1:1 odds that Zelda '05 will have shadow in title.

Here's a little theory I cooked up, hope I dont post anything incorrect heh...

Why Zelda 2005 will have a shadow in its subtitle:

I have replayed The Wind Waker recently just to get a better image of the actual story, and I noticed some very interesting things during the final part (SPOILER)


On the top of Ganon's Tower, Ganondorf explains why this whole story happened. He was envious of the wind that brought Hyrule life and brought his desert homeland only death. He talks about winds, and while this is supposedly an "in-theme" speech referencing the waker of winds, this also gives potential proof for my theory. For some reason, i thought of this and said, "well he's refferencing the title...maybe there is a point in this game where he references Ocarina of Time. So i thought and thought, but there was no refference that would later help my theory. I started thinking back from my now aging memory of playing ocarina of time. Although there were many references, there were none that would later help my theory....except for the game itself. Footage being released later provided "proof" for the "Z 'O5 is in the OOT Hyrule overworld" theory.

Ocarina of Time and The Wind Waker, the names having nothing to do with each other....or do they? and if they do have a connection, what bearing would they have on the next game?

It is then that , I started applying the references in relation to a possible game naming formula.

a+b=c
b+a=c

C always stands for Main Console Legend of Zelda Game. A will always stand for an instrument and B stands for what? Then it clicked, B has so far stood for Time and Wind. I started looking for what could collectively stand for B. Legend of Zelda Sages is the first thing that crept into my brain.

The next Legend of Zelda name must have Water, Fire, Forest, Light or Shadow as the next B in the formula. Then I asked myself...is there an order in which the picking of B should be? or is it at random. So I started looking for an order, and I believe I found one. There are only two other possible B's...time and wind...which have already been used, and apart from the game's orders i had to figure another order, and there was one in Ocarina of Time. The order in reverse by which Link from OOT meets the sages (and not the people people who later find out they are them). The Reverse order is Zelda, Nabooru, Impa, Ruto, Darunia, Saria, and Rauru. Time, Spirit, Shadow, Water, Fire, Forest, and Light.

Ocarina of time's B= Time...but if there is no sage of wind, why would I substitute it with Nabooru, Sage of Spirit?. Because of Ganon's little chit chat with TWW link on top of ganon's tower. Wind is what brought death to the desert and made it what it was, so the only place in OOT where wind could be related to is the Spirit Temple. Now if you are willing to make that substitution, and continue with the formula, the next LOZ game will have a shadow in ots subtitle.

Of course there is the chance they could make another substitution....there is the chance they wont stick to the formula, there is also the chance they might not have an A that fits with the formula. But I believe that if they stick with the formula, that it would have shadow in the name.

Hope you liked my little theory, and hope I dont sound irrevocably looney.

Interesting, but ur going out on a limb here. Ur theory is very premature, it needs more test subjects. If the name of Zelda 05 is The Legend of Zelda: 'insterment' (of) shadow or shadow (of) 'insterment' I will beleive you.

(Oh and I assume ur excluding MM in ur theory.)

Originally Posted by 8bit

Interesting, but ur going out on a limb here. Ur theory is very premature, it needs more test subjects. If the name of Zelda 05 is The Legend of Zelda: 'insterment' (of) shadow or shadow (of) 'insterment' I will beleive you.

(Oh and I assume ur excluding MM in ur theory.)

MM has nothing to do with hyrule so its excluded yes...

Wow, you really thought about that, good for you. I dont think Nintendo is folowing a specific formula, because if they wanted to advance the story line in a different direction than this so called formula then they would have to break it.

That is a reach at best.

It is still pretty interesting though. good analyzation!

I understand what you are saying. The main connection between WW and OoT is the sages. The sages (from OoT) are forest, fire, water, shadow, spirit, light (Rauru), and time? (Zelda). Oh, but that is a problem isn't it? You didn't consider the light sage Rauru. If you count Zelda, then you must count Rauru which destroys your theory in a way. Also, substituting in wind for spirit is a bit iffy.

Also, using the term "shadow" in the name would make sense and sound cool. But if the formula continued on, we would be having names that include water, fire, and forest. Fitting these into a title would sound corny, forced, and everybody would make the connection, destroying its awesomeness (if you know what I mean).

Most of all, I don't think the developers would limit themselves to following the formula you presented.

Once again, good thought, but unlikey to the extreme. If "shadow" is in the title of the next game, I will give you some major credit, but still pass it off as a lucky guess. If the game after that had water in the title, I would just about die and call you a genius.

Wow.

Well, umm, hmm. I have to admit that is certainly an in-depth and well thought out theory, but I don't think Nintendo puts that much thought into naming their games. I'm inclined to think it'll simply be named whatever fits the general theme of the game and sounds cool. Though, I suppose it's possible Miyamoto is sitting up in his tower overlooking Japan, reading through gaming forums and thinking to himself, "Blast, they've figured it out! Now I owe Iwata that 10,000 yen."

That is awsome. A long shot and not very likely but still awsome.

Sheik 84, he didin't forget about Rauru. Just look at the post again.

Aaron G, that was hilarious. I wish for someone, if not myself, to make a comic with that. (when I say comic I don't mean a series, just one strip.)

Sounds great

I think: The Legend of Zelda: Requiem of Shadow

Sounds badass :3

That's an excellent thought. I doubt that Nintendo thought of that when they made the series, but it's not unlikely that the next game will include the word 'Shadow', as it's so 'dark' and 'realistic'. If the one after is water, I will hail you as the next Albert Einstein.

I've noticed that most of the new Zelda games are named after an important character or item. Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Oracle of Ages/Seasons, Wind Waker, Minish Cap, Four Swords... What are the odds of an item taking the title role in LoZ 05? Pretty high, methinks.

The problem with finding any flaws in your idea is that it is impossible to say one way or another the actual odds of having that in the title. If the game ends up having shadow in the title, then fair enough, you were right, despite how much coincidence and uber-reading you have done (uber reading is when someone reads too far into something, like saying that the iron giant represents russia, or how link is merely miyamotots way of talking about the problems in todays polititcs surrounding agriculture). If the game does not ahve shadow in the title, well, there was always a 50-50 chance.

I personally don't believe your theory.

For one, your idea that the games' titles will all stem from the sages in OoT is stupid. Why would the developers use OoT as a gauge/measure/guide for anything? sure it was the first 3D game, but they are not trying to replicate it.

Secondly, the idea of having a sort of checklist of the various elements (time, spisrit, shadow, water etc) is also bogus. It is illogial to think that nintendo will have a shortlist of things to call the game. The game will be named after whatever key element/theme in the game. Whether the game revolves around a boy with a magical ocarina with time powers, or a child who conducts the wind, or even an evil ritualistic mask, to finally a hat that allows link to shrink, to a miniture size.

And there is my third point. The minish cap. It fills all of your criteria. It is a main console Zelda game (GBA), is set in hyrule, and to most peopel, the minish cap fits with OoT and tWW in terms of its title. It both contains the games main theme/element, as well as the key item, for this is waht Zelda is now. The title discusses what new innovation the game will bring to the serires. Even Majora's mask, not set in hyrule, but the concept of masks and identity was rampid throughout the eerily freaky adventure.

The minish cap does this. It talks about the 'minish', which is a derivitive of diminish, which means to decrease, or shrink, much the same way as the word Picori (what Hyilans call the minish) derives from the term Pico, the smallest unit of measurement (pico is together with micro, milli and centre, such as picolitre, or picometre).

Finally, Your exclusion of Spirit, simply becasue the connection between spirit and the windwaker makes sense to you. And it is with this example here that i can sum up the main flaw in your logic. You make this conenction; spirit - desert - ganon talks about the desert wind - windwaker is ticked off the checklist. This is not to dissimilar to my idea for the reasoning behind the title of tauro town; Tauro - tauros - bull - cows - there are a lot of cows and livestock in the town.

It is logic such as this that makes for blurred and inconsistent, therefore untrustworthy theories.

But, with this all said, LoZGC may ahve the word shadow, or grave, or death, or darkness, or any other similie you may think of for shadow in the title, for you to make these connections. I

t is a fair enough theory, there are a lot worse, and a LOT of threads with badly thought out ideas, so i respect your opinion. I just thought maybe you would appreciate some well-thought critisism is all. Sorry if i offend

Originally Posted by HarmanStalefish

And there is my third point. The minish cap. It fills all of your criteria. It is a main console Zelda game (GBA),

What I meant by Main Console Zelda Game was a non-handheld zelda game, that has a distinctly new link. So TMC does not in fact meet the requirement.

The problem with finding any flaws in your idea is that it is impossible to say one way or another the actual odds of having that in the title.

I wasnt trying to give odds, i just added those to the topic name as a kind of confidence in what Im saying....i dont have to mean it.

I just thought maybe you would appreciate some well-thought critisism is all. Sorry if i offend

I dont mind at all...cant really expect everyone to agree with me, can I?

I've just been reading this thread after briefly getting involved in a discussion with DarkTachyon and masterofwind in the chatroom. The theory does seem very well constructed but to break it and find an alternate path for a new story theme is very possible.

I'm not sure if many people have seen the latest scans that Lars has posted in the site but what drove me to make this post is the presence of a "shadowy" element in the magazine's front scan. many say it is a Shiekah, others aren't too sure what that character actually is. it definitely looks eery and shadowy. It just made me realise that DarkTachyon's theory could really be possible for the new Zelda Game since Dark posted the pictures before Lars uploaded the scans and before seeing the image himself.

here's a link:

http://www.zeldauniverse.net/gallery...lbum=321&pos=2

What do you guys think now?

I like that theory. And what HarmanStalefish said about "the games' titles will all stem from the sages in OoT is stupid. Why would the developers use OoT as a gauge/measure/guide for anything? sure it was the first 3D game, but they are not trying to replicate it." I haven't played it yet (no GameCube), but didn't tWW mention the Sages? Perhaps the Sages are not just for OoT, but something that the entire main console/3D Zeldas go by. It makes sense to me. Plus, something like "Legend of Zelda: Electric Guitar of Shadow" would be awesome! j/k

SJ

When you've only got two games to base a patern on, and one of them isn't even certain, you don't really have a pattern. It was called "Ocarina of Time" because time travel was a major gameplay element. It was called " The Wind Waker" because commanding the wind was a major gameplay element.

Also, though I'm sure many of you will say that this doesn't count, you didn't factor in Majora's Mask.

Eiji said that there isn't a title as of now, and that he's looking for more of a subtle title that only players knee-deep in the game will understand.

Other than the backward sage replacing wind with spirit theory, what other information are you basing this on? There's nothing shadowy about this game that we know of, at least up to this point. Animals will play a major part. Maybe it will have something to do with that?

Originally Posted by Citizen Insane

When you've only got two games to base a patern on, and one of them isn't even certain, you don't really have a pattern. It was called "Ocarina of Time" because time travel was a major gameplay element. It was called " The Wind Waker" because commanding the wind was a major gameplay element.

Your point is?

Also, though I'm sure many of you will say that this doesn't count, you didn't factor in Majora's Mask.

Eiji said that there isn't a title as of now, and that he's looking for more of a subtle title that only players knee-deep in the game will understand.

Other than the backward sage replacing wind with spirit theory, what other information are you basing this on? There's nothing shadowy about this game that we know of, at least up to this point. Animals will play a major part. Maybe it will have something to do with that?

I didint factor in majora's mask because it is NOT in hyrule and therefore does not apply to the SAGES.

When I posted my theory, what i had was all the proof i could give...however if you'd bothered to see fox mc clouds post you'd see the picture that the link refers to, the now infamous egm cover with the SHEIKAH on the cover, Impa being a SHEIKAH and SAGE of SHADOW.

Simple truth is, I could not have sent for better proof of my theory than EGM's cover.