Slashdot Mirror
Is Link About to Die?
An anonymous reader writes "Sometimes we know more than we think we know. An about.com article asks if we might already know what happens in The Twilight Princess. If we do, it's not going to be a happy ending. Based primarily on the introduction to The Wind Waker, and the fact that we now know Twilight Princess takes place between Wind Waker and Ocarina of Time, it makes some pretty interesting claims about Link's future. Is Link about to die?" Miyamoto may have been hinting about this earlier this year.
It's not like there's any real continuity of character here. I mean, there's no specific Link character who is in all of the games. I always interpreted Link to be a sort of genetic/time-less hero born again and again. It's basically implied that each one dies at some point after his game ends. So explicitly having him die in game wouldn't really matter that much, since we know there will be another one at some point. And honestly, I wouldn't be that upset if he died anyway. It's not like there's any personality there.
I didn't want to know that Link dies before I played the game. I'd be happy to make the discovery on my own. So next time you want to post a spoiler in a story, at least use the [Read more...] function and give us some warning.
The Zelda games never had a strong connection between games. Each only alluded to each other with hints and details to excite the fanboys (of which I am). This article is taking a giant leap of faith to force the connection it tries to make.
TFA asks if "Link is about to FAIL". As in FAIL his mission.
He died dozens of times in the previous games I played with him. Of course he'll die in the next game. I'm not perfect you know, sheesh.
"Blue Link needs food badly?"
//remember, don't shoot potions!
"Blue Link, your life force is running out?"
I think you mean A Link is going to die. The games loosely exist along the same time line (though I have yet to see a LoZ with hover boards, foo), and each game is a different Link and different Zelda.
I think Zelda II on the NES even went through some thing about all the princesses being named Zelda because one was in a deep neverending sleep, or some such stuff.
In Wind Waker, we're told that the main character isn't even of the Link lineage. He has to search for pieces of his part of the Triforce, remember. The game even says that the hero had left the realm, (referring to Majora's Mask), forcing the Triforce Piece of Courage to split apart.
Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask supposedly have the same Link (Majora's Mask taking place a few years after Link defeats Ganon in OoT and is returned to kid form.)
The Oracle games are supposed to match up with another Zelda game as well, though I can't recall which one right now. The same may be true for Link's Awakening.
So, even if Link does die in the game (which would certainly be a change; whether it's appreciated or not has yet to be seen), it won't be the end of the Zelda franchise.
If he does die, I think we'd see it as more of a "selfless sacrifice" type of thing. Link struggles with the main enemy to subdue him while the supporting hero(ine) blasts him into the Dark World or whatever, but in the process Link is pulled in as well. This would actually be a nice set up to the next game (which is most likely on the Revolution,) where you once again have a non-lineage Link and you wind up having to release the real Link to defeat the evil.
There's also the fact that MMRPGs are not sustainable without getting monthly revenue through fees or ads, while Iwata keeps saying that they want users to play online for free, without having to suffer through ads. Their player base just won't go through with it. How are they going to keep a profitable MMO game if they only get money when the game is purchased? Until there's a good business model for this that wont damage their brands, Nintendo will just not make a MMO game. The closest thing the'll do is what they are doing with Animal Crossing. Other companies would have made it a MMORPG, but Nintendo's vision was far, far, different.
You know, this is a question that could be asked in a *lot* of Slashdot stories...
Chris Mattern
Actually, I was fairly certain that at the time it was made, Ocarina of Time was chronologically first, because it was before Ganondorf became Ganon. The GB & GBA LoZ's are so very much aside from the real games that they could fit literally anywhere in the chronology and not make a bit of difference.
just some guy