No Ganon in Zelda Wii?

Originally Posted by Crab Helmet

Ganondorf couldn't talk in LoZ, aLttP, OoS/OoA (beyond some basic RARARGH stuff), etc. You can't give me the whole "Vaati can't talk" bull****, because that was a mindless monster Vaati, much like Ganon is a mindless monster Ganondorf.

I was under the very correct impression that Ganon spoke in ALTTP. "I can't believe you defeated my alter-ego, the dark wizard Aghanim, twice! I will destroy you and make my wish to conquer both worlds come true without delay!"

Sounds to me like Ganon spoke in ALTTP.

Originally Posted by Crab Helmet

In Twilight Princess, he was awful, and actually ruined a large part of the game.

What are you talking about? Ganon was an utter badass in Twilight Princess. He died standing up. 'Nuff said.

Ganondorf should, however, go away for a few games. But on the topic of TP, the Master Sword expels the Triforce of power from Ganondorf's hand, and Zant's neck breaks because Zant probably refuses to be resurrected, realizing that Ganondorf only used him. So Zant severs the soul connection between himself and Ganon, allowing the Master Sword to kill Ganondorf. I believe Ganondorf's physical being is dead, but Ganon, his spirit, is free to roam until a new Gerudo King is born, at which point Ganon inhabits the body of a new Ganondorf and becomes the Ganon we see in FSA and ALTTP.

I agree with Crab Helmet, but not in those exact terms. Ganondorf could be used again, and it could be done correctly. However, Nintendo have so much to gain in the creation of new content, and alot to lose if they retain anything of the triforce holders/Ganondorf storyline. Twilight Princess was, in terms of plot, latter Ocarina of Time with dressings. Zelda, Ganon, Link, were all there at the core of things, the only difference being the inclusion of the Twilight Realm. Ultimately, Zelda blessed Midna with her piece, Ganondorf housed his power in Zant, and we saw the same events and motives unfold under the guise of different characters. Temporarily.

Zelda needs to create a villian that has a motive unseen by the franchise until this point. They need to do something they have never done before, create a villian that has proper depth. While the situation with Majora's Mask/Skull Kid was arguably compelling, it was only partially justifed by observation of optional stories regarding Termina's past; and nobody understands the intentions of Majora's Mask, if it has any apart from expression of pure malice. As for Ganon/dorf, it is either dominate, or destroy. His portrayal in Wind Waker, however, was excellent in the end - because it defied this.

A villian with a totally new intention is required, with a plot hinged on a host of unknown factors. To ensure this, I ask Nintendo for no Hyrule, Triforce, Ganon or Zelda in the next title. Additionally, harm one of the Goddesses. I'm feeling blasphemous.

Originally Posted by MrBaconsock

Actually, I realized that Ganondorf might return if the game takes place before he gets sent to the twilight realm.

That doesn't leave a lot of room since Aonuma said he got sealed a few years after the child ending of OoT.

Why is everyone saying "No Hyrule" and "No Zelda?" They can make the game unique without excluding everything that makes the series what it is. What's next? Are you people going to say "No Link, he's played out?" They can make changes to the franchise without butchering everything that makes the franchise enjoyable in the first place. While I loved Majora's Mask, it was definitely less enjoyable for me than OoT due to the lack of Zelda, Hyrule, or any other familiar characters. The Happy Mask Salesman didn't even mention Hyrule once. Skull Kid mentioned it at the end when he says Link reminds him of the kid who taught him Saria's Song in the Lost Woods, but that was it.

*facepalm*

Newsflash: Zelda, Hyrule, and Ganon are only in half of the games. They do not make Zelda what it is. If you found MM less enjoyable because of that, then I pity you.

Originally Posted by Triforce of the Gods

That doesn't leave a lot of room since Aonuma said he got sealed a few years after the child ending of OoT.

Actually, Aonuma said that the excecution scene happened several years after OoT. But, even if the game does take place before the execution, it would condradict the fact that ganondorf didn't recognize Link in TP anyways, so I still think that it is more likely for the game to happen afterwards.

Originally Posted by Link92

Why is everyone saying "No Hyrule" and "No Zelda?".

Because inclusion of those elements seems to tether stale ideas to the plot.

They can make the game unique without excluding everything that makes the series what it is.

Zelda, Ganondorf, the Triforce, Hyrule - none of these make the series what it is. The heart of the series is in it's definitive gameplay, and successs under innovation where it occurs.

What's next? Are you people going to say "No Link, he's played out?"

Link is the protaginist, and therefore intergral. However, I wouldn't mind a change in appearance.

They can make changes to the franchise without butchering everything that makes the franchise enjoyable in the first place. While I loved Majora's Mask, it was definitely less enjoyable for me than OoT due to the lack of Zelda, Hyrule, or any other familiar characters.

I completely dissagree. Hyrule is a great setting, although it is by no means required, and Termina was at least equally enjoyable. To me, I have enjoyed the series both in Hyrule and Koholint, or Termina. Setting and characters make little difference to me as long as I enjoy them. I am beggining to treat Zelda and Ganondorf like stale sandwiches, because that is what they are becoming. Part of my intention is for that to be prevented.

These are the only constants in the Zelda series, correct me if i miss any:

Heart Containers

Link

Stalfos

Dungeons

Shields

Swords

Again correct me if i miss any. I'd also like to point out that ZWii might even ax the sword too.

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

These are the only constants in the Zelda series, correct me if i miss any:

It was Octoroks, too, until TP.

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

I'd also like to point out that ZWii might even ax the sword too.

... Where the hell is everyone getting this idea.

Originally Posted by Triforce of the Gods

It was Octoroks, too, until TP.

... Where the hell is everyone getting this idea.

I would have liked to include them but TP had to go and ruin it.

The fact that he isn't carrying a sword. I'm just saying it might be something they'll remove.

Well, considering that it's their goal to incorporate wii motion plus into the game, I doubt it has been axed.

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

The fact that he isn't carrying a sword. I'm just saying it might be something they'll remove.

*facepalm*

Link is swordless. That must mean that there will be no sword. Completely ignore the fact that the girl is dressed like the Master Sword and every time someone asks about her Miyamoto just comments on Link's empty hand.

Originally Posted by Triforce of the Gods

*facepalm*

Link is swordless. That must mean that there will be no sword. Completely ignore the fact that the girl is dressed like the Master Sword and every time someone asks about her Miyamoto just comments on Link's empty hand.

I'm just saying we can't assume anything.

My guess is the girl IS the master sword. It would not be the first time an item of links was spirit/fairy. The gale boomerang in TP was the 'spirit of wind' or whatever.
*And I hope that Ganondorf is not in Zelda Wii. I want a new villan that scares me, one that I will worry about facing at the end.

I want the Dark Interlopers to be the villians.

Uh, can we all get back to the original point of this thread now? Although a swordless Link would be blasphemy, end of story.

Truthfully, Ganon's role is too abused and misused in some of the later games, like WW, FSA, OoA/OoS, and TP. I wouldn't mind any new villain trying to take his place.

So long as they don't try to include Vaati into Zelda Wii, then I'm all for it.

Uh, can we all get back to the original point of this thread now? Although a swordless Link would be blasphemy, end of story.

Truthfully, Ganon's role is too abused and misused in some of the later games, like WW, FSA, OoA/OoS, and TP. I wouldn't mind any new villain trying to take his place.

So long as they don't try to include Vaati into Zelda Wii, then I'm all for it.

If I had to guess, Wii Zelda will not feature Ganon as the main antagonist. I also would guess that it's not going to take place in Hyrule. Unfortunately, Nintendo might do this to make the game feel new and different, without actually changing anything about the gameplay.

Unless your doing your whole theme upon alternate dimensions(which is a bit confusing and old shown in how the zelda timeline got completely split in half!)you should keep ganon.He is the possesor of the triforce of power and you would take link or zelda out.He's not only a big character in the games but hes a big part of the history and back story as well.

Sure, but he doesn't have to play a part in every single game. He's not the cause of everything bad that's ever happened in the Zelda universe. There's no reason why he shouldn't sit this game out.