New Character: Zelda.

[RyokoYaksa]

To Fawriel-Having samus and zamus in the game as different characters does increase shiek's chances as zelda and shiek are the same person, also from a different time period too. Zamus and samus are both brom different time periods, as samus' suit design is the newer kind.

Samus has always been the same person in every game she's been in. Zelda's and Link's incarnations span through several different generations due to the nature of the timeline, and their character redesigns are not merely superficial. The Legend of Zelda series does have a story, you know. We're up to 6+ different incarnations of Link/Zelda. Sheik is only relevant to the OoT Zelda, so it would not make any sense to incorporate Sheik into a TP-influenced Zelda. Yes, you might as well have Tetra transform into Sheik.

Also, like it or not, Wind Waker is canon to the LoZ series. Try not to derail the thread with any unrelated stupidity about it. If you want to see a bad Zelda game, look up something called the CD-I.

 

[Gindor]

Samus has always been the same person in every game she's been in. Zelda's and Link's incarnations span through several different generations due to the nature of the timeline, and their character redesigns are not merely superficial. The Legend of Zelda series does have a story, you know. We're up to 6+ different incarnations of Link/Zelda. Sheik is only relevant to the OoT Zelda, so it would not make any sense to incorporate Sheik into a TP-influenced Zelda. Yes, you might as well have Tetra transform into Sheik.

Also, like it or not, Wind Waker is canon to the LoZ series. Try not to derail the thread with any unrelated stupidity about it. If you want to see a bad Zelda game, look up something called the CD-I.

1-I love the story of the zelda series.
2-I wouldn't want to include sheik in the zelda character as a transformation.
3-having tetra transform into sheik would be ********, I know your being sarcastic btw.
4-I see WW as my favorite zelda game.
5-I'll beleive about that game.
6-I like sheik for her speed and style, bringing sheik into brawl seperately from zelda wouldn't derail the story, anyways this game is basically a gathering of worlds and twisting of time just as kingdom hearts is. Now a comparing the two-young link vs old zelda (both from OoT) meeting tidus on destiny islands and later talking to adult auron in the world of hercules (disney, tidus and auron both from FFX)
I would understand if sheik diddn't make it in, even more if they fixed al these tistings of time.
(FYI-don't burn on me as a sora for brawl fan, as I don't think he should be in brawl, even if he is a traveler of worlds)

 

[OnyxVulpine]

Samus has always been the same person in every game she's been in. Zelda's and Link's incarnations span through several different generations due to the nature of the timeline, and their character redesigns are not merely superficial. The Legend of Zelda series does have a story, you know. We're up to 6+ different incarnations of Link/Zelda. Sheik is only relevant to the OoT Zelda, so it would not make any sense to incorporate Sheik into a TP-influenced Zelda. Yes, you might as well have Tetra transform into Sheik.

Also, like it or not, Wind Waker is canon to the LoZ series. Try not to derail the thread with any unrelated stupidity about it. If you want to see a bad Zelda game, look up something called the CD-I.

Good.. good... I just say seperate character.. I didn't follow all of the Zelda series and have no idea how any of it fits together (if any, or in its own games for that matter). I'll probably be secondary Sheik anyway, but I don't like seeing characters get cut from games... Except Pichu..

 

[Gindor]

Good.. good... I just say seperate character.. I didn't follow all of the Zelda series and have no idea how any of it fits together (if any, or in its own games for that matter). I'll probably be secondary Sheik anyway, but I don't like seeing characters get cut from games... Except Pichu..

Amen about pichu!

 

[maxpower1227]

Samus has always been the same person in every game she's been in. Zelda's and Link's incarnations span through several different generations due to the nature of the timeline, and their character redesigns are not merely superficial. The Legend of Zelda series does have a story, you know. We're up to 6+ different incarnations of Link/Zelda. Sheik is only relevant to the OoT Zelda, so it would not make any sense to incorporate Sheik into a TP-influenced Zelda. Yes, you might as well have Tetra transform into Sheik.

Also, like it or not, Wind Waker is canon to the LoZ series. Try not to derail the thread with any unrelated stupidity about it. If you want to see a bad Zelda game, look up something called the CD-I.

Ugh, no.

The Zelda timeline is pure, unadulterated BULLPLOP. It was something Nintendo came up with to satisfy rabid fanboys who demanded a timeline, and it basically forced them to adopt this ridiculous nonsense about different generations of people with the same names to explain away obvious inconsistencies that arose through different retellings of the same basic story. It got so bad that now they've started trying to incorporate explanations on how games fit into the timeline into the games themselves, forcing them to adopt increasingly asinine scenarios and explanations for certain things.

I have no use for the Zelda Timeline. Sheik is Zelda. Period. She has every right to be included in Brawl in the same way she was included in Melee.

 

[Katy Parry]

Ugh, no.

The Zelda timeline is pure, unadulterated BULLPLOP. It was something Nintendo came up with to satisfy rabid fanboys who demanded a timeline, and it basically forced them to adopt this ridiculous nonsense about different generations of people with the same names to explain away obvious inconsistencies that arose through different retellings of the same basic story. It got so bad that now they've started trying to incorporate explanations on how games fit into the timeline into the games themselves, forcing them to adopt increasingly asinine scenarios and explanations for certain things.

I have no use for the Zelda Timeline. Sheik is Zelda. Period. She has every right to be included in Brawl in the same way she was included in Melee.

I agree 100%. And, the TP Zelda is using a spell from OoT. So y not OoT Shiek? Shiek is in, I bet my Wii on it. Seriously, if I lose, I'll send you my Wii.

 

[Circus]

Ugh, no.

The Zelda timeline is pure, unadulterated BULLPLOP. It was something Nintendo came up with to satisfy rabid fanboys who demanded a timeline, and it basically forced them to adopt this ridiculous nonsense about different generations of people with the same names to explain away obvious inconsistencies that arose through different retellings of the same basic story. It got so bad that now they've started trying to incorporate explanations on how games fit into the timeline into the games themselves, forcing them to adopt increasingly asinine scenarios and explanations for certain things.

I have no use for the Zelda Timeline. Sheik is Zelda. Period. She has every right to be included in Brawl in the same way she was included in Melee.

Well, whether you call it "bullpop" or not is irrelevant. Even if Nintendo did just come up with it out of thin air for the fans, it IS still there, and has been widely accepted amongst said fans. The timeline, as shoddy as it may be, has been created by Nintendo themselves, and I'd bet Sakuari knows of it. I'm sure he's kept it in mind while designing the new LoZ cast for Brawl.

But for arguement's sake, let's do it your way—let's throw out the timeline. Now what do you have? Several Zelda games that are not technically connected in anyway, aside from character similarities and one, basic, reoccurring plot (Link and Zelda must defeat Ganondorf. The rest of the story varies).

You know what that's called? A re-imagining of the game. Now, rather than descendants of Zelda being involved in new adventures, you have the same Zelda existing in a different way in each game. In order to make changes to the details of the game, Zelda must live and act differently. Her life has, essentially, been re-written to fir the new story. The re-imagined Zelda of Twilight Princess, due to the nature of the story, did not disguise herself as Sheik. Ever.

The Zelda we see in Brawl is clearly the Zelda we see re-imagined in Twilight Princess, aside from possibly "browner" hair. I'm not Sakurai, so I won't pretend to know that Zelda doesn't turn into Sheik in Brawl, but I've got a strong feeling she won't. As to whether Sheik will be her own character, that's certainly plausible. But I don't see why she'd be considered important enough for that. But then, there are plenty of inclusions in Melee that made me feel the same (Pichu, Dr. Mario, and Roy all come to mind).

If people want Sheik's moveset so badly, then I would hope that in order to include it, Sakurai would just give it to another character (with modifications to fit that character, of course).

 

[maxpower1227]

It's just stupid though. No other character is tied down to one specific, single game from their history. If the Zelda timeline has so many holes in the first place, including Sheik in Brawl will make no difference. Besides, Sheik was a great character, and having a character who had two forms to use during battle added some uniqueness to that character. Removing her just to honor a stupid timeline that makes no sense anyway would be dumb.

 

[OnyxVulpine]

Does SSB have a timeline? Don't they just grab what ever is good and implement it into the game? Do they follow actual story lines of how they got into the game and such? (Correct me if it does)..

Does Mario have his "Mario Finale" in any other game? Does Link have "Triforce Slash" in any of his games? (Correct me if they do)..

Link's FS is a big one to look at, if he doesn't have that move in TP. What should it matter if Zelda doesn't have a Sheik form in TP?

 

[Gindor]

Does SSB have a timeline? Don't they just grab what ever is good and implement it into the game? Do they follow actual story lines of how they got into the game and such? (Correct me if it does)..

Does Mario have his "Mario Finale" in any other game? Does Link have "Triforce Slash" in any of his games? (Correct me if they do)..

Link's FS is a big one to look at, if he doesn't have that move in TP. What should it matter if Zelda doesn't have a Sheik form in TP?

I agree completely

 

[Circus]

Does SSB have a timeline? Don't they just grab what ever is good and implement it into the game? Do they follow actual story lines of how they got into the game and such? (Correct me if it does)..

Does Mario have his "Mario Finale" in any other game? Does Link have "Triforce Slash" in any of his games? (Correct me if they do)..

Link's FS is a big one to look at, if he doesn't have that move in TP. What should it matter if Zelda doesn't have a Sheik form in TP?

The way it works out in my head goes as follows...

Final Smashes such as Mario's and Link's are fine with me, because they are completely made up for SSBB, but slightly reference their character/franchise (Mario's makes sense because his fireballs are one of his most noted moves; Link's makes sense because the Triforce is the symbol of the Zelda series)

However, Sheik is not made up for SSB. Sheik has been established as a character that appeared in one Zelda game, for a specific reason. A reason that the Zelda being represented in Brawl doesn't have.

In my mind, there's a difference between "character's noted moves" (Mario's fireballs: acceptable), "character inspired moves" (Mario's Final: acceptable) and "no longer relevant/too obscure/out of date character moves" (Mario pulling up a turnip: not acceptable; he's done it before, so we know he can, but it doesn't suit his character well.)

All my opinion. I had a hard time getting my words out here, so this post is probably much more confusing than it needed to be.

 

[OnyxVulpine]

The way it works out in my head goes as follows...

Final Smashes such as Mario's and Link's are fine with me, because they are completely made up for SSBB, but slightly reference their character/franchise (Mario's makes sense because his fireballs are one of his most noted moves; Link's makes sense because the Triforce is the symbol of the Zelda series)

However, Sheik is not made up for SSB. Sheik has been established as a character that appeared in one Zelda game, for a specific reason. A reason that the Zelda being represented in Brawl doesn't have.

In my mind, there's a difference between "character's noted moves" (Mario's fireballs: acceptable), "character inspired moves" (Mario's Final: acceptable) and "no longer relevant/too obscure/out of date character moves" (Mario pulling up a turnip: not acceptable; he's done it before, so we know he can, but it doesn't suit his character well.)

All my opinion. I had a hard time getting my words out here, so this post is probably much more confusing than it needed to be.

Ah, no, I understand... Its completely up to the person though. Sheik = Whatever for me already.. If shes in cool. If shes not then oh well..

But were Zelda's moves canon?

 

[Gindor]

The way it works out in my head goes as follows...

Final Smashes such as Mario's and Link's are fine with me, because they are completely made up for SSBB, but slightly reference their character/franchise (Mario's makes sense because his fireballs are one of his most noted moves; Link's makes sense because the Triforce is the symbol of the Zelda series)

However, Sheik is not made up for SSB. Sheik has been established as a character that appeared in one Zelda game, for a specific reason. A reason that the Zelda being represented in Brawl doesn't have.

In my mind, there's a difference between "character's noted moves" (Mario's fireballs: acceptable), "character inspired moves" (Mario's Final: acceptable) and "no longer relevant/too obscure/out of date character moves" (Mario pulling up a turnip: not acceptable; he's done it before, so we know he can, but it doesn't suit his character well.)

All my opinion. I had a hard time getting my words out here, so this post is probably much more confusing than it needed to be.

I understood well enough, a good counter point.
Zelda and Sheik for brawl!

 

[Circus]

Ah, no, I understand... Its completely up to the person though. Sheik = Whatever for me already.. If shes in cool. If shes not then oh well..

But were Zelda's moves canon?

No, but she's allowed to have the moves she has in my eyes, because she never really had any moves to be seen in order to base anything on. All you really saw her do in OoT was open barred doorways.

I'd get into why I think Din's Fire, Nayru's Love, and Farore's Wind are fine for her to keep, where as I think Sheik should leave, but I don't really want to unless someone bugs me about it.

 

[OnyxVulpine]

Yeah, I understand her whole magic concept... I guess Zelda could use a little buffing if shes not going to have Sheik to back her up. Some new moves, and some new tactics and such to work out. It'll be fun to start from scratch ^^ I'd have to get used to not using Sheik everynow and then though.

 

[Gindor]

No, but she's allowed to have the moves she has in my eyes, because she never really had any moves to be seen in order to base anything on. All you really saw her do in OoT was open barred doorways.

I'd get into why I think Din's Fire, Nayru's Love, and Farore's Wind are fine for her to keep, where as I think Sheik should leave, but I don't really want to unless someone bugs me about it.

