Where The Heck Does MC Go...

[MrMosley]

you do realize that this is the same EXACT thing that happens in EVERY zelda game that involves Ganon but many of those games take place hundreds of years apart so why cant the four swords series games do the same thing?

many people put FS infront of ALTTP which means it comes after TP, IMO. at the end of TP, the master sword is stuck inside of a stone ganondorf. taking it out would release ganondorf so they ditch it to use the four sword which is the only sword ever proven to defeat Vaati who is trying to ressurect ganondorf. Vaati can not bring ganondorf back but he CAN bring ganon back. because Link has the four sword he uses it to trap ganondorf in the same chest that Vaati was trapped in.

every zelda game involving Ganon does the same thing as the four sword series and those games have hundreds of years between them so i dont see why MC, FS, and FSA cant. youre argument is really flawed there.

At the end of TP, Ganondorf is not a stone. That is WW. TP, Ganondorf is just stabbed with it. In fact, during the ending credits, we see the Master Sword returned to its pedestal in the forest. That is where your arguement is flawed.

Sure anything can happen every hundred years or so, but the fact is that it does not make sense in that manner. You don't completely abandon one idea and go with another for no reason. At least to me, and I'm sure to anyone else who thinks about it, it does not make sense to say "Oh well, here is Vaati...Link use this Four Sword to beat him, seal him away in this shrine here, and you'll be a hero." Then years later.."Oh well, Vaati escaped...Use this same sword here to seal him back in this shrine." Then all of a sudden nothing happens until Ganondorf appears, does his thing, then the Master Sword is made/used to beat him, while the whole time the shrine, four sword, and Vaati are completely ignored. All of these are new elements not only to the plot, but to Hyrule. It would make sense if they didn't use the Master Sword because it was stuck in Ganondorf's head at the bottom of the sea after WW, but randomly sticking it somewhere between games and plots on the other side of the timeline is both confusing, and dosen't have enough proof to support the idea.

Where is the Shrine of the Four Sword in all of the Zelda titles if MC and FS came before OoT? Why is the Master Sword not used? These questions have yet to be answered and I don't believe you will be able to answer them because there is no information available yet to do so. That is why they can come before or after, in my opinion.

 

[blackmoon]

What's with Gustav? I thought Gustaf was supposed to be the deceased King of Hyrule, I never heard anything about him being a hero...

MC: Vaati releases evil onto the world that was once sealed away in a chest and held shut by the power of the picori blade. Vaati destroys the picori blade making it the white sword. Vaati is after the light force and Zelda gets in his way so he turns her to stone. Link is off to try and return power to the white sword to make it the picori blade so he can turn Zelda back to normal and defeat Vaati who is after the light force which ends up being inside of Zelda herself. Vaati is trapped in the very chest that he had opened in the beginning of the game and thats where the picori sword remains. the picori sword is also known as the four sword but thats not mentioned in this game. the back story of MC is not related to any previous zelda games.

FS: sequel (but made before MC). Vaati tricks link into setting him free. Vaati kidnaps 7 or 8 girls who are protectors of something or other and link must rescue them by using the picori sword (or four sword as it is known in this game) and splitting into 4 different links (hence the multiplayer).

FSA: Vaati is once again able to trick link into releasing him on the world. this time, not only does Vaati kidnap some more girls, but he has a diabolical plot to ressurect Ganon who was not at all mentioned in FS or MC (thats one main reason why many people put FS and MC before OoT). link rescues the girls, defeats Ganon and seals him in the chest that the four sword was protecting.

this leads into ALTTP which has the four sword shrine and it shows he broken sword and opened chest which means that Ganon escaped.

theres your quick run down.

...1) I don't remember Vaati kidnapping 7 or 8 girls in Four Swords. I remember him kidnapping Zelda, but that's it. Link collects three keys from around the place, then goes on to smack Vaati up.

2) I never actually got into the Four Sword shrine. (It's hard playing Four Swords by yourself... and not very exciting, having to go through the entire level twice...) Is there a detailed description, or better yet, a video of it?

 

[Zemen]

At the end of TP, Ganondorf is not a stone. That is WW. TP, Ganondorf is just stabbed with it. In fact, during the ending credits, we see the Master Sword returned to its pedestal in the forest. That is where your arguement is flawed.

