These real life examples of grief are but a few of what actually happens in life, yet, when we look at the way grief and death is dealt with in Hyrule it seems as if it is a taboo subject. With evidence of death in the series going back as far as the first ever Zelda title, The Legend of Zelda, there is a stark lack of culture in terms of this cross-culture experience.

In fact, it could be argued that there are only six incidences when we see some form of death. The four times where death can actually be physically seen would be with the death of The Great Deku Tree in Ocarina of Time, the death of Twinrova twins, Koume and Kotake, the death of Ganon/Ganondorf in Twilight Princess and in The Wind Waker in the same style. These four areas are prominent deaths throughout the series, and yet, on the whole, they go unnoticed.

The most memorably, and possibly touching, of all of these deaths would be the death of The Great Deku Tree. After spending an extended period of time battling against the evil creatures inside of him, they still managed to destroy The Great Deku Tree, the one of the last demi-Gods in the land. In this instance, we see that he simple shrivels up and goes grey. He is not referred to again in any significant context throughout the rest of the title.

It is clear that The Great Deku Tree passes away. Not only because he states it himself, but also because the Kokiri in the forest believe this as well, this is seen from the following quotes:

Yes, I will pass away soon…
But do not grieve for me…
~ The Great Deku Tree

Source: Zelda Legends

I do not have much time left.
Fly, Navi, fly! The fate of the
forest, nay, the world, depends
upon thee!
~ The Great Deku Tree

Source: Zelda Legends

Hey, Link! What did you do?! The Great Deku Tree…did he…die?
How could you do a thing like that?! It’s all your fault!!
~ Mido

Source: Zelda Legends

Therefore it can see that the mystical creatures of Hyrule do manage to pass on to another world, but we don’t know where they go or what happens for that matter.

Continuing with the Ocarina of Time theme list with the demise of Twinvora, or Koume and Kotake. The guardians of the Spirit Temple, they will go to any length to protect the Spirit Medallion, and go as far as to be destroyed by our Hero for the greater good. In their death scenes they have “halos” over their head to indicate that they have passed on to the next life, as we can see below:

Hey, Koume, what is that above your head?

I don’t know, but you have one over your head too, Kotake!

But I’m only 400 years old!

And I’m just 380 years old!

We’re twins! Don’t try to lie about your age!

You must have gone senile!

Who are you calling senile?! Is that how you treat your older sister?

We are twins! How can you be older?

Keeeyaaah!!
How heartless you are!

How can you be so ungrateful?

You’re heartless!

You ungrateful…

(fading to white screen)
I’ll come back to haunt you!

~Koume and Kotake

However, nothing more is noted about them. That’s it. It’s almost as is they are removed from Zelda history, as they do not seem to pop up again throughout the rest of the Zelda games. Even in games after Ocarina of Time where they could appear, they do not.

Then there is the multiple death of Ganondorf/Ganon, it must be noted that Ganon was first executed by Link in The Legend of Zelda, in which he seems to simply fade into obscurity until The Adventure of Link, whereby his followers are trying to revive him by taking some of Link’s blood (i.e. the person who originally killed him).

Aside from that, Ganondorf/Ganon was killed in The Wind Waker by a sword through the head. It’s a lovely way to go, and his death is seen. In fact, at the point of his probable death, Ganondorf/Ganon is also drowned as the “frozen” Hyrule is let fall apart by the King of Hyrule. Then in Twilight Princess Ganondorf is killed again by the sword, and again just seems to disappear into obscurity.

If these deaths were real, or if Hyrule had some form of burial or mourning process it should be seen immediately after all of the above events, even for the death of Ganondorf/Ganon as ultimately his followers would have to mourn his death.

Yet, it would appear that there could be an afterlife. With the above examples, there are two important points. The first is with Twinrova twins, Koume and Kotake. The pair do ascend, and that’s an important thing to note. In most major religions there is a belief of a heaven and a hell, for symbolic reasons, if Koume and Kotake were to have descended it would have meant that they were going to hell. However, they ascended, which means that they are going to heaven.

Although is there a hell and heaven system in Hyrule, or does everyone simply ascend to the Goddesses? That’s an important question, as we know that Ganondorf is banished to the realm between dimensions in Ocarina of Time. This then confirms the fact that Hyrule is a multi-dimensional realm, and it also confirms that Hyrule will have a place for those who have passed on.

More importantly however, is the fact that in The Adventure of Link, Ganondorf/Ganon’s followers are trying to revive him from the dead. This indicates that death may not be a permanent state of being in Hyrule, or alternatively it could meant that death is optional – similar to the known theory as to why “Ghosts” exist (unfinished business).

The other two areas in which death can be immediately seen are with the two different types of Zombies in the series. The first that have been encountered are the Gibdo. The Gibdo are essentially dead people that have been mummified. The other type of Zombie is the ReDead.

The first time that a Gibdo is encountered is in the very first Zelda game, The Legend of Zelda. The Gibdo is not a strong opponent and doesn’t require much thought to dispose of them. The Gibdo manages to evolve a little in Ocarina of Time, in which they develop the ability to “freeze” Link upon looking at him.

The ReDead first appears in Ocarina of Time and is essentially the same as a Gibdo, except in two respects. The first is the obvious one, they are un-bandaged and the second is that they appear to have some form of ritual for death.

