Do we need princess Zelda?

[Spirit]

Even though her name is always on the box Princess Zelda herself doesnt always appear in the games.

Sometimes she is only in a flashback like MM and sometimes she just doesnt show up at all like in LA.

So, does it feel a little refreshing to not have to worry about Zelda in a game?

Are they better or more interesting without her?

Or do you always want the princess in your Zelda games?

 

[Vanessa28]

Well technically Zelda is most of the time about the Triforce. There's always a jerk who wants to conquer the world and possess the Triforce. Zelda is one of the wielders so I think she'll always make an appearance. Or at least very often. But yeah games can still be interesting without her. MM is an example of an interesting game in which the main villain was possessed by an evil mask. I won't necessarily say the games are better or interesting without her. It depends on the plot as a whole. We have great games with her and the games in which she didn't play a part (besides the flashback in MM) were cool and interesting enough. So it really just all depends on the plot. I would like to see some games without her as I don't really care for her anyway.

 

[DJ Twitch]

Zelda plots typically aren't interesting to begin with, so Zelda herself being present or not doesn't make much of a difference in that. It's always nice to have one nuisance to not worry about, but she should still be in most games though, unless it's one of those stories about what the current Link does next since she normally wouldn't be needed.

The ideal role for Zelda in a game would be one where she's present, but out of the way, helping out in the cutscenes and not being an annoyance in the final fight. Stuff like that.

 

[Ninja]

So, does it feel a little refreshing to not have to worry about Zelda in a game?

For BotW, absolutely. Knowing that she was keeping Calamity Ganon at bay while I was off screwing around allowed me to sleep just fine at night.

Are they better or more interesting without her?

Or do you always want the princess in your Zelda games?

As long as Zelda plays a key role in the game, and actually adds depth to it. I really enjoyed Zelda in the Wind Waker, Tetra was a very interesting character, and her pirate personality was great, it genuinely surprised me when her true identity was revealed with the Triforce of Wisdom.

I think there should be some form or mention of her in the games, as Zelda, Link, and Ganondorf are all tied together thanks to Demise's curse.

 

[Djinn]

I actually think if her name was not on the box then she might have been dropped a while ago.

She only tends to appear when Nintendo is interested in making a "traditional" sequel that mostly recreates the original game with Ganon and the triforce. She has even had a very reduced part in a few games to the point of not even needing to be there.

 

[Dio]

She doesn't NEED to be there. In Halo Reach you aren't even on Halo but it is still the Halo series. Just like when they don't have Zelda it is still the Zelda series.

Most of the time the character of Zelda doesn't bring much and I would not be fussed about rescuing her. Only in SS and WW (as Tetra)did I like the character enough to want to help. In BoTW she is just outright irritating and someone I'd be happy to leave to Ganon. And in most other games she doesn't have a strong personality or much bonding time with Link.

 

[Misty]

I would say that in general the game needs Zelda in some capacity. Not just because her name is in the title, although that does make a strong case for it from a marketing perspective. I also don't think it's necessary because of some curse that binds Link, Ganon, and Zelda, although that's an equally compelling reason.

I would instead say we need it because there is a lot of interesting stuff left to do with that character besides the classic damsel in distress tropezilla. I tend to think that they could easily make a two player game where one person is controlling Link and the other Zelda. I'm surprised they haven't, honestly.

I also think to some extent it is just a cultural rule. Sure, there are exceptions to that rule, but having a Zelda game without Zelda is like having a Die Hard movie without Bruce Willis saying "Yippie Kay Aye" or Batman without the Joker.

 

[Pinkarray]

Zelda should not be needed because she sucks.

 

[YIGAhim]

I don't need her for a good game, but it would help the plot a lot more if she was there and I could smile upon her lovely lower half in future games

 

[Castle]

It is nintendo logic how over all Zelda has little to do with the decades long series that bears her name. Does it have to? I s'pose not. But it is pointless to call it The Legend of Zelda.

But the reason why is because it's a throw back to the first game. The Legend of Zelda in its entirety was literally the opening text crawl that preceded the start menu. Heck, I think it only showed up if you let the game idle for a bit. That was the sum total of the first game's story. Well, its backstory to be precise. Or the premise that served as the reason for why the player and Link were adventuring in the first place. And it was specific to that game.

But when the series went on it started having less to do with Zelda and more to do with Link, Hyrule, and the Triforce. And of course many games like Link's Awakening and Majora's Mask have nothing to do with anything other than Link.

The scope of the series outgrew its namesake. But the name stuck. And it'd be a bit too late to change it now.