Astral Dog
Member
...ok, that sounds fair, they would not make Luigi the main character of a mainline Mario game
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Miyamoto: In mainline Zeldas, Link will always be the hero, will consider S spin-offs
- Thread starter axisofweevils
- Start date
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
Then why does anything about this series matter? When people create things they usually have reasons for them be they bad or good.
Of course, I'm just criticizing their decisions/reasons.
The fans don't really need a reason other then that. Doesn't make them right but I don't see this argument being made in other threads where fans aren't getting what they hope/wanted.
Creators can absolutely do whatever they want and people have the right criticize them for it. If you aren't happy with that then don't enter the discussion.
Mango The Magician
Banned
http://gamerant.com/new-legend-of-zelda-without-link/
You're new to this debate aren't you? Also, what about the myriad of fans who don't want this change? Should they be ignored? Why should only those who do want this change be listened to?
...and they're reason is that they created Link as a male, and that's how they want him to be, that's all there is to it. Expecting them to give some lore or in world explanation, when they themselves don't give two squirts of piss about the timeline of the series, is silly.
Spring-Loaded
Member
Luigi did get Super Luigi U (mechanically equal to Super Mario U) along with the Luigi's Mansion series. Zelda hasn't gotten that.
Fan dislikes creator's choice: "They suck and I need to tell you why!"
Fan likes creator's choice: "It's their decision; stop complaining about it!"
Terrorblot
Member
Mario's name is in the title, If they made a Super Luigi Brothers (Like the Wii U one) it would automatically be a spinoff, or have a misleading name. But "The Legend of Zelda" is a spinoff if Zelda is the main character? Says who? I don't know I just don't see why it isn't possible.
Also, Metal Gear Solid 2 had a female protag, why not Zelda? :^)
Apollo Cree
Member
It seems incomparable considering that Zelda's creators haven't violated any of their world building, lore, and general tradition. Fans are allowed to criticize. In this case, it seems a bit goofy because the creators haven't changed anything that fans have grown accustomed to and some fans are actually upset by that.
LegendofDragoonLives
Member
You can't fathom that an iconic character through decades stays exactly as he is? Yeah, it's a real tough one to figure out.
Reincarnations yes, but Wind Waker Link is specifically said to have absolutely jack shit to do with the Hero. He's literally just a random kid caught up in Ganondorf's mess, worthy enough to wield the Master Sword and the Triforce of Courage. The spirit of the hero means jack if you're worthy enough
.
Jawmuncher
Member
SUPER spinoffs
Ryouji Gunblade
Member
This implies a fixed sex and gender on the spirit of the hero. Some of us don't want that.
ClayKavalier
Banned
People who are that adamant that Link must be male have had their way for decades. Not every Link going forward would need to be female. Seems really bizarre to worry about people who want a male Link being ignored.
Read the article, not sure what your point is.
……forgetit
Member
I see what you're saying, I've been on this roller coaster to long I guess, it's gotten straight nasty in some corners of this discussion else ware. The interesting thing about this discussion to me though is that it's basically going around in circles. I'm not sure what else can be said other than. "Nintendo has no real reason not to do it, but they don't want too."
Honestly, they said as much in their first statement on it.
Trogdor1123
Member
He's a guy. They said so themselves
UnemployedVillain
Member
It's not going to change
Spring-Loaded
Member
They've shut down really specific possibilities that were previously possible within the world building and lore though. Don't think there are any other Nintendo series with explicit reincarnations of the main character.
They've also shut down Zelda as a main character in the mainline series.
ClayKavalier
Banned
Again, I agree there's no obligation. But communication is always appreciated and there's no reason not to be open about something like this. An answer shouldn't have to be "demanded," it's really not a big deal.
"Hey, I really like your game and have a question about the design of the main character."
"How dare you ask me to defend my decisions!! I owe you nothing!!!"
LegendofDragoonLives
Member
I get some people wanting a choice, it's fine. But this guy acting like the idea of a fixed iconic character through decades of a very iconic series staying exactly as he is as difficult to grasp as finding the formula to fucking curing AIDs. The level of cringe in his post was at a pretty all time high.
Personally for people who want to play as a female, I would just ask for Zelda to star or create a new character in the Zelda universe. But I've never really been a fan of pick 3,000 things to make your character. I even hate it when mainline Final Fantasy games ask me to change the character's name. No fuckers, keep it as is and let me experience that world. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
MisterHero
Super Member
Maybe Aonuma himself thinks he needed better wording. The subsequent statements would probably support that.
