General Zelda Reboot?

[ihateghirahim]

Reboots are all the rage these days. Star Trek, DMC, MK, and other media franchises are turning towards a rehashing of the franchise; a "series remake" as I like to call it.

Should Zelda go this route? What might be changed? How would you alter the planning and progression of the timeline? (not that we've had any)

Here are my thoughts

-Zelda games have very flimsy connections to each other. The games embrace various artstyles, gameplay mechanics, and storylines at a rate no AAA developer would dream of attempting. A reboot couldn't change much, unless it toys with the essentials that make Zelda Zelda and make Zelda awesome.

-Any reboot would only confuse and confound the timeline theorists. The timeline can be ignored, but those who enjoy it will feel betrayed by Nintendo copping out. They'd have a new timeline to figure out.

-Nintendo has enough to deal with right now, and any reboot would require great effort to make a difference, or otherwise be pointless and annoying.

 

[Seth]

The Zelda timeline is a mess, I'd rather they just start fresh. With a reboot, they would have more freedom to go in any direction they wanted without trying to haphazardly force it into existing continuity, one which is already bloated and unwieldy.

 

[Sir Quaffler]

-The Zelda timeline has ALWAYS been a mess, so a reboot won't really fix anything in the long run. I kinda view the series more as retelling of the same basic premise with some tweaks each time, a.k.a. a LEGEND, rather than a HISTORY where events flow smoothly from one event to the next with little wiggle room in between.

And, as ihateghirahim pointed out, since Zelda already embraces so many different art styles, gameplay mechanics, and so forth, a reboot wouldn't really change anything.

 

[Salem]

Every new "Hyrule" Zelda is essentially a "reboot".

 

[Sir Quaffler]

Every new "Hyrule" Zelda is essentially a "reboot".

Kind of, yeah. So an official "reboot" would really be meaningless.

 

[HappyMask]

Each new Zelda is a bit like a reboot in my opinion.

 

[ProtagonistJake]

Kind of, yeah. So an official "reboot" would really be meaningless.

Thats only cause you seem to be missing the actual meaning of it.

The fact they all feel like reboots is a bloody problem, not a good thing.
I'm not saying all Zeldas are the same or some nonsense, cause they arent, but every single main series one after MM have been tied down due it's refusal to break out of tradition in terms of settings and characters.
Majora's Mask is one of a kind where it was a sequel to the most traditional Zelda in a perfect way. If it started at OOT, then MM, and had that one Link simply going on more adventures in new and interesting lands, we could have more games that were as impressive and interesting as MM.

Similar to how in Metroid, Samus is constantly being hired to go and explore these new planets, Link is just a lone traveler, save lands whenever he's there to help.
The rest of my idea is in my thread, and if you saw "reboot" and immediately said "lol no" or something, I'd say give my ideas, and the idea of a reboot, a chance.

Besides, if all Zelda's are reboots, What harm would an official reboot do anyway? Not like it'll erase the previous games from existence.

One last thing

The Zelda timeline has ALWAYS been a mess, so a reboot won't really fix anything in the long run.

...What?

A reboot would mean the story starting all over, and, if you read my thread (and this comment now too), I said the games all proceeding in this reboot, wpuld simplt be sequels about the same Link's next adventure, and thats it.
It would be a simple, straight line.

 

[Ventus]

Yeah, most every new game is already a reboot; making an official reboot isn't really necessary given the quality and structure of every Zelda game released so far.
That being said, I would like a new "era" to start.

 

[Turo602]

This idea of Zelda games already being reboots is crazy. Each game is similar enough in both its gameplay, design, and formula. It's all part of the same series. Any improvements or differences within these games are just that, improvements and differences, much like any other video game franchise with sequels. Still, I don't see how something as open-ended as the Legend of Zelda needs rebooting. The stories are already so far apart, that if they attempt to make a coherent story through multiple games, they'd only be limiting themselves. The series can evolve just fine without a reboot. It'd be like rebooting the Mario series. What's the point? Is the princess no longer going to be in another castle? Is Mario not going to jump and stomp his way to the rescue anymore? It's unnecessary.

 

[ProtagonistJake]

The idea was never a coherent story in every game though.
Again, just like in MM, it'd be the same link, and that'd be the only connection between the previous and the last, with maybe Zelda telling something through some form of communication (permanent side kick while she's ruling Hyrule?), and that's it. The story is exclusive to each game. Just the same hero going on a different adventure.
This isn't any different than what we have now, except we get to go somewhere else other than Hyrule, and more villains other than Ganon, while also giving story focus to the side characters since Link would be the same one who is already established in the first game, AGAIN, just like MM.

 

[Big Octo]

I'd be up for it. Although each game seems quite different as others pointed out, the amount of direct sequels and random connections between games still makes the world feel connected. Piecing each game together, though, has always been a mess. A reboot to the canon of the series would be a gift from heaven, to me at least. This way, sequels and prequels can be established more easily with stories that are more easily connected with one another.