Support NeoGAF

[Chmpocalypse]

IGN just put this up, and since it's assuredly going to be a thread, we'll start off the discussion with the fully quotes from everyone instead of an article linking through seven other articles to IGN.

Feel free to weigh in however.


Source: http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/06...aign=Blogroll&abthid=5592dd286e0ef0a14f000007

"It's that way because uh we made it that way and uh well I mean we could change it but... reasons" is a fucking pathetic excuse.

 

[BumblebeeCody]

I still want 4 Links. Where is purple!?

 

[autoduelist]

I'm not sure if he's basically just saying "they're male because they're male" or if he thinks that something about that set up that means that they have to be males

He probably means there are story events that relate to male heroes (ie, love interests, whatever) and they didn't want to write/code/animate/etc variant storylines based on gender due to added time/cost.

People forget options cost money. 'One size fits all' isn't necessarily racist/sexist/whatever, sometimes it's just budget constraints.

 

[Hours Left]

I still want 4 Links. Where is purple!?

Too feminine.

 

[Volotaire]

I'l cross post this from another thread. Nintendo has indeed had a playable female in a minor Zelda game before (but not Link and not in the USA).

Some may not know this, but there was a selectable male or female character in a Zelda game. In BS The Legend of Zelda: Ancient Stone Tablets (a Nintendo developed Zelda game for the Broadcast Satellaview), you could choose between 'male mascot' and 'female mascot'. This was a game that used the A Link to the Past assets but featured an new storyline.

And as a slight off topic discussion for this thread, since Nintendo lifted the item rental mechanic from BS The Legend of Zelda: Ancient Stone of tablets, I would like them to perhaps consider in the future re-releasing a The Legend of Zelda port with the visuals of BS The Legend of Zelda. A Super Mario All Starts visual makeover if you will.

Here are some pictures of 'male mascot' and 'female mascot'. I cannot link the website since the link would show emulation links, which is against the TOS.

 

[Oppo]

He probably means there are story events that relate to male heroes (ie, love interests, whatever) and they didn't want to write/code/animate/etc variant storylines based on gender due to added time/cost.

People forget options cost money. 'One size fits all' isn't necessarily racist/sexist/whatever, sometimes it's just budget constraints.

Yves Guillemot, ladies and gentlemen!

this interview was a bummer, I thought Nintendo was doing a super clever thing with the Wii U (?) Zelda reveal as I did in fact think they had a female Link twist coming. now it doesn't sound at all like that. just the usual nonsense.

that answer was funny because of the wind up. "we'll circle around to me repeating that it can't happen, will all make sense then".

also consider me among those surprised to learn that Link has apparently reached Buster Keaton levels of nonverbal performance. I thought he was just a dumb silent cypher like Gordon Freeman.

 

[Yoshi]

Well, yeah. It's shit.

"We didn't want to" is never a good answer when asked about perceived prejudice in game development. Because then you know it's actual prejudice.

Or you can conclude they just didn't want to for whatever other reason. "We did not want to" is a viable answer as to why you did not design a game in a certain way, are they supposed to offer a breakdown on financial and artistic reasons for that? Even though there probably did not go much thought into it other than "We just take Link and recolour him in three ways, that's easy, cheap and offers all gameplay options we need"? If you were to ask me why a certain character of the game I work on has a certain sex, I could also just answer "this is how we came up with the character and I don't see any benefit in changing it".

And in either case, does the character [Zelda] still have to play the role of damsel in distress, or sit in the castle all day? That's the more outdated aspect of this situation IMO. We have a capable female hero that's been there since day one that constantly has to play the backseat role in every story, basically just acting as a plot device.

What is so outdated about that? We are talking a medival fairytale type story, what do we expect a princess to do? I'd argue Zelda is surprisingly active even in Ocarina of Time and Wind Waker.

 

[Enkidu]

"It's that way because uh we made it that way and uh well I mean we could change it but... reasons" is a fucking pathetic excuse.

I agree that it's a rather lousy explanation that boils down to them being forced to do it this way because of some arbitrary limits they imposed on themselves. However, I find the notion that it is an "excuse" to be absurd. Why does Nintendo need to excuse anything here? Having Link (or whoever these main characters may be) be male is not something that needs excusing, just as how if they were all female there wouldn't be any need to excuse the lack of a male option.

