399 replies to this topic

[Arturo]

Uh, not really, considering what you saw was basically just more standard Hyrule soldier blokeys. But the legend of the 'Knights of Hyrule' may have just come from standard soldiers being involved in the war anyway.

They were not standard, they wore golden... things and their heads. It's the same model they used for Viscen, the most important of soldiers in MM. They might or might not be the knights.

Attached Files

•  normal_hyrulecastle54.jpg   21.78K   18 downloads

[Fyxe]

They still don't look like knights. Knights wouldn't stand by the walls of a throne room anyway. Knights would stand near the king himself, if they were even there. Those are royal guards.

[Arturo]

They still don't look like knights. Knights wouldn't stand by the walls of a throne room anyway. Knights would stand near the king himself, if they were even there. Those are royal guards.

They are really near of the King, and we don't know if there are more around him. They are more important than those soldiers we see around, and I don't see we they can't be Knights. It's a time of peace and they have to do something, they can't just live a confortable life. And if you remember the OoT Comic, Link's father looks like a boss of soldiers, just like those in OoT. And in ALttP Link is from the bloodline of Knights. And OoT Link and ALttP Link seem to be heroes in the same way. So Link in OoT might be a Knight descendant.

[Fyxe]

Knights don't DO that. Knights don't GUARD. That is not the job of a knight. That is the job of a ROYAL GUARD. I think those are obviously royal guards, and quite frankly there isn't much arguement to it. At a time of peace, living a comfortable life is *exactly* what a knight does. It's a reward for their loyalty. Knight is not just a rank, it is a social position. They do not do the job of security men.

I don't remember Link's father in the OoT manga. Are you sure he was in it? What issue? I don't remember seeing him.

[Doopliss]

Who's Viscen? I just can't remember...

[MikePetersSucks]

No, because Link in the Child Timeline is not old enough to have the Master Sword, hes' not the Hero of Time.

Doesn't mean Ganon's ass can't be kicked without it. Or that The Master Sword won't allow Link to weild it after proving himself. Because it's not like 11 year olds have used the Master Sword. Wait. They did.

[Hero of Slime]

See, this is what I'm talking about, Arturo. Inherant bias towards a particular view, considering split timelines a joke. I hate the idea of a split timeline but I see it as less of a 'joke' than the concept of the Imprisoning War and OoT being seperate.

You assume too much. I did not say all split timelines were jokes, I was talking about split timeliens that are jokes. I have never seen a serious split timeline that does not contradict the creaotrs original intentions about the IW.

Also, I'd like you, Zol, to come up with a complete timeline that explains exactly where the IW fits in and why the huge events of OoT are forgotten. Because I still don't see where TWW fits in your timeline anyway.

Its in my sig, the IW fits between FSA and ALttP, the reason none of the events of OoT are mentioned in ALttP is because OoT did not exist when ALttP was made, and TWW's position is shown in the timeline right between MM and FS.

[SOAP]

Yes, yes I did.
I doubt it would be good enough for the original designers if it was WRONG.

Is it that impossible to believe that maybe the creators prefer the english names? It's happened before with Mario and Pauline who were originally Jumpman and the Lady. Just because it's the original Japanese doesn't make it better. Knights of Hyrule is just as legit and official a title as whatever the Japanese term was in ALttP.

Edit: Oh man! This whole page DID NOT exist when I posted this... >_>

Who's Viscen? I just can't remember...

I think he means Vincent, one of the Mayor's body guards in MM.

And Aruro those aren't Knights. Those are Royal Guards. Learn the difference.

Fyxe, I think he's confusing it with the ALttP comic, which as I recall, is the only Zelda comic I ever seen that ever shows his dad. I think it was only as a ghost though.

Edited by SOAP, 01 July 2006 - 05:04 PM.

[Showsni]

Who's Viscen? I just can't remember...

Captain of the Guard in Majora's Mask.

[Arturo]

Knights don't DO that. Knights don't GUARD. That is not the job of a knight. That is the job of a ROYAL GUARD. I think those are obviously royal guards, and quite frankly there isn't much arguement to it. At a time of peace, living a comfortable life is *exactly* what a knight does. It's a reward for their loyalty. Knight is not just a rank, it is a social position. They do not do the job of security men.

I don't remember Link's father in the OoT manga. Are you sure he was in it? What issue? I don't remember seeing him.

It´s not in OoT manga, but in OoT comic, that´s the European comic.

Doesn't mean Ganon's ass can't be kicked without it. Or that The Master Sword won't allow Link to weild it after proving himself. Because it's not like 11 year olds have used the Master Sword. Wait. They did.

In OoT Link was sealed in the Sacred Realm because he was too young to be the Hero of Time, so he cannot wield the sword. And don´t you remember what happenned just before Link got the Ocarina of Time? He didn´t even have an oportunity, and you have to remember that Ganon didn´t have any peace of the Triforce by then. Child Link cannot defeat Ganon.

You assume too much. I did not say all split timelines were jokes, I was talking about split timeliens that are jokes. I have never seen a serious split timeline that does not contradict the creaotrs original intentions about the IW.
Its in my sig, the IW fits between FSA and ALttP, the reason none of the events of OoT are mentioned in ALttP is because OoT did not exist when ALttP was made, and TWW's position is shown in the timeline right between MM and FS.

You are assuming too much. First you are assuming that Link and Tetra find a New Hyrule, whereas the King explicitly says that land would <u><b><i>NOT</u></b></i> be Hyrule. After that, you are forgetting that Hyrule has a reallzy simmillar geography in both ALttP and OoT, that means it´s the same Hyrule. And you say split timelines contradict creators quotes about the SW, but they do it just slightly, because for most of us, the SW is either Child OoT or comes just after it. But what you say completely contradicts what creators said.

Is it that impossible to believe that maybe the creators prefer the english names? It's happened before with Mario and Pauline who were originally Jumpman and the Lady. Just because it's the original Japanese doesn't make it better. Knights of Hyrule is just as legit and official a title as whatever the Japanese term was in ALttP.

Edit: Oh man! This whole page DID NOT exist when I posted this... >_>
I think he means Vincent, one of the Mayor's body guards in MM.

And Aruro those aren't Knights. Those are Royal Guards. Learn the difference.

Fyxe, I think he's confusing it with the ALttP comic, which as I recall, is the only Zelda comic I ever seen that ever shows his dad. I think it was only as a ghost though.

It´s not Vincent, I checked and he´s Viscen. And I am not confusing, you just didn´t understand me. Manga and comic are not the same, I have read the OoT manga and I know that I doesn´t say anything about the father, but the comic does.

[Hero of Slime]

I never said Link and Tetra discovered a new land and I never said that there is a new hyrule. You must be confusing me with some other single timeliner.

Contradicting the creators slightly is still contradicting the creators, and if it is okay for you and mohammed to do it then it is okay for me and all the other single timeliners.

[MikePetersSucks]

In OoT Link was sealed in the Sacred Realm because he was too young to be the Hero of Time, so he cannot wield the sword. And don´t you remember what happenned just before Link got the Ocarina of Time? He didn´t even have an oportunity, and you have to remember that Ganon didn´t have any peace of the Triforce by then. Child Link cannot defeat Ganon.

That may be true, but two other Links of the same age as Child Link has kicked Ganon's ass. It's perfectly reasonable that his experiences in OOT made him mentally mature enough or some bulldizzle. Even if he didn't use the Master Sword, we can assume SOMETHING happened.

[SOAP]

That's also assuming that anything WOULD happen. We don't know Ganon's status in the child timeline. MM mentions him like, not at all.

[Tri-Enforcer]

(Fyxe) Uh, no, it hasn't. What appears on Link's hand in AoL and the Oracle games is a crest of the whole Triforce, appearing evenly. It also has no direct connection to Link touching the Triforce in AoL or the Oracle games.

Uhh excuse me, but the whole Triforce appears on Link, Ganon, and Zelda's hand in OOT. It looks just the same as the mark from Oracles and AoL.

(Fyxe) But he still could have lost his shield (I think...) or bought the other shield for the meeting with Zelda, so why is his equipment so important?

To show that Link is sent back prior to his first meeting with Zelda. Link didn't have the Goron bracelet when he first met Zelda. If he were sent back to the point after Ganon attacked, then Link would be wearing the bracelet, since we know our hero had the bracelet before Ganon attacked and before Link first pulled the MS.

(Fyxe) Except the mark is made to be obvious. Nearly everyone notices the mark. It's a vital plot element. Hardly anyone notices that the Goron Bracelet is missing. It's a minor item and therefore almost certainly an oversight. Hell, couldn't he of just taken the bracelet off?

Link being sent prior to his meeting with Zelda is made obvious as well. We all noticed Zelda practically doing the same thing we saw her do when they first met--peeking through the courtyard window. Why would she be doing the same thing? I think this repeated act is very apparent to making the scene seem as if it's when Link and Zelda first met.

(Fyxe) All of this makes no real difference, as Link is told to close the Door of Time and return the Master Sword to the Pedestal of Time, both of which would not be necessary otherwise.

Link does this upon his arrival--we see the MS is in the Pedestal. I understand we see the Door of Time open in the background, but I'm going to give this a 'Fyxe' explanation: It's a 'graphical oversite'. Hey why can't I use that excuse? Even if the door is shown closed, then maybe it could be opened from the inside.

(Fyxe) Firstly, I wasn't talking about TWW. I know he's a legend in that. At least, to SOME people he's a legend, mainly royals, and one small island. Considering TWW is spread across tons of islands and the royals and the castle are gone, it wouldn't be a surprise if he ended up forgotten after TWW, actually. But that's not the main point. The main point is that the backstory in ALttP is written and told as fact, not legend. It's taken as historical truth. However, the backstory of TWW is largely told as if it's legend. I bet half of the population of the Great Sea don't even believe that there's a land beneath the sea. And why would they? It's nonsense to most of them.

The legend in TWW is actually told as fact, just as the legend in LttP is. I don't see how you can tell that either one is told as more of myth than the other. Heck, the KoRL lived during time of the Flood, what's his say in the matter--moot?

(Fyxe) And yet it's not important to leave out the fact that a man/demon called Ganon has touched the Triforce before and was sealed before another one showed up and did the exact same thing?

I'm not saying that any event involiving Ganon and the Triforce had occured prior to the IW. All I'm saying is that OOT is not the IW and there is a split timeline.

(Fyxe) Tell me about it. Believing stupid ideas like the IW happening twice simply because they can't think of any other answer? If you ask me, the connection between ALttP and OoT is very apparent.

I never said anything about the IW happening twice. The war in one timeline happened in a different way on the other timeline--that's all. So Ganon is sealed once respectively on each timeline. If you're dealing with the child timeline, then I wouldn't say Ganon is sealed twice, since the sealing that we saw happened on a different timeline and vice versa.

(Fyxe) You bunch of children. I'm arguing with CHILDREN. AAAAHHHH. Fuck.

You're not referring to me.

(Fyxe) Problem is, for most of us who played ALttP before OoT (and the creators themselves) we KNEW OoT was the Imprisoning War as we played it. I know I did. Hell, the magazines doing previews of the game said it was, and also the connections seemed rather obvious to me.
And you are going by what you like. Of course you are. You think the OoT/IW connection doesn't make sense for whatever reason so you're looking for any alternatives. You're going by what you like. Was OoT your first Zelda game? I get the feeling that maybe you didn't know much about Zelda before OoT. Not that that matters, but it may cloud your judgement about where OoT came from and what the intentions of the creators were.

For your information, I was whooping ass with Link in the original Zelda, while you were probably shitting in your diapers. In other words--OOT is not the first Zelda game that I played. Don't make assumptions little girl or boy or whatever the heck you are.

(Fyxe) As for TWW... They didn't get around to changing Ganon's character model for the fight. I doubt they expected some pedantic timeliner to come along and go LOOK HE STILL HAS THE TRIFORCE or something. It's obviously a continuity error otherwise the mark would not be there. Why leave it there? There's absolutely zero reason to leave it there.

I could say the same of the mark at the end of OOT. However what I'm going to say is that the mark is simply there indicate that Link proved himself worthy of the ToC which he's destined for.

(Dooplis) Fact: Link has the bracelet when he gets to the Temple of Time and he doesn't have it when he visits Zelda. Therefore, I can give two explanations: Link took the bracelet off as he did with all his items before setting off to Termina.

Or the second one: What we see in the courtyard is just a flashback of when Link met Zelda for the first time, since everything is exactly the same escept for the Triforce. This is what I actually thought when I beat the game for the first time.

Let me tell ya something Dooplis. When Link travels to Termina--it is not immediately after final courtyard scene in OOT. If you ever played MM or remember the scene with Link and Zelda, Link is wearing the initial shield he starts off with in MM. As you know this shield is not the Hylian shield or any other shield that's used in OOT. So in other words, Link sets off to Termina sometime after the final courtyard scene in OOT. Also, neither Link or Zelda's Triforce marks are resonating in those (you can see Zelda's right hand in those scenes, Fyxe) scenes in MM, which is after what we saw at the end of OOT. Why is that hmmmm? Maybe the mark at the end of OOT was also a misake.

(Dooplis) Tri-Enforcer, I think the fact that Link has the bracelet in the Temple of Time is enough to disprove your theory.

What are you talking about? Clearly you read something wrong. In the ending sequence, when Link returns to the Temple of Time for the FINAL time--he is NOT wearing the bracelet and he also does not have it on in the courtyard scene. This is only part of the reason why I believe Link is sent back prior to his first meeting with Zelda.

[SOAP]

Okay everyone stop guessing and watch this video, geez!



Things to note: Tri's right about Link not having the Goron bracelet the FINAL time. Another thing to note is that we don't see Link actually putting the sword back into the pedestal neither. In fact, it looks as if he's raeching out to touch it but he decides not too.

[mohammedali]

We never see those events happen in OoT, so you are contradicting the game creators when they say OoT is the IW. I still think the game creators intended for OoT to be the IW.

You don't see the events, but you are told they happen. e.g. We don't see Ganon take the Triforce, but OoT tells us this happened in the child part. This corresponds to aLttP BS.

I have proof, TWW and FSA. The fact that they come between OoT and ALttP in a single timeline shows that the game creators do not think of OoT as ALttP's BS.

Please provide quotes. I'm pretty definate that the creators didn't say WW comes between OoT and aLttP, but if you claim it's a fact, then let's see the proof.

Not neccessarily. It was important to clarify which ending they meant because tecnically the game ends with Link going back in his childhood and as we know MM continues off of this ending. Just simply stating it takes place 100 years after OoT, people would assume TWW does the same. Then you'd have crazy theories about the OoT dark future being erased or whatever which is not the case since TWW builds off these events. Now whether they meant as a seperate timeline or not is another issue.

If there is only one timeline, then 100s of years afterwards would result in the same thing from either ending. The idea of the dark future being erased is confirmed not to happen in game by Zelda who tells us:
Zelda in future: "peace will once again reign in this world...for a time"
Hence, the future version doesn't just get overwritten and thus has to happen. Therefore, the fact that they specified an ending means that there are 2 seperate series of events. One where the bad stuff happens (adult ending), and another one (child ending).

Edited by mohammedali, 02 July 2006 - 08:38 PM.

[mohammedali]

double post (delete)

Edited by mohammedali, 02 July 2006 - 08:38 PM.

[SOAP]

If there is only one timeline, then 100s of years afterwards would result in the same thing from either ending. The idea of the dark future being erased is confirmed not to happen in game by Zelda who tells us:
Zelda in future: "peace will once again reign in this world...for a time"
Hence, the future version doesn't just get overwritten and thus has to happen. Therefore, the fact that they specified an ending means that there are 2 seperate series of events. One where the bad stuff happens (adult ending), and another one (child ending).

No, because even going with the theory that OoT's future was erased, her quote could still be taken to mean that yes peace will reign over Hyrule because it will bea s if Ganon never conquered Hyrule to begin with. In afct, I could argue that her saying "the way things should be" means she knows her sending Link back a final time will erase the bad future and fix things to the way things were supposed to be before Time got screwed around with. That's what would have been assumed happened if it was thought that TWW continues off the child ending, the last ending we actually see in the game, like MM did. But this is not the case since TWW proves OoT's dark future was not erased since it builds directly off it. Specifying which ending in OoT they meant on a single timeline would have been crucial because it would mean the difference of Hyrule's future being a erased or not.

Edited by SOAP, 02 July 2006 - 09:48 PM.

[Doopliss]

What are you talking about? Clearly you read something wrong. In the ending sequence, when Link returns to the Temple of Time for the FINAL time--he is NOT wearing the bracelet and he also does not have it on in the courtyard scene. This is only part of the reason why I believe Link is sent back prior to his first meeting with Zelda.

Oops! Sorry mister, my bad. I didn't read correctly. Ok, then I guess your theory is valid.

Edited by Doopliss, 02 July 2006 - 09:58 PM.

[Hero of Legend]

Uhh excuse me, but the whole Triforce appears on Link, Ganon, and Zelda's hand in OOT. It looks just the same as the mark from Oracles and AoL.

Not to meddle in your debate, but no, the Triforce crests are not the same in OoT and AoL.

OoT/TWW: The Triforce crests appear with one piece glowing brighter than the others. This is because the person with the crest is in possesion of a Triforce piece (corresponding to the glowing piece on the crest).

AoL/Oracles/(TP): The whole Triforce appears with no piece glowing brighter than the others. This is because Link is a Chosen Hero, and he does not posses any Triforce piece.

Do with these facts what you want. And no, I will not “prove it”, look it up yourself.

Edited by Hero of Legend, 03 July 2006 - 05:59 AM.

[mohammedali]

No, because even going with the theory that OoT's future was erased, her quote could still be taken to mean that yes peace will reign over Hyrule because it will bea s if Ganon never conquered Hyrule to begin with. In afct, I could argue that her saying "the way things should be" means she knows her sending Link back a final time will erase the bad future and fix things to the way things were supposed to be before Time got screwed around with. That's what would have been assumed happened if it was thought that TWW continues off the child ending, the last ending we actually see in the game, like MM did. But this is not the case since TWW proves OoT's dark future was not erased since it builds directly off it. Specifying which ending in OoT they meant on a single timeline would have been crucial because it would mean the difference of Hyrule's future being a erased or not.

She doesn't say over Hyrule though. You can't change the quotes to work with your theory. She says (whilst in the adult timeline) that peace will once again reign in this world. 2 points on this quote. One is that it says THIS world, and it's said in the adult part of the ending. The other point is that it says peach will ONCE AGAIN reign, meaning that it comes after a time where peace was not reigning, which is only true for adult ending. It's blatently clear she is talking about peace returning to this future world after the defeat of Ganon. To see it as any other way is just trying to twist the obvious intentent of the writers.

[Tri-Enforcer]

Not to meddle in your debate, but no, the Triforce crests are not the same in OoT and AoL.

OoT/TWW: The Triforce crests appear with one piece glowing brighter than the others. This is because the person with the crest is in possesion of a Triforce piece (corresponding to the glowing piece on the crest).

AoL/Oracles/(TP): The whole Triforce appears with no piece glowing brighter than the others. This is because Link is a Chosen Hero, and he does not posses any Triforce piece.

Do with these facts what you want. And no, I will not “prove it”, look it up yourself.

I'm sure their meant to be the same. Either way the the crest appears on the chosen one who has fulfilled prior heroics--which is what Link from AoL did previously in LoZ and what young Link accomplished in the alternate future of OOT.

[Fyxe]

For your information, I was whooping ass with Link in the original Zelda, while you were probably shitting in your diapers. In other words--OOT is not the first Zelda game that I played. Don't make assumptions little girl or boy or whatever the heck you are.

You know what, you've said enough. You're just being a friggin' jerk and you're not even listening to any arguments against you. For your information, I was not referring to you specifically, now was I? Yet you, you feel the need to call me a 'little girl or boy or whatever the heck'. Who's making assumptions?

Act your bloody age for once.

Edited by Fyxe, 03 July 2006 - 01:14 PM.

[Arturo]

I'm sure their meant to be the same. Either way the the crest appears on the chosen one who has fulfilled prior heroics--which is what Link from AoL did previously in LoZ and what young Link accomplished in the alternate future of OOT.

It doesn´t matter whether you are sure or not. What matters is that in AoL and OoX Link has the symbol of the whole Triforce, though he doesn´t possess it, it just means that Link is destinated to be a hero:
"Therefore, I have decided to cast a spell on all of Hyrule. A crest will appear on a young man with that character who has been brought up correctly, has gained many kinds of experiences and reached a certain age." But in OoT and TWW the wielders of this symbol, that isn´t exactly the same, but has just one piece glowing, are the holders of the Triforce: "Those two parts will be held within others chosen by destiny, who will bear the Triforce mark on the backs of their hands.". They are not the same, and that´s explicitly stated. It´s canon, therefore, it´s undoubtable truth.

[Hero of Legend]

I'm sure their meant to be the same. Either way the the crest appears on the chosen one who has fulfilled prior heroics--which is what Link from AoL did previously in LoZ and what young Link accomplished in the alternate future of OOT.

Therefore, I have decided to cast a spell on all of Hyrule.

A crest will appear on a young man with that character who has been brought up correctly, has gained many kinds of experiences and reached a certain age.

Those two parts will be held within others chosen by destiny, who will bear the Triforce mark on the backs of their hands.

Different crests, different reasons. Simple as that.

EDIT: Damn, you're too fast for me, Arturo.

Edited by Hero of Legend, 03 July 2006 - 12:55 PM.

[Fyxe]

Okay everyone stop guessing and watch this video, geez!



Things to note: Tri's right about Link not having the Goron bracelet the FINAL time. Another thing to note is that we don't see Link actually putting the sword back into the pedestal neither. In fact, it looks as if he's raeching out to touch it but he decides not too.

I never see him reach out for it. He doesn't. But, he also does not have a shield of any kind. All he has is the Kokiri Sword. I don't see how Link simply having the bare minimum of items means he's gone further back in time than normal.

It still doesn't change what Zelda tells him to do and the fact that the door is open, which is the important matter.

[Hero of Slime]

You don't see the events, but you are told they happen. e.g. We don't see Ganon take the Triforce, but OoT tells us this happened in the child part. This corresponds to aLttP BS.

The events would still take place after OoT has ended, thus they would not really be OoT, they would be after.

I'm pretty definate that the creators didn't say WW comes between OoT and aLttP, but if you claim it's a fact, then let's see the proof.

The game creators said that TWW comes after OoT, so it would have to be between OoT and ALttP. There is no other place for it in a single timeline.

[Tri-Enforcer]

(Fyxe) Was OoT your first Zelda game? I get the feeling that maybe you didn't know much about Zelda before OoT. Not that that matters, but it may cloud your judgement about where OoT came from and what the intentions of the creators were.

Hmmmm, who's the one assuming things? That's why I wrote that comment earlier. Also, these are forums over the internet--who cares about acting proper--we do that enough in the real world. So don't take it personal. It doesn't mean I'd kill you in person or whatever--I just might buy ya a drink or something! Also, I'm listening to all replies made to me about my theory--what the heck have I been doing the last few pages of this thread? I present to you my reasons as do you. Don't get distraught if I'm not convinced with your points. I listen...I just don't agree. All I'm doing is throwing out what I know and what I feel is implied...the more we do this...the more possibilities.

The game creators said that TWW comes after OoT, so it would have to be between OoT and ALttP. There is no other place for it in a single timeline.

You say that as if the confirmed order is OOT-aLttP.

Different crests, different reasons. Simple as that.

Whatever the case...it still does nothing to hurt my theory on OOT's ending. So you can have that argument (see I can concede when necessary, Fyxe).

(Fyxe) It still doesn't change what Zelda tells him to do and the fact that the door is open, which is the important matter.

Graphical oversight. Like your Ganon explanation...we'll just say that the creators forgot to change the background model. I mean with so much happening, these mistakes and errors are common through OOT. Oh yeah, tell me how does Zelda get the Ocarina back in the past? We see her give it to Link in MM.l

[Doopliss]

I dunno... the open gate contradicts the missing bracelet. I think we should ignore the bracelet. This is highly important for the timeline.

[Tri-Enforcer]

Then why the heck is Zelda practically doing the same thing she was doing when her and Link first met. She was peeking through the window looking at Ganon. She still looked scared and frantic, while looking through the window as she did when her and Link first met. You all know that's what you initially thought when you first saw that scene...don't deny it. Why would she even return to the castle if she wasn't sure if Ganon was taken care of?

Edited by Tri-Enforcer, 03 July 2006 - 02:29 PM.