Відео

Imagine getting the game in the 80s and in your first playthrough decided to name Link ‘Zelda’

I like how this video's script is borderline Blood Whistle

“Those who enjoy self inflicted blunt force trauma.” 😂 I’ll give this to my 3 year old son to try.

yes you are going to lose your sanity. Why are you doing this to yourself?

me personally i like skyward swords origin story. i like the fact that evil originates from somewhere i like the heros spirit and blood of the goddess. its not perfect but its good as an origin story

The fact that the Zelda team made such a spectacle of the timeline and the Triforce trio in Skyward Sword, only to follow it up by having Breath of the Wild show almost complete apathy toward those aspects is so funny to me.

(Repost) Personally, as someone who grew up playing Zelda since Ocarina of Time all the way to Skyward Sword before the transition to the open air approach of Breath of the Wild, I was more okay to Demise’s curse in the English localization more than the original Japanese text. To me, Skyward Sword didn’t mess up the lore. Now granted, time travel shenanigans are involved, but the idea of Link already being a hero is okay this time around. I get that the idea of the whole “Prophesied Chosen One” trope definitely ran its course (Looking at you, Star Wars), but take the trope and make it part of a causal time loop. It’s been heavily debated about whether or not Skyward Sword is a causal loop or a grandfather paradox. Zeltik describes how the events unfolded in much greater detail. Neither paradox theories are dismissed nor confirmed. I recommend you watch that video to get my point. The point being is that Link IS the ancient hero spoken of in the legends of Skyloft. The rest of the game is about building up so that the past and the flow of time is stable. Otherwise… Roy Campbell: TIME PARADOX! At least we got a better read on how the Triforce trio came to be in the first place. Zelda and the royal family weren’t just people with mystic abilities, it wasn’t made clear exactly why Ganondorf was so wicked to the point as to why he WANTS TO BE A DEMON (a question I should be asking about Vaati…), and how does a hero appear by chance? Skyward Sword pretty much answers all of that. Zelda is the blood descendant of Hylia as the original Zelda, Link carries the spirit of the Hero of the Sky, blood connection or not regardless, and Ganondorf was born by Twinrova as the perfect vessel for the Demise’s will. So the origins of these figures weren’t just born out of thin air just for the conflicts to take place. MY BIGGEST GRIPE however is not so much Demise placing his curse, but rather the people of Hyrule (supposedly) not doing their best to end it. The way I see it, IT DID end, and in ways nobody took into consideration. Child Timeline: The Twili, The Hero of Time, the Master Sword’s long slumber since Skyward Sword, Princess Midna, Princess Zelda’s selfless sacrifices, Ganondorf’s whoopsies, all of it! Ganondorf dies! And he stays dead! Demise DID NOT think any of that through. CURSE BROKEN! Adult Timeline: The lack of a hero, Toon Link, Ganondorf’s last-minute failed attempt to make the Triforce and Hyrule his, Ganondorf dies and is flooded along with Daphnes and the rest of old Hyrule… CURSE BROKEN! (But it came at such a heavy cost…) Downfall Timeline: Yeah, Ganon and Demise’s curse are just going to keep up here no matter how hard the hero and princess tried… Hyrule got so screwed from there… to the point where a Void Termina wannabe just appears! This timeline just needs to “die off” at this point… Have you wondered why we left the Child and Adult timelines untouched since 2006 and 2009 respectively? Sure, people wanted some more in both timelines, but so much time has passed for us, you look back and reflect both the past and present, to the point in time you considered they’re better off just left there… untouched and untampered… From this point on, I no longer want a direct follow up to Twilight Princess nor Spirit Tracks. (And don’t get me started on FSA’s botched placement; The Four Swords saga should’ve been an entity of their own) There’s just no point. You’re better off just moving on accepting what events took place and leave the future of those timelines to fan interpretation. I would prefer that from this point on. But no! People took the timeline for granted and attempted to make it so that other games matter to them, past and future! How does Null connect to Skyward Sword? How do the Zonai connect to Ocarina of Time? How does the Great Calamity connect to Twilight Princess? How do the Depths and Sky islands connect to Wind Waker? Timeline convergence? Time reset? No! I DON’T WANT ANY OF THAT! Why not just come to terms and keep these realities separate? If some of the games have a logical connection, they do. Others are just their own boat, because it’s way too difficult piecing them together. Yet theorists PERSIST that Hyrule has never learned from past mistakes… and somehow Demise persists to terrorize the kingdom despite his incarnations failing and his curse backfiring… Does every conflict in the franchise HAVE to revolve around this guy? I have my own view of the series, everyone should too, and I say, either there is Demise or no Demise at all. (My apologies for reposting this… Javier Vasquez has been stalking me from one Zelda channel to another, and I can’t get this bastard off my back….)

On a semi-unrelated note, lore wise, I couldn’t help but imagine the events of Skyward Sword or Tears of the Kingdom is a retelling of the other with the amount of parallels story wise. One actually happened and the other is how legends told it

In context of what would be provable by a kid with future knowledge, Ganondorf had already attacked the other races. The Gerudo would also have knowledge of his intent. You could create a very damning modern case, to speak nothing of a monarch who had just exited a war that included throwing people in the shadow temple. So yeah. Insanely justified.

I wish the Zelda series completely moved on from Ganon as the villain in every game. Literally all of the other villains- Majora, Vaati, Zant, Ghirahim, Hilda- they were all more interesting. Null was a step in the right direction.

Sorry, but this is a pretty illiterate take on the whole cycle thing. Granted, a lot of it has to do with the fact that most Western audiences are pretty illiterate when it comes to Japanese religion and mythology, this comment section is already proof enough of that. And NOA's localization team hasn't exactly made things any easier, probably because they are careful to downplay it in order to not upset religious types. But still, if you are gonna do a proper critique of this kind of things, you should make a bit of a bigger effort than just looking up articles about possible mistranslations in wiki articles made by people whose JLPT level doesn't go beyond N3. There are many places I could start with for explaining this, but I guess the first and foremost is how people have a very poor grasp of what reincarnation is to Japanese people. As in, it's not a fantasy trope, but an actual religious believe they actually have in real life. Being surprised at its appearance in a Japanese story is like being surprised at the appearance of analogues to Heaven and Hell in a story made by Westerners of a Christian tradition. The thing is, contrary to popular believe, the first game to explicitly mention reincarnation in the series was NOT "Skyward Sword". It was "The Wind Waker". This is something that has made me go up the walls for decades, because so many people to this day still believe that WW Link has "no relation to the hero whatsoever". But like I've already said somewhere else, people are too enamored with the "Link is literally me" narcisist fantasy to even register when Ganondorf explicitly says WW Link is the Hero of Time reborn after the battle with Puppet Ganon (and before someone tries to pull this off, no, it was not a mistranslation. He calls him 時の勇者の生まれかわり in Japanese, literally "the reincarnation of the Hero of Time). What King of Red Lions says earlier in the game was basically a red herring, not to mention that he seemed to correct Yabun about this the Hero of Winds being literally the same incarnation as the Hero of Time. If you read enough Japanese media, you should know this is far from the ordinary. I've lost count of how many Japanese stories suddenly bring up the reincarnation of the characters, seemingly out of nowhere, and Western fans being confused at it and demanding explanations about how it exactly works. But like I said, for Japanese people reincarnation is not a fantasy trope. So when it appears, they don't perceive it as a new lore point being established, but rather the characters verbalizing something Japanese audiences presumed was the case from the beginning. Again, the way Westerners try to nitpick the way it works would be the equivalent of Japanese audiences demanding explanations about how Heaven and Hell (or analogues of thereof) exactly work in a Christian-culture based story. How many sins you have to commit exactly to go to Hell? Which kind of sins send you to total damnation and which ones are given a pass? Do sins only count if you do them multiple times, or do they become a permanent stain in your soul even if you do them just once? Is it a Catholic interpretation, where you can purge your sins by repenting and confessing, or a Protestant tradition, in which only God can forgive you, so you don't know for sure until you die? Does Purgatory exist? If so, how many years do you spend there? Wouldn't Heaven get boring eventually? Ridiculous, isn't it? Well, the same applies to the way people try to overanalyze reincarnation in Japanese stories, the Zelda series included. Going more into your character about predestined heroes, which I guess is a bigger complaint, that's also pretty big misunderstanding. Just because you reincarnate, that doesn't mean whatever happens in your next life is completely predetermined, not more than things are predetermined in your current life moving forward. For starters, the Hero is always put to the test in most, if not all incarnations. Yes, this is because of gameplay reasons, but it's also part of how Japanese people perceive reincarnation. Not to mention that the Hero and the Goddess are NOT guaranteed to win. Even before Hyrule Historia introduced the "Fallen Timeline" nonsense (a story for another day), we had the Hero of Time failing at preventing Ganondorf from getting his hands on the Triforce. Sure, they defeat it 7 years later, but I'd argue the fact that Ganondorf rose to power puts a dent on the "predestined" argument. Ditto "Breath of the Wild" and the Great Calamity, by the way. Of course, we know at the end of each story the hero is going to win in the end. But that's more because of storytelling conventions and expectations, not because reincarnation makes things predetermined. Then there's the whole Zelda being the goddess Hylia mortal form, which is based on another Japanese culture artifact, albeit to be fair, this one is less well known. Namely, the concept of "arahitogami" (現人神), or "akitsukami" (現御神), or "manifest god", in which it was believed that the Emperor of Japan was both a descendant and a reincarnation of the Goddess Amaterasu. This is something that was believed since at least the 8th century, but it was abolished after World War II (for now. I think the believe was on and off throughout the centuries, but I have to fact check this last one). So what SS did was to essentially apply that concept to Zelda herself with the Goddess Hylia. Now, to be fair, this isn't something as ingrained in Japanese culture as just regular reincarnation, but it's not something that would surprise them all that much either. Then, on a more personal note, why does making reincarnation explicit devalue anything compared to keeping things vague? I just don't get it. Well, at least not beyond the aforementioned "Link is literally me" fantasy, in which apparently people can't relate to characters unless they match themselves perfectly, for some reason, and I guess being "a predestined hero" puts a dent on that. And before you mention it, yeah, I know the developers have always said that Link is just an avatar for the player, but I've always called BS on that. It shows a level of media illiteracy on the developers' part that is frankly quite worrisome. True avatar characters just aren't like Link at all. He's at best a hybrid of an avatar and an established character, and only because he's a silent protagonist. Apart from that, there's little to nothing about Link for him to truly count as a true player avatar beyond what any other type of character is supposed to be: he always has a well established backstory, pre established relationships, and even broad yet well defined character traits in which the player has little to no say about. Anyway, sorry for the text wall, but this is something that truly annoys me.