Upon a ReDead’s execution, the other ReDead’s will gather around the newly deceased and just stand there. With the limited animation that was given to them in Ocarina of Time, it’s hard to tell what they are doing. However, they do just stand there until the creature disappears. This could be interpreted as a form of mourning for their deceased brethren.

Although this behaviour pattern only occurs in Ocarina of Time and does not again appear in The Wind Waker or in Twilight Princess, which are the only other games which feature the enemy in Hyrule. We know that these two creatures were formerly alive as they are usually found in tombs or graves, which the dead tend to be buried.

The four other types of creatures that could be used within any article discussing death would be the Poe’s, the Ghini’s, the Stalfos and the Stalchild’s. However, including these creatures in any form of burial ritual would be unwise as the Poe and the Ghini were formerly alive, however, they have not gone on to the next world. Further, at no point can they be used in circumstantial evidence for any form of burial practise.

In regards to the Stalfos Knights or the Stalchild, it would be foolish to include them as they were never mourned or destroyed in the first place. They continue to fight after their bodies have been destroyed. Therefore there was no burial or mourning process for them. Additionally, the Stalchild was never a Hylian in the first place:

Stalchidren are skeletal creatures who were never flesh and bone. They hunt their prey in large packs, and will only appear once the sun has set.
~ Zelda.com

Source: Zelda.com

Now that all of the obvious areas of death have been identified in brief, the two, which will be focused on, will be the ReDead and the Gibdo, as they may hold the most obvious clues to the habits of the Hylian’s for mourning and class discrimination as well.

In Japan only the Buddhist monks of the highest power and enlightenment would be mummified, and leaving all else to be burned or buried in the traditional Japanese manner (as a side note, in Shinto it tends to be burning, simply because it’s left to the Buddhist religion to deal with death as in Shinto it’s a source of impurity), this would indicate that it would be the Gibdo are the people who used to be more wealthy or powerful.

However, many would use an obvious example to try and counter this. In Ocarina of Time when Link enters into the Royal Family’s Tomb, there are ReDeads everywhere. This would indicate that surely it’s the deceased Royal Family members were not mummified and left as ReDeads.

A solution to this mindset would be that it is not actually the members of the Royal Family in the outer tomb, but it is actually their servants. In the culture of the ancient Egyptians, when someone dies, they would kill their servants and animals and take them along for the ride as well. This is because they believed that they would need everything important in their current life in the afterlife.

Furthermore, the ReDead are found littered all around the place in Hyrule, which is a clear indication that they are neither rich, nor important. Moreover, Gibdo’s do exist in the Spirit Temple in Ocarina of time, in which only the evil and poor souls would reside. This is a perfect example of greed in Hyrule, as the rich and the important are often some of the most impolite and heinous people in the world.

Yet at no point throughout the series does a burial, a burning or mummification take place. Mourning and grief is seen, and that’s seen by Midna’s reaction to Zelda’s “death” in Twilight Princess, and the death of many of the Sages in Ocarina of Time is noted in many of the characters across the game.

Although in Twilight Princess, an interesting, yet far too short point has been opened. After Link travels to Zora’s Domain to try and discover what is happening, it soon becomes apparent that their Queen has been murdered by the evil forces at work, and her son Ralis has gone missing. Later Link discovers the Queen’s grave, but Ralis is also there mourning his loss. This is the first real time that a Zora graveyard has been discovered, and that the races of Hyrule do actually grieve and mourn for their dead.

Moreover, when a person dies and becomes a Poe or a Ghini there is normally a grave that is somewhere close by, so it’s clear that the people of Hyrule tend to burry their dead rather than cremate them.

So in reality, even after a five-page review on the features of death in Hyrule, we are still non-the-wiser. There are plenty of references to death, and there are also plenty opportunities to show us more of Hylian culture and religion in the process – it would just seem that we are to be kept in the dark for a little longer yet.

Zant, for those that are unaware, is the second to last boss in Twilight Princess. Most people find his story to be in distaste, that Zant really turned out to be a disappointing character. Up until you find out his real story, he really seems to be one of the darkest characters in the entire series.

Zant, to me, is one of the most misunderstood characters to date in Twilight Princess. The first major thing to hit on is his misrepresentation as the “Twilight King”, and his now forever popular name: “The Usurper King”

There are a few references to who is the king of twilight in the game. Let’s examine those in a bit more detail. The one that seems to seal the deal on his kingship is in the first cut scene with Zelda. You can watch it in full here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=Oq4CSK3J25o

In that scene Zelda references that Hyrule was taken over by the King of Twilight. Then, it shows a scene of Zant taking over Hyrule castle. So, it would seem the case is closed. Or is it?

There are two other references, located here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=Jog6QPjBcyg and http://youtube.com/watch?v=SpIXfmYV7kg&feature=related

A logical argument could be made that Zelda assumed that Zant was the king, when in reality the “power of the Twilight King”, or as Zant references, the power granted by “my god” is the true King. It meant that Ganondorf was the true King of Twilight, and that Zant was just the loyal servant. Further argument is presented when Zant calls Ganondorf “my master”. King’s have no masters. Now, this debate doesn’t flare up very often, and there are times I wish it did. Unfortunately, there is not a definitive answer. Hence, when Zelda refers to Zant as being the Twilight King, we must assume she is not mistaken. Still, it interesting when you delve into it.

So, it has been decided then. Zant indeed is the King of Twilight. The Usurper King title does fit nicely, just because usurp means to take over by force or without legal right. However, were Zant able to respond to such a title, he would most certainly whole heartedly disagree.

Zant is a member of the Twilight Realms Royal family, or so it would seem safe to assume. The cut scene when Zant receives his power shows that he indeed was the successor to the throne, and Midna even goes so far as to say why they decided to not name him King. In Zant’s mind, the throne was his all along, and thus all he did was remove the wrongful ruler, and put himself in the position for which he belonged. Hence, Usurper King to him would be an insult of a title. So, how did this name come about? Good old Nintendo. He is called the Usurper King on the battle screen just before the fight starts. If Zant was able to protest his creators, surely the first thing he would mention is that he does not feel that he is indeed a Usurper King, but the rightful King of Twilight. Alas, he never did get a say and hence, he is known under a title I seriously he doubt he would of ever wanted.

Now, this article is titled a story of revenge, and I have lightly touched base on what that means. Zant was next in line for the throne, but because of the “evil in his eyes” they (who they are, no one knows) chose Midna to be the ruler instead. He was furious with the decision and in going outside to vent his severe disappointment, in a rather childlike manner, Ganondorf appeared in the sky and offered him the power to overthrow Midna in exchange for turning the world of light into complete darkness. He agrees, and thus his story of revenge is born. Not only did he get his revenge against Midna by dethroning her and turning her into an imp, he punished all of the people in the realm for not choosing him as ruler. He turned them all into Shadow Beasts.

Many people, however, find the story of Zant to be rather disheartening. To put it plainly, his part in the whole story, and his personality, felt disappointing to most. It would seem that Zant has forever been labeled as an “antagonist that is forgettable”. He showed a lot of promise throughout the various cut scenes in the game, and was made out to be a very dark character. The fact Ganondorf was in the game, and that Zant was not just a pawn in the big scheme, but seemingly a crybaby, really turned people off.

To me, Zant is one of the more interesting bosses to date in the entire franchise. Outside of Ganon/Ganondorf, we never really get much back-story about the other major antagonists in the series. Zant related a lot to what people wish they could do in the real world when they believe they are about to receive something, but it gets taken away. Zant to me turned out to be a very dark character, who really turned on his evil side at the prospect of gaining severe power. Zant exacted some revenge, and I really enjoyed the ride.

So when you think of popular Nintendo titles for the N64, after Mario 64, only one name comes to mind, Zelda, the Ocarina of Time. I don’t know a single Zelda fan that didn’t have this in their mind after the release of Super Mario 64. Think about it, arguably the greatest game of all time, available on a handheld console that you can take anywhere you go. It just makes perfect sense, doesn’t it?

Years have gone by and we’ve seen a variety of Nintendo titles and non-Nintendo titles get ported over and revamped for the Nintendo DS. This has been seen in several game franchises including Final Fantasy, Mario, Dragon Quest, and the list goes on and on, but why have we not seen Zelda? Nintendo, and especially the Zelda series, has been guilty of recycling their titles over and over, milking every penny out of us hopeless Zelda nerds. The original Legend of Zelda on the NES has since been released on the gameboy advanced, gamecube, and most recently on the Nintendo Wii Virtual Console. A Link to the Past has seen it’s own port on the GameBoy Advanced and has also made an appearance on the virtual console. Even Ocarina of Time itself has been ported over to the Gamecube and Nintendo Wii, so why not make a version available for the Nintendo DS?

Honestly, as much as we all love our Nintendo Gamecube’s and Wii’s, did we really enjoy Ocarina of Time much on those consoles? The Master Quest on the Gamecube was very playable, but the original Ocarina of Time version was nothing spectacular, just a direct port, yet we all bought it. The virtual console version of OOT is nothing more than yet another direct port, of which many of us have shelled out the 10 bucks for the game. It’s quite clear that Nintendo can release Ocarina of Time on every console from now until the end of time and it will always be a moneymaker. For the DS, all Nintendo has to do is make SOME edits, similar to what they did with Super Mario 64 for the DS and BAM, they have much more than a direct port, they have a multi million selling title. Super Mario 64 for the DS has surpassed 6 million sales, why wouldn’t Ocarina of Time at least be able to sell say… 3 million units?

We’ve seen our fair share of ‘fake’ Ocarina of Time mock-ups for the Nintendo DS, none more apparent than this fake box cover of Ocarina of Time. Click Me. Forgetting the terrible descriptions on the back of the box, we all surely get excited when we see something like this.

Don’t get me wrong, I think a majority of Zelda fans out there would much prefer a new title rather than a port of an old title. Phantom Hourglass was a great game and I loved it much more than I would another port of Ocarina of Time, but why can’t we just have both? Will it really take much effort to port the game over? Seriously, even if it fully revamped to include touch screen controls and some miscellaneous updates, it would by no means take the effort of a brand new Zelda title.

Just when is Nintendo going to make this fantasy a reality. They’ve done it numerous times before with endless ports of Zelda titles, but now they have a chance to make a much more meaningful one. In my mind, it is inevitable for Nintendo to do so. Only time will tell.

Any real fan of the Zelda Franchise knows that Link is silent, but deadly. Not a sound emanates from him until the moment that his enemy is slain (at which point he lets out the classic “hy-ah!”). Otherwise, he never has anything to say. Saria is asking him what to do? No answer. Zelda is telling him what to do? No answer. Never anything to say. Why is this? Is he just shy? Or is there a larger reason than that?

To my own knowledge, Nintendo has never exactly told us why Link never speaks. One can guess as to why though; everybody loves the guy that talks his head off at school, but you know that when you gossip, it’s about that one kid that never ever talks. It’s not that you are actually interested in him as a person, there’s just a certain intrigue that surrounds him because of his solitude. Perhaps, then, this is what Nintendo intended with Link, to make him mysterious. Not to mention he seems all the more valiant that he goes on with his troubles and toils, all the while never once uttering a word of complaint. Minus the occasional grunt of pain when he gets attacked by sinister beasts.

However, it may simply be due to a more hidden storyline aspect from the Big N. Maybe Link was traumatized by events in his past? Maybe, from a game play standpoint, making him talk would be irrelevant, but this may not be entirely true. We’ve seen plenty of games where the protagonist (that’s the main character for all you English-deficient people out there! =P) talks with the other characters. Final Fantasy games, Call of Duty, and others that I quite honestly cannot think of, just to name a few.

Now you may be saying, “Well he does talk! There are times where you have to pick a response to move on to the next part of the game!” and yes, you would be correct. Obviously, nobody could ever get through life without saying a single word (even Helen Keller, she just had sign language and Braille), and Link is no exception. There are rare, limited moments where he is forced to speak. If this is by necessity or choice, we may never know.

However, I prefer to believe in the value of intrigue. As far as I’m concerned, Link has no need to talk, and that’s all there is to it.

And, in case you were wondering, Helen Keller was, in fact, a secret sword wielding heroine who went around slashing baddies.

**Shutter** This was Nintendo’s first attempt at adding voices to rather timeless characters. Though the line above did not come from a Zelda game, it came from a show based off of the Zelda games. These horrendous voices have stuck to The Legend of Zelda throughout the years.

But what would Zelda be like if voice overs were added to it? Hopefully, the world may never know.

Technology today is progressing at a rapid rate. Graphics are constantly being improved, the speed of a game is always being increased, and the overall quality of games in general is rising. Lots of games have adopted many of the new technologies available, including the Legend of Zelda games. The latest console game, Twilight Princess, featured brilliant graphics and the game moved at a speed unparalleled by other Zelda games (i.e. – no loading times between dungeon rooms). However, Zelda did not adopt something that many other games have: voice acting; at least not yet.

Since the beginning, Legend of Zelda characters have not spoken coherent words. Instead, each character makes a unique grunt or squeal-like sound when talking. But what would Zelda be like if the characters actually said what showed up on the screen?

This debate has been going on for a while now. Many fans like Zelda just the way it is, and would rather not hear what their characters sound like. They would rather leave it up to their own imagination. There are those, though, that think Zelda would be much better if each character had an audible voice, including Link. Opinions vary greatly from person to person, but some feel that everyone but Link should talk, while some think that Link, and only Link, should speak.

When approaching a topic, it is always good to hear the pros and cons of both sides of the argument. For some, having a voice to match with Link or Zelda would be fun, even somewhat helpful at times. For others, it would be hell to have a voice to connect Link or Zelda to. The pros and cons vary depending on where you stand, as they do with most articles. The most common fear: a repeat of the 1989 “hit” animated television series based on the Legend of Zelda. Very few disagree with the fact that the voices were atrocious. If Zelda were to ever have voice overs, Nintendo would have to make sure this sort of thing didn’t happen, for fear of losing many die-hard fans of the series.

If you have ever read any of my other articles, you will know that I believe that a huge part of the Legend of Zelda games is the mystery surrounding them. This mystery causes us to be creative and create our own answers to the hundreds of unanswered questions each Zelda game leaves us with. One of the long-standing mysteries of the Zelda series has been what the characters actually sound like.

Each gamer has his or her own view of the characters of Zelda, and, in a way, we all have expectations that the characters live up to. But what would happen if voice acting is added to a later Zelda game and Link doesn’t sound quite as courageous as you pictured, or as powerful as you thought. Would that not affect the way you view Link? Of course it would. We all have ideas somewhere in our heads about what Link, Zelda, or some other Zelda character sounds like. We have grown accustomed to that sound and expect nothing less. Voice overs cannot please everyone. Even if Chuck Norris were to be the voice of Link, people would protest. Part of the mystery that is Zelda would be ruined, all because of something as simple as a voice.

The majority of people in the Zelda community agree that voice overs would not be a good thing. However, there are fans that think it would be nice to have every character talk but Link, which is a much more rational idea. Years of experience has proven that the formula Zelda games follow works. One part of that formula is not having any kind of dialogue attached to Link, not even simple text. The closest thing to dialogue Link has received are small noises accompanying certain actions. This suits Link well, and it is enjoyed by the gamers. Using this reasoning, certain groups believe that voice overs for everybody but Link are necessary. But does anyone really want a voice attached to any character? As I said before, mystery is key in Zelda games, and attaching voices to the characters would diminish an aspect of that mystery. Some may picture Zelda with a high pitched, almost squeaky voice, while others may see her having a deeper, more courageous or powerful voice. There is no in-between voice that would fit Princess Zelda and satisfy both of those perspectives. If voices were added, many people would be disappointed; even if with voices didn’t include Link.

My final point is the failure of the past attempt at a voice over: Navi. Famous for all the wrong reasons, Navi is widely considered the most annoying Zelda character ever. The reason? The constant nagging “Hey!”s or the “Look out!”s. Left and right Navi made noises like that, which often lead to anger at one of the greatest games of all time. This was Nintendo’s first shot at voice acting in a Zelda game, and it turned out miserably. Zelda games have always been extensive, and there is just so much text involved in a Zelda game that, in my opinion, it would get very annoying, very fast.

Though we may often wonder what Link or Zelda sound like, I, and many other gamers, feel it is better left up to the imagination of the player to decide the voices of the characters. That way, each character lives up to the profile that we have built for them, and no one is disappointed. 

Maybe I’ve become somewhat cold over the years in that I want something more from my gaming experience than what’s been given to me time and time again in the past. Nintendo has done a good job of making variations with each Zelda game that has come out, but only to a point. When Wind Waker came out, everyone was fascinated/disgusted with the new cell-shaded style. I liked it personally (but what I like is irrelevant). That was really the only major variance between it and OoT/MM. The gameplay was exactly the same, only this time instead of riding Epona across Hyrule field for hours at a time, you got to sail the endless blue sea with the King of Red Lions. And what about the two Oracle games? The same game with differences in storyline. Now that’s just being lazy. Suffice to say, FSA was no more than a series of cruel genetic abominations that involved LttP’s Link and Minish Cap’s Link, combined together to and cloned into four mutated, bastardized Links that spread havoc and chaos throughout Hyrule with endless supplies of annoyingness. And to take a look back even further, what about the striking similarities between the original Legend of Zelda and Link to the Past? 16-bit recreation much? Oh yeah. Don’t even get me started on Link’s Awakening, or Four Swords for that matter.

Adventure of Link? Irrelevant.

Then along came Twilight Princess, which took most of our breaths away in its stunning graphical enhancements, its vast world, and its innovative new gameplay. It was indeed a pretty picture to look at, and by far the most creative Zelda game in recent memory. But so many aspects of it came directly from its predecessor, Link to the Past. The same Light/Dark (Twilight) worlds, the same two figurehead villains (Agahnim/Zant, and Ganon[dorf]), and of course the same end of Ganon’s dark reign of terror and dismissal to whatever place he’ll be staying until he eventually resurfaces to face Link’s great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandson twice removed and doubly reincarnated.

One could say that I’m just being picky, and one would be correct in saying that, but you’ve gotta admit that Nintendo is still playing of the same themes in some form or fashion whenever they bring out their latest game in our beloved Zelda series.

Some might also argue, saying that’s the entire point, that the games are supposed to carry on the traits of its predecessors, else it will lose it’s identity as a Zelda game. If you don’t keep the similarities in tact then the game itself becomes too separated from what made it a great game in the first place, and that my friends is why it is perfectly alright that each game builds off the last one, keeping the systems similar but making the necessary changes in order to keep the series fresh.

It must adapt to survive.

Wait…what? Yes. I just intentionally destroyed my own argument. But there was a reason, don’t worry. The entire purpose of this first blog is not so much to take a topic and expand on it with humorous overtones or strong, valid arguments. This is more of a warm-up exercise, a way to stretch my brain’s blogging muscles in preparation for the blogs to come. I would like to do this weekly, but I know me, and I know I probably won’t stick to it due to life’s other responsibilities and stresses. That won’t stop me from shooting for that goal, however. As for you? Well, you have come to the new Zelda Blog in order to take a look into the minds of the various webmasters and members of the Zelda Community, my own included. You will no doubt come back and read whatever it is I happen to come up with for my next blog. It is inevitable.

You will join the Collective.

For those who may be newer to the community, ZeldaBlog is a community blog, showcasing Zelda based articles, written by members across the community. Originally opening in 2005, ZeldaBlog was popular site in the community, before inactivity resulted in it’s closure a year ago. While there would be no new articles, it would remain as an archive of all the articles and posts put into it over the years. A server crash a few months later removed it for good. ZeldaBlog would be sorely missed by many across the community.

April 2008. It started as a discussion amoung several webmasters: The idea of a new community blog, providing the same type of service ZeldaBlog had in the past. As the discussion grew, it became clear a new blog wasn’t needed when everyone still loved the ZeldaBlog of old.

Thus it was decided to revive ZeldaBlog. Continuing the site where it left off, while at the same time making it harder, better, faster, and stronger. The result is what you see before you, a revived site ready to kick some *Navi*

As with any reopening however, there are bound to be some changes, and this is no different.

First: While the founder of ZeldaBlog, TML has decided to move into more of a contributor role, leaving the administration of the site to myself. I will be running most of the behind the scenes business, the endless tweakings of the code that will go unnoticed, I’m sure, by everyone but myself. I will also be handling the email side of the administration, dealing with any concerns, link requests, etc. Before anyone starts to worry, this is not my only job here. I will also be continuing my long-suffereing series: A Somewhat Serious Article.

Second: ZeldaBlog is now generously hosted on LegendofZelda.com’s server. It’s not a change you guys can really notice, but it’s a change nonetheless. Chance from LoZ.com will be handling the technical side of the site, including backups.

Third: We will be adding as many of the old posts we can find to the new site. This will take some time, so please bear with us.

