#totk would have whatever that thing is

[rnolduga]

Was rewatching one of the totk teasers and realized something about the enemy that appears for a second.

A seemingly ancient automaton. That doesn't mean much on it's own, honestly, but I'm thinking of that in conjuncture with a specific part of it's design.

These look like hands. Nintendo loves keeping reoccurring naming methods, designs, and motifs in zelda, and it just so happens we have two other enemies that also fit the description of an ancient automaton with hands.

Gohdan, the boss from the tower of the gods in Wind Waker...

and Mazaal, the boss from the fortress of winds in The Minish Cap.

Gohdan was a guardian of the master sword- created by the gods as a trial for the hero to determine whether or not he was worthy of wielding the blade (and more directly, entering hyrule castle to attain it). Mazaal is a guardian of the fortress of winds, created by the wind tribe to protect the fortress.

So, all three of them bear a resemblance to each other, being a head with two hands seemingly floating independently. The two we're familiar with are guardians, they have a similar fight strategy (shooting the hands to take them down before being able to go for the head), and were both made by ancient, powerful people.

Something to note specifically about Mazaal being made by the wind tribe is that they're no strangers to advanced tech and ancient enemy-building, especially when you note their ruins are also protected by armos, robotic statues built for them by the minish.

So... a boss made from ancient tech by a tribe that lived in the skies, that shows similarities in appearance, purpose, and battle strategy to another boss that's fought near the top of a tower that reaches toward the sky. And now we have an unidentified enemy in a teaser for tears of the kingdom that shares the design trope with them and is clearly fought in the sky. Very interesting

[phoenixcatch7]

Loz fandom stop being angsty and give the daydreaming kids on big fun adventures with a cool glowing sword some actual whimsy and joy challenge

[ganondoodle]

Regarding Demise: He is an interesting concept, as is the whole eternal cycle, but for that to actually become something worthwhile the games/stories would have to actually DO something with it. So far they are introduced in Skyward Sword and thats it! No other game even references them. And, yes, that cheapens EVERY other game because there is this implication that its all out of the control of the actual characters in the story because of this one asshole that we only ever saw once! Why not have Ganondorf realize that he is possessed/manipulated by this weird old Demon God? How would he react, would he embrace it, would he rebel, would he be broken by the realization that none of his actions were ever *his*? I dont even care which of these options they pick, as long as they pick any of it and do just ANYTHING with the concept.

Or maybe Link or Zelda figures out the Cycle and starts looking into breaking it because endlessly repeating Demon Attacks kinda suck and you dont want that for your descendants.

Or have a game focus on them remembering bits from past lives and having to piece it all together or, again, just ANYTHING!

The closest they ever came to was with BOTW Zelda praying to Hylia, aka HERSELF, to unlock her powers, which is some brutal narrative irony, but not much more.

And regarding the whole Zelda is Hylia thing, I've seen some headcanons about how Skyward Sword Zelda is terrified of herself after learning that, because she now has to assume that everything she did was planned by a version of her that she no longer is. Is Link her friend or is he the useful pawn that Hylia needs to turn into the Hero? Does she even deserve his affection when she probably manipulated him into becoming her champion and fighting, possibly dying for her all her life?

Thats juicy, thats something you can do something with but Nintendo really does like to plan those stories game per game without any care for the larger story.

Which I guess is the Irony of it all. They tried the whole larger connected story/universe thing once: With Skyward Sword. After all that was also the time we got the first Hyrule Historia & "official timeline" as well as "How it all began" in the game itself.

It felt like the start of a new era for Zelda games and stories and then it just... wasn't.

And while I get that they want to focus on gameplay over story, I will never stop mourning the stories we could get/have gotten, if they put a bit more thought into things.

I actually feel like its harder to make the 'cycle' into an interesting plot point when its a .. divine thing that happens, and not perpetuated by the people (though not impossible, given how the series is build up it would need alot of work to not make it worse still..)-

i actually cannot stand the idea that ganondorf is possessed or manipulated, made eviler by demise somehow (demise is dead, leave him beeeeee hes not some evil master mind behind anything aaaaah) bc it STILL takes away ganondorfs agency and character and gives right into the whole hes basically born evil and just pushes the fault tm onto someone else it in turn legitimizes that the kingdom of hyrule and its high rule (heehoo) is right and if only gan wasnt manipulated hed be good tm, aka allied with the goodest guys, hed gladly accept their invitation and join their holy empire of goodness tm if wasnt for da demon

(and i love to say, who decides what is good tm and evil tm? bc hyrules monarchs making every other tribe their subordinate and persecuting shiekah for example isnt what id call good but its fine bc the good holy guys did it in the name of "peace" -what is their idea of peace? everyones under their rule and must worship their god? uh oh- and resistance to it is gonna get you labelled as evil!! (unless you join their holy kingdom and become their vassal of GOOD) what good and evil boils down to in zelda is .. being allied/ruled by the kingdom of hyrule and being opposed to them, even if its only not wanting to be subjugated by them)

i can see the appeal to some degree, but i dont like the idea of ganondorf even being able to be manipulated or possessed, what makes his character, before it got flattened into well he just be demon in the eyes of the average fandom, interesting is his unbreakable will, that drive to keep on living and resisting those that want him dead, its poetic and sad, to the point that (until totk ...) it was really just ONE ganondorf that refused to die and came back over and over (also something i found a compelling thought for botw, that after all this time theres nothing left BUT his will to resist, its a tragic idea that rly spoke to me)

my personal idea of the cycle is that its only a cycle bc they, the kingdom of hyrule and their belief system, keep it going, its not a divine thing that needs to be broken (though the divine surely messes with it, just for the bit i guess) but something that keeps repeating bc hyrule is so soaked into the idea that their princess once was a god and hers is the right to rule it all in light- so anyone who doesnt agree must be of the demons from the darkness seeking to destroy the world, and what means the 'world' could just mean the kingdom of hyrule- in botw even with the calamity people went on and lived, same in windwaker, they dont need the holy kingdom to live- (who is to say the 'monsters' are bad for the land, to me they mostly looked like well adapted territorial beasts, and the bokblins etc clearly arent mindless monsters either, why do they need to be eradicated? they attack you? ok dont go into their territory, or defend yourself, you dont need to exterminate something just bc it could be a threat at some point)

