Theorists Unite! Learn about Spirit Tracks.

Right guys, www.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk have this promise up at the moment:

Official Nintendo Magazine:

Just as was the case with New Super Mario Bros. Wii, we've been lucky enough to secure the world first review of Zelda: Spirit Tracks.

I spent a couple of days at Nintendo HQ last month storming my way through the finished game. You'll be able to read all about it in issue 50 of ONM which hits the shelves on 20 November.

In the meantime however, I thought it'd be a good idea to ask you guys if you had any questions about the game that you'd like answering. We did a similar thing for New Super Mario Bros. Wii a few weeks back and the response was so huge we had to answer your questions across three features! You can see how it worked by reading part one of our Mario feature here.

Anyway, back to Zelda. There are limits on what I'm allowed to reveal about Spirit Tracks, so I can't promise I'll be able to answer everything, but I'll do my best. Obviously, don't ask what score we've given it - you'll have to check out the magazine for that!

However all the questions so far are totally stupid like "Is the train customisable?"

Is it ****.

Theorists, we must bombard the comments on this blog with timeline and theory questions. I don't care if Link can buy new hats, I care about is Ganon in it? Is he resurrected? Is the Master Sword to be seen? What of the Triforce? Any timeline links to old games?

JOIN ME BROTHERS.

Make an account and literally flood them with questions they can not ignore.

99% chance no plot-related questions will be answered. I'd rather not know too much anyway.

However, I did ask "Do places from previous Zelda games (besides Hyrule Castle) make an appearance?" as that isn't necessarily a very revealing question, and it'll answer the only timeline-related question I really want to know.

We can all try to word timeline-related questions like that-

'Are there any places named after old characters?' etc...

I've put this on ZI too. If enough do we can force them....

On another note: I'm not so sure this is supposed to be set after PH anymore.

It's looking a bit worryingly 'This is the Hyrule that got flooded' isn't it...

That being Gonzo's ancestor in the painting rather than a descendant. That what you getting at?

Originally Posted by River Zora

It's looking a bit worryingly 'This is the Hyrule that got flooded' isn't it...

That being Gonzo's ancestor in the painting rather than a descendant. That what you getting at?

Not worried about THAT; Gonzo looks nothing like his equivalent in the Hyrule Castle painting in this game from what we've seen.

Just not getting a "new Hyrule" vibe at the moment.

Originally Posted by Artemicion

On another note: I'm not so sure this is supposed to be set after PH anymore.

Miyamoto himself recently stated it did.

Miyamoto:
I was hoping you'd ask about the most recent Zelda for DS. On December 23rd in Japan we are going to release The Legend of Zelda: Spirit Tracks, a sequel of Phantom Hourglass.

Originally Posted by Jarsh

Miyamoto himself recently stated it did.

Well, "sequel" could just mean it's the next game of that style/for that console/using that engine.

kind of like how NSMBWii is a sequel to NSMBDS, even though I doubt they're actually related in any way.

^
That's true... eh, I'm still set that it's set after PH.

^Let's hope so.

I'm set on TMC's placement for this game now though because: If it's Gonzo's ancestor then it's him in the painting like it is in TMC for the glasses dude.

But if it's a decendent it works in reverse.

Does anyone get what I'm saying?

Yup. I' m still going post-PH.

Seriously. With LoZ and AoL right after it!

AND THEN THE AT WILL BE COMPLETE!.....

For now

Hopefully...

Originally Posted by River Zora

Yup. I' m still going post-PH.

Seriously. With LoZ and AoL right after it!

AND THEN THE AT WILL BE COMPLETE!.....

For now

No, then Zelda's journey towards the dark side will be complete.

(The AT is the dark side of Zelda. CT FTW!)

I posted some questions btw

Originally Posted by Artemicion

Well, "sequel" could just mean it's the next game of that style/for that console/using that engine.

kind of like how NSMBWii is a sequel to NSMBDS, even though I doubt they're actually related in any way.

What the hell? You've used almost identical statements as evidence for your timeline before. Since when does the context of a statement matter? This can't be right. Who is this?

99% sure Death Mountain is in this game.

Originally Posted by Impossible

What the hell? You've used almost identical statements as evidence for your timeline before. Since when does the context of a statement matter?

What? You mean when I pointed out that Miyamoto had said that LttP was the true sequel to LoZ, and then said the timeline went OoT-LoZ/AoL-LttP a few years later?

I'd just like to jump in and point out that the absence of the Triforce in New Hyrule makes it impossible for any of the older games (i.e. LoZ/AoL) to take place there.

And let's not try making up the usual bull**** excuses for the Triforce to appear in New Hyrule. If the Triforce's disappearance in TWW's ending wasn't enough proof that it wouldn't be travelling with Link and Zelda, then the fact that the developers created a modified Royal Crest where the Triforce has been replaced by a Force Gem, is an obvious statement that the Triforce does not exist there. Developers don't do something like that if they intend to convey the exact opposite message.

So a Force Gem is what we saw on OoT Link's shield? Maybe? Instead of... (I don't even wanna go there)

Originally Posted by Raian

I'd just like to jump in and point out that the absence of the Triforce in New Hyrule makes it impossible for any of the older games (i.e. LoZ/AoL) to take place there.

And let's not try making up the usual bull**** excuses for the Triforce to appear in New Hyrule. If the Triforce's disappearance in TWW's ending wasn't enough proof that it wouldn't be travelling with Link and Zelda, then the fact that the developers created a modified Royal Crest where the Triforce has been replaced by a Force Gem, is an obvious statement that the Triforce does not exist there. Developers don't do something like that if they intend to convey the exact opposite message.

*takes deep breath in preparation to debate this statement*...****. Looks like the new Hyrule is reserved for new games.

Originally Posted by Raian

I'd just like to jump in and point out that the absence of the Triforce in New Hyrule makes it impossible for any of the older games (i.e. LoZ/AoL) to take place there.

And let's not try making up the usual bull**** excuses for the Triforce to appear in New Hyrule. If the Triforce's disappearance in TWW's ending wasn't enough proof that it wouldn't be travelling with Link and Zelda, then the fact that the developers created a modified Royal Crest where the Triforce has been replaced by a Force Gem, is an obvious statement that the Triforce does not exist there. Developers don't do something like that if they intend to convey the exact opposite message.

I'm not sure how that makes it impossible for an AT placement of games. One could say that the Triforce simply went back to the Sacred Realm at the of TWW. If this game ties into the FS arc, then after FSA, people start getting curious about the Sacred Realm and search for the Triforce there, then everyone finds out that it's ultimately powerful thus changing the coat of arms to reflect that.

However, that's completely speculation, and I think in order to properly debate this we'll just need to play the game.

Originally Posted by Triforce of the Gods

*takes deep breath in preparation to debate this statement*...****. Looks like the new Hyrule is reserved for new games.

****, I think your right. Bye-bye ALttP AT.

And *cry* hello to MC... first? *