215 replies to this topic

[Person]

I have seen the community divided over whether TMC takes place before or after OoT. Most of the arguments I have seen against an early placement usually include such inane arguments as the "Hylian Royal Crest" argument or the "Land-walking Octoroks" theory. Most of the proponents of this theory can't answer an early placement, but the proponents of an early placement really don't any evidence besides the lack of evidence for a late placement. What do you guys think?

[Fyxe]

There is actually evidence for a late placement, namely the inclusion of the Oracle girls. I think there's a few other references to games that have to occur later in the series. It's been awhile since I played the game though, I'm meaning to replay it and collect everything at some point.

[Person]

The inclusion of the Oracles girls really doesn't prove anything. We don't know how long the Goddesses have been choosing humans as Oracles. It was actually an in-joke by the development team referencing "Oracles 3" that never was made. The inclusion of TWW Hylian has been used by some people as evidence for a late date, but that's inconclusive. There are actually traces of TWW Hylian in OoT, and Hylian is never a consistent alphabet. I think that TMC comes first because it provides an origin for the hat, Vaati, and the Four Sword, and doesn't ever mention the Triforce or Ganon, indicating that the Sacred Realm hasn't been opened yet. And I think that Arturo has brought up that the European versions explicitly state that this is the first in the series.

[Fyxe]

Well you changed your tune from your first post.

I'm not getting involved in this, because it'll just be Me Vs. Everyone Else again.

I'd like to see some actual evidence.

[Person]

No. On the first post, I was brining up the controversy, and in my second post, I was stating my position. As far as evidence for an early placement:

-Shows origins of the Four Sword. It is already legendary by the time of FS, so it must be ancient.
-Shows origins of rupees and hearts underneath pots and bushes
-Shows origins of Vaati, one of the series's main villains.
-Shows origins of Link's hat (This would be inconclusive if the Hero of Men had a hat, but he does not have one). The green tunic and hat are the defining marks of the legendary hero, and TMC is where they were first worn together. Before this, the hero only wore a green tunic.
-Does not mention Ganon or the Triforce, indicating that those events are long-gone or just haven't happened yet.
-Most of the main NPC's from OoT are in it, in their respective locations (I.E. Malon and Talon in Lon Lon Ranch)

That enough for you?

[Fyxe]

No. None of those things prove that it's first in the timeline.

They just don't.

Besides, I don't understand how the hat thing necessarily proves anything. Is it ever said that it's the first time a hero wore a hat like that? Besides, in OoT the only reason Link is wearing that outfit is because the Kokiri do.

[MikePetersSucks]

I have to take Fyxe's side here. There's really more evidence for TMC having a later placement, and this is coming from someone who originally had TMC as the first in his timeline.

[Showsni]

I don't think there's enough evidence to say much more than "It comes before FS and FSA." Which doesn't really tell us much.

-Shows origins of the Four Sword. It is already legendary by the time of FS, so it must be ancient.

So it comes a long time before FS. Doesn't tell us anything else.

-Shows origins of rupees and hearts underneath pots and bushes

And the Minish could have been coming to Hyrule for a long time before TMC. Doesn't tell us anything.

-Shows origins of Vaati, one of the series's main villains.

So it comes before FS and FSA.

-Shows origins of Link's hat (This would be inconclusive if the Hero of Men had a hat, but he does not have one). The green tunic and hat are the defining marks of the legendary hero, and TMC is where they were first worn together. Before this, the hero only wore a green tunic.

Shows the origin of this Link's hat. Doesn't affect any other Link at all.

-Does not mention Ganon or the Triforce, indicating that those events are long-gone or just haven't happened yet.

Or that they aren't important to TMC's plot. Which they aren't. The triforce has existed since the creation.

-Most of the main NPC's from OoT are in it, in their respective locations (I.E. Malon and Talon in Lon Lon Ranch)

Recycling characters is nothing new, and doesn't really tell us anything. Except maybe the developers are trying to cash in on other popular games.

[Arturo]

Is this enough evidence?

French:

C'est ainsi que prend fin la première aventure de Link. D'autres dangers pourraient menacer
Zelda et le royaume d'Hyrule à l'avenir. Mais Link sera toujours prêt à les défendre!

"This way ended Link's first adventure. Of other dangers that could threaten Zelda and the Kingdom of Hyrule in the future (?). But Link will always be ready to defend them"

German:

Hiermit endet das erste Abenteuer von Link. Doch was wird die Zukunft Link, Zelda und den Hylianern noch bringen?

"With this ends Link's first adventure. But what will the future bring Link, Zelda and the Hylians?"

Spanish:

Y así acabó la aventura de Link... Aunque... Hyrule siempre necesitará la presencia de Link y de Zelda...

"And so ended Link's adventure. Though Hyrule will always need the presence of Link and Zelda.

These three languages show clearly teh diea of TMC as the first Zelda story. I am not too sure about Italian... But 3 out of 5 is well enough. Until we have a literal Japanese translation.

AND READ MY ARTICLE

[Showsni]

And anyone arguing against you can just say: "this Link."

[Arturo]

*sings* Hyrule will ALWAYS need Link's presence.....

[Alastair]

*sings* Hyrule will ALWAYS need Link's presence.....

The problem is that the particular passage you have taken the above quote from,

"And so ended Link's adventure. Though Hyrule will always need the presence of Link and Zelda."

does not specify that this is Link's first adventure.



Not to mention the implication in the quotes that there is only one Link and Zelda throughout the games.

[Arturo]

It is an indication of reincarnation.

[Fyxe]

None of those quotes necessarily indicate anything.

It's odd how they're all wildly different as well.

JAPANESE TRANSLATION PLEASE. Kind of more important. Especially since the European version wasn't exactly perfect with the text anyway (the English text underwent a few alterations before the US release).

[Hero of Legend]

JAPANESE TRANSLATION PLEASE. Kind of more important. Especially since the European version wasn't exactly perfect with the text anyway (the English text underwent a few alterations before the US release).

Yeah, but were they for the better? Not that I'm aware of. It's just minor details that don't affect anything.

Edited by Hero of Legend, 18 July 2007 - 06:25 PM.

[Fyxe]

They were, mostly they were corrections to the trophy gallery.

[Hero of Legend]

Ah, you mean stuff like the Fire Rod and the butter? Yeah, I guess so, but it's not really a better translation since it apparently was that way in the original Japanese version. More like better localization.

I still like 'power of light' better than 'mystic aura', and I don't like Ezlo's choice of words at the end (though I don't remember his exact lines in the American version).

[Vertiboy]

There is evidence in TMC that suggest both a pre- and post-OoT placement. The strength of the evidence has been debated on this board. There has also been a debate about which evidence "counts" and which evidence does not.

Personally, I place TMC first. It doesn't hurt anything. Here is one of the ways that I see it. Let's say for a second that before developing TMC, Capcom said, "Hey, let's make a game that takes place first in the timeline, even before OoT. We should make it a Four Swords game. Since it is a FS game, let's not make references to the Triforce saga. How do we place a game first without referencing the Triforce, Ganon, the Master Sword, etc.?"

I believe that subtle references were placed into the game. Yes, there are multiple Links, so TMC may just be the first time that the game's particular Link got a green hat, but I believe that it is more symbolic evidence. I interpret it as almost a nod to the player that it is the start of the green hat tradition. I'm not going to have the same debate again that I had on the thread that I started, but I think that the Minish placing items around Hyrule could be evidence that TMC is first. That is all in how I interpret it, though. The first canon time that is mentioned that the Minish came to Hyrule is TMC's backstory. I like to say that they came before that simply because no game mentions it, even though TMC never says that it's backstory is the first time that the Minish came. I see no need to add unneccesary events to the timeline in order to debunk a theory. The problem is, however, some people disagree. Some people insist that the Minish definitely came before TMC's backstory, especially since TMC doesn't say that the Minish first came during their backstory. That is their choice.

Ranting aside, I don't think that the evidence placed in TMC to suggest that it is first is strong and blunt evidence, and that is what most people want. They are looking for a connection that is as strong as the OoT/MM or TWW/PH connection, when in reality, the evidence isn't always going to be that strong.

That is why there is such a divide on TMC's placement. None of the evidence in the game is strong enough to shout, "Hey!!! This game takes place before/after OoT!!!" All you can do is take the evidence for both sides presented, as I have, and come to your own conclusion.

[LionHarted]

Sounds like more of the same "legend has it that whenever evil has appeared, a hero named Link has risen to defeat it" fluffy language being tossed around.

Of course, the way these texts present it, it seems like the idea is to have these incarnations of Link and Zelda encounter more evils. Not that any of the texts are remotely synonymous anyway.

[Vertiboy]

Sounds like more of the same "legend has it that whenever evil has appeared, a hero named Link has risen to defeat it" fluffy language being tossed around.

Of course, the way these texts present it, it seems like the idea is to have these incarnations of Link and Zelda encounter more evils. Not that any of the texts are remotely synonymous anyway.

Perhaps it means TMC Link and Zelda, or perhaps it means all Links and Zeldas. Again, it may be more symbolic evidence that is a nod to the audience than factual evidence within the Zelda universe.

[Person]

The hat is significant because the Hero of Men does not have one. TMC Link is not the first Link, but he's the first Link to wear the garb of the hero. And since such a big freaking deal is made about the garb of the hero in TP and TWW, I think that that's pretty significant.

[Fyxe]

but he's the first Link to wear the garb of the hero.

Prove it.

And since such a big freaking deal is made about the garb of the hero in TP and TWW, I think that that's pretty significant.

Ever noticed that TP and TWW are both sequels to OoT. The reason they're making a big deal of it is because it's the garb of the hero from OoT, who himself only wore the outfit because he was a Kokiri.

[Vertiboy]

I am going to be a complete nerd for a second in more than just Zelda. On Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones, a young Obi-Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker are chasing after a bounty hunter through Coruscant, a city-planet that has buildings that are literally hundreds of stories high. After a fierce chase, Obi-Wan and Anakin are walking along the streets, and Obi-Wan says to Anakin something along the lines of, "Why do I have the feeling that you will be the death of me?" To anyone who knows about the Star Wars movies, in Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope, Anakin, now Darth Vader, duels with a now elderly Obi-Wan, and Anakin kills Obi-Wan.

The writer of Episode II knew this. It was ironic that Obi-Wan says that Anakin would be the death of him because he really would be the death of him. It is a reference that breaks the fourth wall in a way. It jumps out at the viewer and says, "Hey, rember this from Episode IV? We just referenced it. Aren't we clever?" Within the Star Wars universe, however, Obi-Wan's quote was just ordinary. He was just observing the fact that his time with Anakin has been rough. He wasn't thinking, "I know the future. He will kill me. Let me slip in a clever reference to the future."

The same could be said about the green hat and the last statement of the game. Within the Zelda universe, they hold no significance. There are multiple Links. It could just be the first time that this particular Link got the hat. It could just be the start of the adventures of that particular Link. The point is, though, that it may be a reference to the player. It may be saying, "Hey, you know how Link has always worn that green hat? Well, this is like a symbolic start of that tradition. You know how every Link has an adventure. This is like a symbolic start of those adventures." That is how I interpret it. Others may disagree. Those are the kind of people who want strong evidence within the Zelda universe. That is their choice.

[CID Farwin]

I am going to be a complete nerd for a second in more than just Zelda. On Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones, a young Obi-Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker are chasing after a bounty hunter through Coruscant, a city-planet that has buildings that are literally hundreds of stories high. After a fierce chase, Obi-Wan and Anakin are walking along the streets, and Obi-Wan says to Anakin something along the lines of, "Why do I have the feeling that you will be the death of me?" To anyone who knows about the Star Wars movies, in Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope, Anakin, now Darth Vader, duels with a now elderly Obi-Wan, and Anakin kills Obi-Wan.

The writer of Episode II knew this. It was ironic that Obi-Wan says that Anakin would be the death of him because he really would be the death of him. It is a reference that breaks the fourth wall in a way. It jumps out at the viewer and says, "Hey, rember this from Episode IV? We just referenced it. Aren't we clever?" Within the Star Wars universe, however, Obi-Wan's quote was just ordinary. He was just observing the fact that his time with Anakin has been rough. He wasn't thinking, "I know the future. He will kill me. Let me slip in a clever reference to the future."

The same could be said about the green hat and the last statement of the game. Within the Zelda universe, they hold no significance. There are multiple Links. It could just be the first time that this particular Link got the hat. It could just be the start of the adventures of that particular Link. The point is, though, that it may be a reference to the player. It may be saying, "Hey, you know how Link has always worn that green hat? Well, this is like a symbolic start of that tradition. You know how every Link has an adventure. This is like a symbolic start of those adventures." That is how I interpret it. Others may disagree. Those are the kind of people who want strong evidence within the Zelda universe. That is their choice.

This sort of thing is rampant in TP. The triforce crest is one triangle AND three, The Hylian Shield doesn't have a fourth triangle, the legendary fisherman, the Triforce statues in Hyrule Castle's courtyard, etc. etc. etc.

Back on topic: I haven't played all of TMC, I'll admit. But from what I have played(through the first dungeon) a few things stood out to me that made me think it was first:
-the lack of Triforce/Ganon/master Sword or mention of such.
-the peaceful state of Hyrule
-the 'feel' of the game was that of a young, early Hyrule.(that hadn't been ravaged by evil)
among many other things. But those were the main ones.

Edited by CID Farwin, 19 July 2007 - 05:39 PM.

[Jumbie]

The same could be said about the green hat and the last statement of the game. Within the Zelda universe, they hold no significance. There are multiple Links. It could just be the first time that this particular Link got the hat. It could just be the start of the adventures of that particular Link. The point is, though, that it may be a reference to the player. It may be saying, "Hey, you know how Link has always worn that green hat? Well, this is like a symbolic start of that tradition. You know how every Link has an adventure. This is like a symbolic start of those adventures." That is how I interpret it. Others may disagree. Those are the kind of people who want strong evidence within the Zelda universe. That is their choice.

Absolutely!! Ingenious explanation, I'm sure that's the way we all should've understood this from the start. Sadly, those literalists who always seek to disprove everything that isn't stated black on white, can't seem to pick up such developer hints.

[CID Farwin]

The same could be said about the green hat and the last statement of the game. Within the Zelda universe, they hold no significance. There are multiple Links. It could just be the first time that this particular Link got the hat. It could just be the start of the adventures of that particular Link. The point is, though, that it may be a reference to the player. It may be saying, "Hey, you know how Link has always worn that green hat? Well, this is like a symbolic start of that tradition. You know how every Link has an adventure. This is like a symbolic start of those adventures." That is how I interpret it. Others may disagree. Those are the kind of people who want strong evidence within the Zelda universe. That is their choice.

Absolutely!! Ingenious explanation, I'm sure that's the way we all should've understood this from the start. Sadly, those literalists who always seek to disprove everything that isn't stated black on white, can't seem to pick up such developer hints.

which is why almost nobody understood Twilight Princess. (i.e. Zant/Ganondorf dying)

[Person]

Well, I always interpreted the ending of TP being that the ToP left Ganon, and so he became mortal. Zant was over in hell, and brought Ganon over with the neck-crack. But the thing is, was it the neck-crack or the Master Sword that killed him?

But I must disagree about the hat. It's the biggest deal in TP and TWW.

[MikePetersSucks]

Yea, except Ganon's mortal with or without the ToP. I think the neck-crack was simply a breaking of connections between them. The sword in the gut obviously did him in.

[Fyxe]

The 'neck crack' was Zant 'dying' (technically he was already dead, mind you), due to Ganondorf dying. Zant needed Ganon to live, not the other way around. It pisses me off when people suggest that Zant was killing Ganon. Makes no sense whatsoever.

Edited by Fyxe, 21 July 2007 - 05:43 AM.

[MikePetersSucks]

Exactly, Fyxe. I always interpreted it as Zant dying along with Ganon. And while yea, it's really stupid when people say Zant killed Ganon, I think it'd be funny if it did turn out that Zant was pulling, as someone put it, an "IN YO' FAEC!"