(i do agree that conflict with zelda being interesting but uuuh .. well they never did anythign with that huh)

in the end, demise was just a throw away villain, and if i may get my tin foil hat back here, i feel like the whole creation myth skyward sword does was really just a way for them to get out of the predicament of having to consider a villain to be treated like a person to save themselves from having to think about what they imply and can just go, well this is the evil demons, this is the good gods- ironically enough the attempt to get out of having to consider complicated writing it ends up reversing straight back into the WORST of kinds of implications .. that arent even subtext anymore, if totk is anythign to go by, the most 'simple' or 'easy' narrative to go for might not be actually simple, just a so often retold one that it appears simple if not made aware of its dark maw, the status quo repeated ad nauseam

(and if i may, the whole gameplay over story thing is bs in my eyes, that sounds like the typical attempt of dismissing any critique, just like the stupid, and frankly, offensive "its just for kids" argument, story and gameplay are inherently intertwined, the story influences the gameplay, the gameplay influences the story, especially in a series like zelda that is a futile thing to go for and a reason why the stories themselves lack depth, how are you gonna have an epic adventure that drives you to get through any amount of puzzles and battles if there is no story to motivate you, at this point it feels like the series has set itself up for catastrophic failure bc i imagine, people might just keep buying and playing the games bc its attached to the series, bc they hope to see characters they loved return, new ones that will grab their attention, perhaps be taken away by a world that meant alot to them once before, hope that there will be something exciting-

i am not saying the series has no value or doesnt do anything well (hello who am i) but how many times can you repeat 'this guy good he fight evil guy he get the pretty princess as reward' without any interesting twists or narrative, even the most beloved characters can only keep it passable for so long, even the best gameplay loses its potential if its surrounded by cardboard characters and a story so "simple" as offensive it fits into a single page, i often wonder how a game would be seen if it wasnt titled -the legend of zelda- ..

it hurts especially when looking at its long history, how much estblished thigns it could exploit and expand, the potential the series has is still immense, it hurts to see it be wasted over and over :(

[quibbs126]

Also with BOTW, TOTK and Echoes having somewhat of a running theme of “changing up the status quo”, whether it be through narrative or mechanics, I wonder if at some point we can have a future game that actually does something new and interesting with Ganon

Like have him be on the good side or him just generally having not done anything yet, but he’s believed to be evil because of the whole repeating destiny thing. Hell maybe you could even make him a protagonist, but I don’t think we’ll be going that far just yet

I just think it’d be cool. And I mean, this last game gave Zelda something new, maybe the next game can be Ganon’s turn

[verflares]

this all being said about the light dragon and how it is definitely the biggest highlight of totk (for me at least), i Do think a lot of the reaction to it Is dependent on botw and zelda's characterisation from that game... a lot of which is kind of lacking in totk because of her more passive role (e.g. you are told about her + see her actions after they have already happened)

like. if you didn't already really like zelda and were sold on her relationship with link (and not even just from a shipping zelink perspective, like. just UNDERSTANDING they have a strong bond from everything they've gone through together) then i'm not sure if any of that stuff in totk would've hit as hard as it did. the game does very little to build on what we already know about them, which i think is both a letdown to new players (which. i am not sure why they are playing the sequel before botw, but that is how totk acts most of the time lmao) and returning ones, and as time goes on it's become harder for me to blame people for not caring for it as much.

what a truly odd game

[mrs-luigi-vargas]

Thinking about a post I reblogged a few days ago about posting fic outlines to AO3 as is and now I'm wondering if I should post my Bowsario Rapunzel AUs to AO3 as is. The first AU, at least, is more or less settled where it is? I kind of like the bulleted format of it, lol. But also I could probably put it in paragraph format and change little else and it would probably be fine, too. Maybe I could also add or flesh out a scene or two but...I dunno.

As for the second one, though...I'm wondering if I should actually watch Tangled and maybe write Mario and Bowser at that festival (or some version of it). Or in some of the other scenes. But I think that's a slightly different conversation lmao

[staledirt87]

Something that really confuses me about TotK.

What happened to EVERYTHING

I mean there's the obvious questions like where did the shrines, divine beasts, and guardians go. The guardians were repurposed, most notably in the towers, but where did everything else go? Someone in my DnD group seems to think they just threw away the divine beasts for some reason, but I doubt that heavily.

But that's not my main greivance with what they do.

What happened to the timeline? We know this happened after Skyward Sword because Hyrule has already been founded, so we know that Demise has already cursed the hero, the goddess, and himself to be infinitely reborn. The wording is something like "Every time the land of Hylia is in danger, you will be reborn to fight it." Now, I don't know about you, but the land of Hylia seemed like it was in danger when the Demon King was rampaging across it, y'know? But where was Link?? Zelda was already there, but Link sure wasn't. Did the curse just not feel like activating?

But that's not all, because unless Zelda's time machine shenanigans unlocked this whole other timeline that goes parallel to every other Zelda game, where thousands upon thousands of years pass until Ganon reawakens, then some fuckery happens. Most notably two Zeldas at all times, and two Master swords. I do think they split the timeline again though, because no NPCs comment on the sudden appearance of the Light Dragon, but that still doesn't make sense.

