……forgetit
Member
At the same time I wonder if it was his decision and if anyone adamantly wanted a female Link. We assume by default the younger designers wanted it and the older ones blocked it, but we really have no evidence of that.
-
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
At the same time I wonder if it was his decision and if anyone adamantly wanted a female Link. We assume by default the younger designers wanted it and the older ones blocked it, but we really have no evidence of that.
Link will always be the hero, yes, but why not include the option to edit things like hair, skin color and sex, otherwise the silent player avatar talk sounds like empty rhetoric. Why would the story and canon need to be changed for that? Bart Simpson and Peter Pan among other male characters have been portrayed by women, why can't Link? Why not allow female players to feel as if they are portraying Link? Zelda BotW seems to borrow some things from Monster Hunter, why not the character edit screen? I'm fine with it either way, but then I'm male. It just seems like an opportunity to embrace new possibilities has been sidestepped here.
Japanmanx3
Member
What even promoted this thought process??? First I've heard of that in particular. Is this really what some people think?
GrandHarrier
Member
Be nice if the game series that is called Zelda, was actually about Zelda for once.
tornjaw
Member
Sure, I understand that people have the right do so, but why? As it's been said time and time again, The Legend of Zelda and everything therein, is their creation. It's their choice.
A phrase I hear a lot on GAF is "I'm going to vote with my wallet and not buy ___________." Why is this any different? If people don't like the choices that Nintendo makes with something they created and own, why argue about it, why not simply choose not to purchase it?
……forgetit
Member
I feel like it's in a lot of people's minds, they blame Miyamoto and Aonuma for the decision, but we have nothing to suggest anyone on the team wanted to do it.
Not buying a game provides no information to a publisher other than that a person did not buy their game. It's a terrible feedback mechanism and using it exclusively is idiotic.
The way that Nintendo tries as hard as possible to make their game stories completely meaningless is pretty backwards as far as I'm concerned. IPs like Zelda & Star Fox have so much lore potential if they'd just bother to explore it.
gigantor21
Member
This.
They have said outright several times they don't want to do this, especially in the mainline games. I personally think that's stupid, but I've never been a huge fan of the games anyway so I doubt they care what I think. Consumers as a whole would have to turn away from the franchise--over THIS issue specifically--for them to change their minds. And judging by how excited people are about Breath of The Wind I don't see that happening anytime soon.
tornjaw
Member
I understand that. But even after representatives of the company come forward, now on more than one occasion, and say that they aren't going to change that particular aspect of the series people still argue and complain about it. At some point you just have to turn your back, decide not to purchase the game and not support them if those are your convictions.
To those willing not to be shitheads, I propose this scenario:
A new Zelda spin-off gets released, Link is finally female, but
. D'you honestly think people wouldn't call bullshit?
Unsure why you ask me though, I haven't brought up Tetra.
A new Zelda spin-off gets released, Link is finally female, but
a female Wolf Link
Both are alter egos of sorts. Sheik is a disguise for Zelda in OoT, Tetra is an unassuming royal descendant until she transforms into Zelda and then stays the damsel in distress (even demeanor) until the final battle where she again plays an active role. Her transformation is reversed when she returns from the bottom of the sea, that part is a bit sketchy.
So the differences are 1) narrated intent behind the pseudo-persona 2) TWW Zelda keeps some character traits from Tetra.
So the differences are 1) narrated intent behind the pseudo-persona 2) TWW Zelda keeps some character traits from Tetra.
Unsure why you ask me though, I haven't brought up Tetra.
Japanmanx3
Member
balgajo
Member
Now that Miyamoto was clear about his vision for the character I hope people stop being delusional and accept it. All we have here is circular and counter-productive discussions about people with different visions for what Link represents to them.
If things continue like this gender bending begging will be as bad as port begging in the near future.
If things continue like this gender bending begging will be as bad as port begging in the near future.
Stealth ageism? Something like that by default all old people become more conservative or some bullshit.
Self restrain is complicated it appears... When in the end that would be more effective than anything else really.
Voting with your wallet is a dictator's wet dream: you can only vote yes or you don't vote at all.
IronicSonic
Member
Probably all the threats about Nintendo creatives being narrow minded about this topic, yes.
Mango The Magician
Banned
Probably cause the actual people that care enough about a female Link that much are nothing but a minuscule group of fans.
runnin_blue
Banned
Yep. Same here.
Japanmanx3
Member
Initially you quoted this, asking "How so?"
I was asking if you were asking "how so?" in regards to Tetra or Shiek for clarificatiion on to what your question actually meant.
Completely and utterly wrong. The conversation was very plain and easy to follow and there was no misunderstanding. You had an idea for a Zelda game and I commented on it with full awareness of what you said and you got butthurt and went straight into angry defensive mode. I've interacted with dozens here, note you're the only one super bent out of shape who started attacking me personally rather than arguing discussion points.
That's when you started your tired-out routine (yes, routine) of implying or outright stating falsehoods on what was going through the other person's mind. I did not think you meant placing Zelda into a Layton-style game and I clarified that perfectly on how a dichotomy of play styles may rub a segment of aware gamers the wrong way. You have this bizarre notion of pulling strawman after strawman out of your butt and trying to coerce people you're arguing with to answer them while devolving the discussion into telling said person that he/she is embarrassing, deluded, confused and many versions of direct or indirect insults that heavily implied stupididty. I CAN take the high road because I'm not doing that to anyone here.
LOL "don't start shit if you don't..." Haha, okay, tough guy. Do you feel accomplished and like you won another Internet argument by browbeating a person with shitty insinuations? None of this shit is new about you and you know it. Your awful reputation precedes you as you continue to live up to it without anyone's help. Please continue your par for the course attack posts. It's the rote pattern we come to expect after ANYONE disagrees with you and you resort to your usual unpleasant and antagonizing posts. Do you ever let stuff slide with a friendly rebuttal or even a level-headed retort that isn't dripping with mean-spiritedness and condescension?
You can add this to your proud collection of terrible interactions with dozens, if not hundreds, of Gaffers that you directly caused because you handle confrontation and debate poorly. I'm sure you take pride in being a condescending and insulting individual to so many people trying to having heated, but still ordinary, arguments with each other. /Stops starting shit
Precisely. Tetra (and Aryll too) are drawn to not match the boys' design in the subtle ways that male and female children differentiate.
othersteve
Member
Man I can't wait until this whole everything has to directly include everyone movement passes. I don't want a male Tomb Raider. I don't want a male Samus. I don't want a female Link.
Spring-Loaded
Member
Thinking that saying "we're making a game about Zelda," is the same thing as "we're making a game about Sheik," is pretty dumb, or at least willfully ignorant. No one asks for a Zelda (character) game by Platinum — they're asking for a Sheik game. Not that Zelda couldn't go on an action-focused adventure, but Nintendo clearly considers certain action/roles appropriate only for certain characters (i.e. "what would Link do").
Same thing with the difference between a "Bruce Wayne game," and a "Batman game." Bruce Wayne and Batman might be alter egos of one another, but they are distinctly separate, particularly in the world of video games. If someone said they wanted a game where you play as Bruce Wayne first and foremost, you don't point at the Arkham series and say "you already have games like that," because what Batman does is different from what Bruce Wayne does.
Do you think Lara Croft and Samus reincarnate between games?
Are 90%of vg protagonists exclusively female, and would it be more balanced if those two series switched to male leads?
orthodoxy1095
Banned
Yeah but this isn't happening.
Princess Simulator it is, then!
othersteve
Member
That's cool and all. But the bottom line is that the vast majority of the target market which enjoys Zelda games remains perfectly acquainted with Link as a male. To propose a sweeping change in this convention would very likely alienate at least a significant portion of that market -- in exchange for what is very likely a tiny calculated faction of newcomers interested in the gender swap.
I find it absolutely inoffensive that people wish to have more females, minorities, etc. in modern games. It is a natural development as the gaming market continues to expand and demographics shift accordingly. But a much safer and more rational approach to expanding the groups, races, genders, et al featured in modern games is to simply create new games with new characters. It is too risky and likely not potentially beneficial enough for a publisher to alter the constituents of a franchise as popular and well-acquainted as Zelda when they could just as easily simply test the waters with new concepts and IPs.
Spring-Loaded
Member
You posted this in response to a post talking about the visual design of the characters, not their roles throughout the game:
The "WTF goes in these threads," part is clearly antagonistic if you didn't want someone to respond in kind while pointing out that your response did not account for the discussion being about visual design of the characters, not sure why you would "start shit," like that if you're going to get bent out of shape afterwards.
You made a post that didn't address what the other person was talking about you can own up to it. It happens. There's no guarantee others will be cordial toward you even if you respond like an adult, but there's a much better chance they will. It's almost guaranteed if you imply someone isn't using logic when you weren't following their sub-discussion.
SweetDonuts
Member
I'm glad
Zelda informer once made a poll and half of their readers wanted a girl link.
But I am talking about EVERY SINGLE INTERVIEW of a dev about why their game had problems. It took capcom like 4 months to understand that releasing without singleplayer was a bad idea =P
Wandering Robot
Member
I've wanted a Sheik game for forever, but I'll take that or Zelda or Impa or whichever--just let me kick ass. It's okay to just let Link be a guy, like damn.
Spring-Loaded
Member
That visual change in player avatar wouldn't be a sweeping change. Considering how androgynous Link has looked in almost every iteration coupled with the relatively simplistic cartoon aesthetic of even the more detailed/gritty entries, making subtle visual changes to make a girl Link look like a girl (or on the girl-side of androgynous) wouldn't require sweeping change, and wouldn't be risky from a brand recognition/visual design standpoint. I genuinely can't fathom someone not recognizing a girl Link as Link and more than I can fathom someone not knowing for sure whether BotW Link was actually Link/a boy in the initial footage. The outfit being different in BotW is a bigger departure from the established character design that a similarly dressed, but girl-version of the character. A girl Link doesn't need ribbons in their hair, hourglass figure, high heels, etc. to look like a girl.
And you underestimate how many people who would be either okay with that or simply wouldn't care either way. It's definitely less risky to stick to the status quo, but that ignores benefit of taking such a risk.
Going by what Aonuma and Miyamoto have said, it'd definitely be different from a Sheik game. Seems they would agree with you here, more or less.
Even though Sheik never did anything beyond use deku nut-smoke bombs in OoT, Smash Bros. and Hyrule Warriors have completely different movesets for those characters and Zelda has only been shown to fight a couple times.
Yeah, and while it's a small community, there was a poll or two on GAF about it, and when it was between girl Link and boy Link, more than half voted for girl Link with thousands of votes. Can't remember what a good sample size for a poll is, but if half of the userbase wanted a girl Link, having an option between those for players would make everyone who wants one or the other happy since they get to choose. Same could be done with Link and Zelda, or other characters in future games.
LuigiBlood
Member
Honestly it feels kind of good to see my own translation at OP post 
That line of mine you quoted...I was talking about Link's visual design being clearly male, not his role. The two prior posts:
1-Both WW and TP Link are clearly male , how can you fail to see how a girl would be different?
2-The notion that Wind Waker Link is clearly male is a lie of epic proportions. Can you explain the clarity of his gender?
3-And I responded to 2 that I agree with 1.
Edit: I understand my post came off as inflammatory. I was caught up in the moment and not deliberately trying to hurl personal insults at any one person.
othersteve
Member
The tiny subset of enthusiast gamers who frequent such websites (in comparison to the whole, which is exponentially larger) is unfortunately not representative of the total market.
Believe me, these companies are actively calculating such risk/benefit ratios in an attempt to gauge the potential payoff should they choose to gamble.
In summation: it's a very risky move in comparison to the alternative of not making the change, which seeks to solve a non-existent problem (in the eyes of likely some 90%+ of the total market), but which could very possibly cost the developer dearly in lost sales if it alienates fans of the existing characters, that no sane publisher would ever undertake. There are far safer and more rational approaches to more inclusionary creations in the future for these companies should they wish to undertake the challenge. And rest assured: whichever of these companies does undertake it, they will reap the benefits of the market segment's support for their decisions. Inertia is a powerful force, but opportunity and profit will eventually overcome it.
Conspiracy theory bs.
And how many of those voters were actually in the target audience and truly care for reasons other than simply wanting woman at the helm of as many games as possible? Hell, how many actually "want" it versus just thinking that it would be interesting? This is definitely a vocal minority no matter how you want to put it.
Though, what annoys me is the "If you don't agree with me it's because you're sexist" mentality. Interestingly, nobody replied to my earlier point...
balgajo
Member
Don't really remember this one. The ones I saw always showed negative reception about girl Link.
Scientist Supreme!
Banned
I've probably been in over 10 threads of this topic and I truly haven't seen one good reason for this to not happen. The push back is usually in three categories of "It's always been this way", some sexist nonsense and "balance of the triforce" type nonsense.
I just want someone to properly explain why having the option of a female link is the end of world, if the comments are anything to go by.
I just want someone to properly explain why having the option of a female link is the end of world, if the comments are anything to go by.
He's named Link because Zelda was originally supposed to have time-travel and sci-fi elements, with the player character acting as a link between the different time periods.
I'm not saying that it wouldn't be different; I'm saying that it would be shit and that having Sheik instead is the better compromise. It's the best way to have an action game starring Zelda in some form without making it an obvious attempt at appeasing a vocal group. Otherwise, I'd see more more merit in an RTS where Zelda commands Hyrule's army in a war.
If this post seems disjointed, I was afraid of someone pulling the "sexist" card on me, though I'm sure that I failed at avoiding even that.
Nintendo do not want to do it. It is THEIR creation, THEIR series, THEIR character and THEIR decision. Not yours.
There. That's your reason, and it should be the only one you need. But you, and many others, will refuse to accept it and carry on banging the same battered old drum until the end of times. Excuse me whilst I go get some earplugs.
othersteve
Member
To comprehend something, we must first choose to accept the information in front of us, unfiltered, so that we might appreciate all perspectives.
