91 replies to this topic

[LionHarted]

Because including ancient ruins in the sky during Twilight Princess is totally ignoring TMC.

Oocca could easily precede the Wind Tribe (they certainly precede OoT), or the Wind Tribe could be on another timeline. The Oocca are clearly not the Wind Tribe, however.

[Duke Serkol]

Wars - OOT - MM - TP - Wars - Imprisoning War - ALTTP

This is what I currently go with:

War involving the Twili ancestors coinciding with/and the invasion of monsters stopped by Hero of Men -
MC -
Civil War prior to OoT -
OoT (child part) -
MM -
Ganondorf's attack and banishment -
TP -
FSA -
ALttP

With the events told of in ALttP being a condensation of what transpired in OoT (including the adult part as MM states it is remembered) and FSA. The war(s) prior to Ganondorf finding the Triforce being of course those we are told about in OoT and TP.

However, I'm more than willing to consider the possibility that the latter two: the civil war prior to OoT and the one that led to the banishment of the Twili's ancestors, may be one and the same.
The only reason I divide them, is not because of what some say concerning their ends (it doesn't seem to me at all necessary that the fighting ended the moment the Light Spirits banished the Twili's ancestors. It could have continued until the Hylian king finally managed to get everyone to sign a treaty), it is because Lanayru seems to suggest that this war occurred very early in time, when people first lost their innocence (which they had since the creation of the world... with the greed for the Triforce being the proverbial fruit of knowledge).
Because of this, I think it fits better before (or coincidentally with) the backstory of MC (the monsters could have been used by the Twili ancestors, just like Ganondorf usually does... but that's justa crazy idea).

Also, I am not sure when to place the Oocca helping the Hylian and putting them as leading race in Hyrule within all this. Clearly, if we assume a pre-OoT placement of MC, this would have to be before that game... but in either case, how does the banishment of the Twili's ancestor relate to the Oocca? Did that war happen before they helped establish the Hylian kingdom? Or After?
Some speculate a connection between the Twili and the Sheikah (because TP confirms that the Sheikah dwindled in numbers after some wars) and the Sheikah do have a connection with the Oocca. Should that be of any indication? Or be dismissed entirely?

Well, I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts on these matters.

[LionHarted]

I unite the wars preceding OoT with the wars preceding the IW and the Twili wars. The latter two are fought for mostly the same purpose, with mostly the same background, and OoT shares the same background with the IW background. In both OoT and TP wars are said to have nearly extinguished the Sheikah, and both of these reference wars that would have occurred at relatively the same time period. These same wars may be related to the Majora tribe, although it's largely possible that that tribe is limited to Termina. I think it pointless to speculate them as being different, as nothing distinguishes them from one another, save the specific details given.

• Since ALttP uses the war to explain the background for the Imprisoning War, so it gives details relevant to the start of the Imprisoning War, but leaves out its conclusion.
• Since OoT uses the war to explain how Link came to the woods, it gives few details as to the war's cause, but tells us about its end.
• Since TP uses the war to explain the history of the Twili and Light Spirits, it gives no details beyond the war's cause and the role of these two groups.

Compile all these details together and you get a cohesive narrative of a single event. A war over the Triforce in which a dark tribe of magicians rose above their competitors and were sealed away by the Light Spirits for their use of forbidden magic which inevitably resulted in the unification of the kingdom under a single ruler, the near-extermination of the Sheikah, and the placement of the hero of the world in the hands of the Deku Tree. These could even be related to the backstory of TMC, although I don't really think that follows, since the existence of TMC before OoT would interrupt what should have been a period of greed and hatred. I also unite them with FSA, with TP expanding on the dark tribe legend.

Edited by LionHarted, 27 May 2008 - 02:46 PM.

[NM87]

I see a very simple explanation to this. In the beginning, the people heard of the Sacred Realm and began to quarrel over the location. A tribe of magic users becomes the dominant group, in which fighting them most of the Sheikahs are lost, until the Light Spirits seal them away. Before or after this, the invasion of monsters is halted by the Hero of Men. Soon after, the fighting dies down and the King unifies the country. This sounds like a bloody history of Hyrule to me.

