Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
When people mistake admiration of a character for sexual/romantic attraction to a character
So last night, I was chatting with my friends.
Ganondorf holds the freaking Power of the Gods. He isn't going to bow to anyone.
you know you sure do talk about ganondorf a lot
i'm seriously starting to think you're gay for him
Yeah
This is like the third time
check out dat gerudo 8 pack
You wanna stick your Master Sword in him
But seriously
yeah
I'm having a hard time believing you aren't gay for him on some level.
What's wrong with admiring a fictional character? Just because I think a character's cool doesn't mean I have a crush on him!
Comments
I-It's not that I like you or anything, Ganon-baka!!!
Dude, they're probably just making fun of you for talking about him all the time.
Granted, this phenomenon is the source of like 80% of shipping fuel.
Meh, you're better off with a crush on Link, all the 'sexy' fanart of Ganondorf looks abysmal.
Better yet, just drop the 'Dorf and go with Ganon.
^
you don't have a crush on him?
But that's the thing. I don't talk about him all the time.
I aten't gay.
Yeah and I don't talk about comics all the time
I don't really recall talking about Ganondorf all that much here...
so have i been tripping balls and browsing ijbm at the same time
is that what you are saying
cuz let me tell you i am a responsible internet browsing person and i never ever trip balls and browse the internet at the same time.
Where are you one the Kinsey Scale? Could be It's Okay If It's Dorfy-Kun.
http://vistriai.com/kinseyscaletest/
OK, maybe I've talked about him once or twice!
...OK, maybe thrice!
...OK, maybe a lot...
^I'm a 0...
We can work with that:
By the way, there's something wrong with the test. It says I didn't answer ten questions, even though I double-checked and made sure I answered everything.
^...Is it just me or is Rule 63 Ganondorf kinda hot?
You literally cannot tell the difference between attractive and unattractive men?
Because that's what a 0 is.
I thought that was the "straight" option. I'm not actually gay.
Gah, I feel like Martin Freeman.
Yessshhh, the indoctrination has begun. First a steady diet of genderswapped Ganons, followed by futa Ganons, then switching over to bishounen Ganons, ending in bara Ganons.
I'm seriously not gay, guys! I mean, there's nothing wrong with being gay! It's a beautiful part of who you are, but it's just not me!
Extremely not relevant:
Everything Genderbent in the Zelda universe is good.
I still think a game where Link is a girl is very good idea. And they could totally do it in the context of the universe since there are many different Links and Zeldas.
That wouldn't work in a lore context, though. The original Skyward Sword Link is male and all Links are canonically his reincarnations: thus, it makes more sense for all Links to be male.
...or is this about making Link female for lesbian subtext between her and Zelda? Because a lot of Zelda fans can get behind that idea.
> Loz
> canon
laughinggirls.jpg
I subscribe to the folkloric interpretation of Zelda games, surprising no-one. And that interpretation doesn't attempt to find continuity between the games, because it sees them not as trying to be part of a singular, cohesive world, but as being self-consciously fictional. And they're so good at this; the only other place where this kind of relationship between consistency and inconsistency is actual folklore, or other works that imitate folklore.
So I see Zelda games as gaming's equivalent of Arthurian mythology, the tales of Robin Hood, and embellishments of folk hero stories from around the world. They exist, very consciously, as stories meant for the audiences that experience them, not to be consistent or logical in their own right. Compare the initial tales of King Arthur, which probably entered circulation in Wales some time around the fall of the Roman Empire. Hundreds of years later, in the Late Middle Ages (c.1250-1450), they've been appropriated by the French as the basis for chivalric romance. These later versions weren't written with respect towards the way the world was in c.600 AD, but included what were then contemporary setting elements -- because the world of King Arthur was the world the French lived in then and there.
To give an example, knights as conceived of under the code of chivalry didn't exist in c.600. Back then, a knight was simply a warrior on horseback, with no mention towards particular skill at arms, moral code or social responsibility. But in the French reimaginings (and some beforehand), Arthur had knights as people of the time thought of them -- professional warrior officials that held one-another to a chivalric ideal (at least in theory). That kind of thing would have been entirely out of place in the original Welsh circulations of the legend, but later versions of those stories used newly emerging social, economic and technological conditions with the old lore as a backdrop.
Or, in short, the stories of King Arthur from after the initial Welsh circulations of the legend are all the medieval equivalent of urban fantasy. It'd kind of be like writing a modern version where Arthur is the prime minister of the UK, fights on the frontlines of war mounted upon a motorcycle, and has a divine rifle named "Excalibur" (or "Caliburn", if you like). Lancelot is involved in a sex scandal with Gwynevere, and Arthur steps down from office as a result. In addition, the existing government was held together by Arthur, and so they disband also. Afterwards, band-aid policies drag down the UK until Arthur confronts his illegitimate son, Mordred, in a ministerial debate. Arthur wins, but not before Mordred can make a sick burn that ensures that he will only hold office for the next term and never again. Arthur declares that he is going to take a nap until the UK decides it wants a half-decent prime minister again, and then some fuckwit throws his rifle into a pond.
Or something.
The point is that LoZ's inconsistencies make a lot of sense from a position outside of the fourth wall, and allow it to imitate older styles of literature and storytelling very well.
So what you're saying is that all Zelda games are essentially the same story, recycled again and again with both constant and changing variables? That interpretation...has some problems too.
Also there's a canon Zelda timeline so nyeh nyeh.
Such as?
As far as I know, the timeline book was discredited as being canon. Especially since various people working on the Zelda games themselves (including Miyamoto, importantly), have said that there isn't any hard connection between the different games, with exceptions such as OoT and MM.
Curious Alex, would Link as a girl still work out, you think?
Some Zelda games very explicitly tell different stories. For example, A Link to the Past and Majora's Mask are very different from each other. A Link to the Past is about shifting between worlds to prevent Zelda from dying so that Ganon can be unsealed. By contrast, Majora's Mask is about being stuck in a single parallel world and having to stop a small populace from being destroyed by an evil Elder God.
Given that some of the input is from Miyamoto and the rest of the Zelda dev team...I don't think so.
Yes, but Majora's Mask is an addendum to Ocarina of Time, and Ocarina of Time is the original Zelda game, and it is also A Link To The Past. Also, it's Twilight Princess and Wind Waker. And Skyward Sword. To use the example of Arthurian mythology again, the core story is remarkably similar from the earliest known renditions up to entirely contemporary versions, but different eras have included different side-stories and whatnot.
Yes, because Link is a consistent aesthetic moreso than a consistent character. Conversely, changing Samus into a man for a game or two would be really bizarre, because she's established as a single, consistent character and a setting with a (reasonably) clear, linear timeline. But under the timeline interpretation, Link is different people and under the mythological interpretation, Link isn't even a fictional person, but a fictional narrative facsimile of a person. He's so meta that being a "he" in the first place is entirely meaningless.
Now would roughly be a good time for this, since the audience for games in general is expanding, and Zelda games are some of the most accessible and widely-loved "hardcore" games out there.