 

[Hours Left]

What is so outdated about that? We are talking a medival fairytale type story, what do we expect a princess to do? I'd argue Zelda is surprisingly active even in Ocarina of Time and Wind Waker.

She can start with getting an opportunity to leave the castle while not in disguise or under someone's protection. No matter how "active" she's been in the past, she's still always relegated to second fiddle. It's time for her to actually be the focus for once, based on her abilities, as opposed to being a prize.

And do all medieval stories have to be the same? The whole point of this topic even coming up is that people want things to change.

 

[Yoshi]

She can start with getting an opportunity to leave the castle while not in disguise or under someone's protection. No matter how "active" she's been in the past, she's still always relegated to second fiddle. It's time for her to actually be the focus for once, based on her abilities, as opposed to being a prize.

And do all medieval stories have to be the same? The whole point of this topic even coming up is that people want things to change.

Zelda still is a videogame, you don't get to know Zelda's every day business. With the exception of Majora's Mask, people in Zelda do not have an everyday life, they stand around in the same places all the time and only seldom do they act explicitly and if they do, it's part of the story telling. Zelda is obviously one of the most active npcs and I certainly don't think it's outdated per sé that she is staying in the castle most of the time - in the few Zelda games where she is in a castle or captured that is. In Zelda LA, OoT, MM, OoS, OoA, ST (you can play her here...) and TWW she does not only in a castle or captured.

EDIT: How often do you see royals walking around unprotected and undisguised btw? Even in contemporary times.

 

[Oppo]

Yoshi stop. you're gonna pull a muscle.

 

[RK128]

I could buy the excuse for single player (as his description makes some sense there) but outside of that? I find it a bit lazy they are not having female character options for the MP mode where that could do a good deal in making the game more open to some players.

I guess this has been a big question ever since the first Zelda U trailer came to surface (with Link looking the most female-like then any other Link in the series), as it would be a nice option for the series future; two different 'Links' that the player can chose from at the start of the game. I mean, other JRPG's do this kind of thing (Digimon CS comes to mind, as does Persona 3 Portable (which a whole new scenes with that choice; granted this was only in the PSP version as a new feature)) and western RPG's like Fallout 4 and the Elder Scrolls series do this too.

Going back to Tri-Force Heroes, I guess they don't want to explore that idea yet and while that idea would be great for this game, they must want to save it for another Zelda title.

 

[Yoshi]

Yoshi stop. you're gonna pull a muscle.

I appreciate the valuable insight you provided to me.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Oh so it had nothing to do with an argument for female Link. Gotcha.



Yeah I agree actually, I think it would be pretty cool to have Link's version of Sheik.

You got it, it had nothing to do with an argument for female Link.

 

[Oppo]

I appreciate the valuable insight you provided to me.

"she's a particularly active NPC" is not exactly a solid line of reasoning.

which is the whole point of the thread. Link and the Zelda series is particularly well suited to having a version with a female lead.

also the royalty disguise thing- would you really recognize the duchess of Luxembourg in cargo shorts and a Pixies t shirt? cmon now

I'd be happy with either female Link or Zelda as lead character. or for Nintendo to get better PR.

I will add this - I do think N should do whatever they creatively want. if they just straight up said "we just don't see Link that way" then that's fine. it's when they spin and twist ineffectually, it's annoying to read.

 

[Hours Left]

Zelda still is a videogame, you don't get to know Zelda's every day business. With the exception of Majora's Mask, people in Zelda do not have an everyday life, they stand around in the same places all the time and only seldom do they act explicitly and if they do, it's part of the story telling. Zelda is obviously one of the most active npcs and I certainly don't think it's outdated per sé that she is staying in the castle most of the time - in the few Zelda games where she is in a castle or captured that is. In Zelda LA, OoT, MM, OoS, OoA, ST (you can play her here...) and TWW she does not only in a castle or captured.

EDIT: How often do you see royals walking around unprotected and undisguised btw? Even in contemporary times.

I don't understand your reasoning. You know I'm advocating for her not to be an NPC right? You're trying to justify this behaviour when I'm saying that I don't want her to be relegated to only acting as a plot device.

And there's lots of games where you play as a member of royalty. We're not beholden to real life concerns here. (And as I said in a previous post, she doesn't even necessarily have to be a princess all the time.) Having Zelda play the eternal supporting role is outdated and shortsighted. We know she can fight, we know she's smart, we know she's capable, now let her demonstrate this in a leading role.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Also aren't tons of stories set up with a prince on an adventure

Almost sounds like Yoshi's concerned more with gender norms than trope norms

 

[NHarmonic.]

Zelda still is a videogame, you don't get to know Zelda's every day business. With the exception of Majora's Mask, people in Zelda do not have an everyday life, they stand around in the same places all the time and only seldom do they act explicitly and if they do, it's part of the story telling. Zelda is obviously one of the most active npcs and I certainly don't think it's outdated per sé that she is staying in the castle most of the time - in the few Zelda games where she is in a castle or captured that is. In Zelda LA, OoT, MM, OoS, OoA, ST (you can play her here...) and TWW she does not only in a castle or captured.

EDIT: How often do you see royals walking around unprotected and undisguised btw? Even in contemporary times.

This is a weird argument; A fictional character isn't ruled by the laws of our world. And to be honest, we've had games already where the princess is the focus: Super Princess Peach. Now, doing a better game that focus on Zelda isn't so titanic, weird or out of place idea, don't you think?

 

[Yoshi]

"she's a particularly active NPC" is not exactly a solid line of reasoning.

which is the whole point of the thread. Link and the Zelda series is particularly well suited to having a version with a female lead.

also the royalty disguise thing- would you really recognize the duchess of Luxembourg in cargo shorts and a Pixies t shirt? cmon now

I'd be happy with either female Link or Zelda as lead character. or for Nintendo to get better PR.

I will add this - I do think N should do whatever they creatively want. if they just straight up said "we just don't see Link that way" then that's fine. it's when they spin and twist ineffectually, it's annoying to read.

I have no problem with Zelda having the lead role of a game (I would take a different gameplay approach for it to meaningfully differentiate, similar to Princess Peach's game, so maybe a super-strict puzzle-Zelda with no combat whatsoever? I'd love that! Or the other way around, a more combat oriented Zelda with Shiek in the main role? I wouldn't like that though). I was mainly responding to the notion that it is "dated" to have Zelda in the role she has and I think this is perfectly fine today. Sorry for the confusion, I did not want to say you need to follow reality when designing a game, in fact, I despise realism in games. It was really just targeted at that specific complaint.

This is also an answer to this:

I don't understand your reasoning. You know I'm advocating for her not to be an NPC right? You're trying to justify this behaviour when I'm saying that I don't want her to be relegated to only acting as a plot device.

And there's lots of games where you play as a member of royalty. We're not beholden to real life concerns here. (And as I said in a previous post, she doesn't even necessarily have to be a princess all the time.) Having Zelda play the eternal supporting role is outdated and shortsighted. We know she can fight, we know she's smart, we know she's capable, now let her demonstrate this in a leading role.

and this:

This is a weird argument; A fictional character isn't ruled by the laws of our world. And to be honest, we've had games already where the princess is the focus: Super Princess Peach. Now, doing a better game that focus on Zelda isn't so titanic, weird or out of place idea, don't you think?

Since this is a bit different, I'll answer it separately:

Also aren't tons of stories set up with a prince on an adventure

Almost sounds like Yoshi's concerned more with gender norms than trope norms

No, Zelda may do whatever the developer wants her to do, I just don't think it's inappropiate to have her stay at the castle for most of the time. It fits the story idea and setting Nintendo is going for and is quite natural for NPCs in a gameplay oriented game anyway.

EDIT: Oh and no, I wouldn't recognize any monarch in casual attire. In fact, I wouldn't recognize and royal other than the british queen at all, in any attire that does not explicitly state who it is.

 

[BGBW]

"It's that way because uh we made it that way and uh well I mean we could change it but... reasons" is a fucking pathetic excuse.

So because random IGN person asks a question Nintendo should just change it because not doing so is pathetic? Press the magical change the game button, summon Mr. Clipit and ask for his help? You can't just change things willy nilly. And 'it's that way because we made it that way' is a fact for everything. If one can't state that then god help us all.

They made a game where three players play as the multicoloured Link truope and then threw together a random story to hold it together. That's how they usually make Zelda games. The story didn't dictate anything.

Just call Red Link "She-Link" like how an orange Slime from Dragon Quest is a She-Slime. Sorted.