Why Sheik will Return

[ScaryMunky]

Well, Zelda sent Link back in time with the Ocarina, but in the WW, Ganondorf comes back into the world because the seal that held him broke. Said seal was created in OoT when Link defeated him and the sages sealed him away. Link was sent back in time to live his childhood, but the fact that Ganondorf breaks from the seal in WW tells me Link defeated him again, only this time it was after he grew up normally, fully living those seven years rather than being sealed away during that time by the Master Sword.

There's a flaw with this too, however, as if Link did live those seven years instead of being sealed away by the Master Sword, he would've been able to obtain the Triforce himself, not Ganondorf. Bah.. freaking Zelda. >.<

Oh, and kudos on 500 rAt.

EDIT: OR.... maybe the Triforce isn't affected by time passage, nor the seal that Ganondorf was sealed away in, thus when Link went back in time, Ganondorf remained sealed away, and the Triforce parts still resided within Link, Ganondorf and Zelda. o.O

 

[Luthien]

First, I want to say that I think there is a decent chance that Sheik will be in Brawl. Now that that's out there, I'd also like to say that I believe (well, really hope) that he/she will be a stand alone character. In melee, the ability for Zelda to change into Sheik and back again was a huge part of her character. Two characters in one was a huge advantage I don't think many people took advantage of. In fact, from what limited knowledge I have, it seems Sheik was a necessity. This was because Zelda was weak... ish (please don't hurt me!) compared to other characters in the game. However, it looks like Zelda's been souped up a bit for Brawl, so she won't need to turn into Sheik. This way, continuity arguement is avoided.

Now, on to Sheik. Apparently, designs have been given to Nintendo for Sheik and Ganondorf. I know that this doesn't really confirm that they're both in, but I doubt that they just randomely showed up with the designs and said, "Here." I'm assuming the designs were asked for.

Oh, and I don't think the designs are strictly TP. Look at Link's hair in Brawl. It's blonde. Is my memory failing me, or was his hair brownish in TP. So, I think the designs are GUIDED by Twilight Princess, not TP detail for detail. And that, my friends, is how I think Sheik fits into Brawl. If I forgot something important, or am totally wrong, please let me know.

And with that, I leave in a quest for muffins.

 

[max32090]

bro your facts werent even tru haha

 

[blueriku]

Well, Zelda sent Link back in time with the Ocarina, but in the WW, Ganondorf comes back into the world because the seal that held him broke. Said seal was created in OoT when Link defeated him and the sages sealed him away. Link was sent back in time to live his childhood, but the fact that Ganondorf breaks from the seal in WW tells me Link defeated him again, only this time it was after he grew up normally, fully living those seven years rather than being sealed away during that time by the Master Sword.

There's a flaw with this too, however, as if Link did live those seven years instead of being sealed away by the Master Sword, he would've been able to obtain the Triforce himself, not Ganondorf. Bah.. freaking Zelda. >.<

Oh, and kudos on 500 rAt.

EDIT: OR.... maybe the Triforce isn't affected by time passage, nor the seal that Ganondorf was sealed away in, thus when Link went back in time, Ganondorf remained sealed away, and the Triforce parts still resided within Link, Ganondorf and Zelda. o.O

the triforce is timeless never being held in the real physical word but rather the only temple that is also not of that world the light temple, but after OOT they(sages) moved it farther into the golden land(sacred realm). this is why Gannon never had the triforce after OOT child hood time line since he never got it in the first place (even though he eventually gets it)

 

[motherbeaver]

Personally I don't see shiek being removed just because of her popularity in melee but I could be proven wrong. I would however like to see her as a seperate character freeing up b-down or incorperated with zelda again but with some reason to switch between forms kind of like the pokemon trainer. Maybe a damage bonus after switching for a set amount of time.

 

[Sonic The Hedgedawg]

I strongly doubt that they would give PT a transform move and NOT let Zelda keep hers.

Also, sheik... well he IS zelda. I mean it only makes sense that these two different bodies are the same character because they share the same mind.

 

[ScaryMunky]

PT can transform? o.O

lol.. he summons one of three pokemon, which you control. There are no transformations when it comes to him. He swaps out pokemon with down B (I think?); that's what beaver was referring to. Although beaver's post is a bit hard to understand.

 

[Fawriel]

Again, wrong. First of all, the Temple stage (which I assume you are refering to) isn't based on any particular Zelda game.

I knew I could rely on you ( or Dirkus ) to go on arguing brilliantly. I was getting a little bored of it.

But, just for your information, the Temple stage is based on Zelda II.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=zYZ4Pm6bUbI *points*

In fact, from what limited knowledge I have, it seems Sheik was a necessity. This was because Zelda was weak... ish (please don't hurt me!) compared to other characters in the game.

Don't be ridiculous, Zelda wasn't weakish.
She was absolutely downright god**** frikkin terrible.

 

[bizybozo]

dude. the best argument i've heard wasn't even in this thread. sheik's moveset will be mostly transferred to zsamus, thus obliterating the idea that "oh they won't take out sheik, its a unique moveset, why take out the character?"

 

[SuperLink9]

Zamus & Shiek don't have the same movesets at all, you can see it from the B moves.

I havn't read the entirety of all posts, but I can some of some of the point I've seen

Smash Bros is either about the most recent character design update, or the series in general. We don't know whether that Zelda is TP specific Zelda, or Zelda in general. Perhaps Sakurai would know?

As for the OoT representation thing, why do we need to move on? I mean Christ, the original Super Mario Bros has had way more representation than OoT. I'm not saying OoT WARRANTS representation, I'm just saying it hasn't had nearly as much as you guys make out. Super Smash Bros Brawl ISN'T Melee or SSB64, they don't add together, it's a NEW game, it could potentially PRETEND to not know the other games existed. It's partly about Nintendo history, they can put as many references in there for as many games as they bloody well like.

Tp has a stage, & it's blatently from TP. Eldin Bridge isn't on any other Zelda game, neither is Termina Bay, Hyrule Castle is (though I'll accept that particular castle design with the green spires is from OoT) but the music isn't. Saria's Song has been used in every 3D Zelda since OoT, so it's not really an OoT song any more. Well, it is, but you know what I mean. It was in MM, so it could be seen as an MM song for Termina Bay. I'm just saying, that although everyone seems to think OoT has had loads of representation, it hasn't had as much as you think, & seeing as this is a game that will bring many NEW players to the Smash Bros series, it's about ALL of Nintendo, it's not about what's had too much in the past. Now I'm going to add up the representation OoT has:

Characters:
Link
Zelda
Shiek
Ganondorf
(Young Link possibly for MM)

Music: Saria's Song
Ocarina Medley

Stages: Hyrule Castle... uhm that's it

8 things across all the games, 6 of them on Melee. Characters are most recent design, so you can't really blame them for that. What would they do, give them 2D game design to give them representation because OoT has too much?

So far TP has:
Link
Zelda
Ganondorf (likely)
Eldin Bridge

& likely a few songs & another stage. Maybe even playable Midna. That would then bring the total "representation" for TP to around 8, would it not? In 1 game. Does that mean they need to "move on" from TP too?

Oh, & the original Super Mario Bros, how could I forget.
Stages: Mushroom Kingdom (SSB64)
Mushroom Kingdom (SSBM)
Mushroom Kingdom Music
Arguably all Mario characters.

Might get even more representation on SMB in Brawl. Infact, it's definate. "It's an important part of Mario's history" you say, well OoT did the same for Zelda.

& really, to sum up how I feel, Zelda is probably the 2nd biggest series by Nintendo, I don't want to bring up the "how many character slots they're entitled to" thing, but I do think it's relative. As far as important characters go in famous Zeldas, Shiek & Midna are the most so, I know Shiek IS Zelda, but all the more reason to include her in her moveset, so that's contradicting yourself (those arguing to get her out of Zelda's moveset) So what if TP gets lots of representation & a character for Brawl, does that mean it has "too much representation"? Brawl is a big game, it can afford to have things from all over Nintendo's history. The fact remains that Smash Bros is not a story, it's a Nintendo all stars fighting game. Shiek is a character, & Melee made her more famous. She's a popular character in Melee, story has nothing to do with it. She'll get in. someway or another.

 

[Revven]

dude. the best argument i've heard wasn't even in this thread. sheik's moveset will be mostly transferred to zsamus, thus obliterating the idea that "oh they won't take out sheik, its a unique moveset, why take out the character?"

BS. That's totally wrong, their movesets are completely different. Zamus' moves mostly consist of her whip and her legs, Sheik on the other hand actually uses her fists and her legs. The only time she uses her whip is her Forward B. Zamus uses it as a priority in all of her Bs, Sheik doesn't use her whip in all her Bs. See the difference? That and Zamus uses her legs more (from what we've seen) than Sheik does.

They're not going to give Zamus Sheik's style/physical moves, that would be dumb. They move differently and have different Bs. Your "fact" is wrong.

I'd argue the Sheik continuity thing but it's early morning and I'm off to school.

Bye-nee~

 

[Drake3]

She's a popular character in Melee, story has nothing to do with it. She'll get in. someway or another.

As a 30 second timed transformation move, where upon expiration, you revert back to Zelda. I have decided. And it's spelled Sheik.

 

[Gutts]

Now, on to Sheik. Apparently, designs have been given to Nintendo for Sheik and Ganondorf. I know that this doesn't really confirm that they're both in, but I doubt that they just randomely showed up with the designs and said, "Here." I'm assuming the designs were asked for.

Ah, you beat me to it Luthien. I remember hearing about that awhile ago. Here's the interview with Eiji Aonuma (Last paragraph): http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200708/N07.0802.1741.54921.htm

Actually, my designers did work on the designs for Sheik and Link and Ganondorf. So they submitted the initial designs, and so it would fit in the Smash Bros. Brawl environment, they’ve had to tweak some of the designs. But Sakurai has brought those altered designs to NCL. We’re working very closely with the team of Smash Bros. Brawl to make sure the characters look their best.

As you can see, he briefly discussed having his designers send Sheik and Ganondorf designs to Sakurai for brawl. If this isn't an indicator for Sheiks return (and Ganondorf), I'm not sure what else could be.

 

[Zone]

Ah, you beat me to it Luthien. I remember hearing about that awhile ago. Here's the interview with Eiji Aonuma (Last paragraph): http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200708/N07.0802.1741.54921.htm



As you can see, he briefly discussed having his designers send Sheik and Ganondorf designs to Sakurai for brawl. If this isn't an indicator for Sheiks return (and Ganondorf), I'm not sure what else could be.

As said before that isn't a 100% indicator that the model being made for shiek is a Playable Character. For all we know the designs could be made as an Assist Trophy or something.

