409 replies to this topic

[Hero of Slime]

You can not say that one method of getting the Master Sword is more valid then the others, as you are implying by using the found in the woods method as evidence.

I never said not canon, I said that it is not part of the original's continuity and that is based on more than just the fact that there are multiple ways to get it.

[Fyxe]

'Original's continuity'? What does that mean? It's part of the continuity of the ORACLE games, which is surely fairly important, them being part of the Zelda series and all.

And I wasn't saying one method was more valid than the others, I was just pointing out what was implicated by one of it's possible locations.

[Hero of Slime]

Original continuity: OoT-TWW-ALttP

Others: OoA-OoS

[Fyxe]

I don't understand. How is that the 'original continuity'? What does that even mean? I'm guessing a missed a post but I'm having a hard time fathoming what it could mean.

[Hero of Slime]

OoT, TWW and ALttP all have the master sword in them. The master swords in these three games is the same sword.

The master sword in OoX is not the same sword as the other three games.

I don't know why you are arguing with me when we both want the same thing. To put OoX after ALttP.

[Jumbie]

Fyxe: I don't understand. How is that the 'original continuity'? What does that even mean?

Now that The Zol explained it, you should just let it rest and turn to more important timeline issues.

The Zol: If TMC is the first game in the timeline then the White Sword in TMC and the White Sword in LoZ can not be related. I think the connection is name only.

Well, to me it seems to be a more important connection than only a cameo. In fact, there could be an explanation for both swords being the same. A short history of the White Sword:
In TMC, the broken Picori Blade is reforged to be the White Sword. It is then infused with the 4 Elements to become the Four Sword. In the ending, the FS must seal Vaati in itself (though it looks totally different) and is enshrined until centuries later, the game FS for GBA happens. Vaati breaks free but is resealed again in no time (much like Ganon in Oracles). Some months or years later, FSA happens where Ganon returns and indirectly makes Link draw the Four Sword to free Vaati once more. In the end, Vaati is killed (for good?), and instead Ganon is sealed in the FS. Then, centuries later, LoZ happens where Ganon has returned somehow, and in the game we receive some White Sword. Huh?!

My theory: After FSA, the Four Sword kept Ganon sealed, but at some point in time, the power of the 4 Elements (which were also seen in FSA as the 4 Royal Gems) fades away. All things must pass after all, don't they? With no force binding him any longer, Ganon can leave the sword which is now reduced to its original form, the White Sword. Further on, Ganon wreaks havoc on Hyrule, and the WS is taken care of by an old man, who will entrust it to Link in the game LoZ. Isn't everything neat in place that way?
Lastly, to explain the whereabouts of the Four Sword/White Sword during the games in between TMC and LoZ:
I've no idea about OoT, OoX, LA really, but in ALttP GBA we see the FS in a shrine in the Dark World's Pyramid, which could (with a little bending here and there) be the same sanctuary or shrine in which the FS is in the games FS+FSA.

Now it's your turn to point out that my theory doesn't fit in with the several intro legends in TMC, FS, Sleeping Zelda and what not...

Edited by Jumbie, 09 July 2006 - 08:43 AM.

[Arturo]

Now that The Zol explained it, you should just let it rest and turn to more important timeline issues.
Well, to me it seems to be a more important connection than only a cameo. In fact, there could be an explanation for both swords being the same. A short history of the White Sword:
In TMC, the broken Picori Blade is reforged to be the White Sword. It is then infused with the 4 Elements to become the Four Sword. In the ending, the FS must seal Vaati in itself (though it looks totally different) and is enshrined until centuries later, the game FS for GBA happens. Vaati breaks free but is resealed again in no time (much like Ganon in Oracles). Some months or years later, FSA happens where Ganon returns and indirectly makes Link draw the Four Sword to free Vaati once more. In the end, Vaati is killed (for good?), and instead Ganon is sealed in the FS. Then, centuries later, LoZ happens where Ganon has returned somehow, and in the game we receive some White Sword. Huh?!

