320 replies to this topic

[Hero of Legend]

No shit. None of them have the blade of evil's bane. What could they possibly do?

Are you retarded? I said they were already in service of Ganondorf. Get it through your thick skull.

"Attack" is still an appropriate word. Name your alternative. "Slaughter", "massacre", "extermination". Forgive me for not being specific.

The word still doesn't mean the same thing as the other ones you listed. Get over it.

He destroyed the castle, presumably killed the king and many soldiers and wrecked the town. If that isn't an attack, NOTHING IS.

I assume he killed the king when he drove Impa and Zelda out of the castle.

And I don't know what fighting was supposed to take place in the IW other than the sealing, which occured without any help from soldiers whatsoever.

[LionHarted]

I said they were already in service of Ganondorf.

They were?

The word still doesn't mean the same thing as the other ones you listed.

All of the above are aggressive acts against a group of people. Don't even try to argue semantics with me.

I assume he killed the king when he drove Impa and Zelda out of the castle.

It's possible. Not necessarily the only correct conclusion.

And I don't know what fighting was supposed to take place in the IW other than the sealing, which occured without any help from soldiers whatsoever.

There was an attack on Hyrule Castle in which the knights perished.

[Hero of Legend]

They were?

Like in ALttP, yes. But tell me, why should I bother with a man that can't even remember what I said less than a few hours ago?

All of the above are aggressive acts against a group of people. Don't even try to argue semantics with me.

Why not? I can't possibly be more annoying than you.

You're still wrong, by the way.

It's possible. Not necessarily the only correct conclusion.

Obviously, it?s possible the King just didn't feel like searching for his missing daughter.

There was an attack on Hyrule Castle in which the knights perished.

Which was when Ganon was sealed, and no soner than that. Now, I didn't see any knights in the final battle. Did you?

[Fyxe]

...Oh, god, this is pathetic.

Hero of Legend, you're being both pedantic and delusional.

AND you've resorted to calling people 'retarded'.

Edited by Fyxe, 03 May 2007 - 04:36 PM.

[LionHarted]

Like in ALttP, yes. But tell me, why should I bother with a man that can't even remember what I said less than a few hours ago?

Again... they were?

You're still wrong, by the way.

Attack (n.) to set upon in a forceful, violent, hostile, or aggressive way
Massacre (n.) the unnecessary, indiscriminate killing of a large number of human beings or animals
Slaughter (n.) the brutal or violent killing of a person
Extermination (n.) to get rid of by destroying; destroy totally

Now, I may just be crazy, but the latter three all involve "setting upon" something or someone in a forceful, violent, hostile, or aggressive way.

If you're going to tell me I'm wrong, pick another debate.

Obviously, it’s possible the King just didn't feel like searching for his missing daughter.

Or was taken prisoner, knew that to search for her would be to lead Ganondorf to her, or he might have been in hiding himself. There are a plethora of potential reasons, not all of which have to have anything to do with his death. The presence of a king post-OoT (Daphnes) seems to suggest that OoT's king probably survived. Though we can't exactly be sure he's the same one, and I, for one, actually doubt it.

Which was when Ganon was sealed, and no soner than that.

Not necessarily. Ganon attacked, the knights perished, and the sages cast their seal. In that order.

Putting seven years between the initial attack and the sealing doesn't disqualify anything in the slightest. It just means that they didn't happen right in a row. Big fricken' whoop. The ALttP story wasn't specific enough to begin with.

Edited by LionHarted, 03 May 2007 - 04:41 PM.

[Hero of Legend]

Again... they were?

Again, yes. I have all the reason in the word to claim they were, and if you can?t see the problem in the fact that the guards aren?t taking action despite the recent events, then I don?t know why you?re posting here.

Now, I may just be crazy, but the latter three all involve "setting upon" something or someone in a forceful, violent, hostile, or aggressive way.

If you're going to tell me I'm wrong, pick another debate.

'Fraid not. This time, not only are you bending the meaning of the word 'attack' but you are again ignoring the real point. I won't stop calling you out on your false arguments just because you tell me to.

Or was taken prisoner, knew that to search for her would be to lead Ganondorf to her, or he might have been in hiding himself. There are a plethora of potential reasons, not all of which have to have anything to do with his death.

Talk about over complication. Either way, the king is not in a position to resist Ganondorf. End of story.

The presence of a king post-OoT (Daphnes) seems to suggest that OoT's king probably survived. Though we can't exactly be sure he's the same one, and I, for one, actually doubt it.

Zelda could've had kids (most likely), or married a fat man, you know.

Not necessarily. Ganon attacked, the knights perished, and the sages cast their seal. In that order.

Putting seven years between the initial attack and the sealing doesn't disqualify anything in the slightest.

Except the knights died as they protected the sages while they made the seal. Seriously.

[LionHarted]

Again, yes. I have all the reason in the word to claim they were, and if you can?t see the problem in the fact that the guards aren?t taking action despite the recent events, then I don?t know why you?re posting here.

"There's a lot going on at the castle right now. We can't even let a dog into the castle!" (rough quote)

If the king just died (as you imply), that'd be reason enough to step up security, would it not? Even more so if he hadn't.

'Fraid not. This time, not only are you bending the meaning of the word 'attack' but you are again ignoring the real point. I won't stop calling you out on your false arguments just because you tell me to.

I'm sorry you think it's smart to argue with the dictionary. This debate is over.

Except the knights died as they protected the sages while they made the seal. Seriously.

Died in the battle against evil monsters, protected the sages from the tides of evil.

1) There are no soldiers to be found in the future. Survey says--they were killed. Did they go down without a fight? Doubtful.
2) The sages have not been destroyed by the tides of evil.

Discrepancy? Where?

[Vertiboy]

Comment: Link didn't. He was planning to take the Triforce himself.

Comment: See above.

Either way, the idea is that it is Link and Zelda's fault that Ganondorf got the Triforce. They tried to stop him from getting it, and that lead him to it.

Comment: We don't know whether he was sneaking. We don't know what "leaving Ganondorf alone" entails. The only reason Hyrule was plunged into darkness in OoT was because the sages were unable to awaken to seal Ganondorf.

Leaving Ganondorf alone means leaving him alone. They did not interfere with his efforts to get the Triforce, and by doing that, they did not lead him to the Triforce. It is that simple.

If they leave him alone, then they probably wouldn't tell anyone else to do anything about it. It says that they let Ganondorf run around Hyrule. Obviously, if he runs around Hyrule for several years before doing something outrageous, Link and Zelda didn't tell anyone else about how Ganondorf was a baddie. They did not interfere = They did not directly and/or indirectly interact. Why else would Ganondorf be running around Hyrule for several years? Was he a fugitive? It is awfully suspicious that Aonuma "left that part out."

Comment: And then Ganondorf and his men chased after Zelda. What then?

So the Ganondorf and his men conquered Hyrule Castle, but every single one of them would go after Zelda and Impa? It takes an entire army to follow two people on horseback? That would make them go faster?

Unless Ganondorf's men are stupid, why would they give up Hyrule Castle? Why wouldn't some of them stay behind and guard it? I think it is pretty much common sense that if someone surrenders their castle, and the army needs to chase someone, some of the army will stay behind. What you are suggesting would make his men idiots.

Comment: Ganondorf and his men chased after Zelda. Solders still occupy the castle.

See above.

Also, soldiers still occupied Hyrule Castle in A Link to the Past, and they were under Agahnim's spell. One could possibly come to the conclusion that the soldiers at HC in OoT are under a similar spell since they do not want to let Link into HC, just like the ones in ALttP.

Comment: For gameplay purposes. Zelda and Impa are not in the Courtyard anymore.

Agreed.

Comment: "At the end of the game" =/= "in-game."

Care to support that?

Comment: Until they do interfere, when it is decided that he should be executed, which Aonuma also says.

Aonuma did not say that Zelda and Link interfered. They said that if they let Ganondorf run around Hyrule long enough (by not interferring with him), he would do something outrageous and be arrested. It didn't say that Link and Zelda would arrest him. Read the quote again.

Comment: Triforce mark on Link's hand.

That is not a plothole. TP says that the possessors of the crests were chosen by the gods. It was divine intervention.

Link's possession of whatever shield you had last time you pulled the Master Sword (not when you first met Zelda).

MM laws. If Link gets a bow on Day 3 and goes back in time to Day 1, he will still have the bow, even though the events in which he got the bow didn't happen. Apply that to OoT. If Link gets a Hylian Shield after meeting Zelda and goes back to a time before meeting Zelda, he should still have the Shield, even though the events in which he got the Shield didn't happen. That could also be an explaination for how Link still has the ToC. Problem solved, within the canon.

Etc. etc. etc.

Care to elaborate?

The Door of Time was not open before you met Zelda; the Spiritual Stones were in the hands of their respective owners.
The guards may or may not exist after the end of the game. We don't know. None of us have seen it.
You misunderstand. I was distinguishing between the invasion and the execution. The execution is several years later. The invasion is never mentioned in the interview.

The Door of Time may or may not have been open, if even for a brief time, before Link's adventure began.

The fact of the matter is you cannot prove that the guards would have a reason to leave their post any more than I can prove that the Door of Time was open for a brief time before Link's adventure began, and you know it. Both explainations are fan fiction.

Besides, I thought you said that end of the game =/= in-game. The Door of Time is open at the end of the game. Which is it? Do you believe end of the game = in-game or end of the game =/= in-game? You cannot have your cake and eat it too. Choose one and only one.

Here is my choice.

In-Game Information = Canon (Unless a reasonable explaination can be presented otherwise)
End of the Game = Canon

Therefore, In-Game Information = End of the Game

Also, think about what you are suggesting. You are suggesting that even though Hyrule Castle was attacked, Zelda returned to it, and the guards protecting the courtyard went away, allowing Link to enter. The Princess of Hyrule is present, and less guards are their to protect the castle that has been attacked? You are not making sense.

You still have yet to answer why Impa would allow Zelda to return to HC if she predicted an attack in the first place. Does she have random clarvoyance that would only allow her to predict one attack, but not another? Even if she wouldn't predict another attack, would Impa actually be stupid enough to allow Zelda to go back to HC after it has been attacked? Would Impa let Zelda go back to what has become a danger zone? I can't speak for Impa, nor can I speak for the writers of OoT, but I would like to think that Impa isn't an idiot. I would like to think that she doesn't have random burst of intelligence that allow her to predict certain attacks but not others. I just like to assume that Impa is consistently clarvoyant and smart. That is just me, though. Maybe she sees an attack coming one moment, then foolishly lets Zelda return to HC the next.

I'm sorry, but if what you are saying is true, then you have some big plotholes to deal with.

Also, you are correct that the interview with Aonuma doesn't mention Ganondorf invading Hyrule. Twilight Princess does. A Sage said that Ganondorf invaded Hyrule in order to try to establish dominion over the Sacred Realm. That is why, at first, I thought that Link arrived after Ganondorf attacked HC in OoT. I thought that the attacks were the same.

I realized, though, that if Link arrived before his adventure began, if he convinced Zelda to do nothing, Ganondorf would still be after the Triforce, so he would still want the Ocarina of Time. That is why he chased after Zelda after the attack in OoT in the first place. Since he doesn't have Link doing the dirty work for him, Ganondorf would have had to collect all of the Spirtual Stones on his own. That is a process that would theoretically take several years. After collecting them, he would need the Ocarina of Time. He would presumably attack Hyrule Castle (that is an attack on Hyrule) to try and get it. Of course, the Ocarina of Time is presumably with Link, where ever he is, since he took it with him to look for Navi. Ganondorf entered the Sacred Realm to get the Triforce in OoT, shortly after the attack. Since there is no gateway to the SR, Ganondorf has nowhere to conveniently "escape" to, and he is arrested. Ganondorf's attack on HC was in vain, and he is arrested. Shortly thereafter, he would be sentenced to execution.

A few details here and there can change, but OoT, TP, and Aonuma's quote provide the framework for the events between OoT's ending and TP.

In general, you have yet to answer the big question: how would Link's presence in a post-split Triforce Hyrule make the events in the child timeline go any differently than they did in the adult timeline? You have conveniently avoided that question, which I find odd.

Here is a message to those who choose not to believe Aonuma's comment. How is it any different than the information in the games? Many people treat them differently.

There are many interviews that have given out false information in the past. I cannot deny that. That is the reason that some people give for not trusting interviews. However, do we apply that to the in-game information? Do we say, "Well, this information in the game is inaccurate, so I will disregard all in-game information"? No, we don't.

Is that really fair? Should we disregard all interviews just because a few of them have been inaccurate, but then disregard some in-game information that has been proven to be inaccurate? More often then not, the interviews with the right people show us creator's intent. We can only assume what the creator's intent is when looking at the in-game information. If anything, the interviews with the right people (director, script writer) at the right time (close to or after a game's release) can be even more accurate at conveying creator's intent than the actual game itself (since the writers are not perfect and may accidentally place information contradicting creator's intent into the game).

Edited by Vertiboy, 03 May 2007 - 07:01 PM.

[FDL]

You say Ganondorf took over Hyrule with the Triforce of Power... but if Link doesn't open the Door of Time (again) and take the Master Sword to let him in, in the seven years to come, Ganondorf won't be able to take the Triforce, which is what allowed him to conquer Hyrule.
This, I believe, is why when he lost his patience and attacked Hyrule, the Sages were able to subdue him.

And, further ensuring that Ganondorf could not get into the Sacred Realm, Link not only left him alone, but went away on a journey with the Ocarina of Time, the key to open the Door of Time.

Again, Link left for Termina several months after OoT supposedly. You mean to tell me Ganondorf let the OoT go? He'd lose his patience AFTER he lost his chance?

I see no reason to disregard his comment. He directed the game. He went into great detail. He should know what he is talking about. If I were Aonuma, and I directed a game and went into great detail about its timeline placement, only to have people disregard my comment, I would be offended. If we don't ever trust creators' comments, how will we ever know creator's intent? Keep in mind that sometimes evidence accidentally gets into the game that contradicts creator's intent, so "the in-game evidence" isn't the answer to that question. The day that the man who directed the game is dead wrong about timeline details is the day that there is no Zelda timeline.

If you choose to disregard the in-depth comments that the director of Twilight Princess made about, well, Twilight Princess, then I cannot stop you. If I have to prove that he, again the director, is not lying, then I guess I lose this debate. If people will stop and think for a moment, though, and stop assuming that the director's comment is wrong just because a few comments have been wrong before (but they weren't anywhere near as elaborate or confident), then we wouldn't have to debate about what Aonuma, the director of Twilight Princess, has said.

Yes, I had to repeat the fact that he was the director to emphasize my point.
Are you going to believe what you see or what is said, as far as a fictional universe is concerned? If you play OoT, Impa clearly says, "...they surrendered a short time after..." in referring to HC. That isn't word play, either. I just can't remember the entire quote, and I don't want to misquote Impa. Also, in A Link to the Past, guards are still at HC, even though Agahnim has taken over. One could interpret Impa's quote and the guards' unwillingness to let Link into the castle to mean that Ganondorf has them under a similar spell.

I'd just like to respond to you generally with this. First of all, only one translation has said that. Most others mention nothing about it and thus my guess is that someone added it in, but it's possible it's not the case. However, I must say, if "they left him alone" is actually said in that way in the translation then you have a good point, though not necessarily something that proves what you said. However, it makes little difference.

If you want Link to travel magically back before he met Zelda then you have to retcon some things/pretend they don't exist. Examples would be the Hylian Shield, how Link got said power when he has always only been able to go back to when he last "existed" in Hyrule, why the ToC was with Link at a time that's apparently before the "divine prank" happened, why the Door of Time is open, and why Zelda specifically TELLS Link to return the Master Sword to the pedestal and to close the Door of Time. There are probably a few more, but that's what I've thought up for now. Don't rush to answer it, it doesn't matter.

[LionHarted]

Either way, the idea is that it is Link and Zelda's fault that Ganondorf got the Triforce. They tried to stop him from getting it, and that lead him to it.
Correct. By opening the Door of Time and drawing the Master Sword, Link allowed Ganondorf to enter the Sacred Realm and take the Triforce.

Leaving Ganondorf alone means leaving him alone. They did not interfere with his efforts to get the Triforce, and by doing that, they did not lead him to the Triforce. It is that simple.
Unless they had already interfered with his efforts to get the Triforce, and already led him there. Which is what I'm suggesting, and my reason for the Door of Time being open when Link gets back.

If they leave him alone, then they probably wouldn't tell anyone else to do anything about it. It says that they let Ganondorf run around Hyrule. Obviously, if he runs around Hyrule for several years before doing something outrageous, Link and Zelda didn't tell anyone else about how Ganondorf was a baddie.
1) Several versions of the quote say that they shouldn't leave him be.
2) No, it doesn't say that they let him run about Hyrule. It says that they decided that if they let him run around Hyrule, that he would do something outrageous. This is why he is executed.

Why else would Ganondorf be running around Hyrule for several years? Was he a fugitive?
He isn't. "Several years after" refers to when the execution scene takes place.

So the Ganondorf and his men conquered Hyrule Castle, but every single one of them would go after Zelda and Impa? It takes an entire army to follow two people on horseback? That would make them go faster? Unless Ganondorf's men are stupid, why would they give up Hyrule Castle? Why wouldn't some of them stay behind and guard it? I think it is pretty much common sense that if someone surrenders their castle, and the army needs to chase someone, some of the army will stay behind. What you are suggesting would make his men idiots.

1) Ganondorf's goal in attacking Hyrule Castle was to steal the Ocarina of Time.
2) The castle surrendered to this attack. Why did Ganondorf level the town later, if his men still occupied it?

Also, soldiers still occupied Hyrule Castle in A Link to the Past, and they were under Agahnim's spell. One could possibly come to the conclusion that the soldiers at HC in OoT are under a similar spell since they do not want to let Link into HC, just like the ones in ALttP.
Or they could have a good reason for not letting him into the castle, such as heightened security thanks to one of the royal family members being assaulted. Common sense, really. No need for brainwashing.

Care to support that?
Link never has the Triforce of Courage mark as a child during the game. He has the Triforce of Courage mark in the ending scene. And many other such situations in other games.

Aonuma did not say that Zelda and Link interfered. They said that if they let Ganondorf run around Hyrule long enough (by not interferring with him), he would do something outrageous and be arrested. It didn't say that Link and Zelda would arrest him. Read the quote again.
The quote said that if they let him run around, he would do something outrageous, so he was decided to be executed.

"In the last scene of Ocarina of Time, kids Link and Zelda have a little talk, and as a consequence of that talk, their relationship with Ganon takes a whole new direction. In the middle of this game [Twilight Princess], there's a scene showing Ganon's execution. It was decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be. That scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time."

I did read the quote again.

TP says that the possessors of the crests were chosen by the gods. It was divine intervention.
OoT says they were chosen by destiny. But someone still had to touch the damn thing.

MM laws. If Link gets a bow on Day 3 and goes back in time to Day 1, he will still have the bow, even though the events in which he got the bow didn't happen.
OoT laws: Link reverts back to the form he was in last time he left the past. MM Link doesn't de-age when he goes back in time; he arrives in the past in the exact same shape he was in when he left the future, subtracting a few item types for the sake of gameplay. Link can't use any of the items only attainable in the future in OoT. And, again, Link doesn't have the ToC as a child during the game. Only in the ending scene.

The Door of Time may or may not have been open, if even for a brief time, before Link's adventure began.
Despite the Spiritual Stones still being where they're supposed to be?

