148 replies to this topic

[Jarsh]

I think the Tree of Life and timeshift stones are the exceptions to the overall timeloop that is SS rather than the Tree of Life and timeshift stones proving the game isn't a timeloop.

The Master Sword follows the same mechanics as the Tree of Life and the Timeshift Stones, and it's a plot thing. It's not that easy.

I believe the Master Sword to have been there all along, and old Impa was aware of it. We already know the pedestal the sword is put into in the past was initially invisible until Link must put it the sword rest in said pedestal, so I believe the whole thing is hidden so no questions are asked when Impa tells Link to get the Sacred Flames to make the Master Sword in the first place.

[MikePetersSucks]

The idea is, of course, entirely unsupportable since you can walk through the spot the Master Sword would've been, and the temple only seems to have two rooms, both of which we can see. It's far more likely that the pedestal was just created out of thin air, or something. It's only a rock with a slit in it, it's not like it's by any means difficult.

[Jarsh]

If a pedestal can magically appear, it's not unlikely it can be magically "put away". By "invisible" I just meant "not there".

[MikePetersSucks]

And where would it go? There's a difference between sequestering something NOWHERE and creating something from nothing. And what's the point of hiding it until that specific moment anyway? Conservation of detail implies that between the sword being set down and their return to the future, the sword was always there.

Plus, as already demonstrated, the things Link does seem to legitimately alter history, regardless of what the other characters do to it.

[Jarsh]

And where would it go? There's a difference between sequestering something NOWHERE and creating something from nothing.

Does it really matter? Besides, we don't know for sure if the pedestal was created by no one right on the spot, or was also hidden beforehand. Since it's not explicitly shown to be created by anyone (not even Fi), it left me with the impression it was hidden.

And what's the point of hiding it until that specific moment anyway? Conservation of detail implies that between the sword being set down and their return to the future, the sword was always there.

It doesn't need to be hidden anymore if Link already fulfilled his destiny. Not having the Master Sword appear in its pedestal throughout the game will avoid questions of why Link can't just go get that already-crafted Master Sword as well as not ruining the story.

Plus, as already demonstrated, the things Link does seem to legitimately alter history, regardless of what the other characters do to it.

I think the timeshift stones, and things from them are the main time fuckery. The developers must have been saying something if Impa already has the bracelet Zelda gives to her since the first time you see her in the game. And, like I said, Demise's fight with Link does offer an explanation for why The Imprisoned is only considered a vessel in-game.

[MikePetersSucks]

And, like I said, Demise's fight with Link does offer an explanation for why The Imprisoned is only considered a vessel in-game.

I'm still not sure what you mean here, can you reiterate?

[Jarsh]

Sure thing, I didn't really state it clearly in the first place. The game says Demise's "remaining consciousness" has been absorbed into the Master Sword. If SS is a time loop, then this could be why The Imprisoned is basically an unintelligent vessel of Demise. When fighting The Imprisoned, Fi says:

Though the details are still unclear,
this monstrosity is the demonic vessel
of Demise.

Basically: Demise - consciousness/intelligence = The Imprisoned

Furthermore, The Imprisoned comes out of this purple gash in the ground, the same spot where the purple portal Demise made right before the final battle. There is no gash in the ground before Demise makes his portal, which would imply Hylia's original seal is not what the sealing spike was made for.

Maybe Link, after defeating Demise, sealed away the last of his consciousness, and left the "body" of Demise in the portal thing. Over time, that body became The Imprisoned and grew strong enough to break free. This would explain why Impa, despite Link defeating Demise, still feels that the temple should be protected.

[MikePetersSucks]

I don't think The Imprisoned is actually unintelligent at all; what reason are we given for thinking so, anyway? It's capable of responding quickly and intuitively to new threats, it changes to respond to how it was beaten before, and it has goals and objectives. And, most importantly, the Imprisoned comes out of the ground when Ghirahim unseals it, not Demise; the Imprisoned has to eat Zelda's soul in order to return to normal, so how is that connected to the Master Sword?

The idea, as neat as it may be, isn't actually supported very well.

[Jarsh]

I agree The Imprisoned was probably trying to get to Zelda. For whatever reason, Zelda's soul has the ability to bring back Demise, probably due to her great force. I personally think the "remaining consciousness" in the Master Sword dissolved shortly after Link and Demise's battle.

And I agree I was wrong before about it being unintelligent, but it's not quite the Demise we see at the end of the game. There must have been a reason to only refer to it as the "vessel" of Demise instead of Demise himself, and I like that Demise being separated from the remnants of his consciousness could be the reason for this. Maybe The Imprisoned is a beast that acts on great instinct, so it's not unintelligent, but it's not quite Demise either.

Also, I'm confused by what you mean by how it comes out from where Ghirahim unseals it? I'm just saying The Imprisoned is in that spot in the Sealed Grounds to begin with because Demise was defeated in that portal and his body remained there. Presumably, Impa sealed it up with the sealing spike and then it gets broken early on in SS.

EDIT: Sorry for the wall of text.

Edited by Jarsh, 17 December 2011 - 12:04 AM.

[joeymartin64]

I think he's saying that Demise was already in Imprisoned form after his battle with the Goddess, prior to any intervention by the MCs, meaning that the idea that he's reduced to The Imprisoned by Link defeating him doesn't really work out.

[SOAP]

Petrhaps it is a part of Links power as the choosen of the gods to be immune to any sort of time-alteration? Would be the perfect counter against Demise - who according to Fi has mastered time and space itself, but Link stands as a counter to that by being outside time and space itself. Sort of. >.>

I think the Tree of Life and timeshift stones are the exceptions to the overall timeloop that is SS rather than the Tree of Life and timeshift stones proving the game isn't a timeloop. Demise's remaining consciousness being sealed in the Master Sword leads quite well into The Imprisoned being a "vessel," as Fi calls it.

The Imprisoned coming out of where Link fought him thousands of years ago also makes sense since the sealing stone wasn't there in the past where Hylia's original seal took place. The purple "gash" below in the sealing stone in the ground where The Imprisoned comes out of looks similar to the purple portal thing Demise made in the past.

Neither of these are necessary because the player sees things from Link's perspective as he's time traveling to make the changes. Other alterations made by other time travelers like Zelda would appear as if they were always there because we don't see things from her perspective. Hence why some things like the Master Sword not appearing on a pedestal in the Sealed temple when Link first arrives until he goes back in time to put it there but other things like the bracelet on Old Impa's hand appearing there before (from's Link's and our perspective) Zelda even gave it to her as if it was always meant to be. It's not because there's something special about Link's method of Time Traveling compared to time traveling in other works of fiction. It's just the most logical way to make it work to avoid dealing with a Grandfather Paradox. That's really all there is to it.

[MikePetersSucks]

There must have been a reason to only refer to it as the "vessel" of Demise instead of Demise himself,

Because it's not his true form and he's trapped within it. I figured that was pretty clear, personally; I chalk it up to Japan having totally different uses for the term "vessel".

Also, I'm confused by what you mean by how it comes out from where Ghirahim unseals it? I'm just saying The Imprisoned is in that spot in the Sealed Grounds to begin with because Demise was defeated in that portal and his body remained there. Presumably, Impa sealed it up with the sealing spike and then it gets broken early on in SS.

How can the Imprisoned exist before Link defeats Demise if the Imprisoned is a result of Demise's existence? You're blatantly ignoring an entire cutscene.

Neither of these are necessary because the player sees things from Link's perspective as he's time traveling to make the changes. Other alterations made by other time travelers like Zelda would appear as if they were always there because we don't see things from her perspective. Hence why some things like the Master Sword not appearing on a pedestal in the Sealed temple when Link first arrives until he goes back in time to put it there but other things like the bracelet on Old Impa's hand appearing there before (from's Link's and our perspective) Zelda even gave it to her as if it was always meant to be. It's not because there's something special about Link's method of Time Traveling compared to time traveling in other works of fiction. It's just the most logical way to make it work to avoid dealing with a Grandfather Paradox. That's really all there is to it.

This really opens up way, way, WAY more paradoxes than you're realizing, because it means that things like Impa getting Zelda's bracelet can occur in iterations of events that don't involve Link's involvement. If Link is in a stable timeloop, he should be experiencing things exactly the same way both times, only realizing his own role in an event after his involvement in it, not seeing distinctly different present eras as he does.

[FDL]

To be fair, it's possible that Hylia beat Demise into the raging, warped state he was in as the Imprisoned, he was revived by Ghirahim, but then quickly returned to the state he was in before by Link. Not saying I 100% buy that being the case, I really haven't decided where I stand yet, but I do think there's a distinct possibility that Link vs Demise in the past didn't really change time at all, and that it was all a part of what was always "meant" to happen to some degree. While their battle in the past does seem very final, I really don't get the sense any huge changes were made to the timeline in the ending. I still think this all might have something to do with Demise having "transcended time" or whatever it is Fi says about him. Perhaps it allowed him to exist in some form until the Triforce overcame him entirely.

[joeymartin64]

Neither of these are necessary because the player sees things from Link's perspective as he's time traveling to make the changes. Other alterations made by other time travelers like Zelda would appear as if they were always there because we don't see things from her perspective. Hence why some things like the Master Sword not appearing on a pedestal in the Sealed temple when Link first arrives until he goes back in time to put it there but other things like the bracelet on Old Impa's hand appearing there before (from's Link's and our perspective) Zelda even gave it to her as if it was always meant to be. It's not because there's something special about Link's method of Time Traveling compared to time traveling in other works of fiction. It's just the most logical way to make it work to avoid dealing with a Grandfather Paradox. That's really all there is to it.

My problem with this is the fact that Link witnesses Zelda giving Impa the bracelet. I get the perspective thing with Groose and the tree. Basically, the events that brought Groose to the Sealed Temple happened slightly differently for him by the end of the game, in that he now remembers the tree always having been there. Link (and by proxy, the player), on the other hand, remembers how it went "before" the tree was a thing, only having caused the tree's presence "later." Am I getting this right so far? The difference between this instance and the bracelet example, though, is that Link was in the past when the bracelet was given. He saw the change to the past being made, even if he didn't do it himself.

[SOAP]

Neither of these are necessary because the player sees things from Link's perspective as he's time traveling to make the changes. Other alterations made by other time travelers like Zelda would appear as if they were always there because we don't see things from her perspective. Hence why some things like the Master Sword not appearing on a pedestal in the Sealed temple when Link first arrives until he goes back in time to put it there but other things like the bracelet on Old Impa's hand appearing there before (from's Link's and our perspective) Zelda even gave it to her as if it was always meant to be. It's not because there's something special about Link's method of Time Traveling compared to time traveling in other works of fiction. It's just the most logical way to make it work to avoid dealing with a Grandfather Paradox. That's really all there is to it.

My problem with this is the fact that Link witnesses Zelda giving Impa the bracelet. I get the perspective thing with Groose and the tree. Basically, the events that brought Groose to the Sealed Temple happened slightly differently for him by the end of the game, in that he now remembers the tree always having been there. Link (and by proxy, the player), on the other hand, remembers how it went "before" the tree was a thing, only having caused the tree's presence "later." Am I getting this right so far? The difference between this instance and the bracelet example, though, is that Link was in the past when the bracelet was given. He saw the change to the past being made, even if he didn't do it himself.

Well then it's due to the fact that Zelda started time-traveling before Link, therefore Link becomes part of the rewrites in history that Zelda made. From her perspective, Link could have remembered things as she did up until she actually makes the change but we don't play as that iteration of Link, we play as the one who was raised in the rewritten history Zelda created by going back in time first. In other words Link is to Zelda is what Groose is to Link as far as differences in perspective go. It does dampen the theory a bit that Link actually witnesses the actual change in the past and therefore should remember things as they were before like Zelda does but it still boils down to who's the actual catalyst for the change.

What I'm really interested is how events play out from Impa's perspective.

Edited by SOAP, 17 December 2011 - 02:40 AM.

[MikePetersSucks]

It does dampen the theory a bit that Link actually witnesses the actual change in the past and therefore should remember things as they were before like Zelda does but it still boils down to who's the actual catalyst for the change.

Link is, because if not for him going back in time Zelda would've died.

Your move.

[SOAP]

It does dampen the theory a bit that Link actually witnesses the actual change in the past and therefore should remember things as they were before like Zelda does but it still boils down to who's the actual catalyst for the change.

Link is, because if not for him going back in time Zelda would've died.

Your move.

He would still be an iteration of Link who saw things as she did, much like there's a iteration of Groose the player knows who remembers things as Link did before he goes back in time to plant the tree but afterwards acts like it was always there. After the point that Zelda gives Impa the bracelet, Link is the iteration of himself that the players are playing as who remembers the bracelet always being there. From Zelda's perspective it would seem like Link's memories had changed instantly.

EDIT:

Case in point: What if Link's life were in danger before he goes back in time to plant the tree and Grrose ends up saving his life. It would still be another iteration of Groose that remembers things as Link does until Link changes the past and returns to another iteration of Groose who remembers things differently. What if we played as that Groose? We go in and save Link and later on we'd go to the Sealed Temple where the Tree of Life is as it had always been from the start of the hypothetical game.

What would really make or break the theory is how Impa remembers it considering she's wearing the damn thing.

Edited by SOAP, 17 December 2011 - 03:05 AM.

[MikePetersSucks]

He would still be an iteration of Link who saw things as she did, much like there's a iteration of Groose the player knows who remembers things as Link did before he goes back in time to plant the tree but afterwards acts like it was always there. After the point that Zelda gives Impa the bracelet, Link is the iteration of himself that the players are playing as who remembers the bracelet always being there. From Zelda's perspective it would seem like Link's memories had changed instantly.

It doesn't change the fact that he was back in time and witnessed the change happen, and is responsible for it happening. It's not at all comparable to Groose, who had no play in the events of the Tree's creation and didn't go back in time with Link. Your idea doesn't work, because the mechanics you're imagining to make it function are completely arbitrary and don't differentiate between a lot of important things.

Case in point: What if Link's life were in danger before he goes back in time to plant the tree and Grrose ends up saving his life. It would still be another iteration of Groose that remembers things as Link does until Link changes the past and returns to another iteration of Groose who remembers things differently. What if we played as that Groose? We go in and save Link and later on we'd go to the Sealed Temple where the Tree of Life is as it had always been from the start of the hypothetical game.

Unless Groose time travels in order to do it, it's irrelevant.

What would really make or break the theory is how Impa remembers it considering she's wearing the damn thing.

Impa's a whole mess of problems. Hell, her memories might transcend time outright since she's kind of godmoding.

[SOAP]

My theory is not arbitrary. It's dependent on several things, such as who's perspective we the players are seeing events unfold and who actually actively making the changes regardless of who else witnesses it. Yes Link saves Zelda's life but he didn't make her give the bracelet to Impa. That was out of her own volition. She could have decided to hell with it and kept it in which case Old Impa wouldn't have had the bracelet when we first meet her. What's arbitrary and contradictory is saying everything is predestined from the start except for a few instances where it's not simply because of game mechanics or whatever.

[MikePetersSucks]

It's arbitrary from an in-universe perspective because it doesn't seem to differentiate between what time period people are in, only their actions; except the root causes of these actions can be superceded or ignored for what ever reason. It's nonsensical, to me.

Zelda only has the CHOICE to give Impa the Bracelet or not because of Link; there is literally no possible iteration of events where Zelda gives the Bracelet at that moment and Link is uninvolved, so how come he doesn't have "time traveler's immunity" as I'll call it? He is an indispensable, crucial part for the event to go down, and he used time travel to do it. By your logic, Fi should continually have memory dissonance to Link's actions. "Master, sensors tell me that this tree was always here. Why did you wait until now to acquire this fruit?"

[SOAP]

If you really want to get into root causes you might as well say everything that everyone does in SS, including the actions of Ghirahim and even Demise all happen the way they do because Hylia reincarnated as Zelda, setting everything else into motion because no one would have been able to make the choices they did if Zelda did not exist to begin with. Link would still be a daydreaming airhead. Groose and his lackeys would still be picking on him. Ghirahim would not have her to awaken Demise. The people of Skyloft would forever be living in sky completely unaware of a rich land below. There'd be no Zelda for Link to save to begin with if it weren't for Hylia. Yet it would completely underwhelming storytelling to take away everyone's free will like that. There'd be no sense f urgency because hey the good guys already won before the game even started. I think there is free will as evidence that Link can make changes to history contrary to how he remembers it. The fact he time travels does not negate any one else's free will, even other time travelers. Changes made in the past by Zelda would still seem like they've always been to Link because he's not in her perspective. They're still two different observers experiencing things in slightly different ways. Also the fact that they didn't go back in time together pretty important too in that regard, even if they eventually catch up with each other in the past. Besides, if LInk has time traveler's immunity why does it only kick in sometimes but not others and why is that the times it doesn't it's something specfically did by Zelda or Impa in the past?

I don't think memory dissonance would be an issue with Fi considering she's aware of Link's actions in the Silent Realm which, for all we know, take place all in his head. There's an implied mental link between Fi and Link in that regard. Besides, as a literal exposition fairy, she seems to know a whole heck a lot about a lot of things for someone who's been sleeping inside a sword for who knows how long. So knowing whatever Link knows wouldn't be a stretch for her.

Edit: Also, Ghirahim is another time traveler and has his own motives and free will so there could be an iteration where Zelda gives Impa the bracelet that doesn't involve Link if it's one where Ghirahim had not yet traveled back in time and made his own alterations. Once he does, then yes it does become necessary for Link to go back and save her.

Edited by SOAP, 17 December 2011 - 06:06 AM.

[Jarsh]

How can the Imprisoned exist before Link defeats Demise if the Imprisoned is a result of Demise's existence? You're blatantly ignoring an entire cutscene.

Uh oh, seems like I forgot a major cutscene, then. What happens in it? Does it confirm The Imprisoned existed before Link and Demise's battle?

[MikePetersSucks]

If you really want to get into root causes you might as well say everything that everyone does in SS, including the actions of Ghirahim and even Demise all happen the way they do because Hylia reincarnated as Zelda, setting everything else into motion because no one would have been able to make the choices they did if Zelda did not exist to begin with.

And this is why I find your idea fundamentally arbitrary and unworkable. It requires that we arbitrary decide to stop "counting backwards" as were to prevent an infinite recursion.

Uh oh, seems like I forgot a major cutscene, then. What happens in it? Does it confirm The Imprisoned existed before Link and Demise's battle?

The Imprisoned comes out of the seal, and eats Zelda's soul, turning into Demise, basically. So yea, it seems he was turned into the Imprisoned and then sealed right from the outset, so that breaking the seal (which is fairly easy to do) didn't automatically doom the world.

[Jarsh]

Then I concede. If he was already The Imprisoned before his fight with Link, then Link's fight isn't what caused him to be The Imprisoned. Which means just sealing Demise at all would seem to make him The Imprisoned. I'll finish my Hero Mode playthrough before I make up my mind again.

[Showsni]

See, my view of time (and time travel) is that at any particular point, only the present exists. Time isn't a river you can sail upstream and downstream (even with a sword for a boat). If you travel through time, it's as though you stay as you are whilst the universe is rearranged around you - simply take all the particles, and put them in the position they were in in the past (except for the bits currently forming you). That's the only way I can see time travel being physically possible.

To quote wikipedia,

Two contrasting viewpoints on time divide many prominent philosophers. One view is that time is part of the fundamental structure of the universe, a dimension in which events occur in sequence. Sir Isaac Newton subscribed to this realist view, and hence it is sometimes referred to as Newtonian time.[3][4] Time travel, in this view, becomes a possibility as other "times" persist like frames of a film strip, spread out across the time line. The opposing view is that time does not refer to any kind of "container" that events and objects "move through", nor to any entity that "flows", but that it is instead part of a fundamental intellectual structure (together with space and number) within which humans sequence and compare events. This second view, in the tradition of Gottfried Leibniz[5] and Immanuel Kant,[6][7] holds that time is neither an event nor a thing, and thus is not itself measurable nor can it be travelled.

I'm firmly in the second camp - "It is sometimes convenient to think of space and time as something "out there," over and above the entities and their relations to each other, but this convenience must not be confused with reality. Space is nothing but the order of co-existent objects; time nothing but the order of successive events."

Now, Zelda (as Sheik explained) views Time in the former way, which doesn't square at all with how I view the world. I'm fine with fantastical video games making up rules for magic and whatnot, but when it comes to changing the fundamental physics of the world to something I don't agree with, I tend to balk at it. Like if they made a game where gravity was a repelling force for no reason whatsoever.

Still, I guess it's their game so we have to accept their rules.

Anyway, one thing you seem to be forgetting is the divide between Link and you. Maybe when Zelda travels back in time Link's memories of events do change. How would we know? It's not like he tells us what he's thinking. Our own memories don't change because we're outside the game. Perhaps Link can remember a time when Impa didn't have the bracelet upon their first meeting.

[MikePetersSucks]

Anyway, one thing you seem to be forgetting is the divide between Link and you. Maybe when Zelda travels back in time Link's memories of events do change. How would we know? It's not like he tells us what he's thinking. Our own memories don't change because we're outside the game. Perhaps Link can remember a time when Impa didn't have the bracelet upon their first meeting.

Fi comments on things FOR Link, though. This idea isn't really the best because she never experiences any sort of cognitive dissonance as far as the continuity of events.

[D~N]

So while playing hero mode I noticed something small but interesting. When Link takes the Goddess Sword for the first time, he pulls it from a pedestal. At the end of the game, as you will recall, Link places the Master Sword into a pedestal, one that was previously MISSING from the temple, or hidden out of sight.

The interesting part is this: the pedestals are the same, visually. This might mean nothing, but I just thought it was neat that they were the same - it could have something to do with the whole island-in-the-sky falling down onto the temple, but probably not. Just thought I'd let people that were interested in this mysterious pedestal know.

[flimsykitty]

So while playing hero mode I noticed something small but interesting. When Link takes the Goddess Sword for the first time, he pulls it from a pedestal. At the end of the game, as you will recall, Link places the Master Sword into a pedestal, one that was previously MISSING from the temple, or hidden out of sight.

The interesting part is this: the pedestals are the same, visually. This might mean nothing, but I just thought it was neat that they were the same - it could have something to do with the whole island-in-the-sky falling down onto the temple, but probably not. Just thought I'd let people that were interested in this mysterious pedestal know.

It's completely missing from the temple in the earlier parts of the game. I just rewatched the cutscene where Zelda enters "eternal sleep" and it's not there. It is also missing from the scene when Link makes his wish and Zelda wakes up and that takes place after the Goddess Statue falls.

Most likely it's just a visual error and they simply copied and pasted the original pedestal to the temple for cutscene purposes...

[Chaltab]

Since it's highly unlikely that Nintendo will every satisfactorily answer the issue of the ending, here's my fanon theory:

The Triforce does not seem to have the power to obliterate people on a spiritual level. If that were the case, Ganon would have done it to Link in the Fail Timeline. We also know that there was at least one timeshift stone in the Sky Keep. My idea is this: the Triforce didn't destroy Demise but rather created a circumstance in which Link could, just as it didn't give Ganon Hyrule in the Seal War, but changed the Sacred Realm to 'his' world. The darkness Fi detects escaping is coming from the past and she detects Demise as gone because the whole pit has been shifted into the past.