“If We Don’t Change We Might Die,” Says Zelda Producer

By Ishaan . June 13, 2013 . 3:00pm

Speaking with Engadget, Zelda producer Eiji Aonuma once again says that Nintendo are looking to shake things up with regard to the series.


“If we don’t change we might die,” Aonuma said. “We need to evolve. Things need to change. Things need to grow.”


Why then, are Nintendo working on a remake of a past Zelda title for the Wii U, instead of looking forward? Aonuma says that it’s so the production team can familiarize itself with what the Wii U hardware. With the next Wii U Zelda game, Aonuma intends to introduce change, as he stated in a Nintendo Direct back in January.


“With regard to… breaking the mold or changing the formula, I certainly hear the thoughts of fans. The impressions of fans that maybe it’s getting a bit stale,” he admits. At the same time, however, Aonuma is also concerned about how much change is too much.


That having been said, changes are coming, he assures. Back in January, Aonuma stated that the next major Zelda title for Wii U would, among other things, feature a non-linear structure.


Read more stories about & on Siliconera.

  • DanteJones

    Honestly, I think a small but positive step would be to have the option to choose Link’s gender (I think I mentioned this in a previous article but I can’t remember).

    • LunarKnite

      I can’t say I agree with this. I would not mind at all if Zelda became playable, or even the main character for once, but I don’t think a gender option for Link is a step forward but rather sideways. Unless they implement a significant change between playing two different Links, than an option for gender is just cosmetic.

      • DanteJones

        Hmm, like having two siblings who share the destiny of “Link”? Doesn’t have to be exactly like this, but kind of how Mana Khemia 2 had the choice between the two protagonists and you would see the different sides of the story unfold depending on who you chose.

        • LunarKnite

          If Nintendo does it smartly and makes it integral, or at least important to the story, then I wouldn’t have a problem with it. The problem comes from them just adding a gender option like they have with most other games, where the gender barely changes anything except for parts of dialogue and appearance. I have not played Mana Khemia 2, so I can’t comment on that, but just an option to choose Link’s gender is not sufficient, there needs to be a substantial reason within the game.

          Edit: I mean, that goes for having a new female, or male, playable/main character as well. Change without reason, without thought is change that’s unneeded.

          • Flandre Scarlet

            I agree and disagree. I agree that change for the sake of change is not the best way to go about breathing life into the series, but if Nintendo were to opt for a second playable character or a female Link option because they want “Link” to still be a link to the gaming world, then more power to them. I have no problem with cosmetic changes like that, especially in this day and age where more and more games are about giving choices to the player.

          • LunarKnite

            That comes off as contrived and not something Nintendo would do unless it again fit within their current view of how the Zelda series should progress. While the change is relatively minor in the scope of all games, I feel Nintendo views it a rather major change within the series and wouldn’t do it without a solid reason.

          • Flandre Scarlet

            In the end, though, neither of us can really tell what Nintendo is feeling or thinking unless they outright say so. They’re looking to shake things up and change, so that could be anything at this point.

            Will wait eagerly to see.

          • DanteJones

            Of course. If Aonuma is that worried about the state of the series, an option like this won’t be enough for the change that they’re looking for, though it could be one of many. Also: thank you for contributing to the discussion, it’s hard to gauge what someone’s opinion is when all they do is downvote. :p

          • LunarKnite

            Right. Well, all we can really do is talk about it and wait and see what Aonuma and Nintendo do with the series. And possibly go up in riot for or against their choices afterwards. =P

          • DanteJones

            If the next game’s setting isn’t in “Grooseland” I say we riot.

        • CirnoLakes

          Aryll! Aryll Aryll! I’ve been saying this for years.

          Aryll is the perfect candidate for a female protagonist in the Legend of Zelda series. I keep wondering if my idea is canonically unsound because I feel like I’ve been the only one shouting Aryll ever since Wind Waker came out.

          I want an actual, canonical, well fleshed out story or stories of Aryll the hero.

    • Crevox

      No… just… no. It’s Link. I don’t see why anyone would want to change that.

      • DanteJones

        With all the different versions of Link, you’re saying Link -has- to be male?

        • Herok♞

          yes, its weird to change established characters genders just because you can.

          • Wolfs_Rain

            What’s wrong with “weird”? The Zelda series has always had a fair amount of weirdness in it, so if the idea of a female link is truly so weird, it certainly wouldn’t be out of place.

          • Herok♞

            well its strange to go one moment a character is male and then the next they are female, like what if they made Zelda male, people wouldn’t have any idea of what to say.

          • Flandre Scarlet

            Giving an option wouldn’t be too jarring. Every single Link and every single Zelda in every game (with rare exception; see the DS games and Zelda 2) is different. There’s literally nothing in the series that says Link has to be a boy, but it’s generally much easier that way since Zelda DOES have to be a girl what with being the physical incarnation of a Goddess and whatnot.

          • DanteJones

            This exactly. And it’s exactly that, an option, so if people don’t like the idea of a female Link or vice versa they can just stick with the other one.

          • John Diamond

            y’know doctor who? it’s like that. someone mentioned making the doctor female, and everyone was all like, hell naw. and why? because like link, the doctor has been well established as a male character and there is absolutely no good reason to change it

          • Herok♞

            well if we are being technical and fix this if its wrong but isn’t link referred to as the hero of legend meaning he would have to be a boy to be a hero. also like I said just giving the option would be pointless because then nothing of value is changed to reflect the differences.

          • CirnoLakes

            If I’m not mistaken, you’re talking about the “spirit of the hero” lore point. Where Link is continually the chosen hero. Where Link is incarnated and chosen by the Goddesses. There appears to be a bloodline aspect to this concept. Though it is a bit confusing.

            The bloodline aspect makes me think it might even be canonically consistent for even Link’s sister Aryll to be the hero. But then again, the lore confuses me a bit on the qualifications for the spirit of the hero. Other than the fact the spirit of the hero has always been incarnated in Link.

            Are there any canonically stated reasons that the spirit of the hero can only be incarnated in a boy Link?

          • Flandre Scarlet

            There are none. Windwaker Link is the strangest of them all, because it can’t be a pure bloodline, as WW is part of the “Hero of Time Fails” timeline, in which Ocarina of Time Link dies in the battle against Ganon.

            The closest anything gets is Skyward Sword, where Demise curses Link and Zelda to always face his neverending anger, even on their descendants. Of course, since WW exists, we know that descendants aren’t just blood related…but once you start talking Zelda timelines things get screwy.

          • CirnoLakes

            Yeah, Zelda canon is a little bit confusing. But the reasoning I would always expect for something “the hero needs to be Link” or “the hero needs to be x” would be the “spirit of the hero” issue.

            But the way the whole spirit of the hero concept sounds, it sounds very possible for someone other than Link to inherit the spirit of the hero. And definitely nothing requiring the hero to be male. It should be very possible for a sister of Link, like Aryll, to have the spirit of the hero.

            I’m going to go with the whole “Link’s sister should be a hero” idea until I get any real lore rebuttal. For people who don’t just want a female Link this seems like the perfect alternative to me.

          • Herok♞

            Link doesn’t always have a sister, that was just one version of him and the triforce of courage is always tied to him.

          • Jelise

            FIrst off: this post contains spoilers for various games. If you don’t want spoiled, don’t read.

            Anyways, just putting my two cents here, but they establish that Wind Waker Link ISN’T the Hero of Time because of how the ship king interacts with him. He says it repeatedly, and the Ganon of that game even mentions it. He’s just a kid who took up with a ship and decided that he couldn’t watch things go on after getting his sister back. He decided to be a hero, but it wasn’t fostered onto him by destiny. If anything, I think this part of the series could have had a change in hero easily and it would still would have made sense because Link in this world is more a ritualistic name if I remember correctly.

            Besides that, I thought Skyward Sword pretty much gave the reason why Link is always male; Zelda is the female; and for the most part, Ganon is the main villain. Zelda and Link, as they were in that game, were cursed with that fate. The entity who would become Ganon pretty much insured that with his dying breath.

            It doesn’t make as much sense when you take into consideration the failed timeline. Unless of course, you say that the Ganon of the failed timeline was the Ganon of OoT. I don’t remember if this is established in game or not, but I remember something about him being sealed off along with Hyrule because the sages couldn’t figure out a way to defeat him without The Hero of Time and the Goddess (Link and Zelda, respectively). If this is true canon, which I’m not sure it is, that means that Zelda and Link, who were cursed to reincarnate with Demise, weren’t able to be reincarnated from the failed timeline as that Ganon was never defeated.

            Anyways, just my two cents about the whole thing.

          • Flandre Scarlet

            Where in the world did you get the idea that a hero has to be a boy? While it’s true that hero is generally used as a masculine word and heroine is used femininely, in the context of ‘The Chosen Hero’ it can be used for either sex. Hero does not inherently mean the person must be male, especially if it’s a system as convoluted and completely random as the Triforce picking someone with great courage.

          • Zenthos

            Does it degrade the game in any way? If anything it adds more options for players. Allow me to get a needle to pop this “I don’t want optional content because it’s “weird” ‘ bubble. “weird” stuff is what would help move the series forward.

          • Herok♞

            the way you phrase it sounds like it would literally be a female link option, that makes no changes other then it being female which makes it pointless in my opinion, which won’t move the game forward at all. if it was only a female link then yes it would move the story forward, but people go crazy when you change links sword hand, imagine changing the gender. Actually I can’t think of any examples where an important established character has changed gender for good or bad, which says alot.

          • CirnoLakes

            I wouldn’t call it pointless.

            But yes, fleshed out gender options are better than the lazy option. There’s a lot to be said of lazy female character writing in the video game industry.

          • CirnoLakes

            At the very least then, Link’s sister Aryll could be a protagonist in the games.

            You either change the protagonist that has always been Link in the Zelda games(aside from those junky CD-i ones) to someone else. Creating an upset in there being a hero other than Link. Link appearing to have some special connection and qualifications to inheriting the spirit of the hero. Could Link’s sister Aryll inherit the spirit of the hero? Is that lore friendly? Surely it would be a controversial move, to have a protagonist hero other than Link.

            It’s either that, or you change Link’s gender.

            Either way, I want a female protagonist. It is time that The Legend of Zelda had some more variety in gender representation.

          • kakikunaninu

            It is possible that all Link are related to each other. Ever heard the concept of reincarnation? Its possible that the newer Link is a reincarnation of the previously dead Link.

            So, it always be a male Link. In reincarnation concept, the appearance, talent, gender is said to remain the same for most of the part.

            Or maybe the spirit of hero is actually Link’s spirit.

          • Linhua

            … I just feel like we’ve come too far to change his gender NOW… I mean, Sammy got away with it because they changed her gender early on and I am SO glad they did because she looks highly nutritious.

            … it’s a little embarrassing to admit though, but if Link WERE a girl… i’d certainly find her attractive.

        • kakikunaninu

          Link have to be male. It is already establish and known that Link is always male character. Or at least what the gamer will expecting when imagining a character named Link.

          Link is a male hylian in green tunic, in a long green Phrygian cap and have long pointed ear. This is the person, physical description that fans known as Link.

          Its kinda a mascot, or trademark of Link.

          Change any of that, make Link a woman/tranny, wear chicken suit or give him a Ronald McDonald hair, it is not Link anymore.

      • CirnoLakes

        Like others have said, there’s already several versions of Link. Why couldn’t one of the incarnations of the hero be female?

        I’m glad that at least some of the people downvoting people who want to play a girl are explaining their reasoning, at least.

        Personally, I don’t want to ruin the lore or anything. But I’d like to be a female hero for a change. There’s not too many “changes” to the Legend of Zelda I’d enjoy more than a little gender representation mix up.

        It all depends on what the most lore friendly way to do that would be. Maybe a female link incarnation? Maybe Link’s sister Aryll? Maybe Zelda herself could be the protagonist? Whatever would fit in with the Zelda universe as the best way to have a female character the hero and save the day rather than a boy who saves the girl.

        • Crevox

          Having a female hero or having Zelda as the protagonist is a GREAT idea.

          Changing Link’s gender just isn’t necessary.

          • CirnoLakes

            Oh, okay then. Well that’s a point I can agree to more.

            I personally want to do whatever can fit in with the lore the best. If Link’s sister could fit into the hero bill without breaking the lore I’d like that even better than a female Link by a long shot.

            Also, it being called the Legend of Zelda, we need a good Zelda game. And not be stuck with the CD-i junk.

            I’m glad we both agree that this sort of thing is a great idea.

          • kakikunaninu

            I am open to the idea Link’s sister be a hero, but is better to do it in form of spin off.

            Cause most of the part fans will expect and want to play as Link in the main Legend of Zelda.

            Kinda like watching Die Hard, the fans expect to watch John McLaine in action,not some other actress named Joan Mc Laine shooting people. John is the mascot of Die Hard, same as Link is the mascot and protagonist in main Legend Of Zelda.

