The Legend of Zelda

{{Talk header}} {{refideas|1=http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/09/25/the-legends-behind-the-legend-of-zelda
|2=

similar ?

Want list of similar games.

For example , 14:21, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Please see NOTAFORUM. This is not the place for asking personal questions, its for improving the writing in the article. If you want to search for similar games, try Google or Gamefaqs or something. Sergecross7314:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

This is useful to add to "See also" section.

There is probably more games "inspired" by Zelda . —nbsp;Preceding 09:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified plural:1|one external link|1 external links on The Legend of Zelda. Please take a moment to review https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prevoldid=713306016 my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit x this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071012120133/http://www.landofthelegend.net/Hyrule/?grab=int-noa-eiji-tmc to http://www.nintendo-europe.com/NOE/en/GB/editorial/article.do?elementId=tsSRlh1e8PvXMtWScR8tLxG9BXLNxXCM

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the "checked" parameter below to "'true"' or "'failed"' to let others know (documentation at tlx|Sourcecheck).

Cheers.—Cyberbot II cyberbot II:Online 06:33, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Non-canon does not mean non-notable

Even though they're God-awful video games and are non-canon, the CDI games are still encyclopedically notable. They have Wikipedia Articles of their own. There are 2 reasons why their notability justifies inclusion in the visualized Timeline: A. Unlike fan-made games, they had some albeit very little involvement of Nintendo (in a supervising role, mostly approving character designs for cutscenes). B. Unlike Hyrule Warriors, Super Smash Brothers, and Link's appearance in Mario Kart 8, they maintain the same genre as the canon games, namely as action-adventure RPGs. The Mysterious El Willstro01:42, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

The reason they're not included in the timeline here is because Nintendo doesn't consider them to be in the timeline at all, according to "Hyrule Historia". They do, however, have their own article section here. — Gestrid01:49, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Release Timeline, not In-Universe Timeline. The Mysterious El Willstro05:37, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

I think he's talking about the chronological timeline. But El Wistro, you are mistaken - "canon" has nothing to do with it. It's that they're spinoffs It's pretty standard that spinoffs are not shown on these main timelines. You'll note that Hyrule Warriors and Links Crossbow Training aren't on there either. Sonic the Hedgehog and Final Fantasy do the same thing - list main entries, but not all the side games. Sergecross7302:09, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

This is a special case because they're the "only" "side games" "in the same genre". Hyrule Warriors is a strategic war game, not an action-adventure RPG. Link's Crossbow Training is a shooter, not an action-adventure RPG. The same out-of-genre argument applies to the Smash Brothers series and Link's appearance at least once in Mario Kart. The Mysterious El Willstro05:36, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

If you can show a source that Nintendo considers them as part of the main series, they can go on the timeline, but everything I've ever read shows that they see it as a spinoff/side game, which in case would mean it doesn't belong on the timeline. Even spinoffs of the same genre are usually listed. Again, see Final Fantasy, Sonic, etc. Sergecross7310:56, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

They are just considered spin-offs, meaning they don't belong here. Its developer and canonicality doesn't matter here. ~ Dissident93 ""'Dissident93""' 18:55, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Since when does Wikipedia allow corporations to dictate what they want to be acknowledged about their history? See PROMOTION. We do not advocate public relations perspectives. Nintendo's wish to distance themselves from these games is not a valid reason for their exclusion. Ozdarka09:34, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Did you read the discussion, or just read the section title and start typing? I can't stress enough: "No one is using "canon" or "Nintendo's influence" as a methodology of inclusion here". Its a very simple "Main games go on, spin-offs stay off" stance that applied across many "series" articles on Wikipedia. (Gestrid's response was about a different timeline - a separate fictional in-universe one, of which they do not go on because it's literally not known where they fall. But even that is due to V, not cannon or any other nonsense.) Sergecross7315:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, my response had to do with http://zeldawiki.org/Zelda_Timeline this timeline. Most Legend of Zelda enthusiasts don't consider the three games being discussed (or Hyrule Warriors, for that matter) canon at all. — Gestrid16:17, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Once again, the subjective claim that these games "don't count" is an attempt to preserve the image of a company, which is advocacy. The concept of these games as "spin-offs" has no basis on anything but negative critical reception. Same genre, same franchise. The argument that that these games are not among the "main games" because they're spin-offs, and they're spin-offs because they're not main games, is a circular argument. Here are the approaches we have to choose from:

The CDi games are bad. "True" Zelda fans don't count them.

