stop posting on my profile please.

haha, what the hell is your problem? You just made a giant baw post at my wall because I "name called" you (which I did not btw, I said you have serious issues, which is just me giving my impression of you. Get some help if you feel the need to see a professional)

And no that's not the best I can come up with, there are several other references to OoT. But it's not worth arguing with you, because you obviously are either a troll or full of logical fallacies (for your sake I hope you are a troll). And OoT->TP is comfirmed by the developers anyway.

Dude, what the hell is your problem? Why are you so quick to name call over a video game like some 14 year old?

And for the record, how exactly is either one any more direct than the other? They were literately EXACTLY the same in the way they were laid out.

Hey, postman! It's said he has a famous ancestor in the same profession!

Hey, girl in fishing hole! She has a picutre of a dude she knows nothing about! Might be her ancestor!

The picture in the fishing hut could simple by seen as a nod to OoT as it was the inspiration for TP having a fishing hole in the first place. Ever heard of Fan service? Zelda is full of it. It was a picture that was sitting in a completely optional part of the game.

That and it was a picture sitting in a completely optional part of the game. By your same logic, the pictures of mario characters in OoT hold some kind of deeper meaning outside of simply being fanservice.

therefore, if it's honestly the best point you can come up with in this whole argument, please fall back. There are clearly obvious connections between certain Zelda games and they're always made a lot more clear and out in the open than the one you brought up.

Your argument reminds me of that stupid debate on whether or not snatcher took place in the future of the metal gear.

That? I thought that was a joke...
If you were serious about that you have serious issues. The reference in WW is indirect and you stated your personal interpretation of it. The reference in TP is direct and doesn't need interpretation.

Whatever.

Post 118.

Because it seemed to me that it would have derail the thread even further.

and I did, it was right after your second to last post.

why did you feel the need to post this on my page?

I ignored your last point? I have no idea what you are talking about, you made no relevant statement.