The Big Picture: Link Be A Lady
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'd honestly rather see a game starring Zelda than one with a gender-flipped Link. Seems like it would have a different set of mechanics and by extension, it could be a more interesting game.
I'm not really hostile to the idea of making Link a girl, per se. It just seems a bit boring. Honestly, when Aonuma said that the character in the trailer wasn't Link, the group I typically chat with online thought it could possibly be a game with a playable Zelda, as opposed to just girl!Link. I mean, the lack of the traditional green, the use of a bow (and what could've been a form of a light arrow), playing as Zelda just seems like a way cooler way to implement a female character into the Zelda series than just flipping one of Link's chromosomes.
Aw well, at least she's playable in Hyrule Warriors (like I figured she was).
I'm not really hostile to the idea of making Link a girl, per se. It just seems a bit boring. Honestly, when Aonuma said that the character in the trailer wasn't Link, the group I typically chat with online thought it could possibly be a game with a playable Zelda, as opposed to just girl!Link. I mean, the lack of the traditional green, the use of a bow (and what could've been a form of a light arrow), playing as Zelda just seems like a way cooler way to implement a female character into the Zelda series than just flipping one of Link's chromosomes.
Aw well, at least she's playable in Hyrule Warriors (like I figured she was).
Still waiting on a female Link, but in the meantime I'm off my rocker screaming in joy that Midna is coming back for Hyrule Warriors. That alone is a console buyer for me. If Nintendo takes all this in mind and rolls with the idea that Link can be female in this (or next) iteration, that's just icing on the next cake.
Funny, the only way I could see this version of Link as female is to quint a lot and go back in time 15 year to before I saw Fushigi Yugi.
On the whole I have nothing against the idea, but I couldn't really get excited about it either. 3 reasons:
1) I've been around the gaming block too long to get excited over a model swap. From the realization that old Arcade beat-em ups were usually the same game, just re-skined to look like the ninja turtles or the simpsons as needed, to endless monster hunter and dungeon crawler clones, I do have to acknowledge when I'm buying the same game and trying to justify it by saying, ooh, it's a Persona dungeon crawler so that makes it different. It's why I can't get excited about new character reveals in Smash Bros or Mario Cart. I've just stopped seeing a new game, just attempts to skin models in the most fanserviced way. And a different batch of polygons in the same game doesn't count as original to me any more than a new paint job will completely change anything but perception.
2) The loss of what little character is there. I appreciate gender swapping as an option in character choice, but more often than not it leaves the main character flat, undeveloped and uninteresting. If it isn't a largely storyless monster hunter clone, it's easy to get lost and feel less like a character, than a mannequin wandering through other people's stories. Why get attached to my Persona 3 character when all I've seen her do is watch other people's lives. Is the Saint's Row Boss a character, or an exagerated personality without history or motivation other than "the story needs this". Or will it be like Skyrim where I don't even get that much, just a customized bot I don't even get to see all that often. Granted, Link's always been that way, but I keep hoping Zelda games will move a bit more beyond "excuse for a fetch quest" each time a new one comes out, and I kind of miss the days when games tried to craft characters, not avatars.
3) I never liked literary appropriation. I saw it a lot in fanfiction: take a story and "fix" things and call it differnt, even though the story structure is the same thing. I want new characters, new IPs and new viewpoints to play a game from. I find the "make an established character female, black, or some other change" a lazy and unmotivated way to hide a lack of new ideas. Why create new ideas when fans get so easily fooled by a new look.
Besides, I doubt it'll happen. I Nintendo was receptive to fan demand the 3DS virtual console would be a lot fuller and we'd have a translation of Mother 3 a few times over by now.
On the whole I have nothing against the idea, but I couldn't really get excited about it either. 3 reasons:
1) I've been around the gaming block too long to get excited over a model swap. From the realization that old Arcade beat-em ups were usually the same game, just re-skined to look like the ninja turtles or the simpsons as needed, to endless monster hunter and dungeon crawler clones, I do have to acknowledge when I'm buying the same game and trying to justify it by saying, ooh, it's a Persona dungeon crawler so that makes it different. It's why I can't get excited about new character reveals in Smash Bros or Mario Cart. I've just stopped seeing a new game, just attempts to skin models in the most fanserviced way. And a different batch of polygons in the same game doesn't count as original to me any more than a new paint job will completely change anything but perception.