We love a fresh take thank you

I adore Skyward Sword, but I have long said that, without Skyward Sword, there would have been no Breath of the Wild. For all the things I love about Skyward Sword, it set the stage for changing the story so much that The Legend of Zelda could be left behind in favor of Elder Souls or Dark Scrolls or whatever with a thin Zelda-colored coat of paint. Back when gamers were picking between Skyward Sword and Skyrim, I was the only person I knew personally who stuck with Skyward Sword. My loyalty was rewarded by Zelda becoming Skyrim five and a half years later. I will always love Skyward Sword, but I will likewise always despise what became of the series as a result.

The PC remake is so good

Zelda was the main inspiration for the gameplay of Dark Souls, and so was it's difficulty

for me the spirit of hero and all just symbolizes that always there will be evil(demise,ganon, vaati nightmares), good(zelda) and someone who is not necessary neither and is an avarage guy but has to fight evil or otherwise it will destroy everything he has and thus himself becomes a hero

I don't think I was ever bothered by that line or even considered it significant. All the prior Zelda games already existed and it was just the story acknowledging that they were going to happen with recurring elements (which was already true). If anything bothers me, it's how we got a game like SS that is the origin story of the Master Sword (another series staple) and then we get to TOTK where it's been "charging" for centuries for more power and then it "breaks" after killing a few Bokoblins. BOTW and TOTK did way more to ruin the Zelda lore imo. The only cool addition was the Depths imo which seem like the darkness/chaos that existed before the Goddesses created on top of it (and I guess that was built on in EoW storyline too iirc). Anyways, I don't blame a self-aware line at the end of a 2011 Zelda game. I blame the Zelda games as a whole for recycling a lot of characters.

Skyward Sword was 100% made as a story and timeline thing and very very much Hyrule Historia had it in mind. At that time they were very much promoting and minding Zelda Lore, and it was a big marketing deal that this game was "the beginning of Zelda" in all but direct words. There may be some dissonant values here, perhaps a bit of a cultural clash, but I believe it's meant to be more of like "this is what destiny has presented to you, and it's up to you what do you do with it" You're given a great power, or chosen for a great mission, and it's on your hands what it means. It's less of a cool trait you have, and more of an unfair responsability placed on you. And it leaves you broken for something you didn't ask for, yet you chose to go through nonetheless. Ocarina of Time, in particular, is very much a story about the choices of people past breaking the people present. I always interpreted Ganondorf, of all characters, as someone so obsessed with his "destiny" as ruler and king that he succumbed to it and all it means, believing he is at the top of all the chains of hatred and revenge and power, yet shackled by it. A king of a chessboard raging against the Gods for a destined prize, forever unable to be freed. It was his choice to pursue world conquest, but all because he believes it's his birthright. (I basically always considered Twinrova the true villain of Ocarina of Time, they're the ones that shaped Ganondorf into who he is: the "gerudo demon king, ruler of the world" is nothing but their pet project) Zelda similarly being, chosen, by prophetic visions and powers-- a big part of her traditional character, aside her relation to that tradition itself, is her relation to a responsability placed onto her. Her being chosen is less that she has the wisdom for it, and more that she now has a literal divine responsability to save the world. And, what makes Zelda as a meta character interesting is the various ways in that *someone can't possibly be able to handle that responsability* -- she messing up on what to do has been a narrative point since a Link to the Past, in Ocarina of Time she essentially is a child that in no way could've and spends the rest of her life dealing with having failed something impossible. Same with the spirit of the hero. It's a call to adventure, imposed on you by others, and that will leave you broken with part of your life lost. Do you accept? Are we even going to explain to you the magnitude of what you're chosen for? There *is* a tragedy to Link's quest. Of even doing the "right thing" because he wants to. That's why Wind Waker Link stands out, _he_ sets to adventure, nobody calls him. He'll break all his bones by himself.

I love when Link is a nobody, just a dude who is standing up to do right and fight against wrongs. That’s one reason I think Wind Waker has one of the strongest stories in the series tbh … still love SS for many reasons, but it introducing the curse of Demise does cheapen some things as you say, and Zelda fanatics (including me) end up clinging HARD to “rules” that don’t really need to be there. Great work on this one LBG

My personal biases aside, I've always had an issue with the fact that these things that are supposed to be the origins of the story and characters we've come to know and love barely resemble them. It feels like a retcon, even though it's not. When Demise laid out the curse, all I could think was "Bro, who TF even are you?"

I like Skyward Sword but it didn't really work for me as an origin story for the Zelda series. I hope they embrace BotW being a hard reboot and ignore the lore from the traditional Zeldas to start fresh. Better yet, ignore the lore added from the open world Zeldas too. It was fun having a timeline but it became ridiculous, so lets just stick with standalone stories.

Demise’s curse is literally the result of a mistranslation. In the Japanese version he has no relation to Ganondorf anymore than he does to Vaati or any other villain in the series. The ending in Japanese just basically states that Demise brought sin into the world which allows people to choose to be good or evil. He’s the devil of the Zelda universe (just like Hylia is the Jesus of the Zelda universe). It’s an origin story based off the Bible. Therefore Ganondorf still chooses to become who he is of his own free will (well as much as someone who was raised by two witch mothers can anyway) and it’s just bad luck he keeps coming back. I wish more people knew about the translation differences.

It kinda ruined the "lore" by putting too much emphasis on giving the series concrete "lore" to begin with. Zelda used to have the same kind of "every game is standalone, but we'll occasionally do callbacks and allusions for fun" attitude as the other main Nintendo properties. Skyward Sword got things bogged down too much in Star Wars Prequels-esque over focus on retrofitting things into some grand continuity that probably didn't exist at the time the game was made and definitely didn't exist when most of the previous games were made. Now Zelda is bifurcated between games that dispense with dungeons almost completely and focus more and more on lore and history, and games that straight up adopt toy aesthetics to show how they're going full arcadey. The best Zelda games, the big 3D ones from Ocarina to Twilight and the almost all great handheld ones, were in a middle ground where you'd have decent self-contained stories with memorable characters like Midna, Linebeck, and Marin, but not so much emphasis on retreading the lore about the Triforce and the main three's relationships. Much like the Star Wars Prequels and Sequels, it sucked some of the magic out of the universe by making it too lore heavy rather than letting things remain unspoken and implied.

oddly enough, Zelda's "level-up" system isnt exactly 'completele Gone' nowadays, its just Disguised... in BotW/TotK, enemies will 'rank up' after youve killed a certain amount (Red Bokoblins upgrade to Blue, Blue to Black, Black to Silver, sometimes even Silver to Gold), which means they drop Better Loot/Weapons on their death, which means you can do More Damage than you could 5 minutes ago...a Royal Broadsword is much stronger than a Tree Branch, for example... Health level-ups are now "universally" represented by How Many Hearts your health bar has... really, the only thing 'missing' is Magic as a Skill-- either theres just No Magic whatsoever, or theres Two: an Initial Ability and then Reduced Cost/Increased Capacity upgrade... ...okay, im kinda losing myself here, so im just gonna wrap up by saying that Zelda-II isnt exactly as "regretful" as the internet's representation may make it seem...

No, it didn't ruin anything.

2:55 No? Not even a little bit, honestly.

You can be arrested, tried, and convicted for conspiring against a political figure. Ganondorf was guilty of conspiring. When uncovered by link, he ran *and then attacked Hyrule* with his warriors. THAT is what got him executed. I would say the questionable part of his sentence was the validity of Link’s (a ten y/o boy) claims. Why would they believe him unless they were already suspicious of Ganon? So anyway. Execution for attacking Hyrule? Sure. Arrest on a 10 year old’s allegations of conspiracy? Hmmm 🤨

Nah, that’s Tears of the Kingdom. Everything is Zonai now. No, we will not elaborate. And Ganondorf is Bad just because, but I guess that’s Demise‘s fault.

The only problem I had with Denise's curse, until recently, was the implications it had on the agency of the villains, especially Ganondorf. I hated 5he idea of Ganondorf being a direct reincarnation of demise, just like how Link and zelda are directs reincarnation of themselves in every game (which I never had a problem with.) The problem when you try to do it with Ganondorf is that it completely dehumanizes him as person, as if he was already destined to become evil the day he was born. It takes away the personal choices he made in ocarina of time to become the evil individual he would end up growing into being, making all of that gackstoru become completely irrelevant. I overcame this disappointment in in the lore when I stopped viewing demises curse as a reincarnation of him, but more as a manifestation of his hatred, as the game says. As demise was on his deathbed, with the realization that he was never going to hold the triforce in his hands, he made the petty and resentful decision to set a curse on the people who prevented him from attaining the triforce; a curse of bad luck, that in his absence, there would always end up being someone else in his place to pursue the triforce instead, guaranteeing that even if he failed, evil itself, which was the greater force he served, would still remain in the ring to keep fighting Link and zelda after he's gone. In a way, it was a very selfless thing demise did when he laid the curse, just a very evil form of selflessness where the thing greater than himself he was serving was malevolent. Since this no longer makes Ganon an actual reincarnation of demise, just a manifestation, that means Ganondorf could have just as easily have chosen to be a better person and not become the tyrant pursuing the triforce that he did. However, if Ganondorf didn't chose to become a manifestation of demise, then somebody else would have risen up to ne the big naddie pf the series in his place, simple as. With Link and zelda I don't have much of a problem at all with them being direct reincarnations of earlier versions of themselves, mostly because those reincarnations served a very important purpose in the fight and evil; they preserve the diamonds in the rough found in the fields of all that is good and true. They forged the good in their hearts all by themselves, but decided to go a step further and guarantee that they could use their goodness far beyond its original expiry date, when they died for the first time and would have been gone forever otherwise, at least in the case of Link.

