A Link Between Worlds What If Zelda 3DS Was a Trilogy?

[Ronin]

For a great deal of its lifetime, the Legend of Zelda has consistently focused on the solitary adventures that Link embarks on. However every now and then a game will cover the progressions of a previous incident, and then stop there. Majora's Mask reintroduces OoT Link on journeying through the Lost Woods to find a "precious friend", and Phantom Hourglass tells of how Link and Tetra discover a new land after they set sail in Wind Waker. These events each have their own set of circumstances, though, rather than truly picking up where the plot left off.

What would you think about Zelda 3DS discarding the usual demarcated stories and concentrate instead on a three-part tale? In my mind it would be split up into a triad of games, each with their own unique circumstances, but in the end Link would face off with a rising evil. Just think about the storytelling mechanics of the Lord of the Rings trilogy, and how the Fellowship underwent trials and tribulations as they strove toward a greater goal, respectively. Link could be pressed by one dilemma after another, which slows him down as he sets off on his long journey to his predestined foe [much like Frodo's trek to Mordor].

TL;DR - Zelda 3DS wouldn't be a single game, but rather a story split up into three parts like any other trilogy. Does this seem like a good or bad idea to you?

 

[Night Owl]

A trilogy on the 3ds... I see what you did there.

As long as each part can be enjoyed as it's own, I think it could be a good idea.

 

[Ventus]

Something...lonesome adventures...dunno what demarcated means but hey, Google is here! I think the gist of what you're talking about, Thar, is a trilogy. :facepalm: Of course that's what you're talking about! xD

Now, I think there is one problem with this: Nintendo is never big on story-telling. Epic trilogies like The Lord of the Rings have somewhat exceptional story telling which allows them to be spread across three sets. Zelda, though, is constantly tussling with its padding issues, nonsensical canonical timeline, and other story-centric issues. Nintendo would need to do one of two things; either have a ton of padding or hire some great writers to do a nice videogame epic.

Is a Zelda trilogy possible? Yeah, Oracle games were supposed to be one and would if not for that meddling GBC hardware. But, is it likely? I'm not sure. I'd enjoy the set of games provided they aren't $40 each.

 

[Spirit]

What if ZeldaU was a trilogy...

If we had a trilogy on 3DS then first and foremost i want to like the style and story and characters, no good having a trilogy if i get three oracles, skyward swords etc so its risky i could love or hate 3 depending on how closely linked they are. Nintendo, like Ven said, aren't very good at crafting stories. I personally see the adult timeline as a trilogy even though ST features a different Link. I see Mc FS and FSA as a trilogy too, again, mostly not the same link but theyre all about the same thing.

but a trilogy on 3DS could be good. we alrwady have OoT3D, we're sure to get MM3D, we have an original title coming and if that became 3 then that means the 3DS was a very good console for Zelda, we'd have five games. which is far more than any other console has had, so i'd like it.

 

[A Link In Time]

I'm not opposed to the idea but I don't trust Nintendo to create a coherent trilogy. While one overrarching evil over a shorter time span may be more detailed and concise, I have my doubts after The Wind Waker and its DS sequels. While The Wind Waker is one of the greatest games ever made, the same can't be said of its DS follow-ups which were lighter on narrative and content. Being on the same platform, however, can reinforce uniformity.

As long as each part can be enjoyed as its own, I think it could be a good idea.

This statement conjures memories of the Oracles which I didn't enjoy very much if it all. I would much rather play three consecutive games chronologically than what essentially is the same game in a different kingdom with its own trademark gimmick.

 

[LinkontheRink]

I have always lobbied for a sequel to MM (therefore a trilogy).

 

[Cfrock]

I don't like the sound of Zelda doing a full-on trilogy. A lot of recent trilogies I've seen in games and in film have ended up disappointing with the final installment (X-Men, Nolan's Batman, The Lord of the Rings, Modern Warfare) and Nintendo don't strike me as being able to pull it off properly. Additionally, I prefer Zelda games to be self-contained stories, each one showing a specific point of Hyrule's history. I don't mind when one game makes clear connections to another (Majora's Mask, Phantom Hourglass, Adventure of Link) but each of those games was very much its own story, able to stand entirely on its own.

Spirit raises a good point as well, a trilogy would likely keep the same art style and a lot of the same gameplay functions across all three games. If the first game was something bad then it would mean the next two Zelda's on 3DS wouldn't be compelling and then what are we left with? A console that's only worthwhile Zelda is a remake. Obviously that's a worst case scenario and would only apply to those who didn't like the game but is it really worth the risk for a trilogy that would likely have a weak narrative anyway? I don't know, such news just wouldn't excite me.

 

[Terminus]

Perhaps not a linear trilogy, because a game trilogy just...

Well would you have 3 different final bosses?