Breath of the Wild Zelda U May NOT Even Have a Place in the Timeline
- Thread starter VitaTempusN92
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2014
Reply to: Zelda U May NOT Even Have a Place in the Timeline
DISCLAIMER: Since I am not Aonuma everything here is but speculation.
Tip: If you do not want to read all of this, Skip to: "Summary:" and read the "Summary" & "Things you should be worried about!" sections.
Why does this Zelda not making it into the timeline trouble you so much?
It has nothing to do with the actual game play or feel of the game. In fact, I would not be surprised at all if Nintendo just sat down and placed all the games into time slots that made sense to them. I highly doubt Aonuma had the timeline written out somewhere when he made the first Zelda. It makes more sense for them to have had no real idea of a timeline and then one day decide to put one together based on certain things they felt defined the timeline.
Aonuma has been saying: "Link represents, again, the player" for a long time. He just said it in different ways. For anyone to just assume that this time when he says that, it means Link is customizable would be sort of silly since most people who have played the first Zelda (when it first came out) know what he means.
The only thing this is suggesting is that they want people to stop making Link a person and remember that he is a avatar for you to become the hero. Also they are watching the communities feedback to all the speculations. This will allow the developers to glean ideas and let them know what the fans are open to and what they are not open to.
How do you get: Link will be more customizable and that Zelda will become the new story essential main character out of:
Once upon time when the very first Zelda came out. Link did not exist! Instead many players went through the whole game thinking they were Zelda. It wasn't until they saved Zelda that they realized that they were the ones saving Zelda. Not Zelda saving anyone.
Why am I telling you about the first Zelda?
Because Aonuma is making reference to the first Zelda. In the first Zelda there was no Link, YOU were the hero. When Aonuma says: "No one ever said that was Link." It is just like when many first sat down to play the first Zelda game. No one ever said that the person we were playing was Zelda. People just assumed it was Zelda. But in reality the hero was YOU. Likewise in this new Zelda, nobody said this protagonist is Link. In every Zelda game, while you are playing, there is never anything that states that the character you are playing is Link. People are just assuming its Link (or somebody else). Its funny because people seem to be having a hard time understanding that its YOU the player. You are the hero of time. Link doesn't exist unless Nintendo is trying to sell a product or something.
The statement:
Is explaining that.
But what about Zelda being the protagonist?
Aonuma said:
He clearly states that Zelda is not the protagonist.
Here is a fun piece of information. Have you ever wondered why the game is called: "The legend of Zelda" & not "The Legend of Link"? Aonuma tells you the answer when he says:
If they made Zelda the protagonist, why would they need to change the title "The legend of Zelda" to something else?
Pst here is a hint: Its because YOU the player are suppose to be the hero. Since every player has a different name they cannot name the hero. (ok so this was more like the answer instead of a hint)
Are you saying: "Link is just the player's customizable avatar with choice of having him be male or female"?
Is Link the players avatar? Yes.
Is Link customizable? He has not been, but he could be in this game.
Can we make Link a boy or girl? We have never been able to do so, but who knows, you may be able to in this game.
Comments?: Link has always been the players avatar and Nintendo has mentioned it before so this is not new, shocking and/or ground breaking. This piece of information does not hurt the game. If they mentioned taking this away from Zelda, then the game would be hurt. Why? Because it removes the player from the role of hero and makes this a game like FF, KH, and many others where you are just watching the protagonist be the hero, instead of you filling the shoes of the hero and being the hero.
Link being customizable is not a bad thing IF done right (I personally prefer more game play and puzzles over costumes). If I can change my clothes to other outfits that match the theme of Zelda, then fine. But if they put some jeans, a tank-top and all sorts of modern outfits in there, then I agree with you that we should storm Nintendo and burn that building to the ground.
IMO about being able to choose if you want to play Male or Female. As long as I am able to play my male version of Link, then I personally don't care. It doesn't change the gameplay and I am not being forced to have to play the girl counterpart.
Zelda has a LOT of females and all of them are not overly sexual, so I trust that the female counterpart won't be either. And that is good. I don't see why we need a female counter part, but like I said earlier, it does not harm the game. It will be like pokemon where they use the guy for all the ads, but you can play as a female and the game play is not affected. It would work this way for the timeline as well. The male version is the mascot, but you can play as both genders. Also the word Hero can cover both that of a male and female because it refers to a person who has done something admirable for others.
What unfortunate possibility became to strong to deny?
Seriously, I need you to tell me what has become to strong to deny. Your only complaint was that the game would not be in the timeline, and would have its own universe...literally, this is what you said:
I have explained that all the stuff Aonuma said had nothing to do with your worries, so I really don't know how anything is to strong for you to deny. Aonuma has done nothing but talk about trying to recapture the first Zelda in this new Zelda. Unless you have never played the first Zelda when it came out back in 86', then you should be, I don't know, excited to see the game trying to go back to its roots?
Who has confirmed that this game is a reboot?
Where do you even see Aonuma mention anything about a reboot? If there is a reboot I sure hope it is for MM, because I have been dying for a remake. If I can't get a remake of MM, I'll gladly take a reboot done better.
Also why is a reboot bad? Heck if they want to reboot the oracle of seasons & ages, and finally release the Farore version they scraped (for technical reasons) then I say go for it. I been dying for that too.
What is wrong with a stand alone universe. WW is sort of its own universe (at least when it first came out it was), but then they worked it into the timeline. I don't see why they can't work this universe into the timeline. And even if they can't, since when did Zelda have to fit into a timeline to be enjoyable to play?
How can you even confirm that this new game most certainly may NOT be "Zelda" at all or least the "Zelda" that we know and love?
How do you know? You even go so far as to say:
First off, you mean Zelda is dead to YOU and a few people like you. I have followed Zelda for a very long time, and 1 game that has more speculation then it does facts is not about to end my obsession for said game.
That said, I can understand your fear when you heard Aonuma say they were "rethinking the conventions" of Zelda. When I heard that I thought to myself: "They are going to screw up this game. Please don't let them put voice acting in. Please don't let them cave in to today's' generation." <----(Abbreviated version, but sums it up) In fact none of my current fears have been addressed. All I know is that Aonuma is aiming to capture both the first Zelda's adventure and Zelda HW combat/statergy(?)[I've never played dynasty warrior, so i'm not sure what he is trying to capture from there].
So far the trailer only shows vibrant colors, a vast world, and a unisex looking Link.
We don't know how the fighting style will be, what the items are or if we will even have items. We don't know the story, we don't really know anything, so i don't see how anyone can run around saying they loathe the game?
Aonuma says:
Why is this bad? This is what Zelda 1 did. If anything you should be happy this new Zelda is trying to capture the very 1st Zelda adventure style. I don't see how HAVING to use your map because you might get lost in this game could be a bad thing, nor do I see how ACTUALLY exploring can be bad either.
Both the elements listed above stay true to what Zelda is about, so why are you so upset?
Side Note: Imagine if they were going to make it like FF-X2. If you choose to help people, or not to help people, it affected the game play a little. Having your actions impact the world is different. To see that done right in a zelda game might be interesting indeed.
He isn't. Link has always been whoever the player is. If you choose to name yourself Link, that is up to you. Nowhere in the game does anyone confirm that the character you play is Link. They always call him whatever you name him, and nothing eles. In KH, no matter what you may want to name Sora, sora is Sora and you are going to watch his life unfold. Link you can rename and watch your legend unfold. In games like KH, FF, and Mario, you are forced to assist and watch the hero attain glory. While in Zelda, you are encouraged to take on a role. For me, I spent time yelling at how Mario can't jump and how he needs to get his act together. This was often followed by words like: "What is wrong with you and other words that blame Mario for my game playing skills. However while playing Zelda I spent my time saying things like: "Sweet, I've obtained the master sword, fear me! (Insert evil laugh here) Now how do I solve this? Thank you Navi I can see that, stop bothering me!" Link is suppose to be you the player, which is why he cannot be one specific character. He is a representation for every player who has played a Zelda game. Did everyone playing the game understand that?
No. Some like me fell into the role of being the hero unconsciously, others caught on consciously, and others like you felt a need to watch the protagonist become a hero. Zelda allows players to do two things. You can form a personal connection with all of the characters by assuming the role of hero, or you can sit back and enjoy watching the story as an outside source. Whatever your play style, you can enjoy the game.
They are eliminating the go to point A and then to point B formula that a lot of Zelda games fell into. They are going back to the first Zelda game where players can start at C and then go to A if they want. Nothing wrong with having that sort of freedom. I'm glad they are not relying on cinematic and voice acting to improve the game. Its a game, it is supposed to be played. People are suppose to enjoy playing as its hero. Its not a movie, and putting voice actors and a bunch of movies in a game does not improve the overall game play, nor does it make the content more enjoyable. The movies are nice, but when I sit down to play a game, I want to PLAY it. Not WATCH it. (Eyeing FF-x2 [nice game, but so~ many clip scenes and movies] I literally remember the cinematic more then the actual game play, and I feel more like I was out watching a movie then actually playing the game.)
Summary:
All in all, everything you listed is nothing to really be too concerned about. Your theory could be true, but not because of any of the information you provided. Just simple because you made a really, and I mean a REALLY good guess. Most of the information you provided all shows that this new Zelda is heavily focused on the very first Zelda game that started it all. It is aiming to capture the vast world of the first, and encourage exploring (aka actually adventuring).
Also we learn that Aonuma wants to keep Link from having a solid existence because THE PLAYER aka YOU are Link. Whether that means allowing players to choose to be a male or female is unknown. It does however strongly suggest that he does not want Link to have a voice actor (YAY) because it would hurt the players experience of being a hero, and would force players into the role of observer. You already stated that you prefer to play as an observer. I already stated that I like to play as the hero. Your observer role is not at risk of being taken away. Aonuma seems to be trying not to take away the personal experience that players like me enjoy when we play as the hero.
Lastly we learn that Aonuma is not only trying to capture the elements of the first Zelda, but also that of HW. As I've never played a dynasty warrior game, I don't know if he means the games fighting mechanics, whatever its strategy or puzzles (if any) are like, or if he means the ability to play as any character you want. IMO I think he might be talking about the fighting style or strategy portion, but like I said. I've never played a dynasty warrior game so I have nothing to go on.
Things you should be worried about!
There are rumors about Zelda going multi-player. <----This, this right here is bad! Why? It breaks the immersion of the game, it takes away the journey, the adventure, and ruins the "Player is the hero" concept. How? I cannot speak for everyone's friends, but how many friends come over and SIT QUIETLY without you feeling awkward?
Friends often talk to you, crack jokes while you are playing games, are telling you to slow down or hurry up, or giving you the answer to puzzles that you were to slow to figure out. <--- all of this is why multi-player is bad. It robs the player of almost all the aspects of Zelda. Exploring at your own pace, enjoying the sights, solving puzzles and feeling good that you did, enjoying all of the characters you meet (the reactions I have to some of the characters are just priceless). When you are playing with friends, you are not as immersed in the game, and players can miss out.
DISCLAIMER: Since I am not Aonuma everything here is but speculation.
Tip: If you do not want to read all of this, Skip to: "Summary:" and read the "Summary" & "Things you should be worried about!" sections.
Why does this Zelda not making it into the timeline trouble you so much?
It has nothing to do with the actual game play or feel of the game. In fact, I would not be surprised at all if Nintendo just sat down and placed all the games into time slots that made sense to them. I highly doubt Aonuma had the timeline written out somewhere when he made the first Zelda. It makes more sense for them to have had no real idea of a timeline and then one day decide to put one together based on certain things they felt defined the timeline.
Aonuma has been saying: "Link represents, again, the player" for a long time. He just said it in different ways. For anyone to just assume that this time when he says that, it means Link is customizable would be sort of silly since most people who have played the first Zelda (when it first came out) know what he means.
The only thing this is suggesting is that they want people to stop making Link a person and remember that he is a avatar for you to become the hero. Also they are watching the communities feedback to all the speculations. This will allow the developers to glean ideas and let them know what the fans are open to and what they are not open to.
How do you get: Link will be more customizable and that Zelda will become the new story essential main character out of:
Once upon time when the very first Zelda came out. Link did not exist! Instead many players went through the whole game thinking they were Zelda. It wasn't until they saved Zelda that they realized that they were the ones saving Zelda. Not Zelda saving anyone.
Why am I telling you about the first Zelda?
Because Aonuma is making reference to the first Zelda. In the first Zelda there was no Link, YOU were the hero. When Aonuma says: "No one ever said that was Link." It is just like when many first sat down to play the first Zelda game. No one ever said that the person we were playing was Zelda. People just assumed it was Zelda. But in reality the hero was YOU. Likewise in this new Zelda, nobody said this protagonist is Link. In every Zelda game, while you are playing, there is never anything that states that the character you are playing is Link. People are just assuming its Link (or somebody else). Its funny because people seem to be having a hard time understanding that its YOU the player. You are the hero of time. Link doesn't exist unless Nintendo is trying to sell a product or something.
The statement:
Is explaining that.
But what about Zelda being the protagonist?
Aonuma said:
He clearly states that Zelda is not the protagonist.
Here is a fun piece of information. Have you ever wondered why the game is called: "The legend of Zelda" & not "The Legend of Link"? Aonuma tells you the answer when he says:
If they made Zelda the protagonist, why would they need to change the title "The legend of Zelda" to something else?
Pst here is a hint: Its because YOU the player are suppose to be the hero. Since every player has a different name they cannot name the hero. (ok so this was more like the answer instead of a hint)
Are you saying: "Link is just the player's customizable avatar with choice of having him be male or female"?
Is Link the players avatar? Yes.
Is Link customizable? He has not been, but he could be in this game.
Can we make Link a boy or girl? We have never been able to do so, but who knows, you may be able to in this game.
Comments?: Link has always been the players avatar and Nintendo has mentioned it before so this is not new, shocking and/or ground breaking. This piece of information does not hurt the game. If they mentioned taking this away from Zelda, then the game would be hurt. Why? Because it removes the player from the role of hero and makes this a game like FF, KH, and many others where you are just watching the protagonist be the hero, instead of you filling the shoes of the hero and being the hero.
Link being customizable is not a bad thing IF done right (I personally prefer more game play and puzzles over costumes). If I can change my clothes to other outfits that match the theme of Zelda, then fine. But if they put some jeans, a tank-top and all sorts of modern outfits in there, then I agree with you that we should storm Nintendo and burn that building to the ground.
IMO about being able to choose if you want to play Male or Female. As long as I am able to play my male version of Link, then I personally don't care. It doesn't change the gameplay and I am not being forced to have to play the girl counterpart.
Zelda has a LOT of females and all of them are not overly sexual, so I trust that the female counterpart won't be either. And that is good. I don't see why we need a female counter part, but like I said earlier, it does not harm the game. It will be like pokemon where they use the guy for all the ads, but you can play as a female and the game play is not affected. It would work this way for the timeline as well. The male version is the mascot, but you can play as both genders. Also the word Hero can cover both that of a male and female because it refers to a person who has done something admirable for others.
What unfortunate possibility became to strong to deny?
Seriously, I need you to tell me what has become to strong to deny. Your only complaint was that the game would not be in the timeline, and would have its own universe...literally, this is what you said:
I have explained that all the stuff Aonuma said had nothing to do with your worries, so I really don't know how anything is to strong for you to deny. Aonuma has done nothing but talk about trying to recapture the first Zelda in this new Zelda. Unless you have never played the first Zelda when it came out back in 86', then you should be, I don't know, excited to see the game trying to go back to its roots?
Who has confirmed that this game is a reboot?
Where do you even see Aonuma mention anything about a reboot? If there is a reboot I sure hope it is for MM, because I have been dying for a remake. If I can't get a remake of MM, I'll gladly take a reboot done better.
Also why is a reboot bad? Heck if they want to reboot the oracle of seasons & ages, and finally release the Farore version they scraped (for technical reasons) then I say go for it. I been dying for that too.
What is wrong with a stand alone universe. WW is sort of its own universe (at least when it first came out it was), but then they worked it into the timeline. I don't see why they can't work this universe into the timeline. And even if they can't, since when did Zelda have to fit into a timeline to be enjoyable to play?
How can you even confirm that this new game most certainly may NOT be "Zelda" at all or least the "Zelda" that we know and love?
How do you know? You even go so far as to say:
First off, you mean Zelda is dead to YOU and a few people like you. I have followed Zelda for a very long time, and 1 game that has more speculation then it does facts is not about to end my obsession for said game.
That said, I can understand your fear when you heard Aonuma say they were "rethinking the conventions" of Zelda. When I heard that I thought to myself: "They are going to screw up this game. Please don't let them put voice acting in. Please don't let them cave in to today's' generation." <----(Abbreviated version, but sums it up) In fact none of my current fears have been addressed. All I know is that Aonuma is aiming to capture both the first Zelda's adventure and Zelda HW combat/statergy(?)[I've never played dynasty warrior, so i'm not sure what he is trying to capture from there].
So far the trailer only shows vibrant colors, a vast world, and a unisex looking Link.
We don't know how the fighting style will be, what the items are or if we will even have items. We don't know the story, we don't really know anything, so i don't see how anyone can run around saying they loathe the game?
Aonuma says:
Why is this bad? This is what Zelda 1 did. If anything you should be happy this new Zelda is trying to capture the very 1st Zelda adventure style. I don't see how HAVING to use your map because you might get lost in this game could be a bad thing, nor do I see how ACTUALLY exploring can be bad either.
Both the elements listed above stay true to what Zelda is about, so why are you so upset?
Side Note: Imagine if they were going to make it like FF-X2. If you choose to help people, or not to help people, it affected the game play a little. Having your actions impact the world is different. To see that done right in a zelda game might be interesting indeed.
He isn't. Link has always been whoever the player is. If you choose to name yourself Link, that is up to you. Nowhere in the game does anyone confirm that the character you play is Link. They always call him whatever you name him, and nothing eles. In KH, no matter what you may want to name Sora, sora is Sora and you are going to watch his life unfold. Link you can rename and watch your legend unfold. In games like KH, FF, and Mario, you are forced to assist and watch the hero attain glory. While in Zelda, you are encouraged to take on a role. For me, I spent time yelling at how Mario can't jump and how he needs to get his act together. This was often followed by words like: "What is wrong with you and other words that blame Mario for my game playing skills. However while playing Zelda I spent my time saying things like: "Sweet, I've obtained the master sword, fear me! (Insert evil laugh here) Now how do I solve this? Thank you Navi I can see that, stop bothering me!" Link is suppose to be you the player, which is why he cannot be one specific character. He is a representation for every player who has played a Zelda game. Did everyone playing the game understand that?
No. Some like me fell into the role of being the hero unconsciously, others caught on consciously, and others like you felt a need to watch the protagonist become a hero. Zelda allows players to do two things. You can form a personal connection with all of the characters by assuming the role of hero, or you can sit back and enjoy watching the story as an outside source. Whatever your play style, you can enjoy the game.
They are eliminating the go to point A and then to point B formula that a lot of Zelda games fell into. They are going back to the first Zelda game where players can start at C and then go to A if they want. Nothing wrong with having that sort of freedom. I'm glad they are not relying on cinematic and voice acting to improve the game. Its a game, it is supposed to be played. People are suppose to enjoy playing as its hero. Its not a movie, and putting voice actors and a bunch of movies in a game does not improve the overall game play, nor does it make the content more enjoyable. The movies are nice, but when I sit down to play a game, I want to PLAY it. Not WATCH it. (Eyeing FF-x2 [nice game, but so~ many clip scenes and movies] I literally remember the cinematic more then the actual game play, and I feel more like I was out watching a movie then actually playing the game.)
Summary:
All in all, everything you listed is nothing to really be too concerned about. Your theory could be true, but not because of any of the information you provided. Just simple because you made a really, and I mean a REALLY good guess. Most of the information you provided all shows that this new Zelda is heavily focused on the very first Zelda game that started it all. It is aiming to capture the vast world of the first, and encourage exploring (aka actually adventuring).
