Reply to: Zelda U May NOT Even Have a Place in the Timeline
DISCLAIMER: Since I am not Aonuma everything here is but speculation.
Tip: If you do not want to read all of this, Skip to: "Summary:" and read the "Summary" & "Things you should be worried about!" sections.
the possibility that Zelda U and future Zelda games may NOT even be placed the timeline at all as Zelda U may be the first of a new series of stand alone Zelda games that exist in their own universes. I didn't want to believe it at first but the things that Aonuma keeps saying keeps on making the possibility stronger and stronger. And it keeps haunting me to death. I will go through Aonuma's quotes that make this possibility stronger in order:
Why does this Zelda not making it into the timeline trouble you so much?
It has nothing to do with the actual game play or feel of the game. In fact, I would not be surprised at all if Nintendo just sat down and placed all the games into time slots that made sense to them. I highly doubt Aonuma had the timeline written out somewhere when he made the first Zelda. It makes more sense for them to have had no real idea of a timeline and then one day decide to put one together based on certain things they felt defined the timeline.
Those two quotes alone by far seem to suggest the possibility that Link may be more customizable
Aonuma has been saying: "Link represents, again, the player" for a long time. He just said it in different ways. For anyone to just assume that this time when he says that, it means Link is customizable would be sort of silly since most people who have played the first Zelda (when it first came out) know what he means.
might be something that consciously we kind of did,but not to say anything specific – I am not saying anything specific – but, I am hoping people continue to comment, and I will continue to follow the fan comments and reactions to the trailer. I am certainly curious, and I am sure there are things we as developers can glean.
The only thing this is suggesting is that they want people to stop making Link a person and remember that he is a avatar for you to become the hero. Also they are watching the communities feedback to all the speculations. This will allow the developers to glean ideas and let them know what the fans are open to and what they are not open to.
These two quotes seem to only get more worried about this "unfortunate" possibility. This is Aonuma further seems to suggest that Link will be more customizable and that Zelda will become the new story essential main character and all Link is just the player's customizable avatar with choice of having him be male or female much like Arisen from Dragon's Dogma. Anyways, on to the final three quotes:
How do you get: Link will be more customizable and that Zelda will become the new story essential main character out of:
One thing I have to say is, I never said that wasn't Link. I said 'No one ever said that was Link.' Every game needs to have a protagonist. You have to have a main character, so we create one that is ultimately supposed to become the player. With each iteration of Zelda, we make this main character and it's not as though this protagonist is not the same character all the time. It's just a role within the game that the player occupies."
"That's something that I tell my designers when they create the character. Certainly, as part of a series, maybe people will think it’s the same main character but, ultimately, it's the player character. It's the person with the controller in their hands, if that makes sense. This kind of information can just exponentially grow, so I just wanted to make that clear."
I'm interested in seeing something like that, but I think one of the charm points of this particular franchise is that fact that it's called 'Legend of Zelda' but Zelda is not the main character. She's not the protagonist. But if you ask me what that is, I don’t know. I can't really explain it. Maybe if she's the main character, then maybe the title needs to change.
Once upon time when the very first Zelda came out. Link did not exist! Instead many players went through the whole game thinking they were Zelda. It wasn't until they saved Zelda that they realized that they were the ones saving Zelda. Not Zelda saving anyone.
Why am I telling you about the first Zelda?
Because Aonuma is making reference to the first Zelda. In the first Zelda there was no Link, YOU were the hero. When Aonuma says:
"No one ever said that was Link." It is just like when many first sat down to play the first Zelda game. No one ever said that the person we were playing was Zelda. People just assumed it was Zelda. But in reality the hero was YOU. Likewise in this new Zelda, nobody said this protagonist is Link. In every Zelda game, while you are playing, there is never anything that states that the character you are playing is Link. People are just assuming its Link (or somebody else). Its funny because people seem to be having a hard time understanding that its YOU the player. You are the hero of time. Link doesn't exist unless Nintendo is trying to sell a product or something.
The statement:
It's just a role within the game that the player occupies.
Is explaining that.
But what about Zelda being the protagonist?
Aonuma said:
I think one of the charm points of this particular franchise is that fact that it's called 'Legend of Zelda' but Zelda is not the main character. She's not the protagonist.
He clearly states that Zelda is not the protagonist.
Here is a fun piece of information. Have you ever wondered why the game is called: "The legend of Zelda" & not "The Legend of Link"? Aonuma tells you the answer when he says:
Maybe if she's (Zelda) the main character, then maybe the title(The legend of Zelda) needs to change.
If they made Zelda the protagonist, why would they need to change the title "The legend of Zelda" to something else?
Pst here is a hint: Its because YOU the player are suppose to be the hero. Since every player has a different name they cannot name the hero. (ok so this was more like the answer instead of a hint)
Are you saying: "Link is just the player's customizable avatar with choice of having him be male or female"?
Is Link the players avatar? Yes.
Is Link customizable? He has not been, but he could be in this game.
Can we make Link a boy or girl? We have never been able to do so, but who knows, you may be able to in this game.
Comments?: Link has always been the players avatar and Nintendo has mentioned it before so this is not new, shocking and/or ground breaking.
This piece of information does not hurt the game. If they mentioned taking this away from Zelda, then the game would be hurt. Why? Because it removes the player from the role of hero and makes this a game like FF, KH, and many others where you are just watching the protagonist be the hero, instead of you filling the shoes of the hero and being the hero.
Link being customizable is not a bad thing
IF done right (I personally prefer more game play and puzzles over costumes). If I can change my clothes to other outfits that match the theme of Zelda, then fine. But if they put some jeans, a tank-top and all sorts of modern outfits in there, then I agree with you that we should storm Nintendo and burn that building to the ground.
IMO about being able to choose if you want to play Male or Female. As long as I am able to play my male version of Link, then I personally don't care.
It doesn't change the gameplay and I am not being forced to have to play the girl counterpart.
Zelda has a LOT of
females and all of them
are not overly sexual, so I trust that the female counterpart won't be either.
And that is good. I don't see why we need a female counter part, but like I said earlier, it does not harm the game. It will be like pokemon where they use the guy for all the ads, but you can play as a female and the game play is not affected. It would work this way for the timeline as well. The male version is the mascot, but you can play as both genders. Also the word Hero can cover both that of a male and female because it refers to a person who has done something admirable for others.
It was this point that this unfortunate possibility became too strong to deny as by this point, it pretty much already 83% confirmed that this new game is potentially a reboot of some sort or a stand alone series games that are set in their own universes. From all can say as of now, I can already confirm that this new game most certainly may NOT be "Zelda" at all or least the "Zelda" that we know and love. Aonuma is obviously taking this whole "rethinking the conventions" garbage WAY TOO far. Zelda isn't supposed to be so much like Skyrim, Zelda isn't supposed to be too much like Dragon's Dogma. Zelda CAN be inspired by those type of games but as LONG it's STILL ZELDA and has a place in the ZELDA TIMELINE! This is ridiculous! This is exactly what I was afraid of when Aonuma first mentioned about the "rethinking the conventions" thing last year in the first but I didn't want to believe it as kept hoping that maybe he wouldn't go too far, I hoped that maybe we might get another prequel game, a game in that sets far in the future of adult timeline in new Hyrule, or maybe even another child timeline game that far in the future in Hyrule but NO, instead he just HAD to go TOO far as I feared and trying be like other developers TOO much.
It is at this point where I'd rather play HW than Zelda U cause Zelda U doesn't even seem to be a real Zelda game at all, at HW seems to actually APPRECIATE what Zelda MEANS to US, as it is considered like a collaboration Zelda's GREATEST HITS as a tribute to the greatest video game franchise ever to exist. I think of Hyrule Warriors as like an "In loving memory of Zelda" type game. Why do I say all this? Cause the Zelda we know and love is DEAD and HW is a tribute to honor the loving fond memories of the Zelda we know and love as such a great game series gets replaced with this new Zelda and Aonuma with confidence had this to say:
What unfortunate possibility became to strong to deny?
