• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

Discussion Why do people want to play as Zelda so badly?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Playable Zelda would be a great idea for a top down Zelda game. The entire game including things like puzzles/dungeons could be designed around having to control 2 separate characters with their own unique abilities and powers, with different solutions possible depending on who you're controlling, as well as even having to control both characters in tandem at certain times - I actually hope they try something like this in the future as there's a lot of potential there. Edit - I guess they sort of explored these ideas with Four Swords & Tri Force Heroes, but I was mostly thinking of a single player focused game here.

In an open world exploration game based heavily around player freedom (like BOTW and TOTK), I don't really see how having another playable character with their own unique playstyle makes that much sense, as you are essentially limiting what each character can do individually, and by extension limiting player freedom while controlling either one of the characters. I'm not saying it couldn't be done; it's just not really near the top of my ideas for how a game like this would evolve.

If people just want the option of playing as a female MC in a Zelda game then it doesn't really need to be Zelda, and would probably be a lot more simple for story reasons if they went down the Link/Linkle route.
 
I think Zelda's magic would probably make for a pretty cool alternate moveset for a Zelda game
 
The title is exactly what I wanted to ask. The point of this thread is to better understand exactly why people want a playable Zelda. My interest in it, or being convinced of something, is secondary.

If you read my responses, you will see I'm not debating. I'm engaging with responses, agreeing with some, disagreeing with others, and teasing out my own feelings on the subject, because I'm open to have my mind changed. I specified what would best change my mind in order to help you do that, if convincing me of your opinion is something you care to do.
Your responses gave me a different impression but if that's the case I will in turn respond to your answer to my earlier post properly:

I think this could easily be solved by choosing Link's gender expression at the start of the game. Or even a choice between Link or Linkle.
I don't really think that this is an easy solution, nor that there is a "one size fits all" solution in the first place. Not everyone will see their desire to express their gender identity met by playing a customizable character, or even in a binary choice between Link or Linkle. Some will want to play as an explicitly and canonically femme character like Zelda the way they've played an explicitly and canonically male character like Link for decades.
 
I think you can safely close the thread, then. Your question has been answered. Unless there's something else you're fishing for?
Thanks, but I'll manage my own thread. You can drop the schtick of accusing me of baiting or fishing for something, as if that's something I like to see on this website I created.
 
0
honestly that playstyle thing is kinda why for me

there's not really anything inherently wrong with Link's moveset but it would be interesting to change that up a bit


also to a lesser extent it just feels kinda weird conceptually to have a character that the franchise is named after and not ever have them be playable
 
Playable Zelda would be a great idea for a top down Zelda game. The entire game including things like puzzles/dungeons could be designed around having to control 2 separate characters with their own unique abilities and powers, with different solutions possible depending on who you're controlling, as well as even having to control both characters in tandem at certain times - I actually hope they try something like this in the future as there's a lot of potential there. Edit - I guess they sort of explored these ideas with Four Swords & Tri Force Heroes, but I was mostly thinking of a single player focused game here.

I can't tell if this is tongue in cheek or you really don't know what the central gimmick of spirit tracks was.
 
I can't tell if this is tongue in cheek or you really don't know what the central gimmick of spirit tracks was.

It's the one Zelda game I haven't played lol. Now that you mention it I do recall seeing that there were segments you could control Zelda in? But I'm not really too aware of the extent that this was explored, or how focused it was on that.
 
0
I don't really think that this is an easy solution, nor that there is a "one size fits all" solution in the first place. Not everyone will see their desire to express their gender identity met by playing a customizable character, or even in a binary choice between Link or Linkle. Some will want to play as an explicitly and canonically femme character like Zelda the way they've played an explicitly and canonically male character like Link for decades.
Yeah, that's a good point. I don't think any solution fits all cases of identity expression, but Zelda is such an iconic and established character in her femininity that I feel like if we were to have an option to express ourselves in that way, she'd be the perfect candidate.
As someone who has virtually no shortage of options for games that represent the way I look and present myself, naturally that's not my priority - but at the same time, I don't have any reason to desire fewer options for others. I don't think anybody has a justifiably good reason to want Zelda to not be playable.
 