2) The loss of what little character is there. I appreciate gender swapping as an option in character choice, but more often than not it leaves the main character flat, undeveloped and uninteresting. If it isn't a largely storyless monster hunter clone, it's easy to get lost and feel less like a character, than a mannequin wandering through other people's stories. Why get attached to my Persona 3 character when all I've seen her do is watch other people's lives. Is the Saint's Row Boss a character, or an exagerated personality without history or motivation other than "the story needs this". Or will it be like Skyrim where I don't even get that much, just a customized bot I don't even get to see all that often. Granted, Link's always been that way, but I keep hoping Zelda games will move a bit more beyond "excuse for a fetch quest" each time a new one comes out, and I kind of miss the days when games tried to craft characters, not avatars.
3) I never liked literary appropriation. I saw it a lot in fanfiction: take a story and "fix" things and call it differnt, even though the story structure is the same thing. I want new characters, new IPs and new viewpoints to play a game from. I find the "make an established character female, black, or some other change" a lazy and unmotivated way to hide a lack of new ideas. Why create new ideas when fans get so easily fooled by a new look.
Besides, I doubt it'll happen. I Nintendo was receptive to fan demand the 3DS virtual console would be a lot fuller and we'd have a translation of Mother 3 a few times over by now.
I guess it could be that sword and stuff are seen as aggressive and very rough and tumble, also that swords generally have only one purpose - which are generally "masculine" traits. While archery is more of a defensive, standoffish, and passive, which are considered to generally be more "feminine" traits. Also archery can be used for more than just straight up killing people, so its more acceptable that way. At least thats my take on it. Also that the majority of female characters that come out of japan that wield weapons, if they want to be seen as more feminine at least, generally wield a bow or some sort of ranged weaponry (priestesses, school girls, etc - Samus maybe, if you squint).Falterfire said:
I'd definitely play as a female link though, something different. I couldn't care about any political crap, as long I can have fun in the game.
Every time I hear people demanding more women in some medium, the following is what I hear in my head:
Leonard: Where all the white women at?
Jeff: There are no white women here, Leonard. This is not a party!
Seriously though, this is getting silly. It would be rad if the main character of the Legend of Zelda games was a girl one (or more) of these times, but why does everybody call her Link? That's a frat boy name. That's the name of a guy who breaks his arm trying to do a keg flip and has to get driven to the hospital by Doug and Teddy. Unless there's some unbreakable canon reason why the chosen one of Hyrule is always named Link, can we just call her something else?
Edit: I've said my peace on the Game Overthinker characters. We're sorry that that show ended, but please let them be. They don't belong here.
Leonard: Where all the white women at?
Jeff: There are no white women here, Leonard. This is not a party!
Seriously though, this is getting silly. It would be rad if the main character of the Legend of Zelda games was a girl one (or more) of these times, but why does everybody call her Link? That's a frat boy name. That's the name of a guy who breaks his arm trying to do a keg flip and has to get driven to the hospital by Doug and Teddy. Unless there's some unbreakable canon reason why the chosen one of Hyrule is always named Link, can we just call her something else?
Edit: I've said my peace on the Game Overthinker characters. We're sorry that that show ended, but please let them be. They don't belong here.
Your "the Hero of Hyrule was born a woman" idea for putting it into canon makes sense.MovieBob said:
However, if you want "maximum" inclusion, why not go the Pokemon (and Western RPGs) "Is your hero a boy or girl?" Zelda has never really shown much of any kind of reason that sexuality would be important to the story, so why not let the player choose?
Like you said, even with canonical reason, it's still a "stunt". The only real way to be more inclusive is either craft stories to the "choose your own hero" route or make new well defined female characters.
Also, I would argue that the avatar (player/character) isn't always the best place if you want to be "inclusive". For example, when I play a game, I put myself into the player, even if it's Lara Croft. Other than the cut scenes, the person I'm playing is me, regardless of gender. So having well written female characters even as NPC is a good way for inclusion.
