Oni Dark Link– "If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed. -Albert Einstein" TALK– {{{time}}}~ evaluationsreviewswalkthrough
So now that there's some activity on the site again, I want to officially broach a subject that's been irking me for some time. And that's the canonicity of Hyrule Warriors. As of now the official stance is that it's completely non canon which I think is very unfair to it. True it was developed by an external company, but that's something that's also true of the Oracle games and The Minish Cap. It also has very different gameplay than the rest of the series, which is also true of Zelda II. The only thing this game truly lacks is the word Zelda in its title. I can accept that it is not part of the main series but I don't think that should regulate it to completely noncanon status. Right now it's treated as the same tier as the Philips CDI games when it's a completely different case. These games had involvement from Nintendo. Not only were the publishers but Aonuma himself has worked on Hyrule Warriors. And unlike many of the other non canon sources we cover, these games actually do feature in a lot of articles. It's not something that can just be ignored. It is using and building upon the Zelda mythos. Maybe as a different series but still definitely part of the overall franchise. So I suggest one of two things, we remove the noncanon tag from all articles and sections involving Hyrule Warriors, or we develop a new tag for articles and sections that are in Alternate Continuity, since it's more than possible future Hyrule Warriors games will be released and will build upon their own canon (this tag could also feature on the Tingle series articles which definitely aren't in the same canon but do have a some form of alternate canon of their own).
Much of what I say can also apply to Link's Crossbow Training and the Game & Watch Games which are not part of the main series but still are fully made and authorized Nintendo games
Ceiling Master– "...Stand down. You're in my way, and the sight of your appalling hair makes my gorge rise." —Ghirahim TALK– Contributions · Editcount
I think the non-canon tags around stuff like CDi games is fitting. But I agree, something about having that bright red warning above something that is a different "tier" than most of the other games on the Wiki kind of bugs me. Maybe instead of having a "Non-canonical appearances" section with a non-canon tag, we can have a separate section, "Title TBD", with a different kind of non-canon tags (maybe some that are just black text and not glaringly red) around it. I think it's a good idea to differentiate these games from the others.
I think you two are overthinking it. From the moment the it was released, the creators explicitly stated it is completely a non-canon game which takes place an a parallel world. I suppose if they continue to release other games that can link with Hyrule Warriors in terms of the timeline, it can be considered as another part of the Zelda universe that's separate from the Unified Timeline, much like the Fallen Hero Timeline, but for now, maybe it's best to just leave it as it is.--Zakitaro (talk) 11:06, June 25, 2016 (UTC)
Oni Dark Link– "I hope that whoever you are, you escape this place. I hope that the world turns and that things get better. But what I hope most of all is that you understand what I mean when I tell you that even though I do not know you, and even though I may never meet you, laugh with you, cry with you, or kiss you. I love you. With all my heart, I love you. - Valery (V for Vendetta movie)" TALK– {{{time}}}~ evaluationsreviewswalkthrough
No one as said it's a non canon game (to my knowledge). The one statement by Anouma is that it exists in a different dimension separate from the main canon. Or to put it another way, it's not on their official timeline. It's not like Super Smash Bros. or the 90s Cartoon, it is a fully licenced game by Nintendo using the Zelda IP. Having it sandwitch between such examples is misleading.
I'm not going to argue with you about who said what at this point, since it seems to have little to do with the topic itself. I'm just saying that even if it was fully licensed by Nintendo, Hyrule Warriors just doesn't seem to be expanded enough to be considered different from the other "non-canon" stuff, in my opinion. As you have noted earlier on this forum, the same would also apply to the other "non-canon" games that feature Link or Zelda, such as Smash Bros, which I'm pretty sure was also licensed by Nintendo. I also feel that making Hyrule Warriors "special" from the other "non-canon" stuff would confuse others, considering its already a somewhat confusing game to begin with.--Zakitaro (talk) 11:43, June 29, 2016 (UTC)
So I'm by no means promising I'll be active enough in the future to deal with this, but I'm here right now and read this and figured I'd give my input...I'm of the more traditionalist opinion that as Hyrule Warriors is a spin-off fighting game and not a main-series adventure game, it's non-canon. That being said, I figured I'd at least give it a google and see what comes up.
I know we've had a complicated relationship with what we view as canon and even what the creators view as canon in the past, given the Hyrule Historia debacle (would someone remind me if that was ever solved? Did we implement it into the canon, even though we don't like it?) but I found a Gameinformer article where the editor asks Aonuma straight-up if Hyrule Warriors is canon. Oni mentioned this in his above message, saying "The one statement by Anouma is that it exists in a different dimension separate from the main canon." However, Aonuma's exact words:
"With Hyrule Warriors, there is a link between the two, but it exists as a separate dimension, so it doesn't exist as part of the main canon."
If we are going with creators' intent, that's basically Word of God that it is, in fact, non-canon; he specifically says that the game doesn't exist as part of the main canon. In the same article, he also says they don't want to put it into the timeline, if that helps at all.
Hopefully this at least generates some discussion!
Well now, I guess this solves things for now. To answer your question, the Hyrule Historia is considered canon for the time being.--Zakitaro (talk) 06:43, August 24, 2016 (UTC)
Oni Dark Link– "I'm at the end of level two, but I'm not sure what to do, I don’t know anyway to win, this fricken boss has impenetrable skin. Tried the sword, arrow and candle, none of these weapons can handle, the boss that slowly chases me around. Oh wait I have this bomb I conveniently found - Neil" TALK– {{{time}}}~ evaluationsreviewswalkthrough
I'm still of the opinion just means it's not part of the, quote unquote official timeline they're currently using. Anouma isn't claiming it's a completely illegitimate game as we tend to view the CD-I games. I concede it isn't a part of the core series but I don't think that means it needs to have a banner over it that essentially says ignore this info. Especially for the many pages that only contain Hyrule Warriors content.
Minish Link– "I'm starting to think Billy has more personal problems than he let on in the first thirty seconds of this video." -- Diabetus TALK– SANDBOX — EDIT
I guess I'm of the opinion that that's exactly what non-canon means, though. All of the other (canon) games are necessarily linked somehow; we know they're all connected through the timeline and can be put together to form a cohesive story, even if we can't agree on exactly how. By saying Hyrule Warriors is non-canon, we're just saying it's not a part of that cohesive story, which the CD-I games also are not. It's not saying the information isn't valuable, or the game isn't good, or that it doesn't have a good story in and of itself; it's just not part of the main Zelda canon. If the information in the Hyrule Warriors pages only has a bearing on the Hyrule Warriors pages, and can't be applied elsewhere in the series, then I would argue the non-canon tag is necessary. That being said, I'm hoping we can get some more opinions in here!
Oni Dark Link– "You couldn't resist it in the end? A mistake, I fancy. It gets under your skin, life. Speaking metaphorically, of course. And you see, the more you struggle for every moment, the more alive you stay... which is where I come in, as a matter of fact. - Death" TALK– {{{time}}}~ evaluationsreviewswalkthrough
Well if the very nebulous timeline (which actually involves a split that actively prevents other games in the series being part of the same story) is what matters than why not include Link's Crossbow Training as a main canon game? It has a very clear non disputable place on the timeline.
Minish Link– 7. Even if the crown is destroyed, it will only rise every time, so long as Ballos yet lives. Such is the strength of his soul that permeates the Crown. TALK– SANDBOX — EDIT
Because it's non-canon, which is a fact that everyone agrees on. Look, all I'm saying is "it doesn't exist as part of the main canon" is basically as straightforward as it gets! I'm not sure what you want to do, is I guess what I'm saying...I do not think we can rightfully say Hyrule Warriors is canon when the developers themselves stated it is not, plus it fits the archetype for a non-canon spinoff game in that it draws from tons of different points in the timeline and brings together characters that never coexisted with one another.
I definitely see what you're saying, Oni, and I was inclined to agree with you — that having the general, flashy, red, this-is-a-warning-please-read-me spoiler tag over every single HW page seems a bit much when it's practically its own thing.
However, I also think that Minish has a point about non-canon being non-canon. If we're using sources and whatnot, I don't think there's any real way to justify not calling HW non-canon, so it should still fall under our categorization and labelling of non-canon material.
Oni Dark Link– "To my dearest Albert, Happy Birthday. By the time you read this, chances are that I'll no longer be with you. So instead of giving you a present I'd like you to hear me out. Albert this is important. I don't want you to ever hate anyone. Something occurred to me. Feelings of love and feelings of hate both start out as caring about someone. It's sad, but I think that sometimes when those feelings aren't returned, those feelings of love change into hate. If something like that ever happen, I want you to think back to our childhood. Back to a time when we could only love openly and honestly no matter how often we got hurt. I want you to go on living Albert. Love people openly without being scared of getting hurt. I truly was lucky to have known you. - Franz d'Epinay. Forever in your heart." TALK– {{{time}}}~ evaluationsreviewswalkthrough
Well that's why I propose what I outlined in the opening statement. We establish some sort of range of canon or an alternate canon approach and relegate Hyrule Warriors (and some other similar examples) as a sub series. Look at how the Final Fantasy wiki does it. [1] The main games are listed first and foremost and then subsequent games are listed based on how close they are to the main series, stuff like Dissidia being listed pretty closely after the main games and stuff like the Chocobo games being listed at the end. Each appearance being grouped with in the individual sub series. That's one way of doing it though we could give things more distinctive a segregation. Like three main appearance categories, main appearances, sub appearances and non canon appearance. Like I said above, I can concede it's not part of the core games, but that doesn't mean we need to lump it in with Soul Calibur II and the 90s cartoon.
