• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Four Swords Vs. Four Swords Adventures?


Happy Mask Salesgirl
Jul 2, 2010
Ikana Canyon
Alright, we're all aware the the Four Swords is for the Gameboy Advanced,

But I have the Four Swords Adventures for the Gamecube...

Anyone want to give me a rundown on which is better? What the differences are?

(It was a gamecube remake right?)
Jun 1, 2010
No. It's not a remake, its a direct sequel. Four Swords was pretty much a short minigame where you compete for rupees and such.

That being said, FSA is probably better.
FS is just a little test you take so you can do a side quest in ALttP to get the Four Sword. FSA has an entirly different story, boss, and theme. Also, FS is closer to MC style, FSA is closer to ALttP style. Both games require a GBA and linking cables if you do multiple players. FSA can be played solo. FS needs atleast two people. FS has four stages. FSA has like what, 12? I have not played either of the two, but these are the well known facts. (Except the 12 which I am not sure about...)


FSA is better by far hands down.

For one, FS needs more than one person to play, not only that, but both people need the actual cartridge, their own GBA, you need a linking cable. I find the fact that you need another guy to play annoying, so I haven't played it much. However, all it is is collecting rupees. Not much of a plot.

FSA isn't my favorite Zelda game, but I would rather play it than FS. You actually don't need a game boy advance to play FSA, just a gamecube.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom