The Reason Why Sheik's Absence in Twilight Princess Means NOTHING

[JonBeBonanza]

omg, sheik is like my second best charachter she is so fast and her "x" airs- are forces to be reckoned with, wish her down air was a spike thouhg lol

 

[Teeb147]

I don't want "he/she/it/potato" in the game.

too bad, cuz she in :D

 

[ronnietheboywonder]

They're gonna put Sheik as Zelda's Down B just like they did in melee, why wouldn't they?

"Oh Zelda is TP based so..."

Only her look is because TP was the most recent LoZ game, her moves aren't gonna change, duh! =P

 

[ronnietheboywonder]

omg, sheik is like my second best charachter she is so fast and her "x" airs- are forces to be reckoned with, wish her down air was a spike thouhg lol

that would be really rigged, and sexy lol

 

[tafutureboy]

i hope its clocked zelda and not shiek......i dont care if there the same... but cloaked would be interesting, unlike shiek(seriously WTF first went through my mind when i saw that)

 

[adumbrodeus]

I'm surprised that you need to ask this, especially since we're talking about Brawl's story mode. The answer to your question is "BECAUSE it's fan-fiction-on-acid." BECAUSE Brawl is a jumbled mess of a plot that is shoving unrelated characters into random situations to fight random, unrelated enemies.

So? That doesn't mean that it can't have internal logical consistency.

Remember, it's not like these are the actual characters from LoZ, and Pokemon, and Metriod, etc. These are action figures.

You say that Brawl could still have consistent rules for how [the story] plays. What consistent rules? What internal logical consistency could you possibly see in a story mode where you have Diddy Kong and Fox fighting Rayquaza? Or Pit and Mario fighting their way across a desert? Or Bowser stealing Donkey Kong's bananas? Or Mario and Sonic zipping through a jungle? Wario turning Zelda into a trophy?

If you assume that they're all initially trophies that got animated, then it's not incosistant with the internal narrative.

It's quite inconsistent with THE OTHER GAME'S NARRATIVES, but not with Smash's narrative.

Internal consistency only require that it be consistent with it's own rules...

Do you see what I'm saying here? There's no inherent internal logical consistency in fan-fiction-on-acid. If there was some sort of internal logical consistency there, we wouldn't have such a mess of a plot. We wouldn't be jumping around like that. There would be some sort of common thread running through SSE beyond the Ancient Minister bit. The only consistency I can see is that Brawl's SSE is going to be consistent at being inconsistent.

Again... how so? All of these characters are, in Smash's world, animated trophies. Sure they may be a trophy intended to represent say, Mario or Kirby, but they're not that actual character.

Once you have that set as your baseline, what has been revealed so far is perfectly consistent.

Only when you throw in unrelated narratives does it become inconsistent, which is why I'm pointing out so strongly that smash established that these other narratives aren't relevant.

Those were book-end cut-scenes. Even in single-player, they had zero bearing on anything. Once you started playing, those book-end cut-scenes ceased to exist. They opened and closed the game, but beyond that, you might as well had been playing a Mortal Kombat or Street Fighter. There was never any internal consistency in the previous Smash Bros games.

Again that's lack of depth, not lack of consistency within the narrative, there's a difference.

The internal inconsistency in Brawl itself is that none of the "story" directly involves any of the characters we've seen. There's no actual backstory and no actual plot. Just a dartboard used to create the story, with characters that could pretty much go anywhere. Each level in Brawl will be a self-contained vignette that doesn't make sense with any of the other levels. And as such, you could switch characters around and it wouldn't make a difference. Internal inconsistency.

Assuming that you are correct about that, however that is again, not inconsistent, it merely lacks depth.

In terms of Brawl fitting into the Smash Bros series, the "action figures coming to life" part is still that book-end cut-scene that has no bearing on what you're doing in the story mode. Granted, they've integrated it a tad better in Brawl from what we've seen (to the extent of the trophy gun), but realistically, the action figure angle is still just an incidental cut-scene that book-ends the fighting. Then when the fighting starts, we've leaped from fighting the Yoshi Team in Hyrule to facing Luigi and Mario in Jungle Japes, then trying to survive against giant Donkey Kong while our two teamates Fox and Jigglypuff get fried by Planet Zebes' acid. Still no internal consistency present.

Again, that's only inconsistent in regards to other narratives.

If in the melee universe a planet that is extremely similar to Zebes happens to be right next to a planet that kirby-trophies inhabit.... that's internally consistent.

Why is the OP convinced that Zelda meeting herself in Brawl wouldn't make sense? Especially within the cluster**** context (read: internally inconsistent) of Smash Bros? Nothing makes sense in Smash Bros. Nothing has ever made sense. The series has never even taken itself seriously. It's always been random and chaotic with heavy influences from various Nintendo games.

Lack of depth internal inconsistency does not make.

Only a clear contradiction between Brawl and itself (since we can't even assume that Brawl and melee take place in the same universe).

Not taking itself seriously is different from being inconsistent.


Really, you keep repeating it's inconsistent, PROVE IT!

Brawl that Brawl lacks internal consistency. Nothing from other narratives, just Brawl.

You merely provided examples of liberties taken with general move sets, changes that have more to do with gameplay than trying to negate character consistency. Link's arrows are most certainly silver arrows, yes. Yes, both Links use the boomerang. Yes, the hookshot normally was ALO (Adult Link Only...sounds kind of kinky...). But there's no denying that the movesets were largely (if not entirely) based on OoT, just like the character models. Even the boomerang and hookshot were modeled after OoT's items. The very appearance of Young Link screams OoT. Of course you had variations (such as the hookshot and arrows), but those were minute variations. And overall, it's stupidly clear that OoT was the character template, so there was still a very strong character consistency, which pretty effectively punches a hole in your other point about "representing all incarnations."

Liberties? Which means that effectively that can do whatever the hell they want.

In order for it to be internally consistent, if it's based on one Link, EVERYTHING MUST FIT. Otherwise it's not internally consistent. Same with Zelda.

So, since they are allowed to use stuff from other Links and they never said they'd use stuff from just one Link, what must the rule be?


So it's not solely based on just one Link, ergo they can pull stuff from any Link, to maintain consistency, the same must be true of Zelda.

Nobody is going to suggest that Link and Zelda were not based on the most part on their TP incarnations, but if they can use features of Link and Zelda from any LoZ game, is it consistent to use features that mostly come from TP? No, same as pulling the Silver arrows from a Link to the Past isn't inconsistent.

So, if you wish to prove their limited in selections, prove it, and explain exactly how limited.

Would blond hair be too far off, how about using one of the medallions? How many changes exactly breaches the "template rule"?

Because, it sounds like it's a fancy way of saying, "they can use stuff from any Link, but you're wrong anyway".

...the very fact that we have random pairings of characters in random levels. If there were only two characters we played as straight through, then Brawl would be internally consistent. But as it stands, we're hopping around from character to character, from enemy to enemy, from level to level. That is inconsistent within Brawl. Why are you even looking for an outright contradiction, anyway?

We don't have any proof that this is true in the storyline mode, in fact all evidence is to the contrary. It wasn't true in melee's adventure mode either.

As to why, because internal inconsistency requires a contradiction between Brawl and it's own logic, not Brawl and anything else.

Because there's never any logic to a cross-over plot. You have random, nonsensical gibberish stringing random external events together with unrelated characters getting caught in the middle. Cross-overs are internally inconsistent because its characters are from completely different stories, often in completely different genres and so bringing them together results in a trainwreck of contrasts, pacing, and plot/character development. This isn't a difficult concept to understand, friend.

It's difficult to make an internally consistent cross-over, but there are ways to do it. And as I pointed out, Brawl did this by establishing from the beginning that the narratives that the characters came from are not related to brawl.

Sure, cross-overs are far more likely to be internally inconsistent, but it's not something that is inherent within the stories.

Then explain why with each Smash Bros game, most of the staple characters have seen visual upgrades/updates/changes in accordance with the current game in their respective franchises?

Different trophies?

I seem to remember pointing out that these characters are trophies according to Brawl.

Furthermore, it's not like Brawl established that it took place in the same universe as melee or SSB64, so there's no need for it to be consistent with them to maintain internal consistency.

Uh...no it's not. lol. Certain story-types (like fan-fiction cross-overs) are focused on one thing and one thing only: jamming as many characters as possible into one story. In those situations there's no need (or desire) to create any type of believable setting. If there's a plot, it's only to keep the characters together, and it's often forced and artificial. Make no mistake, man. The only times when you're going to actually suspend your disbelief are when a work is presenting an entirely original world with entirely original characters. Otherwise, you already know everything you need to know, and therefore nothing is new or surprising, which therefore does not challenge what you can and cannot believe.

Essential in the sense that it's part of what makes the narrative good (generally in the sense that lack thereof makes it worse, but having it doesn't make the narrative good).

Lack of it is a major reason why most crossovers are extremely poor and not worth reading/watching/playing/listening to/whatever.

Sure, the creator may not be concerned about it, but that doesn't make it any less important.

Whoa whoa whoa, are you serious? You must be trolling. Tell me you're trolling. No sensible human being would say what you just said. You say that fan-fiction is no different than any other work, and then mention quality issues and originality as if they're minor little quibbles? No offense, but what in the hell is wrong with you? There are only two things that ever matter in writing. Quality and originality. Anyone tells you otherwise, they're ****ing liars. If you look at fan-fiction and think to yourself "Oh, well, the writing sucks and they're not using original characters but there's still a narrative so I'll consider it no different than Heart of Darkness and Slaughterhouse Five" you need to get your head on straight asap.

Erm... Nice Straw man fallacy there.

I never said it's a minor quibble, but I did say on average, the average fanfiction is unoriginal and of poorer quality then the average book.

Now, you should know this, the majority of works are crap, plain and simple. Fan fiction is more likely to be crap, but you can't generalize, you never know when a legitimately good work of fanfiction might be created.

 

[AkA`Mr.Wigz]

good **** marokie!

heres the shiekah symbol pics...(incase you didnt havethem)

Here it is

Here it is with shiekah symbol highlited

 

[LightLink17]

I think Shiek's making it, but the idea of her transforming from TP Zelda is ********. That *is* Like WW Link transforming into a wolf. I'm tired of hearing "It's Zelda in general, it's just TP themed!" Yeah, right, just as WW Link can transform into Wolf Link because "It's representative of all Links, only WW themed!"

However, I wouldn't put it past developers to do it anyway. So I'm not really saying it's not going to happen, only that it simply makes no sense to me.

 

[T-major]

I didn't miss the post that said Sheik is confirmed, I'm merely pointing out how terrible your logic is, because the only reason they would completely ignore continuity in this case is because Sheik is a popular Melee character and if it is totally stupid for Wind Waker Link to turn into Wolf Link and for TP Link to put on the Oni Mask because that didn't happen in their games, then it is stupid for TP Zelda to turn into Sheik because it didn't happen in TP, yet again we go back to your first post:

yes, it is totally stupid for WW Link to transform into Wolf link. thats because Link can only transforms in the Twilight Realm/with the help of Midna. Brawl doesn't fully follow canon (it still has some influence though), but it still follows logic. you can't just have a character do something that they aren't able to normally do. you can't have Mario breath fire, because he can't normally do that. just like WW Link can't become Wolf Link, because the Twilght realm doesn't exist in his time line.

and Sheik is confirmed. so theres really no point arguing this in the first place... and I don't mean semi-confirmed, I mean fully, officially confirmed by a reliable source. theres, quite literally, NO argument against Sheik now, because it's all pointless...

and tafutreboy, thats a stupid idea. Cloaked Zelda isn't interesting AT ALL. it Zelda, with a Cloak... woo... Sheik is a magically induced GENDER CHANGE, that completely morphs her appearance. I don't see HOW you can think the former is more interesting, in ANY WAY...

 

[Fatmanonice]

I think Shiek's making it, but the idea of her transforming from TP Zelda is ********. That *is* Like WW Link transforming into a wolf. I'm tired of hearing "It's Zelda in general, it's just TP themed!" Yeah, right, just as WW Link can transform into Wolf Link because "It's representative of all Links, only WW themed!"

However, I wouldn't put it past developers to do it anyway. So I'm not really saying it's not going to happen, only that it simply makes no sense to me.

That's a terrrible analogy... Your logic also fails because Zelda has Farore's Wind, Din's Fire, and Nayru's Love and she didn't use any of those attacks in TP.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Yeah, right, just as WW Link can transform into Wolf Link because "It's representative of all Links, only WW themed!"

And the problem with that logic is...?







