Note: At some point in this reply while I was typing my apostorphies turned into ès and my question marks to És. I have no idea how to fix this so please bear with me for the moment.
Do you mean this?
Yes I do. Thank you Jarsh.
You know how tremendously silly that is, right? Hylian script is just a cypher. There's English Hylian for the Western games, and Japanese Hylian for the Japanese games. The Japanese Hylian? No "revived" in there.
Actually the english Hylian didn't apear untill TP was released.
And yes there is. Look at what Jarsh provided. (Exact quote:)
The one who held the evil power, who had been thought to have been sealed forever by the efforts of the hero, revived with no reason.
Well, for one thing, no situation in the games that we've seen involves Ganon dying, and then having his soul sealed. Nor is there any situation involving Ganon reviving himself without someone's assistance or calling his soul from the other world. Whenever Ganon was sealed, he wasn't killed yet, nor was his body really impaired in any significant way. Orochi, however, gets his body broken and destroyed, and his spirit had to be sealed because, as long as there was darkness in the hearts of men, Orochi could just come back to life without needing assistance. Ganon has no such superpower.
He has the Triforce.
Isn't that, you know, a retcon? How the hell can OoT be the SW if there aren't retcons? Saying you don't believe in retcons, but that you believe the story of the SW can actually be the SW is an oxymoron. For OoT to be the SW (even in 1998) the SW story had to be retconned, severely. And since TWW it had to be retconned even further. Either way it's a retcon, pure and simple.
Nope. A retcon is something where something in a game no-longer is considered Canon because it's defied by another game. For example the TP map might retcon the OoT map because the locations of Death mountain and Zora's domain have switched.
However the IW (isn't Seal war the correct translation?) can be explained WITHOUT any games retconing something else. Either my definition of a retcon is messed up, or I'm thinking of something completely different.
Er... do you know what a retcon is? If intent changes, that's a retcon. The IW's intent was changed from being the events described in ALttP's manual to being the very different events of OoT, and then their intent was once again altered to be more consistent with ALttP when the GBA version and TWW came out in 2002, contradicting the originally intended connection. That's a retcon, plain and simple. As well as that, the seal from OoT is no longer the seal from ALttP, and the Ganon from OoT is no longer the Ganon from ALttP, directly retconning the statement that OoT tells the origins of ALttP's Ganon.
Ah, well then you and I have two seperate definitions of a retcon. That explains [img]http://forums.legendsalliance.com/public/ALOT.png[/img]. I donèt believe intent changing = Retcon. I believe retcon is the act of changing something in a story which contradicts something so much that the first thing has to be discounted as Canon.
ALttP shows Ganon basically being killed/disappearing, with no implication of him being sealed, and NOTHING indicating that a seal would be the intent. KnS changes the original intent of Ganon's defeat to being a seal. It wasn't before. I didn't say it was a contradiction, I said it was a retcon. The seal did not exist in the canon in any way until KnS went back and said it was actually a seal for the sake of bringing Ganon back into its own story.
The point is, that even if that is a retcon, doesnèt that mean that the Ganon in LoZ cant really be explained as Ganonès soul is destroyed at the end of ASTÉ (asuming of coarse that LoZ comes after AlttP.)