The statements would also support the idea of these "fans" moving goalposts. The games state Link is a reincarnation of an ancient male hero. Said fans said the lore doesn't count, so Aonuma/Miyamoto flat-out say "Link is male". Now the fans can't handle that.
It's not sexist; it doesn't exclude girls/women from enjoying the games. Link is male, that's all.
Hyrule Warriors is definitely not the kind of game I want a Zelda-led spin-off to be. However, its existence doesn't preclude the potential for proper Zelda-led titles.
And where are you getting this from?
UnemployedVillain
Member
But they actually have tried on multiple occasions to explain it. Your hypothetical answer has never been what Nintendo has actually done. In fact this whole discussion has blown up because they didn't simply do as you stated!
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
What "battles" should we be picking? Or is this the "starving kids in Africa" deflection?
Eolz
Member
Edit: sorry if I missed some answers, took longer than expected to write this whole post.
For your first paragraph, of course that makes sense, but your original reply had nothing to do with mine. Hyrule Warriors is indeed a different series, in a different genre, appealing to different people (the usual Warriors spinoff goal being to attract other franchises fans into Warriors gameplay, and Warriors fans into other franchises), but it doesn't mean that publishers don't look at the feedback to create other stuff. Fans loved the many female characters available in HW, Miyamoto talked after that about a Shiek spinoff. It's likely they are trying little by little to see where they can go, with HW being more of an hommage, and thus with less risks than directly trying another action-adventure game (but more action focused for example).
I completely agree on Aonuma's excuses being bad, but he's not trained for that. It's the equivalent of that stupid Ubisoft guy saying female character models were hard to animate as the reason of AC not having a female playable character. Miyamoto doesn't care since nobody will dare blame him for whatever he says at this point. Reggie or Bill, being in PR, would probably give better excuses while being as vague as possible.
Fans can obviously have their opinion about characters, but that's the thing, casual fans and regular players won't. Those are the hardcore fans always complaining about something (right or wrong), be it gender issues, timeline stuff, gameplay not being exactly like they wanted, X companion talking too much or not enough, etc. When your series has been popular for thirty years, you have to find the right position to be able to appeal to both without compromising your game's formula either (which was kind of Sonic's problem).
So, again, for Link, this is a bigger risk than 25 years ago or so, since they've followed a template for a long, long time and basically established this character (again, without him being "technically" established at the same time) and the game's genre (this is not an RPG where it's easier to switch after a while). This point mainly applies to having a female Link or a new character being playable, or even a less known/popular one (like Impa), not Zelda herself. Zelda herself, on the other hand, need a change of portrayal and to start being more popular, which is another problem that they have been trying to solve over the years, especially since they went 3D (Spirit Track, Sheik, Smash, Hyrule Warriors, Tetra...).
Of course they are interested in having more sales, but in this case, having a defined character is not seen as the problem (same for Mario or Metroid), the problem was using the same formula in terms of gameplay (which is the most important thing for Nintendo).
You can rightfully argue that this wouldn't change anything in terms of gameplay, but that is the issue. Why should they do it when they have a well designed character in a thirty years old franchise? Why put Zelda playable in a main game when it is supposed to be about Link?
The best you could expect in the next decade could be some switch at some point, like Ciri in Witcher 3 (it's still very much a Geralt game) if you truly want to force into the main games, but pushing Nintendo for a true spin-off in a similar genre with a strong female protagonist is actually the best thing to do and the only thing that they will accept (for better and for worse). They are perfectly in their right to stay with Link since, once again, they have other games (a lot) catering to other expectations.
You mean like in Super Mario 3D World? You're probably referencing this, which was focused on multiplayer.
Another Mario Galaxy or Sunshine, aka focused on single player adventures and a bigger story "focus" (for a Mario platformer I mean), they very likely won't allow this choice. Apart from Luigi obviously, since he's basically just an easy interchangeable copy of Mario (and I don't mean only in a gameplay sense).
It's also amazing how some people can't stand that the creators themselves have the final word on something. They grew up. Did you?
Does a creator have to give a "sensible" reason for every choice he makes? They don't want to, for various reasons (including Link being pretty much established in the collective mind), most of those that we'll never know about like for absolutely every work out there, be it art, game, cinema, etc.