Having said that, the answer to your question is that having a female Link is not the "end of the world", but it is quite risky from a commercial perspective, especially as compared to alternative options of appealing to whatever subsets or factions of the gaming market might be energized by such a decision. Quoting myself from just a few posts previous:
Believe me, these companies are actively calculating such risk/benefit ratios in an attempt to gauge the potential payoff should they choose to gamble.
In summation: it's a very risky move in comparison to the alternative of not making the change, which seeks to solve a non-existent problem (in the eyes of likely some 90%+ of the total market), but which could very possibly cost the developer dearly in lost sales if it alienates fans of the existing characters, that no sane publisher would ever undertake. There are far safer and more rational approaches to more inclusionary creations in the future for these companies should they wish to undertake the challenge. And rest assured: whichever of these companies does undertake it, they will reap the benefits of the market segment's support for their decisions. Inertia is a powerful force, but opportunity and profit will eventually overcome it.
Spring-Loaded
Member
Despite studies/reports/figures/etc. that, say, female action movie stars pull in bigger audiences, or that diverse casts in TV shows
I have to reject the notion that every video game company is calculating risk in smart ways. I'm sure they're afraid and apprehensive about making waves, but when Shu Yoshida says there was reluctance to make the Horizon: Zero Dawn protag a woman, or when Ubisoft seemingly never considered having female avatar options in multiplayer for Assassin's Creed: Unity (and then tried to pass of the justification that girl animations would be too hard to add), or the myriad comments from Nintendo following decisions they made about Tomadachi Life (same-sex marriage), New Super Mario Bros. U (Peach's dress animations), TriForce heroes (can't even summarize the rationale for no girl options there), and more, I can only take away that that fear and apprehension has prevented many companies from even discussing the matter or trying to find ways to make it work. Even with recent and not-so-recent examples of gender select/choice between dual protagonists working out in games with more dialogue, and more complex and branching stories.
Inaction is not safe from danger either all the negative press over the terrible justifications Aonuma trotted out (likely the result of never having though the matter through, or never even conceiving the subject) is damaging too. It's something Nintendo as a whole is going to have to learn to properly address in some way (which they really haven't in some prominent instances) if they insist on existing in a global market.
I get what you're saying, but Link's character model is new in every game except for Majora's Mask (not sure about the 2D games though). It isn't "keeping Link a boy," so much as it is "making another boy Link."
It's an active decision, and the design/character of Link isn't a boy in each new mainline game on its own.
Pretty sure most of the people in this discussion are fans of the series. Not sure where that speculation gets us either. Safe to say anyone on this forum has some interest in video games as a whole, and their input is as worthwhile as the most diehard fan.
The bolded sounds like you're projecting that on them. I haven't followed your quote chain, but I really doubt that was ever said.
I posted the following last night. Perhaps some don't think this is a compelling reason, but this I do think is the reason why it won't happen immediately and should not have been expected of BotW:
I think I've said at least a dozen times that I'm on board when Nintendo deems it right to put that female protag front and center, but without feeling rushed or pressured by fans with no understanding of their company and inner workings. For us, it is no big deal to talk and dream and propose any number of ideas like it's a piece of cake. We're all naive and clueless about running a billion dollar multinational corporation and have nothing at stake. It's EASY for us to talk shit here all day about what they could or ought to do. But the reality is very different. For them, it is a careful business decision that will take years and cost millions to create and bring to life, and can cost them millions more if not implemented effectively. I'd rather defer to them to get it right when the time comes and cut them some slack in the meantime.
othersteve
Member
That may be, and if it does come to pass that such inaction eventually defeats a company's position in the market, you will be in a prime position to point the finger and laugh.
But be aware that you and I are not the ones making these calculated decisions, intelligent or not as they may be. Intellectual property is a delicate thing, and the silent majority may or may not be aware of their connection to the characters in a story or the conventions of a franchise until those characters are altered or the conventions are changed. To gamble on a sweeping change to an installment of a major (expensive) franchise which does not seek to correct anything which is definably wrong with that franchise is bordering on insanity. As Nintendo proved this E3, there are far more numerous options of other conventions or properties which can be altered or improved that are far more likely to be accepted by the mass market than of altering the basic identity of the main character of a franchise who is already so widely beloved by the target market.
AcademicSaucer
Member
I wonder if the people begging for a female link will ever reach acceptance ...
Bargaining phase is cute and all but its time to move on.
Bargaining phase is cute and all but its time to move on.
I thought this thread was about Miyamoto don't ruling out a possible spin off starring Sheik/Zelda as a main character. One would assume the thread would revolve around possible ideas about said game. My bad.