I never said the different Link "excuse" was the same as Smashville example, if anything, I showed how they were different. I just said, as they are two different Links, both of them existing on the same stage at the same time makes sense. More sense than two Captain Falcons existing at once, yet clearly that's possible in Smash as well.
The differences are minor at best, and you'll see why later in the response, and especially to my comment towards Kiwi.
Though I'm just going to flat out say at this point that it is a possibility for both Links to appear on the stage at the same time which I am not arguing. However, there is an equal possibility of there being no Toon Link or even no secondary Link at all.
You are the one who said the different Link excuse and the AC example were the same. I said they weren't. You were the one who compared a background Tom Nook to a playable Tom Nook, stating it was the same as a background ST Link to a playable WW Link, which it isn't. The Tom Nooks are analogous to your Captain Falcon example, but are different than the Link one, as the Links are different characters. That's how my point still works.
I'm going to stop you right there; I
never said they were the same.
I'm saying that I refuse to use that excuse because it's been done before to a negative effect in another outcome.
You interpreted what I said to mean that they are the same.
Lastly, it might be similar to compare them to the Villager, granted, as there can be more than one Villager, but arguing for the inclusion of the character (which people did with Villager and Smashville) is very different than trying to prove the removal of a character (which is what people are doing now with the Links). Even though Villager was in the background last time, he still could've been made playable as well, just like how both Links can show up at the same time, as they are all different characters.
I get that already.
But whether or not the situation has some differences, the "different Links" argument isn't that good of an argument. It's merely focusing on a technicality, one that we honestly cannot say whether or not Sakurai sees it the same way.
We know he sees the WW/PH Link as "Toon Link", but we don't know if he considers the ST Link to be one as well, since ST
wasn't released prior to Brawl. It could very well be like how both OoT Link and TP Link are just "Links", both the WW/PH Link and ST Link can be considered "Toon Links". Especially since ST Link is the
direct successor to WW/PH Link.
So I say my original point again, despite me not wanting cuts from any of Brawl's veterans, I refuse to use the "different Links" argument.
Am I saying the stage confirms Toon Link is gone? No. But I have my doubts.
@Kiwi
No, Kiwi, I am
not saying that it is impossible for there to be a Toon Link AND the ST Link stage cameo.
And to respond to your previous post, you cannot claim that ST Link isn't a "Toon Link"; as I said before, ST didn't
exist when the term was made.
And if you're going by trophies, then Link and Toon Link
are the same character in the Smash series.
Toon Link is "Link as he appeared in Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass", while the trophy for Link lists his debut game as "The Legend of Zelda" despite being the Link from Twilight Princess.
Then we get to Melee and even Smash 64, where Link and Young Link are treated as not "OoT Link", but as
every Link in existence up to that point.
So using the trophies is also a flawed argument.
"