And it's not "themed" it's, "that's where some of his attributes came from". ("some" in this case meaning anything from just one to every single attribute of the character)


The whole idea of WW Link rather does annoy me since it's just the same character for the reasons that I stated but I wouldn't put it past them to make another variation of Link and give him attributes drawn from other LoZ games. Doesn't change the core reasoning, he's Link, not WindWaker Link, he draw his looks from Windwaker, and maybe everything about the character, but it's still Link. I expect that they would call him Young Link like in Melee as well.



Plus, that variation of Link isn't confirmed for Brawl, thus even if it would be inconsistent it has absolutely no bearing on this unless/until he is confirmed.

 

[LightLink17]

First of all, we don't know if those are actually the names of the spells.

Second of all, it's not a far stretch to assume that most Zeldas know these spells. Zeldas know magic, they have the triforce of wisdom, and there's nothing to really suggest these spells aren't written down somewhere for Zeldas to learn. It is however, a stretch for a completely different Zelda to somehow don a guise that her ancestor *would have* donned, should things have gone differently. Shiek never even existed ever in the TP timeline, what are the chances that TP Zelda would somehow manage to ever come up with the same disguise? Exceedingly low.

 

[Circus]

and Sheik is confirmed. so theres really no point arguing this in the first place... and I don't mean semi-confirmed, I mean fully, officially confirmed by a reliable source. theres, quite literally, NO argument against Sheik now, because it's all pointless...

I feel like I missed something. Because you can't possibly be referring to the moveset leak in which it was only stated that Zelda has a transformation move as her down B. That moveset says nothing about whether she transforms into Sheik or not. In fact, the way it was worded based on the translation, it actually seems to hinder Sheik's chances.

So. I would really like to see this video clip/screen capture/direct, undebatable quote from Sakurai that proves Sheik is in that everyone else seems to have seen. Because right now, I'm not havin' it.

 

[PEACHYprincess]

I agree with everything Tyeforce said.
It bugs me so much how people think Sheik wont be in it just because Zelda is in her TP costume. Its so stupid.

 

[Fatmanonice]

First of all, we don't know if those are actually the names of the spells.

Didn't you read what I wrote? It doesn't matter what the attacks are called in Brawl because we know what there are and that they weren't used in TP.

Second of all, it's not a far stretch to assume that most Zeldas know these spells. Zeldas know magic, they have the triforce of wisdom, and there's nothing to really suggest these spells aren't written down somewhere for Zeldas to learn. It is however, a stretch for a completely different Zelda to somehow don a guise that her ancestor *would have* donned, should things have gone differently. Shiek never even existed ever in the TP timeline, what are the chances that TP Zelda would somehow manage to ever come up with the same disguise? Exceedingly low.

You are aware that the smash games are not canonical are exist outside the logic of the various Nintendo franchises, right?

 

[T-major]

I feel like I missed something. Because you can't possibly be referring to the moveset leak in which it was only stated that Zelda has a transformation move as her down B. That moveset says nothing about whether she transforms into Sheik or not. In fact, the way it was worded based on the translation, it actually seems to hinder Sheik's chances.

So. I would really like to see this video clip/screen capture/direct, undebatable quote from Sakurai that proves Sheik is in that everyone else seems to have seen. Because right now, I'm not havin' it.

The translation for the final Special move reads: "Twilight Change (Original Twilight version of Sheik transformation)" A rough translation says "Twilight version Seek Transformation". Seek is the Japanese version of Sheik, so there ya go. We have multiple translators confirming this.

source

anything else?

 

[LightLink17]

Didn't you read what I wrote? It doesn't matter what the attacks are called in Brawl because we know what there are and that they weren't used in TP.

Again, irrelevant as it's not exactly unlikely that Zelda knows these attacks. Again, she almost always knows magic, what's stopping her from knowing these things? Nothing.

But again, the idea she can pull Shiek out of her *** is pressing reality. Shiek came about as a disguise for a Zelda 100 years prior to TP, because of a situation that didn't even happen in the TP timeline. And since this situation never happened in the TP timeline, Shiek never even came about with OoT Zelda in the TP Timeline. So why in the world would TP Zelda get lucky enough to come up with a costume that her ancestor would have, if things went differently than they actually did?

You are aware that the smash games are not canonical are exist outside the logic of the various Nintendo franchises, right?

Hence Mario transforms into Fierce Deity Mario, and Samus can turn into Giga Samus.

No. While it's non-canonical, that really doesn't say anything about it. It's still not very sensical.

And the problem with that logic is...?

Well, nothing, if you actually accept that it would be perfectly fine for WW Link to turn into Wolf Link.

And it's not "themed" it's, "that's where some of his attributes came from". ("some" in this case meaning anything from just one to every single attribute of the character)

Yeah, that's usually what "Theme" means.

The whole idea of WW Link rather does annoy me since it's just the same character for the reasons that I stated but I wouldn't put it past them to make another variation of Link and give him attributes drawn from other LoZ games. Doesn't change the core reasoning, he's Link, not WindWaker Link, he draw his looks from Windwaker, and maybe everything about the character, but it's still Link. I expect that they would call him Young Link like in Melee as well.

Except that if it looks like a particular Link, and acts like a particular Link, it should be safe to say that it is that particular Link.

Plus, that variation of Link isn't confirmed for Brawl, thus even if it would be inconsistent it has absolutely no bearing on this unless/until he is confirmed.

Nonsense. Examples and hypothetical are not invalid in discussion. They are used all the time because of their incredibly usefulness. If you were right, I could just say "well shiek isn't confirmed so shut up" and try to ruin the entire thread.

 

[Zoo-bellocks]

source

anything else?

http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=136504

Hmm...

 

[adumbrodeus]

source

anything else?

He said Sakurai...

Not CoroCoro, where did they get their information, how do we know it's reliable?

 

[Luthien]

You are aware that the smash games are not canonical are exist outside the logic of the various Nintendo franchises, right?

Well, yes. Plot-wise, at least. But there is a line that cannot be crossed. Regarding CHARACTERS, though, (as in not plot) Sakurai can BEND the canon rules, he cannot BREAK them.

However, where is this line? No one on this forum has a TRUE idea. The location of the line is up to Sakurai. I gather this stuff from what we've seen so far:

Sakurai has BROKEN canon in the situations he's put the fighters in.
Sakurai has BENDED canon in some of the characters movesets.

I would consider giving TP Zelda (the form of this Zelda) Sheik illogical. This is a problem for me because Sakurai has always used SOME logic regarding character's movesets. Whether he deems Sheik logical or not is up to him, so let's leave it alone, okay? Maybe the fact that Sheik's appeared in another game is enough of a link to bring it to Brawl. Who knows?

"In conclusion, Sheik is definitely returning, and she is very likely to be Twilight Princess-esque, possibly similar to "cloaked Zelda", but not the same."

This quote bugs me more than anything. The arguement you were making (not you, Fatmanonrice) is why Sheik CAN be in Brawl. You aren't Sakurai. You cannot claim Sheik WILL, 100% be in Brawl. You should be claiming that she CAN, not that she WILL.

Outside of that, I agree that Sheik will probably be in Brawl. At least, from all the evidence we've seen.

 

[Circus]

source

anything else?

Exactly.

"Original Twilight version of Sheik transformation." That's the key part of the quote. "Transformation" is the noun there; "Sheik" (or "Seek") acts as more of an adjective.

The sentence doesn't say "Twilight version of Sheik." It says "Twilight version of the transformation." It doesn't imply that Sheik has been updated; it implies that the transformation move itself has been updated to fit Twilight Princess. Which, in all likelihood, would mean the exclusion of Sheik.

Seriously. . . why does no one else see this? I've re-read that quote several times. Am I still blind to something?

EDIT:

http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=136504

Hmm...

Ah. . . and the tables turn yet again.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Well, nothing, if you actually accept that it would be perfectly fine for WW Link to turn into Wolf Link.

A Link trophy that takes it's physical appearance from WW Link turning into Wolf Link, yep I have no problem with it, as long as the game hasn't stated in some fashion that it is WW Link and only WindWaker Link.

Yeah, that's usually what "Theme" means.

Not really, theme is far more strict a term, requiring it to be unifying or dominating. Whereas this might be true of some incarnation, it's not required to be true of all.

Except that if it looks like a particular Link, and acts like a particular Link, it should be safe to say that it is that particular Link.

Except contrary evidence suggests that the Link only has a majoritarian interest.

Which I pointed out.

Nonsense. Examples and hypothetical are not invalid in discussion. They are used all the time because of their incredibly usefulness. If you were right, I could just say "well shiek isn't confirmed so shut up" and try to ruin the entire thread.

A hypothetical... the issue is by it's very confirmation WW Link would confirm a different understanding of how LoZ characters are understood in smash, so it's useless as a hypothetical, were that incarnation confirmed, I'm sure there'd be riotous debates about what exactly that rule is, but it's existance in smash in and of itself changes things, and truthfully, in this circumstance you're not trying to ask "what would WW Link's confirmation change", you're trying to ask, "what would it be like to do the same thing to a different character".

Since picking any character not on the rooster changes how smash characters are inherently understood, no off-rooster character is analogous.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Again, irrelevant as it's not exactly unlikely that Zelda knows these attacks. Again, she almost always knows magic, what's stopping her from knowing these things? Nothing.

And you base this on...? You seem to neglect that these were Link's attacks in OoT and not truely hers in the first place like how PK Thunder and PK Fire are actually Paula's attacks instead of Ness's.

But again, the idea she can pull Shiek out of her *** is pressing reality. Shiek came about as a disguise for a Zelda 100 years prior to TP, because of a situation that didn't even happen in the TP timeline. And since this situation never happened in the TP timeline, Shiek never even came about with OoT Zelda in the TP Timeline. So why in the world would TP Zelda get lucky enough to come up with a costume that her ancestor would have, if things went differently than they actually did?

Pressing reality? You have Solid Snake, a modern day assassin, fighting Samus, an intergalactic bounty hunter from hundreds of years in the future... Good God, man don't even get me started on why what you said was a massive contradiction to the franchise itself...


Hence Mario transforms into Fierce Deity Mario, and Samus can turn into Giga Samus.

This is now just becoming plane stupid as neither of these characteristics have even appeared in either of these characters' respective franchises... Can we please be serious about this debate?

My rebuttals in red.

 

[LightLink17]

A Link trophy that takes it's physical appearance from WW Link turning into Wolf Link, yep I have no problem with it, as long as the game hasn't stated in some fashion that it is WW Link and only WindWaker Link.

We're not talking about trophies, we're talking about PCs.

Not really, theme is far more strict a term, requiring it to be unifying or dominating. Whereas this might be true of some incarnation, it's not required to be true of all.

Nonsense. Theme is not inherently strict. Or else we would never say "Heavy Theme" or "Loose Theme" because we'd automatically know it was strict by virtue of the word itself.

Except contrary evidence suggests that the Link only has a majoritarian interest.

Which I pointed out.

Irrelevant. The Link in Smash looks, and is drawn enough from TP Link it seems to be a fair assumption that it is.

A hypothetical... the issue is by it's very confirmation WW Link would confirm a different understanding of how LoZ characters are understood in smash, so it's useless as a hypothetical, were that incarnation confirmed, I'm sure there'd be riotous debates about what exactly that rule is, but it's existance in smash in and of itself changes things, and truthfully, in this circumstance you're not trying to ask "what would WW Link's confirmation change", you're trying to ask, "what would it be like to do the same thing to a different character".

Since picking any character not on the rooster changes how smash characters are inherently understood, no off-rooster character is analogous.

Illogical. Things follow patterns. Based on what we know, it's safe to continue with the understanding that one could be wrong. But this understanding doesn't make it illogical to continue. Or else, why are you in a Shiek thread when Shiek hasn't been confirmed? The addition of a new character would obviously change the dynamic, and since we don't have the full roster, how could you possibly talk about something without the adequate knowledge that other characters bring?

 

[T-major]

http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=136504

Hmm...

to be fair, I didn't know about that when I posted the other thing.

Exactly.

"Original Twilight version of Sheik transformation." That's the key part of the quote. "Transformation" is the noun there; "Sheik" (or "Seek") acts as more of an adjective.

.... what?

The sentence doesn't say "Twilight version of Sheik." It says "Twilight version of the transformation." It doesn't imply that Sheik has been updated; it implies that the transformation move itself has been updated to fit Twilight Princess. Which, in all likelihood, would mean the exclusion of Sheik.

...um... yes it does... it said "original Twilight version of Sheik Transformation" which means "Sheik Transformation, with an original Twilight Princess based design"... how is that not clear? thats how any normal person would see it if they were reading it casually. you had to go and bring in nouns and what-ever-the-fu*k, which normal people don't do when reading a magazine article!

Seriously. . . why does no one else see this?

because it's wrong...

whatever, I'm done here.

 

[adumbrodeus]

We're not talking about trophies, we're talking about PCs.

In Smash the PCs ARE essentially trophies/action figures.

Hence the reference.

Nonsense. Theme is not inherently strict. Or else we would never say "Heavy Theme" or "Loose Theme" because we'd automatically know it was strict by virtue of the word itself.

I said, "more strict" not "strict", a comparative.

They inherently reference to a considerable majority of interest either as unifying or dominant factor.

What I said has no set parameters.

Irrelevant. The Link in Smash looks, and is drawn enough from TP Link it seems to be a fair assumption that it is.

One deviation is all that is required.

Illogical. Things follow patterns. Based on what we know, it's safe to continue with the understanding that one could be wrong. But this understanding doesn't make it illogical to continue. Or else, why are you in a Shiek thread when Shiek hasn't been confirmed? The addition of a new character would obviously change the dynamic, and since we don't have the full roster, how could you possibly talk about something without the adequate knowledge that other characters bring?

Of course a new character would change the dynamic, that much is obvious, that's why people are discussing what Captain Olimar means for Ridley and Geno.

However, we cannot assume the change in dynamic unless the character is actually confirmed so each character must be evaluated on his or her individual merits, since their confirmation doesn't change anything for them.

We can talk about what it would mean for Sheik is WW Link is confirmed, but discussing Sheik assuming that WW Link is in changes the dynamics considerably, and vice-versa.


Sure, Sheik's confirmation would change dynamics, but that's not what we're discussing, is it?

If we were discussing, say, Marth, and I assumed Sheik was in, you'd have a point, but we're not.




Assume nothing except the givens.

 

[Circus]

.... what?

My point was that the quote (which seems to be fake now, but whatever), as I read it, was just talking about Zelda having a transformation move as a down B. "Sheik" described the transformation as it was in Melee as a point of reference. When the quote mentioned "original Twilight version", I took it as describing the transformation. "An original take on the Sheik transformation from Melee", with "original" obviously meaning something completely new. That is, not Sheik.

...um... yes it does... it said "original Twilight version of Sheik Transformation" which means "Sheik Transformation, with an original Twilight Princess based design"... how is that not clear?

Re-reading it for about the 2093754th time, I now see how one could read it that way. However, I still think that way makes less sense. What is the word "original" doing there if not to signal that the Brawl transformation is unique from it's Melee counterpart?

thats how any normal person would see it if they were reading it casually. you had to go and bring in nouns and what-ever-the-fu*k, which normal people don't do when reading a magazine article!

You're saying "normal people" don't use basic english rules when reading magazines? Because that's all nouns and adjectives are. They're in just about every sentence you've ever read. You don't seek them out and try to define each of them consciously, and I don't expect anyone to, but you DO do it in the back of your mind. It's second nature at this point, is all. That's what allows us to read the same sentence two different ways. I saw "Original Twilight version of (Sheik) transformation" and you saw "Original Twilight version of Sheik (transformation)."

 

[adumbrodeus]

...um... yes it does... it said "original Twilight version of Sheik Transformation" which means "Sheik Transformation, with an original Twilight Princess based design"... how is that not clear? thats how any normal person would see it if they were reading it casually. you had to go and bring in nouns and what-ever-the-fu*k, which normal people don't do when reading a magazine article!

You're wrong, but so is he, it doesn't specify.

I'm sorry, but while people don't place "adjective", "verb", "noun", and "adverb" next to words, they recognize them without acknowledging it, thus it's useful for disseminating what exactly a sentence means, hence why formal reading of sentences came about.

"Original Twilight version of Sheik Transformation" could mean either, "an original Twilight version transformation to replace the Sheik transformation" or "an original twilight version Sheik transformation".

We don't know.

If anyone has the Japanese, I could look it over and figure out exactly what it means, but this doesn't tell us anything useful, it's probably too garbled in somebody's attempt to make it sound like logical English when it not analogous.

 

[Brasil]

So? That doesn't mean that it can't have internal logical consistency.

I'm curious. How WOULD it have internal logical consistency?

If you assume that they're all initially trophies that got animated, then it's not incosistant with the internal narrative.

But there is NO narrative. The opening cut-scenes for SSB64 and Melee were never persistent all the way through. You had the doll/trophy intro and then never saw it or anything substantially related to it ever again. If the trophy bit had been a narrative it would have persisted through the games. It didn't. We weren't playing with trophies in Smash. We were playing with Link, Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong, and so on. For the game itself, the trophy cut-scenes were irrelevant. They did not matter whatsoever. At best, they were a SET-UP...a fun, flashy way to introduce the game.

If in the melee universe a planet that is extremely similar to Zebes happens to be right next to a planet that kirby-trophies inhabit.... that's internally consistent.

And if such a situation is never clearly established? What then? Where's the internal logical consistency? The Melee transition cut-scenes aren't all that informative, that's for sure...and they do nothing but bring you to the next fight...

Only a clear contradiction between Brawl and itself (since we can't even assume that Brawl and melee take place in the same universe).

Then show me how Brawl doesn't contradict itself since you're so hung up on this contradiction thing.

Really, you keep repeating it's inconsistent, PROVE IT!

I have been. You just refuse to see it and keep harping on contradictions. How about you now prove how it IS all internally logically consistent.

Liberties? Which means that effectively that can do whatever the hell they want.

Yup. Ain't it swell?

In order for it to be internally consistent, if it's based on one Link, EVERYTHING MUST FIT. Otherwise it's not internally consistent. Same with Zelda.

What you're talking about here is the game being EXTERNALLY consistent. Not INTERNALLY consistent.

Because, it sounds like it's a fancy way of saying, "they can use stuff from any Link, but you're wrong anyway".

Not really. What I'm pointing out is there's a 95% source template from the current game, and the little tiny gaps in character move-sets are filled with classic items from across the franchise. You want a "template rule" guideline? Too bad. There is no "template rule." All there is is the franchise's current game, how that current game influences Smash Bros character creation/refinement, and then what is used to fill in little gaps here and there. And even if they have little gaps at the end, the character design is still EXTERNALLY consistent with the franchise current game.

Oh, by the way...silver arrows? Debuted long before Link to the Past, mate.

We don't have any proof that this is true in the storyline mode, in fact all evidence is to the contrary.

You're incorrect. See below.

On top of that, notice the videos where Diddy and DK are freeze-framed and the player selects one of them? What about Mario and Kirby's freeze-frame? Pit and Mario. Fox and Diddy. Kirby and Zelda. Sonic and Mario. All of those are random pairings in random levels.

It wasn't true in melee's adventure mode either.

Parts of Melee's adventure mode were consistent...because you played as the character you selected. Beyond that, the thing was a mash-up.

As to why, because internal inconsistency requires a contradiction between Brawl and it's own logic, not Brawl and anything else.

Why does it require a contradiction? And define "contradiction" how you're using it here.

It's difficult to make an internally consistent cross-over, but there are ways to do it. And as I pointed out, Brawl did this by establishing from the beginning that the narratives that the characters came from are not related to brawl.

That's not an answer. Ignoring external narratives does not establish an internal narrative. Keep trying.

Different trophies?

Try different GAMES. NOTHING in Smash Bros depends on the trophies. EVERYTHING in Smash depends on the franchise games.

Essential in the sense that it's part of what makes the narrative good (generally in the sense that lack thereof makes it worse, but having it doesn't make the narrative good).

NOPE. In a GOOD narrative, you NEVER NEED to willingly suspend your disbelief. If you absolutely need to actively suspend your disbelief, then the narrative is not establishing the world and characters well at all.

Lack of it is a major reason why most crossovers are extremely poor and not worth reading/watching/playing/listening to/whatever.

No, lack of suspending your disbelief means jack****, because cross-overs are extremely poor and not worth reading/whatever due to the author lacking writing prowess. If they had written the world and characters well, there never would be a need to suspend your disbelief.

Sure, the creator may not be concerned about it, but that doesn't make it any less important.

When you're reading a great author, willingly suspending your disbelief is as important as current American politics. And that is to say...not remotely important whatsoever.

Erm... Nice Straw man fallacy there.

"Straw Man" nothing. You said that fan-fiction was no different from other writing except for quality and originality. But the fact of the matter is, if you don't have quality and originality, you have nothing. And any English major will tell you that even if you were to strip away everything, there's still going to be a massive, massive, MASSIVE ****ing difference between Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five and some piss-ant little **** writing slash fanfic.

 

[adumbrodeus]

I'm curious. How WOULD it have internal logical consistency?

By not contradicting it's own rules.

THAT is internal logical consistency.

But there is NO narrative. The opening cut-scenes for SSB64 and Melee were never persistent all the way through. You had the doll/trophy intro and then never saw it or anything substantially related to it ever again. If the trophy bit had been a narrative it would have persisted through the games. It didn't. We weren't playing with trophies in Smash. We were playing with Link, Mario, Zelda, Donkey Kong, and so on. For the game itself, the trophy cut-scenes were irrelevant. They did not matter whatsoever. At best, they were a SET-UP...a fun, flashy way to introduce the game.

That's not true, there is an incredibly light narrative in the previous smash games, not no narrative.

Again, there does seem to be enough in the way of cutscenes to suggest that they'll be quite bit more for Brawl.

And if such a situation is never clearly established? What then? Where's the internal logical consistency? The Melee transition cut-scenes aren't all that informative, that's for sure...and they do nothing but bring you to the next fight...

Internal logical consistency is a lack of contradictions, not the inclusion of enough information to explain everything.

Then show me how Brawl doesn't contradict itself since you're so hung up on this contradiction thing.

That's simple, if there are no contradictions, then it is internally consistent.

Internal consistency is not proven by the existence of anything, it's proven by the lack of something, namely contradictions.

Since you can't provide me with any contradictions, the point is proven.

Care to try again?

I have been. You just refuse to see it and keep harping on contradictions. How about you now prove how it IS all internally logically consistent.

It lacks contradictions to it's own rules, ergo it is internally consistent.

As I point out above, this is proven by a lack of something, not the existence of something.

When you read the Tempest (if you read it) did you assume the existence of a zombie hoard in the ship that would've killed all of the crew before the storm?

No, you stuck with the information that Shakespeare gave you about his created world. It's the same with anything, you cannot assume that things not given by the creators are there. A work's consistency is proven only by a lack of things which contradict it within itself.

Yup. Ain't it swell?

Yes, that was my point.

Any Link's moves and attributes are usable for the smash incarnation, because it is internally consistent for them to do so, same with Zelda.

What you're talking about here is the game being EXTERNALLY consistent. Not INTERNALLY consistent.

I was talking about for it to be internally consistent if it had been established that the character was directly lifted from the LoZ game where they got the template, in other words, being true to the attributes of that Link became part of the internal consistency of SSBB.

My point was that it was only external consistency without that point being a given, which it wasn't and the evidence furthermore opposed.

Not really. What I'm pointing out is there's a 95% source template from the current game, and the little tiny gaps in character move-sets are filled with classic items from across the franchise. You want a "template rule" guideline? Too bad. There is no "template rule." All there is is the franchise's current game, how that current game influences Smash Bros character creation/refinement, and then what is used to fill in little gaps here and there. And even if they have little gaps at the end, the character design is still EXTERNALLY consistent with the franchise current game.

Seems a mite more then 95% inconsistent considering that two out of 4 items for Young Link were externally inconsistent...

What evidence do you have to back this up as opposed to a lack of rules governing what they can place as Link/Zelda's moves, especially with evidence to the contrary?

Either way, it seems that your "template rule" is just an attempt to say exactly what I said except picking a word that makes it seem like the correlation is stronger.

Oh, by the way...silver arrows? Debuted long before Link to the Past, mate.

I merely said that because they were in Link to the Past, and I'm extremely biased towards it.

The important thing was that they weren't in OoT.

You're incorrect. See below.

On top of that, notice the videos where Diddy and DK are freeze-framed and the player selects one of them? What about Mario and Kirby's freeze-frame? Pit and Mario. Fox and Diddy. Kirby and Zelda. Sonic and Mario. All of those are random pairings in random levels.

Why those characters?

It's a common technique to set two or more characters up to do something, and let the player decide who actually does it.

Think a lot of rpgs, they let you decide what team you use for most of the game while setting it up in the narrative so any of those characters can be part of the team.

Parts of Melee's adventure mode were consistent...because you played as the character you selected. Beyond that, the thing was a mash-up.

Was it inconsistent with itself however?

Why does it require a contradiction? And define "contradiction" how you're using it here.

I am asking for a concrete contradiction where SSBB sets up a rule and proceeds to break it, a lack of internal consistency.

That's not an answer. Ignoring external narratives does not establish an internal narrative. Keep trying.

I never said it did, that quote was about internal consistency...

Something which it maintained in this case by establishing that the external narratives are unrelated to the story.

Try different GAMES. NOTHING in Smash Bros depends on the trophies. EVERYTHING in Smash depends on the franchise games.

They depend on the different games in the same sense that if I see a movie and that proves to be the impetus to me writing an unrelated book.

It depends on the other games in the sense of inspiration, they inspired people to create smash, but they have no effect on smash's internal narrative.

NOPE. In a GOOD narrative, you NEVER NEED to willingly suspend your disbelief. If you absolutely need to actively suspend your disbelief, then the narrative is not establishing the world and characters well at all.

Willingly?

I just was talking about suspension of disbelief which implies neither active nor inactive.

And whether it's good or not is besides the point since we are establishing part of the criteria (and I do agree, how difficult the suspension of disbelief is does reflect on the quality).

No, lack of suspending your disbelief means jack****, because cross-overs are extremely poor and not worth reading/whatever due to the author lacking writing prowess. If they had written the world and characters well, there never would be a need to suspend your disbelief.

How can you write fiction and expect people to not suspend their disbelief?

How can you read Lord of the Rings and not suspend disbelief about this magical mythical set of Kingdoms? How can you read Slaughterhouse Five without suspending disbelief in time travel?

You can't, if you were to require real-world history to actually apply to Lord of the Rings then the narrative couldn't work. If you were to require real-world physics to work in Slaughterhouse Five then the narrative couldn't work.

Yet, you do, as you pointed out, without even realizing it. "Suspension of disbelief" simply means that you do not question the functional premises (in other words, things like existence of magic, time travel, etc) of the work. It's just the way that world works, and it only gets sticky when it lacks internal consistency.

When you're reading a great author, willingly suspending your disbelief is as important as current American politics. And that is to say...not remotely important whatsoever.

But I never said "willingly suspending your disbelief" did I?

I merely said "suspension of disbelief", very different. The better the author, the easier the suspension of disbelief, yet that doesn't mean that the suspension of disbelief is any less important.

"Straw Man" nothing. You said that fan-fiction was no different from other writing except for quality and originality. But the fact of the matter is, if you don't have quality and originality, you have nothing. And any English major will tell you that even if you were to strip away everything, there's still going to be a massive, massive, MASSIVE ****ing difference between Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five and some piss-ant little **** writing slash fanfic.

And? I have no problem admitting that without quality you have nothing (originality is a factor in determining quality), you have a worthless piece of trite garbage and little more.

However, that doesn't mean that when deciding the quality we cannot hold a fanfic to the same standards as any other book of literature, the average fanfic will simply fail slightly worse then the average book, and much worse then say, Ulysses.

That doesn't make it any less in the category, that simply makes it a bad example, it's a difference that's important, but not for this particular discussion (and no, since this is a discussion on SSBB, Slaughterhouse Five's greatness isn't really relevant, and I admit nothing since I held that opinion since well before this debate began).


It's a Straw man fallacy because you misconstrued my argument to imply that all fanfiction is the same as Slaughterhouse Five. It's in the same medium, but have far different qualities.

And really in this case, for the purposes of this discussion, the actual quality of the work isn't important, what's important is how one judges the quality of the work.




You sir, seem far too inclined to make hasty generalizations.

 

[Black/Light]

Well, seeing as that "twilight change" move was made up BS and how her B down wasn't even showed on her card I have to assume it's something new that they don't want to show us yet.

But it's interesting how Zelda being ignored and her B down being left out of her card makes some people think it "confirms" Shiek's her Bv and yet to others, like myself, it makes it seem all the more likely that it's something new and different dealing with a transformation. IMO if it was just Sheik than she would have been confirmed by now with a Zelda update. Whats the big deal. . . confirms Zelda is the same as she was in melee. We already have her confirmed so why not her old transformation?

I personally see Cloaked Zelda with a sword and ninja like moves as a very possiable new B down. And seeing how restardly long Olimar's official name is (Pikmin and Olimar. . .) I don't see "Sheikah Cloaked Zelda/ Cloaked Zelda" as much of a leap.

But, thats my take on it.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Well, seeing as that "twilight change" move was made up BS and how her B down wasn't even showed on her card I have to assume it's something new that they don't want to show us yet.

But it's interesting how Zelda being ignored and her B down being left out of her card makes some people think it "confirms" Shiek's her Bv and yet to others, like myself, it makes it seem all the more likely that it's something new and different dealing with a transformation. IMO if it was just Sheik than she would have been confirmed by now with a Zelda update. Whats the big deal. . . confirms Zelda is the same as she was in melee. We already have her confirmed so why not her old transformation?

I personally see Cloaked Zelda with a sword and ninja like moves as a very possiable new B down. And seeing how restardly long Olimar's official name is (Pikmin and Olimar. . .) I don't see "Sheikah Cloaked Zelda/ Cloaked Zelda" as much of a leap.

But, thats my take on it.

If it were just an ordinary move, Sakurai would have confirmed it already and wouldn't have had any trouble in letting her be playable at E for All or Jump Festa. Personally, I believe that Sakurai is holding back on Shiek because she/he/it has recieved a major character design revamp in order to go along with the TP theme. She/he/it was a one hit wonder so to have her/his/its character design competely redone would be a pretty big deal and would be as big of news as seeing how Pit was revamped for Brawl.

 

[lumberheartwood]

From what is mentioned on Brawlcental.com:

Zelda's Down-B Move is not mentioned but we all know what it is since her Final Smash is confirmed before it and there's nothing left to speculate what new move that could be if they scrapped Sheik (extremely unlikely).

We've seen color swaps people. Zelda and Peach's color changes were even more spectacular this time around with varities of hair colors and detailed accentuations. So here's my point, Zelda is seen with brunette hair with this main design imported from Twilight Princess. However, Smash Bros. is a parallel universe incorporating many factors into its own world. Anything can happen in this world. Characters even have moves that aren't their's originally and some even have moves that aren't from their games at all. So, who's to say Sheik was shut off due to a new physical appearance. After all, Zelda's never had white hair. They also didn't get rid of Zelda's famous main appearance with blonde hair so this theory is definitely debunked.

So yeah. They could have given any character they want with a new hair scheme just with one click. Dark colored women are sexy and frankly, Nintendo needs it with all their blonde heroines/princesses. Two blondes (Zamus and Peach) don't make a right. So yeah. Glad to see Zelda and Sheik with darker shades in their hair. If you people don't like it, there IS a blonde Zelda too and likely a blonde Sheik also. (There's also Peach with auburn brunette hair too - had to mention her since she's a great support to my concept.) I wonder how Sheik will look when Gothic witch Zelda transforms into her. There you go. Sheik's models are different due to how Zelda's looks are.

A Sheik with blonde, another model with brunette, maybe one with white too. I'm hoping that Sheik will have reddish brown hair due to Zelda's scarlet dress attire. If you look close at Zelda in that red dress, her hair has some flows of reddish streaks. This Smash universe has debunked your theories for so long but yet you people never realized it now, until I just said it formally and direct right now.

*More ideas:

- That blue color scheme yet to be shown...I'm hoping Sheik will have raven black hair just for the fun of it. Maybe Zelda's blue scheme makes her hair darker too. It would be awesome and make Zelda definitely a fun choice at parties. I like to see black haired Zelda because it would make her look really Asian actually.

- I know this isn't Zelda news, but cool desire. (I love playing as the girls for weird reasons.) For Samus's green color, I hope her hair has maybe a greenish tone just for old time sakes. It be cool and makes a possibility more liable. If Daisy is a look for Peach and Zelda has white, red, brunette, and blonde hair, why not Zamus having something cool to her repotoire. No one has had green hair in Smash Bros. so she could start the trend, well besides Paletuna, but she is likely not to be playable.

 

[Black/Light]

If it were just an ordinary move, Sakurai would have confirmed it already and wouldn't have had any trouble in letting her be playable at E for All or Jump Festa. Personally, I believe that Sakurai is holding back on Shiek because she/he/it has recieved a major character design revamp in order to go along with the TP theme. She/he/it was a one hit wonder so to have her/his/its character design competely redone would be a pretty big deal and would be as big of news as seeing how Pit was revamped for Brawl.

I agree that its most likely a transformation into some form like I said before. . . but I personally say Cloaked Zelda. I have no clue how a revamped Shiek merits not confirming that Zelda is the same as she was in melee. A revamped design isn't a "big deal" in this case.

Really, it's not like Pitt. Pitt's game was so old that this would be the first time he was ever rendered in 3D (well, melee would be the first time but that one was very close to the real KI Pitt model and didn't act as a PC. This Pitt actually has a design influanced by whats popular today. . .FF/ KH anime style. And he also has a weapon he never used and was never alined with his character). Sheik was already seen in a very current from in her one and only appearance in the loZ games. No revamping is that much of a big deal in this case.

From what is mentioned on Brawlcental.com:

Zelda's Down-B Move is suppose to be Twilight Sheik Transformation. If I'm not mistaken, that's a confirmation.

http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=136504
Fake. . .

And on a side note to my Cloaked comment I just did some research. Seems that the cloak is a magical cloak and thats why she can stay in human form in the TR according to the devs. Interesting. . .I wonder how that can be applied to brawl.

 

[PwnyRide]

And on a side note to my Cloaked comment I just did some research. Seems that the cloak is a magical cloak and thats why she can stay in human form in the TR according to the devs. Interesting. . .I wonder how that can be applied to brawl.

Which is the reason why you dont see Zelda wearing the cloak in any other Twilight Warped area of Hyrule (i mean not that she has the chance, she did sacrafice her spiritual being to keep Midna alive), giving even more support to the Cloaked Zelda scheme.
Knowing it's a Magic Cloak (although its widely unknown, Sakurai can still use this fact for a moveset), it may open up another moveset option.

 

[The_Corax_King]

Hiding Sheik is in a way confirmation....

The only reason Sakurai would hide her down B is because it confirms another character... And we all know how stingy he is on characters...

 

[PwnyRide]

Hiding Sheik is in a way confirmation....

The only reason Sakurai would hide her down B is because it confirms another character... And we all know how stingy he is on characters...

Everyone is expecting Shiek, so why hide it? The only reason (but this is only my point of view, dont want to push this onto anyone else) he is being so tight lipped is that it's something unexpected to up the hype over Zelda, which is working quite well. And if it is Shiek (of which i am reluctantly expecting will be making a return anyway in some form or another) then he's done equally as well, if not better in terms of getting people talking.

I did read somewhere that Sakurai said he would be less tight lipped about revealing characters, although he's probably full of crap, since that character drought
Wish i could find the source

 

[Brav3r]

Everyone is expecting Shiek, so why hide it? The only reason (but this is only my point of view, dont want to push this onto anyone else) he is being so tight lipped is that it's something unexpected to up the hype over Zelda, which is working quite well. And if it is Shiek (of which i am reluctantly expecting will be making a return anyway in some form or another) then he's done equally as well, if not better in terms of getting people talking.

I did read somewhere that Sakurai said he would be less tight lipped about revealing characters, although he's probably full of crap, since that character drought
Wish i could find the source

i foun the page: http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/gamemode/wi-fi/wi-fi04.html

And there is one more important thing...

When you have a battle mode that runs online like Basic Brawl, the problem of what to do with hidden characters arises. If one of your opponents chooses a character you haven’t unlocked yet, it will be spoiled for you immediately.

But even without this mode, given the proliferation of the Internet these days, the existence of hidden characters is going to get exposed anyway.

So, this time I’m moving in the direction of not being too hung up on hidden characters.

You can earn most characters by playing through Adventure Mode: The Subspace Emissary. For those of you who look forward to those encounters, I recommend you clear this mode before playing Basic Brawl.

And as the case has always been, I’ve made it so you can play the characters you unlock in battles.

 

[PwnyRide]

i foun the page: http://www.smashbros.com/en_us/gamemode/wi-fi/wi-fi04.html

Legend

 

[teamrocketspy621]

*reads first post* Nice arguments.

Remember, people this is not TP Zelda, this is Smash Zelda. She couldn't use Nayru's Love, Din's Fire, and Farore's Wind in Ocarina, could she? Yet she still uses her OoT look in Melee and can use those spells, which, by the way, have even been renamed in Brawl for more TP consistency -- Lanayru's Love, Eldin's Fire, and Faron's Wind -- now the spells she uses don't even technically exist within Zelda canon.

Take that, Sheik haters. XD