54 replies to this topic

[ganonlord6000]

@Soap:
I found you the quote.

NP: We see many familiar characters in this game (even the kid with the dripping nose from The Wind Waker!). Did you refer to any particular Zelda game for development of this game?

HF: In a kind of reverse way. We created the world of the Minish Cap first, then chose characters to fit this world.

Source: http://web.archive.o...int-z14-np-eahf

Thanks, though it's not like I didn't believe you. I'm pretty sure the Oracles in TMC were just Easter eggs put in there just 'cuz. Although they're not as esoteric as a book spine.

Besides, I'm a firm believer that TMC is first. FS/FSA I have other ideas about.

In my view, TMC is most definitly first. Every game since 2005 seems to point to that. Especially the hat bit because this is the only Link that goes through the entire game without a hat and there seems to be no intention to make a sequel to it. Those books in TMC's library are completely useless. Besides. How many people actually know how to translate Hylian? FS might go before OOT. There is very little that says otherwise. FSA is a hard one to place. There seems to be evidence towards palcing it before ALTTP as the IW. But it can't be the IW or anywhere near it because ALTTP's Ganon seemed to be the last gerudo king and he killed all of the gerudos when he got the triforce. FSA is a complete mess anywhere. I'm currently placing it before OOT because it doesn't get in the way of the triforce games. But I think FSA can go anywhere before ALTTP. Any time after that leads to a lot of trouble. I should know. I've tried it.

[Fin]

FS might go before OOT. There is very little that says otherwise.

FS directly precedes FSA, so it's placement is pretty much dependent on where you put the latter game.

[Pinecove]

Besides. How many people actually know how to translate Hylian?

A chart was included with TWW and possibly TMC if I remember correctly.

There seems to be evidence towards palcing it before ALTTP as the IW

1. It's SW
2. Except the references for FSA = SW were completely removed.

Edited by Destiny, 03 June 2010 - 05:12 PM.

[Impossible]

1. It's SW

It's also Triforce of the Gods, not A Link to the Past!

2. Except the references for FSA = SW were completely removed.

Not all of them were. Just enough to fuck things up entirely (due to showing ALttP Ganon's backstory, and him killing off the Knights of Hyrule, but not having it be the IW/SW) and ensure a total lack of cohesion between the games.

[Pinecove]

Stupid Miyamoto...

[Jarsh]

It's funny because Miyamoto wanted everything to become easier to understand, but the opposite happened since a lot of us are still confused about FSA.

[Nerushi]

It's funny because Miyamoto wanted everything to become easier to understand, but the opposite happened since a lot of us are still confused about FSA.

Actually, by easier, I think he meant 'Stop paying attention to the plot'.

[Impossible]

It's funny because Miyamoto wanted everything to become easier to understand, but the opposite happened since a lot of us are still confused about FSA.

Actually, by easier, I think he meant 'Stop paying attention to the plot'.

This, so much. I haven't noticed you much before, but I'm starting to like your observations. >_>

Miyamoto is such an asshole when it comes to plot lately. If he wants to keep Mario "pure", fine. But don't do that to Zelda, not when games like TWW show the potential for amazing stories. He doesn't seem to really accept the fact that story can be an important and integral part of a game if executed well. TP was like, our one last chance to get that, and it was disappointing on that front, so we might be screwed for the Wii game. He always seems to veto it when the other people making the game actually want it. (SMG's director wrote the story of LA. Now there's an awesome guy. Miyamoto won't let him do story now, though.)

It's kind of stupid, given how many other story-heavy games are around. I absolutely believe in maintaining the distinction between games and movies, and keeping things streamlined, but I also believe there are really great kinds of stories that can ONLY be told in games and wouldn't work in any other medium. A lot of recent games have been playing around with ideas like that, and I want to see Nintendo do it. It's not appropriate for Mario, but it IS for an "epic" style quest like Zelda. In fact, that story is arguably needed in order to build the necessary emotion and tension, like we had at the end of TWW. Miyamoto is a genius, sure, but I wish he would realise the importance of that particular element.

Edited by Impossible, 04 June 2010 - 07:14 AM.

[Fin]

1. It's SW.

[ganonlord6000]

Besides. How many people actually know how to translate Hylian?

A chart was included with TWW and possibly TMC if I remember correctly.

There seems to be evidence towards palcing it before ALTTP as the IW

1. It's SW
2. Except the references for FSA = SW were completely removed.

I never knew about this! Which versions of the games was this chart included with? I would like to see this for myself.

[Fin]

I never knew about this! Which versions of the games was this chart included with? I would like to see this for myself.

There was a page in the Wind Waker manual dedicated to the cypher.



IGN did a feature on it in 2002.

Attached Files

•  hyruleglyphics.bmp   705.62K   2 downloads

[ganonlord6000]

I never knew about this! Which versions of the games was this chart included with? I would like to see this for myself.

There was a page in the Wind Waker manual dedicated to the cypher.



IGN did a feature on it in 2002.

It still requires someone in the US to know both this and Japanese in order to translate a few things like those meaningless books and a few things that is stated in the games without the use of Hylian.. Thanks for showing a picture of this chart.

[Fin]

It still requires someone in the US to know both this and Japanese

Yeah, us Europeans have it easy.

Thanks for showing a picture of this chart.

No problem.

[Person]

Actually, in one sense Zelda is becoming more story-driven than past titles. TP, PH, and ST are some of the few games with a cemented place in the timeline.

I think Miyamoto's motivation for changing the plot of FSA was because the plot as it stood required knowledge of several other games for it to make any sense, so only the super-hardcore Zelda fans would get what's up. This is in contrast to games like TP which only required knowledge that it was after OoT, a game which 90% of anybody who has ever played a video game has played. Ditto for PH and ST on building the story arc of the post-TWW timeline.

[Impossible]

FSA would have made sense without ALttP, given that a prequel doesn't usually needs it sequel to make sense. It was only slightly dependent on FS, which was summarised in the manual.

[Average Gamer]

Maybe Miyamoto just didn't want another game to be the IW? OoT created more problems than it solved in that regard, and TWW obliterated the connection later on. Leaving the IW story as nothing more than ALttP's backstory might help out the series in the long run.

[SOAP]

And regarding MM-FSA-TP, there can only be ONE male gerudo every hundred years. Placing FSA before TP means that there are currently two gerudo males. I'm saying 2 because FSA Ganon doesn't seem to be OOT's Ganon. With only a century between OOT ad TP, how would that work out? And Ganon did cause a lot of trouble in FSA. If it was before TP, wouldn't the name Ganon be pretty well known? That and TP seems to begin in a time of peace and that seems to be a result of OOT's Link making sure that this reality didn't turn out like the one he left. I think that the CT actually had it worse, but that really isn't a part of this conversation. There is still the lost woods problem. Because of FSA's and ALTTP's identical geography, they have the same lost woods which used to be the forest of light. If I remember correctly, the removed text mentions that the MS is in the forest. The sacred grove is definitly NOT the dark forest from FSA and ALTTP. It's still a light forest and it's definitly the same place. Wait a sec. In TMC, didn't Din's figurine mention that her ansestors were from Holodrum?

Okay, let's seperate some assumptions from facts here.

Assumption:

FSA Ganon doesn't seem to be OoT's Ganon.

Fact:

While this is a very popular theory amongst fans, especially with FSA's line about Ganon being an ancient demon reborn, it's not necessarily correct though, especially given that the line was a mistranslation and was referring to the trident's power being revived, not the demon.

Assumption:

OoT and TP are only a century apart.

Fact:

This has NEVER been stated to be true EVER, neither in the games or by the creators. What has been stated is that TP is parallel to TWW, which is hundreds of years after OoT. Exactly how many hundreds of years is anyone's guess but it's more than one single century that's for sure. On the otherside of the timeline this would give plenty of time for FSA to take place between the two games.

Assumption:

Ganon being well-known after FSA inferes with TP.

Fact:

There is no reason to believe Ganon is unknown in TP. He just shows up in the eleventh hour after Zant had most of the spotlight.

Assumption:

TP taking place is peaceful era established by OoT Link inteferes with FSA.

Fact:

There is no reason to believe that Hyrule's alternative future was completely peaceful up till that point.

Assumption:

"Lost Woods" being dark in FSA, then light in TP, then dark again in ALttP is a problem.

Fact:

The darkness in FSA's Forest of Light was caused by Ganon's curruption and was temporary. In ALttP, Lost Wood's darkness does not neccessarily have the same cause and seems like it's been that way for a while.

My Assumption:

The darkness in ALttP's Lost Woods is caused by magic that prevents people who are unworthy of the Master Sword from reaching it and has nothing to do with the darkness that afflict the same area in FSA. Since the Master Sword has no relevance to the plot of FSA, it could conceivebly be in Lost Woods somewhere, still resting in it's pedestal where OoT Link left it and TP Link later on finds it again.

[Raien]

Person hit the nail on the head. Miyamoto isn't anti-story, he's anti-timeline. He's said in the past that he wants Zelda stories to be inclusive for new players, and that means limiting the ways in which new Zelda games reference the older games.

Quite frankly, there are much larger reasons why the timeline is so messed up than Miyamoto's position. The first big problem is the constant prequel-making, which is one of the easiest ways to create contradictions and plot holes in narrative fiction. The second big problem is the constant Hyrule setting, which makes it literally impossible for the developers to create new areas/cultures that do not fuck continuity up the ass. If Nintendo just took the Pokemon direction and created regions of Hyrule (i.e. Kanto, Johto, etc) to set the story, there would be no problem.

At this point, I'm all for a complete reboot of Zelda. Introduce a new Hyrule with a new mythology and make every game after a sequel that builds the in-game universe. Problem solved, headaches averted.

[Nerushi]

At this point, I'm all for a complete reboot of Zelda. Introduce a new Hyrule with a new mythology and make every game after a sequel that builds the in-game universe. Problem solved, headaches averted.

That wouldn't stop people from trying to connect the older games at all. If Nintendo tried that then it did be more like problem avoided, fans pissed.
Though its true that prequels seem to mess things up. When you think about it, the only confirmed part ( that actually makes sense IMO ) of the timeline are game that sequels its way from Ocarina of Time such as MM, WW and TP. PH and ST worked alright after WW as well.
And even though we know the order is OoT-ALTTP-LoZ/AoL, they don't make any sense at all. Last time they did a prequel was with TMC, and even that game didn't make all that much sense when looking at FS/FSA.
Who knows what gonna they're gonna try with Zelda Wii. But personally, I think we fans ( no matter how much of an minority we are ) deserve an answer.

Edited by Nerushi, 06 June 2010 - 01:29 PM.

[Raien]

I don't think the fans would get pissed off by a reboot. Although I'm sure they have very strong emotions for the games and their stories, I don't think they feel the same way about the timeline. After all, every second game features a new Link in a whole new period of Hyrule history. It's hard to grow attached to the characters like you would if all the games were set in the same period featuring the same characters. And even if people do feel strongly about the Zelda characters and mythology, a reboot that cements the Zelda mythology should theoretically be much more enjoyable.

Of course, it's worth remembering that only a fraction of the Zelda fanbase are timeline theorists. And I'll bet a good number of theorists only theorise because they enjoy the mystery, not out of emotional attachment to the mythology. So weighing everything up, I don't think Nintendo really have anything to lose by rebooting the franchise.

[SOAP]

I've been up for a hard reboot of the series for the longest time. Actually I've always theories that there have been at least a few "soft" reboots in the past, such as TP and TWW retconning OoT as ALttP's backstory, created three timelines in my opinion. One with the pre-OoT games and possibly Oracles with only vague connections with the other two which are connected to each other by a split caused in OoT. I also sometimes consider the FS games and TMC their own timeline as well making it four unique timelines. Maybe it's the Battlestar Galactica fan in me, but personally I think reboots are a good thing and fit into the whole fluidness of legends changing over time.

Speaking of BSG, Battlesatr Hyrulia anyone? No? Bah!

Edited by SOAP, 06 June 2010 - 08:10 PM.

[ganonlord6000]

@ SOAP

Did I hear you say it isn't a fact from the games or the creators that TP is 100 years after OOT? Actually, Aonuma stated on 2 occasions that it is 100 years later. One is in the split timeline interview. The other is in an interview of NP from a few weeks before its release. I even have the magazine if you want me to confirm it.

[MikePetersSucks]

He's aware, Ganonlord. He's saying games like TP are alternate universes sharing the root of OOT, retconning things as necessary.

[Pinecove]

(SMG's director wrote the story of LA. Now there's an awesome guy.)

He's also awesome because he smuggled in not-wanted-by-Miyamoto-plot behind his back.

[SOAP]

I also should add that in no way am I pretending that FSA is intended to fit bewteen OoT and TP. I just put it there as compromise between having it early in the timeline without being too far from ALttP and maintaining one Ganondorf (not that I hate multiple Ganons but I don't have any reason to believe this is the case though FSA does come really close). I feel a post TP date would negate Aonuma's comments about FS being the earliest story. Being between OoT and TP would still make it one of the earliest stories in the timeline at least. Post TP would make it too late in the timeline.