Could Nintendo change the series?

A while ago, I came across a thread about 'ending the series'. And the more I think about it, I think he may be right. I mean...

Originally Posted by Admiral Black

Timeline arguments...
Crackpot theories...
A lore the size of Texas...

These are all signs of a series that has been going too long. The Zelda series is getting old and stale in it's ways, lacking creative bosses, characters, and lands.

BUT WAIT! There is hope. But it's kind of faint...really faint. In my humblest of opinions, I think the series needs to change. And I don't mean the minor change/nitpicks I've been suggesting from the get-go since I came to this forum, I mean a serious change. A big one.

The biggest change, the one in the catagory that I'm thinking of, would be WindWaker with the sailing and the pirates. Awesome. A shame it came down to the same old scenario at the end (You beat Ganondorf at the end and save Zelda), but it was the first real big leap in the right direction.

So...what? Could Nintendo give a freaking big change to Zelda? Last time they tried (with WW), die-hard fans protested so loud that they actually listened. Holy crap. The series could change to regain the spice that it may or may not be losing.

I mean...Link is a re-incarnation of a Hero, regardless of what time he's in. And fans suggestions that 'HE'S ONLY IN MEDIEVAL TIMES' may be that very thing that's causing it to go down. Maybe.

So...could it severely change? Yeah. But would you guys let it change? I'd be all for it. Would you?

And if it did partake of this massive change, like say a complete change in setting (save for the few core details that make it Zelda), what direction would you set it for? Would you even be for it?

Nintendo is already changing the series. In the last two games, we've had steam engine technology. Just imagine what's next...*shudders*

Originally Posted by Link_I_Gannon

Nintendo is already changing the series. In the last two games, we've had steam engine technology. Just imagine what's next...*shudders*

Why is that such a bad thing? New technology allows for new plot-lines to be explored, after all.

The bad thing is that Link lives in Medieval-like times. Wearing a tunic becomes a girls' thing overtime for one. So, they would either not have Link wear a tunic anymore or he'd be a crossdresser. Also, after the invention of guns, there is almost no use for swords. If they do games that are more based in the future, Link would either still be fighting with a sword against people with guns, or he'd be fighting with guns. The Zelda games are for people who don't like to play First-person shooters, people who are better fighting with a sword.

Originally Posted by Link_I_Gannon

The bad thing is that Link lives in Medieval-like times. Wearing a tunic becomes a girls' thing overtime for one. So, they would either not have Link wear a tunic anymore or he'd be a crossdresser. Also, after the invention of guns, there is almost no use for swords. If they do games that are more based in the future, Link would either still be fighting with a sword against people with guns, or he'd be fighting with guns. The Zelda games are for people who don't like to play First-person shooters, people who are better fighting with a sword.

Well...see, the thing is, with the Hearts system, anything is possible, really. You could say that guns only do four hearts of damage and that swords are better because the enemy isn't wearing armor.

Game balance is a wonderful thing. Just take a look at Devil May Cry...the sword is still the most powerful weapon, but Dante has guns. It could work out like that...I mean, Zelda has always (no matter what game you play) been on the side of 'Fantastic' as opposed to 'Realism'.

EDIT: As for the tunic...he can't wear a different green outfit? I mean, he'd keep the hat because it's one of his defining trademarks, but the tunic could be shortened.

I remember when the "Futuristic Zelda" rumor come by, and almost every fan pissed off.

Well, if is not futuristic, we definetly need a completely new direction for the series. I mean, the whole "pirate" feeling in WW was actually very good and it didn't feel less Zelda.

Majora's Mask took a more technological feel than most games (and I say it because Great Bay Temple and not the milk bar) and, again, it didn't feel less Zelda.

A more steampunk, XIX century feel, in my opinion, is what a game like this need.

Hopefully, one day the hardcore fans are gonna open their minds and accept what Nintendo bring to us.

Majora's Mask took a more technological feel than most games (and I say it because Great Bay Temple and not the milk bar) and, again, it didn't feel less Zelda.

Loved Majora's Mask, I see what you mean. However, I liked Ocarina of Time better. I would still like it if there was this kind of nineteenth century feel to it, as long as they keep guns out of it and leave the bow and arrow. I am mixed about the crossbow (which has kind of made an appearance in the Zelda series).

Originally Posted by Link_I_Gannon

Loved Majora's Mask, I see what you mean. However, I liked Ocarina of Time better. I would still like it if there was this kind of nineteenth century feel to it, as long as they keep guns out of it and leave the bow and arrow. I am mixed about the crossbow (which has kind of made an appearance in the Zelda series).

Is there a PARTICULAR reason that you're saying this? The difference between Guns and the Bow and Arrow in video games is as great as the game makers want it to be. In otherwords, it wouldn't matter. None at all. Heck, the gun could do even less damage than the Bow and Arrow because that's what the designers wanted.

And you realize that in the 19th century, guns were the most dominant weapon, right? So if we put it in the 19th, bow and arrow would be a serious immersion breaker, considering that everyone else would be using guns.

Middle Ages were the 9th-10th century.

EDIT: And all who hath said that Link doesn't belong in the future has clearly not considered the possibilities.



Image very much does not belong to me. It belongs to Tiobolasdoro.