Nintendo doesn't want us to talk about them in the same sentence as the other games, so we won't.

They're adventure games. They have Zelda and Link in the titles. As much as it hurts people's stomachs, they're no different from the other games.

Ozdarka

09:09, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Ozdarka To that, I'll quote what u|Sergecross73|label1=Sergecross73 said earlier in this same discussion:

If you can show a source that Nintendo considers them as part of the main series, they can go on the timeline.

That's all you have to do: find a reliable source that states that Nintendo considers them part of the main series. — Gestrid09:26, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Identifying and using independent sources. We don't give corporations the final say. Commercial entities deny their failures. It's a conflict of interest. Wikipedia requires independent, third party sources. Ozdarka09:57, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Ozdarka Exactly. That's what we're asking for. Show us a or (more preferably) two or three reliable, third party source that is completely independent from Nintendo that says that Nintendo has said these games are part of the main series. That is all that we are asking for. We're not asking for more guidelines for you to show us. Show us what we've continued to ask for since very near the beginning of this conversation. — Gestrid10:04, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

The problem is, this concept of "main games" is a construct that is being invented right here on Wikipedia. You're asking for proof of something you're making up. And you're still looking for statements originating from Nintendo. Any statements from Nintendo are inadmissible because we don't go by corporations' claims about their own products. They have a vested interest in their own reputation and will deny black spots on their history. If you really want to exclude these games from the timeline, then it has to be made clear that it's purely because they're not published by Nintendo. Withholding them out of some intent to falsely portray the series as consistent in quality is not an acceptable reason. Ozdarka10:47, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

outdent

No, that's where you're fundamentally wrong. Third party reliable sources frequently and directly cite this sort of thing independently.

http://www.usgamer.net/articles/whats-the-greatest-legend-of-zelda-game-ever-we-ranked-them-all-number-25-18 "USGamer" clearly calls the CD-i games, "Tingle", "Hyrule Warriors" and others "spinoffs".

http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/10/8758737/legend-of-zelda-hyrule-warriors-nintendo-3ds "The Verge" calls "Hyrule Warriors" a spinoff.

http://www.rpgsite.net/preview/4401-after-hands-on-time-triforce-heroes-feels-a-potentially-worthy-zelda-spin-off RPGSite calls "Triforce Heroes" a spinoff. http://www.gamespot.com/articles/zelda-3ds-spinoff-triforce-heroes-getting-free-dlc/1100-6432248/ So does GameSpot.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/features/galleryoftheday/14569-8-Weird-Video-Game-Spinoffs.4 "The Escapist" calls "Link's Crossbow Training" a spinoff.

If you doubt particular entries and their status, then by all means start up new discussions on them, but to claim that third party sources don't cover it in a general sense objectively false, as is any ludicrous accusations that we're doing Nintendo's bidding to cover up unpopular entries in the series or picking our favorites or any other nonsense you've been rambling on about. Its according to sources. Sergecross7313:43, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

This discussion isn't about "Hyrule Warriors", "Link's Crossbow Training" or "Triforce Heroes"; if you read the first comment in this thread, you'll see it was intended to be about about the CDi games. Nor did I mention them, as their genres' resemblance with "The Legend of Zelda" games is clearly more tenuous. The only one of those sources that mentions the CDi games is the first one, which also calls "Zelda" for the Game Watch a spin-off, which can only be because the hardware it appears on is less advanced. This and the fact that the entire "bottom tier" category on that list uses the term "spin offs" to collectively dismiss certain games reinforces my point that the term is used more as a label to downplay the poorly received games in the franchise than it is to describe their genre, title or protagonists. In any event I have to defer to whatever consensus is reached and stop reading this thread as I have used more time on it than I intended to. Ozdarka15:21, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I know that, I'm just showing its applied throughout the entire series, CDi titles included. My point is that third party reliable sources delineate which games are spinoff throughout the entire series, "CDi games included" (note the "USGamer" source, which discusses the CDi games.) You keep making these unfounded accusations about the CDi games classification being based on quality, Nintendo's marketing motivations, and/or which games are popular/unpopular with the fanbase, and that's fundamentally unfounded and untrue. Sergecross7315:33, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