Also we learn that Aonuma wants to keep Link from having a solid existence because THE PLAYER aka YOU are Link. Whether that means allowing players to choose to be a male or female is unknown. It does however strongly suggest that he does not want Link to have a voice actor (YAY) because it would hurt the players experience of being a hero, and would force players into the role of observer. You already stated that you prefer to play as an observer. I already stated that I like to play as the hero. Your observer role is not at risk of being taken away. Aonuma seems to be trying not to take away the personal experience that players like me enjoy when we play as the hero.
Lastly we learn that Aonuma is not only trying to capture the elements of the first Zelda, but also that of HW. As I've never played a dynasty warrior game, I don't know if he means the games fighting mechanics, whatever its strategy or puzzles (if any) are like, or if he means the ability to play as any character you want. IMO I think he might be talking about the fighting style or strategy portion, but like I said. I've never played a dynasty warrior game so I have nothing to go on.
Things you should be worried about!
There are rumors about Zelda going multi-player. <----This, this right here is bad! Why? It breaks the immersion of the game, it takes away the journey, the adventure, and ruins the "Player is the hero" concept. How? I cannot speak for everyone's friends, but how many friends come over and SIT QUIETLY without you feeling awkward?
Friends often talk to you, crack jokes while you are playing games, are telling you to slow down or hurry up, or giving you the answer to puzzles that you were to slow to figure out. <--- all of this is why multi-player is bad. It robs the player of almost all the aspects of Zelda. Exploring at your own pace, enjoying the sights, solving puzzles and feeling good that you did, enjoying all of the characters you meet (the reactions I have to some of the characters are just priceless). When you are playing with friends, you are not as immersed in the game, and players can miss out.
Jamie
Till the roof comes off, till the lights go out...
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Gender
- trans-pan-demi-ethno-christian-math-autis-genderfluid-cheesecake
First off, I didn't tell you what you can or cannot do. Sorry for advising you, but that sentence just doesn't work. It is contradictory. Certainly means 100%, may means less than 100%. Saying "certainly" and "may" together is contradictory. It would be like if I said "there is a 100% chance that there is a 60% chance of this being true". You don't need the certainly. "It may not", and "It certainly may not" mean the exact same thing. I don't care if your brother is a 90 year old English professor. I know what shun means, why are you telling me the definitions of words? Do you think I am stupid? I am not shunning you, I am telling you your sentence makes no sense. You still didn't answer my first question about your made up statistic. I have no issue with what you have to say, but rather how you said it.
If we all minded our own business when something bothered us, we'd still have slaves.
Second off, where is your second off? You said first off, but you didn't have a second off.
ZeldafreakCJM
Hey there, it's me.
Where does the confirmation that he's called Link because he was suppose to link two different time periods together fit into all of this? Or Hyrule Historia flat-out confirming his canon name is Link? Or better yet the fact that he's 12 different people who reincarnate? Do people really think so highly of themselves that they can imagine themselves actually being 12 different people at drastically different points in time?
Most importantly, why do so many Zelda games open with Link having a history and life prior to the player playing the game? Why is it that he's getting more and more emotions and more and more family members or close friends?
Point is, if Link is an avatar he's a terrible one. I firmly belive he's not, Nintendo intended him to be so but failed and he's been stuck in a weird twilight realm of both a avatar and a character sense. Nintendo even seems more interested in him being a character what with the examples I listed like them coming up with a new character-based explanation for his name, the character getting more emotions and story presence, and the fact that the most recent games literally don't even give a chance to name him before just putting his canon name in. At the very least, if he manages to please both people like me that view him as a character and people like you who don't, in his current state, that alone should be reason enough to not change him one way or the other.
Also, your avatar is hypnotizing. O-O
ZeldafreakCJM
Hey there, it's me.
The point still stands that we have confirmation that that is his offical name, they could have easily called him something like "the namelss hero" or something, but instead they chose to firmly established him as existing ,without the need of the player, in-universe.
Why do you have to be mean? I'm being polite, at the very least acknowledge people have different views.
You do realize that by these guidelines a lot of Nintendo characters are not characters right? Mario rarely talks outside of a few catchphrases, and we know next to nothing about him or his life goals and likes/dislikes. In fact playing through the Metroid Prime trilogy for the first time this summer made me realize that there really isn't much difference between Samus and Link in terms of character, hell the only difference is that you can rename Link, they both have the same amount of personality. Furthermore, I don't read fan-fics or anything like that, my opinion on Link is based on my experiences with the games while growing up, I've never viewed Link as me but as Link. He fulfills a unique role within the games similar to both Zelda and Ganon.
I think the one who's really wrong here is Nintendo. They always claimed that Link is an avatar when he really hasn't been since I don't know, the original. The only thing we were meant to interpret ourselves is his speech, which SS shows.
I still hope Zelda U is the real deal on this.
I still hope Zelda U is the real deal on this.
Last edited:
Mangachick14
Nerdy and Proud
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2012
- Location
- Behind My Computer Monitor
THANK YOU!
No matter what Nintendo says; if Link is supposed to be an avatar, he's a failure of one. If he was a proper avatar he wouldn't have pre-established relationships, like his Uncle or Saria or his family in WW or his friends in Ordon or Zelda in Skyloft. He wouldn't show any emotion either, like he does when Aryll or his ordonian friends or Zelda are kidnapped. He's been given character traits; he kind and lazy but can rise to an occasion and become a hero. You don't need to seek out fan-material to see these traits of his; they're blatantly present in-game. Sure, he's not terribly unique but he has a distinct personality.
Personally, what I've always thought nintendo was trying to do with him was not so much for him to be you, but get you to try to see Hyrule from his point of view. Why on earth they decided that was impossible to do with a full character is beyond me, but Link really is stuck in this limbo between character and avatar. He's neither fully an avatar nor fully a character... and really, I'd prefer it if he stayed that way instead of becoming an avatar. I don't really like avatars because I feel nothing for them. They're an empty vessel, so when something bad or tragic happens to them, I find myself not really caring. I don't want that in Zelda. As open as I am to change, I think Link's status is one thing that should never be touched. And before anyone says it, yes I know Zelda isn't that story-based, okay? I KNOW. But you know what? It's not mindless either. It has a plot, it has characters, and it has a mythos--which Link is a big part of. Is it so wrong to like that mythos and want to see it continue to be built upon?
Jamie
Till the roof comes off, till the lights go out...
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2014
- Gender
- trans-pan-demi-ethno-christian-math-autis-genderfluid-cheesecake
Perhaps I'm a bit of a hypocrite here but honestly, who cares? Zelda was never about plot. Just do the puzzles and kill the enemies. Why do you care if he's an avatar or not?
Maybe there are some of us who do care about story and characters because we don't want it to be like some soulless board game.
VitaTempusN92
Hero of Time! The True Zelda Genius!
Uh, YES it WAS, two words, Hyrule Historia.
Edit:
I don't know what version of Zelda 1 you played, maybe Broadcast Satellaview Zelda, I don't know. Maybe you brainwashed by BS Zelda. I say this cause the ORIGINAL version of Zelda 1 looked like this:
The version of LoZ 1 you're likely thinking of when you said the things like as if Link didn't exist at first, THAT version looked like this:
FYI (For your information), BS Zelda was NOT the ORIGINAL game that came in 1986, an NES game simply by the name of "The Legend of Zelda" was the that came out in 1986 NOT BS Zelda A.K.A (Also known as) Zelda 3rd quest (This is likely where your misinterpretation originated from). BS Zelda came out in Japan only in 1995. BS Zelda was ported to SNES emulator and was translated in english sometime after.
I find this obviously to be the case since you obviously NEVER actually PLAYED the ORIGINAL, you only judge the game by very FALSE assumptions. I say that cause if you have actually PLAYED the ORIGINAL game, you would know about this opening:
[video=youtube;uyMKWJ5e1kg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyMKWJ5e1kg[/video]
Not only would you not know about that, you also wouldn't know about this ending:
[video=youtube;idiAYgl1o2g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idiAYgl1o2g[/video]
To prevent misunderstandings, here is another video:
[video=youtube;EUkbqZoiDn4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUkbqZoiDn4[/video]
Just in case you missed what I was trying to clarify, here are those things:
Link DOES exist in Zelda 1, as I've said, if you've actually PLAYED the ORIGINAL game and READ the manuals for it, you would know this stuff. Here are some scans of the manuals in case you are wondering:
Again, this is Zelda 1:
[video=youtube;c4bvZZa5Mtg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4bvZZa5Mtg[/video]
This is what YOU THINK was Zelda 1 was but was actually BS Zelda:
[video=youtube;8LG4iS0uLmg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LG4iS0uLmg[/video]
If you're STILL lost and confused then LOOK this stuff up yourself and PLAY Zelda 1, the REAL Zelda 1 NOT BS Zelda (which by the way was a NON-canonical remake of the original).
Last edited:
ZeldafreakCJM
Hey there, it's me.
Thread's getting a little too heated. Both sides should probably calm down.
Everybody, chill. Zelda Wii U will be on the timeline. That's all I'm going to say.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2014
I never played "Broadcast Satellaview Zelda". Also the link to your first picture is broken.
That said, I played the game 20+ years ago so going off of memory might not have been such a good thing for me. lol I should have double checked to make sure what I was remembering was on point. You know what they say, "better safe then sorry". Thank you for all the references. Also Zelda wind fish says in the title "Link's awakening" and also Zelda "a link to the past" (although sort of a pun) has his name in there. I'll admit I made a mistake about the name Link being used.
I'm actually quite shocked that is ALL you have to say. I said a lot more in my post then just that. Over 6 diverse points were mentioned in my post and you literally ignored them all. The whole reason for this discussion is because the only thing you complained about was:
I talked about why you should not have to worry and you don't even mention what you thought? You don't say if you disagree or if you agree? You don't even acknowledge that I replied to your biggest issue. I also mentioned that there are rumors of them making Zelda a multi-player game, and you don't even mention that!
Not once in my comments did I take a shot at you, nor did I insult your intelligence. And here you are taking shots at me and bluntly telling me that I not only didn't play the game, but that I was so stupid I could not tell that I was playing another game. If you thought I was taking a shot at you, all you had to do was call me out on it. Had you just done that, I'd have explained that my intention was not to take a shot at you and would have promptly apologized for stepping on your toes(The phrase: "stepping on your toes" is NOT an insult. Saying your sorry after bumping into someone or stepping on their feet/toes is common courtesy . I mention this because offending someone can be likened to bumping into them or stepping on their toes).
