Legend of Zelda The Milk Bar [Archived]

[theunabletable]

No need to be an elitist, Sign of Madness, and the same can go for you Vulcan. No need in marking others with slander and complete objection when none of us can truly be correct. There's a difference between dissecting, analyzing, and distributing information and forcibly disproving another to rectify your own belief. Is it joyous to shoot down another so that your belief may be upheld? Let me use a grand metaphor for this situation.

I don't mean to sound elitist. I'm just used to debating with people who know the Japanese translations, know the Seal War, know more about the AoL BS etc. I'm not used to people disregarding OoX as canon when the Japanese text as huge timeline indicators.

any timeline theory is true, as it lies simply in the reader's interpretation of the concepts held within the saga

Well to a certain extent. There are some things that are just plain wrong. I've seen timelines that go LoZ-MM. And stuff like that.

For instance, what matters most to me is the land. Not the people, but the land and how it changes, which is why - in the past - I've constructed so many theories based on it. If the land is more important to me than Ganon's mortality, then a timeline I construct around it is as true as any other.

If you think land is that important then I suggest looking at the FSA map then the LttP map. They look eerily similar. And FSA takes place on an island.

Also note that there is more water in the past of OoA than the present. Hinting towards the Deku Tree's success.

1. enemy structure - enemies of the same name undergo a million years of evolution within a timeline that suggests only a 100 between games.

2. Geography - once again, if there is a timeline, then there must be at least 500 years between games with significantly different geographies.

3. nature of the triforce - no amount of timelining will explain how in some games the triforce is a birthright in some games and a physical object in others.

1) Well the flood can explain a lot of the evolution. The changes from water octorok's to land octorok's. There's more, but I'm lazy.

2) There very well could be 500 years between the majority of games.

3) Not timeline theorizing. But theorizing on the individual games can. When (if ever) ZeldaInformer comes back up I'll link you to an excellent article which explains the Triforce very well using facts that we know.

About the no timeline thing being "truer" I have to disagree on that. There are certain confirmed arcs that we know of.
OoT-MM
OoT-tWW
OoT-TP
OoT-LttP
FS-FSA

The rest aren't confirmed, but can be put together with a little thought.

 

[c3gill]

No need to be an elitist, Sign of Madness, and the same can go for you Vulcan.

/clap - someone finally said it!

 

[Vulcan55]

No need to be an elitist, Sign of Madness, and the same can go for you Vulcan.

What? I'm not being elitist.

 

[Spire]

About the no timeline thing being "truer" I have to disagree on that. There are certain confirmed arcs that we know of.
OoT-MM
OoT-tWW
OoT-TP
OoT-LttP
FS-FSA

The rest aren't confirmed, but can be put together with a little thought.

I understand the arcs completely. Most knowledge about the timeline is not unknown to me, but I do stray from a limited strain of thought.

Take this into consideration, everyone. Majora's Mask was created as a direct sequel to Ocarina of Time. Everyone knows that. But what if I didn't want it to be? What if I stripped it of all that comprises it and retell it in my own way, with exaggerated landmarks (and a much larger Termina at that), missing, yet new characters, and an altered storyline -- all because I want to. What if I were to say that Link, the Hero of Winds journeys to Termina via boat, docking at the Great Bay after sailing the expanses of the Great Sea. Perhaps he is known as The Hero of Time because he oh-so-resembled The Hero of Time to some, and so he was thus dubbed this Hero. Or perhaps even, he is The Hero of Time, and right after he was sent back to being a child, the Goddesses flooded Hyrule to make sure that Ganon could not reign terror, and so Link traveled vertically to save himself, ending up on what would be called Outset Island.

Yeah, none of it is canonical, but what if I wanted to believe that? I very well could, and it would be absolutely realistic. Video games are known for influencing bad things, but truly, they are only guilty of one crime - the crime of visual limitation. When you play the game, you're going to experience the same thing over and over again. Now, in this day and age, that's changing, with innovative and ever-different/changing games such as Spore (I forgot about that game). Even a book is not guilty of this crime, for the only visual representation is text, which does the simple task of telling the story. How the story looks and feels is simply up to the reader.

The Legend of Zelda is as such. The same story told over and over again, but told through visual limitations, and so we limit ourselves in our perceptions of the series. I mentioned a few pages ago a multi-media project that I started called Project: Future Zelda. Why? Well, it was an interesting point of time that appealed to all that were members of the team, and we did not have to deal with inconsistencies with any of the games, as we could create Hyrule however we wanted, changing the land, the characters, the locations, creatures, everything. Most importantly though, we retained the classic story, but changed it significantly to "keep up with the times". Could it be canonical? Why not? I find that putting experimental ammunition in the cannon could be much more enjoyable than the same old iron cannonball that everyone knows.

Change a variable in the formula, and you have a spark of innovation. Change the formula entirely, and you have an entirely new type of beauty that our beloved series can resonate in. Follow the formula time and again, and you'll get the same answer - time and again. And again. And again. Can you eat a bowl of "27's" every morning? Or would you rather try out some "43's" or maybe some "58's"? I wouldn't want the diet of your average house dog. You eat the same, dry bits every day of your life.

So mix it up. Make Zelda your own, rather than adopting everyone else's Zelda.

That sounds like BS.
Ganon didn't have it yet, and never had it. If he really was "executed" right after kid zelda told the King, he would have never discovered it. In the TP scene he knew he had it, hence the laughing. If he knew he already had it before, he wouldn't need to look for it.

That sound pretty **** elitist to me, Vulcan. This series belongs to everyone as individual interpreters.

 

[Scott!]

No need to be an elitist, Sign of Madness, and the same can go for you Vulcan. No need in marking others with slander and complete objection when none of us can truly be correct. There's a difference between dissecting, analyzing, and distributing information and forcibly disproving another to rectify your own belief. Is it joyous to shoot down another so that your belief may be upheld? Let me use a grand metaphor for this situation.

The Declaration of Independence. Nintendo are the Framers, and The Legend of Zelda, the Declaration of Independence. We are the governors that uphold The Legend of Zelda and continue to interpret it, scrutinizing the ideals and possible concepts behind its writing. We cannot know the truth, as the truth continues to change with time, be it through the words of Nintendo, its author, or our own. Nothing is definite, as all things continue to change with time. Ultimately, it is up to those who express their love for that certain something, to continue to exercise their ability to read into it for insight, inspiration, and spiritual progression.

The Legend of Zelda is a fine art in my eyes, yet it continues to change with every release of a new chapter, and I will continue to read into these chapters over, and over again to connect that which is most important to me.

The "no timeline" theory is truer than any other, but simultaneously, any timeline theory is true, as it lies simply in the reader's interpretation of the concepts held within the saga - but more importantly, how they interpret it and what they choose to interpret. For instance, what matters most to me is the land. Not the people, but the land and how it changes, which is why - in the past - I've constructed so many theories based on it. If the land is more important to me than Ganon's mortality, then a timeline I construct around it is as true as any other.

Nothing is definite, and the Legend of Zelda has been written time and time again in many forms to continue to feed our imaginations and love for the series, and for whatever elements that comprise it are the most important to us, as individuals, be it the land, the people, the creatures, or what have you.

This. This. A thousand times this.

The Zelda timeline is entirely a theory. Sure, we can be pretty sure of some things. We know that OoT comes before all other games (except MC, depending on who you talk to). We know certain things. But we don't have enough information to truly determine it beyond doubt. Perhaps the next game will do that. Who knows. But while there remains doubt in the timeline, it can only be completed by someone based on opinion. There are inconsistencies. Everyone's timelines must decide which are more significant to resolve.

Personally, I think we should work together as a community to see what we can come to, rather than just taking turns telling each other why they're wrong. Just criticizing each other won't make progress.

 

[Vulcan55]

You need to look up the word elitist again, then.

 

[Spire]

The Zelda timeline is entirely a theory. Sure, we can be pretty sure of some things. We know that OoT comes before all other games (except MC, depending on who you talk to). We know certain things. But we don't have enough information to truly determine it beyond doubt. Perhaps the next game will do that. Who knows. But while there remains doubt in the timeline, it can only be completed by someone based on opinion. There are inconsistencies. Everyone's timelines must decide which are more significant to resolve.

Personally, I think we should work together as a community to see what we can come to, rather than just taking turns telling each other why they're wrong. Just criticizing each other won't make progress.

This. This. A thousand times this.

We are all members of these forums because of our interest in Smash Bros, but more importantly, we are the regulars of the Zelda Thread that Skyler created because of our love for the series. Let us not bicker and argue, and although that can lead to a conclusion of a sort, it certainly won't be the type that all can comfortably find their beliefs to be a part of. There are harmonious ways to settle our thoughts, so that all may reside on an equal plane.

 

[Spire]

You need to look up the word elitist again, then.

According to dictionary.com, an Elitist is as follows:

1. Practice of or belief in rule by an elite.
2. Consciousness of or pride in belonging to a select or favored group.

Your wording certainly sounded like you were shooting down another's ideas because they did not coincide with your own, calling them "bull ****". Your own, of course, belonging to a very confined and limited pool of thought, with uninviting waters to those who do not ride the same rails as yourself, the rails, which you deem to be built higher than all else. In other words, an elitist.

Now, I would not want to exclude you from the unity that I'd like established between all of us to further study Zelda as a whole, under peaceful regulation and appreciation of one anothers' beliefs.

EDIT: Sorry for doublepost.

 

[theunabletable]

Take this into consideration, everyone. Majora's Mask was created as a direct sequel to Ocarina of Time. Everyone knows that. But what if I didn't want it to be? What if I stripped it of all that comprises it and retell it in my own way, with exaggerated landmarks (and a much larger Termina at that), missing, yet new characters, and an altered storyline -- all because I want to. What if I were to say that Link, the Hero of Winds journeys to Termina via boat, docking at the Great Bay after sailing the expanses of the Great Sea. Perhaps he is known as The Hero of Time because he oh-so-resembled The Hero of Time to some, and so he was thus dubbed this Hero. Or perhaps even, he is The Hero of Time, and right after he was sent back to being a child, the Goddesses flooded Hyrule to make sure that Ganon could not reign terror, and so Link traveled vertically to save himself, ending up on what would be called Outset Island.

Sure you could. But, and I try and say this without sounding elitist, that would be completely wrong. This isn't about thinking with the timeline could be. It is about using all the evidence the come up with the best possible timeline.

I think fan-fic is fine. But to try and figure out the Zelda timeline through fanfic is pointless. (Maybe pointless is the wrong word. Since Zelda theorizing is pretty pointless, anyway)

Fiction is just that. Fiction. A theory is using actual evidence.

 

[Spire]

Sure you could. But, and I try and say this without sounding elitist, that would be completely wrong. This isn't about thinking with the timeline could be. It is about using all the evidence the come up with the best possible timeline.

I think fan-fic is fine. But to try and figure out the Zelda timeline through fanfic is pointless. (Maybe pointless is the wrong word. Since Zelda theorizing is pretty pointless, anyway)

Fiction is just that. Fiction. A theory is using actual evidence.

But there always comes a point when theory becomes fiction, and vice versa. What if, perhaps, I were to take over the Zelda development team, and change the way the series is seen forever, creating a game so different, yet so remarkable, that all games prior to it are rendered as "blueprints" to the one I make. Then your theory becomes fiction, and my fiction, becomes theory. We live in the "now", so the latest installment in a series should be treated as history should. Learn from the past, but use what's in the present to shape the future, as what is to come will most likely be influenced by the latest rendition.

 

[Scott!]

Sure you could. But, and I try and say this without sounding elitist, that would be completely wrong. This isn't about thinking with the timeline could be. It is about using all the evidence the come up with the best possible timeline.

I think fan-fic is fine. But to try and figure out the Zelda timeline through fanfic is pointless. (Maybe pointless is the wrong word. Since Zelda theorizing is pretty pointless, anyway)

Fiction is just that. Fiction. A theory is using actual evidence.

We know there is a timeline, because the creators have said so. We know it's split, and that OoT is the head, since they've said that too. Beyond that, we don't know much beyond the limited arcs you listed before, and even then, we don't know. I always assumed that LA followed ALttP, but earlier discussion made me consider that it followed MM. Not that that's true either, but we can't assume any one way is right without proof. The evidence in the games is always a bit vague, and self-contradictory at times. The timeline is something that, until we get more info, we cannot be certain on. Yes, we must use all the evidence for fact, but I have not seen a timeline that cannot be contradicted somehow. You yourself said a while back that you've been in what, 30 timeline debates. If you and those you debate with haven't come to a perfect timeline in that much, I don't think it can be done (yet). But that shouldn't stop us. It should just make us pause before telling someone else they're wrong, just because we disagree.

 

[theunabletable]

Sure, but we can't make fiction based on what we think the series might come to without proof.

Anything can happen. The "What if"s are kinda meaningless, Imo. A what if means nothing. It hasn't happened. There is no reason to assume it will happen.

If such a thing happens then my theory will be gone. But to assume that will happen is completely moronic.

Right now all we have are facts. Instead of ignoring facts and making up stuff we should use those facts to make something.

@Scott!
You say that I haven't come up with a perfect timeline. Yet no one has disproved mine. They've only say that some things I use may not be canon.

 

[Spire]

Sure, but we can't make fiction based on what we think the series might come to without proof.

Anything can happen. The "What if"s are kinda meaningless, Imo. A what if means nothing. It hasn't happened. There is no reason to assume it will happen.

If such a thing happens then my theory will be gone. But to assume that will happen is completely moronic.

Right now all we have are facts. Instead of ignoring facts and making up stuff we should use those facts to make something.

But just as Scott has pointed out, the facts cannot be structured in a definite manner, and while it is enjoyable to try and organize the facts, it is inherently pointless, as you can learn so much more from finding what you truly care about in the stories by identifying what stands out the most, and from that, you can formulate your own interpretations, to help progress yourself.

What can you possibly do to progress anything by formulating a hypothesis on how the games align? No one truly benefits from that, because for every connection you make, there will be a hundred sources trying to defy your idea. Studying the series and taking that knowledge to an artistic level, be it visual, musical, literature, theatrical, or what have you, the work you produce will be regarded in honor, as you've put aside the hardships of lining up impossible facts, and rather, focused on the key elements that mean the most to you - to exemplify those in your own, unique way.

 

[theunabletable]

^Until my timeline based purely on facts shown in game is disproved, I'm going to have to disagree with you.

 

[Spire]

^Until my timeline based purely on facts shown in game is disproved, I'm going to have to disagree with you.

What I was addressing is where or what does figuring out a potential timeline truly benefit?

 

[Scott!]

Timelines benefit their creators because, like anything you can create, the satisfaction of creating something is, or should be, the reason for making it in the first place. You want the satisfaction of having figured out the underlying meaning, the hidden message of sorts. There really is no other reason, unless you want to create a fan fic that fits in with all the detail, or you have some other use for the timeline. But figuring it out will give you nothing other than a timeline.

And yet we're all striving to find it. It's like the Holy Grail of Zelda players, everyone's looking for it, some people say it doesn't exist and it's all just a legend told many times. But the searchers seek it out. Why? The satisfaction of finding it, and for the journey itself.

 

[theunabletable]

lol I missed the bit about what can I progress and what will it accomplish.

All-in-all it accomplishes nothing.

But most hobbies accomplish nothing, anyway.

 

[Vulcan55]

Back on the topic of Zeldas timeline, I think there is a problem with the theory of the Oracle games coming after MM in timeline A, in that Ganon is supposedly banished to the dark/evil/twilight/whatever realm during MM, and brought back by Twinrova in the Oracle games.
In the Oracle games, however, Twinrova is trying to resurrect Ganon. Meaning he had been previously dead, not simply banished. I think, then, it would make the most sense that they follow either Zelda II or TP. Both games where Ganon actually dies.