My theory: After FSA, the Four Sword kept Ganon sealed, but at some point in time, the power of the 4 Elements (which were also seen in FSA as the 4 Royal Gems) fades away. All things must pass after all, don't they? With no force binding him any longer, Ganon can leave the sword which is now reduced to its original form, the White Sword. Further on, Ganon wreaks havoc on Hyrule, and the WS is taken care of by an old man, who will entrust it to Link in the game LoZ. Isn't everything neat in place that way?
Lastly, to explain the whereabouts of the Four Sword/White Sword during the games in between TMC and LoZ:
I've no idea about OoT, OoX, LA really, but in ALttP GBA we see the FS in a shrine in the Dark World's Pyramid, which could (with a little bending here and there) be the same sanctuary or shrine in which the FS is in the games FS+FSA.

Now it's your turn to point out that my theory doesn't fit in with the several intro legends in TMC, FS, Sleeping Zelda and what not...

It fits quite nicely, to tell the truth. I will not say anything more.

[Fyxe]

I don't know why you are arguing with me when we both want the same thing. To put OoX after ALttP.

I'm not arguing, I'm trying to work out what you're saying.

The master sword in OoX is not the same sword as the other three games.

Prove it.

Prove that the Master Sword in TWW is the same one in OoT, in fact. You're making baseless statements. You can't just say it's a different sword if you do not know that for sure. It looks, behaves and has the same name as the Master Sword, so why is it a different sword?

I'm not going to start on Jumbie's White Sword theory. I'll be here all day.

Now that The Zol explained it, you should just let it rest and turn to more important timeline issues.

Who are you to tell me when I should let it rest or not? Just because Zol explained what he meant doesn't mean the discussion is over.

Edited by Fyxe, 09 July 2006 - 12:36 PM.

[mohammedali]

I think the Noble Sword was meant to BE the Master Sword, and all you do is unlock it's power. That's why the Noble Sword is in the Lost Woods in Oracle of Seasons.

I've not heard that before. Is there any proof or is that personal fanfic?

I don't think you can judge whether an item is canon or not simply because you can get it different ways. That's just the way the Oracle games are designed. You might as well argue that Onox and Veran aren't canon because we can't tell which one Link fought against first. Therefore, since there are multiple ways of facing either Onox or Veran, and multiple ways to enter the Room of Rites, then by your logic none of the methods are canon.

But you don't have to get the MS in the game at all to complete it where as you have to defeat Onox and Veran irrespective of which you beat first.
We know aLttP says the MS sleeps forever after the ending (canon), and OoX comes after aLttP (assumtion taken to be true). We are given 2 options in OoX - one being the MS is used, and the other being the MS is not used. Given the canon statement we have in aLttP, using the option that the MS was not used in the game makes it work. Using the option that the MS (a completely optional item) IS used in the game causes a contradiction to the canon. Therefore, either OoX comes after aLttP and the optional MS is not used, OR OoX does not come after aLttP.

Mohammed Ali

[Arturo]

Prove that the Master Sword in TWW is the same one in OoT, in fact.

*cough* You got the Master Sword! The legendary blade with the power to repel evil...once wielded by the
legendary hero himself!*cough*

You can't just say it's a different sword if you do not know that for sure. It looks, behaves and has the same name as the Master Sword, so why is it a different sword?

Look at this: "Well I give you something old... This is the Hero's Sword that a great hero gave my ancestors long ago! " Old Zora, before he gives Link the Master Sword/Noble Sword. Do we remember having seen any of the wielders of the MS giving his sword to a Zora in Labrynna? The answer is no.

Who are you to tell me when I should let it rest or not? Just because Zol explained what he meant doesn't mean the discussion is over.

He can not tell you what to do. But it's a sensible advice, anyway. Because we are talking about subjects that are not much relevant, and what we are trying to do is a perfect split timeline, not a history of the MS. For that we can have other topics. But this is the Perfect Split Timeline topic.

[MikePetersSucks]

as for the Master Sword issue, I shall simply say that the OOX Master Sword, if intended to exist in canon, exists through the properties of Time Bastard. Tis all.

[Arturo]

as for the Master Sword issue, I shall simply say that the OOX Master Sword, if intended to exist in canon, exists through the properties of Time Bastard. Tis all.

Huh? I haven't understood anything. What is your opinion?

[Fyxe]

I've not heard that before. Is there any proof or is that personal fanfic?

It's implied, I said that. But no, there's no 'proof'. Like we ever have proof. I'm afraid I can't go ask Miyamoto, and I doubt he either knows or cares anyway.

But you don't have to get the MS in the game at all to complete it where as you have to defeat Onox and Veran irrespective of which you beat first.

In Majora's Mask you don't have to help anyone or get the Fierce Deity Mask. But that's hardly 'completing' the game, is it? If an event CAN happen, who are you (or any of us) to say that it didn't?

We know aLttP says the MS sleeps forever after the ending (canon), and OoX comes after aLttP (assumtion taken to be true).

We also know that KnS occurs after ALttP (canon) and the Master Sword is used (like it or not).

We are given 2 options in OoX - one being the MS is used, and the other being the MS is not used. Given the canon statement we have in aLttP,

Given the canon appearance of a sword in two canon games after the canon appearance of the canon sword in canony canon ALttP, we can assume that the final line in ALttP was retroactively ignored. In a canony way. WHO CAN? CANON CAN. TWO CAN.

using the option that the MS was not used in the game makes it work. Using the option that the MS (a completely optional item)

Optional =/= uncanon.

*cough* You got the Master Sword! The legendary blade with the power to repel evil...once wielded by the
legendary hero himself!*cough*

Ha. That doesn't actually mean it's the same sword, does it?

Look at this: "Well I give you something old... This is the Hero's Sword that a great hero gave my ancestors long ago! " Old Zora, before he gives Link the Master Sword/Noble Sword. Do we remember having seen any of the wielders of the MS giving his sword to a Zora in Labrynna? The answer is no.

Does that mean they couldn't? The answer is no.

He can not tell you what to do. But it's a sensible advice, anyway. Because we are talking about subjects that are not much relevant, and what we are trying to do is a perfect split timeline, not a history of the MS. For that we can have other topics. But this is the Perfect Split Timeline topic.

Like that ever stops people going off on tangants on other topics. That just proves that this topic is a little silly, because the same issues are going to come up in both topics, really.

Edited by Fyxe, 09 July 2006 - 02:34 PM.

[Hero of Slime]

Fyxe, I think you just want to argue with me. This whole debate about the Master Sword is pointless since we all are arguing for the same thing. We all want to be able to put OoX after ALttP. I know most threads go off topic but why can't we make this one different, stick to the real issue, and not argue about somthing we all agree on?

we see the FS in a shrine in the Dark World's Pyramid, which could (with a little bending here and there) be the same sanctuary or shrine in which the FS is in the games FS+FSA.

This is the only part that does not fit. In FS's BS the Four Sword shrine is said to have been built after Vaati was sealed in the Four Sword for the first time.

Edited by The Zol, 09 July 2006 - 03:04 PM.

[mohammedali]

It's implied, I said that. But no, there's no 'proof'. Like we ever have proof. I'm afraid I can't go ask Miyamoto, and I doubt he either knows or cares anyway.

I'm not expecting you to ask Miyamoto. However, if there is no proof for a matter, then forgive me for being unconvinced.

In Majora's Mask you don't have to help anyone or get the Fierce Deity Mask. But that's hardly 'completing' the game, is it? If an event CAN happen, who are you (or any of us) to say that it didn't?

Simple. aLttP ending has to happen. There is no way it can't happen if aLttP happens. OoX MS doesn't have to happen. Therefore, if only one can be true, it has to be the definate event in aLttP rather than the optional event in OoX.
If something can happen, and it doesn't contradict the canon, then we can assume it happened. If it does contradict a definate event, then we can assume it didn't happen. So aLttP ending happened, OoX MS didn't.