I can't speak for everyone here, but I came to this forum to DISCUSS (or if you want to use the term DEBATE) about Zelda Wii U (and maybe a little bit of HW if anyone mentioned it). So if that is what anyone here would like to do, feel free to comment on all the other stuff I did mention in my post:
1) Zelda being multi-player - Why do you like or hate this idea?
2) Being able to play as a male or female - Should he remain a male?
3) Open world like the first Zelda - What are your thoughts on this?
4) Customization for Link - Good idea or bad?
5) What if Zelda was the protagonist - Are you open to this concept? Explain why or why not.
6) Voice acting - Yay or nay and why?
7) What is Zelda to you - Story, no puzzles, wait no... Share your opinion.
8) Reboot of Zelda - What are your thoughts on this? Should they?
9) Based on what you have seen so far in the vid, are you hating or liking? NO middle men.
10) Another Zelda universe - this is good or bad?
11) Link is suppose to represent the player, some fall into RP and do just that, others don't. - Which do you prefer and why?
Bonus: What are your thoughts about Zelda HW?
I want to hear what other people interested in the game have to say. If our thoughts differ good, if they are the same, good. Just as long as we can discuss the game. We all like Zelda for our own reasons and I like hearing each reason, even if I don't agree with it. That is where a debate comes in. This is not Jerry Springer, keep deliberate insults to yourself.
That said, I played the game 20+ years ago so going off of memory might not have been such a good thing for me. lol I should have double checked to make sure what I was remembering was on point. You know what they say, "better safe then sorry". Thank you for all the references. Also Zelda wind fish says in the title "Link's awakening" and also Zelda "a link to the past" (although sort of a pun) has his name in there. I'll admit I made a mistake about the name Link being used.
I'm actually quite shocked that is ALL you have to say. I said a lot more in my post then just that. Over 6 diverse points were mentioned in my post and you literally ignored them all. The whole reason for this discussion is because the only thing you complained about was:
I talked about why you should not have to worry and you don't even mention what you thought? You don't say if you disagree or if you agree? You don't even acknowledge that I replied to your biggest issue. I also mentioned that there are rumors of them making Zelda a multi-player game, and you don't even mention that!
Not once in my comments did I take a shot at you, nor did I insult your intelligence. And here you are taking shots at me and bluntly telling me that I not only didn't play the game, but that I was so stupid I could not tell that I was playing another game. If you thought I was taking a shot at you, all you had to do was call me out on it. Had you just done that, I'd have explained that my intention was not to take a shot at you and would have promptly apologized for stepping on your toes(The phrase: "stepping on your toes" is NOT an insult. Saying your sorry after bumping into someone or stepping on their feet/toes is common courtesy . I mention this because offending someone can be likened to bumping into them or stepping on their toes).
I can't speak for everyone here, but I came to this forum to DISCUSS (or if you want to use the term DEBATE) about Zelda Wii U (and maybe a little bit of HW if anyone mentioned it). So if that is what anyone here would like to do, feel free to comment on all the other stuff I did mention in my post:
1) Zelda being multi-player - Why do you like or hate this idea?
2) Being able to play as a male or female - Should he remain a male?
3) Open world like the first Zelda - What are your thoughts on this?
4) Customization for Link - Good idea or bad?
5) What if Zelda was the protagonist - Are you open to this concept? Explain why or why not.
6) Voice acting - Yay or nay and why?
7) What is Zelda to you - Story, no puzzles, wait no... Share your opinion.
8) Reboot of Zelda - What are your thoughts on this? Should they?
9) Based on what you have seen so far in the vid, are you hating or liking? NO middle men.
10) Another Zelda universe - this is good or bad?
11) Link is suppose to represent the player, some fall into RP and do just that, others don't. - Which do you prefer and why?
Bonus: What are your thoughts about Zelda HW?
I want to hear what other people interested in the game have to say. If our thoughts differ good, if they are the same, good. Just as long as we can discuss the game. We all like Zelda for our own reasons and I like hearing each reason, even if I don't agree with it. That is where a debate comes in. This is not Jerry Springer, keep deliberate insults to yourself.
Last edited:
VitaTempusN92
Hero of Time! The True Zelda Genius!
We can only hope.
Edit:
First off, I'm glad you acknowledged my point. Second, to answer your questions:
1) I do NOT hate the idea of a multi-player Zelda game, FS and FSA are GREAT games to me and it would NOT hurt me if they continued the Four Swords series
2) Yes, Link should remain male. Though, I would NOT mind if they introduced a female "Link" based like character as a protagonist, if they were to do such thing and IF they do it right, I might consider buying such type of Zelda game.
3) I am definitely all for this, I NEVER said was against said idea. If Nintendo did it right with Zelda 1 and ALBW, then they CAN indeed do it right with Zelda U IF they wanted to.
4) BAD! This is where the problem REALLY derives from, ESPECIALLY for a game that's supposed to be HISTORICALLY CANON. Link ALREADY exists a hero written about in Hyrule's history, a feature in such CANON game to custom him whatever way you please would RUIN that! When you play as Link, you're basically just given the ability to experience things virtually through HIS perspective, allowing YOU the player to be able to experience what he went through on his adventures from HIS perspective. In other words, as I have stated in previous posts, Link ISN'T supposed to be YOU, YOU are supposed to be Link but ONLY when you play a Zelda that is supposed to feature LINK as the protagonist.