Also, a problem with Ages-LA-Seasons.
You claim that Link sails away in both of the Oracle games, which I have found to be false. The Sailing away ending only happens after you beat both games + Twinrova and "Ganon". So if anything LA happens after both Oracle games, not in-between. This could then support the LA-Zelda 1 theory, but means that TP would have to be before the Oracle games (and subsequently, after OoT-MM) which we already discussed and, to me, doesn't make any sense.

 

[theunabletable]

Back on the topic of Zeldas timeline, I think there is a problem with the theory of the Oracle games coming after MM in timeline A, in that Ganon is supposedly banished to the dark/evil/twilight/whatever realm during MM, and brought back by Twinrova in the Oracle games.
In the Oracle games, however, Twinrova is trying to resurrect Ganon. Meaning he had been previously dead, not simply banished. I think, then, it would make the most sense that they follow either Zelda II or TP. Both games where Ganon actually dies.

I have a lot more problems with this timeline, though. You can look at my old post a page or 2 ago. There are a lot more things than just the inconsistency of boats and the resurrection.

 

[Darkslash]

Back on the topic of Zeldas timeline, I think there is a problem with the theory of the Oracle games coming after MM in timeline A, in that Ganon is supposedly banished to the dark/evil/twilight/whatever realm during MM, and brought back by Twinrova in the Oracle games.
In the Oracle games, however, Twinrova is trying to resurrect Ganon. Meaning he had been previously dead, not simply banished. I think, then, it would make the most sense that they follow either Zelda II or TP. Both games where Ganon actually dies.

I think I have come to the conclusion that Ganondorf was reborn. He is after all a Male Gerudo. and because Ganondorf looked to be about 20's-30's a 100 years doesn't seem much when put with Hyrule. You also gotta remember that Ganondorf's imprisonment in TP could of been mere months, seeing as the sage's are still mourning the death of the Water Sage.

The Ganondorf in TP is most likely NOT the same one as the on in OoT. The Arbiter Grounds are where Ganon got banned, and the Arbiter Grounds is possibly the Spirit Temple, as there the large looks similar to the mirror of Twilight,a look alike Desert Colossus and its location. I think Ganondorf was banished around a month before TP. He then regains strength(A week or 2 perhaps) and then meets Zant.

Auru, also seemed to be friends with the Sages, as that how he knew the Mirror of Twilight, and what they do at the Arbiter grounds. He never did mention the death of any sage, and seeing they tutored a young Princess Zelda, I doubt that that scene was after OoT or during OoT.

 

[theunabletable]

The Ganondorf in TP is most likely NOT the same one as the on in OoT. The Arbiter Grounds are where Ganon got banned, and the Arbiter Grounds is possibly the Spirit Temple, as there the large looks similar to the mirror of Twilight,a look alike Desert Colossus and its location. I think Ganondorf was banished around a month before TP. He then regains strength(A week or 2 perhaps) and then meets Zant.

That goes against what Aonuma has said, though. Aonuma said that Ganondorf from OoT did "something outrageous" and got caught.

 

[Darkslash]

That goes against what Aonuma has said, though. Aonuma said that Ganondorf from OoT did "something outrageous" and got caught.

Treason is pretty much the death sentence and in a European Feudal System(or any feudal system at all) is the most outrageous thing you can do. Seeing Link told the King*OHH GOD CD-i!!!*the king then executes Ganondorf under the accusation of treason. So then fast forward 70 years or so, and TP Ganondorf is born, as a male Gerudo is born ever 100 years.

 

[theunabletable]

^Umm wut?

