506 replies to this topic

[Lexxi Aileron]

This is a fact: "Nintendo released a version of ALTTP in which Ganon was not overtly stated to have participated in the IW back story."
This is the context: The products of the IW back story (namely the Dark World and the Demon Tribe) were attributed to Ganon, thus cementing his participation in the IW back story. Even if the quote format has changed from one game to another, people judge the context of information by source. All storyline information is determined to be relevant to the source in which it appears; that is a constant which affects all forms of narrative media.

If Ganon was killed in TWW, the Dark World seen in ALttP need not be the same Evil Realm from OoT. Indeed, the Dark World in ALttP is created by the power of the Triforce, not the reflective power of the Sacred Realm as in OoT.

Ganon's creation of the Dark World is still relevant because it is this transformed world that transforms Link and threatens to engulf the Light World and that is indicative of Ganon's wish. The demon tribe is not necessarily relevant to the IW.

[Raien]

If Ganon was killed in TWW, the Dark World seen in ALttP need not be the same Evil Realm from OoT. Indeed, the Dark World in ALttP is created by the power of the Triforce, not the reflective power of the Sacred Realm as in OoT.

So you're saying that ALTTP features a different Dark World to OoT? Yep, that makes sense regardless of which timeline you put ALTTP in.

Ganon's creation of the Dark World is still relevant because it is this transformed world that transforms Link and threatens to engulf the Light World and that is indicative of Ganon's wish. The demon tribe is not necessarily relevant to the IW.

In ALTTP GBA, it is said that a portal opened from the Dark World and evil monsters poured out. Since the evil monsters are the Demon Tribe, this makes them relevant to the IW.

Edited by Raian, 12 September 2008 - 05:25 PM.

[CID Farwin]

We don't know precisely what the legend is. It may be the legend at the start of the game. It may be parts of it. That legend might have surfaced posthumously and is being told by a narrator. I don't know. I won't presume to know.

Yeah, right. "This is but one of the legends of which people speak"

So let me get this straight, Lex:

His name is Ganondorf.

He obtained the power of the gods, planned on transforming the world into a Makai of darkness, and was sealed by the power of the gods.

The emperor of the Makai in the ancient legend (that I just told you) is that Ganondorf. (that I mentioned two sentences ago.)

That's honestly how you read that quote?

Just after releasing a game that kills off the incarnation of Ganon that appears in the game made to represent the IW, ALttP's backstory, Nintendo releases a version of ALttP that removes all reference to Ganon's involvement in the IW backstory.

Tell you what, give GBA ALttP to someone who has either played limited Zelda or no Zelda, then ask them if they think that the bad stuff in the backstory is referencing the villain of the game or not. If they say no, then I'll believe you.

And believe in Santa again.

And the Easter Bunny.

And pigs will fly.

What you're suggesting (That Nintendo threw in-game consistency with its backstory out the window to favor a storyline connection [not to mention supported it with minute changes in its manual that most people wouldn't notice]) is in direct contradiction to their well established policy of throwing storyline connections out the window to favor a cohesive game. As Impossible will gladly tell you for the 5 billionth time.

Edited by CID Farwin, 12 September 2008 - 06:33 PM.

[Impossible]

Your single retcon contradicts the most recent version of ALttP which was released after TWW in Japan.

Japan's TWW release: 12/13/2002
Japan's ALttP GBA release: 3/14/2003

Um, this makes no sense. You know that ALttP GBA came out in 2002 in the US, right? You would count the first release of the game, not the Japanese one. Obviously it was later in Japan because TWW came out at almost the same time, but they were both made in 2002. ALttP/FS was already complete at about the same time as TWW was (probably sooner, since they had to translate FS and retranslate ALttP), and it's fair to assume they were placed in the timeline simultaneously.

Nothing about my retcon contradicts ALttP GBA. In fact, only you contradict it, because ALttP GBA directly contradicts OoT in several ways. My belief is that everything ALttP says is true, which is what Aonuma decided when he made TWW. The connection between OoT and ALttP was messy due to their differences on several things, and he didn't want these problems interfering with his new games. So he changed it with TWW.

The Deku Tree tells us that he plans to turn all the islands into one big island--this would include the islands of the Great Sea which are over the original land of Hyrule. That the people would name the land "Hyrule" in no way contradicts whether or not that land would or would not be Daphnes's "Hyrule."

However, there is zero evidence that people would name the land Hyrule. And while that alone wouldn't, ALttP most certainly does. ALttP shows a Hyrule which is very much the same as OoT's. And it carries with it things like the Triforce and the great power those like Ganon seek, which is why it had to be destroyed.

We don't know precisely what the legend is. It may be the legend at the start of the game. It may be parts of it. That legend might have surfaced posthumously and is being told by a narrator. I don't know. I won't presume to know.

No, the ending is in the present tense and says that this legend is present at that time. And it's also in Tetra's cabin. And referred to by the KoRL. Really, end of goddamn debate, the point of the intro legend is to give us the knowledge that is assumed by people in the game.

Why are all your theories based on what theoretically COULD be possible if you take everything out of context? Why can't you look at context and intent logically? The intro story is the legend the king is referring to. It's known on the Great Sea.

As for NPCs in TP, see: Auru, Zelda, Midna.

I already mentioned Auru and the others. But if you can claim that the kidnapped girls (who Ganondorf needed to check to identify as Zelda) and fish (who are in contact with the KoRL) have no idea who Ganon is, I can much more easily claim that a very small group of people who only ever have some vague sense of scattered bad events happening wouldn't know who Ganon is. They don't have any contact with him. Midna goes back to the Twilight Realm (and is not technically an NPC, given that we effectively control her). We don't know what Zelda does, but what she knows is not public knowledge. It might be for the best of Hyrule to not talk about Ganon.

The "two backstory" thing has been done at least three times:

1) TWW- sages' seal is referenced in the manual and immediate backstory; flood seal (unrelated to sages' seal) plays a direct role in the story
2) FSA- Vaati is referenced as Hyrule's threat; Ganon is later revealed to be behind everything (unrelated to Vaati's seal)
3) TP- Shadow Clan is referenced as the cause of the calamities; Ganon is later revealed to be behind everything (unrelated to Shadow Clan)

Why not ALttP?

This is so insanely different that I'm sure even you can see it. Changing who the villain is is NOT the same as implying that two backstories are the same, having them BE the same in the original version of the game, but then making them totally separate events in a port that does nothing but shorten the old manual story. Those games never talk about an event that is unrelated to the game in their backstory.

And much like the fucking back of the box, there is only ONE possible interpretation to any normal person who plays ALttP, and that is that the manual and the sages talk about the same events. Which we know was the intent. Those events that directly contradicted OoT, in 2002. Tell me, if only the manual specifically needs to refer to OoT, then WHY IS IT NOTHING LIKE OOT? If that was truly their intent to retcon it the way YOU claim, why the hell did they only do it the way I'M saying, and completely contradict your idea? And you're still basically arguing that Ganon entered the SR and took the Triforce twice, just in a far more ridiculous way with more contradictions and speculation.

Removed ending dialogue, yes. You rely on outdated creator intent rather than the most recent quotes.

What the fuck are you talking about? That's what YOU'RE doing. There are no recent quotes contradicting anything I've said, only your delusional idea of what constitutes a logical timeline. You're the one relying on intent that's 10 years old.

Everyone else just contests the Miyamoto quotes for their own personal interpretations.

They do it because they're outdated, often as soon as the game they were about came out, contradicted by newer events, and in one case, very unreliable and no longer supported by Nintendo.

Most of this discussion isn't even worth having anymore, I've made my points and as far as I'm concerned, they're still standing because you never respond to anything directly anyway.

And before I forget, here's your "Impossible's Timeline Analysis" Quote of the Day!

Even if you can show the possibility of there being a Hyrule after TWW, that’s just one step. In fact, all it means is that you’ve just conjured up a huge amount of speculation and basically nonexistent shreds of evidence... To create a situation after TWW that ALREADY exists after TP. Does that even mean anything? It’s still basically fan fiction. Showing the possibility that there’s a land or Hyrule after TWW doesn’t prove that the old games belong there. It actually proves nothing at all, it’s just a speculative attempt to bring the AOST anywhere near the COST in terms of possibility. If it were that simple, all I’d have to say is “Hyrule exists in perfect condition on the Child Timeline, and its world can be flawlessly linked from OoT to ALttP”, and my timeline would be a fact. In fact, that’s much better, because it’s a piece of proof, not a theory that I’m pretending is proof, something ALL AOSTers do. And prove me wrong if you can, but there’s really no evidence at all of Hyrule’s return, only alternate interpretations of the evidence AGAINST it returning, which were invented solely to keep that possibility alive. And those interpretations are just never the most likely, because they involve taking quotes out of context. They were interpretations devised solely to be used to force a timeline theory – they are not natural interpretations intended by the developers, and are not based on the context and plot of the game.

I had an awesomesauce one about retcons and Aonuma's changes to the timeline that isn't yet in the public version, but I think my post responding to wring a while back already summed that up really well.

[CID Farwin]

And it carries with it things like the Triforce and the great power those like Ganon seek, which is why it had to be destroyed.

On this I disagree, but the rest I more or less agree with.

one other thing:

Not that I'm taking Lex's side here, but I do think that minute changes (e.g. "wise men" to "sages") were made to the manual and game of ALttP GBA to make it more consistent with OoT; but on the whole they wanted a rerelease and not a remake. They'd have to drastically change things to make it 'consistent' with OoT.

The "two backstory" thing has been done at least three times:

1) TWW- sages' seal is referenced in the manual and immediate backstory; flood seal (unrelated to sages' seal) plays a direct role in the story
2) FSA- Vaati is referenced as Hyrule's threat; Ganon is later revealed to be behind everything (unrelated to Vaati's seal)
3) TP- Shadow Clan is referenced as the cause of the calamities; Ganon is later revealed to be behind everything (unrelated to Shadow Clan)

Why not ALttP?

Seriously? Seriously?

1) Sages seal referenced in TWW because Ganon broke free and caused the calamity resulting in the flood; tells you what happened since the last game (OoT).
2) Ganon really being behind everything doesn't have anything to do with Vaati's seal. NO HE JUST TRICKS YOU INTO BREAKING IT! *facepalm* It's called a plot twist. You might have heard of it;It's everywhere in literature.
3) Okay, seriously, what are you talking about? When were the Twili 'the cause of the calamities?' Unless you're talking about Zant, in which case Ganondorf being behind everything is completely related. Oh, and again: wow a plot twist.

[MikePetersSucks]

Wrong; it's been confirmed that Ganon was "revived" through a portal, just like in the English version. Ganondorf himself still muses that the seal was intact, but according to the Japanese version it never properly held him to begin with.

We're not talking about the time-freezing seal on Sunken Hyrule, I was commenting on the Seal on the Sacred Realm Ganondorf originally escaped on. Learn how to follow conversations.

Only the details that would be relevant to OoT's placement are left and only those that would contradict it after TWW's release are gone.

Even so, that doesn't mean the storyline is different. You're also the same guy who tried to argue that the Sleeping Zelda story didn't change even when they trimmed it down and seemed to imply it was the same Zelda as the one from AOL. Make up your god damned mind. You have to apply the same rules of discerning information to both scenarios.

He rediscovered the Sacred Realm and took the Triforce like the game itself indicates? And when he couldn't figure out how to get out, he tried to break the seal?

....So....okay.

Ganondorf finds the Sacred Realm. He takes the Triforce. Imprisoning War. ???????????????? Ganondorf finds the Triforce again somehow and gets LOST. LTTP tiem.

No, screw that.

[Lexxi Aileron]

We're not talking about the time-freezing seal on Sunken Hyrule, I was commenting on the Seal on the Sacred Realm Ganondorf originally escaped on. Learn how to follow conversations.

We're talking about the "seal of the gods" (the one in the translation thread) not the Hero of Time/sages' seal.

Only the details that would be relevant to OoT's placement are left and only those that would contradict it after TWW's release are gone.

The storyline itself isn't different; I'm not arguing that the events of the IW prologue magically changed.

I'm simply arguing that the events relevant to the player have changed; the creators no longer see fit to include Ganon's involvement in the IW in the prologue. I'm speculating as to why, of course, but all interpretation involves speculation.

You're also the same guy who tried to argue that the Sleeping Zelda story didn't change even when they trimmed it down and seemed to imply it was the same Zelda as the one from AOL.

The Sleeping Zelda story didn't change in Japanese for the GBA version.

Ganondorf finds the Sacred Realm. He takes the Triforce. Imprisoning War. ???????????????? Ganondorf finds the Triforce again somehow and gets LOST. LTTP tiem.

No, screw that.

Or, alternatively.

IW/OoT - TWW - other stuff - FSA - Ganondorf rediscovers the Sacred Realm - He takes the Triforce (which had to return to the Sacred Realm sometime after OoT in any theory) - He is unable to return to the world of Light (sages' seal) - He uses Agahnim - ALttP tiem

Seriously? Seriously?

1) Sages seal referenced in TWW because Ganon broke free and caused the calamity resulting in the flood; tells you what happened since the last game (OoT).
2) Ganon really being behind everything doesn't have anything to do with Vaati's seal. NO HE JUST TRICKS YOU INTO BREAKING IT! *facepalm* It's called a plot twist. You might have heard of it;It's everywhere in literature.
3) Okay, seriously, what are you talking about? When were the Twili 'the cause of the calamities?' Unless you're talking about Zant, in which case Ganondorf being behind everything is completely related. Oh, and again: wow a plot twist.

1) And, in ALttP, sages' seal referenced because Ganon is trying to break free
2) ALttP has a plot twist, too; you're too late to save Zelda and the sages' seal and you have to go into the Dark World and confront Ganon, who is behind everything
3) See above; Zant's role mirrors Agahnim's, the Twili's seal mirrors the IW

You know that ALttP GBA came out in 2002 in the US, right?

The Japanese version of the game is the authoritative one when disputes arise, no?

The connection between OoT and ALttP was messy due to their differences on several things, and he didn't want these problems interfering with his new games. So he changed it with TWW.

How many of these things don't involve Ganon (which, again, is the element I'm arguing as being in need of change)?

ALttP shows a Hyrule which is very much the same as OoT's.

Au contraire: OoT shows a Hyrule which is very much the same as ALttP's, but that was before the concept of a flood was developed. The only Child timeline absolute besides OoT shows a Hyrule which is very much different from ALttP's.

And much like the fucking back of the box, there is only ONE possible interpretation to any normal person who plays ALttP, and that is that the manual and the sages talk about the same events. Which we know was the intent.

Funny, I can argue the same about interpreting OoT as the IW. And OoT hasn't had a rerelease with changes to the presentation of the backstory.

The intent that OoT is the IW postdates the intent that the ALttP maidens describe the IW. OoT=IW is the more recent intent. I'm arguing that the intent has changed, much the same as you.

Difference is, you have no evidence of changes to OoT while I have evidence of changes to ALttP.

Tell me, if only the manual specifically needs to refer to OoT, then WHY IS IT NOTHING LIKE OOT?

It's exactly like OoT.

1) Goddesses create the world
2) People quarrel
3) Someone opens the Sacred Realm
4) Darkness flows from it
5) Sages are called
6) Knights bear attacks of evil monsters
7) Sages complete seal on Sacred Realm

That's what YOU'RE doing. There are no recent quotes contradicting anything I've said, only your delusional idea of what constitutes a logical timeline. You're the one relying on intent that's 10 years old.

The most recent quotes ARE 10 years old. Your IW intent is 17 years old, on the other hand.

So let me get this straight, Lex:

His name is Ganondorf.

He obtained the power of the gods, planned on transforming the world into a Makai of darkness, and was sealed by the power of the gods.

The emperor of the Makai in the ancient legend (that I just told you) is that Ganondorf. (that I mentioned two sentences ago.)

That's honestly how you read that quote?

No, I see what you're saying here; I'm just not seeing why the name of Ganondorf has to be known to Link.

Tell you what, give GBA ALttP to someone who has either played limited Zelda or no Zelda, then ask them if they think that the bad stuff in the backstory is referencing the villain of the game or not. If they say no, then I'll believe you.

The vast majority of people I know who played TP thought Ganondorf was the leader of the Shadow Clan.

Just an example of how first impressions can be misleading.

What you're suggesting (That Nintendo threw in-game consistency with its backstory out the window to favor a storyline connection [not to mention supported it with minute changes in its manual that most people wouldn't notice]) is in direct contradiction to their well established policy of throwing storyline connections out the window to favor a cohesive game. As Impossible will gladly tell you for the 5 billionth time.

The consistency still exists; Ganon still rediscovered the Sacred Realm, took the Triforce, and is trying to break the sages' seal to conquer the world of light. I don't see how that "throws in-game consistency out the window." All I'm saying is that the information that no longer appears in the GBA ALttP manual is not a part of the GBA ALttP story. It's actually not even a logical leap; it's acknowledgment of a simple fact. If Ganondorf is not a part of the GBA ALttP prologue, then there's no explicit reason to believe that his involvement in it in fact matters in ALttP. If OoT is supposed to be the IW, he can no longer be involved in it if storyline consistency is to be maintained. If OoT is not supposed to be the IW, then his non-appearance in the ALttP GBA prologue is meaningless.

I frankly don't see how coming to a conclusion based on changes in story text is such a heinous thing; coming to a conclusion based on the subjectively-predicted consequences of another story is apparently good and well even though it relies completely on the interpretation of the player.

Edited by Lexxi Aileron, 13 September 2008 - 04:25 AM.

[Impossible]

Ganondorf finds the Sacred Realm. He takes the Triforce. Imprisoning War. ???????????????? Ganondorf finds the Triforce again somehow and gets LOST. LTTP tiem.

Yeah, as I pointed out, what Lex wants isn't exactly superior to two IWs. And it's worse than one IW per timeline. He's still basically saying the whole Ganon entering the SR and getting the Triforce thing happens twice, only he's then taking the moral high ground and accusing us of saying that. Which we don't.

The Japanese version of the game is the authoritative one when disputes arise, no?

News flash: The Japanese version was made in 2002 and translated into English. And YOU don't seem to care for the authority of some translations, not if they don't suit you.

Au contraire: OoT shows a Hyrule which is very much the same as ALttP's, but that was before the concept of a flood was developed. The only Child timeline absolute besides OoT shows a Hyrule which is very much different from ALttP's.

Yes, except for the fact that we all know that TP geography is bullshit anyway. It's different for the sake of variety, not for any story reason, and you have absolutely NO evidence to say it really relates to the plot. And I seem to recall a certain place in TP called the Sacred Grove, which is EXACTLY THE SAME as a certain place in ALttP. How odd.

It's exactly like OoT.

*head explodes*

The entire basis of your argument is that Ganon isn't mentioned in the manual anymore. You know who featured REALLY prominently in OoT's story? And who is somehow totally absent from an account of its events? Oh yeah, that other guy also called Ganon. Weird how he doesn't play into this at all, considering the manual is telling a story that is exactly like OoT.

4) Darkness flows from it
5) Sages are called
6) Knights bear attacks of evil monsters
7) Sages complete seal on Sacred Realm

Psst, this didn't happen in OoT... And OoT had a seal on Ganon, not a seal on the Sacred Realm. There was no evil emerging from the SR in OoT, but according to ALttP, it was some kind of constant stream that they had the seal the SR to stop. In OoT, the evil was a person in Hyrule who conquered it for seven years, and was then sealed into the SR. And again, I wonder why Ganon wouldn't be referenced in such a direct account of OoT's story, if that was what Nintendo wanted us to interpret it as.

The most recent quotes ARE 10 years old. Your IW intent is 17 years old, on the other hand.

Nope, ALttP GBA and TWW were both released in 2002 and both indicate a new direction for creator intent, as well as a new CREATOR, from 2000 onwards, taking the timeline in a new direction. I'm not going to explain the reasons for this again, because as I've said, I already wrote a good enough post on the subject.

The consistency still exists; Ganon still rediscovered the Sacred Realm, took the Triforce, and is trying to break the sages' seal to conquer the world of light. I don't see how that "throws in-game consistency out the window."

You're right, having the backstory in the manual be completely unrelated to the backstory in the game has no impact on consistency.

Also, thank you CID, for your last two posts. I actually have some respect for you now, at least you're not accusing me of crap I don't do by omitting examples in order to suggest a nonexistant pattern (which is often the exact opposite of what I actually do) anymore.

[Raien]

The thing is, Ganon's absence from the prologue doesn't mean anything if it can still be established that he instigated the IW, which it can be because the Dark World and Demon Tribe were established as his creations. So if the story isn't changed by the prologue, then therefore, changes to the prologue do not indicate a timeline change.

[Hero of Legend]

There was no evil emerging from the SR in OoT, but according to ALttP, it was some kind of constant stream that they had the seal the SR to stop.

Not that I'm supporting Lex or anything, but as I recall, Aruru says Ganondorf's evil power is flowing forth from the Temples of Hyrule. Now, seeing how Ganondorf's power historically always flows from his Makai, and the fact that the Temples are portals to the SR, and also the fact that the individual Sages do seal this flow of power once they have awakened, thereby ridding Hyrule of the evil influence... Well, I know I recognize a reference when I see one, even if it is outdated.

Edited by Hero of Legend, 13 September 2008 - 06:35 AM.

[Lexxi Aileron]

Yeah, as I pointed out, what Lex wants isn't exactly superior to two IWs. And it's worse than one IW per timeline. He's still basically saying the whole Ganon entering the SR and getting the Triforce thing happens twice, only he's then taking the moral high ground and accusing us of saying that. Which we don't.

GANON ENTERING THE SR AND GETTING THE TRIFORCE DOES HAPPEN TWICE. OoT and ALttP can't be in the same series if that's not the case.

I just see no evidence or need for a situation in which there's a second war or a second seal.

News flash: The Japanese version was made in 2002 and translated into English. And YOU don't seem to care for the authority of some translations, not if they don't suit you.

I certainly do; just not for the "authority" (what?) of your interpretations.

Fancy that.

Yes, except for the fact that we all know that TP geography is bullshit anyway. It's different for the sake of variety, not for any story reason, and you have absolutely NO evidence to say it really relates to the plot. And I seem to recall a certain place in TP called the Sacred Grove, which is EXACTLY THE SAME as a certain place in ALttP. How odd.

Which is exactly the same as a certain place in OoS.

One or both probably appear for nostalgia.

The entire basis of your argument is that Ganon isn't mentioned in the manual anymore. You know who featured REALLY prominently in OoT's story? And who is somehow totally absent from an account of its events? Oh yeah, that other guy also called Ganon. Weird how he doesn't play into this at all, considering the manual is telling a story that is exactly like OoT.

Right; he was forgotten by TWW and/or FSA, like you yourself have been arguing. XD

4) Darkness flows from it
5) Sages are called
6) Knights bear attacks of evil monsters
7) Sages complete seal on Sacred Realm

Psst, this didn't happen in OoT... And OoT had a seal on Ganon, not a seal on the Sacred Realm. There was no evil emerging from the SR in OoT, but according to ALttP, it was some kind of constant stream that they had the seal the SR to stop. In OoT, the evil was a person in Hyrule who conquered it for seven years, and was then sealed into the SR. And again, I wonder why Ganon wouldn't be referenced in such a direct account of OoT's story, if that was what Nintendo wanted us to interpret it as.

4) "His evil power radiated from the temples of Hyrule, and in seven short years, it transformed Hyrule into a world of monsters."
5) "When evil rules all, an awakening voice from the Sacred Realm will call those destined to be Sages, who dwell in the five temples."
6) Hyrule Castle is completely destroyed and absolutely no soldier except for the Poe salesman appears in the Adult OoT.
7) "The six Sages will open the sealed door and lure Ganondorf back into the Sacred Realm. I will then seal the door to the Sacred Realm from this world. Thus, Ganondorf the Evil King will vanish from Hyrule." [...]"Ancient Creators of Hyrule! Now, open the sealed door and send the Evil Incarnation of Darkness into the void of the Evil Realm!!"

Clearly your knowledge of OoT's relationship to the Seal War is deeply flawed.

Nope, ALttP GBA and TWW were both released in 2002 and both indicate a new direction for creator intent, as well as a new CREATOR, from 2000 onwards, taking the timeline in a new direction. I'm not going to explain the reasons for this again, because as I've said, I already wrote a good enough post on the subject.

Yep;

1) The destruction of Ganon in TWW indicates that OoT has indeed been distanced from ALttP (although Miyamoto had already said this in 1998 even though no one listened); Ganon is later revived in FSA in a form and setting evocative of ALttP and sealed away by seven maidens evocative of those in ALttP;
2) The Great flood offers an ending to the time when "Hyrule was one kingdom" (referenced in the past tense in AoL);
3) TWW offers a king who has the Triforce, something ALttP was missing and something that allows for a timeline connection to LoZ/AoL
4) TWW makes the first storyline reference to the naming of princesses as Zelda (the first timeline reference to LoZ/AoL in the series);
5) TWW demonstrates Hylian descendants "spreading to all parts of the world" (they are spread across the islands in both TWW and PH);
6) TWW and PH are the only games to feature any locale(s) taken directly from AoL

You're right, having the backstory in the manual be completely unrelated to the backstory in the game has no impact on consistency.

It is related if the sages' seal being broken is the biggest threat on Hyrule. Of course, you refuse to even consider that this is its only effective purpose if you don't cling to the plot of 1991.

The thing is, Ganon's absence from the prologue doesn't mean anything if it can still be established that he instigated the IW, which it can be because the Dark World and Demon Tribe were established as his creations. So if the story isn't changed by the prologue, then therefore, changes to the prologue do not indicate a timeline change.

We know from outside games that Ganon was inevitably destroyed after the Sacred Realm was sealed, and later revived. The fact that he "rediscovered the Sacred Realm" and reinstated the Demon Tribe and Demon World need not necessarily be related to the IW, in this context.

For the same reason that TWW's description of events after OoT and TP's description of events before and after OoT can change our understanding of the OoT events, the events connected to OoT (the IW) can change our understanding of ALttP, no? I know you argue internal consistency, but we see all the time with respect to OoT examples of external sources infringing on that consistency.

Edited by Lexxi Aileron, 13 September 2008 - 10:47 AM.

[MikePetersSucks]

We're talking about the "seal of the gods" (the one in the translation thread) not the Hero of Time/sages' seal.

For the most part. And then I made a comment about how the Sage's Seal was broken and you went on like I meant the Seal of the Gods like a jackass.

The Sleeping Zelda story didn't change in Japanese for the GBA version.

Oh come now, it was trimmed down just like LTTP. Get over it.

IW/OoT - TWW - other stuff - FSA - Ganondorf rediscovers the Sacred Realm - He takes the Triforce (which had to return to the Sacred Realm sometime after OoT in any theory) - He is unable to return to the world of Light (sages' seal) - He uses Agahnim - ALttP tiem

Okay, so you think a reincarnation of Ganondorf got caught in a millenia-old seal just for the hell of it?

Yea, except we know now that TWW's backstory has that seal being broken. You lose.

The Japanese version of the game is the authoritative one when disputes arise, no?

There kind've NEEDS TO BE A DISPUTE FIRST LOL.

And just one crazy person going "NO MY VURSIN PLZ" isn't a dispute.

if you don't cling to the plot of 1991.

OW THE IRONY

[Showsni]

He uses Agahnim

Hold it! He uses Agahnim to break the seal on the SR? Yes. And Agahnim's method is to sacrifice the decendants of the sages who cast the seal. Now in your version of events, that's the Hylian maidens descended from Rauru, Saria, Ruto, et. al., whose bloodline has survived since the time of OoT, through the floods and resurrection of the land, through FSA, and still people are very clear on those ancient sages bloodline? Because they are clear. Everyone knows the maidens are the sages descendants, and so is Sahasralah and so on. But how have they kept the bloodlines so well despite TWW, when everyone forgot everything?

The Great flood offers an ending to the time when "Hyrule was one kingdom" (referenced in the past tense in AoL);

Hyrule was one kingdom during SZ time. For your statement to be true, then the Sleeping Zelda story is on one side of the flood and AoL is on the other, which means the ToC couldn't appear in TWW.

3) TWW offers a king who has the Triforce, something ALttP was missing and something that allows for a timeline connection to LoZ/AoL

Half of the triforce of wisdom is not the whole triforce.

4) TWW makes the first storyline reference to the naming of princesses as Zelda (the first timeline reference to LoZ/AoL in the series);

The ancestors of Link and Zelda face monsters on the march... Possibly paraphrasing slightly, but you should see what I'm getting at.

5) TWW demonstrates Hylian descendants "spreading to all parts of the world" (they are spread across the islands in both TWW and PH);

So? The Hylians have always been nomadic...

In TWW's backstory Ganondorf escapes the (OoT) sage's seal on the SR. Yet it's suddenly impregnable in ALttP?

[MikePetersSucks]

Hold it! He uses Agahnim to break the seal on the SR? Yes. And Agahnim's method is to sacrifice the decendants of the sages who cast the seal. Now in your version of events, that's the Hylian maidens descended from Rauru, Saria, Ruto, et. al., whose bloodline has survived since the time of OoT, through the floods and resurrection of the land, through FSA, and still people are very clear on those ancient sages bloodline? Because they are clear. Everyone knows the maidens are the sages descendants, and so is Sahasralah and so on. But how have they kept the bloodlines so well despite TWW, when everyone forgot everything?

OH SNAP

Hyrule was one kingdom during SZ time. For your statement to be true, then the Sleeping Zelda story is on one side of the flood and AoL is on the other, which means the ToC couldn't appear in TWW.

Uh oh, you opened a can of worms with that one.

[Raien]

For the same reason that TWW's description of events after OoT and TP's description of events before and after OoT can change our understanding of the OoT events, the events connected to OoT (the IW) can change our understanding of ALttP, no? I know you argue internal consistency, but we see all the time with respect to OoT examples of external sources infringing on that consistency.

Do we? TP and TWW provided surrounding context to the events in OoT, but neither of them actively changed the meaning of events in OoT. Unless you have any examples in mind?

I can understand why you argue that surrounding context can change certain events; we see it in more complicated timelines like Resident Evil and Metal Gear Solid. But on the other hand, do we ever see a myth or legend infringing upon the events of another myth/legend? If the purpose of these sorts of stories is to instil proper morals in the audience (or to emotionally appeal to the audience, as is the case with the Zelda series), then convoluting the story defeats that because it draws the audience's attention away from the message and into the "conspiracies". This on top of Miyamoto's reasoning that players should never be confused by timelines is a reason why I can't accept that the writers would have developed the events that your theory adheres to.

Edited by Raian, 13 September 2008 - 05:16 PM.

[Impossible]

GANON ENTERING THE SR AND GETTING THE TRIFORCE DOES HAPPEN TWICE.

But your claim is clearly that he does; it's just different incarnations of Ganondorf. Once in OoT, as described (supposedly) in ALttP's manual. Then again between FSA and ALttP, because the Ganon in ALttP also has the Triforce.

It also sounds like some of the maidens are talking about an event hundreds of years before the event the others talk about, which has no relevance to the game.

What do you suggest ALttP Ganon did when he get the Triforce, anyway? Just sat around with it and waited? Yeah, I'm sure there's no way he would have attacked Hyrule, because he wouldn't want to recreate an ancient legend of a war that never happened.

And I was wondering when the SZ story would finally come up. There's another reason why ALttP is before LoZ, it's the only thing that would explain why the Triforce was in Hyrule.

Instead of reading the rest of Lex's post, I'm just going to say that if OoS comes up in response to my Sacred Grove point, I will SHOOT SOMEONE IN THE FACE.

Edit: Okay, one thing.

1) The destruction of Ganon in TWW indicates that OoT has indeed been distanced from ALttP (although Miyamoto had already said this in 1998 even though no one listened);

Miyamoto also said the exact opposite in the same year, except we know that quote was a fact.

LOL at the other points. It's amazing how far omission of details gets you... Anything seems viable if you pick and choose which elements of Hyrule at that point play into your theory. There's no chance for the SZ story to happen before ALttP.

Edited by Impossible, 13 September 2008 - 06:41 PM.

[Lexxi Aileron]

Do we? TP and TWW provided surrounding context to the events in OoT, but neither of them actively changed the meaning of events in OoT. Unless you have any examples in mind?

The ending, mostly. And I wouldn't say "actively changed" the meaning as much as provided a context for its relation to future games.
I would say FSA co-opted elements from the Palace of the Four Sword in ALttP for this same reason. Of course, we know Miyamoto intervened and toned down the ALttP references in FSA considerably because they apparently made the story too complicated as you yourself constantly repeat; I don't see why people are arguing, then, that the relationship between ALttP and the rest of the series has not been complicated in some way.

But on the other hand, do we ever see a myth or legend infringing upon the events of another myth/legend?

If you stick to a rigid interpretation of ALttP and the IW as a direct progression: OoT, TWW, TP all infringe on the events. OoT because Ganondorf does not wind up with the whole Triforce; TWW because Ganondorf does not remain sealed after OoT until ALttP (although, again, if LoZ was supposed to be before OoT and ALttP as the creators had said, this was never supposed to be true); TP because now it's impossible for such an interpretation of the IW to be the first time the Triforce leaves the Sacred Realm as the text indicates.

If the purpose of these sorts of stories is to instil proper morals in the audience (or to emotionally appeal to the audience, as is the case with the Zelda series), then convoluting the story defeats that because it draws the audience's attention away from the message and into the "conspiracies".

Why theorize orders at all, then? Why create such a disjointed timeline? Why not go the extra mile and make stories that are whole and complete and not one- or two-dimensional, instead of, as Miyamoto and Aonuma have said, fitting them to the gameplay? Nintendo doesn't pay enough attention to their stories (in the sense that they refuse to pay the same credence to it as other similarly epic series like Final Fantasy) for me to agree that the purpose of these stories is anything besides a driving factor for gameplay. In more recent games this has been especially true.

It also sounds like some of the maidens are talking about an event hundreds of years before the event the others talk about, which has no relevance to the game.

Why wouldn't the 1) sages' seal, being the reason Ganon's captured; 2) sages' role in casting the seal, being the reason the sage descendants are needed to break it; 3) Knights' role, outlining Link's importance and ability to draw the Master Sword and underlining the idea that the conflict is being brought full-circle; be important?

What do you suggest ALttP Ganon did when he get the Triforce, anyway? Just sat around with it and waited?

He "couldn't return to the world of light," as the game says. So obviously he would have found a way to break the seal, no?

Miyamoto also said the exact opposite in the same year, except we know that quote was a fact.

Quote?

And I was wondering when the SZ story would finally come up. There's another reason why ALttP is before LoZ, it's the only thing that would explain why the Triforce was in Hyrule.

Link getting the Triforce better explains the royal family having the Triforce than the KING OF HYRULE getting the Triforce?

But how have they kept the bloodlines so well despite TWW, when everyone forgot everything?

Aren't the sage bloodlines one of those things that WASN'T completely forgotten, and was restored in TWW?
There are "six sages" who serve(d) the Cobble Kingdom in PH in any case, so it doesn't appear a tradition at least taken in that vein has disappeared entirely.

And then I made a comment about how the Sage's Seal was broken and you went on like I meant the Seal of the Gods like a jackass.

Yeah, because the "seal of the gods" was the one that broke, silly.

神の封印がなぜ解かれたのか　わからぬが 彼奴が蘇った今、再び、世界は邪悪な魔力に 脅かされ始めているのだ
I do not know why the gods’ seal has broken, but, now that he has been revived, the world has once again begun to be threatened by his evil magical powers.

In TWW's backstory Ganondorf escapes the (OoT) sage's seal on the SR. Yet it's suddenly impregnable in ALttP?

Good question.

Don't you have to answer that either way?

The ancestors of Link and Zelda face monsters on the march...

The knights and sages (you know, the people referred to as the ancestors of Link and Zelda in the game we're talking about) did face monsters on the march, you're right.

Edited by Lexxi Aileron, 14 September 2008 - 11:06 AM.

[Showsni]

Don't you have to answer that either way?

With two seals, it's possible for one to be impregnable and the other not. In my theory, the IW seal is flawless until Agahnim messes with it in ALttP, and Ganon curcumvents the later OoT seal via the Death Mountain SR portal rather than the Hyrule Castle one.

The knights and sages (you know, the people referred to as the ancestors of Link and Zelda in the game we're talking about) did face monsters on the march, you're right.

And thus ALttP provides the first timeline reference to LoZ and AoL, not TWW.

[Lexxi Aileron]

With two seals, it's possible for one to be impregnable and the other not. In my theory, the IW seal is flawless until Agahnim messes with it in ALttP, and Ganon curcumvents the later OoT seal via the Death Mountain SR portal rather than the Hyrule Castle one.

Presently, after some review, I have two seals involved in OoT:

1) The sages' seal(s) that close(s) the Sacred Realm
2) The Master Sword seal(s) that repel(s) demonic power

With the Triforce of Power, Ganon can circumvent the first, but the second exists specifically to prevent this. The second may be the seal that is referenced as broken in TWW, although I still prefer to interpret it as the more recent seal, the one actually called the "seal of the gods" later, the flood seal. Ganon (as a "bunshin," currently interpreted as the magician from the Sleeping Zelda story) and/or his minions "break" the second seal by sapping the Master Sword's power. Ganon is then able to escape the sages' seal the same way he will later escape the flooded Hyrule, by creating a portal with the Triforce of Power.

Ganon in ALttP lacks the unlimited access to the Triforce of Power granted to him in OoT; he used the Triforce to make a wish and while it will only obey his wish and no others' until he dies his use of the Triforce ends with his use of that wish.

Would you say that OoT's sages "recast" the older seal, then, or is it a seal of a different kind?

And thus ALttP provides the first timeline reference to LoZ and AoL, not TWW.

The box doesn't have to refer to LoZ/AoL Link and Zelda at all if it's talking about the ancestors of ALttP Link and Zelda, the sages and knights.

Edited by Lexxi Aileron, 14 September 2008 - 01:30 PM.

[Showsni]

It's slightly different, in my timeline. Fanfiction begin!

Originally, Hyrule and the SR are connected; there are natural portals across Hyrule that lead to the SR. The first of these Link uses in ALttP is the one on top of Death Mountain, and it's here that you meet some of the people who have found the SR from Hyrule. The sage's seal from the IW stops anything leaving the SR and entering Hyrule, though it is still possible to cross the portals in the other direction; basically, they make them all one way. Agahnim's sacrifice creates a new portal, near to Hyrule Castle. Immediately after he has done this, the portals, and the new one, remain one way, but it is only a matter of time until the seal fails completely and they become two way again. Link defeats Ganon before this occurs, though. Skip forward (in my theory) to after the Oracles games, and people are worried about Ganon's near revival, and unsure about the triforce's safety in Hyrule Castle. ALttP is a distant legend, but people remember the portal to the SR near Hyrule Castle, and build the Temple of Time here, putting the triforce back in the SR, and using the Master Sword to lock the Hyrule Castle portal. In OoT, Ganon is shoved through this portal, and the portal sealed for good by the sages. It's just this portal, this doorway to the SR, that is sealed by the sages - "Oh sealed door opened by the Sages... Close forever with the Evil Incarnation of Darkness within!!" They neglect the original SR portals, though, including the Death Mountain one. Prior to TWW, Ganondorf discovers this. The ALttP seal has now worn off, thanks to Agahnim's deeds, and the OoT seal was only on one portal, not the entire realm. Hence this portal is not locked, and Ganondorf escapes through it and begins ravaging Hyrule as shown in TWW's backstory.

[Raien]

The ending, mostly. And I wouldn't say "actively changed" the meaning as much as provided a context for its relation to future games.

I'm pretty confident that mythology has been established over several different stories, so I don't see why new Zelda games can't establish the series mythology through the same practice; it shouldn't count as an infringement.

I would say FSA co-opted elements from the Palace of the Four Sword in ALttP for this same reason. Of course, we know Miyamoto intervened and toned down the ALttP references in FSA considerably because they apparently made the story too complicated as you yourself constantly repeat; I don't see why people are arguing, then, that the relationship between ALttP and the rest of the series has not been complicated in some way.

Miyamoto toned down the ALttP references? Can you provide a quote for that?

Otherwise, I can't see any evidence that FSA co-opted elements from the Palace of the Four Sword. The Four Sword was quite clearly returned to the Sanctuary at the end of FSA, with a shield put in place to prevent someone from releasing Ganon.

If you stick to a rigid interpretation of ALttP and the IW as a direct progression: OoT, TWW, TP all infringe on the events. OoT because Ganondorf does not wind up with the whole Triforce; TWW because Ganondorf does not remain sealed after OoT until ALttP (although, again, if LoZ was supposed to be before OoT and ALttP as the creators had said, this was never supposed to be true); TP because now it's impossible for such an interpretation of the IW to be the first time the Triforce leaves the Sacred Realm as the text indicates.

Interesting.
-The Sleeping Zelda was the very first Princess Zelda. That was infringed upon.
-The very first time the Triforce was taken, Ganondorf took the whole Triforce and was beaten back by the combined efforts of the Knights of Hyrule and the Sages. That was infringed upon.

In short, while both of these events still took place in the Zelda canon, the fact that they were origins has been retconned in order to let the mythology mature. That's the reason why TWW and TP continue to infringe upon the IW as an origin story; the IW no longer is an origin story.

Why theorize orders at all, then? Why create such a disjointed timeline? Why not go the extra mile and make stories that are whole and complete and not one- or two-dimensional, instead of, as Miyamoto and Aonuma have said, fitting them to the gameplay? Nintendo doesn't pay enough attention to their stories (in the sense that they refuse to pay the same credence to it as other similarly epic series like Final Fantasy) for me to agree that the purpose of these stories is anything besides a driving factor for gameplay. In more recent games this has been especially true.

1) Myths have always been popular because they appeal to the lowest-common demoninator. Link is more popular than Final Fantasy's Cloud because he is a simple and symbolic character rather than a deep and emotional character (that's why people don't want Link to have a voice). People are perfectly happy with the stories in Zelda games because they're easy to appreciate; hero saves world from villain.

2) Asking why the Zelda stories are disjointed is like asking why the Greek myths are disjointed. Perseus & the Minotaur isn't connected to Jason & the Argonauts isn't connected to the Twelve Tasks of Heracles. The main reason why The Legend of Zelda has connected its stories is because the mythology has been built from scratch and developed itself around the central trio of characters; Link, Zelda and Ganondorf. Now that the mythology has matured, Nintendo have promised to move away from the traditional stories and move in new directions.

[Lexxi Aileron]

It's slightly different, in my timeline. Fanfiction begin!

Originally, Hyrule and the SR are connected; there are natural portals across Hyrule that lead to the SR. The first of these Link uses in ALttP is the one on top of Death Mountain, and it's here that you meet some of the people who have found the SR from Hyrule. The sage's seal from the IW stops anything leaving the SR and entering Hyrule, though it is still possible to cross the portals in the other direction; basically, they make them all one way. Agahnim's sacrifice creates a new portal, near to Hyrule Castle. Immediately after he has done this, the portals, and the new one, remain one way, but it is only a matter of time until the seal fails completely and they become two way again. Link defeats Ganon before this occurs, though. Skip forward (in my theory) to after the Oracles games, and people are worried about Ganon's near revival, and unsure about the triforce's safety in Hyrule Castle. ALttP is a distant legend, but people remember the portal to the SR near Hyrule Castle, and build the Temple of Time here, putting the triforce back in the SR, and using the Master Sword to lock the Hyrule Castle portal. In OoT, Ganon is shoved through this portal, and the portal sealed for good by the sages. It's just this portal, this doorway to the SR, that is sealed by the sages - "Oh sealed door opened by the Sages... Close forever with the Evil Incarnation of Darkness within!!" They neglect the original SR portals, though, including the Death Mountain one. Prior to TWW, Ganondorf discovers this. The ALttP seal has now worn off, thanks to Agahnim's deeds, and the OoT seal was only on one portal, not the entire realm. Hence this portal is not locked, and Ganondorf escapes through it and begins ravaging Hyrule as shown in TWW's backstory.

I'll PM you with questions and a more detailed explanation of my own theory. =]

I actually like it; I've never tried to go that far out of the box before.

Miyamoto toned down the ALttP references? Can you provide a quote for that?

Do you remember when Jumbie talked about the references to sages and the Magic Mirror found in the FSA text dump, citing that it seems FSA was originally supposed to be the new IW? Do you also remember that Miyamoto "upended the tea table" regarding FSA's story saying it made for a too complicated storyline?

-The Sleeping Zelda was the very first Princess Zelda. That was infringed upon.
-The very first time the Triforce was taken, Ganondorf took the whole Triforce and was beaten back by the combined efforts of the Knights of Hyrule and the Sages. That was infringed upon.

1) Depends, there are references to the naming tradition in TWW and Ganondorf has the ability to read dreams (remember that the sleeping spell was cast on Sleeping Zelda during an interrogation?).
2) The Knights of Hyrule defended the castle, and the sages worked to seal Ganon. Ganon taking the whole Triforce in the Imprisoning War was definitely infringed upon, that's true for sure. Of course, I'd argue that everything infringed upon regarding ALttP involves what happened to Ganon, hence the need to supply a new one that fits ALttP's bill. I do not think the war was substantially "infringed upon" if it has been maintained as OoT, and that is why I argue that it is still OoT.

Edited by Lexxi Aileron, 14 September 2008 - 04:10 PM.

[MikePetersSucks]

You know, taking a glance at the text dump of OOT to try and end this debate, it's worth noting that the Sages call their seal "Tachigami no natsuin", or "the gods' seal."

So quit with the god damn arguing, Lex, you're wrong. Christ.

[Raien]

Do you remember when Jumbie talked about the references to sages and the Magic Mirror found in the FSA text dump, citing that it seems FSA was originally supposed to be the new IW? Do you also remember that Miyamoto "upended the tea table" regarding FSA's story saying it made for a too complicated storyline?

I remember Jumbie saying that the forest in which the Sanctuary was built was originally called the "Forest of Sages"; it just cements the Maidens' connection to the Sages, more than anything else I can see. I don't remember Jumbie revealing anything new about the Dark Mirror; perhaps you can be more specific in order to jog my memory? As for Miyamoto's quote, I do remember a suggestion that the storyline had to be made less complicated, but that's hardly the same thing as "removing ALTTP references".

The Knights of Hyrule defended the castle, and the sages worked to seal Ganon. Ganon taking the whole Triforce in the Imprisoning War was definitely infringed upon, that's true for sure. Of course, I'd argue that everything infringed upon regarding ALttP involves what happened to Ganon, hence the need to supply a new one that fits ALttP's bill. I do not think the war was substantially "infringed upon" if it has been maintained as OoT, and that is why I argue that it is still OoT.

The Maidens in ALTTP referred to combining their power with Link's courage in order to break Ganon's barrier, just as their ancestors, the Sages, had combined their power with the Knights of Hyrule. To me, that says all that needs to be said about the IW; if we have to retcon the events of the IW, we might as well retcon ALTTP as well.

Edited by Raian, 14 September 2008 - 04:53 PM.

[Raien]

Sorry for double-posting but, just on this one occasion, I think Lex is right.

I can accept that the Sages' Seal in OoT is in actuality a gods' seal, but the seal on Hyrule in TWW's back story is also a gods' seal. The King of Red Lions says that the gods' seal has broken and that Ganondorf is now revived, which surely means he is referring to the seal on Hyrule since that was what was preventing his resurrection to the Great Sea. I'm not saying this means OoT's seal wasn't broken, but I think the context of the quote tells us that it is referring to TWW's seal.

Edited by Raian, 14 September 2008 - 05:21 PM.

[Arturo]

Someone who has never played TWW and has played OoT would interpret it the way I am when he first read the quote. Mainly because the player is supposed not to know anything about other seals.

[Raien]

Let's put it this way. If the KoRL said "I don't know why the gods' seal had broken, but Ganondorf was revived to Hyrule", then I could accept it being OoT's seal. But the KoRL actually said "I don't know why the gods' seal has broken, but Ganondorf has revived to threaten your world above" and that indicates he's referring to the present situation, brought about by Ganondorf escaping the seal on Hyrule.

[Arturo]

But the player is supposed to know NOTHING about Hyrule at that point.

[Raien]

But the player is supposed to know NOTHING about Hyrule at that point.

Does the exact nature of the seal need to be explained for the player to know that Ganondorf was sealed? The fact that Ganondorf was clearly a newly rising threat suggests that he was sealed until recently.

[wring]

Ocarina of Time is the only time I know of where seven Sages appear in a game. Twilight Princess only has six, FSA has six Maidens of the Four Sword and then Zelda, none of which are sages. Ocarina of Time MUST be the IW. And Maidens are not Sages, I doubt Maidens is even anything special, its like saying "the four sword girl" or "the blue girl" or "the girl whose a descendant of the Sage" in fancy midevil talk.