Official Zelda Thread...

[claud3]

Ok This is the zelda thread... Here we talk zelda and all that it has.... This includes

Favourite zelda moments....
timelines.....
theories.....
enemies.....
NPC's.....
tribes...
Creatures....
worlds.....
connections these all have.....
Link.....
zelda.....
Dungeons.....


This will be the place for all zelda fans and who wants to learn the history of this great series.... The connections these games have with each other and other games... The history of its creation

Theories

The Hyrulian Pantheon: Introduction

Since the series’ conception, the exact nature and structure of Hyrulian religion has been a mystery. We have known there are Goddesses and Gods, Guardians and Spirits, Temples and Sacred Places. What we haven’t known is how all of these separate deities exist in relationship to each other, if they believe themselves to be in relationship to each other in the first place, or whether or not there are different tiers, such as in many multi-god religions. I have always been fascinated by mentions of Gods and Goddesses within Hyrule. There is evidence within the games pointing to a larger picture, but the exact form and nature of that picture has always been clouded by questions. With the release of Skyward Sword, we have been given a wealth of new information, and we are continually discovering the ways in which this information fills in many cracks in Zelda Theorizing. What it has really done for me is allow me to make out the form and nature of the Hyrulian pantheon, and I would like to share that with you. Jump inside to read on.Please note, there will be unmarked HEAVY SPOILERS in the 8th, 9th, and 10th chapters. There may be SPOILERS in the other articles, but they will be clearly marked by bolded text and kept in a single block.
Before we begin, there are a few things that need to be discussed so we are all on the same page. First, I will define the terms I will be using throughout the articles in this series. Second, an overview of the basic structure of the Hyrulian Pantheon will be presented, and lastly we will discuss basic archetypes.
The word “pantheon” is used in two ways: referring to a physical building or structure dedicated to all the gods of a particular civilization, and then, referring to all the Gods or Goddesses of a particular civilization. There have been many pantheons throughout history, including various eastern pantheons (India, China, Japan, etc.) African pantheons, Hispanic, Native American, Judeo-Christian, and of course the classic western Pantheons (Greek/Roman, Germanic pantheons). I will focus mainly on the structure and nature of the Norse and Greek pantheons, as I see the most parallels between them and the Hyrulian Pantheon.
A “Mythology” is a collection of myths and legends from a particular culture. A myth is simply a sacred story passed down by people of that culture, often for the purpose of explaining various natural occurrences or mysteries within the universe. A legend is more of a story about mythical characters within the particular pantheon/culture the legend was created in. Legends and myths can evolve into religious beliefs over time.
What we understand about the Greek and Norse pantheons came from what we have found of their art and stories. Their Myths. There are the legends of Hercules, for example, which detail many traditional Greek myths and mythological figures while talking about the hero that the stories were about. The Norse had two huge collections of stories called the Poetic Edda and the Prose Edda. There are also the stories of Beowulf, the great mortal Norse Hero who defeated Grendle and his mother.

Greek Pantheon

Norse Pantheon

Following this line of thought, if we look at each game as part of a collection of legends about the same characters/gods from the same culture, then we can piece together the system of belief shared by all Hyrulians in the same way that archeologists and scholars have done throughout history. The problem with an approach like this lies in thinking of the games in a chronological timeline. If we think of the games as a history, then each game has a separate mythology; not all of the deity characters show up in every game. However, there have been articles written about the timeline where the each game, or set of games, are considered individual legends, or stories, rather than a chronological history. If we look at them this way, as a collection of myths about the culture, we can easily piece together a Hyrulian Pantheon.
I use the term “Hyrulian” referring to all the races and people in the country of Hyrule. The term “Hylian” specifically refers to the Hylian race. Therefore, all of the different races are included in the general Hyrulian Mythologies, which makes sense as even members of the other races who claim to have their own Gods pay homage to Hyrule and to Hyrule’s three goddesses. They believe in the same set of Gods, but have different “patron gods” than the Hylian race. This phenomena was seen in Greek and Roman times. Although everyone in the country believed in the same gods, different Citystates had different patron gods that they honored most out of the larger pantheon of gods.
There are a few characters and storylines common to the pantheons of various cultures, and they have come to be known as “archetypes”. No discussion of mythologies or pantheons is complete without a discussion of archetypes. To really be considered a traditional pantheon, the cultural myths in question need to share some, if not all, of these archetypes.
For example, we have the Sky God and the Earth Mother. I would argue that Nayru and Farore, respectively, fulfill these archetypes. Din, though heavily related to the earth, seems to have more to do with fire and rock. The Earth Mother archetype is usually associated with plant life and animals, which we associate with Farore in the Zelda universe. This will be discussed in more depth in the Major Deities chapter.
Many pantheons also feature a Sun Goddess and a Moon God. Sometimes, as in Greek and Roman mythology, the genders are flipped, but most pantheons feature a female sun and a male moon. Norse Mythology is no different, and neither is Hyrulian Mythology. Majora’s Mask, the story of Link in Termina, features Majora as a female antagonist and spirit of the sun, whereas the Fierce Deity is male and represents the spirit of the moon. These spirits could easily be seen as deities.
The death deity archetype I can’t discuss here because of spoilers. See “The Evil Gods” section for more information on the Hyrulian God of Death.
Perhaps most interesting is the existence of a Trickster figure within various mythologies. In Norse Mythology, which we will discuss in depth, that figure is called Loki. At best he is a trickster, at worse he is malignant and borders on evil. To counter the trickster figure, there if often a heroic God that keeps the trickster in line. I believe that Majora is the trickster in Hyrulian Mythology and Fierce Deity is the Heroic god who steps in to tame him. This relationship will be discussed in more depth in the Minor Gods chapter.
One last aspect of a collection of cultural mythologies that make up or involve a specific pantheon is the existence of archetypal stories found in most if not all mythologies. First is the creation myth, in which we find out how the world was made. For Hyrule, we are told that the three goddesses came from a distant nebula and created the world with perfect balance and then left. This is a very brief summary, but this myth will be discussed in more depth in chapter two, Hyrulian cosmology.The Creation of HyruleNext, there if often an “origin of death” myth. In Native American mythology, specifically the Nez Perce version as all tribes have slightly different myths, the tale often goes that Coyote, their trickster figure, traveled to the land of the dead to bring back his wife. Death told him that he could have her back if he could travel across the five mountains and not look back to see if she was following him. On the final mountain he couldn’t take it anymore and looked. Because he looked at her, she returned to the land of the dead, and so death enters the world through recklessness. In Christian mythologies, the Snake tricked Eve into committing a sin, disobedience, and so death enters the world through the sin of disobedience.
A similar myth exists in Hyrulian mythology. The Triforce exists in the sacred realm and the goddesses have left the world in perfect balance to govern itself. Many recountings of this time period say that the people were happy, the land was peaceful, there was perfect harmony in the world. Then knowledge of the Triforce spread, and the people began to fight and kill each other for its power. Death enters the world through greed and the desire for power.After the Battles for the TriforceYet another common myth found in many mythologies, including Hyrulian mythology, is the story of the flood. There are many different circumstances surrounding this myth, but ultimately the world is flooded completely and a few survivors live on mountaintops at some point in time. Can anyone say “The Wind Waker’s opening legend”?
Classic Illustrations from Three Different Cultural MythologiesThe Hyrulian Flood Myth
If we look at the games as a collection of cultural stories, legends, and myths, it is clear that there are many parallels between common archetypal characters and archetypal storylines found in most cultural mythologies and cultural pantheons. I believe that using these “legends of Zelda” as a tool, evidence of Hyrulian culture, we can piece together a scholarly and plausible argument for well defined Hyrulian Pantheon. In the weeks to come, we will delve into the various characters and levels of that pantheon.
The articles in the series will be separated into ten chapters as follows:
1-Introduction
2-Hyrulian Cosmology
3-The Major Gods
4-The Minor Gods
5-Demi-Gods
6-Guardians
7-Spirits
8-The Evil Gods
9-The Hylia Problem
10-Conclusion
As previously stated, the last three chapters will have heavy Skyward Sword Spoilers. Elsewhere, they will be clearly marked.
PREVIEW OF CHAPTER 2:
Before actually discussing the gods themselves, we need to understand how the Hyrulian people think of their world in a physical and metaphysical sense. Within the study of ancient mythologies, this is called the cosmology of that culture. In the next article we will take a look at Greek and Norse Cosmology, and compare it to Hyrulian Cosmology as outlined throughout the games.
Please note that this series is not attempting to force theological beliefs onto the Hyrulian society. The writer is aware that Zelda’s mythology is often compared to eastern religions because of where it was created, but found fascinating results by looking at more medieval pantheons for comparison because of the medieval setting the games take place in. She is also aware of the recently released book, Zelda and Theology, which attempts to preach a Christian message using a popular culture figure, Zelda games. This is not at all what this series is attempting to do.

The Hyrulian Pantheon: The Hylia Problem

The subject of the goddess Hylia is a confusing mass of tales at this point, yet to be delved into and sorted out by theorists of the fan community. Before Skyward Sword even starts we are told a legend about her, passed down by the Hylians of Skyloft, which tells of her duty guarding the “ultimate power” from the demonic hoards rising from the earth. It shows her putting the remaining Hylians on an outcropping of earth and using her power to raise both it and the ultimate power into the sky. She then drove Demise, leader of the hoard, into the earth and sealed him there.
After hearing this tale we enter into the world of Skyloft, a floating island dominated by a gigantic statue of the goddess. No one seems to know her name, or the name or form of the ultimate power she guarded, but they worship her all the same It seems that she was their chief goddess for some time rather than the three golden goddesses, who the people didn’t really know much about. Statue of the Goddess on Skyloft
In this chapter, we will tackle the nature and purpose of the Goddess Hylia, addressing the conundrum she and her tales present to the Hyrulian Pantheon. First, as this is the first thing we discover about her, we will look at her relationship to the Triforce and the three goddesses. Then we will examine her relationship to time and its flow, her role in creating the cycle, and lastly her relationship to Demise and place in the Hyrulian Pantheon.
These are the first words we hear on the Triforce and Hylia:
“They did all this in their lust to take the ultimate power protected by Her Grace, the goddess. The power she guarded was without equal. Handed down by the gods of old, this power gave its holder the means to make any desire a reality. Such was the might of the ultimate power that the old ones placed it in the care of the goddess.”
Remember that this is the legend as it was passed down over generations by the Hylians themselves. We know the goddess protects the Triforce, and they understand the Triforce only as an ultimate power that grants the holder anything he wishes. It’s kind of like a genie’s magic lamp to them: the ability to have one wish, one desire, no matter what it is. They understand that there are “gods of old” but seem to know little to nothing about them. The Triforce (LttP)
Of note in this tale is the idea that the Triforce was given to the goddess for her to protect. This leads us to think that the goddesses themselves gave Hylia the Triforce, which would be counter to the idea that it was an accidental creation left behind when the goddesses left the world to govern itself. If it is true that the goddesses gave her the Triforce, then this means that they created it on purpose. Zelda tells Link her theory on why the goddesses left the Triforce behind:
“It’s impossible to know the true reason why the old gods created the Triforce. But I have a theory of my own. The gods created the Triforce, yet they specifically designed it so that their own kind could never use its power. Somehow, I think that may have been their way of giving hope to all the mortal beings of the land.”
I call this Zelda’s theory rather than Hylia’s because of a few contradictions in it. We know that at this point Zelda has all of Hylia’s memories back. A few moments before, she had said: “The old gods created a supreme power that gave anyone who possessed it the ability to shape reality and fulfill any desire. They called it the Triforce.” This is a much more accurate description of what the Triforce does, and the first time it is directly called the Triforce. This is obviously a memory from Hylia herself, and not from Zelda.
However, in the above quote she says two things that are contradictory to this and to the legend told by the Hylians. First, how could Hylia know what the Triforce does and what it’s called if she can’t use it? The goddesses must have told her when they asked her to guard it. However, in this statement she says “It is impossible to know why the old gods created the Triforce.” How could she not know why the goddesses created the Triforce if they directly gave it to her to guard?
The only answer is that the goddesses did not ask her to guard the Triforce. Someone else did. But who were they? The answer lies in the specific phrasing and imagery used in the moment we are told the goddess was given the Triforce to protect.
The goddesses are called “the gods of old” but rather than calling them the “old gods” in the next phrase, like Zelda did in explaining the Triforce to Link, the legend says that “the old ones” gave her the Triforce to guard. When this is said, we are being shown an image of the ancestors of the Skyloftians praying around the Triforce. These could have been the original “people of Hyrule” spoken of in the old, old legend from a Link to the Past who are said to have forged the Master Sword.
The people in prayer around the Triforce
The English manual to a Link to the Past said that after Ganon entered the Golden Land and obtained the Triforce, the people of Hyrule and the Seven Sages created a sword resistant to magic, which could even repulse powers granted by the Triforce. Although the Sages tried to find someone brave to wield the Master Sword, they never found such a person, leaving the Sages, with the aid of the knights of Hyrule, to seal away Ganon instead. (Note how similar this sounds to the opening legend of Skyward Sword where Demise is sealed, and Hylia is looking for a hero to wield the Goddess Sword.)
The Sages (LttP)
However, the Japanese manual states that it was forged long before the Imprisoning War occurred. Shortly after the creation of the world, the Goddesses instructed the people of Hyrule to forge a sword that would have the power to vanquish anyone who misused the Triforce. The location of the blade was already forgotten by the time of the Imprisoning War, and no hero was found worthy of wielding it. It is noteworthy that the “people of Hyrule” themselves are named and not necessarily specific sages, as is said in both the English manual and in Ocarina of Time.
This presents the first “Hylia Problem”: In Skyward Sword the goddess herself says that she forged the Goddess Sword for her chosen hero to wield, and Link tempers it on his adventures until it becomes the Master Sword. The original story was, however, that the people of Hyrule and/or the sages forged the Master Sword. Which story is true?
I believe that they both are, and that these Hylian ancestors are both the “people of Hyrule” and the ancient sages. Sages didn’t really exist, as there is no reference to a culture that fully formed at that time, however these “old ones” could have been serving the goddess Hylia and the Triforce. It could be that these people, fearing the rise of Demise who was terrorizing the earth, asked the goddess to protect the Triforce and themselves. The goddess then forged the sword for them, or helped them forge it if we’re looking at the story in a Link to the Past, and sent the island into the sky to protect the people, the sword, and the Triforce until she found a worthy hero to wield it.
One last note on the creation of the master sword involves Hylia’s true role in that process. If the people of Hyrule created it, under the goddesses instruction perhaps, then what role did Hylia really have? Why are the people so adamant in saying that she forged the Master Sword for her chosen hero? The only time Zelda speaks of the creation of the Master Sword, she says:
“In order to put an end to the demon king, Hylia devised two separate plans and set them both into motion. First, she created Fi. She made the spirit that resides in your sword to serve a single purpose: to assist her chosen hero on his mission.”
Hylia doesn’t claim to have made the sword. She claims to have made Fi who resides in the sword. The people could very well have forged the sword themselves, as Fi is what makes it holy and special.
This theory ties together not only the seemingly different accounts of how Hylia came to protect the Triforce, but also the different legends of the Master Sword’s creation. The people forged the sword, and the goddess made Fi. The golden goddesses had no part in asking Hylia to guard the Triforce. The people of Hyrule, who were perfectly capable of using it and discovering what its powers really are, are the “old ones” and the “sages” who gave the Triforce to Hylia to guard and forged the Master Sword with her.
Link with the Master Sword (LttP) Curiously similar to certain scenes in Skyward Sword…
The goddesses did not leave the Triforce on purpose, as Zelda herself said, but the people of Hyrule who originally found it must have created a meaning for its existence. They themselves chose to see it as hope for all mortal beings in a world of terror where they were in such desperate need of hope. This accidental creation was ruining their lives as forces of evil began killing in their hunger for it. They needed to believe that there was a good intention behind its creation, and so they decided to believe the goddesses left it behind for them. I think that Hylia knew better, which is why Zelda contradicts herself in her speech.
If the goddesses didn’t give Hylia the Triforce, what is her relationship to the Major Gods of the Hyrulian Pantheon? I think that this can be better understood if we look again at Demise and at the Triforce itself.
Zelda said, “The gods created the Triforce, yet they specifically designed it so that their own kind could never use its power.” Demise is more powerful than Hylia, hence why she could not kill him herself, clearly god-like himself. He is the God of Hate, the eternal force behind all evil in Hyrule. How, then, could he use the Triforce if Hylia cannot? I think that he is not one of “their kind”. He is a demonic God, cut of a darker cloth you could say. Perhaps he is part mortal, or perhaps he is just not the same kind of God as the others.
Hylia must have been cut from the same cloth as the goddesses since she could not use the Triforce. Perhaps she, too, came from the distant nebula where they came from. What is confusing is the fact that she doesn’t know them, and therefore couldn’t be a fourth sister. We don’t know what the goddess Hylia looked like in her immortal form, beyond that she was female and possibly had wings. Perhaps she was golden herself, like the three goddesses.
Multiple times it is said that the three goddesses are the “gods of old” or the “old gods”. Hylia must, then, be younger somehow than the goddesses. Maybe she is their child, or simply a being from the same divine place who found their creation after they had already left it. It would have been so much like its creators that no doubt a young goddess far from her home would have been attracted to its familiarity.
Hylia could not have been full goddess, however, because there is no record of the goddesses ever suffering injury. They are all powerful. Hylia tells Link, however, that she was gravely injured in her battle with Demise and knew that were he to break free again she wouldn’t be able to stop him. This is why she sacrificed her immortality to become human and keep the seal strong until Link could defeat Demise himself. Hylia, then, is more divine than Demise, hence her inability to use the Triforce, but less divine than the goddesses due to her ability to be injured or weakened.
Now, with an understanding of Hylia’s relationship to the goddesses, Demise, the Triforce, and the Master Sword itself, we can look at one last very important subject: the nature of Hylia’s powers.
She can create life in a sense, as she created Fi to live in the Master Sword. She is shown to have wielded it herself in the fight against Demise after the Hylians were sent to the sky. I wonder if the creation of the Dark Master Sword was in response to this, and if Demise didn’t create Ghirahim in an attempt to counter Fi. This would explain Ghirahim’s imperfections. He has wild emotions and is insane, which is very counter to the analytical nature and sound logic of Fi. If it is true that Ghirahim and the Dark Master Sword were created in response to Fi and the Goddess Sword, it makes sense that Ghirahim would be the opposite of what the goddess created, and perhaps imperfect himself as his creator and master is not as divine as Hylia.
In addition to her ability to create life, the goddess Hylia has something to do with time. This, I think, is the most fascinating part about her powers. Somehow she could look through time and know that Link was going to be born, what he would be like, and what she needed to do to help him. Every time you learn a new goddess song she says “I am the one that guides you from the edge of time.”
Think about it. If Hylia is the true Goddess of Time spoken of in Majora’s Mask, it would make sense that she gave up her divine form and can still hear Link’s prayers in Majora’s Mask. She could look “from the edge of time” before Skyward Sword happened, see Link’s prayer, and make sure that the song of time has different properties in the land of Termina. It would also make sense that Zelda would know about her, and that she would be watching over Link in all of her incarnations. He is, after all, HER chosen hero.
Link plays the Song of Time in Majora’s Mask
All of this could be done from the edge of time, before she gives up her immortality. This would also explain why we do not see the goddess of time or any depictions of her, as memory of her would fade more with the passage of time. The people learn of the three goddesses and the Triforce, and the goddess is now human. They begin to focus their worship on the goddesses of the Triforce that saved them, and less on the goddess who is no longer directly present in their lives. The royal family, descended from her, would not forget, but the people very well could. After some time, even the royal family could forget where they came from as well.
One last thing that Hylia being the Goddess of Time reborn explains is Princess Zelda’s premonitions. Of course the reborn goddess of time would have visions of the future and other special abilities. A great example is the moment when she allows Link to see her message in the past when he first touches the Ocarina of Time.
After receiving Zelda’s message, Link pulls the Master Sword from the pedestal of time.
Hylia is the Goddess of Time, and a major god in the Hyrulian Pantheon on par with Demise. At first her existence seems to cause many inconsistencies with legends and lore we have previously learned in the Zelda Myths. Some of these include the creation of the Master Sword, the nature of the Triforce, the solitary existence of the Golden Goddesses as the deities of Hyrule, and Farore or Nayru as the Goddess of Time. Further inspection, however, reveals that Hylia in fact answers the mysteries in all of these topics and shows us new things to discover and question.
There is only one more thing that Hylia did that we have not discussed: her role in the creation of the Cycle. Zelda says:
“That brings us back to you… To face Demise and give the land hope, the goddess, Hylia, needed someone with an unbreakable spirit. That someone is you, Link. But spirit alone wasn’t enough. You had to overcome many trials and awaken the hero within yourself so that you could wield that supreme power. And so Hylia… I mean, so I… I knew that if it meant saving Zelda, you would throw yourself headfirst into any danger, without even a moment’s doubt…I…I used you.”
She almost forced Link to become the hero whose spirit Demise will always fight. She started the bloodline of the goddess. Were it not for her actions, Demise would not have anyone to struggle against for eternity. But Hylia is divine and her creations, the blood of the goddess and the spirit of the hero, will live forever much like she would have and like Demise will. In a way this was the Goddess of Time’s first mistake. But, also, in a way she is the one we all need to thank for the Legend of Zelda which is so dear to so many of us.
PREVIEW OF ARTICLE 10:
This is finally the end of our discussion on the Hyrulian Pantheon. We have talked about Hyrulian Cosmology, their major gods, minor gods, demi-gods, spirits, and evil gods. We have also tackled the monkey wrench that is Hylia, and revealed that she is the key that solves so many problems. Now we need to talk about Hyrule’s divine mortal heroes—Link and Zelda themselves.

Link: Theories on the Protagonist and Emergent Narrative

Link: Theories on the Protagonist and Emergent Narrative

Share this post Like 40 Tweet 1 0 3 points

December 14th, 2012 by GaroXicon

We’ve previously discussed Robert McKee’s theories of the archplot, miniplot, and antiplot, and how they apply to the Zelda series. Today, we’re going to continue delving into McKee’s theories with a discussion of our perennial protagonist, Link. He’s been the player character in every canon Zelda game to date, and though we’ve seen many incarnations of him throughout the years, he’s still been the same character at his core.

McKee’s theories of the protagonist are, at their base, about desire. He sums up the foundation of a good protagonist with five statements.

1. The protagonist has a conscious desire.

This is fairly simple: Every protagonist is going to want something, is fully aware that they want that something, and shows that they want that something through their actions. This desire can be a physical object or action — for example, the police chief in Jaws desires the destruction of the shark — or it can be an internal, abstract desire, such as the desire for maturity of the main character in Big. The protagonist’s actions are going to quite explicitly exhibit this desire.

2. The protagonist has the capacities to pursue the object of desire convincingly.

This is a bit less obvious, but it makes sense: The protagonist must be characterized in such a way that the audience believes them capable of pursuing their desire. For example, a character with a desire to walk on the moon must be, if not an astronaut already, an engineer or a scientist working in that field. A mild-mannered office worker in a small town in New England could not convincingly pursue the desire to walk on the moon. The character’s personality and traits must work in the service of pursuing the object of desire (the thing they want), otherwise the audience will be less willing to believe the story.

In some cases, the protagonist may not be in possession of skills or abilities that directly contribute to their ability to convincingly pursue their desire. In these cases, a tremendous amount of will or determination will suffice; the audience will respond well to characters with hope. But it’s a fine balance, as a protagonist with no skills that directly contribute to their pursuit of desire runs the risk of being unable to attain their desire at all. Which brings us to…

3. The protagonist must have at least a chance to attain his desire.

An audience has no interest in the story of a character trying to reach a desire they have no chance of reaching. If our astronaut that wants to walk on the moon is working for a company that has no plans to run manned missions, the audience won’t want to hear this story. There must be a chance —however miniscule — that the protagonist can reach the desire. Hope is an incredibly strong emotion, and audiences will quickly latch onto hope. Hopelessness, on the other hand, is alienating, and will detach the audience from the story.

Likewise, while a character with no directly applicable skills may be able to convincingly pursue his desire, if that lack of skill makes him completely unable to attain his desire, then the audience will reject him on the grounds of hopelessness. Will and determination only work if the character has a chance even without directly useful skills.

4. The protagonist has the will and the capacity to pursue his object of desire to the end of the line, to the human limit established by the setting and the genre.

This is a very wordy way of saying that the protagonist will stop at nothing to reach his goal, and will be able to pursue it all the way until he has reached the very limit of human ability. As I said previously, hopelessness is alienating; a protagonist who gives up will send the audience running for the hills. A protagonist who continues to try against impossible odds? Audiences love it. Our astronaut isn’t going to stop trying, no matter how many times a mission fails to make landfall.

5. Conflict arises from the gap that exists between the protagonist’s expectations and the actual result of his actions.

This is the key statement, as it is the “mechanism of conflict”: The protagonist is going to take actions to attain his desire. When the results of his actions are more extreme than his expectations were, the gap between expectation and result creates conflict. Our astronaut and his team are set to fly a mission to the moon, but a technical problem results in them overshooting their landing zone and having to circle back around the moon, carefully monitoring all of their instruments to ensure their survival. They expected to land on the moon, but their action had more extreme consequences than they foresaw, and thus the conflict arose. The gap between the two gives rise to this conflict, which then fuels the rest of the story. There can be —and are, in most cases —multiple gaps of this nature within the course of a story.

These statements of KcKee’s form a very basic picture of the protagonist as a character with a strong force of will who will stop at nothing to achieve the object of his desire, and create conflict through the actions he takes to do so.

This is a model that can be applied to almost every protagonist in any medium, but applying the model to Link is a rather interesting case. Though Link is almost universally considered a good protagonist (and rightfully so), there are two clear problems with applying the model to Link. Let’s examine these problems, and determine why Link is considered a good protagonist despite them.

The Problem of Link’s Desire

We’re going to look at Ocarina of Time as an example, since I’d call its story the typical Zelda story. What is Link’s desire during the game? What exactly does he want to accomplish? Does he want to fulfill his destiny and become the legendary Hero of Time? Does he want to carry out the Deku Tree’s dying wish out of loyalty to the guardian spirit? Does he want to fulfill Zelda’s wish and end Ganondorf’s tyrannical influence? Does he simply want to return to an idyllic life of peace and calm? Does he want to explore Hyrule, regardless of the situation that compels him to do so?

The answer is none of these… and all of these. In fact, Link himself has no desire. It has been said throughout the series’ life that Link is so named because he is intended as a “link” to the player, a way for the player to connect on a deeper level with the game. Because of this intention, in most every case, Link is not branded with a particular identity or character; he is very much a blank slate. Link has no inherent desire, which defies the portrait of the protagonist that we just defined. So why, then, is Link such an effective protagonist?

Quite simply, he is an effective protagonist because he allows you, the player, to inject him with your own personality and your own desires. And because each player will play the game differently and with different desires, Link is an incredibly versatile protagonist, able to play out any number of narratives simply through the way people choose to play the game. He is the perfect protagonist for a storytelling device known as “emergent narrative”: a story that arises out of the way players interact with the game world.

For example, let’s say that we have three players all playing Ocarina of Time. These players have all drawn the Master Sword and acquired the Hookshot from Dampe’s Tomb in the Graveyard, and are turned completely loose into the world. Player A decides to proceed straight to the Forest Temple. Player B decides to instead rescue Epona from Lon Lon Ranch. Player C opts to simply roam the world, exploring Hyrule Field and surveying the changes that Ganondorf’s reign has brought to the region. Now think about the different desires and stories at play here. Player A is motivated by a desire to finish the game, or to end Ganondorf’s reign, and thus his story displays a sense of immediacy and urgency. Player B is motivated more by personal desires, such as the desire to rescue the horse that he befriended as a child, and thus his story is less urgent. Player C wants to go sightseeing, and his story is the least urgent and completely ignores the main story of the game in favor of just exploring the new landscape.

These are all different stories that can emerge from the game, all because Link’s blank slate nature enables players to inject their own desires into him. What enables these different emergent narratives to take shape is the presence of abnegation. Abnegation is a term that refers to the ability of a player to ignore the main story or object of the game and instead focus on smaller, side efforts. Sidequests are an obvious and ubiquitous source of abnegation, but the very presence of an open world that can be explored, with things like hidden holes and concealed treasure chests, offers abnegation as well. Allowing a player to both instill their own desires in the game’s character by not developing the character as an individual, and to ignore the main story set before them, provides numerous opportunities for an emergent narrative to take shape.

If we turn to other games in the series, this same format appears numerous times. In Majora’s Mask, the game turns the player loose very early on, allowing them to either proceed onward to Woodfall, pursuing the desire to fulfill the promise to Tael by summoning the “four who are there”, or to explore Clock Town and interact with its many citizens, pursuing the desire to better understand Termina. In The Wind Waker, players are free to explore the sea during much of the game, fulfilling the desire to explore, or they can proceed with the main story, work toward stopping Ganon’s plans, and fulfill the desire to rescue Aryll and, later, Tetra. The Zelda series provides so many avenues for the player to pursue their desires, and in so doing gives rise to a near endless number of emergent narratives. Replaying the games can often feel like an entirely different experience if you allow yourself to consider different avenues at different times, creating new narratives in the process.

The Problem of Link’s Expectations

The gap, or the mechanism of conflict, is created by the difference between the protagonist’s expectations of his action and the actual result of the action. As we have established, Link is, for the most part, a blank slate; he may show emotions from time to time, but he has no clearly expressed desires and no clearly conveyed expectations. So from what expectations does the gap form?

As with the problem of desire, the answer is quite simple: Your expectations. Rather than create conflict through Link’s expectations as he pursues his desire, the series creates conflict through your own expectations as you perform actions to pursue your desire. You directly control Link; your actions and your expectations of them are what create the conflict.

Let’s go back to Ocarina of Time. The largest gap occurs when Link draws the Master Sword from the Pedestal of Time, allowing Ganondorf access to the Sacred Realm. As we’ve said, Link as a character had no expressed expectations. But you, the player, did. You thought that drawing that sword was going to prevent Ganondorf from reaching the Triforce, but it had the exact opposite effect. The gap is created because your expectations of the result of your action did not align with the real results.

It’s a rather elegant solution, because it involves the player in the game’s plot more than it would if it used Link’s expectations. Because you expected a certain outcome, rather than being told that Link expected it, your actions are given more weight than they would have if you performed those actions because Link thought they were the right thing to do. Instead you thought they were right, and that difference is critical to involving the player in the story. In this situation you are an actor in the story rather than a detached observer who is operating the character like a puppet, and that elicits far stronger emotional reactions.

There’s a question here that needs to be asked, however. You had these expectations when pulling the sword from the pedestal, but why did you have these expectations? What led you to expect that pulling the sword from the pedestal would stop Ganondorf from obtaining the Triforce? The answer is that Nintendo told you, subtly. In addition to having characters throughout the game (Zelda, the Deku Tree) imply that getting the Spiritual Stones was of the utmost importance, there’s a moment right before you draw the sword that preys upon previous understanding of the Master Sword. The sudden musical silence and Navi’s reaction to the sword place a great deal of importance on the blade, and for those who had played A Link to the Past, the sword’s status as the Blade of Evil’s Bane only further amplified those expectations. Everything in the game had been set up to instill these expectations in you, the player, so that Link, the character, would have these expectations. It’s an intricate bit of sleight of hand, but it’s powerful. Rather than having Link directly express his expectations, Nintendo opted to have other characters (and even knowledge of past games) create these expectations within the player, only to contrast them with reality and pull the player into the story while also creating the gap critical to the conflict of the rest of the game.

Conclusions and a Challenge

Link is an interesting protagonist precisely because he does not fit the model. He is effective because he forces the player to take on the role of protagonist, with the desires and expectations that give rise to conflict coming directly from you rather than being conveyed to you. It’s an involving act that makes what are, at their core, very simplistic stories that don’t even approach deep character study feel like some of the most exciting stories in the medium. Is the story of Ocarina of Time as complex or multi-layered as, say, any of the Metal Gear Solid titles? Not at all, but because you’re forced to become the protagonist of your own story, if feels just as engaging.

In closing, I’d like to present you, constant reader, with a challenge. The next time you replay a Zelda game, consider throughout your playing: What is your desire? What do you want out of the game at any given moment, and are you actively pursuing that desire? How are your expectations being manipulated in preparation for the mechanism of conflict? Think on these things as you play. If you aren’t actively pursuing your desire at a given point, and the game has freed you to do so, then go pursue your desire! I guarantee you that you will find a new emergent narrative in your playing, and the experience will feel refreshingly novel. Because when you’re the protagonist of your own story, it’s best to let yourself pursue your own desires.

Try it sometime, and you’ll be sure to gain a new appreciation for the series’ storytelling.

Zelda and the Silver Screen: Archplot and Miniplot

Zelda and the Silver Screen: Archplot and Miniplot

August 31st, 2012 by GaroXicon
The idea of a film adaptation of The Legend of Zelda series has been tossed around numerous times throughout the years, though to date no official adaptation has been produced, and many fan-based adaptations have been met with mixed reactions. To many, the idea of a Zelda film is very foreign, as the core tenets of the Zelda series do not lend themselves well to the cinema upon first glance. Looking closer, however, there are a number of interesting parallels to screenwriting theory within the structure of various games in the series.
In film theory today, one of the most dominant methods of screenwriting is based upon the teachings of Robert McKee, a renowned lecturer and author known for his Story seminar about the structure not only of films, but of stories in general. In this article we are going to examine McKee’s plot triangle and discuss the ways that Zelda games match the different corners of the triangle, and how this makes it well suited (or in some cases ill-suited) to film adaptation.
The Plot Triangle
McKee’s plot triangle is an arrangement of three specific types of plots that is used to classify various stories. While in both his seminar and his book he goes in depth regarding the spaces in between the corners of the triangle, for the sake of simplicity we’re going to focus on the three corners, which represent the three pure forms of plot: archplot, miniplot, and antiplot.
At the top of the triangle, we have the archplot, or the “classical design”. This is by far the oldest and most persistent of the three plot variants (hence “arch”)—most examples of the Hero’s Journeywill fall neatly into this category, and most strongly plot driven films will mirror this design. When you’re looking at the three-act plot structure common in modern media, you’re looking at the classical design. The archplot is the best fit for films that seek to tell a story on a large scale with high stakes. This is where Star Wars, The Avengers, The Godfather, and Inception fall—most of your summer blockbusters and well known classics will fall under this category. In the bottom left corner, we have the miniplot, which stresses minimalism of classical design. Note that the aspects of classical design are still going to be present—the Hero’s Journey, for instance, will still be intact—but in a minimal state, with aspects other than the plot taking center stage. Miniplots tend to be the most suitable structure for films that seek to explore smaller parts of a larger story. Though somewhat rarer in film than the archplot, miniplots can be seen in films such as Pulp Fiction and Inglourious Basterds. In the bottom right corner, however, we have antiplot—rather than reducing the aspects of classical design, it reverses them entirely. Antiplots tend to work best for films that seek to comment on story structure itself. These are very rare in film, and occur more often in the experimental, arthouse cinema genres—most notably, 8 1/2, Chungking Express, and—oddly enough—Wayne’s World, fall into this category.
These are very rudimentary descriptions of these types of plot—but don’t worry. We’re going to be talking about each kind of plot extensively when comparing it to various games in the series. For now, only a basic understanding of the relationship between these types of plot is needed. This week, we’ll be examining the most significant examples of archplot and miniplot in the series. Additionally, in the triangle above, you’ll notice a number of terms listed near the type of plot; these are all terms we’re going to discuss in greater depth in the next few sections.
While both a miniplot and an archplot would be perfectly suitable for the screen, a potential Zelda film would most certainly belong to the fantasy epic genre—a long tradition of films including, most significantly, The Lord of the Rings trilogy. One of the most critical aspects of films in this genre is their scale—they are all very large scale productions with stories that often involve the fate of the entire world in which it takes place. Such a large scale is something that a miniplot cannot provide as easily as an archplot; as such, for a Zelda film, an archplot would be far better suited for film adaptation than a miniplot. In discussing this idea further, we’re going to use Skyward Sword, the most significant example of an archplot in the franchise, and Ocarina of Time, the most significant example of a miniplot, as examples.
Plot: Causal vs. Coincident
The first thing to be considered when examining an archplot or a miniplot is the plot itself, but more specifically, the plot as distinct from the story. Rather than look at the details of what happens, we need to examine the way that the events unfold. In most every case, events unfold in one of two ways—in a causal way, or a coincident way.
The causal method, corresponding to the archplot, involves events that unfold as a direct result of the previous event. To use Star Wars as an example, the Imperial attack on the Rebel cruiser at the opening of the film leads to R2-D2 and C-3PO’s escape to Tatooine, which then leads to their purchase by Luke’s uncle, which leads to R2’s distress message of Princess Leia motivating Luke to seek out Obi-Wan Kenobi. The events unfold in direct sequence, each event influencing the next. In Skyward Sword, we see this very clearly, particularly in the early stages of the game. Once Link has descended to the surface, his direct goal is to find and rescue Princess Zelda, a mission which leads him to the Skyview Temple in the deep Faron Woods. Because he fails to find Zelda there and instead learns that she had moved on to a new spring in the Eldin Volcano region, he continues his quest in that region. Had he found Zelda at Skyview, however, his quest would have proceeded rather differently—perhaps he would have skipped over the initial Eldin quest entirely. The events of Eldin are a direct result of Link’s failure to reach Zelda at the Skyview spring—hence the causal nature of the game’s plot.
The coincident method, corresponding to the miniplot, involves events that unfold separately of each other and cross paths by coincidence. A film example would be Pulp Fiction—the story of the gold watch and Butch the boxer is entirely separate from the story of Vincent Vega and Jules Winfield. They only cross paths due to a mutual boss, Marcellus Wallace, and a coincidental appearance of Vincent in Butch’s story. Butch’s fight and his subsequent flight from Los Angeles is entirely unaffected by Vincent and Jules’ retrieval of the briefcase from Brett—the events unfold independently, and cross paths by coincidence. In Ocarina of Time, we see this slight disconnectedness with the segmented quests for the Spiritual Stones and the Sage Medallions. While Ganondorf’s interventions throughout Hyrule serve as unifying factors, the quests for each individual stone and medallion are ultimately separate, self-contained stories. Link’s actions on Death Mountain in Dodongo Cavern have no impact on Link’s subsequent actions in Zora’s Domain and Jabu-Jabu’s Belly, just as his actions in the Forest Temple have no impact on his actions in the Fire Temple. While the main quest naturally intersects these separate stories at certain points, such as the opening of the Door of Time and the final encounter in Ganon’s Tower, the existence of these independent, separate stories indicates that Ocarina of Time’s plot is one governed by coincidence rather than causality.
While it is by no means a universal rule that causal plots make for better films than coincident plots—after all, Pulp Fiction is praised almost as much as Star Wars in most film circles, if not more—in the cases of epic fantasy films, segmented plots can often descend into a feeling of aimlessness. After completing one of the many independent quests, there would be a low point during which Link would have to find his next course of action. A low point here and there is not an inherent weakness, but consistent low points throughout the film result in a segmented feel that can bore the audience. A causal plot, however, has the advantage of keeping the audience attached and driven by the same goal throughout. Because events unfold as a direct cause of the previous one, the plot unfolds more naturally without the awkward low points between segments. As a result, the structure of Skyward Sword would make for a better paced film than would the structure of Ocarina of Time.
Resolution: Closed vs. Open
The ending of a film is just as critical as the beginning—while the beginning of the film sets the tone for the rest of the film, the ending imparts the audience with a departing mood, and influences their feelings as they leave the theater. Most simply, there are two types of endings: a closed ending and an open ending.
The closed ending is associated with the archplot. As Robert McKee described it, a closed ending is one after which the audience can imagine no further action. This is not to say that the audience cannot imagine new stories taking place with the same characters in the same environment, but rather that all ends of the story being told are resolved, and that the audience cannot imagine the continuation of the conflict at the core of the story. A closed ending does not mean that sequels are ruled out. To use Skyward Sword as an example, while not only can we imagine events in Hyrule that take place after the end of the game but actually experience these events in later games in the chronology, the events of the game are definitively resolved. Demise is killed and Link and Zelda begin to colonize the surface. We can certainly imagine their actions during that endeavor, and perhaps even imagine new conflicts regarding the remaining surface creatures. But because the central conflict of the game is ultimately resolved, it is a closed ending.
The open ending, associated with the miniplot, marks an ending that leaves further action or emotional resolution to the imagination of the audience. Ocarina of Time’s ending is a perfect example—though much of the conflict of the game is resolved, because Ganon is sealed rather than killed, it is very easy to imagine further action taking place. What makes this further imagined action distinct from continued conflict in a closed ending is that it is an extension of the conflict within the game—Ganon breaking out of his seal and returning to conquer Hyrule is very much an extension of the main story of Ocarina of Time, whereas the appearance of a new enemy after Skyward Sword, while arguably related to Demise, is ultimately a new conflict rather than a continuation of the game’s resolved conflict. Additionally, there are further conflicts that are directly implied by the events that take place in Ocarina of Time, as well as missing emotional resolutions associated with them. When Link is returned to his past before the events of the game occur, there are many unanswered questions—do things happen the same way? What changes, and why is it different? Does Navi still come to Link? If not, how does Link handle the loss of his friend? What about the loss of all the people Link had forged friendships with over the course of the game? All of these lingering questions create an open ending that fails to provide total emotional resolution.
The closed ending is better suited for film adaptation because it allows for a self-contained experience that fully resolves itself emotionally. While many films opt for an open ending in the modern industry, in almost every case those films are intended as the first in a series of films that will follow up and provide additional exposition and resolution, with the end of the series often providing the full resolution necessary of a closed ending. While both Skyward Sword and Ocarina of Time are mostly self-contained stories, only Skyward Sword sufficiently wraps up its central conflict in a way that the audience will feel as if things have ended totally; Ocarina of Time’s open ending will leave them anticipating further action.
Protagonist: Active vs. Passive
Lastly, we must examine the ways in which Link, the protagonist of both games, acts. McKee’s theory of the protagonist is very extensive, so we’re going to discuss it in a very brief form. Firstly, protagonists are willful characters; they have great willpower and work unceasingly to accomplish their goals. Secondly, they all have a conscious desire and work to fulfill that desire. What varies from protagonist to protagonist is whether they are active or passive characters, a trait determined by the ways in which they attempt to fulfill their desire.
The Link of Skyward Sword is very much an active protagonist—he has a clear, conscious desire that he actively works toward throughout the entire game. All of his actions are predicated on the desire to save Zelda and return her to Skyloft. There is no immediate threat pushing him forward; he chooses to leave the safety of Skyloft to travel to the world below and to save Zelda of his own accord. Additionally, Link takes a greater initiative in Skyward Sword than he does in other Zelda games, operating primarily alone, for his own reasons, with Fi’s assistance.
In other games, such as Ocarina of Time, Link is considerably less active, and instead trends toward a passive protagonist. Some may note that Link takes action just as much in Ocarina of Time, and while he certainly does take action, I ask: what is his conscious desire? What about Link suggests that he wants something that he is constantly working toward? It’s far less clear what exactly Link desires in Ocarina of Time, as the call to adventure is a very literal call from the Great Deku Tree rather than an event that Link reacts to. Unlike the Link of Skyward Sword, this Link does not take direct action on his own accord; instead, he (willingly) does the bidding of the Great Deku Tree, of Zelda, and of Rauru. Throughout the game there is little to suggest Link’s own desires. This is because Link is a passive protagonist, one who pursues desire inwardly while acting on the desires of others. Is Link’s desire to make everybody happy? Is it to save the world? We don’t really know, because Link plays these very close to his chest—he is passive regarding the pursuit of his desire. Note that this isn’t because this Link does not have desires—after all, every protagonist has desires—but that rather than actively pursuing them outwardly, he is passively pursuing them inwardly, and as such his desires are not as readily apparent to us as are the desires of an active protagonist.
It’s not very difficult to see why an active protagonist is far preferable to a passive one in the context of a film. When the events of the film are viewed through a specific character, that character needs to have the same drive and desire to reach the end that the audience does. If the character is not ostensibly driven or seems to only be doing the bidding of others, the audience will not identify with him very readily, and thus the film will lack the emotional heft of one that has an active protagonist who engages the audience’s interest. Skyward Sword’s Link, with his desire to save Zelda and be with her romantically, would resonate far stronger than the stoic and somewhat inaccessible Link of Ocarina of Time.
Conclusion
It’s rather clear that Skyward Sword, with its heavy archplot, would be better suited for film than would Ocarina of Time. The miniplot of Ocarina of Time is far better suited for video gaming, as it allows the character the opportunity to engage with the separate regions independently, rather than as part of a single, unbroken plot thread. It also affords the player the opportunity to project themselves into Link, as his lack of desires allows players to create their own desires and act on them accordingly.
The overall point is this: while Skyward Sword’s structure is better suited for film than is Ocarina of Time’s, the miniplot of the latter game is in no way lesser than the archplot of the former. They are different styles that aim to accomplish different things, and that diversity is one of the hallmarks of the Zelda series.

In my next article, we’ll discuss the third type of plot in McKee’s triangle, the antiplot, and how it relates to Majora’s Mask, as well as discuss the inherent difficulty of translating the strengths of a video game series, an interactive medium, to the screen.

The Division Between Tribes and Monsters

The Division Between Tribes and Monsters

November 23rd, 2012 by Djinn
The land of Hyrule has always been a very diverse realm with a large variety of peoples and monsters living throughout. A very common aspect of the Zelda series is there being a clear distinction between a friendly NPCs that will talk to Link and cannot be attacked, and unfriendly enemy NPCs, which almost never speak and only exist as opponents to be defeated. This does not account for everyone, as there are the occasional exceptions on both sides. Nonetheless, Nintendo has generally maintained a curious stance on having a strong division between hostile species and ally species. Link is generally never allowed to fight — and certainly not kill — any member of one of the ally species, unless it is a named NPC, just as there are incredibly few friendly or helpful members of what is considered a monster species. This very black and white approach is rare these days in modern gaming and not entirely common in fantasy storytelling. Many fantasy stories will have more shades of gray, with the occasional bandits or evil individuals of the hero’s tribe or country. This is not an unheard of concept, since any of us can find a criminal element within our own communities. On the other hand, the monsters within the Zelda series are only viewed as evil. This lack of any development is sometimes seen as a flaw by fans. But it wasn’t always this way.
In the early days of the series there were no distinct tribes in Hyrule. There were no named races of any kind mentioned as a tribe or included as a part of the story; only the hero who looked much like an elf and the various enemies to fight. The name “Hylian” did not come about until A Link to the Past, which also included a brief history of the people and a few random characteristics. Certain groups of enemies, such as the Moblins or the Goriya, could be assumed to be representative of races that thrived somewhere in the wilderness of Hyrule, but the game manuals did not elaborate on this in any way. The game, however, seemed to imply they were, indeed, full races.
There were NPCs even in the first game, which were found living within caves spread throughout the land. Most were Hylian merchants, with the occasional old man helping Link out with a few words of wisdom. Interestingly, however, there were a few instances of an enemy creature who would speak to Link and even help him. Hidden underneath certain trees would be a Moblin who would ask that Link not tell anyone and pay him in rupees. There was even a Goriya who did not fight Link but let him pass after being handed some meat. Later on, villages were added, filled with many citizens for Link to speak with and learn skills from, but no friendly monsters remained.
Further on in A Link to the Past, the entire landscape was filled with various friendly NPCs of all ages and sizes who would either help Link out or call upon soldiers to stop him. The line of distinction between friendly and enemy NPCs was blurred heavily in this game. Between the thieves of the Lost Woods, the castle guards of Hyrule, and the various inhabitants found within the Dark World, there is hardly a clear distinction between friendly NPC and enemy monster based on race. There friends and foes on both sides, with friendly monsters and enemy Hylians.
Later on in Ocarina of Time, however, a much greater emphasis was placed on which races were considered consistently friendly and which are monsters who would always be enemies. Normally, intelligent, peaceful tribes were not allowed to be harmed by the player. Even when there’s a combat situation with one, they cannot be killed, only fought until they escape. Link has no ability to attack or harm the friendly NPC tribes such as the Gorons or Zora, and is not allowed to kill a Gerudo guard as he could a common monster when attacked inside their fortress. And besides, their position towards Link changes for the better over the course of the game, and they become hands off as far as combat is concerned. The Skull Kids found within the Lost Woods are similar, only fought until they take enough damage and escape.
The Gorons and the new, friendly Zora introduced in Ocarina of Time have always maintained this friendly NPC disposition in each game they have appeared in since. Like with the Gerudo or Skull Kids, any time one is fought, they cannot be killed and they still remain or become your allies. Most new tribes, such as the Rito, Anouki, Kikwi, etc., continue this trend and are always considered the friendly NPCs. The tribes system introduced by Ocarina of Time created a strong division between civilized people and monsters.
However, as stated before, there have always been exceptions to this; there’s always the occasional helpful members from enemy races and opponents from friendly races. This began with the hidden Moblins from the first Legend of Zelda and continued with Zora King of A Link to the Past (all prior Zoras were nothing more than monsters). Then, of course, there are the antagonists Ganondorf and Twinrova from the Gerudo tribe. They are the only Gerudo that Link fights and kills over the course of his adventures. The other Gerudo guards he defeats, but only injures, in an effort to maintain the traditional monster/humanoid duality. While at first the Gerudo tribe existed to give an origin to the antagonist of the series, they were still a civilized tribe of people living within the land and therefore not for Link to fight and kill as he does with the monsters of the game. Vaati of The Minish Cap had a similar origin among the friendly Picori. He served to be the one evil member of an otherwise friendly and peaceful people.
There have been a couple of instances of tribes that have started out as a common enemy type and either through popularity or necessity they are transformed into a peaceful, civilized tribe in a later sequel. The Zora have appeared as both monster and ally, though not in the same game. The Oracle series has even made a unique distinction between them as separate tribes or races that are either aligned with or against the Hylians. The Zora of Ocarina of Time were labeled the peaceful Sea Zora and the more belligerent Zora of the earlier titles were called River Zora. However, again, even before that there was a single friendly monstrous Zora found in King Zora from A Link to the Past, who sold Link the Flippers, and another found on Koholint Island in Link’s Awakening. The Zora were the first species to make the transition from enemy monster type to a friendly and peaceful tribe of Hyrule, although it was a slow transformation. Only within the Oracle series have both types of Zora appeared within the same game at the same time. In every other game, only the monstrous River Zora or the more humanoid Sea Zora appeared. In this Nintendo still maintains the same distinction between enemy and ally..
Another creature that started out evil but was later fleshed out into a tribe of their own were the Deku Scrubs. In Ocarina of Time they were an enemy constantly encountered in the forest region. There were occasional Business Scrubs that would trade with Link, and many of the normal Deku Scrubs (barring the Mad Scrubs) would speak to you and run away rather than be killed, but they remained enemies overall; they would only trade with you as an apology for attacking and the ones who ran still only served the villain. Later, in Majora’s Mask, the Scrubs were a tribe with a kingdom and citizens of their own. Within this game the Scrubs were an ally species that Link only fought while infiltrating their castle. Later on in Four Swords Adventures, Link encounters Deku Scrubs who will speak to him as villagers and do not attack. Ironically, they appear to be on Ganondorf’s side and talk of conquering Hyrule, not unlike those of Ocarina of Time, who served Gohma.
Other interesting possible exceptions are the monsters that could be seen as intelligent races. The Moblins started out as common enemies in the overworld of the original Legend of Zelda and made many more appearances later on in the series. The few hidden nonviolent Moblins within the first game introduced the idea that they could be intelligent and not evil. This wasn’t seen again until the Oracle series, when Link was capable of transforming into a Moblin with the Moblin Ring and speak to a few. There was also a larger NPC named the Great Moblin who acted as their leader, kidnapping maidens and plotting against the Borons. Even in The Wind Waker, a certain one named Mo exchanged letters with a girl named Maggie… although most of his letters to her alluded to him possibly wanting to eat her.
There are several other creatures encountered in the series with names ending in “blin”, including Miniblins, Bokoblins and Bulblins. The Miniblins and Bokoblins do wear an assortment of clothing and armor and often use weapons just as the other intelligent species of Hyrule do. There was even a variant of the Bokoblin called the Technoblin, which carried advanced weapons to use against Link. However, none of them have ever displayed any kind of greater intelligence or have spoken any lines; they’re always just especially clever monsters.
The Bulblins of Twilight Princess, on the other hand, displayed a little bit more intelligence as a tribe, not only wearing clothes like the Moblins that came before them, but also riding animals, firing bows, kidnapping Hylians, and making camps in the desert. King Bulblin speaking to Link near the end of the game came as a surprise to both Link and Midna, who did not believe him to have the capability. However, in all appearances, the Bulblins maintain the evil NPC status and are always adversaries.
Much like the various enemies that contain the “blin” suffix, there are a larger pool of differing creatures found in and around Hyrule that follow a similar naming scheme with “fos”. There are many examples such as Lizalfos, Dinolfos, Aeralfos, and Wolfos. The pattern behind these isn’t as exact as that of the blin family. The Lizalfos, Dinolfos, and Aerialfos are all bipedal anthropomorphic reptiles that wear armor and carry weapons, which signifies that they come from a tribe of intelligent people like the more well-known tribes. However, the inclusion of the animal Wolfos and the undead Stalfos might mean that the term “fos” is used to signify an enemy or dangerous creature and is not used specifically for intelligent humanoids. So far there have not been any peaceful or nonviolent individuals of the “fos” grouping of enemies, which might indicate a level of separation between them and the “blin” family.
The Dragons encountered in the series are another gray area that can be confusing if considering them as a single species. They can range from the monstrous Gleeok and Volvagia to the friendly Valoo or the three dragons of Skyward Sword. There are a large amount of examples of dragons on both sides of the NPC spectrum, which makes them hard to categorize. The main antagonist of Oracle of Seasons, General Onox (who’s final form is the Dark Dragon), displayed a higher level of intelligence than that of previous evil dragons, who have mostly appeared to be just the same as any other boss monster. Nintendo doesn’t ever seem to make any attempt to sort them into a single grouping or tribe. Comparing them and including the various examples as part of a single species is another activity of the fans, rather than the developers. Perhaps one day Nintendo will elaborate further on the state of the dragons within Hyrule. As it stands right now, their definition is far too vague to determine if they are all in fact parts of a single species or tribe, or isolated cases of similar but unrelated creatures.

