399 replies to this topic

[Doopliss]

But Link has actually beat him, just that it had happened in the future. IMO the fact that it is a legend of the Royal Family implies that Link has defeated Ganon only in the future

[SOAP]

You said it yourself. If we take WW to happen after the adult ending, then MM didn't happen. If OTOH you assume the adult ending is after MM (chronologically), then there is no point in stating that WW is 100s of years after the adult ending. So either MM never happens if WW happen (unacceptable) or MM and WW happen in seperate timelines (much more likely).

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.

[Fyxe]

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.

Not proof. Evidence. Not proof.

[Hero of Slime]

In a single timeline TWW is proof, there is no way that game could exist and still have OoT describing the events that sealed Ganon before ALttP.

Edited by The Zol, 29 June 2006 - 09:42 PM.

[Fyxe]

As far as you know there's no way. That's still not proof.

Also, by the same token, there's no way ALttP could exist if TWW exists in the timeline. And as far as I see it, there's no way OoT could exist if it occured before the actual IW, because otherwise there would be mention of it, what with it being a repetition of such huge and catastrophic events.

[Hero of Slime]

That is like asking why there is no mention of ALttP in LoZ. Why would ALttP need to mention OoT?

[Fyxe]

Because OoT is the Imprisoning War. Zing.

And the difference between TLoZ and ALttP is that TLoZ gives the player NO history whatsoever, yet ALttP does, so you'd think maybe that instead of basing the plot around the fact that Ganon was the first to touch the Triforce, they'd mention the fact that somebody else touched it... Who was also called Ganon... And who was also sealed by seven Sages.

...No, really, sorry, OoT and the IW being seperate events just makes my brain cry in sorrow. It's just... Just... Rubbish, quite frankly. Even if it were so, it'd be just blatantly crap if it was. Plus it still fails to explain how TWW fits into everything anyway.

Edited by Fyxe, 29 June 2006 - 10:20 PM.

[SOAP]

Then by your logic ALttP should mention a great flood too and how Hyrule was somehow re-established. People still trying to make OoT the IW post-TWW's release makes MY brain cry in sorrow.

[Hero of Slime]

Because OoT is the Imprisoning War. Zing.

OoT was the Imprisoning War, but it ain't anymore. Double-Zing

In my timeline the flood, TWW, and many hundreds of years come between OoT and the IW. The people at the time of ALttP could have never heard of the events of OoT. If the people in LoZ don't recall the events of ALttP then its possible for the people in ALttP to not recall the events in OoT. As far as the people in ALttP know, this Ganon was the first Ganon to touch the Triforce.

[SOAP]

It could also be that the actual Imprisoning War was the REAL catatrophe where no hero was ever found nad the Master Sword went unused while OoT was more of a "Thank God someone was there to save us. That was CLOSE!" The simmilarities are probably due, as I said before, to the fact that maybe when you really want to seal somneone up good you use seven sages/maidens.

[Arturo]

But Link has actually beat him, just that it had happened in the future. IMO the fact that it is a legend of the Royal Family implies that Link has defeated Ganon only in the future

It means that Link phisycally defeated Ganon in the future, and only the Royal Family know it. But he's also defeated by that time-paradox.It's a legend just known by the RF because most people think he was sealed by the Knights and the Sages. Only by having Ganon also defeated in the Child Timeline can be explained MM. In the legend it's implied Ganon isn't anymore in Hyrule, and also, Zelda says: I'll never forget the days we spent together in Hyrule... Would you say that if Ganon was still around? MM takes place in a time Hyrule is in peace. This peace can only be explained assuming the Seal trascends time.

It could also be that the actual Imprisoning War was the REAL catatrophe where no hero was ever found nad the Master Sword went unused while OoT was more of a "Thank God someone was there to save us. That was CLOSE!" The simmilarities are probably due, as I said before, to the fact that maybe when you really want to seal somneone up good you use seven sages/maidens.

In my opinion the Great Cataclysm that they speak of in ALttP is what happens in the TWW background story. The SW is no Cataclysm since the good ones won. And yes, Child OoT IS the Seal War. They can't be separated events.

[Fyxe]

Then by your logic ALttP should mention a great flood too and how Hyrule was somehow re-established. People still trying to make OoT the IW post-TWW's release makes MY brain cry in sorrow.

No, that's not my logic, because I don't believe TWW occurs before ALttP anyway.

OoT was the Imprisoning War, but it ain't anymore. Double-Zing

Thou art not Anouma. Thou art a false god.

If the people in LoZ don't recall the events of ALttP then its possible for the people in ALttP to not recall the events in OoT. As far as the people in ALttP know, this Ganon was the first Ganon to touch the Triforce.

AGAIN, you're missing the point, because TLoZ doesn't give ANY history, the plot just doesn't go into history. It doesn't mean it's not there, because ALttP's manual speaks to the reader as if they know who Ganon is. ALttP is TLoZ's history.

ALttP goes back into history right into the beginning. If they're giving close details about the Triforce and the Master Sword, you'd think maybe, just maybe they'd mention something everyone would have DEFINITELY noticed - Ganon grabbing the Triforce and taking over Hyrule. That's hard to just 'forget' if it doesn't forget all the other stuff.

What I find ironic is that many of people who are arguing that OoT and the IW are seperate are the same people who would have been arguing that the ALttP's backstory doesn't quite mesh with the events of OoT. Yet they also argue that OoT can be completely forgotten altogether. What great hypocricy.

In my opinion the Great Cataclysm that they speak of in ALttP is what happens in the TWW background story. The SW is no Cataclysm since the good ones won. And yes, Child OoT IS the Seal War. They can't be separated events.

Problem - the 'Great Cataclysm' had already begun in ALttP - it's Ganon. Problem - Hyrule Castle in TWW has statues of the Hero of Time and it is granted legendary status - in ALttP not even the royal family shows any recollection of the HoT.
Problem - Young Link's timeline in OoT can't be the Imprisoning War, because technically nothing much happened on the Young Link timeline.

[Arturo]

Problem - the 'Great Cataclysm' had already begun in ALttP - it's Ganon.
Problem - Hyrule Castle in TWW has statues of the Hero of Time and it is granted legendary status - in ALttP not even the royal family shows any recollection of the HoT.
Problem - Young Link's timeline in OoT can't be the Imprisoning War, because technically nothing much happened on the Young Link timeline.

Solution-And what's the Cataclysm in TWW? Ganon, who escapes from the SR. If Link hadn't appeared in ALttP, Ganon would have escaped from the SR, attacked Hyrule and the Goddesses would have flooded Hyrule so that Ganon may not conquer it. ALttP and TWW background story correspond each other. The difference is that, while in the former, Link appears in the beggining of it to stop the Cataclysm, in TWW BS, no-one appears.

Solution-Read the MM intro. After a few months Link's a legend only known to the Royal Family! While in the Adult Timeline he is known by everyone, since they saw him fighting and destroying Ganon, in the Child Timeline just the Royal Fammily knows of his existance. And legends, if known by just a few people, tend to disappear. thus, even the Royal family forgot about Link.

Solution-It happened, Ganon attacked Hyrule twice, got the Triforce, (I assume) his evil sopread across Hyrule and he's sealed. Pretty much what happens in the SW. The Royal Family, after knowing of Link and the Sven Sages (in the future Timeline) look for the latter ones so that they might be protected (they are needed so that the Sages' Seal might remain), embelish what happened by saying the Knights were defending the Seven Sages, while this was just an excuse to explain why the evil was sealed... and voilá! You've got the Seal War.

One question, Fyxe. What is your timeline anyway?

Edited by Arturo, 30 June 2006 - 09:12 AM.

[Hero of Slime]

In LoZ, none of the other games are mentioned because they did not exist. It is the same with ALttP, OoT and TWW did not exist. The only history that did exist was the origin and backstory so that is all that was given.

Now if you can provide a complete timeline in which the IW is OoT's Adult, I would like to believe you. I have not really seen any solutions to the problem that arn't Gaiden timelines or joke split timelines.

[SOAP]

No, that's not my logic, because I don't believe TWW occurs before ALttP anyway.

Just currious, where do you place ALttP then? I was assuming you used a single timeline. If that's the case and you believe OoT is the IW, then the only place you'd put it is between OoT and TWW and that doesn't seem like you.

Edited by SOAP, 30 June 2006 - 12:41 PM.

[Arturo]

In LoZ, none of the other games are mentioned because they did not exist. It is the same with ALttP, OoT and TWW did not exist. The only history that did exist was the origin and backstory so that is all that was given.

Now if you can provide a complete timeline in which the IW is OoT's Adult, I would like to believe you. I have not really seen any solutions to the problem that arn't Gaiden timelines or joke split timelines.

From a creators point of view, you're right. But from a storyline point of view, this is false, because you're destroying the whole concept of stroryline. For example, in AoL we've got a mention of tyhe Six Sages in OoT, and ALttP mentions clearly OoT as well, and both FS and FSA mention TMC.

[MikePetersSucks]

We are told implicitly, both in OoT, where Ganon isn't around anymore, and in MM, where it's stated that Link defeated the devil. This devil, Ganon is just defeated in the Aduult Timelien, and Link could also do it in the Adult one. But in the Child one he's also defeated. The Sages' Seal trascends time.

And that means the Seal transcends time/dimensions because...why? So he can't of simply gone back in time and kicked Ganon's ass the old fashioned way or something?

[Arturo]

And that means the Seal transcends time/dimensions because...why? So he can't of simply gone back in time and kicked Ganon's ass the old fashioned way or something?

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

[Doopliss]

Ok, but what about Tri-Enforcer's theory?

[Tri-Enforcer]

(Fyxe) Well, that wouldn't work with Majora's Mask, because in MM he is known by the royal family to be a hero, so if he was meeting Zelda for the first time, what reason does she have to believing that he's just saved the world? Also, if I remember correctly that even if you have the Hylian Shield equipped, Link doesn't have it after he is sent back during the ending sequence. I think he has the Deku Shield but I'm not sure, he may have no shield at all. The equipment he has isn't important - so they forgot to add the Goron Bracelet to the Link model they used in the final cutscene. So what? Little details like that aren't proof, they're oversights.

The reason is because of the mark. Like I said before the mark could just be an indicator that Link either once had the ToC afte defeating Ganon in the alternate future or that Link is destined to hold the ToC. This has happened before in the Zelda series when Link did not have the ToC piece. When you as the player go back in time through ToT Link has no shield on his back, but he does have the Goron bracelet. However in the ending sequence, Link has the Deku shield equipped and is not wearing the Goron bracelet. Keep in mind when Link first met Zelda, he did not have the Goron bracelet and his first shield was the Deku shield. This is part of the reason I think Link is sent back prior to his first meeting with Zelda. I mean, why would the ending be set up where that Link goes back to the place where he orginally met Zelda and with her doing practically the same thing (peeking through a window)? To say that Link not having the Goron bracelet is just an oversight (like you call everything else that's not convenient for your theory), could be taken the same way for the mark being on his hand.

(Fyxe) You wouldn't be able to see her mark anyway, it was on her other hand, away from the camera on the final image. Also, if Link returns after Ganondorf has entered the Sacred Realm, they will both have their pieces, because the Triforce would have split and they will both have the ToW and the ToC, so they would reasonate. You can't argue that the appearance of the ToC in the final scene is an oversight and that the Goron Bracelet isn't. For one thing, we know that the crest symbol object is hidden specifically in the design of the Castle Courtyard, there so the ending sequence moves it to place it on Link's hand. It's a specific addition.

Yeah, but I don't believe Ganon is trapped in the SR, when Link returns to the past. Ganon is still around and that's why Zelda is still shown looking through a window as she was earlier in the game--peeking at Ganon pledge allegiance to the King. As for the triforce mark or whatever, read my above explanation.

When it comes to history, however, Hyrulean historians and those who study the IW legend probably would not seriously consider the existence of a lone hero, especially if this hero seemingly appeared from nowhere and vanished from existence.

Uhhhmmm try telling that to the historians for TWW time period in their description of OOT. Also, in the TWW backstory...the Hero of Time disappears...but he's still remembered and he's a legend. I don't think you follow Hyrulean historians that well. There's no reason why the 'Link' during the IW wasn't mentioned in the LttP BS or the entire game itself. If a legendary Link could be depicted and remembered in TWW and MC, then why not in LttP--especially if that event in the games BS supposedly involved Link?

As for everyone talking about the changes in the GBA version--don't even try it. The orginal Japanese version of the LttP mentioned 'Sages' and not 'wise men', so if anything the changes were to be in compliance with the orginal version--not OOT. If they wanted the changes to be in compliance with OOT--then they woud've added something about the Hero of Time or something of a hero--like Nintendo did with TWW.

Therefore, the accepted idea of the IW in ALttP involves no hero, as such. Or at least, no hero is mentioned in the dialogue, but that doesn't mean one couldn't exist, of course.

Nah...it's just means as it's read...there was no 'hero' such as Link in the LttP BS--just the sages and Knights. If there was a hero like Link during the IW and this Link was the hero of time and the IW was the event from OOT--then it is too important leave out any information about the Hero of Time in either the original version of LttP and the remake. This mistake is made twice? That's ridiculous! Then we have a game like TWW, that makes the connection to OOT very apparent. I can't believe the level of denial in this place! I love OOT and LttP too...but you can't always go by what you like. I actually like the idea of LttP BS being the IW, when I first thought of that...I was like 'awesome'! However, there just one too many things that didn't make sens and decided no matter how much I like the idea, I will find whatever makes sense. Stop going by what you like--cuz I'm not.

Sheik hops around all over Hyrule with abandon, I don't think Zelda has anything to fear from Ganon's forces. Ganon has never appeared to have a very organised army, anyway, he's never needed one.

Trust me she does. That's why she's all over the Hero of Time's jock. If the cops, or lets say Ganny for the heck of it, were after me...if I could make myself look totally different at will, then I'd run around with abandon as well.

Oh? Haven't you ever heard of a continuity error? They happen. A lot. The difference is recognising when one is clearly just a continuity slip (TWW's final sequences) and whether one was an intended addition (the Triforce mark on Link's hand in OoT's final scene was definitely intended, else the crest object would not exist in the room and could not be seen using a Gameshark).

Yes those errors happen, but not a the rate that your describing the errors.

Still means sod all, because it's not on Link's hand when actually fighting Ganondorf/Ganon, and it's not on Link's hand when he stands near Sheik. It clearly only appears at certain moments.

Well, if you're gonna put it that way...then the mark at the end of OOT is just yet another inconsistancy.

Edited by Tri-Enforcer, 30 June 2006 - 05:44 PM.

[Fyxe]

One question, Fyxe. What is your timeline anyway?

I've already mentioned, but I don't have a set timeline yet. I feel that everyone who has a set timeline is always arguing with bias. They're not looking at the games as GAMES, they're looking at them as if they're all one big amazing story. They're not. Yes, they connect, but the connections are vague at the best of times.

Now if you can provide a complete timeline in which the IW is OoT's Adult, I would like to believe you. I have not really seen any solutions to the problem that arn't Gaiden timelines or joke split timelines.

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.

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.

Just currious, where do you place ALttP then? I was assuming you used a single timeline. If that's the case and you believe OoT is the IW, then the only place you'd put it is between OoT and TWW and that doesn't seem like you.

Well, I believe TWW is a gaiden thing, until they release more games and I can judge it further. As it is, I can't, because it's one game, no sequels yet and only has a connection to OoT. Obviously it occurs after OoT, but so does ALttP, and TWW does not mesh with ALttP very well at all. Split timelines and gaiden timelines are the only things worth considering *at the moment*. I'm sure Twilight Princess will just confuse everything even more, however.

Basically...

OoT - TWW - ALttP doesn't work.

OoT - ALttP - TWW doesn't work. So I'm waiting for, uh... Guidance from above, I suppose.

The reason is because of the mark. Like I said before the mark could just be an indicator that Link either once had the ToC afte defeating Ganon in the alternate future or that Link is destined to hold the ToC. This has happened before in the Zelda series when Link did not have the ToC piece.

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.

When you as the player go back in time through ToT Link has no shield on his back, but he does have the Goron bracelet. However in the ending sequence, Link has the Deku shield equipped and is not wearing the Goron bracelet.

Clearly a graphical oversight, if Link doesn't have a shield on his back when sent back in time, what makes the bracelet more important if that appears and disappears?

Keep in mind when Link first met Zelda, he did not have the Goron bracelet and his first shield was the Deku shield.

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?

This is part of the reason I think Link is sent back prior to his first meeting with Zelda. I mean, why would the ending be set up where that Link goes back to the place where he orginally met Zelda and with her doing practically the same thing (peeking through a window)? To say that Link not having the Goron bracelet is just an oversight (like you call everything else that's not convenient for your theory), could be taken the same way for the mark being on his hand.

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?

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.

Uhhhmmm try telling that to the historians for TWW time period in their description of OOT. Also, in the TWW backstory...the Hero of Time disappears...but he's still remembered and he's a legend. I don't think you follow Hyrulean historians that well. There's no reason why the 'Link' during the IW wasn't mentioned in the LttP BS or the entire game itself. If a legendary Link could be depicted and remembered in TWW and MC, then why not in LttP--especially if that event in the games BS supposedly involved Link?

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.

If there was a hero like Link during the IW and this Link was the hero of time and the IW was the event from OOT--then it is too important leave out any information about the Hero of Time in either the original version of LttP and the remake. This mistake is made twice? That's ridiculous!

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?

Then we have a game like TWW, that makes the connection to OOT very apparent. I can't believe the level of denial in this place!

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 actually like the idea of LttP BS being the IW, when I first thought of that...I was like 'awesome'!

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.

I'm not going by what I like. I hate the split timeline yet I am accepting of it as a possibility. I'm going by what the fucking DESIGNERS OF THE SODDING GAME SAID. And until they say OTHERWISE, or until TWW's place is solidified in the timeline, I'm going to stick by that.

if I could make myself look totally different at will, then I'd run around with abandon as well.

Which is my point - she has little to fear.

Yes those errors happen, but not a the rate that your describing the errors.

What rate? There's a continuity error between the cutscenes and the gameplay of the final battle of TWW, and there is a possible continuity error in the ending of OoT. That's not a very high rate, and if you knew about how games are made, it's actually quite easy to get these errors between cutscene and gameplay. For instance, there's a good chance that they programmed the ending of OoT before they had completely finished the rest of the game. OoT is blighted with construction issues, stuff cut out, stuff switched around, it's no surprise that Link does not have the Goron Bracelet or whatever in the very final scene. 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.

[Mad Scrub]

You know, even if you have OoT as the IW, some events still appear to happen twice. Ganondorf becomes Ganon (the King of Darkness) twice, the Knights of Hyrule are slain twice. OoT Ganon doesn't have the ToE so it would make sense (IMO) for FSA to come before ALttP. But that can't really be part of the IW either. If he was sealed in the SR in the IW in the child universe of OoT (or somewhere in between) he would have to somehow find his way out, live like a normal Gerudo again, get the ToE, kill the Knights, be defeated by Link and be sealed by the Maidens, not Sages, a second time. Then, if you think the ToC split when the HoT was lured into Termina, you have to come up with an explanation of how the ToC got back into the SR where Ganondorf could get at it. If you don't think that the ToC split for that reason then you must think it split when the HoT was sent back in time by Zelda. Also OoS and OoA can't be after TWW unless Koume and Kotake are somehow reborn.

Edited by Mad Scrub, 30 June 2006 - 07:26 PM.

[Doopliss]

The reason is because of the mark. Like I said before the mark could just be an indicator that Link either once had the ToC afte defeating Ganon in the alternate future or that Link is destined to hold the ToC. This has happened before in the Zelda series when Link did not have the ToC piece. When you as the player go back in time through ToT Link has no shield on his back, but he does have the Goron bracelet. However in the ending sequence, Link has the Deku shield equipped and is not wearing the Goron bracelet. Keep in mind when Link first met Zelda, he did not have the Goron bracelet and his first shield was the Deku shield. This is part of the reason I think Link is sent back prior to his first meeting with Zelda. I mean, why would the ending be set up where that Link goes back to the place where he orginally met Zelda and with her doing practically the same thing (peeking through a window)? To say that Link not having the Goron bracelet is just an oversight (like you call everything else that's not convenient for your theory), could be taken the same way for the mark being on his hand.

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.

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

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.

The problem is that the year in which ALttP was released is the same one when I was born!

[Fyxe]

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

Mad Scrub, I need to do the thing people call sleep so I can't respond to the whole of your post, but I must point out... The 'Knights of Hyrule' is a title that was only used in the American translation. They were called just a 'family of knights' in the Japanese game. We don't know what the four knights are called in the Japanese version of TWW, but if they are called what directly translates to the 'Knights of Hyrule' in the Japanese version, then they are not even given the same name as in ALttP.

We're not even sure if the 'family of knights' or the 'Knights of Hyrule' in ALttP ever existed. We don't see them in OoT so they may have been just an addition of the legend, replacing the existence of the Hero of Time.

Oh, also, Kotake and Koume aren't the only 'reincarnated' characters in Zelda by any means. Hell, if Ganon can be ressurected it's no surprise that they can too. I can't remember if it's ever stated that Twinrova summoned Onox or Veran, but if they didn't necessarily summon them, then it may have been Onox and Veran that brought them back to life in the first place.

Edited by Fyxe, 30 June 2006 - 08:53 PM.

[SOAP]

Is it just me or do the knight statues infront of the stained glasses images of the Sages and the carvings of people praying on the floor all surrounding the Master Sword seem to hint at the Imprisoning War? Though that probably helps Fyxes' case even if she doesn't agree with it.

Edited by SOAP, 30 June 2006 - 09:42 PM.

[Mad Scrub]

We don't know what the four knights are called in the Japanese version of TWW, but if they are called what directly translates to the 'Knights of Hyrule' in the Japanese version, then they are not even given the same name as in ALttP.

You meant FSA, not TWW didn't you?

[SOAP]

Have I mentioned how I prefer the English translations over the original Japanese?

They're called the same thing in English. That's good enough for me.

[Fyxe]

You meant FSA, not TWW didn't you?

Yes, yes I did.

They're called the same thing in English. That's good enough for me.

I doubt it would be good enough for the original designers if it was WRONG.

[Arturo]

The Knights of Hyrule... is it possible that they are those that you see through the window in Zelda's courtyard?

[Fyxe]

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.