MisterHero
Super Member
They don't want to =/= poor reasoning.
Everyone seems to miss that for some reason.
-
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
Everyone seems to miss that for some reason.
Aeriscloud
Banned
Sold, SOLD.
It's not about the character, it's all about the noise you're making on this matter
It's absurd, annoying and unnecessary, and you're making it sounds like it's a moral matter where people could get hurt or something
Spring-Loaded
Member
The poor reasoning was in reference to the "Triforce balance," and "what would Link do?" statements. Does you get what I was saying now?
While it was Aonuma who said it, the creators have been giving reasons for not having Zelda playable because Link wouldn't have anything to do, which is limited creatively — they could literally come up with anything for Link to do, but they apparently can't if it means letting Zelda get the lead in a game.
Does that make sense?
What about people who don't like the poor reasons given for the decisions?
And not everyone hated Linkle — that's just a girl Link, more or less.
ignoring whether there's any harm, direct or indirect: your posts are equally as much noise, equally annoying as any other in this thread, or in any thread about any game.
Mango The Magician
Banned
...And your obssession with what Link has between his legs will continue to be creepy until that day.
Seriously, what's so grandiose and amazing about giving Link bewbs? Nothing, it's a nonsensical idea that would serve no purpose if implemented, so why keep clamoring for it? What's the deal? I can understand not wanting a character you like and grew up with changed, I get that, but being devoted to this extreme to changing a character just reads like your holding some weird vendetta against people.
I don't get why there's a need for a female lead in a Zelda game though? This wasn't a issue prior to 2014 for the whole 28 years the series was alive, I don't get why it's an issue now.
Also no, there are plenty of people that straight up want a female Link, some for the sake of it, others because they find offense in where there is none (in people not wanting a female Link.), and even others because they view it as some weird goal to conqure in some weird power fantasy of fighting what they conceive to be a form of sexism, in that a famous game series doesn't have a playable female character.
I'm 100% positive it'll be in the game. Regardless the fact that he's still recognizable as Link without it kinda disproves the idea that he "changes all the time." Plus I mean Metroid Fuzion exists.
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
It's a shame that you think this a good joke or something that's bad.
ClayKavalier
Banned
I prefer "small-minded" since people who get defensive over the gender of a video game character clearly lack perspective of how impactful a female Link is in the grand scheme of things.
I would file Kirby and Yoshi under N/A. I really don't want to go into that territory of the internet. I'm also going to ignore Donkey Kong and Toad.
That said, we have e.g. Luigi's Mansion Dark Moon (I think), the various Mario&Luigi RPGs (which may have female party members, but usually focus on Mario/Luigi as protagonist), New Super Mario Bros 2 (which to my knowledge only allows you to play as Mario/Luigi). If we talk about games solely financed by Nintendo, one could maybe also add the Lego Undercover series? I think it is clear that Nintendo has a different focus than most developers/publishers, which makes it hard to compare them to other publishers, but they have their fair share of exclusivity. I really appreciated the diversity of presenters at E3 though. That stood out very positively. The company as a whole is not a misogynistic blob, that much is clear.
TheSpoiler
Member
Yeah, them playing coy was stupid. Just outright say it or not and be done with it. Now the backlash is deserved because it was teased and prodded.
And while I'd love a bunch of spin-offs, I'll wait until those come to fruition first before saying Nintendo fixed the problem.
If they hadn't said shit, this would not have been an issue.
And while I'd love a bunch of spin-offs, I'll wait until those come to fruition first before saying Nintendo fixed the problem.
If they hadn't said shit, this would not have been an issue.
Captain Europe
Member
Exactly, having both Link and Zelda playable, with different movesets and powers, could make for great puzzles. Surely they can come up with a story where they go on an adventure together.
MisterHero
Super Member
I called Aonuma's statement ham-fisted in a previous thread. It's obvious they were kinda forced into saying anything at all.
But you were arguing this same thing last year. You're just grasping at new stuff.
SolidSnakex
Member
No, that's not why this became an issue. It became an issue because of some bullshit rumor. Before then they'd already came out and said that Link was male and the discussion had died to quite a bit. But because of that rumor it caused things to bubble up again and they had to readdress it. Now one thing that is their fault is that they allowed that to carry on to E3. When that rumor started too be reported by various sites they should've issued a statement saying that Aonuma had previously confirmed that Link is male and that has not changed.
Spring-Loaded
Member
Here's a post I repurposed recently about possible benefit of it:
I've mentioned it before, and am going to essentially quite myself and try to keep it in regard to Zelda: The hypothetical gender select doesn't have to be "fun," or add mechanical depth to the game's gameplay for people who are already against it, and the story doesn't have to focus on the main character's gender. It can do all of those things, but it doesn't need to be, same way Link being a boy has never been a crucial element of gameplay or story as it's something that always could've different, and accounted for, in any given game.
I've told people this before, and for some, it's been hard for some to accept as an answer, but here goes: for minorities (the definition of which is different around the world) who aren't as frequently represented in games, having the option to play as a character that looks like them or is similar to them reinforces the notion that they themselves can be important in real life — which can be subtle, and the difference between having that and not having it are not night and day across the board, but that benefit is there. For people who commonly find versions of themselves as playable characters, playing as someone who feels different, or who they know is different from them can reinforce empathy with those who are different from them in real life.Playing as someone different can inspire tangential learning (seeing something based on real life in a game can pique interest in that real life subject/topic).
Who you see in media (or who you play as) and what their roles are can affect one's self-perception. If you're skeptical, please look up the myriad studies out there on the subject; here's one from a couple years back that I've found informative, but by all means, read through more as this is not the end-all-be-all study.
I say all that to say there is an effect on people based on what they see of, what they know about the characters in their media. No matter how significant or how subtle the differences may be between a girl Link to the existing boy Links, knowing the character is a girl will have an affect on audiences, and it can't be negative by merely existing. Showing that doing something great/heroic, being important, or in some way being a "chosen one" is never out of the ordinary for any one person is valuable; for many, knowing that is valuable.
Zelda, Sheik, and Midna could all carry their own games, and they all deserve their own good ones, too. They are also side characters — it would be positive to have them star in their own good games in order to shut down the notion that some characters/people can't be significant. It would be positive in the same way shut down the notion that you must be a certain way (in this instance, a boy) that's outside of your control in order to be important.
If the similarity of a character's appearance or identity has never been important you, and none of the above resonates with you in any way, then look to the game Rust. The developers had a single player avatar for everyone that was the same (all bald, white men avatars), then they later randomized what characters people would have when they started it up, adding in female characters. Once they added the female characters, they received a of vitriol from the fanbase saying their choice was taken away when they never had a choice to begin with. Since there was a very notable response from parts of the community, there were definitely those who were okay with there only being white avatars. When that changed, it bothered them. They never lost a choice, but they still felt some discomfort.
This example isn't meant to prove that people shouldn't care what their characters look like, but only to show people (who are so used to playing as characters they themselves look like) what it feels like be denied a choice, even when you never actually had that choice.
No matter what you conclude from the Rust social experiment, it's clear that it matters to people — if that option can be made available in a game (which is virtually can always be), it will be valued by someone, by many, in fact. The possible benefit from it being in a Zelda game — even if it's a small change to the player character — will be valuable, significant, even interesting for many, even if it isn't for you. I guarantee it — if you believe your standards for "valuable" are universal, then you'll disagree. If you acknowledge that media stops being solely for the individual(s) who made it once it's exposed to the world, then you'll realize it's important (and valuable, and significant) for the creator(s) to acknowledge the world in their work.
Almost every Zelda game is built from scratch; each item, object, character, weapon, and environment must be created, so there's no work "saved" by keeping a new Link as a boy. The Zelda games aren't better by having Link always be a boy. By definition, nothing can become better by staying the same.
To speak to your complaint of people not being satisfied with, say, women characters being in a game, but all of them having the same body type (e.g. Overwatch before Zarya and Mei were revealed): that's not someone having a narrow idea of what acceptable diversity is — that's merely someone who is advocating for more diversity than already exists. The male characters in Overwatch already were varied in regard to body types, and the game had wider appeal and better gameplay (for ease-of-identification purposes during combat, like in TF2) because of the striking differences among its cast. Going back to before Zarya and Mei were revealed, all the female characters had similar body types/shapes/sizes — saying they could be more varied is not having a narrow view of diversity — it's acknowledgement of possibility, and possibility is what diversity is all about.
When people push for female lead characters where that would be feasible (i.e. A series where the protagonist is a series of different individuals across games), it's not them merely wanting to get rid of/cull white, male, straight, middle-aged everymen as protagonists. They are advocating for the possibility of having a female lead. It's recognition of the benefits of reinforcing the fact that anyone can be the hero of a given story, and anyone can have their story told, especially in a medium like video games. It's acknowledgement of the benefit to showing people the woman character can be the destined hero, a bodybuilder, the one who saves the guy; someone who doesn't have a cloud of skepticism hanging above them begging the questions of "are they just being shoehorned into this story? Is this some progressive plot to force women into games?"
People who push for more diversity in games (in the games themselves or behind the scenes) want to dispel the immediate reaction, for some people, to arbitrarily place more scrutiny on minority characters ("this minority character should be written well, or not at all" while they don't even acknowledge how well-written white male soldier grunt #890 is), or to wonder what agenda the inclusion of a given minority character is pushing. People want these atypical characters to be able to just exist, without all that baggag, without all that special scrutiny, and without all the skepticism and complaints of " I can't relate to black people in fictional Victorian London, but these werewolves don't make me bat an eye, no siree.
To bring it back to Zelda, people who want diversity want to move away from an industry that comes up with reasons why the girl can't be the hero. It's all made up, so just come up with reasons why the girl, the person of color, the person with a disability, and any other non-represented people can be the heroes. So many games are great because of their possibilities, and there's no good reason the focus should be on limiting possibility in regards to playable characters.
That was in direct reference to the recent comments Aonuma made. Not sure what your point is here about "grasping at new stuff," when the discussion was brought up again.
Mango The Magician
Banned
Brah did you even read even the recent articles? The same week that Aonuma made that "no one said that was Link" comment, he turned around and said "yeah that's Link and he's a male." this was two years ago. Likewise in the recent articles he straight up said that Linkle was purely something the DW guys wanted, not something he or the Zelda team created, he even admitted to making her less like Link. Finally, he even said that he and the team making the game came to the solution that a playable Zelda would be the "simplest option" they never implied that they were open to the idea, they shot it down, stopped talking about, and then Emily Rogers made up some BS, and then they presented their game Rogers BS free.
Of course it's bad. Not because being black or gay is bad, but because Link is an established character that is none of those things.
I mean christ, why not go all the way and change Zelda into a giraffe whilst we're at it?
You thought wrong.
The argument in favor of a female Link is that Link isn't just one person, but many. Each one is a reincarnation of the original SS Link, born in a time of need. Some of them are even part of the same bloodline, but they are different people.
It makes sense for a reincarnation of a person to look at least somewhat like that person, but it also is worth asking why some of those reincarnations couldn't be women, because it would mix up the formula in an interesting way, it would give female fans of the series a hero they might be able to relate to better and give them a positive role model, and because Link has always been a mute, avatarish character without much personality, so there's no archetype that being female would be gravely offensive toward.
Then I don't get it, why is this necessary?
Explain to me, please
And don't tell me "eh if I don't see them doing a female Link I think the worst about them"
And even about the female players, because I see a lot of girl gamers who grew up with this series and loved it and never had the need to play a girl in this game
Please tell me
Eolz
Member
So incredibly conservative and limited that he told the Splatoon team to create good characters if they didn't want to be forced to use Mario, and that he tells his teams that they should think innovating and improving gameplay instead of making basic sequels.
First time I hear someone saying Miyamoto has an "incredibly conservative and limited mindset"...
Mango The Magician
Banned
You know insulting people is a surefire way to completely invalidate any argument you have right?
And yet you're doing the same thing? People in this thread are getting vehemently defensive about people questioning a convention, a creative choice by Nintendo that they support by only giving incredibly poor roundabout excuses.
"Because they didn't want to, okay?!" isn't shutting down any discussion, and isn't some infallible defense against criticism.
This slippery-slope nonsense sounds exactly like every argument I've ever heard against gay marriage or transgendered people, and it's vile. "If we can let men marry other men, what's to stop them from marrying their dog?" Fucking gross logic.
Anyway, Link is not an established character. There have been many Links. They are discreet individuals.
Spring-Loaded
Member
Someone can be conservative, regressive, progressive, sexist, etc. in specific ways. Fiscally conservative, prejudice against only trans people, and so forth.
He can be creative in terms of gameplay, but regressive in terms of gender roles.
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
Oh, the old changing a character to be black is comparable to changing him to a animal argument.
kunonabi
Gold Member
And I think the people saying its necessary have an overinflated sense of how important a female Link would actually be. Female protagonists in games aren't this mythical unicorn people claim that they are. I think last generations lack of diversity and poor research has really skewed peoples perceptions of how frequent female protagonists have actually been dating back to the famicom days.
UnemployedVillain
Member
But this is completely arbitrary. Somehow reincarnation allows Link to be female, but prevents him from looking any more different than white and blond? People are just twisting "reincarnation" far enough to support one arbitrary change, but stopping it once anyone suggests it supporting other arbitrary changes. Yes some Links are descendants, but that doesn't restrict their appearance to being 99% the same
Being black or gay is equal to turning into a wild animal... got it.
Aeriscloud
Banned
Except that I'm serious.
Why would I ever think any of those things are bad, the fuck is wrong with you?
Gross logic? No. It's sound logic. I support gay marriage. I do not support forcing a developer to change an established character or bend to the will of a vocal minority on the internet just for the sake of some silly argument.
It reminds me of all of those people wishing for a female James Bond. Absolute lunatics.
What the hell. Where did you get that absurd logic from? I didn't mean that at all with my post, anyone with sense could see that.
I was using another example of unnessecarily changing a character simply for the sake of it.
Eolz
Member
And in which ways Miyamoto is that then? Are you seriously gonna say he's sexist because he wants Link to stay the hero?
For your reply on my post on the previous page, sorry, I've read it, but I really feel that you don't want to understand any arguments that are put your way and might show you why they don't want that. I really don't like when it goes like that, but sorry, I find hard to reply to that post when you don't even bother reading specific elements, nor bringing new elements (related or not) to the discussion.
Mango The Magician
Banned
And those multiple Links form together to create the established character that is Link. Likewise you could argue that technically there's two Marios, one made of flesh and bone the other of paper, and technically with Sonic Boom there's two Sonics, and the idea of changing their genders is just as ludicrous and nonsensical as the idea of changing Link's gender.
ClayKavalier
Banned
Who says there's a need? it's just something some people would like to see. Similar to how a lot of people wanted a realistic-looking game after Wind Waker, or how some people prefer cartoony Zelda. Same as Link's gender, there's no need for the game to look one way or the other, but some people prefer one style. Also like Link's gender, most people will play or enjoy the game either way, and some people will throw a fit that they didn't get their way. See the negative reactions following the Wind Waker reveal.
Not sure what's so hard to understand. Literally nothing about the game is "necessary." Each game has artistic decisions that distinguish it from the other games.
As for why more people are talking about Link's gender:
Nintendo provided a coy answer when initially asked if the new Link was a woman ("Who says it's Link?")
Nintendo put a female Link in the Hyrule Warriors spinoff, suggesting they're open to the idea of a female Link
Gender issues in games are more scrutinized in general now
Really can't wrap my head around you're point of view. Is a female Link necessary? No, but who care? Why is it such a big deal to you that some people would like to see a change in a decades-old series? And if Nintendo says they'll never make the change, why does it bother you that some people still say they'd like to see it? The whole thing seems like such a non-issue.
Who says it's necessary? What percentage of people who say they'd like to see a female Link have claimed that it's necessary?
Pretty great to use a line like that and then complain about poor research altering perception.
And I agree that a female Link really wouldn't be a big deal. Which is why it's so bewildering that some people are up in arms that people are even suggesting it.
Who says that people who are into the idea of a female Link would have a problem with changing race? Or a character creator that would allow for whatever option a player wants?
I'd be super fucking down with a Zelda game that was modeled after South Asian culture, or had a character creator that let you play as a person of colour.
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
Apologies then.
Usually that type comment is used to make fun of social issues.
Captain Europe
Member
Totally different, if there's any IP in the world that Zelda is in the slightest comparable to, it's Doctor Who. Spoilers:
the master regenerated into a female and everyone loved it.
Link is more comparable to the Doctor, than the likes of Lara/Nathan Drake/Samus/Mario.
Do you expect to not have any criticism at the way you complain about this matter?
That's the problem, maybe you complain because for you "would be nice to choose between a male and female Link", but in reality it sounds like you PRETEND a female Link, and if they don't do it there are big ethical problems, they Can be even sexists, hate women and so on
And that is an hyperbole. It's ridiculous
We've already been over that. There's nothing arbitrary about it, because I support giving people the ability to make other changes to Link's appearance if they want to. I just don't support giving people the ability to make him completely unrecognizable. As someone else told you, it's not all-or-nothing.
My original post on the issue was many pages ago, but I already mentioned the James Bond thing and drew a clear distinction between the two. They aren't anything alike, because James Bond has always been one character. Link has been various ones, ever since LttP came out.
Also, no one is talking about "forcing" anything here, they are expressing their wishes. I love how every time someone doesn't agree with an argument, that argument is coming from a "vocal minority".
UnemployedVillain
Member
There are definitely some people in here who want to retain "the classic look", but also want a female option. I say, if you want both, go all the way. Blond, white can still be the defaults and what's used in marketing (someone has to be), but limiting it to JUST those options, while trying to use "reincarnation allows anyone" as justification is nonsensical
. . .
Read AgeEighty's posts then and stop talking out of your ass
Aeriscloud
Banned
Certainly not, I would love to see any combination of those, including female. I just think Nintendo has spoken on the issues at length now, and it seems they feel they have established a set character.
……forgetit
Member
ClayKavalier
Banned
Who says he can only be white and blond? Who has even suggested that Link be non-white and non-blond, let alone say that that would be a step too far after saying they'd liek a female Link?
You're doing a poor job of arguing against these opinions you've pulled out of your ass.
Point them out please. I'm not able to find them.
kunonabi
Gold Member
The emotion and insults directed at Nintendo for not doing it give off that impression. I can certainly edit that if you would like though.
Mango The Magician
Banned
The difference being that Link has always remained the same compared to the different art style, thus making them not at all comparable. Likewise I get why people don't want a three decade old character changed, I don't understand the want to change said character especially if there's no need and that it's not a necessary change.
This is really no different than people asking for a Mario powerup that changes Mario into Maria, it's not necessary and the only people that want it seem to be a tiny minuscule group of people who are shouting very loudly.
The Zelda series has gotten along fine without a female Link, and Link has been very clearly established in the series and out, if there's no reason for the change, then this debate has nothing to sustain itself on.
WiiRevolution1
Member
Well considering you've insulted everyone who wants Girl Link your one to talk.
But keep on going. It'll make it funnier when you get banned.
I completely disagree. Those other Marios and Sonics are multi-dimensional representations of one character. The different Links are different characters.
No, his gender doesn't concern me like it does you. I wouldn't mind the option IF it was in the creators' desires to implement such features. Since it appears to not be in their interests and they keep reiterating that Link is a consistently male character, I'm not pressing the issue and know to move on. I respect where they want to take the series and not force my personal wishes and agenda onto them.
The hilarious thing about your post is that it contains a link back to a post by me in which I say I'd be fine with letting people change Link's race and making other changes to his appearance, and you're trying to use that as an example of someone who doesn't want Link to change races. It's like you're not actually reading anything anyone says.