Overall, the tendency Nintendo has to maintain a strong division between monster and ally — with only a scant few exceptions — is seen as a weakness by some fans, who want a little more realism within the storytelling. Adding in several shades of gray to the characters and races of a story does add an extra layer of depth. Still, Nintendo has kept to a very traditional style with the storytelling of the games throughout all the many sequels and the changes that have been made to the overall story and setting. Adding in such things as evil Hylians for Link to defeat or a village of benevolent Moblins to befriend could be viewed as blasphemy by a lot of longtime fans. Some of these things have come in small doses through the various named and important NPCs that go against the flow and act differently from the rest of their tribe, and as I’ve addressed, it wasn’t always the way it seems to be now. Perhaps in future the developers at Nintendo might move a little further with this trend.

All above information is provided from this link: http://www.zeldadungeon.net/

Footage
Zelda 1

Zelda 2

Zelda: Link to the past

Zelda: Ocarina of time

Favorite Zelda Moments: Boarding the Ghost Ship in The Wind Waker

This post is going to be a little short because it’s a short moment, but I still wanted to spotlight the Ghost Ship from The Wind Waker. This ethereal vessel was boarded as part of the Triforce quest, where the player had to seek out shards of the Triforce of Courage. But first they had to find the charts leading to them, and one of these charts was found on-board the Ghost Ship.The Ghost Ship could be seen throughout the game if you were in the right place during the right lunar phase, long before it had to be boarded. The player could only do so while holding the Ghost Ship Chart. The Ghost Ship itself is foreshadowed only a little bit, but it’s enough, and the minimalism here is arguably more effective at setting up anticipation than a lot of detail might have been. Ultimately, the Ghost Ship has no explanation. Who or what used to sail on it, we don’t know.The cool vessel is accompanied by an epic song that follows it as it sails surrounded by blue flames. It fades away when approached unless you have the chart, making it especially mysterious for players who don’t know what to do with it yet. On-board the ship, the player is attacked by all manner of undead until they claim its prize, the Triforce Chart, but not before witnessing a strange mirror on a wall that has a menacing, sharp-toothed and grinning face on it when you’re not looking at it in first-person view or are too close to it. I’m not sure if many people notice this detail or not.After acquiring the Triforce Chart, a malevolent laugh sounds and the player is booted from the ship, never to return. The ship is never mentioned again and never explained, though another Ghost Ship appears in Phantom Hourglass.It’s just a really cool moment. An excellent play on seafaring ghost stories. Nintendo could have probably done a lot more with it, but it’s still really cool as it is, and it’s one of my favorite parts of the game. How about you? Did you like The Wind Waker’s Ghost Ship? Did you notice the creepy mirror? Any other moments like it that you enjoyed a lot? Tell me in the comments!

Make Your Own Zelda Game With Zelda Classic 2.50

If there’s one primary problem with being a passionate Zelda fan, it’s the lack of actual content available for us to play. This is not at all Nintendo’s fault–they’re releasing Zelda titles at a steady rate, and, as far as I’m concerned, each and every one has been fantastic. No, it’s our own fault. We consume those Hyrule-saving, evil-vanquishing adventures at a ridiculous rate. Now this problem is no more. With Zelda Classic 2.5′s eventual release after nearly eight years in the making, it’s never been easier to both create your own versions of Link’s adventures and enjoy those created by others. Hit the jump to find out how!Zelda Classic itself has been around for a long while. With its first build released way back in 1999, it predates even Majora’s Mask, which itself seems an age old now. Work first started on version 2.5 in 2005. With Zelda Classic, fans can create their own Zelda adventures based on the aesthetic style of series’ initial installment, The Legend of Zelda.Wholly dependent on the skill of the person behind the monitor, of course, Zelda Classic provides a backbone for some amazingly creative and complex fan-made [COLOR=#009900 !important]Zelda games. Everything can be customised–dungeons, enemies, maps, even music and visuals–without even the slightest[COLOR=#009900 !important]knowledge of[/COLOR] [COLOR=#009900 !important]computer[/COLOR] [COLOR=#009900 !important]programming[/COLOR].[/COLOR]I’m sure that there’s plenty of creative types amongst Zelda Dungeon’s readers who can’t wait to click on the link below and get to making their own adventures. For me, however, the main drawcard of Zelda Classic is the ability to [COLOR=#009900 !important]download and play all the amazing games created by people better than me.[/COLOR]There are already some brilliant games available that have been created on earlier versions of Zelda Classic, but with the addition of Mac and Linux support, a new graphical user interface, a new quest editor, and item and enemy editors, ZC 2.5 adds a huge amount of functionality to an already feature-packed program. And it’s free!If you’re interested (which you really should be), the official release of Zelda Classic 2.50 can be[COLOR=#009900 !important]downloaded[/COLOR]here, and Zelda Classic-made quests are available from here and here. Still not sure? Check out [COLOR=#009900 !important]the trailer[/COLOR] below for The Legend of Zelda: Lost Lineage, an adventure wholly created within Zelda Classic by Teamudf.

The zelda Time Line


So with all the other stuff in the list.... I will let you all fill them in

Have fun, because this series is on another level of theories, timelines and connections

[RaY_210]

Hands down, favorite series of all time. Although I'm ashamed to admit, I've never been a huge portable gamer, so I never played any handheld games except Minish Cap
I really need to hunker down and get PH and ST since I have a 3ds and buy LA on the eShop lol
Favorite has to go to Link to the Past!

[claud3]

I played them all... I am more into The theories Side of the series and the connection each theory has with each game

From villagers, tribes, enemies, characters, link all of them

[DeviousOne]

nice thread mate i would rep ya but i cant like or rep at the moment LOL cant wait for a Zelda on Wii U

[RaY_210]

Well not too much left as far theory goes I think. Wasn't that Hyrule book released the official timelines? This may seem weird, because it's my favorite series and all, but I never really tried linking them all together (pun not intended). At least until I played Skyward Sword. I'm gonna try to find a post I made on another forum as far as questions/comments I had after playing SS.

