I want a direct sequel to OoT and MM.

You say that if we start now there won't anything stopping later. That isn't the case.
The reason we want a new hero of time game is because the actually gave us a stop in TP with the hero shade, but that end only opened more questions. How did he lose an eye, where did he get the armor, did he learn the sword moves from someone or did he just figure it out, how did he get back to hyrule, can he be a knight without being realized as a hero to earn that title. We don't want a random adventure, just answers and closure.

(For the record my first idea had nothing to with self discovery.)

Originally Posted by NotAllThatEvil

You say that if we start now there won't anything stopping later. That isn't the case.
The reason we want a new hero of time game is because the actually gave us a stop in TP with the hero shade, but that end only opened more questions. How did he lose an eye, where did he get the armor, did he learn the sword moves from someone or did he just figure it out, how did he get back to hyrule, can he be a knight without being realized as a hero to earn that title. We don't want a random adventure, just answers and closure.

(For the record my first idea had nothing to with self discovery.)

The questions you're asking are all completely inconsequential in the grand scheme of everything the Zelda series has ever concerned itself with (mostly just beatin' up bad guys, bein' a hero and all). These are the kinds of questions that are specifically reserved for fanboys like us to talk and theorize about here on the forums. You don't make a game to answer questions that don't need (nor deserve) answers.

That would be like making a game to explain everything about Termina, or a sequel to Twilight Princess in which Midna comes back. It ruins the mystique of the questions, proving that sometimes (like in this case), the unanswered question is better than the answer.

Oh, and your first response to me included something like "A story concerned mostly with HoT's inner demons or quest for personal discovery would still be a cool game". Sure, it might not have been your first idea, but it's the first thing you said to me. Just sayin'.

The only thing the zelda seroes ever concerns itself with is saving the princess, thats it. I can think of only 2 games that had anything but that cliche in their plot. One of them just happens to be a prequal to the game we are debating them making.

Originally Posted by Devonfayr

The questions you're asking are all completely inconsequential in the grand scheme of everything the Zelda series has ever concerned itself with (mostly just beatin' up bad guys, bein' a hero and all). These are the kinds of questions that are specifically reserved for fanboys like us to talk and theorize about here on the forums. You don't make a game to answer questions that don't need (nor deserve) answers.

Nothing is inconsequential when it comes to Nintendo and Zelda, because they have a tendency to do whatever they want and tell us to sit down, shut up, and enjoy the ride. And then theorize the hell out of it afterward.

They made a game that started off of a blink-and-you-miss-it, somewhat unclear ending scene in OoT and called it MM. It has been theorized and turned into a fic about what the HoT was going to do after OoT and about Navi leaving, but Nintendo made it into a game. People have been theorizing and ficcing about First Heroes, First Zeldas, first Ganons, but Nintendo made SS. People wondered if the Hero of Winds would find solid land - okay you know where I'm going with this.

Point is just because the fans think of it, write about it, or theorize about it, doesn't automatically disqualify Nintendo from making a game about it. Even if it's something obscure, or is an "answer to a question that don't need (nor deserve) answers," which in this case (HoT -> ??? -> Hero's Shade; Da fuq happened?) is a load of balderdash.

Originally Posted by Topaz Mutiny

Nothing is inconsequential when it comes to Nintendo and Zelda, because they have a tendency to do whatever they want and tell us to sit down, shut up, and enjoy the ride. And then theorize the hell out of it afterward.

They made a game that started off of a blink-and-you-miss-it, somewhat unclear ending scene in OoT and called it MM. It has been theorized and turned into a fic about what the HoT was going to do after OoT and about Navi leaving, but Nintendo made it into a game. People have been theorizing and ficcing about First Heroes, First Zeldas, first Ganons, but Nintendo made SS. People wondered if the Hero of Winds would find solid land - okay you know where I'm going with this.

But people discussing these things didn't cause Nintendo to make games about them. It's been revealed in articles and interviews that Majora's Mask was merely the result of a personal challenge that Miyamoto issued to Aonuma.

Nintendo's Aonuma: Majora's Mask the result of Miyamoto challenge | Joystiq

These aren't games that Nintendo pops out, saying "Oh, wouldn't it be neat if we addressed THAT topic of fan discussion?" At least, that's obviously not the standard, and that's not what we should expect here.

Skyward Sword was, of course, the exception, as they were clearly and deliberately setting it as the first story...oh. Wait.

Eiji Aonuma’s Zelda Timeline Disclaimer: Story Was Not Prime Focus | The Gaming Realm

"I even think that setting Skyward Sword as the ‘first story,’ was merely a coincidence." - Eiji Aonuma

No. They're just not as concerned with this stuff as you might want to believe. They focus on gameplay, and then, as Aonuma puts it, the timeline placement (and story elements) are sort of an appendix to the gameplay.

So, yes, this stuff IS inconsequential.

Still, the original question comes back and stares us in the face: WHY should another Hero of Time game be made? Clearly, it's not all that important from Nintendo's perspective, and I contend that some questions are best left unanswered. So why on earth should we hear more about HoT's story? How could it possibly add positively to the Zelda experience?

You keep asking why we want it, a better question is why don't you?
And lets take what you said about devoloping a game. 1. Gameplay.
I see no way this would cause problems with the story.
2. Timeline.
Unless you want make a new game at the end of one of the three branches, this would be a perfect place. If the lack of eye is any clue, stuff obviously happened between MM and TP. They have a capable young man in a foreign land who is already on a mini adventure.
3. Story and other stuff.
The HoT obviously did something to make him more hero's-shadey, why would that story be so boring to play through?

Originally Posted by NotAllThatEvil

You keep asking why we want it, a better question is why don't you?

No no no no no, that's not the way things work. You don't come up with an idea, ask "Why not?" and then go through with it if you're not satisfied with any of the answers to that question. That's like saying "There's a giant unicorn floating around Mars", then saying "prove that there isn't" when people don't believe you, and finally saying "Well if no one can disprove it, then I'm just gonna believe in it."

Just as the burden of proof lies on the people supporting the claim - NOT on the skeptics - the burden of giving purpose lies on the people suggesting the idea - NOT on the skeptic.

But to answer your question, I don't want it because (as I've said), it seems clear to me that these questions are all inconsequential and that answering them would actually take away from the mystique that the Hero of Time currently has. I contend that the Hero of Time remains a more interesting character without a thoroughly-developed life story because without answers to those questions, we have the freedom to speculate about him and his life after OoT/MM.

Of course, that's just an opinion. Again, the burden of giving this game a legitimate reason to exist lies on the people FOR its existence, not on the people who are skeptical of it.

Originally Posted by NotAllThatEvil

And lets take what you said about devoloping a game. 1. Gameplay.
I see no way this would cause problems with the story.

I never said it would? I just showed that Nintendo had blatantly admit that they focus on gameplay first, story way later when they develop these games. This was done to demonstrate the point that the questions about the Hero's Shade are inconsequential in the grand scheme of everything that Zelda developers have ever cared about.

Originally Posted by NotAllThatEvil

2. Timeline.
Unless you want make a new game at the end of one of the three branches, this would be a perfect place. If the lack of eye is any clue, stuff obviously happened between MM and TP. They have a capable young man in a foreign land who is already on a mini adventure.

Oh, I see where this is going. Still, just because something CAN be done doesn't mean it ought to be. The sentiment that this game would fit into the 'perfect place' on the timeline is pure speculation, and again, nowhere near sufficient reason to exhaust the resources to develop, produce, and market this as a game.

Originally Posted by NotAllThatEvil

3. Story and other stuff.
The HoT obviously did something to make him more hero's-shadey, why would that story be so boring to play through?

Because, as I've said quite a few times, this stuff is inconsequential in the grand scheme of the Zelda series, but furthermore, such a story would answer questions that are probably better left unanswered.

Such questions exist. Again, I put forth: "What's the true story behind Termina and all its mystery?" and "Did Midna love Link?" "Did Link love Midna?" Those questions and others like it were clearly designed to exist without answers. Answering them would be criminal.

The Hero's Shade kind of unintentionally falls into this category of questions that are better left to speculation than to definitive answers.

I think a sequel to MM would be awesome. HoT Link was my favorite Link by far. This would also bring back magic most likely (I would be pissed if they didn't.)

More of a reason to remake MM for the Wii U imo. Remake an old God-like game, set it up for the Wii U so there' a build up for the next game in the series.

Maybe we can get more than 2 Zelda games for 1 console this time?