If there was in fact a timeline split, it would have have to have reemerged into BotW. Why? They mention the calamity. But, Zelda was present during the whole Calamity, so what the hell was going on with the Light Dragon? BotW and TotK happen in the same timeline, but that's impossible because then two Zeldas and two Master Swords would have to have been in existence at the same exact time.

Don't get me wrong, I love the game and the mechanics, but it just irks me with how much they seemed to have overlooked.

[gabbi-the-grackle]

GUYS LISTEN I DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT IM SAYING HERE BUT!!!!!!! LOOK!!!

[waywardsalt]

when i played persona 5 royal for the first time i felt that it was a great palette cleanser after the dogshit of totk, and now i gotta say elden ring fits a similar bill, and also does certain things better anyways

[princess-hilda]

.

[tsukinoshinjiu]

[⚠️ Major TOTK Spoilers]

Reunited

Inspired by HTTYD Some lore ramblings behind the art below the cut:

For this art, I was thinking "what if Zelda hadn't been completely restored after the end of the game?" Perhaps she'd still have many draconic features. Probably more than what I gave her here. As far as lore, this is what I had in mind:

Link would notice she doesn't feel comfortable going back to the Lookout the way she is, so they'd camp out in the wilds for a few days, maybe travel a bit, do his best to make her feel better. Yet, no matter what he tries, she's so insecure she can hardly find it in herself to open up about her problems. This would eventually cause her to run away, trying to free Link of the burden she's become. She's changed so much, Zelda can hardly see herself as a person anymore, much less the person Link used to love.

Her scars…are probably half from the imprisoning war and half from her escapade. She might be able to defend herself with her new body, but Hyrule is still not completely safe. In a sense, she matches Link in that regard, her body carrying the history of Hyrule in its every inch.

She spends a long time running, hiding, avoiding her problems and herself. Still, Link always finds her. His unwavering devotion will always bring him back to her, to whatever corner of the world she goes.

This is the moment I wanted to portray, where he's just seeing her for the first time in months, maybe years with the entirety of totk. She's changed so much, she's so afraid of what she's done and will do to him. Yet, he's here. He loves her, and will love her, so deeply, nothing she could ever do would change that, and that's the first thing he wants her to know. I want them to have that conversation, to show her that change is a part of growing, and how he wants to grow together with her, no matter what comes. TL;DR: I wanted to put the blorbos in this scene with an entirely different context.

[vivacia-18]

This was getting to long for the tags, hope you don't mind me commenting directly!

asdlkjaada The freaking Dondon quest - I totally did that one by accident, and all of the reveal was totally overshadowed by the fact that I felt equal parts bad and annoyed finding out that they were unkillable NPCs when I just spent the last 10 minutes trying to murder the herd for meat X'D

But yeah, overall while I don't look for much depth in a video game (if I want it I'm cool to come with a shovel myself later) totk really lacked cohesion overall. Certain parts of the story and characters were enjoyable, but it definitely didn't pull itself together very well.

One thing I wanted to see way back in botw, and that I think could have tied in well to this game - and maybe even the Dondon quest! - was having the monsters actually be part of Hyrule. As in like, people that are meant to be there. Its stated multiple times that the blood moon summons lost spirits who are cursed to wander the land and fight and die in eternal cycles of damnation. We also know that dead/undead and transformation into other species is a thing in Zelda (the Stals in OOT anyone?) completely unrelated to Ganondorfs whole deal. What I wanted SO BAD was for post game after getting rid of the blood moon, the curse would be lifted and the monsters would be normal again. So you could barter for stuff (bokoblins, etc), or battle for prestige but not to the death (Lynels), or like sneakily harvest things (Hynox, Talus) but you wouldn't be killing them anymore - because they're among the people you were trying to save, they're a part of Hyrule too. And now the warrior dead can rest in peace once more.

Until we accidentally bring the blood back in totk and they're summoned/cursed again, whoops! But anyways, I felt like that would have been both good gameplay and good depth, and now I kinda like the tie in of the Dondons only being known as they were cursed under the blood moon, and it's only recently that they've shown to be naturally pretty docile, or something along those lines.

I also think that could have tied in well with explaining Gan too, and how the fuck he was still around when the Calamity was supposed to be banished and they made an explicit point of saying he had chosen to forgo the chance of reincarnation, so shouldn't he have been gone forever? Finally broken free of the cycle and allowed to rest?

I haven't thought this part through quite as much, so bear with me. The blood moon reads as a curse to me, but not so much one cast BY Ganondorf, so much as it is the manifestation of the curse UPON him. It truly seems like in this game duo especially Gan is destined to fall to madness, and one headcanon I've gotten rather fond of that ties into the Light and Darkness thing is that its because the power of Light is incompatible with him long term, just as the power of Dark is incompatible to Zelda (if we really want to reach we can link it back to the schism between Hylia and Demise in SS, but that's optional).

Any long term exposure to their opposite will have detrimental mental effects - basically a magical autoimmune reaction. I think he can interact with certain aspects - note that both he and Zelda seem compatible with Sheikah tech/magic, which is fun conceptually as they are a people/Sages of Shadow - but not pure Light. I think Zelda would go equally mad should she ever try to use Dark magics long term.

Fortunately for her and unfortunately for Gan, Light being the magic of the main ruling family makes it much more prominent and easy to find for someone who is naturally driven to seek Power. And when he does his magic becomes... sick, for a lack of better terms. This culminated into terminal illness upon bonding with the soul stone - cruel in the way of tuberculosis, granting a flush of power and vibrancy before death, this created the blood moon - a warped representation of death and rebirth, light and dark, twisted into something foul. And contaminated magic is what we see manifested as the blight/gloom in later years. The Calamity was his spirit, broken free of Rauru's seal, yearning to be reunited with its body. And in totk we see his flesh revived, though his spirit was thought slain and the curse of the blood moon broken. It wasn't though, just briefly contained once more, because the source of the blight - the soul stone - was still bonded to him, and he couldn't rest until it was removed.

...Wow, this got far longer than I was intending, guess I really brought that shovel afterall X'D

tldr; I agree with OP that totk had the potential to be much deeper and more narratively satisfying than it was, even within the realm of what one would generally expect from a mainstream video game (which is not too much). And a big part of that for me would be a tweak to the monster mechanics post-game, and a little more actual backstory to Ganondorfs backstory to they actually make narrative sense.

The Dondon Post (or: the bizarre TotK's side content counterpoints to its main quest's immuable binary morality)

Speaking of strange TotK Choices, I think I have one singe post left in me about this game; and it's about the Dondon quest, "The Beast and the Princess".

(and about other stuff too, you'll see, we'll get to them)

More specifically: about how... strange of a thematic point it feebly attemps to make in the larger context of the storyline, and how it seems to be yet another mark of a world that, perhaps, once tried to be more morally complex that it ended up becoming.

Buckle up: it's a long one, and it gets pretty conceptual.

(good gem boys notwhistanding)

The Princess and the Beast

So, a couple of things about the setup. We are investigating potential Princess sightings; but at this point, either because we have already completed a bunch and know the general gib, because we have met a couple of wild Fake Zelda shenanigans, or through the simple fact that we are completing a side quest, we know there's a good chance it won't lead to an actual Zelda information. So when we ask Penn about what is going on and he replies with the ominous "we saw the Princess riding some kind of beast --a frightening one with huge, brutal tusks-- that the princess seemed to control", we get Ideas. Then the sidequest is registered: "The Princess and the Beast".

So. You know me. And if you don't know me, here's what you should know: my brain immediately flared up with the thought there was no way in hell this wasn't some kind of wink towards Ganondorf's renowned boarish beast form, especially given tusks were given so much focus.

My first assumption was: that's a miniboss right? I will get to fight some small boar-like thing that Fake Zelda rides sometimes. Cool! I didn't hold too hard onto my hope that the relationship of Zelda and/or Ganondorf to the natural world, or to each other would be expanded upon, since I had already been burned before, but my interest was piqued.

You have to understand how starved I was for any hint of complexity or mystery or ambiguity at this point. I was extremely eager for the game to throw anything at me that would surprise me, enlighten something pre-established, make the exploration lead to a meaningful discovery or deepening of characters, world or themes (and not just slightly cooler loot, or a bossfight, or a puzzle devoid of emotional context --cohesion and depth is what motivates my play sessions, especially in an open world game that I want to believe is worth losing oneself into). This was about the most intriguing task on my to do list at the moment, and so I plunged in immediately.

After really REALLY misunderstanding what I was supposed to do (I stalked every corner of every forest surrounding the tropical area at night or during blood moons in hope to see something --which was very much the wrong call), I arrived to the other stable, then was guided to the other side of the river where Cima awaits and explains that these creatures are actually a new species discovered by Zelda; that they are gentle and kind and not at all scary ("Dondons aren't beastly, they're adorable!"), and even somehow digest luminous stones into gemstones. They like the company of people and liked Zelda in particular.

I was... I felt two different ways about this conclusion, and I think it's worth to explore both: disappointment and some sort of... "huh!" Hard to describe this emotion otherwise.

I'll get the disappointment out of the way first, because it's the least interesting of the two. While I think the little emotional arc I was taken on was not devoid of interest --I was indeed taken on by the rumor and intrigued by its implications-- I wanted, well. A little bit more. And if the creatures were to be Zelda's pet project, I would have loved for them to be actually terrifying and feisty, and for her to develop an interest for these creatures in particular regardless. It could have been very interesting characterization that veered out of the perfect princess loving the perfect world floundering around her, always bringing her clear, practical benefits from the interaction.

(I have made another post that speaks of my discomfort that Zelda does everything everywhere and everyone loves her for it --I get what they were trying to go for, but it either lacks conflict for me to buy into that dynamic at the scale of several regions, or they went on too hard for my taste, as she is, at once and in the span of a couple of years at most: a schoolteacher, a gardener, an animal researcher, a scholar, a traveler, a military expert, a knower of landscape, a painter, a horse rider, an infrastructure planner, a [...] princess --at some point it begins to sound made up, "Little Father of the people"-esque to rattle the hornet's nest a little bit, especially if it's not shown as either a clearly godly characteristic or, even more necessary imo, a negative trait; another expression of her killing herself at work to compensate for a perceived flaw she's trying to earn forgiveness for, like she did in BotW. But that's another topic, and the clumsiness of her character arc has been well threaded by basically everybody disappointed in the story already.)

But, if I decide to be a little graceful, I'd like to explore my "huh!" emotion, and take it apart a little bit.

I think there's something interesting to have such strong parallels to setting up a story about the relationship between Zelda and Ganondorf ("The Princess and the Beast", like come on guys that's the conflict of over half the series), or at least Zelda and the concept of Evil since Ganondorf pretty much represents it in this game, and then have it go: actually, there was a horrible monster that everyone was afraid of, but Zelda was wise and patient enough to approach it and realize its potential beyond the tusks, what beauty can be brought upon the world if one makes the effort to look for what exists underneath. It says something a bit deeper about the world and about Zelda in particular. It intrigues, at the very least.

Is it a reach? Probably! Is my first interpretation that the quest is actually about "eww you thought Zelda would be interested in *disgusting vile monsters* and not sweet and gentle and human-loving animals that literally shit jewlery when cared for? jokes on you, she never would feel any ounce of sympathy for anything that isn't Good and Deserving" uhhh definitively truer? Probably! But I also don't want to dismiss that the quest made me think about it. If I had completed it earlier, I might have even felt like it was (very clumsy, not gonna lie) setup about the main conflict.

But that's also a good segway into my next section: the arbitrary limitations between the animal and the creature, the monstrous and the human.

And the fact that TotK points directly at it.

A Monstrous Collection

(these two guys are just. doing So Much and being So Valid despite being massive weirdos the game wants us to be slightly repelled by. I, for one, respect the Monster kinning grind and their general Twilight Princess energy.)

So. These two guys. There is so much to say about these two guys. I don't think I have seen the Trans Perspective on Kolton on tumblr, and I would love to get it because. I feel like it's a worthwhile discussion (just, how gender and identity is handled in TotK overall, I feel like it's a very complicated conversation and I have not seen super deep dives and I'd be very interested in hearing more).

Beyond the throughline of voluntary consumption of magical objects to turn into less human creatures being a weirdly prevalent plot point in TotK (Zelda, Kolton and Ganondorf casually transing their entire species for funsies --Ganondorf being particularly relentless with Fake Zelda, mummy/phantom shenanigans, Demon King and then literal dragon), I want to focus on Kilton a little bit.

Kilton is genuinely the only NPC in the game willing to acknowledge the inherent personhood that monsters have (the game does showcase them picking up fruits, mourning their boss if you kill them, being cutesy and happy to identify you as one of their own if you wear the appropriate mask --and that's not even getting into creatures like the Lynels, who seem to really edge on the limit of being a conscious creature with a system of honor and property and many other things). He does encourage us to think of monsters as more than a species whose only worth lie in how fun it is to eradicate them; even more, gameplay-wise, he does give us a reason to interact with them in other ways than just our sword with his museum. He does encourage us to see that beauty for ourselves and then select what we think is coolest/most intimidating/cutest/eight billion ganondorfs in every pose imaginable

The fact that Ganondorf is considered a monster was a great win for this feature in particular, and is very funny, but it's also... A lot, if we dig at it a little more than warranted. Beyond all of the Implications and all of the things of representation and political conflict and values already discussed ad nauseum: when did he stop being considered a human? What does that mean about the flimsiness of what is a monster and what is a creature and what is an animal and what is a person and what is even a hylian, as sheikahs got absorbed into the definition in this game? Especially with the stones taken into account, how profound changes in nature are a huge part of the plot (even when reversed and ultimately pretty meaningless): how easy it is, to make that slip? Who decides when that slip has been made? What is acceptable to hurt without remorse? What is beautiful and worth preserving? What is both at once? What is neither?

And again, in a classic Zelda conundrum (appreciative(?)): who the fuck gets to decide that, when, and why?

The Bargainers and the Horned God

(major shoutout to these big guys for being the sole and only providers of actual depth to the Depths, and for looking cool as heck)

So. Let's move the conversation to the Depths.

Conceptually: what an interesting idea!! And so well executed (initially)!! A mirror world to the surface, dark and hushed and full of unknown creatures; haunted by gloom and sickness and the unknown. Not a first in the series, far from it: from ALTTP to ALBW, and even taking the Twilight world of TP into account, this idea of a Dark World acting as a deforming mirror to Hyrule and revealing many interesting aspects as we get to explore both is always a very interesting take on corruption and envy and fear/weakness and/or some sense of darkness looming under the perfect exterior. I'd argue even the Lens of Truth of both OoT and MM's serve a similar function, both gameplay-wise, but also in terms of theme: not everything is as it seems. In the world of Light, darkness must hide itself; but darkness also possess its own beauty, its own hardships, and will stare back at you without blinking if you go seek for it. It's, in my opinion, one of the series' most compelling conversation about the cyclical nature of fate, the coldness of godhood, and how small one feels in the face of a universe that is more complicated than it initially appears --which is why Courage must be invoked to push forward regardless.

The Depth's otherworldly ambiance is truy wonderful, whether in the plays of light and shadows, the creatures native to the environment we meet there (wish we met more!), the soundtrack, the strange aquatic/primordial plants, the fact that the dragons visit this place and connect them to the outside --invoking ideas of balance and interconnectivity, that the tree branches look like veins. The coliseums, the mines, the zonai facilities and the prisons do seem to poke at many things about what the relationship to the past was to this place; was it ever truly a place? Did it look like this back then? Why was it buried? Why did it come back? But in spite of it all, I think the Depths struggle overall to question or reveal anything about the surface that we couldn't already assume going in (that the only thing congealing there is Ganondorf's gloom, his lonely domain of Wrongness, only shared by Kohga and the yiga --the only naysayers of Goodness and Light, contemptful and blinded by self-importance and rage). The zonite is mined by gloomy monsters --why, what for?-- so any notion of greed and over-expansion that could have been associated to the zonai is now reabsorbed into Ganondorf's general evilness, since it needs to be reminded he is everything and anything bad with the world: darkness and conquest and greed and capitalism and pollution and bad weather and sickness and darkness and violence and war and death and betrayal and fakeness and lies and patriarchy and exploitation. No matter that he never does a single thing with zonite in the game; rather set up elements of conflict that never go anywhere than, for a second, let the foundations of absolute goodness and absolute evil risk becoming shaky --and you coming to this unwelcoming dark place that hates you, killing the miners and taking their resources for yourself is, on the other holy, royal fur-covered hand, utterly legitimate. The resources were once Rauru's after all, were they not?

And this is what I would say, except... except for the dead. The fallen warriors, the poes, and, most important of all: the Bargainer statues.

The Bargainers are, in-universe, godly creatures guiding the fallen to a place of final respite, regardless of moral alignment. The poes are all, fundamentally, cleansed of judgement: they are lost souls whose past reality does not matter anymore, and all deserve that peace regardless. In spite of the heavy paradise/hell parallels drawn in that game, with Rauru/Zelda/Sonia as the guardians of Light where Ganondorf gets to become a Devil-like figure, it is confirmed here that no such thing exists when you actually die in this universe.

It almost feels as if the fabric of Hyrule itself, in a brief moment that refuses to elaborate on its own point, goes: "yeah, whatever is happening here between Light and Darkness, it doesn't actually matter. This conflict is futile and doesn't understand the real nature of being alive, dead, a god, a person, a monster, an animal. The truth lies elsewhere --but you will never be told what it is."

It's: wild.

One of the game's most striking traits of narrative brilliance in my opinion --to the point where I'm wondering whether it's there on purpose or was effectively an oversight since every other aspect of reality breaks its own back trying to reassure us that everything is at its correct place, receiving the appropriate treatment by the universe in a way that is never to be questioned.

Another case of that ambiguity being allowed to exist without being immediately crushed and repressed is the case of the Horned God (interesting parallel to Ganon's actual horns that he develops in this game in case the hellish parallels weren't clear enough already): a demon Hylia sealed into stone and pushed far from humans in a clear case of questionable behavior since, while the Horned God isn't exactly nice, does propose a different philosophy you are not punished for exploring; and yet, a proposal that has seen itself persecuted in a very real sense by the goddess of absolute goodness, patron of hylians, Zelda, and many more. Pushed away from view.

Interesting.

And Yet, Light Must Prevail

Okay, so, after all of this, we're left to ask... What the fuck is up with morality in Tears of the Kingdom?!

What do we trust? These half-breaths in the occasional sidequests that Light and Darkness is just the wrong frame of reference, that nature cannot be this simple, is ever-shifting and can be recalled or reaffirmed by arbitrary forces, and might even not matter at all in the universe's fabric, despite having so much of its lore soaking in the dychotomy? Or... everything else about the game, this insistence that Good must not only be assumed as whatever tradition the kingdom has passed down for thousands upon thousands of years, but remain utterly unquestioned the entire time? That Bad is without cause, graceless and unworthy of investment?

Are the Bargainer's statues the only thing worth listening to, that morality is a fable the living tells themselves --or should we be moved when Darkness destroys Light, when Light suffers to preserve itself and the world --but not when the Other is rightfully slain?

Was Kilton correct to see beauty in the monstrous? Was Kolton onto something when he let go of his previous form because there is no clear distinction between what should receive an arrow to the face and what shouldn't? Or should we rather focus on Zelda losing her human form as a beautiful and tragic sacrifice --but something that never actually altered her nature as a hylian, the descendant of a lineage of Good Kings meant to rule forever?

Is the Dondon good because it always was, or was it worth Zelda's love in spite of the fear it initially provoked?

Either way, at the end of the game, evil is slain. Ganondorf is, not killed, but --like his angry BotW boar counterpart-- destroyed, as monsters tend to be. He explodes over the lands of Hyrule, freed from Darkness; freed from everything wrong, since the foreign menace that embodied it all was wiped out in one fateful sweep of a holy blade cradled in sacrificial love. Nothing wrong remains. The Sages reaffirm their vows to protect the kingdom forward, and a very human --hylian-- Zelda smiles: Hyrule now forever and ever basked in eternal Light.

[lastoneout]

No but fr we should talk more about how TotK Zelda probably could have learned to use her time powers to fix things without having to turn into a dragon, like all on her own she was able to transport a whole item across 10,000 years which is crazy impressive, but due to Gannon she was thrust into a situation exactly like the one she started in before BotW only worse, and that's probably why the dragon option seemed better.

The only person who could have helped her unlock an incredible power(a figure not dissimilar to her mother) was dead and on top of that Raru(someone who probably felt more like a father to her than her actual father) was ALSO gone and unable to offer her whatever support or guidance he could. She was alone at the end of the world knowing she was the only one who could stop it, and so of fucking COURSE she chose the tangible option even though it would DESTROY her forever rather than spend days, weeks, years, her whole entire lifespan trying and possibly failing to figure out her time power. Not just because she knew the dragon plan had a higher likelihood of success, but because she could not bear to go back to the hell of knowing so many lives depend on her magically discovering how to use her gift without help or any hint that it might actually work.

Zelda chose to sacrifice herself because it would work, but also because like most people who've been through trauma, the very idea of going back was unthinkable. Staying and figuring it out might have worked, but it would have emotionally destroyed her, and physical destruction that will work is, to her, the better option. It's such a profoundly devastating part of the story because her choice makes perfect sense. It's exactly what a traumatized person who's entirely separated from everyone she holds dear and crumbling under the weight of countless lives on her shoulders would choose.

Like ough BotW/TotK Zelda is EVERYTHING I could talk about her forever. The flawed female character of all time. No notes. I wish she hadn't been damseled again but like god this story is going to make me insane forever(high priase) and we got EoW so I'm not gonna complain. God I love her so much.

[blueskittlesart]

Okay, I'm curious cause I've only played Wind Waker, and BotW/TotK: Why is Link sometimes left-handed, sometimes right-handed? I assume it's because of possible motion controls, and not a Lore Reason.

He was definitively left-handed up until they started putting out games on the wii, barring a few anomalies like flipped sprites (there's like one sprite in NES loz where he's got the sword in his right hand) and oot 3d master quest (the entire game is mirrored.) I've heard a few reasons for this, including miyamoto being left-handed and a left-handed sword swing looking better from most angles for the original 2d sprites, but to my knowledge we don't have an official reason as to why this was the general rule. up until botw the answer for the right-hand switch was definitively motion controls--both skyward sword and the wii version of tp would flip depending on the hand the player uses. (I know that in the gamecube version of tp he was always left-handed but I don't have sksw HD so I'm not sure which hand he uses by default with button controls. he's drawn right-handed in pretty much all promo art for that game tho.) However, botw didn't have motion control options but still went with a right-handed link. there are a few potential explanations for that--I wouldn't be surprised if they were toying with the idea of a motion-controlled sword swing early on since the switch does have that capability but ended up scrapping it in the dev process, but it's also entirely possible that since they'd been working with a (predominantly) right-handed link for their 2 most recent home console releases they just. didnt bother switching back. lmfao.

from a lore standpoint though my personal headcanon/theory/whatever you want to call it is that botw link is right handed because that's what's expected of him. Botw link is a character who is very very very conscious of peoples' perceptions of him and the expectations on his shoulders; it's arguably one of his most defining traits pre-memory-loss. When you picture a soldier, you picture the sword in their right hand. I don't think that it's a deliberate CHOICE in-universe to use his right hand, but i do think that being left-handed has the potential to give someone pause when talking about him, which is something that botw link can't have. Nothing can be even slightly out of the ordinary with him, because if it is it's something for the gossip-hungry public to latch onto. (I don't necessarily think that a left-handed link would have been more or less scrutinized in this context than a right-handed one, but being left-handed would have definitely been something of note, especially in the context of a swordsman, and link's whole thing in this game is that he really doesn't want people scrutinizing him any more than they already are.) In this sense, his being right-handed sort of affirms this picture-perfect image he's attempting to project, which is important in the context of the rest of the game. Again, there's no proof that this is actually the reasoning behind the decision, but I personally think the decision to make him right-handed for botw was a good one. I also like that eow went back to left-handed link tho! It's cool that we're getting variety and I think it'd be interesting if they started playing with that difference more in the future beyond just the necessity of hand-switching for motion controls.

[phoenixcatch7]

Okay you know what actually yeah. I was tired but I had a point.

Why. On earth. In zelda fics. Do people not shut up about everything being hylia's fault forever and ever.

Like, the one deity out of a dozen odd who got cursed into this right alongside Link. All the focus on one great all being power who then gets blamed or blessed for everything that ever happens. It's just... I don't know, it just seems like a culturally Christian thing. Not even that - American catholic.

Especially Legend omg when people write him he never shuts up about how everything bad that's ever happened to him is all hylia's fault and she's doing it on purpose with no thought to her poor beleagured hero. He sounds like someone who grew up in an American conservative household who turned out to be queer and never bothered to unpack any of it and acts like he's now atheist.

But even then you could do something interesting with that!! The common headcanon that Legend is hylian royalty - of course that family would put immense worth and worship on hylia as her descendants, she who founded their kingdom. And maybe legend could feel bitter about not inheriting the magic, or the throne, or whatever meant he grew up away from the castle. Give him some unexamined religious trauma! Heck, he could bond with Flora over disappointing your family's expectations or something! They could work on unpacking it together! If you must make it part of his character at least think about why!

Because that belief is wrong, because hylia is literally the one deity we can pretty safely understand is not all seeing, all knowing, all being.

Every time she has a voice, a role, we see her make mistakes or be tricked and have regrets.

Skyward sword, she's literally zelda. She's a young protective warrior goddess (she used a sword and lead armies to battle against demise) who was created by the Three to guard the triforce and keep watch over hyrules lands. By the time ss starts she's already made several tough calls, not limited to yoinking hylians into the sky. When she was zelda she hated every second of leading Link around and even then!! It all hinged on him being completely willing! He was never forced to do anything, she didn't even have her memories with the plan until after she'd fallen to the surface! Their relationship was entirely genuine and she very nearly overestimated her own willingness to go through with the plan! And even then she still managed to get kidnapped lmao. That's not what happens when you're in charge of fate.

And in botw and totk - she's in her full divine form, her full divine powers, she's ancient and magic and worshipped in every corner of the kingdom. And (spoilers!) she loses contact with one of her own mf statues. Not just any ten apples high chibi statue you see in the towns, no, it's The Big One. She's got no idea what happened to it, but she's (rightfully) worried, and asks Link to check it out. And in an entirely separate instance, her OTHER big statue in the ToT gets overridden!! By a triangle head! And ol creep in the deep is the one who releases the statue! It's been what 20k years of power and worship - if she's not all powerful then she never will be.

Hyrule - every hyrule - is very, very polytheistic. She's not even a goddess of time to be in charge of stuff like that! There's multiple of them: Naryu, Cia (and Lana), Farosh to an extent, and many artifacts that can cause time travel, like the harp of ages, the ocarina, the big portal in ss, those time shift stones in the same game, the statue in wind waker. Please stop treating her like the magic elf equivalent of Monotheistic American Christianity God.

She was introduced in skyward sword. The game that came out before botw. She did not exist in any of the games that came before that. There was a lake hylia! In the kingdom hyrule! That's it! Her name or even existence wasn't even hinted at before that. It's actually canonically pretty unlikely any of the chain (cough cough legend) have even heard of her! And her assigned job is protector of the triforce. That's it. And she can't even use the thing. She can very explicitly as a main driving force of the ss plot not use the triforce she protects. And the triforce, shockingly, is not even in every game.

