147 replies to this topic

[Person]

They can be true, but not canon. For example, the Bradygames guides for TP state that Ganondorf is between 40 and 50 years old when everybody knows that he's t least 200something years old by TP. Player's guides make stuff up all the time. Same with the VC descriptions which say that Ganon "broke out of the Dark World" in LoZ when the manual just says that he invaded Hyrule.

[SOHI06]

I was making a point. There seems to be so many, many,many little contradictions between individual games and game developers. If you read the "Try to Prove" topic you can see how I like to try a make wierd combonations for storyline out of all the evidence, even some that's contradictory. I love the zelda games, the storys and characters especially (even if there is no timeline and chronology is near impossible). Just have fun with it.

P.S. Who ever said that ALTTP was a prequel to LOZ and AOL, I'd like to know when that was said and who said it just for the sake of knowing.

[Showsni]

P.S. Who ever said that ALTTP was a prequel to LOZ and AOL, I'd like to know when that was said and who said it just for the sake of knowing.

It's on the back of the ALttP box.

[Person]

It may also be in the English title. You see, looking at it now, "A Link to the Past" just seems like a bad pun. The original Japanese title was "Triforce of the Gods," which makes more sense. However, NoA in the early 90's had a strict no religious references policy and so the title had to be changed. Since the game was supposed to be a prequel, the title "A Link to the Past" served as a proper replacement, since it provided a "link" between the NES era and the earlier Imprisoning War era.

[CID Farwin]

It's on the back of the ALttP box.

And, like I previously stated, I'm pretty sure it's in the OoT Player's Guide.

[Arturo]

It was said in the ALttP box, but it might have been said as well in the OoT Guide.

[Person]

Even though it was said in those sources, the guide is not canon.

Edited by Person, 24 July 2007 - 05:39 PM.

[Arturo]

But the box is.

[Fyxe]

The official guides often get a lot of things right, actually. They give canon names for enemies and people, but obviously you need to be subjective in the information you take from them.

[Person]

Yeah. The NES games come after ALttP because it says so on the box, not because it said so in the guide. I say the only print dosument we should use for canon evidence is the manual and/or world map.

[LionHarted]

But the box is.

But the creators contradict the box.

[Fyxe]

But the creators contradict the box.

Correction, a vague quote in an interview that is severely lacking in detail (seriously, have you read the interview? Paraphrased to hell, I believe) from someone who doesn't really pay much attention to the storyline contradicts the box. And manual. And game.

[LionHarted]

Correction, a vague quote in an interview that is severely lacking in detail (seriously, have you read the interview? Paraphrased to hell, I believe) from someone who doesn't really pay much attention to the storyline contradicts the box. And manual. And game.

1) You'd be hard-pressed to demonstrate that Miyamoto didn't pay much attention to storyline. All he said was that it was not his main concern; the gameplay was his main concern.

2) Miyamoto doesn't contradict the manual. The manual explains the origins of the Triforce and Ganon, and the Imprisoning War story. Putting LoZ after OoT post facto simply adds to the picture of stuff that happened before ALttP. The manual doesn't have to tell you everything.

3) The game's own storytelling is remarkably lacking.

[Showsni]

1) You'd be hard-pressed to demonstrate that Miyamoto didn't pay much attention to storyline.

Not really. A timeline that puts LA nearly anywhere shows you're not paying much attention, as it clearly follows ALttP; or at least AoL (at that stage). And Wind Waker first?

[LionHarted]

He didn't pay much attention to LA, maybe, and didn't even work on the story for TWW, maybe, but you can't argue that he didn't invest heavily in the other games that had come out by that time.

[MikePetersSucks]

But if he didn't even pay much attention to LA, how can we assume he's paid attention to anything?

[LionHarted]

But if he didn't even pay much attention to LA, how can we assume he's paid attention to anything?

I can say the same, in many cases, for Mr. Aonuma. (FS, FSA, TMC, PH?)

Of course, LA wasn't exactly a pivotal game in the franchise. It was the GameBoy extension of the series. How many GameBoy games has Miyamoto invested himself in?

Edited by LionHarted, 29 July 2007 - 08:13 AM.

[Fyxe]

1) You'd be hard-pressed to demonstrate that Miyamoto didn't pay much attention to storyline. All he said was that it was not his main concern; the gameplay was his main concern.

I wouldn't. There's been more than one occasion where he's outright stated things akin to 'I don't really invest in the plot too much'.

2) Miyamoto doesn't contradict the manual. The manual explains the origins of the Triforce and Ganon, and the Imprisoning War story. Putting LoZ after OoT post facto simply adds to the picture of stuff that happened before ALttP. The manual doesn't have to tell you everything.

The manual states that this game and the IW is where Ganon from TLoZ came from. At this point in the series, Ganon had no origin story whatsoever. ALttP provides an origin story. It's fucking logic, and you can deny it over and over by saying 'oh, it could be the Miyamoto order' but that doesn't make you right and you know it. Could is not acceptable. Technically, all the games could happen in ANY order you want if you were so inclined to glaze over the intention of the scriptwriters and directors.

3) The game's own storytelling is remarkably lacking.

Compared to the previous game and most games of the time, it was remarkably in-depth. And back in those days, manuals told the story details that the games themselves could not. NES games rarely if ever explained the story before the game began, and 16 bit games were new in that they were able to adequately summerise the story that the manual merely elaborated upon.

[LionHarted]

I wouldn't. There's been more than one occasion where he's outright stated things akin to 'I don't really invest in the plot too much'.

And I don't really invest in my schoolwork, but I still make top marks.

All this tells us is that it's not very important to him.

The manual states that this game and the IW is where Ganon from TLoZ came from.

The manual simply states that the IW is where Ganon came from.
Tacking ALttP onto that origin story, forcing it to predate LoZ, is a move made by fans (with the box text and the Miyamoto quote both providing equivalent and opposite 'proofs' for either placement).

Compared to the previous game and most games of the time, it was remarkably in-depth.

I'm comparing to the storytelling at the time of OoT (i.e., the time of the Miyamoto Order interview).

[SOAP]

1) You'd be hard-pressed to demonstrate that Miyamoto didn't pay much attention to storyline.

Not really. A timeline that puts LA nearly anywhere shows you're not paying much attention, as it clearly follows ALttP; or at least AoL (at that stage). And Wind Waker first?

Is it really that clear? The only clue we have to go on is that Ganon is dead, and similar art style to ALttP. How many times has Ganon died so far and simmilar art style isn't always enough to go on. Add that to fact that there was still no official stance as to whether there was one Link or multiple Links it really wouldn't have matter where LA was placed if all of them were the same Link as he could've virtually taken the quest at any time after he killed Ganon.

[Fyxe]

And I don't really invest in my schoolwork, but I still make top marks.

Have a fucking cookie.

Tacking ALttP onto that origin story, forcing it to predate LoZ, is a move made by fans (with the box text and the Miyamoto quote both providing equivalent and opposite 'proofs' for either placement).

False, it's a move made by the manual as well, the Japanese one at least.

I'm comparing to the storytelling at the time of OoT (i.e., the time of the Miyamoto Order interview).

Believe it or not, there's not much to choose between the storytelling of OoT and ALttP. The dialogue is on a very similar level. OoT could merely show more visually.

SOAP, at the time of release LA could only occur after Zelda II or ALttP. It doesn't follow well after Zelda II (because it implies that Link leaves on his quest shortly after killing Ganon, which didn't happen in Zelda II, and he had already went on a quest of enlightenment to get the ToC).

However, LA makes multiple references to ALttP, fulfilling the Hyrulean prophecy, the art style being identical (not proof in itself, but it makes it clearer to people who've played ALttP that it's intended to be the same hero), the appearance of Agahnim and Ganon within the final battle, and Marin looking like Zelda from ALttP. Plus it was released right afterwards and it's fairly obvious that it was intended as a sequel.

To place it elsewhere would be merely confusing and pointless.

Edited by Fyxe, 29 July 2007 - 12:14 PM.

[SOAP]

I couldn't have happened after LoZ? I think all he meant was that it could take place either after ALttP or AoL or maybe eeven LoZ without much bearing on the story. And like I said before, there was no official stance on whether there was one Link or many, so arguing from a single Link and considering he places LoZ before ALttP, it would make sense that LA would take place after the first time he slayed Ganon (according to the Miyamoto Order) but he leaves the option open for LA to remain after ALttP which was the popular consensus at the time. I don't think it's fair to dismiss Miyamoto's whole order just because he left that option up to us.

[Fyxe]

There was no official stance? I thought Link from ALttP was constantly referred to in press material as the ancestor of Link from TLoZ (oh, and on the box too), but maaaaybe that's just me.

As much as I love Miyamoto, he's just one man, and he likes to be vague about things. Sure, if you really wanted, you could use the Miyamoto order, but I doubt even he uses that order nowadays (not that I think he uses any order, I'm fairly sure he just thinks of each game individually) and it's pretty clear that the rest of the Zelda team had a preferred order that was a bit more rigid.

[Person]

Never mind that the IW has to happen right before ALttP. If we sandwich the NES games in between, we get too many plot holes to deal with. If they come after, then Ganon just got revived, and any IW plotholes disappear.

[LionHarted]

False, it's a move made by the manual as well, the Japanese one at least.

As far as I could tell, the manual exists to "set the stage for the 'legend of Zelda'". (the series)

And the box text simply tells us that this game tells the story of the ancestors of Link and Zelda battling against an evil wizard. If we were to take it one step further, it could simply be talking about the knights and sages, but no, it had to be referring to Link/Zelda from LoZ, even though at the time it seems the developers were going for a single-Link approach.

Edited by LionHarted, 29 July 2007 - 12:50 PM.

[Person]

The single-Link approach contradicts the manual for LoZ, which says that Link's not from Hyrule. In ALttP, he's lived with his uncle all his life.

[SOAP]

There was no official stance? I thought Link from ALttP was constantly referred to in press material as the ancestor of Link from TLoZ (oh, and on the box too), but maaaaybe that's just me.

As much as I love Miyamoto, he's just one man, and he likes to be vague about things. Sure, if you really wanted, you could use the Miyamoto order, but I doubt even he uses that order nowadays (not that I think he uses any order, I'm fairly sure he just thinks of each game individually) and it's pretty clear that the rest of the Zelda team had a preferred order that was a bit more rigid.

I don't go by the Miyamoto order nor do I believe he goes by that order anymore. I just don't think we should dismiss him completely. He probably had legitimate reasons for placing LoZ before ALttP, so what if he contradicts some box. Most gamers throw the damn things away as soon as they get the game.

Also, press material means squat compared to an official statement from the creators. When the Oracles games first came out it was advertised by under the headline "Everyone's favorite Hyrulean Hero is back for another adventure" or something to that effect when we all know that OoX is the first adventure of a an entirely new Link separate from the rest. They can say that the Link and Zelda from ALttP are ancestors of the Link and Zelda in LoZ all they want but nothing in-game nor anything from the creators themselves prove that that's the case. If, ALttP Zelda fell into a deep sleep and never woke up, then I'd be convinced but no.

But if you want to put your trust in a piece of cardboard, alright....

[Fyxe]

I just don't think we should dismiss him completely. He probably had legitimate reasons for placing LoZ before ALttP, so what if he contradicts some box. Most gamers throw the damn things away as soon as they get the game.

I'm not sure that most gamers throw the boxes away (seems foolish to me, because then you've got nowhere to put the games when you're done) but aside from that, I too don't think we should dismiss Miyamoto off-hand, and indeed he may have had some reasons, but from what I can tell he seems to be going against what the rest of the development team was thinking. And producer or not, one quote in an interview (which for all we know was mistranslated, wouldn't be the first time) doesn't rewrite what the rest of the team did.

When the Oracles games first came out it was advertised by under the headline "Everyone's favorite Hyrulean Hero is back for another adventure" or something to that effect when we all know that OoX is the first adventure of a an entirely new Link separate from the rest.

Link is Link is Link is Link. Yes, they're all different people (for the most part) but they're all still Link, everyone's favourite Hyrulean Hero.

But if you want to put your trust in a piece of cardboard, alright....

Don't pull that trick. Games are just microchips, interviews are just words, manuals are just paper.

I'm putting my trust in logic. It makes a hell of a lot more sense that the order went OoT, ALttP, LA, TLoZ and AoL. There are logical inconsistencies with the alternatives and inconsistencies with what the intentions of the development team seem to be. One interview with no more details than a throwaway order is not enough. At least with Aonuma's comments we get a bit more explaination on how things work.

Also, the Nintendo of Japan website STILL states that LA is a sequel to ALttP, quite explicitly.

[LionHarted]

LA DX's box said something to the effect of "the hero from Ocarina of Time".

And producer or not, one quote in an interview (which for all we know was mistranslated, wouldn't be the first time) doesn't rewrite what the rest of the team did.

The mistranslation argument is bunk; I can use it to invalidate almost any interview out there.

It makes a hell of a lot more sense that the order went OoT, ALttP, LA, TLoZ and AoL.

Actually, here's what made sense:

ALttP/LA - LoZ/AoL

OoT - ALttP never made any more (or less) sense than LoZ/AoL - ALttP. In fact, it makes even less sense, since the position of the Triforce, status of Ganon (inhuman), and TWW and TP render OoT - ALttP fairly impossible.

OoT - LoZ/AoL makes sense enough. Triforce still split in LoZ, Triforce of Courage hidden (basically the situation we see in TWW). The official site even decided to deduce that Ganon must have "broken out of the Dark World" prior to LoZ.

It's LoZ/AoL - ALttP that people can't wrap their minds around. It might have sounded ridiculous before, when putting things before ALttP was preposterous, but now I think it's pretty common knowledge that a ton of Triforce-and-Ganon-related shit happens between OoT and ALttP.

[SOAP]

I just don't think we should dismiss him completely. He probably had legitimate reasons for placing LoZ before ALttP, so what if he contradicts some box. Most gamers throw the damn things away as soon as they get the game.

I'm not sure that most gamers throw the boxes away (seems foolish to me, because then you've got nowhere to put the games when you're done) but aside from that, I too don't think we should dismiss Miyamoto off-hand, and indeed he may have had some reasons, but from what I can tell he seems to be going against what the rest of the development team was thinking. And producer or not, one quote in an interview (which for all we know was mistranslated, wouldn't be the first time) doesn't rewrite what the rest of the team did.

Um yes it does. How many times has the whole developement team worked towrads a certian direction whether it be storyline, gameplay, graphics or whatever, only for Miyamoto to come in and "Upend the teatable." The whole developement team might have their own ideas and Miyamoto may not have as much interest in a overall storyline as they do but at the end of the day Miyamoto has the final say.