Support NeoGAF

[Song of Fire]

You know, in all the years it’s been discussed, this debate has never not been interesting. I’m going to try to distill it into something that may be easy to follow, and hopefully help the conversation along. Keep in mind, I am only touching on certain aspects of this, so just because I don’t say anything about thing does not mean I am trying to ignore it; it is simply not relevant to my chosen points. If it’s too long, feel free to panic; I am including a summary at the end for all our summer reading needs:


Many view Link as being an established character, singular, yet plural. When talking about Link, it is not uncommon for people to refer to all of his iterations as though they are one. In this view, while the different games may have different Links, they are all still a representation of that one character.

Further, Link is often seen as the face of the franchise; he is the one thing that can be said to be consistent throughout the mainline games and is therefore important to the brand.

To add an option to play as a female Link could therefore be viewed as risking diluting the face of the series. She may still be recognizable as Link, but it would be a step away from the idea of an established character. As the character would then be less established, more steps away could be, theoretically, taken. This is a different situation than, say, Commander Shepherd has in Mass Effect: Link has become established over thirty years, whereas Shepherd was created to be built as the player sees fit.

Further, if Link is an established character, many may not view a female Link as truly being that character. This goes back to the character being both singular and plural.

Meanwhile, another group sees him more as an avatar for the player, not so much a character in his own right, and back this up with the past statement that Link is meant to be a link between the player and the game.

If he is not truly an established character, than a gender option cannot dilute that character.

Given he is not an established character, the different iterations of Link cannot be viewed as being one and the same, singular as well as plural. If this is not the case, there is nothing preventing Link from, at some point, being female.


If only one of these can be the case –and yes, I am simplifying this to just two possibilities- than either group getting what they are asking for (Link remaining male only or there being a female incarnation of Link) is going to result in the other group being denied what they want, and for reasons that they do not agree. The problem is that, the way things are presented, the discussion will almost always boil down to something resembling these two viewpoints, and it will go nowhere.

If Link is an established character, and that established character is important to the brand, any change that could be seen as making him less established needs a reason. If the reason cannot be demonstrated as requiring that the change desired must be embodied within Link, people will remain averse to the idea. However, if Link is not an established character, this reasoning is unneeded, and those who demand it are imagining the situation as being more complicated than it really is.

Of course, this discussion is not necessarily so simple. The idea of a female Link seems to be largely driven by the desire for a female protagonist; whether this is actually Link is immaterial to this desire. If this is the case, than the idea is ill-represented. The discussion, after all, centers on a female Link, as opposed to a female protagonist.

Those in favor of Link, as they see it, retaining his character’s identity do not appear to be opposed to the idea of a female protagonist. This idea does not threaten the character identity of the beloved face of the series, so there is no reason to be against it. If this is the case, the opposition seen to a female protagonist among the fanbase can be largely attributed to resistance to the idea of a female Link, which is most commonly how the idea is represented.


If this is all true, than you have people who view Link as an established character and the face of the franchise, who are against changes that may harm that character identity, but are not against the idea of a female protagonist in general.

You also have a group pushing for a female protagonist, yet they are seen as demanding that that character must be Link, when only a few of them actually see that as being important to their desires.

If the pretense of the female Link were dropped, there would than be less resistance to the request for a female protagonist, and we could stop arguing about the nature of the character of Link, something we are likely never to all agree on.

This brings us to the idea of Link staring in the game versus any other character.


Again, some people see the character of Link as being more vital to the games than do others. If Link is vital to the games and their identity, than any mainline game can, in effect, only star Link; anything else would, by default and unless otherwise explicitly stated, be viewed as a side game or spinoff.

One group seems to see this as a simple truth to the argument, but the other group does not think it must be this way. If Link is simply an avatar for the player, than any other character can fill this role. Link, than, is not required for a mainline game.

This creates a division on whether or not Zelda or Impa, Malon or Romani, even, being relegated to a spinoff is acceptable or even expected. Some would see that as the default for any character other than Link, even the king of Hyrule himself; others see it as being, inherently, an intentionally chosen lesser role, some arguing that it means Nintendo is saying one must be male to be the hero at all.

