86 replies to this topic

[Raien]

This is a topic that's been discussed before, but has never been brought to a firm conclusion. Since this does affect our perspective of the timeline, I want to see some level on agreement on it.

To recap, there is a commonly held belief that the Twili's ancestors, the Dark Tribe, entered the Sacred Realm and fought the other Hyrulians for control of the Triforce (before the goddesses stole their dark magic and exiled them to the Twilight Realm). This belief was reinforced by the NOA translation, which not only referred to such an event, but used language that connected the conflict to a similar event in ALttP's back story, where the Hyrulians were fighting to find the location of the Sacred Realm. This language was invented by NOA, btw.

My position, however, is that the Dark Tribe conflict had nothing to do with the Sacred Realm or the Triforce whatsoever. The conflict was simply a fight for Hyrule, unfortunately confused by the writers' decision to refer to Hyrule as the "holy land", which was the Japanese name for the Sacred Realm. However, both Lanayru and another NPC both directly state that their use of the phrase "holy land" is in fact referring to the kingdom of Hyrule. Neither characters make the distinction between the kingdom and another pocket dimension; TP never even acknowledges the existence of another pocket dimension.

Below are the relevant quotes, with the important lines in bold:

混沌とし何もない世界に神々は　降臨し生命と秩序を造られ
The goddesses descended to the world of chaos where there was nothing at all, and created life and order.
When all was chaos, the goddesses descended and gave order and life to the world.

そして、全ての者達に平等に力を与え　天へお戻りになられた
And after granting power equally to all people, they returned to the heavens.
They granted power equally to all who dwelt in the light, and then returned to the heavens.

神々が最初に降り立った地は聖地と呼ばれ
The place where the goddesses first landed is called the holy land.
The lands where the goddesses descended came to be known as the Sacred Realm.

世界は長きにわたり信心深い者達の心で平安であった…
For a long time, the world was at peace, with people's hearts being deeply faithful…
For ages, the people lived at ease, content in mind and body…

しかし、やがて聖地ハイラルを巡り争いが起こった
But at length, a rivalry ensued over Hyrule, the holy land.
But soon, word of the Sacred Realm spread through Hyrule, and a great battle ensued…

人々の中に、魔術に長けた者達が現れ
In the midst of the people, persons who excelled at magic appeared.
Among those living in the light, interlopers who excelled at magic appeared.

強力な魔力によって聖地を治めようとした
With powerful sorcery, they tried to rule the holy land.
Wielding powerful sorcery, they tried to establish dominion over the Sacred Realm.

しかし、神は我ら光の精霊を遣わし　その者達の巨大なる魔力を封じこませたのだ
But the goddesses sent us light spirits to seal away the gigantic magic of those people.
It was then that the goddesses ordered us three light spirits to intervene. We sealed away the great magic those individuals had mastered.

そして、その魔力こそが　黒き力・・・影の結晶石である
And that very sorcery is the black power… the Crystal Stone of Shadow.
You know this magic… It is the dark power you seek…the Fused Shadow.

おや、見たところ腕に自信がありそうだが　アンタ最近この辺りで起こっておる事件を　知らんのかね?
Oh, it looks like you can handle yourself pretty well, but do you know about the events that have occurred around here recently?
Now, you seem like you can handle yourself pretty well, but do you know what's been going on around here lately?

何でも・・・昔、この地を追いやられた者達の怨念が、不可解な事件を起こしている　という噂じゃ・・・
I've heard… rumours that the inexplicable events are being caused by the grudge of those who were driven from this place long ago…
It's just that… There are rumors that recent dire events are being caused by a curse from the people who were driven from this land…

悪いことは言わん、兵士になりに来たのなら　やめといた方がええ・・・
Make no mistake, if you came here looking to become a soldier, you had better think that over…
You know, if you came here looking to become a soldier, but you've changed your mind now, I won't say a thing to anyone…

ハイラルは　昔から聖地と呼ばれ　今はハイラル王家のもと、信心深き人々に　守られておるが・・・
Hyrule has always been called the holy land, and even now it's protected by the royal family of Hyrule and by deeply faithful people, but…
Hyrule was always known as a sacred land in the past, and even now it's protected by the royal family and other spiritual figures…

昔は　この地を巡り争いが　絶えんかったそうじゃよ
In the past, there was an unceasing rivalry over this place, oh yes!
But there was a time when Hyrule was torn by conflicts that swept the land...

