Jump to content

IPBoard Styles©Fisana

Photo

I'm working on my first timeline!


  • Please log in to reply
506 replies to this topic

#421 Crimson Lego

Crimson Lego

    Little Man

  • Members
  • 12,607 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Canada

Posted 10 October 2008 - 12:01 PM

Overestimating our power as sages, we attempted to control the evil magic…


That sentence(and the context it's in) doesn't make sense unless they're referring to literal power.

How are they trying to control the evil magic?


That's probably referring to the evil power of the Gerudo Thieves. They said he was a demon thief, which would suggest he had powers of some kind.

#422 FDL

FDL

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,634 posts
  • Location:Right behind you!
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 October 2008 - 12:05 PM

Overestimating our power as sages, we attempted to control the evil magic?


That sentence(and the context it's in) doesn't make sense unless they're referring to literal power.

How are they trying to control the evil magic?


By killing Ganondorf, obviously. Again, if they were referring to the mirror when they were talking about overestimating themselves, they would more or less be taunting Midna. Furthermore, the Twilight Realm isn't their power.

#423 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 10 October 2008 - 12:28 PM

Overestimating our power as sages, we attempted to control the evil magic?


That sentence(and the context it's in) doesn't make sense unless they're referring to literal power.

How are they trying to control the evil magic?


By killing Ganondorf, obviously. Again, if they were referring to the mirror when they were talking about overestimating themselves, they would more or less be taunting Midna. Furthermore, the Twilight Realm isn't their power.

Ah, no. This is were you went wrong. The sages are responding to Midna stating: "But things changed once that foul power pervaded the world...". The sages respond and tell her it was their fault for sending him there because they thought they could control his magic. So they do overestimate their ability/power. I think NOA uses the term "ability" which is a cleaner translation IMO.

Edited by NM87, 10 October 2008 - 12:28 PM.


#424 FDL

FDL

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,634 posts
  • Location:Right behind you!
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 October 2008 - 12:32 PM

Actually, you're still the incorrect one. They are referring to the mirror only in the sense that their overestimation and attempt to destroy Ganondorf caused them to have to use the mirror. However, at the point they used the mirror they knew that Ganondorf would potentially wreak havoc on the Twilight Realm. Ergo, they were not referring to containing him within the mirror when referring to overestimating their power. And if you want to go by the NoA translation, note that they agree with what I'm saying as well by explicitly saying they tried to "put an end" to the evil magic.

Edited by FDL, 10 October 2008 - 12:33 PM.


#425 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 10 October 2008 - 12:36 PM

Actually, you're still the incorrect one. They are referring to the mirror only in the sense that their overestimation and attempt to destroy Ganondorf caused them to have to use the mirror. However, at the point they used the mirror they knew that Ganondorf would potentially wreak havoc on the Twilight Realm. Ergo, they were not referring to containing him within the mirror when referring to overestimating their power.

What? What what what? They use the overestimation line right after Midna talks about Ganondorf appearing in the TR! They didn't say "overestimation" anywhere else. Not that their overestimation caused them to use the mirror, using the mirror was their overestimation.

#426 jacensolo06

jacensolo06

    Archer

  • ZL Staff
  • 204 posts
  • Location:AL
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 October 2008 - 12:49 PM

What? What what what? They use the overestimation line right after Midna talks about Ganondorf appearing in the TR! They didn't say "overestimation" anywhere else. Not that their overestimation caused them to use the mirror, using the mirror was their overestimation.

Midna refers to the evil magic arriving in her world and the Sages say that that was their fault. Then they explain why they had to do what they did. They didn't have to explain what they did because everyone involved already knew.

Also on how they were trying to control the evil magic, the Japanese word could also mean to suppress. They were trying to suppress Ganondorf's magic power, or, to use the word control, they were trying to control his ability to use it. They overestimated this ability and therefore failed to do so. This means that Ganondorf was able to use his powers. They then had no choice but to send him to the Twilight Realm.

On a side note, the sages refer to this as their power as sages. The ability to suppress evil magic seems in line with what we know about the sages and their powers.

#427 FDL

FDL

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,634 posts
  • Location:Right behind you!
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 October 2008 - 01:09 PM

What? What what what? They use the overestimation line right after Midna talks about Ganondorf appearing in the TR! They didn't say "overestimation" anywhere else. Not that their overestimation caused them to use the mirror, using the mirror was their overestimation.


jacen covered this pretty well, but you're basically claiming the reverse of what is true. The way that sentence is laid out goes beyond any doubt that what jacen and I are telling you is correct. They're not talking about Ganondorf escaping the TR when referring to their overestimation, they're talking about the events that led to Ganondorf being placed there in the first place. The events that led to it being their attempt to kill Ganondorf and suppress/control/put an end to his evil magic. Which they believed they could do, which is why they say they overestimated themselves. jacen's actually capable of translating these lines, so he would tell me if I were wrong and you were right.

Edited by FDL, 10 October 2008 - 01:14 PM.


#428 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 10 October 2008 - 01:21 PM

MIDNA
Some call our realm a world of shadows, but that makes it sound unpleasant...
The twilight there holds a serene beauty... You have seen it yourself as the
sun sets on this world.
Bathed in that light, all people were pure and gentle...
But things changed once that foul power pervaded the world...

SAGES
It was all our doing...
We overestimated our abilities as sages and attempted to put an end to
Ganondorf's evil magic...
I hope you can find it in yourself to forgive our carelessness...
O Twilight Princess.


Still looks like the sages referred to their overestimation of ability to "suppress" Ganondorf in the TR, which was careless and useless in the first place.

#429 Lexxi Aileron

Lexxi Aileron

    Monk

  • Members
  • 362 posts
  • Location:California
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 October 2008 - 01:24 PM

NM87, looking purely at the NoA translation it looks as though their overestimation was in their ability to kill Ganondorf. XD "Put an end to Ganondorf's evil magic"? I mean, come on. They were executing him and failed. Isn't that enough proof of what their "overestimation" was?

#430 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

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

Posted 10 October 2008 - 07:36 PM

I think the meaning of "control the evil magic" is to subdue it, as the Sages subdued Ganondorf during the invasion.

The problem with what NM87 is arguing is that if the Sages could have held Ganondorf's evil magic within the Twilight Realm, then the Twili would still be subjected to Ganondorf's evil magic regardless. In NM87's theory, carelessness or overestimation could only have brought ruin upon the Hyrulians, and they are not to whom the Sages are apologising to. So it makes no sense when we consider the context.

Edited by Raian, 10 October 2008 - 07:37 PM.


#431 FDL

FDL

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,634 posts
  • Location:Right behind you!
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 October 2008 - 07:44 PM

Thank you. I was trying to explain that to him but I think you did so better than me.

#432 CID Farwin

CID Farwin

    Disciple

  • Members
  • 2,935 posts
  • Location:At the threshold
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 October 2008 - 03:15 PM

That's exactly my point, thank you.

Good, because I think it's stupid to think that.

The problem with this, is that the sword would literally be IN THE GAME. It wouldn't be vaguely alluded to.

The mysterious "Power of the Gods" isn't literally in the game? It is, we see it as a crest on the back of the hand (one of the forms of the Triforce.) as well as see it used. Just because it doesn't take a physical form doesn't mean it's not there.

With most of the "events" in a timeline being directly related to the Triforce mechanics, you are still trying to tell me this.

I think we're having trouble communicating here.

You said: "I am not relating TP to other Zelda games and then basing the way we interpret TP according to those games." and used Nintendo's saying that they favor making a game consistent with itself over being consistent with other games as reason that we shouldn't use our prior knowledge of Zelda when looking at a new game.

I say that that idea is utter bullocks.

What I'm trying to tell you is that when Nintendo says that, that doesn't mean that they go and do their own thing: they still keep other games in mind. The only reason that would come into play is if they contradict something that they have previously said, in which we should go with what the new game says. Otherwise we really should use what we know of other games.

#433 FDL

FDL

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,634 posts
  • Location:Right behind you!
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 October 2008 - 04:43 PM

Well said. And I'd say that TP in particular clearly wants us to keep other games in mind. The fact that it was designed as an OoT love letter says as much.

#434 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

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

Posted 11 October 2008 - 08:14 PM

TP's most prominent connections with OoT were thematic, not chronological. If chronological information really stood out in TP, we wouldn't have needed Aonuma's Nintendo Dream interview to confirm a split timeline and we wouldn't have been focusing on minor details like a photo of a fisherman. And I don't think thematic connections are strong evidence of a timeline placement, because if they were, then we might as well accept that TWW > TMC (or FSA > ALttP, which I also think is highly debatable).

I'm a bit too tired right now to go into detail, but I would like to say that there is a big difference between relating to previous titles and relying on them. Nintendo accepts the former in their philosophy, but not the latter. TWW related to OoT, but it did not rely on OoT. FSA related to FS, but it didn't rely on FS. PH related to TWW, but it didn't rely on TWW. TP relates to OoT, but only according to your theory does it also rely on OoT. I'll elaborate tomorrow.

#435 FDL

FDL

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,634 posts
  • Location:Right behind you!
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 October 2008 - 08:44 PM

That's false. There are many things in the games themselves(TP included) that do rely on prior knowledge for people to fully understand. I have given examples before. The theory that you have, that NM has, or whoever else involves guessing to work. I'd say Nintendo is more likely to embrace the idea of using prior knowledge than using simple guessing. Actually, this is definitely the case. I've given examples of this as well. From several games, TP included. Taking into account how Nintendo is, TP would explain concepts like the one NM is posing and even the one you are saying in much more explicit detail than vague lines about divine pranks. Lines that are contradicted by other parts of the game if you try to take a literalist stance no less.

Edited by FDL, 11 October 2008 - 08:49 PM.


#436 Lexxi Aileron

Lexxi Aileron

    Monk

  • Members
  • 362 posts
  • Location:California
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 October 2008 - 09:22 PM

Raian, if anything, Aonuma's interview indicates that the answers to TP's mysteries are found in OoT. There's nothing that interview told us that can't be gleaned from OoT and TP, aside from confirming that TP was on the prong opposite to TWW, which most people guessed anyway.

TWW related to OoT, but it did not rely on OoT.


Many of TWW's uses of the Triforce were in fact unexplained but used mechanics introduced in OoT, among them being 1) the Triforce crest glowing when near another Triforce piece and 2) the three crests being brought together to obtain the True Force. While you certainly don't need prior knowledge to see what is happening, it certainly helps put things into perspective. The same is true in TP, although to a lesser extent since the Triforce has a much smaller role in that game.

#437 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

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

Posted 12 October 2008 - 07:07 AM

There are many things in the games themselves(TP included) that do rely on prior knowledge for people to fully understand.


Sure, but none of those things need to be fully understood in order to be accessible to new players. For example, playing OoT is required in order for new players to understand how the Triforce-splitting and the role of the Seven Sages impact upon the events in TWW, but the absence of those facts doesn't prevent new players from understanding TWW's story. All the new player needs to understand is who have the Triforce pieces and the fact that Ganon was once sealed away.

My argument is that by making things ambiguous and open to interpretation, Nintendo avoids creating holes in the story that require playing previous games to fill in. For example, if Nintendo did specifically reference the Triforce-splitting in TWW, they'd have to explain that Ganondorf touched the Triforce and the legend that caused the pieces to find their bearers. But if Nintendo can just say "Ganondorf took the power of the gods", then new players can just relate that to the fact that Ganondorf has the Triforce of Power.
In this way, new players are satisfied because they can relate the main story to the back story in a clear and unconfusing manner, whereas the veteran players are satisfied because they can relate the back story to a previous game that they enjoyed before. Thus, TWW doesn't rely on OoT because new players don't need to play OoT in order to make sense of TWW's story. It is this philosophy that I believe Nintendo applies to all their games.

Now, this debate about TP depends upon whether you believe (that Nintendo believe) that Ganondorf acquiring the Triforce of Power is something new players need to understand in order to relate TP's main story to its back story. If your theory is correct, then unlike the TWW examples I provided above, new players wouldn't just have a vague understanding of how Ganondorf acquired the Triforce of Power, they'd have a compeletely different understanding from the veteran players of what took place. TP simply said that Ganondorf invaded Hyrule to establish dominion over it (making no distinction between Hyrule and the Sacred Realm in the Japanese script). The Triforce and its wish-granting mechanics had no mention, and Ganondorf himself said nothing about wanting to obtain the complete Triforce, despite the opportunity presenting itself. All that was openly said was that the main characters were chosen to receive their powers by the gods.

It is impossible for new players to establish on even the vaguest terms that Ganondorf took the Triforce of Power with his own hands and that he wanted to possess the complete Triforce throughout the game. If we take the view that this area of the story should matter to new players, then your theory contradicts the accessibility policy.

Edited by Raian, 12 October 2008 - 08:07 AM.


#438 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 12 October 2008 - 12:26 PM

Why would the sages be talking about the well being of Hyrule when they are speaking to Midna about the Twilight (Zone) Realm? Here is why: ?It was all our fault? - they are apologizing to Midna, right after she says the Twilight Realm was pervaded by evil magic. Then they say they overestimated their abilities as sages to put and end to Ganondorf?s evil magic in Hyrule (obviously). Lets say the sages didn?t send Ganondorf into the Mirror. He would have killed the rest of hem, and taken over Hyrule BECAUSE HE JUST GOT THE DIVINE POWER. To prevent this, the sages send him into the mirror, hoping it would be enough to seal him. They were wrong.

I know your argument. You claim that they overestimated their power as sages to execute Ganondorf. Not true. They succeed in killing him. He dies. By some divine prank, in sequence with the scene, he gains the chosen power and comes back to life! They send him into the mirror, thinking it can hold him, but it can no because he is now someone with chosen power, just like Link and Zelda are chosen to have power in TP.

The main idea of the Midna - Sages dialog, is that they are talking about the Twilight Realm. Midna sates that the light changed when evil pervaded the realm. The sages apologize. Why would they change the subject in the same breath about the Twilight Realm into the execution scene in Hyrule? When they said put an end to his evil magic, they were talking about after they had killed him but he came back to life. So they tried to put an end to his magic by?exactly what Midna was just saying about evil pervading and the sages apologetic response?they sent him to the TR to stop his evil power in Hyrule.

The Triforce and its wish-granting mechanics had no mention, and Ganondorf himself said nothing about wanting to obtain the complete Triforce, despite the opportunity presenting itself. All that was openly said was that the main characters were chosen to receive their powers by the gods.

It is impossible for new players to establish on even the vaguest terms that Ganondorf took the Triforce of Power with his own hands and that he wanted to possess the complete Triforce throughout the game. If we take the view that this area of the story should matter to new players, then your theory contradicts the accessibility policy.

Beautiful.

Edited by NM87, 12 October 2008 - 12:29 PM.


#439 MikePetersSucks

MikePetersSucks

    Actual Japanese Person

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

Posted 12 October 2008 - 12:51 PM

I know your argument. You claim that they overestimated their power as sages to execute Ganondorf. Not true. They succeed in killing him. He dies. By some divine prank, in sequence with the scene, he gains the chosen power and comes back to life!


[citation motherfucking needed].

#440 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 12 October 2008 - 01:00 PM

[citation motherfucking needed].

He dies! Just look at the poor fella. Head hung low. motionless. Then we see a glow. He comes back to life. After watching it again, I think that's what really happened.

Edited by NM87, 12 October 2008 - 01:01 PM.


#441 CID Farwin

CID Farwin

    Disciple

  • Members
  • 2,935 posts
  • Location:At the threshold
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 October 2008 - 01:49 PM

There are many things in the games themselves(TP included) that do rely on prior knowledge for people to fully understand.


Sure, but none of those things need to be fully understood in order to be accessible to new players. For example, playing OoT is required in order for new players to understand how the Triforce-splitting and the role of the Seven Sages impact upon the events in TWW, but the absence of those facts doesn't prevent new players from understanding TWW's story. All the new player needs to understand is who have the Triforce pieces and the fact that Ganon was once sealed away.

My argument is that by making things ambiguous and open to interpretation, Nintendo avoids creating holes in the story that require playing previous games to fill in. For example, if Nintendo did specifically reference the Triforce-splitting in TWW, they'd have to explain that Ganondorf touched the Triforce and the legend that caused the pieces to find their bearers. But if Nintendo can just say "Ganondorf took the power of the gods", then new players can just relate that to the fact that Ganondorf has the Triforce of Power.
In this way, new players are satisfied because they can relate the main story to the back story in a clear and unconfusing manner, whereas the veteran players are satisfied because they can relate the back story to a previous game that they enjoyed before. Thus, TWW doesn't rely on OoT because new players don't need to play OoT in order to make sense of TWW's story. It is this philosophy that I believe Nintendo applies to all their games.

Now, this debate about TP depends upon whether you believe (that Nintendo believe) that Ganondorf acquiring the Triforce of Power is something new players need to understand in order to relate TP's main story to its back story. If your theory is correct, then unlike the TWW examples I provided above, new players wouldn't just have a vague understanding of how Ganondorf acquired the Triforce of Power, they'd have a compeletely different understanding from the veteran players of what took place. TP simply said that Ganondorf invaded Hyrule to establish dominion over it (making no distinction between Hyrule and the Sacred Realm in the Japanese script). The Triforce and its wish-granting mechanics had no mention, and Ganondorf himself said nothing about wanting to obtain the complete Triforce, despite the opportunity presenting itself. All that was openly said was that the main characters were chosen to receive their powers by the gods.

It is impossible for new players to establish on even the vaguest terms that Ganondorf took the Triforce of Power with his own hands and that he wanted to possess the complete Triforce throughout the game. If we take the view that this area of the story should matter to new players, then your theory contradicts the accessibility policy.

To understand the basics of TP, then no. You don't need to play other games. To understand the basics of say, Majora's Mask, you don't need to have played Ocarina of Time; you just need to know that Link saved Hyrule, which it tells you.

TP tells you everything you need to know, but it doesn't tell you enough in itself for, say, the dualism theme that's prominent. It was made, in my opinion, as a corollary to TWW.

Allow me to give a comparison here to (FDL should like this) the Legacy of Kain series. Now the first game in the series that I played was Blood Omen 2. Despite the number, it's actually the fourth game in the series. I won't go into detail, but suffice it to say that I understood what the game itself gave me pretty well. I went on to play the game 'before' it Soul Reaver 2 and the game 'after,' Legacy of Kain: Defiance. A few years later, (my brother, who owns the games, moved away for a few years) I played the entire series, starting at the beginning and going all the way to the end. The games I had played previously made way more sense after playing the first ones.

The point I'm making is that I think something similar would happen to someone who starts with TP. It would make so much more sense after playing OoT.

#442 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

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

Posted 12 October 2008 - 03:07 PM

Why would the sages be talking about the well being of Hyrule when they are speaking to Midna about the Twilight (Zone) Realm? Here is why: “It was all our fault” - they are apologizing to Midna, right after she says the Twilight Realm was pervaded by evil magic. Then they say they overestimated their abilities as sages to put and end to Ganondorf’s evil magic in Hyrule (obviously). Lets say the sages didn’t send Ganondorf into the Mirror. He would have killed the rest of hem, and taken over Hyrule BECAUSE HE JUST GOT THE DIVINE POWER. To prevent this, the sages send him into the mirror, hoping it would be enough to seal him. They were wrong.


STOP REFERRING TO THE NOA MISTRANSLATION! The Sages overestimated their ability to CONTROL the evil magic, according to the original Japanese script. "Control" means "to restrict" or "to subdue"; it can only refer to the Sages having captured Ganondorf.

He dies! Just look at the poor fella. Head hung low. motionless. Then we see a glow. He comes back to life. After watching it again, I think that's what really happened.


I thought it was pretty obvious that Ganondorf hadn't passed the point of death during the execution.

To understand the basics of TP, then no. You don't need to play other games. To understand the basics of say, Majora's Mask, you don't need to have played Ocarina of Time; you just need to know that Link saved Hyrule, which it tells you.

TP tells you everything you need to know, but it doesn't tell you enough in itself for, say, the dualism theme that's prominent. It was made, in my opinion, as a corollary to TWW.

The point I'm making is that I think something similar would happen to someone who starts with TP. It would make so much more sense after playing OoT.


You've just rewritten what I said at the beginning of my previous post: "In this way, new players are satisfied because they can relate the main story to the back story in a clear and unconfusing manner, whereas the veteran players are satisfied because they can relate the back story to a previous game that they enjoyed before. Thus, TWW doesn't rely on OoT because new players don't need to play OoT in order to make sense of TWW's story. It is this philosophy that I believe Nintendo applies to all their games."

The problem I have, as I elaborated in my previous post, is that TP leads new players into an understanding that actively contradicts your theory. If we were to assume your theory was correct, we would have to argue that Nintendo was deliberately providing two separate meanings for new players and veteran players, and when has anyone ever done this? Can you imagine Retro suggesting that Samus Aran was a man in Metroid Prime 3, expecting new players to go back to the previous Prime games and discover she's a woman?

New games sometimes contradict the stories of previous games, but only if they're serving as plot twists. New games are not developed so that previous games provide the plot twists. That would be ridiculous.

Edited by Raian, 12 October 2008 - 03:22 PM.


#443 Lexxi Aileron

Lexxi Aileron

    Monk

  • Members
  • 362 posts
  • Location:California
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 October 2008 - 03:22 PM

The Triforce and its wish-granting mechanics had no mention, and Ganondorf himself said nothing about wanting to obtain the complete Triforce, despite the opportunity presenting itself. All that was openly said was that the main characters were chosen to receive their powers by the gods.

It is impossible for new players to establish on even the vaguest terms that Ganondorf took the Triforce of Power with his own hands and that he wanted to possess the complete Triforce throughout the game. If we take the view that this area of the story should matter to new players, then your theory contradicts the accessibility policy.


The "view that this area of the story should matter to new players" is one you yourself have constructed as a straw man. You don't need to know what inevitably happened to Ganondorf after OoT in TP; all you need to know is that Ganondorf possesses a unique power that was cause enough for him to be captured and that through the power of the gods was able to survive a death-blow.

#444 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

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

Posted 12 October 2008 - 03:42 PM

The "view that this area of the story should matter to new players" is one you yourself have constructed as a straw man. You don't need to know what inevitably happened to Ganondorf after OoT in TP; all you need to know is that Ganondorf possesses a unique power that was cause enough for him to be captured and that through the power of the gods was able to survive a death-blow.


This is why I said two posts ago, "Now, this debate about TP depends upon whether you believe (that Nintendo believe) that Ganondorf acquiring the Triforce of Power is something new players need to understand in order to relate TP's main story to its back story." If you don't consider it important, then there is nothing to argue.

#445 FDL

FDL

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,634 posts
  • Location:Right behind you!
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 October 2008 - 05:48 PM

I consider how he received it to be unimportant to new players, and the vagueness behind it appears to confirm that Nintendo agrees. Anyway, CID, Lex, and MPS seem to have covered what else I'd say, more or less... And, YEAH!!!! Legacy of Kain reference!!!

Edited by FDL, 12 October 2008 - 05:49 PM.


#446 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

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

Posted 12 October 2008 - 06:12 PM

I consider how he received it to be unimportant to new players, and the vagueness behind it appears to confirm that Nintendo agrees.


I don't see how TP's back story is vague for new players. Ganondorf was stated to have invaded Hyrule to establish dominion over the land, and he was stated to have been consequently captured by the Sages. As an explanation for his escape from the Sages' execution, Ganondorf stated that he had been chosen by the goddesses to wield power, just as Zelda had stated that she and Link were also chosen. With this level of clarity, I can't see how it can be defined as ambiguous. You'd have to assume that everything above is essentially a falsehood, for which only the true meanings can be derived from circumstantial evidence in OoT and TWW. Isn't this starting to sound like a conspiracy theory?

Edited by Raian, 12 October 2008 - 06:37 PM.


#447 FDL

FDL

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,634 posts
  • Location:Right behind you!
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 October 2008 - 06:38 PM

When/how Ganondorf was captured by the Sages and "chosen by the gods" meaning "gained the Triforce/power of the gods randomly from the goddesses" are assumptions that you and others have made. Those are not in the game itself.

#448 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

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

Posted 12 October 2008 - 06:44 PM

When/how Ganondorf was captured by the Sages and "chosen by the gods" meaning "gained the Triforce/power of the gods randomly from the goddesses" are assumptions that you and others have made. Those are not in the game itself.


I never assumed anything about when/how Ganondorf was captured by the Sages, so I don't know where that came from. All I was arguing is that the event where Ganondorf invaded the Sacred Realm and touched the Triforce is not stated or suggested in TP, so it cannot be taken into account by new players. As far as new players are concerned, the capture of Ganondorf clearly progresses from the invasion by Ganondorf.

As for the second point, what rubbish! Are you honestly trying to tell me that the term "chosen by the gods" has no inherent meaning regardless of context? Even the dictionary gives "selected by God" as a definition for "chosen" (http://www.thefreedi...nary.com/chosen). At the very least, the use of this phrase clarifies to new players that the gods had selected the three characters in TP to receive power, which is what you are arguing to the contrary. Without playing TWW and interpreting the scene where Link received the ToC as you have done, a new player cannot assume "chosen by the gods" to mean anything other than the inherent meaning. Likewise, if Christmas is defined by the birth of Jesus Christ, then no one is going to disconnect them without a strong reason.

