Dun, Dun, Dun!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[sign of table]

BS-LoZ (which was created by the man who wrote the plot for the Seal War) and aLttP GBA (which was stated to have changes made to it for accuracy) both imply that he did.

The changes were made for accuracy in the NoA version, specifically.

Now, Miyamoto comes in and makes a quote that says LoZ is before ALttP. Of course, those who have come to know and completely understand (with good reason) that ALttP is a prequel, go .

LttP didn't fulfill the same things that you were referring to, in 1998.

It no longer was giving an origin to the Triforce, OoT did that and took place before LttP. It no longer gave a good origin for Ganon, OoT did that and updated it.

In that sense, why would I say "Okay. Well Miyamoto says this, so I'm going to ignore the fact that everything about ALttP was meant to be a prequel, and just put it ahead of LoZ", when there's no reason to?

Then let's debate this RIGHT NOW. I want to clear this up. Let's debate RIGHT NOW what the in-game evidenced timeline was in 1998.

For example, the Split Timeline made the events of Ganondorf being sealed fall on the AT. He escapes for WW. Nothing happens between OoT and WW, so LoZ can't exist there. That alone disregards the Miyamoto Order.

Well, yeah, TWW screwed everything over, but that doesn't mean it was wrong in 1998.

Conclusively, we have ALttP originally made to be a prequel... Miyamoto saying that it wasn't a prequel... Then other games coming out to further prove that its a prequel. I'm pretty content with my belief that ALttP is, in fact, a distant prequel to LoZ, in that case.

The first two instances are correct, but NOTHING implies that it still goes LttP-LoZ except for a WAY outdated box (more outdated than the Miyamoto order... and that's saying something lol). No new games have done anything to prove that LttP is a prequel again to LoZ.

And the Miyamoto order getting outdated in no way implies that it goes LttP-LoZ.

So let's debate the timeline of 1998 right now.

Give me some in-game evidence for OoT-LttP-LoZ.

[MrMosley]

It no longer was giving an origin to the Triforce, OoT did that and took place before LttP. It no longer gave a good origin for Ganon, OoT did that and updated it.

Wrong. OoT gave an origin for Ganondorf. ALttP still held the title of giving origin to Ganon, the beast. ALttP made it clear that Ganondorf became Ganon upon making his wish. Therefore:

OoT (Ganondof's BS), ALttP (Ganondorf's BS becoming Ganon), LoZ (Ganon)

LoZ gave us Ganon. ALttP told us of a man and how he became Ganon. OoT told us of how that man first came to be of any importance. That makes good sense to me.

Then let's debate this RIGHT NOW. I want to clear this up. Let's debate RIGHT NOW what the in-game evidenced timeline was in 1998.

This discussion isn't about 1998.

Well, yeah, TWW screwed everything over, but that doesn't mean it was wrong in 1998.

(Read above response)

The first two instances are correct, but NOTHING implies that it still goes LttP-LoZ except for a WAY outdated box (more outdated than the Miyamoto order... and that's saying something lol). No new games have done anything to prove that LttP is a prequel again to LoZ.

Are you still ignoring the fact that I have posted quotes from GBA ALttP in another thread that show that ALttP still has the same plot? Or is that just a common thing for every theorist from ZU to just ignore things? That's really the consensus I'm coming to on this. And I mean no offence by that, but it really seems as if every single theorist that comes from ZU has this "know it all" attitude, and even when good evidence is laid out in front of them, they shove it away like its nothing.

I provided a link in my last post. Ganon didn't come out of the Dark World during the SW. That has pretty well been established as fact. Hell even the Virtual Console description says Agahnim is trying to break the "Imprisoning Seal" on Ganon. How much more information do you need?

So let's debate the timeline of 1998 right now.

Give me some in-game evidence for OoT-LttP-LoZ.

I would but, this discussion isn't about 1998. Its actually about an apparently false, random quote saying Miyamoto doesn't know anything about the timeline, and I already knew that.

On a side note, however... Why are you so intent on trying to argue something 10+ years old? That order has already been shattered with the times. There's really no point in arguing it now because it doesn't matter. But, that would have to be another argument for another thread (which I'm sure we already have one or two of, and have already discussed all these things probably 20 times already).

[Viral]

Wrong. OoT gave an origin for Ganondorf. ALttP still held the title of giving origin to Ganon, the beast. ALttP made it clear that Ganondorf became Ganon upon making his wish. Therefore:

OoT (Ganondof's BS), ALttP (Ganondorf's BS becoming Ganon), LoZ (Ganon)

LoZ gave us Ganon. ALttP told us of a man and how he became Ganon. OoT told us of how that man first came to be of any importance. That makes good sense to me.

But Ganondorf transformed into Ganon in OoT. Therefore, LttP does not serve as the first time that a man named Ganondorf transformed into pig Ganon, because OoT shows us that. Your entire point here is moot.

[MrMosley]

But Ganondorf transformed into Ganon in OoT. Therefore, LttP does not serve as the first time that a man named Ganondorf transformed into pig Ganon, because OoT shows us that. Your entire point here is moot.

He is shown to transform into Ganon by means of using the Triforce of Power in OoT. He does not stay in Ganon form (as shown by the end of the game).

Ganondorf has only ever been shown to transform into Ganon by using some source of power for a short period of time (OoT, TP). ALttP explains that he was permanently transformed into the pig/man form Ganon because he wished on the Triforce. That transformed everything in the SR to the creatures and such of the now Dark World, as well as Ganondorf himself into Ganon (permanently). This explanation was used to show how Ganondorf became the form he is in LoZ.

[sign of table]

Wrong. OoT gave an origin for Ganondorf. ALttP still held the title of giving origin to Ganon, the beast. ALttP made it clear that Ganondorf became Ganon upon making his wish. Therefore:

OoT (Ganondof's BS), ALttP (Ganondorf's BS becoming Ganon), LoZ (Ganon)

LoZ gave us Ganon. ALttP told us of a man and how he became Ganon. OoT told us of how that man first came to be of any importance. That makes good sense to me.

Except OoT specifically calls Ganon/dorf the Daimaou Ganon. Daimaou = Great Demon King. And Ganon... well you get what that means.

This discussion isn't about 1998.

This exact debate may not be. Which is why I said I wanted to debate it with you.

Why am I not surprised that you danced around that and didn't want to debate it with me...

Are you still ignoring the fact that I have posted quotes from GBA ALttP in another thread that show that ALttP still has the same plot?

Yeah it still has the same plot, and I agree about that.

But, and this is a main point I am making so MAKE SURE to read and respond to this, none of said plot implies that it goes before LoZ right now (which is what you want to debate). And you can't be sure of how it worked at other times SINCE YOU'RE UNWILLING TO DEBATE THOSE OTHER TIMES.

Or is that just a common thing for every theorist from ZU to just ignore things?

I'm not ignoring anything. I personally believe that TWW made it so that OoT=SW didn't work anymore. We agree on that.

However I am also NOT ignoring the possibility that TWW merely changed the intent around the SW.

That's really the consensus I'm coming to on this. And I mean no offence by that, but it really seems as if every single theorist that comes from ZU has this "know it all" attitude, and even when good evidence is laid out in front of them, they shove it away like its nothing.

What "know it all" attitude? You mean the unbiased attitude? I wouldn't be surprised that you think that, considering this site is almost disgustingly sheep minded (to quote Impossible) and biased.

The only reason why I might seem like a "know it all" is because I'm trying to show you that there ARE alternatives to what you think. You don't have to believe them (half the things (probably more) I talk about on this site are things I don't believe personally (I debate OoT=SW a lot even though I strongly oppose it. I've debated for OoX/LA a lot while I personally find LttP/LA more likely, etc), but are quite valid. I only debate them because you people would never see these other debates or other possibilities without me doing so. This happened on ZU. Erimgard's timeline got ridiculously accepted. To the point where most people would disregard any CT timeline based upon the fact that it didn't have OoX-TMC-FS/FSA-LttP in it on the AT. Hell it got so accepted that at times Erimgard would debate AGAINST it just so we would see the other possibilities.

I provided a link in my last post. Ganon didn't come out of the Dark World during the SW. That has pretty well been established as fact. Hell even the Virtual Console description says Agahnim is trying to break the "Imprisoning Seal" on Ganon. How much more information do you need?

Have I EVER disagreed that OoT isn't the SW now? Erimgard/Pinecove/Viral can debate this with you, so I won't bother trying to be Devil's Advocate on this.

I would but, this discussion isn't about 1998. Its actually about an apparently false, random quote saying Miyamoto doesn't know anything about the timeline, and I already knew that.

I KNOW this isn't about 1998. Why in hell would I ASK to have a debate that we are already having?

The OP has been disproved and answered, and we've already derailed this thread as far as talking about how we're not having a debate that I've been trying to have for 2 weeks now, why not just debate it here since we've already started debating something similar to it?

On a side note, however... Why are you so intent on trying to argue something 10+ years old? That order has already been shattered with the times. There's really no point in arguing it now because it doesn't matter. But, that would have to be another argument for another thread (which I'm sure we already have one or two of, and have already discussed all these things probably 20 times already).

It's simple. You say that the timeline was OoT-LttP-LoZ in 1998, I say it was OoT-LoZ-LttP in 1998. I want to prove you wrong and prove me right. Thus is the nature of timelines.

Define "doesn't matter". In what way does an all in-game timeline for a video game series matter at all? The fact is that it doesn't. But we have both clearly made a hobby out of this, and we both clearly have differing opinions on something. So why NOT debate it?

And no we haven't discussed it 20 times already. Zemen and you have gotten quite good at not responding to what I have to say on the matter and only posting things that have NOTHING to do with my post.

Ganondorf has only ever been shown to transform into Ganon by using some source of power for a short period of time (OoT, TP). ALttP explains that he was permanently transformed into the pig/man form Ganon because he wished on the Triforce. That transformed everything in the SR to the creatures and such of the now Dark World, as well as Ganondorf himself into Ganon (permanently). This explanation was used to show how Ganondorf became the form he is in LoZ.

No. His wish on the Triforce changed the SR into the Dark World as it is in LttP.

What makes OoT Great Demon King Ganon any different from LoZ Great Demon King Ganon?

[Erimgard]

ALttP GBA does not imply that he left the Dark World after the Seal War. Give me one good example from ALttP GBA that clearly implies that he left the Dark World.

aLttP GBA removes any indication of Ganon's involvement in the Seal War story itself.

[MrMosley]

Except OoT specifically calls Ganon/dorf the Daimaou Ganon. Daimaou = Great Demon King. And Ganon... well you get what that means.

I don't consider Ganon's specific titles more important than the difference between blue-beast/pig Ganon and Ganondorf. That is where you and I differ. I've read over his specific, Japanese titles (on ZI, I believe is where I seen that), and all that I collected was that there were about three names of which he used while both Ganondorf and Ganon, at different times. None are really specified between one or the other so I don't personally see them as a means of placing anything on the timeline.

This exact debate may not be. Which is why I said I wanted to debate it with you.

Why am I not surprised that you danced around that and didn't want to debate it with me...

I wouldn't care to debate it. I've even said before that I would consider LoZ--ALttP, if it were 1998. But the fact is that a discussion or arguement over that topic is very unimportant to me. Its almost rediculous to argue as if we were 11 years in the past. Especially if ALttP's plot is the same (which it is), it really isn't necessary to have that debate.

But, and this is a main point I am making so MAKE SURE to read and respond to this, none of said plot implies that it goes before LoZ right now (which is what you want to debate). And you can't be sure of how it worked at other times SINCE YOU'RE UNWILLING TO DEBATE THOSE OTHER TIMES.

The main issue with placing LoZ before ALttP was that people say Ganon escaped the Dark World between the Seal War and ALttP (which is where LoZ would fit). That's the false argument that I have disproven with in-game quotes (from the most recent of titles). That idea is not possible right now, and I have proven that. So any other idea that someone has of some kind of in-game evidence pointing to Ganon becoming blue/pig beast Ganon sometime after OoT and before ALttP, whilst doing those events in LoZ, I will readily listen to. But the fact is, there are none. And I won't set and listen to "his form doesn't matter", because it surely does. ALttP gave us a clear reason for Ganondorf becoming the blue-pig beast that he is in ALttP and later is shown to have stayed in LoZ. That is why current in-game evidence proves that ALttP comes before LoZ.

I'm not ignoring anything. I personally believe that TWW made it so that OoT=SW didn't work anymore. We agree on that.

However I am also NOT ignoring the possibility that TWW merely changed the intent around the SW.

I have also proven that the most recent games (GBA ALttP), combined with others (such as ALttP's VC description), prove to me that the intent of the SW is still the same as it always has been. Yeah maybe they were making OoT to be the SW at the time, and just maybe at that time it was changing the intent. But since then, information has came out in other forms that still point to the SW being as it was originally described in ALttP.

What "know it all" attitude? You mean the unbiased attitude? I wouldn't be surprised that you think that, considering this site is almost disgustingly sheep minded (to quote Impossible) and biased.

Belittling other sites because they don't agree. That's what everyone from ZU has done in just about every timeline debate I have been in (as well as you lord, "Impossible", whoever that is). You may want to consider what the term "biased" means before you throw it around so freely. Biased is changing your opinion because you are directly apart of an organization of some kind that is for or against something. For example, a person working for a coal company might wright an article on how the use of coal should not be abolished. That would be considered biased. No one here is biased that I have seen, aside from people from ZU. We simply argue about the timeline. People from ZU all have roughly the same idea, quote the same invisible characters on their "oh so mighty" written works, and have the same attitude. By you arguing that this site is so weak, and ZU is so high and mighty, you are being biased in your arguments because you refuse to consider anything from here over anything from there. And again, this may not be true for all of ZU (so I mean no offence towards that site at all), but this is just the general idea I have collected from most that have came from there/are apart of that site.

The only reason why I might seem like a "know it all" is because I'm trying to show you that there ARE alternatives to what you think. You don't have to believe them (half the things (probably more) I talk about on this site are things I don't believe personally (I debate OoT=SW a lot even though I strongly oppose it. I've debated for OoX/LA a lot while I personally find LttP/LA more likely, etc), but are quite valid. I only debate them because you people would never see these other debates or other possibilities without me doing so.

That's a good thing. Its good to look at all sides of the argument. But your problem lies in the fact that you do not argue for your ideas, but mainly against everyone elses. You can't come into an argument and say "this is wrong, and this is probably wrong, and it works this way too", and argue it for pages and pages of posts, then turn around and say "ahh i really don't believe that". You do realize that your just wasting yours and everyone elses time doing that, and confusing people on your stance or beliefs. You could do those things by presenting other sides, having them considered, having arguments presented against them, and going on about your day. But you argue everything as if its what you believe. Advice: Pick your battles.

It's simple. You say that the timeline was OoT-LttP-LoZ in 1998, I say it was OoT-LoZ-LttP in 1998. I want to prove you wrong and prove me right. Thus is the nature of timelines.

And that won't happen, because I have my reasoning and you have yours. So, the fact that a 1998 argument is 1.) Retarded because its 11 years old, and 2.) That I have heard all your arguments for it, and you have heard mine (or should have by now), and we haven't reached a mutual agreement... We probably aren't going to reach a mutual agreement. The timeline from 1998 has been changed. Its rediculous to argue FOR it now, and I won't do it anymore. I happen to not like wasting time or else I would participate in every single timeline argument on this and every other Zelda site I could.

No. His wish on the Triforce changed the SR into the Dark World as it is in LttP.

I'm not sure if it was the SNES ALttP manual or not, but one of those documents said that once Ganondorf touched the Triforce, Ganon was born (a.k.a. Pig-beast Ganon coming to form). This is backed up by the fact that he is STILL blue pig/beast Ganon in LoZ. Connect the dots and you get Ganondorf permanently becoming Ganon by making his wish on the Triforce during the SW.

Now I know you will point out that the SNES manual is old, GBA is new... And I agree with that. But nothing changes the event of pig/beast Ganon coming to be in this way. Nothing says he does, and nothing say he doesn't... And since I believe that the plot stayed the same, it shouldn't have to change for no reason when keeping it there only helps to further connect ALttP--LoZ.

What makes OoT Great Demon King Ganon any different from LoZ Great Demon King Ganon?

The fact that one is Ganon and the other is Ganondorf. As I mentioned in my very first reply on this post, his titles don't matter to me. In OoT, he is a man. By LoZ, he has transformed into Ganon. This means more to me. Its like I said before, Ganondorf can momentarily transform into a version of pig/beast Ganon, but the only time he has ever been shown to do so is when he was about to die and needed that much power from the ToP (OoT), or in a similar instance, a means of combating Link (TP). ALttP gave us reason for him to stay in that form. Nothing anywhere says he can sustain that form at will for long periods of time. Only evidence has shown us that he apparently CANNOT sustain the form, until ALttP when his wish permanently changed him.

aLttP GBA removes any indication of Ganon's involvement in the Seal War story itself.

Yeah see, that's not an example (nor is that the least bit true, which you would know if you read my post in that link I posted a few posts ago). Thank you for further proving that you have no evidence for your argument. You are ignoring obviousness and making random remarks and really, not responding properly to anything. I would consider this spam and advise that you stop doing it.

[Pinecove]

When Hyrule is STILL one country. It's implied that previously, Hyrule was not one country and this game takes place before Hyrule was not one country. When would there be a time prior to the making of ALTTP where Hyrule is not one country? It has to be LoZ/AoL since those were the only 2 games made before ALTTP's release. This implies that Hyrule takes place before LoZ/AoL when Hyrule was still one country. Basically saying that you are playing the history of Hyrule which can only be the history BEFORE LoZ/AoL.

But as I said earlier, it could be reffering to the SW.

The manual was simply shortened. The SNES manual was like reading a chapter from a book. The GBA simply didn't go into that much detail on the matter. The game, however, was NOT changed to disregard the original format. I have proven before, in other threads, multiple quotes from the GBA version of ALttP that still says Ganondorf (man) was sealed and stayed in the Dark World (as Ganon) from the SW to ALttP. That's what ALttP is all about, SNES and GBA.

Yes and the SNES manual was full of mistranslations and random crap that NoA decided to throw in. The GBA manual in english is the SNES manual in Japanese.

Then let's debate this RIGHT NOW. I want to clear this up. Let's debate RIGHT NOW what the in-game evidenced timeline was in 1998.

Ingame? OoT-LoZ-SW-ALttP.

Period.

Ganondorf has only ever been shown to transform into Ganon by using some source of power for a short period of time (OoT, TP). ALttP explains that he was permanently transformed into the pig/man form Ganon because he wished on the Triforce. That transformed everything in the SR to the creatures and such of the now Dark World, as well as Ganondorf himself into Ganon (permanently). This explanation was used to show how Ganondorf became the form he is in LoZ.

Proof that he was permanately transformed?

[MrMosley]

Yes and the SNES manual was full of mistranslations and random crap that NoA decided to throw in. The GBA manual in english is the SNES manual in Japanese.

And the plot still didn't change so, I don't know where your going with that one.

Proof that he was permanately transformed?

My proof is simply the games. It is stated in the SNES manual too, that Ganon was born when Ganondorf touched the Triforce. Of course, we don't consider this canon anymore, but has it ever been disproven? Absolutely not. If I say ALttP/LA--LoZ/AoL--OoX, then that is perfectly fine because ALttP gives backstory to Ganondorf becoming Ganon. He is permanently left in this shape because other times that he has turned into Ganon, he turned right back into Ganondorf, yet he is still Ganon by LoZ. In AoL, Ganon is dead. Generations later, in OoX, Ganon is partially revived again in the same form he became in ALttP. How can you even argue against that when there's nothing that proves it wrong?

Where's your proof that he wasn't permanently transformed? I've already proven that he stayed in the Dark World from the time of the SW to ALttP, so LoZ isn't coming in between those events, no matter what you say. There are current descriptions that prove I'm right about that (like the VC descriptions that you brought to my attention earlier, thanks for that by the way, I hadn't noticed before). Therefore, what game could come after ALttP that would be a problem as far as him being permanently transformed?

[Zemen]

But as I said earlier, it could be reffering to the SW.

I'm sure this isn't what you're trying to say because it sounds like you're saying that what I said is the SW. I said exactly what the game says about itself. ALTTP takes place when Hyrule is still one country. It's not the SW, that is clearly talking about the actual events of ALTTP. It implies that in a previous game, Hyrule was not one country. The only previous games were LoZ/AoL which would put them after ALTTP.

Regardless, the SNES version is not canon but I wanted to make it clear that the part I was referring to was not the SW.

[Pinecove]

And the plot still didn't change so, I don't know where your going with that one.

It somewhat did. The GBA manual doesn't mention Ganon.

My proof is simply the games. It is stated in the SNES manual too, that Ganon was born when Ganondorf touched the Triforce. Of course, we don't consider this canon anymore, but has it ever been disproven? Absolutely not. If I say ALttP/LA--LoZ/AoL--OoX, then that is perfectly fine because ALttP gives backstory to Ganondorf becoming Ganon. He is permanently left in this shape because other times that he has turned into Ganon, he turned right back into Ganondorf, yet he is still Ganon by LoZ. In AoL, Ganon is dead. Generations later, in OoX, Ganon is partially revived again in the same form he became in ALttP. How can you even argue against that when there's nothing that proves it wrong?

Where's your proof that he wasn't permanently transformed? I've already proven that he stayed in the Dark World from the time of the SW to ALttP, so LoZ isn't coming in between those events, no matter what you say. There are current descriptions that prove I'm right about that (like the VC descriptions that you brought to my attention earlier, thanks for that by the way, I hadn't noticed before). Therefore, what game could come after ALttP that would be a problem as far as him being permanently transformed?

A good note to memorize is that when I say "proof" I'm usually asking for a quote, but whatever this is good enough. At any rate I was just asking you because I was under the impression that AlttP Ganon is only permanantley Ganon because of the Trident and him being in the DW.

In LoZ it's because of the ToP...and in OoX it's because Twinrova never finished the ressurection.

I'm sorry, but could you provide a link to the post where you "disproved" that stuff, I can't seem to find it...

Edit: Sorry Zemen...

I'm sure this isn't what you're trying to say because it sounds like you're saying that what I said is the SW. I said exactly what the game says about itself. ALTTP takes place when Hyrule is still one country. It's not the SW, that is clearly talking about the actual events of ALTTP. It implies that in a previous game, Hyrule was not one country. The only previous games were LoZ/AoL which would put them after ALTTP.

Regardless, the SNES version is not canon but I wanted to make it clear that the part I was referring to was not the SW.

What who said is the SW for what now?

Hold on there's an article on what my argument is, I'll get back to you with it.

[MrMosley]

It somewhat did. The GBA manual doesn't mention Ganon.

The manual doesn't have to. The game stayed the same. Nothing in the game implies that anything changed. Certain things were removed from the manual to shorten it, IMO. The game stayed the same though.

In LoZ it's because of the ToP...and in OoX it's because Twinrova never finished the ressurection.

Are you referring to Ganondorf being Ganon because of those things? If so, that's never been said anywhere at all. Ganondorf is not in his Ganon form from ALttP because of the ToP in LoZ. That was never stated. And it was also never stated that he was that form in OoX because the ritual wasn't carried out as they had planned. Ganon was his pig/beast form because he had became that at some point in time. ALttP gives us this point in time. Sure, he turned into that form in FSA, but according to ALttP, he had to have changed back into Ganondorf afterwards.

[QUOTE=Pinecove;80259]I'm sorry, but could you provide a link to the post where you "disproved" that stuff, I can't seem to find it...[/quote[

No problem.

http://zeldadungeon.net/forum/showth...?t=5150&page=4

Post #51. All quotes there were taken from GBA ALttP. To make it easier, examples 4 and 5 are the only ones important to proving Ganon never left the DW after the SW. Also, the VC description of ALttP:

"Return to an age of magic and heroes! When an evil magician named Agahnim begins kidnapping young maidens in Hyrule in a quest to break the imprisoning seal on Ganon, a young boy named Link is called upon to stop him..."

Which essentially describes just what my quotes from the GBA version say. Agahnim was attempting to break the "Imprissoning" seal on Ganon by capturing the Maidens. "Imprissoning" meaning the seal from the Imprisoning War. Proving that when the IW (or Seal War for Japanese), occurred, Ganondorf found his way into the SR, touched the Triforce, couldn't find his way out, and was "sealed" in there. Come ALttP, Agahnim is trying to break this seal.

[Pinecove]

The manual doesn't have to. The game stayed the same. Nothing in the game implies that anything changed. Certain things were removed from the manual to shorten it, IMO. The game stayed the same though.

Eh interpretation is interpretation.

Are you referring to Ganondorf being Ganon because of those things? If so, that's never been said anywhere at all. Ganondorf is not in his Ganon form from ALttP because of the ToP in LoZ. That was never stated. And it was also never stated that he was that form in OoX because the ritual wasn't carried out as they had planned. Ganon was his pig/beast form because he had became that at some point in time. ALttP gives us this point in time. Sure, he turned into that form in FSA, but according to ALttP, he had to have changed back into Ganondorf afterwards.

Alright yes the LoZ one is crap, but I have a point on the OoX one. Twinrova didn;t finish the ressurection, so they only revived the mindless raging beast Ganon and not the intelligence of the human ganondorf. The text seems to imply they want to revive Ganondorf anyways...

Post #51. All quotes there were taken from GBA ALttP. To make it easier, examples 4 and 5 are the only ones important to proving Ganon never left the DW after the SW. Also, the VC description of ALttP:

"Return to an age of magic and heroes! When an evil magician named Agahnim begins kidnapping young maidens in Hyrule in a quest to break the imprisoning seal on Ganon, a young boy named Link is called upon to stop him..."

Which essentially describes just what my quotes from the GBA version say. Agahnim was attempting to break the "Imprissoning" seal on Ganon by capturing the Maidens. "Imprissoning" meaning the seal from the Imprisoning War. Proving that when the IW (or Seal War for Japanese), occurred, Ganondorf found his way into the SR, touched the Triforce, couldn't find his way out, and was "sealed" in there. Come ALttP, Agahnim is trying to break this seal.

When did I ever say the seal was different? I think Ganondorf bypasses the seal...

