105 replies to this topic

[Jumbie]

Fyxe, we've gone over the arguments five billion times. Wake up and smell the apples and stop trying to act as if you're a better person just because you repeat the same argument over and over.

You see, all your words also apply for yourself.

[Fyxe]

I am not repeating the same argument. I wasn't even posting anything.

It doesn't work the other way around, kiddo. And I certainly don't have an ego problem, I don't particularly give a monkeys what you think, but repeating yourself over and over without opening your eyes to the other side is just foolish.

Everyone else here has accepted that it *could* be possible for LA to be a sequel to the Oracle games. But with no EVIDENCE to disprove it's original placement, then all you're doing is saying 'but there's a boat, there's a boat' over and over and over.

Please stop being childish.

Edited by Fyxe, 10 August 2006 - 05:50 PM.

[Jumbie]

I am not repeating the same argument. I wasn't even posting anything.

Nooo, not at all..! There have only been over a dozen replies from you since the beginning of this thread, often with the same stupid argument that LA was supposedly designed to be a sequel to ALttP. Don't try to deceive me.

And I certainly don't have an ego problem, I don't particularly give a monkeys what you think, but repeating yourself over and over without opening your eyes to the other side is just foolish.

Everyone else here has accepted that it *could* be possible for LA to be a sequel to the Oracle games. But with no EVIDENCE to disprove it's original placement, then all you're doing is saying 'but there's a boat, there's a boat' over and over and over.

You could find at least three posts of me here and in other threads where I admit that LA could go after both ALttP or OoX. So, I haven't done such a thing as closing my eyes to the other possibility. Why is it that you won't allow me to retain my opinion although I was able to disprove every argument that was proposed to disprove me?
Seriously, I have never ever seen you let go of an outdated conviction that you had and take on that of somebody else, throughout the time that I've been here. Maybe such an instant happened before my time, but nowadays you seem to think you have gathered all the knowledge you need, so your opinions are fortified now. Therefore, please don't point on others when the fault is with you!

[Fyxe]

That's it. You've got some serious issues with me, clearly, and you need to drop them. You've been here a MONTH. ONE. MONTH. And suddenly you know everything about me and my opinions? You know nothing about me, and you really need to stop assuming and being so arrogant.

I make a bad first impression, sure. I am outspoken and a bit rude. But I don't make assumptions about people and I don't disregard their arguments in the slightest.

I used to believe in a single timeline, I don't anymore. I used to think the Oracle games definitely came after ALttP and LA but I'm not so sure about that anymore.

In fact, ask me what my timeline is. I don't even know what it is. But you seem to think I've solidified my opinions. Like hell. My opinions are more vague than ever, but there are some things I focus on. Creator intention is *the* most important factor in how I place games.

Nooo, not at all..! There have only been over a dozen replies from you since the beginning of this thread, often with the same stupid argument that LA was supposedly designed to be a sequel to ALttP. Don't try to deceive me.

Wake up. I was replying to the same 'stupid argument' you were using. And just for your information, other people have been using the 'same stupid argument' I have been using. Why? Because it's freakin' goddamn valid for fucks sake. You're basing your whole argument on a boat. We're not going to change what we think and what the creators originally intended because of THAT. It's not solid evidence. Why completely alter a rather solid and fairly well accepted placement of one game based on something so vague?

LA is so closely tied with ALttP. It's not something people are going to abandon just because you have a little conspiracy theory about the designers retconning the series when there's no need to.

I am a very nice person if you get to know me. But you don't know me. Just because I go all Dr. Cox on you, newbie, doesn't mean I'm conservative and 'outdated'. You come across as unbelievably arrogant sometimes, you know that, right?

'Outdated'. Yeah, y'know, cos, it's a timeline placement that people thought when the game came out. So it's outdated. Ancient history, eh? Please.

I'm done, I've said my peace, and I'm certainly not going to let this discussion get any more personal than it already has, for the sake of everyone else. Lets please focus on the issues in a sensible manner now, wouldn't that be nice?

Edited by Fyxe, 10 August 2006 - 07:06 PM.

[Jumbie]

That's it. You've got some serious issues with me, clearly, and you need to drop them. You've been here a MONTH. ONE. MONTH. And suddenly you know everything about me and my opinions? You know nothing about me, and you really need to stop assuming and being so arrogant.

I make a bad first impression, sure. I am outspoken and a bit rude. But I don't make assumptions about people and I don't disregard their arguments in the slightest.

I've read more than enough of what you wrote, even long before I joined. You have proven many, many times to be arrogant yourself, and it's hardly me alone who noticed it. No drama now, that's the truth. You often make one-line replies that contain nothing else than sarcastic stabs at people who aren't as experienced as you, and even worse, you also do that to people of whom you only think they have less knowledge than you! That much for your "I don't make assumptions". ARROGANT.

But you seem to think I've solidified my opinions. Like hell. My opinions are more vague than ever, but there are some things I focus on. Creator intention is *the* most important factor in how I place games.

All I know is that whenever you've replied to my comments, it's been to try to disprove what I said. Not saying you restricted yourself on me alone of course, but it's simply annoying if people are always out for telling others how things really are.

'Outdated'. Yeah, y'know, cos, it's a timeline placement that people thought when the game came out. So it's outdated. Ancient history, eh? Please.

The more important word here is 'conservative'. Believing LA has to be after ALttP just because it has looked nice like that for years is conservative in a bad way of not being able to open to new arrangements.

I'm done, I've said my peace, and I'm certainly not going to let this discussion get any more personal than it already has, for the sake of everyone else. Lets please focus on the issues in a sensible manner now, wouldn't that be nice?

I always rely on what I feel I'm being treated like, from me it's never to start beef with someone for no reason.
As for the topic of this thread, I obviously hated it from the start because I was bound to unneededly clash with other people's opinions, knowing that we had already discussed that issue in another thread. I repeatedly asked for the LA placement question to be ignored while discussing the timeline, but the lot of you can't seem to rest until the "newbie" is convinced. I'd love to say it's over for me here now, but one can never predict if one won't have to defend one's honour later on, so...

[Fyxe]

I've read more than enough of what you wrote, even long before I joined. You have proven many, many times to be arrogant yourself, and it's hardly me alone who noticed it. No drama now, that's the truth.

I'm not arrogant. I don't think I'm 100% right. I just recognise when other people are likely to be wrong. There's a difference.

You often make one-line replies that contain nothing else than sarcastic stabs at people who aren't as experienced as you,

How am I experienced? I'm not. And oh dear, I'm sarcastic. The terror. And actually I made a shedload of long posts, thankyouberrymulch, so please forgive me for trying to make some points a bit more succinctly.

and even worse, you also do that to people of whom you only think they have less knowledge than you!

You've added that bit. You've just made that up. Again, I reiterate, you know sod all about me and you have no idea what I'm thinking, so I ask you kindly to shut the heck up. I'm really, really tired of people just assuming I'm an evil sarcastic bitch because I'm always matter-of-fact on this particular section of the forum.

If you think I am wrong and you are more 'knowledgable' or whatever, then please, by all means, prove me wrong on something.

That much for your "I don't make assumptions". ARROGANT.

I don't. You are the one making assumptions about me making assumptions. It's kinda creepy, really. I must have wronged you in a previous life, or accidentally insulted your very fibre of being. For that, I apologise, but I'm afraid I do not have E.S.P., so I do not know how I cause such loathing. I'm sure the power of sarcasm is not so great.

All I know is that whenever you've replied to my comments, it's been to try to disprove what I said.

...Yeah, cos nobody does that around here.

And there's plenty of comments you've made that I haven't tried to disprove. Seriously. I am not the fucking devil, you've made me into one because you just happen to be the one I'm disagreeing with fairly often. I don't even pay attention to who's point I'm replying to half the time. I am not on some vendetta.

Not saying you restricted yourself on me alone of course, but it's simply annoying if people are always out for telling others how things really are.

But... What... Zeh... Fuh buh pizzle? Isn't this, um, a... Topic for working things out and discussing things?

The more important word here is 'conservative'. Believing LA has to be after ALttP just because it has looked nice like that for years is conservative in a bad way of not being able to open to new arrangements.

...Yeeeeahnoooo... How, exactly? I explained why it's nothing to do with being 'conservative', it's more to do with 'lack of evidence for us aaaall to change what we 90% knew beforehand just like that'.

I repeatedly asked for the LA placement question to be ignored while discussing the timeline, but the lot of you can't seem to rest until the "newbie" is convinced.

'Newbie' was a joke, newbie. Watch Scrubs. Might make you realise that sarcasm isn't evil.

Edited by Fyxe, 10 August 2006 - 08:49 PM.

[Showsni]

Don't make me lock the thread. Just calm down. If the other person insults you, be the better person and ignore it. Or tell a mod if it's really bad.

[Fyxe]

I apologise Showsni, I hope I've avoided using insults. I'm done, anyway, even if there's a response. Jumbie, if you do still have a problem with me, please keep it in PMs from now on.

I didn't want this to carry on, I hoped my other post made it clear I wanted it to stop. *Sigh* I am fed up of having to defend myself against various accusations of 'bad form' though... Believe it or not but I try fairly hard not to piss people off.

[lord-of-shadow]

When I first saw this topic, I was appalled at the state of the argument. Nobody had even bothered with direct quotes or even trying to build a nice block of evidence for or against. I was hoping that my post - even though it was hardly subjective - would maybe snap some of you out of the way this was going.

But no. I leave for a few hours, and this happens.

Thus, I don't see what's the sense in still clinging to the conservative order of ALttP>LA which was never intended by the developers anyway.

It is impossible to argue with someone who has fundamentally different views of canon and/or viable evidence then yourself, and this proves that you are one such person, Jumbie. If you can't see the intention from the developers that is so glaringly obvious to me, then... we are mutually unable to have a good argument, I would guess. Not necessarily a flaw in you or myself, but an... incompatibility.

And so I bow out of this discussion.

[Paviel]

even if the Oracles' Link never met Agahnim

Didn't he? I thought one of the mini-bosses in Oracle of Seasons sure looked a lot like Agahnim...

[MikePetersSucks]

Yea, but it's not Agahnim. Nintendo Power called it <something> Wizzrobe. Cheif Wizzrobe? Bah, screw it.

But yea, I trust Nintendo Power enough to atleast get enemy names right.

[Arturo]

But no. I leave for a few hours, and this happens.
It is impossible to argue with someone who has fundamentally different views of canon and/or viable evidence then yourself, and this proves that you are one such person, Jumbie. If you can't see the intention from the developers that is so glaringly obvious to me, then... we are mutually unable to have a good argument, I would guess. Not necessarily a flaw in you or myself, but an... incompatibility.

He's speaking about the Miyamoto order. Miyamoto stated LA could come in any place on the timeline, so he concludes that creators never inetnede ALttP>LA to be set in stone. But there's other creator's evidence for ALttP>LA. I can think now about KnS, where Link is gone..... presumably at Koholint. But I am positive there is more evidence. And it's not impossible to discuss with a person that has diffrent views than I do. I discuss with Jumbie, and I think LA comes after ALttP. I see the boat as a little homage to LA.

[lord-of-shadow]

He's speaking about the Miyamoto order. Miyamoto stated LA could come in any place on the timeline, so he concludes that creators never inetnede ALttP>LA to be set in stone. But there's other creator's evidence for ALttP>LA. I can think now about KnS, where Link is gone..... presumably at Koholint. But I am positive there is more evidence. And it's not impossible to discuss with a person that has diffrent views than I do. I discuss with Jumbie, and I think LA comes after ALttP. I see the boat as a little homage to LA.

I'm talking about when you have different views of canon and reliable sources. One of you will view something as absolute proof, the other could view it as either inconsequential or untrustworthy. When you're working with differences like that, you can't argue normally until you've resolved your disagreements on canonical information, which is more pain then I'd like to bother with ever again.

[Crazy Penguin]

http://www.nintendo....zlj/sutori.html

Well, they outright confirmed it, so until they outright contradict it...

[MikePetersSucks]

Pwnt.

[HeroOfTime5]

I'm talking about when you have different views of canon and reliable sources. One of you will view something as absolute proof, the other could view it as either inconsequential or untrustworthy. When you're working with differences like that, you can't argue normally until you've resolved your disagreements on canonical information, which is more pain then I'd like to bother with ever again.

And yet many shallow fools fail to realize this.

[Jumbie]

And yet many shallow fools fail to realize this.

Haha, very funny. I, whom you obviously mean, have hated this thread (it was yours, on top of that!) from the start for the very reason which lord-of-shadow named. The way I value this particular piece of canon is very different to how most others do, therefore this thread has always served only the satisfaction of your own ego.

Oh, how it hurts that this post will put it back on top once more...

[HeroOfTime5]

Haha, very funny. I, whom you obviously mean, have hated this thread (it was yours, on top of that!) from the start for the very reason which lord-of-shadow named. The way I value this particular piece of canon is very different to how most others do, therefore this thread has always served only the satisfaction of your own ego.

Oh, how it hurts that this post will put it back on top once more...

Thank you, I must say I take what you said as a compliment. Instead I will keep thinking that people like you who refuse to believe this are just to stubborn to. There's no flaws in this theory. It's too good to have any.

[Sentient]

Jumbie, why must you argue against the most logical things all the time? Seriously, the LA manual makes it clear enoguh that it is the direct sequel to ALttP. The Oracles can't come between ALttP and LA. I will not repeat all the reasons HeroOfTime5 has brought up, but I will say this: if the Oracles came before LA, then why didn't Nightmare take on the forms of Onox and Veran? Hmm? Because Link hadn't met them yet.

There is too much going for ALttP - LA - Oracles for it to be false. Jumbie, get some sense in your head and stop arguing simple logic and common sense.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

You know... the third Oracles game was supposed to have Ganon kidnap Zelda, with Link rescuing her from him. Perhaps the ending scenes were made before the third game was cancelled and Capcom really did intend for Oracles to be LA's prequel.

After all, that third game was only scrapped during the debugging process.

Edited by Wolf_ODonnell, 05 September 2006 - 09:29 AM.

[Fyxe]

I thought it was scrapped much earlier than that. In fact I'm fairly sure it was. We never saw any screenshots of any version other than Seasons and Ages, and they had time to put in the stuff they had already used in the third game into the other two. It wasn't that bebugging found errors in the password system, it's that the password system was far too complex and ambitious to work in the first place, and they didn't have time.

Edited by Fyxe, 05 September 2006 - 01:17 PM.

[Jumbie]

You know... the third Oracles game was supposed to have Ganon kidnap Zelda, with Link rescuing her from him. Perhaps the ending scenes were made before the third game was cancelled and Capcom really did intend for Oracles to be LA's prequel.

A good point, at last! But regardless of whether the third game would've made LA's manual story refer even more obviously to the Oracles series or not, the developers must have had some intention behind the embarking scene in the ending. There was no reason at all to have Link setting out on another adventure, one on the sea, after the games were over. They could've just shown Link riding into the forest on his horse or something, and never would anybody have thought that LA could be the sequel to Oracles..
But no, they deliberately dug out the ship sprite from LA and fabricated a wonderfully detailed scene with Link departing from Hyrule's coast to go on a journey of enlightenment. ..I mean, that transition to LA is as striking as a fist into a face!!
ALttP, however, gave no hint whatsoever in its ending that Link might leave on a journey. All we have is LA's manual telling about a previous adventure where Link killed Ganon and saved Hyrule - which is true for Oracles just as well as for ALttP - and Oracles' unequivocal ending scene.
Especially I can't understand why some people who are not even above ripping apart the steely OoT+ALttP connection by putting up to 5 other games in between them, make such a whining about the previous ALttP+LA connection, which doesn't have any importance for the overall timeline at all, ripped apart by Oracles! Come on, that's nothing but ridiculous.

Edited by Jumbie, 05 September 2006 - 03:44 PM.

[Hero of Slime]

The OoT-ALttP can not work at all with TWW existing. However, ALttP-LA can, so I'll just keep with it.

You should not base your theories on the "third oracle game".

[Fyxe]

There was no reason at all to have Link setting out on another adventure, one on the sea, after the games were over.

Why can't he? Why can't it just be a homage, just like 99% of everything else in the Oracles games? Do you mean every time Link gets on a boat, he'll end up on Koholint?

But no, they deliberately dug out the ship sprite from LA

They did NOT. That is false. It is not the same sprite. It's not even a sprite.

and fabricated a wonderfully detailed scene with Link departing from Hyrule's coast to go on a journey of enlightenment. ..I mean, that transition to LA is as striking as a fist into a face!!

It is if you ADD stuff that the ending doesn't tell us.

ALttP, however, gave no hint whatsoever in its ending that Link might leave on a journey. All we have is LA's manual telling about a previous adventure where Link killed Ganon and saved Hyrule - which is true for Oracles just as well as for ALttP - and Oracles' unequivocal ending scene.

Except that LA was made after ALttP, designed as a sequel, and the story in the manual is an obvious and blatant reference to the events of ALttP. Also it fitted in nicely with KnS, where Link is not in Hyrule and the people of Hyrule have to rely on a different hero. There is no NEED to retcon it.

Edited by Fyxe, 05 September 2006 - 05:06 PM.

[Jumbie]

Why can't it just be a homage, just like 99% of everything else in the Oracles games?

As a homage I'd understand the reused enemies, characters and landscape tiles, but not an actual part of the game's story, namely Link's leaving on an additional journey!

Do you mean every time Link gets on a boat, he'll end up on Koholint?

Technically speaking, yes - since the only time Link ever got on a boat was in Oracles' ending (and of course in TWW, but we can disregard that because it certainly has no connection to either LA or Oracles)

They did NOT. That is false. It is not the same sprite. It's not even a sprite.

LA's ship is entirely black with sails rolled in, Oracles' ship is coloured with sails open. That's all they differ in, the outlines of the ships are identic. They did remake the ocean and sky from scratch, but not so the ship. If they spent their time on remaking everything, but not the ship, this obviously means that both games' ships were intended to be the same one.
And how is the ship not a sprite? Is the scene of the ocean a freeze-image, after all?!

It is if you ADD stuff that the ending doesn't tell us.

What have I added? Does the "enlightenment" bother you? I usually understand enlightenment as something that you seek when you have already gone through some battles but still don't feel that strong you'd wish to be. This is exactly what Link does in Oracles - he leaves Hyrule's coast (it is obviously Hyrule because of Hyrule Castle's silhouette in the background, while there were no castles in Holodrum or present-day Labrynna) for nothing else than an additional, voluntary adventure.
So in that regard, I really haven't added anything that the ending didn't tell!

Also it fitted in nicely with KnS, where Link is not in Hyrule and the people of Hyrule have to rely on a different hero.

That's not a point at all. I may simply ask in return, "Why can't Link have left Hyrule for another purpose?" Indeed he can, and if one were desperately looking for an excuse for Link's absence in KnS, one could bring in Soul Calibur II. Yes I know it's not canon, but as long as it doesn't contradict canon, one might easily say that Link left for planet Earth at the same time that the boy/girl in KnS arrived in Hyrule, basically as a divine "hero exchange project". Actually, *if* Soul Calibur II was canon, it would happen after ALttP anyway, as the game refers to ALttP's events and uses weapons from it. But no worries, I won't include SCII in my timeline, also for the simple reason that I don't care where Link is during KnS, if not on Koholint.

There is no NEED to retcon it.

And at the same time there is nothing that'd speak against retconning the ALttP+LA connection. It's all just common sense, look at what Capcom made the ending sequence look like, and you instantly know what intentions they had doing it. Nothing 'homage to LA' - 'direct transition to LA' rather!!

Edited by Jumbie, 05 September 2006 - 05:48 PM.

[Fyxe]

As a homage I'd understand the reused enemies, characters and landscape tiles, but not an actual part of the game's story, namely Link's leaving on an additional journey!

And fighting and destroying Ganon and saving Zelda.

Technically speaking, yes - since the only time Link ever got on a boat was in Oracles' ending (and of course in TWW, but we can disregard that because it certainly has no connection to either LA or Oracles)

And in LA's backstory/ALttP's future. You cannot assume that LA follows the Oracle games just to fulfill your own argument.

LA's ship is entirely black with sails rolled in, Oracles' ship is coloured with sails open. That's all they differ in, the outlines of the ships are identic.

Firstly, that's because they're SHIPS. There's only so much a ship can look like. Secondly, I am fairly sure the ship shown in LA looks much smaller because the 'camera' is further away, and the ship shown in the Oracle games is viewed much closer.

They did remake the ocean and sky from scratch, but not so the ship. If they spent their time on remaking everything, but not the ship, this obviously means that both games' ships were intended to be the same one.
And how is the ship not a sprite? Is the scene of the ocean a freeze-image, after all?!

Yes, it's a freeze frame CG image. It's not a sprite. Sprites have motion. Take for instance...

 Fire_Emblem_Blazing_Sword.PNG   42.05K   8 downloads

This screenshot from Fire Emblem. Nothing here is a sprite. Sprites are moving objects on the screen during gameplay. I'm not entirely sure if the ships in LA's opening counts as a sprite or not, even, since everything is moving and it's an originally scripted event. But the ship there does move, at least.

What have I added? Does the "enlightenment" bother you? I usually understand enlightenment as something that you seek when you have already gone through some battles but still don't feel that strong you'd wish to be. This is exactly what Link does in Oracles - he leaves Hyrule's coast (it is obviously Hyrule because of Hyrule Castle's silhouette in the background, while there were no castles in Holodrum or present-day Labrynna) for nothing else than an additional, voluntary adventure.

If you're assuming that Link is going on a journey of enlightenment, what makes it the same one? One might say that Link leaves on a 'journey of enlightenment' at the end of MM, and at the end of TWW (to an extent), and KnS shows Link has already left. There is a precident of Link leaving Hyrule after saving it in many of the games. What makes the ending of the Oracle games so special other than the method of travel? Think about it - how many ways can Link travel, anyway? Horse or boat, that's pretty much it, unless you want to explain how he is meant to find a Boeing 747 in Hyrule.

Actually, *if* Soul Calibur II was canon, it would happen after ALttP anyway, as the game refers to ALttP's events and uses weapons from it.

The weapons issue is moot, it uses weapons from almost all the Zelda games. Moreso from OoT and MM than any others, in fact. It would NOT have to happen after ALttP because the wizard in the backstory of SC2 was being controlled by/using the power of the Soul Edge. Neither Agahnim nor Ganon (well, same thing) were doing this. SC2's backstory is clearly about a different mage, as a bit of a homage to the backstories of both ALttP and AoL. It doesn't matter which game it occurs after.

Besides, in ALttP it was all about Agahnim stopping the disasters, rather than creating them (although he probably did that too).

also for the simple reason that I don't care where Link is during KnS, if not on Koholint.

If you care so much where he goes after the Oracle games, you should care where he is in KnS.

And at the same time there is nothing that'd speak against retconning the ALttP+LA connection. It's all just common sense, look at what Capcom made the ending sequence look like, and you instantly know what intentions they had doing it. Nothing 'homage to LA' - 'direct transition to LA' rather!!

Capcom have no basis to rewrite the canon. There needs to be something more solid than that to override a connection that was solid as it was. Nintendo themselves had to have intended it, and there's just not enough evidence to suggest it's nothing more than homaging traditional staples of the Zelda series.

Edited by Fyxe, 05 September 2006 - 07:51 PM.

[HeroOfTime5]

You know... the third Oracles game was supposed to have Ganon kidnap Zelda, with Link rescuing her from him. Perhaps the ending scenes were made before the third game was cancelled and Capcom really did intend for Oracles to be LA's prequel.

After all, that third game was only scrapped during the debugging process.

So what it never came out and so it doesn't count as official evidence.

[Jumbie]

And fighting and destroying Ganon and saving Zelda.

Huh, what's with this? That's hardly a homage either, but part of Oracles' plot.

And in LA's backstory/ALttP's future. You cannot assume that LA follows the Oracle games just to fulfill your own argument.

Just as you cannot assume that LA follows ALttP.
It's really a circular argument through and through - I say Capcom did indeed retcon the game order with Nintendo not caring about it, you say the order of ALttP+LA cannot possibly be retconned. We really lack strong evidence for either opinion.

Firstly, that's because they're SHIPS. There's only so much a ship can look like.

Even I could make a different one if I wanted to. Think about it, you have the option to give it one mast or three masts, if you do it short or long, or what the rear end looks like.. It really would've been possible if the designers had wanted it to be a different ship.

Secondly, I am fairly sure the ship shown in LA looks much smaller because the 'camera' is further away, and the ship shown in the Oracle games is viewed much closer.

Whoa, that's quite a big assumption to hear from you.

Yes, it's a freeze frame CG image. It's not a sprite. Sprites have motion.

Okay. So I simply forgot that it wasn't an animated scene. But that doesn't have any bearing on what the.. thing (may I go on calling it a sprite?) looks like.

If you're assuming that Link is going on a journey of enlightenment, what makes it the same one? One might say that Link leaves on a 'journey of enlightenment' at the end of MM, and at the end of TWW (to an extent), and KnS shows Link has already left. There is a precident of Link leaving Hyrule after saving it in many of the games.

That's correct, Link has a thing for personal follow-up quests. But so far I've only defended my calling it a journey of enlightenment, which it would have to be for Oracles to qualify as a prequel to LA.

What makes the ending of the Oracle games so special other than the method of travel? Think about it - how many ways can Link travel, anyway? Horse or boat, that's pretty much it, unless you want to explain how he is meant to find a Boeing 747 in Hyrule.

Right again, only horse or boat. We see Oracles begin with Link on a horse, so logically it would end similar with Link riding through the fields again. But it doesn't, instead Link steps on board of a ship. That's quite a big decision for the developers to make, I think.

If you care so much where he goes after the Oracle games, you should care where he is in KnS.

Actually not. I've come to acknowledge KnS as canon, but I'll stick with thinking it's only canon where it doesn't contradict anything. Does it contradict that the Dark World vanished after ALttP? Not really, it explains. Does it contradict that LA happens after Oracles? Not really, Link is just away but we don't know where nor why. If a game doesn't contain Link, why should I care about where he is. If a game shows Link starting a journey, I do very much care where he'll end up.
That's how my personal curiosity works: If I call someone and they aren't home, I don't care where they are. But if I'm with someone and they suddenly leave, I do care why they do.

Capcom have no basis to rewrite the canon. There needs to be something more solid than that to override a connection that was solid as it was. Nintendo themselves had to have intended it, and there's just not enough evidence to suggest it's nothing more than homaging traditional staples of the Zelda series.

The Oracles came out shortly after Aonuma had taken over. Still it was before Aonuma announced that the Zelda timeline would be heeded more from now on. What I want to say, it may be that Nintendo gave Capcom somewhat of a free hand what to do with Oracles.

[coinilius]

Actually, *if* Soul Calibur II was canon, it would happen after ALttP anyway, as the game refers to ALttP's events

A bit off-topic, but Soul Calibur II doesn't really reference the events of ALttP - the backstory of Link has certain similarities to the backstory of ALttP, but it zigs just as much as it zags in comparison and by using the same logic that says its the back story of ALttP you could argue that it is referencing practically any other Zelda game you care to speak of. Nothing against people wanting to think it references ALttP, but it is by no means a cut-and-dried situation of 'it is referencing ALttP.'

Edited by coinilius, 05 September 2006 - 10:34 PM.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

So what it never came out and so it doesn't count as official evidence.

The point is, that Capcom intended for Oracles to be the prequel to LA. The Oracles series fits just as well before LA as ALttP does, because let's face it, Capcom does a lot of screwing around with other people's timelines... Take the Megaman series for example; they screwed up the original creator's timeline, then screwed it up again more recently with a book that contradicts a lot of in-game material.

Let's not forget how Capcom screwed up the Resident Evil story by bringing back a character that had his lungs torn out of his body. They then had to create some stupidly long-winded and pointlessly strange backstory to explain how he came back. As if that wasn't enough, they then ret-conned the story completely but in the process, added another character that ret-conned yet another part of the game's backstory.

Judging from how Capcom screws up timelines in general, is it any wonder that Oracles fits equally as well before LA as ALttP?

If Oracles doesn't go before LA, then you've got a timeline in which two Links, set out from Hyrule on a boat on a quest of discovery. Place Oracles before LA, and you do away with all that. The ending cutscene suggests he leaves Hyrule on a boat. It may not be exactly the same as the one in LA's backstory, but then again, something could have happened to it on the way back.

There is as much evidence supporting Oracles > LA as ALttP > LA, and I like it that way.

I don't understand people's obsession with a timeline. Zelda already doesn't have very original stories. Do you really want the stories to be restricted further by some kind of timeline that dictates where games should go?