Nah... probably asking for too much...

Originally Posted by sumSOTY

I think a sequel to MM would be awesome. HoT Link was my favorite Link by far. This would also bring back magic most likely (I would be pissed if they didn't.)

More of a reason to remake MM for the Wii U imo. Remake an old God-like game, set it up for the Wii U so there' a build up for the next game in the series.

Maybe we can get more than 2 Zelda games for 1 console this time?

Nah... probably asking for too much...

They have to make a choice: make it a console with an awesome game pool like the GC (3 original Zeldas on gamecube + ports) or a csual-gamer appealing console like the wii.

Originally Posted by Devonfayr

No no no no no, that's not the way things work. You don't come up with an idea, ask "Why not?" and then go through with it if you're not satisfied with any of the answers to that question. That's like saying "There's a giant unicorn floating around Mars", then saying "prove that there isn't" when people don't believe you, and finally saying "Well if no one can disprove it, then I'm just gonna believe in it."
.

Just read all of your posts. You pretty much have me convinced that a sequel just wont happen. Ideally, it would be awesome to have closure and answers to qustions that linger about "How did this and this happen to Link to leave his shade (or w/e the correct name is for him) looking the way he does."

I think Link having one final calling, to put an end to his adventures could work out. But it could also turn out like ♥♥♥♥ and leave alot of fanboys like me really pissed off.

At this point, I would prefer a MM remake for the Wii U over a sequel. Maybe the ending cutscene will answer a few questions. Maybe why he looks like a stalfos (I remember that being a popular theory, with him looking like one and he leaves into the lost woods (that's what I think at least. I could be totally wrong.) Unless it's already been explained, and I missed it.) But then again, that could really ruin the MM ending. Sometimes its better to not have closure, and to just make assumptions.

Btw, could somebody reply with a link to the confirmation of the Shade in TP being the Hero of time? Thanks.

---------- Post added at 07:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:26 PM ----------

Originally Posted by TDA

They have to make a choice: make it a console with an awesome game pool like the GC (3 original Zeldas on gamecube + ports) or a csual-gamer appealing console like the wii.

I would prefer a larger pool of games, but that's me. I was extremely disappointed with the Wii. I almost consider TP more of a GC game than a Wii game. And then, what was it, 5 years later (correct me if I'm wrong)? A huge chunk of time from TP, and then they release SS (which I was not a fan of by any means, but glad to hear many others enjoyed.)

I feel like the Wii was the perfect console for Zelda sword-swinging games. But they really didn't do much with it.

The Wii U looks like it could be awesome, and I'm anxious to see some Zelda games with HD graphics. The touch pad could also add some pretty nifty items into the series.

Originally Posted by sumSOTY

Btw, could somebody reply with a link to the confirmation of the Shade in TP being the Hero of time? Thanks.

Link!

If nothing else, the HoT deserves it. They killed him off completely in the DT and supposedly the CT too. Plus, it's almost the perfect time for it. They've already remade OoT. They're going to remake MM pretty soon. Both of those are on the 3DS. The engine is already complete. They could finish off the HoT trilogy with a new original game on the 3DS after remaking MM on 3DS as well. It would work out prefectly, plus like I said before, the engine is already done. It just needs a new shape and paintjob to make a new game with it. The development process probably wouldn't take more than 2 years. Maybe about the same as the original MM dev time.

Originally Posted by Topaz Mutiny

Link!

Thank's

---------- Post added at 09:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:00 PM ----------

Originally Posted by The Doctor

If nothing else, the HoT deserves it. They killed him off completely in the DT and supposedly the CT too. Plus, it's almost the perfect time for it. They've already remade OoT. They're going to remake MM pretty soon. Both of those are on the 3DS. The engine is already complete. They could finish off the HoT trilogy with a new original game on the 3DS after remaking MM on 3DS as well. It would work out prefectly, plus like I said before, the engine is already done. It just needs a new shape and paintjob to make a new game with it. The development process probably wouldn't take more than 2 years. Maybe about the same as the original MM dev time.

No, fu*k no. HoT Link is meant to be on a console. OoT 3D was just to show the graphic capability, and to get people to actually buy the 3DS. To end the HoT's story on the handheld system, over the Wii U would just be outright stupid.

It's my opinion and all, but why would you want the HoT to end on the 3DS over the Wii U (which will have much more people playing it.)?


And where did you hear MM is being remade on the 3DS. Not that I don't believe you, but I've heard from others that one of the Zelda creators said he would rather have MM on the console bc it was meant to be on the console, and that the 3DS would be better suited for a game actually meant for the handheld device (I heard A Link to the Past sequel.)

If I'm just being antagonistic at this point, tell me (politely, of course) to just shut my big, stupid mouth. Seriously, though, I'm not trying to be repetitious or antagonistic. I'm simply sharing my thoughts.

Originally Posted by The Doctor

If nothing else, the HoT deserves it. They killed him off completely in the DT and supposedly the CT too.

The Hero of Time had his adventure - two of them, actually. Then we got a bit of characterization out of him from Twilight Princess; that characterization established and defined him as a tragic hero. His story was told. His character has been established.

As I mentioned earlier, any other story we try to add to the Hero of Time's life will have to be utterly inconsequential and overall not adding much to who the Hero of Time is or what he's recognized for, or else the Hero's Shades and Hyrule Historia will be retconned as false.

However, if the proposed game was designed to be inconsequential and overall not adding much to who the Hero of Time is or what he's recognized for, it would likely feel too much like Majora's Mask - a game that is celebrated for its uniqueness and for having the aforementioned qualities.

So, any new game would not fit into the Hero of Time's currently-established character or the Zelda series' (specifically the Child Timeline's) currently-established flow. That is, of course, unless we ignore all of the above and forcefully shove it into the series with a hammer. I'm sure I've demonstrated why that's something we certainly don't want.

Originally Posted by The Doctor

Plus, it's almost the perfect time for it. They've already remade OoT. They're going to remake MM pretty soon. Both of those are on the 3DS. The engine is already complete. They could finish off the HoT trilogy with a new original game on the 3DS after remaking MM on 3DS as well. It would work out prefectly, plus like I said before, the engine is already done. It just needs a new shape and paintjob to make a new game with it. The development process probably wouldn't take more than 2 years. Maybe about the same as the original MM dev time.

Again, I bring forth the important point that something being doable doesn't mean it ought to be done. I've provided plenty of points for why it ought not be done. Thus, the game being potentially easy to develop doesn't make it worthy of existence from a storytelling standpoint.

---------- Post added at 03:39 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:30 AM ----------

Originally Posted by sumSOTY

And where did you hear MM is being remade on the 3DS. Not that I don't believe you, but I've heard from others that one of the Zelda creators said he would rather have MM on the console bc it was meant to be on the console, and that the 3DS would be better suited for a game actually meant for the handheld device (I heard A Link to the Past sequel.)

I know you weren't asking me, but this might help.

Zelda 3DS: It's Majora's Mask vs. Link to the Past - IGN

Actually, if you just google "Majora's Mask remake", you'll find a bunch of articles all citing the same interview. I haven't seen anything more definite than this, so I'd love to know where you heard / read that they wanted the potential Majora's Mask remake to be on a console and that they were contemplating a sequel for a Link to the Past.

Originally Posted by Devonfayr

Actually, if you just google "Majora's Mask remake", you'll find a bunch of articles all citing the same interview. I haven't seen anything more definite than this, so I'd love to know where you heard / read that they wanted the potential Majora's Mask remake to be on a console and that they were contemplating a sequel for a Link to the Past.

It was just some YouTuber comment saying that Miyamoto would rather have a remake on the console bc it was meant for it. Not a reliable source by any means. But it was one internet post vs another, so I wasn't sure until I googled "Majora's Mask remake."

I would have checked before I posted but I had a frien waiting to pick me up, so I wasn' going to have him wait so I can do my nerd research.

---------- Post added at 02:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:03 PM ----------

Originally Posted by sumSOTY

Thank's

---------- Post added at 09:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:00 PM ----------



No, fu*k no. HoT Link is meant to be on a console. OoT 3D was just to show the graphic capability, and to get people to actually buy the 3DS. To end the HoT's story on the handheld system, over the Wii U would just be outright stupid.

It's my opinion and all, but why would you want the HoT to end on the 3DS over the Wii U (which will have much more people playing it.)?


And where did you hear MM is being remade on the 3DS. Not that I don't believe you, but I've heard from others that one of the Zelda creators said he would rather have MM on the console bc it was meant to be on the console, and that the 3DS would be better suited for a game actually meant for the handheld device (I heard A Link to the Past sequel.)

I should probably reword this post.

I think it's a horrible idea, and in my opinion, Majora's Mask should be on the Wii U over the 3DS. I mean, its cool and all to have a game you grew up with that you played on your ♥♥♥♥ty TV in the basement, on a handheld device now. But its pratically a clone of the old game. Something like is fresh, updated, and gives us something to play with the Wii U other than ZombiU. There really wouldn't be much of a difference between the 3DS and the N64, other than the screen being much smaller and in 3D.

Majora's Mask on the Wii U wouldn't only attract alot of old Zelda fans, but would break the ice for many who are on the border about buying a Wii U or not.

---------- Post added at 02:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:11 PM ----------

Hm. Tried making a youtube link through a word, but I wasn't sure how. Obviously didn't work.


Shazam Zelda Majora's Mask Trailer WII U Zelda Majoras mask remake HD E3 2012 - YouTube

Originally Posted by Devonfayr

But people discussing these things didn't cause Nintendo to make games about them. It's been revealed in articles and interviews that Majora's Mask was merely the result of a personal challenge that Miyamoto issued to Aonuma.

Nintendo's Aonuma: Majora's Mask the result of Miyamoto challenge | Joystiq

These aren't games that Nintendo pops out, saying "Oh, wouldn't it be neat if we addressed THAT topic of fan discussion?" At least, that's obviously not the standard, and that's not what we should expect here.

Oh whoops, I totally forgot to address this! XD Sorry if you felt like I ignored ya!

And, this is actually the exact point I was getting at. Yeah, we didn't cause them to make the game (Twilight Princess kind of being an exception; WW backlash and all), but they still made the game. Even if though they were completely unrelated to whatever the fans were thinking, the games were still made. It's that randomness, that spontaneity, that makes our questions not inconsequential.

Originally Posted by Devonfayr

No. They're just not as concerned with this stuff as you might want to believe. They focus on gameplay, and then, as Aonuma puts it, the timeline placement (and story elements) are sort of an appendix to the gameplay.

Well sure, I don't disagree with that. But again, that also part of the reason why Nintendo is so spontaneous with their stories. Because there is always a hot-heaping amount of potential, we can't really say any sort of game couldn't/wouldn't/shouldn't be made.

Originally Posted by Devonfayr

Still, the original question comes back and stares us in the face: WHY should another Hero of Time game be made? Clearly, it's not all that important from Nintendo's perspective, and I contend that some questions are best left unanswered. So why on earth should we hear more about HoT's story? How could it possibly add positively to the Zelda experience?

I also feel that there are two questions in this thread that are getting mixed into each other: Why should a third HoT game be made, and Why would Nintendo make such a game. They're similar but very different.

For me personally, I see a character that has three ends to three stories, but only two beginnings. Story-wise it bothers me, because something interesting must have happened in order to get that third ending. Other heroes have their beginnings and their ends, putting aside sequel-hooks like riding off into the sunset. Would I not have this opinion if the Hero's Shade never appeared in Twilight Princess? Yes, actually. I was, and still am, quite content with two Hero of Time stories. The edition of him in Twilight Princess is the incentive, the problem, with the tales of the Hero of Time. By adding a third game, it could possibly give the third resolution its missing beginning.

In addition to story elements, I also feel the Hero of Time is one of the more important heroes in Zelda lore. Almost everything he has done has had far-reaching consequences, and many of us are familiar with him and his legends. I do get excited by new legends and new heroes and new everything, but it also means I have to develop new attachments to each hero, and occasionally I don't get attached much at all. I feel distant to a lot of Links. Wheras a new tale with the Hero of Time would give something solid to grasp onto. A very familiar face with a very familiar history and actions. A friend, you could say.

sumSOTY: when using [youtube] tags, just copypasta the random junk after the equal sign in between the tags. {youtube}cyazYYev7Nw{youtube} Like that, but with straight brackets.

Originally Posted by sumSOTY

] To end the HoT's story on the handheld system, over the Wii U would just be outright stupid.

It's my opinion and all, but why would you want the HoT to end on the 3DS over the Wii U (which will have much more people playing it.)?

