Support NeoGAF

[BlackTron]

Even the side-story games are just that, side-stories. One is a dream, the other is a parallel world. The story itself is not that important, it's the way it sets up a moment-to-moment tone within the game.

For example in OOT, the story came from when you went down into the Royal Family's Tomb, dodged a bunch of scary redeads, learned a song, and then froze them on the way out. The only real purpose of the written story was to create the context for you to play one.

 

[Darkmakaimura]

Personally, I'm glad there are still video games where we can save the girl. In other words, what is taboo in American games today.

 

[Kataploom]

Yeah, why Sony insist on telling same TLOU story? I mean, post apocaliptic world, people killing each other, same shit all over again.

Well, not quite, it depends on HOW they tell it.

But Nintendo just use characters concept + names. They're not the same each other, they don't do the same each game, you don't have the same goal neither and everything is well within the lore.

I agree that it would be amazing for the characters to vary more regarding other reincarnations though, like this time Link is a rebel guy that doesn't want to listen the elder and get in trouble and Zelda is the actual princess guard that happen to carry the goddess spirit or whatever.

 

[93xfan]

They’ve told a few unique stories. Wither way, it never gets old and always has something fresh about it.

 

[MAX PAYMENT]

If i had to guess, it's because it sells like hot-cakes.

 

[dreamcastluvr]

 

[lughnasadh123]

If you're going to take the time to put a story into your game why half-ass it? Even stranger are the people defending it. Implementing a well written, well voice acted, story isn't going to take away from all the gameplay elements people like.

But since they're cheap and people will by their shit regardless they'll keep on keeping on the same ol' path.

 

[LakeOf9]

If you're going to take the time to put a story into your game why half-ass it? Even stranger are the people defending it. Implementing a well written, well voice acted, story isn't going to take away from all the gameplay elements people like.

But since they're cheap and people will by their shit regardless they'll keep on keeping on the same ol' path.

Because the story is not the point. It’s not a defense, it’s the explanation. OP asked a question, people are answering it.

 

[kunonabi]

I wouldn't say that BOTW/TOTK are the same story as the other games at all, or even the same as each other.

If you reduce it to "Princess needs help, there is some kind of Ganon" then okay, but the actual storytelling process and series of discoveries by the player is very different from past games.

This criticism would apply to something like Twilight Princess, sure, but after BOTW/TOTK it seems like a strange time to suggest Zelda is in the old rut. Far from it.

TotK is very much the same story as botw to the point that lots of npcs just conveniently forget they know Link and the world makes very little allusion to living in a post Calamity world. All the major points of botw's story had to be reused since they recycled the game structure. Really the biggest difference is the memories mainly focus on a shitty retelling of the imprisoning war instead of developing the champions and trying, and failing, to make Zelda likable.

 

[DownLikeBCPowder]

I never really pay much mind to the story in any of the Zelda games, they just kind of exist with certain metrics going on in the background and I love them. I don't play them for detailed plots.

 

[nkarafo]

Because story in videogames is not really important. No reason to spend development time and money for it.

 

[nkarafo]

because the last time they went on telling a different story with Majora's Mask, "fans" were telling them it's shit (even though Majora's Mask is the third-best Zelda).

It wasn't the story that drove off fans, they don't care about the story.

It was because of all the different game mechanics. It felt like a different game. And the time mechanic in particular drove off a lot of people thinking it's a time limit, which is not. Not to mention how you become Deku Link at the start of the game and it takes some time before things get to normal. Majora's Mask is one of those games you have to advance a bit to get you hooked, in a world where most people have a short attention span.

 

[supernova8]

Just watched that Everything is a remix video you linked, amazing video, thanks

 

[Noxxera]

TotK is very much the same story as botw to the point that lots of npcs just conveniently forget they know Link and the world makes very little allusion to living in a post Calamity world. All the major points of botw's story had to be reused since they recycled the game structure. Really the biggest difference is the memories mainly focus on a shitty retelling of the imprisoning war instead of developing the champions and trying, and failing, to make Zelda likable.

