GQTDM: Is Hyrule Warriors Canon?

[Glen-i]

Welcome to a stupid thread idea I had that I'm calling Gaming Questions That Don't Matter.

Simply put, I think about things in games way too hard at times and end up with questions that I'll never actually find the answer to and I think you should all join me in my torment. Each week, I'm gonna post a different question like this in the hopes of starting deep, meaningful conversations on stupid crap.

This week's question is one that's bubbled up for me quite recently. And it involves the Zelda timeline.

Yeah, that hot mess. But we're not here to debate whether it's accurate and we're certainly not here to debate on why the hell the Oracle games got moved to after Link's Awakening. For the sake of this question, let's just assume that this is the timeline and that anyone who diverts the discussion towards what goes where will get pointed and laughed at for not reading this post. OK? Cool.

So, we can all agree that Breath of the Wild happens sometime after all of this, which has puzzled me for quite a while. Because...

OK, so Zoras exist in BotW, must be somewhere in the middle or the left timeline.

OK, now I'm lost.

Somehow, Rito also exist in this world. Which would place it on the right hand side of the timeline, but that can't be, because Zoras exist and Wind Waker established that Zoras evolved into the Rito to adapt to the now flooded Hyrule, but they're right there on the other side of Hyrule in BotW, and oh no, I've gone cross-eyed!

This isn't the only case of stuff from different points in the timeline showing up in BotW. There are way too many references to locations from all sorts of games and it makes no damn sense!

A popular theory is that all three timelines somehow merge together to make the world of BotW. That would conveniently solve a lot of the problems here, but it does leave one major concern of mine.

How?

And then an idea started to bubble in my mind, which forms the basis of a theory that has led me to finally ask this week's question.

Is Hyrule Warriors Canon?

For clarity, I'm not talking about Age of Calamity (Nintendo has already confirmed that as canon), I'm talking about the original Hyrule Warriors, specifically the 3DS and Switch version.

If you don't know the plot of that game, basically some evil sorceress gets the Triforce and uses it to smash different Zelda games together. These include Ocarina of Time and Wind Waker. You can play as Ruto (a Zora) and Medli (A Rito) in this game.

I think you can see where I'm going here.

Now, obviously Ruto and Medli went back to their respective worlds once everything was fixed, but you can't honestly believe that any Zora or Rito didn't take the opportunity to explore this strange new Hyrule where Link has a scarf and rock music is everywhere?

What if said Zora/Rito got left behind once everything went back to normal? Suddenly, we have a world where both Zora and Rito exist, which would mean that Hyrule Warriors is this grand timeline unification, BotW can start making sense and I can stop giving myself an aneurysm thinking about it.

I think you all know my view is that Yes, Hyrule Warriors is Canon.

Now, obviously, there's bound to be something out there that's still unanswered despite this, but what do you think? Am I on to something? Or am I just barmy? (Don't answer that one, I already know)

Discussion starts here

Edited January 25, 2021 by Glen-i

[Glen-i]

This discussion is now closed. Don't bother talking about it, we won't listen to you. Look at the first post for the current question.

With Mario 3D World getting released on the Switch soon, I'll start this thread off with a doozy of a philosophical question.

First of all, watch this 23 second video.

Now then, after seeing that, I have to ask...

Does Mario Still Exist?

I don't think anyone has managed to play through the entirety of 3D World and managed to keep the original Mario intact. (This happens at the Flag pole as well, only the Mario that touches it stays, every other one disappears)

Where your answer lies will depend on your philosophical viewpoint, I guess.

Spoiler

Nah, he don't exist. Not the original Mario anyway.

 

Edited January 25, 2021 by Glen-i

[LazyBoy]

Evidence is clear. What we have here is a Prestige situation, and no one can be sure who the original is. All I know is that he's dangerous and should be stopped.

[Will]

I think this is similar to the transporter in Star Trek. In that scenario, I am of the opinion that when someone uses it the original person is destroyed and in their place is an exact copy that thinks it is the original, has the memories of the original, and appears to be exactly the same as the original. But it's not.

With Mario, I think it's a bit different.

Mario has died many times before this, but is each new life of Mario the same re-animated Mario or a new Mario? If he's re-animated then in theory whenever all of the Marios have died then it is the original Mario that comes back and he still exists. If each Mario is a new Mario then the only real Mario was the first ever Mario and he is long gone.

Personally I think Mario re-animates after death and so he continues to exist in the scenario you presented.

[Dufniall]

All Mario games are simulations, so all these Marios are fake. I mean, no human being can be the best in saving princesses, go karts, tennis, golf and so on. It would also explain how he can have so many lives. It's all digital, all virtual.

Mario still exists in the real world, living in some New York apartment with his Italian-American brother. After a day of fixing the plumbing in shady buildings all over the city, he straps into his VR seat Ready Player One style to live out his dreams.

[Glen-i]

32 minutes ago, Vileplume2000 said:

All Mario games are simulations, so all these Marios are fake. I mean, no human being can be the best in saving princesses, go karts, tennis, golf and so on. It would also explain how he can have so many lives. It's all digital, all virtual.

Mario still exists in the real world, living in some New York apartment with his Italian-American brother. After a day of fixing the plumbing in shady buildings all over the city, he straps into his VR seat Ready Player One style to live out his dreams.

So... That's a No? And also the SMB Super Show was set in the future all along?

Wild!

42 minutes ago, Will said:

Mario has died many times before this, but is each new life of Mario the same re-animated Mario or a new Mario? If he's re-animated then in theory whenever all of the Marios have died then it is the original Mario that comes back and he still exists. If each Mario is a new Mario then the only real Mario was the first ever Mario and he is long gone.

Personally I think Mario re-animates after death and so he continues to exist in the scenario you presented.

See, this is why I can never fully commit to my No answer before.

Mario as a concept still exists and no-one will ever notice because in essence, that's still Mario. He still beats up Bowser and shouts wahoo a lot. But in that specific scenario, didn't the Mario that didn't walk off a cliff see it happen?

That has to have left some impression. And wouldn't that Mario remember that? And coincidentally, wouldn't all future Marios share the same memory? I know that would haunt me for the rest of my life if it happened to me.

Edited January 18, 2021 by Glen-i

[Dcubed]

Smash 4 already answered this question for us...

 

1-ups and Double Cherries create clones of Mario with their own individual consciousness and memories.  Each Mario lost is one Mario dead and kicked out of existence.

The end  

[Jonnas]

How dare you start this topic on a Monday morning?

My tentative answer is yes, and I'll hopefully explain why, later today

[Ike]

On sorta related note. In the early Phantasy Star games (PSII I think), it was established if your character died and you took them to get revived that they actually cloned the character and clone kept all the original character's traits and memories. This always freaked me out a little.

[Glen-i]

4 hours ago, Dcubed said:

Smash 4 already answered this question for us...

 

1-ups and Double Cherries create clones of Mario with their own individual consciousness and memories.  Each Mario lost is one Mario dead and kicked out of existence.

The end  

I'm sorry, where does it say Double Cherry?

You can't just lump 1-up Mushrooms in with Double Cherries willy nilly! That just causes anarchy!

Edited January 18, 2021 by Glen-i

[Ashley]

1 hour ago, Glen-i said:

I'm sorry, where does it say Double Cherry?

You can't just lump 1-up Mushrooms in with Double Cherries willy nilly! That just causes anarchy!

You can indeed combine mushrooms and cherries: https://www.cookinglight.com/recipes/crispy-polenta-cakes-with-cherry-and-mushroom-ragu

(actually that doesn't look too bad, may try making a veggie version at some point).

And no Mario doesn't exist any more. Want to know why?

Spoiler

He's a work of fiction

Spoiler

...just like all of us

Spoiler

 

 

 

[bob]

Clearly there are multiple Mario:

[Jonnas]

Okay, so here's the trufax:

The Double Cherry does not create a second Mario at all. In order for the moral quandary to be raised, the clone must have its own identity, ideas, and decisions, even if, at the moment of the split, the minds feel like they're equal (albeit growing apart the more time passes, as the two identical entities gain more and more distinct life experiences). However, this is not what happens with The Double Cherry at all, for the second Mario cannot act independently from the first Mario at all. If Mario goes left, both go left, if one jumps, both jump. Literally their only difference is location in space. Because they share a mind, it's fair to say, this is not a second Mario: it's a second body for the one Mario.

When one of the bodies "dies"... it doesn't. It leaves no corpse. It poofs. Same thing happens when you finish a level. If the one remaining Mario body dies, then it completely falls off the stage, or leaves a corpse, or falls off the screen/4th wall. This never happens with the Cherry bodies, ergo, no life is being taken. The cherry "unphases" Mario's physical body into two separate vessels for a limited amount of time, and if one of them poofs, Mario's mind (or soul) reconvenes back into where the remaining body is.

In other words, the Double Cherry is not a "Prestige" kind of situation to begin with. Mario still exists, because no life is lost in the scenario that Glen-i opened the thread with.

Extra lives: This feels like it should be next week's topic.

Edited January 18, 2021 by Jonnas

[Glen-i]

10 hours ago, Jonnas said:

Okay, so here's the trufax:

The Double Cherry does not create a second Mario at all. In order for the moral quandary to be raised, the clone must have its own identity, ideas, and decisions, even if, at the moment of the split, the minds feel like they're equal (albeit growing apart the more time passes, as the two identical entities gain more and more distinct life experiences). However, this is not what happens with The Double Cherry at all, for the second Mario cannot act independently from the first Mario at all. If Mario goes left, both go left, if one jumps, both jump. Literally their only difference is location in space. Because they share a mind, it's fair to say, this is not a second Mario: it's a second body for the one Mario.

When one of the bodies "dies"... it doesn't. It leaves no corpse. It poofs. Same thing happens when you finish a level. If the one remaining Mario body dies, then it completely falls off the stage, or leaves a corpse, or falls off the screen/4th wall. This never happens with the Cherry bodies, ergo, no life is being taken. The cherry "unphases" Mario's physical body into two separate vessels for a limited amount of time, and if one of them poofs, Mario's mind (or soul) reconvenes back into where the remaining body is.

In other words, the Double Cherry is not a "Prestige" kind of situation to begin with. Mario still exists, because no life is lost in the scenario that Glen-i opened the thread with.

Extra lives: This feels like it should be next week's topic.

Huh... I never thought of it like that.

That's messing with my head! Now I'm even less confident about my "No".

And don't worry, I have a veritable smorgasbord of unimportant questions covering a wide range of (mostly) Nintendo series.

[Glen-i]

OK, so this question is closed now. The poll for "Does Mario Still Exist?" has No winning 7-3. Guess we have to call it "Super Someone 3D World" now.

Next question is at the top of the page, so I won't bother posting it here.

Is Hyrule Warriors Canon? Have at it.

Yeah, sorry, turns out you can't add a new poll, after one has closed so I'll just have to count all the votes next week. (Sorry, anyone who only voted without posting, you'll have to post your answers)

Edited January 25, 2021 by Glen-i

[Jonnas]

(I think a new thread for a new question might've worked better)

I hear what you're saying. Decent explanation as to why Rito and Zora exist in the same timeline. Heck, the Musou warfare in HW may actually explain why people in Age of Calamity also fight like that.

However, there are a few unexplained details still: where does Hyrule Warriors fit into the timeline? Sure, it could be a prequel to BotW, but how did we reach HW in the first place? Does that game take place in a 4th timeline? And would the migration of a handful of races by itself explain the references to multiple locations, centuries down the line? Right now, my position is a cautious "maybe".

(Of course the Oracle games take place after Link's Awakening. I'm not sure what your issue is)

[Cube]

The first one is fun and harmless. Can be its own separate adventure as it doesn't really impact anything.

 

 

The plot of the second deserves to be sent into a pit to be forgotten about alongside Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. A "prequel" to BotW was such an interesting concept, so it was a massive shame that they didn't do that.

[Dcubed]

I agree.  New thread is better than recycling old tat.

[Will]

The very concept of a Zelda canon still makes me angry. Because of that I totally ignore it and try to pretend it doesn’t exist.

So, is Hyrule Warriors canon? No.

[Ike]

I don't see why it's not possible that Zoras could split and some still evolve into the Rito without the flood happening. The Koroks exist after all.

Zelda knowing about the other timelines could just be from her powers/connection to the Goddess, the events in Hyrule Warriors doesn't really explain how she would know about them.

In my opinion:

Hyrule Warriors: Not cannon

Age of Calamity: Shouldn't be cannon.

[Dcubed]

Hyrule Warriors is canon because it explains how every race appears in BOTW and how places from all of the main Zelda games show up in some form in BOTW.

Hyrule Warriors is the grand rejoining together of the three Zelda timelines.  Then BOTW happens after, then Age of Calamity screws up the timeline all over again by rewriting BOTW’s history through even more timey wimey nonsense!

Edited January 25, 2021 by Dcubed

[Glen-i]

21 hours ago, Jonnas said:

I hear what you're saying. Decent explanation as to why Rito and Zora exist in the same timeline. Heck, the Musou warfare in HW may actually explain why people in Age of Calamity also fight like that.

However, there are a few unexplained details still: where does Hyrule Warriors fit into the timeline? Sure, it could be a prequel to BotW, but how did we reach HW in the first place? Does that game take place in a 4th timeline? And would the migration of a handful of races by itself explain the references to multiple locations, centuries down the line? Right now, my position is a cautious "maybe".

(Of course the Oracle games take place after Link's Awakening. I'm not sure what your issue is)

Guess I'm making a new thread next week then.

Given this theory I have. Hyrule Warriors would happen at the end of the pictured timeline, sometime after all the other games happen. HW merges the three timelines together, then Age of Calamity/BotW happen after some time after Hyrule Warriors.

@Dcubed raises an important point. It's not just conflicting races. BotW contains hints of conflicting places as well! I feel like this further concretes my idea because Hyrule Warriors had loads of places from different timelines show up in one game. They were literally plonked into HW's Hyrule as part of the plot.

Spoiler

Are you forgetting how the Oracle games end? Finishing both entries after linking them ends with Link sailing away on the raft from the Link's Awakening intro which strongly hints that the Oracle Games happen right before Awakening.

Link's Awakening ends on Link sitting on what remains on that raft after it got destroyed looking up in the sky and watching Marin and the Wind Fish fly away.

And then Marin and the Wind Fish get dragged into Hyrule Warriors through Cia's shenanigans. Assuming Hyrule Warriors is canon.

Doing it the other way around means that Link goes sailing, gets struck by lightning, magically gets to land somehow, also magically gets a horse, and then goes sailing again. It's just weird.

 

18 hours ago, Ike said:

I don't see why it's not possible that Zoras could split and some still evolve into the Rito without the flood happening. The Koroks exist after all.

Zelda knowing about the other timelines could just be from her powers/connection to the Goddess, the events in Hyrule Warriors doesn't really explain how she would know about them.

Koroks existing just make the Zora in BotW even more confusing.

The Rito evolved from Zoras because WW's Great Sea is pretty much devoid of food sources, it's just monsters, which the deep sea diver group in WW point out.

But take the Zoras from OoT, put them in a world where Hyrule getting flooded never happens, and there's no need for that anymore. In fact, the Zora seem to have evolved to be even more fish-like. While the Rito trended to be more bird-like. (My guess is that their new, super cold home meant more feathers were required)

As for Zelda being quite knowledgeable about the three different timelines. It certainly could be related to her being Hylia reincarnated, but then how do you explain Tetra? If being one of the many Zeldas clued you in to that kind of knowledge, shouldn't she have been knowledgeable of all the Zeldas before her? That wouldn't make sense because she's absolute clueless about her heritage until King Daphnes reveals it to her.

Hyrule is pretty notorious for losing records of past events, but put Hyrule Warriors into the equation and suddenly, BotW's royal family knowing of the events of Skyward Sword, Twilight Princess, and Ocarina of Time make a whole lot more sense!

I wouldn't be shocked if Zelda from HW asked Midna, Fi, Darunia, and so on about the Hyrules they came from. That sort of accurate knowledge would be ridiculously valuable!

Edited January 26, 2021 by Glen-i

[Ike]

20 minutes ago, Glen-i said:

As for Zelda being quite knowledgeable about the three different timelines. It certainly could be related to her being Hylia reincarnated, but then how do you explain Tetra? If being one of the many Zeldas clued you in to that kind of knowledge, shouldn't she have been knowledgeable of all the Zeldas before her? That wouldn't make sense because she's absolute clueless about her heritage until King Daphnes reveals it to her.

Hyrule is pretty notorious for losing records of past events, but put Hyrule Warriors into the equation and suddenly, BotW's royal family knowing of the events of Skyward Sword, Twilight Princess, and Ocarina of Time make a whole lot more sense!

I wouldn't be shocked if Zelda from HW asked Midna, Fi, Darunia, and so on about the Hyrules they came from. That sort of accurate knowledge would be ridiculously valuable!

Zelda is usually shown to be quite spiritual, Tetra wasn't. As you say, she didn't know about her heritage.

But you've given me an idea for another theory - what was common between those games? The Master Sword. BotW shows Fi is still within the Sword, it's also possible she was recording the events. BotW Zelda was shown she has spoken to her so it's possible Fi told her. That would mean the Master Sword itself would exist in all timelines at the same time though. It shows it can open portals in time, but not sure if it's just a key rather than having the ability itself.

From what I remember, Hyrule Warriors closed the hole to other timelines, Hyrule Warriors being the "new" start of the timeline still doesn't make sense to how they were be location references, basically what Jonnas said. 

A less fun answer is Nintendo explicitly stated AoC was cannon, having not said the same for Hyrule Warriors makes it not likely to be cannon.

 

[Cube]

1 hour ago, Ike said:

A less fun answer is Nintendo explicitly stated AoC was cannon

But until the demo came out, they also said it was the events leading up to BotW and that turned out to be a lie.

[Ronnie]

Those LIARS!!

I don't see the issue personally. It was always a bit dubious how they could end a game with failure and defeat and most of the characters dying.

They've split the timeline before so them doing it again isn't a bit deal I don't think. We were shown the events leading up to BOTW in that game's memories + AoC anyway, so job done in that regard.