Also, sick of the Ass. Creed "Controversy". It wouldn't have even HAPPENED if a PR guy didn't butcher an answer. Ass. Creed has been more inclusive than most series (black female, arab male, remember?), and just having the female "skin" to play multi=player with is a small issue. I think they should have done it, but they did state that in your personal play thru, you like like Arno, and just different to the other people in the party. So I don't think it's a big conspiracy, just a misstep blown out of proportion .
Glad to see the majority of comments here are open minded to change and/or women in general.
Though Joel from the Last of Us is a complex and interesting character, Naughty Dog really does have a problem with diversity. A primary female protagonist (no Ellie wasn't primary, play the first half of the game) or non-white protagonist would go a long way. Especially since non-white people in Naughty Dog games don't tend to stick around long (I still love their games).
Though Joel from the Last of Us is a complex and interesting character, Naughty Dog really does have a problem with diversity. A primary female protagonist (no Ellie wasn't primary, play the first half of the game) or non-white protagonist would go a long way. Especially since non-white people in Naughty Dog games don't tend to stick around long (I still love their games).
As cool as an idea it is I don't think gender swapping link would be that ground breaking as much as it would just be that novelty Zelda game where link had bewbs
Now I think what would be a lot more ground breaking would be an actual decent Zelda game where you play as Zelda
And I think a cool setup for that would be if Nintendo pulled an MGS 2 with it. Have the standard 3 dungeons then 6 dungeons setup and have you play the first three dungeons as link but then in a surprise twist when link finally collects the three doodads and opens the magic whatever it results in him getting trapped or captured by Gannon or whatever and then Zelda has to take over and you play as her for the longer 6 dungeon part of the game
Now I think what would be a lot more ground breaking would be an actual decent Zelda game where you play as Zelda
And I think a cool setup for that would be if Nintendo pulled an MGS 2 with it. Have the standard 3 dungeons then 6 dungeons setup and have you play the first three dungeons as link but then in a surprise twist when link finally collects the three doodads and opens the magic whatever it results in him getting trapped or captured by Gannon or whatever and then Zelda has to take over and you play as her for the longer 6 dungeon part of the game
Totally on board with female Link.
Also, yeah, fuck Ubisoft. You idiots know women play the game, not representing them and saying "uuuugh, it's too haaaaard, I don't wannaaaaa," is an admission of laziness and spite. I will not support you as long as this stands.
Also, yeah, fuck Ubisoft. You idiots know women play the game, not representing them and saying "uuuugh, it's too haaaaard, I don't wannaaaaa," is an admission of laziness and spite. I will not support you as long as this stands.
Yep, that seems to be a running theme with a lot of people... Myself included...Uriel_Hayabusa said:
Back OT:
Hell yeah female link! Would make no complaints at all if that was the game Nintendo built...
I'm just happy in general that Nintendo is finally getting over the casual market and trying to sell the WiiU as a gaming console instead of a tablet with joysticks...
My only question was that IF Nintendo made Link female... Would Zelda remain a princess, or instead be a prince and remain the pseudo love-interest?
Hell, could Zelda remain a princess and still be said love interest with female Link...?
There really is a lot Nintendo could do with it... I mean, everything would still be another Zelda game... But, it'd be awesome!
EDIT: In the end, it's another Zelda game... So, there's really not much beyond cosmetics that can change the formula
Definitely agree with this. If all you want to see is "omg more chicks in games," and you can be placated by simple reskins... that's sad. What games are missing is gripping stories that include female characters - stuff from "their perspective" that you can play through and experience (which is the huge benefit gaming has over other forms of entertainment).Dexterity said:
In general, if a game's genre is not even remotely character focused (shooters, fighters, many adventure/puzzle games), the developers can put whoever they want in as playable characters and it doesn't matter at all. The fact that chell was a chick in portal had nearly no bearing on the plot or gameplay. The fact that Link is a guy in Zelda has nearly no bearing on the plot or gameplay. They're interchangeable heroes on a quest that involves their personality very little. In cases like that, I think it makes most sense for developers to include multiple options (or, even better, a character creator a la saint's row), but even if they don't, it's not a mark against them. I didn't hate portal because I "had to" play as a chick. I don't hate zelda because I "had to" play as a guy. It's just how the game is made. If it has no actual impact on the game, trying to shame and bully developers into wasting resources on something that doesn't matter is only going to hurt our industry. Trying to force arbitrary gender/sexual orientation/religion/whatever quotas on developers, merely for the sake of increasing numbers, is not only pointless, it's actively destructive. Stop it.
