Jump to content

IPBoard Styles©Fisana

Photo

IW Ganon =/= ALttP Ganon?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
238 replies to this topic

#91 Arturo

Arturo

    I swear this game is Adults Only!

  • ZL Staff
  • 3,356 posts
  • Location:Un lugar de la Mancha
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 May 2008 - 04:55 PM

You basically have to assume that ALttP has nothing to do with its backstory, which is an offense against logic.

#92 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 02 May 2008 - 05:11 PM

You basically have to assume that ALttP has nothing to do with its backstory, which is an offense against logic.


It has more to do with its backstory, in my scenario, than TMC does. XD

And it already doesn't have anything to do with its backstory. The wars for the Sacred Realm are irrelevant. The creation is now far from the reference point.

Edited by LionHarted, 02 May 2008 - 05:12 PM.


#93 Jumbie

Jumbie

    Language Freak

  • ZL Staff
  • 1,023 posts
  • Location:Germany
  • Gender:Female

Posted 02 May 2008 - 05:47 PM

Jumbie: If anything, the fact that Aonuma wants to do a remake of ALttP (when he has himself said that he hopes to make the storylines of the games more clear) probably speaks for the fact that it needs realignment with the timeline to account for the branches of OoT, not that the intentions involving OoT=IW have been reversed. Wouldn't you say so?

Definitely, yes.

But the wole OoT=IW thing means that ALttP takes place in the adult timeline, which is absolutely absurd. A new Hyrule would have to be formed (the whole pint of WW is that this will not happen) with similar geaography, the exact same names and lore. In fact this point has been made and debated in countless threads alrady, so maybe I'm being redundant.
In the child timeline we don't have all these problems...but oh well.

You're right that any previous games taking place after TWW+PH is truly absurd. But personally, I find the notion of ALttP Ganondorf not being OoT Ganondorf just as absurd as a new Hyrule emerging after TWW. Sure, we have another Ganondorf in FSA too, but the backstory of that one is not reminiscent of OoT or ALttP Ganondorf in any way. Since the backstory of ALttP and OoT Ganondorf is identical, I place ALttP outside of both timelines.

"This is a big, heavy shield just like the ones Hylian Knights use. It can stand up to flame attacks!" (OoT)

In Japanese, it also says Hylian Knights (ハイリアの騎士). This is the only instance the word "knight" (騎士) occurs in OoT.
The Hylian soldiers are called 兵士, which does mean "soldier", but at least it shares its second Kanji with the second one in "knight".

Standard knights are a bit different from the 'Family of Knights'.

一族 can mean family or clan. It's the same word as in TP's clan of shadows and FSA's clan of darkness.

"Long ago, Ganon's Tower was an impenetrable fortress that not even the daring and dauntless Knights of Hyrule could hope to assail." (TWW)

Without a Japanese translation, that means bog all, really.

It can only be a matter of weeks until we'll find out!^^

#94 Ize

Ize

    Bard

  • Members
  • 57 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 May 2008 - 08:17 PM

The IW is OoT. That discounts the argument entirely.


Whoah there, you are using your own interpretation/assumption as absolute proof to shoot down an argument. What's up with that?

We were told that OoT is the IW, and the IW is ALttP's prologue.


We were told that ten years ago, before TWW, TP, FSA, FS, MC, PH, OoX, etc.
It's called "retroactive continuity." I suggest you familiarize yourself with it, because the Zelda series is essentially a big mess of it.

#95 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 03 May 2008 - 02:13 PM

Whoah there, you are using your own interpretation/assumption as absolute proof to shoot down an argument. What's up with that?


I'm using a statement by the story writer of the game.

We were told that ten years ago, before TWW, TP, FSA, FS, MC, PH, OoX, etc.


None of which make it impossible for OoT the IW.

It would be much, much easier to assume that the origins of ALttP's Ganon have changed (when we've seen that Ganon has multiple origins anyway) than to assume that the placement of the IW has changed (when, if anything, the placement has been upheld based on information in TP).

#96 Arturo

Arturo

    I swear this game is Adults Only!

  • ZL Staff
  • 3,356 posts
  • Location:Un lugar de la Mancha
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 May 2008 - 04:16 PM

What you say just means something: You don't understand ALttP

#97 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 04 May 2008 - 08:35 AM

What you say just means something: You don't understand ALttP


Sure I do.

Some stuff happened a long time ago that caused the Sacred Realm to be sealed.
Some guy got into the Sacred Realm and took the Triforce, and is trying to break the seal.

You view the two events as related. That is, the guy who got into the Sacred Realm and took the Triforce is the reason it was sealed in the first place.

I look at TP, and do you know what I see?

Some tribe attempted to take over the Sacred Realm, but were sealed away in a dark world.
Some guy attempted to take over the Sacred Realm, but was sealed away in a dark world.

Now, the obvious interpretation would be to view these two events as related. That is, the guy is part of the tribe. I mean, honestly, the scene that shows the tribe shows the Triforce being taken, apparently, and he has part of it. But that obviously doesn't fit if we try to connect these two events with the greater context of the series. That is, that the wars over the Sacred Realm happened BEFORE he tried to take over.

So the popular view for TP is approximately just as ridiculous as my view of ALttP. The only difference is that TP doesn't have a preexisting, archaic notion that the two events HAVE to be related. It just seems obvious that they would be... unless you know about anything unrelated to TP.

Now, my justification for going with the view that ALttP is not directly linked to the IW is this.

The IW was designed to tell the story of the origins of Ganon and the first time the Triforce was disturbed. This is obvious because the original manual tells us that Ganon was "born" during the IW, and the Triforce and the Master Sword are both introduced through their own origin stories as well.

OoT was designed to tell the IW, but took a number of liberties as to details of the story, including but not limited to: the races of the sages, the appearance of a hero who subdued Ganon, and the splitting of the Triforce when Ganon touched it. Thus, the IW story was changed, but still retained its apparent origins status.

Then TWW came out. It followed OoT, but not in such a way that could link directly to ALttP, as the sealed Ganon was killed.

So what now? Do we completely ignore both the status of the IW as an origins story and the status of OoT as the IW, or do we just accept that the relationship between the IW and ALttP is more complicated than it originally was? (Newsflash: the latter of the two was already true when OoT was released.)

I'd prefer not to ignore the intent of the IW over ALttP, especially when the relationship between the 3D games and the 2D games is sketchy anyway. Effectively, I'm going with what's already true (that the 2D games don't perfectly fit right now) over what's not necessarily true (that OoT is no longer the IW and that the IW doesn't tell the original Ganon story; the latter of THESE points is simply preposterous, since the remake of ALttP, which came out at about the same time as TWW and was definitely influenced by TWW--see FS--upholds that the IW DOES tell the story of the first time the Triforce was taken).

Edited by LionHarted, 04 May 2008 - 08:42 AM.


#98 Alastair

Alastair

    Scout

  • Members
  • 183 posts
  • Location:Cheshire, England
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 May 2008 - 08:10 AM

Some stuff happened a long time ago that caused the Sacred Realm to be sealed.
Some guy got into the Sacred Realm and took the Triforce, and is trying to break the seal.

You view the two events as related. That is, the guy who got into the Sacred Realm and took the Triforce is the reason it was sealed in the first place.

These events are considered related as otherwise aLttP makes no sense. The point of the game is that you are aware of the IW back story, and after you defeat Agahnim you discover that Ganon is still alive and trying to break the seal on the Sacred Realm.

I look at TP, and do you know what I see?

Some tribe attempted to take over the Sacred Realm, but were sealed away in a dark world.
Some guy attempted to take over the Sacred Realm, but was sealed away in a dark world.

Now, the obvious interpretation would be to view these two events as related. That is, the guy is part of the tribe. I mean, honestly, the scene that shows the tribe shows the Triforce being taken, apparently, and he has part of it. But that obviously doesn't fit if we try to connect these two events with the greater context of the series. That is, that the wars over the Sacred Realm happened BEFORE he tried to take over.

The difference is that this is an assumption that the player could make, though there is little reason for them to do so. There seems to be some time between the war with the interlopers and Ganondorfs' execution, making it unlikely that Ganondorf is part of the same tribe. Even viewed solely in the context of TPs' plot there is no reason why a player would make this assumption, or a least no reason why they would be certain that the implication was deliberate on the part of the games designers. If the implication were stronger then it would still be unfair to compare it to presuming that there is only one Ganon in aLttP. Whether TPs' Ganon is part of the previously sealed tribe is largely irrelevant to the games story. If aLttP features two Ganons then the story loses any cohesion.

So what now? Do we completely ignore both the status of the IW as an origins story and the status of OoT as the IW, or do we just accept that the relationship between the IW and ALttP is more complicated than it originally was? (Newsflash: the latter of the two was already true when OoT was released.)

I'd prefer not to ignore the intent of the IW over ALttP, especially when the relationship between the 3D games and the 2D games is sketchy anyway. Effectively, I'm going with what's already true (that the 2D games don't perfectly fit right now) over what's not necessarily true (that OoT is no longer the IW and that the IW doesn't tell the original Ganon story; the latter of THESE points is simply preposterous, since the remake of ALttP, which came out at about the same time as TWW and was definitely influenced by TWW--see FS--upholds that the IW DOES tell the story of the first time the Triforce was taken).


You keep presenting the argument as if there are only two options; either that aLttP features two Ganons, or that the IW does not describe the first time that the triforce was taken, Ganons origins etc.

Even if these were the only two options I would still consider it preferable for the IW to no longer be an origin story as this does not invalidate the plot of aLttP (numerous posters have established that the GBA release changed no plot related details at all, so it cannot be used as evidence for creators intent post tWW). That said the only reason for anyone to consider these to be the only options is if they had a preconcieved notion of how the games relate, and were only considering possibilities that complemented their timeline. A late OoT(no loner the IW) is one option, as is a third timeline split or any variation of timeline that does not proceed OoT > tWW > aLttP.

#99 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 04 May 2008 - 08:33 AM

These events are considered related as otherwise aLttP makes no sense. The point of the game is that you are aware of the IW back story, and after you defeat Agahnim you discover that Ganon is still alive and trying to break the seal on the Sacred Realm.


Wouldn't it make just as much sense if you had no clue who Ganon was before you started?

The difference is that this is an assumption that the player could make, though there is little reason for them to do so.


There is little reason for players of the GBA version of ALttP to make the assumption that Ganondorf is related to the IW.

Sure, the story hasn't changed, but some details simply aren't presented. The ones that establish the "Ganon was sealed by the sages" context that the direct connection is based on, actually.

There seems to be some time between the war with the interlopers and Ganondorfs' execution


Why?

Even viewed solely in the context of TPs' plot there is no reason why a player would make this assumption, or a least no reason why they would be certain that the implication was deliberate on the part of the games designers.


That's certainly not true, as a number of first-time gamers, as well as myself, made this assumption at first.

Whether TPs' Ganon is part of the previously sealed tribe is largely irrelevant to the games story. If aLttP features two Ganons then the story loses any cohesion.


ALttP only features one Ganon and a seal persisting from an event that few people remember.

Even if these were the only two options I would still consider it preferable for the IW to no longer be an origin story as this does not invalidate the plot of aLttP


The plot of ALttP is that Ganon is threatening to break the seal that was cast a long time ago.

That said the only reason for anyone to consider these to be the only options is if they had a preconcieved notion of how the games relate


Or how the IW and ALttP relate.

Edited by LionHarted, 04 May 2008 - 08:36 AM.


#100 Alastair

Alastair

    Scout

  • Members
  • 183 posts
  • Location:Cheshire, England
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 May 2008 - 06:17 PM

These events are considered related as otherwise aLttP makes no sense. The point of the game is that you are aware of the IW back story, and after you defeat Agahnim you discover that Ganon is still alive and trying to break the seal on the Sacred Realm.


Wouldn't it make just as much sense if you had no clue who Ganon was before you started?

The difference is that this is an assumption that the player could make, though there is little reason for them to do so.


There is little reason for players of the GBA version of ALttP to make the assumption that Ganondorf is related to the IW.

Sure, the story hasn't changed, but some details simply aren't presented. The ones that establish the "Ganon was sealed by the sages" context that the direct connection is based on, actually.

I disagree that without the Sages context there is little reason to believe that Ganondorf is related to the IW. The player still knows that the Sacred Realm was sealed and they then find a demon/monster hell bent on Hyrules destruction trying to escape from the seal. Without finding a player who has no prior knowledge of Zelda games it is impossible to be certain, but I am 99% sure that every player will consider the two to be related.

If it is acceptable to assume that information had delibrately been omitted to facilitate an OoT>tWW>aLttP progression, then it is reasonable to ask why no refernece at all was added regarding the flooding of Hyrule.

There seems to be some time between the war with the interlopers and Ganondorfs' execution


Why?

Without playing through the game again I am not sure why I had this impression. Point conceeded.

Whether TPs' Ganon is part of the previously sealed tribe is largely irrelevant to the games story. If aLttP features two Ganons then the story loses any cohesion.


ALttP only features one Ganon and a seal persisting from an event that few people remember.

Even if these were the only two options I would still consider it preferable for the IW to no longer be an origin story as this does not invalidate the plot of aLttP


The plot of ALttP is that Ganon is threatening to break the seal that was cast a long time ago.

I think we both consider the seal to be intrinsic to the plot of aLttP. Where I cannot agree with you is that a player might not consider the seal to have been created to keep Ganondorf inside the Sacred Realm. Even if this is an assumption on the players part it is far from a baseless one. You need to establish that it is equally plausable for the IW to be unrelated to the Ganondorf Link defeats in aLttP. It is not a valid argument to say that something could (theoretically at least) happen, and as it fits the order you wish to place the games in then it must have happened.

That said the only reason for anyone to consider these to be the only options is if they had a preconcieved notion of how the games relate


Or how the IW and ALttP relate.


I know I'm repeating myself, but I still consider the relationship between the IW and aLttP to be clear within the context of the game, and indeed an intrinsic part of the plot. With exception of direct sequels the links between games are far less obvious than the implied link between the IW and aLttP.

#101 Jumbie

Jumbie

    Language Freak

  • ZL Staff
  • 1,023 posts
  • Location:Germany
  • Gender:Female

Posted 04 May 2008 - 07:29 PM

There seems to be some time between the war with the interlopers and Ganondorfs' execution


Why?

Because TP and OoT make it clear. We can deduce how much time passes from the following:

1. From OoT we know that the war ended at a point between Link arriving in Kokiri and a few years before he turned 9 years old.
2. From Lanayru we know that the clan of magic users stepped into the war at a later point, but the Light Spirits ended the war by banishing them.
3. From the Deku Sprout we know that then the King of Hyrule had the chance to unify the country (again).
4. An old man in TP's Castle Town tells us the recent disturbing events are related to the dispute of long ago.
5. Don Corone tells us the wars were prolonged. (Just throwing that in to show there's only ONE war referenced in OoT, TP, and ALttP.)
6. Now as for Ganondorf, his attempted execution was stated by Aonuma to happen some years after OoT's child ending.

Makes it around 9 years between Twili banishment and Ganondorf banishment.

Edited by Jumbie, 04 May 2008 - 07:33 PM.


#102 Hero of Legend

Hero of Legend

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,414 posts

Posted 05 May 2008 - 10:00 AM

Eh? I might be wrong about this, but I don’t think that tells us anything about when the magic users were banished; your theory only makes sense if you assume that the war before OoT was the war spoken of in TP, which is not a fact by any means. Even if there was only one war, it certainly could have continued long after the shadow clan’s banishment.

Also, it seemed to me like the Temple of Time did not exist at the time of the first conflict – at least, the war with the shadow clan would have been a good reason to build it – and that thing was ancient even in OoT.

Edited by Hero of Legend, 05 May 2008 - 10:02 AM.


#103 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 05 May 2008 - 12:32 PM

Eh? I might be wrong about this, but I don’t think that tells us anything about when the magic users were banished; your theory only makes sense if you assume that the war before OoT was the war spoken of in TP, which is not a fact by any means. Even if there was only one war, it certainly could have continued long after the shadow clan’s banishment.


The conflict spoken of in OoT appears to be based on the one spoken of in ALttP, and so does the one in TP. By association, and since they are placed relatively in the same time period relative to Ganondorf's appearance, I presume them to be at least related conflicts.

Also, it seemed to me like the Temple of Time did not exist at the time of the first conflict – at least, the war with the shadow clan would have been a good reason to build it – and that thing was ancient even in OoT.


It's quite possible, but I'm rather neutral on it.

The Master Sword was forged for the same reasons as the Temple of Time, and the Master Sword appears to have been forged as a safeguard because of a command from the gods, not in response to any particular event.

So I can't really say what I think, so I won't make any judgment.

The player still knows that the Sacred Realm was sealed and they then find a demon/monster hell bent on Hyrules destruction trying to escape from the seal. Without finding a player who has no prior knowledge of Zelda games it is impossible to be certain, but I am 99% sure that every player will consider the two to be related.


Again, the same is true of Ganondorf and the shadow clan in TP.

A clan capable of using magic is sealed in the Twilight Realm for invading the Sacred Realm.
A leader of a clan of thieves who is capable of using magic is executed for his crimes, one of which is an attempted invasion of the Sacred Realm. The execution fails, however, and he is banished to the Twilight Realm.

Why shouldn't these two events be related?

#104 Arturo

Arturo

    I swear this game is Adults Only!

  • ZL Staff
  • 3,356 posts
  • Location:Un lugar de la Mancha
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 May 2008 - 12:41 PM

Because the context where they are told is totally different.

#105 Hero of Legend

Hero of Legend

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,414 posts

Posted 05 May 2008 - 01:06 PM

The conflict spoken of in OoT appears to be based on the one spoken of in ALttP, and so does the one in TP. By association, and since they are placed relatively in the same time period relative to Ganondorf's appearance, I presume them to be at least related conflicts.

Yes, well, I was actually talking to Jumbie, but you are both right in that at least one war was fought over the Triforce prior to OoT. However, to assume there was only one such war - the one directly prior to OoT - is going well beyond what is implied in the games. And as for Ganondorf, he never played an important role in these wars; he appeared at the very end of that period, and was only important because he was the first man to actually get his hands on the Triforce - the aftermath of which marked the end of the wars, as told by ALttP.

It's quite possible, but I'm rather neutral on it.

The Master Sword was forged for the same reasons as the Temple of Time, and the Master Sword appears to have been forged as a safeguard because of a command from the gods, not in response to any particular event.

So I can't really say what I think, so I won't make any judgment.

The Master Sword could have been forged a long time before the Temple of Time was built; the fact that it was used as a key does not mean it was created with that purpose: this is the case in TWW, as well.

#106 Jumbie

Jumbie

    Language Freak

  • ZL Staff
  • 1,023 posts
  • Location:Germany
  • Gender:Female

Posted 05 May 2008 - 01:23 PM

Eh? I might be wrong about this, but I don’t think that tells us anything about when the magic users were banished; your theory only makes sense if you assume that the war before OoT was the war spoken of in TP, which is not a fact by any means. Even if there was only one war, it certainly could have continued long after the shadow clan’s banishment.


I must correct myself:

2. From Lanayru we know that the clan of magic users stepped into the war at a later point, but the Light Spirits ended the war by banishing them.

But in fact, the text names the emergence of the magic users as the sole cause for the war. It is not implied that the war was already on when they entered.
That makes it even more plausible for the war to end with their banishment. And think of it, why would the light spirits allow the other fighting parties to continue the war, when they just banished the ones responsible for it?

Also, it seemed to me like the Temple of Time did not exist at the time of the first conflict – at least, the war with the shadow clan would have been a good reason to build it – and that thing was ancient even in OoT.

Going with what I said, the ToT must have already existed. Not that that's a problem.

We definitely have to look at two or three passages from TP again, including one that I haven't posted yet.
I will post them in some hours, and we're all in for some realisations.^^

#107 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 05 May 2008 - 01:31 PM

Because the context where they are told is totally different.


Not different enough.

It could just as well be that the light spirits tell their side of the story, and the sages tell their role in the story, with Midna and Zant supplying the information that tells us how the story links to the present events.

I could say the same for the IW and Ganon's history as they are told to us in-game ALttP, as well.

Edited by LionHarted, 05 May 2008 - 01:33 PM.


#108 rayne85

rayne85

    Barbarian

  • Members
  • 281 posts
  • Location:Queensland, Australia
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 May 2008 - 03:38 PM

there are too many events that happen in the hyrule universe for it all to be considered as one static timeline, why look at it in 2d when you can look at it in 3d, why does one event have to lead to another, or be classed as similar, if we've learnt anything from the legend of zelda series is that everything seems to repeat itself throughout history, and the age in which the games are created never seems to change, except for a few where there are mine carts, other then that, there's nothing really, which could be a clue to the fac that maybe there are mulitverses of zelda.

The only thing that seems to change is hyrule itself, the landscape changes, the locations change, and the races change. yet the story and events are all recylced throughout their history.

#109 MikePetersSucks

MikePetersSucks

    Actual Japanese Person

  • ZL Staff
  • 4,174 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 May 2008 - 12:37 AM

So in other words, "It's just a legend/each game is in their own timeline" theory.

No thank you.

#110 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 4,833 posts
  • Location:Luton
  • Gender:Male
  • United Kingdom

Posted 06 May 2008 - 11:47 AM

I thought I'd have to say a lot, but thanks to Jumbie's recent re-translation of Lanayru's speech (check it out), I don't have to. To put my point quite simply, no new Zelda game since OoT has made any chronological reference to the IW or made any attempt to show an active progression leading into ALTTP. The theory is entirely founded on a string of random parallels brought together by the single desire that OoT MUST AT ALL COSTS be the IW.

#111 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 06 May 2008 - 05:40 PM

To put my point quite simply, no new Zelda game since OoT has made any chronological reference to the IW


Not necessarily.

