22nd May 2010, 12:25 AM
Um, ABF, they weren't ever going to make brand new characters for Smash Bros. That's the POINT of the game, characters we KNOW. In crossover games, the "new creations" tend to be lame, like that cactus man or Rubyheart in Marvel vs Capcom.
The second character is not a main star, and their point with Fire Emblem was to stick in a character from the most recent one to pal around with Marth, the classic. Fire Emblem 7 was not the most recent one, now was it? There was no sexist goal in place I assure you. Lolo and Lala would have been an interesting choice, perhaps as a "clone" of Popo and Nana, but then again they didn't want too many clones. Let's face it, they really didn't have many options there. You're inventing a reason to be offended where there isn't any. They did the best one could expect, and in the end gameplay had to take priority. If they'd stuck in Lynn as yet another clone of Marth, at the sacrifice of a character that played differently like Solid Snake, that'd be pretty lame, and I think you know that.
When it gets right down to it, you seem to want something amazing from a Mario storyline. Sometimes they do something different, but seriously you're inventing a problem where it doesn't need to exist. Was the original story, heck the story of Donkey Kong while we're at it, sexist? Sure in the sense it's based on cultural stereotypes. However, there's no need to interpret it in that light now. It's over, it's done, and in the end Mario is basically a cartoon. Just have fun with it. A serious Mario game is something we don't need. Not even Super Mario RPG was that, a game where Peach gets kidnapped like 3 times AND is a playable character who saves the world. It's the standard story, a running gag of the series, and saying "we won't do that anymore" would be a real slap in the face to the fans. That said, I had really hoped they could work Peach into NSMB Wii instead of just a lame recolored Toad.
Sometimes it's best to go with the standard storyline. Heck even in Zelda 1, Zelda's still saving the world, even if indirectly. It was her idea to split the triforce into 8 parts and hide them across Hyrule so Ganon didn't get them. The one in Zelda 2 may be asleep the whole game, but it's because she took a stand against an evil prince and refused to tell him where the hidden triforce of courage was.
I'm not arguing that it's not a problem, but you're taking the few good signs and spitting in their face. Heck the best thing about Samus, at least until "Zero Suit Samus" was that not only was she a hero, she wasn't being shown in scantily clothes all the time (except in the endings). Sometimes you just gotta let people enjoy a good classic story about heroes saving people. When it comes to Zelda, the issue isn't one of gender discrimination, it's about the series relying on Link being the main character. He's ALWAYS the main character. They put plenty of strong females in there, but it IS the Legend of ZELDA, so she's got to be in there, and she's always got the secret of ulitimate power that forces Ganon to abduct her for various reasons througout the series (or some other force). Don't look a gift Midna in the mouth here. Don't forget that Zelda isn't screaming for help either, she seems pretty eager to help out and is rather stoic about all these abductions.
In fact, you get so blinded that you see the CD-i games as having "better stories" JUST because of the gender reversal. I'm sorry but I've SEEN those games, I PLAYED a little of those games, and those stories are TERRIBLE. Zelda in those games is FAR more offensive than any Zelda incarnation in the "true" games. You just need to see some of her comments about jewelry or her sarcastic forced relationship conversations with Link to see that. Plus, the stories are just plain bad. The Zelda 1 story may be a cliche, but at least it's not a Saturday Morning Cartoon plotline.
Besides, wouldn't just flipping the roles come across as far too blatant to be effective? It's fine for a Mario game, not so much for a Zelda game.
Baby steps here. First step, make a Zelda game where the main character isn't Link, doesn't look like him, doesn't have his name, even acts different than most Links. Female, male, don't care, but don't make it Zelda because again that's too blatant.
Again, you are focusing all your rage on a pointless target. Your arguments on it being sexist have roots in the original stories, but after that, they fall flat. And, they especially fall flat in a CROSSOVER GAME. If they can't find enough interesting female leads (LEADS, that mage was NOT a lead, though I admit Marth clones are getting old that's more a complaint at the series in general), inventing characters no one has ever heard of JUST to make them female would just be an insult. No one cares about random Xena knockoff number 41, they wanted Megaman in the game.
The second character is not a main star, and their point with Fire Emblem was to stick in a character from the most recent one to pal around with Marth, the classic. Fire Emblem 7 was not the most recent one, now was it? There was no sexist goal in place I assure you. Lolo and Lala would have been an interesting choice, perhaps as a "clone" of Popo and Nana, but then again they didn't want too many clones. Let's face it, they really didn't have many options there. You're inventing a reason to be offended where there isn't any. They did the best one could expect, and in the end gameplay had to take priority. If they'd stuck in Lynn as yet another clone of Marth, at the sacrifice of a character that played differently like Solid Snake, that'd be pretty lame, and I think you know that.
When it gets right down to it, you seem to want something amazing from a Mario storyline. Sometimes they do something different, but seriously you're inventing a problem where it doesn't need to exist. Was the original story, heck the story of Donkey Kong while we're at it, sexist? Sure in the sense it's based on cultural stereotypes. However, there's no need to interpret it in that light now. It's over, it's done, and in the end Mario is basically a cartoon. Just have fun with it. A serious Mario game is something we don't need. Not even Super Mario RPG was that, a game where Peach gets kidnapped like 3 times AND is a playable character who saves the world. It's the standard story, a running gag of the series, and saying "we won't do that anymore" would be a real slap in the face to the fans. That said, I had really hoped they could work Peach into NSMB Wii instead of just a lame recolored Toad.
Sometimes it's best to go with the standard storyline. Heck even in Zelda 1, Zelda's still saving the world, even if indirectly. It was her idea to split the triforce into 8 parts and hide them across Hyrule so Ganon didn't get them. The one in Zelda 2 may be asleep the whole game, but it's because she took a stand against an evil prince and refused to tell him where the hidden triforce of courage was.
I'm not arguing that it's not a problem, but you're taking the few good signs and spitting in their face. Heck the best thing about Samus, at least until "Zero Suit Samus" was that not only was she a hero, she wasn't being shown in scantily clothes all the time (except in the endings). Sometimes you just gotta let people enjoy a good classic story about heroes saving people. When it comes to Zelda, the issue isn't one of gender discrimination, it's about the series relying on Link being the main character. He's ALWAYS the main character. They put plenty of strong females in there, but it IS the Legend of ZELDA, so she's got to be in there, and she's always got the secret of ulitimate power that forces Ganon to abduct her for various reasons througout the series (or some other force). Don't look a gift Midna in the mouth here. Don't forget that Zelda isn't screaming for help either, she seems pretty eager to help out and is rather stoic about all these abductions.
In fact, you get so blinded that you see the CD-i games as having "better stories" JUST because of the gender reversal. I'm sorry but I've SEEN those games, I PLAYED a little of those games, and those stories are TERRIBLE. Zelda in those games is FAR more offensive than any Zelda incarnation in the "true" games. You just need to see some of her comments about jewelry or her sarcastic forced relationship conversations with Link to see that. Plus, the stories are just plain bad. The Zelda 1 story may be a cliche, but at least it's not a Saturday Morning Cartoon plotline.
Besides, wouldn't just flipping the roles come across as far too blatant to be effective? It's fine for a Mario game, not so much for a Zelda game.
Baby steps here. First step, make a Zelda game where the main character isn't Link, doesn't look like him, doesn't have his name, even acts different than most Links. Female, male, don't care, but don't make it Zelda because again that's too blatant.
Again, you are focusing all your rage on a pointless target. Your arguments on it being sexist have roots in the original stories, but after that, they fall flat. And, they especially fall flat in a CROSSOVER GAME. If they can't find enough interesting female leads (LEADS, that mage was NOT a lead, though I admit Marth clones are getting old that's more a complaint at the series in general), inventing characters no one has ever heard of JUST to make them female would just be an insult. No one cares about random Xena knockoff number 41, they wanted Megaman in the game.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)