Why Minish Cap SHOULDNT Be the First Game in the Timeline (WARNING HUGE RANT) :D

[Zemen]

I see where you're coming from Locke about the thread not being a debate of MC being first, but the title of the thread directly implies that that is exactly what this thread is about. I will let this thread go on a little longer and if it keeps up with the MC debate then I may close it as you have made it obvious that other games were discussed, but just to be devil's advocate, the title of the thread specifies MC.

 

[Ventus]

You could say the same about WW, TP, and ALttP, couldn't you? There's no reference to those games as being "legends" even though they did the same thing MC Link did, save Princess Zelda. I could be wrong about WW, I haven't played PH or ST. And does Link ever get rewarded with anything better than a festival? What more could he really even ask for other than money?

TWW had a definite placement on the timeline, what with real confirmations having been made by Aonuma/Miyamoto. The same goes with TP, that was also stated to be a sequel to OoT. Link HAS been rewarded with more than a festival. Say, a chance at a real childhood that he may/may not have used.

 

[Pinecove]

1. You can say the hat isn't important all you want but the entire game is centered around hats so obviously the creators of the game deemed the hat concept important. The BS starts the game with a previous hero who did not wear a hat.

It could be a retroactive reference to ST's gaurd uniform.

2. Ganondorf is not mentioned once or even hinted at an existence. I've heard the long over used argument of "The game has nothing to do with him so why would he be mentioned in it?" Although I would agree that this is a good counterargument in most cases, I don't in this case. Why? Because MC is the ONLY Hyrule based game to not give any mention or screen time to Ganondorf. The only other Hyrule based game to do so is Spirit Tracks but this is easily explained by the fact that it's new Hyrule and the game is directly connected to a previous game that did have Ganondorf as the antagonist.

You've just answered your own question. If TMC comes after ST then there's no reason to mention Ganondorf.

My feelings on the issue are pretty much summed up by these:

I pretty much agree except for the last part about the Master Sword, but that's not really pertinent to the topic. I believe that Flagship may have intended for TMC to be first, which would explain why it seems to have "origins" for several things (even if they don't make sense in the grand scheme of things [hat, Armos, etc.]). However, I think Nintendo has different ideas about what the origin for the series should be, hence SS; I think SS will be what TMC was trying to be. This is strengthened by how the original logo for TMC had the Master Sword, which presumably would have been what the Picori Blade is now; which also means it would have been a story about the Master Sword coming from the sky.

So, I think Nintendo's current intent necessitates that TMC is after ST, despite what Flagship may have intended.

TMC - OoT has pretty much been debunked by Aonuma's comments on the placement of SS.

TP - TMC share no connections at all. (If there are, please tell me.)

ST - TMC has a lot of connections, such as:
The use of Force Gems.
The existence of the tunic without the pointed hat as a uniform.
The need to use a sword other than the Master Sword to fight evil.
The same graphic/art style.
Link being childhood friends with Zelda.
A volcano in Hyrule that isn't currently named Death Mountain.
No word of the Triforce or its location.
Zelda being turned to stone (PH - TMC connection).
Main villain who isn't Ganon.
Etc.

 

[DuckNoises]

ST-TMC is an interesting idea, but if you take the whole Four Swords trilogy with it, things start not to make sense -- FSA in particular. If Ganondorf truly died at the end of WW, how could he come back in FSA if it takes place in New Hyrule? How are the Gerudo alive, when Ganondorf said they were all wiped out by the Great Flood?

But you're right, TP has no connections to TMC. No game really has much of a connection to TMC other than the rest of the Four Swords trilogy, which means we don't have much else to base its placement on other than the rest of the Four Swords trilogy (assuming that they are all adjacent). Unfortunately for us, since Four Swords itself (packaged with GBA ALttP) doesn't have much of a story, all we have to look towards is FSA, which seems to have a contradiction for each piece of evidence it sets forth. This makes TMC one of the hardest games to place.

 

[Deity]

Zemen makes some really nice points, and I think I'd throw TMC right after SS on my timeline mainly for the fact that I can't think of any other reasonable place to throw it. So until some further clues comes about, I think thats the most reasonable spot to put it.

 

[Pinecove]

ST-TMC is an interesting idea, but if you take the whole Four Swords trilogy with it, things start not to make sense -- FSA in particular. If Ganondorf truly died at the end of WW, how could he come back in FSA if it takes place in New Hyrule? How are the Gerudo alive, when Ganondorf said they were all wiped out by the Great Flood?

Ganondorf never makes a reference to the Gerudo being wiped out by the great flood.

But you're right, TP has no connections to TMC. No game really has much of a connection to TMC other than the rest of the Four Swords trilogy, which means we don't have much else to base its placement on other than the rest of the Four Swords trilogy (assuming that they are all adjacent). Unfortunately for us, since Four Swords itself (packaged with GBA ALttP) doesn't have much of a story, all we have to look towards is FSA, which seems to have a contradiction for each piece of evidence it sets forth. This makes TMC one of the hardest games to place.[/QUOTE

The problem is that FSA connects itself to two games: TWW and ALttP. And while ALttP seems to take place on the child timeline thanks to TP references, I wouldn't dare split up the connection between FSA and ALttP, not because of the connections they bear (which can easily be written off as part of the tea table indecent) but because LoZ and AoL MUST take place on the same timeline as FSA, and ALttP is the only game that truly sets up for those games (with FSA not setting up for them at all.)

[QUOT=Deity]Zemen makes some really nice points, and I think I'd throw TMC right after SS on my timeline mainly for the fact that I can't think of any other reasonable place to throw it. So until some further clues comes about, I think thats the most reasonable spot to put it.

I would like to point out that both his points were addressed (along with an alternate placement) in my previous post.

 

[DuckNoises]

Ganondorf never makes a reference to the Gerudo being wiped out by the great flood.

My mistake; he was referring to the wind:

When the sun rose into the sky, a burning
wind punished my lands, searing the world.
And when the moon climbed into the dark
of night, a frigid gale pierced our homes.
No matter when it came, the wind carried
the same thing... Death.

Although I'm pretty sure now that he could just be referring to the suffering of the Gerudo people in general, I must have subconsciously associated the word death, in reference to his homeland, to the death of the Gerudo. I thought he was using the word "wind" in reference to fate, as in the phrase "the wind carried," which follows the wind imagery set in place by the rest of the game. I naturally assumed that, in addition to emphasizing the harsh climate, that this was a metaphor for the death of the Gerudo. He doesn't outright state that the Gerudo died out, but it definitely seems implied due to the narrative that he was taking with that speech.
Not to mention that a valley is a terrible place to be when a flood hits. I think this does a nice job of contrasting how the other peoples of Hyrule fled to the mountaintops to survive the flood, where the Gerudo have no mountains to climb atop, which further fits in with Ganondorf's whole narrative of the Gerudo being impoverished and overburdened.

I may not be taking his speech as entirely literal, but I don't think that's the way it's meant to be interpreted. In my opinion, it seems too profound and eloquent to mean only what he says. Understanding writing is just as much about reading what's not written as it is about reading what is actually written. I may be giving the story too much credit, and I'm perfectly vulnerable to the "it's just a video game" argument as a counter, but I think this is a rare exception.

Again, the flood isn't specifically mentioned, but it seems fitting, granted that there have been only two or three Gerudo-like characters in games confirmed to follow TWW on the time line. Again, even if it was not the flood that killed the Gerudo, they cannot reproduce within their society, because Ganondorf was the only remaining male, and he is killed or at least incapacitated at the end of TWW.

 

[bbevington90]

TWW had a definite placement on the timeline, what with real confirmations having been made by Aonuma/Miyamoto. The same goes with TP, that was also stated to be a sequel to OoT. Link HAS been rewarded with more than a festival. Say, a chance at a real childhood that he may/may not have used.

I don't know what point this thread is at, but I just need to respond to this is all. That's not really what I was talking about. Touche on the more than a festival thing though haha. Anyway, I meant there's never references to the Link's of WW, TP, and ALttP in future games as being legends, like the hero of time was in WW and TP (like statues or just references at all).

 

[Zemen]

Pinecove, you brought up good points but something I noticed is that the Triforce not being mentioned in ST and MC is not a good connection at all. In ST, there is literally no mention, sighting, word, or symbols of the Triforce anywhere. You clearly believe MC to take place after ST but MC has the Triforce symbol all over the place. Even though it's not mentioned by anyone or physically shown in game it's clear that the people know of the Triforce and what it looks like. Wouldn't it make more sense for MC to take place after a game where the Triforce is well known? ST doesn't show it at all but MC makes it obvious that it's a well known item.

Also, force gems aren't anywhere in MC so the person you quoted, I don't know where he got that idea. The symbol for them is no where. They aren't mentioned or used. Those were you two biggest points on the connections between ST and MC and one of them is false and the other one isn't entirely true.

