The Seal War's timeline placement is... there???

Originally Posted by Sparty

I'm not sure if this is actually the case

Granted. The interlopers is the first SR incident we know of, but I doubt the existence
of an earlier incident.

Quite possibly it did, as the Sages...

In that sentence I meant knowledge of the Temple of Time hiding the Triforce.

Originally Posted by Beemnorv

I agree. I'm not understanding it fully though.

Are you saying the the Seal War is after TP?

In the simplest words, the Seal War is when the second Ganondorf got the
Triforce (after TP), and was stuck in the Sacred Realm until ALttP.

On “OoT contradicts the IW”

It doesn't. Toru Osawa, as the writer of the story, says that OoT is the IW; therefore any differences in the story must be viewed as valid creative license, not an invalid inconsistency. He is the writer of the story; there is no valid basis by which anyone can claim his interpretation of that story is wrong in any sense of the word. It may be outdated, but any evidence taken from LttP is about seven years older.

If you want to continue to claim that Osawa's original intent for OoT is outdated, you'd better be prepared to accept the claim that the original intent for LttP is even more outdated. I guarantee you that none of your current views on LttP's relationship to the IW have any weight whatsoever without the “original intent” for LttP to back them up. And I can guarantee you that there are more and more meaningful connections to the IW in OoT than there are in all the other games combined.

NOTE FOR THE FUTURE: I will NOT respond to any further arguments about how OoT is inconsistent with the IW. They are red herrings from this point forward.

On TP, FSA, and the IW

Yes, the Temple of Time has become ruins in TP, and yes, those ruins are an obvious reference to LttP's Master Sword Grove. Yes, there is a band of thieves in FSA that seems to be related to the thieves we see in LttP. But here's the bottom-line – neither of these things really has anything to do with the Imprisoning War.

I know the original manual said the Sages had to search for the Master Sword. That may mean that it's supposed to be “lost,” but in both TP and LttP people of the Sages' lineages – Zelda and Sahasrahla respectively – know that it is in the forest grove. If people in both of these time periods know where it is, how can we conclude that people in the in-between period didn't know what to find it?

I also know that LttP's Ganon was said to be a thief, and that he had a group of thieves that followed him. But they were also said to be a race of evil thieves that Ganon himself was a part of – and the thieves in FSA and LttP definitely ain't Gerudo, although the Dark World thieves in the latter game at least do seem to follow Ganon.

Also, I'm not convinced that any of the elements present in the IW really exist anywhere in the timeline, except on the Adult Timeline after OoT.

Since the Sacred Realm was still the place “where the Triforce was [still] hidden” when it was opened for the IW it doesn't seem consistent to me that the realm could have been opened and sealed after TP, since the Triforce is most certainly not hidden there in that game. And yet TP is silent about the fate of the Sacred Realm, not mentioning any sort of transformation into the Dark World nor any dark powers seeping forth from there – so it doesn't seem the sealing LttP describes took place before TP, either.

On the other hand, there is already an established Dark World in FSA, and the Triforce is nowhere in sight. So if that Dark World was created when Ganon made his wish on the Triforce in order to set up for LttP, we must wonder why this was not covered anywhere in FSA, given that it is one of LttP's crucial plot elements. Perhaps it will be featured in a game in-between TP and FSA? Ah, but if this is to be the case the Child Timeline would have the same complications between the IW and LttP that so many point out for the Adult Timeline.

So, no, I cannot say that TP or FSA set up particularly well for the IW – although I definitely agree that either, or even both, could set up for LttP, with the IW/creation of the Dark World predating TP. However, if you're going to put that much distance between the war and LttP, there's not much of an advantage to such a placement versus an Adult Timeline one.

Yet TP does treat an important element of the IW story – the violent rivalries over dominion of the Sacred Realm. So it is not as though the game is entirely unhelpful. But rather than “setting up for the IW” per se, it treats those events in such a way that they seem to be history that predates even OoT, the game that was supposed to be the IW. Why would this be, I wonder?

On a “Second Ganondorf” for LttP

You say that because there is a second Ganondorf in FSA, there is no need for OoT to be the IW. After all, if there's another Ganondorf, that Ganondorf would have to get inside the Sacred Realm and get the Triforce. There are two primary problems with this:

- In the Imprisoning War, Ganondorf became a Demon King when he touched the Triforce; in FSA, Ganondorf became a Demon King when he took the trident, and does not seem to have possession of the Triforce
- In the Imprisoning War, the darkness in/coming from the Sacred Realm came from Ganondorf's misuse of the Triforce's power; in FSA, Ganondorf does not seem to have the Triforce, and so he cannot be misusing its power to create/spread the power of the Dark World

On the other hand, both of these facts correlate perfectly to OoT. So while the new Ganon may fill the void left by OoT's Ganon - as he died in TWW/TP, after all, so there must be a new incarnation to be stuck in the realm in LttP - he does not satisfy the conditions necessary to be the IW's Ganon.

OoT's Ganon is and remains the only incarnation of Ganon we've seen that can satisfy these conditions within known canon. LttP's could, if the circumstances necessary for the IW were present in any game between OoT and LttP. However, at present, this is not the case. Only fan speculation creates such conditions, and fan speculation is not canon.

On the Dark World in FSA

It's a “demon world,” so it's definitely corrupted. It doesn't have all of the effects that LttP's Dark World does, but these were said to be results of Ganon's wish on the Triforce (and I've already discussed how there was no wish in the context of FSA). That doesn't mean the Dark World didn't exist, as obviously it exists in FSA. I don't know what else there is to say here, really.

My question to you, however, is this: if the Dark World of FSA didn't come from Ganon's wish in LttP, where did it come from?

On the Sacred Realm being opened by “accident”

This I feel is worth treating because it's a misunderstanding of the text, and a failure to accurately read the translators' notes. The word “guzen” (偶然) means “by chance, unexpectedly, suddenly, accidentally, or fortuitously.” These don't necessarily require that the band of thieves themselves have stumbled upon the realm and managed to open it – just that they discovered it through fortunate circumstances. Link conveniently opening it for Ganondorf is certainly rather fortunate for him, isn't it?

On Ganondorf “rediscovering” the Sacred Realm

In 1998, it was clear that Ganondorf didn't “rediscover” the Sacred Realm when he entered it in OoT – and because OoT was the IW, this meant that he didn't rediscover it for the IW, either. LttP's intent for Ganondorf to have “rediscovered” the realm could have simply itself been outdated at the time, but this was ruled out because he was still said to have “rediscovered” it in GBA LttP.

What does this mean? It means that when LttP Ganon entered the Sacred Realm, it wasn't in OoT. Almost all timelines agree on this; it is a logical impossibility for the Sacred Realm's location to be simultaneously known and forgotten.

What does this NOT mean? It doesn't mean that OoT's intent is outdated. OoT can still be the IW, even if LttP Ganon “rediscovered” the Sacred Realm – the “rediscovery” just has to be a separate event from the IW. This is not a logical impossibility – the IW happens hundreds of years before LttP, plenty of room for other games (especially since Miyamoto doesn't let the timeline restrict him when creating new games).

I've covered in my other points why I think the IW can't take place anywhere other than OoT, using information outside of Toru Osawa's quote – so what other option do I have? I have no other option.

On the Triforce being “hidden”

It's only hidden in the Sacred Realm in OoT. No other game between OoT and LttP has it in the Sacred Realm that we know of, much less be hidden there. Not much else to say here.

That the Japanese doesn't say "still hidden" is pretty irrelevant, as OoT is still the only place where it's hidden in the Sacred Realm at all.

I like how you say that Agahnim isn't part of the Seal War, instead of saying that Agahnim isn't part of OoT. The former is much, much more biased based upon the context.

He's not part of the Seal War. He comes into play centuries after.

Anyways, if OoT doesn't cover it, then what is the extremely timeline relevant reason for the drastic shortening of the Agahnim story?

The details are irrelevant to the timeline.

What the developers SAID 11 years ago, when there was almost a THIRD of the amount of games that there are now, and the evidence that the intent of 1998 was based upon was destroyed.

And replaced with...?

Originally Posted by Sparty

Sure, it might exist, but there's no proof that FSA's Dark World is the same one as ALttP's Dark World.

Why wouldn't it be?

In fact, isn't the Dark World in FSA only there becuase of the existence of the Dark Mirror? It created Shadow Link, and he can travel in between the Light and Dark world at will; this is because the Dark World is his realm. If it truly was the Dark World of ALttP, it would look more like that one, not a hazy copy of the Light World, but a Dark, gloomy, and darkened golden realm.

1) The Dark Mirror has nothing to do with the Dark World.

2) Shadow Link can travel to the Dark World likely because he serves Ganon, who rules the Dark World.

3) Ganon hasn't wished on the Triforce in FSA, so all the absent properties from LttP probably are due to that.

I can't deny that OoT was originally meant to be the Seal War, but that was back in 1998. Since then, Aonuma has seen the inconsistency and even tried to make FSA into the Seal War. Even though Miyamoto upended the teatable on that idea, the fact that a retcon was in order on the SW is very evident. Due to this event, I believe the OoT =/= the SW anymore, and Nintendo has proven this with its actions.

1) And everything everybody is saying to contradict it either has nothing to do with the SW or is from back in 1991.

2) Aonuma had nothing to do with the story of FSA; he said so himself.

That Interloper War is something completely different, imo. There's no talk of the SR itself being sealed, only the banishment of the Dark Interlopers is discussed.

That's because the interloper war isn't the Seal War, it's the conflict over the Sacred Realm that occurred before the Seal War. (That it occurs before OoT, the game made to be the Seal War, should be pretty telling.)

And Retcons kicked his ass.

Nothing about the IW that was covered in OoT has been covered in any other game. So there can't be a "retcon" - a retcon requires that there be new content that replaces older content.

The details are irrelevant to the timeline.

Then why was it shortened?

And replaced with...?

It doesn't need to be replaced, it's just a ****ing backstory.

^ Does it change anything though? If not, then we could still take the SNES as canon, but more detailed.

By shortening it is of course changed.

But, no, the way the story goes is still virtually the same, just heavily, heavily shortened.

Nothing about the IW that was covered in OoT has been covered in any other game. So there can't be a "retcon" - a retcon requires that there be new content that replaces older content.

No.

From Wikipedia:
Retroactive continuity is the deliberate changing of previously established facts in a work of serial fiction.

There can be things that replace other things, which is a retcon. But a change in intent is ALSO a retcon.

Originally Posted by Artemicion

On “OoT contradicts the IW”

It doesn't. Toru Osawa, as the writer of the story, says that OoT is the IW; therefore any differences in the story must be viewed as valid creative license, not an invalid inconsistency. He is the writer of the story; there is no valid basis by which anyone can claim his interpretation of that story is wrong in any sense of the word. It may be outdated, but any evidence taken from LttP is about seven years older.

I am claiming the intent has changed since OoT. And you're disproving me with a quote said at the time
of OoT... How is that relevant?

How can I explain to you that to prove old intent has not been changed, you need a recent quotation?

I know the original manual said the Sages had to search for the Master Sword. That may mean that it's supposed to be “lost,” but in both TP and LttP people of the Sages' lineages – Zelda and Sahasrahla respectively – know that it is in the forest grove. If people in both of these time periods know where it is, how can we conclude that people in the in-between period didn't know what to find it?

Easy. They found the Sword after the Seal War... (and before ALttP).
Did you think it could stay hidden from the Sages forever? They ran out of time
to look for it because of the crisis with evil flowing out of the SR.

Originally Posted by Table

Then why was it shortened?

Because Agahnim being thought to be the "second coming of the sages," the seal being investigated, and the people praying for deliverance don't really contribute anything to the story. Really all that we need to know is how Agahnim came on the scene and what he's up to, and that stuff was left in.

It doesn't need to be replaced, it's just a ****ing backstory.

If a game was made to represent the backstory, the game's version of the story needs to be replaced, otherwise why would we not consider it valid?

By shortening it is of course changed.

By shortening it it is shortened. I don't really think anything from the old manual that got cut is directly relevant to LttP's plot anymore because LttP's original intent has been ****ed to high heavens - but I also think most of the details that we'd need to discuss got carried over to OoT and/or TP.

But, no, the way the story goes is still virtually the same, just heavily, heavily shortened.

Right.

Still virtually the same.

As OoT.

Retroactive continuity is the deliberate changing of previously established facts in a work of serial fiction.

There is no "new fact" though. And if there's no "new fact," how do we know anything has changed?

There can be things that replace other things, which is a retcon. But a change in intent is ALSO a retcon.[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Cukeman

I am claiming the intent has changed since OoT. And you're disproving me with a quote said at the time
of OoT... How is that relevant?

Because you're trying to disprove me with stuff said before the time of OoT.

Easy. They found the Sword after the Seal War... (and before ALttP).
Did you think it could stay hidden from the Sages forever? They ran out of time
to look for it because of the crisis with evil flowing out of the SR.

You misunderstand me: there's no evidence the Master Sword's location was ever forgotten since it was put to rest in the sacred grove, without first assuming that the Seal War is in-between TP and LttP.

Originally Posted by Artemicion

Because you're trying to disprove me with stuff said before the time of OoT.

TP, FSA and GBA ALttP are before OoT?

I use the SNES manual because I think GBA ALttP, TP and FSA (recent games) verify it as canon.

Originally Posted by Artemicion

You misunderstand me: there's no evidence the Master Sword's location was ever forgotten since it was put to rest in the sacred grove, without first assuming that the Seal War is in-between TP and LttP.

That's true. But having the Seal War between TP and ALttP explains how
a new Ganondorf was stuck in the SR, so...

I also know that LttP's Ganon was said to be a thief, and that he had a group of thieves that followed him. But they were also said to be a race of evil thieves that Ganon himself was a part of – and the thieves in FSA and LttP definitely ain't Gerudo, although the Dark World thieves in the latter game at least do seem to follow Ganon.

FSA/ALttP Ganondorf was part of a race of thieves. Maybe the thieves in the ALttP
backstory were separated into two groups by FSA. The thieves of his tribe, and the thieves that
followed him. Still, it's a minor quibble when we are dealing with larger concerns.

It's only fair to point out that OoT's Gerudo's don't fit the ALttP BS either.
So the thief detail doesn't fit anything perfectly, what're you gonna do?

Since the Sacred Realm was still the place “where the Triforce was [still] hidden” when it was opened for the IW it doesn't seem consistent to me that the realm could have been opened and sealed after TP, since the Triforce is most certainly not hidden there in that game.

It's not smooth, but the Triforce was in the SR after TP (if TP leads into ALttP).
That's where ALttP Ganon got it. That's why he is stuck in the SR. It had to happen.

On the other hand, there is already an established Dark World in FSA, and the Triforce is nowhere in sight. So if that Dark World was created when Ganon made his wish on the Triforce in order to set up for LttP, we must wonder why this was not covered anywhere in FSA, given that it is one of LttP's crucial plot elements.

Two possibilities:

1) In FSA Ganon gets the Trident and starts to whoop it up with his monsters in the SR (DW),
but he is quickly sealed in the Four Sword before he can get the Triforce.
[supported by Ganon's FSA Castle statues not yet holding the Triforce]

2) The Dark World may not be the SR.

I believe option 1

Yet TP does treat an important element of the IW story – the violent rivalries over dominion of the Sacred Realm. So it is not as though the game is entirely unhelpful. But rather than “setting up for the IW” per se, it treats those events in such a way that they seem to be history that predates even OoT, the game that was supposed to be the IW. Why would this be, I wonder?

If OoT is no longer the Seal War, we need to know how the SR was discovered and what kind of
evil led it to be sealed before OoT. Interlopers anyone?

- In the Imprisoning War, Ganondorf became a Demon King when he touched the Triforce; in FSA, Ganondorf became a Demon King when he took the trident, and does not seem to have possession of the Triforce

Does this not suggest two separate origins?

- In the Imprisoning War, the darkness in/coming from the Sacred Realm came from Ganondorf's misuse of the Triforce's power; in FSA, Ganondorf does not seem to have the Triforce, and so he cannot be misusing its power to create/spread the power of the Dark World

Ganondorf is not corrupting or spreading the Dark World in FSA. He is just running amok.
After FSA Ganon got the Triforce, he wanted to spread the corrupted SR with the power
of the Triforce.

...while the new Ganon may fill the void left by OoT's Ganon - as he died in TWW/TP, after all, so there must be a new incarnation to be stuck in the realm in LttP - he does not satisfy the conditions necessary to be the IW's Ganon.

I just explained how he fits the conditions.

My question to you, however, is this: if the Dark World of FSA didn't come from Ganon's wish in LttP, where did it come from?

My theory is that the Dark World is the uncorrupted Sacred Realm that always paralleled Hyrule.
Only Ganon's trident-created monsters make it "dark". There are many safe areas in FSA's DW.

On the Sacred Realm being opened by “accident”

This I feel is worth treating because it's a misunderstanding of the text, and a failure to accurately read the translators' notes. The word “guzen” (偶然) means “by chance, unexpectedly, suddenly, accidentally, or fortuitously.” These don't necessarily require that the band of thieves themselves have stumbled upon the realm and managed to open it – just that they discovered it through fortunate circumstances. Link conveniently opening it for Ganondorf is certainly rather fortunate for him, isn't it?

Indeed it is. But while this can fit both OoT and my proposed take on the Seal War, the other
events cannot. One thing the same =/= all things the same. Also, I noticed that it can mean many
things. How did you determine which one it meant? Did you arbitrarily pick the meaning that
fit your theory? I probably did too. But what does that word mean from an unbiased source?

What does this NOT mean? It doesn't mean that OoT's intent is outdated. OoT can still be the IW, even if LttP Ganon “rediscovered” the Sacred Realm – the “rediscovery” just has to be a separate event from the IW.

What is the IW, if not the story of how ALttP Ganon entered the SR? It doesn't make much sense
for the one story to be two events.

I've covered in my other points why I think the IW can't take place anywhere other than OoT, using information outside of Toru Osawa's quote – so what other option do I have? I have no other option.

We need to arrange a new developer interview with Aonuma on OoT's timeline relevance.
He alone seems to be painting the new timeline picture.

1) And everything everybody is saying to contradict it either has nothing to do with the SW or is from back in 1991.

Not true it's a fresh look at ALttP in light of TP and FSA.

2) Aonuma had nothing to do with the story of FSA; he said so himself.

Yet he can make newer games connect to it.
And older games connect to it in new ways.

That's because the interloper war isn't the Seal War, it's the conflict over the Sacred Realm that occurred before the Seal War. (That it occurs before OoT, the game made to be the Seal War, should be pretty telling.)

This would be pretty convincing had not TP and FSA allowed for a forgotten SR entrance,
which opened up this whole can of worms. Until then, we had to assume that the part about
the SR entrance being lost knowledge before the Seal War was bogus. No longer.

This post is now completed. Whew!

Originally Posted by Cukeman

TP, FSA and GBA ALttP are before OoT?

Every connection you've made based on these things is predicated on pre-OoT intent.

I use the SNES manual because I think GBA ALttP, TP and FSA (recent games) verify it as canon.

I think OoT is perfectly compatible with the SNES manual.

So did the people who made it.

That's true. But having the Seal War between TP and ALttP explains how a new Ganondorf was stuck in the SR, so...

Except there's nothing to explain how the Seal War could happen between TP and LttP.

Does this not suggest two separate origins?

It suggests that there is no Ganon besides OoT's that satisfies the qualifications to be the Ganon of the IW. Otherwise it suggests that LttP's Ganon is completely new, and has nothing to do with FSA. I would rather not construct events outside of the games wherever possible as this requires too much speculation.

FSA/ALttP Ganondorf was part of a race of thieves.

The Gerudo ain't thieves in FSA. They're considered trustworthy and honorable

It's only fair to point out that OoT's Gerudo's don't fit the ALttP BS either.

Orly?

It's not smooth, but the Triforce was in the SR after TP (if TP leads into ALttP).
That's where ALttP Ganon got it. That's why he is stuck in the SR. It had to happen.

Circular reasoning is circular.

So your argument is based on a fallacy?

If OoT is no longer the Seal War, we need to know how the SR was discovered and what kind of evil led it to be sealed before OoT. Interlopers anyone?

It was sealed in OoT to prevent evil from getting in in the first place, why does an evil have to predate the Temple of Time?

Moreover, who said the interlopers actually reached the Sacred Realm? According to TP, they were sealed because they used forbidden magic (the fused shadow), not because they accessed the realm.

I just explained how he fits the conditions.

Nothing you explained has any proof.

But while this can fit both OoT and my proposed take on the Seal War, the other
events cannot.

They fit Toru Osawa's take on the Seal War, though.
And since GBA ALttP's differences hardly say anything the original didn't...

Also, I noticed that it can mean many
things. How did you determine which one it meant? Did you arbitrarily pick the meaning that
fit your theory?

I determined what it meant based on how a developer interpreted it for OoT.

My theory is that the Dark World is the uncorrupted Sacred Realm that always paralleled Hyrule.
Only Ganon's trident-created monsters make it "dark". There are many safe areas in FSA's DW.

It's a makai - it's corrupted.

What is the IW, if not the story of how ALttP Ganon entered the SR?

The story of how the Sacred Realm first became the Dark World and was sealed, and how the Triforce was first captured.

If it was the story of LttP Ganon, I would question why the manual talks about the creation, the Triforce being hidden there, the spread of darkness, and the seal (all stuff also talked about in OoT), and doesn't mention Ganon at all.

Originally Posted by Artemicion

Every connection you've made based on these things is predicated on pre-OoT intent.

I disagree.

I think OoT is perfectly compatible with the SNES manual.

So did the people who made it.

1 - Opinion.
2 - Old, old, uncertain data.

Except there's nothing to explain how the Seal War could happen between TP and LttP.

If you rule out my explanation I don't have one. Makes sense.

It suggests that there is no Ganon besides OoT's that satisfies the qualifications to be the Ganon of the IW. Otherwise it suggests that LttP's Ganon is completely new, and has nothing to do with FSA. I would rather not construct events outside of the games wherever possible as this requires too much speculation.

It's theorizing, all theories await validity, but the best theories fit the clues,
whether or not they are proven yet. Speculation is not bad.

The Gerudo ain't thieves in FSA. They're considered trustworthy and honorable

OoT Nabooru would disagree with you. She is a noble thief -unlike Ganondorf.

Who says they aren't thieves... quote? At any rate, they were thieves at one point,
so the thief race can still refer to them.

Orly?

Rly. They didn't open the SR, and in OoT all the Gerudo women seemed to have
remained in the desert. Who did OoT Ganondorf fight with to get the Triforce,
when his wish was (not) granted as he held the Triforce in his blood-stained hands?

Circular reasoning is circular.

So your argument is based on a fallacy?

It's a theory. If all the clues fit it's good.
I'm not trying to prove it, I'm trying to prove it's as valid as anything else
because it fits the clues. I don't give a rat's ass if I can't prove my theory 100%
All I have to do is be able to give a reasonable explanation.

It was sealed in OoT to prevent evil from getting in in the first place, why does an evil have to predate the Temple of Time?

Because the interlopers predate OoT, silly.

Moreover, who said the interlopers actually reached the Sacred Realm? According to TP, they were sealed because they used forbidden magic (the fused shadow), not because they accessed the realm.

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. But they knew about it, since they tried
to dominate it. Hence it does match a discovery purpose.

Nothing you explained has any proof.

That's okay. It fits what we know about the Imprisoning War far better than
OoT ever did.

It's about time the developers took some pride in their work and respected the
epic ALttP backstory instead of being lazy and saying "eh, OoT is close enough,
who cares if it's radically different? It's just a game."

Nowadays games are recognized as art on par with the cinema. It's only logical
the developers would reassess their approach, particularly with the phenomenal
success and numerous awards the Zelda series has achieved.

They fit Toru Osawa's take on the Seal War, though.
And since GBA ALttP's differences hardly say anything the original didn't...

Doesn't matter, TP and FSA re-opened a can of worms.

I determined what it meant based on how a developer interpreted it for OoT.

Prove to me that developer intent meant that. I mean developer intent about
what that word originally meant. Not developer intent later, which lazily re-interprets
everything in ALttP in light of OoT. I want the real-deal original meaning, since
I believe AlttP's BS is being brought back from the dead.

It's a makai - it's corrupted.

Only by the presence of monsters. Witness the many safe areas.
Clearly the entire realm itself is not corrupted.

The story of how the Sacred Realm first became the Dark World and was sealed, and how the Triforce was first captured.

Only if you ignore the original ALttP manual which has a loss of the SR and MS.
It doesn't matter that OoT ignored it, TP and FSA are bringing it back baby!

If it was the story of LttP Ganon, I would question why the manual talks about the creation, the Triforce being hidden there, the spread of darkness, and the seal (all stuff also talked about in OoT), and doesn't mention Ganon at all.

It talks about the creation of the Triforce so we will understand how it can grant
AlttP Ganon's wish. The spread of darkness matches ALttP Ganon's evil intentions.
Stuff talked about differently in OoT. The GBA manual doesn't have to mention Ganon,
the game confirms that the plot remains the same.

Originally Posted by Cukeman

I disagree.

"Ganon rediscovered the Sacred Realm in the Imprisoning War" was the intent in 1991.

1 - Opinion.
2 - Old, old, uncertain data.

1) How many times must I tell you - if a developer said it, it's not my opinion?

2) It's more certain than "the developers put the IW somewhere else but NEVER TOLD US LOLOLOL"

If you rule out my explanation I don't have one. Makes sense.

The problem is your explanation isn't based on evidence; case in point being that no one can say the Triforce returns to the Sacred Realm after TP without completely making up a reason why.

It's theorizing, all theories await validity, but the best theories fit the clues, whether or not they are proven yet. Speculation is not bad.

Speculation is bad when there is no evidence; case in point being the above.

OoT Nabooru would disagree with you. She is a noble thief -unlike Ganondorf.

She's not respected or trusted, though.

Who says they aren't thieves... quote? At any rate, they were thieves at one point, so the thief race can still refer to them.

They're not evil, and they don't steal anything in FSA.

In fact, when the maidens hear about Ganon, they don't suspect he would have stolen the mirror/trident because he is a Gerudo. Kind of odd if the Gerudo themselves are thieves, right?

They didn't open the SR, and in OoT all the Gerudo women seemed to have
remained in the desert. Who did OoT Ganondorf fight with to get the Triforce,
when his wish was (not) granted as he held the Triforce in his blood-stained hands?

I dunno. Ask the dying guard in OoT who says that Ganondorf and his men chased Zelda, even though we only saw Ganondorf.

And the IW story didn't say his wish was granted.

It's a theory. If all the clues fit it's good.
I'm not trying to prove it, I'm trying to prove it's as valid as anything else
because it fits the clues. I don't give a rat's ass if I can't prove my theory 100%
All I have to do is be able to give a reasonable explanation.

It fit the clues we had in 1991.
It doesn't fit the clues we had in 1998.
All the clues we had in 1991 were absent in the product in 2002.

Because the interlopers predate OoT, silly.

But why do they predate the Temple of Time?

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. But they knew about it, since they tried to dominate it. Hence it does match a discovery purpose.

Everybody who tried to find it wanted to rule it, I'd wager.

That's okay. It fits what we know about the Imprisoning War far better than OoT ever did.

No place but OoT do we see the creation of the Dark World before ALttP, Ganon touching the Triforce in the Sacred Realm, or Sages sealing the realm.

Unless there's another time this happens that I don't know about?

It's about time the developers took some pride in their work and respected the
epic ALttP backstory instead of being lazy and saying "eh, OoT is close enough,
who cares if it's radically different? It's just a game."

Fun fact: the developers have never given a **** about the original LttP backstory. That's why it was remade in OoT, abridged in the GBA rerelease, and why FSA has to go and tell a "new story" to set up for LttP.

Nowadays games are recognized as art on par with the cinema. It's only logical
the developers would reassess their approach, particularly with the phenomenal
success and numerous awards the Zelda series has achieved.

Which is why pretty much every major game since OoT has focused back primarily on OoT.

Doesn't matter, TP and FSA re-opened a can of worms.

Neither of them talk about the origins of the Dark World or of a Sages' Seal, so I don't really know what can of worms you're talking about.

Prove to me that developer intent meant that. I mean developer intent about
what that word originally meant. Not developer intent later, which lazily re-interprets
everything in ALttP in light of OoT. I want the real-deal original meaning, since
I believe AlttP's BS is being brought back from the dead.

What it meant in 1991 doesn't matter if the developers didn't mean it in 1998. If you want to continue to argue that OoT is meaningless in light of more recent games, you should at least accept that LttP has to be at least twice as meaningless.

Only by the presence of monsters. Witness the many safe areas.
Clearly the entire realm itself is not corrupted.

There are safe areas in LttP's Dark world, you know.

Only if you ignore the original ALttP manual which has a loss of the SR and MS.
It doesn't matter that OoT ignored it, TP and FSA are bringing it back baby!

TP and FSA ignore everything else about the IW, though.

It talks about the creation of the Triforce so we will understand how it can grant
AlttP Ganon's wish.

Despite the fact that the manual doesn't say anything about wish-granting powers?

The GBA manual doesn't have to mention Ganon,
the game confirms that the plot remains the same.

The only changes made to the game were translation errors and minor gameplay alterations. So the GBA game proves nothing, outside of what was actually changed.

Because Agahnim being thought to be the "second coming of the sages," the seal being investigated, and the people praying for deliverance don't really contribute anything to the story. Really all that we need to know is how Agahnim came on the scene and what he's up to, and that stuff was left in.

Yeah it was irrelevant. The creation story was irrelevant (for the most part, of course) because we still understood what happened. The Agahnim story was irrelevant because we still knew for the most part what happened. Having Ganon in was irrelevant because the maiden's story's told us exactly what happened.

Where was this all important change in intent in the GBA manual? What makes the leaving out of Ganon have timeline intent, whereas Agahnim story doesn't?

If a game was made to represent the backstory, the game's version of the story needs to be replaced, otherwise why would we not consider it valid?

It DOESN'T need to be replaced, though. It wasn't a game in 1991, so the concept clearly isn't new to developers. If a newer game makes the old explanation impossible/extremely stupid and illogical then we DON'T need a new game to take its place.

By shortening it it is shortened. I don't really think anything from the old manual that got cut is directly relevant to LttP's plot anymore because LttP's original intent has been ****ed to high heavens

If the 1998 intent, when OoT=SW was true, got ****ed up the ass, why should that 1998 intent that was based on things that are currently ****ed actually be evidence now?

It makes no sense.

It's like saying that the 1991 LttP box is evidence for LttP-LoZ now.

Well NO because the things that made LttP-LoZ logical DON'T work now. The things that the box was based upon is currently false. Thus that box holds absolutely NO bearing on the timeline.

Right.

Still virtually the same.

As OoT.

Oicwatudidthar

There is no "new fact" though. And if there's no "new fact," how do we know anything has changed?

There ARE new facts since the 1998 confirmation quote, however. Hyrule was the same damn place. There wasn't a flood that erased the old Hyrule.

The reasoning and intent behind the 1998 confirmation are IMPOSSIBLE now. They were made absolutely impossible by TWW and FSA. Thus the NEW FACTS have changed the OLD FACTS.

OoT=SW is still possible, but the 1998 quote is NOT at ALL evidence for such a conclusion, as the conclusion in 1998 was based upon things that are currently 100% IMPOSSIBLE (unless an OoT-LttP-TWW timeline makes sense... which it doesn't. So for all intent and purposes it is impossible).

Because you're trying to disprove me with stuff said before the time of OoT.

Because you're trying to disprove me with stuff said before the time of TWW.

ucwatididthar?

I think OoT is perfectly compatible with the SNES manual.

So did the people who made it.

It wasn't compatible at ALL. It made absolutely NO sense. It contained more cons than pros.

It was absolutely insane and stupid. It didn't make any sense what-so-ever.

That doesn't stop it from being fact. It most definitely was. It just wasn't logical fact.

Every connection you've made based on these things is predicated on pre-OoT intent.

If they purposefully removed Ganon from the GBA BS then why didn't they remove the other things that ****ed over OoT=SW?

Except there's nothing to explain how the Seal War could happen between TP and LttP.

There's nothing logical about a flood destroying the Hyrule mentioned in this sentence: "As a result, peace returned to Hyrule, and the people started to lead a peaceful living again." and a new Hyrule being discovered somehow linked to, and identical to, the old Hyrule mentioned in this FOLLOWING sentence: "However, suspicious incidents have been occurring in Hyrule since a mysterious priest who calls himself "Agunim" used as a pretext his confronting and suppressing a calamity of unknown origin that happened one year."

Why would a story talking about the history of Hyrule fail to mention a freaken flood that ERASED Hyrule, then talk about Hyrule in the following sentence, whilst the Hyrule mentioned in the latter sentence is actually one founded thousands of years later unconnected, yet identical to the old containing the race that the old one had while both coincidently had the races, and their language, go extinct?

Yeah that makes a LOT of sense /sarcasm

Originally Posted by Table

The creation story was irrelevant (for the most part, of course) because we still understood what happened. The Agahnim story was irrelevant because we still knew for the most part what happened. Having Ganon in was irrelevant because the maiden's story's told us exactly what happened.

I'll put it this way:

Ganon can't have been in the IW story if the details given in the IW story (the Triforce was hidden in the Sacred Realm when it happened) are true - because the details given in the IW don't match the description of Ganon's entry into the Sacred Realm. As far as the current games, any time when the realm's location had been lost was not a time when the Triforce is hidden there.

Newer games may correct this - but as of now this is how it is.

Where was this all important change in intent in the GBA manual? What makes the leaving out of Ganon have timeline intent, whereas Agahnim story doesn't?

The Agahnim story wasn't left out, it was shortened.

It wasn't a game in 1991, so the concept clearly isn't new to developers.

You're right. It isn't new - it's OUTDATED.

If the 1998 intent, when OoT=SW was true, got ****ed up the ass, why should that 1998 intent that was based on things that are currently ****ed actually be evidence now?

What you believe is the SW's current intent already got "****ed up the ass" in 1991, and it still doesn't fit.

On the other hand, the only things against the 1998 intent depend on things from 1991 that already weren't true by 1998.

Hyrule was the same damn place. There wasn't a flood that erased the old Hyrule.

There is nothing in LttP that says Hyrule was the same place in the IW and in LttP.

The reasoning and intent behind the 1998 confirmation are IMPOSSIBLE now. They were made absolutely impossible by TWW and FSA. Thus the NEW FACTS have changed the OLD FACTS.

None of the new facts are about the IW at all.

the conclusion in 1998 was based upon things that are currently 100% IMPOSSIBLE

What things?

It wasn't compatible at ALL. It made absolutely NO sense. It contained more cons than pros.

Table, if you're going to argue with a developer, I see no reason to continue this discussion, as developer intent obviously means **** to you.

It was absolutely insane and stupid. It didn't make any sense what-so-ever.

Assuming that the IW can fit after TP is "insane and stupid" and doesn't make any sense whatsoever - and no developer has even remotely suggested it.

If they purposefully removed Ganon from the GBA BS then why didn't they remove the other things that ****ed over OoT=SW?

Such as?

There's nothing logical about a flood destroying the Hyrule mentioned in this sentence: "As a result, peace returned to Hyrule, and the people started to lead a peaceful living again." and a new Hyrule being discovered somehow linked to, and identical to, the old Hyrule mentioned in this FOLLOWING sentence: "However, suspicious incidents have been occurring in Hyrule since a mysterious priest who calls himself "Agunim" used as a pretext his confronting and suppressing a calamity of unknown origin that happened one year."

According to TWW, the gods spared the people of Hyrule from the flood because to destroy them would be the same as granting Ganon's wish for the destruction of the land [Hyrule]. So "Hyrule" existed even in TWW - just not as a land but as a collective of people.

However, to reference all this in LttP would make for a convoluted and unnecessary complex storyline - especially since the events of LttP don't really have anything to do with the flood.

Why would a story talking about the history of Hyrule fail to mention a freaken flood that ERASED Hyrule

The same reason it fails to talk about anything but the creation, the Seal War, and Agahnim - because NONE OF THAT OTHER **** HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE PLOT.

By this logic, no game can come before LttP, since LttP doesn't talk about any games between the creation and the Seal War.

And the Triforce certainly can't have left the Sacred Realm and gone back there - because they would have mentioned that, right?

Originally Posted by Artemicion

1) How many times must I tell you - if a developer said it, it's not my opinion?

You're twisting my meaning. I said it was your opinion that developer intent never changed.
Regardless, developer quotes are hardly hard facts just because they issue forth from a developer's
mouth, look how many quotes are contradictory. Do you believe FS is pre OoT? If not, you admit
we have to take developer quotes with a grain of salt.

2) It's more certain than "the developers put the IW somewhere else but NEVER TOLD US LOLOLOL"

They never told us because they only recently set up the backdrop for this to even be possible.
They dropped the hint in TP. I think they'll tell us after they make it possible, not before. Are they
gonna tell us Zelda Wii's plot before it's released? Not stinkin' likely. "LOLOLOL"

The problem is your explanation isn't based on evidence; case in point being that no one can say the Triforce returns to the Sacred Realm after TP without completely making up a reason why.

Complete and utter nonsense. No evidence? Made up?

Did I make up the fact that TP sets up the SR entrance to be forgotten, matching the ALttP BS?
Perhaps I made up that TP sets up the MS for ALttP? What exactly is it that is not based on something
in a Zelda game? Oh, maybe I made up that FSA introduces a Ganondorf who was not it OoT!

...seriously, that was just an attack, not a point of argument...

Speculation is bad when there is no evidence; case in point being the above.

My speculation is based on evidence. See above. It may be an interpretation, but it's still based on
something in-game. You tell me that TP has no intentional connection to ALttP. You can't.

[Nabooru's] not respected or trusted, though.

Originally Posted by OoT

[Nabooru's] just a little girl,
but she commands a lot of
respect among the Gerudo, Kotake...

*sigh*

They're not evil, and they don't steal anything in FSA.

All thieves are evil? Even Robin Hood?

In fact, when the maidens hear about Ganon, they don't suspect he would have stolen the mirror/trident because he is a Gerudo. Kind of odd if the Gerudo themselves are thieves, right?

Is this what you are talking about?

Originally Posted by FSA

I can't imagine these
creatures worshipping
some desert nomad.

They can't imagine them worshipping Ganondorf, because they don't know he became powerful
with the Trident.

In fact, as soon as the maidens read the inscription:

Originally Posted by FSA

Do you think the person who
took this trident was...
Ganondorf?!?

The King of Darkness is
not Vaati?

Does this mean this wicked
man is somewhere in Hyrule
plotting even now?

Link! The situation is even
more desperate than I
believed!

They right away suspect that Ganondorf took the Trident!!!
They reason they didn't suspect him before was because they suspected Vaati.
I really wish you'd do your research. (Also see above mention of Nabooru's respect.)
Owned.

I dunno. Ask the dying guard in OoT who says that Ganondorf and his men chased Zelda, even though we only saw Ganondorf.

Ganon is the only man in the Gerudo tribe during OoT. If his "men" entered with him.
They were not of Ganondorf's race since Gerudos import their men. (Remember your
argument against this being ALttP Ganon was that the thieves were the same race as
Ganondorf)

And the IW story didn't say his wish was granted.

I already showed that it does.

Manual: Ganon acquired the Triforce, but no one knows what Ganon wished for.
Game: Surprisingly, the Triforce created this world to fulfill Ganon's wish. What is Ganon's wish,
you ask? It's to rule the entire cosmos!

Don't tell me these quotes don't directly reference each other.

It fit the clues we had in 1991.
It doesn't fit the clues we had in 1998.
All the clues we had in 1991 were absent in the product in 2002.

It fits the hints dropped in TP in 2006.

But why do they predate the Temple of Time?

I misunderstood you. But if the ToT is built first, how on earth did the interlopers
try to dominate the SR? The ToT shows no signs of a struggle. Were they attempting
to dominate the SR from the desert or the forest or the mountains? The interloper
story only makes sense if the SR is accessible (whether the interlopers enter it or not).

No place but OoT do we see the creation of the Dark World before ALttP, Ganon touching the Triforce in the Sacred Realm, or Sages sealing the realm.

Unless there's another time this happens that I don't know about?

I believe this "time we don't know about" is between TP and ALttP. That's my theory.
I as much as admitted in my first post, that this theory comes from a suggestion of
new developer intent. This is a new theory. You aren't going to find developer support
or contradiction unless it's during or after TP's development.

Fun fact: the developers have never given a **** about the original LttP backstory. That's why it was remade in OoT

Until TP came out, I'd agree.

abridged in the GBA rerelease

The abridged version is inconclusive. It does not contradict the old manual.

and why FSA has to go and tell a "new story" to set up for LttP.

FSA has to set up for ALttP because OoT doesn't!
FSA is setting up for ALttP's backstory, because OoT doesn't cut it.

Which is why pretty much every major game since OoT has focused back primarily on OoT.

Which is why ALttP couldn't.

Neither of them talk about the origins of the Dark World or of a Sages' Seal, so I don't really know what can of worms you're talking about.

Lost knowledge of the Sacred Realm predating the IW as in ALttP's BS.

What it meant in 1991 doesn't matter if the developers didn't mean it in 1998. If you want to continue to argue that OoT is meaningless in light of more recent games, you should at least accept that LttP has to be at least twice as meaningless.

That would be accurate, except that I draw it's meaning from recent games such as TP and FSA,
I don't take it's meaning from the original context, or it's OoT interpretation. It comes from
2006.

There are safe areas in LttP's Dark world, you know.

In ALttP the entire landscape, and the transforming power show that the realm itself
is corrupted. Monsters are the only hint of corruption in FSA.

TP and FSA ignore everything else about the IW, though.

Of course TP does. It is not a part of the IW, it just sets up for it.
FSA's dark coulds covering Hyrule may or may not be referenced in the ALttP BS.
The point is that these games set up for the IW, so of course they don't reference those
future events (duh) they just support them. Did you expect OoT would
reference The Wind Waker??? Even if the developers knew WW came next, it's not
part of what happens in OoT, so of course it would not be mentioned.

'Oh, Hero of Time. Know that the Sages seal won't last and your absence will cause Hyrule
to be sealed under the Great Sea...'

If they knew it is doubtful that Zelda would've sent Link back in time!

Despite the fact that the manual doesn't say anything about wish-granting powers?

Originally Posted by ALttP Manual

"The golden power lies somewhere descended from the heavens.
He who claims it as his own shall have their desires granted by the gods."

...or were you referring to the GBA version which does not contradict the original?

The only changes made to the game were translation errors and minor gameplay alterations. So the GBA game proves nothing, outside of what was actually changed.

What was "actually changed", that is relevant to this discussion?

You keep ignoring evidence, you post statements that are contradicted by simple research,
for the most part you are just contradicting, not debating.

Do you believe FS is pre OoT? If not, you admit
we have to take developer quotes with a grain of salt.

PRE-RELEASE quotations, yes. Post-release not so much.

I agree with you Cukeman in many respects, but you have to understand that I've only JUST as a LAST RESORT accepted retconned intent and a CT aLttP, and I still aggree with as many of Lex's points as yours, and although it's getting a bit heated from you both, he is being a little bit more eloquent in this case, Cukey my love!

And please, PLEASE don't question him on research- we're all allowed a muck up every now and then, I'd bet actual money he's more up in what he knows than either of us.

Someone set in their ways is pretty hard to sway. I think it might be time to agree to disagree. I mean, who's going to believe that San Diego means a Whale's Vagina?

In what language now? If you told me it meant that in like Inuit or something I might believe you. Sounds a fun coinkidink

Originally Posted by Table

Oh so we're talking SNES manual?

Now that I think about it... why the hell was that "rediscovered" quote there in 1991? I'd forgotten how clear the SNES manual quote was.

But how did the LttP Ganon rediscover the SR in 1991?

Anyways, do you think that the SNES manual is canon? Your theory is ****ed further with SNES manual as canon lol.

I'm confused now, though, about how things went in 1991...

Ganon rediscovered the SR, but was also the person to discover the SR...

I'm confused lol

I was under the impression that Cukeman was using only 1991 materials, so that's what I was using.

Going by 2004 materials, the same thing is still implied.

Originally Posted by Sparty

I mean, who's going to believe that San Diego means a Whale's Vagina?

Me.

Originally Posted by Table

There ARE new facts since the 1998 confirmation quote, however. Hyrule was the same damn place. There wasn't a flood that erased the old Hyrule.

That's actually a good point. If ALttP is decidedly old Hyrule, then WW moved ALttP to the
CT for sure. And if OoT is the Seal War, then it did not happen on the CT. So there was no
Seal War before ALttP.

Just another reason I think OoT is not the Seal War, but that it happens on the CT after TP.

Originally Posted by Artemicion

There is nothing in LttP that says Hyrule was the same place in the IW and in LttP.

Yes there is. The fact that there was no flood yet means that the developers only had one Hyrule in mind.
Hence the ancient Hylian relics.

None of the new facts are about the IW at all.

Opinion.

Table, if you're going to argue with a developer, I see no reason to continue this discussion, as developer intent obviously means **** to you.

Do you believe FS -> OoT?
If you don't, stop holding up developer statements as the holy grail of theorizing.

Originally Posted by River Zora

PRE-RELEASE quotations, yes. Post-release not so much.

I just think it goes to show that things change.

By this logic, no game can come before LttP, since LttP doesn't talk about any games between the creation and the Seal War.

And the Triforce certainly can't have left the Sacred Realm and gone back there - because they would have mentioned that, right?

I realize you may or may not be promoting this, but the explanation is:

Creation...ALttP BS

Everything in the middle is left out because it does not directly affect the plot of ALttP.

Someone set in their ways is pretty hard to sway. I think it might be time to agree to disagree. I mean, who's going to believe that San Diego means a Whale's Vagina?

Dork means a whale's male genitals. San Diego means Saint Diego.
Oh, wait, this isn't a theory in debate, lol.

Originally Posted by Sparty

I think it might be time to agree to disagree.

I think that time may have come and gone already.
But I want to stick it out with my theory to show that it can "go the distance".
*plays Rocky theme*

Originally Posted by River Zora

...it's getting a bit heated from you both, he is being a little bit more eloquent in this case...

I don't think so, but we could both stand to tone it down.

...Cukey my love!

Stop scaring me.

And please, PLEASE don't question him on research- we're all allowed a muck up every now and then, I'd bet actual money he's more up in what he knows than either of us.

You may be right. But us newer theorists don't get no respect. We have to stick it to the man,
because they try to run us over.

Originally Posted by Cukeman

You're twisting my meaning. I said it was your opinion that developer intent never changed.
Regardless, developer quotes are hardly hard facts just because they issue forth from a developer's mouth, look how many quotes are contradictory. Do you believe FS is pre OoT? If not, you admit
we have to take developer quotes with a grain of salt.

1) It is your opinion that the developer intent did change; fun fact being that you have no statement of developer intent to back it up, and most of your arguments wind up going back to how things were in 1991.

2) THE MAN WHO WROTE THE GAME KNOWS WHAT HE MEANT WHEN HE WROTE IT

They never told us because they only recently set up the backdrop for this to even be possible.

But in the current timeline it's not possible.

Complete and utter nonsense. No evidence? Made up?

The last time we see any of the Triforce parts in TP they are not in the Sacred Realm. No one talks about anything happening to the Triforce.

THERE. IS. NO. EVIDENCE.

Did I make up the fact that TP sets up the SR entrance to be forgotten, matching the ALttP BS?

As if TWW didn't set up for this just as well?

Perhaps I made up that TP sets up the MS for ALttP?

Agreed; TP was also supposed to be before TWW at some point, however - so how do we know this was not leftover from that stage of development?

My speculation is based on evidence. See above. It may be an interpretation, but it's still based on something in-game. You tell me that TP has no intentional connection to ALttP. You can't.

TP's story has no connection to LttP.

*sigh*

The thief is respected by OTHER THIEVES, obviously.

All thieves are evil? Even Robin Hood?

The "race of evil thieves" is evil.

Is this what you are talking about?

No.

The Gerudo honor the desert.
They are trustworthy and
pure of heart.

I cannot imagine one of them
is the King of Darkness...

I really wish you'd do your research.

1) I did. You brought up ****ty counterevidence.
2) Your quote about Nabooru said that she was respected by other Gerudo - and the Gerudo were also thieves in OoT.

Ganon is the only man in the Gerudo tribe during OoT. If his "men" entered with him.
They were not of Ganondorf's race since Gerudos import their men.

Ganondorf and his "men" were renowned for evil thievery in OoT, even though his "men" were actually the Gerudo thieves.

I already showed that it does.

Manual: Ganon acquired the Triforce, but no one knows what Ganon wished for.
Game: Surprisingly, the Triforce created this world to fulfill Ganon's wish. What is Ganon's wish, you ask? It's to rule the entire cosmos!

You're still stuck in 1991; in 1998, Ganon acquired the Triforce, but didn't even get his wish granted because the Triforce split.

It fits the hints dropped in TP in 2006.

TP "dropped" that the Temple of Time was actually in the forest. I interpret this as a retcon of its location - so the Temple of Time was in the forest on the Adult timeline too. And if this was the case it doesn't apply exclusively to the Child timeline.

But if the ToT is built first, how on earth did the interlopers try to dominate the SR?

They tried to find it and/or track down the keys to the realm so they could rule it.

The abridged version is inconclusive. It does not contradict the old manual.

It also definitely doesn't contradict OoT.

FSA has to set up for ALttP because OoT doesn't!

It doesn't? The Sacred Realm wasn't opened? Darkness didn't leak out? It wasn't sealed by Seven Sages?

Which is why ALttP couldn't.

But it did! The GBA manual said explicitly that the Triforce was hidden in the Sacred Realm when the IW happened, AND SINCE THE GBA GAME'S RELEASE THE ONLY GAME IN THE TIMELINE TO QUALIFY THIS IS OOT.

Lost knowledge of the Sacred Realm predating the IW as in ALttP's BS.

As in LttP's BS in 1991.
Not in 1998.

I don't take it's meaning from the original context

Literally every argument you've made has been something that would have been true in 1991 but would have been untrue in 1998.

In ALttP the entire landscape, and the transforming power show that the realm itself is corrupted. Monsters are the only hint of corruption in FSA.

It's a makai.
It's a "shadowy" reflection of Hyrule.
Its power is spreading across Hyrule.
It's called the world of darkness.

The "transforming power" in LttP's Dark World was said to come from the "golden power," which Ganon doesn't have in FSA.

Of course TP does. It is not a part of the IW, it just sets up for it.

Is the Triforce in the Sacred Realm in TP? Did Ganondorf open the realm to steal it? Did it become the Dark World? If the answer to any of these questions is no, then TP doesn't set up for the IW. It might set up for LttP in other ways, but not on this subject.

..or were you referring to the GBA version which does not contradict the original?

This.

What was "actually changed", that is relevant to this discussion?

Instead of talking about Ganon getting into the Sacred Realm and being sealed away, and the seal remaining intact until Agahnim appeared, the manual instead says that the Triforce was hidden in the realm when the war happened.

It ignores all of the details that would support the direct relationship between the IW and LttP's more immediate circumstances, and instead talks about the creation and the Triforce being hidden in the Sacred Realm, even though these things describe OoT's scenario.

Do you believe FS -> OoT?
If you don't, stop holding up developer statements as the holy grail of theorizing.

I believe the man who wrote the story for a game is the authority for that game, while a man who had nothing to do with another game is not the authority for that game.

Usually authority on a fictional work has to do with authorship - Aonuma is not the author of FS; in fact he was not involved with it at all!

I realize you may or may not be promoting this, but the explanation is:

Creation...ALttP BS

Everything in the middle is left out because it does not directly affect the plot of ALttP.

And my explanation is Oot/IW...LttP

Everything in the middle is left out because it does not directly affect the plot of ALttP.

My question is why the creation is mentioned if the Triforce isn't in the Sacred Realm because of the creation, but because of events happening after OoT?

The Agahnim story wasn't left out, it was shortened.

The Seal War story was merely shortened.

What makes the Seal War story being shortened so much more important than the Agahnim story being shortened?

You're right. It isn't new - it's OUTDATED.

However that's the way it was confirmed to go at one point, so it's not completely out of the question.

Your theory that Hyrule was flooded and erased then brought back and referred to as Hyrule again as if nothing has happened between the fifth and sixth lines of the GBA LttP manual HAS NEVER been confirmed EVER. So STOP going around acting like you have developer quotes on your side; because you don't.

On the other hand, the only things against the 1998 intent depend on things from 1991 that already weren't true by 1998.

Are you referring to Cukeman's arguments with you? As so far the ONLY things I've said that contradict OoT=SW are from TWW or more recent.

What things?

Hyrule being the same.

There is nothing in LttP that says Hyrule was the same place in the IW and in LttP.

Of course if you leave all logic and reason behind they don't have to be the same place.

But when the fifth line of the GBA manual says that peace returned to Hyrule, and the sixth line of the GBA manual says that a priest named Agahnim has come to Hyrule and peace is being disturbed, it's completely and utterly ****ing bull **** to say that the Hyrule that had peace returned to it was a COMPLETELY different one that got flooded a couple thousand years before and a NEW Hyrule has popped up that is identical, contained the exact same race that went for the most part extinct with the flood and the language has died out twice, in between those two sentences.

No offense to you personally, Lex, but that is just complete utter ZD. I could take that to Youtube, or lolZD and I'd get flamed for how stupid that theory is. By the distorted and ridiculous that the above theory uses I could say that this line in FSA: "Princess Zelda's childhood friend, the boy Link, borrowed the mysterious power of the Four Sword, and at the end of a furious battle, he succeeded in sealing Gufuu away once again." takes place thousands of years later and in a new Hyrule after this line: "The wind demon Gufuu resurrected overcoming the Four Sword's seal, and kidnapped the princess of the country of Hyrule, Princess Zelda."

Or would you think I was a moron if I posted that theory seriously?

None of the new facts are about the IW at all.

The land that the SW takes place in is unimportant?

No direct facts go against this line: "Princess Zelda's childhood friend, the boy Link, borrowed the mysterious power of the Four Sword, and at the end of a furious battle, he succeeded in sealing Gufuu away once again." being thousands of years later after a flood destroyed the Hyrule that this line directly prior took place in: "The wind demon Gufuu resurrected overcoming the Four Sword's seal, and kidnapped the princess of the country of Hyrule, Princess Zelda."

Table, if you're going to argue with a developer, I see no reason to continue this discussion, as developer intent obviously means **** to you.

God damn you're good at taking things out of context and only quoting what you like to make the other person look bad.

You are 100% wrong. Actually you could go ask the ZD theorists and they'd say I don't give a **** about in-game evidence and ONLY care about developer intent.

I love how you didn't quote the thing I said right after where I said: "That doesn't stop it from being fact. It most definitely was. It just wasn't logical fact."

It WAS stupid and ridiculous and illogical. But it was most definitely fact.

Assuming that the IW can fit after TP is "insane and stupid" and doesn't make any sense whatsoever - and no developer has even remotely suggested it.

Why do you arbitrarily assume I actually have a timeline? Just because I think your theory is ZD/stupid doesn't mean I have a personal opinion on how it works.

And no developer has suggested that LttP takes place after TWW, while keeping OoT as the SW.

Such as?

"Therefore, the king ordered the Seven Sages to create a firm seal so that the entrance to the sacred place would never be opened again." The king never made any order.

According to TWW, the gods spared the people of Hyrule from the flood because to destroy them would be the same as granting Ganon's wish for the destruction of the land [Hyrule]. So "Hyrule" existed even in TWW - just not as a land but as a collective of people.

Which then got "erased" by Daphnes.

However, to reference all this in LttP would make for a convoluted and unnecessary complex storyline - especially since the events of LttP don't really have anything to do with the flood.

Why don't they remove everything that refers to the old land as Hyrule? THAT is unnecessary and complex. Why don't they actually make it clear that the Hyrule mentioned in the backstory is different from the current Hyrule?

I know why; BECAUSE IT WASN'T different. They're the same damn place. One place referred to in two consecutive sentences. It's complete and utter ZD to say that they aren't the same place.

The same reason it fails to talk about anything but the creation, the Seal War, and Agahnim - because NONE OF THAT OTHER **** HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE PLOT.

The Agahnim story has to do with the plot.

In your timeline the SW mentioned in the BS of LttP would have NOTHING to do with the timeline. Because everything that happened in that BS has been solved by TWW (the Hyrule being destroyed, the seal being destroyed).

By this logic, no game can come before LttP, since LttP doesn't talk about any games between the creation and the Seal War.

Yeah. Which is why I don't have a timeline. Because at the moment it is ****ed thoroughly (in regards to LttP anyway).

And the Triforce certainly can't have left the Sacred Realm and gone back there - because they would have mentioned that, right?

I have no problem with things happening without us being told.

I have a problem with one sentence referring to something, then the consecutive sentence referring to something by the exact same name, with the same race that went extinct, thousands of years later.

The "race of evil thieves" is evil.

I lol'd irl when I read this.