最近起こっておる不可解な事件は　その時争った者達の怨念が　起こしておる　という噂じゃ
Rumour has it that the recent inexplicable events are being caused by the grudge of those who competed back then.
And these recent disturbing events may be caused by the leftover anger and misery of the souls who departed in that conflict...

In response to this position, two arguments have been raised in defence of the Sacred Realm's appearance, to which I have provided counter-arguments.

1) "The Triforce is shown during Lanayru's speech. Link is running towards it, and the Shadow Links stand in front of it."

While this is true, there is an overlooked pattern to Lanayru's speech. For every object that Lanayru introduces in the text, only a symbolic representation of that object appears on screen. Here's a list of examples:

-When Lanayru refers to the goddesses, three balls of coloured light appear.
-When Lanayru refers to the world, a hilltop appears.
-When Lanayru refers to the kingdom of Hyrule, the Triforce appears.
-When Lanayru refers to the people, Link and Illia appear.
-When Lanayru refers to the people's greed, Link and Ilia's eyes become white (a reference to the phrase "blinded by greed").
-When Lanayru refers to the Dark Tribe, Shadow Links appear.

It is clear that in this context, the Triforce is just Hyrule's symbol. It is not the literal Triforce.

2) ""Holy land" is an interchangeable definition for both Hyrule and the Sacred Realm. "Holy land" refers to both objects in the general context of the timeline."

Every use of the word "holy land" in a Zelda game has been given a specific context by the writers. Even if the term "holy land" is used to refer to Hyrule and the Sacred Realm on separate occasions within the same game, it's still perfectly clear what "holy land" means in the quotation it's used. At no point is the meaning of "holy land" ever open to a player's preference. Not even in Lanayru's speech, where it is clearly said:

But at length, a rivalry ensued over Hyrule, the holy land.

In fact, the idea that two objects can possess the same name without contextual distinction in a narrative, and thus is open to interpretation by the audience, simply doesn't exist in fictional writing. Writers in general have been known to make some pretty stupid mistakes, such as continuity errors and mischaracterisation, but one of the mistakes we never see is interchangeable names without contextual distinction. It's a concept that I've only ever seen raised and discussed by timeline theorists for this very debate.

And with that all said, post if you agree or disagree (and reasons why obviously).

Edited by Raien, 26 May 2009 - 02:45 PM.

[SOAP]

Yes we did indeed discuss this before. I thought we concluded that the Holy Land in Lanayru's speech was Hyrule? I thought it was the Sacred Realm before but the last time this was brought up I changed my position in light of this original Japanese texts. I figured others did too. Oh well.

I wonder if the Twilight Realm/Sacred Realm connection is still up to debate?

[Raien]

Yes we did indeed discuss this before. I thought we concluded that the Holy Land in Lanayru's speech was Hyrule? I thought it was the Sacred Realm before but the last time this was brought up I changed my position in light of this original Japanese texts. I figured others did too. Oh well.

Well, there was a much bigger discussion on the subject months ago, and almost none of the people involved in that debate commented in this recent debate. I'm hoping to bring them back into the fold and possibly change the general belief about Lanayru's speech altogether.

Edited by Raien, 26 May 2009 - 02:38 PM.

[SOAP]

Yes we did indeed discuss this before. I thought we concluded that the Holy Land in Lanayru's speech was Hyrule? I thought it was the Sacred Realm before but the last time this was brought up I changed my position in light of this original Japanese texts. I figured others did too. Oh well.

Well, there was a much bigger discussion on the subject months ago, and almost none of the people involved in that debate commented in this recent debate. I'm hoping to bring them back into the fold and possibly change the general belief about Lanayru's speech altogether.

That's good and all but what for? Not that I think it's pointless but some people just don't care about the original Japanese texts have to say and they shouldn't have to. Even if NOA localization tends to make up stuff, it's really silly that we have to scour the original texts, or rather actually rely on alternative fan translations, in order to understand what's really going on. Not to knock you for trying though, just saying.

[Raien]

That's good and all but what for? Not that I think it's pointless but some people just don't care about the original Japanese texts have to say and they shouldn't have to. Even if NOA localization tends to make up stuff, it's really silly that we have to scour the original texts, or rather actually rely on alternative fan translations, in order to understand what's really going on. Not to knock you for trying though, just saying.

Anyone who has an interest in the official timeline (which actually drives most theorists in the community) will be looking at fan translations to see the original game storylines. Considering that NOA has made mistakes in fundamental places, we simply cannot rely on them to make timeline decisions. They lead to false conclusions.

Edited by Raien, 26 May 2009 - 03:14 PM.

[SOAP]

That's good and all but what for? Not that I think it's pointless but some people just don't care about the original Japanese texts have to say and they shouldn't have to. Even if NOA localization tends to make up stuff, it's really silly that we have to scour the original texts, or rather actually rely on alternative fan translations, in order to understand what's really going on. Not to knock you for trying though, just saying.

Anyone who has an interest in the official timeline (which actually drives most theorists in the community) will be looking at fan translations to see the original game storylines. And although there are multiple fan translators, for the most part there's only one translation for each game that people can look at. It's not nearly as much of a complicated process as you presume it to be.

NOA does a good job just telling stories, but they have changed a lot of important details in recent games, which have made the timeline difficult to understand. That's why we have fan translations to make sense of things (like knowing that Ganondorf's minions were sealed by the Master Sword in TWW, not his magic).

Well at least NOA gives us something. The original Japanese texts of the games usually tend to be vague and watered down. If we wanted to to be purists about it and stick solely to original Japanese, I think we'd start seeing that there's no such thing as an "official timeline" and that the games are just constant recycling of the same basic story, characters, and motifs switched around ever so often. We'd probably have as many four or five separate timelines that have nothing to do with each other and THAT would be the official timeline(s). (Which is what I have anyways but oh well)

Edited by SOAP, 26 May 2009 - 03:17 PM.

[Raien]

Well at least NOA gives us something. The original Japanese texts of the games usually tend to be vague and watered down. If we wanted to to be purists about it and stick solely to original Japanese, I think we'd start seeing that there's no such thing as an "official timeline" and that the games are just constant recycling of the same basic story, characters, and motifs switched around ever so often. We'd probably have as many four or five separate timelines that have nothing to do with each other and THAT would be the official timeline(s).

I honestly don't know what you're talking about. As someone who has read all the fan translations, I've found a much clearer understanding of the timeline with them than I did with NOA's translations. There's very little ambiguity, especially as the fan translators provide context notes.

Edited by Raien, 26 May 2009 - 03:19 PM.

[Person]

That's good and all but what for? Not that I think it's pointless but some people just don't care about the original Japanese texts have to say and they shouldn't have to. Even if NOA localization tends to make up stuff, it's really silly that we have to scour the original texts, or rather actually rely on alternative fan translations, in order to understand what's really going on. Not to knock you for trying though, just saying.

Anyone who has an interest in the official timeline (which actually drives most theorists in the community) will be looking at fan translations to see the original game storylines. Considering that NOA has made mistakes in fundamental places, we simply cannot rely on them to make timeline decisions. They lead to false conclusions.

While it's obvious NoA made stuff up, why hasn't Hyrule ever been referred to as the "holy land" before? It's like they were being intentionally confusing. It's easy to interpret fighting over "Hyrule, the holy land" for "Hyrule and the Holy Land." This is especially interesting, given that NoA's TWW translation seemed tailor-made for single-timeliners with made-up references to MM where there were none in Japan.

[Raien]

While it's obvious NoA made stuff up, why hasn't Hyrule ever been referred to as the "holy land" before? It's like they were being intentionally confusing. It's easy to interpret fighting over "Hyrule, the holy land" for "Hyrule and the Holy Land." This is especially interesting, given that NoA's TWW translation seemed tailor-made for single-timeliners with made-up references to MM where there were none in Japan.

With TWW and TP, it's obvious that NOA are trying to clarify what they think is the official timeline. Sadly, they're as bad as most fan theorists and that's why they make so many mistakes.

[Person]

While it's obvious NoA made stuff up, why hasn't Hyrule ever been referred to as the "holy land" before? It's like they were being intentionally confusing. It's easy to interpret fighting over "Hyrule, the holy land" for "Hyrule and the Holy Land." This is especially interesting, given that NoA's TWW translation seemed tailor-made for single-timeliners with made-up references to MM where there were none in Japan.

With TWW and TP, it's obvious that NOA are trying to clarify what they think is the official timeline. Sadly, they're as bad as most fan theorists and that's why they make so many mistakes.

Didn't they say once that they thought there was a single timeline until TP came out? And they went and changed the wording of "Link's first adventure" line in TMC. And let's not even talk about the botched ALttP manual.

[Raien]

Didn't they say once that they thought there was a single timeline until TP came out? And they went and changed the wording of "Link's first adventure" line in TMC. And let's not even talk about the botched ALttP manual.

This is exactly why we have fan translations. NOA are great for enjoying the games, as their poeticisation of the script creates a nice effect, but they are unreliable sources for the official timeline. Only trust a literal fan translation as recommended by the theorist community.

[SOAP]

Well at least NOA gives us something. The original Japanese texts of the games usually tend to be vague and watered down. If we wanted to to be purists about it and stick solely to original Japanese, I think we'd start seeing that there's no such thing as an "official timeline" and that the games are just constant recycling of the same basic story, characters, and motifs switched around ever so often. We'd probably have as many four or five separate timelines that have nothing to do with each other and THAT would be the official timeline(s).

I honestly don't know what you're talking about. As someone who has read all the fan translations, I've found a much clearer understanding of the timeline with them than I did with NOA's translations. There's very little ambiguity, especially as the fan translators provide context notes.

What I'm saying that it's not enough to simply translate the texts. Japanese culture is entirely different from western culture so trying to make a timeline applying western logic on Japanese stories isn't going to produce one official timeline. It would probably give us sevearl rebooted timelines though.

[MikePetersSucks]

I've never seen a real distinction between fighting over Hyrule and fighting over the Sacred Realm/Triforce. The two almost always go together, as means to acquire the other, or because gaining both is apparently required to have either. Hyrule and the Sacred Realm, bound together by the governing of the Triforce, have this weird mumbo-jumbo connection that is extremely complex and hard to find a Western counterpart to, since it involves Japanese understanding of dimensional and spiritual mechanics and whatnot.

I guess the closest I can explain it is that Hyrule is the body, and the Sacred Realm is the soul, with the Triforce being the silver cord that binds the two.

[Person]

Well at least NOA gives us something. The original Japanese texts of the games usually tend to be vague and watered down. If we wanted to to be purists about it and stick solely to original Japanese, I think we'd start seeing that there's no such thing as an "official timeline" and that the games are just constant recycling of the same basic story, characters, and motifs switched around ever so often. We'd probably have as many four or five separate timelines that have nothing to do with each other and THAT would be the official timeline(s).

I honestly don't know what you're talking about. As someone who has read all the fan translations, I've found a much clearer understanding of the timeline with them than I did with NOA's translations. There's very little ambiguity, especially as the fan translators provide context notes.

What I'm saying that it's not enough to simply translate the texts. Japanese culture is entirely different from western culture so trying to make a timeline applying western logic on Japanese stories isn't going to produce one official timeline. It would probably give us sevearl rebooted timelines though.

Don't we have several rebooted timelines already?
Top of my head:
Current:
OoT-MM-TP
and
OoT-TWW

Past:
OoT-ALttP

Four Swords:
TMC-FS-FSA
(This was supposed to be a side-series until Ganon showed up in FSA).

[Raien]

What I'm saying that it's not enough to simply translate the texts. Japanese culture is entirely different from western culture so trying to make a timeline applying western logic on Japanese stories isn't going to produce one official timeline. It would probably give us sevearl rebooted timelines though.

But the fan translators ARE adept in Japanese culture (particularly MPS, who's been an excellent reference for this very subject). And please stop saying "it would probably give us several rebooted timelines"; you're just pulling this statement right out of your ass.

[Raien]

I've never seen a real distinction between fighting over Hyrule and fighting over the Sacred Realm/Triforce. The two almost always go together, as means to acquire the other, or because gaining both is apparently required to have either. Hyrule and the Sacred Realm, bound together by the governing of the Triforce, have this weird mumbo-jumbo connection that is extremely complex and hard to find a Western counterpart to, since it involves Japanese understanding of dimensional and spiritual mechanics and whatnot.

I guess the closest I can explain it is that Hyrule is the body, and the Sacred Realm is the soul, with the Triforce being the silver cord that binds the two.

Your explanation doesn't sound altogether different from my understanding of the Sacred Realm. My only concern is that in games where the Triforce/Sacred Realm do not have a role, it is clear that the story is only concerned with the land of Hyrule. Like the original LoZ or TMC, for example. My position is that TP takes such a stance.

Edited by Raien, 26 May 2009 - 03:45 PM.

[Duke Serkol]

It's like they were being intentionally confusing.

It's like? I'd say that's the only thing concerning Lanayru's vision that we will ever reach a widely shared agreement upon.

NoA's TWW translation seemed tailor-made for single-timeliners with made-up references to MM where there were none in Japan.

I don't believe NoA is responsible for inserting the "legend of the fairy" in the game.

[Raien]

I don't believe NoA is responsible for inserting the "legend of the fairy" in the game.

They were responsible for saying the ToC split when Link left the land of Hyrule, not when Link went back in time.


AAANYWAY, we're getting off-topic. I've responded to MPS's post, which has been particularly insightful. Does anyone else have an opinion?

[Person]

NoA's TWW translation seemed tailor-made for single-timeliners with made-up references to MM where there were none in Japan.

I don't believe NoA is responsible for inserting the "legend of the fairy" in the game.

Legend of the fairy was an easter egg that single-timeliners twisted into timeline evidence and really makes no explicit references to MM. What I'm talking about is "called away on another journey" instead of "went through the flows of time," which almost explicitly replaces a reference to time travel with a reference to MM.

[CID Farwin]

I suppose I'll add my two cents here.

I guess my position here is similar to MPS's. It's funny, because I was thinking about this last night (about the same time this topic was started, too), "The sacred realm where the Triforce rests" applies both to the space-pocket-thingy ("The" sacred realm) and Hyrule itself. To my knowledge, the pre-Dark World is never really named, just called "a sacred land," similar to how in TP the Triforce is never named, just called "Power of the Gods"

Why would you invade Hyrule? to get to the Sacred Ream. Why would you fight to get to the sacred realm? so you can get the Triforce. Why would you want the Triforce? so you can rule Hyrule. It's all very circular to me, since basically they're all meaning the same thing. Though with my western mindset, I'm not sure I understand MPS's "Japanese mumbo-jumbo"

I guess that counts as my argument for point 2.

My only concern is that in games where the Triforce/Sacred Realm do not have a role, it is clear that the story is only concerned with the land of Hyrule. Like the original LoZ or TMC, for example. My position is that TP takes such a stance.

I would argue against this. I would say that the Triforce clearly plays a significant role in TP. I would count Lanayru's "Sacred realm Hyrule" as one of the many changes in the text to eradicate the Triforce and the old plots along with it. (the possible reasons for Nintendo doing this, as well as whether or not the "Power of the Gods" is the Triforce would be other threads entirely)

I guess I'm arguing my support for point 1, now.

Since you insist, Raien, that everything in the scene is symbolic of something, I would ask: Suppose you're the developer, and it is the Triforce "Link" runs for. How would you symbolically represent it?

[Raien]

Why would you invade Hyrule? to get to the Sacred Ream. Why would you fight to get to the sacred realm? so you can get the Triforce. Why would you want the Triforce? so you can rule Hyrule. It's all very circular to me, since basically they're all meaning the same thing. Though with my western mindset, I'm not sure I understand MPS's "Japanese mumbo-jumbo"

So, you're saying an evil dark lord wouldn't invade Hyrule to conquer it? Like Sauron to Middle-Earth? This is the same problem I had with MPS's argument; you assume that the Triforce is a necessary step to conquest, and it simply isn't. If the villain has the means to conquering Hyrule, such as Ganon's Trident in FSA, then the immediate goal becomes the conquest of Hyrule. The Dark Tribe had powerful dark magic, and that was surely all they needed to conquer Hyrule.

You know, I should have held up FSA from the beginning. No game demonstrates better that the Triforce is not necessary for a villain to conquer the land of Hyrule. I'm still happy to accept MPS's explanation as to how Hyrule and the Sacred Realm are connected, but this assumption is clearly unjustified.

Since you insist, Raien, that everything in the scene is symbolic of something, I would ask: Suppose you're the developer, and it is the Triforce "Link" runs for. How would you symbolically represent it?

I wouldn't be able to, because the Triforce is only identifiable by its symbolic design. But even though we might not be able to distinguish the literal from the symbolism in the imagery, we can still refer to the literal nature of Lanayru's quotes. Since Lanayru does not directly refer to the Triforce (or vaguely refer to the "power of the gods"), we can still establish that the Triforce does not literally appear.

Edited by Raien, 26 May 2009 - 08:49 PM.

[Sparx401]

You know, I should have held up FSA from the beginning. No game demonstrates better that the Triforce is not necessary for a villain to conquer the land of Hyrule. I'm still happy to accept MPS's explanation as to how Hyrule and the Sacred Realm are connected, but this assumption is clearly unjustified.

There's also The Minish Cap where Vaati doesn't seek the Triforce, but rather the Light Force and he has a pretty good grasp of the Castle (he even impersonated the King) and potentially the rest of Hyrule with his magical cap. The Light Force also gives him near god-like powers. In any case, TMC is also a game where it isn't necessary for the villain to acquire the triforce (I would say that Vaati doesn't even need the Light Force really, the magical cap alone makes him really powerful, he may have been just greedy/overbearing).

Also, if one were to try and change it so that the scene really depicts the Triforce instead of Hyrule, you really can't do much with visuals. The Triforce is also the symbol of Hyrule as we see countless times, but I do admit that the fact that we see it as a shining artifact makes it hard to determine what it refers to, but that's where the text comes in for clarification (else the entire scene would be an abstract mess). I mean, if we read the text without thinking of the scene, we can unequivocally figure out that Lanayru is referring to Hyrule's conquest and not the Sacred Realm. After we get that, and then add the visuals, it becomes clearer to say the least.

[MikePetersSucks]

Your explanation doesn't sound altogether different from my understanding of the Sacred Realm. My only concern is that in games where the Triforce/Sacred Realm do not have a role, it is clear that the story is only concerned with the land of Hyrule. Like the original LoZ or TMC, for example. My position is that TP takes such a stance.

To be fair, LoZ was before the development of these later views, and TMC was supposed to dodge those sorts of things. TP is a bit of a unique case, and it seems the Triforce matters to Ganondorf to some extent, since he went out of his way to capture Link via his proxies.

Why would you invade Hyrule? to get to the Sacred Ream. Why would you fight to get to the sacred realm? so you can get the Triforce. Why would you want the Triforce? so you can rule Hyrule. It's all very circular to me, since basically they're all meaning the same thing. Though with my western mindset, I'm not sure I understand MPS's "Japanese mumbo-jumbo"

You got the basic gist of it worded better than I can. There's just some apparent nuances that are hard to express, that admittedly aren't exactly relevant right now.

[Raien]

MPS, what do you say about FSA, in which Ganon starts covering the land of Hyrule in darkness without the Triforce?

[SOAP]

What I'm saying that it's not enough to simply translate the texts. Japanese culture is entirely different from western culture so trying to make a timeline applying western logic on Japanese stories isn't going to produce one official timeline. It would probably give us sevearl rebooted timelines though.

But the fan translators ARE adept in Japanese culture (particularly MPS, who's been an excellent reference for this very subject). And please stop saying "it would probably give us several rebooted timelines"; you're just pulling this statement right out of your ass.

Nah, I didn't pull that out of my ass as we do have fragmented timelines as person pointed out. And that's the closest we've ever gotten to an "Official Timeline" even with the Japanese texts. The reason I brought it it up is typically western fans are trying to make linear timelines (whether they be split or single timelines) while waht I understand from Japnese culture they view time as circular so a constantly rebooted timeline is probably closer to what the Japanese official timeline would be. MPS, can correct me if I'm wrong. If you don't multiple rebooted timelines then that's fine. I'm fine with it. But if you want an overall cohesive timeline, I doubt the Japanese texts will help you much though it will give better insight on individual stories.

[Raien]

The reason I brought it it up is typically western fans are trying to make linear timelines (whether they be split or single timelines) while waht I understand from Japnese culture they view time as circular so a constantly rebooted timeline is probably closer to what the Japanese official timeline would be. MPS, can correct me if I'm wrong. If you don't multiple rebooted timelines then that's fine. I'm fine with it. But if you want an overall cohesive timeline, I doubt the Japanese texts will help you much though it will give better insight on individual stories.

Oh right. I didn't understand what you meant by "rebooted timelines". Thing is though, Nintendo have said that there is a single official timeline for all the games, and that indicates a linear progression.

Edited by Raien, 27 May 2009 - 02:47 PM.

[SOAP]

The reason I brought it it up is typically western fans are trying to make linear timelines (whether they be split or single timelines) while waht I understand from Japnese culture they view time as circular so a constantly rebooted timeline is probably closer to what the Japanese official timeline would be. MPS, can correct me if I'm wrong. If you don't multiple rebooted timelines then that's fine. I'm fine with it. But if you want an overall cohesive timeline, I doubt the Japanese texts will help you much though it will give better insight on individual stories.

Oh right. I didn't understand what you meant by "rebooted timelines". Thing is though, Nintendo have said that there is a single official timeline for all the games, and that indicates a linear progression.

Yes but if they're going by Jpanese culture, then there may only be a single cohesive timeline only the vaguest sense, simmilar to Battlestar Galatica and Peter Pan's "All of this has happened before. And it will happen again, and again, and again." Actually an eternal return motif explains much of the Zelda universe, namely why Link is always the Hero.

[Raien]

Yes but if they're going by Jpanese culture, then there may only be a single cohesive timeline only the vaguest sense, simmilar to Battlestar Galatica and Peter Pan's "All of this has happened before. And it will happen again, and again, and again." Actually an eternal return motif explains much of the Zelda universe, namely why Link is always the Hero.

Well, specific events may reoccur in the series, but the general decline of Hyrule from the "Hylian Age" to a small kingdom inhabited by their descendants is still pretty visible. The story of Hyrule is a linear progression, and we can determine the timeline on that basis.

[CID Farwin]

So, you're saying an evil dark lord wouldn't invade Hyrule to conquer it? Like Sauron to Middle-Earth? This is the same problem I had with MPS's argument; you assume that the Triforce is a necessary step to conquest, and it simply isn't. If the villain has the means to conquering Hyrule, such as Ganon's Trident in FSA, then the immediate goal becomes the conquest of Hyrule. The Dark Tribe had powerful dark magic, and that was surely all they needed to conquer Hyrule.

You know, I should have held up FSA from the beginning. No game demonstrates better that the Triforce is not necessary for a villain to conquer the land of Hyrule. I'm still happy to accept MPS's explanation as to how Hyrule and the Sacred Realm are connected, but this assumption is clearly unjustified.

I'm saying he/they wouldn't invade Hyrule, and ignore the Triforce. I'm saying that the vision is virtually the same as ALttP/OoT backstory, just with the Dark Tribe involved. I'm saying that it can be the actual Triforce in the vision, because to have the Triforce serve as a symbol for Hyrule would be redundant, because they mean the same thing, and if you control the Triforce, you control Hyrule.

The ultimate goal of these villains, yes, is to rule Hyrule, and the world. I'm not arguing against that, and I never have (though I will admit I haven't been clear on that in the past.) I just don't see why they can't be fighting over the Triforce when we see them fighting over it.

I wouldn't be able to, because the Triforce is only identifiable by its symbolic design. But even though we might not be able to distinguish the literal from the symbolism in the imagery, we can still refer to the literal nature of Lanayru's quotes. Since Lanayru does not directly refer to the Triforce (or vaguely refer to the "power of the gods"), we can still establish that the Triforce does not literally appear.

I see, so you're arguing that because of the text. okay.

I brought this up in my last post (which wasn't my main point because it only occurred to me when I was typing.) Lanayru wouldn't reference the Triforce, or "the" Sacred Realm because they're not referenced anywhere else in the game. The more I think about it the more I see places where the game text was deliberately changed to eradicate the Triforce and the Sacred Realm. In this view, "the Sacred Realm" to "the Sacred Realm, Hyrule" was one of these changes. As for the reason for these changes, well, like I said; that's for another thread.

Yes but if they're going by Jpanese culture, then there may only be a single cohesive timeline only the vaguest sense, simmilar to Battlestar Galatica and Peter Pan's "All of this has happened before. And it will happen again, and again, and again." Actually an eternal return motif explains much of the Zelda universe, namely why Link is always the Hero.

Yet more proof!

Masa should be proud of you.

You got the basic gist of it worded better than I can. There's just some apparent nuances that are hard to express, that admittedly aren't exactly relevant right now.

I think I almost get it, like when there's a word on the tip of your tongue.

Anyway, my brain hurts.

[SOAP]

Well, specific events may reoccur in the series, but the general decline of Hyrule from the "Hylian Age" to a small kingdom inhabited by their descendants is still pretty visible. The story of Hyrule is a linear progression, and we can determine the timeline on that basis.

We're led to believe this but any sort of progression shown? The closest thing to the golden Hylian Age we've seen so far is OoT and the Hylians don't seem to all that different in the people in ALttP. The Hylians in OoT certianly don;'t seem all that magically adept than the people in ALttP except for a few key people, such as Princess Zelda, but taht was the same case in ALttP. Hyrule always seems to be locked in some vague pseudo-medieval stasis with plenty of anachronisms thrown here and there which lead me to believe Hyrule's cultural and technological progression through the series isn't all that serious.

Yet more proof!

Masa should be proud of you.

Ha! Masa has plenty of reasons NOT to be proud of me. He knows me all too well.

Besides, this is a much better theory.

Simply because it includes Tricia Helfer.

Edited by SOAP, 28 May 2009 - 01:10 AM.