Demise's curse is a lamer version of Ganondorf's final words in OoT (then the earliest entry in the timeline), where he vows to return and "exterminate your descendants." Instead of Ganondorf himself showing agency and seeking revenge, Skyward Sword takes away the agency of Ganondorf, Link, and Zelda for all future games, the events of which were preordained. Combined with Skyward Sword replacing the Golden Goddeses with the figure of Hylia, whom Zelda is said to be the mortal incarnation of, it was an early example of Fujibayashi's disregard for Zelda's previously-established continuity, which became even more blatant in TotK.

Translation issues from JP to English is the cause of these weird theories and inconsistencies

I very much agree. The previous games, especially the Wind Waker made it seem that Ganon was evil or became evil because of the choices he made, not because he was destined to be evil. Evil is a lot more interesting when it is the product of choices, instead of a mystic force in the world.

No. It was *Tears* that ruined everything. TotK's story is bad, Fs with pre-established key lore aspects, absolutely shatters all the Master Sword's reputation, unga bunga buff Dorf with little to no ambition other than "me strongest there is" uninteresting, nearly everyone forgot who you were despite this game taking place a mere 4-6 years after Wild, Rauru existing is an insult, no Fi, no breaking of the Demise curse despite it being falsely hinted being the case what with all the Skyward Sword PR this game got (I distinctly remember Skyward Sword being advertised as heavily linked to TotK somehow which, again, is misleading as on Nintendo's part), no dog petting, no hookshot spiderman swinging with the physics being suuuuch a driving factor in these newer Zelda games, no underwater exploration instead a damp dark smelly overgrown cave can't see jack, COLLOSAL missed opportunity to hitch the princess with her handsome knight in shining armor, no stakes since Zelda's sacrifice was reversed giving the story little to no agency or consequence, Link as a protagonist felt nonexistent feels like everyone else was the star of the show not the guy who's saving all their 🫏s, no Link backstory before any of this went down aka no Arryl 2 or Granny 2 aka NOT WIND WAKER, didn't make me cry like Twilight Princess, dungeons are STILL NOT dungeons (pulling a couple levers to open a door and then be treated with literally the same copy-paste cutscene at the very end with each champion? Yeah naw), sky islands hardly anything worth noting although they are pretty asf to look at, I was expecting a totally NEW revamped endgame super Saiyan master sword golden tier 4 legendary new hilt new everything but naw same design with a booboo scar and hilariously less powerful... Hoverbike completely and utterly borks any and all """"""""dungeon""""""""" traversal (I literally just flew over to all the switches in the fire """"""""""""temple"""""""""""""" with the hoverbike making it all redundant) and it PALES in comparison to THE Master Cycle the TRUE vehicle worth having and using.

I might not care for Zelda very much, but game that take inspiration from it tend to be pretty good. Adventure Time: Hey Ice King, Why'd You Steal Our Garbage (yes, that's the full name) is very heavily inspired by Zelda 2 and that game is a banger!

No Tears of the Kingdom destroyed Zelda's lore!

Skyward Sword isn't perfect, but it does such a good job with the characters in it that I really like it. I like that there's at least one Zelda game that at least tries to be specific with lore. Meanwhile BOTW and TOTK are vague-posting all over the place, which i hate. They could have done better with timeline stuff, sure, but a failed attempt is better than not giving a darn.

It doesn't ruin anything directly, it further established things that were already present before, what people take from there is up to them. Reincarnation, demons vs mortals and chosen ones going in a cycle were pretty prominent themes in Zelda before SS and in my experience it was a common theme in pre-SS fan works to reveal a beginning or end to that cycle too. So frankly, adressing it in-universe was just a matter of time for Nintendo.

You know, it's funny you point out the whole 'takes the metaphor and makes it literal' because, like, that pops up a LOT in Japanese fiction and media when you take a step back. Their metaphors are both literal and, well, metaphoric at the same time! Not saying that to comment on Skyward Sword's use of it, but it is kinda funny in an ironic sort of way.

I can see where you’re coming from and I think you bring up some interesting points! Personally I’ve always looked at it through the lens of choice. We know because of Totk that The Hero does not always have to be Link, we also know from Wind Waker you don’t have to be blood connected to a previous Hero to become one. I have always believed that to be a Hero you simply have to have the courage to stand up for those who cannot do it themselves. In most instances being Link. On the flip side ganon also has the choice to push others aside. There are a lot more examples of bad people other than ganon laying waste to Hyrule. I’ve always disliked the fandoms obsession with a “good guy” Ganondorf, because it’s not who he is that makes him bad it’s his choices. Which is why I think a story about a bad Zelda would be ten times more interesting. Owing to what you said at the beginning. Skyward Sword is one of my favs and I actually really like the lore introduced. But that’s also just my opinion. All in all this is a pretty good video. Keep Up the great work!

My problem is that it is not really an origin story. Where does the Demon King come from? It feels like just another cycle where he attacks, just that he curses at the end. It even has a "long time ago" backstory. OoT was way more like an origin story because you learned how Ganondorf was born and had a creation story too. The cycle thing doesn't trouble me, because it is very pagan way of thinking we also used to do in ancient Europe, and kind of Dalai Lama.

4:25 It's meant to be a hazard that you dodge, not an enemy that you can kill. Of course it takes a ton of hits to kill, it's *not supposed to be damageable at all*

Demise's curse is mistranslated, btw. In the Japanese, its the curse of Demon tribe, not a curse that Demise casts on his death bed. Demise himself is just another incarnation of malice and as such is part of that curse himself.

The problem with SS is instead of writing an INTERESTING story, they tried to make an "Epic" one. Wind Waker and TP and Oot and MM all had UNIQUE stories that Nintendo WANTED to tell. SS felt like they were forced to make a beginning to the series and its apparent they didnt have passion for it

Echoes of Wisdom was the one with the lame lore...

I don't have a problem with the ending, i have a problem with the entire story up to that point. Goddess, Goddess, Goddess plume, Goddess block, Goddess Shield, Goddess reincarnation, Isle of the Goddess, Goddess Goddess, Goddess..... Goddess. ...... Goddess

I'm.... not completely sure what is the point you're trying to make, more so when you bring up many points against yourself already. For starters, there is a tangible element behind each game as a product before a story first, and part of the identity of any series, videogame, book or otherwise, is to have certain elements repeat, which is just how things work, be it characters, themes, or in the case of videogames, even gameplay segregated from the narrative. Repetition is the cornerstone of all storytelling, and to try to deconstruct that from such a hyperfocused lens is, in my humble opinion, a fool's errand, more so in this series of all things. There is a grander narrative to Zelda, yes, as even back when AlttP and OoT were released, there was an effort to keep some sort of chronology to the series, but ultimately, each game tends to be self-contained for the most part, and the writers are not looking to reinvent the wheel in writing. Skyward Sword in this sense is just more of this, it just so happens to have been created as the predecessor, and even then, what gives? What do you want out of the series? New villains? A new protagonist? Someone else to wield the pieces of the Triforce? Sure, they are nice things to have now and then, but the core narrative of good vs evil just works. Your point of them becoming literal only happens here, once, amidst the many other adventures we've had before and since. And even if Demise's curse is literal, what's the problem? Ganondorf isn't the only evil we have, and if he just so happens to be born to be evil, what's stopping the same criticism to apply to the many Zeldas and LInks? We could go a step further and ask that of any reincarnating/recurring characters, heroes or villains across fantasy. We've also already had stories without the Triforce as well, so I'm further baffled. Heck, in the latest games (BotW+TotK and EoW), the Triforce itself is not even used in the conventional way as established by OoT and later reused by WW and TP, and we even got a completely redesigned Link who ditched the greens and the hat.

Yes, it did

The Golden Goddesses were also scrapped for SS, much to my chagrin.

i prefer getting the lore re affirmed towards us even though we knew already like skyward sword, instead of having the lore broken apart and changed into whatever Tears of the kingdom was, Stupid sky furrys

Tbf, since Zelda is a fantasy series, the line between metaphor and literal reality being blurry is kind of a given. But I do agree that the "spirit of the hero" thing holds a lot more weight if it's symbollic rather than literal