Story definitely isnt the same from what I remember haha. Well some guys definitely dont like the Zelda character and if thats the case it speaks for itself.

 

[Hudo]

It wasn't the story that drove of fans, they don't care about the story.

It was because of all the different game mechanics. It felt like a different game. And the time mechanic in particular drove off a lot of people thinking it's a time limit, which is not. Not to mention how you become Deku Link at the start of the game and it takes some time before things get to normal. Majora's Mask is one of those games you have to advance a bit to get you hooked, in a world where most people have a short attention span.

True but the story was more tightly linked (pun intended) to the game mechanics that time around. Much stronger so than what they did with Ocarina of Time, for example.

 

[cartman414]

Because Nintendo, they have a "free pass" if it was any other company they would be heavily criticized.

Nah. Other companies are likely to get dinged for not bringing the gameplay.

 

[YeulEmeralda]

Zelda games have never had a super deep story, it's enough to serve a purpose but i doubt many people play it for that reason. Gannon Zelda & Link are integral to the series the whole part of it been the legend of Zelda, 3 parts of the triforce removing any of them and it kind of stops been a mainline zelda & more of a spinoff game.

If the story is really that important, maybe Zelda isn't the series for you.

I would go further: if story is important Nintendo is not for you.

Which is why I've never owned a Nintendo console or played any of their games.

 

[NanaMiku]

I would go further: if story is important Nintendo is not for you.

Which is why I've never owned a Nintendo console or played any of their games.

Well, at least Nintendo currently have 1 series that are focused on story: Xenoblade
Even the story in Fire Emblem is pretty simple.

Nintendo always focused on gameplay first and story that can relate to the gameplay. Ocarina of Time have time travel story because Miyamoto wanted both young Link and Adult Link in the same game.

This GMTK video is pretty great on explaining how Nintendo operates

 

[Ribi]

$$$

 

[kunonabi]

Story definitely isnt the same from what I remember haha. Well some guys definitely dont like the Zelda character and if thats the case it speaks for itself.

BotW - Link is defeated, master sword is compromised, Zelda makes a big sacrifice to suppress Calamity Ganon seemingly vanishing from Hyrule, Link is awakened after after a long time gap, is provided guidance from an old spirit, needs assistance from the Sheikah to retrain his body to return to full power and is given a high tech device passed down from Zelda to aid his quest. Calamity Ganon has taken over Hyrule castle and Link must, in theory anyway, journey to the 4 regions for aid in taking down Calamity Ganon.

TotK - Link is defeated, master sword is broken, Zelda sacrifices her human form to repair the Master Sword seemingly vanishing from Hyrule. Link awakens after a shorter time gap, is provided guidance from an old spirit, needs assistance from the Zonai to remove the gloom from his body and regain his full power and is given a high tech device passed from Zelda to aid his quest. Ganondorf seemingly makes Hyrule Castle his base and lifts it into the sky and Link must, in theory of course, journey to the 4 regions for aid in taking down Ganondorf.

We start the stories at different points, the memories have a different focus, and i'd argue totk's back story is a whole lot of nothing really, and the finer details are different with a few subversions here and there but the core structure of the plot is pretty much the same.

Zelda's problem is the writing and in botw the random nature of the memories. Botw doesnt allow you to see her arc develop unless you get super lucky and they dropped the ball with the love being the key to her power shtick. In totk, she just sort of stands around in the past doing very little of anything until her transformation outside of being sad and telling people to put their faith in Link.

Zelda is a much better character in just about every other incarnation where she's actually given a spotlight.

 

[Cyborg]

Children don't understand the story, it's all new and cool to them. Grown-ups want new experiences

 

[BbMajor7th]

I always think of it like a saga, retold through different ages and cultures. I actually really like it - it's a genuinely unique take in the gaming sphere and completely eschews the chronological fixation of most modern IP storytelling. I like that it's more ephemeral and poetic and inconsistent. I'd like them to go a bit deeper with it game to game, for sure, but I wouldn't change the concept.

