
Wind Waker Hylian Opening Translation
#91
Posted 28 January 2005 - 08:20 AM
I'm just saying, MJ, that the way it worked in Oracles is DIFFERENT from here, and you have to mix LOGIC with magic.
#92
Posted 01 February 2005 - 03:12 PM
And people remember things they never experienced all the time.
#93
Posted 01 February 2005 - 07:57 PM
Husse said
YES! Tri-Enforcer FINALLY sated the obvious! People, you WON'T KNOW if someone is traveling through time and playing with your memory! Unless you came with him, or have special powers, (It IS possible, not definite, but possible, that the Sages know,) you won't know! Think back to the future. Marty drastically changed events, but no one knows the difference.
LOGIC!
I dunno, I wouldn't rule it out. Back to the Future (and most time travel stories infact) is science based fiction, Zelda is fantasy based fiction and thus open to much wilder ideas with things like this.
#94
Posted 02 February 2005 - 05:02 PM
Quote
More importantly, how did he become a legend if he hadn't saved Hyrule yet?
Obviously, people actually NOTICED all the alterations in history, which means they not only had new memories of what happened, they actually remembered how thing originally were as well (kinda like how time travel worked in OoA!). Which means, that when Link was sent back to original time for the final time, thus closing the crossroads between the two time periods forever, it erased the dark future from happening but the people still remembered it! So... ONE TIMELINE!
You just solved the largest and most complex series of time paradoxes in all of Zelda. You didn't even know how amazing that one post was. I'm shocked.
#95
Posted 02 February 2005 - 05:13 PM
#96
Posted 02 February 2005 - 05:21 PM
#97
Posted 02 February 2005 - 05:44 PM
#98
Posted 02 February 2005 - 05:49 PM
#99
Posted 02 February 2005 - 05:56 PM
Zythe said
I think his whole point was that there were no multiple timelines. I like to call what he described as the "Cat House" theory, named after the episode of Charmed. Basically, if X minutes passes after you go back in time then after X minutes passes on the other side of the time, any changes will randomly appear there, as if time is rectifying itself. Everything inbetween those changes did happen, but were anomylous.
Are you talking about relative time? Such as, if you travel back in time five years, the future won't experience any change until five years later?
#100
Posted 02 February 2005 - 07:26 PM
Zythe said
Pefectly serious. No sarcasm whatsoever. And no, this post is not sarcastic. I find it hard to tell whether I am being sarcastic or not, too. And that last line wasn't sarcastic. Or the previous one. Or that one or this one. Sheesh. I'm so confused now.
Oh, good. I agree with MJ 100% so I just wanted to know what you thought.
#101
Posted 03 February 2005 - 09:09 AM
Hero of Winds said
Are you talking about relative time? Such as, if you travel back in time five years, the future won't experience any change until five years later?
Yes. Exactly. Because there's a scale of time that these chronological mishaps take place on. The world instantly changes as if there's been an error and it has to catch up with itself.
Time itself is a flawed scientific principal, but as we're debating fantasy, it's all to do with accepting fantastical rules of science.
#102
Posted 04 February 2005 - 12:12 PM
#103
Posted 04 February 2005 - 01:39 PM
#104
Posted 04 February 2005 - 02:07 PM
Since Time Travel is not a proven science it differs depending on the book, movie, game, and so on depending on who makes them. Time Travel may be one way in a book but then another in a totally different movie. Both can be logical but the theories behind them are just theories and are just as factual as the movies they're in. There's no universial laws written somewhere on how time travel works. Just a bunch of stuff writers made up in order to better suit the story. That said, if time travel works one way in a game, I think it's a pretty safe bet that it works the same in all the same way in other games in the series. After all, you wouldn't say time travel works one way in Back to the Future but it works more like Terminator in the Back to the Future 2, would you?
#105
Posted 04 February 2005 - 02:18 PM
Quote
Actually it does. Things happen. There's nothing you can do to stop these random changes and eventually everything corrects itself. It does actually make sense, and well, yeah.
Zythe, that was spam.
#106
Posted 04 February 2005 - 02:32 PM
Quote
Zythe, that was spam.
Actually, it wasn't. I was referring to your post. Yeah. So, not spam. Yeesh.
#107
Guest_TanakaBros06_*
Posted 04 February 2005 - 03:41 PM
Mario Jr said
Husse, how, praytell, is that you think Time Traveling in OoT is more like Back to the Future than how it worked in another Zelda game?
Since Time Travel is not a proven science it differs depending on the book, movie, game, and so on depending on who makes them. Time Travel may be one way in a book but then another in a totally different movie. Both can be logical but the theories behind them are just theories and are just as factual as the movies they're in. There's no universial laws written somewhere on how time travel works. Just a bunch of stuff writers made up in order to better suit the story. That said, if time travel works one way in a game, I think it's a pretty safe bet that it works the same in all the same way in other games in the series. After all, you wouldn't say time travel works one way in Back to the Future but it works more like Terminator in the Back to the Future 2, would you?
Funny you should say that, because Zelda has given us at least three different kinds of time travel.
#108
Posted 04 February 2005 - 04:20 PM

Atleast that's what I think, I mean Zelda's father already died a long time ago in Ocarina of time, and then this random dude shows up to be king x_x'' So I really believe that King Daphnes was chosen to be the next king of Hyrule when Zelda the first died. Because they needed a king, and they needed to protect the decendents of Zelda...
#109
Posted 04 February 2005 - 05:27 PM
#110
Posted 04 February 2005 - 07:59 PM
Quote
King daphnes isn't part of the royal family he somewhere stated that, he said that Tetra was the last one of the royal family. And that King daphnes was more a chosen king for Hyrule then really the father/son of Zelda
For one, he never said that...at all. For two, her father didn't die early in OoT, that past with Ganon was changed. And for three, she married and had other little kings, obviously. Since Daphnes can't yet die, apparently, Tetra is his *insert certain number of greats here* granddaughter, of course. Makes sense to me. Daphnes appears to be a quiet man of sorrow, it's a good thing he croaked at the end.
Can I say again that OoT Zelda had kids that were NOT Link's, or would that piss you beyond belief?

#111
Posted 04 February 2005 - 08:54 PM
#112
Posted 06 February 2005 - 03:17 PM
I really don't get why people think King Daphnes and Zeldaaren't related. Some random king isn't going to be "chosen" if the royal family's bloodline was still carried on. Also, when Ganon came, it was sudden and without warning. That's not enough time to make up some substitute King to divert attention from the real royals. Not too mention how pointless it would've been since Hyrule was going down anyways. Also, he had the other half of Zelda's Triforce of Wisdom. I don't care how good a person he may be, but some random guy isn't going to be trusted with something that vital. He had to be immediately related to OoT Zelda, either as a father, son, or even brother.
There are no quotes anywhere to suggest that Daphnes is not related to Zelda. Nor is there any reason to believe such a thing.
#113
Posted 06 February 2005 - 04:30 PM
I think, it being that it was the King's job to stay with Hyrule, he was either granted spirit life, or he died, and couldn't rest. We know he uses his spirit to inhabit the boat anyway. And he wasn't frozen in time. He roamed (able to move in time) between the surface world to watch his people and watch for Ganon, to his beloved frozen Hyrule, that he wished to rise again.
Oddly enough, I love King Hyrule. He says no more than Rauru, but he's MUCH deeper if you care to investigate his character.
WHO LOVES DAPHNES? WOO!
#114
Posted 06 February 2005 - 04:34 PM
#115
Posted 06 February 2005 - 04:42 PM
I saw the original just yesterday, and it SUCKED, so I probably never will.
#116
Posted 06 February 2005 - 04:47 PM
#117
Posted 06 February 2005 - 04:56 PM
Basically, in Atlantis 2, the old gang go back to Atlantis (God knows why) and get Milo to join them on a bunch of random adentures on the surface world. Actually it's three seperate stories that eventually lead up to Princess Kari getting the trident and she has to decide whether or not to bring Atlantis back to the surface. She decides what hell, "Let their be Light!" Her decision was too hasty. First off, ignoring the fact that this was still in the early 1900's, Atlantis rising again and the world be a better, brighter place after that and that's that... just doesn't sit right with me. I mean would Atlantis be recognized as it's own country? Wouldn't people try to take it over? And there's the fact that Atlantis had technology that even we're not ready ready for in the current millenium. Like the immortal-life- giving crystals for starters. The world just wasn't ready for Atlantis to come back. Especially not in the Steam Engine Age. :/
#118
Posted 06 February 2005 - 04:59 PM
#119
Posted 06 February 2005 - 05:26 PM
Sacrifice of the past. Living for the future. The King goes down with what he has preserved and forced upon Link and Zelda, and finally realizes that they can only save the world by living in the future, not in the past, giving up his lifelong dream of bringing back his kingdom for the kids. Everything about the game is young and fresh. there's your moral.
#120
Posted 06 February 2005 - 05:32 PM