Don't get me wrong I'd like shiek to still be in. But as a Zelda player(Not my Main) I want Zelda to have her own Down B.

 

[Gutts]

Ah, now I see where this topic went. My assumption is that Sheik will be a new, separate character.... At least, that seems most likely.

 

[Legendary Angel]

Sheik had a unique moveset in Melee. I don't see why she wouldn't return. Only annoying thing that I don't appreciate about her is that though we all generally agree that she is female it seems, her features make it hard to make out either way.

 

[Iris]

Just wondering, where does Aonuma say anything about updating Sheik? He says he'll tweak her initial design to fit the Brawl environment, something very common with assist trophies, as they're usually from last-gen or before systems. That just means Sheik won't be the same polygonal ninja as she was in Melee and OoT. After all, she's a realistic character and it makes sense that they'd smoothen out her appearance, even if it's just as an assist trophy. Therefore, this confirms nothing.

Sheik really holds no relevance to the series now, and saying Sakurai doesn't care about continuity is completely false. As some one already said, he's bent the rules before, but he still accurately represents the individual character. Every character has been kept up to date, and to use examples such as Mario make no sense, as there is always just one Mario (meaning using moves from ALL of his games, new and old, makes perfect sense) and many, many Links, Zeldas, and Ganons. Obviously, Link's design and attacks have changed significantly with respect to Twilight Princess. Sure, he still has the same basic moves, but those are pretty much constant in the whole series. Zelda's design has also changed with respect to TP. Although her moves are stolen from OoT, simple things like spells would be kept since giving Zelda a completely new moveset would be a waste. However, since she has been given a few extra capabilities from the last few games, I feel that giving her a new down B, such as light arrows or anything else she's capable of fighting with would be much more sensible than recycling a minor character of the Zelda series and having her overshadow the true character of the series.

I'm not saying which is more likely. After all, we have very little information to base assumptions off of. Still, I really, REALLY don't want her to return as part of Zelda's moveset. Not because I dislike Sheik, or because I supposedly must've been "owned" countless times by her, but because she, in all honesty, is an insignificant character that takes away from Zelda, one of the main stars of the series. After around 2 decades, I think Zelda's earned her own, complete moveset.

 

[JoshuaAmaron]

Okay, Circus, I know you're making a point there, and I find it both intelligent and insightful. But I have to say, I've been waiting for Pikachu to do all of those things since SSB64. C'mon, can he at least say the "takin' out the trash" lines?





Fawriel, I don't think I've ever read a post of yours I didn't like. Don't ever change.




Incorrect; Impa represents the Sheikah. Why? Because she is a Sheikah, not a princess posing as a Sheikah. And since Impa has been appearing in Zelda games since Adventure of Link (1989, maybe? I'd have to look it up), it is arguable that the entire idea of the Sheikah was taken from her OoT incarnation (combined with elements mentioned in LttP). So here's an idea; why not replace Sheik with Impa?

For the sake of Smash Bros Brawl making any sense whatsoever (outside of the mind of a Sheik fan, in whose mind her appearance in Star Wars Episode 7: Return of the Revenge of the Wrath of Darth Fett would make sense), Sheik should have no connection with Smash Bros Brawl Zelda. I'm not sure if it can be said in better ways than it already has.

However, speaking in terms of what we know, I think we can establish that Sheik will return. I'm actually surprised nobody has mentioned the Aunoma (sp?) article yet. It's been floating around forever. It's linked on the Zelda Down + B Discussion, I believe. I'll try and dig it up (again) if its that big of a deal. Anyhow, it basically states that the director of Twilight Princess was approached by Sakurai to approve Twilight Princess-ish designs of Gannondorf and Sheik for Brawl.

Some people think this means she will return as an AT. That makes no sense to me. Why update her to match Twilight Princess specs, just to stick her in a Trophy? Especially when, as a trophy character she would be representing the game she was actually in, OoT, as opposed to the Zelda series overall. Also, why overhaul any character for a trophy? I mean, Andross is showing up in his SNES form. There is also her moveset to consider, and the fact that tossing it out completely, when you've already gone through the work of redesigning her makes no sense whatsoever.

For that reason, I'd say it's looking a lot like Sheik will be returning playably. I say this with full understanding that she is an extremely insignificant character in the Zelda series, and that there are many better characters to replace her. I don't like it either. I'm just trying to look at the facts.

The real question in my mind is whether or not Sakurai has the common sense of an autistic Pichu to understand that linking (no pun intended) Twilight Princess Zelda and OoT Sheik is pure madness. Only time will tell for sure.

And now everyone understands how I feel about Geno. :D LOL Couldn't have said it better myself. Of course due to his fanbase. I am positive we'll see him playable.

 

[The rAt]

I knew I could rely on you ( or Dirkus ) to go on arguing brilliantly. I was getting a little bored of it.

But, just for your information, the Temple stage is based on Zelda II.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=zYZ4Pm6bUbI *points*
[/I]

Why thank you, though I hope you don't desert the thread completely. I mean, my attention span only holds out so long these days.

Yeah, I knew that Zelda II comment was going to come back to bite me in the ***. It's one of the few Zelda games I never played all the way through. Just couldn't get used to the side scrolling. Also, the health and magic system really got on my nerves.

Smash Bros is either about the most recent character design update, or the series in general. We don't know whether that Zelda is TP specific Zelda, or Zelda in general. Perhaps Sakurai would know?

Not so. I know she's TP specific. Why? Because rather than enhancing the existing SSB Zelda model (like they did with Mario, Pikachu, Peach, ect.), they chose to replace it with one identical to Twilight Princess. Instead of making OoT Zelda look better, they replaced her with a different Zelda. That has nothing to do with improvement, that has to do with character choice.

As for the OoT representation thing, why do we need to move on? I mean Christ, the original Super Mario Bros has had way more representation than OoT. I'm not saying OoT WARRANTS representation, I'm just saying it hasn't had nearly as much as you guys make out. Super Smash Bros Brawl ISN'T Melee or SSB64, they don't add together, it's a NEW game, it could potentially PRETEND to not know the other games existed. It's partly about Nintendo history, they can put as many references in there for as many games as they bloody well like.

Tp has a stage, & it's blatently from TP. Eldin Bridge isn't on any other Zelda game, neither is Termina Bay, Hyrule Castle is (though I'll accept that particular castle design with the green spires is from OoT) but the music isn't. Saria's Song has been used in every 3D Zelda since OoT, so it's not really an OoT song any more. Well, it is, but you know what I mean. It was in MM, so it could be seen as an MM song for Termina Bay. I'm just saying, that although everyone seems to think OoT has had loads of representation, it hasn't had as much as you think, & seeing as this is a game that will bring many NEW players to the Smash Bros series, it's about ALL of Nintendo, it's not about what's had too much in the past. Now I'm going to add up the representation OoT has:

Characters:
Link
Zelda
Shiek
Ganondorf
(Young Link possibly for MM)

Music: Saria's Song
Ocarina Medley

Stages: Hyrule Castle... uhm that's it

8 things across all the games, 6 of them on Melee. Characters are most recent design, so you can't really blame them for that. What would they do, give them 2D game design to give them representation because OoT has too much?

So far TP has:
Link
Zelda
Ganondorf (likely)
Eldin Bridge

& likely a few songs & another stage. Maybe even playable Midna. That would then bring the total "representation" for TP to around 8, would it not? In 1 game. Does that mean they need to "move on" from TP too?

Oh, & the original Super Mario Bros, how could I forget.
Stages: Mushroom Kingdom (SSB64)
Mushroom Kingdom (SSBM)
Mushroom Kingdom Music
Arguably all Mario characters.

Might get even more representation on SMB in Brawl. Infact, it's definate. "It's an important part of Mario's history" you say, well OoT did the same for Zelda.

Hmm, where to start? Let's go with your comparison with Super Mario Bros. It doesn't hold up. First of all, none of the things you highlighted specifically represent Super Mario Bros 1. The Mushroom Kingdom (though it has looked different) has been a staple of the Mario SERIES since its creation. However, even if you want to define the Mushroom Kingdom as its appearance as a stage in the Smash Bros. series, it does not represent only one game. It was featured almost identically in Super Mario Bros., Super Mario Bros. 2, Super Mario All-Stars, and Super Mario. Bros Deluxe.

However, even if it WAS representing only Super Mario Bros. 1, it would be, as you said, justifiable. Not just because it's an important part of Mario's history, but because it's the BEGINNING of Mario's history. What do we have from the beginning of Zelda's history? Do we have the raft or the creepy old dude who gives you advice? Or a mazelike Lost Woods? No. Okay, let's bring it forward a step, do we have the Dark World or Agahnim from LttP (which is AT LEAST as good and popular a game as OoT, considering that most of OoT was BASED off of it)? The Windfish or Koholint island from LA? Anything whatsoever from the ill-fated Oracles series? No. We have ONE level from Majora's Mask. ONE level from Zelda II. POSSIBLY a Cell-shaded Link from Wind Waker. No Wind Waker Medley. No Best of Majora's Mask songs. And, let's face it, a comparable amount of content from Twilight Princess as we had from OoT in Melee.

You said it best, OoT was featured more than the 2-d games because they were more recent designs. Well, now they're not. Now Twilight Princess is a more recent design, and should be featured more heavily than OoT. The most recent game should, and will get more attention than the older games in the series. No one is proposing we forget OoT. In fact, I would argue that most people here would be very disapointed if we don't see the aspects of OoT which were encorporated INTO THE SERIES returning, like Saria's song or Gannondorf. What we are arguing about are the larger catergory of things which are SPECIFIC TO OoT, and within that the importance of Sheik in relation to the entire series.

So, what I mean when I tell people to move on, is that people need to stop expecting OoT-era characters, items or stages should comprise the bulk of Zelda representation, or even as much as more recent games such as Twilight Princess, but also that people need to stop expecting that a clearly Twilight Princess character (Zelda) should share an attribute which was exclusive to ONE AND ONLY ONE of her ancestors, which not only defies all logic, but in doing so detracts from the more recent version of the character, simply to maintain the status quo of Occarina of Time fanboy obsession.

& really, to sum up how I feel, Zelda is probably the 2nd biggest series by Nintendo, I don't want to bring up the "how many character slots they're entitled to" thing, but I do think it's relative. As far as important characters go in famous Zeldas, Shiek & Midna are the most so, I know Shiek IS Zelda, but all the more reason to include her in her moveset, so that's contradicting yourself (those arguing to get her out of Zelda's moveset) So what if TP gets lots of representation & a character for Brawl, does that mean it has "too much representation"? Brawl is a big game, it can afford to have things from all over Nintendo's history. The fact remains that Smash Bros is not a story, it's a Nintendo all stars fighting game. Shiek is a character, & Melee made her more famous. She's a popular character in Melee, story has nothing to do with it. She'll get in. someway or another.

That's the WHOLE point. Sheik ISN'T Zelda. Sheik is ONE Zelda. To boot Sheik is A DIFFERENT Zelda. With a different set of abilities. Adding her in changes Twilight Princess Zelda CONTRADICTS what we know about her (unlike her magic moves). I believe it was Fawriel who made the best point, so I will repeate it for emphasis;

Twilight Princess turning into Sheik as much sense as her turning into Tetra.

Or Wolf-Link.

So the fianl point is this; if you want to argue that we need more Zelda representation, then fine. Let's start with the games that have no representation. If you can find a way to justify why we need more OoT representation, then fine; let's put in some more music and stages. If you can find some random way to justify why we need another OoT specific character, then fine; let's toss in Darunia or the Owl guy (I keep forgetting his name). If you want to make the point that we shouldn't toss out Sheik's moveset, then fine; let's replace her with Impa, who is an actual Sheikah anyhow. Now if you can overcome all of those obstacles and finally find some way to justify why we absolutely, positively must have Sheik over all of the other, better, and more sense-making characters in the Zelda series, let alone OoT itself, at least have enough respect for the Zelda continuity to realize that she is a different character than Twilight Princess Zelda, and make Sheik her own character. And if for some inconceivable reason, you cannot live without Zelda and Sheik being attached at the hip then FINE. Throw out the Twilight Princess model and bring Zelda back to her OoT look. But don't crap all over the rest of the series just to keep OoT on its pedestal.

End rant.

EDIT: By now it might be beating a dead horse, but I tried posting all of that about two hours ago, and my internet went out. Didn't want it all to go to waste.

 

[Iris]

Well, the only thing confirmed now is that Saukrai either hates Zelda or has something IMMENSE planned for her.

My guess is the latter. OoT's been out for ages and Melee's been out for like 6 years. Revealing Sheik at the last moment wouldn't shock anyone, it'd simply relieve/annoy people. Most of Zelda's moves are the same, and there's been plenty of opportunity to update Zelda. Her exclusion from the demo and lack of any update whatsoever guarantees that something about Zelda moveset changed, and if they've worked this hard to hide whether or not Sheik stays or goes, I think the odds are going against her. It's simple logic, because why exactly would he hide Sheik if she's coming back, just to tick people off?

 

[Eldezar]

Why thank you, though I hope you don't desert the thread completely. I mean, my attention span only holds out so long these days.

Yeah, I knew that Zelda II comment was going to come back to bite me in the ***. It's one of the few Zelda games I never played all the way through. Just couldn't get used to the side scrolling. Also, the health and magic system really got on my nerves.



Not so. I know she's TP specific. Why? Because rather than enhancing the existing SSB Zelda model (like they did with Mario, Pikachu, Peach, ect.), they chose to replace it with one identical to Twilight Princess. Instead of making OoT Zelda look better, they replaced her with a different Zelda. That has nothing to do with improvement, that has to do with character choice.



Hmm, where to start? Let's go with your comparison with Super Mario Bros. It doesn't hold up. First of all, none of the things you highlighted specifically represent Super Mario Bros 1. The Mushroom Kingdom (though it has looked different) has been a staple of the Mario SERIES since its creation. However, even if you want to define the Mushroom Kingdom as its appearance as a stage in the Smash Bros. series, it does not represent only one game. It was featured almost identically in Super Mario Bros., Super Mario Bros. 2, Super Mario All-Stars, and Super Mario. Bros Deluxe.

However, even if it WAS representing only Super Mario Bros. 1, it would be, as you said, justifiable. Not just because it's an important part of Mario's history, but because it's the BEGINNING of Mario's history. What do we have from the beginning of Zelda's history? Do we have the raft or the creepy old dude who gives you advice? Or a mazelike Lost Woods? No. Okay, let's bring it forward a step, do we have the Dark World or Agahnim from LttP (which is AT LEAST as good and popular a game as OoT, considering that most of OoT was BASED off of it)? The Windfish or Koholint island from LA? Anything whatsoever from the ill-fated Oracles series? No. We have ONE level from Majora's Mask. ONE level from Zelda II. POSSIBLY a Cell-shaded Link from Wind Waker. No Wind Waker Medley. No Best of Majora's Mask songs. And, let's face it, a comparable amount of content from Twilight Princess as we had from OoT in Melee.

You said it best, OoT was featured more than the 2-d games because they were more recent designs. Well, now they're not. Now Twilight Princess is a more recent design, and should be featured more heavily than OoT. The most recent game should, and will get more attention than the older games in the series. No one is proposing we forget OoT. In fact, I would argue that most people here would be very disapointed if we don't see the aspects of OoT which were encorporated INTO THE SERIES returning, like Saria's song or Gannondorf. What we are arguing about are the larger catergory of things which are SPECIFIC TO OoT, and within that the importance of Sheik in relation to the entire series.

So, what I mean when I tell people to move on, is that people need to stop expecting OoT-era characters, items or stages should comprise the bulk of Zelda representation, or even as much as more recent games such as Twilight Princess, but also that people need to stop expecting that a clearly Twilight Princess character (Zelda) should share an attribute which was exclusive to ONE AND ONLY ONE of her ancestors, which not only defies all logic, but in doing so detracts from the more recent version of the character, simply to maintain the status quo of Occarina of Time fanboy obsession.




That's the WHOLE point. Sheik ISN'T Zelda. Sheik is ONE Zelda. To boot Sheik is A DIFFERENT Zelda. With a different set of abilities. Adding her in changes Twilight Princess Zelda CONTRADICTS what we know about her (unlike her magic moves). I believe it was Fawriel who made the best point, so I will repeate it for emphasis;

Twilight Princess turning into Sheik as much sense as her turning into Tetra.

Or Wolf-Link.

So the fianl point is this; if you want to argue that we need more Zelda representation, then fine. Let's start with the games that have no representation. If you can find a way to justify why we need more OoT representation, then fine; let's put in some more music and stages. If you can find some random way to justify why we need another OoT specific character, then fine; let's toss in Darunia or the Owl guy (I keep forgetting his name). If you want to make the point that we shouldn't toss out Sheik's moveset, then fine; let's replace her with Impa, who is an actual Sheikah anyhow. Now if you can overcome all of those obstacles and finally find some way to justify why we absolutely, positively must have Sheik over all of the other, better, and more sense-making characters in the Zelda series, let alone OoT itself, at least have enough respect for the Zelda continuity to realize that she is a different character than Twilight Princess Zelda, and make Sheik her own character. And if for some inconceivable reason, you cannot live without Zelda and Sheik being attached at the hip then FINE. Throw out the Twilight Princess model and bring Zelda back to her OoT look. But don't crap all over the rest of the series just to keep OoT on its pedestal.

End rant.

EDIT: By now it might be beating a dead horse, but I tried posting all of that about two hours ago, and my internet went out. Didn't want it all to go to waste.

That is complete bull****. How can you forget a name like Kaepora Gaebora?! lol

Edit: Oh. And everything else I agree with.

 

[Circus]

[BAMF-ness]

Oh my god. Such beauty.

/end thread

 

[Darkfur]

Incorrect; Impa represents the Sheikah. Why? Because she is a Sheikah, not a princess posing as a Sheikah. And since Impa has been appearing in Zelda games since Adventure of Link (1989, maybe? I'd have to look it up), it is arguable that the entire idea of the Sheikah was taken from her OoT incarnation (combined with elements mentioned in LttP). So here's an idea; why not replace Sheik with Impa?[/FONT]

This is the best idea ever. Impa would really fit, would represent OoT and could easilly use Sheik's moveset.

Also, IIRC if you read the story in the original Zelda booklet it mentions Impa, so technically she has been in even the first one. (At least story wise.)

 

[Fawriel]

ba-ba-ba-baaaaaamf

Ain't nothin' better than some ***-whoopin' in the morning.

That is complete bull****. How can you forget a name like Kaepora Gaebora?! lol

Edit: Oh. And everything else I agree with.

I concur.

Oh my god. Such beauty.

/end thread

I concur.

Wait, one second.

Just wondering, where does Aonuma say anything about updating Sheik? He says he'll tweak her initial design to fit the Brawl environment, something very common with assist trophies, as they're usually from last-gen or before systems. That just means Sheik won't be the same polygonal ninja as she was in Melee and OoT. After all, she's a realistic character and it makes sense that they'd smoothen out her appearance, even if it's just as an assist trophy. Therefore, this confirms nothing.

Actually, this is a pretty good point. Some characters were kept in their old-school designs as a gimmick, but some weren't, like Little Mac. And Sheik is clearly not old-school enough to make her slightly subpar appearance her gimmick. And IF previous playable characters are going to be revealed as ATs, it's pretty likely that they'll get a graphical overhaul to at least be on par with their counterparts, and to work with the general, slightly gloomy and kinda cream-ish art style of the whole game.

 

[SuperLink9]

Can't be bothered to make a rant really. OoT doesn't NEED more representation, I'm just saying a little more wouldn't hurt. As I said before, it's a different Smash Bros game, it's to appeal to a newer audience as well as the old one, OoT is probably the most famous Zelda game, just as Super Mario Bros. is for Mario. So I don't see why it's "illegal" all of a sudden. The Smash Bros games don't ADD UP, they're new, they REPLACE the old Smash Bros (you can't really deny that) so OoT should be "legally" entitled to have as much as it did before, you make it sound like it's milked like a Mario Party game.

Besides, TP Zelda ISN'T SSB Zelda. They're entirely different.

SSB Zelda is ZELDA. Not TP Zelda, not OoT Zelda, not Oracle of Ages Zelda, just Zelda. It's the most updated design that looks the best. I keep saying this.

Personally, us arguing doesn't change anything at all does it? All I know is that Shiek is a popular character, & that she has a good chance of returning to Brawl fully playable in some form or another. Think what you want, this argument seems like it's going to be fairly endless.

 

[pud22]

sheik has already been practically confirmed in an interview for game informer:
http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200708/N07.0802.1741.54921.htm (last paragraph)

 

[Shadowbolt]

It's not so much that TP Zelda doesn't transform into Sheik, but that a TP design for Sheik DOESN'T EXIST.

 

[zSTACKz]

What does TP Zelda have to do with ssbb zelda?

 

[rageagainst]

... I think its unlikely zelda will transform into shiek, for one continuity, for two, it seems the game thus far (subspace emissary) is focusing on zelda's role only and shiek is nowhere hinted. Shiek was a one time character from an older generation, and to break continuity just for her would be wierd of nintendo.

However, due to her popularity and the face that she had a unique moveset, gives her a high chance of bieng individual character, if she isn't a transformation.

We KNOW shiek is going to be in the game(due to an interview that hinted her model was bieng worked on for brawl), probably playable somehow, but its interesting to think that shiek might be an alt costume of zelda. By OoT standards it would make sense, since shiek probably fought like zelda since we never actually see shiek fight, though this would piss a lot of shiek fans off.

I don't want shiek to be a transformation and would rather have 2 individual characters, but the fact that zelda was not playable on the demo means that nintendo is hiding something (or not, since lucas wasn't on the demo either), either that zelda is a seperate character, or shiek has returned as a transformation. Zelda having a buffed version of her melee moveset also helps shiek's chances of bieng one of zelda's b moves.

Oh and for those who want shiek back simply because she rocked in melee, remember that she is likely to be hit with the nerf bat very hard, whether a transformation or a solo character (just like fox).

What does TP Zelda have to do with ssbb zelda?

Though physically zelda does have a few differences with TP zelda, link and zelda are definately based off their most recent generation, as link, though his hair color is a little bit different than his TP counterpart, has all of his weapons come straight off of TP. A large reason why most of Zelda's moveset is similar to her melee counterpart's is that nintendo doesn't like creating new movesets for characters who already have original movesets. If she wasn't in melee she would most likely be fighting with a rapier this game.

 

[The rAt]

And now everyone understands how I feel about Geno. :D LOL Couldn't have said it better myself. Of course due to his fanbase. I am positive we'll see him playable.

You know, I've got to be about the only person on this forum who's never played Mario RPG.

That is complete bull****. How can you forget a name like Kaepora Gaebora?! lol

Edit: Oh. And everything else I agree with.

Ha, yeah, I was kicking myself for not remembering it, especially since I have a techno rendition of his theme somewhere on my computer. **** Alzheimers is kicking in early...

Oh my god. Such beauty.

/end thread

Glad to know you appreciated it. If only we could just end threads when everything had been said. Unless one of us acheives Mod status or world domination (I'm shooting for the latter, myself), these debates will probably continue endlessly.

This is the best idea ever. Impa would really fit, would represent OoT and could easilly use Sheik's moveset.

Also, IIRC if you read the story in the original Zelda booklet it mentions Impa, so technically she has been in even the first one. (At least story wise.)

Really? Nice catch. Well, then she's been around since the beginning. All the more reason, right?

Ain't nothin' better than some ***-whoopin' in the morning.

Actually, this is a pretty good point. Some characters were kept in their old-school designs as a gimmick, but some weren't, like Little Mac. And Sheik is clearly not old-school enough to make her slightly subpar appearance her gimmick. And IF previous playable characters are going to be revealed as ATs, it's pretty likely that they'll get a graphical overhaul to at least be on par with their counterparts, and to work with the general, slightly gloomy and kinda cream-ish art style of the whole game.

As much as I'd love to agree with you, it sounded to me when I first read the article that Link, Sheik and Gannondorf were all part of a set of designs that Aunoma. Since we've already seen Link in action, and it's a good bet we'll eventually see G.dorf in action again, I don't think we can count Sheik out as playable. Not that I like saying that. Cause I don't. But you know that.

Can't be bothered to make a rant really. OoT doesn't NEED more representation, I'm just saying a little more wouldn't hurt. As I said before, it's a different Smash Bros game, it's to appeal to a newer audience as well as the old one, OoT is probably the most famous Zelda game, just as Super Mario Bros. is for Mario. So I don't see why it's "illegal" all of a sudden. The Smash Bros games don't ADD UP, they're new, they REPLACE the old Smash Bros (you can't really deny that) so OoT should be "legally" entitled to have as much as it did before, you make it sound like it's milked like a Mario Party game.

Don't sell yourself short, I'm sure you can rant just like the rest of us.

Regarding more OoT representation, I addressed that. More songs and stages. Or more elements which carried over into the rest of the Zelda series. There's a reason some things aren't repeated in later games; usually they're one trick ponies. Like Sheik for example. Anyhow, if you'd read my post thorougly I never said more Zelda representation, more OoT representation, more OoT character representation, or even Sheik appearing as a sepparate character (which I wouldn't like, but I would probably survive by as slim margin) should be illegal. I just said making her and Zelda the same character would be crapping on the rest of the series, and focusing on a minor plot device featured in one and only one game purely because fanboys can't recognize her insignificance/lack of connection with every character named Zelda.
As far as things adding up, I believe you were the one who first made that point, I was simply arguing that it isn't an exaggeration that OoT has gotten the most facetime of the Zelda series. A few years ago, it was because it was the most recent game in the series, so it was justifiable. Now it's not, so it's not justifiable. Plain and simple.

Besides, TP Zelda ISN'T SSB Zelda. They're entirely different.

SSB Zelda is ZELDA. Not TP Zelda, not OoT Zelda, not Oracle of Ages Zelda, just Zelda. It's the most updated design that looks the best. I keep saying this.

Wrong. Zelda IS Twilight Princess Zelda. How do I know? Because they DIDN'T use the most updated version of any other character in the game. Think about it, if Smash Bros was just intended to use the appearance of ever character from they're most recent game with no thought of continuity, then why don't we see Samus in her Metroid Prime 3 costume? And how come Mario from Mario Galaxy doesn't sport the game denim (not just blue DENIM fabric) overall's as Smash Mario? With each of those characters, Sakurai created his own unique version of the character with its own appearance, distinct from their most recent games. But with Zelda and Link, they CHOSE rather than to update what they already had (like with Mario, Samus, ect.), to use characters model specific to one game, which is distinctly different from the characters they chose to represent the Zelda series in the last generation. It would only make logical sense to stay true to that specific character, rather than combining it with attributes of the character they chose for the last generation.

But even if you could justify that SSBB Zelda is different from TP/OoT Zelda and thus free from any continuity issues, then I could argue just as easily that SSBB Zelda is different from the SSBM Zelda, since they are clearly based on two different versions of Zelda, and Sheik still doesn't make sense.

It's funny, the only reason this arguement exists is because the two look similar. No one argues that SSBB Zelda should change into Tetra. Or, if a Wind Waker Zelda is included, that she should transform into Sheik. The truth is people are stuck on realistic-Zelda=Sheik, and it demonstrates a lack of knowledge in the series.

Personally, us arguing doesn't change anything at all does it? All I know is that Shiek is a popular character, & that she has a good chance of returning to Brawl fully playable in some form or another. Think what you want, this argument seems like it's going to be fairly endless.

You're right, this arguement could continue for all of eternity, because I'm stubborned and because I know I'm right on this particular topic. If you don't want to say anything more in this discussion, I certainly won't think any less of you, but I'm not going to back down on this. I know my arguements aren't going to change whatever Sakurai ends up doing, but that doesn't mean I have to like it or be quiet about it.

End rant.

 

[SiD]

I don't understand people that think the Smash Bros. series has anything to do with continuity. It's a fighting game, story doesn't matter in the slightest in reference to each characters individual games, their movesets are made to be fun/unique, often times not having anything to do with ANY of their games. Honestly, Shiek transformation is a good, unique mechanic that just needs some balancing issues. There is no reason to remove it from a gameplay standpoint, so therefore, no reason to remove it from a Smash Bros. game.

 

[Fawriel]

I don't understand people that think the Smash Bros. series has anything to do with continuity. It's a fighting game, story doesn't matter in the slightest in reference to each characters individual games, their movesets are made to be fun/unique, often times not having anything to do with ANY of their games. Honestly, Shiek transformation is a good, unique mechanic that just needs some balancing issues. There is no reason to remove it from a gameplay standpoint, so therefore, no reason to remove it from a Smash Bros. game.

Good? It turned Zelda/Sheik into the worst-designed character of all.
Unique? Zamus and the Pokemon Trainer say hi.
No continuity? Hell, I could live with Zelda transforming if she turned into Tetra. First ninjas, then pirates. Next: Robots!

 

[SiD]

Good? It turned Zelda/Sheik into the worst-designed character of all.
Unique? Zamus and the Pokemon Trainer say hi.
No continuity? Hell, I could live with Zelda transforming if she turned into Tetra. First ninjas, then pirates. Next: Robots!

It could have been good, like I said, just needed some tweaking.
Unique, yes, PT and Zamus aren't the same at all.
Um, not to sure where you were going with the last one.

 

[Fawriel]

It could have been good, like I said, just needed some tweaking.
Unique, yes, PT and Zamus aren't the same at all.
Um, not to sure where you were going with the last one.

It could have been. But that royal screw-up left me bitter and unable to trust in Sakurai's abilities.
No, they aren't exactly the same. But they transform. And it makes more sense for them. If he wants to make Zelda unique, he should do something that actually makes sense for her, like fulfilling his promise to make her a "defensive character", not a "character who can't be played offensively".
And with the last point I was just being a jerk and pointing out how silly it is to want Sheik as a transformation for Zelda. Then again, whatever.

 

[SiD]

It's not silly at all. I didn't say do random ****, I said continuity doesn't matter. Zelda did transform into Shiek before, therfore, not silly.

So, stop being bitter. Let's just assume it's done fairly well, like I said before, so that switching during a match is a usable tactic, that both Zelda and Shiek have their uses. Then tell me Sheik shouldn't return.

 

[Fawriel]

Sheik shouldn't return.

 

[SiD]

Yes, she should.

And she most definitely will.

 

[Fawriel]

Awww, that should at least have gotten a smirk out of you.
Cheer up, buttercup! Turn that frown upside down!

...

Okay, so we're never gonna agree about this because I care about continuity and you don't. So we might as well drop this.
Also... this thread pretty much turned into a dialogue between us. *looks around*

 

[SiD]

Lol, to be honest, I can't tell on these boards anymore if someone is serious when they say something like that.

I'm curious though, why do you care about continuity in a game like this?

 

[RDK]

Good? It turned Zelda/Sheik into the worst-designed character of all.
Unique? Zamus and the Pokemon Trainer say hi.

Zamus and PT weren't in Melee, so that argument is moot. He's talking about her being a unique / new system in Melee. It then carried over to Brawl, manifesting in Zamus and PT.

No continuity? Hell, I could live with Zelda transforming if she turned into Tetra. First ninjas, then pirates. Next: Robots!

Tetra? Bleh.

After my experiences with people who want WW Link as a PC, I think anything WW-ish should be left out of Brawl. Pirates and Ninjas I am okay with, though.

~Naruto 4 Sandbag Alt.~