Edited by Raian, 12 October 2008 - 07:40 PM.


#449 FDL

FDL

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,634 posts
  • Location:Right behind you!
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 October 2008 - 07:50 PM

I never assumed anything about when/how Ganondorf was captured by the Sages, so I don't know where that came from. All I was arguing is that the event where Ganondorf invaded the Sacred Realm and touched the Triforce is not stated or suggested in TP, so it cannot be taken into account by new players. As far as new players are concerned, the capture of Ganondorf clearly progresses from the invasion by Ganondorf.


TWW does the exact same thing, which I have already told you several times now. If you go by TWW, the entire Triforce being touched and Ganondorf entering the Sacred Realm are not mentioned at all. In fact, the "power of the gods" is supposed to have been in Hyrule, and nothing else is said on this subject. Going only by TWW, someone would most likely come to the conclusion that Ganondorf took the Triforce in a "backstory of LoZ" scenario, rather than an OoT/ALttP-esque scenario.

As for the second point, what rubbish! Are you honestly trying to tell me that the term "chosen by the gods" has no inherent meaning regardless of context? Even the dictionary gives "selected by God" as a definition for "chosen" (http://www.thefreedi...nary.com/chosen). At the very least, the use of this phrase clarifies to new players that the gods had selected the three characters in TP to receive power, which is what you are arguing to the contradictory. Without playing TWW and interpreting the scene where Link received the ToC as you have done, a new player cannot assume "chosen by the gods" to mean anything other than the inherent meaning.


Ugh, way to ignore our previous argument. I'm not arguing they don't imply that the gods selected Ganondorf, Zelda, and Link, I'm arguing specifically what they were selected for. Namely, to have a crest and a piece residing within them. Does the game specifically imply this? No. But it does not imply that they received the pieces at the AG or anything like that either. But supposedly that's not what you're even arguing. You are arguing something that requires just as much knowledge as mine. Actually, even more because mine doesn't even really rely on knowledge of a "split timeline". Which is yet another thing that requires knowledge of other games and even interviews with the creators to understand. The "split timeline" in and of itself proves beyond any doubt that Nintendo is fine with stories finding different meanings for those more or less knowledgable about their overall storyline. Any newbie to Zelda will not be connecting their first game to other games in the first place, nor will they be contemplating a timeline split, and are thus entirely irrelevant to this discussion.

And I'll throw it back to you: Are you honestly trying to say the term "overestimated our power" would mean "We should have checked if Ganondorf had the Triforce before we attempted to off him" to anyone but a timeline theorist such as yourself? I apologize if I didn't explain this well enough, I'm distracted right now by some personal issues(in fact, I'm hoping someone else like CID or Lex will be able to come in and argue with you better).

EDIT: You're really using the Christmas angle? Yes, there are people who celebrate holidays like Easter or Christmas with little to no knowledge of Christianity.

Edited by FDL, 12 October 2008 - 07:54 PM.


#450 NM87

NM87

    Crusader

  • Banned
  • 417 posts

Posted 12 October 2008 - 08:43 PM

STOP REFERRING TO THE NOA MISTRANSLATION! The Sages overestimated their ability to CONTROL the evil magic, according to the original Japanese script. "Control" means "to restrict" or "to subdue"; it can only refer to the Sages having captured Ganondorf.

Ok! Ok! I'm done being stupid. He doesn' die. Anyway! Why can't the restrict and subdue part be about sending him to the TR? Isn't that like trying to subdue him? Why would they refer to the execution as a "subdue" or "restrict" when they are clearly trying to "eliminate"? That's my point.

]Are you honestly trying to say the term "overestimated our power" would mean "We should have checked if Ganondorf had the Triforce before we attempted to off him" to anyone but a timeline theorist such as yourself?

I think to a common person that would mean he had more power then they expected. Which-is-what-it pretty much means. Which is why the TR didn't hold him like they had thought. HA!

Edited by NM87, 12 October 2008 - 08:48 PM.





Copyright © 2021 Your Company Name