Stories of publishers attempting to alter or downplay games featuring female leads always gets my blood boiling - if the developers going into a project have a clear vision of a female lead the whole time, the game is built around that concept, and changing it to a guy (or even changing the cover art to feature a guy) because "hurr durr gotta cater to the calladoody crowd" is despicable. But equally despicable is trying to force a numbers game where one doesn't belong. Having female characters simply to fill a quota of female characters is petty and shallow. Raising hell over it is equally petty and shallow. Fight the publishers when they try to neuter a game's story or original design ideas, but don't demand that every developer put females into every game simply to HAVE females standing around. That's not going to solve anything - games will simply end up featuring a bunch of poorly written caricatures. I mean, even more than they already are. Is that the path we want to go down? :/
If you want to demand anything, demand better writing. Demand better voice acting. Demand characters who have personality, who can be loved... or hated. Characters who aren't simply cardboard cutouts yelling generic military-sounding jargon into your earpiece. When that happens, all of gaming will improve. We'll get better female characters, we'll get better male characters. We'll get better *games*, period. Attempting to substitute in a silly numbers game and pretending like it'll improve anything is a fool's bet.
I guess because my mind just works in such a way that if I see something that can be changed without any obvious consequences, I say do it because you might turn out getting something that was even better than before.Houseman said:
Sticking with tradition for traditions sake is a terrible reason to do anything. If you have a chance to change something up, do it.
Besides, we already have plenty of male Links. Whats one female Link going to do besides give the world a decent example of a female playable character? Or prove that ultimately your gender doesn't matter, you are still the hero of the story?
It'd be pretty sweet.
I posited it'd be a nice change of pace if the link we saw was a previous Zelda and Link's daughter.
But apparently that would shatter the Shipping Continuum.
Pity that it's just Androgynous Link #8, but eh. Like Bob said Nintendo now knows there's a demand for it.
Just off the top of my head is Baldur's Gate, which predates the original Persona 3 by a decade.
Then there's Metroid, though one could make a good case for Samus Aran's change occurring incidentally (in the original Metroid game manual, Samus is referred to as a "he". Though that could just be lazy localization.)
I posited it'd be a nice change of pace if the link we saw was a previous Zelda and Link's daughter.
But apparently that would shatter the Shipping Continuum.
Pity that it's just Androgynous Link #8, but eh. Like Bob said Nintendo now knows there's a demand for it.
Well, as long as we're willing to ignore even earlier examples, I suppose it could be "first".Grenge Di Origin said:
Just off the top of my head is Baldur's Gate, which predates the original Persona 3 by a decade.
Then there's Metroid, though one could make a good case for Samus Aran's change occurring incidentally (in the original Metroid game manual, Samus is referred to as a "he". Though that could just be lazy localization.)
I honestly think a choice of gender is the best option, considering Link is supposed to be an empty vessel for the player. But if that were the case I'd pick the girl anyway, so if they decide to go girl-only I wouldn't have a problem.
Also, you know how Mass Effect has Shepard and FemShep? Can we please call girl Link "Linke" (same pronunciation, different spelling)? No real reason, I just think it's kind of adorable.
Also, you know how Mass Effect has Shepard and FemShep? Can we please call girl Link "Linke" (same pronunciation, different spelling)? No real reason, I just think it's kind of adorable.