5) If it's done right, I'll approve. It wouldn't be a bad idea to be able to experience things from Zelda's experience IF it's done right course. I say that cause, if they were to make a such a game, they would have to be fair and treat Zelda as they have with Link, in other words, when you play as her, she can't talk at her own will either, again like they've done with Link.
6) Yes, they absolutely NEED this, they have been sticking with the OUTDATED text boxes for TOO LONG, it is time they should step up their game here. However, if they do FINALLY consider having voice acting instead of text boxes, they HAVE to make sure they do it right. In other words, they should stick with the same formula just with voice rather than text.
7) Zelda to me is about the history of Hyrule, and of course the characters that have lived in Hyrule or just interacted with such land. As the games have proven, Zelda isn't just about Hyrule but more about the characters of the franchise, more in particularly, Link and Zelda, especially according to SS. You see, THIS is WHY and HOW come Link is SO MUCH IMPORTANT to such HISTORY that exists within the franchise's universe. THIS is WHY I am against the idea of being able to customize Link into being something he is NOT.
Sure it may not that bad IF it were for MACHINIMA purposes where such thing might be required or some NON canon parody or spinoff like BS Zelda but something that is HISTORICALLY CANON, such thing is NOT okay. Anyways, back on the topic of the question. Zelda is not only about the EPIC story but also about the FUN gameplay, the AMAZING soundtracks the games have, and of course, the AWESOME and EPIC exploration experience of action, adventure, solving the GREAT INNOVATIVE CREATIVE puzzles, and other making it to the top to face the final challenge of the game. THAT is what Zelda is about.
8) If done right, maybe.
9) If you're referring to the Zelda U teaser, my answer would be loving what I have seen. Personally, I think the game looks GREAT, it just Aonuma's words that worry me and RUIN that excitement I had from when the first several times I looked and saw the teaser. Not only that but Aonuma's words have also been crushing on some great theories I had for the game too. It's annoying how even time I have a theory for a new game, such theories always end up being crushed at times.
10) If done right, it wouldn't hurt.
11) As I stated before, ONLY YOU fill in the role as Link and experience things from his perspective whenever a Zelda that features him as the main protagonist. Link ISN'T YOU, Link is Link, you are ONLY just stepping into his shoes whenever you play as him. That's the way it has been and knowing how Nintendo feels about Link and their idea of him, the reasonable thing to do is leave him the way he is ONLY for when you play as him and everyone will be happy.
Bonus) As of now, all I can say is AWESOME!
Third and lastly, the reason why I didn't respond to the other parts of your previous post is because I didn't know what to say in regards those things, not to mention I have a tendency where I get bored easy and fairly quickly, therefore I sometimes don't feel like reading an entirety of long posts. I didn't answer to summary either cause again, didn't know what to say.
Anyways, that's all I have to say right now, I'm tired.
Last edited:
r2d93
Hero of the Stars
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2011
- Location
- Lost Woods
No offense, but I honestly have no clue where the hell you're coming from or why you think that Zelda is "dead" and is falling apart at the seams.
First off, Aonuma has given little to no factual information for us to speculate off of, and all you've really provided us are multiple quotes of Aonuma's suggesting:
1. Link is (and has always been) a figurehead of sorts for the actual player, and will possibly be more customizable
2. Hyrule itself will be bigger
3. The player's actions will have a more direct impact on his/her surroundings and path
While it's not ridiculous to think that this game could be a standalone Zelda game in a universe of its own, there's absolutely zero evidence to support that claim. Nothing Aonuma has talked about (or at least nothing in the provided quotes) makes any mention or slight reference to the timeline.
Plus, we don't even know if this whole customizable avatar Link is even a real thing. I think you're looking at this tiny provided game clip and these extremely vague quotes from Aonuma far too negatively. We really don't know anything about the game right now. I think we should focus on how gorgeous the game looks, the new immense open world, and the exciting new innovations that Nintendo will provide for us in the next upcoming installment. The Legend of Zelda, my friend, is not dead.
First off, Aonuma has given little to no factual information for us to speculate off of, and all you've really provided us are multiple quotes of Aonuma's suggesting:
1. Link is (and has always been) a figurehead of sorts for the actual player, and will possibly be more customizable
2. Hyrule itself will be bigger
3. The player's actions will have a more direct impact on his/her surroundings and path
While it's not ridiculous to think that this game could be a standalone Zelda game in a universe of its own, there's absolutely zero evidence to support that claim. Nothing Aonuma has talked about (or at least nothing in the provided quotes) makes any mention or slight reference to the timeline.
Plus, we don't even know if this whole customizable avatar Link is even a real thing. I think you're looking at this tiny provided game clip and these extremely vague quotes from Aonuma far too negatively. We really don't know anything about the game right now. I think we should focus on how gorgeous the game looks, the new immense open world, and the exciting new innovations that Nintendo will provide for us in the next upcoming installment. The Legend of Zelda, my friend, is not dead.