To note though, I don't think the Hyrule Warrior series is expanded enough to be considered a different "thing" from all the other non-canon stuff. There's only like one or two games that have anything to do with it.--Zakitaro (talk) 03:18, August 25, 2016 (UTC)
Rebumb[]
Oni Dark Link– "People. Humans. Are beings that seek happiness. The only thing that the Brittanian boy Lelouch wanted was a small bit of happiness. Nothing special. At least- as far as the root for his actions was concerned- a very human and modest wish. Who could deny him that wish? That promise? Who has that right? But, if people didn't have death and hardships, they wouldn't bee able to establish a base in this world and be punished for it. So, the thoughts of an individual, and even working with the view of the world, they only have a short existence. Sin and punishment. Fate and judgement. What stood in Lelouch's way was his own past. The hatred that exists because people are people. But even so, people should be thankful. That people are beings that seek happiness. The best kind of wish is born from despair. - C. C. (not the user on this wiki btw)" TALK– {{{time}}}~ evaluationsreviewswalkthrough
So since there was no real discussion on what I proposed earlier I guess I'll bump this by going a bit more in depth about it and showing off a loose template I have. Articles would go something like this.
Main Appearances[]
The, currently, 18 main series titles (19 when Breath of the Wild is released) including remakes. Listed in order of original release release (even in the case of remake exclusive content).
Any game expressly part of the Zelda franchise and published by Nintendo. This includes the Hyrule Warrios games, Link's Crossbow Training, the Game & Watch Games and the BS Games.
Possibly including the Skyward Sword manga as its a prequel rather than an adaptation like the other mangas and was made specifically to contribute to Skyward Sword's lore. And for what its worth it was included in Hyrule Historia (or so I hear, still haven't had the spare cash to justify buying myself a copy. The thing's expensive).
Non-canon warning: This article or section contains non-canonical information that is not considered to be an official part of the Legend of Zelda series and should not be considered part of the overall storyline.
Beta appearanes and unreleased games (by which I mean Mystical Seeds of Courage).
Tech demos
Games with major Zelda elements but are distinctly part of other franchises. Namely Super Smash Bros., Soul Calibur II, Bayonetta, Nintendo Land, Mario Kart and Sonic Lost World. Unless there's a major example I'm forgetting anything outside of them that fits into that category is probably minor enough to be included on Cameos page. Basically if it has its own dedicated article than elements from that appearance should be listed in related articles.
Philips CD-I Games.
Books, cartoons, comics, mangas (except aforementioned, possible, Skyward Sword exception), mechandise and any other noteworthy sources I've failed to mention.
Oni Dark Link– "This is foolishness... A future...for you? Very well, then... Allow me to show you... Your future... Yes... Allow me to show you... Just what hope you have... - Ganondorf" TALK– {{{time}}}~ evaluationsreviewswalkthrough
So does anyone have any thoughts or opinions with that type of layout (or suggestions on how it should be changed/implemented)? I think it satisfies all ways of looking at the situation and creates a distinct separate line between things that are clearly separated already. Even if we don't go with this I think we should at least look at how things are ordered in non canon sections since there is some inconsistencies about it sprinkled throughout the site.
But I have to say, I really like the look of that template. Maybe it's just the shades of blue that appeal to my eyes, but I could probably get behind this. I am curious if anyone else around has anymore thoughts on it, though.
That really shows how a different colour can convey an entirely different meaning. It's literally the exact same template used for the non canon warning except for the colour and text edit. One thing I forgot to add is the Tingle series. I'm not exactly sure where to include it. It does definitely seem to be part of its own canon of sorts but it also seems to be quite different from the Zelda series as a whole. I think there's a reasonable argument for both but I'll have to actually play some of the games some day to really get a feel for my own personal opinion of it. At least a lot of those articles don't tend to over lap so it's not really that pressing an issue compared to some other stuff.
My advice...[]
Think of it as its own separate universe. It might not fit into the main timelines, but it's pretty awesome, so think of it like some parallel reality. KillRoy231 (talk) 07:43, March 8, 2017 (UTC)
What I think:[]
I like the look and think it conveys the image wanted. I was honestly a little confused that Hyrule Warriors wasn´t at all considered to have relevance the first time I came to this site. I feel like this is a good compromise and works well.
User:Dark Byrne 10:01 April 6, 2017
