.
Yes it originally was going to suck even more, adding single player makes it suck less.
"That explains a lot."
I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one that guessed this.
Alot of the fps games on other consoles are online multiplayer only. Feels like Nintendo is trying out that mode in certain games now. I hope it doesn't form the core of future games. I like my single player! Though some games definitely are better with multiplayer. They maybe need to experiment to get it right for their style of gaming. Splatoon has a great online multiplayer, a good single player that isn't developed enough and a poor local option. I would prefer TFH to be good for single players, but can understand that it's primarily a multiplayer and, as such, going to be a different experience for me. Going in different directions is fine, but really could do with not going in quite so many different directions at once. Feels destabilising to be a Nintendo player just now (mobile, spin-offs, focus on multiplayer,..)
that's why NIntendo is clueless... 3DS is doing o.k but outside Japan the people who have 3 other friends with 3DS who can get together for playing this thing locally are the minority
I'm still not sure if I am going to pick this up. The multiplayer seems really fun, however, I'm not sure if any my friends would want to play this game. My brother would be my best bet for multiplayer. Too bad we both have busy schedules and wouldn't get too much time to play it together. I'm sure it's a fun game, I just wouldn't be able to enjoy it properly if I got it.
I have had no problems with the online multiplayer. Everyone did what they had to do, and when it went wrong it was mostly hilarious. The icons are good enough for the communication, but allows others to think for themselves as well. The bonus challenges are where the game is really shining though
@rockerztonight1 Only if you enjoyed playing Four Swords solo, as it's the same style game. Bare minimum story where you're supposed to co-operate with others to solve puzzle rooms. It's not terrible, but it's not an adventure like your typical Zelda title.
I wouldn't know. I only have the demo.
The fact that this actually comes as a surprise to anyone is a bit of a laugh. Triforce Heroes was obviously set up to be a multiplayer game, designed around multiplayer. They added in the single player after all the nagging they probably got from people with no friends who feel the need to be able to play every Zelda game.
TIP: If you don't have anyone to play with, skip the game and look for something else to play. Not everyone has to appeal to everyone, even if it is a franchise you enjoy.
@rockerztonight1 don't buy it if you don't plan on playing with othera or online the dopples for single mode are super challenging
@Dogorilla yes you can
Since there's online multiplayer, why even make a singleplayer?
It's a shame, becaue the critics wouldn't so mixed without that forced singleplayer.
You know? Even Steel Diver Sub Wars suffers the same as this even with the single player. Basically, the single player is just training mode and nothing else.
I think I prefer playing in multiplayer mode, but I do think I like that there are a optional single player as well so I can play on the go alone and do some grinding alone . (Though I do wish the dopples followed me/the main ;^^).
My qualm with the game is that you can only play with 1 or 3 players. Or at least that's what I read about on the Ars Technica review. The lack of purple link is also glaring. It's not like 4 player hasn't been done before? In fact, if more time had been spent on the game, I suspect there could even have been up do 8 players, working in teams of their choosing. Also, bring back Shadow Battle from Four Swords Adventures!!!
@rjejr
I think the problem is this...
Gamers want every single game to be everything. They want every game to have robust single player AND designed for multiplayer AND with online AND with voice chat.
Which is exactly what led to all the tacked on multiplayer modes in AAA games.
People need to understand games should have a focus and excel in that one aspect. If the vision is for a single player game, then it should be single player. No co-op ruining the level design, no online modes tacked on- just single player.
If a game is meant to be played with 3 people- that's what it should focus on. Co-op with 3 people.
If they DO wanna toss in a mode that let's a 2nd player get in on the action, or that allows a multiplayer game to be played solo, that's fine, but people shouldn't complain about it because the game wasn't designed with that in mind. It wasn't part of the vision. And for the the side mode to work well they'd have to alter the original design intent, so each one excels at the expense of the other. You can't have it both ways.
Triforce Heroes is an excellent game- when played with 3 people as intended. Solo play is a waste of time tbh, and that doesn't really surprise me. From day one they designed this entire game around the idea of 3 people working together in cooperation.
I don't have any friends to play with locally, but they did include online which grants round-the-clock access to 2 other partners. People need to lose their fear of "strangers" and take advantage of the fact there are a million other gamers in their same shoes- looking for someone to play and have fun with.
As a gentleman in the comments said before, this game is easily a 9/10 when playing multiplayer as intended, but no more than a 6/10 if playing solo. And I wholeheartedly agree. So it's best to just play as intended or don't play at all. That's my opinion on the matter anyways. But if people will step out of their comfort zone a bit and actually give online a chance, I think they'll be surprised how fun this game is.
What I don't understand here is why so many people are implying that it's nearly unplayable in Solo mode? I've managed absolutely fine so far...17 stages done (out of 32) and not touched the online stuff yet, as I'd rather work through puzzles at my own pace and not have to rely on other people thinking, or not thinking about things the same way I do. I've also had no issues and not had to skip any parts of stages at all. Absolutely, it's worth trying in Solo mode.
I'm not saying multuplayer shouldn't be the main focus (it obviously is) but anybody who has much difficulty playing Solo with the Doppels must really suck in general at Zelda games.
@ToxieDogg Try out the Time Limit special challenge in the Vulcano area, Level 2 - the mine one - on single player mode. Have fun with that.
Even though I have no interest in a multiplayer focused Zelda this game has at least inspired me to play through A Link Between Worlds, so at least there's that! It is a magnificent game and it is a shame that this wasn't quite as good, though I can't fault them for wanting to try something new.
@JaxonH I might spent the rest of the night just copying and pasting this across the entire comment section so I can pretend the world has some sense of perspective.
A game's main purpose should be being good at what it's supposed to be. Not good at what arbitrarily many other games are supposed to be. Not every game is in direct competition to every other game - not even within the same series.
Let Triforce Heroes be a goofy multiplayer experience. The 'core' games won't be any worse for it when they come, and I feel it's healthy to let a series breath a little.
@ToxieDogg So true. I decided to take a break from multiplayer to do some challenges for certain rare materials and I was able to beat a good portion of them. It's harder but doable and way less chaotic if you know what to do. If this was part of a puzzle or 3 in a more traditional LoZ game, people will have no trouble beating it or at least implying it unbeatable.
@LinkSword I'm trying that one right now. For the most part it's easier then "The Dunes 6-4" time limit challenge. I was lucky to beat that with 13 seconds remaining.
@GoldenGamer88 How hard was to design the single player separately, like a sequel fpr ALBW with a solo adventure with puzzles not focused on using 3 players at once? You could just pick one Link and play a different story and dungeons with each color, it could have turned into an amazing game in both single and multi.
I really don't understand. That's so lazy.
@JaxonH - $40 game
See the problem?
@rushiosan because that would remove the whole point of what this game is... it was always meant to be a coop game. the first ONLINE zelda coop game. and everyone hates it merely for its single player, which isnt the point.
@rushiosan how about you keep looking for people who actually have good wifi? its not that hard. only 1 out of 15 times do i ever get into a laggy game. maybe the lagger is you? as long as you can play with your friends, i think its fine if they dont get to save. cause you get too.
you should try the game at a store first before judging it. its actually one of the funnest zelda games as of late. you guys need to find more friends if this is the case. or show your friends its actually fun. it sounds like your just following their opinion.
@rushiosan
Thus the wonders of living in an age of internet. You don't need friends. You've got thousands of other players ready to go at a moment's notice.
I've played hundreds of hours online with 3DS games- MH4U, RE Revelations, Smash and Mario Kart... and now Triforce Heroes- I can tell you know if it's consistently lagging, it's you that's causing it.
***And if you read my post you'd understand why it can't be for 2 people. Because it was designed for 3, it was designed for 3, because it was designed for 3. You can't have it both ways. Go back and ready my post as to why games shouldn't have modes shoehorned in that weren't part of the original design intent. And ya they could have also made a separate single payer, but that woulda been a completely separate game tacked on. They are a business after all. Can't just make 3 games worth and sell it for budget price and expect to stay in business
@LinkSword They're optional bonus challenges though. I'm talking about just playing through the levels normally the first time through. So far, from my experience at least, you can get through the whole standard portion of the game yourself with a bit of thought and innovation here and there. Yes, things like the timed bonus challenges are tough (impossible maybe?) on your own but I've still managed to do a fair few of the other bonus challenges up to now. Maybe I will try the online mode and go back to those afterwards but at least by then I'll have learned to play the game properly by myself, have a better understanding of the puzzles and won't be a hindrance to the other people I'm playing with.
@3DSWiiUFanatic its just a huge developer gimmick. Remember when it was announced and they was the developer interview. They were saying there were trying to squeeze in the totem mechanic for years. And they are like fan boys of their own game, which is cool, but it is obvious this was something they wanted to do for fun. But its narrow focus whatever they were trying to accomplish ruins the Zelda universe experience a bit. Now they say only one character is the real link from link between worlds, the story sucks (they should have told the story as a hyrulian childs tale).... It just appears to be a jumbled mess. Game play looks fun, but they were so focused that all the rest it is ignored
@Qun_Mang you have a balling library hahha
@crzysortagamer balling library??? In any event, I don't know how many have local libraries that have games, but mine has games for all modern systems and, though slowly disappearing over time, games for last generation as well. I could put the game on reserve as they get games pretty much on or close to release day, but it is not really a priority so I will just wait until I see it on the shelf while browsing.
@JaxonH Well said.
One thing which I think contributes to the problem, though in a lessor extent than tacked on modes which the game was built to handle, is the set price structure in videogames. $60 for consoles, $40 for 3DS. I know Wii U has done a fairly decent job of mixing that up where Nintendo has seen appropriate w/ Captain Toad and Kirby, but I'm guessing PS4 and Xbox One games go for $60 retail regardless. (download is another story.) I think for a game like Uncharted 2, which is obviously built on single player story but had multiplayr added, which a lot of people seem to have enjoyed - they add on the mode to justify the price. God of War 3 came out at $60 for a 6-8 hour game and peeple complained, thus GoW4 (which nobody calls it but me) had more multiplayer than solo, I believe to justify the $60 price, rather than just make it a $40 solo game.
In this case, if you've read a number of comments above, you'll see most people would have preferred this to be a budget priced multiplayer download following on the heels of the free 4 Swords Anniversary promotion, no single player. I think they added in the single player just to justify the $40 retail price rather than make a Zelda game a $20 download.
My point being, price games accordingly - less for a short single player or multiplayer, more for both. Then you don't have to force in modes and people will complain less b/c they know they are getting what they paid for.
Well people will always complain, I know, that's why I added "less".
On the bright side like I said Wii U has had several budget priced titles, more overseas than in the US like Splatoon, and w/ the growth of the indie games multi-tiered price points are the future, so I think game development will tend towards the ideal play mode in the future. Of course soon all games will be budget releases b/c they will all be downloads w/ $50 season passes or $400 worth of toys to buy to unlock everything, but that's a story for another time.
I've been playing this game online with friends who live many states away, with Skype calls. It's been tons of fun. Really no different to local multiplayer except we aren't getting those friend things sadly and once someone's internet dropped. But that was only one time out of dozens.
Single player blows. It just does. It both sucks and blows at the same time. It is a vortex of unhappiness.
@ULTRA-64 There is no two player because the dungeons were all designed for three. And even then you can always find a random third person online.
I'm mostly annoyed by the fact that they locked some costumes to local multiplayer only.
I don't know enough people to get a local game going, so there are several costumes I'll never be able to get.
I could get a 2 player game going at most, but that's not allowed.
@HMNIM Nintendo servers and online experiences are far from being stable. Take SSB as the best example.
Talking about Triforce Heroes, I experienced some delays even in local multiplayer while playing the demo. That's a software/hardware issue. Nintendo handhelds have poor wireless connectivity, the New 3DS seems to have improved it a little bit.