A few things I want to say on this note:

1.) The series seems to have taken a slight plunge, yes. However, the sheer popularity of the game will keep it going until it ceases to remain so. It's all about the money, after all.

2.) There are two new games coming out: one for the DS in '09, and one for the Wii in 2010 (supposedly). These could do well, or they could do bad. Depends on what the developers do. I, personally, am planning on getting both.

3.) Guns is just a BAD IDEA. Now, let me elaborate:

Using guns, it suddenly becomes a game of who can shoot the fastest, rather than who has the prevailing strength, like in sword fights. No more strategy. Rather, you'll be competing for speed. This doesn't fit Zelda at all. No more need for the Master Sword, or any other sword for that matter. "Let's just shoot this blasted monster right out of existence!"

And you were complaining about the monsters being too easy!

4.) I don't think it needs so much a change in the technology, so much as a change in bosses, monsters, difficulty levels, and storyline. There's a bunch of branches to work off of here. All Nintendo has to do is start making the connections. This would clear up a bunch of confusion with the timeline, as well as setting a complete story to play through in order.

We find games like MM and OoT to be fun and amazing games in the series. Why is this? Great plot, great characters, great gameply, as well as originality. These two games have the same "technology" as any other in the series, but they are still wonderful!

5.) I just have to point out that Zelda is set more in medieval times than anything else. All the technology we've seen displays that.

As far as guns go, there's a very severe problem with your reasoning.

Guns would be about speed, well it's the same with the Bow and Arrow...only Guns arn't more powerful than the Bow and Arrow unless the game designer says so. And I doubt he will.

Incidentally, where are the posts on the newest version of the paper I put up?

Yes, but with the introduction of guns in the game, it would become all about gun fights. Therefore, the sword would become useless.

Zelda could try a more massive land. Like the AT Hyrule is said to be. Maybe having MORE strict medevil settings would be better. We haven't seen that since the NES games. I really don't want to see Link in the generic JRPG Steampunk settings a few people want to see.


And why would you even NEED guns in Zelda? Arrows work the exact same way gameplay wise.

I think the Zelda franchise should go in a new direction of more mature themes such as more graphic violence and finally making an adult Link who is not a pure hearted eternal virgin who has no hope of ever getting laid. But I know that will never happen.

Originally Posted by Ganonslayer2000

I think the Zelda franchise should go in a new direction of more mature themes such as more graphic violence and finally making an adult Link who is not a pure hearted eternal virgin who has no hope of ever getting laid. But I know that will never happen.

How is that going to make Zelda better? I mean, where did you get the idea of Link being a pure hearted eternal virgin is a bad thing? Besides, I don't think that Link is hoping to get laid. Not everyone is hoping that in their lives.

Go play GTA, boy!

Yeah! M RATED ZELDA FTW! SEX SEX SEX LOTS OF FAIRY SEX!!! AND DONT FORGET VIOLENCE!!!!!!!!!!:e vil:

No, but i do think Zelda should evolve maturely but through story, with originality, and a darker subtext.
And about the whole time period thing, when you want to improve on something that usually involves risks, so i think it's best if the Zelda series slowly transitions into different time periods, and when i first heard about the Futuristic Zelda rumor i thought it'd be a very interesting idea. I believe it would actually work, and a steampunk style Zelda wouldn't be bad either.

Originally Posted by noah-x

How is that going to make Zelda better? I mean, where did you get the idea of Link being a pure hearted eternal virgin is a bad thing? Besides, I don't think that Link is hoping to get laid. Not everyone is hoping that in their lives.

Go play GTA, boy!

Maybe I worded that wrong. I didn't mean to say that the next Zelda game should have Link having sex with someone. That aspect should be kept vague for the player to decide who Link ends up with. All I'm saying is that Nintendo should ditch the whole adorably shy & angelically polite sweetheart aspect of Link.

He should still be a silent protagonist but with a more manly attitude like Prince of Persia or Assassins Creed and less of a sweet and over polite nice guy who has a fetish for being bossed around by various female NPCs.

Like I said I know that will never happen as squealing Link fangirls would probably start rioting world wide over Link not being this fangirly sexist ideal of an always obedient trophy boyfriend.

I think the Zelda franchise should go in a new direction of more mature themes such as more graphic violence and finally making an adult Link who is not a pure hearted eternal virgin who has no hope of ever getting laid. But I know that will never happen.

Nintendo should ditch the whole adorably shy & angelically polite sweetheart aspect of Link.

I suppose for the sake of your male-dominant masculinity that your so insecure about...I like the way Link is. He's responsible, he's not some pig always thinking about sex, he's not disrespectful towards women or anyone really, and he's happy. I don't see the problem here.

I never said he had to be a pig that treats women bad. I just think him always being an over polite & gullible sweetheart with no motive is annoying and hard to relate to now. It doesn't mean he has to abuse women.

I didn't say anything about him abusing women, I said he would be a disrespectful punk; as well as irresponsible.

Thats just it. I never said that. The Prince of Persia and the guy from Assassins creed were not that way that I can recall. Just because I want Link to be a little more mature instead of this boyishly innocent over polite sweetheart does not equate that I want him to be disrespectful to anyone. IMO Link being this fangirly sexist ideal of an always polite & obedient trophy boyfriend is very offensive and rather disgusting.