A Mature Zelda: A response to the argument from Dylan James

              Dylan's article so you know what fuck is going on: http://www.zeldainformer.com/news/comments/an-argument-for-a-more-mature-zelda

            Recently, my friend showed me an article written by Dylan James arguing for a "more mature Zelda" He claims that a more mature Zelda will enrich the series and push video games in general to a more mature and overall improved direction. He parallels the progression of video games as a medium with the progression of movies as a medium. Movies, much like videos games, was considered a form of pure entertainment that slowly progressed into the works of art we know today. I agree completely with this analogy and I agree that  video games need to take the step from pure entertainment into works of art, however I don't agree with the notion of Zelda becoming more mature. And truthfully I don't think Dylan wants that either. Instead what Dylan is advocating for through his examples is more depth in the Zelda series. While I love narratives with depth I'm going to explain why even that isn't the best idea either. Now before I get into the point by point, I want everyone to know that I think what Dylan is advocating for: the gradual maturing of video games as a medium, is something worth advocating for and should be demanded by gamers in the way we purchase and talk about games. But maturity as a medium doesn't mean maturity in a title. I'll explain using one of my favorite examples: Earthbound.
           Narrative Depth is not maturity 
          Earthbound, as many of you know, is in my opinion one of the best RPGs ever made. This is because Earthbound touches on so many themes integral to the human experience. However, Earthbound approaches these themes with the point of view of a child in mind. Earthbound as a piece of art is mature because it touches on a well of human emotions and experiences, but as a title it is very child like. If Earthbound had been "mature" as the way Dylan wants it to be, it would have been inaccessible to the very audience it was intended for. But many of you might be saying, well duh, titles like Earthbound are meant to be for children. Yes, but there is a universality to Earthbound that makes it enjoyable by adults and children alike. Since many of the themes and emotions in Earthbound are so mature and full of depth, even an adult can appreciate what the game is putting out there. This is a description of "depth" in the narrative. When a narrative has depth it allows the player to spend hours tussling with the messages and ideas the game is trying to put forth in tandem with the player. This is what Dylan is really advocating for in his article, not a "mature Link". I'll even use his own examples to prove it.
      The counter example example 
       I have never played Paper Mario (yet) so I can't speak to the maturity of that title. Though I can tell just by looking at the art design and from what others have told me that it looks like the classic Earthbound example (a game that takes the point of view of a child and expresses very mature themes). Now on to the example I do know. I loved the Avatar series and have watched every episode of Legend of Korra. He claims legend of Korra has a lot of maturity to it and cites the themes touched on by Legend of Korra. But the reality of Legend of Korra is that it isn't mature at all, and instead it has depth in its narrative (or at least some, no where near as much as the original Avatar series). My counter example is as follows:

Does this look mature to you?

It clearly isn't completely mature. Legend of Korra is intended for pre teens and teens. It doesn't completely alienate children from its audience, but it isn't for adults, you know, the audience mature titles are usually catered towards. What Dylan is describing is maturity in the art form, not the actual series itself. If he wanted to describe maturity in Korra a good example would have been how quickly the intimate relationships were developed in comparison to the first series. Avatar was made for kids (ages 6-12) and Korra clearly for pre teens ( the 6- 12 year olds who grew up watching the first series).

Why this wouldn't work for Zelda
            So now that I've made the distinction between depth in narrative and "more maturity" I'm going to explain why neither is right for the Zelda series. First, let me start off by saying both depth in narrative and more maturity has been implemented in the Zelda series already. These games were called Majora's Mask and Twilight Princess. Both were great games, but none of them fared as well as other titles such as OOT and WW. The reason why is because they were adding something that, while improved the games individually, did not cater to what audiences wanted or expected for Zelda(except maybe TP, let me explain).
       Let's start with Majora's Mask. My readers are lucky that I haven't written about MM yet. That's because when I do finally write about it, you will be given a whole month's worth of writing just on that game. It is one of my favorite games and might be my favorite game of all time. But as a Zelda game MM fails completely. Yep, you heard me correctly. MM is not a good Zelda game. That's because MM completely deviates from the Zelda equation. And instead of reinforcing this deviation with more titles like MM, Nintendo decided to go back to the Zelda equation with WW. This left MM in an oddball out situation where gamers certainly enjoyed the game, but it was hard to believe that it was a Zelda game. The story of Link in clock town isn't the classic story of the chosen hero. Instead it is more of the story of the random traveler who is just doing what he can for the people that happen to be around him. MM was an amazing game as it has all the depth (and some maturity) that Dylan was asking for. But it floundered in the regards of the Zelda faithful. When talking about the best Zelda game most will automatically put OOT on a pedestal (which I disagree with completely). Why didn't MM get the respect it deserved from Zelda fans? When you think about what Zelda is supposed to be it becomes clear. MM deviated from what the Zelda equation was. Link in this story wasn't the blank slate chosen one, he was just an ordinary person and that caused many Zelda lovers to be disappointed when playing. When an audience has a set of expectations for a title, it's often best not to completely let them down on them. You can play with the expectations by twisting them (i.e. make Link the villain at first), but never do you completely deviate from them.
    Now let's get to Twilight Princess (or as I've been denoting it TP). TP is a successful Zelda title, but it clearly was meant for older audiences. TP feels more like the Legend of Korra of the Zelda series. There are even some parallels between the two. Link's insinuated infatuation with Illia and then, later Midna is exactly like the string of relationships in Korra (for some reason adults assume that relationships are a critical function of growing up). Link also never gets older in this titles, plunging the player into the mindset of adult link to begin with. TP was heralded for having amazing graphics and probably one of the best overall narratives in the Zelda series, but even then it didn't reach the heights of WW and OOT. This is probably because Nintendo jumped the gun a little with assuming their audience grew. Or maybe people like the child like nature of Zelda games and were unsettled with this clear change of gears to cater to a slightly more mature audience.
     Make games with more depth, but leave classics alone
            What if the new Avengers movie decided to take the Dark Knight approach to their film? If the film had all the blurring of good and evil, then what was initially craved from the Avenger's film, classic super hero bad assery, would have been turned into a huge convoluted mess. Batman was clearly not a conventional super hero, so he was the perfect choice for that kind of plot. The point is pick and choose what titles to add depth and maturity to. I think the Zelda equation works and the gradual upping of maturity is great, but it might be time for Zelda to reboot the series and start catering to the new younger generation (perhaps a founding story may be suitable for that, oh wait... didn't one of those just get made?).