What if the Villain Won?

[Atheistbigred]

The Zelda Series has one major flaw i guess. It can be a win, yet it is something that is getting too old. Link always wins in the end, it is the main problem, it is getting too old for my taste. I love zelda for what it is but they need to step it up a bit. If they change it to where the villian wins in the end no matter what link does i would see a sequel to the game with another Link trying and each time they fail the more the world becomes inhospitable and barren.

so let me ask all of you, what if Ganon or Vaati or even Malladus won for once? Wouldn't it be neat to see their side of the story, instead of Link winning all the time?

oh and heres a bonus:

I wouldn't want gani to win, he is adorable for Losing all the time

 

[UraZelda]

then nintendo would make a sequel where link wins

 

[Azure Sage]

It would be sad, but you do have a point. I guess it would be intersting to see it from the villain's side. And a sequel where another Link has to try would be cool. Like, the world is in chaos, controlled by a man of great evil, and a hero has to rise to the challenge to stop him.

... Epic.

 

[zack125]

How many games do you know where the protagonist doesn't win?

 

[Kappa]

Hmm...it is an interesting idea. It would also be kind of cool to play as a villain. Lol, Ganondorf, MAGICAL POWERS GO! :triforce: You could sneak aorund and kidnap Zelda, send out monsters and create bosses. That would be fun! Also, you could see Ganon win the triforce of power!^^ And then there would be a sequel where you play as Link and win, bla bla bla. Zelda gets saved, everything else that's in a typical game.

Still though, as fun as that would be, there's always that satisfying feeling when you beat the final boss.

 

[Atheistbigred]

then nintendo would make a sequel where link wins

This doesn't add to the conversation at hand, im asking what if the villain won for once, not for a sequel about how Link saves the day.

How many games do you know where the protagonist doesn't win?

Dude, Link always wins this is about Zelda not about any other game. Once again that is a fail post and is not what a post should look like for someone with 334 posts.
To continue i hate one liners with a passion. They do not add to the conversation and are considered spam.

Hmm...it is an interesting idea. It would also be kind of cool to play as a villain. Lol, Ganondorf, MAGICAL POWERS GO! You could sneak aorund and kidnap Zelda, send out monsters and create bosses. That would be fun! Also, you could see Ganon win the triforce of power!And then there would be a sequel where you play as Link and win, bla bla bla. Zelda gets saved, everything else that's in a typical game.

Still though, as fun as that would be, there's always that satisfying feeling when you beat the final boss.

That is a different thing than what this thread is about, but it would be neat to play as a villian in another franchise, but not in Zelda.

 

[Djinn]

I think we may have seen this very situation a few times now. The first time in the seven years of Ganondorf's rule of Hyrule while Link was asleep in the Temple of Time. And the second time when Ganondorf conquered Hyrule in the backstory of Wind Waker. Possibly not as well seen in that second scenario but he was still the unchallenged major power of the land at the time. With no heroes around to defeat minions and awaken sages life appears to go on with a few more monsters roaming around in the field. Castle Town becomes an empty and haunted place filled with redeads in the shadow of an evil fortress. However Lon Lon Ranch and Kakariko remained relatively unchanged. The people were under the influence of a dark lord but still went about their own lives as normal.

After that we see the Dark World of ALTTP as another possiblilty of Hyrule under the control of Ganondorf. This time much darker as there are monsters everywhere, the village is in shambles, and the entire world had a gloomy, haunted look t it. Ganondorf seemed to not have any real presence in the daily lives of the people living there, they seemed to suffer more under the effects of the transformation properties of the Dark World changing them into monsters. The Dark World did not really come off to me as a what would happen to Hyrule scenario since it is mostly populated by minions that flocked to serve under Ganon and hapless individuals that became trapped there when looking for the triforce for themselves. Kakariko might be different from the Village of Outcasts, which was ruled by Blind the Thief at the time.

It is hard to say with Malladus and Vaati. Malladus was more of a typical break and destroy demonic entity while Vaati only transformed Hyrule Castle to keep guards out of his way on his quest to find the Light force. Vaati of the Four Swords series was content to capture maidens and stay in the Palace of Winds most of the time.

I imagine any situation that has the villains succeeding would only end up much like the backstory of Wind Waker or Twilight Princess. The gods or their servants might have to directly interfere so that a hero can come along and rescue the kingdom. Or keeps things under wraps long enough for a hero to be born no matter how long that takes. It took several centuries for a hero to be born to finally put a stop to Ganondorf's plans in ALTTP and WW. Each time before he was mostly contained just long enough for that to happen. In TP Link was chosen by the gods and directly aided by their servants. I think something like this would happen again if there was someone worthy of the title Hero even in the outside lands around Hyrule.

 

[Locke]

No thanks. I prefer the classic "good is more powerful than evil." I don't like being told that evil is stronger, and I hate being told that it's okay for evil to win sometimes. About Medli's comment, I would hate actually playing as a villain. The reason I like Zelda games is because I can feed my own character through Link. Playing as a villain would force me to do things that I would never want to do. Even playing games with protagonists who have their own character (with their own dialog and/or VA), I cringe every time the player I'm supposed to be controlling says or does something that I wouldn't want it to say or do.

If the villain's going to win, have it be before the end of the game, and not a complete victory. The protagonist has to win at the end in my book. It doesn't have to be a "happily ever after" ending, but there has to be some sense that good has triumphed over evil. Making a sequel wouldn't help at all, because I would still hate the first game, and the second would already be tainted by what happened in the first. Also, Aonuma never makes Zelda games that require playing another one first to understand the story.

 

[Myriadviper42]

I think that if they were to do that, it would have to be something similar to the Oracle of Ages-Seasons gameplay. You xould get both, the villain wins in the first game, and then you would link the games and win in the second on. Still, I'm not bright on the idea. I think that a villain's victory in the middle of the story would be better, such as in TP, or Oot.

 

[Atheistbigred]

No thanks. I prefer the classic "good is more powerful than evil." I don't like being told that evil is stronger, and I hate being told that it's okay for evil to win sometimes. About Medli's comment, I would hate actually playing as a villain. The reason I like Zelda games is because I can feed my own character through Link. Playing as a villain would force me to do things that I would never want to do. Even playing games with protagonists who have their own character (with their own dialog and/or VA), I cringe every time the player I'm supposed to be controlling says or does something that I wouldn't want it to say or do.

If the villain's going to win, have it be before the end of the game, and not a complete victory. The protagonist has to win at the end in my book. It doesn't have to be a "happily ever after" ending, but there has to be some sense that good has triumphed over evil. Making a sequel wouldn't help at all, because I would still hate the first game, and the second would already be tainted by what happened in the first. Also, Aonuma never makes Zelda games that require playing another one first to understand the story.

i respect your opinion, but i will say this... If good always triumphs over evil wouldn't that make it boring, there are so many possibilities of what would happen if the villain actually won for once, you just shouldn't say "evil always beats good end of story", there has to be something different, an new challenge to the game. As for you saying that Anouma wouldn't do such a thing. Anouma is a fan hog, he listens to what the fans say and makes a game around that.

I think we may have seen this very situation a few times now. The first time in the seven years of Ganondorf's rule of Hyrule while Link was asleep in the Temple of Time. And the second time when Ganondorf conquered Hyrule in the backstory of Wind Waker. Possibly not as well seen in that second scenario but he was still the unchallenged major power of the land at the time. With no heroes around to defeat minions and awaken sages life appears to go on with a few more monsters roaming around in the field. Castle Town becomes an empty and haunted place filled with redeads in the shadow of an evil fortress. However Lon Lon Ranch and Kakariko remained relatively unchanged. The people were under the influence of a dark lord but still went about their own lives as normal.

After that we see the Dark World of ALTTP as another possiblilty of Hyrule under the control of Ganondorf. This time much darker as there are monsters everywhere, the village is in shambles, and the entire world had a gloomy, haunted look t it. Ganondorf seemed to not have any real presence in the daily lives of the people living there, they seemed to suffer more under the effects of the transformation properties of the Dark World changing them into monsters. The Dark World did not really come off to me as a what would happen to Hyrule scenario since it is mostly populated by minions that flocked to serve under Ganon and hapless individuals that became trapped there when looking for the triforce for themselves. Kakariko might be different from the Village of Outcasts, which was ruled by Blind the Thief at the time.

It is hard to say with Malladus and Vaati. Malladus was more of a typical break and destroy demonic entity while Vaati only transformed Hyrule Castle to keep guards out of his way on his quest to find the Light force. Vaati of the Four Swords series was content to capture maidens and stay in the Palace of Winds most of the time.

I imagine any situation that has the villains succeeding would only end up much like the backstory of Wind Waker or Twilight Princess. The gods or their servants might have to directly interfere so that a hero can come along and rescue the kingdom. Or keeps things under wraps long enough for a hero to be born no matter how long that takes. It took several centuries for a hero to be born to finally put a stop to Ganondorf's plans in ALTTP and WW. Each time before he was mostly contained just long enough for that to happen. In TP Link was chosen by the gods and directly aided by their servants. I think something like this would happen again if there was someone worthy of the title Hero even in the outside lands around Hyrule.

Now what you're talking about is temporary. the villain wins in the same game and link stops him/her in the same game. However you do make a good point with the Gods/godesses stopping the villain if link fails but that is not what i am asking here. I'm asking what if the Villain won in the end, like nothing was able to stop the villain?

 

[Blackbaldrik]

I agree with everything Djinn said.

Now what you're talking about is temporary. the villain wins in the same game and link stops him/her in the same game. However you do make a good point with the Gods/godesses stopping the villain if link fails but that is not what i am asking here. I'm asking what if the Villain won in the end, like nothing was able to stop the villain?

It would be very much like we have seen when the villains temporarily won, but forever, and maybe more than just Hyrule.


But due to story line reasons, there is no possible way evil can control the world forever.

 

[Djinn]

Now what you're talking about is temporary. the villain wins in the same game and link stops him/her in the same game. However you do make a good point with the Gods/godesses stopping the villain if link fails but that is not what i am asking here. I'm asking what if the Villain won in the end, like nothing was able to stop the villain?

Even then, temporary still sometimes means multiple centuries. Almost any time there has been a scenario where the villain will take over Hyrule there has been some type of intervention on part of the gods. Either by flood, the light spirits stopping the interlopers, the same light spirits helping Link begin his quest, the sages sealing Ganondorf in the sacred realm, the Picori appearing to seal away the monsters of Hyrule helping the Hero of Men, or the spirits of Good sealing Malladus away until Link defeats him permanently. The lesser deities living within Hyrule have gone to great lengths to help Link or act on their own until a hero comes along. The gods seem to be very interested in not allowing any dark power take over Hyrule.

I think the situation you are describing might only work in a game that has multiple ending based on what you have done throughout the game. Or what items you collected, sidequests completed, etc. If you get the good ending then you defeat the villain and rescue the princess, saving Hyrule. But if you get the bad ending you are defeated and Hyrule falls into darkness. It might still have to be some kind of quest related happening at least to have the player be capable of winning the final fight. If there was ever a scenario where you could not win the fight with the last boss it would frustrate players to not ever try it again. But if you still won, yet for some unknown storybased reason (maybe not acquiring the silver arrow?) your victory did not succeed in saving the kingdom, then it might work. It would have to be a story ending, that way you can still have the fight with the last boss and defeat them. Then a bad ending would inspire a player to attempt to go back and try harder to get a better ending.

Having this work out a little better than Shadow the Hedgehog might be a challenge though. I remember when Chrono Trigger did this the failure ending was just that, you essentially committed suicide against the last boss and he destroyed the world. It was kind of a copout, the other endings never really had a villain succeed and rule over all. There was a minor villain that did live but there was a short animation of one of the main characters hunting him down.

 

[GoldenWolf12]

Are you talking about a cliffhanger? If so, yes I totally agree. It would spice things up for a change, not to mention would practially kill all of us with shock. But if you mean that Link dies and the villain inslaves Hyrule?? The game would have to have a sequel some time! The villain can't just win and that's the end! I believe (and hope) you meant a cliffhanger because I would never ever forgive Nintendo if they ended Zelda like that.

 

[425]

This is a very interesting concept that could work if they pulled it off right, but would most likely end in failure, and would certainly disrupt one of the main aspects of the games.

The best way to pull this off would be to have it create a backstory of another game that ends in a semi-victory. For example: Link fights a villain in another land and is defeated, but there are still many knights defending Hyrule, or perhaps one where Link wins but must go to extreme measures and make major sacrifices to win.

Then, there would have to be a game following it to show how Hyrule is eventually saved. I feel like it would not fit the Zelda series for a game to end in utter defeat.

If everything was unwinnable, however, it would ruin to an extent the character of Link, since, as Locke explained, Link's character is essentially that of the player. Hyrule is almost like a free world where the player has freedoms, but if there was something the player COULDN'T do, say, defeat Ganondorf, it would tarnish this aspect of the game.

So overall, unless within a narrow set of specifications, I would say no to a game where the villain won.

 

[Ventus]

You're all right, it is an interesting idea for Link to lose. One way I was thinking of how Link could meet his demise (or...be banished from Hyrule so it would be less gruesome) was Ganondorf finally uses his head and enlists powerful generals to do his bidding, rather than say Twinrova who can't even do so much as agree with each other. Link, even with the power of the Triforce of Courage, would eventually grow tired from his many fights with said generals, and then comes Ganondorf with the KO blow. As horribly cliche as that is, I think it would be a good starting point for Nintendo if they ever do decide to make a 'true' dark Zelda game. At the moment I can't think of any other possible way for Link to lose, as he isn't a separate character in that he can lose hope and just give up...