Forums
Guides
Features
Media
Zelda Wiki
Patreon
    So...that was Calamity Ganon, eh?
    • I disagree strongly about retiring Ganondorf. While I do think his best iteration remains Ocarina of Time, I don't think we've seen the full extent of what can be done with him as a character or as an antagonist in the series, and Wind Waker is hardly the peak in terms of what can be done with regards to motivation or agency.

      What I do agree with is how you describe the nature of Calamity Ganon and the role it plays in BotW. From the very start, as soon as you lay eyes on the castle and see the swirling darkness take form, you get the sense that you're dealing with something more akin to a malevolent weather event rather than an intelligent being. The thing is that I think, with the exception of the final boss fight, the game goes to a significant enough length in pushing this notion through the gameplay in the open world, and the backstory with the Divine Beasts and the Guardians.

      What needs to be kept in mind is that Calamity Ganon is restrained to Hyrule Castle throughout the game, up to the point where you engage it in battle. The reason for this, from a gameplay perspective, is simple; players need to be able to decide for themselves at what point they want to head to the castle and confront the beast, and so the final boss is placed in an easily identifiable location. But the reason from a story perspective is also simple; there needs to be a reason for why Calamity Ganon, after starting to wreck shit up 100 years ago, hasn't just ravaged everything to hell and back in that timespan. We learn fairly quickly that Zelda is the one who has kept him in check within the castle this whole time, but she needs us to come help her defeat the monster once and for all. That's our impetus for going to the castle. At the same time, we are not outright required to go there right away. We have the option of better equipping ourselves and growing stronger by exploring the land of Hyrule before initiating the final battle.

      At the same time, you learn quickly that this doesn't mean the Calamity Ganon is without influence in the outside world. Many of the Guardians that he seized control of 100 years ago are still operational and roaming the fields. Some nights he will summon a blood moon to revive his forces across the landscape. The Divine Beasts remain in his control, plaguing their respective regions. Now, if Ganon himself had had a more prominent presence in the land itself, I think we'd see a crack in this fine balance between having a distinct and easily identifiable final goal (defeat Ganon in the castle) and having a reason not to go there immediately (we need to get more powerful first). Not to mention that it would also mess with the notion of why Calamity Ganon escaping the castle is so dangerous; left unchecked, it would ravage the land of Hyrule without mercy. That's the whole danger of the Calamity, and why it needs to be stopped. This isn't a man who wants to just conquer Hyrule - it's a malevolent force of nature that wants to destroy it outright.

      I do agree wholeheartedly about the final battle though. It would have been much, MUCH better if the fight had utilized the landscape more, and put your ability to move and fight across locations to the test.
    • l-o-s: Agreed about Ganon's final form. A Shadow of the Coloussus-type of battle is what I had envisioned before BotW came out, with it taking us through some parts of Hyrule and perhaps even damaging or destroying some places in the process. And with all the climbing we got, it wasn't too far fetched to guess that we would've been able to climb it. Or so I thought at least.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by ich Will ().

    • So I jumped into BOTW knowing very little about the game, apart from it being Really Good. I like playing games without being spoiled about certain things, and like, ofc I knew it was the Most Ambitious of all Zelda games... but that was about it?

      Like, this is to the extent I didn't know about the Divine Beasts. Hell, I didn't even know it was 100% open world until quite a few hours in. Didn't use the mini-map and all that either, I turned off the setting, which gave me a magnificent experience wandering around Hyrule!

      Anyway, what I'm getting at is--this made the Divine Beasts and the Dragons super scary, because I didn't know whether they were enemies (like, getting lightningbolted by Farore was... y'know, an indication to me that I should Stay Away, rather than shoot arrows at it). That meant the Beast circling the Rito village was incredibly threatening to watch, far more so than Ganon locked away in his castle.

      Now, how cool would it be if Ganon himself were travelling? Like, have unexpected signs of his black evil gunk show up and not knowing whether the man (monster?) himself is in there or not. I think for me that would have enhanced the feeling of danger as well, because honestly, once you find nice weapons (which is especially easy once you've played through the game before) the bokoblins/moblins aren't that difficult to deal with. I want a place that poses unknown threats, not guardians that pop up always in the same area.
      I am the master of my fate / I am the captain of my soul
    • Abyss Master wrote:

      I disagree strongly about retiring Ganondorf. While I do think his best iteration remains Ocarina of Time, I don't think we've seen the full extent of what can be done with him as a character or as an antagonist in the series, and Wind Waker is hardly the peak in terms of what can be done with regards to motivation or agency.

      But there's the rub- in WW, Ganondorf is dead, and hasn't appeared since, with PH and ST bringing new antagonists in to replace him; in TP, he also dies, and his reincarnation (who has also denatured into an angry pig) has been sealed away; and all throughout the DT, Ganon has basically only been a pig beast and has been getting progressively less expressive and human as the games go on. On every front, Ganondorf the man has long since been shoved aside and there aren't really a whole lot of avenues to bring him back into play, so barring some kind of massive retcon somewhere (which sadly is very much on the table, given how BotW demonstrated once and for all that they have no qualms in screwing with the lore, but is still not exactly desirable), yes, we basically have seen the full extent of where they're going to take him as a character.

      Beyond that, factor in that Ganon has in some way technically been the final boss and main antagonist of half the franchise (nine of the eighteen main series titles, and that's if we ignore how Demise was basically him cranked up to 11 and served as his origin, and how his minions in TAoL were acting specifically to bring him back). Not necessarily an inherent problem, as there's nothing wrong with a series having a main villain, but a fairly good indicator that the series can afford to at least send him on vacation for a while and let someone else have the spotlight, or even start coming up with a worthy successor.
      Wither and decay... End this destiny... Break these earthly chains and set the spirit free...
    • Setras wrote:

      Abyss Master wrote:

      I disagree strongly about retiring Ganondorf. While I do think his best iteration remains Ocarina of Time, I don't think we've seen the full extent of what can be done with him as a character or as an antagonist in the series, and Wind Waker is hardly the peak in terms of what can be done with regards to motivation or agency.
      But there's the rub- in WW, Ganondorf is dead, and hasn't appeared since, with PH and ST bringing new antagonists in to replace him; in TP, he also dies, and his reincarnation (who has also denatured into an angry pig) has been sealed away; and all throughout the DT, Ganon has basically only been a pig beast and has been getting progressively less expressive and human as the games go on. On every front, Ganondorf the man has long since been shoved aside and there aren't really a whole lot of avenues to bring him back into play, so barring some kind of massive retcon somewhere (which sadly is very much on the table, given how BotW demonstrated once and for all that they have no qualms in screwing with the lore, but is still not exactly desirable), yes, we basically have seen the full extent of where they're going to take him as a character.

      Beyond that, factor in that Ganon has in some way technically been the final boss and main antagonist of half the franchise (nine of the eighteen main series titles, and that's if we ignore how Demise was basically him cranked up to 11 and served as his origin, and how his minions in TAoL were acting specifically to bring him back). Not necessarily an inherent problem, as there's nothing wrong with a series having a main villain, but a fairly good indicator that the series can afford to at least send him on vacation for a while and let someone else have the spotlight, or even start coming up with a worthy successor.
      There's one word in your post that puts a major dent in your whole point here. I went ahead and placed further emphasis on that word, but for those who missed it, it's this one:

      R E I N C A R N A T I O N

      I mean, sticking to the lore so rigidly is just shooting yourself in the foot creatively speaking, but even then we already have an in-universe example of Ganondorf being reincarnated. And here's the thing; if it can happen once, it can happen again. If it can happen in the CT, it can happen in the other timelines as well. Not only that, but Demise's curse from Skyward Sword means there's already an established reason within the lore for this to be happening. So you have precedent, and you have an in-universe explanation; if there's any retcon on offer here, it's the one where we just all of a sudden yank Ganondorf out of the series with no explanation, after decades of games showing him to be a constantly returning threat that takes several different forms.

      Furthermore, putting Ganondorf on the back-burner for a while is something quite different from retiring him for good. Shifting to a different villain for a while gets no beef from me, but tossing Ganondorf aside because we can't imagine what can be done with the character is bordering on creative laziness.
    • I mean, isn't reincarnating him because we can just to bring him back for the sake of having him also pretty creatively bankrupt? The one time they've used this tactic thus far, in FSA, resulted in a new Ganon with a different origin story, but he was otherwise just vanilla Ganon. And again, in the DT, he's already been resurrecting repeatedly, and it certainly hasn't been making him more complex.

      The only place where this mechanism could really be viable is post-ST, and even at that, we're on an entirely new continent with entirely new cultures and an entirely separate pantheon that has already had to contend with entirely new problems- dragging Ganon back into the limelight there just because we hypothetically can would squander all that creative potential purely for the sake of having him, while also even further ruining the sentiment of WW's ending.

      I'd really rather they not continue to zero in on Ganon if it's just going to involve leaning on the same tired formula at best or outright upending other areas of the series at worst. If they're going to be creative, then they should be creative.
      Wither and decay... End this destiny... Break these earthly chains and set the spirit free...
    • You're making assumptions based solely on precedent. "The one time they've used this tactic" is not really an argument against reincarnation, because it being done in that manner once is no guarantee that it will be done in the exact same manner again. If you'd been applying this logic back in the early 2000s, you would never have seen Wind Waker's Ganondorf coming. You would have expected the developers to do the exact same thing they did in Ocarina of Time, because at that point it was "the one time they'd used this tactic" of implementing a human form for Ganon.

      In addition to that, you're still limiting yourself creatively speaking by sticking too rigidly to the lore as we know it today. There's actually no limitation to where reincarnation is viable in any of the three timelines, and if you feel like the return of Ganondorf would "ruin the sentiment of WW's ending", I suggest you head on over to gamtos' new thread where he lays out the case of how that sentiment has already been ruined. A point wrapped in some hyperbole, to be sure, but a point made nonetheless; the sentiment behind Wind Waker's ending is squandered by the games that follow it, Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks (ESPECIALLY Spirit Tracks).

      Finally, you're jumping ahead quite a bit when you say that "dragging Ganon back into the limelight just because we hypothetically can would squander creative potential", because no-one here is advocating for that. Did I not already state that I am perfectly happy with shelving him for a while and bringing in other villains? What I object to - once again, this is what we were initially discussing - is retiring him for good. THAT is what I find to be close to creative laziness, to basically punt a character off because, based solely on prior examples, you can't think of how to utilize this character.
    • I don't care about the lore. Zelda lore has been a steaming pile of inconsistent garbage for 15 years. I do care about that fact that I roll my eyes every time they re-use Ganon because he's been done to death (literally, many times), and almost all of those cases he was a really poorly done antagonist. Even if they COULD do it well, I'd rather they do well with a DIFFERENT antagonist. He's just boring now. Maybe I'll sing a different tune if the next 5 games use other antagonists, but that'll never happen.


      ich Will wrote:

      A Shadow of the Coloussus-type of battle is what I had envisioned before BotW came out, with it taking us through some parts of Hyrule and perhaps even damaging or destroying some places in the process. And with all the climbing we got, it wasn't too far fetched to guess that we would've been able to climb it.
      I never really thought about the Shadow of the Colossus angle, but you're totally right. That seems like it would have been a good fit.
      Pronouns: He/Him

      The post was edited 4 times, last by Max N. ().

    • ^
      ^

      I guess we just have equal and opposite views on the subject, then, because as I see it, if you can't think of how to effectively use a character and only have them around for the sake of having them while coming up with increasingly contrived ways to shoehorn them in, then creativity would demand you don't continue using them, and instead shift focus toward newer, fresher avenues that haven't necessarily been explored yet. Canning a character just for the sake of doing so can be bad, yes, but keeping a character for its own sake can be just as stifling, and I'd argue it kind of has been in this series. This mythos and setting are complex enough that I think we'd live even if Ganon vanished for good.
      Wither and decay... End this destiny... Break these earthly chains and set the spirit free...

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Setras ().

    • @Abyss Master I see what you are saying and I do agree on almost everything, except the "OP-thing". In previous non-open Zelda titles, the problem was that you pretty much always were OP even if you didn't searched for heart pieces and stuff... so the main problem in the earlier games in my opinion was that they were just too easy. In BotW on the other hand almost everything is hard or at least challenging in the beginning, but as you get stronger, more "power ups" and upgrades, everything gets easier and easier. The silver/gold Lynels are still superior to Calamity Ganon even at the very end when you are as powerful as you can get. Even a random Bokoblin camp consisting of at least black and silver ones with arrows and shit is way more challenging than the final boss, especially the bastards on horses. In BotW, it's never obvious WHEN you are going to beat the crap out of the final boss, while it is obvious in most other Zeldas.

      My main point is, and especially when you aren't playing the game the first time, but the second, third... etc, is that aside from exploring the world and completing shrines for mere fun, there are not much reason to do all that when you know that you can overrun Calamity Ganon whenever. And after I had beaten Calamity Ganon/the game, I had less motivation to return to it, since I had cleared the main objective "destroy Ganon". A solution to this issue could be:

      1) Have a harder difficulty level for the final boss specifically (or the entire game without BS like regenerating health for enemies since I viewed that as unfair and bad design for BotW specifically with breakable weapons and stealth options (which is worthless when they just regain their health).

      2) Have "superbosses" in the game, that are completely optional and that not gives you anything important or unique for beating them. Perhaps "semi-important" stuff like in BotW's case like Dragon Scales or Star Fragments.

      The second alternative is the one that I think would be the greatest option. There should be an "ultimate challenge" in every game, for people who wants to 100 percent the game in question and still have a purpose for doing it, and at least ONE great challenge awating, despite the fact that they are OP for the final boss.

      The Trial of the Sword fails in this regard because of three reasons in my opinion: 1) It is DLC, 2) there are no new enemies/bosses, and lastly 3) I personally don't like that kind of design with loooong gauntlets where you are forced to start from the beginning if you fail. I rather have ONE overpowered boss that I can return to as many times as I want without having to spend 20 minutes to even reach to.

      The post was edited 4 times, last by MVS ().

    • If Nintendo ever will do a serious attempt in giving us a big unrelated villain that has nothing to do with Ganon(dorf), it/he/she HAS to be very different from Ganon(dorf) or we will just get another Demise that isn't Ganon(dorf) but practically a Ganon-copy that even resembles Ganon(dorf). I know I know Demise is very linked to Ganon(dorf), and his appearance is depending on who is looking at him, but my point still stands. Ghirahim is a great example how this new villain could have been, or Majora (albeit it was a bit boring in terms of dialogue and whatnot).

      @Abyss Master Even if it is very logical from a story standpoint that Calamity Ganon is confined to the castle until Link faces him, there are ways to going around it if Nintendo truly wanted to. Perhaps Calamity Ganon had Link specifically as a target for some reason (maybe Link holds the key for Calamity Ganon to get his "true power"), like triforce of courage? I don't know, I am just thinking loud at this point. And Link being the "target" could more have to do with mere instinct of Calamity Ganon than anything else, so he could maintain his monster-calamity-nature intact. Would have been cooler nontheless if Ganon was more present in BotW and that he could suddenly appear as a violent storm or whatever.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by MVS ().

    • Vaati, Ghirahim, Zant, and Veran, are all great examples of actual character villains that could have been great standalones or recurring. Hell, even Agahnim and Onox, to a much lesser extent. Most of them were undermined by the age-old hijacked-by-Ganon trope, unfortunately. Only Vaati ever really got re-used though, and they eventually undermined him, too.

      Majora and Dethl/The Nightmares were great examples of primal evil villains that were more interesting than most incarnations of Demise/Ganon, too.
      Pronouns: He/Him

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Max N. ().

    • Max N. wrote:

      Vaati, Ghirahim, Zant, and Veran, are all great examples of actual character villains that could have been great standalones or recurring. Hell, even Agahnim and Onox, to a much lesser extent. Most of them were undermined by the age-old hijacked-by-Ganon trope, unfortunately. Only Vaati ever really got re-used though, and they eventually undermined him, too.

      Majora and Dethl/The Nightmares were great examples of primal evil villains that were more interesting than most incarnations of Demise/Ganon, too.
      ^This. The problem I have with saying it's creatively lazy to just sideline Ganondorf is:

      A. It's not creatively lazy to finish a character's story, that's good storytelling. Dragging things out far longer than is interesting is a serious problem with a lot of pop culture and hurts rather than helps a narrative.

      B. It's particularly ironic to claim it would be creatively lazy to drop Ganondorf because for years and years now he has been a creative hobble on the series. Almost every time we get a new interesting villian with potentially interesting motives and personality, they are subsumed by Ganon, who rarely has an interesting motive and almost never has any personality. Ganondorf himself is creatively lazy.


      Do I hate the character and desperately wish they'd nuke him? No, not really. The nature of The Legend of Zelda is that the story and lore has always come secondary to the excellent gameplay, and the nature of the stories that are in the games are to be legend-like and archetypal, so it's not really as much of a problem as it would be in another series. But would I be psyched if Nintendo put the same amount of care and detail into every game's story that MM and LA received? Yeah, that would be dope. Ganondorf as he has existed for over a decade now is antithetical to that. Either they drop him entirely or seriously revamp him, or he'll remain a poor villian and a poor character.
      A dark chase requires a silent hound, and deep roots are not reached by the frost.
    • Putting this in spoilers, cuz there's a lot;

      Display Spoiler
      I'll reiterate again;

      Did I not already state that I am perfectly happy with shelving him for a while and bringing in other villains? What I object to - once again, this is what we were initially discussing - is retiring him for good.
      Only objection I have is to retiring Ganondorf for good. I think there's still plenty of untapped potential there, and Ganondorf has a signfiicance to him at this point that other villains simply do not have, which is why it's not as simple as just switching him out with a new guy. Not saying that you can't go with someone new, just saying that there's merit to keeping Ganondorf around still.

      Doing away with Ganondorf because "he's boring" doesn't fly in my eyes, because in terms of villains in the series (and do keep in mind, I said "in my eyes"), the two best ones are both Ganondorf; Ocarina of Time, and Wind Waker. The worst ones have invariably been one-off villains that don't stay around long enough to maintain much of a presence in the series, like Malladus, Bellum, and so on. Thus, I am not convinced at all that what we need is less of the former and more of the latter. I am definitely not convinced that we need to just get rid of the former outright.

      Now sure, new villains can be done decently just as well as Ganondorf can. But here's the thing, bringing it back to Calamity Ganon; if it had been a new antagonist, just some random evil robo-spider-smoke-demon instead of Ganon, a lot of the weight and significance behind the Calamity would be gone. Those who are familiar with the series, with the history of Ganondorf/Ganon, have an added layer of understanding for the nature of Calamity Ganon and can truly appreciate the subtle tragedy of a man - an evil man, to be sure, but still a man - losing so much of himself through the eons that this is the closest thing to his old humanoid form that he has left.

      @MVS I don't disagree with much of what you posted. The point you make about being overpowered in BotW as opposed to other Zelda games is one I actually agree with, but I think with the way the game is designed, being as open as it is, this is something you're bound to run into at some point. The developers could impose restrictions to limit how overpowered you can get (well, they do restrict how many weapons and bows and shields you can carry, but this can be expanded with korok seeds), but I think those restrictions would ultimately have worked against what the game was going for, which was to give you as little hassle as possible while traversing the overworld. I find it very convenient to pick up materials in Breath of the Wild, to the point that I will happily deviate from my path if I see something I can gather quickly just a few skips away. But that convenience goes out the window if I start to get restricted on how much I can carry, and that in turn gets in the way of what the game is aiming for; to make the act of traversing the overworld an enjoyable experience, rather than a cumbersome one. But because I can carry so many materials, it's easy for me to stock up and craft meals that let me restore my health and stamina, provide protection to heat or cold, and so on. And the more materials I have, the easier it is for me to upgrade my armor.

      Some balancing could certainly be applied to make sure you don't end up at a point where you have to actively go out of your way to even run the risk of getting killed in combat, but the game's open nature and emphasis on freedom to choose your equipment - weapons, shields, bows and armor - becoming overpowered is really just a matter of how patient you are.

      That said, I would have no qualms whatsoever with something like superbosses as additional challenges. If the game was to receive more DLC, that's something I would have loved to see added.

      MVS wrote:

      Even if it is very logical from a story standpoint that Calamity Ganon is confined to the castle until Link faces him, there are ways to going around it if Nintendo truly wanted to.
      Sure, but if they wanted to work around it then they'd have to change the nature of the game itself. Breath of the Wild has a careful balance, as I noted once before; the game gives you a goal (defeat Ganon), but it does not go out of its way in pushing you to reach that goal any sooner than you'd like. Because Ganon is kept confined to the castle, you can relax a bit if you'd like and go at your own pace.

      Now imagine if you have these moments where you randomly run into Calamity Ganon out in the open. All of a sudden, there's a disruption in the player's agency to go at their own pace. You could then choose to ignore these instances of the main story getting up in your face, but there would still be a subconscious pressure to get a move on and defeat the Calamity. Breath of the Wild is a game where such pressures are not really needed, and at worst can get in the way of players' enjoyment of traversing the overworld. I know I for one would be miffed if, while riding across Hyrule Field, the plot suddenly came up to me and went "hey remember what you're supposed to be doing??"

      Of course, riding across Hyrule Field also runs the risk of getting blasted by a Guardian if I'm not careful, but such an encounter at least wouldn't have that subconscious pressure to proceed with the plot. Freedom to go at your own pace is really the name of the game here.

      Max N. wrote:

      Vaati, Ghirahim, Zant, and Veran, are all great examples of actual character villains that could have been great standalones or recurring. Hell, even Agahnim and Onox, to a much lesser extent. Most of them were undermined by the age-old hijacked-by-Ganon trope, unfortunately. Only Vaati ever really got re-used though, and they eventually undermined him, too.

      Majora and Dethl/The Nightmares were great examples of primal evil villains that were more interesting than most incarnations of Demise/Ganon, too.
      I actually agree with some of these, but not all of them. Some of them would require extensive work-arounds in terms of motivations (Ghirahim, for example, has no motivation except to revive his master - at least Zant had desires of his own before being hijacked by Ganon, as it were), and if we allow for that then the same would have to be said for Ganondorf, who we know can be made a properly compelling villain if given some depth. I agree that some of them could have been great standalones, Zant and Vaati in particular.

      But I disagree strongly about Majora. The mask is not the interesting one in that game, the Skull Kid is. He's the one with the motivation to do the things he does (twisted as he is by the mask). He's the one with the interesting relationships. He's the one who you interact with and come to know more about through the game's intro and unfolding story. At no point does the mask become the interesting one, it is merely the evil object that influences the Skull Kid to do what he does. It's treated like the One Ring from LotR, an object that is seen as insidiously evil, able to corrupt and twist the mind of the one who wears it.

      And ironically enough, Skull Kid gets undermined by the very same trope you lament, being hijacked by another villain. The thing is that it's more egregious in the Skull Kid's case because it's done literally at the eleventh hour, right before you're about to head to the game's final challenge. The mask, because it is revealed as the villain - hell, as a sentient being - so late in the game, fails to generate any sort of actual impact before you snuff it for good, which is far more underwhelming than what Calamity Ganon was, and far far FAR less interesting. At least Calamity Ganon showed some swift cunning and laid waste to the kingdom of Hyrule. Granted, it was done through flashbacks, but that's still lots more than anything we got from Majora.

      GregariousTree wrote:

      ^This. The problem I have with saying it's creatively lazy to just sideline Ganondorf is:

      A. It's not creatively lazy to finish a character's story, that's good storytelling. Dragging things out far longer than is interesting is a serious problem with a lot of pop culture and hurts rather than helps a narrative.

      B. It's particularly ironic to claim it would be creatively lazy to drop Ganondorf because for years and years now he has been a creative hobble on the series. Almost every time we get a new interesting villian with potentially interesting motives and personality, they are subsumed by Ganon, who rarely has an interesting motive and almost never has any personality. Ganondorf himself is creatively lazy.


      Do I hate the character and desperately wish they'd nuke him? No, not really. The nature of The Legend of Zelda is that the story and lore has always come secondary to the excellent gameplay, and the nature of the stories that are in the games are to be legend-like and archetypal, so it's not really as much of a problem as it would be in another series. But would I be psyched if Nintendo put the same amount of care and detail into every game's story that MM and LA received? Yeah, that would be dope. Ganondorf as he has existed for over a decade now is antithetical to that. Either they drop him entirely or seriously revamp him, or he'll remain a poor villian and a poor character.
      A. The Legend of Zelda is not one unified story, it's a collection of stories with similar elements and narrative structures. More to the point, they're not Ganondorf's story. So to claim that cutting him loose from the series now would be to "finish his story" is just wrong, and is nowhere near anything that could remotely be called good storytelling.

      B. What purpose Ganondorf has been used for in the context of the series for the past however many years is irrelevant to the point of whether he has potential to still be a compelling villain. Ganondorf was just a pig-monster up until the point that he wasn't. He was just a power-hungry warlord up until the point that he wasn't. If you constantly keep your gaze fixed solely on what came before, you're going to be missing out on a whole lot of storytelling potential. We know that Ganondorf can have interesting motives, we know that he can have personality, and we know that he has plenty of potential to be menacing, conniving and engaging as an antagonist.

      So what's the real problem here? It's the writing. It's the developers deliberately choosing to go for tried and true tropes, and it doesn't matter if it's someone other than Ganondorf either - Demise and Malladus are evidence enough of that. Majora's Mask is just as much of an example of a plot getting "hijacked by the REAL villain" as Twilight Princess or the Oracle games or Four Swords Adventures was. The problem is still there, even if you take Ganon out of the equation.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Abyss Master ().

    • Overall yeah he was underwhelming on both a story and gameplay perspective.

      Game-play wise, I did like how they implemented him in the world, able to take him on at any point but very overpowered unless you explore the world a little. I think what was truly disappointing in the game though was a real epic final showdown, something that has us absorbed and gets the adrenaline pumping. Something that makes us want to jump into the mosh pit and fight like hell. I get that feeling every time Ganondorf emerges from the ruble in OoT, or when he turns with his swords atop his tower in WW, or when he lunges at you with his glowing blade in TP. It's one of the reasons I love the new Doom because I feel that every time the demons pop in and the heavy metal begins. I mean it should make you want to do this:



      But the final battle in BoTW didn't really have that impact. No thrill, no excitement, just a giant pig with glowing "shoot here" spots all over him. The lights were cool, but that's about all I can say. I first half of the battle under the castle I thought complimented the game very well, and while his appearance was odd, it fit his character and the varying levels of difficulty made sense with the gameplay. I just wanted the final battle to end on a high note, not a flashing shooting gallery.


      Story-wise? I mean the concept really wasn't a bad one. Having a force of nature be the main antagonist of the game isn't a bad choice so long as the conflicts leading up to the final showdown are interesting. In this case its about the characters you interact with and how they react to the danger itself. They tried doing this with Zelda and her struggle to harness her powers before the calamity, but because they didn't really do her justice in fully telling her story Ganon also suffers as a result. We see the results of his destruction, but not really the cause of it expect for a couple of brief glimpses. I do think there should've been more to show the fall of Hyrule Castle, and more lore spread throughout the game detailing different events of the calamity because otherwise we only know Ganon is evil because the game says so. It's hard to really care about something like that without understanding how the characters in the game react to it.
      It's a shame to ruin such a beautiful morning by being awake

      -Bill Watterson
    • Creatively speaking, though, I'd like to see a game where Ganon resurrects/reincarnates but not in time to gain power before Link is a teen/young adult/strong enough to take him on. So then there would be references, the "threat" of Ganon(dorf), and it turns out he is only a mini-boss in-world (assuming it's a more linear game) or maybe a dungeon boss at some point mid-game after which the True Evil Dude is revealed (or Lady--we can do with more female villains!!! Even Hilda wasn't really because she got trumped by Ganon and did a lot of it to save her Kingdom--same for Midna, in a way, and I just want Link to fight a badass lady to want to destroy the world... no fury like a woman scorned and all that). Maybe someone who resurrected Ganon as their pet and is disappointed by his power? I'd love to see that, that'd be creative use of the whole Ganon lore, because you can't tell me that Ganon's power is Immediate (Link just... seems to sleep in a little too late to nip the whole issue in the bud).
      I am the master of my fate / I am the captain of my soul

      The post was edited 4 times, last by goodmorninghyrule ().

    • I struggle to think of a way to bring back Ganondorf with depth to his character without the use of bad writing, but I'll try:


      He could appear in a game that takes place somewhere between SS and OoT as a previous Ganondorf, but then of course OoT's Ganondorf would be retconned to be the second one. Unless we are to believe that he stays young and loses his memory somehow.

      Then you have the potential of Calamity Ganon completely restoring his human form as he was trying to do in BotW in that cocoon, but wouldn't he just act mindlessly in human form too? There's clearly some intelligence left in him as he knew to hijack the Guardians and Divine Beasts because they helped defeat him long before BotW, but I think it's a bit of a stretch to see that as potential for character depth. He seems to have mentally degraded after so many years.

      And then there's the Adult Timeline. Either he somehow breaks out of being a statue below the ocean, or if he really died as it's said then have him be reborn or reincarnated. But then something has to be done about the existence of Malladus, as that's the next incarnation of the curse, isn't it? The two can't exist at the same time.

      Anyway, they'll probably just do what they want to do, which is to not prioritize how much sense the games make with the 'gameplay first' mentality and all that.

      The post was edited 5 times, last by ich Will: '...SS and OoT AS a previous Ganondorf', not 'WITH a previous Ganondorf' ().

    • Timothyhoad wrote:

      I’ve decided to voice an opinion in the most suitable place, amongst those who love the Zelda games as dearly as I do in the hopes of getting some interesting feedback.

      Was anybody else slightly disappointed with Calamity Ganon?

      I’m taking in terms of character here, not in terms of difficulty to beat. All the way through botw I was so excited to see how Ganon’s character design had transported into the zelda franchises most recent title, and particularly to see what kind of voice acting would go with it. Having been hugely impressed with other iterations like The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess’s character development, I had high hopes for him in this title.

      But it was...odd. (SPOILERS!)

      He’s an ethereal, canon-wielding scorpion monster which was a surprise, and i know hes not his human form Ganondorf, but even still I found this disappointing. I’m all for new directions and experiments to the franchise, but because it was just another somewhat generic monster (and after fighting the different blight ganons there was no real deviation I thought) I feel like it wasn’t the dramatic crescendo to the story that I was expecting. He felt a bit of a hollow adversary.

      Anybody feel similar about this, or did you really like calamity ganon, and if so why?
      I’m 50/50 with you.


      I liked the explanation, though. Seems he has completely lost all sense of reason and logic. The Ganondorf/Ganon that we knew him as is no more; he’s this deranged, etheral being that wants Link, Zelda, and Hyrule dead. This isn’t the cunning Guerdo king anymore. That man is gone. This entity is basically destruction embodied.


      That said, I agree that after all the other Blight Ganons, he felt like just another Blight Ganon only more powerful (for obvious reasons.) There could’ve been more done to make it feel like we weren’t just fighting Blight Ganon Master.


      "I'm the King of the Seas!" - Said every Orca Whale Ever

      The post was edited 1 time, last by linkthezora ().

    • I have to agree with @'Max N' 's point back from Page 2 about how Calamity Ganon probably would have worked better as a Force of Nature, kind of like what World of Warcraft did with Deathwing in Cataclysm, before that expansion's final patch, how he'd just show up randomly and nuke a zone, and there was absolutely nothing you, as a player, could do about it (except earn the Stood in the Fire achievement).

      Have the Ganon Storm show up every so often instead of the Blood Moon -- have it rez monsters, maybe cause wild temperature swings, maybe fierce winds that make gliding/climbing impossible for a time. Instead of physically fighting this version of the Calamity, maybe Link's quest would be to find a way to calm the storm, maybe finding elements of nature that would progressively make the storm better until balance was finally restored.

      I was very disappointed that we didn't get to fight Ganon as his swirly evil cloud-pig form. Not sure how we could have, but that's the Ganon the game had been building up to. The ... thing under Hyrule Castle was a huge disappointment, and the flashy malice pig even more so. After beating it, the first thing I said was "that's it?! Seriously?"


      BotW Zelda in her purple Hylian Gear, by my husband, D4rkSilver
    • Abyss Master wrote:

      I disagree strongly about retiring Ganondorf. While I do think his best iteration remains Ocarina of Time, I don't think we've seen the full extent of what can be done with him as a character or as an antagonist in the series, and Wind Waker is hardly the peak in terms of what can be done with regards to motivation or agency.
      While I liked the rest of your post, this part I do have to partially disagree. While there is still potential in Ganon(dorf) , the issue lies when the devs attempt to develop him beyond his OoT/Windwaker persona for game or story reasons. Put it simply, some fans don't want him really moving much beyond his OoT and Windwaker forms.

      When SS came out and revealed him to be a product of a demon king's hatred, people complained. They wanted (to use a TV Tropes' term) for him to remain a tragic misbegotten Woobie from WW.

      When Calamity Ganon showed up in all of his (it'?) demi-god glory, some fans complained. They didn't want this new form, they wanted the old Ganondorf from their childhoods, even though this form appears to be far more powerful and doesn't even need the ToP anymore to accomplish his monstrosities.

      Ganon(dorf) I think seems 'stale' because some fans can only ever see him as this eternal OoT/WW persona. In some degrees, he's only mentally considered as Ganondorf, and some can't even conceive of his non-human form as having a 'personality.' (Thus wanting the bulk of his development to go towards his Ganondorf persona, and not the Ganon one.) His 'lore' has to keep him as this familiar Ganondorf who becomes Ganon in his 'first' appearance in OoT, becoming the sympathetic villain in Windwaker coveting that wind. Nothing suggesting in a new revelation that he could be way way older then OoT or that this actually isn't the first time a Link has encountered him, or even anything even more radical like suggesting that Ganondorf could be anything other or anything more then just a Gerudo and human.

      Simply put, some people will complain that Ganon(dorf) is a stale Zelda villain, while at the same time complaining mightily if the devs decide to retcon or reveal something startlingly new. That is why I think it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't-type situation, because people want him to feel 'fresh' while not allowing him to change.
      Rymes with 'Achoo.'

      The post was edited 5 times, last by Aku ().