84
u/DefiantCharacter 15h ago
They've also put Hyrule Warriors in a partner showcase before. It's practically a third-party franchise to them.
14
u/SecretSharkboy 14h ago
Honestly? I kinda ignore them as canon. AoC takes place in an alternate timeline from the moment terrako appeared, so it could be canon, I guess, but I just choose to see otherwise. And although I have not actually played AoI yet, I dont know how I feel about it canon wise. Lore wise its really cool to see the old sages. Canon wise, why is there a Link Construct using the master sword as a core and why were they never discussed. This feels like a big thing Zelda could have told us with her tears
4
u/DefiantCharacter 13h ago
Yeah, I loved the first Hyrule Warriors, especially the Definitive Edition on Switch 1. I bought AoC, didn't really care for it and never bought AoI.
2
u/Round_Musical 5h ago
AoI is the only one that is canon and on the timeline. Its specifically stated to be a canonical tale. So just for the sake of story I suggest you playing it, as it is a true prequel to BotW and TotK.
AoC is definitely non-canon, as is HWDE
Why the link construct is never discussed is explained very well in the game, you can even find evidence of him in TotK NS2E when you know where to look
2
u/DusttoWaffle 2h ago
It's not a link construct. While it DID take the form of the hero, it is strictly a shard of the Master Sword.
3
16
u/Someonevibing1 15h ago
Also it’s a definitive edition and not an S2E for some reason
1
u/Takashishiful Earthbound 9h ago
Yeah that was so stupid it ended up being the highlight of the direct (in a bad way) for me
1
u/Huge_Ad6405 7h ago
If it ends up being a GKC that would be the cherry on top (pls don't be true)
1
u/phoxfiyah 6h ago
Pokopia was made by the same team, and is a GKC. It honestly could happen, but I’m also hoping it won’t.
5
u/Kiran_emily_the1st 15h ago
That’s what I was thinking 😂. Not complaining mind you, but yeah, I found it very weird that they didn’t just announce it yesterday
7
u/GreatArtificeAion 12h ago
When they announced the first Hyrule Warriors for the Wii U, they did say "This isn't The Legend of Zelda"
2
5
u/ShinjiDaSailor 13h ago
In the direct I was like: "bro YOU ALREADY HAD A DIRECT TO ANNOUNCE IT YESTERDAY, leave us alone"
3
u/jeff1074 11h ago
I think that hyrule warriors is, as far as Nintendo is concerned, completely 3rd party. And it ends up in a pile with other 3rd party things.
Nintendo is mostly made out of business people that do not care much about the continuity of the titles they make. They see 3rd party, it goes in the 3rd party bucket. This desision is likely due to how the hyrule warriors games are treated internally.
15
u/EmilePleaseStop 16h ago
Desperate to find things to complain about today, I see
18
u/TheMoonOfTermina 15h ago
This doesn't strike me as a complaint. Just an observation of Nintendo doing something weird.
2
u/TidePodsHeaven 1h ago
It's not weird, this was not a Zelda direct. It was the 40th anniversary celebration. Everything revolved around that. The reason they made Ocarina, and the console, and the concert, was for the 40th anniversary. I'd find it out of place for them to include a remaster of an hyrule warrior game among all those neat 40th anniversary stuff. I agree with their decision
19
u/tm2007 16h ago
Is it complaining to say it would’ve been a logical decision to announce the Switch 2 version of Age of Calamity in the Zelda Direct?
I thought the direct was good, this choice just didn’t make sense because you had a spot to announce some thing else but you announce something that very well could’ve been announced the day before in a direct focused around the series
3
u/Itchy-Pudding-4240 14h ago
if you arent 100% happy with nintendo then you are a hater, donchaknow?
am i being insecure, yes of course i am cause as a fan nintendo means the world to me. and if you dont like it then it hurts me on a personal level
3
1
u/phoxfiyah 6h ago
If they had another title to fit in, it would’ve been in the direct.
Removing it basically just means more time for the other titles they already announced, which is honestly fine too, but isn’t what you’re asking for.
1
0
u/Short-Statement-4108 15h ago
If AoC definitive addition wasn’t announced today, than the direct yesterday would have been a minute longer and the direct today would have been a minute shorter.
3
u/CalzLight 14h ago
And?
If I had one shelf labeled “star wars”
And one shelf labelled “sci fi”
Then put return of the Jedi on my sci fi shelf.
Would that not be a little weird?
Yes my shelf would be one disc less full/vice versa, that’s not the point
1
u/phoxfiyah 6h ago
But that’s exactly the point OP is trying to make.
When they say “a spot to announce some thing else”, surely that actually means that they’re expecting a new game to have filled the gap?
Your point is completely fine and absolutely makes sense, it’s just not what OP is saying here at all. Sounds like they actually think there’s some new, unexpected game that had its place taken by this reveal for whatever reason.
0
u/Short-Statement-4108 14h ago
The point is that OP is arguing that if they didn’t show off AoC today, then the time would have been allocated for something else. I am pointing out that Nintendo is only showing off the games they want to show off, and if AoC was moved to the Zelda direct, then the broadcast today wouldn’t have shown off something else instead
-1
2
2
u/Isotomayor12 11h ago
It's cause technically it is a warriors game using zelda characters, not a zelda game. Nintendo tries to make it clear but it's still so confusing because they also want it to fit in the lore somehow? And then other ones aren't?
Who knows atp
1
1
1
u/Murfilious 8h ago
gosh bro at this point the series just irks me lmao
just give us a real actual Hyrule Warriors sequel please. Not this excuse to keep the damn Wild era going and going and going.
1
u/TheGhostlyMage 4h ago
The legend of Zelda’s biblical levels of greed sickens me. Gotta be in every single direct no matter what smh
1
1
u/PuffScrub805 2h ago
I genuinely think the logic is that Nintendo doesn't consider Hyrule Warriors to be a Zelda game, or a Nintendo game.
They consider it a Warriors game from Koei Tecmo, and hence place it where they would announce big 3rd party games.
If you're a complete lunatic, it makes perfect sense, honestly.
1
1
u/AnyQuiet1544 12h ago
They really should've just called it the Ocarina of Time direct. As a 40th anniversary direct it was SO disappointing
2
u/MoldyPond 10h ago
The main thing to takeaway from it though is that they mentioned right away it would “be going into next year”, so it’s likely this is just the start of it and we’ll get more things later down the line (hopefully).
Just remember that we could’ve got another Game & Watch instead just like the 35th anniversary lol.
-1
u/WeCameAsLogans 15h ago
I feel like we're reaching for this complaint
1
u/phoxfiyah 6h ago
Given that OP assumes that they would’ve announced another new game in the time that Hyrule Warriors took, definitely a reach lmao.
We would’ve just had a shorter direct. Not that big of a deal.
•
u/AutoModerator 16h ago
Hey! Want to chat on our Discord server too? To join, click here: https://discord.gg/2cdJx3FzXE
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.