This game shouldn't exist, yet it does. It bears the name "Zelda" so that means I must have it but I can't say I'm particularly awaiting for this to be released.
What sucks is that this just feels like a waste of time. If the Zelda team (*ahum*Aonuma*ahum*) didn't seem bent on wasting time just because they could, we'd have had Zelda U already. I could have done without the filler in this generation, it's very disappointing.
But that's not all, Four Swords is also the worst thing ever in the Zelda series, I can't believe they feel the need to revisit that failure of an experiment. It's funny that when they talked about it in the DE, they made it seem like this co-op Zelda was a new idea. It also seems uninspired, why three Links? In Four Swords at least they had a reason to be a Link that was split in four, what's it here? If there's a 'Three Sword' I'm going to punch someone in the face.
Especially when, if they really wanted to go with this co-op idea, why not use three characters that actually have something to do with the Triforce, like the terribly lame subtitle pretends? Having three Links is a cheap, easy way out. In Zelda lore, where the Triforce picks three people to represent it time and time again, it seems pretty illogical to now all of a sudden pick one and split him in three.
Why not have a game where one is Link with the Triforce of Courage, one Zelda with the Triforce of Wisdom and one with the Triforce of Power. That last one is usually Ganondorf though, so this needed to fit story-wise but surely something could have worked out. Then, each of the three characters could have had different abilities and special feats which opens up a plethora of interesting gameplay possibilities concerning the cooperation of each character and about what character to use where with what ability or item.
There, I just thought up of a better concept of this game in five minutes.
