I came quite close to not posting this, because I realize the controversy surrounding the idea of a 4th triforce piece. Hoowweeevverr, the Tetraforce (also called Qaudraforce) is a theory littered with misinformation, which leaves people who might have thought "well, maybe.." instead thinking "WTFNOWAY!!1"
So I am going to stress here,
I am not trying to tell you that the theory is true, and I have proof. I am trying to get across what validity there is to the Tetraforce argument, and clear up some misconceptions. 'Cause quite frankly, knowing the facts, it can be one of the more fun of the Zelda theories out there =3
First misconception.. the name itself. The "Tri" in "triforce" is NOT referring to "three". It stands for triangle. Proof? It was called a "triforce" in the first Zelda game.. but in the first Zelda game, there were only 2 triforces.
That throwing in of another triforce, while a less stable argument, can also be used to say "they've done it once, they could do it again". I'm sort of just throwing that one out there to say I did, I realize that doing it once doesn't mean they
are going to again =P
Next misconception, the origin of the theory. It was not just randomly made up, as many believe. In early beta pictures from
OoT, Links shield had a triforce with 4 triangles on it. I'm not just referring to the bird shield that we see in the normal version, here-- I mean 4, put together golden triangles. I am going to provide 2 pictures, and incase anyone tries to say it's photo shopped, look up early beta pictures yourself. It might take some searching, but be dedicated, they are out there.
In all, there were 3 designs (I know of) for Links shield. An even earlier one that simply had the triforce with a sword behind it--
-- The tetraforce shield, and our finished product, the triforce, a bird, and a 4th triangle set apart.
Alright, so maybe we could say that the designers were thinking of putting in another triforce (they've done it before), but took it out pretty fast. Except,
why the heck leave a 4th estranged triangle on the finished version? What purpose would it serve? Is it too much of a stretch to think that maybe they were leaving one of their nice subtle hints at something?
What's more, in
MM, a 4th Goddess (one of Time) is mentioned. Not too much of a stretch to think 4th Goddess = 4th triforce piece.
Yes, yes, it was a Goddess of Termina, not Hyrule. However, the mention of that 4th Goddess served no point at all to MMs plot. Would the Zelda designers really throw the mention of a 4th Goddess at us for no reason at all,
especially after making a show of a 4th triangle present in
OoT?
I'm not saying it couldn't all just be coincidence, but that does seem sort of sketchy.
Lastly, once again just to throw this out there.. Tetra. Zelda from WW. Okay, the fact that they named her Tetra could mean absolutely nothing, and there really is nothing to prove that it -does- mean something. However, I doubt they did it in ignorance-- so either they were implying something, or just poking fun =P I thought it was interesting.
Anyway, I have my own theory on how a 4th triforce can exist in the plot, and how they could bring it into play without completely coming out of the blue and saying BAM! 4th triforce. However, I'm mostly trying to lay the foundations for theories like that here, and giving what is generally a dismissed theory a bit more weight.
Bring on the flames, but do try and read the whole argument first =3