Cases that hylia often gets the most flack for (links awakening and all the trauma from that, Link failing in botw, the events of totk) hylia has absolutely zero part in. Hilariously. And she has zero power over wishes made to the triforce or who makes those wishes or what the triforce does about it.

She even gets all the blame for the cycle of the hero, the reincarnation! Which? We know exactly how that happened. Blaming her for a curse she herself is a victim to?? Demise, in skyward sword, explicitly, on screen, doing it ON PURPOSE, cursing the spirit of the hero and the blood of the goddess.

Hylia, I don't know if you've noticed, also has her own blood. Whether or not she lost that blood upon return to her divine form, she still couldn't break the curse. Link, spirit now tied to whatever demise had cooking up, is basically to reincarnate in time for whenever the Interesting Times happen. And it's demise's fault, who, again, did it on screen, on purpose, explicitly, pointing at the camera with text bolded and everything.

So why do people even blame her? I think it comes down to this:

Her name matches the kingdom. Whatever her connection to the people with the same name, I don't know, but she did found the surface kingdom as a mortal. Being named zelda at the time I wonder who chose the name XD!

Her worship in botk as a high ranking deity. Again, not monotheistic, there's temples to the Three and there's Malanya and Satori and the great fairies and the yiga worship ganon, but hylia is the most widespread for all she's basically a side character working for the new heart piece situation. Again, this is only the case in ss/botk, she doesn't appear in even aoc.

A misguided belief spread in fanfiction that in linked universe, hylia is the one opening and controlling the portals. To my knowledge, lu canon is that the portals are opened by dark link, or at least that's the working theory. I think it's assumed that hylia is the one who gathered the heroes together to combat it? If that's true? Congratulations! We have one (very plot necessary) act of hers in a fan comic. That is not canon to The Legend Of Zelda series.

An american Christian (I hesitate to say evangelican?) cultural understanding of religion. The differences between polytheism and monotheism. How one might feel if the divine was proven real on earth. Zelda is a Japanese property, it is not a Christian country. Though it draws aesthetic inspiration from western medieval fantasy it is not and never will be culturally western. The majority of ao3/tumblr users are American or at least English speaking, and that will always affect interpretation. It's giving 'be thankful to God no matter what for he always has a plan. Trust in him and your suffering will be rewarded' which is not a universal religious belief.

Something I've noticed to be surprisingly common in fandom, is where a mentor or figure of authority who is anything less than perfect or all forgiving can very quickly have their reputation ripped to shreds by the fandom. And then newer authors come, read those works, internalise that about the characters and produce new works that assume that character's cruelty to be par for the course. I will not be listing those characters or fandoms for a variety of reasons lol. But it is amazingly common and very hard to untangle, especially in larger fandoms. It's character bashing in a way near identical to cancelling people irl. It's not 'giving them depth' or 'making it more realistic' (grittier equalling realism is an ice cold take proliferated by dudebro comic authors and wrong besides.) Have some critical thinking.

Lately, I've also been running into a great many fics (not so much comics) that make hylia do some fairly heinous stuff... And then unironically blame her for it. They do remember they're the ones deciding what the characters do, right? She's not an abusive master playing with her puppets until they break, she's quite the opposite! Use the right tags (dark hylia/ooc characters/character bashing/author made them do it, idk) or dial it back. This is a growing percentage of fics and I'll never restrict content but yanno, if you're going to make hylia evil or manipulative at least understand it's a canon deviation (and do something interesting with it, I once read an amazing botw fic with evil hylia and fierce deity!).

TLDR, To summarise, hylia is canonically incapable both emotionally and physically of doing the majority of things characters in fics blame her for. Stop using her as a scapegoat especially when demise is right there. Please give your whumpees deeper characterisation than hating on hylia. Please give legend deeper characterisation than hating on hylia every time he or someone else is sad. Please remember wild can talk to hylia if he wants. Please double check anything you're not sure about :D!

[ganondoodle]

another thing i feel has deepend my hatred for totk is... how quickly people jump to defending it, as soon as there is any criticism at all, no matter how little or legit, anyone that expresses disappointment, even in the most tamest way possible, the comments are filled with excuses for it like nintendo can do no wrong

(saw someone express disappointment about a concept art in the totk book that they would have liked more than what we got, and the comments were filled with people making excuses for it-)

often the process of cool concepts getting less cool over the development cycle, especially in this modern gaming industry, isnt bc it just wasnt 'possible' or not the best choice, but bc it gets filtered through many layers of corporate "mass appeal" ideals for greater profit, "mass appeal" i think is always going to give you something more generic, losing its edge, its spark, you cant make soemthing that literally appeals to everyone, thats not how it works, but they certainly try anyway bc it promises greater profit in theory

of course, that doesnt mean that has to be the reason for whatever they decide to go for in the end, but they can do wrong, very questionable, and very much bad things, they have done that and ARE doing that, and you should be able to express disappointment about that without getting swarmed by a weird nintendo defense squad, in fact, it SHOULD be criticised, sometimes that can even be fun, sometimes mroe frustrating, but it should be done regardless, does it sound fun to jsut fully accept everything they throw in front of you without question??? does that sound like you will only get better things???

i just realyl hate that weird cult following (exaggeration) the game has amassed where you either worship it or must unreasonably hate it, that you cant express any sort personal feelign towards it that isnt praise without being hit by the squad tm

its not just annoying, its weird, what are you defending them for?? why??? i had this problem a while too, but its died down sicne then, probably bc people realized im not the 'average' fandom guy but a very specific kind of fandom guy- whenever i view outside my little bubble though i see it still happen ... even for the most miniscule of criticism

(dont get me started on how i have MASSIVE gameplay and design frustrations about totk and dont really understand how so many people can say the gameplay is stellar and jsut the writing sucks .... bc its not ..)