Posted by: seanmalstrom | July 3, 2015

Email: Link is “not masculine”

I caught this recent interview between IGN and the director of the Zelda: Four Swords 2 game. If anyone needs another example that a) Nintendo doesn’t understand their own IPs nor their fans and b) Nintendo is obsessed with their “Vision”, here it is:

IGN: I guess I wouldn’t be doing my job if I didn’t express some slight disappointment with that, especially because there is a Zelda outfit Link wears in the game. It just feels like it’s one step closer to giving the Zelda series’ female audience the chance to explore that universe from another perspective.

Shikata: Understood. I understand what you’re saying, and just as general information, we do have a lot of female staff members who are playing this game and enjoying it. It doesn’t seem to be a big issue to them. They still are getting emotional investment in this game. And to be honest, Link isn’t the most masculine of guys in the world, depending on how you want to project yourself into the character.

If they’re already giving players a cutesy wardrobe of dress-up clothes, how hard is it REALLY to add in female characters? Oh, you can sure dress up like a bomb-Link or a Goron, but it would break the expertly crafted storyline (lol) if they allowed you to be a female.

What really takes the cake is Nintendo responding “Link isn’t the most masculine of guys in the world” to why there aren’t women. As if they’re admitting “Link is an effeminate sissy, so it’s pretty much like playing a girl, right?”

I would be zero surprised if playable Zelda shows up in the next mainline Nintendo game, and then Nintendo will expect us to be surprised and impressed. They did the same thing with Peach: it was “too hard” to add her moveset into NSMB U (even though Luigi U had totally different physics….) but she showed up in Super Mario 3D World just fine.


What other perspective could there be? Nintendo already made a Princess Peach game where Peach saves Mario.

The real reason why people want to play Zelda in a Zelda game has nothing to do with ‘her perspective’ but everything to do with more gameplay options. Zelda uses arrows and spells. Adding in Zelda is like adding in the Wizard to Gauntlet or the amazon in Golden Axe.

Nintendo is responding to a crazy person here. What other perspective could a ‘female’ have? Does playing Metroid with Samus somehow make that a different perspective since Samus is a girl and not a guy? These crazy people suffer from a type of political cancer to the head. All they see is politics, and they cannot get away. They probably even politicize their dinner!

One of the big changes with Zelda is who plays Zelda. Girls did not really play Zelda back in the 8-bit and 16-bit generation. Now, girls did play Ocarina of Time and some of the other Zeldas (though I have hear girls, like everyone who thinks Ocarina is the bee’s knees, totally hate Wind Waker. Those who like Wind Waker are probably younger than 20 at the moment).

We can’t get a Zelda where Link becomes a badass with a sword and rips through enemies because Nintendo fears that might alienate the female demographic. This might explain why Link has been so wussified lately. NPCs talk to him about feelings to NPCs and performs ‘puzzles’. In the past, NPCs would give the clue and shut the hell up because they are NPCs and do not matter.

What will Zelda U contain? Probably some girl stuff. By girl stuff, I mean Facebook stuff. Link will probably grow a farm and raise vegetables like farmville. Link will also gather apples and give them to a NPC to make that NPC’s feelings happy.



%d bloggers like this: