"Why Can't ______ Be ______?" Discussing The Representation Cliche

When deciding to write a blog, many times the inspiration or even the reason for writing the blog comes from watching a youtube video, or reading some article that makes me feel like commenting on its topic. Today is no exception. I was watching a video on youtube from a Romanian youtuber named veemonro and he was discussing an article written by Ben Kuchera titled "Wait, Why Can't Link Be A Female?"

In that article, Ben is discussing a video done by some PBS guy that talks about video games and he was originally the one that asked why can't Link be a female protagonist. If you want to see his video, click the link.

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

Aside: Yep, that guy wears frames, not glasses. He has perfect vision, or wears contacts, and just decided to wear frames because... reasons.

I refuse to link to Polygon for any reason, especially Ben Kuchera, so if you want to find his article, you'll have to Google it yourselves. He's not deserving of any click revenue and even with Adblock I won't subject myself to his... opinions.

Now, this question of why can't Link be a girl isn't the only instance of this idea that I'm discussing. There are also questions like "Why can't Link be black" or "Why can't Assassin's Creed have a female protagonist" or "Why aren't more fat people heroes?" and so on and so forth.

I don't know if I'm just unlucky, or subconsciously seeking this stuff out, but the sheer volume of times I've seen this subject brought up has caused me to see it as complete cliche. Every time a new game comes out, someone's complaining about the protagonist not being some identifier they want the protagonist to be, and it's more often than not someone who complains about this stuff in every walk of life, not just games.

There has been examination on just how much representation matters to the majority of gamers, or even if being represented would make one feel more like a gamer themselves, and the results seem to indicate that most people really don't care. Speaking for myself, if I'm playing a game with a chosen and developed protagonist, then I try to simply be that protagonist's conscience. I attempt to simply be a guiding force akin to what was called "the spirits" in Final Fantasy VIII's Laguna Dream sequences. If I am playing a game with a character creator, there's a 50/50 chance I'll make a physical representation of myself, depending on how I'm feeling, that will follow my own principles and ideals. But I've talked about this before, so let's move on.

So let's try to answer the question. Why Can't Link Be A Girl?

Answer: Because Nintendo doesn't want him to be. Because the artists designed him as Male. Because the story writers wrote Link as Male. But, the most important reason of all, because Link is an iconic character.

This is what so many people just don't understand. When something is iconic, it means that it is a symbol. Being Iconic means that there is a history behind Link, something that fans have loved for generations, a legacy, a constant portrayal of greatness and appeal. That is the single most important reason why Link isn't/can't be a girl.

There's a tendency among the selfish to disregard history in favour of their own personal feelings or ideology. Most recently we saw this with #CHANGETHECOVER in which non-comic book fans and ideologues complained about a Joker variant cover of a Batgirl comic referencing the much acclaimed comic The Killing Joke in which The Joker shot Barbara Gordon, severing her spine which rendered her helpless, then stripped her naked to take pictures of her body in order to get to her father Commissioner Gordon. The comic implies, but never depicts, that The Joker raped Barbara Gordon and the variant cover is meant to showcase The Joker's history with Batgirl in honour of his 75th Anniversary.

Without trying to go too much into that controversy, the reason I bring it up is because although some of the complaints could be seen as borderline legitimate (the cover doesn't fit the actual issue's theme, but variant covers aren't meant to and you can buy the comic without the cover), most of the complaints center around this idea that the cover is "triggering" and that rape survivors could be traumatized by it, or that a woman is being used for a man's benefit, blah blah blah. Most of these complaints of course being made by people who hardly know that Batman actually has a comic series and isn't just a series of movies starring a forcefully raspy Christian Bale.

Now, the artist that designed that cover decided to ask DC to pull it because he says he didn't intend to offend anyone. If you read his actual statement, you can see the disappointment in his words which leads me to believe that he felt coerced into saying what he did and merely asked for the pull so as to stop the whining, but that's speculation on my part. The point I'm trying to make is that here's a man trying to honour history by creating a provocative cover in honour of one of the most iconic villains to ever be written and his work is slammed by people who care more about themselves than they do about the art, or the history surrounding the art.

Why can't Mario be Asian? Why can't Arno be Arnette? Why can't, why can't, why can't? Because they aren't. That's why.

Do you know why you'll never see Batman crying on the cover of one of his own comics, but you can see Batgirl doing so? Because the risks can be taken with newer or less crucial characters. Making Batman cry on his cover would destroy the fact that Batman went through years of personal torture and training to build up his personal defenses to be the stoic Dark Knight. Batman is an iconic, business driving character for DC Comics. Link is an iconic, business driving character for Nintendo.

Building up years of legacy isn't easy. It requires extremely hard work, dedication, and time. With that time comes association, and generations of people associate Link in the specific ways he's been developed over the years. Not just Link either, and not just a character either. Franchises are associated the same way. Look at what happened when Devil May Cry was handed off to a Western developer and they changed the iconic look and personality of Dante? Yeah, the game was scored well, but received poorly by the majority of the fanbase and sold woefully below Capcom's expectations.

When you ask the people who ask things like "Why Can't Link Be A Girl" why they want that, most of the time the typical answer will be "because it'd be different." So what? Different doesn't mean better, it also doesn't mean good, it just means different. Personally speaking, i consider iconic characters to be something that should be preserved, not altered to suit whims. I also want to know, once again, why is it so hard for people to come up with their own characters that fit the molds they want characters to fit in? Why does it have to be that the big game developers have to change their visions, their art, their designs to suit the whims of people that would likely forget about it once they finished the game, or would be bored of it if it became a trend?

There are many ways to shake up gaming development, but is a cliched request one of them? I don't think so. What do you think?

[Concertoine]

I think TLoZ is in serious need of a shake-up of some kind, but what would probably be a purely aesthetic gender swap doesn't seem like the best way to do it. I guess they could let you choose between a female/male link in one of the games, but like Aonuma said (and myself, to a surprising number of disagrees on that article), the character's gender doesn't matter.

I really like female protagonists but they should only be included by the choice of the dev. I'm not sure why it's usually male journalists wanting female protag's, often saying that girls have a hard time relating to games because they lack the ability to choose their own gender.

I find games that include a variety of characters in different situations the best for helping relate the player to the game. Like Catherine, GTA, Silent Hill 2, even Metal Gear...

[DragonKnight]

I think with the upcoming LoZ game they're trying small ways of shaking it up but it remains to be seen exactly how much and how far it will go. Gender swapping will literally do nothing at all for the series.

Personally I don't care about a protagonist's gender. I find it to be completely irrelevant as a good character is a good character no matter what. Why one would want to design a game around something people are simply born as and just because they think it would do anything significant is beyond me. I mean, what about games about people with massive birth marks on their bodies? Why don't we have protagonists like that? I think the male journalists are calling for it more to make it look like they care when they really don't. I have found that male journalists that complain about such things, also complain about other inconsequential stuff and really just sound like they need to get out of gaming period because their hipster mentality is ruining it for them, causing them to try and ruin it for everyone else.

I like games with multiple characters too. I mean, Suikoden is one of my most favourite franchises, and no one can say that those games are lacking in character types. Though my favourite character in that franchise is, by a wide margin, Georg Prime, even he has a unique quirk in that he's obsessed with Cheesecake.

[Concertoine]

I usually enjoy the games where making a female protagonist isn't done to identify with anyone. To be blunt, i think the gun-toting, badass chick is just an awesome image. Aya brea, Samus, Bayonetta. Also, in persona 3 on the PSP choosing a female protagonist obviously altered the game enormously. I just wish they brought that feature back, though its a lot of work i imagine.

Really there was one game where race actually made a difference to me, and that was Prey which starred a Cherokee protagonist. I thought that was really cool, because they also heavily featured a lot of Native American mysticism into the story and gameplay. That's the one game i can think of where the protagonists heritage made a significant impact on the game.

[DragonKnight]

Speaking of Native characters, I didn't enjoy what they did to Delsin in Second Son. Yeah he's got the skin color, but that's it. I saw the original design idea for Delsin and thought that was really cool but Sucker Punch decided to go for a generic skater look instead and that was disappointing. Which is another aspect of what I'm talking about. If you're going to do a character who isn't "traditional", do it right.

[Godmars290]

Think a better shake up would be a general role change. Meaning since the series is now apparently a recurring event in time, have one where Zelda is the warrior and Link the priest, or one where even Gannon is the hero while one of the other two is cast as the villain.

Though in regards of the complainers, they should just make their own game.

[coolbeans]

Regarding the aside: Jamin (PBS Game/Show guy) does wear glasses but just removes the lenses because of the glare. Keeping them on without lenses is just a signature thing some people may do if they've worn them almost their entire life.

Anyways...

In regards to arguing about the icon of Link, appeal to tradition is kind of a weak argument and tougher to work here since we're talking about a reincarnated character rather than a singular one. While all the current incarnations have been male, the title of Link doesn't seem to have been cemented as such. Similarly, Green Lantern as a title was never established to only be white, yet all Green Lanterns before '92 were white. There's Cloud Atlas levels of change Ninty can work with: where themes, Triforce, etc. perpetually play the same role but gender of key characters can shift (I think for all of them) and settings can change drastically.

Sure, different doesn't inherently mean it'll be totes better just because of that but it's something that I think sounds mildly interesting. To adamantly reject even the very notion of this particular case sounds just as silly as those who're getting worked up about it in favor of the idea. As for all the LOZ's I can currently think of he's:

-been able to shrink in size
-been a youth, in one case with dyed-hair (probably didn't know C++ programming)
-been an adult
-shape-shifted into different species
-become a wall painting

And while some of these exotic ideas have fulfilled gameplay purposes, having an androgynous traditionally-male character become female, or just allow for the option, doesn't seem like anything 'icon-shatteringly' drastic.

[DragonKnight]

You understand that, in regards to Link, the very fact that he's consistently male could also be argued as being a necessary factor in the Legend of the Hero right? It's not, after all, the Legend of the Heroine. Remember, the continuity of Zelda places the characters of Zelda and Link in an inescapable destiny as one is the incarnation of a Goddess (Zelda) and the other is the holder of the Triforce of Courage as chosen by a Goddess (Link).

Now, moving on to your Green Lantern example, you're arguing a character that's part of an organization filled with members of different species, that has multiple representatives from Earth. It's not nearly the same argument when you can have 2 white Green Lanterns and one Black Green Lantern simultaneously. There aren't 2 Heroes in Zelda.

"To adamantly reject even the very notion of this particular case sounds just as silly as those who're getting worked up about it in favor of the idea."

I adamantly reject the idea of altering iconic characters, yes. I always will. I am not, however, opposed to the idea of an LoZ game where Zelda herself is the protagonist and Link is nowhere to be found for example. But the idea of making Link a girl just because, and let's be honest here... that is the only reason to do it, is not something I will ever back. Just like I think making Thor female was the wrong move too, especially when there is a wonderful female hero in the Thor series who is deserving of her own comic, Sif. These characters were designed a specific way, they were successful because of great design and great use. To then suddenly alter their basic nature of these characters is, in my opinion, an insult to their history and the height of pandering.

"-been able to shrink in size
-been a youth, in one case with dyed-hair (probably didn't know C++ programming)
-been an adult
-shape-shifted into different species
-become a wall painting "

Game mechanics all. Are you saying gender is a game mechanic?

"And while some of these exotic ideas have fulfilled gameplay purposes, having an androgynous traditionally-male character become female, or just allow for the option, doesn't seem like anything 'icon-shatteringly' drastic."

But for the fact of the aforementioned lore reasons and history. "Just because" is not a suitable reason to alter an iconic character. Gender isn't a gameplay mechanic either.

[coolbeans]

I understand that it could be argued but that it's, again, still a weak one to make, especially when considering that lore or even our own standard definitions of hero don't always cement hero as being male. With that considered, it's still rooted in appeal to tradition; as if continuously being male (so far) serves as some kind of evidence to assume it can't be changed. That was the whole intention of the Green Lantern parallel (which unsurprisingly went in a totally different direction).

"Remember, the continuity of Zelda places the characters of Zelda and Link in an inescapable destiny as one is the incarnation of a Goddess (Zelda) and the other is the holder of the Triforce of Courage as chosen by a Goddess (Link)."

Right, and said holder doesn't (currently) have a listed gender/race tagged along with it. Which is why the Cloud Atlas-esque shifting hasn't been totally thrown off the table.

Sure, the Zelda protag idea is another fine way to go too. Even if they scrapped FemLink entirely and just went that route then that's cool; it's their choice at the end of the day. The rationality behind "altering Link's basic nature" is really based on the flimsy traditional reasoning. Nintendo's stated that Link is effectively an avatar for the player. I haven't seen them trump up Link's gender as being a central component to him. He's effectively been a stand-in for the player, with the option to have any name the player wishes, yet somehow this is the thing that could insult their history?

"Game mechanics all. Are you saying gender is a game mechanic?"

Link's age can be considered a game mechanic within all of the LoZ games? While not with ALL of them, Ocarina shows it depends upon the context. I'd say the same can be achieved with gender depending upon the context. Heck, Assassin's Creed Liberation used her gender and certain gameplay elements to fluctuate the attitudes of specific people in its gaming world.

"Just because" is also not a suitable reason to keep that specific tradition especially when it's lore/history have been deconstructed to show that the possibility is still there. Heck, LoZ's own "Word of God" (Hyrule Historia) is inconsistent to begin with.

And who's to say "just because" would be the only "real" reason to go for it? Aunoma sounded open to the idea (based on Hyrule Warriors success) and who's to say the writers wouldn't be interested just for it being another thing to mix up the formula?

[DragonKnight]

Uh no, it's not weak. The lore is the core of the series and of the game. It is the single best reason there is. Striving for continuity that continues to be beloved by millions is not an easy thing to accomplish, yet LoZ continues to do it with every game. Why fix what isn't broken when the only reason is because your hands are fidgeting? That's a poor analogy for saying if the only reason is "just because" it's again not a legitimate reason.

As for the Green Lantern, now you're arguing about the human Green Lanterns which is a poor argument. There are female green lanterns, they aren't human, so is the argument now to be made that the only way it counts is if the character is human AND female?

"Right, and said holder doesn't..."

Uh yeah, it actually does. Just look at every incarnation of Link or Zelda. Always male/female. And with Zelda it's even more cemented in the lore as A) After the original princess Zelda died, the then King proclaimed all first born Princesses must be named Zelda and B) Zelda is an incarnation of a Goddess. Meaning female. Link is a consistent reincarnation of a chosen hero. Yes, the Goddess chooses a suitable body, but it's the original hero that is reincarnated. We can further extend the argument to the point of this being a necessity as each new incarnation must possess similar potential, ability, and features to fulfill their destiny.

Next, moving on to the Avatar argument. Yeah, Nintendo said that Link is a stand in character representing you the player, but have you considered that if Nintendo didn't have an actual design intent in mind, a plan to continue an iconic version of their Elven-esque hero, then they'd simply allow for a character creation system? Have you ever played an RPG with a silent protagonist before? All those games are also meant for you to be the guiding personality of the character, but each is designed with a specific intent behind it. Any Suikoden game, Dragon Quest, Hell even Final Fantasy has done this. You don't find it odd that Nintendo would consistently create the same character over and over and yet allegedly expect that their design is totally irrelevant as the player is supposed to be the real star and not Link? Why bother creating a central story based around Link and Zelda then if it's the player's story? Clearly what Nintendo means is that how you progress with the game, how you play out Link's story is up to you. Kinda like Infamous for example.

Moving on to the age as a game mechanic. It was your example, and a poor one. In Ocarina of Time it was a game mechanic, in most other games Link is around the same age. In Wind Waker it was a part of the overall artistic design. Are you now suggesting gender is an artistic design choice as well? Good point about Avelyn, I have to admit, but that leads into my point about the non-iconic characters being suitable for experimentation. Batman will never be made to cry on his cover, it goes against the personality type that's been developed for him. Batgirl however can be made to do so because she's not as iconic as Batman is.

When the fact that gender literally has no impact on the quality of a game is factored in, "just because" is the only possible reason. Aonuma saying he's open to the idea isn't a declaration that he believes he can make a better LoZ game with a female Link, it's him saying "meh, why not, it'd be different." That's just another way of saying "just because" with the addition of "we haven't done it yet" added to the end of it.

[Blacklash93]

"You understand that, in regards to Link, the very fact that he's consistently male could also be argued as being a necessary factor in the Legend of the Hero right? It's not, after all, the Legend of the Heroine. Remember, the continuity of Zelda places the characters of Zelda and Link in an inescapable destiny as one is the incarnation of a Goddess (Zelda) and the other is the holder of the Triforce of Courage as chosen by a Goddess (Link)."

Actually, this destiny involves those who "share the blood of the goddess and the spirit of the hero". Zeldas are a descendant of the the original Zelda in Skyward Sword, who herself was the only explicit reincarnation of the goddess Hylia. On the topic of Link, going into the semantics of the word "hero" is pointless as it varies and often applies to both genders. (Also, Ganon is an incarnation of the hatred of the first demon king, Demise.)

Generally and as far as we know, it's a descendant and the incarnations of a hero and a villain. There's no explicitly-stated gender that is tied to any of the roles. Your argument that this is the "basic nature" of these characters via the established lore does not have substance to support it.

I certainly agree with you that Link being female isn't necessary at all. I mean, we've gone nearly 30 years without it, right? Your argument that Link shouldn't be female ever doesn't hold up beyond subjectivity, however.

[DragonKnight]

@Blacklash93: Your argument about Zelda can be used for Link as well. We're talking reincarnation here fueled by destiny here, not some random person who decides "hey, that's a cool looking sword, let me save this princess I don't know just because." There are, no pun intended, links with these characters. Purposely made to make a central story connect in a deep way.

And have you played A Link To The Past? I ask because in that game, Link is the bloodline descendant of one of the 7 Knights of Hyrule, the former hero of that game's particular universe. They don't show us that knight, but this is part of the established links I'm referring to. Of course, the LoZ continuity is a convoluted mess.

"Your argument that Link shouldn't be female ever doesn't hold up beyond subjectivity, however."

I say Link shouldn't be female because he's an iconic character with a specific design intent put behind him. He's been sold as a he in other incarnations beyond games. He's been a he in toys, in cartoons, and in books. That is the main crux of my argument, the other stuff is just support.

[coolbeans]

"The lore is the core of the series and of the game. It is the single best reason there is. Striving for continuity that continues to be beloved by millions is not an easy thing to accomplish, yet LoZ continues to do it with every game. Why fix what isn't broken when the only reason is because your hands are fidgeting?"

"Striving" is definitely a key word to consider, especially when it's own lore continues to change from game to game. You're making a stand for a continuity in which the parts of its history can and has changed it so often already.

-Oracle of Ages/Seasons and Link's Awakening issues.
-Ganon initially being a pig monster to Ganondorf (doesn't seem like anyone contested that sort of radical change back then)
-Impa's changes
-Even the very timeline itself still gets argued over

The point being that there are several inconsistencies despite this notion that they must follow a set path when it really just sounds like a like fanbase noise to an idea that's just being tossed around, and not something that's being forced against Ninty by the majority of people (I've seen).

"As for the Green Lantern..."

And still going in a different direction. Look: the purpose of the parallel was in regards to the portion of your text regarding the icon of Link. Like the vid brings up, there's a difference between a title and a character. Or, as the vid mentions, "honorific characters" and "single" ones. That's all it serves as being.

"Uh yeah, it actually does. Just look at every incarnation of Link or Zelda. Always male/female."

Again, just because every incarnation of Link has been male doesn't mean such a change is disallowed.

"Link is a consistent reincarnation of a chosen hero. Yes, the Goddess chooses a suitable body, but it's the original hero that is reincarnated"

The Zelda portion does have a solid footing for why she's a woman, so that's fair. In regards to Link, what you're bringing forth still doesn't take away the chance of reincarnation always giving Link a set gender, especially if Ganondorf's reincarnation seems to change into entirely different forms. If it were just plopping the original hero back for another fight then it's strange to see even subtle variations in things like hair color or age.

As far as having a intent design in mind and not (yet) introducing a character creation system, that's just going to end up having a lot of speculation attached to it that could lead to us having different outlooks altogether. I'm not ignorant of what Miyamoto had in mind when thinking up the idea, but as this series is already evidence enough, design intent for either a character or series of characters can be subject to change. "Kinda like Infamous for example." Speaking of bad examples...

[coolbeans]

Part 2

"Are you now suggesting gender is an artistic design choice as well? "

Looking at game aesthetics/design from a broad perspective, I'd take everything that been drawn, made, etc. as an artistic design choice, whether implicit or explicit. But judging by your lead-in to this question, I'm not 100% sure that's what you were trying to ask.

In regards to your iconic characters/experimentation: wouldn't that make your previous idea of a Zelda protag and Link nowhere to be found be just as much of an insult to their history were such a game made?

In regards to the final paragraph, I don't think that's a clear picture of what Aunoma is thinking. He's been open in a Kotaku article about the whole thing with saying "I want him to represent any player, have that possibility. So that's why I don't really know if we need or want to define it so clearly." So more than just because, at least the possibility of gender selection via character creation does seem to align even with what he wants to cater to with the character. Along with consistently being male he's consistently been androgynous as well.

Dat 4000-character limit :(

[Bimkoblerutso]

@Dragonknight

There is a certain hypocrisy behind your main argument. Link should be whatever the devs want the character to be, plain and simple. I agree with you 100% there.

The second you start talking about "iconicism," though, you are essentially subscribing to the same mentality as the feminists: that a character SHOULD be something for reasons beyond the artistic vision of the creators. Link SHOULD be male because that is what WE know him as.

That is a very stifling ideology. Link can literally be whatever the devs want the character to be because they are the source of his genesis in the first place. If they somehow wanted to write a female Link into the "Legend" (and it would be easy, considering that a "Legend" is by definition an unverified account of past events, and legends are often very, very far-removed from their source) then it is their prerogative to do so, just as it is our prerogative to dislike the direction they have gone in. But it is never our prerogative to dictate the direction of an artistic creation based on our personal ideologies.

You either like what an artist has created, or you don't.

[Anthotis]

Link's(among other male character's) gender wouldn't even be an issue, if not for the anti-male rhetoric that seeks to permeate all forms of media.

The same hateful rhetoric that is swallowed and regurgitated by those who claim to be well meaning, when in reality they act(either obliviously or intentionally) as a carrier and a messenger of misandry.

"You either like what an artist has created, or you don't."

And they hate it, simply because it's fronted by a male, and those who hate it for that reason alone mobilize and attack, in an act of sickening hatred.

[Bimkoblerutso]

@Anthotis

I don't know how you took my post to mean that I'm siding with the feminists. I was simply suggesting that DragonKnight's statements about iconicism were unnecessary and slightly hypocritical in the grand scheme of things.

Link is what he is because it is the artistic vision of the developers. What Link "should" be cannot even factor into the equation if it is not the creators contemplating the question. As far as we, the beholders, are concerned, Link should be whatever the developers want him to be.

[Blacklash93]

The series' lore is indeed inconsistent and messy, especially if we're comparing pre- and post-ALttP. However, Skyward Sword is the most up-to-date spin on Zelda history, and the most implicating and far-reaching one, so I used that as an example. But I'd judge that the very fact that the series' lore is so undefined and debatable also leaves the possibility for a female Link in itself.

[Anthotis]

Link doesn't need to become female, because there's nothing wrong with him being male. Therefore, there is no issue here and acting out of misandry and pandering to sick SJWs is not a good thing, and isn't in any way progress.

P.S. DragonKnight. I hope you consider writing for Reaxxion.com

[DragonKnight]

Of course there's something wrong with Link being male. He's not female, that's what's wrong. Didn't you know that being male is always wrong?

P.S. Never heard of that site.

[spritelike]

This put me in mind of a recent argument I had about Batman. The question; why can't Batman be black?
~Because Batman is white
~But people don't care about race in the same way anymore so it wouldn't be a negative thing to make him black
~If people don't care why does it matter if he stays white?
~herp derp representation

Hear the same argument every single year for Doctor Who. When will he be a woman?! *sigh*

[ShaunCameron]

<I also want to know, once again, why is it so hard for people to come up with their own characters that fit the molds they want characters to fit in? Why does it have to be that the big game developers have to change their visions, their art, their designs to suit the whims of people that would likely forget about it once they finished the game?>

Because creating a character requires the discipline, foresight, intelligence, creativity and whatnot that the average person just simply don't have.

They think developers are obligated to represent everybody even if a lot of them weren't the developer's intended target demographic just so they don't feel left out, or discriminated against.

This is what Marxism/Feminism/Socialism ultimately is about in the end. The subjugation of those who can to the mercy of those who cannot. All in the name of "fairness and equality." Catering to the lowest common denominator.

[Stringerbell]

Wha? Socialism has nothing to do with changing the identity of a video game character. Your conflating socialism with some form of totalitarianism. Unless of course you see your local fire department, police, public school system / universities, bridges, roads, libraries, healthcare systems, etc etc as some tyrannical entities of subjugation. In that case, I dont know what to tell you.

I mean 'The subjugation of those who can to the mercy of those who cannot." I can copy and paste nearly any political ideology with that myopic definition of yours.

[ShaunCameron]

How am I conflating socialism with totalitarianism? Judging by its past and present track record, socialism and totalitarianism goes hand in hand not to mention has a way of stagnating everything it touches.

AH YES! Every leftist's favorite go-to talking point when defending socialism. Those things are infrastructures needed to maintain a civil society independent of political/economic/social model. And they just happen to be funded by the very same people you love to hate. The wealthy. The bourgeoisie. The capitalists (hoarders). The best and brightest via income, business and property taxes. Built and maintained by the workers on their own accord on the terms they and their employers agreed to.

Actually socialism has something to do with changing the identity of a video game character when its producer did it to avoid any accusations of discrimination and publicly shamed because what s/he intended conflicts with the sensibilities of an audience s/he wasn't even talking to in the first place. It's called the loss of individual freedom.

Sure you can. Is there another political ideology that ever advocated discrimination against the individual in favor of the collective in the name of "fairness and equality?"

[SilentNegotiator]

"Wha? Socialism has nothing to do with changing the identity of a video game character"

You don't know enough about socialism, then. Creating pointless social dissent is a large part of implementing socialism. It's called "critical theory".

You create a big stink about things that are non-issue like the "sexist" existence of women making 75 on the dollar for the "same" work (completely different fields and positions being the "same" work, apparently - Men work an entire 8 hours more per week on average, but that doesn't count for some reason), use it as an excuse to legislate more "equality" (not equality of opportunity; that is to be actively discouraged), and create "accepting" political groups (so long as you agree with them), that actively try to make others look discriminatory, to get voted for.

And nobody thinks that things like roads are "socialism". Such things have always been handled mainly by government/taxes as far back as when there were monarchys. That's such a ridiculous trope of a retort.

[Stringerbell]

Okay...

'judging by its past and present track record, socialism and totalitarianism goes hand in hand not to mention has a way of stagnating everything it touches.'

See France, the UK, Scandinavia, Australia, New Zealand, France, Canada, Denmark, South Korea, Japan, Belgium, Holland, Turkey. All horrible ruined by implementing socialist policies...

'Those things are infrastructures needed to maintain a civil society independent of political/economic/social model. And they just happen to be funded by the very same people you love to hate.'

I dont hate anyone, haven't alluded to any disdain. Just so you know I help to fund my roads too, because I pay my taxes. Cool how that works.

'Built and maintained by the workers on their own accord on the terms they and their employers agreed to.'

For private institutions sure, but not public ones. Those have democratic accountability- not shareholders.

@SilentNegotiator

'And nobody thinks that things like roads are "socialism".

Well its an inconvenient truth that they are sorry. Either an institution is public or its private.

'Such things have always been handled mainly by government/taxes as far back as when there were monarchys. That's such a ridiculous trope of a retort.'

Really? The Kings of Europe had kindergarten for the kiddies? They gave their subjects universal healthcare too? I must have missed all of this- whats your source?

'You create a big stink about things that are non-issue like the "sexist existence of women..."

I haven't at all defended or even touched upon feminism. You might as well guess what I had for dinner last night while you're at it. You see I really dont care about feminism- at all.

This is actually my main gripe with all this Game Gate stuff. I can read an article by Dragon Knight and generally agree with his spiel. He's making some valid points.

But in comes someone else piggybacking off his ideas but injecting a ton of hyperbole. Disagree with it and all of a sudden you
'hate the rich' and are some sort of a 'leftist feminist etc etc.' No- nonsense is nonsense and just because its part of the counter doesent mean it should get a free pass and hijack the topic at hand.

Kudos to both of you though for at least not dropping the 'oh no he didn't' moniker of a SJW. It would have ruined my weekend!

[SilentNegotiator]

"I haven't at all defended or even touched upon feminism"

And I didn't in the slightest suggest that you had. I pointed out an example of the topic at hand (that is, the comment that we are replying to). Intelligent discussion includes not entirely ignoring context.

[Stringerbell]

@Silent

Just see a reply and the word 'you' and I'm thinking that retort is directed towards me. Oh well, no harm no foul.

[SilentNegotiator]

Oh, I see. I guess I could have used better wording.

[Blacklash93]

Is there really any constructive point to crying marxism/socialism/communism every time a topic like this comes up? It's a platitude as old and redundant as feminists crying patriarchy. It's just tangential noise.

[rainslacker]

Given your corollary to Marxism(et. al) wouldn't capitalism win out in the end though? The market would speak their approval or disapproval of these changes in their media. If it's widely accepted, and the groups asking for these changes buy it enough to make it a viable market, then they will get their female game characters in droves. If they're just being all blustery for whatever reason to force representative equality, then it'll likely fail in the market, and they'll have to keep complaining since publishers care more about money than they do about vaguely defined social issues.

This may even blow some people's mind...but it's possible that there is more than one market out there that publishers/devs could cater to. Crazy I know.

I honestly don't think that those trying to get these changes made would make up enough of a market to really make serious changes. Even if games had more representation of different groups, it doesn't mean that that representation is actually beneficial, and lets be fair here, the vast majority of game characters aren't really that compelling. If a game is praised highly as being representative, yet is lacking as a game, is that a good thing just because it represents?

[SilentNegotiator]

"Given your corollary to Marxism(et. al) wouldn't capitalism win out in the end though? The market would speak their approval or disapproval of these changes in their media"

Except that the media and governments are controlled by rather small groups that do things under the noses of people too busy having lives to retaliate.

[SilentNegotiator]

Would we even notice the difference if Link was gender swapped? Not exactly a particularly masculine character.

If I didn't know better, you could fool me into believing that many incarnations of Link are female.

[rainslacker]

Link is rather elfish in appearance. I wouldn't call Legolas from LOTR particularly masculine, but he was undeniably male, and did kick some ass...more likely because he was a trained warrior, and not because he was a male.

Anyhow, given that Link is rather androgynous, does it even matter if he's made a female? What exactly would be emphasized to make him a her, and would that change be truly representative?

[SilentNegotiator]

https://heyckm.files.wordpr...
I wouldn't call this "undeniably male", though.

"Anyhow, given that Link is rather androgynous, does it even matter if he's made a female?"

That's what I'm saying.

[Blacklash93]

I don't care deeply if Link is ever female at one point or not, but I wouldn't be opposed to it (especially as just an option) if Nintendo thought it was a neat idea. I know the folks at Tecmo entertained the idea, and they drew full concept artwork of it for Hyrule Warriors. They do love the women. :P

Anyway, I don't get the idea the Link should be male for the sake of unofficial tradition for the same reason I don't get the idea that Link should be female for the the sake of subverting tradition. It's too subjective and mileage-may-vary to feel too strongly about. I especially don't get those who think either course of action would necessarily be a major offense.

As I said, no need to feel too strongly about it. Even if the main player character isn't female, anyone who thinks Zelda lacks overall female "representation" clearly hasn't played Hyrule Warriors where the entire playable cast is female by a very considerable majority. They also haven't played the mainline games enough to appreciate cool characters like Midna and Impa. Actually, a lot of such critics probably haven't played them. :P

[LightDiego]

Soon, the SJW media will ask for a reboot of all the gaming series which have a male as a protagonist.

What about playing with Link as a male (like always happened since the beginning) AND play with Sheik, that is an awesome female character?

Articles like this always destroy the SJW with arguments and facts, it's really funny how they ignore that, lol.

[sweetSWAGGER]

So much I want to say, but I'm pressed for time so I'll just list my points in an easy-to-digest questionnaire:

To anyone who asks why can't Link be Female? please answer the following questions:

Link isn't really a character, he's a blank slate, a role for the player to fill. How do you get a strong, well-written female character out of LINK, a silent, nearly characterless protagonist who's meant to represent/reflect whoever's currently controlling him?

-I can understand wanting more INTERESTING and unique characters in video games, but, taking what I just said into account, is this the right game for that? What amount of difference would it make if the character merely sounded like a woman? How many people would even care?

-what does changing the character's gender change about the game besides the characters grunts, and some pronouns of some dialogue boxes?

-if the answer to the last question is "encourage more women to play games", then that raises even more questions...

-one, how do you even know more women will taken interest, do you honestly believe it's because the main character simply has lady parts? Isn't that a tad unrealistic?

-two, so more women will suddenly start spending hundreds of dollars on gaming consoles to play hardcore video games simply because they're being represented more? You don't think difficulty, pricing, or convenience play a part in that?

-three, what evidence is there to suggest that more women will begin to take interest in a male-dominated space just they are being pandered to through marketing/representation?

-According to Christina H Summers, demanding a space to change through intimidation/fear so that more women will take interest (thus evening up the gender gap) just isn't healthy or productive. Thoughts?

-of all the people who complain about representation towards a game, how many of the complainers would actually buy it if it did what they wanted it to?

-on the topic of representation, how many gamers actually care about being represented? You could argue that the companies pander a lot to white, straight males, but are gamers TELLING them to do that, or is that just big companies trying to play it safe?

-do you honestly believe that a large enough percentage of gamers buy games because of who the main character is? (An exception can be made for an established character/series, obviously), but who do you mostly see making a bigger stink over who's on the box art of a new game: gamers or publishers?

-isn't the heavy-handed push for representation just scaring developers into doing it, not because they want to represent, but because they don't want be perceived as sexist/racist/anti-progressive /discriminatory?

-Is that healthy for game development?

-isn't gaming already arguably diverse? And isn't it only inevitable that it'll become more diverse naturally?

-shouldn't you just be supporting the growing diversity by signal-boosting, praising, buying, and DEVELOPING games that feature diverse and interesting female characters instead of imposing some obligatory checklist on others?

-will all the accusations, intimidation, us-verses-them mentality and fear-mongering really do any good for women/feminism in gaming?

-isn't link going to be wearing a skirt anyway?

[DragonKnight]

Wow. +Bubbles and...

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

Excellent comment.

[coolbeans]

Looks more like a Gish Gallop rather than an "easy-to-digest questionnaire," and it's no surprise to see which kind of people will salute that tactic when it just so happens to work in their favor.

I think the first issue I take from this is how fear/intimidation is somehow tied into a simple question that's inherently benign. As it's been explained in regards to the lore, Nintendo's own design implementation of Link being considered a blank slate (that you acknowledge), being able to name said character, all the question is intended to bring to the conversation is "why not?" when there's not really any barrier to something simple like a male/female option should Ninty want to go that route. I certainly wouldn't support anyone wanting to MAKE Nintendo does this through fear and intimidation, and I'm also not sure how relevant that is when most seem to be acting mild about it altogether.

Even what you've stated about Link is what seems to be fueling the "why not?" crowd:

"LINK, a silent, nearly characterless protagonist who's meant to represent/reflect whoever's currently controlling him"

If he's meant to represent/reflect whoever's controlling him (by your own admission) then it doesn't sound unreasonable to ask about the option of being a female, since they do play these games too, or even a deep character customization. Again, if it's just brought in the context of discussing instead of demanding I don't see the big issue here.

As far as the representation-oriented questions goes, there does seem to be compelling evidence brought to GDC 2015 brought up by Wiseman and Burch that showed girls in high school are more likely to prefer to play female characters than boys of the same age are likely to prefer to play male characters. I can't discount the idea of various gaming factors: investing big purchases in different game consoles, typical costs of games, etc. There's more factors in games than in the simplicity of buying a movie ticket to see whatever.

I'm getting a bit tired of jumping around to address this web of questions.

[sweetSWAGGER]

"Looks more like a Gish Gallop rather than an "easy-to-digest questionnaire," and it's no surprise to see which kind of people will salute that tactic when it just so happens to work in their favor."

Well, that's the idea, I'm not just referring to people who are "mild" about the subject, but also to those who're aggressive or have an agenda to push. That's why some of the questions are only relevant if you answered a certain way to an earlier question. It's meant to cater to different kinds of people, not lump everyone into one group. I'm not interested in only hearing what one kind of person has to say on this subject.

"I think the first issue I take from this is how fear/intimidation is somehow tied into a simple question that's inherently benign."

Again, wide canvas. You may not see how it's relevant because it's not relevant to YOU, but it's very relevant to those that the question pertains to.

"...all the question is intended to bring to the conversation is "why not?" when there's not really any barrier to something simple like a male/female option should Ninty want to go that route."

I do understand the idea of APPEALING to female gamers who take on the Link role. BUT, how many of those female gamers NEED it or CARE? I'd love to ask a bunch of them and find out. Are you one, can I ask you?

"I certainly wouldn't support anyone wanting to MAKE Nintendo does this through fear and intimidation, and I'm also not sure how relevant that is when most seem to be acting mild about it altogether."

wide canvas.

"If he's meant to represent/reflect whoever's controlling him (by your own admission) then it doesn't sound unreasonable to ask about the option of being a female, since they do play these games too, or even a deep character customization."

Again, in regard to appealing to female/ethnic Zelda fans, we should be asking them if they even care enough about it. If Link being a boy or girl creates any kind of barrier between them and Link at all. I think this is the kind of game where there is no barrier. In my experience, I find that people tend to want to create various likenesses when playing a story-driven RPG, or a game with relationship-building or a branching narrative, but Zelda isn't central to any of that, which is probably why not enough people care for Ninty to lift a finger.

"Again, if it's just brought in the context of discussing instead of demanding I don't see the big issue here."

wide canvas.

"I can't discount the idea of various gaming factors: investing big purchases in different game consoles, typical costs of games, etc. There's more factors in games than in the simplicity of buying a movie ticket to see whatever."

Well, ironically, the movie-going experience is complex enough on it's own, what with the different kinds of films that are made to cater to certain demographics, and the wide array of formats that you can see them in (IMAX, 3D, etc.), but you get the point regardless.

"I'm getting a bit tired of jumping around to address this web of questions."

That's because you weren't supposed to address the whole web, just parts of it that were relevant to your position on the subject. I see that you misunderstood how the questions were supposed to work, my apologies, I'll structure them better next time.

[coolbeans]

@sweetSWAGGER

But at the very beginning you do lump together people into one group:

"To anyone who asks why can't Link be Female? please answer the following questions"

This is why I called your first comment a Gish Gallop. It's a disingenuous debate technique that's meant to drown out opposition with a series of small, some of which aren't really fair, questions that take a ridiculous amount of time for any responder to unravel. Even some of your own questions are intentionally loaded gotchas to further pad out your series of questions.

Anyways...

I can't really speak for how many female gamers NEED or CARE for this, but the comments section of the youtube video DK's linked has a few that gauge between it being an interesting idea to not seeing the point. I haven't really seen any go so over-dramatic as to say they need this to happen either. Since the question is just 'why not?' it doesn't seem like they're now trying to make this an obligation for Ninty to do. And no, I'm not a female.

Well, I wouldn't call it any kind of "barrier" but for a blank-slate who's name can be changed to anything in practically every game, I'm sure anyone can agree seeing the 'he/him' pronouns next to something like a player-named 'Elena' can look silly. Again, it's not some huge immersion barrier but certainly something for anyone to casually ask 'why can't Link be a girl?'

The movie-going experience has complexities but it's not near that of games. That's why demographics for movies ('chick flicks' 'found-footage' etc.) is easier to graph when the only barrier involved is a single-use ticket at the theater. Age+gender demographics for games also has to deal with which device they're using on top of the games they may be interested in playing.

While I appreciate you explaining your intention when it came your first comment it's still comes off more as 'anti-SJW' showmanship than you actually wanting to further discuss this topic because of how often I've seen this tactic done here.

[sweetSWAGGER]

@coolbeans

Well, thank you for the feedback. It's a good thing you showed up before I posed this questionnaire to another site, otherwise I'd catch all kinds of hell.

The bloody things certainly needs to be segmented, that's for flipping sure.

[coolbeans]

@sweetSWAGGER

Not a problem. I think I should also point out that I'm not suggesting you MUST ask one question per comment or an extreme like that. Just do your best at assessing if x group of questions you have either looks more like consistent questions to give a platform for healthy dialogue or overload to get some kind of advantage in debates.

Regardless, I do still appreciate you bringing your questions/concerns forward regarding this topic.

[Blacklash93]

Honestly, I see no need to reason load this topic up with so much pointless antagonism. Innocent ideas like this:

'I'd like to see a female Link.'
'I wouldn't like or don't care to see a female Link.'

Become more like this:

'I'd like to see a female Link and those who don't are sexist boys' clubbers and Nintendo is an insular stone-age company if they don't do it. You're hurting gaming and society if you don't support it.'

'I wouldn't like or don't care to see a female Link, and those who do are idiot SJWs and Nintendo is a disgraceful panderer if they do it. You're hurting gaming and society if you do support it.'

It becomes more rhetorical and presumptuous than logical and compelling. I found your post more agenda-driven and one-sided than anything, which won't resonate with those who don't already share your position and will even put them off. All of this may not be your intention, but boils down to it all the same.
----
One other thing:

"-will all the accusations, intimidation, us-verses-them mentality and fear-mongering really do any good for women/feminism in gaming?"

I have a particular problem with this line of questioning. My opinions and preferences concerning a female Link have nothing to do with any of these people, and I don't appreciate you assuming so. You're falling into the "us-versus-them" mindset and fear-mongering tactics yourself if you're attempting to persuade people against a female Link like that. Just careful about these things, okay? :)

[sweetSWAGGER]

"My opinions and preferences concerning a female Link have nothing to do with any of these people, and I don't appreciate you assuming so."

I'm not assuming that you and the agenda-pushers have anything in common. That wasn't the point of the questionnaire, the point was to address every possible argument/reason regarding Link being a woman. I wanted to communicate my thoughts to as many different opinions as possible.

However, it's because the questionnaire isn't properly divided, that one can easily assume that I'm trying to lump everyone into one big problematic party (and even trying to confuse that party with a "gish gallop" tactic). That was a mistake on my part, and it's only because there's nothing else for me to say here, that I'm perfectly fine with admitting that fault over and over again to different people until I run out of bubbles.

"You're falling into the "us-versus-them" mindset and fear-mongering tactics yourself if you're attempting to persuade people against a female Link like that."

I'm not really trying to persuade AGAINST the idea of a female Link, but the POINTLESSNESS I find with it, and the AGENDA that some have behind it. From my personal experience, I don't think female Zelda fans have a problem identifying with the link role, and that's one of the many well-done things about the series. Additionally, The fact that they're hardcore gamers tells me they aren't your typical Ijusgattmahnailsdid woman anyway, so they likely already identify more with the knight role, not the princess one. They don't need persuasion (but that's something to talk to them about, isn't it?)

Problematically, if Link were to become a woman, I think the game would be praised and paraded for all the wrong reasons by socially-progressive journalists and feminists, in the same way a female novelist is praised simply because she's a female novelist in a sea of male ones. It's misguided praise. If anything, a female Link should be regarded as something unique to a particular Zelda, something remembered for it's style, not some political statement.

But this is a complex analyisis on my part, something deserving its own space to breath. I'll be looking into it extensively later in a whole new blog (or website... like Deviantart/Tumblr, that'll be fun!), because I'm THAT interested in the idea of Link being a woman!

"Just careful about these things, okay? :)"

Roger Dodger, skipper, Thanks for the feedback!

[Nineball2112]

So, maybe things can be flipped towards the other argument too.

Why can't Bayonetta be a guy? LOL

[Ravenor]

I know PLENTY of women from a lot of different age groups, all of them seem to love their legend of Zelda. I've never once heard Links gender being a major issue for them.

[carcarias]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

I'm all for a greater number of great female protagonists but simply changing well established male characters into females is stupid, lazy and, more importantly, destructive for most of the existing fans.

Before I go any further, I'd like to point out that I'd hate them to turn Lara Croft into a man too. It's about respecting established characters.

Anyway, my view is this. Let's say you have 10 great game characters. 9 are male, 1 is female. You want more diversity and want a 50/50 split. The way you achieve that is by using some talent and creating 8 more female characters making it 9 of both genders, therefore 50% each way.

You don't create the equal split by turning 4 those 9 male characters into the opposite sex. It's just dumb.

[hazelamy]

did you post a similar post when gearbox turned an Aliens game into a sausage fest?

you talk about the history of a series like the Zelda games, what about the history of a series like Alien?

what about the cultural impact of a franchise like Alien?
you complain about the possibility of an androgynous mute one day being portrayed as female, or shock horror, the player being given the choice, but did you have a word to say when the legacy one of the most important female led series in movie history was pissed on by gearbox?

that series changed what women could do in movies, and the influence has spread beyond movies, into books and games.

Ripley has had an arguably larger impact on the world at large than Link has.

and on the subject of Link, isn't the reason he never speaks because the developers wanted him to represent the player, now that almost half of console gamers, probably a higher number on Nintendo consoles, does Link still represent the "gamers"?

i'm not demanding link be made female as cannon or anything, i'm not even demanding an option.
would i like the option to choose the gender of Link in the next game?
absolutely, but i'll play it with or without the option.

but back to my main point, what was your reaction to gearbox and the way they shat on the legacy one of the most beloved multimedia franchises in the world?

[sweetSWAGGER]

"did you have a word to say when the legacy one of the most important female led series in movie history was pissed on by gearbox?"

Well for one, the Ripley role (that is, the female lead) wasn't given to a man, because there was no Ripley role (or "lead role"). You were put into the perspective of some marines, and that was the point. A sausage fest of marines, sure, but marines nonetheless. Side characters.

Two, we're talking about the legacy of a FILM, and then comparing that to a derivative work. If Gearbox made an Alien film that featured some macho action hero and a bunch of weak, bimbo damsels, then it would have had more of an effect on that legacy. At least in film, where the legacy matters, I don't think people care that someone made a crappy video game based on some side characters from one of the most popular film franchises in history.

"that series changed what women could do in movies, and the influence has spread beyond movies, into books and games."

I agree, I think it even influenced the gender of Samus Aran (I'm not so sure though).

"Ripley has had an arguably larger impact on the world at large than Link has."

Okay?

"and on the subject of Link, isn't the reason he never speaks because the developers wanted him to represent the player, now that almost half of console gamers, probably a higher number on Nintendo consoles, does Link still represent the "gamers"?"

You lost me. I don't understand what you're asking here. Are you talking about a new core market? Because I don't understand how that's relevant. I'd always assumed Link was Nintendo's idea of the classic young hero, a boy, destined to destroy evil and save the princess (representing the player is only a part of that). In fact, this is pretty prevalent in a lot of Japanese games with a similar fantasy style.

I remember an interview with one of the developers of The Last Guardian, who said that the main character (the human boy) was originally a girl. But, they decided against it because "her hands would be too small to pick up objects" (or something about young girls being weaker). Perhaps it's a cultural thing? Perhaps they could rectify that with an older Link? Hmm, interesting.

"i'm not demanding link be made female as cannon or anything, i'm not even demanding an option.
would i like the option to choose the gender of Link in the next game?
absolutely, but i'll play it with or without the option."

Something just feels wrong about reducing Link down to a piece of cloth. In my opinion, if Link does become a girl in a future game, then it should be unique to that specific game (or type of game, like "Windwaker Link"). I don't know, having the option of custom representation in Legend of Zelda just doesn't... feel right for some reason. I'll have to look deeply into this analsis later, Mr. Plinkett style, baby.

"but back to my main point, what was your reaction to gearbox and the way they shat on the legacy one of the most beloved multimedia franchises in the world?"

I can't speak for DragonKnight, but I can say that it annoyed me... and that's it. It's not like it was the next big film or anything, it was just another Call of Duty-wannabe. Pretty weird for Gearbox, but it didn't really do anything to the legacy of the film, just like a Zelda porno doesn't do anything to the legacy of the games.

I don't need Gearbox to understand what makes Aliens so unique or influential, because their work is derivative; it's based on the films, not a part of them.

[hazelamy]

i guess if they wanted to turn link into a black guy, that wouldn't be a problem right?
it's just race, that doesn't matter right?

[JOWAPPO]

"i guess if they wanted to turn link into a black guy, that wouldn't be a problem right?
it's just race, that doesn't matter right?"

You say "it's just race" at the beginning of that question, but in your haste to make a point, I don't believe you put a lot of thought into it in the context of the Zelda universe. Zelda features fictional races, not real ones. There are only 3 different human races in the game, according to the Zelda wiki: They're called "Hylian", "Sheikah and "Gerudo". And, although they do take design influences from the real world, such as the Gerudo being like gypsies, the races are still almost entirely fictional (there're no "white people" here).

I don't know if there are humans of other varying ethnicity, if you can find some that'll be news to me.

Nintendo could perhaps create a whole new race, so you could get a version of Link who has black features, or perhaps even Asian features. There are two problems you face though.

-One is that I don't think the hero of time can be anything other than Hylian, story-wise.

-Two, I think Nintendo wants to stay as far removed from real life as possible, adding in new races for the sole purpose of representing real races will not only result in every possible race needing to be represented eventually, but I believe it will remove the game that much further from its fantasy setting.

[The Krystal]

I can't actually believe I read that. Having black Hylians would divert from the fantasy, but the white ones we've been getting this whole time are just fine? Not to mention fish people, plant people, rock eaters, and fairies. Smh.

[JOWAPPO]

@The Krystal

"I can't actually believe I read that."

I can't either, because you later ask that it's "just fine" that there are WHITE Hylians in the game... when I never said that. There are no "white Hylians" in Legend of Zelda, I even said that in the comment that you responded to:

"although they do take design influences from the real world, such as the Gerudo being like gypsies, the races are still almost entirely fictional (there're no "white people" here)."

How you read that and still tried to attack the "white Hylian argument" (as if I said it) is beyond me. I can't believe I just read that.

Here, I'll go over the fictional races in the game again. There are 3 fictional humans races in the game that I know of: "Hylian", "Gerudo "and "Shiekah".

The counter point you're making isn't even in response to anything I said. I said that representing REAL races would divert from the fantasy (as in: having black people just for the sake of black people, or Asian people, Hispanic people, etc.). It's purpose becomes representation of the real world, which only removes the game from it's supposed fantasy setting and pushes it closer to a real one. This defeats the whole point of fictional human races to begin with.

Lastly, you point out that there are rock, fish and plant people, and I see the point you're TRYING to make. I mean, if we can have all these crazy made-up creatures in the game and pass them off as people, then why not black people? Well, that's the point: they're MADE-UP. If Nintendo wants to throw in a whole new race of humans that have black/African features, then they're more than welcome to do that; it's their universe after all.

However, the problem that will inevitably arise, is after it becomes apparent that they did it for political correctness, they'll have to represent other real races that play Zelda as well. They won't be able to just pick and choose what real race they're inclusive to, that will look just as bad as not being inclusive at all.

I made this point already, but it feels like every time I do, I get someone completely side-stepping my argument, to the point of not even addressing anything in it, in what appears to be an attempt to take some kind of inclusive, moral high ground, as if that alone is supposed to be a counter argument. Smh.

[The Krystal]

That's always a silly question to ask when talking about a creative medium. The creators can do whatever they want, but it's a question if they should and I say no. It would be pretty dumb to make Link female in a game before the character that the series is named after even gets a chance to lead a game. Get Zelda actually playable in her own series, then I can consider that.