 

[Pinecove]

Although I'm pretty sure now that he could just be referring to the suffering of the Gerudo people in general, I must have subconsciously associated the word death, in reference to his homeland, to the death of the Gerudo. I thought he was using the word "wind" in reference to fate, as in the phrase "the wind carried," which follows the wind imagery set in place by the rest of the game. I naturally assumed that, in addition to emphasizing the harsh climate, that this was a metaphor for the death of the Gerudo. He doesn't outright state that the Gerudo died out, but it definitely seems implied due to the narrative that he was taking with that speech.

Well obviously the wind did burden the Gerudo, but the main point of the speech was to foreshadow Ganondorf's death in which he was killed by the hero of winds and how when he died he felt wind blowing - the wind brought him death.

Not to mention that a valley is a terrible place to be when a flood hits. I think this does a nice job of contrasting how the other peoples of Hyrule fled to the mountaintops to survive the flood, where the Gerudo have no mountains to climb atop, which further fits in with Ganondorf's whole narrative of the Gerudo being impoverished and overburdened.

Except Outset island is implied to be at the same location as Gerudo desert (compare the savage labyrinth to the cave of ordeals).

Again, the flood isn't specifically mentioned, but it seems fitting, granted that there have been only two or three Gerudo-like characters in games confirmed to follow TWW on the time line. Again, even if it was not the flood that killed the Gerudo, they cannot reproduce within their society, because Ganondorf was the only remaining male, and he is killed or at least incapacitated at the end of TWW.

Except we KNOW Ganondorf isn't the only male the Gerudo reproduce with - they just don't keep the relationship for more than one night:

They say that Gerudos sometimes
come to Hyrule Castle Town to
look for boyfriends.

Pinecove, you brought up good points

Why thank you.

but something I noticed is that the Triforce not being mentioned in ST and MC is not a good connection at all. In ST, there is literally no mention, sighting, word, or symbols of the Triforce anywhere. You clearly believe MC to take place after ST but MC has the Triforce symbol all over the place. Even though it's not mentioned by anyone or physically shown in game it's clear that the people know of the Triforce and what it looks like. Wouldn't it make more sense for MC to take place after a game where the Triforce is well known? ST doesn't show it at all but MC makes it obvious that it's a well known item.

Regardless of where it takes place, TMC SHOULDN'T have people well aware of the Triforce:
If it's after TP and before ALttP, people shouldn't remember the Triforce because it's supposed to be forgotten in time for the seal war (which come to think of it can't occur post FSA anyways because of the sages - maidens power ingression).
If it's before OoT, people shouldn't know about the Triforce because the Triforce wars haven't occurred yet.

However if TMC is post ST, than there is DEFINITELY some leisure room for people to know about the Triforce. Look at it this way: The Seal War has to take place after a time when the Triforce has been forgotten. But it also has to take place before FSA due to the Sages - maidens power loss. This cannot be after TP because in TP the Triforce is still known somewhat known about, when the Seal war needs to have the Triforce forgotten even by the ancient sages themselves. This can leave the only possible explanation of where it goes before TMC on the adult timeline, without assuming the Triforce's location is lost overnight - obviously the location of it was lost during the flood.

So:

-TWW. Triforce location is lost.
-ST. No knowledge of the Triforce.
-Seal war Occurs. Knowledge of the Triforce is gained.
-Hero of Men.
-TMC.

Also, force gems aren't anywhere in MC so the person you quoted, I don't know where he got that idea. The symbol for them is no where. They aren't mentioned or used. Those were you two biggest points on the connections between ST and MC and one of them is false and the other one isn't entirely true.

What is the light force? There's your answer.
And they are in FSA.

 

[DuckNoises]

Except we KNOW Ganondorf isn't the only male the Gerudo reproduce with - they just don't keep the relationship for more than one night:

I'm aware of that, my point is that Ganondorf has always been part of the royal line of Gerudo, and for there to be another male king of the Gerudo, he would have had to be part of that same royal line. What I'm trying to get at here is that if Ganondorf died at the end of TWW (as most people believe), how could FSA feature a new Ganondorf if there was no way that the royal line could be preserved? This is assuming that the Gerudo never changed their societal structure, of course. What's more is that if the Gerudo began to recognize an "illegitimate" royal line, they would no longer be following Gerudo culture, and then the Gerudo as a society would cease to exist. There are still those of Gerudo ancestry, but if Gerudo society has dissolved before FSA, the Gerudo could not have been Gerudo "proper" after TWW. This is to say that FSA wouldn't make much sense (in my opinion) coming on the AT.
To conclude, Pinecove, you are right; Ganondorf did not mention the Gerudo being wiped out by the flood. However, I've reason to believe that he could still be foreshadowing the death of the Gerudo in general by a gradual dwindling in numbers, if not by disaster.

Regardless, I've drawn this minor argument about the Gerudo out far longer than anyone else has in this thread, so I'll end it here unless anyone has anything to add.

 

[Zemen]

Pinecove, although the BS of MC isn't the clearest, for all you know the Triforce wars took place before MC. The BS of MC talks about how monsters had rampaged the land and all hope seemed lost until the Hero of Men came along. It's very possible that these monsters were after the Triforce. The piccori gave the Hero of Men a powerful golden light and gave him a sword. If this golden light was used to stop the monsters from getting the Triforce then maybe Vaati came along thinking that this golden light was more powerful than the Triforce. Either way, the Triforce symbol is all over MC but no one ever talks about it.

Now that I think about it, the BS of MC is extremely unclear as to the purpose of there being monsters in the first place.

And regardless of the light force being in MC, force gems are no where to be found so I don't understand what your point was there... Just because FSA had force gems doesn't automatically make MC connected to force gems as MC could easily take place hundreds of years before MC. If you're suggesting that because both games deals with Vaati and the Four Sword then the fact that one of those games has the force gems is a reason to believe that both games must be connected to force gems then that is faulty logic. I'm not sure if that's what you were suggestion but by that logic I could say since all games are in some way connected and in some way in the same universe then they are all connected to force gems since a couple of the games feature force gems. That logic makes the point completely moot.

 

[Pinecove]

Pinecove, although the BS of MC isn't the clearest, for all you know the Triforce wars took place before MC.

The Triforce wars seem to have ended with the construction of the temple of time and the unification of Hyrule ten years prior to OoT though...
Don't get me wrong though, I'd love to hear an alternative.

Now that I think about it, the BS of MC is extremely unclear as to the purpose of there being monsters in the first place.

In my theory (SW pre TMC) the monsters are the ones left over from the seal war.

And regardless of the light force being in MC, force gems are no where to be found so I don't understand what your point was there...

The Light Force seems to just be one gigantic force gem.

If you're suggesting that because both games deals with Vaati and the Four Sword then the fact that one of those games has the force gems is a reason to believe that both games must be connected to force gems then that is faulty logic. I'm not sure if that's what you were suggestion but by that logic I could say since all games are in some way connected and in some way in the same universe then they are all connected to force gems since a couple of the games feature force gems. That logic makes the point completely moot.

Er, no you're missing the point entirely. The fact that force is shown in TMC, FS and FSA and ONLY the confimred AT games doesn't tell you something?

While I'm at it Zemen, I'd like to know where you stand on the entire "Zelda power" issue.
In TMC, Vaati turns Zelda to stone because of another "mysterious power that runs in the veins of every royal lady." What is it?

Also:

I believe that Flagship may have intended for TMC to be first, which would explain why it seems to have "origins" for several things (even if they don't make sense in the grand scheme of things [hat, Armos, etc.]). However, I think Nintendo has different ideas about what the origin for the series should be, hence SS; I think SS will be what TMC was trying to be. This is strengthened by how the original logo for TMC had the Master Sword, which presumably would have been what the Picori Blade is now; which also means it would have been a story about the Master Sword coming from the sky.

So, I think Nintendo's current intent necessitates that TMC is after ST, despite what Flagship may have intended.

Please respond to this.

 

[AwesomeLink86]

My only thing with MC is that it is connected with FSA, which to my understanding (never played FSA and MC only once) FSA's backstory for Ganondorf/Ganon completely contradicts OoT's backstory for him. This shows that either there are two Ganons or the FS trilogy is not cannon at all. I actually believe the latter. If you believe the first that wouldn't affect MC's placement at all and I realize that my whole point would be mute anyway. However, if there is an importance to MC being apart of the timeline, wouldn't many of it's "explanations" be referenced (the Picori, the hat, hiding things under rocks and jars, etc.). Many of the things introduced in the four sword trilogy are only seen in the four swords trilogy.

Also about the hat, the Link in OoT had a hat not because of a previous hero but because it was the clothing style of the Kokiri. In WW and TP, when Link is given the "garb of the hero", it is most likely referencing the OoT Link.

So point being, Minish Cap should NOT be first in the timeline, because it does not even fit the timeline at all. Just my opinion though.

 

[AwesomeLink86]

The Link's don't have to wear the green clothes for a special reason, WW's Link and TP's Link had it because of OoT Link. But the rest just wore it. It's not something that actually matters that much that it has to have a reason, just like the Hero's Shade.

I never said the other Links wore it for a special reason. I actually totally agree with what you just said.