@HMNIM The ideal experience needs 3 copies of the game. Online has no voice chat and it's far from being the frustration-free marvel we're all supposed to love, plus the lag in most sessions, plus the "game over" screen when someone gets randomly disconnected.
I'm still having trouble to find reasons to support this game at full price considering all the limitations. Even if I wanted to play it desperately, I'd have to find and convince other two friends to buy it for $40. How's that reasonable? "It's okay when it's Nintendo", right?
@JaxonH great post man, you kind of went into specifics of what I was trying say. It frustrates me I guess, to see games spread do thin when they could imo, be better at focusing on one aspect of gameplay.
I don't play online, I have rubbish internet, so for me local online is my holy grail. I wish a multiplayer games catered for all types of multiplayer or had great single player so I can still enjoy without friends.
@ULTRA-64
Right. And I guess that's why there's so many different kinds of games out there. For the single player folk (and make no mistake I love me my single player, that's almost all I do is play solo) there's a vast array of games to choose from.
But, for those that enjoy playing with others, there's gotta be a few games focused on multiplayer too. Some games do well at integrating both (MH4U easily stands as the best multiplayer experience on 3DS, while a good argument could be made for the single player as well) but I'm glad to see a game like Triforce Heroes take multiplayer and make it center stage.
It may not be for everyone- as you just pointed out, a few don't have stable internet (though I reckon there are relatively few who fall into this category) and some just refuse to play online, for whatever reason. But, with as many single player focused games as there are in the library, surely we can make room for one or two high profile multiplayer games, no?
@rushiosan
Has nothing to do with it being Nintendo man. It's ok because things aren't bad like you're painting them to be. You're going to extremes and exaggerating to make it sound like a worst case scenario in every regard and that's simply not the case.
The vast majority of gamers playing are not experiencing lag as you claim. So no, it's not Nintendo's servers or the 3DS. The handheld is perfectly capable of stable online as evidenced by games like Monster Hunter 4 Ultimate and Resident Evil Revelations. The only time there is lag is when someone has a poor connection, be it you or the person you're playing with. This is not speculation, this is firsthand experience from a day one 3DS owner who has sunk nearly 500 hours into online play on 3DS.
And disconnects happen in any online game. That's not a problem unique to Triforce Heroes. As for needing 3 copies of the game, you act like that's somehow hard to accomplish when there's 10,000 people with the game online, ready to play at any given moment's notice.
As for voice chat, an argument could definitely be made for it's merits in this case. Sure. But at the same time, countless other online games don't have voice chat and are perfectly enjoyable. In fact, one could argue it's more enjoyable without voice chat. No listening to bossy kids dictating what you have to do step by step. Part of the fun is the puzzle of figuring out how to communicate your ideas. It was same way in RE Revelations and MH4U. You get creative with ways to share ideas. And tbh, that's a lot of the fun right there. It's not some frustrating experience- every time I've played it's been a blast, and no puzzle had us stumped for more than a few seconds before everyone realized what needed to be done.
With all due respect, it does seem like your hellbent mindset on hating this game is at least partially clouding your rational judgement. It's not a perfect game- the single player is worthless after all, but dear goodness the multiplayer IS a fun experience. But I don't think anything I say will convince you of that.
@rockerztonight1 I actually enjoy single player mode. Sometimes online can be a problem with some trolls. Local, download play is awesome. But if need specific things or items or enemies that ur teammates can't best then I go to single player. It maybe tough or a bit slow but you can do it, or skip a scene that you can't do at the cost of losing a treasure when you pick it at the end of the road.
@crzysortagamer This game Ruins the Zelda universe? Far from it my friend.
@Dpishere What's new? It 4 swords without purple link. Just something that many people seem to want from Nity. Online. Lol
@OddworldCrash Because fans.....even now complain cause there is no singler player and now complain because it there, which is not as bad as people make it out to be. And thats a real darn shame that all people gave this score base on SP when clear that wasn't the case with this game. And I glad Critics who gave it a better score didn't just look at the problem because this game is a great game. And it certainly isn't the worst.
@DarthNocturnal Uh? The game isn't bad tho. It has 32-level design around 3-players.and plently of challenges that make you coming back to this game. Just because the game doesn't have a single player that you want doesn't make the game rush. Single player isn't even that bad at all.
@rushiosan Why? because it doesn't have a single player that you like that that cut the price for this game? Sheesh. I know you want to save money be seriously, just don't buy it. Not every game even has single player yet they charged the full $60 and no complains about that.Or heck just to play another mode let's put a season pass just to have moblins in it. The single player is there and you don't like it then that fine. But it online/local/download play (other companies would had made you play for another game for that option) is where the game shines and I certainly don't regret playing $40 for it.
@ULTRA-64 Funny, thing is that when 3D world came out people were complain to Nintendo about not have online mode. Then When Splatoon came out people complain out it not having local. Now with this game having download play, local, and online now everyone complains about single player when this was clearly design for co-op.
@JaxonH Hello. I been reading your comments for some time now and i gotta say. You are awesome.
@DarthNocturnal ok. That's fine. If its not your cup of tea (which many feel the same) its fine. My thing was that SP isn't the main important in this game. Co-op is. But it seems many people think SP is and bash on it. Nintendo could had just gotten rid of it all together but one of the producer thought of other people and added it in there. And some people don't mind that feature in the game. It may not be the best thing there. But its there as an option.
By the way that was a compliment not an insult for "normal" or per say "someone that speak of sense of I want to say" of the issue. Whether you take it as a onfense then that up to you for it wasn't meant for you. And opinions are opinions. But talking your thoughts of the vs something else is two very different matter. :/
@rushiosan But if you have both, an amazing singleplayer and multiplayer experience, that would distract from the main part of the game, the online multiplayer. There are many many many Zelda games out there that you have to play completely on your own. A multiplayer, an online one no less, is something special for the Zelda series and thus, should be emphasized by not distracting from it with an equally great singleplayer. Plus, having different dungeons and a new story would seperate the two modes further and make the game feel like getting two games in-one.
Oh, and it's not laziness, it's simply the need to get it out by christmas. I mean think about it, Nintendo's line-up for the holidays ain't that great this year, on 3DS and WiiU.
Honestly, though, I'd just play another Zelda game or wait till next year for Zelda U if I can't stand working in a team. TriForce Heroes should be praised for focusing so much on an online multiplayer that is so rare for the franchise.
@rockerztonight1
Iäve mostly played the local multiplayer but single player mode wasn't as bad as some people say. Not sure if you should pay full price for it though.
@SanderEvers @ULTRA-64 I think a 2 player mode with 3 links, maybe similar to the single player mode would have been great. Maybe the host would control both the main character and the other cpu, while the second one controls his own, or maybe the host would give like a permission to both the host and the second player to be able to control the cpu. I don't know, but I'm pretty sure it would have worked. I tried to play years ago Four Swords with my brother and we couldn't because we had only one cartridge, now we wanna play this game but we can't because we don't have a third people lol...
I still think this game would have added a 2 player mode. 2 players controlling 3 links or something, but there's like that big hole on the game. You have a single player mode and a 3 player mode and wait... Yes, there are people who don't have a good internet/don't have wi-fi and only know 1 people with another 3ds (my case)... I don't know, these patterns of nintendo multiplayer games are strange.
@JaxonH A 2 player mode with 3 links to control would have worked. I'm sure about it. The dungeons are designed for three, and? In single player mode they can be beaten, in a similat 2 player mode i'm sure it would work too.
@imacoolpianist
I guess... But it's so clumsy controlling those dopples. I would not wanna sit there and play with someone who has to control 2.
Only reason I think they included them at all was for sake of saying there's a single player mode, which personally I find to be frustrating and worthless for the most part. I'm glad others enjoy it, but in comparison to multiplayer it just falls flat.
Why play with a dopple with 2 people instead of just grabbing a 3rd real player online? Idk
Tap here to load 87 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...