0
Then indulge me and give me insight beyond "her name's in the title"

Other people have put forth versions of points I'd make and I don't think the engagement has been fruitful. They're known to you in any case, so here I'm picking "No" on the "if convincing me of your opinion is something you care to do" option you offered.
 
I see what you're saying, but an answer related to gameplay is the surest way to get me, the person asking the question, to agree with those who want to play as Zelda, which is why I'm framing it this way
I suppose then I think there's a disconnect between the thread title and the question at the end of your OP. It's a bit like asking "why do people badly want to eat chocolate" and then saying that you're primarily interested in answers related to mouthfeel. It limits the scope of potential true answers I think.

People who badly want playable Zelda are going to answer with the reasons why they badly want that; but those reasons aren't necessarily going to be gameplay related. Making the initial question something like "convince me that playable Zelda would offer novel gameplay possibilities" would get closer responses to what it sounds like your looking for. I don't think starting with a a broad question about why people want something necessarily tees them up to realise this is supposed to be a chance to sell you on the idea rather than express their perspective.
 
It's not about the gameplay at all. It's about representation. Could be female Link too for all I care, with the exact same mechanics

But putting aside the framing of the thread that I feel kinda misses the point, if it was specifically Zelda herself, then gameplay segments involving her could include stealth, or magic, or the old Sheikah slate powers, or many other things
 
As someone who really likes Link I don't want him to loose his protagonism nor a story where your character is a mere avatar where choosing between Link and Zelda doesn't matter.
So the only way for me to be happy with playing as Zelda is a different quest. For example, doing the things she did in Oot and SS. But it's difficult to design a game like this and expect it to be good instead of annoying(like Spider-Man MJ and Miles quests).
 
I don't think the engagement has been fruitful.
I guess you haven't really read my comments, then. I've read some pretty eye-opening responses that have helped me understand differences between my game priorities and others, while pointing out that some responses like "because her name's in the title" don't really make sense as points to me. Like, god, The Wizard of Oz would have been so much better if it focused on the Wizard.
 
It's not about the gameplay at all. It's about representation.
That's what it seems like, for the most part, which makes sense as to why it hasn't really occurred to me.
However, there have been some great ideas as to what actual Zelda gameplay could entail.

But putting aside the framing of the thread that I feel kinda misses the point, if it was specifically Zelda herself, then gameplay segments involving her could include stealth, or magic, or the old Sheikah slate powers, or many other things
Stealth segments with Zelda actually sound really cool. Even if she didn't have any weapons, and you were stuck with having to use your environment and your own ingenuity to solve puzzles or take out swaths of baddies.

In fact, something like the Yiga Clan segment in BotW could have worked perfectly playing as Zelda. Imagine having the ability to choose whether you want to take on a dungeon in a "stealthy, clever" style playing as Zelda, or take on the same dungeon in a more combative, action style as Link.
 
I guess you haven't really read my comments, then. I've read some pretty eye-opening responses that have helped me understand differences between my game priorities and others, while pointing out that some responses like "because her name's in the title" don't really make sense as points to me. Like, god, The Wizard of Oz would have been so much better if it focused on the Wizard.

don't you think people would increasingly be calling for that eventually if that was the name of a franchise that had like 20 movies in it instead of just one movie though?

the name thing does grate a bit at some point when there's enough entries in a series
 
0
Nintendo has many male protagonists

Regardless of if their other series are improving (3d world + movie makes me think Peach's days as a damsel may be outnumbered, and the Odyssey ending is arguably progressive in some way though it was kinda weirdly toned compared to typical Mario) or not (Kirby generally has 4 playable characters now and all are guys, I don't wanna scrap any of them but do wonder if someone else could be added, I'd say Tiff tbh but they don't want the anime to be that connected I assume), there is one thing in common

These are very defined characters. We play as Mario or Kirby or whoever, and to the extent any game character is, they are analogous to the player. But they are still primarily their own characters. Mario is Mario above all else.

Link is to some degree, an avatar. For a long time you've been able to name him. There has been an insistence upon the inability to speak because he is meant to be a shell. Well he has more of a direct story role then say, a Pokemon Trainer (in terms of lore stuff, I suppose beating the evil team is major too), he is primarily an empty slate that has some backstory.

Despite Aunoma believing otherwise, I do not believe Link's gender is integral to his character in anyway, considering how much vagueness there is surrounding him. Most other games with an avatar-esc character do let you choose, like going back to Pokemon it was always the plan, it didn't happen at first cause of technological limits but it came soon enough.

Letting Mario be a girl, while largely inoffensive, would be a bit weird cause Mario is such a defined character. Link, while iconic, is not only open ended but has many versions, in every Mario game besides maybe Paper Mario its the same guy. Perhaps the canon is weirder with hints of them being actors in Mario 3 and such, but its not some multiverse at all. Even the Paper thing is a modern era retcon that the RPG era PM fans hate.

Meanwhile with this game and like 3 other exceptions, every Link is his own. So the idea of choosing male or female feels very obvious, yet again, Aunoma seems to believe it goes against Link's character on some fundamental level.

If that is the case, then fans will naturally shift to the most primary female character, who can best fill this role. I do believe the primary goal is just a female protagonist, as there was little Zelda talk until after rumors- followed by a denail of - of female Link in BOTW.

Whether it will ever happen I don't know, perhaps if leadership changes, then again Peach seems to not be directly tied to leadership considering what Miyamoto said about her in the movie, perhaps its just whatever suits what situation best (aka if the game has 4 player multiplayer from now on Peach isn't captured, but I'd hope the next 3d has multiple playable characters and Peach is one, though avoiding a DK64 situation may be hard)

Usually when Nintendo is refered to as a "conservative company" we are meaning resistance to industry changes, resistance to bucking their own trends which, ironically can be the opposite of conservative (as in they are conservative by refusing to stop innovating in wacky ways), but on some level they are on a social level. I believe it is a lot better then it could be and has been getting better in recent years, both EPD 5 and 9 seem to be doing great in that area I'd say, as well as GameFreak, though for EPD its harder to really implement in mario kart perhaps. And this was very much good news:https://www.engadget.com/nintendo-japan-same-sex-marriage-benefits-175653064.html. And gives me hope that the (imo inevitable) Tomadachi Life Switch will deliver on that old promise (you could argue Miitopia did, but the relationships in that game are a lot less explicitly romantic, it feels like it can thread the needle). But they are still a Japanese company with primarily fairly old leadership, and in many cases the essentialization of gameplay, intentionally or not, makes a good excuse to avoid these changes.

Despite this, as many in this community are aware, there are many fans who are not of the most stereotypical "gamer" groups, regardless of how much of a bubble the places I'm in are or are not, I do think it's fair to say there are many nintendo fans of color, who are women, who are members of the LGBT community, who desire more clear representation. Their protagonists are predominantly male, and the human ones predominantly white or at the least very light skinned. Zelda, being such a big series and one with some idea of representing the player, is one that many would love to see themselves in, and if Link cannot be molded to fit players who want to play as a girl, then playing as the leading woman is the next best thing.
 
Stealth segments with Zelda actually sound really cool. Even if she didn't have any weapons, and you were stuck with having to use your environment and your own ingenuity to solve puzzles or take out swaths of baddies.

In fact, something like the Yiga Clan segment in BotW could have worked perfectly playing as Zelda. Imagine having the ability to choose whether you want to take on a dungeon in a "stealthy, clever" style playing as Zelda, or take on the same dungeon in a more combative, action style as Link.
Yeah that's kinda what I had in mind. Except people usually hate forced sections in games so I don't really know how it would go over lol. But if Zelda still had access to the old Sheikah slate ruins, but no weapons, she could still fend for herself. It would require a stealthy approach since the old powers are slow and ineffectual in close combat - instead it would force people to engage in creative setups, like magnesis or bomb traps. It could basically be an expansion of Eventide
 
0
I guess you haven't really read my comments, then. I've read some pretty eye-opening responses that have helped me understand differences between my game priorities and others, while pointing out that some responses like "because her name's in the title" don't really make sense as points to me. Like, god, The Wizard of Oz would have been so much better if it focused on the Wizard.