We also know that KnS occurs after ALttP (canon) and the Master Sword is used (like it or not).

And for various reasons, the canonisity of AST is under doubt - not to mention that we don't even know what was said in the realtime audio of the game. You can't use a game that we have inadequate information about as proof, especially when it's legitimacy is under question for a who host of reasons.
I'm not going to debate if AST is canon, and you are welcome to believe what you like, but even if you take it as canon, you can't even be sure what it actually says about the MS, not to mention you have to discount other canon quotes by accepting a highly doubted game. Again, up to you if you want to accept it, but personally I don't so it has no effect on the canon to me.

Mohammed Ali

[Arturo]

Ha. That doesn't actually mean it's the same sword, does it?

Of course it does! In the quote it says that it was wielded by the legendary hero. Who is the legendary hero in TWW? Let me think.... The Hero of Time? And which sword did he use to destroy Ganondorf? The Master Sword, the sword of evil's bane. The MS in TWW and OoT is the same one. Saying the contrary is fanficcish and contradicts all the in-game evidence.

Does that mean they couldn't? The answer is no.

The answer is yes, this is a sword of a legendary hero he gave to a Zora family. Do you consider that the MS can be GIVEN TO A FAMILY OF ZORAS? Let's make memory on what happens with the MS in in the games it appears.

OoT: It's returned to the Pedestal of Time, and sealed by the Door of Time. No heros that give swords to Zoras.
TWW: It remains sunken in Ganondorf's skull under the sea. No heros that give swords to Zoras.
ALttP:It is returned to its pedestal. And rests FOREVER (where forever means less than a year). No heros that give swords to Zoras.
KnS:The Hero uses it, and seems (sort of) to be returned to the pedestal, though we will never know. But it's sure that there are no heros that give swords to Zoras.

The MS was made to fight the magic of the Triforce, just in case someone evil got it. And there's no Triforce neither in Holodrum, nor in Labrynna.

[Fyxe]

I'm not going to debate if AST is canon, and you are welcome to believe what you like, but even if you take it as canon, you can't even be sure what it actually says about the MS, not to mention you have to discount other canon quotes by accepting a highly doubted game. Again, up to you if you want to accept it, but personally I don't so it has no effect on the canon to me.

Mohammed Ali

The 'whole host of reasons' you mention are extremely arbitrary and ignore the fact that Nintendo has been shown to recognise it as part of the series. If Nintendo recognises it and it has a plot, it's a sequel and introduces new things to the series (which it does), then we should accept it as canon and someone should prove that it's NOT canon, not the other way around. Why should KnS be treated any differently? OoT fucked up the timeline, TWW fucked up the timeline, and KnS fucks up a tiny bit of the timeline in comparison because it ignores one line. That's not good enough reason to pretend it's not part of the series when Nintendo recognises it.

Of course it does! In the quote it says that it was wielded by the legendary hero. Who is the legendary hero in TWW? Let me think.... The Hero of Time? And which sword did he use to destroy Ganondorf? The Master Sword, the sword of evil's bane. The MS in TWW and OoT is the same one. Saying the contrary is fanficcish and contradicts all the in-game evidence.

You're missing my point. Fine then, prove that the Master Sword in OoT and ALttP are the same sword.

The point is I AGREE with you. They are clearly the same sword. And it's fanficcish to assume that the Master Sword in the Oracle games are a different sword. It's not based on anything other than that one line from ALttP (which I doubt the creators were concerned hugely about) and personal opinion.

The answer is yes, this is a sword of a legendary hero he gave to a Zora family. Do you consider that the MS can be GIVEN TO A FAMILY OF ZORAS?

What you got against Zoras, foo?

ALttP:It is returned to its pedestal. And rests FOREVER (where forever means less than a year).

God, why are people so obsessed with that line? There's thousands of other lines in Zelda games that have turned out not to be 100% true or perfect and some lines that are just false.

The MS was made to fight the magic of the Triforce, just in case someone evil got it. And there's no Triforce neither in Holodrum, nor in Labrynna.

Look, the implication is that the Master Sword was LOST. Either it was moved deeper into the Lost Woods, or it was used at some other point (somewhen) and was given to the Zoras to look after, maybe the hero that used it had a connection to the Zoras. Who are you to say this can't happen if the game says it happens? You can't say 'no that can't happen because it didn't happen in the other games'. What? That's not logic.

[mohammedali]

The 'whole host of reasons' you mention are extremely arbitrary and ignore the fact that Nintendo has been shown to recognise it as part of the series. If Nintendo recognises it and it has a plot, it's a sequel and introduces new things to the series (which it does), then we should accept it as canon and someone should prove that it's NOT canon, not the other way around. Why should KnS be treated any differently? OoT fucked up the timeline, TWW fucked up the timeline, and KnS fucks up a tiny bit of the timeline in comparison because it ignores one line. That's not good enough reason to pretend it's not part of the series when Nintendo recognises it.

Aonuma didn't include it as part of the Zelda franchise in a seminar given by Nintendo about the Zelda games series. Even if you blindly ignore all the other issues with AST (from direct contradictions of numerous game facts, to missing information about the game itself), it's still not even part of the franchise according to Nintendo themselves. If Nintendo don't recognise it as an actual Zelda game, then why should anyone else?
I've provided proof it's not part of the franchise. All I've seen for AST being canon was it being mentioned in a Zelda Manga (an uncanon source itself). Now you tell me, which holds more weight? (Awaits biased statement)

Mohammed Ali

[MikePetersSucks]

Huh? I haven't understood anything. What is your opinion?

That the OOX Master Sword more or less exists through a time paradox, like when you get a "Twin" through time travel.

[SOAP]

To help Fyxe out a bit, in none of the game endings does any of the Links put the Mastersword in Lost woods (for the first time) nor do any of them put them in the basement of Hyrule Castle. Yet they are found in these locations. So how is OoX's MS any different?

Also, if you guys are going to put OoX affter ALttP, how do you account for the disquised soldiers protecting Din being Hylain when in ALttP they're basically gone. I can understand them being of watered-down Hylain lineage, which seems to be the case in ALttP, but why be all hush-hush about it unless they mean they're pure-blooded Hylian.

[Arturo]

Also, if you guys are going to put OoX affter ALttP, how do you account for the disquised soldiers protecting Din being Hylain when in ALttP they're basically gone. I can understand them being of watered-down Hylain lineage, which seems to be the case in ALttP, but why be all hush-hush about it unless they mean they're pure-blooded Hylian.

There are Hylian knights both in OoS and FSA. That means that Link had children (with Zelda? )after ALttP, being the last one of them. And Hylians haven't disappeared in ALttP, but their bloodline has grown thin. They are as magical as the ones in OoT.

[SOAP]

Which is what I said. Water-downed lineage, which is what I think the case is in ALttP. They're not at all magical but still retain the long ears.

But I don't think Link and Zelda hooking up in ALttP (which how do you even know happens) could repopulate the pure-blooded Hylain gene pool. It'd be very limited and as far I know, Link in ALttP was as pure-blooded Hylian as anyone else in ALttP. I could be mistaken though. But even so, I don't think it's enough of a justification to put OoX after ALttP. At least nott when you got two timelines to work with.

[Fyxe]

Aonuma didn't include it as part of the Zelda franchise in a seminar given by Nintendo about the Zelda games series. Even if you blindly ignore all the other issues with AST (from direct contradictions of numerous game facts, to missing information about the game itself), it's still not even part of the franchise according to Nintendo themselves. If Nintendo don't recognise it as an actual Zelda game, then why should anyone else?

Uh, for heck's sake, they DO. That was just a seminar. It's appeared on lists of Zelda games by Nintendo (unlike the Cd-i games) and it appeared most notably on the Zelda no Video documentary, which, before you say, it was endorced by Nintendo and even had interviews and input directly from Miyamoto.

I've provided proof it's not part of the franchise.

What, a SEMINAR? Was the seminar even in Japan or was it in the US?

All I've seen for AST being canon was it being mentioned in a Zelda Manga (an uncanon source itself). Now you tell me, which holds more weight? (Awaits biased statement)

Firstly, wow, arrogance, and secondly I haven't heard of it being mentioned in a manga and I don't care about that.

SOAP, you're right, there's no evidence that Link or Zelda are 'pure-blooded' Hylians. They're just decendants of various people who weren't necessarily pure-blooded Hylians in the first place.

Edited by Fyxe, 10 July 2006 - 06:09 PM.

[Jumbie]

Sorry I missed out. Now I'll have to jumble quotes around a bit wildly, but I think you'll get the context.

As for the Master Sword:

Fyxe: And it's fanficcish to assume that the Master Sword in the Oracle games are a different sword.

No, the so-called "Master Sword" in Oracles must be a different sword than the one in OoT, TWW and ALttP, since it's either upgraded from another sword or picked up in some random Lost Woods in Labrynna.

It looks, behaves and has the same name as the Master Sword, so why is it a different sword?

[ironic]Well, are OoT's and AoL's Link the same? They look, behave and have the same name, so how can they be different?[/ironic]

God, why are people so obsessed with that line? There's thousands of other lines in Zelda games that have turned out not to be 100% true or perfect and some lines that are just false.

Exactly, that quote is much too overrated. The Master Sword was originally meant to rest forever after ALttP, but whoever spoke that line in the credits must have turned out to be wrong in the end. If only for KnS! After all, no Hyrulean in ALttP could be sure what the future would hold. I'm sure the MS was already supposed to rest forever after OoT, but in the end it didn't. Also, if a human says "forever", what can that mean? "I will love you forever" - Haha, two weeks later they break up.

Look, the implication is that the Master Sword was LOST. Either it was moved deeper into the Lost Woods, or it was used at some other point (somewhen) and was given to the Zoras to look after, maybe the hero that used it had a connection to the Zoras. Who are you to say this can't happen if the game says it happens? You can't say 'no that can't happen because it didn't happen in the other games'. What? That's not logic.

'Whooo are you...' See, it's best to avoid assuming weird things like Link entrusting the MS to the Zora. We mustn't stretch every tiny bit of evidence to build shaky fan-fictional constructions on it. That's just my revanche for accusing my 'Wind Fish's dream' theory to be fanficcy

As for Kodai no Sekiban:

Fyxe: It's appeared on lists of Zelda games by Nintendo (unlike the Cd-i games) and it appeared most notably on the Zelda no Video documentary

Well, Nintendo may acknowledge KnS as a game that was produced sometime, but what does that say about the canon-ness of its story? Just think about it, KnS was only accessible to Japanese players, and for how long - FOUR PUNY WEEKS!! After that, no one ever saw it again until some fans recovered it from the trashbin. With half of the community not even knowing of this game's existence ("existence" is almost too much said), how can it be taken as evidence for a timeline theory?
Anyway, personally I don't say it's non-canonic as it fits well with everything else, but please don't build your theories upon KnS.

As for finally moving on:

SOAP: Also, if you guys are going to put OoX affter ALttP, how do you account for the disquised soldiers protecting Din being Hylain when in ALttP they're basically gone.

There has never been a castle without guards. Having recruted new ones, maybe?

Fyxe: I'm not going to start on Jumbie's White Sword theory. I'll be here all day.

If you never respond to what I say (regardless if it's out of lack of time), I won't know your opinion about it and am thus inclined to think no one found things to disprove it. Now, would you want that?

Like that ever stops people going off on tangants on other topics. That just proves that this topic is a little silly, because the same issues are going to come up in both topics, really.

No, we cannot afford to stray over to trifles like that in this thread! For the sake of it, why don't you open a new one? And no, this topic certainly is not silly. If you look at my last post - not to be an egoist, but I *am* actually trying to start a discussion of different topics!

The Zol: This is the only part that does not fit. In FS's BS the Four Sword shrine is said to have been built after Vaati was sealed in the Four Sword for the first time.

Yes, of course. But does my Pyramid theory contradict that? "Built" doesn't necessarily mean a new building was erected, the shrine could just have been carved into the Temple of Light (= Pyramid of Power).

Edited by Jumbie, 10 July 2006 - 08:29 PM.

[Fyxe]

No, the so-called "Master Sword" in Oracles must be a different sword than the one in OoT, TWW and ALttP, since it's either upgraded from another sword or picked up in some random Lost Woods in Labrynna.

The Lost Woods are massive. They stretch beyond Hyrule's boarders. I think the Lost Woods in Holodrum are actually meant to be the same woods. That's besides the point though. The fact that the Master Sword is an upgrade of the Noble Sword is irrelevant. The Master Sword is upgraded three times in ALttP. The upgrade of the Noble Sword in the Oracle games reveals it to be the Master Sword. The Noble Sword is virtually identical to the Master Sword anyway, and this isn't coincidence.

[ironic]Well, are OoT's and AoL's Link the same? They look, behave and have the same name, so how can they be different?[/ironic]

Person =/= sword, so that arguement is a little irrelevant, ne?

Exactly, that quote is much too overrated. The Master Sword was originally meant to rest forever after ALttP, but whoever spoke that line in the credits must have turned out to be wrong in the end. If only for KnS! After all, no Hyrulean in ALttP could be sure what the future would hold. I'm sure the MS was already supposed to rest forever after OoT, but in the end it didn't. Also, if a human says "forever", what can that mean? "I will love you forever" - Haha, two weeks later they break up.

Well at least you agree on that.

'Whooo are you...' See, it's best to avoid assuming weird things like Link entrusting the MS to the Zora. We mustn't stretch every tiny bit of evidence to build shaky fan-fictional constructions on it. That's just my revanche for accusing my 'Wind Fish's dream' theory to be fanficcy

Who said the hero was Link? And it's not a tiny bit of evidence, it's in-game dialogue. It doesn't matter what happened *exactly*, but we shouldn't just ignore what a character says just because they don't give us all the details.

As for Kodai no Sekiban:
Well, Nintendo may acknowledge KnS as a game that was produced sometime, but what does that say about the canon-ness of its story? Just think about it, KnS was only accessible to Japanese players, and for how long - FOUR PUNY WEEKS!! After that, no one ever saw it again until some fans recovered it from the trashbin. With half of the community not even knowing of this game's existence ("existence" is almost too much said), how can it be taken as evidence for a timeline theory?

It still EXISTED (saying 'existence' is too much is an insult to the people who made the sodding game, y'know), and it was broadcast twice, and in Japan it's part of the Zelda no Video documentary Dvd. None of those things you've cited are acceptable reasons for why it isn't canon. Not everyone can play Four Swords - many people haven't, does that mean it's not canon?

It doesn't actually affect the timeline in a great way but it does affect the series as a whole, as it introduced a bunch of new stuff.

[SOAP]

There has never been a castle without guards. Having recruted new ones, maybe?

I'm not talking about a castle. I'm talking about Din. And you can't exactly recruit someone of a dead race. No one in ALttP refers to themselves a Hylian, despite being of Hylian decent. They're too mixed with outside races. Someone calling themself Hylian after ALttP, a soldier no less, would be increibly inaccurate. If OoX was meant to be after ALttP, then he should've said he was Hyrulean soldier, which would've referred to his nationality, not ethnicity.

[mohammedali]

To help Fyxe out a bit, in none of the game endings does any of the Links put the Mastersword in Lost woods (for the first time) nor do any of them put them in the basement of Hyrule Castle. Yet they are found in these locations. So how is OoX's MS any different?

The MS in OoT is left in the ToT which is located in the same region we see in the MS in aLttP. This place is near woods which are pushed back due to the castle being there. If the castle were to have moved, and all but the pedistal were to collapse, it would be in the correct place for aLttP. As for the basement, we can assume that the castle was rebuilt over the ToT in WW Universe. The MS need not have moved in either cases.
However, having the MS as an upgrade of a different sword is crazy. Having a bunch of Zoras owning the MS when only those of the bloodline of knights can hold it is even crazier. OoXs MS is not only divorced and contradictory to what we know about the MS from other games, but is also an optional part to booth.

Also, if you guys are going to put OoX affter ALttP, how do you account for the disquised soldiers protecting Din being Hylain when in ALttP they're basically gone. I can understand them being of watered-down Hylain lineage, which seems to be the case in ALttP, but why be all hush-hush about it unless they mean they're pure-blooded Hylian.

There are other Hylians in aLttP that are not part of the Knights of Hyrule line. Therefore, these new knights can be of Hylian decent, even if they are not of the line of Knights like Link is.
However, on the subject of OoX placement. I'm having trouble working out why the Dark World is still there when the Essence of the Triforce said the DW would seise to exist once Link touched the Triforce. Maybe we should rethink where OoX should go? I hope not :S

Uh, for heck's sake, they DO. That was just a seminar. It's appeared on lists of Zelda games by Nintendo (unlike the Cd-i games) and it appeared most notably on the Zelda no Video documentary, which, before you say, it was endorced by Nintendo and even had interviews and input directly from Miyamoto.

The list you're referring to was the one in the Zelda Manga I believe. If not then please provide a link.
As for the Zelda video, it was produced by Enterbrain! which is a Japanese magazine publisher (behind the Famitsu game mags). Although they had many Nintendo reps interviewed, a chart from them (unless in an interview) does not hold as much weight as a chart from Nintendo themselves. Not to mention that we still don't even have a translation for the video. Oh and Finally, the video was released in 2000, whilst the seminar was given in 2004.

What, a SEMINAR? Was the seminar even in Japan or was it in the US?

The GDC (Game Developers Conference) is a place where game companies all over the world come to talk about their games. The talk was given in Japannese and the conference was held in the US.

Mohammed Ali

[Hero of Legend]

Which is what I said. Water-downed lineage, which is what I think the case is in ALttP. They're not at all magical but still retain the long ears.

No-magic my ass. It is stated throughout the whole game that Link and the maidens have the powers of their ancestors, which WERE Hylian.

And please, all of you, stop with this "There are people with long ears who aren't Hylian" BS, because it contradicts EVERYTHING the games have told us thus far. If you have the ears, you are Hylian. TWW was the last game to state this, and I don't see what reason there could possibly be to ignore such evidence.

Having a bunch of Zoras owning the MS when only those of the bloodline of knights can hold it is even crazier.

No, only a Hero can pull it from its pedestal and WIELD it. Everyone who's not evil can hold it (i.e. Zelda in TWW).

Edited by Hero of Legend, 11 July 2006 - 05:40 AM.

[mohammedali]

No, only a Hero can pull it from its pedestal and WIELD it. Everyone who's not evil can hold it (i.e. Zelda in TWW).

Where are we told that anyone who isn't evil can hold the MS? Quotes?
And if someone can hold the MS, they are essentially wielding it.
The fact that Zelda was holding the MS suggested to me that she is somehow related to the Knights of Hyrule - i.e. either one of her ancestor Kings was also a Knight (like King Arthur), or he married the daughter from one of the Knights families.
In any case, when did a Zora get the MS after aLttP? We see it returned to the pedistal in aLttP ending, and even in AST (for those that want to use that). Finally, how do you have one sword being the possession of Zoras for generations AND being an upgrade of the Noble Sword AND being in a different countries Lost Woods? It's impossible for all those situations to reconsile without excessive fanfiction.

Mohammed Ali