Years ago I wrote a story for a fan game that featured the daughter of Link and Malon as the protagonist (Zelda was married off to the prince of a neighbouring kingdom, as was the way with medieval royalty). I never really saw any chemistry between Link and Zelda (outside of Skyward Sword). Link seems like a simpleton, which could cause tension being in a relationship with arguably the smartest/wisest person in the country. I guess there'd be sexual tension but I don't see anything long term. A plucky farm girl, on the other hand... that makes more sense - especially for an older Link that's settled down his adventurous lifestyle a bit.Atmos Duality said:
Honestly, I didn't even think about masculinity or femininity when I watched that trailer for the first time. I simply saw the video and noted that the character being shown was Link, the male protagonist of the Zelda series. Well, I didn't literally think "the male protagonist," but I remember Link as a male character and didn't think any differently. I am actually a little disappointed that people would project gender (expression) onto the sex of a character, that because one sees femininity, they see a woman. Not to mention that the forms of gender expression that made people think female, are quite superficial forms. Pony tails? The hood? Arrow firing stance? That is fairly superficial and flimsy to make assumptions on. The feminine hips is a bit more substantial evidence because of the genetics of sex specific body shape, but all in all, saying that Link looks like a woman in that teaser is simply falling into traps of too heavily relying on superficial gender stereotypes. I don't think we should allow ourselves to fall prey to such thinking and so I am a tiny bit disappointed. Well, at first I was confused as the title of this video genuinely caught me off guard with a proposition that didn't make sense to me. I really didn't see any reason to believe Link from the teaser was anything but the Link that everyone here knows.VVThoughtBox said:
To put, this confusion in a different light. I would like to say one thing. It seems that Link is a character that, while not ever having a non male incarnation (yet), has never been very masculine. Despite how matter of fact that most of us treat link not being masculine, it is a very powerful counter point to the belief that games need a masculine main character. Of course, link doesn't actually have any gender identity, because as noted, he doesn't really have any character, but he is designed in a way that rejects the common video game protagonist stereotype. I would even propose a hypothesis that Link is potentially more relatable to the feminine audience, than say, a female character that is masculine.
No, because female link doesn't need added adorable...NoeL said:
In fact, if they implement a female link, they should keep everything outside of making Link's body believable belonging to a woman, the same. In which case, could actually simply mean editing any gender specific references to Link... since apparently he is already believably has a woman's body. Also that would be funny. Is this Link a she or he? Then they can make a game with completely gender neutral references to Link and tell us to shove off when we ask about Link's gender.
That's a big assumption. Having Link be female in one incarnation makes sense because the character and his relationship with Zelda changes(sometimes dramatically) from game to game so having Link be a girl would be an interesting change of pace. That's why if Link every does become a girl I'd want it to be heavily explored to make for some good writing. Also who's "too lazy to make new ones"? The people asking for Link to be female aren't the one's who make new characters for Nintendo.uanime5 said:
While I know for a fact that the soldier part is true I'm not sure what an "adventures" is, and I'm pretty sure the nurse/teacher is more stereotyping than actual statistics. As for the soldier majority thing, I don't think that's a legitimate excuse, since even the most realistic military shooters invoke suspension of disbelief all the time, why cling to realism for that specific thing? If people go "What's with all the girls?" they can go "It's a video game.". Not to mention it only covers military shooters, doesn't hold water for fantasy games, or games set in the future, or really anything else.
Except we don't have any real tangible proof that games with male characters sell better than female ones. Whenever people try to point to games centered around females that didn't sell and go "HA! You see? Girl games DON'T make money. Developers are justified in sticking to boys" they tend to point out fresh new IP that got almost no big promotions, hype, or ad spots who's chances of success were already pretty dubious. That's one of the reasons I think big established franchises like Zelda, Assasin's Creed, Grand Theft Auto, or Call of Duty should utilize female protagonist, so that when they make the billions of dollars they were already going to make regardless of their protagonist's gender every developer out their will go "Oh my god! When you have all the ingredients for a successful game, it doesn't matter what chromosomes the player character has, we'll still make tons of money! We should probably stop having such a knee jerk aversion to ladies.", but of course, when Activision finally puts a girl on the cover of Call Of Duty: Modern W.O.L.F. Operations, and it proceeds to sell zero units then I'll gladly eat my own words.
The idea that the decision to change the gender of a character (either female or male, it makes no difference) just because it would be "different" is a concept that I can't help but question both as a person who enjoys art and as a artist myself (writer and musician).
Gaming is at a interesting time, a lot of gamers are starting to notice the negative effect that large, corporate publishers are having on the games that they enjoy. They are starting to see that in the end, publishers are going to keep doing the same thing until there is no money left in it, as such, a lot of gamers tend to get bored with the more popular AAA titles.
The effect of this is starting to become obvious to me, a lot of gamers are asking for something "different" even though they don't really know what that "different" thing really is, they want gaming to change, they want publishers to do things to make games more interesting to them but they don't really know what specifically would do it.