            By naming it a spin off, fans will understand and more willingly to accept the change of main character.

            I am against the idea of female Link. Link already have establish character and have physical description of “this person is Link”. If the protagonist changed to be female, the names have to be changed.

            Like I say before, Link is described as a male Hylian in green tunic, in a long green Phrygian cap and have long pointed ear. Lose any of those feature, the person is not recognized as Link anymore.

            Also, Link is a name, not a title like DragonBorn or the Arisen. Most likely a name used for a guy in Hylian, not girl.

            We do not name a guy Tiffany or name a baby girl Arnold Schwarzenegger, are we?

    • That alone is enough for me, really. c:

    • James Enk

      it a no for me… now having a new female character being playable then yes

    • Totally agree. An option to choose your gender would be great. Why not? Pokemon does it, and SSB Brawl already has a female Link mod that aesthetically works just fine

    • puchinri

      That would be pretty cool, and create something interesting for what it means to be Link. I mean, if not that, then finally just let us play as Zelda at least (even fans are having fantastic ideas about how it would work).

    • JoeSislack

      That isn’t evolution or change. Merely an option. The complaints of being stale or boring would persist if the only thing they introduced was the choice of gender.

      • kakikunaninu

        Agree. Zelda is not a game that deeply emphasize on character and plot, the plot and character is just there to give a guide why are Link out from his village for the adventure, and where is the location Link should explore next.

        Its all about exploring, battling and and solving puzzle.

        Knowing this fact change Link’s gender will not improve anything. Maybe it refreshing for 10 minutes to control a female character, but then it become stale again if the gender is the thing that changed. There will be some backlash to some fans to, which will saying “Hey, this isn’t Link. This is a chick that look like Link, but is not Link”

        So, for a better Zelda, I suggest to improve or innovate the exploring, the battling and the solving puzzle part. Focus on that part as that is the reason why fans playing Zelda in the first place.

        How about exploring on an island, a deep jungle, in a ruin, in old castle, ghost town, on top of a mountain instead of in dungeon. Make different more puzzle than just pushing block around, or finding switch all over the place. Add more weapons (lance, blow-dart, rapier, axe, etc) and more combat animation so the combat do not feel repetitive. Weird unique looking monster that require specific strategy and weapon to be defeated also helps.

        That is what I am thinking should be done, and shouldn’t done to improve Zelda game.

  • Longsun_Zhao

    I think the open world style is over hyped and unnecessary in most games that utilize it, but I do think Zelda would benefit from that feeling of exploration and discovery in a huge way.

    • Wait what

      Wind Waker was pretty much built upon that feeling, what with the giant ocean and all the islands in it. Imagine if a Zelda game had a world like Wind Waker where it was free to explore and discover things in, but with the story locations and dungeons not fixed in a specific order.

      • $36598391

        yea, Nintendo should do a full remake of the Original Legend of Zelda in the style that Link to the Past 2 is getting

  • I don’t envy Aonuma in trying to strike that balance between doing something fresh and keeping that “Zelda” feel. I see a lot of fans clamor for massive changes to the series that take it in lots of different directions (“do a modern Zelda!”, “Make Zelda the hero instead of Link!”, etc.), but I feel like going to far would really make something with that kind of approach Zelda in name only. I trust everyone at Nintendo to figure it out though. I don’t think I’ve ever truly been disappointed with a Zelda game.

  • Longsun_Zhao

    When I played Zelda 1 as a kid, I just wanted to walk around and see things. The excitement lay in walking around looking for the next dungeon, making a map, or just seeing what’s around the corner. I wish Zelda still had that, but it really hasn’t since OoT. Not that newer Zeldas are bad games, but they have a fairly linear formula;that’s what has grown stale.

    • Wait what

      But discovery and making a map are literally two of the major focuses of Wind Waker. Really, this is a perfect game to be remade as the lead-in for a less linear Zelda.

      • Longsun_Zhao

        WW is my favorite Zelda, but an ocean is not the same as a full continent. I know it’s basically just an aesthetic change, but the feeling I get from sailing and the feeling I would get from riding Eponya or taking a train across a huge world is different.

  • I’m wondering what this will mean for the new Zelda game. Change can be good, but it has to be structured change. Just changing things for the sake of changing things doesn’t always lead to evolution. It’s really about how you balance the new with the old and create something that feels fresh as a result.

    I don’t see the basic gameplay changing anytime soon, but perhaps we’ll see innovation in how we interact with the world. Majora’s Mask was basically Ocarina of Time 1.5, but it was really innovative because of the 3 day time limit as well as the mask system. It didn’t feel like a rehash of the first game, but a totally fresh experience.

  • How to change the Legend of Zelda:

    1. Give Link a gun and attach it to his grappling hook.
    2. Make the Master Sword a Gunblade.
    3. Embrace your inner Final Fantasy
    4. And last but not least…unintentionally piss off all of your long time fans because you supposedly went -overboard-.

    All joking aside…
    No matter what they do, no matter what they change, someone is going to be pissed off. The best thing for them to do is make the world open, explorative, and vibrant toss X and Legend of Zelda into a blender and see what you get—I’m sure it will be a marvelous concoction.

    • m r

      Nah i’m pretty picky but ive never been pissed off by a Zelda game. They’re all quality.

      But yeah make it more open world and less linear.

      What if they made a Zelda game that was an MMO? Perhaps they should do the Pokemon MMO first and then apply it to Zelda once they’ve got it down.

  • James Enk

    the Zelda formula works having said that there is nothing perfect so there is always room for improvement on a formula that works also by reading what he is saying i get the feeling that he knows that change for the sake of change will not do so i am exited to see what they are preparing for us

  • randominternetperson

    He’s worried for nothing. Nintendo fans are known to eat up rehashes

    • Shut up!
      …and take my money.

    • We can’t help it. They’re just too addictive to pull away from.

      • CirnoLakes

        Because they’re guaranteed good quality games.

        Unlike lots of other companies, Nintendo isn’t comfortable allowing out a bad product with their name on it. Meaning that if it is from Nintendo, you know the gaming software is good. That the level design is a carefully crafted piece of art. That it isn’t a glitchy mess that doesn’t work.

        When you buy from Nintendo, it just works and it’s just good. How can you not want to keep buying when you have a quality assurance every time?

    • CirnoLakes

      Nintendo fans understand that Nintendo games aren’t really re-hashes at all.