And Last, but not least, are our new contributors! You may recognize them from websites across the community. They are:

• Last Chance, Xizor, Webmasters of Legend of Zelda.com
• Nathan, Webmaster of Absolute Zelda
• F3, Webmaster of Hyrule: The Land of Zelda
• Maxine MagicFox, Webmaster of Midnight Castle’s Legend of Zelda
• Sheik-Yumil1988, Webmaster of The Temple Ruins
• The King of Hyrule, Webmaster of Zelda Capital
• Avenged, Webmaster of Zelda Chronicles
• Mases, Webmaster of Zelda Dungeon
• and Jason, Webmaster of Zelda Universe

Along with a few well known faces:

• The Missing Link, Webmaster of Zelda: The Grand Adventures
• Lady Juliet, Webmaster of North Castle
• Archaic Sage, Webmaster of Rauru’s Return
• lord-of-shadow, Webmaster of Zelda Legends
• and myself, Darth Citrus, Webmaster of Exploding Deku Nut

Finally, if I may quote a section of TML’s original opening post, two and half years ago:

“ZeldaBlog is a community site designed not only to bring news, opinions, and discussions to the fans of the community but also to help promote unity within the Zelda community.”

That was the purpose of ZeldaBlog when it first opened. It is our goal, with it’s reopening, to continue upholding that ideal.

Welcome back.

Such is the case with the Legend of Zelda series. Our good old Subject A (Link, for those of you who can’t figure it out) always manages to save Hyrule while putting the hurt on our friend Subject B (Ganon/Ganondorf).

Of course this kind of thing has to wear down our villain. You can’t just keep losing every single time. Something will eventually break be it mentally or physically. Every time the poor Gerudo tries to take over Hyrule, Link arrives once again to deliver what I have decided to call, a Linkwhopin’

And thus, welcome to another Somewhat Serious Article. If you haven’t figured out what this edition is about, you deserve a LINKWHOPIN’

First off, I know this is going to be repeated somehow. So lets get it straight. Its pronounced “Link –whh(wh sound as in “wh”at) – pin”

Not “whooping” or “whipping”. “Link – whh – pin”. Got it? Good.

Linkwhopin’ is the term for when Link completely owns someone or something. This usually results in messing up Ganon’s plans, and winding up killing/locking away/banishing/rekilling etc etc Ganon in the end.

Now we as fans have been conditioned to rejoice when Hyrule is safe once more. Overlooking the fact that it will only to be in peril again when the next game comes out. Nevertheless you can’t help but feel sorry for all the Linkwhopin’s Ganon has had to go through.

Legend of Zelda

Link is called a “Skillful Lad” in the manual. So therefore he has to be pretty young. And nothing feels worse than getting owned by a ten year old. First incident of a Linkwhopin’.

Adventure of Link

Ganon technically isn’t in the game at all. But Link still decides to kill all his faithful minions incase he does show up again. That’s gotta be a Linkwhopin’ right there.

A Link to the Past

This has to be the most embarrassing Linkwhopin’ of them all. First off, Ganon is in his huge pig form. Second, Link is just a young adult that’s never fought a battle before. Lastly, Ganon had the WHOLE freaking Triforce. You know, like the complete wishing power thing. I don’t know about you, but I think after achieving your life’s goal and then getting it taken from you just like that. That’s a Linkwhopin’.

Link’s Awakening

The poor guy can’t even get away from Link as a nightmare. Of course Link not only gave Ganon a Linkwhopin’, but the whole island as well.

Ocarina of Time

This one wasn’t as bad a Linkwhopin’. Link was 17, he had help from the sages, and really his minions were useless. In retrospect though, he could have played it a bit smarter as outlined by TML here.

Majora’s Mask

Ganon wasn’t in this one, but it doesn’t matter, cause pretty much anything Link does in his quest results in a Linkwhopin’ of some kind.

Oracle Series

I’ve put these two together because you need to play both to reach Ganon. Those of you who don’t know the ending of this Linkwhopin’ yet, skip to the next game.

Anyway, right after Ganon’s revived by Twinrova, he immediately receives a Linkwhopin’ and gets sent back to where he came from. Kind of sucks.

Four Swords, Four Swords Adventure, The Minish Cap

I’ve never played the Four Sword games but I have played TMC. But I do know that they all have Vaati in them. Following a simple line of logic: Link fights Vaati. Vaati is a villain. Ganon is a villain. Hence Ganon once again gets a Linkwhopin’.

The Wind Waker

The Phantom Ganon’s get a Linkwhopin’, The Puppet Ganon gets a Linkwhopin’, Forsaken Fortress gets a Linkwhopin’, Hyrule gets a Linkwhopin’ and finally Ganondorf gets a Linkwhopin’. Again, may I add, by a child.

Oh and for those of you who didn’t know about that, I suggest you immediately forget what you just read.

Twilight Princess

Now we don’t even know what role Ganon even plays in this game. But let’s give the poor guy the benefit of the doubt and assume that he gets the mother of all Linkwhopin’s

Now that’s quite a lot for one guy to take. Think how much it would blow to have some kid with the same name, foil your plans over and over while saving a princess that has the same name EVERY *NAVING* TIME YOU TRY AND TAKE OVER HYRULE! I don’t know about you, but if I wasn’t insane at that point, I would at least take up knitting or something just to break the monotony.

Point? The poor guy has had so many Linkwhopin’s I think he deserves a break. He could write his whole autobiography around this.

So the next time you’re playing through Ocarina of Time, don’t gloat when you lock Ganondorf away. Instead feel a little sorry for the guy. Apologize to the TV even. Just remember what you learned here today about Linkwhopin’s. Things that you learned, in A Somewhat Serious Article.

Let’s take a stroll down memory lane and take a look at some of the most interesting, the most original, the best designed, and yes, the most evil dungeons out there.

1. Deadliest Dungeon—Level Six, LoZ: Move over Shadow Temple. For those of you old-schoolers and for those of you who got to torture yourselves over the Collector’s Edition, you know precisely what I’m talking about. This dungeon had you restarting over and over and over again the first time you played it, and even after the first time, it’s no walk in the park. Wizzrobes (especially the blue variety) back in the day were tough as nails, nothing like today’s variety (they just don’t make enemies like they used to), and getting past them was a feat and a half, even with your obligatory 68-rupee red potion! The runner up, as I’m sure those who’ve played it will agree, is the Great Palace from AoL; those who’ve managed to see the end of AoL are quite possibly some of the most dedicated Zelda fans.
2. Most Convoluted Dungeon—Ice Palace, LttP: This dungeon is the deepest dungeon in Zelda history at an impressive seven basements. What would seem like a straightforward plunge into the earth, however, gets complicated as you have to backtrack from B4 back up to B1 just to get the boss key, and then later from B6 back up to B4 back down to B6 just to get to the boss. (Of course, you could cheat and go to Misery Mire first to get the Cane of Somaria, and most players did, but they killed off that shortcut in the GBA version, forcing you to take the long way around.)
3. Most Confusing Dungeon—Level Nine, LoZ: Very few dungeons in the history of Zelda have teleporters that warp you all over the map; fewer still strictly rely upon this for the difficulty of the dungeon! In Nine, you have no idea where you are, even if you’re lucky enough to have found the map of the dungeon. Tied for this is Level Nine of LoZ’s second quest which has so many one-way doors, invisible doors, and sometimes both that you’ll start testing each of the four walls the moment you enter a room.
4. Most Unique Dungeon—Stone Tower Temple, MM: Just when you think the dungeons of Majora couldn’t get any more messed up, halfway into the final dungeon, the dungeon flips upside down, and you find yourself walking on the ceiling with the sky below your feet. The strange sights are enough to give you a sense of vertigo, especially when you have to flip the dungeon several times to make your way through, not to mention getting the illustrious 15^th fairy.
5. Most Beautiful Dungeon—Forest Temple, OoT: If you’re like me, the moment you stepped into the interior courtyards of the Forest Temple, your eyes went all aglow with the marvelous wonders you found there. It definitely was a magnificent sight, and the fresh green grass and ivy-covered stone walls allow the fiercest of heroes a chance to take a break, pull out his picnic basket, and take a well-deserved rest.
6. Cruelest Dungeon—Spirit Temple, OoT:MQ: Master Quest had a good couple of tricks up its sleeve when you start traversing the dungeons through an entirely different path than you ever thought possible, but the worst part of all is when you’ve finished the child-half of the temple, gone through half of the adult-side, and then you step on a switch that causes a treasure chest to appear through a hole that only child Link can go through. If this were a high school reunion, this version of the Spirit Temple would easily win Dungeon that Made Link Travel the Furthest.
7. Most Innovative Dungeon—Mermaid’s Cave, OoA: The dungeon was neat because it was broken into two major sections, but unlike other two-part dungeons like LttP’s Ganon’s Tower, this one spanned time. You had to have two keys to open up the two halves, and you couldn’t fully explore the present half of the dungeon until you activated some trigger in the past. Sounds like messing with the mind of the guy in Ocarina’s windmill, eh?
8. Most Annoying Dungeon—Jabu Jabu’s Belly, OoA: Many people would claim that the Water Temple from Ocarina was worse, but make no mistake about it. (Don’t worry; we’re saving the Water Temple for later!) At least controlling the water level in that dungeon could be done by cycling through several areas of the dungeon. In this dungeon, not only was the water level NEVER at the right spot, but there was a single room that provided the master controls to playing with the water, meaning that you went through the five or six rooms just before the master control room thirty or forty times just to find what you were looking for. Talk about annoying! Just as annoying as that Evil Purple Dinosaur of Doom.
9. Dungeon with the Biggest Puzzle—Earth Temple, WW: Despite being underground, light still managed to find its way into the deep crevasses of the Earth Temple. Of course, it quickly became a recurring theme, and light was needed just about anywhere Link could possibly shine it—that is, Link or Medli could shine it. The final mirror room forced Link and Medli to shine a beacon of light off of about 10 mirrors just so that a single door would open, and often Medli would need to stand in one place, shine light off of her lyre, and then have Link redirect it to where it was needed. That’s a puzzle!
10. Most Hated Dungeon—Water Temple, OoT: I’ve never personally understood the hatred most players carry for this place, but I think a lot of it has to do that the dungeon design was fundamentally different from any other dungeon in the past; you had to think completely in 3D. Narrow vertical shafts carried Link between multiple floors, and the most likely way to find yourself in a random room was to tunnel from above or below to get to it. It is easily the dungeon that has extracted the most ire from all of the Zelda games combined.

Well? What do you think?

The video game world is not an exception. We’ve got a strict separation of games into various genres, and those division lines define what a game is. I mean, we all know that all of the Mario Kart games are racing games, all of the older Kirby titles are platformers, Final Fantasy games are RPGs, and Halo is an FPS. Thus, if you’re looking for a game where you get to shoot people, all you need to do is look at all the games in the FPS genre and figure out which one strikes your fancy.

But there are games that defy that mold, games which begin to eat away at the system. Take Metroid Prime. Before Prime, Metroid games have been action games, and that was that, but Metroid Prime was unlike those. It’s very easy to tell that it’s an FPS; however at the same time, it displays the characteristics of an adventure game where you go to point A to get this item, then go to point B to get this. It’s not like traditional FPSes where you complete the missions from one area then go to a completely new map. So how do you classify Metroid Prime? FPS? Adventure? Well? The answer many people came up with was to call it a “First-Person Adventure” game, but there’s no other game in the world that’s called an FPA. “You can’t come up with this new genre thing!” the people cried. “It’s illegal! It’s criminal! Make it one or the other!” Yet despite people’s attempts to change the system, and even though Nintendo officially calls the game a “First Person” game, it is still an adventure game in its own right.

This brings us to the main event of the evening: The Great Zelda Debate (Controversy). In this corner, weighing in at a scream factor of 65 decibels, The Adventure Kid! And in this corner, weighing in at 64 decibels, RPG-Man! Now, you know the rules, keep it a clean fight, no flaming one another, no insulting anyone else’s mother. And… go!

Needless to say, the bloodbath would be incredible. The rules would quickly be thrown out, Nazis would be mentioned at some point, and all of this would somehow be blamed on George W. Bush. Dear goddesses, what have we just done? Have mercy on us, Din, Nayru, and Farore.

But let’s get serious here for a brief moment. (You know some humorous quip will leak out of me sooner or later!) What genre is Zelda? Adventure? RPG? Sadly, the answer to this one isn’t as obvious as you think.

Everyone knows about adventure games. Adventure games primarily focus on exploration of a world as well as solving puzzles. There’s also a big emphasis on story and the unraveling of that plot. It’s no doubt that the Zelda games (and Metroid Prime!) fall into this category.

Much of the problem in this issue, however, is that the precise definition of an RPG is… well… ambiguous at best. The origins of the term stem from the traditional, non-video game forms of the RPG, which may seem to help, but even that doesn’t provide a clear direction. Most people, when they think of traditional RPGs, immediately latch onto Dungeons & Dragons, and thus, all RPGs must pull elements from there, but as 8-bit Theatre has talked about, there are many, many other forms such as live-action role-playing (LARP), multi-user dungeons (MUDs), as well as about a thousand other varieties of the genre. So much for definitions. (Definitions are dumb, anyways. Or something.)

Because of this lack of a good definition, people made up their own, and those that have “defined” what RPG means categorise into one of two schools of thought:

1. The Strict RPG School (Yes, I’m making these names up.) believes in a vary narrow definition of RPG; in other words, for a game to be an RPG, it must adhere to a very strict set of properties. The specific requirements vary, but almost always there is talk about some levelling system—where characters start at “level 1″ and progress to some “max level”, as well as some numeric quantifier of how “good” your character(s) are in different areas. (Oh look at me! I have 65 Strength! I have no idea what that means, but it’s better than your 64 Strength, so RAR! I am awesome and stuff!)
2. The Liberal RPG School believes in a very loose adaptation of what an RPG is. Usually they go in and look at what RPG literally stands for. Thus, say them, any game where the player plays the role of any other character is, by definition, an RPG. Simple. Hasta lasagna, don’t get any on ya.

There’s virtually no middle ground on this one. You’re either one or the other. The problem is that both schools of thought have good arguments for their side… and they also both have good arguments against the other.

The argument against a strict view is based upon the meaning of the levelling system. The liberals believe that the concept of a “levelling system” is inherently abstract. In Zelda, you “level” from having only 3 hearts (a measure of health, mind) to having some maximum level of hearts when you’ve found all the pieces of heart and heart containers. What’s more is that items are inherently more powerful than one another, and while there are no visible numbers to define this, people generally figured out that the Fighter’s Sword of Link to the Past is precisely half as powerful as the Master Sword, a third as powerful as the Tempered Sword, and a quarter as powerful as the Golden Sword. Thus, every such game has a “levelling system”, even if there’s no “level 1″ ever found in the game text. Thus, there really is no strict viewpoint at all.

The argument about the liberal POV is that their version of what an RPG is is way too inclusive. By their argument, FPS games are RPGs because you actually take on the role of some character in the game. Imagine… Halo… an RPG! Surely those guys must be sipping a bit too much of the Chateau Romani!

So which side is “right”? Well, there is no answer to that. (Stop booing, guys. I’m not done yet!) Personally, I veer to a more liberal perspective on what an RPG is, but I can easily see the argument for a strict definition. They are both good definitions and reasonable points of view. So, let me pose a few probing questions:

1. If Metroid Prime can be both an FPS and an adventure game, what prevents Zelda from being both an RPG and an adventure game?
2. Does Zelda have to be one or the other? If Metroid Prime can be an “FPA” game, can’t Zelda be a unique category all to itself?
3. If a tree falls on a mime in the forest, and nobody is around, does anyone care whether the mime believed Zelda was an RPG or not?

The answer to the debate inevitably lies within those three questions, and I personally think the last question is, quite honestly, the most telling of all three.