Sorry to say, I read all of them and made an informed decision. But if you insist, I will clarify that "it's her damn legend" is shorthand for how women deserve to write their own stories, how often that isn't the case, and how movies or books or a long-established, highly prestigous video game series with a tradition of minimizing the importance of its titular character - for the franchise or indeed for saving Hyrule again and again and again - are one place to start changing that.

Or you could do it because girls can like heal and magic while boys play with hookshots or shit.
 
The way I see it, if Link is to be used as nothing more than an avatar I really don't see the point of not giving the player options. I also think that letting you play as an actual character with real characterization in a Zelda game sounds interesting.

That being said, Zelda is probably one of my least favorite of the main cast. She's incredibly dull in Breath of the Wild and at times one of my least favorite English performances. So I'm a bit conflicted.

So I think she should be playable, and/or Link should have a gender option, but I don't particularly find her interesting.
 
0
Sorry to say, I read all of them and made an informed decision. But if you insist, I will clarify that "it's her damn legend" is shorthand for how women deserve to write their own stories, how often that isn't the case, and how movies or books or long-established, highly prestigous video game series with a tradition of minimizing the importance of its titular character - for the franchise or indeed for saving Hyrule again and again and again - are a good place to start changing that.

Or you could do it because girls can like heal and magic while boys play with hookshots or shit.

It's a bit disingenuous to assume that people are only approaching the question of playable Zelda from a perspective of representation, when for many people the first thought whenever the question comes up is to consider the gameplay consequences and ideas surrounding it instead. That's why the idea seems a little pointless (for lack of a better word) to a lot of people, as there aren't immediate hooks for having Zelda playable with her own set of abilities in a game that was entirely about giving the player freedom to do as much as they wanted, whenever they wanted, the first time around.

It's pretty obvious reading through this thread that some people are missing that, and using it as an excuse to attack the OP with claims of shutting down representation or implying sexism, when it's obviously not what he was getting at.
 
It's a bit disingenuous to assume that people are only approaching the question of playable Zelda from a perspective of representation, when for many people the first thought whenever the question comes up is to consider the gameplay consequences and ideas surrounding it instead. That's why the idea seems a little pointless (for lack of a better word) to a lot of people, as there aren't immediate hooks for having Zelda playable with her own set of abilities in a game that was entirely about giving the player freedom to do as much as they wanted, whenever they wanted, the first time around.

It's pretty obvious reading through this thread that some people are missing that, and using it as an excuse to attack the OP with claims of shutting down representation or implying sexism, when it's obviously not what he was getting at.

Framing gameplay as better - or indeed necessary - justification for playable Zelda implies a blind spot. Naturally many people who are already represented would first think of gameplay consequences. Well, unless they're actually sexist, then they'd be screaming about how women can't fight and how PC culture is taking away their male role-models. Which also means I don't think Bellydrum is a sexist, by the way. I just think "What's the gameplay argument for playable Zelda" when the established protagonist is a moldable character who is free to take on almost any gameplay abilities the developers want isn't an answerable question and it badly misses the point.
 
Zero, zero desire to play as Zelda in the games as they currently stand, i.e. with Link as the focus. As a spin-off featuring her own battles, more story-focused (because her...story, seems to be more serious, emotional, and down to earth), and with more magic going on. More people, more kingdom, more lore. I'd like Nintendo to use her as a method to expand upon the world because Link doesn't talk. Kind of like how they used Luigi to just do a completely unrelated genre from Mario.
 
0
I've wondered this too so I appreciate the thread. I honestly don't even think this incarnation of zelda is that interesting tbh ( playable SS zelda would have been neat though), but I'm open to whatever nintendo wants to do in the future. Also, for those of you who haven't played spirit tracks, you should because it did have playable zelda and its a great game. Also I think link is getting a little too much disrespect tbh, he's far from just a shell of a character and its been that way since windwaker.
 
0
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom