Poll: Should Link be female in the next Lengend Of Zelda

[Treblaine]

Dude you seriously need to drop this. Susan's right, you're pushing this really hard. I dunno if you just had a women's issues class or something, but you're forced activism is kind of hurting your point.

Nobody really wants a female Link. It's stupid to change his gender at this point because that would only agonize the bullshit plot hole filler (the alternate timelines) and rip the hole back open to be filled with more shit.

Sure, they COULD do it. Nintendo has been taking retarded liberties with their IPs for years. Hell, now they're doing it with their hardware.

But you haven't presented a real reason as to why Link would ever up and be a girl in the next Zelda. It is almost guaranteed to sell worse than a normal Zelda game, the plot doesn't really call for it, and it would probably be ridiculously forced and cheesy... like that Metroid game... ugh...

But yeah, seriously man... It's like you're trying to prove, without a doubt, that this game would be cool.

You're trying to prove something that is a %100 subjective opinion.

Stop it.

Yeah, like I'm doing this for feminism. Like I've been petitioning for a Dutchess Nukem and female Solid Snake.

Nope.

I am a Zelda fan and I know the Zelda lore and THAT is the reason I am arguing for a female link and I am arguing so vehemently because people are ignorantly and erroneously claiming that a female Link contradicts Zelda lore.

You think it would be a plot hole to have a female Link? No the plot hole ALREADY EXISTS because of the LACK OF a female Link! You just don't understand what you are talking about, you seem to know little more than a sideline observer who merely noted from a distance that it all looks like the same character who is male or is male from some kind of male inheritance.

"But you haven't presented a real reason"

Only possible if you have not read my previous post. I outline it in almost every single one. How the Link role is not one by inheritance, by any worthy child of Hyrule who is courageous enough, 50% of the select pool is female.

"It is almost guaranteed to sell worse than a normal Zelda game"

Wii Sports was the highest selling Wii game this gen. That's judging a game by sales.

But why would a game with a female Link be "guaranteed" to sell worse than a "normal" Zelda game? As if it's abnormal to have a female hero.

My argument doesn't depend on whether it would subjectively be good for a female Link. Obviously sexists will hate the idea, and coincidentally you seem to hate the idea, and you have ideas that might be interpreted as sexist... soo... not saying anything.

My argument throughout has depended on that a female Link is naturally ordained in Zelda lore itself, not by any outside PC meddling executives.

 

[sethisjimmy]

I think a lot of people misinterpret the character. Me, I think Link is more of a symbol. A courageous person who appears throughout generations and happens to don the hero's clothes and tunic. I see no problem with Link being female. Every Link is different. They aren't all the same Link. Sure, the Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask Link are the same, as well as the Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass's Link, but in most games they are different people entirely.

The way I see it, Link isn't born as the hero of time, he has to become it, and there's nothing stopping a girl to becoming the hero of time, who could easily be Link.

I think it would make the character all the more interesting to be a transcendent hero instead of a purely male character.

To be quite honest, I voted no in this poll, because I prefer Link as a male. But after reading through the posts here, I had to post myself because I think some people are just being way too close minded and abrasive when it comes to the character. To say Link shouldn't be a girl is a fine opinion. To say Link could never be a girl is silly and baseless.

I think people would have a leg to stand on if it was all the same character, but since it's many different characters, I don't see why they shouldn't change it up now and then, other than "but it's been that way for so long".

 

[The Heik]

I don't really see the point in swapping the character's gender around if its going to be the same character anyways. I feel like all it's doing is just pandering to the "gender-bender" fetish.

Besides, there are a few cases where changing a character's gender would destroy the whole narrative dynamic of the game. Samus Aran in particular would go from one of gaming's greatest female characters to just another generic Space Marine if the developers stapled a penis onto her.

SO again I ask, why?

It's amazing how many people on this threat are so IGNORANT to assume that there is only one Link across all the Legend of Zelda games, as if it is one character that would actively have to be retconned.

No.

Almost every Zelda game there is TOTALLY DIFFERENT INDIVIDUAL who is born, and is named Link. They take on the green tunic and adopt the role of adventurer and saviour.

Samus is one characters who's role arcs across the narrative of many games.

But the Link in Wink Waker it is EXPLICITLY STATED as a totally different and totally unrelated (by blood or anything) to the Link of Ocarina of Time.

Considering HALF of all children ever born are female, and ANYONE could take up the role or the Saviour of Hyrule, now YOU have to explain why another Link in another time (as Zelda games often are) WOULD NOT ever be a girl.

PS: Samus does not depend on the gimmick of having a vagina, she's not "good for a girl, but mundane for a guy" that utterly belittles all women as the most impressive achievement of a woman is nothing compared to men's achivement. She's impressive for her decisions, actions and achievements regardless of her chromosomes.

Ok, I want you to read though that bolded bit of your text. Then I want you to read through my previous post and note that at no point did I say that there was only one Link. That is what is known as a "strawman argument", in that you somehow managed to create a debate out of some perceived point that doesn't exist within my post.

I know that there are multiple Links in existence. The changing appearance between various iterations is proof enough of that without even needing to jump into the lore. But what you need to understand is that the culturally perceived character of Link has been of him as a young boy facing off against the evil flavour of the day. In fact the only times that I've ever seen a female Link in any media has been cases of Rule 63, more often than not in conjunction with Rule 34 to some degree.

Now of course you can make Link female, but unless you have a good narrative reason why Link should be female, then changing him either feel like an unnecessary change to the established and empirically functional settings, or it feels like you are pandering by changing a male character into a female one simply because a female one doesn't exist (no matter what lore or canon says).

As for Samus, it seems that you need to be reminded of the concept of "desensitization". The gaming scene has been male-dominated for pretty much it's entire existence, as such most of it's media has been directed towards that demographic. That results in a very large amount of male-directed characters, quite a few of which of are strong, confident role models, so the gaming community has become quite used to seeing them, so they're considered 'a dime a dozen" simply due to over-stimulation. In comparison though there aren't that many female role models out there in gaming. Besides Samus, Alyx Vance, and few choice others, the female role model is sorely underrepresented. As such the few who do exist are rare gems and are usually given a lot of focus and attention due to their rarity.

Now if Samus Aran were to be changed into a male character, then "he" would now be inevitably be compared to the plethora of peers he suddenly now has. And as Syndrome says it (starting at 0:08):


Samus is still a damn good character whatever part of the gender spectrum, but simply turning her from female to male without considering the ramifications of that can lead to that new Samus being seen as "just another dime" to a community so used to strong male role models.


So I hope you learned two things today:

1) Don't jump the gun with arguments. Try and figure out what the other person is saying before replying to them.

2)Figure out the cultural impacts of characters. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean that it would have the same impact as it's prior counterpart, or be sensible/popular/easy to do from a narrative perspective.

 

[JimB]

Would it bring anything brand new to the game?

It would bring a female Link to the game, which is considerably more new than a male Link.

You know why Mario isn't black? Because every single thing about him as a character works better if he's white.

What things about Mario work better if his hair is straight, and why do they work better that way?

But you haven't presented a real reason as to why Link would ever up and be a girl in the next Zelda.

Nor has anyone presented a real reason why Link ought not be female, unless "I don't want it" counts (and there's room to argue it does count in a discussion about personal preference, though personally speaking, I find it frustratingly dissatisfying).

The most important thing about Link (arguably) is his deep connection with Princess Zelda. The subtle romance that follows them and the passion that binds them is a huge staple of the series.

What romance? Where is romance even implied, and how?

Testosterone: Men are generally more aggressive. Men are generally more dominant. Men are generally more bold in their actions.

Estrogen: Women are generally more passive. Women are generally more likely to consider their actions before acting on them.

...Are you arguing for real-world biology in a setting where picking up heart-shaped objects allows you to get stabbed more often without dying?

 

[lunavixen]

I think it'd be really wierd, there is no solid reason why Link (an established male character) should have his gender swapped (because the fans might like it is not an excuse). If they were going to have a proper female protagonist in the lead in a Zelda game, it should be Zelda herself, she has proven to be competent, she is wise, her Shiek persona would be more than capable of fighting enemies.

Besides a lot of people hate playing as a female character (i personally like playing as a female character), and genderbending an established male character could alienate some people from the series, besides, think of all the creepy art on deviantart.

 

[JimB]

I want you to read through my previous post and note that at no point did I say that there was only one Link.

Uh...yeah, you did. You said "the character." Singular. That only makes sense if Link is the same person in each game. If that's not what you mean, then by all means, amend your position, but you did say it.

Now of course you can make Link female, but unless you have a good narrative reason why Link should be female, then changing him either feel like an unnecessary change to the established and empirically functional settings, or it feels like you are pandering by changing a male character into a female one simply because a female one doesn't exist (no matter what lore or canon says).

Why is the only burden of proof on people who are in favor of a female Link? Why is it that no one has to prove "a good narrative" reason for Link's masculinity, instead leaning on vaguely referenced sales?

As for Samus, it seems that you need to be reminded of the concept of "desensitization." The gaming scene has been male-dominated for pretty much its entire existence; as such most of its media has been directed toward that demographic.

I had really hoped we were past the "No Girls Allowed" phase of our development. And let's not pretend that marketing to men is not by definition deliberately excluding women, please.

Samus is still a damn good character whatever part of the gender spectrum, but simply turning her from female to male without considering the ramifications of that can lead to that new Samus being seen as "just another dime" to a community so used to strong male role models.

I don't get this argument at all. I mean, I can't even make enough sense of it to rebut it. What is your point here? That Link has to stay male because he'd be compared to Samus Aran if he was female?

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

Now of course you can make Link female, but unless you have a good narrative reason why Link should be female, then changing him either feel like an unnecessary change to the established and empirically functional settings, or it feels like you are pandering by changing a male character into a female one simply because a female one doesn't exist (no matter what lore or canon says).

Thank you...

That's EXACTLY what I was trying to say about him not having actually made a real point as to why Link would be a female all of a sudden.

It would bring a female Link to the game, which is considerably more new than a male Link.

I'm pretty sure he meant as far as mechanics go, and the answer is no.

What things about Mario work better if his hair is straight, and why do they work better that way?

Wat?

I said he is better as a white guy. He's an Italian plumber... Being black would kinda ruin his schtick, don't you think?

Nor has anyone presented a real reason why Link ought not be female, unless "I don't want it" counts (and there's room to argue it does count in a discussion about personal preference, though personally speaking, I find it frustratingly dissatisfying).

Aside from:

1. Monetarily: Not only has time shown that most demographics generally dislike drastic changes in protagonist characteristics, but male protagonists ALWAYS sell better in games.
2. Logically: See "The Heik"'s post at the top
3. Artistically: The games are, on the whole, about Link and Zelda and have romance undertones. A female link would ruin that.

You seriously don't see the romantic undertones between them?

Well here, the new games are a little less subtle about it.

Testosterone: Men are generally more aggressive. Men are generally more dominant. Men are generally more bold in their actions.

Estrogen: Women are generally more passive. Women are generally more likely to consider their actions before acting on them.

...Are you arguing for real-world biology in a setting where picking up heart-shaped objects allows you to get stabbed more often without dying?

Nope. I know it was a long post, but you should actually read it before you try to argue about it.

The point of bringing up hormones was to show how they reflect on gender norms and how that reflects on marketing... in RL.

 

[Treblaine]

Inserting myself into this is probably a mistake but what the hell:
I do believe you misunderstood something here:
It was never said that "GIRLS COULD NOT SWORPLAY CUZ GUURRRLLLZZ ARE TEH WEAKERST CREATUREZ EVAAAA11!!!11!" or anything even aluding to that, but rather that Susan Arendt envisioned a Legend of Zelda in which Link injured himself and his LITTLE cousin would have to take over for him.
There is a keyword in the above sentence:
It's "little" as in "small" as in probably physically incabaple of wielding an adult sized sword, which would make for new and interesting gameplay.
The girl which Arendt envisioned taking over after Link was simply a small child, which would be unable to lift the Mastersword not because she was a girl, but because she was a small child.
If you question this, go ahead and give a 5 year old a longsword and see how long he/she manages to swing that thing around in a controlled manner.

I've addressed this already.

She (should) know well enough that male Link in most of the Legend of Zelda games was a little boy yet more than capable of all sorts of combat, swords and shields and everything. So that's a case where she (should) knows little boy Link can use swords, but asserted little girl Link couldn't.

Long swords aren't the only swords. It's a well loved trope in fantasy adventures of diminutive hero with diminutive weapon. The Hobbit and their sword that's really a just a long dagger.

So, the hero would have to be "healed" before embarking on his quest, because the handicap would make it impossible for him to succeed is what you are saying?
So playing as a handicapped is ok as long as the handicap gets "better" because "magic"?
What you are saying is essentiually that the "ailment" of a handicapped needs to be "cured" before he/she can be successful?
You would not be interested in playing a blind Link?
Or a deaf one?
Suit yourself.

And let's rather make that "Coach CalibanButcher" (clever by the way to mangle my name, I almost did not recognize myself) who trains the young hero and encourages him/her to go further and further, so that in the end, Link does not need to be "healed" in order to succeed.
Would make for a far more interesting game...

Yes, healed or otherwise enabled, just as the swords and magic have always enabled Link in the Zelda games.

It would be impossible for any of the Links to proceed without many many other aids they do get from magic boots to hookshots. There is no contradiction at all in a disabled person enabling themselves by any means they can, be it by prosthesis or reversal of the condition. There is nothing wrong with someone with paralysed limbs either using a wheelchair, or undergoing some surgery to restore motor control to their legs.

I don't see what you are getting at here.

Are you seriously objecting to the idea of a disabled person making efforts to enable themselves so they can go above and beyond what everyone else was prepared to do?

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

snip

Look at JimB's last post.

Just read it.

His first response is some ridiculous semantic tangential argument that proves absolutely nothing.

His second response has been addressed like 20 times in this thread and shows an ill-informed understanding of game development and where the priorities lie.

His third response is a subtly insulting blatant over-dramatization of a perfectly rational argument.

And his fourth response sums up this entire argument and flat out proves that some people simply do not understand the first thing about character design.

90% of the people who voted 'Yes' are just saying that they don't care, and this weird group of the other 10% are militantly fighting to make it seem like a good idea under a veil of self-righteous "altruism"... the worst kind of veil.

I dunno why I quoted you tbh, I just need someone sensible to relate to in this thread.

 

[JimB]

It would bring a female Link to the game, which is considerably more new than a male Link.

I'm pretty sure he meant as far as mechanics go, and the answer is no.

Then it is no argument at all, because a male Link doesn't add any new mechanics either unless there's a minigame where he writes his name in the snow.

I said he is better as a white guy. He's an Italian plumber... Being black would kinda ruin his schtick, don't you think?

Er, no, I don't. How would being black make it harder for him to jump on turtles?

Monetarily: Not only has time shown that most demographics generally dislike drastic changes in protagonist characteristics, but male protagonists ALWAYS sell better in games.

And Michael Bay movies tend to make more money than Werner Herzog movies. That's not a standard I'm particularly interested in.

Logically: See "The Heik"'s post at the top.

His logic does not make sense to me, so that isn't doing me any good.

Artistically: The games are, on the whole, about Link and Zelda and have romance undertones. A female Link would ruin that.

None of the games I have ever played even hint at a romantic connection between them. Not one. Zelda doesn't interact with Link beyond sending him a telepathic message (Link to the Past), sending him out to do fetch quests for her (Ocarina of Time), insult him for being a 'tard (Wind Waker), telling him there's an evil wizard (Twilight Princess), or any other barely-there interactions. Or, actually, maybe I'm approaching this from the wrong end. How about I put the ball in your court, and let you tell me what Zelda did to or for Link that a heterosexual man could not have done or would have felt uncomfortable doing?

Well here, the new games are a little less subtle about it.

I don't own a Wii, so I'll have to take your word for it; but even granting a romantic link in Skyward Sword, that's one game out of...how many? Twenty? Five percent of the time, they have a romantic relationship, so all future games must have romance and the romance must be heterosexual?

I know it was a long post, but you should actually read it before you try to argue about it.

The point of bringing up hormones was to show how they reflect on gender norms and how that reflects on marketing... in real life.

And I'd feel more chagrined about that if your post had mentioned marketing before getting into male and female character traits. Instead, the paragraphs preceding the chemistry discussion were about why it's better for a man to save a princess than a woman, so I don't accept much blame for thinking your points were related.

 

[Lethos]

Forgive me for intruding on what looks like one hell of a quotathon up there, but I'm just going to quickly add my thoughts. Changing the gender of a character just for the sake of changing the gender, or trying to be progressive seems to me to be a stupid move. If you can establish a decent reason for why Link is suddenly female, and how her new story will be different then fine. But by that point, why not just create a new character entirely?

Captcha: public good. What are you saying? -.-

 

[Treblaine]

I don't really see the point in swapping the character's gender around if its going to be the same character anyways. I feel like all it's doing is just pandering to the "gender-bender" fetish.

Besides, there are a few cases where changing a character's gender would destroy the whole narrative dynamic of the game. Samus Aran in particular would go from one of gaming's greatest female characters to just another generic Space Marine if the developers stapled a penis onto her.

SO again I ask, why?

It's amazing how many people on this threat are so IGNORANT to assume that there is only one Link across all the Legend of Zelda games, as if it is one character that would actively have to be retconned.

No.

Almost every Zelda game there is TOTALLY DIFFERENT INDIVIDUAL who is born, and is named Link. They take on the green tunic and adopt the role of adventurer and saviour.

Samus is one characters who's role arcs across the narrative of many games.

But the Link in Wink Waker it is EXPLICITLY STATED as a totally different and totally unrelated (by blood or anything) to the Link of Ocarina of Time.

Considering HALF of all children ever born are female, and ANYONE could take up the role or the Saviour of Hyrule, now YOU have to explain why another Link in another time (as Zelda games often are) WOULD NOT ever be a girl.

PS: Samus does not depend on the gimmick of having a vagina, she's not "good for a girl, but mundane for a guy" that utterly belittles all women as the most impressive achievement of a woman is nothing compared to men's achivement. She's impressive for her decisions, actions and achievements regardless of her chromosomes.

Ok, I want you to read though that bolded bit of your text. Then I want you to read through my previous post and note that at no point did I say that there was only one Link. That is what is known as a "strawman argument", in that you somehow managed to create a debate out of some perceived point that doesn't exist within my post.

I know that there are multiple Links in existence. The changing appearance between various iterations is proof enough of that without even needing to jump into the lore. But what you need to understand is that the culturally perceived character of Link has been of him as a young boy facing off against the evil flavour of the day. In fact the only times that I've ever seen a female Link in any media has been cases of Rule 63, more often than not in conjunction with Rule 34 to some degree.

Now of course you can make Link female, but unless you have a good narrative reason why Link should be female, then changing him either feel like an unnecessary change to the established and empirically functional settings, or it feels like you are pandering by changing a male character into a female one simply because a female one doesn't exist (no matter what lore or canon says).

As for Samus, it seems that you need to be reminded of the concept of "desensitization". The gaming scene has been male-dominated for pretty much it's entire existence, as such most of it's media has been directed towards that demographic. That results in a very large amount of male-directed characters, quite a few of which of are strong, confident role models, so the gaming community has become quite used to seeing them, so they're considered 'a dime a dozen" simply due to over-stimulation. In comparison though there aren't that many female role models out there in gaming. Besides Samus, Alyx Vance, and few choice others, the female role model is sorely underrepresented. As such the few who do exist are rare gems and are usually given a lot of focus and attention due to their rarity.

Now if Samus Aran were to be changed into a male character, then "he" would now be inevitably be compared to the plethora of peers he suddenly now has. And as Syndrome says it (starting at 0:08):


Samus is still a damn good character whatever part of the gender spectrum, but simply turning her from female to male without considering the ramifications of that can lead to that new Samus being seen as "just another dime" to a community so used to strong male role models.


So I hope you learned two things today:

1) Don't jump the gun with arguments. Try and figure out what the other person is saying before replying to them.

2)Figure out the cultural impacts of characters. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean that it would have the same impact as it's prior counterpart, or be sensible/popular/easy to do from a narrative perspective.

Well you did say "the character" as if there is only one individual Link. You talk of changing a character ruining the narrative. Everything you said acted as if Link was one character in an overarcing story across all the Zelda games. You even talked of "genderbending" which is taking one individual of one gender and changing aspects till they are somewhat like another gender. Not a different character of a different gender in the same role. That's not gender bending.

"But what you need to understand is that the culturally perceived character of Link has been of him as a young boy"

Didn't stop them deciding to have him as a young man in other games.

Look, the people are too attached to the idea that Link must arbitrarily be a male. There is no reason to it, it is because it is because it is because it is because it is!

"Now of course you can make Link female, but unless you have a good narrative reason why Link should be female"

I've given it enough times, it's been ignored many more times.

The Link role is the chosen one for whoever is courageous enough to rise up and save their land of Hyrule. That doesn't exclude girls and half of Hyrule children born would be girls so a female Link is in the waiting.

Now why can't a girl be courageous enough to take up the Link role?

Ok, you didn't introduce the role-models aspect earlier. On stapling penises.

But I don't agree with the role-model idea for gaming characters for how it can go both ways when it clealry doesnt'. Because quite simply playing as Agent 47 isn't a role-model for me to do garrotting security guards, equally Samus is not a role model for me being a noble bounty hunter. What they are are interesting and compelling characters in complete fantasy worlds. They can tell the stories of nice good people, or those of cruel evil people, but they don't imbue their values on us.

There are subtitles to Metroid and Samus, some of overlooked and they are largely in the feel and theme of the games, it's in the music, the pacing, the sense of isolation rather than simply it being a sparsely populated game.

 

[Cheesepower5]

I don't really give two shits.

Are there swords? Puzzles? Will it basically be essence of nostalgia on a compact disc?

If yes, yes and yes, I'd play either way.

 

[JimB]

His first response is some ridiculous semantic tangential argument that proves absolutely nothing.

It proves the only thing I said it to prove: that words mean things. If he talks about Link in the singular rather than the plural sense, then he is, by definition, talking about Link as a single being. If he's talking about Link in a plural sense, then I do not understand what purpose is served by having multiple characters if all the characters are required to be identical.

His second response has been addressed like twenty times in this thread[...]

Then I have missed it, because I have never once seen anyone answer why it should be accepted without question that men do not require plot justification but women do.

[...]and shows an ill-informed understanding of game development and where the priorities lie.

Less of a poor understanding and more of a disinterest: I do not work for Nintendo and I will never see one cent off a Zelda game, so I am not required to care about what decision will make Nintendo more money. I care about what product I want to see, and the idea that I should think about this from the position of the people taking my money is confusing to the point of nonsensical to me. It's like telling me I'm wrong to order a Big Mac without cheese because the fry cook wants to make them with cheese.

His third response is a subtly insulting blatant over-dramatization of a perfectly rational argument.

I hadn't intended to be subtle about it, because it is a ridiculous position. "Video games are only marketed at somewhere between forty-nine and fifty-one percent of the population" is so absurd that it seems completely self-evident to me: How on earth is the industry better served excluding half of the people in the world who have money than trying to include them? I do not personally know a single feminist who wants any video game producer to go out of its way to try to please them with a female protagonist or whatever; they just want to stop feeling excluded by the sausage fest.

And his fourth response sums up this entire argument and flat out proves that some people simply do not understand the first thing about character design.

Heh. Convenient how declaring the ignorance of you opponent is proof of how wrong his position is while simultaneously relieving you of any responsibility to address his points.

 

[xshadowscreamx]

i thought link was feminine enough, are we sure his not a girl in the first place?
he/she is kind of ambiguous.

 

[Treblaine]

Forgive me for intruding on what looks like one hell of a quotathon up there, but I'm just going to quickly add my thoughts. Changing the gender of a character just for the sake of changing the gender, or trying to be progressive seems to me to be a stupid move. If you can establish a decent reason for why Link is suddenly female, and how her new story will be different then fine. But by that point, why not just create a new character entirely?

Captcha: public good. What are you saying? -.-

If you'd just read a few of the posts before posting...

We have discussed all this so much, you can gain so much more by reading before posting and could probably post some more relevant of your insight.

I mean you talks as if there is only one character of Link that would have to be changed, rather than the actual case where almost every Zelda game released the Link is a completely new character.

And the idea that this is trying to be "progressive" (hasn't Fox News made that a dirty word) rather than how the Link Mythos inevitably leads to a hero rising from the population who is courageous enough, 50% of the pool is female, it's becoming increasingly likely that the next Hero of Hyrule will be female.

But that's for the opportunity to summarise.

To say Link shouldn't be a girl is a fine opinion. To say Link could never be a girl is silly and baseless.

I think people would have a leg to stand on if it was all the same character, but since it's many different characters, I don't see why they shouldn't change it up now and then, other than "but it's been that way for so long".

+Respect

 

[EvilRoy]

i thought link was feminine enough, are we sure his not a girl in the first place?
he/she is kind of ambiguous.

Apparently this dude made a romhack of one of the zelda games to change every text reference to Links character from male to female for his daughter. So... I guess so? Although honestly if you can change the gender of the main character and still not be sure if its the right one or not, maybe we just need to accept that in this case gender doesn't really mean anything.

 

[TomLikesGuitar]

I can't keep up with the inane bullshit in this thread anymore. It's physically tiring me.

Game development 101: Plot follows mechanics. NOT the other way around.

There is no reason to change the mechanics of Zelda, and therefore there is no reason to make Link a girl. Just like there's no reason to make him gay. Just like there's no reason to make him black.

CHANGE REQUIRES JUSTIFICATION Mr. JimB... not women. No one has said otherwise, but thank you for proving that you guys are still willing to make every single issue here a sexist one.

If Samus became a man out of the blue, I'd be fucking furious.

It's called pandering, and it cheapens the experience by showing that you are blatantly trying to please an audience instead of continuing to write the story the way it has always been written. The changes that they make fit the themes of Zelda.

As a matter of fact, the lack of change in main character IS one of the themes of a Zelda game.

Could it be done canonically? Sure... Would it be done tastefully or have any depth to it? Who knows... But until there is a good reason for it, it's a bad idea.

The main reason it will not happen is money. Regardless of if it COULD be done well, it won't get a shot because on the surface the game sounds dumb. Being probably more involved in the industry than most of you, I have a pretty good grasp of different games' respective demographics. However, if you don't believe me, look at the poll results.

Zelda games aren't super deep. It's always just a smorgasbord of abstract fantasy elements with intertwining character relationships that are sometimes a bit sad or something. It's more about the characters than the story, and Link is an established character.

[HEADING=2]THERE IS ONLY MORE THAN ONE LINK BECAUSE THEY NEEDED TO FILL A PLOT HOLE[/HEADING]

This was not planned. There are multiple documentaries on Zelda that state this fact. Link would have just been one MALE character if it wasn't for that plot hole.

In order to turn him into a girl, there would have to be excess plot to explain it. Then there would have to be even more excess plot to differentiate female link, otherwise it would turn out as a hackneyed gimmick... remember when everyone was fighting for Superhero's rights to be gay? "Spiderman should be allowed to be gay mann!"

Guess how good those comics turned out?

Hint: Bad (You probably didn't buy them, but trust me.)

This bullshit PC ruined what could have been a sweet alt. Spiderman and made him into a hackneyed gimmicky *****.

And the same would happen to Link.

EDIT: oplinger said it all on the first page

I don't think It'd work well. A girl named link? I mean the hero of legend is always named link, and wears a green tunic. Even if we can rename him every time. I think the entire legend in the heads of its creators has link always being a guy, and looking the same. It's a staple of the series now that they scrambled to make a timeline and have it try to make sense.

Could the game work if link was a girl though, barring all that? Sure. No doubt. It just doesn't fit in the legend is all.

I think it could make an interesting spin-off game though, or maybe some sort of coop zelda feature, where it bases the heroes gender on your Mii? SO you can have guys -and- girl links, but you can still keep the canon intact.

That'd be pretty cool actually...but then why not just use Zelda or something? <.<

 

[JimB]

I can't keep up with the inane bullshit in this thread anymore. It's physically tiring me.

Yet here you are of your own free will anyway, so please forgive me if I find my sympathy for your plight is limited.

CHANGE REQUIRES JUSTIFICATION Mr. JimB...not women.

This, like the Samus metaphors you make further on in your posts, make no sense to me (EDIT: though for the sake of clarity, I do concede the difference between justifying change and justifying female characters). The character who will be named Link in a particular game does not exist before the game says he does; unlike Samus, Link is a legacy, not a single being contained within a single lifetime. If Samus became male, then that would be a change, because the existing character is and always has been female. If a Link is female, nothing has changed, because nothing ever said there couldn't be, among the dozen or so Links we've already seen, a female Link.

I think you might be confusing "different" with "changed."

It's called pandering, and it cheapens the experience by showing that you are blatantly trying to please an audience instead of continuing to write the story the way it has always been written.

"The way it has always been written" is a bad answer. People were killed in the Dark Ages for not using leeches to cure diseases because "that's the way it was always done," and never mind that the leeches didn't work.

As a matter of fact, the lack of change in main character IS one of the themes of a Zelda game.

I'll grant you that, but I think it's shameful to say that the character is his appearance rather than his personality traits.

This was not planned. There are multiple documentaries on Zelda that state this fact. Link would have just been one MALE character if it wasn't for that plot hole.

Nevertheless, it is canon. You can't argue that Link has to stay male because that's the tradition while claiming the tradition that would allow for a female Link doesn't count. If you want the traditions to be valid reasons for basing decisions on them, you can't cherry-pick.

In order to turn him into a girl, there would have to be excess plot to explain it.

There really wouldn't. "Some fourteen years ago, a man and a woman loved each other very much, and they made a baby, and at some point the baby's second X chromosome failed to mutate into a Y chromosome, thus making her female."

Then there would have to be even more excess plot to differentiate female Link; otherwise it would turn out as a hackneyed gimmick.

There would not have to be plot to differentiate female Link from male Link, because--and perhaps this is only in the game I'd be interested in--the entire point of a female Link would be that female imaginary elves are every bit as good as male imaginary elves at beating up imaginary wizards and saving imaginary princesses.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Well, I guess people see what they want to see. Enjoy your agenda.

Oh how charming. I use reason and ethics against your claims and assertions, then you drop an illogical allegation that I am the one with some sort of ulterior motive and delusional as well.

That's the thing about the internet, you can put so much effort into a reasoned explanation then they'll just ignore it all and throw out a snide irrelevant response that totally misrepresents your position.

Well, I guess if it makes you feel good, knock yourself out. You've only come into a thread, skipped over most of the post, asserted what you think should be done with a series you know little about then accuse anyone who challenges you of delusions and a self-satisfying agenda.

You know why Link isn't a fucking girl? Because every single thing about him as a character works better if he's a guy. It's not sexist, it's just how the character has developed.

Tell me why - for the characteristics of courage, daring and duty towards one's land - it would be WORSE for a woman to have those characteristics than a man?

Because those are the vital characteristics of the many different heroes of Legend of Zelda, who went by the name Link, and saved Hyrule. But you're saying it would be better if a male had those characteristics than a female?!?!?!? Yet not sexist. How?

I personally don't see why they can't take the usual set up of Link, Ganon and Zelda and gender bend them the same way the Ice King did to Finn and Jake/Fionna and Cake for his Adventure Time fanfiction . It's a fun thing to do with anything.

This episode was really popular and Fionna has her own comic and is referenced in the show other than that episode.

I'm more up for Zelda getting her own game based around the triforce of wisdom (the puzzles would be more cerebral) but I see absolutely NO REASON why a female Link would be ridiculous.

Hell I pretty much ran around pretending to adventure in the same way I'm sure Shigeru Miyamoto did when he was small (which is what Legend of Zelda is based on).