Besides, I thought you said that end of the game =/= in-game. The Door of Time is open at the end of the game.
The state of the Door of Time requires certain conditions which we know were a certain way at the beginning of the game, until you open it. Unless you're proposing that Link goes back to sometime before the game even begins, then you have an irreconcilable situation. I merely have one without explanation, not one that contradicts known facts. None of us knows what happened after the last point in the Child history seen in the game; we do know what happened before.

Also, think about what you are suggesting. You are suggesting that even though Hyrule Castle was attacked, Zelda returned to it, and the guards protecting the courtyard went away, allowing Link to enter. The Princess of Hyrule is present, and less guards are their to protect the castle that has been attacked? You are not making sense.

1) You are suggesting that although the Spiritual Stones are in the hands of their keepers, and the Ocarina of Time in Zelda's possession, that the Door of Time is somehow open when Link returns to the past. We know this is where these items are at this point in time for a fact.
2) I am suggesting that during a point in time we know next to nothing about, that something that we would never have seen takes place. I am posing a hypothetical definition for a variable situation; you are posing a contradiction to known facts.

You still have yet to answer why Impa would allow Zelda to return to HC if she predicted an attack in the first place. Does she have random clarvoyance that would only allow her to predict one attack, but not another?
We do not know why she predicted an attack. We do know that the events that came to pass after Link drew the Master Sword were something even the prophetic Princess Zelda "never could have expected". Why would Impa anticipate another attack if Link, who Zelda had just given the final key to the Sacred Realm, was supposed to enter it, take the Triforce, and then be fully capable of completing the task Zelda set before him?

Also, you are correct that the interview with Aonuma doesn't mention Ganondorf invading Hyrule. Twilight Princess does. A Sage said that Ganondorf invaded Hyrule in order to try to establish dominion over the Sacred Realm. That is why, at first, I thought that Link arrived after Ganondorf attacked HC in OoT. I thought that the attacks were the same.
I still believe the attacks are the same. We differ in that you think Link and Zelda prevented the first attack on Hyrule Castle, the attempt to steal the Ocarina of Time, and I think instead that Link and Zelda prevented the invasion after Ganondorf claimed the Triforce, the one that happened during the seven years.


Both have the same functional result. Mine has the advantage of being able to account for the Triforce split, the Door of Time being open, and the Hyrule invasion without creating hypothetical situations surrounding those specific elements. Instead I hypothetically have Zelda return to the castle after Ganondorf disappears into the Sacred Realm, thinking that Link, who was supposed to have claimed the Triforce, had defeated him as planned. This allows Link to meet her there after returning from the future.

Edited by LionHarted, 03 May 2007 - 07:49 PM.

[Vertiboy]

I agree with most of your post, except this part:

You say Ganondorf took over Hyrule with the Triforce of Power... but if Link doesn't open the Door of Time (again) and take the Master Sword to let him in, in the seven years to come, Ganondorf won't be able to take the Triforce, which is what allowed him to conquer Hyrule.
This, I believe, is why when he lost his patience and attacked Hyrule, the Sages were able to subdue him.

And, further ensuring that Ganondorf could not get into the Sacred Realm, Link not only left him alone, but went away on a journey with the Ocarina of Time, the key to open the Door of Time.

That does sound plausible, yes.

Unless they had already interfered with his efforts to get the Triforce, and already led him there. Which is what I'm suggesting, and my reason for the Door of Time being open when Link gets back.

Agreed. If Link came back after the Triforce had split, the door would be open. No dispute there.

1) Several versions of the quote say that they shouldn't leave him be.
2) No, it doesn't say that they let him run about Hyrule. It says that they decided that if they let him run around Hyrule, that he would do something outrageous. This is why he is executed.

(Don't bother replying to this just yet. I address this issue more in-depth later.)

The Wind Waker is parallel. In Ocarina of Time, Link flew seven years in time, he beat Ganon and went back to being a kid, remember? Twilight Princess takes place in the world of Ocarina of Time, a hundred and something years after the peace returned to kid Link?s time. In the last scene of Ocarina of Time, kids Link and Zelda have a little talk, and as a consequence of that talk, their relationship with Ganon takes a whole new direction. In the middle of this game [Twilight Princess], there's a scene showing Ganon's execution. It was decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be. That scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time. Ganon was sent to another world and now he wants to obtain the power...

Here is what the quote is saying.

If Ganon were to do something outrageous, then he would be executed.

You see the line that says, "That [execution] scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time"? It follows the statement that if Ganondorf were left alone, he'd do something stupid and get caught. That is why Ganondorf is being executed in OoT. He did something outrageous. He did something outrageous because Link and Zelda let him be. The quote clearly says that is the reason he is being executed.

That is why it is a fact that Link and Zelda decided to leave Ganondorf alone. The quote clearly says it.

When Aonuma says, "It was decided..." he is referring to the writers. The writers decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be. Link and Zelda did not decide that.

Show me a version of the quote that says that they didn't want to leave Ganondorf alone. If they are out there, I would like to see them. I am not challenging you. It's just that I want to see every translation I can.

He isn't. "Several years after" refers to when the execution scene takes place.

When are you suggesting that he got captured? Shortly after OoT's ending? I need to understand your view to debate this issue further.

1) Ganondorf's goal in attacking Hyrule Castle was to steal the Ocarina of Time.
2) The castle surrendered to this attack. Why did Ganondorf level the town later, if his men still occupied it?

I understand 1, but I am confused by 2. Maybe my vocabulary sucks. Could you rephrase it?

Or they could have a good reason for not letting him into the castle, such as heightened security thanks to one of the royal family members being assaulted. Common sense, really. No need for brainwashing.

Why is one interpretation better than the other?

Link never has the Triforce of Courage mark as a child during the game. He has the Triforce of Courage mark in the ending scene. And many other such situations in other games.

His crest resignates in most cut scenes though because it is near another crest (either Wisdom or Power). The cut scenes are also inconsistent about this, though, because there are multiple times when Link is talking to Sheik, and the mark does not appear. So sometimes even mid-game cut scenes =/= end of game cut scene. That's what it would seem like.

Basically, the crest are present whenever the developers saw necessary. Sheik was saying that the person who possessed the crest of Wisdom was the 7th Sage. She was showing Link that she had the crest, so it was necessary for it to shine. Ganondorf mentioned that the crest were resignating when they were all three in the same area before the fight with Ganondorf, so it was necessary for them to shine. Ganondorf used the Triforce of Power to transform into Ganon, so it was necessary for it to shine. The developers wanted to show that Link still had the Triforce of Courage, even though he had traveled back in time, so it was necessary for it to shine.

We aren't told that the Triforce split until near the end of the game, by Sheik. For those expecting OoT to follow the Imprisoning War legend, it was somewhat of a twist. In order for the twist to work, it was necessary for the crest not to appear before the scene near the end of the game, whether Link was near Sheik or not.

You did not provide a good example because some cut scenes also follow the same rules as the crest does in-game (it isn't always present). How is the end of the game any less canon than in-game information? You are basically saying that certain parts of the in-game canon do not apply to the end of the game, but others do. That is really inconsistent.

Why do you say that the Door of Time should be closed if in-game =/= end of game? That really confuses me.

The quote said that if they let him run around, he would do something outrageous, so he was decided to be executed.

"In the last scene of Ocarina of Time, kids Link and Zelda have a little talk, and as a consequence of that talk, their relationship with Ganon takes a whole new direction. In the middle of this game [Twilight Princess], there's a scene showing Ganon's execution. It was decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be. That scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time."

I did read the quote again.

Wait, wait. This is very confusing.

Apparently we have to interpretations of the same quote.

1. Link and Zelda decided that they should execute Ganondorf because they knew he would do something outrageous if they left him alone.

2. The writers decided that Link and Zelda will leave Ganondorf alone (to prevent him from getting the Triforce). Ganondorf does something outrageous, and he is executed.

I don't want to claim that my interpretation is better than yours because I personally have no idea what Aonuma meant.

Anyway, how would Hyrule go about arresting Ganondorf if he has the Triforce of Power. They couldn't succeed in stopping him from ruling Hyrule in the adult timeline. What difference would Link's presence make? Would Link's presence somehow "empower" them to be able to subdue Ganondorf? I doubt it.

Also, even if they could subdue him, that doesn't explain how the Sages don't know how Ganondorf got the ToP. You would think that, if Link were to tell Zelda about his adventure in the future, he wouldn't forget to leave out the fact that Ganondorf entered the Sacred Realm and got his hands on the ToP, which helped him to rule Hyrule in the first place.

What if I were to tell you the story about Hitlter's rise to power in Germany? I wouldn't leave out how important his book Mein Compf (spelled poorly by me?) to that process. If Link told Zelda about Ganondorf's rise to power, would it make sense for him to leave out that Ganondorf has the ToP?

OoT says they were chosen by destiny. But someone still had to touch the damn thing.

Destiny doesn't always = Gods. The gods could choose to give the Triforce to whomever they please. Destiny doesn't need to be a part of it. No one necessarily needs to touch anything (that's what she said; I'm sorry, but I had to).

Despite the Spiritual Stones still being where they're supposed to be?

If Zelda is in Hyrule Castle despite the fact that is it a possible terrorist target, then it is possible that the Door of Time opened for Link magically, despite the spiritual stones still being where they're supposed to be.

The state of the Door of Time requires certain conditions which we know were a certain way at the beginning of the game, until you open it. Unless you're proposing that Link goes back to sometime before the game even begins, then you have an irreconcilable situation. I merely have one without explanation, not one that contradicts known facts. None of us knows what happened after the last point in the Child history seen in the game; we do know what happened before.

So you can prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Door of Time didn't magically open just for Link?

Personally, I don't think that the DoT magically opened. I just think that it is a plothole. While we can make up reasons for why it could be open, we cannot canonically prove that it was open. I am aware that it hurts my theory.

It is also a plothole, though, that Zelda is in HC at the end of the game. While we can make up reasons for why Zelda is in HC at the end of the game if Link theoretically arrived after the Triforce split, we cannot canonically prove that she came back.

Also, while we can make up reasons for why Link can reach Zelda at the end of the game if he arrived post-Triforce split, we cannot cononically prove that he could get to her.

Basically, you are saying that your plotholes are justified but mine are not. I'm sorry, but that's not allowed. I'm telling... :pout:

Seriously, though, stop saying that your plotholes are okay but mine are not. It is hypocritical.

1) You are suggesting that although the Spiritual Stones are in the hands of their keepers, and the Ocarina of Time in Zelda's possession, that the Door of Time is somehow open when Link returns to the past. We know this is where these items are at this point in time for a fact.
2) I am suggesting that during a point in time we know next to nothing about, that something that we would never have seen takes place. I am posing a hypothetical definition for a variable situation; you are posing a contradiction to known facts.

It is said that the Spiritual Stones and Ocarina of Time are the way to open the Door of Time. Where in OoT does it say that it is the only way? I can make stuff up, too.

We don't know if the door was opened or closed near the beginning of Link's adventure, either.

What you are suggesting is that the Hylians are stupid. They heighten security at HC during Link's childhood, but not soon after the 7 years of no Link begins, they reduce security? WTF? Does that seem rational to you?

The difference is that I have a rational reason to assume that the guards would remain at HC. I have a rational reason to assume that Zelda wouldn't be in HC after OoT. The only reason you are assuming that the guards leave and Zelda returns (again WTF?) is because it fits your theory. You are molding the facts around your theory, when in reality, it should work the other way around. You should look at the evidence with an unbiased opinion (as I have), and mold a theory around those facts and rational ideas.

On the flip side, you have a rational reason to assume that the Door of Time would be closed before Link opened it. OoT says that the Spiritual Stones and OoT open the door (despite the fact that TP Link opens it by howling and solving a puzzle, proving that the OoT and SS are not the only way to do so). I made no attempt to rationalize why the door was open. I accepted it as a plothole, instead of going into denial.

Basically, what we are looking at here is plothole vs. plothole. Which theory has the least plotholes? That is most likely the correct theory.

We do not know why she predicted an attack. We do know that the events that came to pass after Link drew the Master Sword were something even the prophetic Princess Zelda "never could have expected". Why would Impa anticipate another attack if Link, who Zelda had just given the final key to the Sacred Realm, was supposed to enter it, take the Triforce, and then be fully capable of completing the task Zelda set before him?

Where does OoT say that Link was trying to get the Triforce? It simply says that he was trying to prevent Ganondorf from getting it (Zelda says that). Link's motives for pulling the Master Sword out of the pedistal were never really revealed.

I still believe the attacks are the same. We differ in that you think Link and Zelda prevented the first attack on Hyrule Castle, the attempt to steal the Ocarina of Time, and I think instead that Link and Zelda prevented the invasion after Ganondorf claimed the Triforce, the one that happened during the seven years.

Yes, I agree that we disagree (but I still want to debate).

Both have the same functional result. Mine has the advantage of being able to account for the Triforce split, the Door of Time being open, and the Hyrule invasion without creating hypothetical situations surrounding those specific elements. Instead I hypothetically have Zelda return to the castle after Ganondorf disappears into the Sacred Realm, thinking that Link, who was supposed to have claimed the Triforce, had defeated him as planned. This allows Link to meet her there after returning from the future.

My theory also account for the Triforce being split within the Zelda canon, so it is not just a plothole. I used canon information to explain how the Triforce split.

Specifics are needed in this debate, though. Rational thought still means something.

Rationally, without fan fiction, there is no reason for Zelda to return to HC. Rationally, there is no reason to assume that HC would let down its guard after being attacked, especially if Zelda does hypothetically return.

What you are saying is not consistent. Zelda returns, and the security at the castle decreases. There is definitely no canon explaination for that, let alone a rational one, without adding more fan fiction.


Right now, as I have said, it basically comes down to plothole vs. plothole. Which theory has the most plotholes? Let me define a plothole in this case. It is a snag in continuity that cannot be explained with the current canon and/or rational thought.

Pre-Adventure
1. Why is the Door of Time open when it seemingly shouldn't be?
2. Does OoT or MM time travel logic apply to OoT's ending?

Post-Triforce Split
1. Why does Zelda return to Hyrule Castle?
2. Why is security less than before at HC, especially if Zelda is present?
3. Why do the Sages in TP not know how Ganondorf got the Triforce of Power, if Link would have logically told Zelda that Ganondorf obtained it in the first place?
4. How would Link's presence make capturing Ganondorf successful, unlike the adult timeline?
5. Why would Ganondorf's men give up HC if it surrendered to them?

Let me explain why 2 on my theory says OoT time travel logic. Not every item from adulthood can be used in childhood, but some can. One example is the Golden Scale. Link can use it as a child, even though the events in which it was obtained have not happened yet. The same applies to heart containers. That is very similar to MM's logic.

I would like to say that OoT's ending follows either OoT's or MM's time travel logic. If you want to be a pain and say that it follows a separate set of rules, then I can't really do anything.

If you want to say that a theory with 5 plotholes triumphs over a theory with 2, then I can't really stop you. If the point of this debate is to prove the other person is definitely wrong, then I lose. I have succeeded, however, in proving that one theory is better than another as far as the least amount of plotholes goes. I have hopefully shown that one theory is more likely than another, even if I couldn't prove that one is definitely wrong.

I'd just like to respond to you generally with this. First of all, only one translation has said that. Most others mention nothing about it and thus my guess is that someone added it in, but it's possible it's not the case. However, I must say, if "they left him alone" is actually said in that way in the translation then you have a good point, though not necessarily something that proves what you said. However, it makes little difference.

If you want Link to travel magically back before he met Zelda then you have to retcon some things/pretend they don't exist. Examples would be the Hylian Shield, how Link got said power when he has always only been able to go back to when he last "existed" in Hyrule, why the ToC was with Link at a time that's apparently before the "divine prank" happened, why the Door of Time is open, and why Zelda specifically TELLS Link to return the Master Sword to the pedestal and to close the Door of Time. There are probably a few more, but that's what I've thought up for now. Don't rush to answer it, it doesn't matter.

OoT and MM laws. I already addressed the shield and "divine prank" above, but here is the MS. Even if Link arrives before he drew the MS, it would be in his possession when he arrives in the past. Then he could plant it. Problem solved.

Edited by Vertiboy, 03 May 2007 - 10:36 PM.

[BourgeoisJerry]

Well, I'm bored, so I'm gonna go ahead and give my take on things even though I'm not really part of this debate.

1. Why does Zelda return to Hyrule Castle?

Well, it does make sense that she would assume that Link would have prevented Ganondorf from ever obtaining the Triforce. Link doing the exact opposite was completely unexpected.

2. Why is security less than before at HC, especially if Zelda is present?

Who says Link even needed to sneak in that time? He did have the Triforce of Courage, after all.

3. Why do the Sages in TP not know how Ganondorf got the Triforce of Power, if Link would have logically told Zelda that Ganondorf obtained it in the first place?

Granted, but I'm not the one doing the debating, so I guess what I say doesn't really matter.

4. How would Link's presence make capturing Ganondorf successful, unlike the adult timeline?

Well, he told Zelda stuff and apparently it was decided that Ganondorf be executed, or whatever. I don't really know how Ganondorf was captured while he had the Triforce of Power, but I don't think the Goddesses suddenly decided to give it to him when the Sages were executing him. I guess the Sages were awakened early and they had enough power to at least subdue him or something?

5. Why would Ganondorf's men give up HC if it surrendered to them?

You realize Impa only said they surrendered after a short time, not that they surrendered right away, right? Also, Ganondorf wasn't trying to take the castle when he attacked, all he cared about was the Ocarina of Time. I really don't get why people think the king surrendered fifteen minutes into the attack, and Ganondorf for some reason felt the need to occupy the castle. Impa's statement that they surrendered a short time after the attack is still accurate if they surrendered after Ganondorf gained the Triforce of Power.

Oh, and I guess I'll go ahead and throw my interpretation out there for that Aonuma quote. "It was decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be," to me, sounds like it was decided (in Hyrule, not the real world) that Ganon be executed because he'd (inevitably) do something outrageous if they (didn't execute him, but rather) left him be.

[LionHarted]

If Ganon were to do something outrageous, then he would be executed.

That's one translation of the interview. There are others.

You see the line that says, "That [execution] scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time"? It follows the statement that if Ganondorf were left alone, he'd do something stupid and get caught. That is why Ganondorf is being executed in OoT. He did something outrageous.

Again, we have differing translations, and differing interpretations based on them.

When Aonuma says, "It was decided..." he is referring to the writers. The writers decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be. Link and Zelda did not decide that.

Regardless, Ganondorf was not left alone, because he was captured and executed.

Show me a version of the quote that says that they didn't want to leave Ganondorf alone.

I just did. You promptly ignored the fact that it said nothing about them actually leaving Ganondorf alone.

When are you suggesting that he got captured? Shortly after OoT's ending?

Sometime after taking the Triforce of Power, before the darkness is able to prevent the sages from awakening.

I understand 1, but I am confused by 2. Maybe my vocabulary sucks. Could you rephrase it?

Why did Ganondorf destroy Hyrule Castle Town if he had already captured it?

Why is one interpretation better than the other?

Both ALttP and OoT tend to make it a point to tell us when people are being brainwashed.

For those expecting OoT to follow the Imprisoning War legend, it was somewhat of a twist. In order for the twist to work, it was necessary for the crest not to appear before the scene near the end of the game, whether Link was near Sheik or not.

The Imprisoning War legend was rather ambiguous as to the extent to which the Triforce was involved.

You did not provide a good example because some cut scenes also follow the same rules as the crest does in-game (it isn't always present). How is the end of the game any less canon than in-game information? You are basically saying that certain parts of the in-game canon do not apply to the end of the game, but others do. That is really inconsistent.

Why do you say that the Door of Time should be closed if in-game =/= end of game?

We know the Door of Time is closed in-game. If Link is traveling back to the point in time you say he is traveling back to, he arrives at a point in time we experience during the game. The Door of Time is not open at that point in time.

Anyway, how would Hyrule go about arresting Ganondorf if he has the Triforce of Power. They couldn't succeed in stopping him from ruling Hyrule in the adult timeline. What difference would Link's presence make? Would Link's presence somehow "empower" them to be able to subdue Ganondorf? I doubt it.

Link's presence would have alerted everyone to what had happened, which was not the case in the Adult timeline. The sages would have been called before the darkness in the temples prevented them from being awakened, and Ganondorf would have been confronted long before he ever conquered Hyrule.

Also, even if they could subdue him, that doesn't explain how the Sages don't know how Ganondorf got the ToP.

Again. This is your interpretation. I always viewed the scene as them being surprised that he was able to evade death, despite whatever means they had to use to subdue him.

It is also a plothole, though, that Zelda is in HC at the end of the game.

Plothole, yes.
Contradiction, no.

It is said that the Spiritual Stones and Ocarina of Time are the way to open the Door of Time. Where in OoT does it say that it is the only way?

"And, in order to open the door, it is said that you need to collect three Spiritual Stones.
And another thing you need...is the treasure that the Royal Family keeps along with this legend... the Ocarina of Time"

Although, looking back, it seems that Link is able to open the door in TP simply by possessing the ToC, which is a credit to your theory. The implication Zelda gives, though, is that Link is to go back to close it, which would imply that it will be open already when he returns.

We don't know if the door was opened or closed near the beginning of Link's adventure, either.

"The entrance is sealed with a stone wall called the Door of Time."

What you are suggesting is that the Hylians are stupid. They heighten security at HC during Link's childhood, but not soon after the 7 years of no Link begins, they reduce security? WTF? Does that seem rational to you?

I've already suggested that Zelda returns. Following that suggestion, she believes she is out of danger (hence her return).

You are molding the facts around your theory, when in reality, it should work the other way around. You should look at the evidence with an unbiased opinion (as I have), and mold a theory around those facts and rational ideas.

1) The Door of Time is closed before OoT. You need three spiritual stones to open it, which are kept hidden.
2) Zelda flees Hyrule Castle when Ganondorf tries to steal the Ocarina.
3) Link opens the Door of Time.
4) Ganondorf touches the Triforce of Power, which splits into three. Link gets the Triforce of Courage.

These three conditions happen in this order.

End of the game:

1) The Door of Time is open. Link uses it to exit the Master Sword chamber when he returns to the past.
2) Zelda is in Hyrule Castle.
3) Link has the Triforce of Courage.

Which conditions do I have to defy to add the endgame conditions (listed above) after the in-game conditions (listed above)? Zero. Conditions 1 and 3 logically follow from in-game conditions 3 and 4. Condition 2 is not necessarily permanent.

Which conditions do you have to defy to add the endgame conditions (listed above) before said in-game conditions? One. Condition 1 does not logically precede in-game condition 1. Before/during in-game condition 1, the spiritual stones are hidden. Condition 2, however, makes logical sense before in-game 2, and condition 3 may or may not be the result of time travel.

Where does OoT say that Link was trying to get the Triforce? It simply says that he was trying to prevent Ganondorf from getting it (Zelda says that).

"Let's get the Triforce before Ganondorf, and then defeat him!" (rough quote)

I used canon information to explain how the Triforce split.

Being chosen by the gods explains why they received the pieces. It does not explain why the Triforce does not still rest in the Sacred Realm.

Pre-Adventure
1. Why is the Door of Time open when it seemingly shouldn't be?
2. Why does Link have the Triforce of Courage?

Post-Triforce Split
1. Why does Zelda return to Hyrule Castle?
Because Ganondorf is not chasing her, given that he is in the Sacred Realm. Impa was bound to take her out of Ganondorf's reach, and was successful in evading his pursuit. In reality, he gave up the pursuit to go for the Triforce, but they don't know that.

2. Why is security less than before at HC, especially if Zelda is present?
Ditto.

4. How would Link's presence make capturing Ganondorf successful, unlike the adult timeline?
You said yourself that he would have told Zelda that Ganondorf had the Triforce. This alone would have generated some action taken against him--the same action, likely, that should have been taken in OoT, except the sages were prevented from awakening.

5. Why would Ganondorf's men give up HC if it surrendered to them?
Why would Ganondorf's men stay at HC if their target was the Ocarina of Time, which is no longer there?

Point 3 is a non-point, since we can't know for sure what exactly the sages meant.


I prefer to go with my theory, because

1) Zelda being back in the castle after initially fleeing is easier for me to reconcile with the story than the Door of Time being open before Link opens it;
2) I prefer having a concrete reason for the Triforce being split;
3) My interpretation of the interview and the execution scene are different than yours.

Edited by LionHarted, 03 May 2007 - 11:18 PM.

[Hero of Legend]

"There's a lot going on at the castle right now. We can't even let a dog into the castle!" (rough quote)

If the king just died (as you imply), that'd be reason enough to step up security, would it not? Even more so if he hadn't.

Which incidentally is what the soldiers say in ALttP, after Agahnim took over.

I'm sorry you think it's smart to argue with the dictionary. This debate is over.

I could say the same to you and your ability to read and properly understand said dictionary.

Died in the battle against evil monsters, protected the sages from the tides of evil.

1) There are no soldiers to be found in the future. Survey says--they were killed. Did they go down without a fight? Doubtful.
2) The sages have not been destroyed by the tides of evil.

Discrepancy? Where?

Except they didn't protect any Sages at all. Of course you can pretend to have a serious argument as much as you want, but it just makes you look like a fool.

[Duke Serkol]

The developers wanted to show that Link still had the Triforce of Courage, even though he had traveled back in time, so it was necessary for it to shine.

Yep. And by not having Zelda's shine they also chose to show that she did not have hers.

Anyway, how would Hyrule go about arresting Ganondorf if he has the Triforce of Power. They couldn't succeed in stopping him from ruling Hyrule in the adult timeline. What difference would Link's presence make? Would Link's presence somehow "empower" them to be able to subdue Ganondorf? I doubt it.

Also, even if they could subdue him, that doesn't explain how the Sages don't know how Ganondorf got the ToP. You would think that, if Link were to tell Zelda about his adventure in the future, he wouldn't forget to leave out the fact that Ganondorf entered the Sacred Realm and got his hands on the ToP, which helped him to rule Hyrule in the first place.

Excellent points

Destiny doesn't always = Gods. The gods could choose to give the Triforce to whomever they please. Destiny doesn't need to be a part of it. No one necessarily needs to touch anything (that's what she said; I'm sorry, but I had to).

I agree but... who's "she" in this sentence?

it is possible that the Door of Time opened for Link magically, despite the spiritual stones still being where they're supposed to be.

Personally, I don't think that the DoT magically opened. I just think that it is a plothole.

Well I do. I mean if we assume the seventh sage can work with time to send Link back to when he should have been on his way to Hyrule Castle (having not entered the Master Sword's chamber yet) then Zelda ought to have opened the Door of Time for him too.

Even if Link arrives before he drew the MS, it would be in his possession when he arrives in the past. Then he could plant it.

Ah, this time I disagree. Link doesn't seem to have carried back any items from the future in OoT's ending other than the Triforce of Courage (in fact, one of the main reasons I believe he's come back before meeting Zelda is because the programmers were careful to take the Goron Bracelet away).
But did we really see him plant the Master Sword? No, we only see him appear in front of it (his hands could be on the hilt, but that doesn't mean much) and we know the time travel is usually initiated by taking/dropping the sword, not ended that way. So if Link himself put the sword back (as opposed to simply finding himself in the past with the sword in front of him), he likely did this in the future (before going back and after floating away in that crystal Zelda put around him).

Sometime after taking the Triforce of Power, before the darkness is able to prevent the sages from awakening.

Do you suppose the Sages that execute Ganondorf in TP are the same Sages awakened by Link in OoT?

Although, looking back, it seems that Link is able to open the door in TP simply by possessing the ToC, which is a credit to your theory.

I hadn't thought about that... very interesting idea
Though of course the Time Door in TP is very different (thin actual doors, not a block of stone, no altar for the Spiritual Stones and not in the middle of the temple but at the entrance of it)

[LionHarted]

We see Link arrive in the past with the sword already in the Pedestal.

Do you suppose the Sages that execute Ganondorf in TP are the same Sages awakened by Link in OoT?
I hadn't thought about that... very interesting idea
Though of course the Time Door in TP is very different (thin actual doors, not a block of stone, no altar for the Spiritual Stones and not in the middle of the temple but at the entrance of it)

1) Well, it wouldn't make sense if they were different sages. Otherwise we would have had a group of sages perfectly capable of sealing him who did nothing for seven years for basically no discernible reason.
2) Considering the part of the temple we see is inside the Time Door, we don't know whether there was an altar or not.

Edited by LionHarted, 04 May 2007 - 09:34 AM.

[Duke Serkol]

1) Well, it wouldn't make sense if they were different sages. Otherwise we would have had a group of sages perfectly capable of sealing him who did nothing for seven years for basically no discernible reason.

Ganon's capture likely happened several years after Link came back, so it is possible these sages are different ones that were not around during OoT. However, it seems also possible that they were around but could not apprehend Ganondorf when he was armed with the Triforce of Power (as you may know, I don't believe for a moment that Ganondorf had his divine power before the execution scene).

2) Considering the part of the temple we see is inside the Time Door, we don't know whether there was an altar or not.

In OoT the door leads to the round chamber where the sword is. In TP the door is further back, in front of the rectangular room that (in OoT) was the first room of the Temple, its entrance. That's what I meant. For an altar to have been in front of the door in TP you'd either have to assume another chamber was added in front of the first one, or that the altar was outside in the open.

[LionHarted]

Ganon's capture likely happened several years after Link came back, so it is possible these sages are different ones that were not around during OoT. However, it seems also possible that they were around but could not apprehend Ganondorf when he was armed with the Triforce of Power (as you may know, I don't believe for a moment that Ganondorf had his divine power before the execution scene).

I disagree. I think the capture happened pretty soon after Link came back, and the execution happened later, as with real executions in the real world.

And the OoT sages were perfectly capable of sealing Ganon, once their powers were restored. The presentation of the capture in the Child timeline is that he was blind to danger, and that is why he was subdued, suggesting to me that what's changed in the Child timeline is that they were able to get the drop on him, instead of vice-versa.

However, that's just my interpretation. I don't know how exactly you take that bit into account.


And I agree that, in any case, the Temple of Time design and placement seem to have been changed, possibly as a retcon.

Edited by LionHarted, 04 May 2007 - 11:07 AM.

[Vertiboy]

I agree but... who's "she" in this sentence?

It is an innuendo joke. She just part of the joke.

Pre-Adventure
1. Why is the Door of Time open when it seemingly shouldn't be?
2. Why does Link have the Triforce of Courage?

As I have said, the Triforce of Courage is not a plothole. It is either divine intervention, as TP says, or it is OoT or MM time travel logic. There are canon explainations for it, so it is not a plothole. One of those two explainations are correct.

The Door of Time is a plothole. I have no disagreement there.

1. Why does Zelda return to Hyrule Castle?
Because Ganondorf is not chasing her, given that he is in the Sacred Realm. Impa was bound to take her out of Ganondorf's reach, and was successful in evading his pursuit. In reality, he gave up the pursuit to go for the Triforce, but they don't know that.

2. Why is security less than before at HC, especially if Zelda is present?
Ditto.

That doesn't mean that they returned to HC. Again, you are assuming that she returned to HC in order to fit your theory, when it should work the other way around. You gave a non-canon explaination for why she returned to HC.

It is the same with the Door of Time. I can give you a non-canon explaination, like the door was destined to open at that point for a few minutes just for Link to leave. Possible explaination or not, it is still not canon.

4. How would Link's presence make capturing Ganondorf successful, unlike the adult timeline?
You said yourself that he would have told Zelda that Ganondorf had the Triforce. This alone would have generated some action taken against him--the same action, likely, that should have been taken in OoT, except the sages were prevented from awakening.

It doesn't matter if Link tells Zelda that Ganondorf has the Triforce of Power. Ganondorf has the Triforce of Power. How would an effort to capture him be any more successful in the child timeline? He would still be able to use it to pwn everyone and take over Hyrule. If they couldn't defeat Ganondorf in the adult timeline, then why would they be strong enough to defeat him in the child timeline? The knowledge that Ganondorf has the ToP doesn't make those arresting Ganondorf any stronger.

Why would Ganondorf's men give up HC if it surrendered to them?
Why would Ganondorf's men stay at HC if their target was the Ocarina of Time, which is no longer there?

They have common sense. If they let the Hylian Royal Family have control of the castle again, they will attack Ganondorf and his men. You don't just attack someone surprisingly one day, then let them go and say, "I trust that you won't attack us." That's not how it works.

Point 3 is a non-point, since we can't know for sure what exactly the sages meant.

Yes, we do know what they meant. They meant that they have no idea HTF Ganondorf got the Triforce. 99% of the Zelda community recognizes that. Why would they all looked shocked? Why would they have a look in there eyes that says, "OMFG WTF?!?!?" Also, if they knew that Ganondorf had the ToP, you would think that they would bound him with something besides chain. It would be like tying the Hulk up with shoelaces. It is stupid, and if one is aware that one are dealing with someone with the power of the gods, one doesn't bind them with chain.

[LionHarted]

As I have said, the Triforce of Courage is not a plothole. It is either divine intervention, as TP says, or it is OoT or MM time travel logic.

I highly doubt it's MM time travel, since Link doesn't revert in any way whatsoever when he time travels in MM.
I have never seen a case in OoT time travel when Link carries things from the future into the past.

You gave a non-canon explaination for why she returned to HC.

I give a non-canon explanation for why she returned to the HC. In fact, anything about the seven years that we are not told directly in-game is non-canon. The entire situation opens itself to individual interpretation. This is true of the ending scene as well, but we know a few things:

1) When Link arrived, he must have arrived at a point in time that the Door of Time was open, or been able to open it somehow without the necessary items. Of these two, the first is considerably more likely.

2) When Link arrived, he didn't have a Triforce mark glowing on his hand. When he goes to meet Zelda, he has the Triforce mark glowing on his hand.

3) Sometime after Link arrives in the past, he meets Zelda in Hyrule Castle. We do not know what transpired between his return and this meeting.

A. We are told that the Temple of Time was constructed to guard the entrance to the Sacred Realm, and that this entrance has been sealed by a stone wall called the Door of Time, and that you need three spiritual stones and the Ocarina of Time to open it. Since no one during the OoT era seems to ever gather all of these but Link, we can reasonably guess that the Door has remained closed throughout the entirety of the game, until opened by Link.

B. We see Zelda flee Hyrule Castle when Ganondorf attempts to steal the Ocarina of Time from her. We then travel to the future to find everything in ruins, and return to the past for brief stints to gather information and collect items. We do not see Princess Zelda during any of our jaunts to the past, nor can we access Hyrule Castle. Reasonably, we cannot assume anything beyond these facts; it is up to personal interpretation to fill in the seven years, as previously asserted. Again, Zelda fled, and security was stepped up at the castle because "a lot was happening" there. Seven years passed after that which we know next to nothing about. Anything could have happened during that time.

Ganondorf has the Triforce of Power. How would an effort to capture him be any more successful in the child timeline?

Because he's blind to any danger, and is exposed, subdued, and brought to justice before he can make his move.

I interpret this as applying to his attack post-Triforce; you interpret it as applying to his actions beforehand. Neither is any more evidenced than the other.

If they couldn't defeat Ganondorf in the adult timeline, then why would they be strong enough to defeat him in the child timeline?

But they could, once the sages had been rallied. It seems the sages were rallied to capture Ganondorf in the past in the Child timeline; they're the ones executing him.

You don't just attack someone surprisingly one day, then let them go and say, "I trust that you won't attack us."

Ganondorf's target was the Ocarina of Time. Assuming that he intended anything beyond this is fanfiction.

It is stupid, and if one is aware that one are dealing with someone with the power of the gods, one doesn't bind them with chain.

"We overestimated our ability as sages" certainly covers their so-called stupidity.

If they didn't know he had that power, they weren't overestimating anything, because, by rights, they should have been able to destroy him. If it was an overestimation of their abilities, as they themselves say, they acknowledge that they would never have been able to destroy him, and that it was an error in judgment on their part. This does not lend itself well to them being thwarted by divine intervention that no one saw coming.

Of course, in a way, this means you're right. They couldn't stop him because they couldn't kill him. So they had to send him to the Twilight Realm instead. No biggie.

Edited by LionHarted, 04 May 2007 - 12:30 PM.

[FDL]

It's funny how both Vertiboy and Serkol are arguing the same thing but [img]http://forums.legendsalliance.com/public/ALOT.png[/img] of their arguments don't even agree.

If Ganon were to do something outrageous, then he would be executed.

You see the line that says, "That [execution] scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time"? It follows the statement that if Ganondorf were left alone, he'd do something stupid and get caught. That is why Ganondorf is being executed in OoT. He did something outrageous. He did something outrageous because Link and Zelda let him be. The quote clearly says that is the reason he is being executed.

That is why it is a fact that Link and Zelda decided to leave Ganondorf alone. The quote clearly says it.

When Aonuma says, "It was decided..." he is referring to the writers. The writers decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be. Link and Zelda did not decide that.

Show me a version of the quote that says that they didn't want to leave Ganondorf alone. If they are out there, I would like to see them. I am not challenging you. It's just that I want to see every translation I can.

I'd like to know how you discovered that he was taking about the writers when he never even changed what he was talking about. He would've said "he writers decided" if that's what he was talking about.

Why is one interpretation better than the other?
His crest resignates in most cut scenes though because it is near another crest (either Wisdom or Power). The cut scenes are also inconsistent about this, though, because there are multiple times when Link is talking to Sheik, and the mark does not appear. So sometimes even mid-game cut scenes =/= end of game cut scene. That's what it would seem like.

Basically, the crest are present whenever the developers saw necessary. Sheik was saying that the person who possessed the crest of Wisdom was the 7th Sage. She was showing Link that she had the crest, so it was necessary for it to shine. Ganondorf mentioned that the crest were resignating when they were all three in the same area before the fight with Ganondorf, so it was necessary for them to shine. Ganondorf used the Triforce of Power to transform into Ganon, so it was necessary for it to shine. The developers wanted to show that Link still had the Triforce of Courage, even though he had traveled back in time, so it was necessary for it to shine.

We aren't told that the Triforce split until near the end of the game, by Sheik. For those expecting OoT to follow the Imprisoning War legend, it was somewhat of a twist. In order for the twist to work, it was necessary for the crest not to appear before the scene near the end of the game, whether Link was near Sheik or not.

You did not provide a good example because some cut scenes also follow the same rules as the crest does in-game (it isn't always present). How is the end of the game any less canon than in-game information? You are basically saying that certain parts of the in-game canon do not apply to the end of the game, but others do. That is really inconsistent.

Regardless, he had the ToC and it was there for a reason.

Why do you say that the Door of Time should be closed if in-game =/= end of game? That really confuses me.
Wait, wait. This is very confusing.

Apparently we have to interpretations of the same quote.

1. Link and Zelda decided that they should execute Ganondorf because they knew he would do something outrageous if they left him alone.

2. The writers decided that Link and Zelda will leave Ganondorf alone (to prevent him from getting the Triforce). Ganondorf does something outrageous, and he is executed.

I don't want to claim that my interpretation is better than yours because I personally have no idea what Aonuma meant.

Anyway, how would Hyrule go about arresting Ganondorf if he has the Triforce of Power. They couldn't succeed in stopping him from ruling Hyrule in the adult timeline. What difference would Link's presence make? Would Link's presence somehow "empower" them to be able to subdue Ganondorf? I doubt it.

Also, even if they could subdue him, that doesn't explain how the Sages don't know how Ganondorf got the ToP. You would think that, if Link were to tell Zelda about his adventure in the future, he wouldn't forget to leave out the fact that Ganondorf entered the Sacred Realm and got his hands on the ToP, which helped him to rule Hyrule in the first place.

What if I were to tell you the story about Hitlter's rise to power in Germany? I wouldn't leave out how important his book Mein Compf (spelled poorly by me?) to that process. If Link told Zelda about Ganondorf's rise to power, would it make sense for him to leave out that Ganondorf has the ToP?

Destiny doesn't always = Gods. The gods could choose to give the Triforce to whomever they please. Destiny doesn't need to be a part of it. No one necessarily needs to touch anything (that's what she said; I'm sorry, but I had to).
If Zelda is in Hyrule Castle despite the fact that is it a possible terrorist target, then it is possible that the Door of Time opened for Link magically, despite the spiritual stones still being where they're supposed to be.

So you can prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Door of Time didn't magically open just for Link?

Personally, I don't think that the DoT magically opened. I just think that it is a plothole. While we can make up reasons for why it could be open, we cannot canonically prove that it was open. I am aware that it hurts my theory.

It is also a plothole, though, that Zelda is in HC at the end of the game. While we can make up reasons for why Zelda is in HC at the end of the game if Link theoretically arrived after the Triforce split, we cannot canonically prove that she came back.

Also, while we can make up reasons for why Link can reach Zelda at the end of the game if he arrived post-Triforce split, we cannot cononically prove that he could get to her.

Basically, you are saying that your plotholes are justified but mine are not. I'm sorry, but that's not allowed. I'm telling... :pout:

Seriously, though, stop saying that your plotholes are okay but mine are not. It is hypocritical.
It is said that the Spiritual Stones and Ocarina of Time are the way to open the Door of Time. Where in OoT does it say that it is the only way? I can make stuff up, too.

We don't know if the door was opened or closed near the beginning of Link's adventure, either.

What you are suggesting is that the Hylians are stupid. They heighten security at HC during Link's childhood, but not soon after the 7 years of no Link begins, they reduce security? WTF? Does that seem rational to you?

The difference is that I have a rational reason to assume that the guards would remain at HC. I have a rational reason to assume that Zelda wouldn't be in HC after OoT. The only reason you are assuming that the guards leave and Zelda returns (again WTF?) is because it fits your theory. You are molding the facts around your theory, when in reality, it should work the other way around. You should look at the evidence with an unbiased opinion (as I have), and mold a theory around those facts and rational ideas.

On the flip side, you have a rational reason to assume that the Door of Time would be closed before Link opened it. OoT says that the Spiritual Stones and OoT open the door (despite the fact that TP Link opens it by howling and solving a puzzle, proving that the OoT and SS are not the only way to do so). I made no attempt to rationalize why the door was open. I accepted it as a plothole, instead of going into denial.

Basically, what we are looking at here is plothole vs. plothole. Which theory has the least plotholes? That is most likely the correct theory.

Where does OoT say that Link was trying to get the Triforce? It simply says that he was trying to prevent Ganondorf from getting it (Zelda says that). Link's motives for pulling the Master Sword out of the pedistal were never really revealed.
Yes, I agree that we disagree (but I still want to debate).

My theory also account for the Triforce being split within the Zelda canon, so it is not just a plothole. I used canon information to explain how the Triforce split.

Specifics are needed in this debate, though. Rational thought still means something.

Rationally, without fan fiction, there is no reason for Zelda to return to HC. Rationally, there is no reason to assume that HC would let down its guard after being attacked, especially if Zelda does hypothetically return.

What you are saying is not consistent. Zelda returns, and the security at the castle decreases. There is definitely no canon explaination for that, let alone a rational one, without adding more fan fiction.
Right now, as I have said, it basically comes down to plothole vs. plothole. Which theory has the most plotholes? Let me define a plothole in this case. It is a snag in continuity that cannot be explained with the current canon and/or rational thought.

Pre-Adventure
1. Why is the Door of Time open when it seemingly shouldn't be?
2. Does OoT or MM time travel logic apply to OoT's ending?

Post-Triforce Split
1. Why does Zelda return to Hyrule Castle?
2. Why is security less than before at HC, especially if Zelda is present?
3. Why do the Sages in TP not know how Ganondorf got the Triforce of Power, if Link would have logically told Zelda that Ganondorf obtained it in the first place?
4. How would Link's presence make capturing Ganondorf successful, unlike the adult timeline?
5. Why would Ganondorf's men give up HC if it surrendered to them?

Thing is, you're looking at this in one way, but while you may believe one has more "plotholes" then the other what's also true is that one has more proof than the other. The only "proof" you give is that Zelda was at the castle. On the other hand, the DoT being open, the state of the Triforce, and Zelda telling Link to close the DoT and return the MS(making it acknowledged and thus less likely to be a plothole) says otherwise.

Yep. And by not having Zelda's shine they also chose to show that she did not have hers.

Stop. I'll admit you've definetly got a well thought out theory, but this is a very, very, very weak point. First of all, we don't even see her hand clearly, and secondly Link's isn't on his hamd when he first returns. Is this intended as a sign? Hell no. And neither is the Zelda thing.

.
As I have said, the Triforce of Courage is not a plothole. It is either divine intervention, as TP says, or it is OoT or MM time travel logic. There are canon explainations for it, so it is not a plothole. One of those two explainations are correct.

You say it's divine intervention and yet Ganondorf supposedly didn't have his Triforce yet. You say MM time travel logic works and yet you have no explanation as to why there's a Maste Sword in both timelines.

The Door of Time is a plothole. I have no disagreement there.

Zelda herself acknowledges it was open. If she were sending him back before it was opened why would she even mention it?



Really, I don't want to get into fanfiction but at the moment I'm thinking that, taking everything into account, the most likely thing is that Link searched for these Sages and that's what caused the change. Zelda was the one who informed him of them.

[LionHarted]

FDL, I get the feeling your quote tags are a little off.

[Vertiboy]

I highly doubt it's MM time travel, since Link doesn't revert in any way whatsoever when he time travels in MM.
I have never seen a case in OoT time travel when Link carries things from the future into the past.

What do you mean by "he doesn't revert"?
Heart containers obtained in adulthood can be used in the past. Nayru's Love can be obtained in adulthood and can be used in the past. The Golden Scale is obtained in adulthood and can be used in the past.

A. We are told that the Temple of Time was constructed to guard the entrance to the Sacred Realm, and that this entrance has been sealed by a stone wall called the Door of Time, and that you need three spiritual stones and the Ocarina of Time to open it. Since no one during the OoT era seems to ever gather all of these but Link, we can reasonably guess that the Door has remained closed throughout the entirety of the game, until opened by Link.

We are told that is a way to open the Door of Time. We are not told that it is the only way.
We know for a fact that it is not the only way. In TP, Link has to howl and solve a puzzle to open it.

Again, though, I understand that is not canon. It is just a plothole.

B. We see Zelda flee Hyrule Castle when Ganondorf attempts to steal the Ocarina of Time from her. We then travel to the future to find everything in ruins, and return to the past for brief stints to gather information and collect items. We do not see Princess Zelda during any of our jaunts to the past, nor can we access Hyrule Castle. Reasonably, we cannot assume anything beyond these facts; it is up to personal interpretation to fill in the seven years, as previously asserted. Again, Zelda fled, and security was stepped up at the castle because "a lot was happening" there. Seven years passed after that which we know next to nothing about. Anything could have happened during that time.

What is 100% rational is canon. What is irrational is not canon. Let me explain.

Let's say that I want to make the OoT/IW/ALttP connection work perfectly, as far as the state of the Triforce is concerned. How did Ganondorf get the rest of the Triforce. Here is how it probably did not happen:

Link and Zelda (from OoT) turned evil, tricked ths Sages into letting them into the Dark World, and gave Ganon the Triforce of Wisdom and Courage.

That is a possible explaination because we cannot prove nor disprove it, but it is irrational. Link and Zelda would not turn evil and give Ganon their Triforce. There are 0% of theories that explain the OoT/IW/ALttP connection that way because it is just so irrational, even if it is possible.

Rationally, security at HC would not decrease if Ganondorf and his men are still on the run. Rationally, Zelda would not return to HC since it is a dangerous place to be.

That is not canon in the sense that the game says it. Nobody says,"Security has loosened up around Hyrule Castle," or, "Zelda has returned to the dangerous castle." If that is what I have to have for something to be canon, then no, I cannot provide that, and I cannot prove you wrong. However, if we are in a time when rational assumptions mean nothing in a debate, then it is sad.

I'll have to respond more later, but I have to go.

[Duke Serkol]

And the OoT sages were perfectly capable of sealing Ganon, once their powers were restored.

Only after Ganon had a sacred blade stuck into his head. otherwise there would have been no need for a final battle.

[BourgeoisJerry]

What is 100% rational is canon. What is irrational is not canon. Let me explain.

Let's say that I want to make the OoT/IW/ALttP connection work perfectly, as far as the state of the Triforce is concerned. How did Ganondorf get the rest of the Triforce. Here is how it probably did not happen:

Link and Zelda (from OoT) turned evil, tricked ths Sages into letting them into the Dark World, and gave Ganon the Triforce of Wisdom and Courage.

That is a possible explaination because we cannot prove nor disprove it, but it is irrational. Link and Zelda would not turn evil and give Ganon their Triforce. There are 0% of theories that explain the OoT/IW/ALttP connection that way because it is just so irrational, even if it is possible.

Rationally, security at HC would not decrease if Ganondorf and his men are still on the run. Rationally, Zelda would not return to HC since it is a dangerous place to be.

That is not canon in the sense that the game says it. Nobody says,"Security has loosened up around Hyrule Castle," or, "Zelda has returned to the dangerous castle." If that is what I have to have for something to be canon, then no, I cannot provide that, and I cannot prove you wrong. However, if we are in a time when rational assumptions mean nothing in a debate, then it is sad.

I'll have to respond more later, but I have to go.

Rational explanations have been given, they just can't be proven. And who, besides you, says that the castle is dangerous at that point in time? Ganon took the people of Hyrule by surprise when he went after the Ocarina of Time (he was only concerned with the Ocarina, so him occupying the castle is an assumption,) security got stepped up in response and Ganon, from that point on, would not be trusted anywhere near the castle or Zelda. Now, you seem to believe the castle surrendered right away because Impa says it wasn't long before they did surrender, but I honestly don't believe he had the power at the time of that attack to seriously take Hyrule Castle. He caught them off guard and forced Zelda and Impa to flee, but I highly doubt he occupied the castle at that point. Now, let's examine Zelda's beliefs at this point in time:

1. Hyrule Castle, assuming it wasn't occupied by Ganon's forces (I assume Ganondorf would have attacked well before this point if his forces were actually strong enough to accomplish this goal,) is a very safe place at this point, especially from Ganondorf.
2. That kid from your dream, Link, has the Ocarina of time and probably has the Spiritual Stones. Pretty soon he's going to get to the Triforce, and there's absolutely no way Ganondorf is going to get his hands on it after that.
3. Impa, while competent, may not be able to protect you from Ganondorf as well as the entire army of your Kingdom if he somehow finds you.

Those, with the possible exception of 3, are facts in Zelda's mind at that point in time. You really can't deny any of those facts unless you seriously believe the Gerudo are powerful enough to occupy Hyrule Castle without need of the Triforce of Power, and of course they would rather leave the defense of this castle to its own brainwashed soldiers than defend it themselves (I guess Ganondorf was trying to pretend he'd been defeated? Kinda smart if there's any chance of Zelda returning to the castle, but Ganondorf seems a bit too proud to try it.)

As for security decreasing, we don't really know that Link had to sneak into the castle. He could have just told the guard his story, showed him that letter from Zelda and/or the Triforce of Courage, and asked to be let by. Sounds a bit convenient I know, but some of the most powerful people in Hyrule know of Link, and even the King has at least heard of Zelda's dreams (assuming Zelda didn't tell him of Link after she hypothetically returned.) I don't see it being too difficult for Link to get into the castle considering who he is and what he has.

Edited by BourgeoisJerry, 04 May 2007 - 08:40 PM.

[Chaltab]

What is 100% rational is canon. What is irrational is not canon. Let me explain.

Let's say that I want to make the OoT/IW/ALttP connection work perfectly, as far as the state of the Triforce is concerned. How did Ganondorf get the rest of the Triforce. Here is how it probably did not happen:

Link and Zelda (from OoT) turned evil, tricked ths Sages into letting them into the Dark World, and gave Ganon the Triforce of Wisdom and Courage.

That is a possible explaination because we cannot prove nor disprove it, but it is irrational. Link and Zelda would not turn evil and give Ganon their Triforce. There are 0% of theories that explain the OoT/IW/ALttP connection that way because it is just so irrational, even if it is possible.

Why is this even a point of contention?

Ganon got the Triforce back after it was made whole again in The Wind Waker. The circumstances aren't important. The fact that the Triforce was reunited in a direct sequel to Ocarina of Time makes the question of how exactly it happened a moot point, because it solves the obvious problem of him ending Ocarina with only the TOP and beginning ALTTP with the entire thing.

Edited by Chaltab, 04 May 2007 - 11:41 PM.

[Duke Serkol]

Not to be rude Chaltab, but I'm pretty sure no one here is disussing OoT's ending with the assumption that there is a single timeline, or even just that TP and TWW may take place in the same one

[MikePetersSucks]

Yea, it's pretty much impossible at this point.

[Vertiboy]

1. Hyrule Castle, assuming it wasn't occupied by Ganon's forces (I assume Ganondorf would have attacked well before this point if his forces were actually strong enough to accomplish this goal,) is a very safe place at this point, especially from Ganondorf.

Ganondorf could have been waiting to attack Hyrule Castle until Link gathers all of the Spiritual Stones, as well.
Also, this is false. She would assume that Ganondorf's men occupied the castle.

We Sheikah have served the
royalty of Hyrule from generation
to generation as attendants.
However...
On that day seven years ago,
Ganondorf suddenly attacked...
and Hyrule Castle surrendered
after a short time.
Ganondorf's target was one of
the keys to the Sacred Realm...the
hidden treasure of the Royal
Family...The Ocarina of Time!
My duty bound me to take Zelda
out of Ganondorf's reach.
When last I saw you, as we made
our escape from the castle, you
were just a lad...
Now I see that you have become
a fine hero...

http://dictionary.re...wse/surrendered

Hyrule Castle surrendered to Ganondorf's men. That is the quote from the game. It is 100% canon and truth. When Ganondorf attacked, the castle gave up. It is only rational that Ganondorf's men would stay behind. If they gave control of the castle back to the Hylian Royal Family, then they would be more likely to attack Ganondorf later on.

If you deny that Hyrule Castle surrendered, then you are denying a direct quote from the game[/i]. With that being said, Zelda was assuming that Hyrule Castle was occupied by Ganondorf's forces.

2. That kid from your dream, Link, has the Ocarina of time and probably has the Spiritual Stones. Pretty soon he's going to get to the Triforce, and there's absolutely no way Ganondorf is going to get his hands on it after that.

Again, I ask, where is everyone getting that Zelda wanted Link to get the Triforce? I remember hearing Zelda say that she wanted to stop Ganondorf from getting it, but I don't remember her [b]ever saying that she wanted Link to take the Triforce. Please provide a quote.

Those, with the possible exception of 3, are facts in Zelda's mind at that point in time. You really can't deny any of those facts unless you seriously believe the Gerudo are powerful enough to occupy Hyrule Castle without need of the Triforce of Power, and of course they would rather leave the defense of this castle to its own brainwashed soldiers than defend it themselves (I guess Ganondorf was trying to pretend he'd been defeated? Kinda smart if there's any chance of Zelda returning to the castle, but Ganondorf seems a bit too proud to try it.)

The part in ()s could be true. It could be similar to ALttP, where Agahnim didn't want anyone to know that he had taken control of the castle, so he left the brainwashed soldiers out to protect HC.

As for security decreasing, we don't really know that Link had to sneak into the castle. He could have just told the guard his story, showed him that letter from Zelda and/or the Triforce of Courage, and asked to be let by. Sounds a bit convenient I know, but some of the most powerful people in Hyrule know of Link, and even the King has at least heard of Zelda's dreams (assuming Zelda didn't tell him of Link after she hypothetically returned.) I don't see it being too difficult for Link to get into the castle considering who he is and what he has.

Possible.

Rational explanations have been given, they just can't be proven. And who, besides you, says that the castle is dangerous at that point in time? Ganon took the people of Hyrule by surprise when he went after the Ocarina of Time (he was only concerned with the Ocarina, so him occupying the castle is an assumption,) security got stepped up in response and Ganon, from that point on, would not be trusted anywhere near the castle or Zelda. Now, you seem to believe the castle surrendered right away because Impa says it wasn't long before they did surrender, but I honestly don't believe he had the power at the time of that attack to seriously take Hyrule Castle. He caught them off guard and forced Zelda and Impa to flee, but I highly doubt he occupied the castle at that point.

Common sense says that the castle was dangerous. It had been attacked once, and if the HRF gains control of it again (even though Impa says that HC surrendered, but w/e), wouldn't they be wary?

How long were airplanes out of the skies after 9/11? We were worried that attacks could possibly happen again within the next day. If enemy armies attacked the White House, do you think that Bush and his family would come right back the next day? No, they would not. I understand that these are real world examples, but it's not like people in the Zelda universe lack common sense just because said universe is fictional. If Ganondorf attacks Hyrule Castle, for whatever reason, common sense would tell the HRF, especially Zelda, that they should evacuate the area for a while. That is why it is completely rational to assume that the HRF would consider HC a dangerous area after the attack, and they would probably not return for a while. That of course, is assuming that the opposite of what Impa says is true, and that HC did not surrender. Of course, the only reason to assume that what Impa is saying is false is for the theory to work.

I would think that the HRF wouldn't know why Ganondorf attacked HC. I don't think that his armies battle cry was, "GIVE US THE OCARINA OF TIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMMMMMMMMMME!!!!!!!! RAAAAAAAWWWWRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!" That is why, rationally, the HRF would not return to HC for a while (if Ganondorf's men don't control it) after the attack. They did not know that they were safe for the time being. They may not have known Ganondorf's motives. Impa seems to be one step ahead of everyone else. She knew that Ganondorf was after the Triforce, so she knew that he was after the OoT. Zelda also knew. Beyond that, we don't know who else in HC knew.

[Raien]

If Ganondorf's access to the Sacred Realm was prevented by Link, then Zelda would have no reason to remain hidden forever. We assume that Link met Zelda straight after leaving the Temple of Time in OoT's ending, yet is it not impossible that he waited for Zelda's return before sneaking back in to see her? Since Ganondorf had revealed himself in his sneak attack, he wouldn't be able to attack like that again, hence his full-scale invasion on Hyrule in TP's back story.

This explanation covers all the plot-holes, doesn't it?

Edited by jhurvid, 05 May 2007 - 06:29 PM.