Jump to content
IGNORED

Zelda: The Wind Waker

kamrantaz

By kamrantaz
in Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Jarik

Jarik

Posted
Posted

UP until WW, the Zelda timeline had been going backwards with each Link and Zelda being an ancestor (Ganon was always the same Ganon).

Zelda 1 and Zelda 2 (Nes)

- Back 1000 or so years -

Zelda 3 (Snes) and Links Awakening (GB)

- Back 1000 or so years -

Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask (N64) and Ages/Seasons (GBC)

WW is a departure in that it's apparently set 1000 or so years after the events of OOT. I expected the land to be resurrected so it could become the Hyrule of 3, so the fact that that did'nt happen either means that:

[A] The Hyrule of 3 is another land mass. (The "new land" the king spoke of?)

Nintendo have decided to abandon this convoluted timeline and the Zelda series now officially starts with OOT.

I would lean more towards as otherwise Nintendo will have painted themselves into a corner. It does raise the question of where GBA Zelda fits in, but we could always just ignore the question. It's a great game right? who cares about the timeline! :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kamrantaz

kamrantaz

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thats what pisses me off.

Nintendo state that the time line was reset by OoT. All games will revolve around its timeline. LTTP etc are discarded. The only thing i liked with TWW was its connection with the hyrule of OoT. the world actually felt like a kinda continuation of hyrule after a grea disaster. Kinda like comparing our world now to that of water world.

I didnt like the direction of the plot though. It was like Hyrule is gone now and all thats left is a series of shitty islands. Hyrule as a world had a lot of potential but nintendo the fools have effectively destroyed it with the ending of TWW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Festoon

Festoon

Posted
Posted
Thats what pisses me off.

Nintendo state that the time line was reset by OoT. All games will revolve around its timeline. LTTP etc are discarded. The only thing i liked with TWW was its connection with the hyrule of OoT. the world actually felt like a kinda continuation of hyrule after a grea disaster. Kinda like comparing our world now to that of water world.

I didnt like the direction of the plot though. It was like Hyrule is gone now and all thats left is a series of shitty islands. Hyrule as a world had a lot of potential but nintendo the fools have effectively destroyed it with the ending of TWW.

Eh? What's to stop them setting a game in the past?

Or the far future where the land has dried out?

You seem to be looking for reasons to be pissed off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dismembo

dismembo

Posted
Posted
I like the fact that Hyrule's effectively dead now. It means that (hopefully) the new games will be set in strange new worlds (as in Link's Awakening and Majora's Mask) instead of yet more incarnations of Death Mountain etc.

I like your thinking there. Maybe future Zelda's will have completeley new ideas, new pick-ups, new styles etc. We'll look back on WW and see that it was a transitional game between the old gameplay and the new.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jarik

Jarik

Posted
Posted
I like the fact that Hyrule's effectively dead now. It means that (hopefully) the new games will be set in strange new worlds (as in Link's Awakening and Majora's Mask) instead of yet more incarnations of Death Mountain etc.

Oh, I would'nt write Hyrule off just yet. All that's really happened is that all the buildings which had been preserved have now been washed away. The land is still there, and the plot of WW said that the water came from the power of the gods, so it could always be removed at some future time, or simply drain away. Cue a completely altered landscape shaped by the sea, with secret tombs preserved from the water but their entrances revealed.

I think that WW2 will be set away from the Hyrule/Sea area though, as it was pretty thoroughly exhusted as a setting in it's present state.

I don't think they can move away from Hyrule really, as it's as much a part of the series as Zelda, Link, Ganon and the Triforce. It was a plot point that Triforce could'nt leave Hyrule after all, unless they intend to ignore that too... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paradigm

Paradigm

Posted
Posted
Why?

First off I like the actual mechanics of the sailing. The physics are accurate, the conditions around you change, the feel of it is very nice. The sea is pretty.

In lots of Zelda games you spent a while traversing empty land to get somewhere. So instead, they've given you a boat, and created a sea. It's a more natural thing for us to associate the sea with being mainly empty, as opposed to walking around a field with nothing there. It's a true sense of travel, rather than feeling like you're running endlessly on foot. Plus, making the boat your companion/advisor was a stroke of brilliance too. Two birds with one stone, and no dodgy interference at the most inappropriate moment ("HEY LISTEN! HEY LISTEN! HEY LISTEN!").

What it also does is physically break up the islands, and gives a reason for why they're different, and why some are sparsely populated. Instead of crossing the same bit of land to get somewhere that's essentially *the same place*, you've got a whole sea to break stuff up. So every time you go somewhere new, you're expecting something different, and the sea provides a reason for it to *be* different. You wouldn't get a few people knowing about a specific island somewhere without there being a *reason* for that. There's a nice human aspect to the whole voyage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Popo

Popo

Posted
Posted
I think that WW2 will be set away from the Hyrule/Sea area

Either way, that should make for a change from the war-torn European setting we're used to ;)

Ahaha, sorry, you should be careful with that acronym though, I think it's already taken!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comrade

Comrade

Posted
Posted
Oh, I would'nt write Hyrule off just yet. All that's really happened is that all the buildings which had been preserved have now been washed away. The land is still there, and the plot of WW said that the water came from the power of the gods, so it could always be removed at some future time, or simply drain away. Cue a completely altered landscape shaped by the sea, with secret tombs preserved from the water but their entrances revealed.

I think that WW2 will be set away from the Hyrule/Sea area though, as it was pretty thoroughly exhusted as a setting in it's present state.

I don't think they can move away from Hyrule really, as it's as much a part of the series as Zelda, Link, Ganon and the Triforce. It was a plot point that Triforce could'nt leave Hyrule after all, unless they intend to ignore that too... ;)

Yeah and SPOILER - though I kind of think that time has passed -: The Master Sword and Ganon are still down in Hyrule too. I don't think they could really get away with them just appearing somewhere else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Professor Puzzles

Professor Puzzles

Posted
Posted
I don't think they can move away from Hyrule really, as it's as much a part of the series as Zelda, Link, Ganon and the Triforce.  It was a plot point that Triforce could'nt leave Hyrule after all, unless they intend to ignore that too...  :huh:

Majora's Mask and Link's Awakening were both set outside of Hyrule, and they both turned out to be supoib.

SPOILER!!

It would really piss me off if, after the whole speech that the King of Hyrule gave about leaving Hyrule behind and finding a new Kingdom, the next Zelda game suddenly forgot all about that, and we ended up back in Hyrule again. TWW ends like it does for a reason, so why bother telling that story then creating a sequel that essentially says 'Oh, just forget that one ever happened.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites
D-Side

D-Side

Posted
Posted
It would really piss me off if, after the whole speech that the King of Hyrule gave about leaving Hyrule behind and finding a new Kingdom, the next Zelda game suddenly forgot all about that,

The thing is, the Royal Family have left the Kingdom of Hyrule before. They travelled to the Northern Provinces and set about building the appropriately named North Castle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jarik

Jarik

Posted
Posted

I meant they can't move away from Hyrule Permanently. IMO it's great that the series takes the occasional vacation, Wind Waker 2 will most likely do so.

The meaning of the King's/Tetra's speech seemed to be that there will in future be a new Hyrule, most likely on N5. The Master Sword/Ganon plot point could be that the Ganon's evil slowly corrupts the sword, and a new one must then be forged to combat the now evil blade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Liquid Myth

Liquid Myth

Posted
Posted
UP until WW, the Zelda timeline had been going backwards with each Link and Zelda being an ancestor (Ganon was always the same Ganon).

Zelda 1 and Zelda 2 (Nes)

- Back 1000 or so years -

Zelda 3 (Snes) and Links Awakening (GB)

- Back 1000 or so years -

Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask (N64) and Ages/Seasons (GBC)

WW is a departure in that it's apparently set 1000 or so years after the events of OOT. I expected the land to be resurrected so it could become the Hyrule of 3, so the fact that that did'nt happen either means that:

[A] The Hyrule of 3 is another land mass. (The "new land" the king spoke of?)

Nintendo have decided to abandon this convoluted timeline and the Zelda series now officially starts with OOT.

I would lean more towards as otherwise Nintendo will have painted themselves into a corner. It does raise the question of where GBA Zelda fits in, but we could always just ignore the question. It's a great game right? who cares about the timeline! ;)

And where, pray, did you get that from? I've never come across it in any of the games, apart from WW.

And don't say "some fansite".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kensei

kensei

Posted
Posted
And where, pray, did you get that from? I've never come across it in any of the games, apart from WW.

And don't say "some fansite".

Nintendo used to have a timeline, but I don't know if they cary it anymore. He's quite right though: there are several links. In a geeky sense I like to think of it as a true "legend" where there are lots of different stories intermingled and no one's quite sure what's what. Like King Arthur, or something.

I always thought a good twist for a sequel would be that you need the Master Sword to defeat some other evil, but in getting it you free Gannon. As a pig, obviously, because the statue thing would act like a chrysalyis.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sekiro

Sekiro

Posted
Posted

Loved it and played it loads and loads, then the atmosphere of the setting started to wear off and I couldnt be assed to finish it. I only have a little bit left to do as well, its the first Zelda game (if not Nintendo game) that I have nearly go to the end of and just stopped for no real reason.

Sod it - one to beat this week then maybe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
linkster

linkster

Posted
Posted

Playing through it again (I didn't get colour film first time out so have the whole statuette thing to do) there are a couple of REALLY annoying, shoddily implemented features, namely 1. when you stop swinging to reposition the rope and then try to start swinging again, he ALWAYS climbs the rope instead. Majorly irritating. 2. The grapple hook cannot be retracted if you change your mind or fire by accident. Most annoying.

Whinge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jolly

Jolly

Posted
Posted
mind you, at least it would explain why they have the same damn puzzles in each game. There's an eye, and I have some arrows - what to do!?

As an aside, I've been getting this a lot in adventure games recently - I flew through Prince of Persia for example. I think it's just got something to do with playing games for a long old time - you gain a "gamers logic".

I must be able to move that block. I must be able to turn those mirrors. There must be a bronze dodechedron key for the dodechedron hole and so on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jolly

Jolly

Posted
Posted
^ I think that's just regular logic... however, you're definitey onto something there.

See, games are good for the mind. :)

They were pretty shoddy examples, but you seem to get what I mean.

As for good for your mind...hmmm, not sure about that. The gamers logic only seems to help you with games, never been able to apply it in real life! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept