• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

My Mind Blowing Realization

E

EliOfHyrule0616

Guest
This is my realization.
after you beat the game, theres the cut scene of zelda giving impa her purple bracelet, so she could remeber zelda. Keep in mind youre in the past when the bracelet is given. Then you go to the future, and you see the old woman with the braid. You see zeldas bracelet on her and realize holy crap its been impa this whole time. BUT. I went back and played the game again...and ever since the first time you meet the old woman in the beginning of the game, she has that bracelet. SO. Zelda gave her the bracelet AFTER demise was defeated, right? Then how come when you first meet the woman, before demise is defeated, she has the bracelet? Doesnt demise need to be defeated for impa to have it? And obviously demise isnt dead since until the end of the game.
But...if impa has zeldas bracelet, that she gave to her AFTER demise was dead, wouldnt that mean demise is already defeated in the past? But...obviously he isnt...until you physically go to the past and defeat him
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sydney

The Good Samaritan
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Location
Canberra, Australia
(This kind of confused me, but I think I understand where you're coming from.)

Link defeats Demise in the past. 1,000 years in the past to be precise. Zelda gives Impa the bracelet in the past, it only makes sense that she would now have it in the present.
 

Ventus

Mad haters lmao
Joined
May 26, 2010
Location
Akkala
Gender
Hylian Champion
The only canon events are the end game events, meaning when Impa shows her bracelet and disappears or w/e. Everything you see prior to that never happened, ever.
 
E

EliOfHyrule0616

Guest
Yes, but even before you defeat demise in the present (or past), impa has the bracelet. So if link already technically defeated demise in the past, leading to zelda giving her the bracelet, why does he need to go back and do it again? And sorry :p it was so hard to put all of this into words
 

Random Person

Just Some Random Person
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Location
Wig-Or-Log
I'm not seeing the paradox from this example. Old Impa having the bracelet doesn't create a paradox itself because she was given it in her past. Happening in her past, but Zelda's future doesn't create a paradox. I do, however, see the paradox of Demise's defeat in general. All in all, defeating Demise in the past should've undone all of the events in the future (or present). Someone tried to explain that Demise exists outside of time and thus defeating him in the past would not undo the events of the future that you yourself already did, but I honestly still don't get the logic. I understand how a being can exist outside of time, but that would mean you would have to either defeat him in all times simultaneously or defeat him in one time which would destroy him in all times, neither of which happened in SS. It could make sense, but Nintendo did a really bad job at putting the logic together. Time travel itself is already an iffy subject to put in a story. Combined with Zelda's ability to forget continuity, it will probably lead to a "Nintendo wasn't careful enough" answer.
 

Ronin

There you are! You monsters!
Forum Volunteer
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Location
Alrest
But...if impa has zeldas bracelet, that she gave to her AFTER demise was dead, wouldnt that mean demise is already defeated in the past? But...obviously he isnt...until you physically go to the past and defeat him

Well now, the rules of space and time and whatnot are oftentimes different in Zelda. Nintendo gave a rather hasty explanation [through Fi] that Demise has mastered time itself, and by extension I believe that means he can affect the circumstances in some cases. (He is even believed to reincarnate himself as future villains—so perhaps this ability has to charge over time?). But in this particular instance I'd speculate that Demise used these hypothetical powers to reform and protects himself from dissipating from reality, whereas it was then necessary to go to the past and defeat him [alongside saving Zelda].

Yes, but even before you defeat demise in the present (or past), impa has the bracelet. So if link already technically defeated demise in the past, leading to zelda giving her the bracelet, why does he need to go back and do it again?

In my mind Link had not defeated Demise until he went back to the past after Zelda's abduction. But when he actually did bring down the Demon Lord, in the flesh, that terminated Demise's influence of time during that era, and things arguably reverted back to "normal". Afterwards Zelda gave Impa her bracelet as a trinket for memorial, and everyone besides Impa and Fi returned to the present. They got back to find that "Grannie" had the same bracelet and that she'd shrunk with age over the last 1,000 years.

And sorry :p it was so hard to put all of this into words

Haha, don't feel bad. Time paradoxes such as these are quite puzzling to a lot of people; myself included.
 

Jimmu

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Suggestion: Add a Spoiler prefix so people don't casually stumble upon this and have the game spoiled for them?

I find this paradox stuff confusing but since the Demise was defeated in the past then she would still have the bracelet regardless of if you've played the end of the game or not..... I think.....
 

sailormars109

Finding Love by the Moon
Joined
May 28, 2012
Location
Macy, Indiana
I think that she has the bracelet because it was given in the past. You defeated Demise in the future after Sky Keep. Therefore, it doesn't matter if you have defeated Demise yet.
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
If we ignore all the rest of the ending of the game and only leave Zelda giving the bracelet to Impa in the past, and then she still has it in the future (present), it makes sense. But the rest of the ending doesn't make sense. AT. ALL.
 

Fig

The Altruist
Joined
Jul 23, 2011
Location
Mishima Tower
This is my realization.
after you beat the game, theres the cut scene of zelda giving impa her purple bracelet, so she could remeber zelda. Keep in mind youre in the past when the bracelet is given. Then you go to the future, and you see the old woman with the braid. You see zeldas bracelet on her and realize holy crap its been impa this whole time. BUT. I went back and played the game again...and ever since the first time you meet the old woman in the beginning of the game, she has that bracelet. SO. Zelda gave her the bracelet AFTER demise was defeated, right? Then how come when you first meet the woman, before demise is defeated, she has the bracelet? Doesnt demise need to be defeated for impa to have it? And obviously demise isnt dead since until the end of the game.
But...if impa has zeldas bracelet, that she gave to her AFTER demise was dead, wouldnt that mean demise is already defeated in the past? But...obviously he isnt...until you physically go to the past and defeat him

That was exactly what I was thinking when I was replaying Skyward Sword almost a year ago! :xd:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom