Rrrromance?

Originally Posted by Ganonslayer2000

Well since its generally accepted that each temple song had to do with that particular sage one can only assume that the romantic quote with the Serenade of Water had to do more with Link's relationship with Ruto and not Zelda

What did Zelda say about her temple song

i forget

Originally Posted by Shinespark

The problem with a ZeLink relationship in general is this key factor: Zelda rarely has an active involvement in the games. The purpose of Zelda is that she is somehow responsible for the state of affairs, or is deeply immersed in the events currently trying to undo said state of affairs. But her role has almost always been one of discretion. Her impact is tremendous, but her character never is. She is almost more of a guide than anything to Link, giving him scant direction once in a while, but mostly working from the shadows of the game's focus.

This is, in fact, why I believe these games are called the Legend of Zelda. It is because of her actions, and not her presence, that makes the games what they are. This fact on its own would seem to destroy any hope of a Zelda relationship, as the scope of her role almost necessitates her lack of involvement with Link. Of course, this is just my opinion on the matter, but this is how I have always viewed the ZeLink relationship.

Thats Nintendo's fault that they've put Zelda into this hole. Nintendo are also putting these stupid relationships with Midna and with Illia etc, when the culprit is right in front of you, sadly being ignored. Bad attitude by Nintendo. Who cares if shes a sage or whatever. Big deal. The more emphasis on other female characters they put the more that is taken away from Zelda's character. If you accept that this weak character Zelda has is part of what makes Zelda, then your just in denial and not accepting what development she could have and what relationship she could have with Link.

Originally Posted by Ganon the King

Thats Nintendo's fault that they've put Zelda into this hole. Nintendo are also putting these stupid relationships with Midna and with Illia etc, when the culprit is right in front of you, sadly being ignored. Bad attitude by Nintendo. Who cares if shes a sage or whatever. Big deal. The more emphasis on other female characters they put the more that is taken away from Zelda's character. If you accept that this weak character Zelda has is part of what makes Zelda, then your just in denial and not accepting what development she could have and what relationship she could have with Link.

...You do realize that her smallest roles were in LoZ and AoL, the progenitor of all other Zelda games, right? If Zelda is indeed "in a hole" as you suggest, then she hasn't been put there at all, she's been there since the beginning. If anything, she's been steadily climbing her way out.

However, it is that fact that she started "in this hole" that makes me think that that is the purpose of her role in the games. Though you're certainly entitled to your own opinions.

EDIT: 1337th post! Woot!

Originally Posted by Ganon the King

Thats Nintendo's fault that they've put Zelda into this hole. Nintendo are also putting these stupid relationships with Midna and with Illia etc, when the culprit is right in front of you, sadly being ignored. Bad attitude by Nintendo. Who cares if shes a sage or whatever. Big deal. The more emphasis on other female characters they put the more that is taken away from Zelda's character. If you accept that this weak character Zelda has is part of what makes Zelda, then your just in denial and not accepting what development she could have and what relationship she could have with Link.

Tetra would like a word with you

and if zelda is the main female they won't have as much creativity with supporting characters

Originally Posted by Ganon the King

Thats Nintendo's fault that they've put Zelda into this hole. Nintendo are also putting these stupid relationships with Midna and with Illia etc, when the culprit is right in front of you, sadly being ignored. Bad attitude by Nintendo. Who cares if shes a sage or whatever. Big deal. The more emphasis on other female characters they put the more that is taken away from Zelda's character. If you accept that this weak character Zelda has is part of what makes Zelda, then your just in denial and not accepting what development she could have and what relationship she could have with Link.

I think if this next Zelda game portrays Link as a more mature and assertive character that would make for a believable king to rule by Zelda's side I'm all for it. In the case of OOT and TP Link, he is characterized in a way that he is too shy and gentle spoken that makes it hard to believe that he is worthy of someone like Zelda. If OOT or TP Link did hook up with Zelda, he would be more of a trophy royal sex slave for Zelda instead of a king co ruling by Zelda's side IMO.

I don't think Link should be a king, though...it's just too fanfiction-y.
I mean, looking back, TP was pretty fanfiction-y, too, but...ah.

The title of a "king" just...doesn't befit him so well, you know? A king suggests someone regal, loud, ostentatious. Link is more of a kind of vagabond, reserved, humble, etc.

This is just my perception, of course. We're kinda getting off topic. ;p

I agree. the concept of a forest savage or country bumpkin becoming king seems a bit awkward. That's why I think in the case of OOT/TP Link, they fit better in a non royal relationship or with no one IMO. But the new Link on Wii is still debatable I guess.

Yeah, but I doubt they will turn him into some royal ...brat (I was gonna use another word but decided not to :p ). Still to early to tell, huh?

You know what would be kinda cool, though--like, seriously--is if he let loose a little bit on the shy innocence (which was cute, don't get me wrong) and turned a little in to more of a playboy. Not too sleazy, and not the cliché type, but yeah.

I'm for real not joking.

Originally Posted by Shinespark

...You do realize that her smallest roles were in LoZ and AoL, the progenitor of all other Zelda games, right? If Zelda is indeed "in a hole" as you suggest, then she hasn't been put there at all, she's been there since the beginning. If anything, she's been steadily climbing her way out.

However, it is that fact that she started "in this hole" that makes me think that that is the purpose of her role in the games. Though you're certainly entitled to your own opinions.

EDIT: 1337th post! Woot!

Oh yeah, like anyone actually cares about the NES games except for a couple of 40 year olds that played that game for a 1000 hours. DO NOT make comparisons about characters between the 2d and 3d games. The NES zeldas have no character development because they are NES games - doesn't take a genius to figure that out. The fact is, Nintendo need to start getting their character development back on track. Putting all the emphasis on Midna's story in TP was what let the game down IMO - made Ganondorf feel tacky.

Originally Posted by Ganonslayer2000

I think if this next Zelda game portrays Link as a more mature and assertive character that would make for a believable king to rule by Zelda's side I'm all for it. In the case of OOT and TP Link, he is characterized in a way that he is too shy and gentle spoken that makes it hard to believe that he is worthy of someone like Zelda. If OOT or TP Link did hook up with Zelda, he would be more of a trophy royal sex slave for Zelda instead of a king co ruling by Zelda's side IMO.

Oh my god...

Who ever said he has to become King and rule by her side. Ever heard of bittersweet or tragic? Zelda might sacrifice herself at the end of the game in order to defeat the villain... or she might get killed... or some event might happen in the game and Link just leaves at the end because he knows the relationship can't ever work out. That would make it believable and tragic at the same time and make you emotional. Also, Link wouldn't be able to become King anyway.

Originally Posted by Cafe Mocha

Yeah, but I doubt they will turn him into some royal ...brat (I was gonna use another word but decided not to :p ). Still to early to tell, huh?

You know what would be kinda cool, though--like, seriously--is if he let loose a little bit on the shy innocence (which was cute, don't get me wrong) and turned a little in to more of a playboy. Not too sleazy, and not the cliché type, but yeah.

I'm for real not joking.

Cafe you're scaring me
and ganon tetra would still like a word with you

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

Cafe you're scaring me
and ganon tetra would still like a word with you

Oh? Why?

Originally Posted by Ganon the King

Oh my god...

Who ever said he has to become King and rule by her side. Ever heard of bittersweet or tragic? Zelda might sacrifice herself at the end of the game in order to defeat the villain... or she might get killed... or some event might happen in the game and Link just leaves at the end because he knows the relationship can't ever work out. That would make it believable and tragic at the same time and make you emotional. Also, Link wouldn't be able to become King anyway.

Oh yeah I agree with you 100% and your storyline idea on Zelink sounds like a good idea. I'm just going on the theory that if Nintendo wants to please all the rabid Zelinkers who like the fanfic idea of Link being a king, he would have to be characterized more as an assertive well spoken warrior leader instead of the more gentle spoken follower who is very good at following orders like OOT/TP Link for the concept to be believable that's all. But I prefer your bittersweet and tragic idea of Zelink more.

Originally Posted by Ganon the King

Oh yeah, like anyone actually cares about the NES games except for a couple of 40 year olds that played that game for a 1000 hours.

...I'm not even 21 and AoL is one of my favorite Zelda games, so... no. Way to overgeneralize though. Your attempts are most appreciated... in a lulzy sort of way.

DO NOT make comparisons about characters between the 2d and 3d games. The NES zeldas have no character development because they are NES games - doesn't take a genius to figure that out.

Fair enough, but the NES games were perfectly capable of giving backstory. In fact, the backstory in the manual for AoL was quite complex, and is still debated among theorists today as to just what all of it means and/or implies. The simple fact of the matter is that even in these backstories, Zelda's role is kept to a minimum. This leads me to believe that it was more than just the limitations of the system that made her facilitate this role.

The fact is, Nintendo need to start getting their character development back on track. Putting all the emphasis on Midna's story in TP was what let the game down IMO - made Ganondorf feel tacky.

No, the truth is that adding Ganondorf into TP at all is what made it stupid. His addtion to the game totally ruined Zant's character, and, if as you say, Midna's character development really hurt Ganondorf, then it should have been Ganondorf's character that was removed from the game rather than Midna's stinted. It wasn't TP that ruined Ganondorf, it was Ganondorf that ruined TP.

Originally Posted by Shinespark

No, the truth is that adding Ganondorf into TP at all is what made it stupid. His addtion to the game totally ruined Zant's character, and, if as you say, Midna's character development really hurt Ganondorf, then it should have been Ganondorf's character that was removed from the game rather than Midna's stinted. It wasn't TP that ruined Ganondorf, it was Ganondorf that ruined TP.

At least Ganondorf appeared with a backstory an a lot of kickass. I've seen bad guys be there the entire game and lack both. While he was seriously underused, his appearence made sense and he made Zant better.

Not denying that he was a bit tacked on, not fully realised, but he did not ruin TP.

Originally Posted by Darth Alec

At least Ganondorf appeared with a backstory an a lot of kickass. I've seen bad guys be there the entire game and lack both. While he was seriously underused, his appearence made sense and he made Zant better.

lolwut? Made Zant better? Are you f***ing kidding me? Ganondorf RUINED Zant's character. Zant was a deliciously sinister villain that still had some semblance of helping his people take back what was theirs. He was quite capable of standing his ground, and the way he was characterized, certainly should have. Him praising Ganondorf as a god ruined everything that Zant was and had been building up to, leading to his freako death scene. Zant was a far stronger character when he wasn't a pawn of Ganondorf, which, by the way, has been used like three times in the past. It's getting really old now.

Ganondorf was kickass, I'll give you that. I mean, a Ganondorf who fancies himself a god is just epic. But his underuse was his undoing. He was never really developed or realized as the main villain. He was just a way to add on another dungeon and boss fight to the game. He did nothing more for that game. Truth is, Zant is awesome. TP Ganondorf is awesome. Had they been used in their own games, they could have been some of the best Zelda villains ever, but by sticking them in the same game, they ruined both of them.

I think Zant had an awesome plot twist. Everyone playing TP for the first time had a huge "WTF" when the truth was revealed. If anyone noticed, Zant's voice was the same as Ganondorf's until you see him in the Twilight Palace. Zant was built out to be so awesome, and then you realize it was all just Ganon working his puppet.

Originally Posted by Zeldablue777

I think Zant had an awesome plot twist. Everyone playing TP for the first time had a huge "WTF" when the truth was revealed. If anyone noticed, Zant's voice was the same as Ganondorf's until you see him in the Twilight Palace. Zant was built out to be so awesome, and then you realize it was all just Ganon working his puppet.

People say Zant was a psychopath and thought Ganon was a god but you have to realize
He was practically guaranteed the position of twilight king
when he couldn't have it he went insane
and then he meets a big flaming head that says it will grant him great power
it was because he was insane and desperate that he believed ganon was a god
It also makes you rethink midna, if she hadn't become the princess maybe none of this would have happened

Originally Posted by Zeldablue777

I think Zant had an awesome plot twist. Everyone playing TP for the first time had a huge "WTF" when the truth was revealed.

There were two reasons why I went "WTF" when it happened, and neither of them were good. 1. It was totally out of character for Zant to be worshiping Ganondorf as a god. 2. I couldn't even believe that they were using this same plot device of "Ganon's pawn" for like the fourth time.

If anyone noticed, Zant's voice was the same as Ganondorf's until you see him in the Twilight Palace. Zant was built out to be so awesome, and then you realize it was all just Ganon working his puppet.

Why is this a good thing? He was indeed built up to be awesome. He was a great villain. Why is it a good thing that all of this turned out to be just him being Ganondorf's pawn? I don't understand that at all. I think it's terrible that an otherwise awesome villain was just the pawn of someone else.

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

People say Zant was a psychopath and thought Ganon was a god but you have to realize
He was practically guaranteed the position of twilight king
when he couldn't have it he went insane
and then he meets a big flaming head that says it will grant him great power
it was because he was insane and desperate that he believed ganon was a god
It also makes you rethink midna, if she hadn't become the princess maybe none of this would have happened

Zant wouldn't have been insane if it weren't for the inclusion of Ganondorf. All of his actions were brutally efficient, a sign of an intelligent and patient villain, only striking when the moment is opportune. He carried out an evil campaign against Hyrule, but truly believed it was for the good of his people, which it very well might have been.

The only time he went insane was upon his death, the same scene that we learn he's just a pawn. His character was ruined in this one moment. All of that deliciously sinister development was reduced to ashes in a few short moments. The whole momentum of the game was not only destroyed, but completely reversed in that one scene.

Originally Posted by Shinespark

There were two reasons why I went "WTF" when it happened, and neither of them were good. 1. It was totally out of character for Zant to be worshiping Ganondorf as a god. 2. I couldn't even believe that they were using this same plot device of "Ganon's pawn" for like the fourth time.



Why is this a good thing? He was indeed built up to be awesome. He was a great villain. Why is it a good thing that all of this turned out to be just him being Ganondorf's pawn? I don't understand that at all. I think it's terrible that an otherwise awesome villain was just the pawn of someone else.



Zant wouldn't have been insane if it weren't for the inclusion of Ganondorf. All of his actions were brutally efficient, a sign of an intelligent and patient villain, only striking when the moment is opportune. He carried out an evil campaign against Hyrule, but truly believed it was for the good of his people, which it very well might have been.

The only time he went insane was upon his death, the same scene that we learn he's just a pawn. His character was ruined in this one moment. All of that deliciously sinister development was reduced to ashes in a few short moments. The whole momentum of the game was not only destroyed, but completely reversed in that one scene.

Evil villians need servants. even majora had one

he was shrieking and banging his head on the ground before ganon showed up, he's completely sane(sarcasm)

how was the momentum reversed

let's get back on topic please