I think it is nothing special, except the geometrical design of the shape. Technically, you can't really arrange three triangles to form a bigger one. So, what they did was to make a single pattern of Sierpinski's Triangle, where you connect the midpoints of the sides of the triangle to form four triangles, where the one in the middle is upside down. Therefore, I believe there really isn't anything special; it is just a geometric design after all.
Triforce Hole
- Thread starter theothernavi
- Start date
Michael Heide
The 8th Wise Man
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2010
- Location
- Cologne, Germany
Well, they could have arranged the three triangles in a different way if they had wanted to avoid a fourth triangle in the middle. I don't have photoshop on this pc, so this little MSpaint pic has to suffice:
No, that doesn't prove that the "fourth triangle" has to mean anything. It's just as likely that they just didn't care about a fourth triangle appearing in the middle. But either way, it's there. Which means that we can't rule out a hypothetical fourth goddesswith absolute certainty. Now whether that fourth goddess is a likely scenario or not? That's a different debate. If you ask me, I'd put the chances at 50/50. Until we get new information either way (confirming or denying a fourth goddess) in an actual game or at least in an official interview with Miyamoto or Aonuma, we can never be sure.
No, that doesn't prove that the "fourth triangle" has to mean anything. It's just as likely that they just didn't care about a fourth triangle appearing in the middle. But either way, it's there. Which means that we can't rule out a hypothetical fourth goddesswith absolute certainty. Now whether that fourth goddess is a likely scenario or not? That's a different debate. If you ask me, I'd put the chances at 50/50. Until we get new information either way (confirming or denying a fourth goddess) in an actual game or at least in an official interview with Miyamoto or Aonuma, we can never be sure.
I do see what you mean, but somehow I can't agree with the fact of the "Fourth Triangle". You see, the Triforce is "tri" meaning three. Which means there is no fourth triangle. Try looking at the middle as an empty space that means nothing. There is NOTHING between the three triangles. I would like to explain it a bit more, but I can't really put it into words.
Last edited:
Michael Heide
The 8th Wise Man
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2010
- Location
- Cologne, Germany
Once again, "Triforce" doesn't have to be named after the amount of pieces. In the original Legend of Zelda (NES), there were only two triangular parts of the Triforce we ever saw, not three. And yet it wasn't called "Biforce".
Satsy
~~SaturnStorm
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2010
- Location
- Somewhere small
Probably because a third piece was considered.
What also strikes me as dubious about the idea of a fourth triangle in the Triforce, is how that would play into the current cycle already in effect. Y'know, the whole Ganon/Zelda/Link thing. A fourth piece, when the Triforce split, would mean another person would have been coined as the bearer of that piece. This is something that has yet to happen. But there would have to be a bearer, with a significant role. If the role played by the fourth Triforce/bearer is void in the battle over Hyrule, then its just as well to say "they don't have a piece of the Triforce" or "they are represented by the hole in the triforce" which is what it'd amount to.
Out-there theory: Tingle holds the fourth segment of the Triforce.
What also strikes me as dubious about the idea of a fourth triangle in the Triforce, is how that would play into the current cycle already in effect. Y'know, the whole Ganon/Zelda/Link thing. A fourth piece, when the Triforce split, would mean another person would have been coined as the bearer of that piece. This is something that has yet to happen. But there would have to be a bearer, with a significant role. If the role played by the fourth Triforce/bearer is void in the battle over Hyrule, then its just as well to say "they don't have a piece of the Triforce" or "they are represented by the hole in the triforce" which is what it'd amount to.
Out-there theory: Tingle holds the fourth segment of the Triforce.
Djinn
and Tonic
What virtue could you attribute to a fourth piece that is not already somewhat covered by Wisdom, Power, or Courage? And would still make sense for a deity to be the deity of that virtue.
Impa, Kaepora Gaebora, Maron, Vaati, the Old Man, and Skull Kid have appeared in multiple titles as well as Tingle but I do not know just what they could represent along side Link, Zelda, and Ganon.
Impa, Kaepora Gaebora, Maron, Vaati, the Old Man, and Skull Kid have appeared in multiple titles as well as Tingle but I do not know just what they could represent along side Link, Zelda, and Ganon.
Ninten*
BLOOOOOOOO
Well, I'm not exactly sure about this. Maybe there is some 4th goddess who was probably evil or something like that. So they took her Triforce from the group. But they hole doesn't nessesarily mean that there is a forth one. Nintendo just made that so that it will have a cool style. If it didn't, it would be something like a trapazoid which isn't a cool style for Zelda.
Alex Arbiter
That Random Guy
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2010
Maybe, the hole is there to represent the void that was left after the triforce was created like: the sacred realm.
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2010
- Location
- Twisted Tea Cafe
Okay believe this or not...
But they purposely show upside down triangles in lots of zelda titles.
In OoT if you look at the shadow medallion you will see a upside down triangle. ( Or if I am wrong an upward triangle.) But still a triangle...
If you look at zelda's dress as a kid, you will see a fourth triangle on her dress. If you play ST you will see an upside down triangle in the front of the train. What I am trying to get down to is that you will see upside down triangles or four triangles in everygame. I will not be surprised if I find one in SS. As I see it, there totally is a fourth piece. Nintendo just does not want you to figure it out.. cause if you figure it out then they will get less money. They want fans to speculate. So thats why they removed the fourth piece from links sheild. In other words to make it really hard
. and to keep you guessing, and buying more games. If you want more info go to this link: http://www.zeldawiki.org/Tetraforce I totally believe in this theory :xd:
But they purposely show upside down triangles in lots of zelda titles.
In OoT if you look at the shadow medallion you will see a upside down triangle. ( Or if I am wrong an upward triangle.) But still a triangle...
If you look at zelda's dress as a kid, you will see a fourth triangle on her dress. If you play ST you will see an upside down triangle in the front of the train. What I am trying to get down to is that you will see upside down triangles or four triangles in everygame. I will not be surprised if I find one in SS. As I see it, there totally is a fourth piece. Nintendo just does not want you to figure it out.. cause if you figure it out then they will get less money. They want fans to speculate. So thats why they removed the fourth piece from links sheild. In other words to make it really hard
. and to keep you guessing, and buying more games. If you want more info go to this link: http://www.zeldawiki.org/Tetraforce I totally believe in this theory :xd:
At the very least that one instance, the upside-down triangle represents a Force Gem. The one on Zelda's dress and/or some other occurrences may be the Light Force.
Nintendo does not intentionally mislead. (at least that's what I've heard...don't remember if it was from an interview or someone else's opinion with a very good argument) If they remove an element, it reveals intent that the element no longer exists, if it ever did.
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2010
- Location
- Twisted Tea Cafe
Then why would four pieces of a triangle appear in other games, either if they were the light force or some other source? They still have a fourth triangle somewhere in the game no matter if they said they removed it. Nintendo stated that there was no timeline...
But then if I am not correct in one interview, Miyamoto and Anouma stated something about a timeline. So right now I am thinking Wha...? :xd:
But then if I am not correct in one interview, Miyamoto and Anouma stated something about a timeline. So right now I am thinking Wha...? :xd:
Sorry, source please?
Shigeru Miyamoto: For every new Zelda game we tell a new story but we actually have an enormous document that explains how the game relate to eachother and bind them together.
Eiji Aonuma: Yes, there is a master timeline but it is a confidential document!
Edit @below: (I assume that's ocarinahero's vid...) Nintendo's a large company. Whoever responded to that letter (It was from NoA, right?) was in no position to know what (s)he was talking about.
(I don't dignify this subject with a new post because I very much disapprove of his theorizing practices - nothing against you. I didn't click the link because I would hate to watch his theory/followup again, so if it is not ocarinahero then I would apologize and bring the discussion back to a more productive level.)
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2010
- Location
- Twisted Tea Cafe
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5FozOuwQjI
Watch the whole video...
It seems that one of my favorite theorists tried to talk to nintendo about his timeline theory, and this is the response that they gave him... :shake:
Watch the whole video...
It seems that one of my favorite theorists tried to talk to nintendo about his timeline theory, and this is the response that they gave him... :shake:
