269 replies to this topic

[Jumbie]

We know Hyrule was invaded some time between TMC and OoT. Could that explain the change in Hyrule Town? If the town was attacked during the war, new buildings could have been built in a different style.

Well yes, that would be the only explanation there is. But still it's a weird feeling that the war threw TMC's present-day world back to become a medieval world again...

[Hero of Slime]

Who says it was a "medieval" world before? Hyrule Town could have built in the TMC style and then changed to the OoT style after many of it's buildings were damaged during the war. And I don't think the world changed, the style of architecture in Hyrule Town is the only thing that changed to "medieval" style.

Edited by The Zol, 04 August 2006 - 08:35 PM.

[spunky-monkey]

Magic is Hyrule's technology. That's what I meant. I'll just say magitech, alright? We do see magic change over time, but there's also a definate change in technology.

I've never heard of that term before. There are rare exceptions when technology and magic are combined to make some very unusual machines, but in Zelda any kind of device is always mechanical and does not use "magitech". So far, the most advanced example of technology I've seen is in TMC where the Minish have already build these weird robot/Iron knuckle contraptions and their construction happened a long time ago when the Wind Tribe still lived in Hyrule. I think it's possible that this "magitech" you speak of may in fact be the Light Force?

Well yes, that would be the only explanation there is. But still it's a weird feeling that the war threw TMC's present-day world back to become a medieval world again...

That's right, problem is the timeline is badly messed up so technology isn't one-directional enough for us to work out what's happening. I already know Termina made more advances with machines than Hyrule had in OoT/MM with clocks, pumps and upside-down dungeons and all...but that doesn't really tell us where TMC fits in...and every bloody time Hyrule does make significant process the Gods, Ganon, or some other supernatural force destroys it (a Seiken Densetsu 2 scenario if you will).

[Fyxe]

So far, the most advanced example of technology I've seen is in TMC where the Minish have already build these weird robot/Iron knuckle contraptions and their construction happened a long time ago when the Wind Tribe still lived in Hyrule.

You mean Armos. Beamos are similar things, as is Gohdan. They're the closest thing to 'magitech', but they could simply be technological with no magic involved.

I'm talking about things like the Fire Rod. It can be made by us using simple technology, but it's made by the Hylians with magic. Trust me, I could make a Fire Rod if I wanted to. I also figured a way to make an Ice Rod that uses liquid nitrogen to freeze things.

You could NOT make a Fire Rod. The Fire Rod is nothing to do with technology. You could not make a ball of fire fly through the air in a perfectly straight line. You could not make it appear from a crystal.

The magic rods do not use technology in the slightest. It's magic in it's purest form. Magic rods, staves and books are nothing to do with technology as we know it.

[Jumbie]

So far, the most advanced example of technology I've seen is in TMC where the Minish have already build these weird robot/Iron knuckle contraptions and their construction happened a long time ago when the Wind Tribe still lived in Hyrule.

Of course, Minish technology can't determine the degree of development of the Hylian culture.
It seems all the evidence on TMC's placement that are brought up prove to be ambiguous, at best...

[spunky-monkey]

I'm talking about things like the Fire Rod. It can be made by us using simple technology, but it's made by the Hylians with magic. Trust me, I could make a Fire Rod if I wanted to. I also figured a way to make an Ice Rod that uses liquid nitrogen to freeze things.

But the Fire Rod (ALttP) item isn't magitech at all it's simply a rod that shoots out fire by using up magic. Like Fyxe said, that item has nothing to do with technology, you can't compare the Fire Rod to a flamethrower or the Ice Rod to a fire extinguisher.

You mean Armos. Beamos are similar things, as is Gohdan. They're the closest thing to 'magitech', but they could simply be technological with no magic involved.

*Thanks, I forgot it's name*

I believe the Armos is entirely mechanical because of the on/off switch inside it, not to mention "Mazaal" found in Fortress of Winds also has various switches inside it so that's probably the most complex machine in Zelda (making the Minish the most 'advanced' race) I think the closest thing to it would be the Bombchu, and after that again the Hookshot/Longshot.

[Hero of Slime]

The fire rod is entirely magical, without magic it would only be a stick. The flame is generated and shot through the air entirely by magic.

[Showsni]

Then how do you suggest the ignited flame is propelled from the rod? Explain that to me.

By magic, of course.

I haven't seen the skittles ad., but if you could create a neverending fire spewing rod I'd be greatly impressed. As it is, I'm a tad sceptical.

Armos might be mechanical in TMC, but what's their power source? They can hop around forever without running out, so they're not any plain technology alone. Armos in most games are animated stone statues; in fact, in LoZ they're a normal soldier who has been turned into stone (presumably by magic).

[Hero of Slime]

Armos seem to have a different origin in every game. The Armos in OoT and MM were likely built by the Gorons because they all have the Goron symbol on their forheads.

[Hero of Legend]

Guys... I have but one word for you. Or rather, a picture:



Yes, Gohdan. What is he if not a machine powered by magic? And he is not the only example in TWW. The whole Tower of the Gods is powered by the same kind of "energy".

Of course, Hylians didn't make the Tower, but it proves it can be done.

[Jumbie]

I've never understood what's supposed to be so scandalous about that 'magitech' in Zelda, anyway...
Who cares if the Fire Rod works with magic or fuel? It does work, that's all that matters.
Really, to discuss the mechanics of items doesn't help us placing TMC. But while we're just at it now, could someone explain the big mystery that the hookshot's mechanics is to me? Why doesn't the chain fall to the ground on its way back? Oooh, might there be magic involved...

[Hero of Slime]

Why do you think that discussing mechanics is pointless but geography could help us place TMC? Both are things that the game creators don't even think about beyond their gameplay application.

[Jumbie]

Why do you think that discussing mechanics is pointless but geography could help us place TMC?

No, I don't think that geography could help. If I thought that, I'd still be clinging to that argument now, wouldn't I? As I said, all the 'evidence' for TMC's place we came up with have proven to be useless.

Edited by Jumbie, 05 August 2006 - 05:47 PM.

[Fyxe]

I was talking about the FSA Fire Rod. It's possible to make a rod that shoots fire from it. Have you seen the new Skittles bubble gum commercial? Yeah, that's what I'm talking about.

The Fire Rod in FSA makes blocks from thin air as well. I'd like to see Skittles do that. I have no idea what advert you're referencing, anyway, and how it's at all relevant.

Then how do you suggest the ignited flame is propelled from the rod? Explain that to me.

Magic, for god's sake!! That's like asking 'how do you suggest a fairy heals Link'. MAGIC. The Fire Rod is a magical staff with a crystal on the tip from which the flame is unleashed. You can't make a ball of fire fly from a stick by using lighter fluid. The Magic Rods are just the same as the staves that Link uses (Cane of Somaria, etc.).

As for what powers Armos and Beamos and Gohdan and all those things... Magic, obviously. Magic is a sort of 'fuel' in Zelda. So I suppose you could call them magitech, but they don't need magic for much other than fuel, the rest of them is fairly mechanical, on/off switches and all that.

But yes, Armos have different histories in different games, anyway.

Jumbie, the only reason the chain of a Hookshot doesn't fall is because is because it would of been too complex to animate, even in OoT and TWW. It falls to the ground in Melee though, so I wouldn't be surprised to see it do the same in Twilight Princess.

If you want, you could just say that the Hookshot reels in so immediately and so fast that the chain doesn't have time to be affected by gravity. It's meant to be purely mechanical though. Little discrepancies like that aren't important.

Edited by Fyxe, 05 August 2006 - 06:36 PM.

[Fyxe]

The chain is made from a super light but incredibly strong metal. The hook itself has tiny barbs it it that extend when it is imbedded in something like wood that allow it to grip the object.

No, it's a hook. Who says it has 'tiny barbs'? You just made that up.

Man, I'd love to be falling in Twilight Princess and then use the Clawshot to grab on to something at the last second...

That would be good, but difficult to pull off if the aiming is first person. But with the Wiimote...

I know that it wouldn't be possible (to the best of my understanding) to make a Fire Rod that can shoot a fireball, but it would be possible to get the "flame thrower" effect like the one in FSA.

The thing is, the Fire Rod doesn't use lighter fluid and doesn't even have a trigger or anything.

The Melee representation is the most accurate. The Hookshot would really be more of a grappling hook of sorts, but they wanted something fancier in Zelda. Oh, and the Clawshot doesn't fall to the ground, from what I've seen.

I don't really know anything about the 'Clawshot'. I've been avoiding most previews for TP. I like surprises.

and then it could also support my "super light but super strong metal" theory.

No need to make sense of imaginary physics. Plenty of things in Zelda don't make any sense from a physical perspective. Take the very basic sword motion - when you hit a monster with the sword, in many of the games the monster is sent flying backwards. With a bouncy monster like a Hardhat Beetle, that's fair enough, but generally when you cut something with a sword it doesn't send it flying backwards.

Plus arrows are affected by gravity. I can't remember if they added arrows being affected by gravity in TWW or not, though.

[spunky-monkey]

Armos might be mechanical in TMC, but what's their power source? They can hop around forever without running out, so they're not any plain technology alone. Armos in most games are animated stone statues; in fact, in LoZ they're a normal soldier who has been turned into stone (presumably by magic).

I haven't a clue, but they aren't really "magitech" like Gohdan is, they simply use magic for fuel, but that still bothers me because magic is finite. If Link uses magic too much he'll run out of it, those Beamos suggests technology has become fairly advanced in the OoT/MM time period but they don't ever stop firing their lasers at you which would suggest it's being powered by something else. Everything that is magic-dependant in Zelda should 'tire' or shut down at some point wouldn't you think?

No, I don't think that geography could help. If I thought that, I'd still be clinging to that argument now, wouldn't I? As I said, all the 'evidence' for TMC's place we came up with have proven to be useless.

Geography alone won't solve anything but combining it with other features may give us a clue about the positioning of the games in the chronology. We would know for a fact that IF any Zelda game featured a civilization made by the Hylian race and everything imaginable ran on "magitech" the game would be at the very beginning of the timeline. We can also assume that if the people are all Hyrulian and every machine is mechanical then it is much later on in the series.

MY theory is the Minish had a significant impact upon the Hyrulians because they secretly help them build and construct everything from swords to shoes. The Minish bestow magical gifts on the people every one hundred years and help them advance everyday in technology as well (it is noted their efforts often backfire obviously because humans don't develop the way they expect them to). Their influence on cultures in Hyrule would indicate that TMC is the 'first game' of the Zelda Timeline, so far.

If you want, you could just say that the Hookshot reels in so immediately and so fast that the chain doesn't have time to be affected by gravity. It's meant to be purely mechanical though. Little discrepancies like that aren't important.

Yeah but we know the Hookshot isn't very realistic anyway, a small powerful device that fires, attaches and retracts so fast would be nightmarish/impossible to design. I'm amazed at how the stress doesn't rip Link's arm off. ^^

Edited by Ricky, 06 August 2006 - 08:55 AM.

[Fyxe]

I haven't a clue, but they aren't really "magitech" like Gohdan is, they simply use magic for fuel, but that still bothers me because magic is finite. If Link uses magic too much he'll run out of it, those Beamos suggests technology has become fairly advanced in the OoT/MM time period but they don't ever stop firing their lasers at you which would suggest it's being powered by something else. Everything that is magic-dependant in Zelda should 'tire' or shut down at some point wouldn't you think?

Who says they won't tire after a long period of time? Everything in the dungeons works even after however long they've been sitting around. Torches, traps, changing water levels. Beamos and Armos and Eyeroks and so forth must be just very efficient. I think they are alive in some respects anyway. Magic tends to make unliving things 'alive'. Stalfos, for instance, are just bones, but they're alive. Armos are just statues but they're 'alive' too.

Their influence on cultures in Hyrule would indicate that TMC is the 'first game' of the Zelda Timeline, so far.

...Why? What do the Minish do in TMC that means it must be the first?

Yeah but we know the Hookshot isn't very realistic anyway, a small powerful device that fires, attaches and retracts so fast would be nightmarish/impossible to design. I'm amazed at how the stress doesn't rip Link's arm off. ^^

Edited by Fyxe, 06 August 2006 - 08:54 PM.

[Jumbie]

No, it's a hook. Who says it has 'tiny barbs'? You just made that up.

But if you take a look at the official artwork of the hookshot in OoT, you can see many little... lol, kidding
Sorry that I caused you all to explain that hookshot thing, while I was actually aware of its realistic animation in Melee and everything, but I just thought, it fits the subject right now

We would know for a fact that IF any Zelda game featured a civilization made by the Hylian race and everything imaginable ran on "magitech" the game would be at the very beginning of the timeline. We can also assume that if the people are all Hyrulian and every machine is mechanical then it is much later on in the series.

Hmm, interesting view.. You mean, the descendants of the Hylians cannot rely on magic any longer, so their mechanics get simpler? I've never looked at it that way, but it really sounds like the most probable explanation.

Magic tends to make unliving things 'alive'. Stalfos, for instance, are just bones, but they're alive. Armos are just statues but they're 'alive' too.

True. Especially considering Ganon's artificial vassals, it seems the black magic never runs out. Phantom Ganon or Shadow Link, for example. After all, Ganon holds one tool that we can expect to provide a great resource of magical power...

Cool sprite, with the snapping chain! So, they should put some effort into it, next time in TP

[SOAP]

...my God this thread has become so pathetic.
Take a gander at the name of the forum - it says Zelda Storyline. Believe it or not we make storyline connections to other games in the series.

Okay, I know this is from a few pages back but i was catching up on this debate since I haven't been in it for a while and I came across this.

Yes, this is a forum for storyline discussion but where the story takes place is just as important to any storyline as all the who did what and when's. Of course they don't take precendant over everything else (I don't think anyone's claiming that either) but geography shouldn't be written off completely either. Obviously it must have some importance since if it were just a game design issue, there'd be no problem with putting any Hyrule based games after TWW without coming with theories like the magic of the trees draining the Great Sea, Tetra and Link finding a new Hyrule, or having TWW alone in it's own timeline with the exception of PH and maybe TP.

[Fyxe]

SOAP, the fact that Hyrule got flooded is completely irrelevant to the way some people discuss the geography. Hyrule getting flooded is a blatant storyline issue, stuff like whether Kakariko is below the Lost Woods or above the Lost Woods or in the shadow of Death Mountain are game design issues.

Hell, what about Hyrule in TWW? Despite being a direct sequel to OoT, it bares virtually no resemblance to any area of Hyrule we witness in OoT.

[SOAP]

The fact that Hyrule got flooded is a part of the changes in Hyrules geography (from being a larger land mass to a bunch of scattered islands in a large sea). And the geography is part of the storyline because it's about where the game takes place and how it looks. And the setting of any game is just as important to the storyline as everything else. The creators may not give much though to continuity but to say they don't give a damn about geography AT ALL is just ignorant. Any good storyteller knows where the story takes place is just as important as the characters and what they do.

As for that nonesense about Kakariko, that has LESS to do with geography than Hyrule being flooded in TWW. Kakariko is a village, a man-made location. Villages burn down, get abondoned, and rebuilt elsewhere. Same with castles, temples, and such. That was the point I believe Jumbie was trying to make about Kasuto in AoL, since you have an actual example of a town being built in one place, abandoned, then rebuilt elsewhere keeping the same name all in same game. But you totally missed his point and went on about some nonesense about Kasuto not being in any other game or whatever.

I also like how Zythe and Mike Peters were both mentioned and not me when I'm a bigger geography whore than the both of them combined.

Edited by SOAP, 07 August 2006 - 07:06 AM.

[Fyxe]

Any good storyteller knows where the story takes place is just as important as the characters and what they do.

They're not storytellers. They're game designers. The games take place in Hyrule and is recognisable as Hyrule, and the actual locations of the forests, etc. are irrelevant to this.

But you totally missed his point and went on about some nonesense about Kasuto not being in any other game or whatever.

The difference between Kasuto and Kakariko is that Kasuto is called Old Kasuto and New Kasuto, correct? If they moved Kakariko and renamed it, it would be New Kakariko, right? And where's the remains of the old one?

The fact is, the games take place over such a large timescale that it's just bizarre for one town to continue existing over and over with the exact same name. Therefore 'Kakariko' is just another running theme throughout the series, and not one Kakariko is the exact same as the last. The same can be said for other locations.

Hyrule is Hyrule because it's recognisable as such. The niggling details are down to what works for the designers. As long as it's recognisable, it doesn't need every single detail to be in the exact same spot, and they notably flaunt that fact at most opportunities.

[spunky-monkey]

SOAP, that was only posted because thread was turning into an argument over stupid game design issues where no one was even talking about geography anymore - I don't care who debates what so long as we have fun doing it.

Who says they won't tire after a long period of time? Everything in the dungeons works even after however long they've been sitting around. Torches, traps, changing water levels. Beamos and Armos and Eyeroks and so forth must be just very efficient. I think they are alive in some respects anyway. Magic tends to make unliving things 'alive'. Stalfos, for instance, are just bones, but they're alive. Armos are just statues but they're 'alive' too.

That sounds about right, though the rest may have to do with the designers objective(s) in giving the gamer a decent challenge in the dungeons too, also Ganon having the ToP would grant him almost unlimited black magic anyway.

...Why? What do the Minish do in TMC that means it must be the first?

Oh didn't you read my theory first-time? I thought I explained it fairly well...bearing in mind it is an assumption that the Minish taught the people how to make things for themselves.

Where can I get me one of those?

[Fyxe]

Where can I get me one of those?

Pharae, my friend, Pharae.

[Jumbie]

Hell, what about Hyrule in TWW? Despite being a direct sequel to OoT, it bares virtually no resemblance to any area of Hyrule we witness in OoT.

True, and it's absolutely not comprehensible why the designers didn't just put TWW's Hyrule Castle into the middle of those Hyrule Fields from OoT, so that the players had actually got the feeling of familiarity which they wanted to achieve anyway... I mean, as we were only allowed to walk along a narrow path, making the surroundings look exactly like in OoT wouldn't have been too bad.
..Unless they can explain it in TP. It would be slightly hilarious if this game, set between OoT and TWW, didn't pick up landmarks from the other two games. TWW showed a really vast Hyrule, and all they would have to do is substitute the lake with grasslands, and the recognition would be there.

The creators may not give much though to continuity but to say they don't give a damn about geography AT ALL is just ignorant. Any good storyteller knows where the story takes place is just as important as the characters and what they do.

I also like how Zythe and Mike Peters were both mentioned and not me when I'm a bigger geography whore than the both of them combined.

SOAP, you da man! Where have you been

The difference between Kasuto and Kakariko is that Kasuto is called Old Kasuto and New Kasuto, correct? If they moved Kakariko and renamed it, it would be New Kakariko, right? And where's the remains of the old one?

I recall having read in AoL only the names "Ghost Town of Kasuto" and "Hidden Town of Kasuto" respectively, nothing with Old and New. "Ghost Town" and "Hidden Town" are not part of the actual names, but how the people say to differentiate between them. Thus, the Kakariko in ALttP doesn't need a "New" in its name. The ruins of OoT's village are gone and replaced by the Cathedral in ALttP. Consider, the two Kasutos are coexistent during the events of *one game*, while OoT and ALttP are separated by centuries - so one can really expect the remains of the old village to disappear at some point.

The fact is, the games take place over such a large timescale that it's just bizarre for one town to continue existing over and over with the exact same name.

Duh, it's not bizarre at all to name re-founded towns after the original places. Look at the history of explorers: newly founded towns in America were named after European ones, only with a "New" added. But, why should ALttP's Kakariko be called "New Kakariko" if it's just a small village without much significance? Of course, the game design justification is that ALttP introduced the name Kakariko, so the creators couldn't have possibly started off calling it New Kakariko, if nobody had ever heard of any Kakariko existing before.

Hyrule is Hyrule because it's recognisable as such. The niggling details are down to what works for the designers. As long as it's recognisable, it doesn't need every single detail to be in the exact same spot, and they notably flaunt that fact at most opportunities.

I don't think anyone of us questions this attitude of yours, as it certainly is the (sad) truth, but that's just not what we want to hear. We simply like to make up theories how the different places can be connected in a logical storytelling way, and that can only come after the timeline theorizing has been done. I explained this, MoALttP explained it, and now SOAP explained it, too. So, what about finally accepting it?!

Edited by Jumbie, 07 August 2006 - 12:19 PM.

[Fyxe]

The ruins of OoT's village are gone and replaced by the Cathedral in ALttP.

Firstly, the Sanctuary is built into the mountain, second, it's on standard ground level, unlike Kakariko in OoT, and thirdly, there is not nearly enough room for a whole village next to the graveyard, even one as small as the one in OoT.

I explained this, MoALttP explained it, and now SOAP explained it, too. So, what about finally accepting it?!

I do accept it, but I'm not the one going on about it. I was busy talking about the monsters and dungeons and stuff (which is much more interesting, if you ask me) until SOAP brought the geography thing back and appeared to claim it was as important as the storyline, which just isn't true.