      Someone who isn’t a Nintendo fan and might see Super Paper Mario, and think that it’s “just another cookie cuter Paper Mario game.” In reality, the game was so different as to be uncomfortable for many Paper Mario fans. The game grew on me, and I like it. But at first it was a little bit of a culture shock, too. A bit like moving from Super Mario RPG to an entirely new RPG universe, Paper Mario. In Super Paper Mario, I loved the new gameplay mechanics, but the world felt alien and unlike the other two Paper Mario games.

      People look at the New Super Mario Bros. games and claim they’re the epitome of a rehash nobody wants. In reality, they’re a return to something platform gamers have been demanding and craving for years. New 2D Mario platformers taking the best from Mario games like Super Mario Bros. 3, Super Mario World, and Yoshi’s Island. And adding new gameplay innovations, at that. You may not have played Super Mario Bros. 3 recently and thought “I’d really like to play another game like the classic masterpiece Super Mario Bros. 3. Maybe with all the modern possible gameplay innovations.” But I did, and so did many others. Many of us miss 2D platformers, and Nintendo making them again is a godsend. On the surface, they may appear “lazy” because it is just the same old type of scenario you saw in Super Mario Bros. 3. In reality, that’s because the New Super Mario Bros. is a classic game with a classic mentality. Gameplay first. On the surface, they may look the same and they may look like rehashes. But in reality, these games take all the best from classic 2D Mario platformers, some of the best in the genre, that 2D platforming fans love, and make loads of ingenious innovations with every single game in the franchise.

      New Super Mario Bros. are not a “re-hash”, they are a return to grace for 2D platformers. No worrying too much about story, just good gameplay ideas keeping a great genre of video games alive and well. I hate that so many people look at new Super Mario Bros. and shallowly judge that they’re lazy re-hash, cash in games. When in reality, they’re some of the best games that 2D platformers have to offer from the video game industry today and worthy legacies to games like Super Mario Bros. 3 and Super Mario World. We deserved more 2D platformers today from the people who made them great to begin with. More great 2D platformers from the legends and the masters of the genre themselves. Many people may not have wanted that, many people may no longer have been interested in 2D platformers. I did. And the games are everything I could have dreamt. Completely solid level design that is flawless and shined a perfect polish. Every bit the polish of level design you expect from Nintendo and up with classics like Super Mario Bros. 3. And new, innovative gameplay. The New Super Mario Bros. games are finely tuned works of art that are continuing to show great things can be done with the 2D platformer genre.

      Still keeping in with the Mario example, the 3D Mario games are far, far from re-hashes. No, they’re not radically different enough from Super Mario 64 for some people. But they do their very best with the genre and push it more than pretty much anyone in the industry you’ll find. Not content to just abandon the platformer genre and follow trends, they consistently push the envelope. And they succeed in both innovation and quality gameplay where others have failed. Super Mario Galaxy took basic concepts of gravity in platformers and turned them completely on their head bringing some of the best of the concept of platform gaming and of 3D gaming and thinking together. Super Mario Galaxy is pure innovation, not a rehash at all.

      And that is just in Mario games, I could go into countless other franchises from Nintendo.

      To an outsider looking in, it may seem like Nintendo is this lazy company banking on its past. And nostalgic folks just eating it up. From the inside, Nintendo fans are still going strong and very happy for many very good reasons. We may buy some outdated piece of hardware just to play mostly Nintendo games that “all look the same” to a non-fan. But on the inside, there is this growing library of gameplay first designed, top of the line, consistently good software you can trust to be a well designed product that is worth it. And in a video game industry like this, a guarantee of a finely tuned, high quality product is an assurance worth not only buying a console for, but of the kind of loyalty that Nintendo fans are notorious for. With Nintendo, you never have to gamble on quality.

      We’re not known to eat of re-hashes, we’re known to keep buying games from one of the few companies in the industry that can consistently good video game development companies in the industry that doesn’t let us down. Never having to gamble on whether a game is good or worth it is a special thing you don’t get very often.

  • Miss_Madness

    A fun way to change would be if you could play as Zelda and capitalize on her part in the triforce. Think about it. Link has the triforce of courage, Ganon has Power and Zelda has wisdom.
    I’ve sort of separated them into rpg classes in my mind. Link is the knight, solider and Paladin. Ganon is the berserker/heavy knight/monk. Zelda is the mage/ninja/thief.
    She has a different skill set then Link if you take what you know of her from the games. So it could open up to some interesting game play and story. Heck a game where you get to be all three would be interesting too.

    • Rishtopher

      This, so much of this!

    • Considering how crazy strong she is in Smash Bros. games, it’s almost unfair to not make her playable by this point

    • wahyudil

      than the title will become The Legend of Link

  • Yuriangels

    Words to live by!!!

  • Flandre Scarlet

    Just give us more details on the upcoming Wii U title. I’d like a new title that defines the generation, not a updated re-release of the Wind Waker with more bloom than sea.

  • Brimfyre

    Less handholding sidekick is the only fix Zelda needs. Otherwise SS would have been best Zelda since LttP.

  • Xerain

    Link to the Past actually had some non linear elements in it. It wasn’t exactly intended, but if you were good enough there were many dungeons you could do “early,” such as the lost woods and the town in the Dark World.

    The challenge of going through this content with less heart containers and a weaker sword than intended, followed by the reward of going back and dominating the early content I skipped became one of my favorite parts of the game.

  • MrJechgo

    Need to evolve?

    How about creating the Hylian language (like how Tolkien created the Elven language for his books, how Cameron created the Na’vi language for Avatar and how Marc Okrand and James Doohan created the Klingon language for Star Trek) and have every character speak it instead having constant silent moments during cutscenes?

  • puchinri

    My friend recently griped about the linear structure of LoZ, but I think it actually works well for the series. In context, it’s the backtracking and such, but really, I feel like they do enough to bring a new element to the dungeons by the time you have to really backtrack (even when within the same puzzle/part of the game).

    I guess I can understand how it can get old or tiresome for some people though. I am curious about what changes they’ll do and all, but I’m also a little worried about what elements will be sacrificed.

  • ragingmerifes

    Change, please. Change, Nintendo.
    You can make great games, and you did, but as a fan of good games, and not of Nintendo games, I ask of you to change, because if I wanted the essence of a 1987 game, I would play this 1987 game; try something new, something different, because for a company known as one that innovates, you are not innovating.
    It is hard to change, when traditionality can bring so much money, but please don’t be like an offline EA. Do good new stuff.

    Also, I wanted a Zelda deconstruction.

    • Tom_Phoenix

      Depends on which 1987 game we’re talking about. It’s certainly not the original Legend of Zelda, beacuse the newer Zelda games have been nothing like the original.

      Infact, that’s part of the reason why the series has declined so much; after OoT, they completely threw out the fundamentals of old school Zelda and replaced them with other things. The games became increasingly less about exploration and combat and more about story and puzzle solving. So if anything, Nintendo SHOULD be looking at that 1987 game to figure out where they’ve gone wrong.

      Unfortunately, I don’t see that happening as long as Aonuma is at the head of the series, since he wasn’t a fan of the older games. Heck, even the LttP sequel they’re making seems more “puzzley” than it needs to be.

      • ragingmerifes

        Yeah, the first two ones were more about adventure and less about solving puzzles.
        But when I said “1987 game”, I meant the old formula that is now being used, and not necessarily the first LoZ.
        And I wish they had a Zelda like Zelda II.

    • CirnoLakes

      They’re nothing like an offline EA.

      In fact I feel like Nintendo is one of the few companies that still consistently makes good games with a gameplay first philosophy.

      And I don’t believe that Nintendo games aren’t changing and improving at all. On the contrary, Super Mario Galaxy was a revolution in 3D platform gaming.

      • ragingmerifes

        I think SM64 was a real revolution, while Galaxy was more like another 3D Mario with small planets and puzzle planets, basically.
        And well, games like Call of Duty has gameplay as first philosophy, because stuff like multiplayer is considered part of gameplay. Nintendo, on the other hand, seem to focus more on graphics, seriously, because they hardly change anything between games, adding just better graphics to the same games.

        • CirnoLakes

          As technology has moved forward, the kinds of innovations that labeled Super Mario 64 a revolution are extremely difficult to recreate. Super Mario 64 was a revolution, because it was on the forefront of the new 3D gaming world.

          We aren’t seeing leaps in technology today like moving from 2D gaming to 3D gaming. So of course some innovations may seem less impressive. Super Mario Galaxy is still the most innovative 3D platformer in recent year. If you don’t think that Nintendo is doing something special with 3D platformers right now, I’d like you to point me out who is.

          And not only do you make the claim that Nintendo is “making the same old games”, which you would know isn’t true if you had actually played new Nintendo games. But you think that focuses on graphics above gameplay? You’re pretty much the only person on the planet I can think of who believes such a ridiculous idea. You’re grasping at completely nonsensical straws in order to attempt to justify bias against Nintendo. Did you really just claim that Nintendo cares more about graphics than Activision?

          Oh God, you must not like Nintendo. But you really don’t know anything about Nintendo and if you think that they’re the same old games with better graphics you have not played them at all.

          Please actually understand Nintendo games before giving the company advice. Because you’re giving Nintendo advice based upon your own biases and ignorance.

          • ragingmerifes

            I understand them; I like some of them; I just can’t accept them giving me the same thing over and over for new prices and with new names.
            If you like being and ignorant fan, that is your problem, but it is not my fault or a problem if I have a negative and critical opinion about the company you worship.
            And calm down; say your arguments, please; a text wall made of insults and bragging about I’m having a bias when I am just fairly criticizing the way Nintendo offers me games won’t work.

  • Wake

    I wasn’t really sold with another serious/dark Zelda, but since we’re getting a Wind Waker remake, I’m open to it now. Anyway, here’s what I want for the next Zelda game.

    1. Bring back the sense of adventure. That means having a big open world that we can get lost in. A mixture of the world of Wind Waker, Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword would be amazing.

    2. The joy of unscripted stories. Minecraft, Dragon’s Dogma, Skyrim, Far Cry 3, the great thing about these games is you can experience random things within it’s world. Encountering a creeper. A griffin. A dragon. Scouting an outpost only to have a tiger clear it out for you. Random unscripted events that give the world a sense of being alive.

    3. Voice acting. Link still needs to be a silent protagonist, but any character not named Link should have a voice. Again, this makes the world feel more alive.

    4. Relationships between characters. It’s time for character development to take center stage in a Zelda game. Skyward Sword gave us a glimpse of this and it made the story that much richer.

    5. Another shot at a dark Zelda game. Why? Aesthetic should match the story. Here’s why.

    6. The Fallen Hero Timeline. This story needs to be told. Why did Link fail? They could create something amazing here. War. Betrayals. It’s a timeline wherein you can create a complex story full of intrigue. Also, everybody loves a good tragedy.

    *Posted this a couple of months ago

  • The Zelda franchise is already hewing dangerously close to irrelevancy (if it isn’t already there), so Aonuma better get on that fast. Personally, I think the first step toward reforming the series would be to put someone in charge of it who isn’t Aonuma, but I guess that’s not going to happen. Yet.

    • CirnoLakes

      Except that Skyward Sword is a critically acclaimed game that has sold millions of copies. One of the best selling Wii games ever and one of the best selling games of 2011.

      There’s also nothing at all wrong with Aonuma’s vision.

      • Final Fantasy XIII was also initially praised by mainstream game critics; any franchise that is sufficiently well-established as a respected brand can expect to coast by on good scores from the yes-men game reviewers as long as it isn’t unplayably bad.

        The Zelda series was once considered the forefront of innovation in the action-adventure genre; where Zelda went, other developers followed. For much of the last decade, however, it has increasingly slipped into its own little universe, with each new game slavishly reiterating a rigidly- defined formula with new gimmicks, torn between an obsessive desire to recreate the series’ past triumphs (which I blame fully on Aonuna) and a need to dazzle their audience with novelty so as to distinguish each new formula-hewn game from all the others.

        Meanwhile, the rest of the medium has moved on, and Zelda is still using most of the same gameplay and narrative techniques that were revolutionary in 1998. Other developers no longer turn to the Zelda games for inspiration; now they’re seen not as landmark action adventure games, but as “Zelda games”, a genre unto themselves with no particular relationship to anything else but themselves. It’s still a commercially successful brand, but artistically and mechanicaly, the series has become irrelevant.

        • CirnoLakes

          The difference between Final Fantasy XIII and The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, is that Skyward Sword is still very respected by fans.

          And the gaming industry doesn’t have to turn to Zelda games for inspiration. The games are still extremely high quality. There’s nothing irrelevant about good quality.

          What on earth kind of innovation do you think that The Legend of Zelda needs? One that makes what The Legend of Zelda is doing now is weak by comparison?

  • Richard N

    I always wanted them to put the game in a different setting besides magical fantasy. Like, I like how at first they described Link in Twilight Princess as a “cowboy.” I thought that sounded freaking awesome! Hell, maybe a more modern setting or a steam punk setting. So many possibilities!

    • AaqibRawat

      liking the steam punk idea :)

  • DCBlackbird

    I agree, Zelda as a franchise has plots I consider mediocre and a villain I considered memorable but not really a good villain. That’s why I really dug Skyward Sword’s change of pace, But what this series forte is Music, Characters, Cinematography and Overall gameplay….. but that’s it. Experiment Nintendo, Make link a red head or kill off epona, I’m just spit balling here though :p

    • CirnoLakes

      I hate how many people refuse to play Skyward Sword because they think Ganon is the antagonist. And I have to keep telling them that the villain isn’t Ganon.

      Also, leave poor Epona alone.;_;

      • DCBlackbird

        Ghiraghim was a very smart creative direction his presence was consistent like Zants but his character equally sinister as Ganondorf. Skyward Sword has replaced Ocarina of Time as my favorite…… yes I said it.

  • Kevi Johnson-el

    I would love for them too add abit of Dragon’s dogma and skyrim’s style overworld foes like how you would randomly see a dragon flying an he might fight you or he might keep going an mayyyyyyyybe add voices to everyone besides Link.

  • sandra10

    If the series is really going to evolve, I think they need a new visionary – one who isn’t constrained by the conventional Zelda formula and universe. Because it’s not just the formula that’s getting stale.

    • KingRuff

      Do you even think about what you are saying before you type something? You sound so childish saying that. “If Zelda games want to be good they should take away a man’s job in order to satisfy my selfish desires”. The game doesn’t need to change as much as you and others like you.

      • sandra10

        Do you? Aonuma’s been talking about change for years with very little progress to show for it. So how do you think a series is going to change when the head is so hamstrung on a rigid formula and universe? He’s not the one that’s going to push the series to the heights it can reach and I’m positive the next Zelda games will prove that even more.

        Not to mention he has always been saying that he wants to do something other than Zelda. So let him do something else, they can find a more fitting director to replace him.

        And if anything is childish, it’s how you twisted my words into this: “If Zelda games want to be good…”.

    • AaqibRawat

      the combat in ZSS was beautiful you had to think use your stamina accordingly and use the right angles to do damage with the sword.

      i loved it.

      there was innovation in that game for sure.

  • Jirin

    Change is good so long as the core of what makes the series good is preserved. But recent titles have been focusing on plot more than the core gameplay elements and have way too much handholding.

    Change would be good.

  • Ni

    The only Zelda that I liked was Twilight Princess. If they make another Dark Zelda I would totally buy the game :3

    • CirnoLakes

      And I like my Legend of Zelda light like Wind Waker.

      It’s fine if they make more dark Zelda games. But I don’t think that’s what the Legend of Zelda need be about. I think that Twilight Princess and Wind Waker show a split among fans. Some like dark, some like light. And I don’t think that the majority of fans will ever be truly pleased by either extreme.

      I did like Twilight Princess. I like all Zelda games. I just don’t think that dark is the way to go with Zelda. In fact, if anything, I think there’s too much dark fantasy within the game industry today.

      • Ni

        Nice that you like the light ones but i don’t. i’m not the right person to speak anything about the Zelda games anyway, since I only liked and played Twilight Princess and never had any interest on the others games of the series aside for Majora Mask. If they make a Dark Zelda i’ll play it if not I’ll just ignore the game like I did with the rest of this franchise

        • CirnoLakes

          Why do you need a dark Zelda so much?

          I don’t see how that’s much of an improvement.

          • Ni

            I only like darker story themes, just this simple.

          • CirnoLakes

            I know that anime isn’t always light-hearted, but that doesn’t surprise me a little bit coming from someone with an anime avatar. Most anime, especially the ones I have seen, don’t seem all that “dark”.

            Well, I guess you’re not the right person to talk to. And I’m sorry to say this, but I really hope that Nintendo don’t prioritize catering to your audience. I personally think there are just as many casual fans of Zelda who also prefer light content.

            I don’t mean to be rude or dismissive of your opinions or wants or needs. But we have a clear conflict of interest. And I’d rather you ignore the Legend of Zelda games than see them become focused on dark materials.

            By the way, if you prefer Zelda “dark”, you might like A Link to the Past and Majora’s Mask. Both of those games can be pretty dark. Though I’m not sure what you mean exactly by dark.

            What I do know is that I want to see more games like Wind Waker.

        • AaqibRawat

          ocarina of time has a dark link……

          he is the epitome of coolness

  • canes

    Sometimes we overvalue the changes, sometimes the things are special for keeping the same while the others are not.

  • CirnoLakes

    Most of the people I hear who say the feel like Zelda has gotten stale is that section of the internet who doesn’t like Nintendo or Nintendo franchises.

    For instance, there’s a certain sector of the PC gaming community that loathes Nintendo for being the exact opposite of what they expect and want games to be. Japanese, cute, unrealistic, weak hardware, low graphics and polygon count, and console traditions and genres. I.e., there are PC gamers out there who will insult Zelda games for being re-hashes as long as the game is Zelda and not Half Life. And wouldn’t be buying the new Zelda game as long as it is Zelda, and especially if it doesn’t come out for the PC. A lot of those slights at Zelda being re-hashes are just slights as Nintendo gaming.

    And of course, there’s a certain sector of the PlayStation gaming community that loathes Nintendo for similar reasons. Seeing them as kiddy, graphically inferior, “casual”, and ect. And won’t like Nintendo franchises as long as they’re not Sony franchises.

    Not that that is everyone. But in my personal anecdotal experience, a lot of the people making this criticism haven’t really been Zelda fans to begin with. Kind of like how a lot of people out there who complain that Final Fantasy games star effeminate men rather than masculine men aren’t fans of Final Fantasy to begin with.

    That being said, I do think there’s a little bit of legitimacy to the discussion. I think that The Legend of Zelda has room to experiment that hasn’t been tapped. For one thing, the game is called The Legend of Zelda and is about the stories of Hyrule, for the most part. As long as there is reference to the lore of Zelda and the world she inhabits, it can be the Legend of Zelda. Thus Legend of Zelda games can tell the stories of people other than link and villains other than Ganon.

    In fact one of the most interesting things about Skyward Sword is that the main antagonist isn’t Ganon/Ganodorf. Something that is still overlooked by all of the Legend of Zelda haters out there who still say Legend of Zelda games aren’t interesting because the villain is always Ganon. I still hear this argument even after the release of Skyward Sword and I still hear people say they won’t play Skyward Sword because they don’t want to play a predictable story where they fight Ganon. And I have to tell them that in Skyward Sword Ganon isn’t the villain at all. In fact it is amazing how many people I have to tell that Ganon isn’t the main antagonist of Skyward Sword.