This, therefore, is founded in each individual person’s view of Link himself.

Of course, many who view link as an established character are open to the idea of another protagonist starring in some mainline games; to say otherwise would just be silly. Whether or not this character could star in such games may yet be up for debate.


In general, a large part of this debate originates with the two different, often irreconcilable views of Link as a character, whether he is established or not. This, in itself, should not be relevant to the idea of a female protagonist, but that idea is most often presented as being female Link. If what is desired is more a female protagonist than only a female Link, than the arguments for a female Link must be detrimental to the conversation, as they do not truly represent what is desired. There is further division to be caused by the ideas of Link as a character, as those who see him as the face of the series are more likely to expect games with any other protagonists to be spinoffs.


TL;DR:

To simplify matters, one group sees Link as an established character and the face of the series; to provide an option for a female Link may than dilute the character, and any stand-alone female Link is not truly that character to begin with. The other group sees Link as a changeable avatar, making it less important the character have the sense of identity the first group sees in him. This second group is calling for a female protagonist, but this is often portrayed by both sides as a female Link specifically.

The first group may not be opposed to a female protagonist so much as they are a female Link, making the argument about the matter more about one specific possible aspect of what people are asking for than the actual request itself.

The first group may also view any game without Link as the protagonist as inherently being a spinoff of sorts, but people calling for a female protagonist seem to view the idea of a spinoff as being, in itself, lesser to a mainline game. The division here seems to be largely based on whether or not Link is viewed as both an established character and the face of the series, though that is likely not the entire cause.

Of course, even this simplified idea of the debate could be way off, and I am open to being corrected.

 

[Alex_Mexico]

pretty good video criticizing Nintendo's reasoning Link is male
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t-QiJI3TwU

Even if his theory was true that won't excuse Aonuma's pathetic reasonings for not having a female playable character (either Link or Zelda).

Thanks for sharing that video.

 

[mugwhump]

Obviously aa we go forward games will work to be more inclusive ans have different characters and portrayals and that is great. I like the way Guaccamelee did it with the characters both male and female playable but integrated for story reasons. But I think its different to complain about establishrd characters being established characters. And having a paper thin personality or motiivation doesnt mean a character hasnt been defined for the audience. Chrono is an example of a character who has been defined as a set of traits that now are established lore both by the games and also the media. Link is the same thing.

Yeah. I think these discussions often have a bit of a false dichotomy, with some people saying that characters are either completely set in stone or faceless, fluid avatars. But there are ways to handle characters that fall in between those two extremes. Characters can be defined in some ways, but in other ways be blank slates. Personality-wise, Link is more of a vessel for the player. But in terms of character design, Link is quite well defined, to the point that he's become one of the most recognizable characters in gaming.

Also, as othersteve said, why is optional gender selection more important than being able to make link dark haired, or fat, or black? Nintendo has a vested interest in keeping Link's design immediately recognizable, as he's the face of their IP.

TL;DR:

To simplify matters, one group sees Link as an established character and the face of the series; to provide an option for a female Link may than dilute the character, and any stand-alone female Link is not truly that character to begin with. The other group sees Link as a changeable avatar, making it less important the character have the sense of identity the first group sees in him. This second group is calling for a female protagonist, but this is often portrayed by both sides as a female Link specifically.

The first group may not be opposed to a female protagonist so much as they are a female Link, making the argument about the matter more about one specific possible aspect of what people are asking for than the actual request itself.

The first group may also view any game without Link as the protagonist as inherently being a spinoff of sorts, but people calling for a female protagonist seem to view the idea of a spinoff as being, in itself, lesser to a mainline game. The division here seems to be largely based on whether or not Link is viewed as both an established character and the face of the series, though that is likely not the entire cause.

Of course, even this simplified idea of the debate could be way off, and I am open to being corrected.

Good writeup, I think you did a good job summarizing why these threads are always so controversial. Personally I'm in the Linkette camp. I don't really want gender selection or playing as Zelda if they go for a female protag. I don't think there's anything Nintendo could do that would make everyone happy.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

Good writeup, I think you did a good job summarizing why these threads are always so controversial. Personally I'm in the Linkette camp. I don't really want gender selection or playing as Zelda if they go for a female protag. I don't think there's anything Nintendo could do that would make everyone happy.

I consider making everyone happy to be an unattainable goal (for anything) and consider it harmful when its lack of attainability is used to justify inaction/stagnation.

That said, how would a gender option for a brand new Link (which BotW Link might not be based on a lot of hints in the demo) not please more people?

 

[mugwhump]

I consider making everyone happy to be an unattainable goal (for anything) and consider it harmful when its lack of attainability is used to justify inaction/stagnation.

That said, how would a gender option for a brand new Link (which BotW Link might not be based on a lot of hints in the demo) not please more people?

Personally, I don't want gender selection. I enjoyed the hints of romance in the previous games and wouldn't want those to be de-emphasized, which would probably happen. I also want the game to have one "canon" link. I'm not sure how rational these preferences are, but that's how I feel.

I think most of the people who wouldn't be pleased with it just don't want Link to change. They like him how he is, as a fairly well-defined character. Or maybe they have other reasons, I don't know. But the repeated threads on this issue should make it pretty clear that gender selection wouldn't necessarily please more people than it displeased. It would be, at the least, highly controversial, even moreso outside of neogaf.

 

[_Isaac]

Did somebody already explain what an S spin-off is or is that a typo?

 

[Galactic Fork]

TL;DR:

To simplify matters, one group sees Link as an established character and the face of the series; to provide an option for a female Link may than dilute the character, and any stand-alone female Link is not truly that character to begin with. The other group sees Link as a changeable avatar, making it less important the character have the sense of identity the first group sees in him. This second group is calling for a female protagonist, but this is often portrayed by both sides as a female Link specifically.

The first group may not be opposed to a female protagonist so much as they are a female Link, making the argument about the matter more about one specific possible aspect of what people are asking for than the actual request itself.

The first group may also view any game without Link as the protagonist as inherently being a spinoff of sorts, but people calling for a female protagonist seem to view the idea of a spinoff as being, in itself, lesser to a mainline game. The division here seems to be largely based on whether or not Link is viewed as both an established character and the face of the series, though that is likely not the entire cause.

Of course, even this simplified idea of the debate could be way off, and I am open to being corrected.

There is a third group, too. Those who see each Link as individual characters, separate from the others. Not both singular and plural. To me at least, making them all one character ignores each one's whole life. What makes a character but their life experiences? Is it simply a picture and a vague archetype?

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

Did somebody already explain what an S spin-off is or is that a typo?

SHEIK

 

[Song of Fire]

Good writeup, I think you did a good job summarizing why these threads are always so controversial. Personally I'm in the Linkette camp. I don't really want gender selection or playing as Zelda if they go for a female protag. I don't think there's anything Nintendo could do that would make everyone happy.

Thanks. I figured it would be helpful to this thread, and hopefully others, to remind people why they always turn out how they do. While Nintendo could try to please everybody, I do think you are correct that they would find themselves unable.

There is a third group, too. Those who see each Link as individual characters, separate from the others. Not both singular and plural. To me at least, making them all one character ignores each one's whole life.

This is true, and there are certainly more groups as well.

However, while my summary didn't explain it as clearly as maybe it should have, I opted to simplify the debate to two sides, as it is easier to explain and to follow. Those who see each Link as one individual character without the idea of the singular Link are, as far as their arguments are concerned, fairly close to those who view Link as an avatar. In fact, many who make the argument that Link, as an avatar, can be changed may lean more toward the idea of many independent Links than they let on. Of course, it's not up to me to say either way.

Gender select?

While the ability to choose Link's gender may seem like it wouldn't cause issues, the argument could be made that it dilutes the singular character of Link, or risks the dilution thereof. For instance, it would provide two interchangeable "Link" characters, one of which still does not match how some people view the singular character. While she may still be recognizable as a kind of Link, many people would still not see her as being that Link. To some, this may be seen as a threat to the singular Link.