1. OoT Ganondorf gets sealed.
2. He escaes the seal without breaking it in time for LoZ.
3. LoZ happens. He dies.
4. New Ganondorf is born.
5. He accidentaly "re-discovers" the SR but can't find a way out because the seal is still in place on the outside.

[MrMosley]

Alright yes the LoZ one is crap, but I have a point on the OoX one. Twinrova didn;t finish the ressurection, so they only revived the mindless raging beast Ganon and not the intelligence of the human ganondorf. The text seems to imply they want to revive Ganondorf anyways...

Shouldn't they have called him "Ganondorf" then? The only time Koume and Kotake have ever referred to Ganon/dorf elsewhere, it was OoT, and in that game they called him Ganondorf. The name Ganondorf is never mentioned in OoX. Also, some of you example is out of context. They never mention reviving a mindless, raging "beast" Ganon. They say mindless and raging Ganon. None of the text really implies that they are talking about his human form at all.

Essentially, its your theory of them wanting to revive Ganondorf, but being unable to so all they get is Ganon (who is actually a more powerful version, so that doesn't really click with me), which OoX never implies... Or, you have my theory that they revive him in the form he became permanently stuck in from the time of ALttP, a form that looks exactly the same as the design from ALttP, trident and all.

When did I ever say the seal was different? I think Ganondorf bypasses the seal...

1. OoT Ganondorf gets sealed.
2. He escaes the seal without breaking it in time for LoZ.
3. LoZ happens. He dies.
4. New Ganondorf is born.
5. He accidentaly "re-discovers" the SR but can't find a way out because the seal is still in place on the outside.

Where does your number 2 count for today? Because your leaving out WW and TP altogether, whichever side of the timeline we are talking about here. I can tell you that neither would work, because on the AT, Ganon escapes only once, and that is told in WW's BS, and on the CT he isn't sealed at all.

Anyway, I'm not sure where your going with that. Then and now, the Seal War says Ganon went in, wished on the Triforce, and was sealed. I've given evidence that the story is still the same today. OoT is not the SW anymore. Even if we were talking like it was 1998, your number 2 has no evidence. That is speculation. VC's description of LoZ says that Ganon has escaped the Dark World, but that doesn't automatically connect it to ALttP or the SW. There is also no evidence for a new Ganondorf being born. FSA somewhat implies it, but its never been stated anywhere and someone could just as well say that it has never happened. Your number 5 doesn't make much sense because your acting like the Seal on the Dark World is not a seal at all. If it is "sealed", nothing comes in and nothing goes out. That doesn't mean that Ganon can mysteriously escape without finding a way around the seal. And even if he did find some other way out, and LoZ took place before ALttP, then why would he need Agahnim to get him back out? Why wouldn't he just use whatever means he did before to escape? See the problem with that?

Ganondorf "rediscovered" the Sacred Realm because at the time, no one knew where it was. During OoT, people knew where it was. So prior to ALttP, generations before, people knew where the SR was and how to get to it (certain people). By the time of the SW, everyone had forgotten how to get there. Ganondorf was the one to rediscover an entrance. That is what that whole thing means. He found it, went in, wished on the Triforce, evil creatures started coming out, so it was sealed up. Ganon couldn't find his way out so he got sealed in there. Then we come to ALttP.

That is pretty clearly what the games, even today, describe, based on my in-game evidence, descriptions, and quotes.

[sign of table]

Alright yes the LoZ one is crap, but I have a point on the OoX one. Twinrova didn;t finish the ressurection, so they only revived the mindless raging beast Ganon and not the intelligence of the human ganondorf. The text seems to imply they want to revive Ganondorf anyways...

It doesn't imply that they want to revive Ganondorf. Considering that they were trying to resurrect the Daimaou, I'd say it's quite clear they intended on rezzing Ganon.

When did I ever say the seal was different? I think Ganondorf bypasses the seal...

Currently now, though, that doesn't work, as TWW DESTROYED that seal.