I put this specific idea on blast a few pages ago for being nothing more than a "make Zelda Link" scenario.
No he gave Ganondorf a monocle it's totally original.
I should be down with this but seriously, fuck Aaron Diaz.
I put this specific idea on blast a few pages ago for being nothing more than a "make Zelda Link" scenario.
I put this specific idea on blast a few pages ago for being nothing more than a "make Zelda Link" scenario.
Ahhhhhh! I love this and need it in my life! I always thought a good solution would be a role reversal like that, where Link was some kind of bumbling oaf of a prince (to allow for keeping him largely mute) with Zelda having to be the savvy, adept hero who saves the kingdom.One of my favorite fan suggestions for a new Zelda game back in 2013 was The Legend of Zelda: Clockwork Empire, by Dresdencodak. Ganondorf had essentially gamed the system by elevating Link to royalty as a sheltered Prince, while Zelda was outcast, I believe. You played as Zelda then, trying to reveal Ganondorf's evil.
More details at the link:
http://dresdencodak.tumblr.com/post/47724463171/inspired-by-anita-sarkeesians-video-game-tropes
The simplest reason isn't always the best. You want the situation to be super-simple so you can paint in a broad stroke. Nintendo is a large company, and their IPs have been handled by a large number of devs over the years. I can't tell you, specifically, what drove the creation of characters in one game over another. Certainly, most of Nintendo's IPs have an obvious male lean in terms of cast representation, but what drove specific choices at any given time, I don't know. It's an interesting subject to research, but I'm not going to make a definitive statement on that level. Especially given the way that franchises have changed hands and even entire studios over time.The best thing to go for is the simplest reason.
Is there a reason you could suggest as to why nearly every Nintendo game has a majority-male cast besides conscious/subconscious bias?
I'm sorry for the curt tone of my previous reply. I just think that entire concept is the most trite and unimaginative a playable Zelda scenario could be.I was fuzzy on the details until I started Googling for my post, forgive me for missing you putting it "on blast'.
Eh, he has a certain fame around the Transformers fanbase that everything he thinks concerning the franchise is right and insults other people who think otherwise which apparently lead to a certain campaign of harassment from him just when he was starting to get famous years ago (which also makes him a bit of a hypocrite because now he apparently denounces that kind of acts).
The simplest reason isn't always the best. You want the situation to be super-simple so you can paint in a broad stroke. Nintendo is a large company, and their IPs have been handled by a large number of devs over the years. I can't tell you, specifically, what drove the creation of characters in one game over another. Certainly, most of Nintendo's IPs have an obvious male lean in terms of cast representation, but what drove specific choices at any given time, I don't know. It's an interesting subject to research, but I'm not going to make a definitive statement on that level. Especially given the way that franchises have changed hands and even entire studios over time.
Linkle is technically a creation of Koei Tecmo and a separate character from Link. She's not a female Link.People asking for a female Link, Nintendo did create Linkle recently so I wouldn't be surprised to be able to choose to play as Link or Linkle some time in the future when the series eventually will be needing for a new kick.
Sheik game sounds great too.
He can be a bit of an ass and come off as that aggravating brand of overreaching ally where he presumes to speak for, and over, the people he's trying to represent in his work.
Honestly though, he's a decent dude. He does the usual straight white webcomic writer thing where he loads his comic with cute queer girls and proudly waves them around, and all of this is so painfully written from the perspective of a complete outsider to who he's trying to represent, but through all of this I see a genuine effort to be as inclusive as can be, whereas your Jeph Jacques of the world are perfectly happy with "here is your lesbian; praise me!"
I feel like this is a problem that only a small minority of Zelda fans have, and it's really only because of the franchise's title lol.
Probably should have used a better word than create but Nintendo did have to accept and approve of this new character in the Zelda universe, which leaves some room for interepretation. In a time where we have seen some pressure for a female Link I think that's Nintendo answer to it and as far as it will ever go, if at all.Linkle is technically a creation of Koei Tecmo and a separate character from Link. She's not a female Link.
Why does it matter? Nintendo has been making video games since the 1970s. They have a variety of franchises that have evolved and changed hands over the years. The people that made a game thirty years ago are not necessarily involved in the creation of a follow-up today. Eiji Aonuma was not involved in the creation of the Zelda franchise. He's since taken on the role of the lead producer, but he's also no longer sitting in the director's chair. And some years from now, he'll retire, and another producer at Nintendo will take up the role he had.Actually, the simple situation is usually the best fore explaining something. The alternative is that many people have this problem - mainly guys - coincidentally. Which is highly unlikely.
Also, you bring up the fact that franchises change hands and studios, but what does that matter? The problem doesn't really get better or worse when that happens. That information suggests that our society instills a bias against women into its inhabitants. Why else would the problem persist even when different people handle the franchises?
Why does it matter? Nintendo has been making video games since the 1970s. They have a variety of franchises that have evolved and changed hands over the years. The people that made a game thirty years ago are not necessarily involved in the creation of a follow-up today. Eiji Aonuma was not involved in the creation of the Zelda franchise. He's since taken on the role of the lead producer, but he's also no longer sitting in the director's chair. And some years from now, he'll retire, and another producer at Nintendo will take up the role he had.
In the time that Aonuma has been in charge of Zelda, there have been a number of mainline Zelda games, remakes, and the occasional spin-off. Hyrule Warriors was made because Koei Tecmo pitched the idea and Aonuma, who had coincidentally been playing a different Musou game at home at the time, thought it was a good idea. And Koei Tecmo loaded the roster with so many playable female characters that it actually upset some of the pissbaby Zelda fans out there. If someone else had been in charge of Zelda at the time, it's entirely possible that this wouldn't have happened.
People sure are sleeping on Hyrule Warriors as a game where Zelda is playable.
As for the should Zelda be playable in a mainline game. My inherent reaction is yes and I would like to see a more 2 player co op design philosophy tried at least once.
Should link be a girl/gender swapped. Personally I don't think so. I think playable Zelda is a much better way to do positive representation within the series. I also think that Link is a defined character and his Heteronormative relationship with Zelda is nice.
Personally I think the Zelda series has a pretty good track record with writing Zelda as a positive force within that Herero framework.
I think that Nintendo definitely has a responsibility to do better with representation when it comes to LGBTQ issues, however other IP are definitely better suited to that. Splatoon instantly springs to mind
I said "Why does it matter?" to restate your question of "What does it matter?" Not to dismiss your concern.What do you mean why does it matter? It's a legitimate problem and it's slightly important to try and understand why the problem exists. You can't exactly solve the issue of underrepresentation if you have no idea why it happens.
I said "Why does it matter?" to restate your question of "What does it matter?" Not to dismiss your concern.
I was fuzzy on the details until I started Googling for my post, forgive me for missing you putting it "on blast'.
I honestly don't know much about the artist, is he an asshole? I did some Googling, but so far all I've found is claims he insists Nintendo stole his ideas, some attacks by Gamergate (I'm sure the association/accreditation to Anita caused some people to hiss like Skeksis), and some accusations of hypocrisy about drawing adult "male gaze" artwork while claiming he was for female empowerment. If you could summarize or provide further details, I would very much appreciate it.
I never suggested that changing hands fixes a problem. It's just something that happens with long-running franchises naturally over time. Sometimes it leads to some overt or obvious shifts, and sometimes it doesn't. You mention Final Fantasy XV, but even the Final Fantasy franchise has gone through a number of creative leads over time, even from game to game, and the focus and direction of each main numbered title tends to shift dramatically from the one that came before it.I asked that because changing hands doesn't seem to result in a fixing for the problem, suggesting either an active disinterest or a passive disinterest in women in the franchise. I lean heavily into the latter because the former seems too cartoony usually, or is usually reserved for a game like FFXV where the designers explained why they wanted to do four male protagonists.
I never suggested that change hands fixes a problem. It's just something that happens with long-running franchises naturally over time. Sometimes it leads to some overt or obvious shifts, and sometimes it doesn't. You mention Final Fantasy XV, but even the Final Fantasy franchise has gone through a number of creative leads over time, even from game to game, and the focus and direction of each main numbered title tends to shift dramatically from the one that came before it.
That could certainly be the case, but a suggestion is not a complete argument.I mean... I know that. I don't understand your point in response to my point that fictional worlds tend to be underpopulated with women. My point in response to that was to say that the consistent issue with representation despite a series changing hands strongly suggests that it's a problem people generally have with women.
Hopefully.well that game is a bit old, hopeful the next games goes in a better direction like samus returns or improves on it, maybe she becomes the mentor of a new playable character that results to be woman(we don't have much game that do this), or maybe sylux results to be one.
"...if we have princess Zelda as the main character who fights, then what is Link going to do," Aonuma asked.
That could certainly be the case, but a suggestion is not a complete argument.
You brought up Ocarina of Time earlier for its lack of female representation, and when I mentioned it's an older game, you immediately jumped to Splatoon 2 instead of a more natural point of comparison in Breath of the Wild. Is Breath of the Wild any better or worse than Ocarina in your eyes?
Wait are we seriously going with OoT being bad for representation? Why? To me it's among the standouts for positive representation (although it could be better, most things could)
OoT is certainly far better then BotW and in a slightly unrelated note Mario Odyssey both of which range from good ideas but poor execution (BotW) to WTF were they thinking (Mario)
Given the previous games in the series (3D world, Hyrule Warriors/WWHD) this was especially jarring
Vocal minority.I mean, not really. People wanted Peach playable in another game for literally decades in a game called Mario Bros.
It's also odd to call it a small minority when it's an issue that Nintendo has made a point of addressing multiple times.
Vocal minority.
And have they? Linkle was a Bamco thing, was she not? Otherwise I don't remember Nintendo really saying much other than "Link is a dude and that's that." I think if anything they feel the need to address it because someone in PR is telling them it's good to get ahead of stuff like this in this day and age.
Sure, lets delay the game even more.I have no qualm about making Zelda playable, honestly speaking she should had been playable in Breath of the Wild as it would had made a lot of sense and unlike Link she can talk.
Just make her play differently from Link as there's no reason to why both can't exist.
Fact of the matter is that the wielder if the Triforce of Power is always the same manI don't see Link as much of a blank slate/self insert as some people do, so a gender swap just seems unnecessary.
YupThere is no good reason to not have either playable Zelda in a main game or a female Link.
Heck have both at the same time.
Link's defining attribute is just being courageous - he's the player's 'link' into an adventure. He's intentionally vacuous - it's a second-person narrative. Zelda, however, is a character who has a personality in each of these games. So you perceive and follow her story as a character within the narrative, more than following a character arc for Link.
The best thing to go for is the simplest reason.
Is there a reason you could suggest as to why nearly every Nintendo game has a majority-male cast besides conscious/subconscious bias?
Thats like complaining that only Samus is playable in Metroid games.
Link is the main hero - its not like Ganon and co. are playable in every game but Zelda.