Should Zelda games be more directly intertwined or still be self contained?

[mαrkαsscoρ]

Yeah, but none of the numbered Final Fantasy games purport to be part of a single continuity. They are openly standalone, whereas Zelda claims to be one continuity.

and then Final Fantasy X-2 happened
though now I wonder, is there any game in the series that handled the zelda continuity the closest to what you're talking about? besides direct sequels

 

[DJ Twitch]

I'm going with interconnection as well because I'm sick of them wiping the slate clean every two games. Some people (including Ninty) love to talk about how the isolation between games allows more freedom to do what they want, but what good is this freedom really when all they want to do is just recycle the same old cliches?

IMO, we need more sequels, not the 40th reimagining of Hyrule. There doesn't even need to be a bunch of elaborate lore (heaven knows Ninty would screw that up anyway) they just need to not go running to some remote section of the timeline whenever they get bored of a setting they introduce. They should take something that's already been established and expand on it.

 

[Bowsette Plus-Ultra]

and then Final Fantasy X-2 happened
though now I wonder, is there any game in the series that handled the zelda continuity the closest to what you're talking about? besides direct sequels

X-2 and the XIII sequels are direct sequels, but they do differentiate themselves by including the title of the original game in their title.

And no, I honestly don't think there's a Zelda game that handles sequel status the way I'd like them to. Zelda tends to wipe the slate clean with each entry, introducing new versions of old characters and locations so they can walk through the same introductions in each game. Heck, even the ones that are direct sequels do their best to avoid references to the games they're following up.

 

[mαrkαsscoρ]

X-2 and the XIII sequels are direct sequels, but they do differentiate themselves by including the title of the original game in their title.

And no, I honestly don't think there's a Zelda game that handles sequel status the way I'd like them to. Zelda tends to wipe the slate clean with each entry, introducing new versions of old characters and locations so they can walk through the same introductions in each game. Heck, even the ones that are direct sequels do their best to avoid references to the games they're following up.

I guess the sequel part was obvious but I meant more it trying to connect w/ FF7 by having the character Shinra, then FF7 remake calling to that as well by having an easter egg of Shinra the character from X-2

I think Nintendo deems that necessary so that just about each new game can be anyone's first jump into Zelda, some games like WW and TP even kind of struggle w/ that by being a new story but still trying to hold on to the story roots of OoT

 

[Bowsette Plus-Ultra]

I guess the sequel part was obvious but I meant more it trying to connect w/ FF7 by having the character Shinra, then FF7 remake calling to that as well by having an easter egg of Shinra the character from X-2

I think Nintendo deems that necessary so that just about each new game can be anyone's first jump into Zelda, some games like WW and TP even kind of struggle w/ that by being a new story but still trying to hold on to the story roots of OoT

But if Zelda's writers are struggling with how to write sequels in that case get better writers, why put on a show of pretend continuity? There would be nothing wrong with going full standalone with the series. It'd probably offer them a lot more narrative freedom.

 

[mαrkαsscoρ]

But if Zelda's writers are struggling with how to write sequels in that case get better writers, why put on a show of pretend continuity? There would be nothing wrong with going full standalone with the series. It'd probably offer them a lot more narrative freedom.

that's definitely not something we can answer since it was up to them to have these recycled stories yet still say it's all in the same continuity

 

[twilitfalchion]

I would love for Zelda games to be more deeply interconnected. For a series that features a singular timeline, most of the games don't provide a proper sense of them all co-existing in that same timeline, or when they do, the connections are painfully shallow.

Zelda games ought to show considerable progress and development in-universe from game to game (however Nintendo chooses and fails to do that) rather than being the same or a similar story effectively retold again and again, or in the case of the stories and worlds that differ, having them be minimally expounded upon (or not at all) outside of their specific entry. It would make for a much more compelling narrative to follow as the series cranks out new entries.

 

[DJ Twitch]

I think Nintendo deems that necessary so that just about each new game can be anyone's first jump into Zelda, some games like WW and TP even kind of struggle w/ that by being a new story but still trying to hold on to the story roots of OoT

They've actually said as much, so you're right. Personally, I think that's fine since the sequel games I've played thus far have been able to serve their purpose just fine without spelling out what happened in the previous chapter. Wind Waker stands on its own to new players, but then becomes a sequel when they try OoT.

 

[mαrkαsscoρ]

They've actually said as much, so you're right. Personally, I think that's fine since the sequel games I've played thus far have been able to serve their purpose just fine without spelling out what happened in the previous chapter. Wind Waker stands on its own to new players, but then becomes a sequel when they try OoT.

Wind Waker being my first, I definitely relate to this, I remember that subtly mindblowing moment when I beat the forest temple and the deku tree sprout came up and realizing he eventually turns into the Great Deku Tree in Wind Waker
there was other moments like that but this one just occurred to me

 

[Bowsette Plus-Ultra]

They've actually said as much, so you're right. Personally, I think that's fine since the sequel games I've played thus far have been able to serve their purpose just fine without spelling out what happened in the previous chapter. Wind Waker stands on its own to new players, but then becomes a sequel when they try OoT.

Being approachable to a first timer is important, but I do think it's more satisfying for an overarching storyline to be more self-referential. Mass Effect 2 is fairly approachable, but it still maximizes all its links to the first game.

I think a good example is Harry Potter (pre-author transphobia). In Deathly Hallows, the main characters are trying to figure out how to destroy a horcrux, a magical soul maguffin that is allegedly indestructible to most means. Then they realize, 'Oh wait! Harry destroyed a hocrux with a basilisk fang back in the second book!' leading to a nice moment where they go back to the Chamber of Secrets, see the corpse of the basilisk, and extract one of its fangs.

 

[DJ Twitch]

Being approachable to a first timer is important, but I do think it's more satisfying for an overarching storyline to be more self-referential. Mass Effect 2 is fairly approachable, but it still maximizes all its links to the first game.

Well that's not to say Wind Waker did it perfectly, we could have had some more obvious OoT connections for sure. It's just the general idea they got right.

 

[Bowsette Plus-Ultra]

Well that's not to say Wind Waker did it perfectly, we could have had some more obvious OoT connections for sure. It's the general idea they got right.

I think WW is alright, but it does kind of gloss over its big continuity connections. It would have been more interesting to see a returning character that directly references stuff from OoT. Heck, maybe a flashback. What if one of the temples was a temple from Ocarina of Time, but with sections of it eroded away due to age, leading to unintended expansions?

WW just dances a bit too safe a dance for me. The big connections shouldn't be largely limited to the opening two minute backstory scrawl.

 

[DJ Twitch]

I think WW is alright, but it does kind of gloss over its big continuity connections. It would have been more interesting to see a returning character that directly references stuff from OoT. Heck, maybe a flashback. What if one of the temples was a temple from Ocarina of Time, but with sections of it eroded away due to age, leading to unintended expansions?

WW just dances a bit too safe a dance for me. The big connections shouldn't be largely limited to the opening two minute backstory scrawl.

For me, the one thing WW was seriously missing was an extra encounter with Ganondorf where he goes into further detail on his past. He was there for the main event, so obviously he would have remembered things that were smudged by time. Rumor has it that there was going to be a scene where Jabun is killed or injured, so maybe that would have been a good point for storytime with Ganon? Perhaps he could even recall killing Jabu Jabu for a flashback.

That's the way I would have done it, at least: Start the game with a vague outline, Ganon himself clears up the picture, and then you get the little tidbits of lore scattered about the game. Then again, a returning dungeon would also be a good idea, so I guess I'd throw that in for good measure too.

 

[Bowsette Plus-Ultra]

For me, the one thing WW was seriously missing was an extra encounter with Ganondorf where he goes into further detail on his past. He was there for the main event, so obviously he would have remembered things that were smudged by time. Rumor has it that there was going to be a scene where Jabun is killed or injured, so maybe that would have been a good point for storytime with Ganon? Perhaps he could even recall killing Jabu Jabu for a flashback.

That's the way I would have done it, at least: Start the game with a vague outline, Ganon himself clears up the picture, and then you get the little tidbits of lore scattered about the game. Then again, a returning dungeon would also be a good idea, so I guess I'd throw that in for good measure too.

I think WW would have benefited from just more time spent with Ganon. It's an issue I have with almost every Ganon encounter, but with WW most of all.

This is the one version of Ganon that seems to be propped up in a more sympathetic light, to the point where he's almost not the bad guy, but the game glosses over those motivations in favor of a big stabby sword fight. Give me some flashbacks, some dubiously good monologuing. Maybe a point where Link hears Ganon's sympathetic motivations and his desire to resurrect Hyrule and looks to Boat King with a look that says, "Hey, maybe we aren't the good guys in this situation."

Remember, Ganon's entire plan in WW is to resurrect Hyrule, and the KoRL's goal is to drown it. Leave the few survivors of the apocalypse that he brought on to fend for themselves atop what has been stated in game to be a dead and lifeless sea.

 

[Mikey the Moblin]

and then Final Fantasy X-2 happened
though now I wonder, is there any game in the series that handled the zelda continuity the closest to what you're talking about? besides direct sequels

Wind waker plays pretty obviously like a sequel to oot