and just as general information, we do have a lot of female staff members who are playing this game and enjoying it. It doesn't seem to be a big issue to them. They still are getting emotional investment in this game. And to be honest, Link isn't the most masculine of guys in the world, depending on how you want to project yourself into the character.
Plus we already know from Hyrule Warriors that Zelda can kick some serious ass!!!
I love Zelda as much as the next guy but I'm done with the "male mute in green saves helpless princess from big baddie at the end" story. I hope Zelda U has some twist to the story formula. It got stale years ago.
His answer to the question is so problematic. What does being male have to do with fulfilling the kings request for heroes? Why can't women be heroes? How does Link's masculinity justify the lack of women? That's borderline homophobic.
And they could have skipped the question enitrely if they just made it a four swords game ag ain. Dammit Nintendo, why you gotta make it hard for yourself.
Huh?
Didn't this generation see an increase in their promotion of female characters?
Hell, Zelda itself scored a homerun with the massively lady-oriented cast in Hyrule Warriors.
Weird answer. So, there are three Links? Is there some story explanation for that?
I would actually accept the answer "It's because the main character is Link, and Link is a male character, and the game is at least partly story-driven so the fact that it's Link makes a difference."
But that doesn't seem to be the case here. There's barely any story, and three playable characters.
Metroid, Animal Crossing, Splatoon, pretty much every modern Zelda game, any Mario game with Peach or Roselina would like to have a word with you.
Super Princess Peach indeed was a bit of a step back, but let's not fly off the handle here. When it comes to progression in women's roles Nintendo's actually ahead of the curve.
Weird answer. So, there are three Links? Is there some story explanation for that?
I would actually accept the answer "It's because the main character is Link, and Link is a male character, and the game is at least partly story-driven so the fact that it's Link makes a difference."
But that doesn't seem to be the case here. There's barely any story, and three playable characters.
You've got one Link that somehow is split into three Links with different hair and tunic colors. So, if you could change one of the Links into a girl, it'd mean that the magic somehow also did a gender change. It wouldn't be just a female avatar.
The character in my avatar is actually a male alien magically changed into a human girl for a mobile game tie in, but it should be obvious why Nintendo wouldn't randomly do something like that with their own characters.
Because changing a characters gender would fundamentally change them. Also randomly swapping gender after two decades of established games makes literally no sense.
Unless youre being sarcastic in which case ignore this
Honest question, why does it matter? No malice behind my question but I've been under a rock for a while. I never played games thinking about the gender of the character I'm playing as. I played games to play games.
Is it really a bad thing not to include optional gender choices?
Because changing a characters gender would fundamentally changes them. Also randomly swapping gender after two decades of established games makes literally no sense.
Unless youre being sarcastic in which case ignore this
Well, I definitely agree that their explanation is a bad. I mean, if anything, in cases like this its the explanations that usually make the situations a lot worse (ergo Ubisoft with AC Unity). I guess my point is just to address the wider issue of whether or not we should be pushing for greater representation in games for the sake of greater representation, or should we be pushing for more meaningful representation.
It doesn't have to be about malice. But at some point, ignorance stops working as a defense when you repeatedly have to say "oops, you know, it never came up"
Yeah, I absolutely understand where you're coming. And like I said, as someone who is part of a minority in the country I live in, I'd love for more characters of my racial background to be included in video games, but if they're going to be included, I'd rather it be a meaningful inclusion rather than a checklist inclusion to appease those who a vocal about the issue. If anything that's worse than not including them in my eyes.
In Hyrule Historia, Miyamoto even acknowledged that Link was Nintendo's original player avatar and that it's his first game where the player could give the main character his or her own name. Still really depressing that Nintendo hasn't caught up with the genre they were standards-setters in 30 years ago.
Since that time they evolved the franchise to be fairly plot and character development focused, including the various Links. I want to play as a character, not myself. One of the most disappointing things about Xenoblade X was that they turned the main character into a customizable player avatar.
As for this game, all they had to do was say "The main character is Link and we didn't want to model other characters so we used palette swaps."
Honest question, why does it matter? No malice behind my question but I've been under a rock for a while. I never played games thinking about the gender of the character I'm playing as. I played games to play games.
Is it really a bad thing not to include optional gender choices?
Huh?
Didn't this generation see an increase in their promotion of female characters?
Hell, Zelda itself scored a homerun with the massively lady-oriented cast in Hyrule Warriors.
lol I haven't played this but I think pointing out a few games where Nintendo has done a somewhat better job than they usually do as a sign that they're immune from sexism/misogyny complaints is a strange argument. Like what they've done is baby steps but they haven't really changed anything major to make me believe that they're honestly getting better. Being able to choose your gender in a mainline Zelda game would certainly help with that. Ain't no reason Link needs to be a boy. It's not like he has some in depth character development that needs to stay consistent.
You've got one Link that somehow is split into three Links with different hair and tunic colors. So, if you could change one of the Links into a girl, it'd mean that the magic somehow also did a gender change. It wouldn't be just a female avatar.
The character in my avatar is actually a male alien magically changed into a human girl for a mobile game tie in, but it should be obvious why Nintendo wouldn't randomly do something like that with their own characters.
This is the same company that gave us Birdo. I don't think there would be a big issue with a magic gender change for a magic replica of Link.
Also, Nintendo just announced that they're going to have gay marriage in a Fire Emblem game, I don't think they're that against changing up their ideology.
Link is also a pantheon of characters, descendants from one another, that has the possibility for versatility and diversity built directly into the lore. If Link was suddenly female (like Thor) or black (like Green Lantern), why would this change the game, series, or character in a detrimental way?
How would this be anything other than good? Or at the very least interesting? Are you unable to enjoy a Zelda game without white male Link? It's not like an entire generation rejected Luigi as a playable character because he wasn't Mario. Or Dixie Kong because she wasn't Donkey Kong.
You slap a Hispanic Link on the cover of Zelda NX and you know how this would compromise the character? Not at all. Not even a little bit.
Ryu is a false equivelancy and you know it. Ryu is not an infinite bloodline of Ryu's spanning all history, past and future.
lol I haven't played this but I think pointing out a few games where Nintendo has done a somewhat better job than they usually do as a sign that they're immune from sexism/misogyny complaints is a strange argument. Like what they've done is baby steps but they haven't really changed anything major to make me believe that they're honestly getting better. Being able to choose your gender in a mainline Zelda game would certainly help with that. Ain't no reason Link needs to be a boy. It's not like he has some in depth character development that needs to stay consistent.
I'm more confused by the fact that there seems to be no story explanation behind there being three Links, that and Link somehow dyes his hair at some point.
Still it is called Tri Force heroes, they could have easily made one character be Link, one be Zelda and then one be Impa or someone else.
lol I haven't played this but I think pointing out a few games where Nintendo has done a somewhat better job than they usually do as a sign that they're immune from sexism/misogyny complaints is a strange argument. Like what they've done is baby steps but they haven't really changed anything major to make me believe that they're honestly getting better. Being able to choose your gender in a mainline Zelda game would certainly help with that. Ain't no reason Link needs to be a boy. It's not like he has some in depth character development that needs to stay consistent.
Link is also a pantheon of characters, descendants from one another, that has the possibility for versatility and diversity built directly into the lore. If Link was suddenly female (like Thor) or black (like Green Lantern), why would this change the game, series, or character in a detrimental way?
How would this be anything other than good? Or at the very least interesting? Are you unable to enjoy a Zelda game without white male Link? It's not like an entire generation rejected Luigi as a playable character because he wasn't Mario. Or Dixie Kong because she wasn't Donkey Kong.
You slap a Hispanic Link on the cover of Zelda NX and you know how this would compromise the character? Not at all. Not even a little bit.
Making Link ethnic for the sake of making Link ethnic would be worse than not even including a different race at all. You'd turn Link into the token black guy.
Sounds like he's trying to squeeze out explanations/justifications from the very basic fact that they simply defaulted to male characters as they usually do, and of course, the result feels forced and unsatisfying. It's difficult, because these interviews aren't actually set up to be especially introspective, or to act as a platform for admissions of societal blindspots. Doesn't leave much room for heartfelt self-critique.
All that said, it's disappointing that they missed the opportunity to implement gender customization. That's not something I want at all in a mainline Zelda game (all for a fully realized female Link, though), but it would have made complete sense in this one. The pallet swat approach is kind of lame.
You've got one Link that somehow is split into three Links with different hair and tunic colors. So, if you could change one of the Links into a girl, it'd mean that the magic somehow also did a gender change. It wouldn't be just a female avatar.
The character in my avatar is actually a male alien magically changed into a human girl for a mobile game tie in, but it should be obvious why Nintendo wouldn't randomly do something like that with their own characters.
Honest question, why does it matter? No malice behind my question but I've been under a rock for a while. I never played games thinking about the gender of the character I'm playing as. I played games to play games.
Is it really a bad thing not to include optional gender choices?
They don't need to be in everything, but it is good that it is brought up. There's a strong tendency for developers to create male protagonists, because that's how it has pretty much always been in the history of art. That's what we get used to from our childhood.
If we ask these questions, maybe we'll someday learn to get rid of that default thinking.
Please don't tell other people something isn't an issue. You can be fine with it, there's nothing wrong with it. But understand that some people would actually like being represented decently in games.
To reiterate a little, it's not necessarily a bad thing at all to not include gender choices. If your game has a set protagonist, it's fine to create it male, there's nothing wrong with it.
But the thing is, it's easy to just create those male protagonists and there are a lot of people who would like also more female protagonists (for example because they're bored of stereotypical male characters, or they're a minority that would some more representation). So that's why people ask about it.
I don't see why you couldn't genderswap Link and Zelda if you really wanted to. Plotwise, I think only Ganon has to be male because he never reincarnated like Link or Zelda have. He just gets resurrected or escapes banishment, and his whole thing is that he's the only dude in his tribe.
Making Link ethnic for the sake of making Link ethnic would be worse than not even including a different race at all. You'd turn Link into the token black guy.
So when Jimmy Stewart became the new Green Lantern, he became the token black guy? When Miles Morales became the new Spider-man, he was the token Hispanic?
How many male characters are always presented as strong and sexy at the same time? (I know I'm going to get like a few token examples, and that's fine.) It's not an issue or debate when it comes to them. But it's extremely common in video games and other forms of media when it comes to women, and it's pretty alienating!
Making Link ethnic for the sake of making Link ethnic would be worse than not even including a different race at all. You'd turn Link into the token black guy.
I'm usually really against unnessecary options for games with established characters, but for link it really doesn't matter.
They could even keep the canon link a dude, or just focus on "green tunic'd hero"
If they made a sequel to Majora's Mask then yeah, that link would be a dude. He's established as a guy. But for an all-new game? Why *can't* that link be a lady if the main goal isn't helping Zelda and wooing her but saving hyrule as a continent?
Why can't two cool ladies team up in a Zelda story?
I don't see why you couldn't genderswap Link and Zelda if you really wanted to. Plotwise, I think only Ganon has to be male because he never reincarnated like Link or Zelda have. He just gets resurrected or escapes banishment, and his whole thing is that he's the only dude in his tribe.
"a brave hero named *insert name* wakes up and [he/she] is told by their fairy to go talk to [Prince/princess] Zelda that Ganon is back and he's about to cause a ruckus"
You have link, Zelda, and ganon. Link and Zelda are in the same family tree as they're supposed to be and they've got the cool sprits or whatever but link is lady this reincarnation
Since that time they evolved the franchise to be fairly plot and character development focused, including the various Links. I want to play as a character, not myself. One of the most disappointing things about Xenoblade X was that they turned the main character into a customizable player avatar.
As for this game, all they had to do was say "The main character is Link and we didn't want to model other characters so we used palette swaps."
Come on. They're all Link. (They can say it's Link and two other random heroes but I'm not blind. It's pretty clear you're always Link from your own perspective, like how you're always playing as Arno in Assassin's Creed Unity multiplayer.) People need to get over this weird desire to gender swap characters.
Making Link ethnic for the sake of making Link ethnic would be worse than not even including a different race at all. You'd turn Link into the token black guy.
I can't think of a single plot moment in any of the recent Zelda games where the game would need to be changed if you could choose a female version of the character. Your character has no dialogue or romantic relationships (the plot's been told mostly through sidekick characters), so it would be a purely cosmetic change as far as consequence to the game universe goes.
There are enough Links and Zeldas for it to be statistically significant that they will always reincarnate as the same gender. Even if it's not explicitly said.
The legend of Zelda : 1
The Adventure of Link (unconcious zelda, not the same one as in LoZ) : 2.
Link to the Past(/Seasons/Ages): 3.
Ocarina of time : 4
Four swords: 5.
Wind Waker/Phantom Hourglass: 6.
Four Swords adventures: 7.
Minish cap: 8.
Twilight princess: 9.
Spirit Tracks: 10.
Skyward Sword: 11.
Link Between Worlds: 12
So 12 Zeldas. 13 if you count hilda. 14 if we also count hyrule warriors.
Plus the reincarnations of link
Loz:/Aol :1.
LTTP/LA/Oracle of Ages/Seasons. :2.
OoT/MM: 3.
Four swords: 4.
WW/PH: 5.
Four Swords Adventures: 6.
Minish Cap: 7
Spirit Tracks: 8.
Skyward Sword: 9.
Link Between worlds: 10
+1 more if you count hyrule warriors. (LBW spoiler)
+another one if you count ravio
.
Say it's a 50:50 chance of being male or female, for it to happen that both of them end up in the same gender every time 14+12 =26 times across multiple timelines and dimensions is 0.5^26=0.000000015 (0.0000015%), or a 1 in 66million chance of that happening that way by accident.
Or the goddess and her chosen hero always reincarnate that way on purpose. Hmm. I know which way I prefer to bet with those odds.
Super Princess Peach is almost 10 years old. I can't call that a shining beacon of progressiveness but its a decade old blip on the Nintendo radar. To call them misogynic, you're going to have to demonstrate a pervasive pattern of belittling women amongst their games and narratives (especially recently). The occasional "damsels in distress" isn't going to cut it because for most of these tropes, the problem isn't their existence but their overuse.