MC-OOT-MM-Ganondorf's attack-TP all follow.

The back-story to ALTTP now takes place. Why?

"It is said that they passed on [stories of] their magic and prophecies to their descendants, who rooted themselves in all parts of the world. Hyrule, where many Hylian relics have been left, is an area very much tied to myth. One such example is an old saying about the Triforce. "The golden power lies somewhere descended from the heavens. He who claims it as his own shall have their desires granted by the gods." The people, seeking the Golden Power, began searching for the Sacred Realm. Many reports began to surface; lying beneath the relics of the desert, inside the graves of the race of people in the high mountains, but no one ever found it. Longing soon became greed, and it was not uncommon for blood to be spilt for certain information."

This whole paragraph, implies that by the time the events of ALTTP back-story takes place, the Hylian population was declining. It also mentions that the people began searching for the Golden Power because of the rumors and information that began surfacing again from the legends. This is what resulted in them fighting over the Triforce. This is inconsistent with any war prior to OOT because we know that the Hylian population was still intact, and that the people weren’t looking for it because of legends, it was because they were the ones making history at the time.

In conclusion, I believe that all of the wars mentioned in the games are one single war occurring before OOT, and the fighting mentioned in ALTTP is separate, which lead into the IW since during that time Ganondorf found the entrance. So in my theory there were on two periods of struggle.

Since ALttP uses the war to explain the background for the Imprisoning War, so it gives details relevant to the start of the Imprisoning War, but leaves out its conclusion.

I’m pretty sure it stated that it ended with the seal of Ganon.

Edited by NM87, 27 May 2008 - 03:41 PM.

[Jumbie]

Just like the hat doesn't have an origin in TMC? o:

It does, Ezlo created it. Symbolism.

So is it a coincidence that all heroes wear the same tunic that the Kokiri-raised Link happens to receive?

Call it coincidence or call it destiny. In reality it's Nintendo keeping true to Link's original character design.

OoT describes it as a one-size fits all tunic, actually.

Show me the quote.

Regardless of all, mistaking Link's clothes for those that a fairy wears is crazy.

Now you're just being crazy.

How so?

And how come you avoid addressing the other half of my points?

I rather them just separate the 3D games from the 2D games and call it a different legend.

Nah, I wouldn't go so far as to disconnect that timeline entirely from the other games (that is, from TMC and a quasi-OoT). I don't want to tear the games apart completely, the triple prong is fine with me.

Oocca could easily precede the Wind Tribe (they certainly precede OoT), or the Wind Tribe could be on another timeline.

Did you notice how the Wind People basically come off like predecessors of the Hylians, wielding advanced technology like their robots (Armos, Eyegores, Mazaal)? Their relationship with deceased King Gustaf supports it, especially as depicted in the TMC manga. All that heavily reminds me of the sky people in TP.

The Oocca are clearly not the Wind Tribe, however.

Directy they aren't, no. But the name Oocca isn't in the original game, it just talks about the sky people. "Sky people" may refer to the Oocca as well as to potential humans who used to live with them in ancient (TMC) times.
To associate the Oocca with the birds we see in the Wind People's house is not that big of a stretch then.

Well, I'd like to hear everyone's thoughts on these matters.

Let me do so by commenting on the other members' replies:

• Since ALttP uses the war to explain the background for the Imprisoning War, so it gives details relevant to the start of the Imprisoning War, but leaves out its conclusion.
• Since OoT uses the war to explain how Link came to the woods, it gives few details as to the war's cause, but tells us about its end.
• Since TP uses the war to explain the history of the Twili and Light Spirits, it gives no details beyond the war's cause and the role of these two groups.

That I call a perfect summary!^^

These could even be related to the backstory of TMC, although I don't really think that follows, since the existence of TMC before OoT would interrupt what should have been a period of greed and hatred. I also unite them with FSA, with TP expanding on the dark tribe legend.

However, I'm more than willing to consider the possibility that the latter two: the civil war prior to OoT and the one that led to the banishment of the Twili's ancestors, may be one and the same.
The only reason I divide them, is [...] because Lanayru seems to suggest that this war occurred very early in time, when people first lost their innocence (which they had since the creation of the world... with the greed for the Triforce being the proverbial fruit of knowledge).
Because of this, I think it fits better before (or coincidentally with) the backstory of MC (the monsters could have been used by the Twili ancestors, just like Ganondorf usually does... but that's justa crazy idea).

There's nothing in TMC (or before) that made the people lose their innocence. And likewise, the period of greed didn't begin until well after TMC.
A horde of ghosts haunting Hyrule is no problem, that wasn't the people's fault.
Vaati usurping Hyrule's throne for a short while isn't worthy to be mentioned by Lanayru either (not that it affects TP's plot anyway).
And very conveniently, the Triforce is not yet a topic of public interest throughout TMC (although its symbol is already used to represent Hyrule because the royal family possibly knows).

Given that, TMC fits perfectly as the first game before OoT, and well before the mages conflict happens. If you put that conflict before TMC, I think you do have to worry about Lanayru sounding like he gets the facts wrong.

In the beginning, the people heard of the Sacred Realm and began to quarrel over the location. A tribe of magic users becomes the dominant group, in which fighting them most of the Sheikahs are lost, until the Light Spirits seal them away. Before or after this, the invasion of monsters is halted by the Hero of Men. Soon after, the fighting dies down and the King unifies the country. This sounds like a bloody history of Hyrule to me.

MC-OOT-MM-Ganondorf's attack-TP all follow.

Hmm.. Leave the Hero of Men out of the mages conflict, and you're good to go. Your summary tries to combine what Serkol and Lex said, but how would you cram TMC so closely between the fierce war and OoT?

In conclusion, I believe that all of the wars mentioned in the games are one single war occurring before OOT, and the fighting mentioned in ALTTP is separate, which lead into the IW since during that time Ganondorf found the entrance. So in my theory there were on two periods of struggle.

That explanation is justified, and it works for you. I'll stick to uniting all three wars though because it also works.^^

Also, I am not sure when to place the Oocca helping the Hylian and putting them as leading race in Hyrule within all this. Clearly, if we assume a pre-OoT placement of MC, this would have to be before that game... but in either case, how does the banishment of the Twili's ancestor relate to the Oocca? Did that war happen before they helped establish the Hylian kingdom? Or After?

I solve this question based on my previous decision to put the mages war after TMC. So the Sky People weren't affected by the war, but the Hylian King may have tried to seek help from them, via the messengers to the skies. Maybe, if the Sky People really were closer to the Gods than the Hylians, couldn't it be that they appealed for some divine assistance in the stead of Hyrule's people, thus causing the Light Spirits to intervene in the war?

Some speculate a connection between the Twili and the Sheikah (because TP confirms that the Sheikah dwindled in numbers after some wars) and the Sheikah do have a connection with the Oocca. Should that be of any indication? Or be dismissed entirely?

It is implied by the charas in TP that the Sheikahs' disappearance triggered the loss of contact to the Sky People. But it makes no real difference whether that was due to the Sheikah dying in the fight with the mages, or due to the Sheikah being banished because they actually were the mages.

This topic is great, because for a long time I've wanted to post a really lengthy translation of *everything* that Impal says in TP. I think there are one or two things of interest in there, so check it out when I soon post it over in the translation thread (and to debate it, return here).

[NM87]

Nah, I wouldn't go so far as to disconnect that timeline entirely from the other games (that is, from TMC and a quasi-OoT). I don't want to tear the games apart completely, the triple prong is fine with me.

I understand why you wouldn’t want them separated, since we all want it to be one big timeline. I just think that if we were going to create a side-story/Gaiden, I would just make them two different tales. Although, your explanation of the tri-timeline does just that in a more efficient way and still has the games united in a timeline. Think Megaman Legends series (one of the greatest and best Megaman series IMO).

Hmm.. Leave the Hero of Men out of the mages conflict, and you're good to go.

In my theory it happens after or before, not at the same time, so yeah.

Your summary tries to combine what Serkol and Lex said, but how would you cram TMC so closely between the fierce war and OoT?

Exactly, I think they make the most sense combined, and MC is set to happen at any time since it has no bearing on the Triforce/Ganon story.

That explanation is justified, and it works for you. I'll stick to uniting all three wars though because it also works.^^

That’s good, plus your theory clears all of this up pretty swiftly. You had explained it to me before remember.

[Arturo]

As the only person who has played Tingle here, as far as I know, I must say that Tingle is completely irrelevant to the timeline. It explains nothing about Tingle or about Hyrule. It's just a spinoff based on a Zelda character. There's clearly no canonic intent, moreover, all the Zelda references are just little easter eggs, which ahev nothing to do with timeline.

[LionHarted]

It does, Ezlo created it. Symbolism.

Ezlo was the hat, prior.

He attains this status by latching on to Link's head after following him in the forest.

How, pray tell, is this supposed to happen if Link is already wearing an identical cap?

In reality it's Nintendo keeping true to Link's original character design.

It's just as much a reality that Nintendo is simply playing tribute to Link's hat.

Show me the quote.

How bizarre. It doesn't appear in the text-dumps, and yet I'm not the only one who remembers that quote. I got the game in '98, and never looked up Zelda on the Internet until 2003, so I'm certain I didn't get it from the Internet.

So where is it? Guess I have to find it. >_<

How so?

And how come you avoid addressing the other half of my points?

Because if you're going to completely ignore my evidence, what's the point of arguing?

Did you notice how the Wind People basically come off like predecessors of the Hylians, wielding advanced technology like their robots (Armos, Eyegores, Mazaal)?

I actually link them closer to TWW, personally, with TP being their parallels on the other timeline.

To associate the Oocca with the birds we see in the Wind People's house is not that big of a stretch then.

Potentially not, true.

Given that, TMC fits perfectly as the first game before OoT, and well before the mages conflict happens. If you put that conflict before TMC, I think you do have to worry about Lanayru sounding like he gets the facts wrong.

Well, I have to worry about that if TMC is before OoT in any case, because the existence of the monsters interrupts what should have otherwise been peace (before the mages came).

It's just a spinoff based on a Zelda character.

We must remember that this is also true of the Capcom games.

[Chaltab]

Because including ancient ruins in the sky during Twilight Princess is totally ignoring TMC.

Oocca could easily precede the Wind Tribe (they certainly precede OoT), or the Wind Tribe could be on another timeline. The Oocca are clearly not the Wind Tribe, however.

Of course not, I'm not suggesting they are. But it also stands to reason that the little people did not build the vast floating temple they inhabit. I'm suggesting that they moved in after the Wind Tribe cleared out.

[Hero of Legend]

We must remember that this is also true of the Capcom games.

That's just bullshit and you know it.

Of course, we all know you don't really care about intent (like Chaltab or Showsni or something - but at least they're honest about it), so what difference does it make?

Edited by Hero of Legend, 28 May 2008 - 01:01 PM.

[LionHarted]

That's just bullshit and you know it.

Capcom themselves said that they had no intention of connecting the Four Sword games to Ganon.

[Hero of Legend]

Capcom themselves said that they had no intention of connecting the Four Sword games to Ganon.

Show me the interview. Then I'll tell you what it means.

Edited by Hero of Legend, 28 May 2008 - 01:02 PM.

[Duke Serkol]

There's nothing in TMC (or before) that made the people lose their innocence. And likewise, the period of greed didn't begin until well after TMC.