Because OoT was a great success, for one. And for many younger players, it was the first time they ever played the game. As far as MM3D goes, it only makes sense for it to be on 3DS because it would be the sequel to OoT3D just as the original MM was the sequel to OoT on the same system. In that same light, the story would then be tied more to the 3DS. Also, while a console sequel would be great, it would make more sense for 3DS. For one, the development process would be faster.

And where did you hear MM is being remade on the 3DS? Not that I don't believe you, but I've heard from others that one of the Zelda creators said he would rather have MM on the console bc it was meant to be on the console, and that the 3DS would be better suited for a game actually meant for the handheld device (I heard A Link to the Past sequel.)

Actually, Aonuma mentioned remaking MM on the 3DS just like OoT3D. They even brought it up again when asked, and it was also 3DS. I also don't recall any upper devs making a statement supporting MM remake on a console. For reasons stated before, in additon to Aonuma's statement, MM will be remade for 3DS if ever. There's no question. Actually, I thought that ALttP was mentioned/suggested for console remake.

Originally Posted by Topaz Mutiny

sumSOTY: when using [youtube] tags, just copypasta the random junk after the equal sign in between the tags. {youtube}cyazYYev7Nw{youtube} Like that, but with straight brackets.

Sweet, thank's for the guide.

---------- Post added at 06:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:27 PM ----------

Originally Posted by The Doctor

Because OoT was a great success, for one. And for many younger players, it was the first time they ever played the game. As far as MM3D goes, it only makes sense for it to be on 3DS because it would be the sequel to OoT3D just as the original MM was the sequel to OoT on the same system. In that same light, the story would then be tied more to the 3DS. Also, while a console sequel would be great, it would make more sense for 3DS. For one, the development process would be faster.



Actually, Aonuma mentioned remaking MM on the 3DS just like OoT3D. They even brought it up again when asked, and it was also 3DS. I also don't recall any upper devs making a statement supporting MM remake on a console. For reasons stated before, in additon to Aonuma's statement, MM will be remade for 3DS if ever. There's no question. Actually, I thought that ALttP was mentioned/suggested for console remake.

It makes much more sense to have it on the 3DS, yes. And I can almost gurantee that's what it will come out on. Really, I was spoiled with that fan made MM trailer, and that idea seems amazing to me. MM with the WiiU touch pad, graphics, and everything that can be added to the game with the system with much higher capabilities just sounds... incredible. MM is by far and away my favorite Zelda game, and seeing it on the flat-screen in 1080p would be orgasmic.

They made OoT on the 3DS, so whatever system they used to make the game onto the 3DS could still be used for MM. So forgive me for calling your idea stupid, I was in a rush to leave so I didn't really go over my post after I typed it, and I didn't ponder the idea much either. Had some celebraiting to do elsewhere

Originally Posted by Topaz Mutiny

And, this is actually the exact point I was getting at. Yeah, we didn't cause them to make the game (Twilight Princess kind of being an exception; WW backlash and all), but they still made the game. Even if though they were completely unrelated to whatever the fans were thinking, the games were still made. It's that randomness, that spontaneity, that makes our questions not inconsequential.

No, it's all inconsequential in terms of what they place priority on during the development process. After the move onto the story / timeline-placement phase of the development process, they don't seem to think too long about what questions to address. It just doesn't matter to them as much as we might think (or like to think).

Furthermore, while expanding upon the Hero of Time's story is completely unnecessary and inconsequential in the overall scheme of the Zelda franchise from a development standpoint, it would also be so from a story standpoint. The Zelda series concerns itself mainly with the actual events of each game - with few exceptions. For the most part, Zelda games aren't about just enjoying the journey or learning lessons on the way; they're about a very specific goal, usually "save the world" and "make some lasting impact on it".

The Hero of Time made easily the most lasting impact on the world out of any iteration of Link, except for maybe Skyward Sword's Link. So, he's met his quota for "grand adventures". Later, in Majora's Mask, he met his quota for "a story that really doesn't matter in terms of the Zelda universe but is still neat for its own reasons".

Any additional games would, by necessity, fall into one of those two categories, and because it would star the same old Link we're all familiar with, it would feel too derivative. Too similar. Too repetitive.

Also, saying "Well, they still MIGHT make a game based around what we're discussing out of pure coincidence" is no more relevant or important than me saying "Well they still might NOT make a game based around everything we're discussing". I never said it was impossible, just unlikely.

Originally Posted by Topaz Mutiny

Well sure, I don't disagree with that. But again, that also part of the reason why Nintendo is so spontaneous with their stories. Because there is always a hot-heaping amount of potential, we can't really say any sort of game couldn't/wouldn't/shouldn't be made.

Correction: We can't necessarily argue for why a game COULDN'T be made or WOULDN'T be made, because we can't claim to know absolutely EVERYTHING about Nintendo's processes, but we CAN debate whether or not something deserves to exist or not (in our own humble opinions).

Originally Posted by Topaz Mutiny

I also feel that there are two questions in this thread that are getting mixed into each other: Why should a third HoT game be made, and Why would Nintendo make such a game. They're similar but very different.

I kind of just addressed this. Even from a storytelling standpoint, completely independent of Nintendo's interests, this game doesn't make sense in the grand scheme of the Zelda universe.

Originally Posted by Topaz Mutiny

For me personally, I see a character that has three ends to three stories, but only two beginnings. Story-wise it bothers me, because something interesting must have happened in order to get that third ending. Other heroes have their beginnings and their ends, putting aside sequel-hooks like riding off into the sunset. Would I not have this opinion if the Hero's Shade never appeared in Twilight Princess? Yes, actually. I was, and still am, quite content with two Hero of Time stories. The edition of him in Twilight Princess is the incentive, the problem, with the tales of the Hero of Time. By adding a third game, it could possibly give the third resolution its missing beginning.

His presence in Twilight Princess doesn't necessitate (or even deserve) a closer look at the Hero of Time's life via a new game. We already know what happens: he develops a dissatisfaction with life, and that dissatisfaction remains present in death. We KNOW what his conflict is: he wanted to be remembered as a hero, and he wasn't. This technically began in Ocarina of Time. That's the beginning of this third "story". He did all the heroic stuff BUT wasn't remembered as a hero for it. He alleviated that distress by helping TP's Link learn heroic combat skills. That's the entire third story right there. Case closed. He may not have brought it up until Twilight Princess, but we can quite easily tell where this arc began: back in Ocarina of Time. We don't need a new game to reintroduce that.

If he had said something like, "That old man knew what he was talking about," we could infer that something greater happened. We could infer that there was more that we missed. And we might want to know what it was via a new game.

But there ISN'T anything more. A missing eye? Simply a character design choice to show that the hero had faced hardship. Looks like an undead? Obviously to show that he's super old. Regret that he didn't gain fame as a hero? Done to help fans recognize that he was the Hero of Time. That's it! None of this was done for any purpose other than the sake of characterizing the Hero's Shade WITHIN Twilight Princess and establishing him as an older, battled-hardened version of the Hero of Time. Everything is perfectly fine and complete as it stands.

Originally Posted by Topaz Mutiny

In addition to story elements, I also feel the Hero of Time is one of the more important heroes in Zelda lore. Almost everything he has done has had far-reaching consequences, and many of us are familiar with him and his legends. I do get excited by new legends and new heroes and new everything, but it also means I have to develop new attachments to each hero, and occasionally I don't get attached much at all. I feel distant to a lot of Links. Wheras a new tale with the Hero of Time would give something solid to grasp onto. A very familiar face with a very familiar history and actions. A friend, you could say.

Majora's Mask had no lasting implications. At all. At least, none that have been made explicit enough (or even HINTED at) in any Zelda media ever. Just saying.

Furthermore, the Hero of Time was in two games. So was Wind Waker's Link. The Link from the Oracle Games (and Link's Awakening, unless I'm very much mistaken) had three adventures. The fact that you only latched on to one of these heroes probably just means you liked his games the best or had some other driving factor biasing you toward one of them. Maybe you just haven't played the others. Maybe you played Ocarina of Time / Majora's Mask first.

Regardless, I shouldn't have to go into detail about why personal preference means nothing. The Hero of Time made a lasting impact on the Zelda universe not because of who he was but because of which game he happened to star in. That's no great personal achievement, and it certainly doesn't warrant another game with him as the star.

I would like it in one sense because I liked the HoT from OoT the best of the Links, but at the same time, his story is done. I don't think there's any room left.

TP Link or SS Link though, hell yes.