Egg Man or Robotnik?

[flamepanther]

Then again, Princess Peach Toadstool could quite easily be her name, so again its no big deal. All these names work fine together.

This is very true. For some reason I'd prefer to think that "Princess Toadstool" is a formal title bestowed upon all princesses of the Mushroom Kingdom, but since there don't seem to be any others and I haven't seen Nintendo use "Peach Toadstool" yet, I guess we won't know.

[BurningDoom]

I had a problem when King Koopa started getting called Bowser starting with Super Mario Bros. 3. And I had a problem when Gannon started being called Gannondorf. I'm just an old-foggie stuck in my ways, I guess.

I don't have an issue with this, because of how it was presented in the story in the LttP players guide. There was a thief named Gannondorf, and when he got the Triforce it mutated him thanks to his dark desires and he became the pig-man Ganon. And they carried that out in OoT and have kept it consistent through all the games.

I was about to say that Ganon is the monstrous pig form and ganondorf is the man, but you beat me to it.

And with Bowser, King Koopa seems to be a name that is also correct anyway. He is Bowser, King of the Koopas after all.

In fact, I'm surprised people are annoyed with Bowser, I thought that Peach would irritate more people. Then again, Princess Peach Toadstool could quite easily be her name, so again its no big deal. All these names work fine together.

There were two Zelda games on NES before LttP was ever around, and in them it was simply Gannon. There was no man form, or Gannondorf. He was simply called Gannon in the cartoon, as well.

[flamepanther]

There were two Zelda games on NES before LttP was ever around, and in them it was simply Gannon. There was no man form, or Gannondorf. He was simply called Gannon in the cartoon, as well.

Those two games had minimal story and poor translations of what little there was, not to mention liberal changes to the story of Zelda II. Even so, they didn't really tell us what Ganon's history or origin was. They didn't even give us the correct spelling of his name at first. He was just PRINCE DARKNESS "GANNON" and that's all we got. I don't think it's exactly fair to fault the later games for changing his background when he didn't even have one.

The cartoon also had crazy multicolor Triforce. I hardly think it counts as established canon.

[BurningDoom]

There were two Zelda games on NES before LttP was ever around, and in them it was simply Gannon. There was no man form, or Gannondorf. He was simply called Gannon in the cartoon, as well.

Those two games had minimal story and poor translations of what little there was, not to mention liberal changes to the story of Zelda II. Even so, they didn't really tell us what Ganon's history or origin was. They didn't even give us the correct spelling of his name at first. He was just PRINCE DARKNESS "GANNON" and that's all we got. I don't think it's exactly fair to fault the later games for changing his background when he didn't even have one.

The cartoon also had crazy multicolor Triforce. I hardly think it counts as established canon.

So you seem to think that nothing in Zelda counts until until LttP? Not like The Legend of Zelda was played by millions and millions of people or anything

[flamepanther]

So you seem to think that nothing in Zelda counts until until LttP? Not like The Legend of Zelda was played by millions and millions of people or anything

That's not what I said at all. Parts of the story may not be translated correctly as we know them, and there isn't much content there to start with, but that's not the point either. I'm pointing out that the later games can't change parts of the story that were never covered before.

The first two games had Ganon present as the villain, but we never knew anything about who or what he was, or where he came from. Now we do. The newer games don't change or invalidate what we knew about Ganon before, they just add to it.

[alienjesus]

There were two Zelda games on NES before LttP was ever around, and in them it was simply Gannon. There was no man form, or Gannondorf. He was simply called Gannon in the cartoon, as well.

Those two games had minimal story and poor translations of what little there was, not to mention liberal changes to the story of Zelda II. Even so, they didn't really tell us what Ganon's history or origin was. They didn't even give us the correct spelling of his name at first. He was just PRINCE DARKNESS "GANNON" and that's all we got. I don't think it's exactly fair to fault the later games for changing his background when he didn't even have one.

The cartoon also had crazy multicolor Triforce. I hardly think it counts as established canon.

So you seem to think that nothing in Zelda counts until until LttP? Not like The Legend of Zelda was played by millions and millions of people or anything

TBH, it more seems to come across as you thinking that nothing in Zelda counts after Zelda 2. It's not like anything was really changed, just a bit of character backstory was developed.

[flamepanther]

I think the lesson we should all take away from this thread is that if you form your idea of a video game's story and characters from the cartoons and comics based on that game, you are going to have problems when the games develop more story of their own.

[BurningDoom]

TBH, it more seems to come across as you thinking that nothing in Zelda counts after Zelda 2. It's not like anything was really changed, just a bit of character backstory was developed.

Like I said, I'm stuck in my old foggie ways. But now that I think about it more, wasn't Gannon simply Ganoon in LttP as well? I thought it wasn't until Ocarina of Time that he was called Gannondorf. His human form in LttP was the wizard Anagham or something similar.

[alienjesus]

TBH, it more seems to come across as you thinking that nothing in Zelda counts after Zelda 2. It's not like anything was really changed, just a bit of character backstory was developed.

Like I said, I'm stuck in my old foggie ways. But now that I think about it more, wasn't Gannon simply Ganoon in LttP as well? I thought it wasn't until Ocarina of Time that he was called Gannondorf.

Certainly in game that was the first appearance of ganondorf, but MrPopo ( i think it was) said earlier in this thread that it referred to how ganon used to be a man called ganondorf in the manual of a link to the past. I can't say either way though.

[flamepanther]

Certainly in game that was the first appearance of ganondorf, but MrPopo ( i think it was) said earlier in this thread that it referred to how ganon used to be a man called ganondorf in the manual of a link to the past. I can't say either way though.

I think he said it was a player's guide, actually, but that's still official Nintendo material. I do not remember if the manual had the same info. The manual may have covered it in other regions, if not.