When looking at it that way, I suppose you have a point there.
See, what I had in mind when I said innocence, was not just a lack of civil wars previosu to MC... I meant an actual eden-like condition. With people not even knowing what a "sword" or "weapon" would be (which clearly is not the case in MC since there are armed soldiers). But I guess I may have been reading too much into Lanayru's statement.

And very conveniently, the Triforce is not yet a topic of public interest throughout TMC (although its symbol is already used to represent Hyrule because the royal family possibly knows).

Admittedly, we do not know how the nature of the Triforce was originally revealed to the people of Hyrule (before the fighting over the secret of its whereabouts begun) maybe through an Oracle? ...but regardless, OoT does make it clear that at least by the end of the fight, the Royal Family knows, yet has no intention to disturb the holy relic (well except silly Zelda who decided it was a good idea to open the Door of Time *lol*)

Maybe, if the Sky People really were closer to the Gods than the Hylians, couldn't it be that they appealed for some divine assistance in the stead of Hyrule's people, thus causing the Light Spirits to intervene in the war?

Uhm... if anything that would explain why the Goddesses intervened to stop them and not (later on) Ganondorf.

[Jumbie]

Ezlo was the hat, prior.

He attains this status by latching on to Link's head after following him in the forest.

Don't you see: Ezlo's hat form and the green hat he gives to Link in the end have nothing to do with each other, the latter is a souvenir to remind Link of their adventures, and as such, the symbolic start of the hat tradition in Zelda.

How bizarre. It doesn't appear in the text-dumps, and yet I'm not the only one who remembers that quote. I got the game in '98, and never looked up Zelda on the Internet until 2003, so I'm certain I didn't get it from the Internet.

So where is it? Guess I have to find it. >_<

The only moment when such a quote could appear would be when Link receives the Kokiri Tu...eh, wait a minute!
So, I can't imagine any purpose of such a quote, not to mention I don't remember it at all. What I do remember is that both the Goron and Zora Tunics only fit adults, and I doubt the green tunic Adult Link wears behaves differently.

Did you notice how the Wind People basically come off like predecessors of the Hylians, wielding advanced technology like their robots (Armos, Eyegores, Mazaal)?

I actually link them closer to TWW, personally, with TP being their parallels on the other timeline.

Do you make them yet another ancient tribe, alongside FSA's pyramid builders which you identify as the Cobbles?

Maybe, if the Sky People really were closer to the Gods than the Hylians, couldn't it be that they appealed for some divine assistance in the stead of Hyrule's people, thus causing the Light Spirits to intervene in the war?

Uhm... if anything that would explain why the Goddesses intervened to stop them and not (later on) Ganondorf.

True!^^ I didn't even think that far, I just found it a neat idea that the Hylians could have turned to the Sky People for assistance.

[LionHarted]

HoL: It was up on LandoftheLegend, but as we all know, that site was killed, by TSA, I believe.

Anyone know where the Capcom roundtable on TMC can be found? Impossible has cited it before. ("We created the world for The Minish Cap first...")

the latter is a souvenir to remind Link of their adventures, and as such, the symbolic start of the hat tradition in Zelda.

Actually, that rather doesn't follow at all.

The only moment when such a quote could appear would be when Link receives the Kokiri Tu...eh, wait a minute!

It's entirely possible it's not in the text dump, but in another official source. Of course, it's also possible it's in the player's guide.

In any case, all of my roommates recall reading it, so I know it must exist.

Do you make them yet another ancient tribe, alongside FSA's pyramid builders which you identify as the Cobbles?

Not necessarily. I don't speculate on much besides a connection between the two.

Edited by LionHarted, 28 May 2008 - 02:25 PM.

[Hero of Legend]

HoL: It was up on LandoftheLegend, but as we all know, that site was killed, by TSA, I believe.

Anyone know where the Capcom roundtable on TMC can be found? Impossible has cited it before. ("We created the world for The Minish Cap first...")

Well then, I can still tell you it doesn't mean what you want it to. Why not? Because 1) the developers spoke only of TMC (and their previous game) when they said it was not part of the main story-arc (with Ganon, the Triforce, etc – and they’re obviously not), and 2) by making FSA, Nintendo have not contradicted them, but instead shown that they endorse their work by tying the Four Sword sub-series into the main Zelda storyline. And again, it’s still the same guy making the story for the games, and he’s not likely to ignore his own vision.

[LionHarted]

And again, it’s still the same guy making the story for the games, and he’s not likely to ignore his own vision.

And who made the story for both TMC and FSA?

[Hero of Legend]

And again, it’s still the same guy making the story for the games, and he’s not likely to ignore his own vision.

And who made the story for both TMC and FSA?

Aonuma.

[LionHarted]

Aonuma.

Aonuma himself said he had no part in the FSA story. (In the very same interview in which he says FS is first, and in a separate interview where he praises the work of FSA's director for his work on the game.)

[Erimgard]

Aonuma.

Aonuma himself said he had no part in the FSA story. (In the very same interview in which he says FS is first, and in a separate interview where he praises the work of FSA's director for his work on the game.)

Aonuma: In an example with Four Swords Adventures, I was the producer.. I didn’t actually put the story for that game together... Mr. Miyamoto then came in and upended the tea table... we changed the story around quite a bit... storyline shouldn’t be something complicated that confuses the player... and the storyline changed all the way up until the very end

Looks like Shigeru had a pretty big say over the story.

[Jumbie]

HoL: It was up on LandoftheLegend, but as we all know, that site was killed, by TSA, I believe.

Anyone know where the Capcom roundtable on TMC can be found? Impossible has cited it before. ("We created the world for The Minish Cap first...")

No, LotL ultimately died because its webmaster neglected it. Anyway, here's the interview.

It's entirely possible it's not in the text dump, but in another official source. Of course, it's also possible it's in the player's guide.

In any case, all of my roommates recall reading it, so I know it must exist.

If it's not in the game, I cannot care. Not like there are any point to be proven here.

[LionHarted]

If it's not in the game, I cannot care. Not like there are any point to be proven here.

I just realized my roommate has a copy of Master Quest, so I'll scour it.

Ganon is the villain from the Triforce story. We thought the Four Sword story needed a different evil than Ganon, so we created Vaati.

Flagship gives the impression that Ganon was never supposed to come into the Four Sword story, at least not in their plans.

EAD takes the Four Sword games in a different direction, tying them in with this villain "from the Triforce story."

My thanks to Jumbie; I would never have known where to dig up that quote.

Edited by LionHarted, 29 May 2008 - 03:16 PM.

[Hero of Legend]

Aonuma himself said he had no part in the FSA story. (In the very same interview in which he says FS is first, and in a separate interview where he praises the work of FSA's director for his work on the game.)

So, Aonuma endorsed it. I never meant to say he worked on either game directly, just that he knew what was going on and did nothing to change it. It's obvious there was an exchange of ideas between the teams that made TMC and FSA (which were developed simultaneously), and I knew it had to have been approved by him and/or some other big shot that oversaw both projects.

And lookey here: "After the Capcom team presented the core idea and Nintendo agreed to it, we held progress meetings almost every month until completion."

Clearly, there was no lack of communication between Capcom and Nintendo, so your attempt to pass it off as a 'lesser', almost non-Nintendo game of some sort becomes quite pathetic, I must say.

Flagship gives the impression that Ganon was never supposed to come into the Four Sword story, at least not in their plans.

No, and this is where your argument fails. As we now see, thanks to Jumbie, Fujibayashi doesn't say they didn't want to involve Ganon: he said they wanted a new main villain for the Four Sword series. Do you deny that this is Vaati? And do you deny that FSA is the end of that series, and perfect opportunity to tie it into the overall story?

Of course you do, which makes me wonder why I’m having this conversation...

EAD takes the Four Sword games in a different direction, tying them in with this villain "from the Triforce story."

Even if that had been in conflict with Fujibayashi's intentions, what do you think it matters? Stories change all the time, within or without the original development team. It's not like it lessens their credibility, or changes the fact that I still maintain: that Fujibayashi will continue to make the stories that he wants. And since he’ll be the main man in charge of that in all future Zelda games, he will have an effect on the games we play.

Edited by Hero of Legend, 29 May 2008 - 04:02 PM.

[LionHarted]

So, Aonuma endorsed.

Irrelevant.

He can endorse and have no knowledge of it whatsoever (as seems to have been the case between the big M and Link's Awakening).

Such is often the case with producers.

It's obvious there was an exchange of ideas between the teams that made TMC and FSA, and I knew that had to have been approved by him and/or some other big shot that oversaw both projects.

More than likely Miyamoto, given his involvement.

As we see, thanks to Jumbie, Fujibayashi doesn't say they didn't want to involve Ganon: he said they wanted a new main villain for the Four Sword series.

He clearly references Ganon as being a villain of the "Triforce series," distinguishing their series from the Ganon games.

And do you deny that FSA is the end of that series, and perfect opportunity to tie it into the overall story?

I do not.

I do, however, posit that EAD was in charge of doing so, not Flagship.

[Hero of Legend]

I do, however, posit that EAD was in charge of doing so, not Flagship.

Irrelevant.

Your original claim was that Nintendo had disregarded Flagship intentions by contradicting the expressed intent of their director - that the Four Sword series was never intended to be anything but a spin-off (a far cry from the actual statement) - now you claim that they did so by simply developing the final game and assume that Flagship would have disproved of Ganon's inclusion, which is both fallacious as an argument and based on nothing but your personal opinion and speculation.

More than likely Miyamoto, given his involvement.

It doesn't matter who it was - the important part is that it was overseen by someone - but Miyamoto to our knowledge did nothing but upend the tea-table in the FSA project, which does not at all mean he was intimately involved in the project.

e clearly references Ganon as being a villain of the "Triforce series," distinguishing their series from the Ganon games.

Yes, because it is a sub-series. That does not mean it cannot include things like Ganon if it focuses on the things specific to that series – like FSA does.

[LionHarted]

Your original claim was that Nintendo had disregarded Flagship intentions by contradicting the expressed intent of their director - that the Four Sword series was never intended to be anything but a spin-off (a far cry from the actual statement) - now you claim that they did so by simply developing the final game and assume that Flagship would have disproved of Ganon's inclusion, which is both fallacious as an argument and based on nothing but your personal opinion and speculation.

Hardly.

I simply see what Capcom says about Ganon - that he is the villain of the "Triforce series," and that their series is separate with a separate villain - and I see what EAD has done with FSA - include Ganon - and I conclude that EAD connected the FS games to the main timeline in a way that Capcom did not themselves accomplish with the remainder of the FS games.

I then take EAD's connections as having priority over Capcom's.

It doesn't matter who it was - the important part is that it was overseen by someone - but Miyamoto to our knowledge did nothing but upend the tea-table in the FSA project, which does not at all mean he was intimately involved in the project.

Aonuma certainly paints Miyamoto as being more involved than he himself is.

[Hero of Legend]

Hardly.

I simply see what Capcom says about Ganon - that he is the villain of the "Triforce series," and that their series is separate with a separate villain - and I see what EAD has done with FSA - include Ganon - and I conclude that EAD connected the FS games to the main timeline in a way that Capcom did not themselves accomplish with the remainder of the FS games.

I then take EAD's connections as having priority over Capcom's.

Fluff.

You make a poor case, my friend, because that was not what you said at all. You said, and I quote: "Capcom's games are no different from Tingle's Rupee Land" and "EAD does not care about their intentions" - neither of which are true, nor are they what you apparently claim now, which is that EAD's intentions take priority over Capcoms and that they have expanded their story beyond the presupposed “original vision.” Of course, I again restate that Capcom and EAD were/are led by the same guy, so the practical effect on future games is negligible.

You also seem to ignore what I have said about the nature of a 'sub-series' and what Fujibayashi meant by his comment, which by the way pertains mostly to FS since that is where the story started and Vaati was created.

Aonuma certainly paints Miyamoto as being more involved than he himself is.

Yes, Aonuma even said Miyamoto was 'more involved with TP than any game since OoT' which I take to be at least partially a PR stunt. But what difference does it make? My original point was and still is that someone bridged the gap between the teams, and if that person was Miyamoto (which I doubt) or Aonuma or someone else does not matter much - he is certain to have been appointed by either Miyamoto or Aonuma though, which means this exchange was authorized - again, my original point.

Edited by Hero of Legend, 29 May 2008 - 05:40 PM.

[LionHarted]

You said, and I quote: "Capcom's games are no different from Tingle's Rupee Land" and "EAD does not care about their intentions" - neither of which are true, nor are they what you apparently claim now, which is that EAD's intentions take priority over Capcoms and that they have expanded their story beyond the presupposed “original vision.” Of course, I again restate that Capcom and EAD were/are led by the same guy, so the practical effect on future games is negligible.

I'd like to see these quotes, as I'm quite certain that I spell "Rupee Land" as "Rupeeland" when referring to the title of the Tingle game.

I do think that EAD has ignored Capcom's placement.

As for the practical effect on future games, I see a marriage of TMC and FSA in PH's depiction of Force Gems.

You also seem to ignore what I have said about the nature of a 'sub-series' and what Fujibayashi meant by his comment, which by the way pertains mostly to FS since that is where the story started and Vaati was created.

Completely true.

However, it also remains true that Fujibayashi distinguishes Ganon as the villain from the main series, which seems to suggest that Ganon was not meant to be a villain in his.

My original point was and still is that someone bridged the gap between the teams, and if that person was Miyamoto (which I doubt) or Aonuma or someone else does not matter much - he is certain to have been appointed by either Miyamoto or Aonuma though, which means this exchange was authorized - again, my original point.

Whether the rep's exchange was authorized does not mean that Aonuma is authorized to say anything in particular of truth about this game that he seemingly didn't participate in.

Edited by LionHarted, 29 May 2008 - 08:29 PM.

[CID Farwin]

Note: I don't really care about this current debate too much, so I'm just addressing this:

The only moment when such a quote could appear would be when Link receives the Kokiri Tu...eh, wait a minute!

It's entirely possible it's not in the text dump, but in another official source. Of course, it's also possible it's in the player's guide.

In any case, all of my roommates recall reading it, so I know it must exist.

For what it's worth, I remember that, too.

*whips out game*

There's not an equipment description. so it would have to be when he gets...

wait...

The Shop!

wait...

The only thing that makes sense is the instruction manual.

*checks ZL*

What the!??!??

...

I will not rest until I figure this out!

[Hero of Legend]

I'd like to see these quotes, as I'm quite certain that I spell "Rupee Land" as "Rupeeland" when referring to the title of the Tingle game.

I thought it obvious that I was citing from memory. The point still stands.

I do think that EAD has ignored Capcom's placement.

Placement? Are you sure Fujibayashi specified a placement? He said the golden light was old, but then everyone except you agree that TMC is first. That, by the way, is another reason why I don't care about your unfounded opinions.

As for the practical effect on future games, I see a marriage of TMC and FSA in PH's depiction of Force Gems.

Considering both were mainly gameplay mechanics, and completely in line with what TMC tells - the light force being represented by a triangle and all - I don't think Fujibayashi's intentions have been ignored here.

Completely true.

However, it also remains true that Fujibayashi distinguishes Ganon as the villain from the main series, which seems to suggest that Ganon was not meant to be a villain in his.

And he is not. It is only at the end of the FS series that Ganon is introduced to tie these games into the main fold - if anything, this would indicate the exact opposite of what you are saying. Funnily, that could be said about most things you say.

Whether the rep's exchange was authorized does not mean that Aonuma is authorized to say anything in particular of truth about this game that he seemingly didn't participate in.

I wasn't aware he had done so.