 

[kubricks]

Most of the story we have within our history can essentially be boiled down to the "Hero's Journey".

I see absolutely nothing wrong with Nintendo doing the same on Zelda. They don't need to change the narrative, they just need to improve on the story telling skill.
Changing for the sake of changing or subverting the audience often just ended up a disaster, see most of the Hollywood's attempt in recent years. ;/

 

[yurinka]

Because their fans don't give a shit about getting the same simple story again and again, and keep buying the Mario and Zelda games. As long as they keep selling very well, they'll keep doing it.

 

[Shwing]

At this point, it looks like a self-imposed limitation. How many variations of the hero, the Master Sword, Ganondorf, saving the princess, and all that jazz that we need?

Two of their most interesting games story-wise are Link's Awakening and Majora's Mask, and know what they have in common? Almost nothing of the traditional Zelda lore. I recall playing Twilight Princess and being invested in the story until that cutscene where, surprise, they revealed that Ganon was behind everything again. I just rolled my eyes.

I just don't get it. I know we don't play Zelda games for the story but there's absolutely nothing preventing them from having an engaging story that doesn't repeat the same storyline over and over again. Nintendo loves new mechanics and each Zelda is very distinct from the last one but for some reason that escapes me, they insist on bringing back the same story when it would just be easier to make new lore and characters. Sure, keep Link as the main protagonist but everyone else, especially Zelda and Ganon, don't need to come back. They simply add to the feeling of retread and similarity. We can still have the Zelda elements that we know and love without having the same thing retold to us for the 50th time.

Because that is Nintendo's business model... rinse & repeat (including forcing the consumer to rebuy the same game as many times as possible).

 

[brian0057]

I'm honestly amazed by the amount of people that don't get how Nintendo operates when it comes to game development.
Even more so by the fact that they've explicitely told us as such. Like, multiple times. And in no uncertain terms.
It's truly impressive, not gonna lie.

 

[TheDreadLord]

Zelda is the guy with blond hair and elf ears?

 

[Noxxera]

BotW - Link is defeated, master sword is compromised, Zelda makes a big sacrifice to suppress Calamity Ganon seemingly vanishing from Hyrule, Link is awakened after after a long time gap, is provided guidance from an old spirit, needs assistance from the Sheikah to retrain his body to return to full power and is given a high tech device passed down from Zelda to aid his quest. Calamity Ganon has taken over Hyrule castle and Link must, in theory anyway, journey to the 4 regions for aid in taking down Calamity Ganon.

TotK - Link is defeated, master sword is broken, Zelda sacrifices her human form to repair the Master Sword seemingly vanishing from Hyrule. Link awakens after a shorter time gap, is provided guidance from an old spirit, needs assistance from the Zonai to remove the gloom from his body and regain his full power and is given a high tech device passed from Zelda to aid his quest. Ganondorf seemingly makes Hyrule Castle his base and lifts it into the sky and Link must, in theory of course, journey to the 4 regions for aid in taking down Ganondorf.

We start the stories at different points, the memories have a different focus, and i'd argue totk's back story is a whole lot of nothing really, and the finer details are different with a few subversions here and there but the core structure of the plot is pretty much the same.

Zelda's problem is the writing and in botw the random nature of the memories. Botw doesnt allow you to see her arc develop unless you get super lucky and they dropped the ball with the love being the key to her power shtick. In totk, she just sort of stands around in the past doing very little of anything until her transformation outside of being sad and telling people to put their faith in Link.

Zelda is a much better character in just about every other incarnation where she's actually given a spotlight.

Well havent played the older games in a while so cant really argue wether Zelda was better there or not. But yeah saying Zelda isn't given a spotlight now in ToTK is just baffling.. Literally the whole game is centered around finding her. And we're gonna have to disagree about the storytelling, I think its fine and I enjoyed it. The memories aspect and her arc is laid out in what order to look up the heiroglyphs so I'd say I got a good look at her arc. Missed some cutscenes tho I haven't unlocked yet and dont know where they unlock. I see it refreshing the way its done. Beside the cinematics are lined up in order in the purah pad too so you can see her arc if that's your tea. Anyway if you didnt enjoy the games cause the story was dogshite I'd say just move on, the next games likely will be different. Remember how much shit Wind Waker got when it was first announced for cartoon graphics? This whining you're doing now is literally same thing but this time about Zelda, lol. TLDR: I thought story was solid (not masterclass mind you but thats not my expectation), epic, Zelda VA is good (seems a lot hate the VA). Still havent finished the story completely tho but what I've seen so far is good!

 

[MDX]

At this point, it looks like a self-imposed limitation. How many variations of the hero, the Master Sword, Ganondorf, saving the princess, and all that jazz that we need?

Two of their most interesting games story-wise are Link's Awakening and Majora's Mask, and know what they have in common? Almost nothing of the traditional Zelda lore. I recall playing Twilight Princess and being invested in the story until that cutscene where, surprise, they revealed that Ganon was behind everything again. I just rolled my eyes.

I just don't get it. I know we don't play Zelda games for the story but there's absolutely nothing preventing them from having an engaging story that doesn't repeat the same storyline over and over again. Nintendo loves new mechanics and each Zelda is very distinct from the last one but for some reason that escapes me, they insist on bringing back the same story when it would just be easier to make new lore and characters. Sure, keep Link as the main protagonist but everyone else, especially Zelda and Ganon, don't need to come back. They simply add to the feeling of retread and similarity. We can still have the Zelda elements that we know and love without having the same thing retold to us for the 50th time.

Legend.

This.

An event from the past that can have different versions or accounts depending on who is telling the story. But Nintendo kind of screwed that up when the introduced a timeline. The same way Skyfall ruined the James Bond theory.

 

[kunonabi]

This.

An event from the past that can have different versions or accounts depending on who is telling the story. But Nintendo kind of screwed that up when the introduced a timeline. The same way Skyfall ruined the James Bond theory.

The James bond theory was always nonsense.

 

[justiceiro]

If link's awakening and majora mask is anything to go by, then it's pretty clear why they didn't do that again.

 

[Thirty7ven]

That way the games don’t have to grow with the audience.

 

[Kenpachii]

Nintendo understands to keep the story to a minimum

 

[Andrew Evenstar]

lol always thought Zelda's story was a snooze fest. however the gameplay is pretty great

 

[LordOcidax]

Because it works... Simple..

 

[tr1p1ex]

Never thought story and games mixed well.

1). You have to strike lightning in a bottle twice - great story and great gameplay. tv/movies have enough trouble without adding gameplay.
2). meanwhile fun gameplay makes the story irrelevant.
3). a great story is tough to get thru if the gameplay is 'rote or mediocre or repetitive etc. might as well just watch the tv show on streaming if you are there for story.
4.). the gameplay often elicits different feelings than the story and the pace of either often conflicts with the other.


I think Carmack hit the nail on the head long ago when he said,
“Story in a game is like story in a porn movie, he said. “It's expected to be there, but it's not important.”

 

[_Ex_]

I can't imagine playing any Zelda for the story.

 

[E-Cat]

Because "story" in a Zelda is just a template to slop shit on your plate to pad the game dynamics.

 

[Kamina]

Honestly, Zelda’s story doesn’t need to be that important either, it just needs to be enough to give motivation to go somewhere. The aim is the adventure that happens ‘on the way’.
I never cared so much that the in OoT Deku tree told me to go to Zelda, and Zelda told me to do some other stuff, i just had that something to aim for and the adventure was mine to figure out.