So, perhaps this is why we are seeing a lot of gamers on the internet (and Bob apparently) jump on the bandwagon that changing things just to make them "different" or "new" is automatically better, that publishers and developers have to start shaking things up on even the most established of franchises, no character, no story, no concept is sacred, everything should be changed to match the current flavor of the month and this month, the flavor is the sexism debate and if that means we turn Link into a girl for no reason other than to "set a example" or to "be different", so be it.
Look, here is the thing, I want more games with female characters, heck, I even want games that explore the sexism debate in the public forum that is mainstream gaming. additionally, I would love to see more women in the industry who will be able to create more realistic and complex female characters beyond what we usually get now.
With that said, I don't like the idea of changing the gender, race or religion of a character just for the sake of appeasing public opinion. Like it or not, games are art and that means that artists intent actually means something, I don't want to live in a world where developers need to go through a checklist just to make sure that the game they make either directly conforms to a specific social ideal or is vague and generalized enough to not offend anyone at all.
Being "different" is not a good enough reason to arbitrarily change the gender of Link, I am sorry, I know that there is a huge internet thing about that right now but the character has been around for longer than some of you here have even been playing games, Link's gender is part of the characters identity and that means something, it would be like turning Lara Croft into a man, it is just a silly, meaningless solution for a complex problem.
If we want to have more women in games, we need to start demanding new gaming franchises with women as main characters, we need to start demanding that women have a louder voice in the creation of games in the mainstream market and we as gamers need to embrace that diversity.
Switching a famous characters gender might seem like a good idea but it is a shallow solution and one that sets a bad precedent, it cheapens what a character is in a game when the gender of them changes when the wind blows in the opposite direction.
If you want a Zelda game with a female main character, I think we are all smart enough to see the OBVIOUS solution to that problem.
Why not let Link be a male, that is fine, it is not sexist for a male character to be male, seriously, instead, why not let Zelda save him? Would that not make more sense?
Gaming is at a interesting time, a lot of gamers are starting to notice the negative effect that large, corporate publishers are having on the games that they enjoy. They are starting to see that in the end, publishers are going to keep doing the same thing until there is no money left in it, as such, a lot of gamers tend to get bored with the more popular AAA titles.
The effect of this is starting to become obvious to me, a lot of gamers are asking for something "different" even though they don't really know what that "different" thing really is, they want gaming to change, they want publishers to do things to make games more interesting to them but they don't really know what specifically would do it.
So, perhaps this is why we are seeing a lot of gamers on the internet (and Bob apparently) jump on the bandwagon that changing things just to make them "different" or "new" is automatically better, that publishers and developers have to start shaking things up on even the most established of franchises, no character, no story, no concept is sacred, everything should be changed to match the current flavor of the month and this month, the flavor is the sexism debate and if that means we turn Link into a girl for no reason other than to "set a example" or to "be different", so be it.
Look, here is the thing, I want more games with female characters, heck, I even want games that explore the sexism debate in the public forum that is mainstream gaming. additionally, I would love to see more women in the industry who will be able to create more realistic and complex female characters beyond what we usually get now.
With that said, I don't like the idea of changing the gender, race or religion of a character just for the sake of appeasing public opinion. Like it or not, games are art and that means that artists intent actually means something, I don't want to live in a world where developers need to go through a checklist just to make sure that the game they make either directly conforms to a specific social ideal or is vague and generalized enough to not offend anyone at all.
Being "different" is not a good enough reason to arbitrarily change the gender of Link, I am sorry, I know that there is a huge internet thing about that right now but the character has been around for longer than some of you here have even been playing games, Link's gender is part of the characters identity and that means something, it would be like turning Lara Croft into a man, it is just a silly, meaningless solution for a complex problem.
If we want to have more women in games, we need to start demanding new gaming franchises with women as main characters, we need to start demanding that women have a louder voice in the creation of games in the mainstream market and we as gamers need to embrace that diversity.
Switching a famous characters gender might seem like a good idea but it is a shallow solution and one that sets a bad precedent, it cheapens what a character is in a game when the gender of them changes when the wind blows in the opposite direction.
If you want a Zelda game with a female main character, I think we are all smart enough to see the OBVIOUS solution to that problem.
Why not let Link be a male, that is fine, it is not sexist for a male character to be male, seriously, instead, why not let Zelda save him? Would that not make more sense?