If you don't have the time to watch, I'll just summarize. Jim Sterling heavily criticize's Eiji Aonuma's reasoning for why, when people heard rumors of a possible female playable character were disappointed they weren't true, they didn't go with a playable female character. Quoting Aonuma from a GameSpot interview.
"We thought about it," said Aonuma, "and decided that if we're going to have a female protagonist it's simpler to have Princess Zelda as the main character."
This idea was ultimately rejected, because according to Aonuma "...if we have princess Zelda as the main character who fights, then what is Link going to do? Taking into account that, and also the idea of the balance of the Triforce, we thought it best to come back to this [original] makeup."
This answer has apparently caused quite a bit of backlash. I'm not bothered by it, honestly. I can understand why some people are, though, because it makes it seem that it's too much effort on Nintendo's part to make up a heroine that could replace Link. In my honest opinion, though, Link should always be the main character in The Legend of Zelda, because. well, he always has. Putting him in the backdrop as an NPC makes about as little sense as playing a Mario game as Toad where all Mario does is tell you the Princess is in another castle.
Think for a second. Remember when Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull came out and it introduced Shia LaBeouf as Indy's son? Would it still be Indiana Jones if the next movie came out with LaBeouf as the main character with the original Harrison Ford in only a few scenes? Indiana Jones belongs in Indiana Jones movies. Granted, Link's name is never in the main title of a Zelda game, but it's always a given that it's Link you'll be playing as, just as Metroid will always have players playing Samus Aran. This is where the whole debate should cease as far as I'm concerned.
Some people have yearned for a female Link for some time, but no one has ever yearned for a male Samus Aran. My point is people accepted Samus Aran as Metroid since its inception, and people should accept Link as the playable character in Zelda. There honestly is no need for a playable femaleLlink for the exact same reason as there's no need to change Samus to male, or hell, even change Lara Croft to Larry Croft in Tomb Raider.
I get that some female gamers feel they're underrepresented, but asking existing franchises to cater to them is nothing but politics in my eyes. Even if Nintendo came up with a great explanation for why the playable character is female, say, Link has a daughter, it would only be seen as Nintendo taking a step to become progressive. I am all for a spin off, though. If Nintendo wants to take Zelda out of the damsel in distress trope and make a game surrounding her own journey where Link is never in the picture, that would be awesome.
I just want to make this absolutely clear, though, just so no one mistakes this blog post as sexist or misogynistic or whatever. I am against removing Link from Zelda just as much as I'm against removing Samus Aran from Metroid. I'm a traditionalist first and foremost, and that works both ways for me.
While Aonuma's responses are kind of stupid and dodging the question, my bottom line is that he doesn't owe any response to begin with, because no one was ever promised a female Link and there has been absolutely no established precedent suggesting that there even would be a female Link. It's just fans getting so worked up on their own hype train with speculation and rumors that started being mistaken for truths. They only have themselves to blame for the disappointment resulting from that.
ReplyDeleteI wholeheartedly agree as well, I'm against Link being female as much as I am against Samus being male. I feel these are established characters at this point with certain traits about them that fundamentally define who they are, and sure, Link gets reincarnated as a different hero every game, but I would still be similarly dismayed if Link was turned into a fat bearded hobo that fights with his walking cane. It just wouldn't be Link anymore. I'm just not seeing why we need to ruin established characters in order to satisfy audiences. Why not simply make up a new character? They already did it appropriately in Hyrule Warriors with Linkle after all. Instead of replacing Link they just added a female alternative character to play, and I actually wouldn't mind maybe playing a Zelda game with a brother and sister relationship between Link and Linkle with a story like Assassin's Creed Syndicate where it alternates between them; perhaps even allowing you to swap on-the-fly and the other one always follows you around as a companion. Would be an interesting twist on Zelda.
Of course, there is also the preferred alternative of simply making a new IP. I was a bit disappointed myself that Splatoon had no iconic new characters to add to Nintendo's roster, as it was just a multiplayer shooter, but expect the new "Squid Girl" to appear along side Wii Fit Trainer and Animal Crossing Villager in the next Smash Bros as another new "character". Needless to say, there's plenty of room still for Nintendo to make new IPs and catch up for a lot of lost time. The latest additions to Smash Bros have been scraping the barrel for a long time.