Chat Moderator: Question 9: Do you think Zelda fans should be regarded with much importance when it comes to influencing the making of the games?
Nathan: Honestly, No. We don't know what we want till we get it. Look at Wind Waker for an example. Everyone hated the Cel Shading, and now? Most people thought it fit very well with the game. Nintendo is known for innovation, and I trust there ability to create a new and beautiful expirience over us influencing them to do so.
The Real Link: Yes and no, as gamers we know what we like, but we really have no clue what all goes into it. The Game Developers know what they are doing. Our job is to enjoy the games.
TSA: I think Nintendo should pay attention to fans post-release of products, not beforehand.
Nathan: Agreed
TSA: I do think, however, they need to pay attention to what we ask for sometimes. For example...manga. We want it translated into English for us to buy. We want soundtracks in the US. Why don't they listen to that?
Nathan: Because the games are the big sellars. That is most likely why they don't head word about the manga and such.
Archaic Sage: Yes. Simply because we are the ones who are purchasing the games, we are the ones who spend hours creating and reading the sites and pointing out Nintendo's inconsitancies. So they should definately consult us, on the whole, before allowing things to go ahead. I don't think people would've hated The Wind Waker half as much if there was no Spaceworld 2000 demo of Link. Further, a decent In essense, to survive, they need to talk to us. As we're the ones keeping them either alive, or dead. After all, we're translating manga and downloading soundtracks ourselves, why not let us buy them and earn a profit off of us.
Captain Cornflake: The avarage consumer is retarded. If the avarage consumer decided what the next Zelda game should be, it would be a mash-up of every sub-par adventure game in existance, with music provided by Green Day. Some voice is good. I'm positive that developers linger around fansites, just to gather ideas. The gamer has final say, however, by choosing whether or not to spend their hard earned money on a game. But leave the development process up to the professionals.
Nathan: I think they need to listen to our comments after the game is released. They seem to ignore them and make the same mistakes. I just don't think we should be adversly effecting the way the games are made, just pointing out reminders on past mistakes.
Art1st4786: I think it's a good idea for them to listen to their fans. It lets them know how well they're doing and also where they're struggling. However, all of Nintendos ideas should be their own and not that of the fans.
Jack: No, because everyone wants different things to be in the game. Too chaotic if you're going to try to please everyone. It'd be less sloppy in the end if they left the game details to the production team and let only certain issues like game mechanics be the province of gamer complaints.
JC: Zelda stimulates the imagination. People could get inspirtations from Zelda games, sure. As you've noticed, theres alot of Zelda fan games (Including mine) around the Community. You can either take Zelda as an influential source, or a source of enjoyment, or both. The Legend of Zelda holds a very special place in the Market, and in every fan's heart. Look at the PS2 game "Shadow of Colossus". All the huge, gigantic monsters in that game are inverted Zelda Ocarina of Time dungeons. Remember in the original Final Fantasy where it said "Here likes Link"? Zelda influences alot of things for people. It just depends on how you interact with the series you claim you are so dedicated to.
Link of Hyrule: I don't believe that the fans should have a say in the making of the Zelda games because as ArchaicSage said we just have too many opinions and preferences. Leave it to the proffesionals at Ninty and they will hopefully find a middle ground and create the games we all know and love. It hasn't gone wrong yet (as long as Tingle doesn't get his own game!)
Lysia: That's a tough question. Each fan has their own view of the Zelda series, and they don't all agree. Nintendo are the ones who know what they're doing, and I think we should trust them. If one or two fans were allowed to give input, other fans may hate what they come up with. But if you gathered a group of fans together - say even those of us doing this chat right now - there would be a *lot* of arguing and debating. Like TSA said, Nintendo should watch for how the fans react to each game instead of just taking Zelda off into their own little world.
MNgoldenEagle: The making? Not very, no. No group can decide on a single storyline, for one... if fans are given any precedence, it should be contests for fan-made materials, like characters or music. If any of it fits, they can add it and give out bonuses. It's a small part, but it would give us something to look forward to.
Kifika: Hmm, i dont think we should simply because, would the zelda game be what it is today if we put our say in it today ? I mean there are alot of fan games going around, and they stray away from the zelda game its self, i mean tehre are like 200 mmorpg zelda fan games out tehre... i dont think zelda was made to be a mmorpg, also in my opinion zelda has got this far by its self, and i couldnt really think of anything to change it.
Chat Moderator: Question 10: Should fans really care so much abou the overall timeline of the zelda series? Do you really think the creators mean for fans to be so worked up about it?
JC: Fans can care about the timeline, or not. It's up to them really. It's hard to say if the creators got us worked up about it. I'm not sure they'd know they'd make games contradicting existing game info. I, for one, care very much for the timeline. And to hear Aonuma say they are working on it is sort of a comfort and a distress. I guess we'll just need to wait it out. I for one am ready to tackle every theory I find until we have a full, complete timeline.
TSA: Here's the timeline. Zelda's Adventure. Final Fantasy VII. Mega Man X. Super Mario Kart. A Link to the Past -> Split timeline -> Chrono Trigger -> Ocarina of Time -> Final Fantasy X -> Bomberman -> Metroid II: The Return of Samus. (sarcasm)
Link of Hyrule: Indeed that is the timeline TSA!
TSA: It's fine if people debate it.
MNgoldenEagle: I sincerely doubt that the creators wanted there to be this much controversy about the timeline. On the other hand, it's a lot of fun.
I won't digress into my own thoughts of what the timeline is, but I sincerely doubt Nintendo is going to define it further. To them, it's not a major issue, and to us, it only really became an issue when OOT was released and some sense of continuity became apparent. I think it's fascinating, and I love contemplating various theories, but I think it's also important not to make too much of a big deal out of it. No matter what theory you come up with, Nintendo will break your canon sooner or later. Unless you convince Nintendo to follow your timeline, which is quite a feat.
Art1st4786: Everyone has their own views on what the timeline should be. Discussions and debates have been brought up about each person's views, including whether there's a single or multiple timelines.
TSA: Just so long as people know two things: 1) There is a timeline. 2) You don't know it. I don't think the timeline should ever be revealed.
Link of Hyrule: I personally think that the creators of Zelda never intended for there to be a timeline, they just got caught up in making some games link slightly
Lysia: When Nintendo first made LoZ, back in 1986, I doubt that they knew it would still be going so strong 20 years after that.
JC: For one: theories are useless. If you want a complete CANON timeline, using only game info, you wouldn't need any theory really. You'd just need to piece each game together.
TSA: It would destroy some of the mystique behind the series.
Art1st4786: Just like with how some fans will be angry with giving Link a voice, it goes the same for giving a specific timeline. It'll anger a lot of fans who believe their timeline is right.
TSA: Why'd they call it Final Fantasy? It was supposed to be the last game they made...
Link of Hyrule: Then fans made their own assumptions. Miyamoto said some rubbish about there being a true timeline that was taken in the wrong way and now we are where we are
TSA: Now they are stuck with the title...which doesn't even make any sense anymore.
Jack: Overall, I think the timeline is indeed important because if the Zelda series is anything, it's one expansive story. And, what good is a story if you don't what order it takes place in? Having a timeline adds a much needed dimension to the Zelda experience.
MNgoldenEagle: Not to mention that Nintendo has often changed the timeline, so nothing is set in stone.
Link of Hyrule: I highly doubt they will ever release a true timeline.. there is just too many games now to make it seem real
Captain Cornflake: Frankly, I don't think there is much of a timeline at all anymore. It's obvious after all the localizations and releases that Nintendo quit caring about the timeline long ago. And now that the fans are attempting to piece things together themselves, the inevitable chaos is here, and Nintendo is totally screwed on what to do, other than say "we'll work it out eventually."
TSA: Fans should focus on the in-game stories.
JC: The timeline is definately something great. It gives the Zelda series an extra shine.
Captain Cornflake: So what do we have now? Multiple timelines? Multiple dimensions? I'm suprised that black holes havn't come into play at this point.
Art1st4786: There is a timeline, and Nintendo is working on it, but nobody else knows what it is yet. I, personally, would like to see what it is. It'll make a lot of sense with the games and possibly explain some things, like what happened after Wind Waker.
The Real Link: I have no need for a timeline. I just take each game as they are.
Art1st4786: Or if Ganon ever came back after Adventure of Link
Lysia: I can play each Zelda game as a separate game, and enjoy its own world, and as long as there are no obvious links to other games then I don't usually play through thinking about the overall timeline, but rather just the story of that game.
MNgoldenEagle: I think Wind Waker should be non-canon... there are just so many concepts that don't make sense in that game. For one, how come they have so many mountains close together, and nearly all of them lush and flat?
TSA: You see, Sephiroth killed Zelda when Link was going for the Holy Triforcia...then like...The Minish used their life force to summon the four giants to stop the Moon in Majora's Mask....
JC: Nothing changes the fact that it is definately one of the most aggrevating portions of Zelda.
Captain Cornflake: Frankly, all we need is a futuristic Zelda game. That way Nintendo can appease all the people who would like to see a somewhat-solid timeline theory, by knowing which game is last in the series. At least all the folks in the single-timeline camp.
TSA: Capcom should handle that one.
Captain Cornflake: Doesn't matter if it sucks, but at least part of the crowd is calmed. We can name it "Return of Four Swords" because nobody liked the FS subseries anyways.
Chat Moderator: I'd like to see the game where the triforce is destroyed
Nathan: Honestly, the timeline stuff is very interesting, but not exactly of nintendo's concern. They pay no never mind to it when they make the games, and afterwords give hints as to how it fits in, but they never explain exactly how it fits in. They like the fans to keep the storyline and timeline to themselves, it helps us feel more into the series as whole when we can come up with the ideas ourselves.
TSA: Okay, last question: This one is for the public room - should GameFAQs boards be destroyed?
MNgoldenEagle: Oh, good god yes!
Captain Cornflake: No. Leave the GameFAQ's boards. You see, I have a theory about the internet.
Nathan: GameFAQ baords need to rot in hell.
Captain Cornflake: It involves a set of 'wastebaskets' that bad members of the internet populate. (Such as Gaia, IGN, GameFAQ's, ect)
TSA: Ok, here comes The Real Link last question: Do you think that Nintendo should ever consider a Legend of Zelda film. If so, what format should it be in. Could a Zelda film really "destroy" the series?
Link of Hyrule: Brilliant question!
TSA: Oh yeah, stick around after because I have exclusive information to give out
Archaic Sage: No, there should never be an official film. It would simply be awful. I hate the idea of it and the fact that Nintendo could never please all of the fans make me sad. A Zelda film would divide a community more so than it does at the moment. If it was unofficial, then that's great.
Otherwise, no.
Captain Cornflake: When are game-based-movies ever good, should be the question here.
MNgoldenEagle: Oh, I think they could make the movie idea work. (Personally, I loved Final Fantasy Spirits Within.) It just would have to be done perfectly... so we'd have to get Peter Jack:son to make it.
Nathan: Should they consider it? Of course. It should be made a real life type of format. It can't destroy the series really. If the CD-I games couldn;t destroy the series, nothing can.
JC: A Zelda Film. Hmm...Alot of fans would be against it, but many for it. Theres all too many questions like "Who plays Link or Zelda" or "what game will take place in?" I personally think a real live action movie would destroy the series because it is defining who the characters should be.
MNgoldenEagle: Agreed. If it flops, fans will ignore it.
Nathan: It may not be good, but you know what, we'll all go see it anyways
JC: A CG Zelda movie is the way to go.
Captain Cornflake: Somebody needs to find Steve Buscemi. He'd make a kickass townsperson.
MNgoldenEagle: If fans don't like it, they'll ignore it. Let's face it, people: we'll play Zelda, no matter how many mistakes Nintendo will make.
Jack: Only if it's something other than live action, and direct to DVD. A live-action, blockbuster film would make a laughing stock of Zelda.
Link of Hyrule: The idea of an official Zelda movie fills me with dread. An actual live action one with actual people could never really work because the people would never meet up to the fans expectations of what the characrter's should look like. And we just don't have the right cartoon animation at the moment I don't believe to properly carry off the storyline to its full potential.
TSA: Adapt one of the manga into an animated film. That's my opinion.
Art1st4786: I wouldn't mind the movie being Anime or CG-style. I would love to see a Zelda movie.
Link of Hyrule: I agree
TSA: Manga lends itself more to a visual medium
Link of Hyrule: But not unless it is properly done
TSA: Video games are bad to adapt, period.
JC: And that's coming from TSA, the guy who wanted to make a live action Zelda film! :-p
Art1st4786: What if they created a whole new storyline?
TSA: They're too much in the "mindscape," much like books...
MNgoldenEagle: What about LoTR?
TSA: Lord of the Rings only did well because it visually looked "awesome". As for accuracy and all that stuff, not sure - I'm not a well-versed LotR fan. It had wide appeal...it looked awesome, promised epic battles... And keyword here... it was a big studio project
Lysia: I would only like to see a Zelda film if, and only if, the highest level of effort and standards went into it. I would rather have no Zelda movie than a terrible one.
TSA: Most real film adaptations aren't even that...
Lysia: It would be extremely hard to please all of the fans of Zelda, and if it was to be a major release, it would have to try and cater to the mainstream movie-going population, bringing Zelda to those who have never played the games. My personal format preference is for CG, since it can be used to bring a lot of the fantasy elements to life, and it would prevent the, "That actor doesn't look like Link!" comments.
TSA: Uwe Boll's crap is like almost indie film. and Indie Films are no way to go for a Zelda film.
Art1st4786: CG would be the best bet.
MNgoldenEagle: Well, if it's done, it must be done perfectly. Otherwise, fans will ignore it and other people will give it funny looks. Won't hurt the series, but it'll hurt Nintendo's pocketbooks.
TSA: You can't acheive the visual quality needed for a good Zelda film with indie production.
Captain Cornflake: Nintendo would have to file a restraining order against Uwe Boll, just to make sure he didn't taint it.
Art1st4786: They'd have to find really good voice actors for the characters then.
Lysia: But while Nintendo won't make a film, what's the harm in the fans making their own indie versions?
TSA: 2If the thing doesn't pass the visual test - it doesn't look like Zelda - nobody gives a damn about the story.
Art1st4786: If Nintendo works with the movie producers the entire way, we're sure to get a good Zelda movie.
Captain Cornflake: Billy Bob Thornton could easily do an animated Sahasrahala.
Art1st4786: Didn't Nintendo open up that animation studio recently?
TSA: Indie fan films are fine... If they're like the Legend of Vernon. They don't take themselves seriously. And it's meant to be funny, and fan oriented. If you're trying to make a serious Zelda indie film...I'm sorry...you need more time, more money, more resources than the entire community could come up with.
Lysia: The way I see it, fan-made films are really no different to fanfics 'brought to life'
TSA: There's nothing wrong with that. But to me, it's Zelda. Zelda is held to a higher standard.
JC: You're better off sticking with fan games
Art1st4786: Zelda movie production should be handled only by professionals and by Nintendo.
Nathan: Well to us, of course it is.
TSA: If there is to be a film, it must also be made with as much love, care and high quality production. The problem is this: Just like LOTR book fans held it to a high standard. Fan film = fan interpretation.
Nathan: most though the movies were crap.
TSA: Official film with Miyamoto and compnay = official. Fans would have less to bitch about.
Lysia: So are fan fics, fan art, and even fan games.
Nathan: Just like most of us will think a Zelda movie is crap.
Lysia: Granted, movies do attract more scrutiny from fans.
TSA: They'd be like "Oh, Miyamoto made it. It will be official."
Nathan: But, you all know we would still pay to see it.
TSA: There's a lot tha tneeds to be considered. 1) Creator involvement does not mean good film. See - Final Fantasy
Captain Cornflake: People paid to see the Doom movie after all, and look how spectacularly bad that was.
TSA: if you stray too much...you lose fans.
Lysia: But a Zelda movie isn't just about getting people to pay to see it
Link of Hyrule: I think that fan movies are ok even Zelda ones but I do agree with JC that fan games will always work better for the Zelda genre..
TSA: But, there is the opposite end.
Nathan: Lol the best part of that film lasted 30 seconds
Captain Cornflake: The thing is, even if a movie does come out, and it outright blows, nobody is going to stop being a Zelda fan.
TSA: True. Mario the movie sucked.
Captain Cornflake: They'll just pretend it didn't happen and move on with their lives.
Nathan: All we can say is it's nintendo, and hope for the best. You know a video will come from them.
TSA: I still see Mario games.
Nathan: Thye know it will sell, and they want the money
TSA: I just don't think it should ever be left to fans.
Lysia: But it a bad movie may prevent new gamers from picking up a Zelda game
TSA: Do we see fan games replacing official movies?
Nathan: Bad or not, i'll own it because it;s Zelda
TSA: Okay, so here's the exclusive info.
Captain Cornflake: EXCLUSIVE: SNAPE KILLS DUMBLEDORE
TSA: "We still don't know when TP is coming out."
Chat Moderator: XD
Nathan: nice exclusiveness
Jack: boooo
TSA: It will be playable on Revolution at E3. ;-)
Captain Cornflake: Predictable.
Nathan: How do you know this?
Chat Moderator: He has contacts
Lysia: Well that's all fine for those of you who are going to E3 ;-P
TSA: On both...GCN...and Revolution.
AND
You will all finally see Ganon.
Chat Moderator: okay END OF DISCUSSION
Captain Cornflake: Your mother is playable, as well! Oh, snap!
Nathan: Honestly, No. We don't know what we want till we get it. Look at Wind Waker for an example. Everyone hated the Cel Shading, and now? Most people thought it fit very well with the game. Nintendo is known for innovation, and I trust there ability to create a new and beautiful expirience over us influencing them to do so.
The Real Link: Yes and no, as gamers we know what we like, but we really have no clue what all goes into it. The Game Developers know what they are doing. Our job is to enjoy the games.
TSA: I think Nintendo should pay attention to fans post-release of products, not beforehand.
Nathan: Agreed
TSA: I do think, however, they need to pay attention to what we ask for sometimes. For example...manga. We want it translated into English for us to buy. We want soundtracks in the US. Why don't they listen to that?
Nathan: Because the games are the big sellars. That is most likely why they don't head word about the manga and such.
Archaic Sage: Yes. Simply because we are the ones who are purchasing the games, we are the ones who spend hours creating and reading the sites and pointing out Nintendo's inconsitancies. So they should definately consult us, on the whole, before allowing things to go ahead. I don't think people would've hated The Wind Waker half as much if there was no Spaceworld 2000 demo of Link. Further, a decent In essense, to survive, they need to talk to us. As we're the ones keeping them either alive, or dead. After all, we're translating manga and downloading soundtracks ourselves, why not let us buy them and earn a profit off of us.
Captain Cornflake: The avarage consumer is retarded. If the avarage consumer decided what the next Zelda game should be, it would be a mash-up of every sub-par adventure game in existance, with music provided by Green Day. Some voice is good. I'm positive that developers linger around fansites, just to gather ideas. The gamer has final say, however, by choosing whether or not to spend their hard earned money on a game. But leave the development process up to the professionals.
Nathan: I think they need to listen to our comments after the game is released. They seem to ignore them and make the same mistakes. I just don't think we should be adversly effecting the way the games are made, just pointing out reminders on past mistakes.
Art1st4786: I think it's a good idea for them to listen to their fans. It lets them know how well they're doing and also where they're struggling. However, all of Nintendos ideas should be their own and not that of the fans.
Jack: No, because everyone wants different things to be in the game. Too chaotic if you're going to try to please everyone. It'd be less sloppy in the end if they left the game details to the production team and let only certain issues like game mechanics be the province of gamer complaints.
JC: Zelda stimulates the imagination. People could get inspirtations from Zelda games, sure. As you've noticed, theres alot of Zelda fan games (Including mine) around the Community. You can either take Zelda as an influential source, or a source of enjoyment, or both. The Legend of Zelda holds a very special place in the Market, and in every fan's heart. Look at the PS2 game "Shadow of Colossus". All the huge, gigantic monsters in that game are inverted Zelda Ocarina of Time dungeons. Remember in the original Final Fantasy where it said "Here likes Link"? Zelda influences alot of things for people. It just depends on how you interact with the series you claim you are so dedicated to.
Link of Hyrule: I don't believe that the fans should have a say in the making of the Zelda games because as ArchaicSage said we just have too many opinions and preferences. Leave it to the proffesionals at Ninty and they will hopefully find a middle ground and create the games we all know and love. It hasn't gone wrong yet (as long as Tingle doesn't get his own game!)
Lysia: That's a tough question. Each fan has their own view of the Zelda series, and they don't all agree. Nintendo are the ones who know what they're doing, and I think we should trust them. If one or two fans were allowed to give input, other fans may hate what they come up with. But if you gathered a group of fans together - say even those of us doing this chat right now - there would be a *lot* of arguing and debating. Like TSA said, Nintendo should watch for how the fans react to each game instead of just taking Zelda off into their own little world.
MNgoldenEagle: The making? Not very, no. No group can decide on a single storyline, for one... if fans are given any precedence, it should be contests for fan-made materials, like characters or music. If any of it fits, they can add it and give out bonuses. It's a small part, but it would give us something to look forward to.
Kifika: Hmm, i dont think we should simply because, would the zelda game be what it is today if we put our say in it today ? I mean there are alot of fan games going around, and they stray away from the zelda game its self, i mean tehre are like 200 mmorpg zelda fan games out tehre... i dont think zelda was made to be a mmorpg, also in my opinion zelda has got this far by its self, and i couldnt really think of anything to change it.
Chat Moderator: Question 10: Should fans really care so much abou the overall timeline of the zelda series? Do you really think the creators mean for fans to be so worked up about it?
JC: Fans can care about the timeline, or not. It's up to them really. It's hard to say if the creators got us worked up about it. I'm not sure they'd know they'd make games contradicting existing game info. I, for one, care very much for the timeline. And to hear Aonuma say they are working on it is sort of a comfort and a distress. I guess we'll just need to wait it out. I for one am ready to tackle every theory I find until we have a full, complete timeline.
TSA: Here's the timeline. Zelda's Adventure. Final Fantasy VII. Mega Man X. Super Mario Kart. A Link to the Past -> Split timeline -> Chrono Trigger -> Ocarina of Time -> Final Fantasy X -> Bomberman -> Metroid II: The Return of Samus. (sarcasm)
Link of Hyrule: Indeed that is the timeline TSA!
TSA: It's fine if people debate it.
MNgoldenEagle: I sincerely doubt that the creators wanted there to be this much controversy about the timeline. On the other hand, it's a lot of fun.
I won't digress into my own thoughts of what the timeline is, but I sincerely doubt Nintendo is going to define it further. To them, it's not a major issue, and to us, it only really became an issue when OOT was released and some sense of continuity became apparent. I think it's fascinating, and I love contemplating various theories, but I think it's also important not to make too much of a big deal out of it. No matter what theory you come up with, Nintendo will break your canon sooner or later. Unless you convince Nintendo to follow your timeline, which is quite a feat. Art1st4786: Everyone has their own views on what the timeline should be. Discussions and debates have been brought up about each person's views, including whether there's a single or multiple timelines.
TSA: Just so long as people know two things: 1) There is a timeline. 2) You don't know it. I don't think the timeline should ever be revealed.
Link of Hyrule: I personally think that the creators of Zelda never intended for there to be a timeline, they just got caught up in making some games link slightly
Lysia: When Nintendo first made LoZ, back in 1986, I doubt that they knew it would still be going so strong 20 years after that.
JC: For one: theories are useless. If you want a complete CANON timeline, using only game info, you wouldn't need any theory really. You'd just need to piece each game together.
TSA: It would destroy some of the mystique behind the series.
Art1st4786: Just like with how some fans will be angry with giving Link a voice, it goes the same for giving a specific timeline. It'll anger a lot of fans who believe their timeline is right.
TSA: Why'd they call it Final Fantasy? It was supposed to be the last game they made...
Link of Hyrule: Then fans made their own assumptions. Miyamoto said some rubbish about there being a true timeline that was taken in the wrong way and now we are where we are
TSA: Now they are stuck with the title...which doesn't even make any sense anymore.
Jack: Overall, I think the timeline is indeed important because if the Zelda series is anything, it's one expansive story. And, what good is a story if you don't what order it takes place in? Having a timeline adds a much needed dimension to the Zelda experience.
MNgoldenEagle: Not to mention that Nintendo has often changed the timeline, so nothing is set in stone.
Link of Hyrule: I highly doubt they will ever release a true timeline.. there is just too many games now to make it seem real
Captain Cornflake: Frankly, I don't think there is much of a timeline at all anymore. It's obvious after all the localizations and releases that Nintendo quit caring about the timeline long ago. And now that the fans are attempting to piece things together themselves, the inevitable chaos is here, and Nintendo is totally screwed on what to do, other than say "we'll work it out eventually."
TSA: Fans should focus on the in-game stories.
JC: The timeline is definately something great. It gives the Zelda series an extra shine.
Captain Cornflake: So what do we have now? Multiple timelines? Multiple dimensions? I'm suprised that black holes havn't come into play at this point.
Art1st4786: There is a timeline, and Nintendo is working on it, but nobody else knows what it is yet. I, personally, would like to see what it is. It'll make a lot of sense with the games and possibly explain some things, like what happened after Wind Waker.
The Real Link: I have no need for a timeline. I just take each game as they are.
Art1st4786: Or if Ganon ever came back after Adventure of Link
Lysia: I can play each Zelda game as a separate game, and enjoy its own world, and as long as there are no obvious links to other games then I don't usually play through thinking about the overall timeline, but rather just the story of that game.
MNgoldenEagle: I think Wind Waker should be non-canon... there are just so many concepts that don't make sense in that game. For one, how come they have so many mountains close together, and nearly all of them lush and flat?
TSA: You see, Sephiroth killed Zelda when Link was going for the Holy Triforcia...then like...The Minish used their life force to summon the four giants to stop the Moon in Majora's Mask....
JC: Nothing changes the fact that it is definately one of the most aggrevating portions of Zelda.
Captain Cornflake: Frankly, all we need is a futuristic Zelda game. That way Nintendo can appease all the people who would like to see a somewhat-solid timeline theory, by knowing which game is last in the series. At least all the folks in the single-timeline camp.
TSA: Capcom should handle that one.
Captain Cornflake: Doesn't matter if it sucks, but at least part of the crowd is calmed. We can name it "Return of Four Swords" because nobody liked the FS subseries anyways.
Chat Moderator: I'd like to see the game where the triforce is destroyed
Nathan: Honestly, the timeline stuff is very interesting, but not exactly of nintendo's concern. They pay no never mind to it when they make the games, and afterwords give hints as to how it fits in, but they never explain exactly how it fits in. They like the fans to keep the storyline and timeline to themselves, it helps us feel more into the series as whole when we can come up with the ideas ourselves.
TSA: Okay, last question: This one is for the public room - should GameFAQs boards be destroyed?
MNgoldenEagle: Oh, good god yes!
Captain Cornflake: No. Leave the GameFAQ's boards. You see, I have a theory about the internet.
Nathan: GameFAQ baords need to rot in hell.
Captain Cornflake: It involves a set of 'wastebaskets' that bad members of the internet populate. (Such as Gaia, IGN, GameFAQ's, ect)
TSA: Ok, here comes The Real Link last question: Do you think that Nintendo should ever consider a Legend of Zelda film. If so, what format should it be in. Could a Zelda film really "destroy" the series?
Link of Hyrule: Brilliant question!
TSA: Oh yeah, stick around after because I have exclusive information to give out
Archaic Sage: No, there should never be an official film. It would simply be awful. I hate the idea of it and the fact that Nintendo could never please all of the fans make me sad. A Zelda film would divide a community more so than it does at the moment. If it was unofficial, then that's great.
Otherwise, no.
Captain Cornflake: When are game-based-movies ever good, should be the question here.
MNgoldenEagle: Oh, I think they could make the movie idea work. (Personally, I loved Final Fantasy Spirits Within.) It just would have to be done perfectly... so we'd have to get Peter Jack:son to make it.
Nathan: Should they consider it? Of course. It should be made a real life type of format. It can't destroy the series really. If the CD-I games couldn;t destroy the series, nothing can.
JC: A Zelda Film. Hmm...Alot of fans would be against it, but many for it. Theres all too many questions like "Who plays Link or Zelda" or "what game will take place in?" I personally think a real live action movie would destroy the series because it is defining who the characters should be.
MNgoldenEagle: Agreed. If it flops, fans will ignore it.
Nathan: It may not be good, but you know what, we'll all go see it anyways
JC: A CG Zelda movie is the way to go.
Captain Cornflake: Somebody needs to find Steve Buscemi. He'd make a kickass townsperson.
MNgoldenEagle: If fans don't like it, they'll ignore it. Let's face it, people: we'll play Zelda, no matter how many mistakes Nintendo will make.
Jack: Only if it's something other than live action, and direct to DVD. A live-action, blockbuster film would make a laughing stock of Zelda.
Link of Hyrule: The idea of an official Zelda movie fills me with dread. An actual live action one with actual people could never really work because the people would never meet up to the fans expectations of what the characrter's should look like. And we just don't have the right cartoon animation at the moment I don't believe to properly carry off the storyline to its full potential.
TSA: Adapt one of the manga into an animated film. That's my opinion.
Art1st4786: I wouldn't mind the movie being Anime or CG-style. I would love to see a Zelda movie.
Link of Hyrule: I agree
TSA: Manga lends itself more to a visual medium
Link of Hyrule: But not unless it is properly done
TSA: Video games are bad to adapt, period.
JC: And that's coming from TSA, the guy who wanted to make a live action Zelda film! :-p
Art1st4786: What if they created a whole new storyline?
TSA: They're too much in the "mindscape," much like books...
MNgoldenEagle: What about LoTR?
TSA: Lord of the Rings only did well because it visually looked "awesome". As for accuracy and all that stuff, not sure - I'm not a well-versed LotR fan. It had wide appeal...it looked awesome, promised epic battles... And keyword here... it was a big studio project
Lysia: I would only like to see a Zelda film if, and only if, the highest level of effort and standards went into it. I would rather have no Zelda movie than a terrible one.
TSA: Most real film adaptations aren't even that...
Lysia: It would be extremely hard to please all of the fans of Zelda, and if it was to be a major release, it would have to try and cater to the mainstream movie-going population, bringing Zelda to those who have never played the games. My personal format preference is for CG, since it can be used to bring a lot of the fantasy elements to life, and it would prevent the, "That actor doesn't look like Link!" comments.
TSA: Uwe Boll's crap is like almost indie film. and Indie Films are no way to go for a Zelda film.
Art1st4786: CG would be the best bet.
MNgoldenEagle: Well, if it's done, it must be done perfectly. Otherwise, fans will ignore it and other people will give it funny looks. Won't hurt the series, but it'll hurt Nintendo's pocketbooks.
TSA: You can't acheive the visual quality needed for a good Zelda film with indie production.
Captain Cornflake: Nintendo would have to file a restraining order against Uwe Boll, just to make sure he didn't taint it.
Art1st4786: They'd have to find really good voice actors for the characters then.
Lysia: But while Nintendo won't make a film, what's the harm in the fans making their own indie versions?
TSA: 2If the thing doesn't pass the visual test - it doesn't look like Zelda - nobody gives a damn about the story.
Art1st4786: If Nintendo works with the movie producers the entire way, we're sure to get a good Zelda movie.
Captain Cornflake: Billy Bob Thornton could easily do an animated Sahasrahala.
Art1st4786: Didn't Nintendo open up that animation studio recently?
TSA: Indie fan films are fine... If they're like the Legend of Vernon. They don't take themselves seriously. And it's meant to be funny, and fan oriented. If you're trying to make a serious Zelda indie film...I'm sorry...you need more time, more money, more resources than the entire community could come up with.
Lysia: The way I see it, fan-made films are really no different to fanfics 'brought to life'
TSA: There's nothing wrong with that. But to me, it's Zelda. Zelda is held to a higher standard.
JC: You're better off sticking with fan games
Art1st4786: Zelda movie production should be handled only by professionals and by Nintendo.
Nathan: Well to us, of course it is.
TSA: If there is to be a film, it must also be made with as much love, care and high quality production. The problem is this: Just like LOTR book fans held it to a high standard. Fan film = fan interpretation.
Nathan: most though the movies were crap.
TSA: Official film with Miyamoto and compnay = official. Fans would have less to bitch about.
Lysia: So are fan fics, fan art, and even fan games.
Nathan: Just like most of us will think a Zelda movie is crap.
Lysia: Granted, movies do attract more scrutiny from fans.
TSA: They'd be like "Oh, Miyamoto made it. It will be official."
Nathan: But, you all know we would still pay to see it.
TSA: There's a lot tha tneeds to be considered. 1) Creator involvement does not mean good film. See - Final Fantasy
Captain Cornflake: People paid to see the Doom movie after all, and look how spectacularly bad that was.
TSA: if you stray too much...you lose fans.
Lysia: But a Zelda movie isn't just about getting people to pay to see it
Link of Hyrule: I think that fan movies are ok even Zelda ones but I do agree with JC that fan games will always work better for the Zelda genre..
TSA: But, there is the opposite end.
Nathan: Lol the best part of that film lasted 30 seconds
Captain Cornflake: The thing is, even if a movie does come out, and it outright blows, nobody is going to stop being a Zelda fan.
TSA: True. Mario the movie sucked.
Captain Cornflake: They'll just pretend it didn't happen and move on with their lives.
Nathan: All we can say is it's nintendo, and hope for the best. You know a video will come from them.
TSA: I still see Mario games.
Nathan: Thye know it will sell, and they want the money
TSA: I just don't think it should ever be left to fans.
Lysia: But it a bad movie may prevent new gamers from picking up a Zelda game
TSA: Do we see fan games replacing official movies?
Nathan: Bad or not, i'll own it because it;s Zelda
TSA: Okay, so here's the exclusive info.
Captain Cornflake: EXCLUSIVE: SNAPE KILLS DUMBLEDORE
TSA: "We still don't know when TP is coming out."
Chat Moderator: XD
Nathan: nice exclusiveness
Jack: boooo
TSA: It will be playable on Revolution at E3. ;-)
Captain Cornflake: Predictable.
Nathan: How do you know this?
Chat Moderator: He has contacts
Lysia: Well that's all fine for those of you who are going to E3 ;-P
TSA: On both...GCN...and Revolution.
AND
You will all finally see Ganon.
Chat Moderator: okay END OF DISCUSSION
Captain Cornflake: Your mother is playable, as well! Oh, snap!
Subscribe to RSS