Sure anything can happen every hundred years or so, but the fact is that it does not make sense in that manner. You don't completely abandon one idea and go with another for no reason. At least to me, and I'm sure to anyone else who thinks about it, it does not make sense to say "Oh well, here is Vaati...Link use this Four Sword to beat him, seal him away in this shrine here, and you'll be a hero." Then years later.."Oh well, Vaati escaped...Use this same sword here to seal him back in this shrine." Then all of a sudden nothing happens until Ganondorf appears, does his thing, then the Master Sword is made/used to beat him, while the whole time the shrine, four sword, and Vaati are completely ignored. All of these are new elements not only to the plot, but to Hyrule. It would make sense if they didn't use the Master Sword because it was stuck in Ganondorf's head at the bottom of the sea after WW, but randomly sticking it somewhere between games and plots on the other side of the timeline is both confusing, and dosen't have enough proof to support the idea.

Where is the Shrine of the Four Sword in all of the Zelda titles if MC and FS came before OoT? Why is the Master Sword not used? These questions have yet to be answered and I don't believe you will be able to answer them because there is no information available yet to do so. That is why they can come before or after, in my opinion.

the fact of the matter is that miyamoto said that FS is first. this was before MC which is obviously before FS. i dont know where the quote is but i remember reading it on another website and im not the only who has seen it. there ar emany people in other posts who say theyve seen the quote too.

just because they games have the same basic gameplay doesnt mean they have to be one right after another. as i said before, all the games with ganon have the same basic formula but take place many years apart so i dont see why you find that so weird with the FS series.

 

[MrMosley]

the fact of the matter is that miyamoto said that FS is first. this was before MC which is obviously before FS. i dont know where the quote is but i remember reading it on another website and im not the only who has seen it. there ar emany people in other posts who say theyve seen the quote too.

just because they games have the same basic gameplay doesnt mean they have to be one right after another. as i said before, all the games with ganon have the same basic formula but take place many years apart so i dont see why you find that so weird with the FS series.

But see that is what I was pointing out, that quote is something that few people have seen, and many have not. I wish I could find it somewhere so that it would clear some more up about the placement, but until I do I can't agree with it.

Personally, the Four Swords Saga really dosen't matter to me. If it had never been made I wouldn't be any happier/more sad than I am now. So wherever it goes dosen't really affect the rest of the series in my view. However, it does bother me that the series would skip plot ideas as you suggest.

I do find it very weird in fact that the series would abandon big plot ideas such as the Master Sword being the blade of evil's bane, for a crappy Four Sword. Link took the chance of pulling the Four Sword from the pedestal in FSA, which unleashed Vaati once again. If this game takes place after OoT, then why couldn't he have just went and got the Master Sword? That dosen't make sense to me, nor do I see how it would make sense to anyone else. They are completely separate plot ideas that both include different places in Hyrule not featured in every game, namely the shrine of the four sword. You don't just abandon an entire storyline like that.

 

[Zemen]

But see that is what I was pointing out, that quote is something that few people have seen, and many have not. I wish I could find it somewhere so that it would clear some more up about the placement, but until I do I can't agree with it.

Personally, the Four Swords Saga really dosen't matter to me. If it had never been made I wouldn't be any happier/more sad than I am now. So wherever it goes dosen't really affect the rest of the series in my view. However, it does bother me that the series would skip plot ideas as you suggest.

I do find it very weird in fact that the series would abandon big plot ideas such as the Master Sword being the blade of evil's bane, for a crappy Four Sword. Link took the chance of pulling the Four Sword from the pedestal in FSA, which unleashed Vaati once again. If this game takes place after OoT, then why couldn't he have just went and got the Master Sword? That dosen't make sense to me, nor do I see how it would make sense to anyone else. They are completely separate plot ideas that both include different places in Hyrule not featured in every game, namely the shrine of the four sword. You don't just abandon an entire storyline like that.