If this article's classification was based off of quality, Nintendo's marketing motivations, and which games are or are not popular with the fanbase, as you presume, we would not have "Hyrule Warrior" in the spin-off section. — Gestrid17:38, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

How about this compromise

All of the CD-i games were released after Link's Awakening but before Ocarina of Time. I just wanted a visual aid to show this fact. So, I made one at the Article specifically pertaining to the CDI games. That Timeline graphic is just meant to illustrate that the CDI games postdate the first 4 games in the series but predate Ocarina of Time, which it does quite nicely. To remind the reader of that is to provide the context Phillips was working with when it published those games, although of course it doesn't excuse the awful control schemes. The Mysterious El Willstro04:07, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

I suppose it is more relevant to that article at least. I'm indifferent. Sergecross7315:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Cameos in television shows like Jeopardy

Could we have a mention of Jeopardy's latest cameo in video gaming that they had on February 21, 2017. It was about Link's Crossbow Training and they had to name the series it appeared in. Zacharyalejandro20:23, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

That's really more TRIVIA than anything of importance... Sergecross7314:02, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Breathe of the Wild game timeline.

Since the game has been released, I was wondering when this game sits on. My theory is perhaps a sequel to Skyward Sword, explaining the Hyrule apocalypse or dystopia (whatever you call it). Well judging by the expansion of the cel shading since the Gamecube version of The Windwaker. Anyway, I'm just asking for an opinion that's all.

Thanks. Johnnyauau200013:49, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

We can't place it anywhere unless Nintendo directly states where it falls. Adding it anywhere based on our own personal speculation is original research and not allowed on Wikipedia. Sergecross7313:59, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

I'll keep waiting then. Thanks anyway. Johnnyauau200012:13, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Title used in websites for Japan. Fix.

Every website that lists The Legend of Zelda games in Japan are named "Zelda no Densetsu" not "Zeruda no Densetsu". Either somebody made an obvious mistake and forgot to fix it, or they didn't follow the name used in numerous websites. Could someone fix every page and the right name in there? I'd appreciate it! Zacharyalejandro03:46, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Zacharyalejandro Are you confident your change is in line with Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Japan-related_articlesRomanization? This is not meant to be "The official title" per say, but the romanization of the actual Japanese title. I don't have the expertise to make that determination but you may need to revert. -- Ferret ferret (talk) 12:15, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Reception

In a 2017 special edition of Edge magazine, listing their 100 top videogames of all-time, the "Zelda" series had the most entries, with 5 games on the list, including Breath of the Wild (1st) and Ocarina of Time (9th). - The 100 Greatest video games, Edge special edition, Future Publishing, page 8

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on The Legend of Zelda. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit x this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.1up.com/do/feature?pager.offset=7cId=3140040

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100619113453/http://nindb.net/game/legend-of-zelda.html to http://www.nindb.net/game/legend-of-zelda.html

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090129184014/http://goty.gamespy.com/2007/ds/12.html to http://goty.gamespy.com/2007/ds/12.html

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.oldnintendogames.info/top-selling-old-nintendo-games/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot "'InternetArchiveBot"' 09:45, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Legend of Zelda. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit x this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090326064241/http://zelda.com/universe/pedia/k.jsp to http://www.zelda.com/universe/pedia/k.jsp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot "'InternetArchiveBot"' 07:44, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on The Legend of Zelda. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit x this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100430172315/http://zelda.com/universe/game/phantomhourglass/ to http://zelda.com/universe/game/phantomhourglass/

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090425165642/http://uk.bestof.ign.com/2007/ds/25.html to http://uk.bestof.ign.com/2007/ds/25.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot "'InternetArchiveBot"' 23:01, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Very Good Article!

There are no things that I see wring with this article. It is incredibly informative and makes the game seem important to the video game community. Thank you everyone for their contributions and sharing your knowledge on the subject.

The one thing that I think should be added to this article is more on the controversy over the timeline. That was a very big deal in the Zelda community!

Ethan harris1104:19, 5 February 2018 (UTC)ethan_harris11

Hi there. Thanks for the input! FYI, the reason the article doesn't go into the "timeline controversy" stuff is because that's mostly just casual arguments among fans - which Wikipedia doesn't usually document really. Wikipedia is supposed to be written by what reliable sources - like by websites with professional writers and journalists - and they don't usually go very deep into all of that. They mention it, but they don't go into all the crazy fan theories and arguments.

But that's just my casual observation, feel free to prove me wrong. VG/S is a great resource for approved sources, and sources to stay away from, when writing video game-related content on Wikipedia. Perhaps with some research you can find some information on this by usable sources. Thanks! Sergecross7315:57, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Timeline of release years: Consistency with other major Nintendo series' pages

The "Timeline of release years" section on the other long-running series pages for Nintendo (Metroid Super Mario) include entries for re-mastered releases, and make use of ""'bold font""' to highlight major releases in the respective series. Since these standards are already being followed on other relevant pages, is anyone aware of Wikipedia standards that would prevent their implementation here?

Wiki.Alkaline.Unique

22:54, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, there is no specific guideline that says to do this. Including games that are already apart of the list is silly, should we add every single game with Mario in the title next? ~ Dissident93 "Dissident93" 22:59, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

* There is a clear set of games discussed in the article for "The Legend of Zelda" series (and included in Nintendo's offical timeline for the series as defined in the article itself). I propose including all of them, as is already done for Nintendo's other primary game series. The Super Mario "Timeline of release years" is limited to North American releases bearing the specific words "Super Mario", so I don't think your example is a good counter argument. Wiki.Alkaline.Unique23:24, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

**Also against this. As Dissident stated, there's no established standard, so there's no need to standardize. The articles you've alluded to, like Super Mario, aren't especially well written articles. It's not particularly a standard to aspire to. I also object to your random assertion that handheld games like the DS entries were not "major games". That's getting into murky, subjective, OR territory. Sergecross7300:46, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

***I've never really liked this template anyway. Takes up a lot of space for something that is discussed in prose anyway. I've just removed the bolding and remakes/releases from the template, as they didn't use to be like this. ~ Dissident93 "Dissident93" 01:56, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

****Yes, just as well, "Super Mario"'s prior state wasn't representative of the most recent talk page discussion a few months back anyways. Passerby's tweak and change things all the time. All the more reason not to standardize to the "Super Mario" article. Sergecross7313:34, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Breath of the Wild Timeline misinformation.

It says in the fictional chronology section that BotW is at the end of all three timelines, but the latest interview had Hidemaro say nothing about there being a convergence; instead, he said that it's up to the player. On the timeline on the Zelda JP site, BotW isn't attached to any timeline.Kholdstare9323:38, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

This was my reasoning when I first removed it a few days ago. If it's not being directly attributed to a certain timeline, it doesn't belong (either in one timeline or all three). ~ Dissident93 "Dissident93" 01:12, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Historically, That has been pretty much been their approach for all Zelda games that weren't direct sequels. They make separate games, let the fans make up timelines, and then say "Sure. That one." ApLundell15:31, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Excalibur

I can't edit this because the page is protected, but the article should just say the master sword is "inspired by Excalibur". We don't need a fairly confusing reference to the origins of the Excalibur story in Welsh mythology as that has nothing to do with the inspiration for the sword in the game. This is something that happens quite often on Wikipedia - someone has their own niche interest in a topic and adds overly detailed information which undermines readability. —nbsp;Preceding 01:39, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Agreed, condensed. -- Ferret ferret (talk) 13:59, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 May 2019

I AM A HUGE HUGE HUGE FAN AND I WOULD LIKE TO EDIT ON THE WINDWAKER AND TWILIGHT PRINCESS ONLY. I HAVE GOOD INTENTIONS AND WOULD LOVE TO BE PART OF YOUR GROUP.

WITH LOTS OF HOPE-SETH Seth ryaob15:35, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

20px|link=|alt= "'Not done:"' it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – ""'Þjarkur""' 16:17, 2 May 2019 (UTC)