For your first paragraph, of course that makes sense, but your original reply had nothing to do with mine. Hyrule Warriors is indeed a different series, in a different genre, appealing to different people (the usual Warriors spinoff goal being to attract other franchises fans into Warriors gameplay, and Warriors fans into other franchises), but it doesn't mean that publishers don't look at the feedback to create other stuff. Fans loved the many female characters available in HW, Miyamoto talked after that about a Shiek spinoff. It's likely they are trying little by little to see where they can go, with HW being more of an hommage, and thus with less risks than directly trying another action-adventure game (but more action focused for example).
I completely agree on Aonuma's excuses being bad, but he's not trained for that. It's the equivalent of that stupid Ubisoft guy saying female character models were hard to animate as the reason of AC not having a female playable character. Miyamoto doesn't care since nobody will dare blame him for whatever he says at this point. Reggie or Bill, being in PR, would probably give better excuses while being as vague as possible.
Fans can obviously have their opinion about characters, but that's the thing, casual fans and regular players won't. Those are the hardcore fans always complaining about something (right or wrong), be it gender issues, timeline stuff, gameplay not being exactly like they wanted, X companion talking too much or not enough, etc. When your series has been popular for thirty years, you have to find the right position to be able to appeal to both without compromising your game's formula either (which was kind of Sonic's problem).
So, again, for Link, this is a bigger risk than 25 years ago or so, since they've followed a template for a long, long time and basically established this character (again, without him being "technically" established at the same time) and the game's genre (this is not an RPG where it's easier to switch after a while). This point mainly applies to having a female Link or a new character being playable, or even a less known/popular one (like Impa), not Zelda herself. Zelda herself, on the other hand, need a change of portrayal and to start being more popular, which is another problem that they have been trying to solve over the years, especially since they went 3D (Spirit Track, Sheik, Smash, Hyrule Warriors, Tetra...).
Of course they are interested in having more sales, but in this case, having a defined character is not seen as the problem (same for Mario or Metroid), the problem was using the same formula in terms of gameplay (which is the most important thing for Nintendo).
You can rightfully argue that this wouldn't change anything in terms of gameplay, but that is the issue. Why should they do it when they have a well designed character in a thirty years old franchise? Why put Zelda playable in a main game when it is supposed to be about Link?
The best you could expect in the next decade could be some switch at some point, like Ciri in Witcher 3 (it's still very much a Geralt game) if you truly want to force into the main games, but pushing Nintendo for a true spin-off in a similar genre with a strong female protagonist is actually the best thing to do and the only thing that they will accept (for better and for worse). They are perfectly in their right to stay with Link since, once again, they have other games (a lot) catering to other expectations.
You mean like in Super Mario 3D World? You're probably referencing this, which was focused on multiplayer.
Another Mario Galaxy or Sunshine, aka focused on single player adventures and a bigger story "focus" (for a Mario platformer I mean), they very likely won't allow this choice. Apart from Luigi obviously, since he's basically just an easy interchangeable copy of Mario (and I don't mean only in a gameplay sense).
It's also amazing how some people can't stand that the creators themselves have the final word on something. They grew up. Did you?
Does a creator have to give a "sensible" reason for every choice he makes? They don't want to, for various reasons (including Link being pretty much established in the collective mind), most of those that we'll never know about like for absolutely every work out there, be it art, game, cinema, etc.
Mango The Magician
Banned
And why should their favorite character be changed to appease others? They said they're open to a playable Zelda in spinoffs, so there's your female character, and everyone is happy. Plus the developers continue to keep their character the way they choose it to be, thus making the idea of a female Link irrelevant.
Also, you said they didn't respond immediately about Link being male, that article and quote came out a day or two after the 2014 footage of Zelda U, confirming Link was the protag and male, they didn't leave this up to speculation, they shot it down pretty quickly.
Likewise Linkle was made because the director of DW wanted to make something akin to her, Aonuma stepped in and made her less like Link, making your whole idea about them "teasing" or "testing the waters" for this idea completely inaccurate.
Well for starters arguing for a playable female lead that doesn't change or alter the existing male lead would be a good idea.
LordGorchnik
Member
The problem is people don't want to criticize, they want the developers to actually implement change to conform to their specific wishes/wants.
Which just isn't going to happen (if Miyamoto/Aonomua's words are truthful) in this case/instance/series. You are free to discuss why you think why it would be great, insightful, or even revolutionary if Link was to be female; but to claim Nintendo is sexist, out of touch, and doesn't listen to fans is beyond silly.
Which just isn't going to happen (if Miyamoto/Aonomua's words are truthful) in this case/instance/series. You are free to discuss why you think why it would be great, insightful, or even revolutionary if Link was to be female; but to claim Nintendo is sexist, out of touch, and doesn't listen to fans is beyond silly.