[Kuro]

Link to the Past /I'm out

[claud3]

But some still think that hyrule book is wrong....

Nintendo have not said anything about this

But not all theories are answered, New ones are appearing

[DeviousOne]

Nintendo revealed an official timeline however they have gone on record and said the games we not developed with a timeline in mind

[claud3]

True, the timeline posted in this thread, is actually the Nintendo timeline

But some have issue with it, because some logic does not fit and since one time line is the same aka Ocariana of time and Majors Mask, they are one timeline instead of separate.

Because they happened as he left hyrule and was in the lost woods, which is an area part of hyrule and tremaine I think that's how you spell it

[Linconan]

Hey i'm Link!
I wanna play my game so bad,lol

I wish they'd put up that Demo of Zelda they had, on the store, so people can play/view/interact to their hearts content.

[claud3]

Since and before Ocariana of time

All zelda's had a reason.

Since OOT, all hit me

[RaY_210]

Nintendo revealed an official timeline however they have gone on record and said the games we not developed with a timeline in mind

Actually, I believe Miyamoto and Aunoma have gone on record as saying that Nintendo does have an official timeline.

I also found the original post I made so I'm just going to paste it as is and see where the discussion leads:

Disclaimer: I'm not all that much into trying to figure out the timelines and such, I mainly just enjoy the games on their own. But after completing this one, and starting the Minish Cap, I've been thinking about it some. And I'm at the very beginning of MC.

Broken_Cartridge wrote:
@the_nintendo_screw the temple in the woods is only identified as a temple that was made in honor of the goddess Hylia. It was never called the Temple of Time like the other one was. (Though it is the only other place that has time travel....so again, I'm thinking it later becomes known as the Temple of Time)

This. I'm not sure where the desert Temple of Time fits in. But seeing as these are the only two places with gates, one can only assume since the Master Sword is housed at this temple, it'll eventually become the Temple of Time. Also, Link and Zelda stay together on the surface? Thoughts? Are they an "Adam and Eve" of sorts since they are the only humans on the surface? Also, just thought of this as I was writing this: I can't seem to recall too much of it in detail, but is there any similarities or anything between Skyloft and the sky land in Twilight Princess?

[claud3]

It's rich in history and theories and myth and truth...I am going to search more on this

[DeviousOne]

Actually, I believe Miyamoto and Aunoma have gone on record as saying that Nintendo does have an official timeline.

I also found the original post I made so I'm just going to paste it as is and see where the discussion leads:

Disclaimer: I'm not all that much into trying to figure out the timelines and such, I mainly just enjoy the games on their own. But after completing this one, and starting the Minish Cap, I've been thinking about it some. And I'm at the very beginning of MC.




This. I'm not sure where the desert Temple of Time fits in. But seeing as these are the only two places with gates, one can only assume since the Master Sword is housed at this temple, it'll eventually become the Temple of Time. Also, Link and Zelda stay together on the surface? Thoughts? Are they an "Adam and Eve" of sorts since they are the only humans on the surface? Also, just thought of this as I was writing this: I can't seem to recall too much of it in detail, but is there any similarities or anything between Skyloft and the sky land in Twilight Princess?

Same here bro i just enjoy the story from each zelda game i played!

[claud3]

The fact that some NPC's in the progress of the series were turned into enemies and enemies turned into NPC's was awsome to learn

Also the fact their are tribes and none-tribes which should explain a lot of the villagers

Also dragons that have no direct connection with each other

[RaY_210]

I know Nintendo really loved the Wiimote plus control scheme. Do y'all think they are going to stick with that setup for the Wii U game with Gamepad used as an accessory, or do you think they're going with the Gamepad as the control style? And which would you prefer?

[claud3]

maybe so, the wii u handheld will be used for chest search and dungeon maps and navigating weapons

so yes, but how much more can it offer the game

[DeviousOne]

I would like controls from the gcn version via the gamepad and use the game pad as an accessory to get you items and use it as a map or compass

[claud3]

i see most want that... But it can be involved in all aspects of the game in some way

[claud3]

Top 5 Legend of Zelda Bosses

Posted by Greg B. on Dec 29, 2012 in Games, lists, Nintendo, Opinion, Slider | 0 comments

---

The Legend of Zelda is arguably my favorite game series. It has many great elements: grand adventure, intense action, intricate puzzles and memorable dungeons. It’s a clutch series, always delivering an enjoyable experience. Part of that experience is created from its onslaught of exciting bosses. I decided to make a list on what I perceive are the five best bosses/boss battles from the series. As you read on, you’ll notice that most of the bosses I chose are from the 3D entries. This does not reflect my opinion on the 2D games. I love 2D and 3D equally. However, I do find that the 3D bosses leave a bigger mark. To 2D’s defense, 3D gives game developers more room to work with.

Anyway, here I provide my list (BEWARE OF SPOILERS):

Courtesy of Deviantart user, HeavyMetalHanzo

Argorok made his debut in Twilight Princess as the boss of the City in the Sky. Argorok is mainly on my list because he’s a bad-ass, black-armored, fire-breathing dragon. Really, that should be enough, but the technique to this fight is innovative. You get to use your shiny new toy, Double Clawshots, to climb up massive pillars, latch on to Argorok and bring him down using your Iron Boots.
The second phase of the battle is where things really start to heat up (horrible pun intended). Wind, rain and thunder begin as you now have to double-claw your way around Peahats as Argorok breathes fire your way. I remember sitting on the edge of my couch in full focus and fear as I aimed my Wiimote at the screen. After an invigorating battle, you’re rewarded with seeing a dragon explode in mid-air. Pretty awesome.

Courtesy of Deviantart user, TV-OutcastArt

Veran is the main antagonist of Oracle of Ages, and makes for a fun yet difficult fight. Though her first battle isn’t nearly as challenging as the second, I always like when games throw in multiple fights with a boss. Stage one is essentially the same as the first battle. Veran possesses Queen Ambi, and you have to hit her with a Mysterious Seed. You can then pull Veran out of Queen Ambi with you Switch Hook and attack away. Stage two is where the battle reaches its peak. Veran turns into a fairy-esque creature and summons four “Dark Links” that mimic your movements.
Stage three is the true swear-provoker. Her turtle form is enough to make you want to headbutt your gameboy as she tries to jump on you, forming a small pool of acid around where she lands. Her spider form is a bit easier, but you must hit her with bombs as she scurries about. The bee form… I didn’t find it very threatening. Overall, she’s a challenge, but definitely a boss worth noting when it comes to creativity and skilled gaming.



Stallord, also a boss from Twilight Princess, is found at the end of the Arbiter’s Grounds. This could be the most fun I had fighting a boss in any Zelda game. Using my Spinner to ride rails, dodge Staltroops (sand zombies) and attack Stallord’s spine is my definition of a good time. This is just the first stage of the battle. The second stage speeds up as you ascend a spiraling rails and dodge Blade Traps and fireballs being shot from Stallord’s floating head. Definitely an adrenalin pumper.



Although Dark Link makes several appearances throughout the series, his biggest would be his surprise attack in the Water Temple in Ocarina of Time. I was so psyched by this fight, that I moved the Water Temple up a couple notches on my dungeon list. You could always decimate him with the Megaton Hammer or Din’s Fire, but why not have a good old fashioned sword and shield duel with yourself. It’s the ultimate test of your skills. If you can beat someone who knows and copies your every move, you can beat anybody.

Courtesy of Jo Enaje

Phantom Ganon has his grand opening in Ocarina of Time at the end of the Forest Temple. He makes appearances in Wind Waker and Four Swords Adventures, but doesn’t look nearly as cool. I was shocked when come to the end of the Forest Temple to find Ganondorf on his high horse. I was even more shocked when he tears his Ganondorf face off to reveal Phantom Ganon. The battle that follows is equally intense and innovative. You have to follow him from painting to painting with your bow and shoot arrows as he emerges in a dark vortex.
The second half the battle foreshadows your later battle with Ganondorf. It’s a clever way of having you battle the main antagonist twice without actaully doing so. He’s of course not as hard as Ganondorf, but his menacing laugh paired with the haunting music keep you on edge. Watching him writhe and erupt in flames as Ganandorf taunts you from afar is a satisfiying end to a nail-biting battle.

There are definietly plenty of great battles spread across the series. It was a challenge on par with the first LoZ to narrow it down, and to put them in order. Please, feel free to provide your list.

http://leviathyn.com/games-2a/opinio...-zelda-bosses/

i do not know about this list... But i agree ganon is the top boss any zelda enemies list

[claud3]

new update for the thread... A video of a zelda game someone made

within the spoiler their is the info and video, plus download link and all

it's called this

Make Your Own Zelda Game With Zelda Classic 2.50