The word for "Sacred Realm" can apparently be translated "sacred place" (according to the ALttP manual translation guide), which fits perfectly with the context of Lanayru's speech.

And, as I've tried substituting this wording in ALttP's manual (as a pseudonym for Hyrule/the place in Hyrule where the Triforce is hidden), the meaning itself could fit the context of the ALttP manual. Maybe we've had it wrong this whole time, based on NoA designating the "sacred place" exclusively as the "other world," the Golden Land/Sacred Realm.

Considering Hyrule has often been designated as the place where the Triforce dwells, there's obviously some sort of association made between it and the world where the Triforce is actually hidden. And Lanayru's speech shows this as well.

The theory is entirely founded on a string of random parallels brought together by the single desire that OoT MUST AT ALL COSTS be the IW.


As opposed to the single desire that ALttP MUST AT ALL COSTS have the same Ganon from the IW, yeah.

The problem being that ALttP's original intent has already been ignored in large part, whereas OoT's hasn't.

Edited by LionHarted, 06 May 2008 - 06:02 PM.


#112 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 06 May 2008 - 06:29 PM

You basically have to assume that ALttP has nothing to do with its backstory, which is an offense against logic.

Well, this should totally end the topic. If ALTTP Ganon wasn't the same as the Ganon from the IW, this would mean that IW Ganon disappears and another Ganon takes his place under the same circumstances the previous Ganon left office in.

#113 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 06 May 2008 - 06:37 PM

If ALTTP Ganon wasn't the same as the Ganon from the IW, this would mean that IW Ganon disappears and another Ganon takes his place under the same circumstances the previous Ganon left office in.


If OoT isn't the IW, this would mean that the IW somehow takes place under the same circumstances that OoT's takes place in.

i.e., as I repeat it for the millionth time, while the Triforce was still resting in the Sacred Realm from the creation

And this happens all the time. Vaati is sealed with the FS at least twice, even in rapid succession!

Edited by LionHarted, 06 May 2008 - 06:39 PM.


#114 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 06 May 2008 - 06:50 PM

If OoT isn't the IW, this would mean that the IW somehow takes place under the same circumstances that OoT's takes place in.


OOT isn't an IW and neither is it the IW.

#115 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 06 May 2008 - 07:16 PM

If OoT isn't the IW, this would mean that the IW somehow takes place under the same circumstances that OoT's takes place in.


OOT isn't an IW and neither is it the IW.


The man who wrote the story wrote it as the IW.

He said this himself. XD

#116 MikePetersSucks

MikePetersSucks

    Actual Japanese Person

  • ZL Staff
  • 4,174 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 May 2008 - 04:51 PM

Retcons.

#117 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 07 May 2008 - 07:11 PM

Retcons.


Of ALttP, or of OoT?

#118 Ize

Ize

    Bard

  • Members
  • 57 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 May 2008 - 01:29 AM

Of ALttP, or of OoT?


OoT. What was retconned is the fact that OoT is ALttP's backstory.
The IW is a vital part of ALttP's backstory, yet in OoT the IW isn't mentioned because then it was supposed to be the IW itself. You retcon the event and the event was OoT. TP killed OoT ganon, separating the story of the IW from the story of OoT
Now, after TP, OoT can't be the IW, so we have OoT's events and then the war.

And the war isn't under the exact same circumstances. Now they're just two SIMILAR events, and that's entirely plausible since many games themselves are similar.
Excuse the mess, but it's late and I'm tired.

Edited by Ize, 08 May 2008 - 01:35 AM.


#119 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 10 May 2008 - 01:20 PM

The man who wrote the story wrote it as the IW.

He said this himself. XD


As someone previously said, retcons. Recall when we learned that a season of "Dallas" was all a dream. Facts remain the same, but the interpertation is different. Thus, OOT is no longer the IW, aside from other inconsistences between it and ALTTP.

#120 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 10 May 2008 - 02:05 PM

OoT. What was retconned is the fact that OoT is ALttP's backstory.


Only if Ganon from the two games must be the same for the connection to work.

Clearly they're not meant to be the same at this point, so you can either believe they are not the same and there's no more connection or that they are not the same and there is still a connection.

You retcon the event and the event was OoT. TP killed OoT ganon, separating the story of the IW from the story of OoT


Not so.

This just means that Ganon has to be revived.

Which has debateably happened in FSA.

Edited by LionHarted, 10 May 2008 - 02:06 PM.





Copyright © 2021 Your Company Name