I'm on the side of "story is important, but not the game-to-game timeline". Unless the developers had really made an effort to have continuity from the first game, it inevitably just gets too difficult to manage without retconning and contrivances. Plus, having a compartmentalized story makes it so much easier for new people to jump into a series 20 or 30 years down the road. Imagine the CDi games being a prerequisite to understanding what was going on in BotW! 😂
Also not having the different games needing to be connected 100% allows the developers the freedom and enjoyment of allowing themselves to be as creative as they wish. For example whether or not fans like the final fantasy 7 remakes, you can tell that the developers of those remakes are enjoying themselves and putting all their passion into it because they're allowing themselves to create new storylines regardless of fan entitlement
They actually have made an effort to have continuity from the first game. The second Zelda game was a direct sequel to the first with the same Link and the third was a prequel set long before the first 2 games that told the origin of Ganon and the Triforce. The next game, OoT, actually showed the origin of Ganon that ALttP only told a story about. Wind Waker and Twilight Princess both make it very clear they take place directly after OoT and that's integral to those stories making sense. Skyward Sword was made to show the origin of the Master Sword and the cycle of reincarnation. The only games that haven't been clear about their connections were the Oracles games, the Four Sword games, and BotW/TotK. While most of the time the continuity isn't super important to individual stories it helps add flavor. Sometimes it is important like in Wind Waker and Twilight Princess and I think those stories would suffer without their strong connections to OoT. And in games where it's not super important it being there isn't hurting anything. I feel an issue with BotW and TotK is it wants to have all of these iconic elements from the series and feed on the lore surrounding them while also not caring about the lore. It made those elements feel less special cuz they were just there.
Yeah, I've always naturally just assumed they were separate stories to out of common sense really. It's clear they're different lands and each is approached (broadly) As if you've never seen a Zelda story before.
I'm in a similar boat where I enjoy the individual game's stories, but I've lost any interest in caring about continuity when I noticed the devs themselves clearly aren't interested. The biggest problem I've always had with the whole continuity/timeline thing, is that it's easy for a developer to make an off-hand comment in a prologue or an interview or a manual somewhere about how a game is supposed to be a sequel or a prequel to another, especially when the series is still young and only has a few games in it - but it doesn't really *mean* anything if they don't put in bare minimum effort to follow up on this in a meaningful or believable way. One of the first big signs for me was actually quite early on, with Wind Waker. The game set itself up in the prologue as a sequel to OoT set in a flooded version of its world in the future - which is a cool concept - but then the game sends you underwater to see it. I'll never forget how excited I was to go down there, and how confused/disappointed I was when... nothing down there even remotely resembled anything I'd seen in Ocarina of Time. It's like, what, they couldn't even *partially* shape the landscape to look like a section of OoT Hyrule Field, or to have us run through a familiar location like the ruins of Castle Town or something? Even something small like having Lon Lon Ranch appear off in the distance would've gone such a long way to making it believable. But there was none of that. I held out hope for a few years after that and *tried* to make myself believe they cared, but Wind Waker planted the first seed of doubt that eventually made me realise this just isn't a dev team which is particularly interested in making the connections between games believable. Watching some of these videos where Kit & Krysta talk about their personal interactions with Aonuma and how he always seemed disinterested and would try to change the topic when the timeline was brought up, had me nodding the entire time - because it basically cemented something I've suspected for a long time. I can't think about the timeline for long without very quickly getting a strong feeling that I'm giving this more thought than even the devs themselves have. These days I just expect each new game will have its own standalone story and I never expect any game to reference another meaningfully beyond easter eggs, and I think I'm actually happier for it.
Fully agree with this. It's like Zelda fans have lost the ability to appreciate self-contained stories in favor of franchise-long lore (that they have to make up themselves too). It's a quick way to be miserable lol.
Krysta's entire point of just really focusing on the mythology of the Zelda world and not the timeline really, puts words to exactly how I feel. things like the races of Zelda, the characters, the triforce, the goddesses, Hylia, the reincarnation cycle, and all the different ways that can come about and really additions like the Zonai or putting the two different types of Zora in one Hyrule like in EoW soon, is exactly the amount of care for the "Story" I care about, the timeline has always just been a fun fan thing to me that's neat trying to place each game and the idea of dying in OoT being considered an ending and thus a split on a timeline is neat but its just a neat fun thing. The STORY of Zelda has always been the mythology and the literal story of each individual game, to me personally.
I agree with Cerulean Dragon. I really don’t like how the introduction of open world in Zelda has caused a dilution in storytelling because of the non-linearity. I think that some linearity is needed in order to keep the main narrative on track. That, or spend the time to create alternate endings or events to personalize the journey.
Interesting cuz i found nothing about botw’s story to be well done besides some of the characters and even then theyre all super shallow. Totk isnt much better but it at least had emotional moments and a good ass ending. When botw credits rolled i just thought “…thats it?”
@@epic_iram I think the problem I mostly had with ToTK's storytelling is that, it has to be told a specific way to be enjoyed properly. When I found the first glyph, I was really excited to find the others thinking it'd be like botw, where i'd have to piece together the story, but nah it just straight up spoiled a story major beat. ToTK just overall felt way more disconnected and kind of took away all the stakes away with what happened in the ending? Botw's ending is like, we're all that's left from the past and that's okay. And ToTK's ending I felt like, what was the point of the sacrifice? I kind of wish the sacrifice had a consequence that lead to a dlc to solve. Example it being an inverse of the ending of botw, where "do you remember who I am?" to "who are you?". Would've been nuts. I think if they had like minor connections from botw to totk, I also wouldn't be as upset lol, but they barely did that. It's kind of bizarre that no one knows about what happened, especially when there's a newspaper line
@@epic_iram Botw has really well done atmosphere and environmental storytelling. Discovering people wandering and talking to them was novel. The memories worked well too. ToTK gave the impression that the devs didn’t care in the slightest about the worldbuilding or continuity, and the orderless method of plot delivery they lifted from botw didn’t work well that time.
The thing is, Nintendo doesn’t even have to sacrifice their “gameplay first” ideals to explore more of Hyrule’s story. We’ve gotten Manga in the past, but they could do so much more. The movie is a start but there’s so much potential for novels or an animated show or shorts or… anything! So many characters could have excellent side stories, so many major events in Zelda are glossed over… I don’t play Zelda for the story, but that doesn’t mean I don’t consider Nintendo’s refusal to expand it wasted potential
Alot of games that has "Gameplay First" sort of vision is really light on story, Souls-Like, Monster Hunter, Mario, Hollowknight and Majority of Metroidvania..... and also can ba said for almot every Zelda games. Yes some do offer alot more dialogue and scenes but almost every Zelfa games doesn't offer that much of a "story". Moreso when you factor in that the Era of the Wild's scope in terms of gameplay was VASTLY BIGGER than anything they've done.
I’m on the story is important side, it brings context to some of the games settings and moments and make them mean so much more. Things like the the Great sea being flooded hyrule after Link disappeared in Oot or the hero’s shade in TP are SO iconic, they bring meaning to what you’re playing and make you care. People replay older Zelda games so often, and it’s not because (sometimes) they like a challenge like replaying a Mario game, they want to delve deeper into the games background, settings, and story.
It really comes off as you defending Nintendo's decision rather than challenging it. They could come up with better stories.Them being so casual about things disappearing isn't a good thing. They should know.
We had interesting story and gameplay before. So the real question is, “Why are we making excuses to have less?” It’s not like workers are improving story at the expense of gameplay, they’re two different departments. Both things can’t be good. It’s not like anyone is expecting amazing stories that’ll last decades, just something interesting.
I don't think Fujibayashi is a good authority to hang an argument about story on. He is the head of the series now, but his games stand out amongst the rest as not caring about story. Games that weren't directed by him, the majority of the series, are all very conscious of continuity. Fujibayashi's games (Oracles, Four Sword, Minish Cap, and BotW/TotK) are among the rare Zelda games that don't fit cleanly into the continuity of at least one previous Zelda game. Skyward Sword skirts the issue by being set before everything so it can play it loose, but trying that with BotW and TotK which are set after everything just breeds frustration.
Story (Or plot, considering setting and motivations) is important, but it can be put or told directly in gameplay, as Majora's Mask did, using cutscenes only at key points, and all other story elements are delivered as much as possible while playing.
In my opinion, with TOTK, they legitimately did not make much of an effort to tell a compelling story. I think a big thing that is being mis understood is that game to game continuity does not matter that much, but the game should have contnuity with itself, and with the games it is a direct sequel to
If I am being completely honest, the only reason I bothered at getting back into Zelda was because of the story behind breath of the wild and tears of the Kingdom. So the answer to the question posed at the beginning: yes, I do believe that story is important to Zelda
honestly, there isn't really an excuse for a bad story in a game like zelda. it doesn't take away from the gameplay since they're still making us sit through cutscenes even when they're wholly unnecessary (secret stone thing as the easy example), and i think it's one of those situations where we just have to say nintendo isn't doing enough (like when they admitted in a mario wonder interview that they just didn't think mario games looking good mattered in the past). it's also pretty easy to say that for me, totk putting absolutely no effort into worldbuilding and just pretending botw didn't happen in so many ways drastically reduced my enjoyment of the exploration. if they don't want to even bother acknowledging guardians existed, then why should i expect any more care or reasoning put into any world changes from botw?
look at games like dark souls and elden ring, for example. they have incredibly cool worlds and lore and background details that build an intriguing story with far more detail than any zelda game, but it arguably takes even less out of the raw gameplay experience because they don't tell you those details in cutscenes. zelda needs more of that, but totk neglected caring about making sense to an insulting degree
World building is key. There's so many elements of the mithology that have just vanished from the lore. The triforce is not even referenced in TotK, the goddesses are forgoten, and now even Ganondorf is just another dude who appeared before Demise, invalidating SS. The new game added the Zonai. Watch them not getting referenced ever again, just like the Twili, the Minish, etc. Why are sky islands in TotK? Never explained.
I'm worried about the Zelda movie. It seems a lot harder to pull it off than the Mario movie, especially since they decided to go live-action instead of animated. I just don't know how you do that without it being cheesy in the wrong ways.
"Good Story" is highly subjectice tho and for me all of then have "Good Story". Some are better by a bit but it's still debatable which one is better..
I think Majora's mask was that perfect middle ground for me. The main plot of the game was pretty simple, which was you have 3 days to stab the moon GOOOO!!!. However, engaging with the people of termina was the bulk of the story and you could choose to interact with it as much as you like, which expands the main quests experience. Easily my favorite game of all time!
I really wish Nintendo just had the guts to make BotW entirely its own thing. Keep the current timeline separate in case an idea for a direct sequel pops up one day, and make it very clear that Breath cannot be placed on it. But instead they handled it the worst way they could by keeping it within the same continuity, but trying to hand wave the rest of the games away by placing it so far in the future that they don't matter. And yet, Breath directly references events, characters, and places from literally every Zelda game that came before it, making it impossible to place anywhere on Zelda's branched timeline. Then they make it even more convoluted with TotK, which has concepts like the Zonai founding Hyrule which are incompatible with the previous games' stories, but which would have been fine had Breath and Tears been set within their own continuity.
STORY is SO important. Its the thing I remember most about Zelda games growing up until present day where as gameplay was always a second thought and helps support the story. Krysta def won this one! 😁
I really don't think Miyamoto's way of making games should still be done these days outside of games like Mario and Donkey Kong. Story is important. You can focus on gameplay and still have a story. It's like his series are mostly gameplay and the story is an afterthought. He doesn't like story. Zelda could be an epic story with multiple characters involved and voice cutscenes. It just feels like some Nintendo series are fine where they are whereas others like Zelda need to do better in the story area. Flashbacks aren't a story. A cutscene after beating a boss and a few here and there is not a story. It shouldn't be this hard. Why make all this lore and do nothing with it?
Miyamoto’s way is unique Nintendo does do stuff with their lore but only when it isn’t a burden It’s a case by case basis Also flashbacks is a story a unique take They want to bend the lore to fit their approach rather than making their approach fit the lore
Miyamoto’s way is unique Nintendo does do stuff with their lore but only when it isn’t a burden It’s a case by case basis Also flashbacks is a story a unique take They want to bend the lore to fit their approach rather than making their approach fit the lore
Story is obviously important, it gives stakes to the things that you do in these games and gives you something to work towards so that you can see what happens next. When it comes to the timeline, I don't see why people get so up in arms about the fact that it exists at all. Most of the time when people have questions about where a game falls within it, it's basically just curiosity and a joy of piecing things together. Most of the games don't connect together so obviously, and so people don't mind where it falls so long as it makes some sense. I think the people who hate the timeline talk more about it than the timeline people do lol The timeline existing doesn't really stop them from being creative with their property. There's always a way to make it work and not subsequently tick off a bunch of people that they decided to cater to in the first place
Yeah, I think some people that shit talk it are just being lazy or petty. Like they think that "if an overall timeline exists I don't want it to become 'mandatory' to the point where I have to keep track of it in order to play/understand future games" or something. While a few are probably against it solely because they're tired of hearing people argue about it. But with BotW and _especially_ TotK we also have the 'rabid defender' category of people. (This is more often seen with Pokemon games in the last decade, but has shown up here too.) Anytime someone criticizes a specific thing or says something negative like, "it has a really bad framerate" or "it has a terrible story", you'll then be flooded with comments saying "that doesn't matter" or "it's not/never was important". Like, okay. Maybe YOU "had fun" and "didn't notice" such things, but when someone else points them out you don't suddenly get to say that "those details are invalid" and just ignore them. Improving these details can only "enhance the user experience", yet some are content letting them slide constantly. (Funny how people only get dismissive about these things when others say "it's bad" or "it has issues", huh?)
I personally love the interpretation that the entire Zelda franchise is simply one meta fairytale/oral traditional myth that changes as it gets passed down from generation to generation which is why sometimes there’s sequels and random references and continuity
That's... not how oral tradition works. Oral tradition was essentially a huge "broken telephone" game in which people retold stories from the past, but they presented each one of them as THE story. They never pretended that it was a new version of something that came before, let alone something that was built upon previous versions. To people listening to those stories, that was the only version that existed. And on the off chance that they somehow met a bard who made changes to the story, you can bet they noticed. However, the whole point is kind of moot because oral tradition existed in a very specific time that doesn't exist anymore.
@@XanderVJ which is exactly what botw and totk are as they’re completely separate to the timeline right? What I’m saying is it’s the same story evolves with new tidbits while still retaining most of the fundamental pieces
@@noaramboa2913 Again, not really. Just one example, TWW is a story that has OOT as its backstory. It is not a new version of the story from OOT that just happens to take place on the sea, which is what would have happened in oral tradition. That approach just doesn't work under scrutiny. As for BotW and TotK, both could as easily be in separate universes from one another, so I don't think they should be taken as an example for anything continuity-related.
I've never been a fan of this interpretation. It just feels like giving up on trying to find a way to relate them to each other. Like Majora's Mask is clearly a sequel and Wind Waker's opening retells the events of Ocarina of Time.
@@XanderVJ 1) Oral tradition still exists, just in smaller scale ways then the epic poetry of yore. 2) "This thing no longer exists, thus it doesn't matter" is never valid reasoning
Tears of the Kingdom literally starts with a cutscene, that's what got me in the door. I just wish the champions were with Link and each area had more story going on.
Personally I think a hero is only as good as the villain he overcomes. So if there is no story telling and buildup the villain and hero sorta fall flat. If the oposite is true that makes the journey up to the showdown all that more impactful. The best Zelda games of all times all have good stories and reveals. Zelda 3 and Wind waker comes to mind. There are a lot of Zelda inspired games from the snes era that focused more on the story and they are all fantastic like Terranigma, Secret of Mana among many others. On the other hand I don't necessarily think the story needs to be connected between 2 games. For example Sephiroth killing Areith is brilliant in FF7 simply because that makes him all that much more evil. Or how in Tales of Phantasia when they wake the villain he start to just kill everyone. Just having Ganon shuckle in an evil way is not the same as making him evil and a real treat to Link. Aslo NIntendo now owns Monolith Soft JP that have single handedly created many of the greatest story moments in gaming ever so why are they not asking them for help boggles my mind.
I'm still waiting for them to include a companion character as a major part of the story again. Midna was the only one. The others are almost unnecessary and annoying. Even Fi, while being the spirit of the sword, doesn't do it for me. Unfortunately Tri in echoes of wisdom doesn't seem to be that important either.
While yes Nintendo doesn't do continuity through out Zelda regarding the timeline as a whole. But if you look at it in pieces. You can see a pocket of games tie into each other individually than it might not be easier to grasp. Like I can see how Ocarina of Time to Spirit Tracks and the games in between, because Link was sent back he couldn't protect Hyrule so they flooded the world, Link and friends go to find a new continent. Ocarina of Time to Twilight Princess to Breath of the Wild, I can understand. Hyrule's expansion as a kingdom throughout generations, Time Link never having his battle with Ganondorf since he was sent to a different dimension yet returns with help but instead trains his descendant and his descendant helps his own successor millennia later in Breath if you got the amiibo. I even get ALttP-ALBW. The SNES and gameboy games all have the same Link going on different adventures with ALBW and TF being set in the future. It really comes out of not looking to broadly and focussing on individual branches to see what games connect.
@@madnessarcade7447 Is this bait? How is a story holding your hand? I want a deep story, not boring gameplay for over 100 hours. You like wandering around a world? Speculation and theories aren't a substitute for a story. You play a game for yourself or to talk to people???
1:52:44 I feel so vindicated hearing you talk about how expensive travel is. I find it insane how casually people talk about taking trips ANYWHERE given the insane expenses of hotels, gas, food, etc. How are all of these other college students able to constantly go on trips every few months?
I have a hunch that one factor that spurs the frustration that some players feel is that the story in Zelda games often uses powerful and alluring plot points to motivate and draw in players but doesn't go the extra mile to make those plot points internally consistent or respect the player's emotional experience. My opinion is that the writers and developers of Zelda use these simple but powerful plot devices and environmental storytelling to play into the emotions and curiosity of the player but that they often fail to respect the impact those powerful and emotional devices have on the player and on their conception of the world in the game. It might feel a little like being led on or tricked into paying attention and caring which could leave the player feeling bitter or emotionally confused. I'll try to share some examples, but I'm not sure they're the best available-there are certainly others who can provide more and better thoughts and examples. For instance ( *spoilers for Skyward Sword* ), in the first part of Skyward Sword, the player must "chase after" Zelda, but (conveniently for the sake of the story) cannot actually catch up to her no matter how fast they complete those parts of the game-here I think that the game makes light of the player's motivation to hurry or perform well, since no matter what the player does, nothing plays out differently. Had there been actual consequences, like there are in Majora's Mask for taking too long, or if there were a bad ending for instance, it would make the player's emotions and motivation and completion of those parts of the game have gravity and feel worthwhile rather than contrived. It's the same for Tears of the Kingdom, *spoilers* ; the fact that Zelda transforms and supposedly "can never go back" is a powerful and emotional message that is repeated multiple times in the story-and let me specifically note that they *did not have to include this in the game to include the transformation mechanic that allowed the sword to be fixed* - they could have told the player how to undo it or that it's just never been done, and yet they didn't do that. They explicitly tell the player that fate is sealed and there's nothing that can be done and gives the player no reason to think otherwise and no apparent means to change said sealed fate (unlike in other games). In the end, that premise is conveniently ignored and the player's heartache, motivation, and, frankly, trust in anything that the game told them, are all betrayed and made light of. I think this issue in particular is what maybe drives a lot of the frustration players have with this game and made the story and lore feel weak or less impactful to them. In other words, I think that despite claiming that they don't care about the story, the developers and writers of the Zelda games purposefully make use of very emotional and intense themes and writing which lead the player to develop and feel equally intense feelings and build an understanding of the game world based on those feelings, but then don't always follow through or even make those feelings or understandings feel invalid or inconsequential. I may well be totally off or be completely entrenched in my own opinions though, so take what I say with a grain of salt lol
I think you're right on point. Love the lore of this series. It's executed in a way that it feels like I'm hearing an actual legend about a great kingdom, hearing just enough details to be able to imagine it, and how it's changed through history, while still leaving just enough creativity to fill in the gaps. I care about the lore and the timeline simply because I like them. Nintendo's done a good job at selling these concepts to me. Now when they go against these concepts, yeah it makes me a little upset because they're essentially throwing aside something that I like a lot and thus care about to some extent (If anyone is going to say that I shouldn't care about something silly like a fictional timeline or lore, just wait until you meet other people and see the kinds of silly things they care about too). Now that I've explained how the topic makes me feel, let me also say that *Zelda games are already mostly free in terms of storytelling!* Most of the games either take place hundreds to thousands of years after each-other, or they take place in other regions of the world. There aren't that many carry-overs you need to keep track of between games. Start a new era, go to a different location, hell, start another branch on the timeline. The timeline is present, but it is incredibly loose, which is its biggest strength. You would have to actively be trying to overwrite old lore in order to create any glaring flaws that can't be explained away by either creative theorizing or by declaring it a retcon. That's what upsets me the most. Writers have tons of room to work with, but they chose to use plot points that A. Aren't consistent with other games in the series, and B. Aren't consistent with their own game. Here's hoping Echoes of Wisdom does much better in the story and lore department.
I agree with your point, but are you saying they're doing this maliciously? I don't think that's their intent, I think they're trying to appeal to the idea of classic fairy tales, very simple stories where grand events and high stakes take up just a couple sentences. That perspective seems so outdated to me, the same as Miyamoto's view of video games as toys. I wish Zelda would evolve into caring more about the story and lore, like Wind Waker or Twilight Princess or Skyward Sword but with a more lived-in world like the HD games have.
@@TriforceWisdom64 Nooo, my apologies if I came off that way! I don't at all think that they're intentionally doing it or that they are purposefully trying to get away with not following through, it's perhaps something like "they value and prioritize gameplay, then spectacle and putting on a show, and then making it all make sense". As a result of that sometimes things don't make sense and/or are more about driving the player forward rather than making the player feel satisfied and/or making it all make sense, possibly purely out of coincidence and because it just wasn't on their list of things to put into the game from the higher ups. There are also pacing issues in the two open world games because of the nature of the gameplay, but I can't exactly criticize the writers since they had to make the story completely optional and thus pacing is out the window
I think story is more important in 3D than it is 2D games for Zelda. I don't think it needs to be Mass Effect level story but it does need to be engaging, emotional and fun. Personally, I think the main 3D games have all had a great balance. Admittedly, Skyward Sword may have been a LITTLE much, at least it was good stuff. On the flip side, I think Breath of the Wild was a LITTLE sparse but overall all the 3D games do it well. Now if that level of story were in the 2D games I don't think I'd enjoy them as much. And vice versa, if the 3D games were as minimal as the 2D games that would be lame. Ultimately, I think what they HAVE been doing is just fine. ALSO I want to throw out there, the timeline was talked about as far back as Ocarina of Time. They indicated that the timeline was meant to split, including the Downfall (Link dies) timeline. I love how everybody, you included, acts like this is a new thing, the timeline, but it's literally been on their mind from the point that the timeline split happened. It's always been intentional. I don't disagree that the importance of the timeline shouldn't really matter, just the individual stories. I think keeping BotW and TotK so far in the future that it doesn't matter, leaves them room to have the franchise be more linear from now on, while still not truly mattering outside of the context of each individual game.
I think the story is important in Zelda games because it establishes the tone for each title. However I believe the gameplay plays a larger role and even contributes to the storytelling. The best Zelda moments are when you get lost in the adventure and start to experiment in the world. I think they do a great job of balancing the two which is what makes the series so compelling!
Very good title! I clicked to see what the verdict will be. I wish the story could be important in Zelda games. They are definitely more fleshed out than say a Mario story but I still feel that the stories in Zelda games can almost be important. Skyward Sword is my example as the character Groose was relatable as a bully since we all have experienced bullying, but midway to the end of the story, you see Groose’s character growth as he realized his follies and actions and also what his role in the dire situation that faced them with the monster that invaded their town. It was a great story
I find Zelda a very frustrating series in that it offers just enough story and worldbuilding to hook you but then shows no interest in exploring any of that further. You've got my attention, I want to know more, but there is no more.
Here's my thing. If story isn't important, why are you playing the game? I know not everyone cares about story but I find that odd and playing a game for 100+ hours with barely any story ain't it. Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom would have been great if they had story paths and more cutscenes. I wanted the champions to be more involved. The scene with them joining up with Link was great. I wanted more of Ganondorf.
I guess I'm team Krysta in this case, since I do believe the story is important. When we take into account the quote that Kit read that mentions they think of what they want to do about the gameplay and *then* the story, it makes sense what has happened with the story (and lore) across all the games. We have generally excellent games with an overall story and world that is fun and interesting, and that eventually becomes compelling to us players. Sadly, sometimes it falls short: Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom are the most recent examples where the delivery of the story itself (and some of the writting) leaves people wanting for something more polished, or something different altogether. "It could have been just so much better if they tweaked this little thing" is something that I hear too often... be it with the memories/flashback like system or the fact there's little reference to proper events from Breath of the Wild in Tears of the Kingdom (Towers, Divine Beasts, Shrines). On the other hand when we have gotten "good" cinematic-like story experiences like Skyward Sword... the gameplay has become a bit of a slog and rigid, and the way the story narrative gets fractured to fit the different very specific gameplay moments makes the whole experience a tiny bit tiring. And that is a bit of a shame! Regarding the timeline... I don't think it's that big of an issue. They have a timeline where most of the games fit, and the level of connection between each other is good enough for me; I don't think they have "overexplained" it (the timeline), if anything, people have issues with it because there's still too many things in the are that don't add up. Then they made 2 games that do not fit on said continuity, yet they borrow of the cool elements they have written across all the games. That's it. If they make new games that fit into it, that's cool too. People bending over backwards about it... yeah, nothing much to say about that lol.
The whole issue with story in Zelda is that Nintendo, at least in recent years, seems to want to have their cake and eat it too. They can say in interviews that they don't concern themselves that much with story as many times as they want, that doesn't change the fact they want us to care about the story anyway. If they really didn't want us to care about it, pretty much all games from "Link's Awakening" onward would be very different to what they are now. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about the disappearance of Koholint Island in LA. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about the oppressed Hyrule and Link's loss of innocence in OOT. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about the inhabitants of an entire realm and their multiple issues in MM. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about the loss of old Hyrule in TWW. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about Midna's emotional journey from cynicism to idealism in TP. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about the relationship between Link and Zelda in SS. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about Zelda's sense of self-worth and the melancholy of a lost past in BotW. And by god, They wouldn't have tried to make us care about Zelda's literal death of self in TotK. And make no mistake, I could go on with the 2D entries as well. ALL OF THAT IS STORY. Whether you personally didn't care for some, or even all of those examples is besides the point. That's why the whole idea of story not being important in Zelda falls flat on its face under scrutiny. You have to willfully ignore all of that for that idea to hold any kind of water. Something similar happens with continuity and the timeline. They keep saying that they only think about it "to an extent". Even if we take them at their word, they are in a weird place in which they both don't care about it enough AND they care about it too much, simultaneously. They don't want to concern themselves with making everything fall into place, but they still want to put tons of references to previous titles that convey a sense of shared history to Hyrule and add to their epic aesthetic. Again, if they didn't want us to think that way, the games we have now would have been very different. I will spare you another paragraph of me picking representative examples of each game, partly because this comment is already too long as it is, and partly because there are a lot of people who have done it already. The funny thing is that up to the BotW games, they managed to get away with it for the most part. Yes, there were inconsistencies, but the vast majority of them were of the type that you had to dig really deep in order to notice them. Not to mention that the series had (most likely inadvertently) built a lore structure that was incredibly flexible. Since there were huge time skips between each entry, they could use them to play a bit loose with the details. As long as they didn't contradict the real major events, they can side step almost any issue with a huge time skip. That's what they did with BotW, after all. That's why I don't buy for a single second the "a fixed continuity would limit the team's creativity" argument. I'm sorry, but that's just an excuse for careless writing. Ditto the "Nintendo things of gameplay first" argument. About the latter, I've seen the development of the series since 1997, and I still have to see a single instance in the entire series in which they made a gameplay choice that wouldn't had been able to exist if they had stuck to the established timeline. Even if only by side stepping the issue by NOT referencing other games. And then, there's TotK, which is the game I think just... broke the spell. What makes TotK so infuriating is that it was a golden opportunity for Nintendo to start fresh. They could have just left the timeline up to that point intact in all of its convoluted glory behind and use BotW as a starting point for a more streamlined continuity without any major hiccups. All they had to do was to NOT reference games previous to BotW, nor add elements that would rewrite them. But they couldn't do even that. Not only do they use references from older Zelda games, going all the way back to freaking "A Link to Past", in an utterly lore-breaking fashion (I swear, the first few weeks after the game came out I honestly thought that they had essentially de-canonized all games previous to BotW, including SS. And I would still believe it if Fujibayashi had not say otherwise in Famitsu), but they couldn't even make TotK to connect properly with BotW, a game which story is supposed to have happened just a few years prior. Meaning they screwed up the continuity for both old fans who obsess about the timeline AND new fans who have only played BotW and little to nothing else. And again, I struggle to see a single gameplay element in the entire game that would warrant such a thing. Continuity-wise, they had it the easiest they ever had it since 1998, and they still managed to make things the worst they've ever been. That just... baffles me. I'm not gonna mince words here: the truth is TotK made me bitter for the Zelda series, both in story AND gameplay, but the latter is a story for another day. I'm still gonna follow it, and will buy "Echoes of Wisdom" day one, but the enthusiasm has been severely diminished. As a matter of fact, the (diminished) enthusiasm I do have for EoW is primarily carried out by the idea of Zelda being the protagonist and the idea of her playing different to Link. I hope that game wins back some of my good will, because I really, REALLY don't want to feel the way I do now about my favorite series. Wow! That was... WAY longer than I originally intended it to be. Sorry for the doom and gloom. If you somehow managed to stay all the way up here... well, thank you. See you next time with "Echos of Wisdom".
You kind of throw away any semblance of a point you may have had by your complete misevaluation of TotK's relation to the rest of the franchise's story. You legitimately believed that TotK naming its event the Imprisoning War made it the same Imprisoning War from LttP? That is such a critical literacy failure. There also doesn't exist a single way in which TotK doesn't properly connect with BotW. Like this is abundantly clear to anyone with a working noggin that actually played the game. Here's an easy hack for understanding what is going on in the BotW section of the Zelda story: understanding the concept of Samsara. It is perhaps the most popular theme in games from the East, it is a reflection on the cyclicality of existence on a major scale. Events will repeat, and familiar things will come to exist centuries after we have thought they went extinct. This manifests in BotW and TotK by showing that even hundreds of centuries after the Hyrule that we were so familiar with in the prior Zelda games are starting to occur again. It also fits in with the very name of the series: the events of the prior Zelda games have finally truly passed into legend, in a way which has not been seen since Wind Waker. And what do you do with legends? You retell them
I tend to phrase it that Nintendo provides all the ingredients to a great story (character, setting, conflicts), but tell the player to make their own meal.
I really like a good and compelling story within each game. Isolated. I'm less bothered about a connecting line trying to find cohesion through the entire series. I think the key word is "Legend" I've always liked the idea of someone in the modern day telling this tale to their grandchild. "What do you mean the world was flooded? Last week, you were telling me Link was making things from a magical hand in a world beneath the world!" Legends can often have an understandable narrative within each story, but can contradict other stories about the same characters (or, in this case, characters with the same name). They sometimes also have a nugget of truth in there. Yeah, so I've never had an issue when I've allowed myself to imagine these legends in that way.
Emphasis on LEGEND on the series title The Legend of Zelda. Each game is a legendary tale unknown to a specific time, but pieced together by historians/scholars/sages to the best of their knowledge. Leave the timeline as it is, but now tell new games as its own individual timeline with some prior game Easter eggs.
Can either of Wind Waker or Majoras mask's stories exist without Ocarina of time? Can phantom hourglass or Spirit tracks exist without being sequels to Wind Waker? Can skyward Sword's plot exist without the idea of being "the first in the timeline?" Tears really made it clear that the devs currently don't care enough to utilize game to game continuity for what it could bring to Zelda stories, even in a direct sequel, however, it's baffling to me you guys call the timeline "nonsense" and "should be erased" over and over when it's just ... A thing lol
I do enjoy story in Zelda games, but I do agree with Kit that I don't think it's worth being upset about the story. I am sad to hear that anything set outside of Hyrule automatically gets thrown into the "I don't care" pile because I think some of Zelda's most emotionally impactful stories have taken place outside of Hyrule. I want Zelda to be able to explore other regions and I don't want it to be pigeonholed into Hyrule only.
This is my first time listening to your podcast, and I found it to be quite enjoyable. The chemistry between the hosts is excellent, and Krysta is hilarious 😂
Great podcast today. I love Zelda story talk and it was good to get your Astro Bot impressions. Also, thank you for answering my question on Indie Mania, from the 1:56:53 - 1:57:49 mark. I hope you enjoy the show! To good gaming. 😁
Even if you don't like story, I don't think it can be argued that a good story wouldn't make the game better. I've played a few Zelda games. They seem cool, i just want more story. I'm playing an open world game right now and you get some gameplay for a while, then some story. It's been repeating that and I like that a lot more than Zelda.
I would push back on the previous title for TOTK being potentially spoilery... it's only that way because you know the story of the game having beaten it. To a person who has no idea about the game's story, it doesn't reveal what you know for later imo.
I understand that y’all need to keep the lights on with sponsors, but please please please look into how corrupt of a company “better help” is. Its worse than you might think. Not trying to flame y’all or start a debate or anything, I only say this because I enjoy your work, and because I care 🙏❤️
There has been controversy there - but if you go into it with more than half a brain cell, you can find someone who is a good fit for you and benefit from it. I used better help for about a year and found it very beneficial. I had to try a couple different therapists to find the right fit - but it was worth it. Sure - they have some less-than-stellar privacy practices, but everything you do on the internet is like that. I still recommend the service to people that want to start therapy.
every corporation is gross or has skeletons in its closet and the ad is just an ad. you can skip it entirely, never use better help, and still enjoy the podcast just fine.
@@daveglass6008 Don't think they ever said Kit and Krysta were horrible people or that they deserve to get cancelled or anything, they were just informing them on what's going on with Better Help and suggesting that they should probably try and find a different sponsor to partner up with. Ads are a pretty important part of a business and what you sell to your audience is definitely something that matters. Talking about it doesn't mean that we can't continue enjoying the podcast lol.
I don't know if they know about what's going on with Better Help but even if they do when you take sponsors you sometimes make contracts them that can last a bit and require you to promote them for x amount of time so it might be a while until they can do anything about it and stop promoting them. Saying anything about the situation would also be a breach of contract because you can't talk bad about a sponsor while sponsoring them so they can't really talk about it either even if they wanted to.
For me, the story is not as important in Zelda games. It's all about the adventure and gameplay. That doesn't mean there won't be any story or lore. What I'm saying is, there should be just enough story to kepe things interesting. The real story is the adventure you are playing as Link (or Zelda in the upcoming game). With that said, I don't care much about the "Zelda Timeline" because I treat almost all Zelda games as stand alone adventures unless it's directly mentioned as a follow up, sequel , prequel, or whatever...and even then I don't care much. I'll just be aware of a connection. And I like it this way. It makes it easier to play Zelda games because you can jump right in instead of trying to play them all in order just for the story. Its rare when I play a video game just for the story. In some cases I play for both story and gameplay (Metal Gear series). But for me, gameplay is what its all about most of the time.
Of course it's important, this is The LEGEND of Zelda. The only reason the series started with minimal in-game story was because of the limitations of the hardware.
Before watching I think story is obviously important because Nintendo wants you to care or at least puts up the veil of importance. I think the existence of the time line is one part of course. There’s also just the major importance on story in the 3D Zelda games. For example Skyward Sword obviously has the biggest focus on story, but also TOTK has major focus on its massive set pieces. Really all the 3D Zelda’s do. I mean I feel like the story of how the world was destroyed is one of the major reasons to explore in BOTW as well. So yeah it’s super important at least in 3D Zelda, although I think the newer game are tougher story wise in terms of mattering I won’t lie. The story in 2D games are still important, but more as just a driving force for the game I think. Imo it’s pretty ludicrous to take the stance they don’t matter when Nintendo wants you to care.
The way I have always looked at it, as legends and myths are passed down, they are passed down and altered from person to person. Maybe The Legend of Zelda is just the same story but passed down by a different group of people. I always liked that idea. lol
I always was team Krysta, hearing story was her argument, then being completely alienated by hatred of the timeline. I think seeing it for what it is makes the series unique and provides a logical reference to make sense of a set of objects that were not originally designed with a super linear trajectory.
As someone with deep attachment to this series and its stories, I’ve always thought that stories in games exist to ENHANCE the experience, and it should never be the focus. If your gameplay sucks, your game sucks. Period. Can have the greatest story ever told but if it sucks to play, whats the point? Theyre VIDEOGAMES first, stories second. Thats why i dont care for games like The Last of Us because a big part of that game is just moving from point a to point b, the gameplay feels like it breaks up the story which is what youre ACTUALLY interested in. That said, the timeline is so clearly an afterthought. Nintendo never meant to make it all connect, but wanted to give hardcore fans some answers. When I was a kid, i understood these games have nothing to do with one another, that was made clear to me. It wasnt til i got older and started seeing ppl online connecting things that i realized maybe it is connected. The next Zelda could completely nuke the timeline and i would have zero problems with it.
Also Tears of the Kingdom’s story is significantly better than botw. Sure theres less characters but the development of link zelda and ganon is unmatched compared to any character in botw.
I think that games with stories are cool. I don't need to explore everywhere, that's boring. Zelda isn't a game where the story is broken up by gameplay. It's mostly gameplay. It's overwhelmingly gameplay. I want more story. Story is why I'm playing. What games do you not need a story for? Mario? A card game? A platformer? Nintendo does a bad job with the Zelda story. I'm playing an open world game now with a story. You play for a bit and get story. It's nice.
My thoughts on Astro Bot are...every single thing K & K say positive about it is in comparison to a Nintendo game. Every clip I have seen of that game (I don't own a PS5 so can't play for myself but have watched a good amount of gameplay) seems to be a carbon copy of something a 3D Mario game already did (heavily inspired by Mario Sunshine & Galaxy). I see people consistently saying "Astro Bot is so creative, original, unique" etc. but I really do not feel that it is. I fully own that I am a Nintendo fanboy so take my opinion with a grain of salt but I really feel like Sony is getting way too much praise for basically taking a page right out of Nintendo's playbook. I'm happy for everyone who is enjoying the game though.
I would be one of those people, but I don't think we're the majority. Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword did focus more on story, and I don't think we saw the level of endearment you're talking about.
Well from word of mouth Zelda was always supposed to include time travel and tech. The Breath of the wild trilogy has really embraced the original ideas. Now story vs gameplay Tetris = gameplay Life is strange/ mass effect = story Both styles result in a good game Life is strange can get away with same bland gameplay mechanics in most cases across different games because I’m there for story. The story can drive a unified appreciation and understanding for a game. Tetris on the other hand needs to change it up because what it has to offer not only I have had before and can have at anytime but makes no attempt to offer anything new. It solely relies on what I consider my journey is in the game. Once I reach the end of my journey that’s it.
If Mr. Fujibayashi is truly going to take over Zelda, he needs to choose if he will actually reboot Zelda. I would be happy and more understanding. The zonai were not in skyward sword. Which had weird tech. And even before that game demise was imprisoned. But the zoniai made mention of a red haired monster. Was demise a zonai?
I appreciate you both reading all the Patreon names every week, but the list is getting quite long. 😂 Maybe just show a slideshow of the names during the last minutes of the show?
Thanks for another great episode and for answering my question this week. I agree with Krysta, I also cannot get into Majoras Mask. I love all Zelda games but it just doesn't click with me because I want to be in Hyrule. A win for Krysta this week. Sorry Kit 🎉
Hey hey! Thanks for answering my question this week. Another fun episode. Loved the Zelda debate and I totally agree with Krysta about Majora's mask, could not get into it! A win for Krysta this week (sorry Kit) 🎉
If story was of vital importance Skyward Sword would be more loved and both Switch Zeldas would of been picked apart for having a story that gets told out of order, but they’re probably 2 of the most beloved.
Because live action is serious and animation is childish that’s the Hollywood mindset and that is what Nintendo is following to make the movie as big of a success is possible for a wide audience Also it’s going to be great The director is a big Zelda fan and Nintendo is in control Nintendo are control freaks You should have been persuaded by now
I'm on the side of "story is important, but not the game-to-game timeline". Unless the developers had really made an effort to have continuity from the first game, it inevitably just gets too difficult to manage without retconning and contrivances. Plus, having a compartmentalized story makes it so much easier for new people to jump into a series 20 or 30 years down the road. Imagine the CDi games being a prerequisite to understanding what was going on in BotW! 😂
Also not having the different games needing to be connected 100% allows the developers the freedom and enjoyment of allowing themselves to be as creative as they wish. For example whether or not fans like the final fantasy 7 remakes, you can tell that the developers of those remakes are enjoying themselves and putting all their passion into it because they're allowing themselves to create new storylines regardless of fan entitlement
They actually have made an effort to have continuity from the first game. The second Zelda game was a direct sequel to the first with the same Link and the third was a prequel set long before the first 2 games that told the origin of Ganon and the Triforce. The next game, OoT, actually showed the origin of Ganon that ALttP only told a story about. Wind Waker and Twilight Princess both make it very clear they take place directly after OoT and that's integral to those stories making sense. Skyward Sword was made to show the origin of the Master Sword and the cycle of reincarnation.
The only games that haven't been clear about their connections were the Oracles games, the Four Sword games, and BotW/TotK.
While most of the time the continuity isn't super important to individual stories it helps add flavor. Sometimes it is important like in Wind Waker and Twilight Princess and I think those stories would suffer without their strong connections to OoT. And in games where it's not super important it being there isn't hurting anything.
I feel an issue with BotW and TotK is it wants to have all of these iconic elements from the series and feed on the lore surrounding them while also not caring about the lore. It made those elements feel less special cuz they were just there.
Yeah, I've always naturally just assumed they were separate stories to out of common sense really.
It's clear they're different lands and each is approached (broadly) As if you've never seen a Zelda story before.
I'm in a similar boat where I enjoy the individual game's stories, but I've lost any interest in caring about continuity when I noticed the devs themselves clearly aren't interested.
The biggest problem I've always had with the whole continuity/timeline thing, is that it's easy for a developer to make an off-hand comment in a prologue or an interview or a manual somewhere about how a game is supposed to be a sequel or a prequel to another, especially when the series is still young and only has a few games in it - but it doesn't really *mean* anything if they don't put in bare minimum effort to follow up on this in a meaningful or believable way.
One of the first big signs for me was actually quite early on, with Wind Waker. The game set itself up in the prologue as a sequel to OoT set in a flooded version of its world in the future - which is a cool concept - but then the game sends you underwater to see it. I'll never forget how excited I was to go down there, and how confused/disappointed I was when... nothing down there even remotely resembled anything I'd seen in Ocarina of Time. It's like, what, they couldn't even *partially* shape the landscape to look like a section of OoT Hyrule Field, or to have us run through a familiar location like the ruins of Castle Town or something? Even something small like having Lon Lon Ranch appear off in the distance would've gone such a long way to making it believable. But there was none of that.
I held out hope for a few years after that and *tried* to make myself believe they cared, but Wind Waker planted the first seed of doubt that eventually made me realise this just isn't a dev team which is particularly interested in making the connections between games believable. Watching some of these videos where Kit & Krysta talk about their personal interactions with Aonuma and how he always seemed disinterested and would try to change the topic when the timeline was brought up, had me nodding the entire time - because it basically cemented something I've suspected for a long time. I can't think about the timeline for long without very quickly getting a strong feeling that I'm giving this more thought than even the devs themselves have.
These days I just expect each new game will have its own standalone story and I never expect any game to reference another meaningfully beyond easter eggs, and I think I'm actually happier for it.
Fully agree with this. It's like Zelda fans have lost the ability to appreciate self-contained stories in favor of franchise-long lore (that they have to make up themselves too). It's a quick way to be miserable lol.
Krysta's entire point of just really focusing on the mythology of the Zelda world and not the timeline really, puts words to exactly how I feel. things like the races of Zelda, the characters, the triforce, the goddesses, Hylia, the reincarnation cycle, and all the different ways that can come about and really additions like the Zonai or putting the two different types of Zora in one Hyrule like in EoW soon, is exactly the amount of care for the "Story" I care about, the timeline has always just been a fun fan thing to me that's neat trying to place each game and the idea of dying in OoT being considered an ending and thus a split on a timeline is neat but its just a neat fun thing.
The STORY of Zelda has always been the mythology and the literal story of each individual game, to me personally.
100%
I think Krysta (and you) said it perfectly.
I agree with Cerulean Dragon. I really don’t like how the introduction of open world in Zelda has caused a dilution in storytelling because of the non-linearity. I think that some linearity is needed in order to keep the main narrative on track. That, or spend the time to create alternate endings or events to personalize the journey.
The quality of the story is one of the biggest reasons why I fell in love with botw and why ToTK was frustrating.
Interesting cuz i found nothing about botw’s story to be well done besides some of the characters and even then theyre all super shallow. Totk isnt much better but it at least had emotional moments and a good ass ending. When botw credits rolled i just thought “…thats it?”
@@epic_iram I think the problem I mostly had with ToTK's storytelling is that, it has to be told a specific way to be enjoyed properly. When I found the first glyph, I was really excited to find the others thinking it'd be like botw, where i'd have to piece together the story, but nah it just straight up spoiled a story major beat. ToTK just overall felt way more disconnected and kind of took away all the stakes away with what happened in the ending? Botw's ending is like, we're all that's left from the past and that's okay. And ToTK's ending I felt like, what was the point of the sacrifice? I kind of wish the sacrifice had a consequence that lead to a dlc to solve. Example it being an inverse of the ending of botw, where "do you remember who I am?" to "who are you?". Would've been nuts. I think if they had like minor connections from botw to totk, I also wouldn't be as upset lol, but they barely did that. It's kind of bizarre that no one knows about what happened, especially when there's a newspaper line
Totk story was fine
@@epic_iram Botw has really well done atmosphere and environmental storytelling. Discovering people wandering and talking to them was novel. The memories worked well too. ToTK gave the impression that the devs didn’t care in the slightest about the worldbuilding or continuity, and the orderless method of plot delivery they lifted from botw didn’t work well that time.
@@baka_tsunamivods5369 Never go north first in ToTK, worst mistake of my life
The thing is, Nintendo doesn’t even have to sacrifice their “gameplay first” ideals to explore more of Hyrule’s story. We’ve gotten Manga in the past, but they could do so much more. The movie is a start but there’s so much potential for novels or an animated show or shorts or… anything! So many characters could have excellent side stories, so many major events in Zelda are glossed over…
I don’t play Zelda for the story, but that doesn’t mean I don’t consider Nintendo’s refusal to expand it wasted potential
Alot of games that has "Gameplay First" sort of vision is really light on story, Souls-Like, Monster Hunter, Mario, Hollowknight and Majority of Metroidvania..... and also can ba said for almot every Zelda games. Yes some do offer alot more dialogue and scenes but almost every Zelfa games doesn't offer that much of a "story".
Moreso when you factor in that the Era of the Wild's scope in terms of gameplay was VASTLY BIGGER than anything they've done.
I’m on the story is important side, it brings context to some of the games settings and moments and make them mean so much more. Things like the the Great sea being flooded hyrule after Link disappeared in Oot or the hero’s shade in TP are SO iconic, they bring meaning to what you’re playing and make you care.
People replay older Zelda games so often, and it’s not because (sometimes) they like a challenge like replaying a Mario game, they want to delve deeper into the games background, settings, and story.
It really comes off as you defending Nintendo's decision rather than challenging it. They could come up with better stories.Them being so casual about things disappearing isn't a good thing. They should know.
Their canon their rules don’t like it then don’t play Zelda
We had interesting story and gameplay before. So the real question is, “Why are we making excuses to have less?”
It’s not like workers are improving story at the expense of gameplay, they’re two different departments. Both things can’t be good. It’s not like anyone is expecting amazing stories that’ll last decades, just something interesting.
I don't think Fujibayashi is a good authority to hang an argument about story on. He is the head of the series now, but his games stand out amongst the rest as not caring about story. Games that weren't directed by him, the majority of the series, are all very conscious of continuity. Fujibayashi's games (Oracles, Four Sword, Minish Cap, and BotW/TotK) are among the rare Zelda games that don't fit cleanly into the continuity of at least one previous Zelda game. Skyward Sword skirts the issue by being set before everything so it can play it loose, but trying that with BotW and TotK which are set after everything just breeds frustration.
Kit and Krysta praising Link's Awakening's story from the manual without putting respect on the Koizumi and Tanabe who wrote it made me =(
Zelda could be so much better if they cared more and put more effort into the story. It SHOULD BE important
Story (Or plot, considering setting and motivations) is important, but it can be put or told directly in gameplay, as Majora's Mask did, using cutscenes only at key points, and all other story elements are delivered as much as possible while playing.
In my opinion, with TOTK, they legitimately did not make much of an effort to tell a compelling story. I think a big thing that is being mis understood is that game to game continuity does not matter that much, but the game should have contnuity with itself, and with the games it is a direct sequel to
If I am being completely honest, the only reason I bothered at getting back into Zelda was because of the story behind breath of the wild and tears of the Kingdom.
So the answer to the question posed at the beginning: yes, I do believe that story is important to Zelda
honestly, there isn't really an excuse for a bad story in a game like zelda. it doesn't take away from the gameplay since they're still making us sit through cutscenes even when they're wholly unnecessary (secret stone thing as the easy example), and i think it's one of those situations where we just have to say nintendo isn't doing enough (like when they admitted in a mario wonder interview that they just didn't think mario games looking good mattered in the past). it's also pretty easy to say that for me, totk putting absolutely no effort into worldbuilding and just pretending botw didn't happen in so many ways drastically reduced my enjoyment of the exploration. if they don't want to even bother acknowledging guardians existed, then why should i expect any more care or reasoning put into any world changes from botw?
look at games like dark souls and elden ring, for example. they have incredibly cool worlds and lore and background details that build an intriguing story with far more detail than any zelda game, but it arguably takes even less out of the raw gameplay experience because they don't tell you those details in cutscenes. zelda needs more of that, but totk neglected caring about making sense to an insulting degree
World building is key. There's so many elements of the mithology that have just vanished from the lore. The triforce is not even referenced in TotK, the goddesses are forgoten, and now even Ganondorf is just another dude who appeared before Demise, invalidating SS. The new game added the Zonai. Watch them not getting referenced ever again, just like the Twili, the Minish, etc.
Why are sky islands in TotK? Never explained.
I'm worried about the Zelda movie. It seems a lot harder to pull it off than the Mario movie, especially since they decided to go live-action instead of animated. I just don't know how you do that without it being cheesy in the wrong ways.
A Zelda game without a good story is like eating pie with no filling. You’re taking away the most fulfilling and memorable part of the experience.
"Good Story" is highly subjectice tho and for me all of then have "Good Story". Some are better by a bit but it's still debatable which one is better..
I think Majora's mask was that perfect middle ground for me. The main plot of the game was pretty simple, which was you have 3 days to stab the moon GOOOO!!!. However, engaging with the people of termina was the bulk of the story and you could choose to interact with it as much as you like, which expands the main quests experience.
Easily my favorite game of all time!
I really wish Nintendo just had the guts to make BotW entirely its own thing. Keep the current timeline separate in case an idea for a direct sequel pops up one day, and make it very clear that Breath cannot be placed on it. But instead they handled it the worst way they could by keeping it within the same continuity, but trying to hand wave the rest of the games away by placing it so far in the future that they don't matter. And yet, Breath directly references events, characters, and places from literally every Zelda game that came before it, making it impossible to place anywhere on Zelda's branched timeline. Then they make it even more convoluted with TotK, which has concepts like the Zonai founding Hyrule which are incompatible with the previous games' stories, but which would have been fine had Breath and Tears been set within their own continuity.
Zelda fans care about the story, Nintendo doesn't. That's the issue.
STORY is SO important. Its the thing I remember most about Zelda games growing up until present day where as gameplay was always a second thought and helps support the story. Krysta def won this one! 😁
The story is the reason I got into the series. So yes. Who cares what Nintendo thinks. Nintendo also thinks Paper Mario fans hate story.
I really don't think Miyamoto's way of making games should still be done these days outside of games like Mario and Donkey Kong. Story is important. You can focus on gameplay and still have a story. It's like his series are mostly gameplay and the story is an afterthought. He doesn't like story. Zelda could be an epic story with multiple characters involved and voice cutscenes. It just feels like some Nintendo series are fine where they are whereas others like Zelda need to do better in the story area. Flashbacks aren't a story. A cutscene after beating a boss and a few here and there is not a story. It shouldn't be this hard. Why make all this lore and do nothing with it?
Miyamoto’s way is unique
Nintendo does do stuff with their lore but only when it isn’t a burden
It’s a case by case basis
Also flashbacks is a story a unique take
They want to bend the lore to fit their approach rather than making their approach fit the lore
Miyamoto’s way is unique
Nintendo does do stuff with their lore but only when it isn’t a burden
It’s a case by case basis
Also flashbacks is a story a unique take
They want to bend the lore to fit their approach rather than making their approach fit the lore
Why does it matter what Nintendo thinks? If the fans want something, you do it. Story is why you care about a game.
Story is obviously important, it gives stakes to the things that you do in these games and gives you something to work towards so that you can see what happens next.
When it comes to the timeline, I don't see why people get so up in arms about the fact that it exists at all. Most of the time when people have questions about where a game falls within it, it's basically just curiosity and a joy of piecing things together. Most of the games don't connect together so obviously, and so people don't mind where it falls so long as it makes some sense. I think the people who hate the timeline talk more about it than the timeline people do lol
The timeline existing doesn't really stop them from being creative with their property. There's always a way to make it work and not subsequently tick off a bunch of people that they decided to cater to in the first place
Yeah, I think some people that shit talk it are just being lazy or petty.
Like they think that "if an overall timeline exists I don't want it to become 'mandatory'
to the point where I have to keep track of it in order to play/understand future games" or something.
While a few are probably against it solely because they're tired of hearing people argue about it.
But with BotW and _especially_ TotK we also have the 'rabid defender' category of people.
(This is more often seen with Pokemon games in the last decade, but has shown up here too.)
Anytime someone criticizes a specific thing or says something negative like, "it has a really bad framerate" or
"it has a terrible story", you'll then be flooded with comments saying "that doesn't matter" or "it's not/never was important".
Like, okay. Maybe YOU "had fun" and "didn't notice" such things, but when someone else points them out
you don't suddenly get to say that "those details are invalid" and just ignore them.
Improving these details can only "enhance the user experience", yet some are content letting them slide constantly.
(Funny how people only get dismissive about these things when others say "it's bad" or "it has issues", huh?)
I personally love the interpretation that the entire Zelda franchise is simply one meta fairytale/oral traditional myth that changes as it gets passed down from generation to generation which is why sometimes there’s sequels and random references and continuity
That's... not how oral tradition works.
Oral tradition was essentially a huge "broken telephone" game in which people retold stories from the past, but they presented each one of them as THE story. They never pretended that it was a new version of something that came before, let alone something that was built upon previous versions. To people listening to those stories, that was the only version that existed. And on the off chance that they somehow met a bard who made changes to the story, you can bet they noticed.
However, the whole point is kind of moot because oral tradition existed in a very specific time that doesn't exist anymore.
@@XanderVJ which is exactly what botw and totk are as they’re completely separate to the timeline right? What I’m saying is it’s the same story evolves with new tidbits while still retaining most of the fundamental pieces
@@noaramboa2913 Again, not really. Just one example, TWW is a story that has OOT as its backstory. It is not a new version of the story from OOT that just happens to take place on the sea, which is what would have happened in oral tradition. That approach just doesn't work under scrutiny.
As for BotW and TotK, both could as easily be in separate universes from one another, so I don't think they should be taken as an example for anything continuity-related.
I've never been a fan of this interpretation. It just feels like giving up on trying to find a way to relate them to each other. Like Majora's Mask is clearly a sequel and Wind Waker's opening retells the events of Ocarina of Time.
@@XanderVJ 1) Oral tradition still exists, just in smaller scale ways then the epic poetry of yore.
2) "This thing no longer exists, thus it doesn't matter" is never valid reasoning
Having seen the title have DEBATE on it today of all days is very cheeky and well timed. 😂👌
They're eating the Cuccoos!!!
Astro Bot is great. I beat the story two days ago and am currently trying to get the last few bots to platinum it.
Tears of the Kingdom literally starts with a cutscene, that's what got me in the door. I just wish the champions were with Link and each area had more story going on.
Personally I think a hero is only as good as the villain he overcomes. So if there is no story telling and buildup the villain and hero sorta fall flat. If the oposite is true that makes the journey up to the showdown all that more impactful. The best Zelda games of all times all have good stories and reveals.
Zelda 3 and Wind waker comes to mind.
There are a lot of Zelda inspired games from the snes era that focused more on the story and they are all fantastic like Terranigma, Secret of Mana among many others. On the other hand I don't necessarily think the story needs to be connected between 2 games.
For example Sephiroth killing Areith is brilliant in FF7 simply because that makes him all that much more evil.
Or how in Tales of Phantasia when they wake the villain he start to just kill everyone.
Just having Ganon shuckle in an evil way is not the same as making him evil and a real treat to Link.
Aslo NIntendo now owns Monolith Soft JP that have single handedly created many of the greatest story moments in gaming ever so why are they not asking them for help boggles my mind.
I'm still waiting for them to include a companion character as a major part of the story again. Midna was the only one. The others are almost unnecessary and annoying. Even Fi, while being the spirit of the sword, doesn't do it for me. Unfortunately Tri in echoes of wisdom doesn't seem to be that important either.
While yes Nintendo doesn't do continuity through out Zelda regarding the timeline as a whole. But if you look at it in pieces. You can see a pocket of games tie into each other individually than it might not be easier to grasp. Like I can see how Ocarina of Time to Spirit Tracks and the games in between, because Link was sent back he couldn't protect Hyrule so they flooded the world, Link and friends go to find a new continent.
Ocarina of Time to Twilight Princess to Breath of the Wild, I can understand. Hyrule's expansion as a kingdom throughout generations, Time Link never having his battle with Ganondorf since he was sent to a different dimension yet returns with help but instead trains his descendant and his descendant helps his own successor millennia later in Breath if you got the amiibo.
I even get ALttP-ALBW. The SNES and gameboy games all have the same Link going on different adventures with ALBW and TF being set in the future. It really comes out of not looking to broadly and focussing on individual branches to see what games connect.
I personally don't like coming up with my own story for someone else's story at all. They need to put effort into the story.
U want the game to hold your hand?
That’s literally what speculation and theories are
@@madnessarcade7447 Is this bait? How is a story holding your hand? I want a deep story, not boring gameplay for over 100 hours.
You like wandering around a world?
Speculation and theories aren't a substitute for a story. You play a game for yourself or to talk to people???
1:52:44 I feel so vindicated hearing you talk about how expensive travel is. I find it insane how casually people talk about taking trips ANYWHERE given the insane expenses of hotels, gas, food, etc. How are all of these other college students able to constantly go on trips every few months?
The importance of coherent stories is not very important in mythology. But the symbolical layering is. Thats why majoras mask is so great
I have a hunch that one factor that spurs the frustration that some players feel is that the story in Zelda games often uses powerful and alluring plot points to motivate and draw in players but doesn't go the extra mile to make those plot points internally consistent or respect the player's emotional experience. My opinion is that the writers and developers of Zelda use these simple but powerful plot devices and environmental storytelling to play into the emotions and curiosity of the player but that they often fail to respect the impact those powerful and emotional devices have on the player and on their conception of the world in the game. It might feel a little like being led on or tricked into paying attention and caring which could leave the player feeling bitter or emotionally confused. I'll try to share some examples, but I'm not sure they're the best available-there are certainly others who can provide more and better thoughts and examples.
For instance ( *spoilers for Skyward Sword* ), in the first part of Skyward Sword, the player must "chase after" Zelda, but (conveniently for the sake of the story) cannot actually catch up to her no matter how fast they complete those parts of the game-here I think that the game makes light of the player's motivation to hurry or perform well, since no matter what the player does, nothing plays out differently. Had there been actual consequences, like there are in Majora's Mask for taking too long, or if there were a bad ending for instance, it would make the player's emotions and motivation and completion of those parts of the game have gravity and feel worthwhile rather than contrived.
It's the same for Tears of the Kingdom, *spoilers* ; the fact that Zelda transforms and supposedly "can never go back" is a powerful and emotional message that is repeated multiple times in the story-and let me specifically note that they *did not have to include this in the game to include the transformation mechanic that allowed the sword to be fixed* - they could have told the player how to undo it or that it's just never been done, and yet they didn't do that. They explicitly tell the player that fate is sealed and there's nothing that can be done and gives the player no reason to think otherwise and no apparent means to change said sealed fate (unlike in other games). In the end, that premise is conveniently ignored and the player's heartache, motivation, and, frankly, trust in anything that the game told them, are all betrayed and made light of. I think this issue in particular is what maybe drives a lot of the frustration players have with this game and made the story and lore feel weak or less impactful to them.
In other words, I think that despite claiming that they don't care about the story, the developers and writers of the Zelda games purposefully make use of very emotional and intense themes and writing which lead the player to develop and feel equally intense feelings and build an understanding of the game world based on those feelings, but then don't always follow through or even make those feelings or understandings feel invalid or inconsequential. I may well be totally off or be completely entrenched in my own opinions though, so take what I say with a grain of salt lol
I think you're right on point. Love the lore of this series. It's executed in a way that it feels like I'm hearing an actual legend about a great kingdom, hearing just enough details to be able to imagine it, and how it's changed through history, while still leaving just enough creativity to fill in the gaps. I care about the lore and the timeline simply because I like them. Nintendo's done a good job at selling these concepts to me. Now when they go against these concepts, yeah it makes me a little upset because they're essentially throwing aside something that I like a lot and thus care about to some extent (If anyone is going to say that I shouldn't care about something silly like a fictional timeline or lore, just wait until you meet other people and see the kinds of silly things they care about too). Now that I've explained how the topic makes me feel, let me also say that *Zelda games are already mostly free in terms of storytelling!* Most of the games either take place hundreds to thousands of years after each-other, or they take place in other regions of the world. There aren't that many carry-overs you need to keep track of between games. Start a new era, go to a different location, hell, start another branch on the timeline. The timeline is present, but it is incredibly loose, which is its biggest strength. You would have to actively be trying to overwrite old lore in order to create any glaring flaws that can't be explained away by either creative theorizing or by declaring it a retcon. That's what upsets me the most. Writers have tons of room to work with, but they chose to use plot points that A. Aren't consistent with other games in the series, and B. Aren't consistent with their own game. Here's hoping Echoes of Wisdom does much better in the story and lore department.
I agree with your point, but are you saying they're doing this maliciously? I don't think that's their intent, I think they're trying to appeal to the idea of classic fairy tales, very simple stories where grand events and high stakes take up just a couple sentences. That perspective seems so outdated to me, the same as Miyamoto's view of video games as toys. I wish Zelda would evolve into caring more about the story and lore, like Wind Waker or Twilight Princess or Skyward Sword but with a more lived-in world like the HD games have.
@@TriforceWisdom64 Nooo, my apologies if I came off that way! I don't at all think that they're intentionally doing it or that they are purposefully trying to get away with not following through, it's perhaps something like "they value and prioritize gameplay, then spectacle and putting on a show, and then making it all make sense". As a result of that sometimes things don't make sense and/or are more about driving the player forward rather than making the player feel satisfied and/or making it all make sense, possibly purely out of coincidence and because it just wasn't on their list of things to put into the game from the higher ups. There are also pacing issues in the two open world games because of the nature of the gameplay, but I can't exactly criticize the writers since they had to make the story completely optional and thus pacing is out the window
I think story is more important in 3D than it is 2D games for Zelda. I don't think it needs to be Mass Effect level story but it does need to be engaging, emotional and fun. Personally, I think the main 3D games have all had a great balance. Admittedly, Skyward Sword may have been a LITTLE much, at least it was good stuff. On the flip side, I think Breath of the Wild was a LITTLE sparse but overall all the 3D games do it well.
Now if that level of story were in the 2D games I don't think I'd enjoy them as much. And vice versa, if the 3D games were as minimal as the 2D games that would be lame.
Ultimately, I think what they HAVE been doing is just fine.
ALSO I want to throw out there, the timeline was talked about as far back as Ocarina of Time. They indicated that the timeline was meant to split, including the Downfall (Link dies) timeline. I love how everybody, you included, acts like this is a new thing, the timeline, but it's literally been on their mind from the point that the timeline split happened. It's always been intentional. I don't disagree that the importance of the timeline shouldn't really matter, just the individual stories. I think keeping BotW and TotK so far in the future that it doesn't matter, leaves them room to have the franchise be more linear from now on, while still not truly mattering outside of the context of each individual game.
I think the story is important in Zelda games because it establishes the tone for each title. However I believe the gameplay plays a larger role and even contributes to the storytelling. The best Zelda moments are when you get lost in the adventure and start to experiment in the world. I think they do a great job of balancing the two which is what makes the series so compelling!
Kit & Krysta:
Today, we FIGHT.
Very good title! I clicked to see what the verdict will be. I wish the story could be important in Zelda games. They are definitely more fleshed out than say a Mario story but I still feel that the stories in Zelda games can almost be important. Skyward Sword is my example as the character Groose was relatable as a bully since we all have experienced bullying, but midway to the end of the story, you see Groose’s character growth as he realized his follies and actions and also what his role in the dire situation that faced them with the monster that invaded their town. It was a great story
And this is where the Kit & Krysta: Civil War Saga begins.
Thanks Zelda.
1:31:22 K&K: it’s gonna be $599. Sony: surprise!
It feels lesser than secondary. It feels like Nintendo thinks the game should be 90 percent gameplay and 10 percent story.
Which is what makes them so unique
Compared to Sony and Microsoft with 99% story and 1% gameplay
I find Zelda a very frustrating series in that it offers just enough story and worldbuilding to hook you but then shows no interest in exploring any of that further. You've got my attention, I want to know more, but there is no more.
Always nice to see a video from you guys
Here's my thing. If story isn't important, why are you playing the game? I know not everyone cares about story but I find that odd and playing a game for 100+ hours with barely any story ain't it. Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom would have been great if they had story paths and more cutscenes. I wanted the champions to be more involved. The scene with them joining up with Link was great. I wanted more of Ganondorf.
exploration, gameplay, puzzles, making cool stuff in the case of tears of the kingdom, doing challenge runs, or speedruns, etc
@@Zorgot. Yeah, that's not very fun to me without a story.
@@sirmel11 yeah, i was just saying what other people find fun about it. i enjoy it much more with the story too
Both gameplay and story are important in Zelda games. Both need to be prioritized.
I guess I'm team Krysta in this case, since I do believe the story is important. When we take into account the quote that Kit read that mentions they think of what they want to do about the gameplay and *then* the story, it makes sense what has happened with the story (and lore) across all the games.
We have generally excellent games with an overall story and world that is fun and interesting, and that eventually becomes compelling to us players. Sadly, sometimes it falls short: Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom are the most recent examples where the delivery of the story itself (and some of the writting) leaves people wanting for something more polished, or something different altogether. "It could have been just so much better if they tweaked this little thing" is something that I hear too often... be it with the memories/flashback like system or the fact there's little reference to proper events from Breath of the Wild in Tears of the Kingdom (Towers, Divine Beasts, Shrines). On the other hand when we have gotten "good" cinematic-like story experiences like Skyward Sword... the gameplay has become a bit of a slog and rigid, and the way the story narrative gets fractured to fit the different very specific gameplay moments makes the whole experience a tiny bit tiring.
And that is a bit of a shame!
Regarding the timeline... I don't think it's that big of an issue. They have a timeline where most of the games fit, and the level of connection between each other is good enough for me; I don't think they have "overexplained" it (the timeline), if anything, people have issues with it because there's still too many things in the are that don't add up. Then they made 2 games that do not fit on said continuity, yet they borrow of the cool elements they have written across all the games. That's it. If they make new games that fit into it, that's cool too. People bending over backwards about it... yeah, nothing much to say about that lol.
Yes. Without a story there's no reason to care
The whole issue with story in Zelda is that Nintendo, at least in recent years, seems to want to have their cake and eat it too.
They can say in interviews that they don't concern themselves that much with story as many times as they want, that doesn't change the fact they want us to care about the story anyway.
If they really didn't want us to care about it, pretty much all games from "Link's Awakening" onward would be very different to what they are now. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about the disappearance of Koholint Island in LA. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about the oppressed Hyrule and Link's loss of innocence in OOT. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about the inhabitants of an entire realm and their multiple issues in MM. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about the loss of old Hyrule in TWW. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about Midna's emotional journey from cynicism to idealism in TP. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about the relationship between Link and Zelda in SS. They wouldn't have tried to make us care about Zelda's sense of self-worth and the melancholy of a lost past in BotW. And by god, They wouldn't have tried to make us care about Zelda's literal death of self in TotK. And make no mistake, I could go on with the 2D entries as well.
ALL OF THAT IS STORY. Whether you personally didn't care for some, or even all of those examples is besides the point. That's why the whole idea of story not being important in Zelda falls flat on its face under scrutiny. You have to willfully ignore all of that for that idea to hold any kind of water.
Something similar happens with continuity and the timeline. They keep saying that they only think about it "to an extent". Even if we take them at their word, they are in a weird place in which they both don't care about it enough AND they care about it too much, simultaneously. They don't want to concern themselves with making everything fall into place, but they still want to put tons of references to previous titles that convey a sense of shared history to Hyrule and add to their epic aesthetic. Again, if they didn't want us to think that way, the games we have now would have been very different. I will spare you another paragraph of me picking representative examples of each game, partly because this comment is already too long as it is, and partly because there are a lot of people who have done it already.
The funny thing is that up to the BotW games, they managed to get away with it for the most part. Yes, there were inconsistencies, but the vast majority of them were of the type that you had to dig really deep in order to notice them. Not to mention that the series had (most likely inadvertently) built a lore structure that was incredibly flexible. Since there were huge time skips between each entry, they could use them to play a bit loose with the details. As long as they didn't contradict the real major events, they can side step almost any issue with a huge time skip. That's what they did with BotW, after all.
That's why I don't buy for a single second the "a fixed continuity would limit the team's creativity" argument. I'm sorry, but that's just an excuse for careless writing. Ditto the "Nintendo things of gameplay first" argument. About the latter, I've seen the development of the series since 1997, and I still have to see a single instance in the entire series in which they made a gameplay choice that wouldn't had been able to exist if they had stuck to the established timeline. Even if only by side stepping the issue by NOT referencing other games.
And then, there's TotK, which is the game I think just... broke the spell.
What makes TotK so infuriating is that it was a golden opportunity for Nintendo to start fresh. They could have just left the timeline up to that point intact in all of its convoluted glory behind and use BotW as a starting point for a more streamlined continuity without any major hiccups. All they had to do was to NOT reference games previous to BotW, nor add elements that would rewrite them.
But they couldn't do even that.
Not only do they use references from older Zelda games, going all the way back to freaking "A Link to Past", in an utterly lore-breaking fashion (I swear, the first few weeks after the game came out I honestly thought that they had essentially de-canonized all games previous to BotW, including SS. And I would still believe it if Fujibayashi had not say otherwise in Famitsu), but they couldn't even make TotK to connect properly with BotW, a game which story is supposed to have happened just a few years prior. Meaning they screwed up the continuity for both old fans who obsess about the timeline AND new fans who have only played BotW and little to nothing else. And again, I struggle to see a single gameplay element in the entire game that would warrant such a thing.
Continuity-wise, they had it the easiest they ever had it since 1998, and they still managed to make things the worst they've ever been. That just... baffles me.
I'm not gonna mince words here: the truth is TotK made me bitter for the Zelda series, both in story AND gameplay, but the latter is a story for another day. I'm still gonna follow it, and will buy "Echoes of Wisdom" day one, but the enthusiasm has been severely diminished. As a matter of fact, the (diminished) enthusiasm I do have for EoW is primarily carried out by the idea of Zelda being the protagonist and the idea of her playing different to Link. I hope that game wins back some of my good will, because I really, REALLY don't want to feel the way I do now about my favorite series.
Wow! That was... WAY longer than I originally intended it to be. Sorry for the doom and gloom. If you somehow managed to stay all the way up here... well, thank you.
See you next time with "Echos of Wisdom".
You kind of throw away any semblance of a point you may have had by your complete misevaluation of TotK's relation to the rest of the franchise's story. You legitimately believed that TotK naming its event the Imprisoning War made it the same Imprisoning War from LttP? That is such a critical literacy failure. There also doesn't exist a single way in which TotK doesn't properly connect with BotW. Like this is abundantly clear to anyone with a working noggin that actually played the game.
Here's an easy hack for understanding what is going on in the BotW section of the Zelda story: understanding the concept of Samsara. It is perhaps the most popular theme in games from the East, it is a reflection on the cyclicality of existence on a major scale. Events will repeat, and familiar things will come to exist centuries after we have thought they went extinct. This manifests in BotW and TotK by showing that even hundreds of centuries after the Hyrule that we were so familiar with in the prior Zelda games are starting to occur again. It also fits in with the very name of the series: the events of the prior Zelda games have finally truly passed into legend, in a way which has not been seen since Wind Waker. And what do you do with legends? You retell them
I tend to phrase it that Nintendo provides all the ingredients to a great story (character, setting, conflicts), but tell the player to make their own meal.
I wouldn't be able to help myself either if I had that ace attorney investigations gavel
I really like a good and compelling story within each game. Isolated. I'm less bothered about a connecting line trying to find cohesion through the entire series. I think the key word is "Legend" I've always liked the idea of someone in the modern day telling this tale to their grandchild. "What do you mean the world was flooded? Last week, you were telling me Link was making things from a magical hand in a world beneath the world!" Legends can often have an understandable narrative within each story, but can contradict other stories about the same characters (or, in this case, characters with the same name). They sometimes also have a nugget of truth in there.
Yeah, so I've never had an issue when I've allowed myself to imagine these legends in that way.
Emphasis on LEGEND on the series title The Legend of Zelda. Each game is a legendary tale unknown to a specific time, but pieced together by historians/scholars/sages to the best of their knowledge. Leave the timeline as it is, but now tell new games as its own individual timeline with some prior game Easter eggs.
Can either of Wind Waker or Majoras mask's stories exist without Ocarina of time? Can phantom hourglass or Spirit tracks exist without being sequels to Wind Waker? Can skyward Sword's plot exist without the idea of being "the first in the timeline?"
Tears really made it clear that the devs currently don't care enough to utilize game to game continuity for what it could bring to Zelda stories, even in a direct sequel, however, it's baffling to me you guys call the timeline "nonsense" and "should be erased" over and over when it's just ... A thing lol
Cerulean Dragon hit the nail on the head. Interesting concepts but they didn't amount to much.
I do enjoy story in Zelda games, but I do agree with Kit that I don't think it's worth being upset about the story. I am sad to hear that anything set outside of Hyrule automatically gets thrown into the "I don't care" pile because I think some of Zelda's most emotionally impactful stories have taken place outside of Hyrule. I want Zelda to be able to explore other regions and I don't want it to be pigeonholed into Hyrule only.
This is my first time listening to your podcast, and I found it to be quite enjoyable. The chemistry between the hosts is excellent, and Krysta is hilarious 😂
I guess I'm not good enough. Lol I was just curious Krysta.
Great podcast today. I love Zelda story talk and it was good to get your Astro Bot impressions.
Also, thank you for answering my question on Indie Mania, from the 1:56:53 - 1:57:49 mark. I hope you enjoy the show!
To good gaming. 😁
Even if you don't like story, I don't think it can be argued that a good story wouldn't make the game better. I've played a few Zelda games. They seem cool, i just want more story. I'm playing an open world game right now and you get some gameplay for a while, then some story. It's been repeating that and I like that a lot more than Zelda.
Saying that Ultrahand as a mechanic was only interesting because of the Zonai story stuff is franky an insane take lol
I would push back on the previous title for TOTK being potentially spoilery... it's only that way because you know the story of the game having beaten it. To a person who has no idea about the game's story, it doesn't reveal what you know for later imo.
Astro Bot is my clear #1 game of the year. Only game that could maybe dethrone is Sparking Zero
Astrobot wasn't on my radar (probably because I don't own a PS5), but hearing about your experiences is making me want to try it out!
I understand that y’all need to keep the lights on with sponsors, but please please please look into how corrupt of a company “better help” is. Its worse than you might think. Not trying to flame y’all or start a debate or anything, I only say this because I enjoy your work, and because I care 🙏❤️
There has been controversy there - but if you go into it with more than half a brain cell, you can find someone who is a good fit for you and benefit from it. I used better help for about a year and found it very beneficial. I had to try a couple different therapists to find the right fit - but it was worth it. Sure - they have some less-than-stellar privacy practices, but everything you do on the internet is like that. I still recommend the service to people that want to start therapy.
@@Blackbird9070 Im glad you received the help you needed but wouldn’t trust them one bit with my privacy / protected health information. That is all
every corporation is gross or has skeletons in its closet and the ad is just an ad. you can skip it entirely, never use better help, and still enjoy the podcast just fine.
@@daveglass6008 Don't think they ever said Kit and Krysta were horrible people or that they deserve to get cancelled or anything, they were just informing them on what's going on with Better Help and suggesting that they should probably try and find a different sponsor to partner up with. Ads are a pretty important part of a business and what you sell to your audience is definitely something that matters. Talking about it doesn't mean that we can't continue enjoying the podcast lol.
I don't know if they know about what's going on with Better Help but even if they do when you take sponsors you sometimes make contracts them that can last a bit and require you to promote them for x amount of time so it might be a while until they can do anything about it and stop promoting them. Saying anything about the situation would also be a breach of contract because you can't talk bad about a sponsor while sponsoring them so they can't really talk about it either even if they wanted to.
For me, the story is not as important in Zelda games. It's all about the adventure and gameplay. That doesn't mean there won't be any story or lore. What I'm saying is, there should be just enough story to kepe things interesting. The real story is the adventure you are playing as Link (or Zelda in the upcoming game).
With that said, I don't care much about the "Zelda Timeline" because I treat almost all Zelda games as stand alone adventures unless it's directly mentioned as a follow up, sequel , prequel, or whatever...and even then I don't care much. I'll just be aware of a connection. And I like it this way. It makes it easier to play Zelda games because you can jump right in instead of trying to play them all in order just for the story.
Its rare when I play a video game just for the story. In some cases I play for both story and gameplay (Metal Gear series). But for me, gameplay is what its all about most of the time.
I bought a ps5 for AstroBot. Astrobot and Astro’s playroom are amazing.
The SNES, N64, GC Zelda games had great stories for their time. But videogame storytelling has progressed a lot, and Zelda stories haven't.
Of course it's important, this is The LEGEND of Zelda. The only reason the series started with minimal in-game story was because of the limitations of the hardware.
Before watching I think story is obviously important because Nintendo wants you to care or at least puts up the veil of importance. I think the existence of the time line is one part of course. There’s also just the major importance on story in the 3D Zelda games. For example Skyward Sword obviously has the biggest focus on story, but also TOTK has major focus on its massive set pieces. Really all the 3D Zelda’s do. I mean I feel like the story of how the world was destroyed is one of the major reasons to explore in BOTW as well. So yeah it’s super important at least in 3D Zelda, although I think the newer game are tougher story wise in terms of mattering I won’t lie. The story in 2D games are still important, but more as just a driving force for the game I think. Imo it’s pretty ludicrous to take the stance they don’t matter when Nintendo wants you to care.
Another great episode of the podcast! My favorite genre is 3D platformers! So I’m excited for Astro Bot 😍
That’s crazy how project M is so feared by Nintendo.
The way I have always looked at it, as legends and myths are passed down, they are passed down and altered from person to person. Maybe The Legend of Zelda is just the same story but passed down by a different group of people. I always liked that idea. lol
I always was team Krysta, hearing story was her argument, then being completely alienated by hatred of the timeline. I think seeing it for what it is makes the series unique and provides a logical reference to make sense of a set of objects that were not originally designed with a super linear trajectory.
Erasing the timeline in the movie is a motion in the timeline regardless😅
1:41:54 is pretty accurate since I saw so many Yankees vs Orioles games in my life because is my hometown is 15 miles from Yankees stadium 😂
As someone with deep attachment to this series and its stories, I’ve always thought that stories in games exist to ENHANCE the experience, and it should never be the focus. If your gameplay sucks, your game sucks. Period. Can have the greatest story ever told but if it sucks to play, whats the point? Theyre VIDEOGAMES first, stories second. Thats why i dont care for games like The Last of Us because a big part of that game is just moving from point a to point b, the gameplay feels like it breaks up the story which is what youre ACTUALLY interested in.
That said, the timeline is so clearly an afterthought. Nintendo never meant to make it all connect, but wanted to give hardcore fans some answers. When I was a kid, i understood these games have nothing to do with one another, that was made clear to me. It wasnt til i got older and started seeing ppl online connecting things that i realized maybe it is connected. The next Zelda could completely nuke the timeline and i would have zero problems with it.
Also Tears of the Kingdom’s story is significantly better than botw. Sure theres less characters but the development of link zelda and ganon is unmatched compared to any character in botw.
I think that games with stories are cool. I don't need to explore everywhere, that's boring. Zelda isn't a game where the story is broken up by gameplay. It's mostly gameplay. It's overwhelmingly gameplay. I want more story.
Story is why I'm playing. What games do you not need a story for? Mario? A card game? A platformer? Nintendo does a bad job with the Zelda story. I'm playing an open world game now with a story. You play for a bit and get story. It's nice.
My thoughts on Astro Bot are...every single thing K & K say positive about it is in comparison to a Nintendo game. Every clip I have seen of that game (I don't own a PS5 so can't play for myself but have watched a good amount of gameplay) seems to be a carbon copy of something a 3D Mario game already did (heavily inspired by Mario Sunshine & Galaxy). I see people consistently saying "Astro Bot is so creative, original, unique" etc. but I really do not feel that it is. I fully own that I am a Nintendo fanboy so take my opinion with a grain of salt but I really feel like Sony is getting way too much praise for basically taking a page right out of Nintendo's playbook. I'm happy for everyone who is enjoying the game though.
Evil Krysta: Tomorrroooooooww!!!!
I guarantee you if Zelda, Metroid, or Star Fox had more story, people would call those games the best games in the respective series for sure.
I would be one of those people, but I don't think we're the majority. Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword did focus more on story, and I don't think we saw the level of endearment you're talking about.
Well from word of mouth Zelda was always supposed to include time travel and tech. The Breath of the wild trilogy has really embraced the original ideas.
Now story vs gameplay
Tetris = gameplay
Life is strange/ mass effect = story
Both styles result in a good game
Life is strange can get away with same bland gameplay mechanics in most cases across different games because I’m there for story. The story can drive a unified appreciation and understanding for a game. Tetris on the other hand needs to change it up because what it has to offer not only I have had before and can have at anytime but makes no attempt to offer anything new. It solely relies on what I consider my journey is in the game. Once I reach the end of my journey that’s it.
If Mr. Fujibayashi is truly going to take over Zelda, he needs to choose if he will actually reboot Zelda. I would be happy and more understanding. The zonai were not in skyward sword. Which had weird tech. And even before that game demise was imprisoned. But the zoniai made mention of a red haired monster. Was demise a zonai?
I really don’t know
Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom needed a lot more voice acting.
I appreciate you both reading all the Patreon names every week, but the list is getting quite long. 😂
Maybe just show a slideshow of the names during the last minutes of the show?
Thanks for another great episode and for answering my question this week. I agree with Krysta, I also cannot get into Majoras Mask. I love all Zelda games but it just doesn't click with me because I want to be in Hyrule. A win for Krysta this week. Sorry Kit 🎉
Wondering if either of you plan to check out the Splatoon 3 finale grand splatfest that starts tonight 🦑🦑 I'm choosinf team Future!
I gave up on Nintendo ever making a good story still in the 90s, they simply don't care.
Hey hey! Thanks for answering my question this week. Another fun episode. Loved the Zelda debate and I totally agree with Krysta about Majora's mask, could not get into it! A win for Krysta this week (sorry Kit) 🎉
Hearing what they think the PS5 Pro price will be here is hilarious now lol
The reason Link doesn't speak is because he is Zelda's first echo and therefore lacks the ability to speak
What are we going to talk about ------ TOMORROW-------
Story yes, place in the timeline, no!
I'm with Krysta on this one sorry Kit
I don’t think the story is very important. The gameplay, exploration, puzzles, atmosphere, weird characters make the games.
Pacing is important.
And new Zelda ain’t got it.
Astro bot made me want to hug my ps5
If story was of vital importance Skyward Sword would be more loved and both Switch Zeldas would of been picked apart for having a story that gets told out of order, but they’re probably 2 of the most beloved.
I wish it was more important
The characters you meet ARE the story.
I could see the Zelda movie being terrible. Why is it live action?
Because live action is serious and animation is childish that’s the Hollywood mindset and that is what Nintendo is following to make the movie as big of a success is possible for a wide audience
Also it’s going to be great
The director is a big Zelda fan and Nintendo is in control
Nintendo are control freaks
You should have been persuaded by now
I wanted Krysta to swing the gavel :(