 

[brian0057]

There's absolutely nothing preventing them from having an engaging story

There is. It's called gameplay.
It's inversely proportional to how much focus you put on story.

 

[ResurrectedContrarian]

If link's awakening and majora mask is anything to go by, then it's pretty clear why they didn't do that again.

?

Link's Awakening was surely considered a success. It's very often cited near the top of fan favorite lists too. And the Switch remake even sold a decent amount.

 

[Lethal01]

I'm fine with a simple plot and fun characters, if the premise being generally the same is an issue then i'd have the same issue with every big AAA game.
I'd say Zelda characters are more charming than most though

 

[lughnasadh123]

Because the story is not the point. It’s not a defense, it’s the explanation. OP asked a question, people are answering it.

Singularly no, but the story is part of the overall experience of the Zelda series however half-assed it's been done. Hell even Nintendo considers it important enough to at least put some effort into it. Why not expect better from them?

 

[Comandr]

I’d like to see a game told from all three perspectives. Maybe start as Ganondorf. He’s gerudo man and maybe he has a lot to prove or something to protect. At some point he either acquires or awakens the Tri force of power. Maybe that power corrupts him. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

We switch to Zelda. Her royal life. Perhaps she’s an advisor of some kind. Dealing with the greater issues of the kingdom as an ambassador. But her profound wisdom causes her to second guess herself a lot. Maybe too many times. And when a critical decision is needed she hesitates at the worst possible time.

Finally the players take control of Link. It’s one of his usual outings. Discovering new things, overcoming obstacles despite the odds, and having the courage to take up the blade, the power to stand against adversity, and the wisdom to know when to put that blade down.

He embodies all of these traits, then the goddess comes down and high fives him and they do it.

 

[Dr. Wilkinson]

Honestly, does it matter?

Haven’t heard a single person complaining about the story in TotK. If anything people are praising it and saying it significantly outdoes the story in BotW.

Nintendo develops game concepts first and then the story comes later. Clearly it works for them

 

[cartman414]

I'm honestly amazed by the amount of people that don't get how Nintendo operates when it comes to game development.
Even more so by the fact that they've explicitely told us as such. Like, multiple times. And in no uncertain terms.
It's truly impressive, not gonna lie.

Yeah, really. Can't tell whether it's boomer or zoomer shit.

 

[Heimdall_Xtreme]

How I wish Princess Zelda was the true protagonist of a video game. Or a Spin-Off with Linkle or Marin.

 

[Heimdall_Xtreme]

The better question is why "journalists" accept it, it's because of nostalgia?

I have a better question...

Why the "journalist" seeing the word ZELDA.. They give it 10, without even playing it?

 

[Scotty W]

Even the side-story games are just that, side-stories. One is a dream, the other is a parallel world. The story itself is not that important, it's the way it sets up a moment-to-moment tone within the game.

For example in OOT, the story came from when you went down into the Royal Family's Tomb, dodged a bunch of scary redeads, learned a song, and then froze them on the way out. The only real purpose of the written story was to create the context for you to play one.

Videogames all boil down to complete, defeat and win.

When games try to tell a story that isn’t cdw, they just fail. The story becomes a parallel reality which artificially connects to the game.

 

[Gallard]

Are these stories the same? If you didn't call the heroine "Zelda", and you didn't call the big bad "Ganondorf", the stories could come from entirely different games.

Game A: The world is lost to the oceans. A princess knows not her birthright and sails the sea as the leader of a band of pirates. One day, she comes upon a humble island where a young boy...
Game B: A boy lives in the forest as an outcast due to not having a fairy companion. The Lord of the forest, father of all the forest children bestows upon the boy a fairy and a great mission...
Game C: Since ages long past, the world of shadows and light have remain separated. Now, the worlds collide, as a young village boy is cursed into the form of a wolf...

Seems suitably different to me! Tell me the other game where Zelda (TotK spoilers) turns into a dragon in order to powerup the master sword. I must've missed that one.