Should Nintendo make a game with a romantic relationship between Link and Zelda?

I say "no" because Nintendo doesn't understand the meaning of "optional content" outside of minigames and rupees.

See, I'd be fine with it if it weren't forced upon the player (like it was in SS). But it inevitably would be, because we're talking about Nintendo here.

Originally Posted by R3B3LCAUSE

Link with a dude would definitely ruin the game

Sorry, I couldn't help but giggle reading this.



I'm going to have to say no, or actually... I really don't care. But I'm leaning on the "no" part. SS sort of delivered some sort of connection between Link and Zelda.

We don't really need another one, or something that goes a little deeper in terms of "romantic settings."

Originally Posted by R3B3LCAUSE

Link with a dude would definitely ruin the game

Isn't Ezlo a man?

Yes, but Ezlo is totally camp. Maybe not gay, but still camp. Also, is this text annoying? It looks great on the mobile skin, which I always use, but I'm apparently not allowed to do it in the Graphics Design section anympre.

Originally Posted by Melody of Fantasy

Isn't Ezlo a man?

I don't think they mean it in "that way". Because don't forget that there is also the Kind of Red Lions in the WW. It's not always Link's partner.

Originally Posted by Anima†eur

Yes, but Ezlo is totally camp. Maybe not gay, but still camp. Also, is this text annoying? It looks great on the mobile skin, which I always use, but I'm apparently not allowed to do it in the Graphics Design section anympre.

For someone who uses the Temple skin, I say yes.

It's hard to read that orange text against the yellow skin. It's probably not a good idea to use any font colour at all, but just the default, unless you're writing up an article with major headings and pointers.

Kay. I'll keep my mangolicious writing to the F&G section.

I definitely say no. I do not ship Zelda/Link or any romantic pairing in Zelda really. I really would hate to play a game and be forced to see a ship I don't like constantly.

^
Honestly, I wasn't a fan of ZeLink until I played SS. I thought it was absolutely lovely.


And AA, what's your deal with player choice? If a developer wants to deliver a romance between two characters, and designs a whole story and the characters themselves with this romance in mind, BUT DOESN'T INCLUDE ANOTHER OPTION, it's automatically poor gaming design? Why can't a developer try to deliver a specific experience to players? Artists do it. Authors do it. Film writers do it.

Originally Posted by Claus

And AA, what's your deal with player choice? If a developer wants to deliver a romance between two characters, and designs a whole story and the characters themselves with this romance in mind, BUT DOESN'T INCLUDE ANOTHER OPTION, it's automatically poor gaming design?

If a game developer wants to deliver a scripted experience, then that's their right. I don't have to support it though. Nor do I have to pretend that such a move (intentionally limiting the ability of the player to make interesting/meaningful choices) isn't blatantly anti-gamer.

Why can't a developer try to deliver a specific experience to players? Artists do it. Authors do it. Film writers do it.

It's preferable for game developers to not deliver a scripted experience to players, since games are interactive. With interactivity comes the expectation that the player has control over his/her own situation in the game, otherwise the interactivity is largely pointless.

I'm with you there, though it could be argued that the game designers set the rules of the game and can therefore do whatever they want with it. It's saddening, though, to see how the feeling of interactivity has faded since game developers decided that what they really want to make is movies. If you want to present a story that the consumer has no say in whatsoever, I suggest you write a book or a screenplay.

I'm just not so sure how well that would go over. Not only would a lot of fans not like it, but I'm not sure Nintendo would be able to pull it off XD

Zelda is to stereotypical of a character.

Adding ZeLink as a canon pairing would serious make wonder if I should buy the game.

Even the amount in SS was starting to seriously bug me.

To be fair, SS did seem to have some proto-options going on what with the dialogue options and sidequest decisions. Maybe they were tentatively trying something new? I've also heard rumors that OoT was originally intended to have some sort of pseudo-sidequest regarding the women in the games, kind of like Harvest Moon I guess. I honestly think they could pull it off, and they might have a bit of a bee in their bonnet regarding this feature.

I'm not going to push for it, though; I know I'd be really upset if they explicitly paired Link with someone other than Zelda and I wouldn't want anyone else to feel that way if they did do so. And sort of like AA said, it's not that important but I do feel that while a romantic relationship wouldn't affect SOME important aspects like gameplay or overreaching plot, it would affect the feel of the game for better or for worse.

Zelda is to stereotypical of a character.

And what stereotype is that?

Anything past what SS does would be straight up p**n. Not that I'd object

Originally Posted by R3B3LCAUSE

And what stereotype is that?

Strong princess of a prosperous kingdom that has an evil man in it, yet gets kidnapped and has to have a knight rescue her.

Either that or she's the girl-next-door.

Both are stereotypical traits for fictional females.

If a game developer wants to deliver a scripted experience, then that's their right. I don't have to support it though. Nor do I have to pretend that such a move (intentionally limiting the ability of the player to make interesting/meaningful choices) isn't blatantly anti-gamer.

No. Romance is a minor, very minor, element in the Zelda series. Further, the Zelda games themselves aren't lent to making the gamer feel like it's open ended and such. Zelda is presented as a story in which the player gets to immerse themselves in being Link, not in making Link do the things they would have done.

That's not anti-gamer, that's simply what is. No different than every book not being one of those book adventures where the reader picks an option and turns to X page.

Originally Posted by Great White North

No. Romance is a minor, very minor, element in the Zelda series.

In SS, this implied "romance" was granted its own cutscenes. While I agree that romance doesn't come close to, say, the swordplay in how "major" it is, having more than a couple of minutes of screen time (or, heck, simply being one of the more major things emphasized in cutscenes) brings it out of the realm of "very minor".

Further, the Zelda games themselves aren't lent to making the gamer feel like it's open ended and such. Zelda is presented as a story in which the player gets to immerse themselves in being Link, not in making Link do the things they would have done.

That's not anti-gamer, that's simply what is. No different than every book not being one of those book adventures where the reader picks an option and turns to X page.

The Zelda series still markets itself as an adventure. The fact that modern Zelda games "aren't lent to making the gamer feel like it's open-ended" is an issue I'm quick to highlight when I talk about certain games. Regardless, this particular discussion isn't about open-endedness in general, but simply providing the ability to make a particular set of choices.

What reason would a game designer have to not go the extra mile and provide a choice in this particular situation? Perhaps I don't want to see the cheesy cutscenes associated with romance, but still want the plot to still feel consistent/unbroken (the result of skipping cutscenes). I suppose all it would take would be to make it so that talking to certain characters activates/unlocks certain cutscenes. Perhaps responding to characters in the right way could intensify such a relationship between two characters. How could the existence of choice possibly have a negative impact on anyone who plays the game, least of all the players that actually want to see a ZeLink romance (heck, having the ability to intensify the romance would arguably benefit them)?

But why not anyway? The only reason I can think of is that the person who designs these cutscenes/blocks of dialogue wants to force everyone who plays the game to experience these particular things. Being restrained in some ways (mainly gameplay-wise) isn't inherently bad, since some limits need to be placed on the player in order to make the choices they DO make more interesting. But in this particular case, the lack of such a simple set of choices is inherently anti-gamer, as it prioritizes the developer's vision over the gamer's experience.

^
Because the developer wants to tell a story. Interactivity being the key foundation of gaming does not translate to "every game must have an open-ended story and/or structure in which I can choose to do what I want, when I want, at least to a fairly large degree." You can tell a straight, scripted story with straight, scripted characters, and still involve interactivity to create a totally unique and meaningful experience.

Again, I don't think interactivity necessarily translates to player options.

Let me ask, is this an inherent flaw in every type of game design out there?.



Also, as a side note - the whole ZeLink in SS being too forced is almost invalidated by a darling woman named Peatrice. Of course, canonically Link ends up with Zelda at the end and the game does spend more time with ZeLink, and maybe you have beef with that, but there is a whole lot of interaction and dialogue branching and choosing (read: player option) involved with Peatrice. You can easily see your Link as being captivated by Peatrice and that lovely beauty mark of hers.

And then, there's even enough stuff goin' on to constitute a valid shipping between Link and Kina (Lumpy Pumpkin girl). What with talking to her (the things she says), working for her, talking to her admirer... It's nowhere near the level of Peatrice and Zelda, but it's there.

I've taken the first half of the response to PM.

Also, as a side note - the whole ZeLink in SS being too forced is almost invalidated by a darling woman named Peatrice. Of course, canonically Link ends up with Zelda at the end and the game does spend more time with ZeLink, and maybe you have beef with that, but there is a whole lot of interaction and dialogue branching and choosing (read: player option) involved with Peatrice. You can easily see your Link as being captivated by Peatrice and that lovely beauty mark of hers.

And then, there's even enough stuff goin' on to constitute a valid shipping between Link and Kina (Lumpy Pumpkin girl). What with talking to her (the things she says), working for her, talking to her admirer... It's nowhere near the level of Peatrice and Zelda, but it's there.

The kind of choice I was looking for was the ability to forego all romantic relations with ingame characters altogether, since that kind of stuff just doesn't appeal to me.