Link didnt "take a chance" and pull the four sword. he was tricked, by Vaati, into pulling the four sword, which was holding Vaati captive. obviously, Link would use the sword that held him captive, to defeat him. its the same thing with Ganon. the only sword proven to defeat Ganon was the master sword. the only sword proven to defeat Vaati was the four sword. youre thinking of this way too literally. youre making it sound like there is only ONE weapon in the world to save the world. each villain is different with their own differences. the four sword was made by the piccori. Vaait is a piccori so it makes sense that the only sword that can defeat him is a sword that was made by his people. also, in FSA, the four sword proves itself to be able to defeat Ganon so obviously its nearly as powerful as the master sword, if not, as powerful.

 

[MrMosley]

Link didnt "take a chance" and pull the four sword. he was tricked, by Vaati, into pulling the four sword, which was holding Vaati captive. obviously, Link would use the sword that held him captive, to defeat him. its the same thing with Ganon. the only sword proven to defeat Ganon was the master sword. the only sword proven to defeat Vaati was the four sword. youre thinking of this way too literally. youre making it sound like there is only ONE weapon in the world to save the world. each villain is different with their own differences. the four sword was made by the piccori. Vaait is a piccori so it makes sense that the only sword that can defeat him is a sword that was made by his people. also, in FSA, the four sword proves itself to be able to defeat Ganon so obviously its nearly as powerful as the master sword, if not, as powerful.

Obviously the Four Sword is powerful, but the reason Link used it to defeat Ganon in FSA is because they completely ignored A) The existance of the Master Sword, and Link didn't know about Ganon until the very end. Sure there were people talking about him in Hyrule, but he didn't make an official appearance until the very end of the game.

I don't mean to be making it sound like there is only one weapon, and I believe I am thinking of it quite simply rather than literally. The Four Sword, the place where it is held, and the whole thing with Vaati is part of its own Saga. One that dosen't stray from its plot or various items included in its plot very often, aside from Ganon being the main boss in FSA. I'm simply excluding this particular saga from the main stream story line that the rest of the Zelda titles have.

Still, the question has not been answered as to why FSA leaves out so much about Hyrule that is present in other games such as OoT and TP, if in fact it comes after those. So, the most simple way to answer why it leaves those things out is to go with what I have heard in Wind Waker, and that is that Link and Zelda were sent to find a new Hyrule. Therefore, not many things from the old Hyrule would be present, including the Master Sword. It answers the placement of the saga in a very simple manner.

 

[Zemen]

Obviously the Four Sword is powerful, but the reason Link used it to defeat Ganon in FSA is because they completely ignored A) The existance of the Master Sword, and Link didn't know about Ganon until the very end. Sure there were people talking about him in Hyrule, but he didn't make an official appearance until the very end of the game.

I don't mean to be making it sound like there is only one weapon, and I believe I am thinking of it quite simply rather than literally. The Four Sword, the place where it is held, and the whole thing with Vaati is part of its own Saga. One that dosen't stray from its plot or various items included in its plot very often, aside from Ganon being the main boss in FSA. I'm simply excluding this particular saga from the main stream story line that the rest of the Zelda titles have.

Still, the question has not been answered as to why FSA leaves out so much about Hyrule that is present in other games such as OoT and TP, if in fact it comes after those. So, the most simple way to answer why it leaves those things out is to go with what I have heard in Wind Waker, and that is that Link and Zelda were sent to find a new Hyrule. Therefore, not many things from the old Hyrule would be present, including the Master Sword. It answers the placement of the saga in a very simple manner.

i came up with a pretty easy answer to all of this. Link is tricked into pulling the Four Sword, as i said before. When he pulls it in FSA he becomes 4 different Links and the only way to change is back is by capturing Vaati and putting the sword back in the chest. he HAS to use that sword because of the split curse thats on him. it wouldnt matter if the master sword was around or not because hes pretty much forced to use to the four sword.

 

[MrMosley]

i came up with a pretty easy answer to all of this. Link is tricked into pulling the Four Sword, as i said before. When he pulls it in FSA he becomes 4 different Links and the only way to change is back is by capturing Vaati and putting the sword back in the chest. he HAS to use that sword because of the split curse thats on him. it wouldnt matter if the master sword was around or not because hes pretty much forced to use to the four sword.

Now that, is a very good possibility. Logical enough for me. Nice answer.