Jump to content

IPBoard Styles©Fisana

Photo

FSA and TP


  • Please log in to reply
91 replies to this topic

#31 Chaltab

Chaltab

    Bright Lord of the Sith

  • Members
  • 1,031 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 12:41 PM

Because I frankly see nothing about TMC, besides vague Capcom-written narration at the end, that suggests it to be first.


You mean aside from the genesis of Link's hat, the Ocarina-era markings, the migration of the Gorons, the lack of common landmark names, and the explanation for why tall grass and rocks tend to have Rupees underneath them?

#32 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 01:30 PM

Either a new Hyrule was found, or the Koroks created one big island. Both are hinted in the games, thus, I "believe in the legend" ;)

Yes, a "New Hyrule" could be found, but what are the chances of it looking exactly like OOT/ALTTP Hyrule? That's the big question...not to mention the old Hyrule is "washed away" in the adult timeline.

Not helped by this particular fact. TP referencing the fierce war just like ALttP may as well mean that ALttP and TP are in parallel timelines.


It could be the same war. The war spoke of before TP seemed to be one of disunity, and the King of Hyrule unified the country. The war ALTTP is referencing is the war TP is predicting.

And for what purpose exactly would the Hyrulians go against common sense and Midna's decision?


Their princess believes that Shadow and Light cannot exist without each other? Link left his home town to look for all three thousand six hundred and eighty seven pieces? I don’t know why, don’t force this out of me. This is also assuming it’s the same mirror, which is a strong argument but not completely proven.

Not compulsorily. We can open as many timelines as we want, it's a free world.


Yes…for the sake of your timeline. :balloon:

Because I frankly see nothing about TMC, besides vague Capcom-written narration at the end, that suggests it to be first.


So you would never place MC before OOT because of principle. :blink:

Edited by NM87, 24 May 2008 - 01:31 PM.


#33 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 01:48 PM

You mean aside from the genesis of Link's hat, the Ocarina-era markings, the migration of the Gorons, the lack of common landmark names, and the explanation for why tall grass and rocks tend to have Rupees underneath them?


1) TMC actually references Link's clothes as "fairy garb," which nods back to OoT's origin story anyway.
2) There are Ocarina-era markings in OoT, TP, and TWW.
3) The migration of the Gorons doesn't nod to pre-OoT.
4) The Picori could have always been in Hyrule.

Yes, a "New Hyrule" could be found, but what are the chances of it looking exactly like OOT/ALTTP Hyrule?


Pretty good, since the Deku Tree plans to connect the islands, which are formed from the mountaintops and miscellaneous other high ground from OoT Hyrule. The only thing that's difficult to explain is why the desert is in exactly the same place, but there's no reason why there can't be a desert island leftover.

So you would never place MC before OOT because of principle.


More like I wouldn't place TMC before OoT because all of its references to actual games in the series (as opposed to series elements at large, such as the cap and items hidden in grass/rocks) suggest that it is after.

Triumph Forks, Oracles leaving their respective lands, Link's clothes as fairy garb, etc.

Edited by LionHarted, 24 May 2008 - 01:50 PM.


#34 Chaltab

Chaltab

    Bright Lord of the Sith

  • Members
  • 1,031 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 02:00 PM

You mean aside from the genesis of Link's hat, the Ocarina-era markings, the migration of the Gorons, the lack of common landmark names, and the explanation for why tall grass and rocks tend to have Rupees underneath them?


1) TMC actually references Link's clothes as "fairy garb," which nods back to OoT's origin story anyway.
2) There are Ocarina-era markings in OoT, TP, and TWW.
3) The migration of the Gorons doesn't nod to pre-OoT.
4) The Picori could have always been in Hyrule.


1) The Kokiri could have just as easily been around in either era, so that's a moot point. The hat is stronger evidence than a throw away line.
2) TWW uses the Kanji-esque letters, and Twilight Princess uses Latin-esque letters.
3) The Gorons live in the East in OOT and TP; they live in the West in TMC and migrate East. That does point to pre-OOT.
4) Granted. The big question is, why does HYRULE only seem to know about them for the x number of years (where x must be greater than 100) between Ocarina and the TWW backstory. It makes more sense to me if it were old knowledge that were lost.

Triumph Forks, Oracles leaving their respective lands, Link's clothes as fairy garb, etc


Triumph Forks is an Easter Egg to start with; the pun only works in English and the Hylians obviously don't really speak that. The Oracles are presumably immortal, and I already covered Link's clothing.

And we're massively off topic anyway.

#35 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 02:07 PM

1) The Kokiri could have just as easily been around in either era, so that's a moot point. The hat is stronger evidence than a throw away line.
2) TWW uses the Kanji-esque letters, and Twilight Princess uses Latin-esque letters.
3) The Gorons live in the East in OOT and TP; they live in the West in TMC and migrate East. That does point to pre-OOT.
4) Granted. The big question is, why does HYRULE only seem to know about them for the x number of years (where x must be greater than 100) between Ocarina and the TWW backstory. It makes more sense to me if it were old knowledge that were lost.


1) The hat doesn't prove anything when it comes to the timeline, though. It's just a plot device used to give Link a talking hat that can shrink him down to Minish size.
2) I guess I'm referring to symbology, not letters. Although OoT uses a different lettering system than TWW anyway.
3) Since TMC's world map is flawed (Cloud Tops should be immediately above Veil Falls, not to the east), I don't think we can use it to reliably place any of the locales in TMC geographically.

Triumph Forks is an Easter Egg to start with; the pun only works in English and the Hylians obviously don't really speak that. The Oracles are presumably immortal, and I already covered Link's clothing.


1) The hat and Rupees/items could also be viewed as Easter Eggs.
2) The Oracles being immortal (in theory) doesn't change the fact that they leave Holodrum and Labrynna. What, should they leave their respective lands to settle down and then later return? Not that they're immortal anyway, as one of them is said to come from a line of Oracles.

Edited by LionHarted, 24 May 2008 - 02:08 PM.


#36 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 02:11 PM

Pretty good, since the Deku Tree plans to connect the islands, which are formed from the mountaintops and miscellaneous other high ground from OoT Hyrule. The only thing that's difficult to explain is why the desert is in exactly the same place, but there's no reason why there can't be a desert island leftover.


These mountains and high grounds are pretty tall.

#37 Chaltab

Chaltab

    Bright Lord of the Sith

  • Members
  • 1,031 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 02:17 PM

1) The hat doesn't prove anything when it comes to the timeline, though. It's just a plot device used to give Link a talking hat that can shrink him down to Minish size.
2) I guess I'm referring to symbology, not letters. Although OoT uses a different lettering system than TWW anyway.
3) Since TMC's world map is flawed (Cloud Tops should be immediately above Veil Falls, not to the east), I don't think we can use it to reliably place any of the locales in TMC geographically.


1) Prove, no, but it does indicate the thematic intention.
2) Mix up of words, there. My bad.
3) Well technically yes, but that doesn't change the fact that the Gorons went from Mount Crenel to Death Mountain. Even if you assume they're the same mountain, it makes little sense to say the name was changed from Death to Crenel, then back to Death for the rest of time.

1) The hat and Rupees/items could also be viewed as Easter Eggs.
2) The Oracles being immortal (in theory) doesn't change the fact that they leave Holodrum and Labrynna. What, should they leave their respective lands to settle down and then later return? Not that they're immortal anyway, as one of them is said to come from a line of Oracles.


1) Not really, since items are either unique to a few games or found in nearly every Zelda. And rupees are in all of them.
2) Granted, point retracted. But the very fact there's a line of Oracles doesn't prove anything other than there could be Oracles in every

#38 Jumbie

Jumbie

    Language Freak

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

Posted 24 May 2008 - 02:31 PM

It could be the same war. The war spoke of before TP seemed to be one of disunity, and the King of Hyrule unified the country. The war ALTTP is referencing is the war TP is predicting.

Once again I'm not sure whether we agree or disagree... Which war exactly does TP predict? (Not counting Ganondorf's words, which merely refer to the eternal battle between Link, Zelda, and Ganon.)

And for what purpose exactly would the Hyrulians go against common sense and Midna's decision?

Their princess believes that Shadow and Light cannot exist without each other?

Sure, but that's just what they continue to do: they coexist, with or without a connecting portal.
Zelda's and Midna's point (they perfectly agree) is that both worlds must exist at the same time, but that the contact between both worlds has only ever brought misery.

Link left his home town to look for all three thousand six hundred and eighty seven pieces?

.......

I don’t know why, don’t force this out of me.

Well, if you hold it possible that the mirror was reforged, I expect of you to at least come up with a plausible reason for it, no matter how fanficcy, but just more plausible than those two things.

This is also assuming it’s the same mirror, which is a strong argument but not completely proven.

I'm not trying to prove they're the same either (they always could be different mirrors), but rather I say they are the same because I have TP and ALttP in different timelines anyway, so they can as long as FSA is in ALttP's timeline.

Not compulsorily. We can open as many timelines as we want, it's a free world.

Yes…for the sake of your timeline. :balloon:

It's not that I like having this unexplained prong there. To me, my timeline just is the inevitable reaction to what ALttP, TWW, and TP tell us.

1) TMC actually references Link's clothes as "fairy garb," which nods back to OoT's origin story anyway.

You're not honestly talking about Tingle now, are you? If so, you're point fails right there. :lol:

More like I wouldn't place TMC before OoT because all of its references to actual games in the series (as opposed to series elements at large, such as the cap and items hidden in grass/rocks) suggest that it is after.

Triumph Forks, Oracles leaving their respective lands, Link's clothes as fairy garb, etc.

Except all of those are useless as evidence. You're trying to work with a basket full of easter eggs...

#39 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 02:41 PM

You're not honestly talking about Tingle now, are you? If so, you're point fails right there. :lol:


Why would it?

It's not as though Tingle is mistaken.

Except all of those are useless as evidence. You're trying to work with a basket full of easter eggs...


ALL the references in TMC are Easter Eggs, but these are the only ones actually tied to any particular game.

#40 Jumbie

Jumbie

    Language Freak

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

Posted 24 May 2008 - 02:58 PM

3) Since TMC's world map is flawed (Cloud Tops should be immediately above Veil Falls, not to the east), I don't think we can use it to reliably place any of the locales in TMC geographically.

Hear, hear. I remember something earlier when you spoke about the placement of TMC's Lake Hylia... :rolleyes:

1) The hat and Rupees/items could also be viewed as Easter Eggs.

I don't see how.

Why would it?

It's not as though Tingle is mistaken.

It's that Tingle is a little crazy in the head, thus disqualifying him as a reliable source.

ALL the references in TMC are Easter Eggs, but these are the only ones actually tied to any particular game.

Notice the pattern? Those things in TMC that do refer to other games are the easter eggs, while those that merely state TMC is first (without drawing any connections to other games) are not easter eggs.

#41 Erimgard

Erimgard

    Scout

  • Members
  • 187 posts
  • Location:East Clock Town
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 May 2008 - 03:06 PM

I do believe this thread's been hijacked :P

May I suggest a separate thread be made for the placement of the Four Sword Saga [MC in particular]? In the meantime, does anyone have any more comments regarding what the Shadow Links, the magic users, or both have to do with the Interlopers?

#42 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 03:56 PM

Hear, hear. I remember something earlier when you spoke about the placement of TMC's Lake Hylia... :rolleyes:


That was regarding the in-game maps, not the blocky world map.

I don't see how.


Of course you don't.

They're integral to your placement.

It's that Tingle is a little crazy in the head, thus disqualifying him as a reliable source.


Tingle is correct about the fairy garb, however.

And have you even played TFPRR?

Notice the pattern? Those things in TMC that do refer to other games are the easter eggs, while those that merely state TMC is first (without drawing any connections to other games) are not easter eggs.


Nothing states TMC is first, however. o_O

There are only Easter Egg references to Link's pointy hat and the Rupees and other items being placed under bushes and in jars.

I simply choose to include all Easter Eggs as canon, whereas you are choosy.

#43 Hero of Legend

Hero of Legend

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,414 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 06:32 PM

Tingle is correct about the fairy garb, however.

Tingle is correct about it being akin to the cloths worn by the Kokiri (just like his own garb) but that does not imply anything; the Kokiri might well be around in TMC. The fact is rather part of Tingle's character - he always recognizes Link as one of the fairies he strives to become due to their similar clothing - but that has nothing to do with the legend and costume surrounding the Hero's Clothes. Indeed, if Tingle’s Rupee Land is to be believed, Tingle’s clothes are not related to forest fairies at all, and so the similarity is entirely coincidental!

It is also quite ignorant and pathetic of you trying to dismiss TMC's ending as "vague Capcom text." Not because it’s a slippery slope where we ultimately end up ignoring the entire game/trilogy/series for one stupid reason or another: No, it’s because it's not even a correct presumption considering TMC's director/scriptwriter, Hidemaro Fujibayashi, has a long history with Nintendo and has been appointed one of his chief cooperatives (and successors) by Aonuma.

Edited by Hero of Legend, 24 May 2008 - 06:34 PM.


#44 Jumbie

Jumbie

    Language Freak

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

Posted 24 May 2008 - 06:48 PM

May I suggest a separate thread be made for the placement of the Four Sword Saga [MC in particular]?

I doubt this is necessary. We've been over TMC's placement over and over recently. Arturo and Impossible have published detailed articles both concluding that TMC is first. I do not even want to debate this, just let me make my last points for Lex.

Tingle is correct about the fairy garb, however.

Aha, so prior to TMC, a fairy came to Link and gave him his green clothes, yea? Or a Kokiri, or whatever you're talking about?

And have you even played TFPRR?

No. Would it give me a better understanding of the timeline, or merely force me to take Tingle's words more seriously? (And regardless of what happens in FPTRR, Tingle definitely is crazy in some of the other games.)

Nothing states TMC is first, however. o_O

There are only Easter Egg references to Link's pointy hat and the Rupees and other items being placed under bushes and in jars.

The ending text says TMC was Link's FIRST adventure. And no, not only this Link's.
The Hero of Men didn't have a hat, TMC Link didn't have a hat - then he gets one. This is a symbolic statement that TMC is first.
That's all the evidence you need, along with the developer statement that it's a "very old tale". TMC is first in the timeline, no contesting that, and I'm out.

#45 Erimgard

Erimgard

    Scout

  • Members
  • 187 posts
  • Location:East Clock Town
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 May 2008 - 07:35 PM

No. Would it give me a better understanding of the timeline, or merely force me to take Tingle's words more seriously? (And regardless of what happens in FPTRR, Tingle definitely is crazy in some of the other games.)

some FPTRR stuff:

1: Shows us Tingle is not a single person, or a single person re-incarnated. Anyone can become a "Tingle" by meeting up Uncle Rupee.
2: Takes place on a series of Islands, with some similar names [a Lon Lon Meadow, a Deku Forest, and a mountain that is said to have been once known as Death Mountain]
3: Features creatures that appear to be Subrosians and references a past encounter with a hero who defeated a Demon.

#46 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 11:33 PM

Once again I'm not sure whether we agree or disagree... Which war exactly does TP predict? (Not counting Ganondorf's words, which merely refer to the eternal battle between Link, Zelda, and Ganon.)

The war ALTTP speaks of, in which the search for the Triforce soon had turned to the spilling of blood. I do not think this is the war spoke of in OOT since that one in the ended the King unifying the country. Why would him unifying the country stop the search for the Triforce? So I think ALTTP is speaking of the crusades, while TP is symbolically predicting this.

Well, if you hold it possible that the mirror was reforged, I expect of you to at least come up with a plausible reason for it, no matter how fanficcy, but just more plausible than those two things.

Are you sure? Would I really be able to actually…theorize without having to worry about validity? No, probably not, at least not here.

It's not that I like having this unexplained prong there. To me, my timeline just is the inevitable reaction to what ALttP, TWW, and TP tell us.

Let me remind you who you are talking to here, NM87, not anyone else, so you don’t have to justify your timeline placements to the utmost where you throw your body over them. Anyway, with that said, I think the idea of WW occurring if ALTTP fails is pretty cool. You never explained it to me, but what I gather is that the implications of doom given out in ALTTP to Link if he does not complete his quest compliment that theory. When playing ALTTP as a wee child, I always thought “Gee, I really have o save the land, or who knows what could happen!”. This is precisely what your idea is founded on, which is pretty neat.

Just one thing, why would the timeline split if ALTTP failed? Wouldn’t a WW-like event occur in the same timeline, why split it? Why would two different realities exist? See where I’m getting at? I'm thinking that the godesses intervene and create two realities...but wouldn't they have o rewind time in the other for Link to try ALTTP over? I'm confused.

#47 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 24 May 2008 - 11:34 PM

No. Would it give me a better understanding of the timeline, or merely force me to take Tingle's words more seriously? (And regardless of what happens in FPTRR, Tingle definitely is crazy in some of the other games.)

some FPTRR stuff:

1: Shows us Tingle is not a single person, or a single person re-incarnated. Anyone can become a "Tingle" by meeting up Uncle Rupee.
2: Takes place on a series of Islands, with some similar names [a Lon Lon Meadow, a Deku Forest, and a mountain that is said to have been once known as Death Mountain]
3: Features creatures that appear to be Subrosians and references a past encounter with a hero who defeated a Demon.

I want to play that game so badly...I never understood why no one ever liked Tingle, I was pulling for him in SSBB.

#48 Jumbie

Jumbie

    Language Freak

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

Posted 25 May 2008 - 12:57 PM

The war ALTTP speaks of, in which the search for the Triforce soon had turned to the spilling of blood.

But you do think that OoT and TP speak of the same war, i.e. the banishment of the mages is the fierce war? I'm convinced that this is true - but if you doubt ALttP speaks of that war, you might as well doubt OoT and TP speak of the same because the Light Spirits and the King both ending the war seems to be an inconsistency to some people (when it's really not at all, it's simply different bits of information about the same event given in two different games).

I do not think this is the war spoke of in OOT since that one in the ended the King unifying the country. Why would him unifying the country stop the search for the Triforce?

Because the yearning for the Triforce is the one and only reason the Hyrulians fell into disunity. The major force in the war came to be the mages, and once they were defeated (their magic sealed), the logical reaction of everyone else would be to stop fighting, thus enabling the Hylian king to unify the country.

So I think ALTTP is speaking of the crusades, while TP is symbolically predicting this.

Well, you still didn't tell me in what way you think TP predicts that.

Are you sure? Would I really be able to actually…theorize without having to worry about validity? No, probably not, at least not here.

We have members with very exotic timelines here, who never fail to defend their theories even if belittled or ignored by everyone else. So I'd say we're quite tolerant, albeit not always peaceful.
All I ask of you is that you actually form a potential explanation or reason for a presumed event that you could use to connect games in your timeline. Because if you can't find one, that only means you should abandon that particular idea.

Let me remind you who you are talking to here, NM87, not anyone else, so you don’t have to justify your timeline placements to the utmost where you throw your body over them.

Huh? I'm not aware the defence of my theory actually differs depending on whom I talk to.

Anyway, with that said, I think the idea of WW occurring if ALTTP fails is pretty cool. You never explained it to me, but what I gather is that the implications of doom given out in ALTTP to Link if he does not complete his quest compliment that theory. When playing ALTTP as a wee child, I always thought “Gee, I really have o save the land, or who knows what could happen!”. This is precisely what your idea is founded on, which is pretty neat.

Just one thing, why would the timeline split if ALTTP failed? Wouldn’t a WW-like event occur in the same timeline, why split it? Why would two different realities exist? See where I’m getting at? I'm thinking that the godesses intervene and create two realities...but wouldn't they have o rewind time in the other for Link to try ALTTP over? I'm confused.

I don't necessarily believe anymore that ALttP happens after OoT's adult ending, but rather after an OoT that didn't really happen. The reason is that TWW's backstory really is very inconsistent with ALttP, especially regarding the Triforce possession.

I've long removed the statement "ALttP fails" from my sig. I didn't realize until now that I still had it say there were two adult timelines. I've changed one of them into gaiden, with which I mean "alternate history". The good thing about a gaiden is that you don't need to bother to explain where it comes from - it's got to do with quantum theory.

#49 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 25 May 2008 - 11:58 PM

But you do think that OoT and TP speak of the same war, i.e. the banishment of the mages is the fierce war? I'm convinced that this is true - but if you doubt ALttP speaks of that war, you might as well doubt OoT and TP speak of the same because the Light Spirits and the King both ending the war seems to be an inconsistency to some people (when it's really not at all, it's simply different bits of information about the same event given in two different games).

Because the yearning for the Triforce is the one and only reason the Hyrulians fell into disunity. The major force in the war came to be the mages, and once they were defeated (their magic sealed), the logical reaction of everyone else would be to stop fighting, thus enabling the Hylian king to unify the country.


I think I miss communicated. OOT, TP and ALTTP all reference a time when there was fighting over the Sacred Realm. OOT claims that the King ended the fighting, TP claims the Light Spirits ended the fighting and ALTTP claims that…the fighting never really ended until someone actually found the entrance. For instance, Ganondorf had discovered the Sacred Realm during a time of struggle according to ALTTP. Therefore, its possible OOT and TP reference the same war, but I believe that the fighting described in ALTTP was another time of searching for the entrance. This may have happened after TP, and it is predicted in the cut-scene which shows good turning evil in search of it. So it looks like this:

Wars - OOT - MM - TP - Wars - Imprisoning War - ALTTP

As for the 2D games being a side-story series, I am not too hot about. We might as well just have...

........WW/PH
OOT=
........MM-TP

&

MC-IW-ALTTP/LA-(FS/FSA)-LOZ/AOL-OOX-(FS/FSA)

Edited by NM87, 25 May 2008 - 11:58 PM.


#50 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

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

Posted 26 May 2008 - 07:48 AM

The Hyrulian civil wars referenced in ALTTP, OoT and TP are all simplified to a general meaning; the people got greedy and fought for power. So of course, they're all going to sound similar. It's not like there were any specific circumstances under which the wars can be specified to any period of Hyrulian history. This is just another repeated element to the Zelda mythology, like Link fighting Ganon.

Edited by Raian, 26 May 2008 - 07:49 AM.


#51 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 26 May 2008 - 11:26 AM

The Hyrulian civil wars referenced in ALTTP, OoT and TP are all simplified to a general meaning; the people got greedy and fought for power. So of course, they're all going to sound similar. It's not like there were any specific circumstances under which the wars can be specified to any period of Hyrulian history. This is just another repeated element to the Zelda mythology, like Link fighting Ganon.


I don't know if we agree or not, Raian, as I can't discern a dissenting view or not. TP occurs only a small time after OOT, so its possible for them to be referencing the same war. ALTTP happens a very long time after both of those games, so is possible for it to be another struggle. ALTTP also doesn't make it sound like it was a war, the people were fighting over information and the like. ALTTP states that during those struggles Ganondorf opened the way to the Sacred Realm, an soon after the Imprisoning War took place.

If the fighting over the entrance to the Sacred Realm is a common theme in Zelda, such as Link fighting Ganon, why can't it be repeated multiple times?

#52 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

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

Posted 26 May 2008 - 04:49 PM

My point is that the circumstances in which the civil wars occur parallel each other, but parallels are not reliable forms of timeline evidence. See my "parallel" topic for further elaboration.

#53 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 26 May 2008 - 05:22 PM

Aha, so prior to TMC, a fairy came to Link and gave him his green clothes, yea? Or a Kokiri, or whatever you're talking about?


No.

I'm suggesting that TMC is not first.

Therefore the origin of the garb is established before TMC.

Would it give me a better understanding of the timeline, or merely force me to take Tingle's words more seriously?


It actually establishes Tingle's Rupee-craze as part of a self-preservation mechanism inflicted upon him by Uncle Rupee. He needs lots of Rupees, otherwise he dies. His interest in fairies is explained as well, as it has to do with part of Uncle Rupee's promise of immortality and an entrance to Rupeeland (as far as I know). So Tingle is not crazy, by any means.

As for the remainder of the game, it features a clearly post-flood world, a Deku Tree who is clearly spreading forests across the islands of the world, which in FPTRR are the size of continents, and this world features a number of place names from Hyrule. And yes, it clearly is Hyrule, since Death Mountain (or rather, the mountain formerly known as Death Mountain) appears, too.

It's now surrounded by forest - kind of like in ALttP, no?

The ending text says TMC was Link's FIRST adventure. And no, not only this Link's.


Capcom says there's no intention to connect the FS games to the Ganon story, but look what happened to that. TMC is clearly the first adventure of Link - in the FS side series, which Capcom always and only ever intended to be a side series.

The Hero of Men didn't have a hat, TMC Link didn't have a hat - then he gets one. This is a symbolic statement that TMC is first.


Link gets the hero's clothes in TP and TWW, but neither of these is the beginning of the series. Of course, this is because they reference past heroes.

TMC attaches a symbolic meaning to the hat by showing a game in which the hat serves both as the key item of the game and as the main sidekick. However, does this mean it has to be first? In fact, OoT attaches a literal meaning to the entire Kokiri garb.

One of the two has to be first, and OoT is the only one of the two in which the clothing is clearly an origins story. TMC is merely a symbolic tribute to the hat which may or may not be an origin story. Bill Trinen's statements are irrelevant, as we know from his translations. In fact, Bill Trinen supervised the translation that removes the "first" wording altogether. Should we take his revisions as creator-intended? Possibly.

Edited by LionHarted, 26 May 2008 - 05:23 PM.


#54 Chaltab

Chaltab

    Bright Lord of the Sith

  • Members
  • 1,031 posts

Posted 26 May 2008 - 07:09 PM

Capcom says there's no intention to connect the FS games to the Ganon story, but look what happened to that. TMC is clearly the first adventure of Link - in the FS side series, which Capcom always and only ever intended to be a side series.