    I think that Nintendo can innovate all they want, but I think that many who don’t like The Legend of Zelda to begin with will refuse to acknowledge it.

    I also fear losing some of the best traditions of The Legend of Zelda. Some mechanical ideas work perfectly and need to stay. If they’re not broke, don’t fix them. For instance, the hookshot is a Legend of Zelda tradition still being used in fascinating ways. Twilight Princess was fascinating with the way they used the hookshot. There’s a basic formula that makes Legend of Zelda games Legend of Zelda games. Things that the fans like and want to continue seeing. Reasons we buy the games to begin with. I don’t want Nintendo to alienate that for the sake of people who complain on the internet but never liked Zelda to begin with. For some people out there, such complaints aren’t a constructive criticism from a fan, but instead an excuse and rationalization for why they’re not a Legend of Zelda fan to begin with.

  • Linhua

    … you can NEVER please EVERYONE. It’s like having the cheat code to infinite money in real life; ‘s just not gonna happen no matter how bad you want it.

    … so whatever happens… I know you guys did what you thought was right for your fans and like any fair and loyal fan… I will try my best to understand the nature of your approach… and I will stand behind you no matter what.

    … but i’m not worried, because you got this.

    … best of luck, Aonuma-san.

    • I want that cheat code… Someone start decyrpting life so I can have this cheat code. I promise I’ll share :D

      • Linhua

        … I can’t let you use that, Star Fox~

  • HPN

    “If we don’t change we might die,” Aonuma said. “We need to evolve. Things need to change. Things need to grow.” — No shit. Why I haven’t liked Zelda since the NES.

    • CirnoLakes

      Huh, that’s a funny opinion. One that I doubt most Zelda fans are going to like. Here’s a controversial opinion of my own that I doubt Zelda fans are going to like much, either.

      The Zelda NES games weren’t that great. It was a great experiment in different genres for Nintendo. And went on to become an amazing video game franchise. But the original Legend of Zelda is overrated by some people. And doesn’t shine as much as many, many other games.

      Crystalis did come out a full four years later, but was a much better game. The Legend of Zelda deserves credit for being a good game and coming out before games like Crystalis. And Crystalis wouldn’t likely exist with The Legend of Zelda. But the improvements it made were vast. Something the Zelda II did not live up to at all. Crystalis wasn’t just an improvement on The Legend of Zelda, but it was leaps and bounds better.

      The Legend of Zelda was good because it was Nintendo, again, branching out into other material and into a new genre. A genre looking inspired by RPGs, which was unexpected from Nintendo. Nintendo wasn’t sword and sorcery RPGs. And it definitely was an influential game. But Zelda II was not so great at all not a worthy evolution at all. And I feel like games in its genre probably would have formed without the original Legend of Zelda. And that’s the most important thing the Legend of Zelda had. It helped establish a great sort of gameplay. But the game itself had loads of gameplay flaws. And Zelda II was only a step backwards from there.

      It was only upon the release of A Link to the Past that The Legend of Zelda truly stepped into greatness. The Legend of Zelda was a good game for its time, being a good early game in the NES library. And leaps and bounds over the Atari library. But A Link to the Past was a masterpiece all around. Completely timeless. A much better Zelda game than even the original. No matter what standard you hold both games to. A Link to the Past, is, in my opinion, the first true masterpiece of the Legend of Zelda franchise. It brought with it, loads of innovation, and vastly superior, flawless gameplay.

      This may seem strange, but yes, even for its time period, the original Legend of Zelda didn’t have the same flawless gameplay as A Link to the Past. There is a poor flow to a lot of the game that was unnecessary, and the game was more like a roguelike than a lot of the best Legend of Zelda games, and not even among the best roguelikes out there. When you look at that game, you really notice how it isn’t the action-adventure genre we see today, but a variant on the roguelike. And even if you wanted some kind of rogue-like-like, the Legend of Zelda wasn’t really the best possible thing out there. Thus majorly cheapening exactly how innovative The Legend of Zelda was. As well, the Legend of Zelda shared some of the worst gameplay flaws present in a lot of NES titles and the Legend of Zelda certainly didn’t set the bar high for comparison with these gameplay flaws.

      People today attack games like Milon’s Secret Castle because such a thing is in vogue. But games like that probably thought these gameplay flaws were okay to be present in their games because of the precedent set by games like The Legend of Zelda. A lot of the navigation and what you’re supposed to do is completely blind in the Legend of Zelda, it is not clear what you are supposed to do in order to progress, and to make things worse, a lot of the ways to progress through the game were completely un-intuitive, and you would need to experiment for countless hours with completely ridiculous and nonsensical ideas to even progress. Like Milon’s Secret Castle, you really needed a guide to truly progress in the game. Which is a design flaw. The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, had no such design flaws. All exploration and progression was wholly intuitive while not being overly obvious or easy.

      Puzzles were both challenging and logically sensible. And nothing was left to random chance. These were gameplay choices that the original Legend of Zelda could have had, but didn’t. And it wasn’t technology preventing them from being able to do that. The Game Boy uses similarly weak hardware comparable to the NES. The NES could have been capable of running something Link’s Awakening flawlessly. But instead of being comparable in terms of gameplay, Link’s Awakening is a much better game than the original Legend of Zelda. Both A Link to the Past and Link’s Awakening are simply better game design, regardless of technology. Sure, the Legend of Zelda had to start somewhere, and the original is by no means a bad video game. But it certainly isn’t the best Legend of Zelda game. When even competitors on the NES like Crystalis were better than the game. I see the original Legend of Zelda as being a beta for a much better video game, A Link to the Past.

      The point of what I am say is, if you’re going to be elitist against new Zelda, kind of like how Gen-one’ers are for Pokemon. I don’t think the best place to start is with the NES titles. If you’re going to be elitist for old Zelda, A Link to the Past is the best place to be. Most people who like old Zelda either like A Link to the Past or the Ocarina of Time. To me, and for many others, the original A Link to the Past is the first time that the Legend of Zelda truly came into grace. And it is still, personally, my favourite Legend of Zelda game. But unlike you, I also heavily respect the new Zelda games. They may not accomplish the same magic for me as the first time I played A Link to the Past. But they are still amazing games.

      tl;dr: If you haven’t liked a Zelda game since the original Legend of Zelda, then you’ve missed out on a better game with better gameplay design, A Link to the Past. And if you think things haven’t grown since then, you’re wrong.

      • HPN

        You know, I think The Legend of Zelda is and has always been garbage. When I say I haven’t liked Zelda since the NES, I’m referring to A Link to the Past. It’s the only Zelda game I’ve ever liked.

        • CirnoLakes

          The Legend of Zelda has never been garbage.

  • Auvers

    Die? Are sales that bad?

    • CirnoLakes

      They’re still in the several million mark, so no.

  • m r

    You can’t really do a bad Zelda game. Zelda isn’t going anywhere.

    The classic formula works great in my opinion. Go to a new area, learn about their problem, go to the dungeon, gain an ability, beat the boss, and go to a new area with the item you unlocked.

    But I’d like to see a more open world Zelda like the very first NES game and Dark Souls where the entire map is open to explore from the start with tons of npcs to find and help all over the place. So you could go and do the dungeons in different orders. This would really mix things up because dungeons would have to be designed to where you could complete them with a variety of different unlocked equipments. It would be cool to be able to explore more and have the game be less linear with more secrets to discover in the world.

    Regardless, I cant wait to see what types of innovations they’ll have for the WiiU Zelda with that second screen aside from just showing your inventory.

  • Aisha Lee

    Personally I feel the Zelda series have been doing this from the very being. Keeping the feel of the game there (the adventure aspect and the sword and shield play) while adding this to the game make it fresh or feel different from the other zelda titles (Like a poster mention the 3 Day setting and Mask System in MM, Boat Sailing in WW, Wolf Link in TP, Train Riding in ST, and switch between land and sky in SS. Not to mention the change of items and guide characters in each game). As for the final being Ganon thing, even though this is true with most of the console games. The handheld ones have been introducing new main villians for awhile now. All and all Nintendo been on point when it came to changing but if I had to with a new zelda game. It would be a sequal to MM focusing more so on the background of the Fiecre Deity, like if link was ever corrupt but thats just my 2 cents

  • Virevolte

    There are lots of places to visit in Zelda’s worlds… but they’re empty. The quests rarely give you a satisfying reward. Nearly all the action takes place in dungeons, that’s a little suffocating.

    Those are my main concerns about this saga.

  • wahyudil

    zelda skyrim would be great …

  • sakusakusakura_nyo

    I loved Twilight Princess and Windwaker but I hated Spirit Tracks.

  • XiaomuArisu

    We need to change.
    But first we need to waste 2 or more years on a remake of a game most people dislikeXD

    • s07195

      I thought most people thought Wind Waker was a good game overall?

      • Laith Rem

        It has the fame of being the most disliked because of the graphics it had when it came out way back on 2003.

        Everyone expected a Zelda with Twilight Princess like graphics since the tech demo sported those. After that people fell in love with the boat and the exploration.

        The most disliked Zelda would be Four Sword Adventures, ironically enough, being a game that tried to change the formula a bit more.

  • Haseyo

    Make Zelda playable. That’ll freshen some things up. She was a swordmaster in TP, ya?


    Rather change too much than too little again. Nintendo wasn’t afraid of taking risks back in the good old days. Just look at the evolution of all their favourite franchises from 8-bit to 16-bit to 3D. You never knew what to expect back in the day. Its time to go back to those days.

  • ChiffonCake

    I’m ok with change and innovation, especially when it comes from Nintendo.

  • Virevolte

    I kind of remember them talking about a multiplayer feature…
    After Mario, Zelda ?

  • Yan Zhao

    I think the only thing Zelda really needs is more exploration. Everyone regards OoT as the best Zelda but I hate the zero exploration, its overworld was a joke. Compard to LTTP, Zelda 1, hell even Zelda 2 and Links Awakening, most new Zeldas has no exploration.

    It would be nice if the game felt more like an adventure again, without linearity but a more open world, finding the dungeons yourselves. Just like Zelda 1, 2, 3 did.

  • grevlinghore

    Zelda should mate with Dark Souls and have a beautiful baby.

    • DCBlackbird

      A tough no nonsense baby

    • Showmeyomoves

      But Dark Souls is already one of Zelda’s babies…


      • PoweredByHentai

        Yay! You’re back!

        • Showmeyomoves

          I never left!

          • PoweredByHentai

            So stop lurking! :P

  • A spiritual successor to the series would be cool, just with a bit more flexibility with exploration and all.

  • Kelohmello

    Hm…. I really liked Skyward Sword, but I suppose my one true issue was that it had too little real exploration. The overworld for example, paled in comparison to Wind Waker, but Wind Waker itself was mostly just sea riddled with islands here and there. I’d like more exploration along the lines of Dark Souls where there’s tons of secret areas with optional bosses and unique game mechanics, and rewards for actually going out of your way.

    Elsewise, I think i’d like more of an emphasis on story. The zelda series hasn’t ever really been strong on that point, but the characters are so famous and people argue over timelines and whatnot all the time, I figure giving more focus to the plot would do it some good, as long as it’s good (and as long as link stays silent!).

  • Pockystix

    the next Zelda game

    you actually play as Zelda

  • pupuzuken

    They should probably have thought of this before making the next two Zelda games a remake and a game with what looks like the exact same overworld as A Link to the Past…

  • Chris Cruz

    I just want a Link with an original personality and actual Dialogue.

    • ShadowDivz

      Hmm….. no.

      • Chris Cruz

        Uhm. Okay. WHY?

        • ShadowDivz

          His charm is that he is a silent hero travels the land helping people.

          • Chris Cruz

            Then at the very least you could give the character a reason for being a mute * goes into a lewis black voice * FOR THE LAST FKIN’ 20 years! Somethin’ like a case of mental trauma or sickness, mannnn!

            ‘His charm’. Tch.

  • Kavyn

    What I thought would be an interesting concept is the idea of a team, where each character has their own weapon and combat style. For example you let Link use his sword, while give you a second character the bow, a third character the boomerang and the fourth the hammer.

    Then in a similar style to Four Swords, you can swap between allies as you explore dungeons, or do co-op play with friends. Whether it be four Links (Green, Red, Blue and Purple), or completely different characters (Link, Zelda, Pipit and Groose) is something I’m not sure about, although I think the latter would be incredibly unique and fun.

    This also allows for the ability to replay dungeons, because the enemies weaknesses would depend on the weapons you use. For example, only the characters with the boomerang or bow has the ability to defeat buzzblobs, while attacking them with the hammer or sword will shock the character and harm them.

  • artemisthemp

    I really wish they would make a Dark Zelda

    • ShadowDivz

      Dark zelda?

      • artemisthemp

        Basically a darker more mature Zelda game.

Video game stories from other sites on the web. These links leave Siliconera.

Siliconera Tests
Siliconera Videos