Seriously, I need you to tell me what has become to strong to deny. Your only complaint was that the game would not be in the timeline, and would have its own universe...literally, this is what you said:
It seems that from what I've been seeing lately of Aonuma's words on Zelda U and future Zelda titles that are really starting to worry me. And that is the possibility that Zelda U and future Zelda games may NOT even be placed the timeline at all as Zelda U may be the first of a new series of stand alone Zelda games that exist in their own universes. I didn't want to believe it at first but the things that Aonuma keeps saying keeps on making the possibility stronger and stronger.
I have explained that all the stuff Aonuma said had nothing to do with your worries, so I really don't know how anything is to strong for you to deny. Aonuma has done nothing but talk about trying to recapture the first Zelda in this new Zelda. Unless you have never played the first Zelda when it came out back in 86', then you should be, I don't know, excited to see the game trying to go back to its roots?
Who has confirmed that this game is a reboot?
Where do you even see Aonuma mention anything about a reboot? If there is a reboot I sure hope it is for MM, because I have been dying for a remake. If I can't get a remake of MM, I'll gladly take a reboot done better.
Also why is a reboot bad? Heck if they want to reboot the oracle of seasons & ages, and finally release the Farore version they scraped (for technical reasons) then I say go for it. I been dying for that too.
What is wrong with a stand alone universe. WW is sort of its own universe (at least when it first came out it was), but then they worked it into the timeline. I don't see why they can't work this universe into the timeline. And even if they can't, since when did Zelda have to fit into a timeline to be enjoyable to play?
How can you even confirm that this new game most certainly may NOT be "Zelda" at all or least the "Zelda" that we know and love?
How do you know? You even go so far as to say:
the Zelda we know and love is DEAD! This is exactly what I was afraid of when Aonuma first mentioned about the "rethinking the conventions" thing last year in the first but I didn't want to believe it as kept hoping that maybe he wouldn't go too far
First off, you mean Zelda is dead to YOU and a few people like you. I have followed Zelda for a very long time, and 1 game that has more speculation then it does facts is not about to end my obsession for said game.
That said,
I can understand your fear when you heard Aonuma say they were "rethinking the conventions" of Zelda. When I heard that I thought to myself: "They are going to screw up this game. Please don't let them put voice acting in. Please don't let them cave in to today's' generation." <----(Abbreviated version, but sums it up) In fact none of my current fears have been addressed. All I know is that Aonuma is aiming to capture both the first Zelda's adventure and Zelda HW combat/statergy(?)[I've never played dynasty warrior, so i'm not sure what he is trying to capture from there].
So far the trailer only shows vibrant colors, a vast world, and a unisex looking Link.
We don't know how the fighting style will be, what the items are or if we will even have items. We don't know the story, we don't really know anything, so i don't see how anyone can run around saying they loathe the game?
Aonuma says:
with the new Zelda game, I really want to open the opportunities up for the players to really make an impact on their environment and to give them a little more freedom to choose their path the story takes."
Why is this bad? This is what Zelda 1 did. If anything you should be happy this new Zelda is trying to capture the very 1st Zelda adventure style. I don't see how HAVING to use your map because you might get lost in this game could be a bad thing, nor do I see how ACTUALLY exploring can be bad either.
Both the elements listed above stay true to what Zelda is about, so why are you so upset?
Side Note: Imagine if they were going to make it like FF-X2. If you choose to help people, or not to help people, it affected the game play a little. Having your actions impact the world is different. To see that done right in a zelda game might be interesting indeed.
Aonuma:“When I say Link, it’s not one specific character. It is the protagonist in the Zelda game. Please understand.”
He isn't. Link has always been whoever the player is. If you choose to name yourself Link, that is up to you. Nowhere in the game does anyone confirm that the character you play is Link. They always call him whatever you name him, and nothing eles. In KH, no matter what you may want to name Sora, sora is Sora and you are going to watch his life unfold. Link you can rename and watch your legend unfold. In games like KH, FF, and Mario, you are forced to assist and watch the hero attain glory. While in Zelda, you are encouraged to take on a role. For me, I spent time yelling at how Mario can't jump and how
he needs to get
his act together. This was often followed by words like: "What is wrong with
you and other words that
blame Mario for my game playing skills. However while playing Zelda I spent my time saying things like: "Sweet,
I've obtained the master sword, fear me! (Insert evil laugh here) Now how do
I solve this? Thank you Navi
I can see that, stop bothering
me!" Link is suppose to be you the player, which is why he cannot be one specific character. He is a representation for every player who has played a Zelda game. Did everyone playing the game understand that?
No. Some like me fell into the role of being the hero unconsciously, others caught on consciously, and others like you felt a need to watch the protagonist become a hero. Zelda allows players to do two things. You can form a personal connection with all of the characters by assuming the role of hero, or you can sit back and enjoy watching the story as an outside source. Whatever your play style, you can enjoy the game.
Aonuma: It’s unlike the traditional Zelda titles where there is a process – a flow you have to follow. You start at A, you go to B, you get the key kind of thing. My goal is to eliminate that sort of formula and make it more of, as in with Hyrule Warriors, this large space where you have to figure out what your experience is going to be within that space. You define it.
They are eliminating the go to point A and then to point B formula that a lot of Zelda games fell into. They are going back to the first Zelda game where players can start at C and then go to A if they want. Nothing wrong with having that sort of freedom. I'm glad they are not relying on cinematic and voice acting to improve the game. Its a game, it is supposed to be played. People are suppose to enjoy playing as its hero. Its not a movie, and putting voice actors and a bunch of movies in a game does not improve the overall game play, nor does it make the content more enjoyable. The movies are nice, but when I sit down to play a game, I want to PLAY it. Not WATCH it. (Eyeing FF-x2 [nice game, but so~ many clip scenes and movies] I literally remember the cinematic more then the actual game play, and I feel more like I was out watching a movie then actually playing the game.)
Summary:
All in all, everything you listed is nothing to really be too concerned about. Your theory could be true, but not because of any of the information you provided. Just simple because
you made a really, and I mean a REALLY good guess. Most of the information you provided all shows that
this new Zelda is heavily focused on the very first Zelda game that started it all. It is aiming to capture the vast world of the first, and encourage exploring (aka actually adventuring).
Also we learn that Aonuma wants to keep Link from having a solid existence because THE PLAYER aka YOU are Link.
Whether that means allowing players to choose to be a male or female is unknown. It does however strongly suggest that he does not want Link to have a voice actor (YAY) because it would hurt the players experience of being a hero, and would force players into the role of observer. You already stated that you prefer to play as an observer. I already stated that I like to play as the hero. Your observer role is not at risk of being taken away. Aonuma seems to be trying not to take away the personal experience that players like me enjoy when we play as the hero.
Lastly we learn that Aonuma is not only trying to capture the elements of the first Zelda, but also that of HW. As I've never played a dynasty warrior game, I don't know if he means the games fighting mechanics, whatever its strategy or puzzles (if any) are like, or if he means the ability to play as any character you want. IMO I think he might be talking about the fighting style or strategy portion, but like I said. I've never played a dynasty warrior game so I have nothing to go on.
Things you should be worried about!
There are rumors about Zelda going multi-player.
<----This, this right here is bad! Why? It breaks the immersion of the game, it takes away the journey, the adventure, and ruins the "Player is the hero" concept. How? I cannot speak for everyone's friends, but how many friends come over and SIT QUIETLY without you feeling awkward?
Friends often talk to you, crack jokes while you are playing games, are telling you to slow down or hurry up, or giving you the answer to puzzles that you were to slow to figure out.
<--- all of this is why multi-player is bad. It robs the player of almost all the aspects of Zelda. Exploring at your own pace, enjoying the sights, solving puzzles and feeling good that you did, enjoying all of the characters you meet (the reactions I have to some of the characters are just priceless). When you are playing with friends, you are not as immersed in the game, and players can miss out.