CentralScrutinizer
Member
I think the insinuation is that some people are treating Link being female as some big gender barrier that will change gaming where their efforts could be better spent on actual sexist games. Some people want Link to be female for the sake of a female Link. Some people want Link to be female because of an agenda.
ClayKavalier
Banned
Camarasketch did a poll of people who make posts about a female Link. The methodology is up to standard, he made sure to randomly sample a representative pool of respondents. Hard to believe 70% of people talking about the main character of an extremely popular, decades-old game series on a message board about video games have never played a single entry of said game, but those are the facts.
Spring-Loaded
Member
People supported/believed in the possibility of gender difference between reincarnations because the lore never outright demanded that Link be a boy. Most interpretations of reincarnation across different media/cultures/religions involve change of gender, species, etc. since those spirits or w/e are being reborn.
These Links are indisputably distinctly different characters born in different times, and some people never considered the gender at all central to the plots/themes/lore/etc. The only lore justification given for Link "needing" to be male so far is the "balance of the Triforce" stuff which doesn't make sense or doesn't translate well at all.
The possible spinoffs for Zelda don't preclude full-on Zelda-like titles starring Zelda, but the comments about how Link will be the only hero for the series suggests otherwise. They believe Zelda can't go on TLoZ-like adventures.
spazchicken
Member
I agree, but the issue there is when people want to do something sexist or otherwise discriminatory with their work—and I'm not saying Nintendo is doing that here—it's easy for them to say, "That's just what I want to do." So it's a valuable exercise to examine the reasons behind those choices, because sometimes you do find sexism, racism or what have you behind those decisions, and when you do, it should be challenged. And when those reasons don't seem like particularly good ones, it's worth looking even more closely at them.
It very well could. Not for BotW in all likelihood, but Aonuma or whoever makes the next Zelda game could easily pivot on the issue, especially after seeing all the feedback. And it's not like Nintendo has ever traditionally been averse to female protagonists, or even a female Link, which they put in Hyrule Warriors.
Female Link is and always will be a terrible idea perpetuated by people who'd rather have a man dressed as a woman as the heroine than see Zelda finally get her time in the spotlight. It's stupid and its proponents are more rabid than rational.
That said, I'll never say no to a game that lets you play as Zelda as much as some Marios let you play as Peach.
That said, I'll never say no to a game that lets you play as Zelda as much as some Marios let you play as Peach.
Apollo Cree
Member
I get that it was possible and now it's not something on the table but their decisions haven't violated any spoken or unspoken rule of the series. I understand fan disappointment in not getting something they wanted. The reaction seems overblown and I think people are being silly nannies about it. Of course, this is all about my opinion and debating about it won't get us very far.
That Zelda point is a more interesting debate and I suspect that it might be a gameplay issue that Nintendo hasn't wanted to address. Zelda gets things done a lot differently than Link.
Good.
But regardless, people will keep begging for a female link until the end of time, sadly.
I would love a Zelda game that focuses on someone other than Link though, a woman, that would be great. Why not focus on that rather than repeatedly trying to get Nintendo to change an established character?
But regardless, people will keep begging for a female link until the end of time, sadly.
I would love a Zelda game that focuses on someone other than Link though, a woman, that would be great. Why not focus on that rather than repeatedly trying to get Nintendo to change an established character?
ClayKavalier
Banned
I was responding to you saying they were under no obligation to provide an explanation, not commenting on what they've actually done.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to remind everyone they don't need to address anything if they don't want to when they already have.
I strongly disagree, but let us leave it at that. The discussion has been had a dozen times.
I think this is an unfair way to approach this. People are just much more outspoken about the issues in gaming these days, notably representation. I think it is okay for a company to make this decision and I'm sure this would not have blown up as much, if Nintendo had handled this better. That said, Nintendo is not exactly a role model when it comes to female protagonists. Their only franchise with an exclusively female protagonist is clearly B-level, has been treated poorly and is currently comatose. I'm sure these things didn't help them in this discussion. I doubt we would have this discussion if Nintendo had actually put out or announced a (big effort) spin-off game.
……forgetit
Member
I'm honestly not sure what you're saying here. Do you mean that not giving a female option or making Zelda playable in the main series is inherently wrong or that it isn't? Either way I agree that you have every right to disagree with the creators vision.
I see what you're saying, but I don't really see malice behind the intentions, just that the creators have an idea for the characters portrayals and that's at odds with some of the fans ideas. Also Linkle isn't a female Link, seriously she's basically a joke character.
ClayKavalier
Banned
Works both ways. Why should people who'd like to see a female Link be shut down to appease people who've gotten their way for decades?
Need citation for Link being the favorite character of everyone getting defensive over the idea of a female Link.
DangerMouse
Member
This. This is one of the biggest reasons why this issue will never die.
Osukaa
Member
Thank you .
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
I think both efforts are equally important. Sexism in games doesn't go away because we beat up on obviously sexist games (which there are few) but the sexist elements in other wise fine games. Overall, people wanting a female link is not going to stop the "actual" progress in games.
Also, what could be that agenda and how could it possibly be a bad one?
Sorry, forgot the not in "Of course not".
Basketball
Member
CentralScrutinizer
Member
Kind of ridiculous to get upset about that considering the original game in the series established you playing as Link in order to save Zelda.
I could see this crazy expectation holding weight if the original game had you play as Zelda, but let's not act like it's crazy a legend of Zelda game doesn't have Zelda as the playable character, because you're thirty years late in making any valid points on that one.
Iva Demilcol
Member
Can we finally put this to rest?
again?
again?
Mango The Magician
Banned
Where did I say that everyone who didn't want this viewed Link as their favorite character? All I said was that some felt that way.
Also, because that's the way the character was designed and has been designed since day one, changing him changes a significant part of the game, not changing him does nothing and that's it. There's no inherent issue with Link being a male, and the idea that there's few female protags is not a issue that all games should have to address and it's definitely not a issue that Zelda, the series with it's entire mythology dominated by women, needs to try to fix.
"sexism in games" is not an issue that all games need to tackle, and there's next to nothing in Zelda that I'd call sexist, so why this issue of "sexism in games" is being applied to a thirty year old character is beyond me. There's nothing wrong with a character that's male, and there's nothing wrong with that character staying male. There's also nothing wrong with a series never having a female protagonist. In fact it's outright silly to assume that all games need or should have one at some point.
But I thought the main argument toward a female Link was that "there is no traditional look so why no change him into a girl"?
Really, the fact that people are asking for Link to be a girl rather than "Zelda main character" speak miles, there is an unconscious acknowledgement that Link IS an iconic character at this point.
AlphaDragoon
Member
Link being considered an established character and not a interchangeable avatar = good. I always thought he was just as much a character as Mario, Samus, Fox, etc.
Nintendo outright refusing to make Zelda the main character at any time in the main series = not good. I don't see how it would be difficult, especially when they're discussing changing up the Zelda formula. Making the girl who the series is named for the lead in at least one game isn't gonna be the end of the world.
Nintendo outright refusing to make Zelda the main character at any time in the main series = not good. I don't see how it would be difficult, especially when they're discussing changing up the Zelda formula. Making the girl who the series is named for the lead in at least one game isn't gonna be the end of the world.
ClayKavalier
Banned
I'm not seeing the "some feel this way" disclaimer in your post.
I agree Link being male isn't an issue. I just don't see why having a female Link IS an issue. The series doesn't have an obligation to answer for the crimes of a male-dominated industry, or whatever nonsense you're talking about, but clearly there's some people who would like to see a female Link and I don't see the harm in it.
I'd love to know the average age of posters in this thread. It's lustrous to me that an adult would have a strong opinion that's it's vitally important that a video game series have a male main character. Just imagine the consequences if Nintendo made a change to a character whose been around for decades! My small mind can't begin to wrap itself around the consequences!
UnemployedVillain
Member
What games have they even released on their xurrent systems that only have male playable characters? People keep bringing this up, but they hardly release single character based games anymore. In fact, looking at a list of Nintendo developed/second party games released for the Wii U and 3DS that only ones that only have males are:
Star Fox Zero
Kid Icarus Uprising
Devil's Third
Sakura Samurai
Dillon's Rolling Western
Harmoknight
Mario & Luigi: Dream Team
Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam
edit: Forgot a few
This is getting really boring
You guys are obsessed over a matter that really shouldn't even exists
I hope Nintendo never speaks again and do whatever they want to do
And if this don't like you then don't buy the game (and then we'll laugh because you didn't buy a good game because they didn't let you choose to control a female character)
You guys are obsessed over a matter that really shouldn't even exists
I hope Nintendo never speaks again and do whatever they want to do
And if this don't like you then don't buy the game (and then we'll laugh because you didn't buy a good game because they didn't let you choose to control a female character)