Aonuma: The Wind Waker is parallel. In Ocarina of Time, Link flew seven years in time, he beat Ganon and went back to being a kid, remember? Twilight Princess takes place in the world of Ocarina of Time, a hundred and something years after the peace returned to kid Link’s time. In the last scene of Ocarina of Time, kids Link and Zelda have a little talk, and as a consequence of that talk, their relationship with Ganon takes a whole new direction. In the middle of this game [Twilight Princess], there's a scene showing Ganon's execution. It was decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be. That scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time. Ganon was sent to another world and now he wants to obtain the power...

OoT Ganondorf and TP Ganondorf are the same...

 

[Ochobobo]

I've wondered for a bit how TP Ganondorf had the Triforce of Power as well, when child link hadn't even gotten to it yet.

My reasoning is that when Zelda sent Link back at the end of OoT, he kept his Triforce of Courage. I'm sure nobody would deny that. Could Zelda even have the power to remove a Triforce from another individual, even through time?

So, there's Child Link with a Triforce of Courage. That means, assuming that Ganondorf has not yet reached the Sacred Realm, that there would be 2 Triforces of Courage at that time. Impossible. It's likely that the Triforce sensed this separation and broke off the other 2 pieces to send to their respective owners. Thus, Zelda and Ganondorf now have their pieces, allowing Ganondorf to escape his trial.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

Than it's Zelda's fault the Sage of Water died!

...I wonder how messed up it turns out with a sage dying

 

[Darkslash]

^Umm wut?
OoT Ganondorf and TP Ganondorf are the same...

Source? I know that may seem like begging but I have to see the source so you arn't,you know BSing me.

 

[The Halloween Captain]

Personally, I don't see OoT being the first Zelda, because the creators of the game only named it as the first one when referencing TP and Windwaker, while the question of the Zelda games created prior to these three has never been completely resolved, or even addressed, by the current Zelda staff.

Also, it is kinda assumed that OoT gannon is TP gannon since OoT gannon was a theif and TP gannon was sentenced as such, but I never really recall him possessing the triforce in the child timeline, so it is up for debate. This is especially true because of the rules of triforce physics, which state that if Gannon from OoT had to steal the triforce (which he hadn't done in the proposed TP timeline to my knowledge), he could not be the gannon from TP, where triforce weilders are born with the triforce.

EDIT: you know, no one ever questions the Mario timeline.

 

[c3gill]

EDIT: you know, no one ever questions the Mario timeline.

The same **** happens over and over again. bowser captures peach, mario kicks his ***, yoshi is a crazy dinosaur, and luigi is worthless. they dont change the basic idea of the game, just the levels. with LoZ, every game introduces a new time and new theorys about Hyrule.

 

[phenom-forever]

i think your time line is a bit wrong
cronelogicly the first game because there are only two triforce the second is when they find the triforce of courage then its oot then majora then twilight link to the past oracle series windwaker phantom that's how i think it goes

 

[Ochobobo]

i think your time line is a bit wrong
cronelogicly the first game because there are only two triforce the second is when they find the triforce of courage then its oot then majora then twilight link to the past oracle series windwaker phantom that's how i think it goes

lol

...I've never played the first 2 Zelda games all the way through (though I plan to eventually) Do they explain how it used to be 2 Triforces, then Courage was suddenly discovered? Was the Triforce of Courage somehow lost in between OoT and Zelda 1? (accordin to most timeline theories we have here)

 

[The Halloween Captain]

How can you have two triforces?

I mean, yes they are magic triangles so two is technically possible (as a single piece could be called a triforce without reference to the others), but the triforce implies three, and is iconic as a trio that forms a larger triangle.

However, the names and functions of the triforce do imply that courage was the last of the three.

http://www.awkwardzombie.com/comic1-100806.php

Incidently, there is a Mario timeline (in a sense). Yoshi's Island was the first game cronologically in the series. After that, who knows what happens.

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

How can you have two triforces?

I mean, yes they are magic triangles so two is technically possible (as a single piece could be called a triforce without reference to the others), but the triforce implies three, and is iconic as a trio that forms a larger triangle.

However, the names and functions of the triforce do imply that courage was the last of the three.

http://www.awkwardzombie.com/comic1-100806.php

Incidently, there is a Mario timeline (in a sense). Yoshi's Island was the first game cronologically in the series. After that, who knows what happens.

I think the triforce is more along the lines of it being in the shape of a triangle rather than there being 3 pieces.

The Triforce of Wisdom alone could broken FURTHER into pieces, and the original triforce itself was once one before Ganon entered the sacred realm.

 

[The Halloween Captain]

I never really liked the triforce of courage.

I never understood what it did exactly. So far, it has turned link into a wolf instead of a spirit (I think), but it hasn't done much else. It might have allowed Link to pick up the master sword, but it's hard to tell if it is the triforce allowing link to pick up the sword or link himself who does it.

Wisdom and power are self explanatory, but courage... not so much, and in some cases, almost unnecessary.

 

[Ochobobo]

I'll take the Triforce of Courage to protect me! If you don't hear from me in a month, send Link.

 

[The Halloween Captain]

How could anyone make anything that awful?

Seriously, that is the worst acting I've ever seen in a video game, even worse than the M&M's adventure intro.

 

[theunabletable]

Are you kidding?

–When does Twilight Princess take place?

Aonuma: In the world of Ocarina of Time, a hundred and something years later.

–And the Wind Waker?

Aonuma: The Wind Waker is parallel. In Ocarina of Time, Link flew seven years in time, he beat Ganon and went back to being a kid, remember? Twilight Princess takes place in the world of Ocarina of Time, a hundred and something years after the peace returned to kid Link’s time. In the last scene of Ocarina of Time, kids Link and Zelda have a little talk, and as a consequence of that talk, their relationship with Ganon takes a whole new direction. In the middle of this game [Twilight Princess], there's a scene showing Ganon's execution. It was decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be. That scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time. Ganon was sent to another world and now he wants to obtain the power...

It's the infamous split confirmation interview. http://www.thehylia.com/index.php?subaction=showfull&id=1173582355&archive=&start_from=&ucat=19& I'm sure there are way more places to find the interview, though.

On the subject of there being no Triforce of Courage (ToC). The scroll writer in the AoL backstory hid the ToC.

 

[Scott!]

Since we're wondering about its nature, I wonder if the Triforce of Courage is linked to the Master Sword. They say that the Master Sword is the only sword that can slay the evil, or something along those lines. Do you think that perhaps it's not the sword that has the power, but perhaps the sword reacts to the power of the Triforce of Courage to become powerful?

I also wonder about the nature of the Triforces in that I wonder how much a carrier of one can manipulate it. Zelda can clearly draw hers out and break it, as she did before LoZ started. And the Triforce of Courage was broken somehow pre-WW. But could it be possible that Zelda could give her part to Link if she was afraid of being captured? I wonder if Ganon could survive Link if Link had two pieces. So many hypothetical possibilities with that.

 

[theunabletable]

No reason to assume that the MS is connected to the ToC.

**** I can't remember whether the Japanese text says that the MS was forged by the people or the sages...

 

[PsychoIncarnate]

Since we're wondering about its nature, I wonder if the Triforce of Courage is linked to the Master Sword. They say that the Master Sword is the only sword that can slay the evil, or something along those lines. Do you think that perhaps it's not the sword that has the power, but perhaps the sword reacts to the power of the Triforce of Courage to become powerful?

I also wonder about the nature of the Triforces in that I wonder how much a carrier of one can manipulate it. Zelda can clearly draw hers out and break it, as she did before LoZ started. And the Triforce of Courage was broken somehow pre-WW. But could it be possible that Zelda could give her part to Link if she was afraid of being captured? I wonder if Ganon could survive Link if Link had two pieces. So many hypothetical possibilities with that.

Link didn't have the triforce of Courage in the first game. He received it or whatever in the second game, Adventure of Link.

I'm pretty sure he didn't still have the triforce of Wisdom in AOL

 

[theunabletable]

^Ummm.

Of course he had the Triforce of Wisdom in AoL. Remember the end scene? Where he uses all 3 Triforces and awakens Zelda?