OMG

[the Octopus]

Originally Posted by CuccoLady

^ I don't see how you can dismiss the connection between the goddesses and the Triforce so easily. No, it wasn't in the earlier games, but it IS in the later games, and the later games are still Zelda canon.

No, it isn't canon, it's related via 3rd party. There's no way to test the reliability of the information, it is only canon that you have been told that it occurred. And you still cannot argue with whether or not it was depicted in that fashion, it was. Whether or not the games since then have been consistent is a non-entity.

That wasn't the point, anyway, as I already addressed that it both wasn't meant to be accessible to regular mortals and is not inherently evil.

^^ I would at least expect that artistic concepts are referential to prior games in the series. Just like the other similarities between TP and OoT, I would say that it is both in homage to the previous games of the series and additionally to maintain cohesive direction. Considering how many enemies, musical themes, and locations failed to make the jump from the past games, they've got to have something else to evoke similar themes.

While we're lumping symmetry into the category of tie-ins, maybe Majora's Mask's boob eyes were a reference to spectacle rock, the entrance to death.

[CuccoLady]

Well I don't know about you but I believe what I get from the games and not from comics based off of the games. The Triforce of Power doesn't corrupt so much as greed and having what one is greedy for does. :{P

And wow I'm surprised I never caught on to those various [possible] Majora's Mask boob-eye references considering how obsessed I am with MM. x{D

[Cravdraa]

Bro, It wasn't the Triforce of Power's corruption that created the Dark world, that was the Triforce as a whole, granting his wish.

Further more, the backstory of the goddesses in OoT matches up more or less perfectly, with the creation story in the LttP manuel, which is more or less stated as fact, so it's validity isn't really in question. Certainly not less reliable than some old comics approved by Nintendo of America that the creators of the series had nothing to do with. Comics that, in fact, contradicted on many points, the two games that were already part of the series. Pretty sure actual content trumps thrid party comics. I liked them too, but they were just place holders filling in the backstory until the actual games got around to it. Now, they did carry more validity than, say, a comic made today, because back then manuels and such were part of the games they belonged to. The written components that surrounded these old games filled roles that cutscenes and flashbacks do in modern gaming. Make no mistake, if you've played the original Zelda without reading through it's maunel and going over the various maps and legends that came with it, you haven't really played the game anymore than if you played a modern Zelda game on a black and white tv, with the sound off, while skipping all the dialog and cutscenes.

But that wasn't the point at all, now was it?
The argument was whether or not Majora's Mask used these same themes that appeared in the comics. The comic's lesson was never that the Triforce of power was innately evil (it makes a point even then that the Triforce is neither good nor evil. That it can be used to bring great prosperity, but that if it's missused it can bring about evil.) That power corrupts, as you've already said, or as the comic put it "Those that wield power without wisdom can never know true courage."

Majora's mask is only similar on a superficial level. Sure there's a corrupting agent, but they're presented differenty. With the Triforce, it was merely a side effect of channeling the power of the gods into mere imperfect beings without the wisdom to use it.
The Mask is something different entirely. It's a malevolent evil spirit that manipulated and feeds off of the darkness it finds within people so that it can grow stronger. It has a darkness to it. It twists a person to suit it's own desires. It took the skullkid, a harmless imp that liked to put equally harmless pranks, and turned them vicious.
At first the Skullkid was convinced that he was still just having fun, but he starts to care less and less about that as the days go on. In a frightfully short amount of time he goes from pulling pranks and giggling like an easily amused child to sowing misery and inflicting pain in whatever way he can. He's cursing and enslaving souls, murdering people, kidnaping children and leaving them to die, and his final goal is the destruction of everything.
But then it's revealed that it wasn't really the Skull kid at all, doing these horrible things. He was just a weakminded puppet that the mask was controlling. He wasn't actually being corrupted himself, so much as the mask was slowly possessing him, tricking him or forcing him to do progressively worse and worse things as it gained power over his mind and body. Finally it discards him when it decides that he has no further use. It should be noted that once he wakes up the skullkid is back to his old self. He hadn't actually been corrupted, just controlled and manipulated.

So when you break them down, they're really not that similar at all.

On the note of originality, neither concepts are new. They're both portrayed rather uniquely, especially for their mediums, but the ideas of power corrupting, and a vulnerable youth being first mislead and then controlled by evil have both been around for centuries.

Still, that doesn't make either bad. They're told and retold so often because they're interesting.

[DJ Blue J]

AI, What do you mean when you say "related via 3rd party"?

[the Octopus]

^ Not experienced first hand, or even explained by a participant, but someone whom was created by the process and therefore incapable of direct knowledge.

Originally Posted by CuccoLady

Well I don't know about you but I believe what I get from the games and not from comics based off of the games. The Triforce of Power doesn't corrupt so much as greed and having what one is greedy for does. :{P

And wow I'm surprised I never caught on to those various [possible] Majora's Mask boob-eye references considering how obsessed I am with MM. x{D

That doesn't make it any more original or compelling, whether or not you consider the validity of the comics. We're talking about the existence of the use of the concept. Even if it were new to Zelda, it's still blatantly unoriginal, and that was my point all the same.

Symbiote did it, Graygem of Gargath did it.

Originally Posted by Cravdraa

Bro, It wasn't the Triforce of Power's corruption that created the Dark world, that was the Triforce as a whole, granting his wish.

Further more, the backstory of the goddesses in OoT matches up more or less perfectly, with the creation story in the LttP manuel, which is more or less stated as fact, so it's validity isn't really in question. Certainly not less reliable than some old comics approved by Nintendo of America that the creators of the series had nothing to do with. Comics that, in fact, contradicted on many points, the two games that were already part of the series. Pretty sure actual content trumps thrid party comics. I liked them too, but they were just place holders filling in the backstory until the actual games got around to it. Now, they did carry more validity than, say, a comic made today, because back then manuels and such were part of the games they belonged to. The written components that surrounded these old games filled roles that cutscenes and flashbacks do in modern gaming. Make no mistake, if you've played the original Zelda without reading through it's maunel and going over the various maps and legends that came with it, you haven't really played the game anymore than if you played a modern Zelda game on a black and white tv, with the sound off, while skipping all the dialog and cutscenes.

Even if I credit this argument, you understand that it's still pointless in that you would have to be insinuating that the goddesses had never created anything with the potential for "evil", which is outright disproven. I accept the LttP manual as supplemental print, the same as the comics - they are, yet that does not cause the comics to not exist. It also does not mean that the goddess story was acceptable - you are arguing on the grounds of canon, those games have been retconned. They can no longer be considered universal knowledge. Henceforth, it is not in your interest to contest validity based on contradictions of various media.

As it is, there is no reason to assume that the intentions of the Goddesses are so one-dimensional that they are concerned by specific rights or wrongs. If they are truly omnipotent, there are no grounds to declare that an assumption of cause can be accurate.

Originally Posted by Cravdraa

Majora's mask is only similar on a superficial level. Sure there's a corrupting agent, but they're presented differenty. With the Triforce, it was merely a side effect of channeling the power of the gods into mere imperfect beings without the wisdom to use it.
The Mask is something different entirely. It's a malevolent evil spirit that manipulated and feeds off of the darkness it finds within people so that it can grow stronger. It has a darkness to it. It twists a person to suit it's own desires. It took the skullkid, a harmless imp that liked to put equally harmless pranks, and turned them vicious.
At first the Skullkid was convinced that he was still just having fun, but he starts to care less and less about that as the days go on. In a frightfully short amount of time he goes from pulling pranks and giggling like an easily amused child to sowing misery and inflicting pain in whatever way he can. He's cursing and enslaving souls, murdering people, kidnaping children and leaving them to die, and his final goal is the destruction of everything.
But then it's revealed that it wasn't really the Skull kid at all, doing these horrible things. He was just a weakminded puppet that the mask was controlling. He wasn't actually being corrupted himself, so much as the mask was slowly possessing him, tricking him or forcing him to do progressively worse and worse things as it gained power over his mind and body. Finally it discards him when it decides that he has no further use. It should be noted that once he wakes up the skullkid is back to his old self. He hadn't actually been corrupted, just controlled and manipulated.

So when you break them down, they're really not that similar at all.

On the note of originality, neither concepts are new. They're both portrayed rather uniquely, especially for their mediums, but the ideas of power corrupting, and a vulnerable youth being first mislead and then controlled by evil have both been around for centuries.

Still, that doesn't make either bad. They're told and retold so often because they're interesting.

I disagree, I see it as the differences being only superficial. Of course they're used in different context, displaying different actions. Their behavior or use being identical would be unconducive to the game design process, differences will be established simply by merit of level and plot design differing as the game is developed.

[Cravdraa]

Originally Posted by Throbbing Mob

Even if I credit this argument, you understand that it's still pointless in that you would have to be insinuating that the goddesses had never created anything with the potential for "evil", which is outright disproven. I accept the LttP manual as supplemental print, the same as the comics - they are, yet that does not cause the comics to not exist. It also does not mean that the goddess story was acceptable - you are arguing on the grounds of canon, those games have been retconned. They can no longer be considered universal knowledge. Henceforth, it is not in your interest to contest validity based on contradictions of various media.

Please. Don't try to play that card here. EVERY SINGLE SOURCE on the matter states that the Triforce is truely neutral. Including the essence of the Triforce itself at the end of LttP. It doesn't even matter if the Goddesses are concerned with good and evil, as it's not even part of the arguement.

On the matter of validity. The old canon and the new canon completely and total agree with eachother on this matter and there's no plausible reason to doubt it's validity. This is what's refered to as a reliable narration.

But are you honestly trying to compare a crappy third party comic that wasn't even made by nintendo, and conflicted with the two games that exisited at the time to the expertly crafted manual that came packaged with one of the actual games? They claimed the Triforces were pyramid shaped, the Link got the Triforce of courage at the begining of AoL, and that Zelda was a tomboy, amoung other things. It's hardly above the CDi games as a source of reliable information. It was made by the same people that wrote freaking Captain N. I could go on and on, listing the problems that were known with these comics at the time they were written.

The history in the manuel may have been rewritten in part since then, but the comics were never valid sources of information in the first place. The absurdity of saying that Majora's mask reused a concept from a bunch of old comics only becomes greater when you realize that in all likelyhood the people that made the games probably don't even know they exist. That's almost like writing a fanfiction and then claiming the games that followed "reused" your ideas when some of them kinda, sorta made it into the following games.

Except that it's not even the same thing in this case. As I already showed, the corruption in the comics comes from power corrupting, which isn't a fault of the Triforce itself.
Majora's mask, on the other hand, is an evil spirit that doesn't even corrupt so much as manipulate, control, and possess as it works towards it's own, clearly evil set of goals.
Those are totally different concepts.

What, exactly, are you even attemping to argue at this point?

[CuccoLady]

Aww man I spent all day at school coming up with a response to AI and I come home to find out that Crav said it all.

One addition: you say that the goddesses' connection to the triforce can be disregarded because it came from a 'third party', the telling of a legend, correct?

Welllll, look at every single other legend in the Zelda series. The WW legend is based off of OoT's events, and we played the game and can say that is accurate. Even in MM there is a legend [in granny's book] of the Giants and the Skull Kid that is truthful based on what you hear from the Giants and Tatl. All of the legends in Zelda are remarkably accurate. Why dismiss this ONE because it contradicts a comic that Ninty didn't even have anything to do with?

[Cravdraa]

Hey, Can't let you have all the fun, CL.

[the Octopus]

Originally Posted by Cravdraa

Please. Don't try to play that card here. EVERY SINGLE SOURCE on the matter states that the Triforce is truely neutral. Including the essence of the Triforce itself at the end of LttP. It doesn't even matter if the Goddesses are concerned with good and evil, as it's not even part of the arguement.

You're off subject, as well as wrong. Oracle games disagree with neutrality, and even provide the Triforce with sentience. I'm not talking about that, though, I'm talking about its potential as a cause of evil. If the Triforce is neutral, there is no reason to assume it would make a large difference to the Triforce one way or another how it affects an impure mind.

On the matter of validity. The old canon and the new canon completely and total agree with eachother on this matter and there's no plausible reason to doubt it's validity. This is what's refered to as a reliable narration.

The old canon and the new canon agree only when it isn't a hindrance to game development, there is no canon. None of the information is reliable enough to consider it to have internal merit to the series, as it has been proven time and again that it means nothing to the creator. This is an outside principle we're discussing, whether or not CL has confidence in the goddesses is a detour that I don't care about - it has no affect on the point of originality.

But are you honestly trying to compare a crappy third party comic that wasn't even made by nintendo, and conflicted with the two games that exisited at the time to the expertly crafted manual that came packaged with one of the actual games? They claimed the Triforces were pyramid shaped, the Link got the Triforce of courage at the begining of AoL, and that Zelda was a tomboy, amoung other things. It's hardly above the CDi games as a source of reliable information. It was made by the same people that wrote freaking Captain N. I could go on and on, listing the problems that were known with these comics at the time they were written.

And yet they exist, and I am not comparing it as a matter of canon. You are disagreeing on the grounds that its production was poorly conducted? Shame on Nintendo some more, if their hack writing produces the same outcome as something so uninspired as their comic contracts. That doesn't help you argue for originality, and it doesn't make the games dependable canon, either.

The history in the manuel may have been rewritten in part since then, but the comics were never valid sources of information in the first place. The absurdity of saying that Majora's mask reused a concept from a bunch of old comics only becomes greater when you realize that in all likelyhood the people that made the games probably don't even know they exist. That's almost like writing a fanfiction and then claiming the games that followed "reused" your ideas when some of them kinda, sorta made it into the following games.

It's no surprise that you'd try to say this, and it just makes Nintendo look unprofessional. It might have conveniently not contradicted the other games, although it does seem rather unfortunate that Ganon, who was killed, is just as conveniently no longer dead, come time of the first game. No, the contradictions are there, the enemies are changed, Hyrule is changed. If you'll recall, the second game did not conveniently rearrange the first game's landscape. That all went out the window when it did not suit the developers. Validity of canon cannot be used as an argument, here, even in stages of game installments. Even were it so, it still would not make the concept more original.

Except that it's not even the same thing in this case. As I already showed, the corruption in the comics comes from power corrupting, which isn't a fault of the Triforce itself.
Majora's mask, on the other hand, is an evil spirit that doesn't even corrupt so much as manipulate, control, and possess as it works towards it's own, clearly evil set of goals.
Those are totally different concepts.

That's arguable, there's very little to determine that the Triforce doesn't have a specific purpose. Whether its purpose is inherited by its creator, or is simply not otherwise displayed, you're taking a means-justified route. Perversion by an object of power is, as you said, apparently a disposable theme - one Nintendo has reused in any quantifiable manner as possible. You're arguing against the singular principle of how it's accomplished. I'm pointing out the final outcome and the flow of the story, and saying that the user accomplishing his own dependency and perversion through that dependency is not dissimilar to the user being outright "manipulated" by the object of power. If the conduct is similar, if the themes establish the same ascent of plot, they are interchangeable.

I don't doubt you'd like to disagree, but from a writer's perspective, they are one in the same.

What, exactly, are you even attemping to argue at this point?

Apparently very little that you're trying to argue. You've tried to erode the merits of the medium without a point in mind. That doesn't benefit you, as I've pointed out, as there is no canon beside any individual source. They do not accumulate. Theirs is not a whole. Any consistencies can be chalked up to stylistic integrity - and can only point out that Nintendo reuses themes and concepts, which supports my argument.

Originally Posted by CuccoLady

One addition: you say that the goddesses' connection to the triforce can be disregarded because it came from a 'third party', the telling of a legend, correct?

Welllll, look at every single other legend in the Zelda series. The WW legend is based off of OoT's events, and we played the game and can say that is accurate. Even in MM there is a legend [in granny's book] of the Giants and the Skull Kid that is truthful based on what you hear from the Giants and Tatl. All of the legends in Zelda are remarkably accurate. Why dismiss this ONE because it contradicts a comic that Ninty didn't even have anything to do with?

Those are separate instances, and cannot have bearing upon one another. If you call a coin toss heads five times in a row, and it is heads those five times, it does not mean the coin landed as heads because you called it heads. Calling it heads again will not have bearing on a sixth coin toss, and the previous tosses will not have bearing on the sixth.

[Saria Dragon of the Rain Wilds]

Originally Posted by CuccoLady

If the Mask hadn't been picked up by such an emotionally unstable and confused person, it probably wouldn't have had anywhere near the effects.

If the Triforce hadn't been picked up by such an emotionally unstable and greedy person, it probably wouldn't have split/turned the Golden Land into a plane of darkness/given the power of Gods to an "evil" person.

Yeah.

See, the point you're missing (either willfully or not) is that the Triforce of Power more or less does, through "coincidence" I'm sure, the same thing as what Majora did. That's why it's unoriginal. All these plotlines with a single ultimate bad guy, with bull**** power-driven "motives" are unoriginal. It's all a pile of ass and it's depressing that Nintendo made MM the way it did: as a Wizard of Oz to OoT, jumbling up all the ideas they already used but re-wrote them to be wwwwwacky and crazy and bizzarro!~

So, an Artifact of Power is obtained by a Person of Questionable Integrity, and henceforth used to craft a Land of Suffering to reflect what is In Their Heart. Whether or not the Artifact of Power was a Relic of the Gods of Creation, left as an embodiment of their power for the people they had brought into being, or was an item of Malevolent Intent is irrelevant. The outcome is the same. The path to the outcome is, for all intents and purposes, the same as well. Both Persons of Questionable Integrity suffered impure feelings. The newfound magical strength they obtained through the Artifact of Power served to enhance the impurities In Their Heart.

As the Triforce is said to be impartial, it doesn't give two ****s if the guy holding it is good or evil; if they are an unbalanced person, the Triforce splits and resides within the living persons most suited to the attributes. It still grants Ganondorf Power. The Triforce (though slightly re-written in English) is specifically stated to be unable to cast judgement on its user, for it is not a God itself, and only the Gods may judge the people.

And in case AI was too verbose, let's just make it clear once more that the games themselves contradict one another: there is no canon. Canon does not exist. If the core story to Game1 were inconvenient to the developers, it would be discarded in Game6. It has been done already. There is no canon, because the games do not adhere to a strict ruleset about their own world, their own legends, their own people, and so on. This isn't even an argument about canon (you guys brought it up), it's a statement that even if Majora was as you've guessed/assumed, it's still nothing more exciting than the usual story of perversion through power. Except with a gay mask as the boss. A mask.


ps. The movie "The Mask" was released in 1994.

[Cravdraa]

Aahhh, but AI was the one that brought up canon. Repeatedly.
Despite the fact that I tried to get off that subject because it doesn't matter, and honestly isn't all that related.
But since he insisted, I played his little game and now that it didn't go his way there suddenly is no canon. I understand. How very convenient for him.

No, my point is and always has been that Majora's mask is not simply an object of power that corrupts, it's a an evil spirit that controls. That's the third time I've had to repeat myself. These are fundamentally different concepts, "from a writer's perspective" because of what it means for the victim. Sure, in this case they both become villains. But in the case of corruption through power, the victim is less empathetic because they are essentually doing it to themselves. In many cases, with this sort of plot device, the object of power is just speeding up what would have happened. (given, Ganondorf wasn't that nice a guy to begin with.)
In the case of Majora's Mask, the victim is slowly, subtilely overtaken, as the mask eventually takes complete control over them. In a way, the victim is completely innocent in this senario. It's the Mask acting through them, controlling them, inflicting what harm it wishes to through them, possibly even despite of their best efforts to contrary. This can even make them them a tragic character, once their plight is known to the audience.


Those are very different concepts.
Neither are all that original. I never said they were.
My point was simply that the concept of Majora's Mask is quite different from what had been used in the Zelda series before.

[1-up Salesman]

Y'know, I really need to play through Majora's Mask. But I know one, and it's that Majora's Mask (or just Majora) is freaking evil. I mean, like "I'LL EAT YOUR CHILDREN" evil. Actually, worse than that.

And I do kind of agree that Majora's Mask is similar to the Triforce of Power in a way that it can have an effect on people who use it. But the thing about Majora's Mask is that it really came out of nowhere. They barely tell you anything about it, and all you really know is that the Happy Mask Salesman had it.

I think that Majora's Mask is the most evil thing that I've ever seen from Zelda. In my opinion, (MY opinion) Majora really surpasses Ganondorf. Ganondorf dies in just about every game he's been in, along with Ganon. And he's a good villain, he really is.

From all this rambling, I really can't prove a point. But Majora's Mask (the game, not the character) was a kind of Zelda that Nintendo hadn't made before, and they gave it a try. It came out, people bought it and played it, some loved it, some hated it. And when a series has a bad game, for alot of cases such as Sonic the Hedgehog, the bad games just keep on coming out. But after Majora's Mask was out, Nintendo stopped using the Three Day system, and you never hear any reference to Majora's Mask again.

So at least, for the MM haters, there aren't any other games like it.

[heh]

luckily, despite the concept of "POSSESSOR ARTIFACT" being unorginal, researchers are still shocked to find that Majora's Mask is still The Best Zelda Game

[PK FIRE!]

^ ALttP would like a word with you about that. (not say it's bad haven't played it yet. just that sound more like an opinion than a fact much like my rather unsupported count opinion.)

As for Majora's Mask why should it be exempt from cause and effect if the Triforce isn't.

Also all this talk of cannon and continuity makes me want to go warch episode 29 of the game overthinker again.

- You stupid dog.

[Valigarmander]

I read through all the posts again, and I'm really not seeing much of the similarity between the Triforce of Power and Majora's Mask, AI. It feels like you're comparing two plot devices because they're both plot devices which, while like in output, are completely different in their function and nature in the game. And for that matter, the Skull Kid wasn't a power-hungry warlord after an ancient artifact, he was a lonely bumpkin who happened upon a demonic mask which saw him as a vessel it could use to carry out its evil plans.

Crav and CL seem to have expressed most of my thoughts already, though.

[CuccoLady]

The Triforce of Power and Majora's Mask have the same plot device, clearly. However, one supplies power to a person, the other brings out the evil to that person, controls him/her, and gives the possessed host the power to wreak havoc. Same effect, but entirely different things, and the Mask itself is its own conscious entity. The Triforce just gives power to whoever holds it. The Mask gives power to this person, draws out the evil within them, feeds off of them, and grows into its own evil form of doom and destruction.

Also when I said the Triforce wasn't final boss material I meant you wouldn't go into the boss chamber and fight a golden triangle. It itself doesn't do anything; it is entirely the person that does this. The Mask, however, is the final boss... it is its own being, and it does the asskicking itself once it gets up its power. Yes, they both need a host, but Majora is a controlling being, not just something that gives power to its wearer.

[Saria Dragon of the Rain Wilds]

Except AI was, at all times, dismissing "canon" as anything legitimate.

Originally Posted by Throbbing Mob

Considering that Miyamoto himself is incapable of not contradicting his canon, I don't see how any official outlet is less valid;

The makers of the games themselves do not adhere to a canon: there is no real, accurate canon to speak of.

Originally Posted by Throbbing Mob

The Goddesses did not exist in-game until OoT, and the Triforce creation story isn't even canonically accurate - it is related via 3rd party, as you are never present during the creation of the world.

"canon:
A secular law, rule, or code of law.
An established principle: the canons of polite society.
A basis for judgment; a standard or criterion."

The only establishment of the Goddesses' connection to the Triforce is from a backstory. A vaguely known history. It's not that it didn't happen, or that it's a lie, so much as you didn't experience it directly, therefore it isn't a realistically solid basis of judgement. All history is suspect. History that is depicted the fifth installment of a series is suspect. It is not "canon", because there is no established principle for it to follow. The games adapt to whatever they feel like at any time. You can't have factual knowledge of something that's related through word of mouth or storytelling.

I think the Skull Kid is an *******. There is no sympathy for someone who can be manipulated by an item of power. He was still capable of great evils, as shown by his ability to try and crush the world with the moon. If he HAD gotten hold of the Triforce of Power instead, what should we reasonably assume he would have done? Really, if you consider what CL's trying to present as a revelation in the first instance (the Mask used what was in his heart to latch on), then there would ultimately be enough ill-will in his heart to use the Triforce of Power (should he have been able to wield it) to aspire to ever-increasing amounts of power and be further perverted by the hatred and betrayal he feels.

That the Mask is supposedly an evil spirit should have little to no bearing on what the Skull Kid did, if it truly feeds on the vile emotions of a damaged soul. Power = power. If you have the power for revenge and retribution against those who harmed you, then you would use it, as shown by the outcome of Majora's Mask anyway. Just because, once drained of the power, the Skull Kid was able to feel regret for his actions makes him no less accountable. If he had retained the power to exact his revenge, are you so certain he would be regretful? Doesn't it seem just as likely that, without the strength awarded through the Mask, he was afraid of the Big Bad People again? That, given the opportunity to snatch that power back, he probably would?

[the Octopus]

Originally Posted by Cravdraa

Aahhh, but AI was the one that brought up canon. Repeatedly.
Despite the fact that I tried to get off that subject because it doesn't matter, and honestly isn't all that related.
But since he insisted, I played his little game and now that it didn't go his way there suddenly is no canon. I understand. How very convenient for him.

You're reading it wrong, k thx. I said that there is no over-arcing series-wide canon. I said that in-game, in the instance of OoT where the Triforce is created, it is not presented as an unarguable fact. It is therefore canonical that you are told the story, not that the story is presented as fact. As there is no dependable series-wide canon, LttP canon cannot be used to argue OoT canon. As it is, CL's ability to accept conflicts in canon are not related to the root argument, as well, and I am accurate in stating that it's not in your interest to pursue a validity-of-medium-as-canon argument. Belittling the comic does not negate its existence. If your "EVERY SINGLE SOURCE" weren't canonically related, if CL hadn't attempted to use canon to disprove the validity of the comic's existence, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

No, my point is and always has been that Majora's mask is not simply an object of power that corrupts, it's a an evil spirit that controls. That's the third time I've had to repeat myself. These are fundamentally different concepts, "from a writer's perspective" because of what it means for the victim. Sure, in this case they both become villains. But in the case of corruption through power, the victim is less empathetic because they are essentually doing it to themselves. In many cases, with this sort of plot device, the object of power is just speeding up what would have happened. (given, Ganondorf wasn't that nice a guy to begin with.)
In the case of Majora's Mask, the victim is slowly, subtilely overtaken, as the mask eventually takes complete control over them. In a way, the victim is completely innocent in this senario. It's the Mask acting through them, controlling them, inflicting what harm it wishes to through them, possibly even despite of their best efforts to contrary. This can even make them them a tragic character, once their plight is known to the audience.

So what you're saying is that the character reverts to pre-mask possession state, and that ultimately makes the transformation from a mask-stealing ******* into a world-destroying ******* completely different from a triforce-stealing ******* who carries through with his final attack rather than commanding a minion or force to attack you. The nature of the perversion is different because Ganondorf sought it directly and used it intentionally to attempt to ruin the world, whereas the Skull Kid happened on it and used it intentionally, possibly with an external voice directing him, to attempt to ruin the world. As Ganondorf is imprisoned and ruined after his battle, and the Skull Kid is eschewed by his power which leaves him impotent, how can we ascertain that the Skull Kid's true nature is impotence? As Ganondorf's true nature is a void of power and influence minus the triforce, this is different? The Skull Kid uses his abilities prior to obtaining the mask to cause intentional ill-will, and ill-will is something he is incapable of not having possessed the mask?

Those are very different concepts.
Neither are all that original. I never said they were.
My point was simply that the concept of Majora's Mask is quite different from what had been used in the Zelda series before.

No, they are very similar concepts. Very different concepts are a man driving down a highway to get to a dentist's appointment having a flat tire, and a lamp that doubles as a blender. Your differences are superficial.

Originally Posted by Valigarmander

I read through all the posts again, and I'm really not seeing much of the similarity between the Triforce of Power and Majora's Mask, AI. It feels like you're comparing two plot devices because they're both plot devices which, while like in output, are completely different in their function and nature in the game. And for that matter, the Skull Kid wasn't a power-hungry warlord after an ancient artifact, he was a lonely bumpkin who happened upon a demonic mask which saw him as a vessel it could use to carry out its evil plans.

Crav and CL seem to have expressed most of my thoughts already, though.

You are comparing two plot devices that are like in function, output and nature, and finding that their execution varies to a small extent and concluding they are not identical clones, which does not correlate to this argument.

For that matter, Link wasn't a hapless child summoned by a faerie to tree in TP, he was an adult shepherd who took up a quest to rescue his village's children. He ultimately still serves a near-identical purpose and place in a transparent plot.

[I REALLY HATE POKEMON!]

AI's latest post reminds me of Light Yagami in the final episode of Death Note.

[the Octopus]

Goku on the sun, mister.