Whatever Capcom intended, Nintendo themselves connected the Four Sword games to the Ganon story arc with Four Sword Adventure. You can't dismiss them as a side series when Nintendo incorporated them into the main canon.

#55 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 27 May 2008 - 02:08 AM

Whatever Capcom intended, Nintendo themselves connected the Four Sword games to the Ganon story arc with Four Sword Adventure. You can't dismiss them as a side series when Nintendo incorporated them into the main canon.


I can dismiss Capcom's intentions when EAD has clearly ignored them.

#56 Jumbie

Jumbie

    Language Freak

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

Posted 27 May 2008 - 02:20 AM

OOT, TP and ALTTP all reference a time when there was fighting over the Sacred Realm. OOT claims that the King ended the fighting, TP claims the Light Spirits ended the fighting and ALTTP claims that…the fighting never really ended until someone actually found the entrance. For instance, Ganondorf had discovered the Sacred Realm during a time of struggle according to ALTTP. Therefore, its possible OOT and TP reference the same war, but I believe that the fighting described in ALTTP was another time of searching for the entrance.

Ah, this can be reconciled easily. We know in OoT there were merely 9 years between the fierce war and Ganondorf entering the Sacred Realm. The Seal War legend being centuries old, such a short timespan is not likely to be correctly remembered, and therefore appears in the legend like no time at all. So, centuries later in ALttP, people assume Ganondorf entered the SR during the war, because there were only nine years between the two events.

This may have happened after TP, and it is predicted in the cut-scene which shows good turning evil in search of it.

Eh, actually that cutscene is not a prediction but a review. While I agree that the imagery with Link and Ilia refers to what ALttP's manual says, these events are told by Lanayru as having occurred in the past. That means that ALttP's manual refers to the fierce war.

So it looks like this:

Wars - OOT - MM - TP - Wars - Imprisoning War - ALTTP

I don't like to have so many repetitive wars if it may as well have been just one.

As for the 2D games being a side-story series, I am not too hot about. We might as well just have...

........WW/PH
OOT=
........MM-TP

&

MC-IW-ALTTP/LA-(FS/FSA)-LOZ/AOL-OOX-(FS/FSA)

That's not far from my timeline actually... Just that I have TMC occurring before both of them, but otherwise it's completely the same.^^

The Hyrulian civil wars referenced in ALTTP, OoT and TP are all simplified to a general meaning; the people got greedy and fought for power. So of course, they're all going to sound similar. It's not like there were any specific circumstances under which the wars can be specified to any period of Hyrulian history. This is just another repeated element to the Zelda mythology, like Link fighting Ganon.

But I wanna know, where's the need to say they are NOT one and the same war?
Also, Link fighting Ganon is a different matter. This we always witness in form of games, not just as a backstory.

Therefore the origin of the garb is established before TMC.

No, therefore the garb in TMC just does not have any origin, how about that? TMC Link wears it as his normal clothing, it's not a family treasure nor passed to him by a spirit. It's not of Kokiri origin either - it's simply a common green medieval jacket. OoT explains nothing more but the origin of OoT Link's tunic. And btw, the tunic in TP is obviously not that same one, because a sixteen-year old cannot possibly wear what a nine-year old wore.

It actually establishes Tingle's Rupee-craze as part of a self-preservation mechanism inflicted upon him by Uncle Rupee. He needs lots of Rupees, otherwise he dies. His interest in fairies is explained as well, as it has to do with part of Uncle Rupee's promise of immortality and an entrance to Rupeeland (as far as I know). So Tingle is not crazy, by any means.

Regardless of all, mistaking Link's clothes for those that a fairy wears is crazy. Fairies typically wear dresses, or ivy foliage in OoT.

As for the remainder of the game, it features a clearly post-flood world, a Deku Tree who is clearly spreading forests across the islands of the world, which in FPTRR are the size of continents, and this world features a number of place names from Hyrule. And yes, it clearly is Hyrule, since Death Mountain (or rather, the mountain formerly known as Death Mountain) appears, too.

It's now surrounded by forest - kind of like in ALttP, no?

We don't even know if FPTRRL is part of the Zelda timeline. And if it explains Tingle's origins, it should rather happen before all the Zelda games.

Capcom says there's no intention to connect the FS games to the Ganon story, but look what happened to that. TMC is clearly the first adventure of Link - in the FS side series, which Capcom always and only ever intended to be a side series.

Rofl! I must acknowledge, this argumentation is new to me. :lol:
Ah, and while you're at it - why not follow your own advice and take TMC, FS and FSA out of your timeline?

TMC attaches a symbolic meaning to the hat by showing a game in which the hat serves both as the key item of the game and as the main sidekick. However, does this mean it has to be first?

I'm not talking about Ezlo, but about the new hat Ezlo gives to Link in the end. That one is not a key item - it's the pure symbolism.

Bill Trinen's statements are irrelevant, as we know from his translations. In fact, Bill Trinen supervised the translation that removes the "first" wording altogether. Should we take his revisions as creator-intended? Possibly.

You say in the same sentence that Trinen's word is irrelevant but reflects creator intent?! :blink:
...Instead of debating with you, I might as well discuss the theory of relativity with a four-year old.

Edited by Jumbie, 27 May 2008 - 02:24 AM.


#57 LionHarted

LionHarted

    Quirky.

  • Members
  • 2,029 posts

Posted 27 May 2008 - 02:43 AM

No, therefore the garb in TMC just does not have any origin, how about that?


Just like the hat doesn't have an origin in TMC? o:

TMC Link wears it as his normal clothing, it's not a family treasure nor passed to him by a spirit.


So? Just cause every game doesn't explain why some podunk kid wears a green dress doesn't mean that it's not got the same origin.

It's not of Kokiri origin either - it's simply a common green medieval jacket.


So is it a coincidence that all heroes wear the same tunic that the Kokiri-raised Link happens to receive?

OoT explains nothing more but the origin of OoT Link's tunic.


It at least serves as an actual origin.

And btw, the tunic in TP is obviously not that same one, because a sixteen-year old cannot possibly wear what a nine-year old wore.


OoT describes it as a one-size fits all tunic, actually.

Regardless of all, mistaking Link's clothes for those that a fairy wears is crazy.


Now you're just being crazy.

#58 Chaltab

Chaltab

    Bright Lord of the Sith

  • Members
  • 1,031 posts

Posted 27 May 2008 - 07:42 AM

Whatever Capcom intended, Nintendo themselves connected the Four Sword games to the Ganon story arc with Four Sword Adventure. You can't dismiss them as a side series when Nintendo incorporated them into the main canon.


I can dismiss Capcom's intentions when EAD has clearly ignored them.


Because including ancient ruins in the sky during Twilight Princess is totally ignoring TMC.

Edited by Chaltab, 27 May 2008 - 07:44 AM.


#59 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 27 May 2008 - 10:15 AM

Ah, this can be reconciled easily. We know in OoT there were merely 9 years between the fierce war and Ganondorf entering the Sacred Realm. The Seal War legend being centuries old, such a short timespan is not likely to be correctly remembered, and therefore appears in the legend like no time at all. So, centuries later in ALttP, people assume Ganondorf entered the SR during the war, because there were only nine years between the two events.

Oh yes, I had forgotten about Link being born during that war. You are correct about the events being obscured by the mists of time.

Eh, actually that cutscene is not a prediction but a review. While I agree that the imagery with Link and Ilia refers to what ALttP's manual says, these events are told by Lanayru as having occurred in the past. That means that ALttP's manual refers to the fierce war.

True, but there isn't any reason why it can't be foreshadowing other times the Sacred Realm might be fought over.

I don't like to have so many repetitive wars if it may as well have been just one.

Its really only two times of war, pre-OOT and ALTTP bask-story.

That's not far from my timeline actually... Just that I have TMC occurring before both of them, but otherwise it's completely the same.^^

Exactly. I rather them just separate the 3D games from the 2D games and call it a different legend. The most attractive timeline for that legend, to me, is shaping up to be:

MC-IW-ALTTP/LA/OOX-FS/FSA-LOZ/AOL

In conclusion, making it a separate legend is the best alternative. Although, nothing stops these games from occurring after TP in the child timeline, and nothing is even inconsistent or contradictory. Except the possibiliity of the two mirrors being one in the same, then one would have to say it was reforged. Although, that is not a proven fact anyway. :)

#60 MikePetersSucks

MikePetersSucks

    Actual Japanese Person

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

Posted 27 May 2008 - 12:52 PM

Because including ancient ruins in the sky during Twilight Princess is totally ignoring TMC.


It's not really alluding to it, either. The Wind Tribe aren't the Oocca.

Ooooh, ancient ruins of a sky civilization. THAT hasn't been done in fantasy before a million times.




Copyright © 2021 Your Company Name