She's basically a magical C.F (in how they thought up his moves, by scratch to fit their personality)

 

[Circus]

She's basically a magical C.F (in how they thought up his moves, by scratch to fit their personality)

To an extent, yeah. Though, the spells did at least exist in Oot; Zelda just never used them herself.

I think I might compare her more to Ness, because if I'm not mistaken (and I may be—I never played Earthbound) he uses moves that were in his game that only other characters used.

Kind of off topic: I was reading my last few posts in this thread, and I sound like a....word that would be censored if I typed it. I really didn't mean to come off quite as....forceful with my opinion as those make it sound. Sorry, ya'll.

 

[maxpower1227]

In my mind, there's a difference between "character's noted moves" (Mario's fireballs: acceptable), "character inspired moves" (Mario's Final: acceptable) and "no longer relevant/too obscure/out of date character moves" (Mario pulling up a turnip: not acceptable; he's done it before, so we know he can, but it doesn't suit his character well.)

That is a good point in general, but it's hard to apply to Zelda since she doesn't really have "moves". I could argue that OoT featured Zelda to a greater extent than most other Zelda games (and her 3 special moves are all specifically from OoT as well), so there's is still good reason to retain Sheik.


Once again, the Zelda Timeline is a stupid obstacle that shouldn't be there. TP Zelda = OoT Zelda = WW Zelda = LttP Zelda = ZELDA.

 

[Circus]

That is a good point in general, but it's hard to apply to Zelda since she doesn't really have "moves". I could argue that OoT featured Zelda to a greater extent than most other Zelda games (and her 3 special moves are all specifically from OoT as well), so there's is still good reason to retain Sheik.


Once again, the Zelda Timeline is a stupid obstacle that shouldn't be there. TP Zelda = OoT Zelda = WW Zelda = LttP Zelda = ZELDA.

True enough, you could.

I guess overall, it comes down to how you view Zelda. Since I accept the timeline that's been made for the Zeldaverse, I see something blocking Sheik from being a part of TP Zelda.

And admittedly, if you want to get technical about it, Zelda in Brawl could have nothing more than an aesthetic change. I can't rule that out. I just come from the perspective that it isn't, and I don't want it to be.

 

[xMizux]

if zelda been confirmed, doesnt that mean sheik would be in the game?

 

[Circus]

if zelda been confirmed, doesnt that mean sheik would be in the game?

Depends on who you ask.

39 pages worth of posts haven't been able to answer that question.

 

[blayde_axel]

Unfortunately, we'll just have to wait and see... which I have a feeling we're gonna be on a drought of AMAZING news for a while.

 

[OnyxVulpine]

Until they release it.. I'm staying neutral with this... I like Sheik, but with all of the arguements that contradict me I'll say its 50/50 chance..

But I hope its more like 80/20...

 

[Gindor]

Smashbros.com could show it in many ways if sheik is in,
if she's the alternate form of zelda, she'll be introduced alongside some special moves for zelda, otherwise, she'll be introduced as another veteran.

 

[PrinnyFlute]

Can anyone honestly look me straight in the face and say that the differences between Tetra and TP Zelda as characters are so small that they're not even worth noticing? If so, I may eat my hat in frustration.

Also, who cares if moves are slightly fabricated or slightly changed? Seriously: nobody. It's really incomparable to an entire character.

Aonuma thinks the timeline is important, and I'd have to agree. The only character who stays completely unchanged from game to game is Link (he literally is a walking hero generalization, which is another reason why he has no lines,) and to a lesser degree, Ganondorf. Zelda's an interesting character because every Zelda has the same fate, and to some degree the same tools, but they each handle that in different ways.

I've said it before, but the difference between TP and OoT Zelda isn't just timeline, anyway. They're different characters with different situations and different ways of handling them. Where OoT saw a princess in exile become a pro-active tomboy, TP found Zelda as practically a sheltered, martyr type character. And honestly, after seeing her sit in that tower half the game and suffer for her people, watching TP Zelda transform into a ninja and get into a goofy brawl with Mario and DK just might make me cringe.

It's not like I don't want Sheik to come back in some form, I just think it's unlikely she'll be attached to Zelda in the process...and I'm weirded out that people keep negating perfectly reasonable logic about it.

 

[Circus]

Can anyone honestly look me straight in the face and say that the differences between Tetra and TP Zelda as characters are so small that they're not even worth noticing? If so, I may eat my hat in frustration.

Also, who cares if moves are slightly fabricated or slightly changed? Seriously: nobody. It's really incomparable to an entire character.

Aonuma thinks the timeline is important, and I'd have to agree. The only character who stays completely unchanged from game to game is Link (he literally is a walking hero generalization, which is another reason why he has no lines,) and to a lesser degree, Ganondorf. Zelda's an interesting character because every Zelda has the same fate, and to some degree the same tools, but they each handle that in different ways.

I've said it before, but the difference between TP and OoT Zelda isn't just timeline, anyway. They're different characters with different situations and different ways of handling them. Where OoT saw a princess in exile become a pro-active tomboy, TP found Zelda as practically a sheltered, martyr type character. And honestly, after seeing her sit in that tower half the game and suffer for her people, watching TP Zelda transform into a ninja and get into a goofy brawl with Mario and DK just might make me cringe.

It's not like I don't want Sheik to come back in some form, I just think it's unlikely she'll be attached to Zelda in the process...and I'm weirded out that people keep negating perfectly reasonable logic about it.

No post has deserved a "QFT" more than this.

 

[Gindor]

Can anyone honestly look me straight in the face and say that the differences between Tetra and TP Zelda as characters are so small that they're not even worth noticing? If so, I may eat my hat in frustration.

Also, who cares if moves are slightly fabricated or slightly changed? Seriously: nobody. It's really incomparable to an entire character.

Aonuma thinks the timeline is important, and I'd have to agree. The only character who stays completely unchanged from game to game is Link (he literally is a walking hero generalization, which is another reason why he has no lines,) and to a lesser degree, Ganondorf. Zelda's an interesting character because every Zelda has the same fate, and to some degree the same tools, but they each handle that in different ways.

I've said it before, but the difference between TP and OoT Zelda isn't just timeline, anyway. They're different characters with different situations and different ways of handling them. Where OoT saw a princess in exile become a pro-active tomboy, TP found Zelda as practically a sheltered, martyr type character. And honestly, after seeing her sit in that tower half the game and suffer for her people, watching TP Zelda transform into a ninja and get into a goofy brawl with Mario and DK just might make me cringe.

It's not like I don't want Sheik to come back in some form, I just think it's unlikely she'll be attached to Zelda in the process...and I'm weirded out that people keep negating perfectly reasonable logic about it.

I agree with you, but the logic they are using is the fact that ssb has no logic why characters are there, and there is no timeline in ssb as said before. Plus samus and zamus are different charac-*looks at smashbros.com*-scratch that point.

 

[Katy Parry]

People, Shiek will be in, think about it. In this:

She is casting "Din's Fire", a spell in Ocarina Of Time. So why not Shiek? That's probably one of the main reasons Zelda made the cut. Players liked being able to change in-battle. So why would Sakiruai(?) get rid of Shiek, if that's one reason Zelda's back. They wont change any returning character that drastically. In terms of special moves, of course. There not gonna change Mario's fireball just because in Super Mario Sunshine he doesn't have fireballs. They won't change Link's Bomb to...well anything, because players are like, "Great, Link doesn't have bombs anymore, now I can't do_____. (And that ruins the fun factor) That's the exact same as, "Great, Zelda's transformation isn't here anymore, now I can't do _____. That's what made Zelda so cool. Being able to "Transform". And in battle!


Shiek is in, don't worry. And all of the SSB made it in to SSBM. Maybe all of SSBM will make it into SSBB.

 

[Gindor]

People, Shiek will be in, think about it. In this:

She is casting "Din's Fire", a spell in Ocarina Of Time. So why not Shiek? That's probably one of the main reasons Zelda made the cut. Players liked being able to change in-battle. So why would Sakiruai(?) get rid of Shiek, if that's one reason Zelda's back. They wont change any returning character that drastically. In terms of special moves, of course. There not gonna change Mario's fireball just because in Super Mario Sunshine he doesn't have fireballs. They won't change Link's Bomb to...well anything, because players are like, "Great, Link doesn't have bombs anymore, now I can't do_____. (And that ruins the fun factor) That's the exact same as, "Great, Zelda's transformation isn't here anymore, now I can't do _____. That's what made Zelda so cool. Being able to "Transform". And in battle!


Shiek is in, don't worry. And all of the SSB made it in to SSBM. Maybe all of SSBM will make it into SSBB.

A very good point, and will zamus and sheik be different characters on smashbros.com.
As in samus being in the veteran section while zamus is in the newcomer section, or will they both be on the same character page. I think they might be seperate so there is no confusion about the newcomer, but everyone knows zelda and sheik as the same character from melee, but I still think sheik will be seperate if in the game at all, with the whole time warp transformation making no sense.
I wonder if zamus can get her suit back on at all, probably not since final smashes can only be used once. I aint arguing against zamus' suit though!

 

[Circus]

People, Shiek will be in, think about it. In this:

She is casting "Din's Fire", a spell in Ocarina Of Time. So why not Shiek? That's probably one of the main reasons Zelda made the cut. Players liked being able to change in-battle. So why would Sakiruai(?) get rid of Shiek, if that's one reason Zelda's back. They wont change any returning character that drastically. In terms of special moves, of course. There not gonna change Mario's fireball just because in Super Mario Sunshine he doesn't have fireballs. They won't change Link's Bomb to...well anything, because players are like, "Great, Link doesn't have bombs anymore, now I can't do_____. (And that ruins the fun factor) That's the exact same as, "Great, Zelda's transformation isn't here anymore, now I can't do _____. That's what made Zelda so cool. Being able to "Transform". And in battle!


Shiek is in, don't worry. And all of the SSB made it in to SSBM. Maybe all of SSBM will make it into SSBB.

Transforming into Sheik isn't what made Zelda cool; it's what made her completely overshadowed.

Nayru's Love, Din's Fire, and Farore's Wind all make sense to me because Zelda needs some kind of moveset to call her own, and those spells, while technically OoT specific, reference the series as a whole as well. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't Din, Nayru and Farore all involved somehow in every Zelda game? Sheik isn't. Sheik is much more game specific than those spells are (Hell, the spells hardly even look the same way they do in Oot, and Nayru's Love doesn't even do what it does in Oot. Those moves might as well be called something entirely made up for as much as they really relate to the moves they're supposed to be based on).

I see the point you're making—it's actually the main thing that's allowing me to think Sheik could be in Brawl as Zelda's alternate. But I still disagree.

And I'd get into why the Mario Sunshine thing doesn't count, but that's been explained several times now.

And just to be REALLY technical, we don't know that's Din's Fire in the trailer. It could be the exact same move, but they might call it something entirely different this time.

 

[PrinnyFlute]

That's the exact same as, "Great, Zelda's transformation isn't here anymore, now I can't do _____. That's what made Zelda so cool. Being able to "Transform". And in battle!

That's exactly what they did to Samus though. With the advent of FS's, now you can't even do hers without having to deal with a seperate character afterwards, which is already upsetting some Samus players.

I'd hope that if Sakurai were going to disregard character details (like TP Zelda -> Sheik would just be weird,) that he'd be going more for a generalized representation of all Zelda's and not just the one from the latest game.

 

[Katy Parry]

Well, people. Zelda could still have the power to transform. It would make sense in SSB. I mean besides, that would take down profits, so why would they want to do that? Shiek players might not buy the game if Shiek isn't in.


Anyway, Zelda is the best character so far. I'm so happy my main made it. She looks so much better. And, I'm gonna beat everyones' ***** with her. I'm almost as good as Kawn. No joke.

 

[Gindor]

That's exactly what they did to Samus though. With the advent of FS's, now you can't even do hers without having to deal with a seperate character afterwards, which is already upsetting some Samus players.

I'd hope that if Sakurai were going to disregard character details (like TP Zelda -> Sheik would just be weird,) that he'd be going more for a generalized representation of all Zelda's and not just the one from the latest game.

Ack! I didn't see that flaw of transforming into zamus! playing as samus is fun, but now I can only use the FS if I need back up physical combat from zamus when I'm getting pwned, and in that case my foe would get the smash orb every time. My name is woe.

EDIT-to ethanrogders, the sheik fans will still buy the game, it will be an awesome game, and there might be something else for them in the game also.

 

[maxpower1227]

Can anyone honestly look me straight in the face and say that the differences between Tetra and TP Zelda as characters are so small that they're not even worth noticing? If so, I may eat my hat in frustration.

Also, who cares if moves are slightly fabricated or slightly changed? Seriously: nobody. It's really incomparable to an entire character.

Aonuma thinks the timeline is important, and I'd have to agree. The only character who stays completely unchanged from game to game is Link (he literally is a walking hero generalization, which is another reason why he has no lines,) and to a lesser degree, Ganondorf. Zelda's an interesting character because every Zelda has the same fate, and to some degree the same tools, but they each handle that in different ways.

I've said it before, but the difference between TP and OoT Zelda isn't just timeline, anyway. They're different characters with different situations and different ways of handling them. Where OoT saw a princess in exile become a pro-active tomboy, TP found Zelda as practically a sheltered, martyr type character. And honestly, after seeing her sit in that tower half the game and suffer for her people, watching TP Zelda transform into a ninja and get into a goofy brawl with Mario and DK just might make me cringe.

It's not like I don't want Sheik to come back in some form, I just think it's unlikely she'll be attached to Zelda in the process...and I'm weirded out that people keep negating perfectly reasonable logic about it.

- No, the timeline is not important for this game

- You think that maybe the reason that Link is unchanged from game to game (besides the fact that he really is the same character is because he has no lines? Zelda has speaking parts in most of her games, so she may act different from game to game as necessitated by the plot for that particular game. Again, it's really inconsequential for the purposes of Smash Bros.

- If you're going to base this Zelda completely from the TP game, shouldn't she just drop her sword and cower in the corner during every battle? The only time we saw her do anything aggressive in TP was when she was possessed by Ganondorf.

I just don't get all this obsession over a stupid timeline. You say that nobody will care if her moves are fabricated, then go and say that you'll be flabbergasted if she turns into a ninja because it's so out of character for TP Zelda.

And another thing, if you look at the site, it says that the DESIGN of Link is based on the TP model. Nothing more. That makes perfect sense since TP has the most detailed model of Link used to date. It doesn't mean that everything about him will reference TP. On Zelda's page, it says the same thing (that her DESIGN is updated), and there is not even a mention made of TP.

 

[Gindor]

- No, the timeline is not important for this game

- You think that maybe the reason that Link is unchanged from game to game (besides the fact that he really is the same character is because he has no lines? Zelda has speaking parts in most of her games, so she may act different from game to game as necessitated by the plot for that particular game. Again, it's really inconsequential for the purposes of Smash Bros.

- If you're going to base this Zelda completely from the TP game, shouldn't she just drop her sword and cower in the corner during every battle? The only time we saw her do anything aggressive in TP was when she was possessed by Ganondorf.

I just don't get all this obsession over a stupid timeline. You say that nobody will care if her moves are fabricated, then go and say that you'll be flabbergasted if she turns into a ninja because it's so out of character for TP Zelda.

And another thing, if you look at the site, it says that the DESIGN of Link is based on the TP model. Nothing more. That makes perfect sense since TP has the most detailed model of Link used to date. It doesn't mean that everything about him will reference TP. On Zelda's page, it says the same thing (that her DESIGN is updated), and there is not even a mention made of TP.

Sheik and Zelda for brawl! This thread seems to be the "is the time line really important?" and "sheik, here or not?" thread really.

 

[PrinnyFlute]

- No, the timeline is not important for this game

- You think that maybe the reason that Link is unchanged from game to game (besides the fact that he really is the same character is because he has no lines? Zelda has speaking parts in most of her games, so she may act different from game to game as necessitated by the plot for that particular game. Again, it's really inconsequential for the purposes of Smash Bros.

- If you're going to base this Zelda completely from the TP game, shouldn't she just drop her sword and cower in the corner during every battle? The only time we saw her do anything aggressive in TP was when she was possessed by Ganondorf.

I just don't get all this obsession over a stupid timeline. You say that nobody will care if her moves are fabricated, then go and say that you'll be flabbergasted if she turns into a ninja because it's so out of character for TP Zelda.

-If the director of the entire Zelda series tells Sakurai it's important, you bet yer freakin' booties it's important. We don't know if he has or not, but I'm just saying that if that communication is there, then it does matter.

-Yes, Link's supposed to be the same from game to game. He's like that because he has no lines and he's supposed a generalized hero, and he has no lines because he's supposed to be a generalized hero. Zelda is different for plot purposes, and those plots matter. Now whether or not those plots are consequential to Smash is entirely up to Sakurai, and up to Aonuma depending on what he asks Sakurai to do with his characters. NOTE that as much as everyone keeps reinstating that Sakurai could do whatever he wanted with these characters, he by no means is going to violently go against the wishes of their creators and managers! It was noted more than a year ago that the entire reason Sakurai was chosen is because of how well he networks with people and gets along with them. This is also Japan we're talking about. Giving Aonuma a big slap in the face by saying, "I don't care about your storyline or what you say I should do," is not something Sakurai is going to do. Again, the storylines and/or timelines are important as Aonuma wants them to be, and we'll just have to wait and see.

-She more than did her part in the final battle, and she never did anything at all to suggest that she didn't have fighting spirit. TP Zelda was never a coward. There was always the hint that she stayed locked up because it was best for her people. It was also hinted during the game that she was at least a decent magic user and knew how to use her powers. Of course, how peacable a character is is another factor that is skewed for Smash. Why in the hell would you ever really see Mario beating up on Kirby?

-Some people just like the timeline. I think it conceptually ties the storylines together in a manner that gives them a little more meaning than they do on their own. But timeline or no, we're also talking about storylines here, and if you're going to say nobody cares about Zelda's storyline...well...hooooo. There's a humongous difference in personality here that I think is hard to ignore. And yeah. Does anybody else really think that it's such a big deal for TP Zelda to learn some Hylian magic when A) it's been shown that she's good at magic, and B) she lives in Hyrule. Where the magic is. And she's blessed by the Goddesses...who power that same magic. Magic is such a common Hylian concept that that's practically like saying that Link shouldn't have any kicking moves because we've never seen him kick. It's no big deal. Sheltered, stoic magic user -> tomboy ninja? Seems like a big deal to me, and IF (I admit it's an if,) Sakurai and Aonuma are going to be paying attention to the cumulative storylines and differences, even a LITTLE, it seems pretty unlikely they'd go ahead and put Sheik in that same position over again.

 

[PyrasTerran]

And another thing, if you look at the site, it says that the DESIGN of Link is based on the TP model. Nothing more. That makes perfect sense since TP has the most detailed model of Link used to date. It doesn't mean that everything about him will reference TP. On Zelda's page, it says the same thing (that her DESIGN is updated), and there is not even a mention made of TP.

Important point. Just how literal are these words giving in terms of changes?

At the same time, could design just mean her physical appearance or the design of her combat and abilities as well?

-She more than did her part in the final battle, and she never did anything at all to suggest that she didn't have fighting spirit. TP Zelda was never a coward. There was always the hint that she stayed locked up because it was best for her people. It was also hinted during the game that she was at least a decent magic user and knew how to use her powers.

I don't believe it was ever hinted that, BUT, TP Zelda is no coward. She sacraficed her own freedom to prevent her kingdom's destruction, and seemingly her life force when reviving Midna. She stood nobly by Link when facing against Ganondorf, and if it wasn't for the dark lord shoving her out of the fight with a fire wall, she would ahve been right there launching light arrows, just like in WW.




Oh, back on topic..

What are the chances of Shiek being his/her own character, separate from Zelda? Shiek is definitely popular, I don't think Sakurai can ignore that. Would he really remove Shiek?

 

[Katy Parry]

- No, the timeline is not important for this game

- You think that maybe the reason that Link is unchanged from game to game (besides the fact that he really is the same character is because he has no lines? Zelda has speaking parts in most of her games, so she may act different from game to game as necessitated by the plot for that particular game. Again, it's really inconsequential for the purposes of Smash Bros.

- If you're going to base this Zelda completely from the TP game, shouldn't she just drop her sword and cower in the corner during every battle? The only time we saw her do anything aggressive in TP was when she was possessed by Ganondorf.

I just don't get all this obsession over a stupid timeline. You say that nobody will care if her moves are fabricated, then go and say that you'll be flabbergasted if she turns into a ninja because it's so out of character for TP Zelda.

And another thing, if you look at the site, it says that the DESIGN of Link is based on the TP model. Nothing more. That makes perfect sense since TP has the most detailed model of Link used to date. It doesn't mean that everything about him will reference TP. On Zelda's page, it says the same thing (that her DESIGN is updated), and there is not even a mention made of TP.

Thank You!

 

[GameAngel64]

Just a thought... not really significant... but for a while there was debate as to whether or not the Zelda/Sheik forum should be split into two forums, one for Zelda, and one for Sheik. Ultimately, this split did in fact occur. This is because, while a few people did dabble with both characters simply because the option was there, most players dominantly played one or the other.

I wonder if, in the same way that it was eventually judged better for the forums to be split, the game-making decision makers will also take note and split the characters... assuming Sheik is included at all. Since many players dominantly mained either Sheik or Zelda, and seldom "both," both types of players could only benefit from getting a down+B move they could actually use. So even though the transformation thing was novel and even still sounds good in theory, I don't think it was a large component for effective battle - certainly, it was not noticeably used to that end.

It's hard to say, but Zero Suit Samus -as many before me have pointed out- seems to have Sheik's moveset, or at least a style quite similar, so because of this one would have to wonder if they'd include Sheik at all, if not attached to Zelda. Anyway, I'm talking in circles now.

 

[Katy Parry]

wtf? ZSS does NOT replace Shiek! Its the same character kinda...samus. Shiek WILL be in.