Talk:The Legend of Zelda CD-i games

Content

This info was culled from several other articles, including the individual game pages, so please don't blame me if it's apocryphal or not NPOV. :) --Sraan 00:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I had an Idea

This article has many similarities in the individual game articles. I thought it would be a good idea to compile the information onto the main CD-i Zelda article, so as to make it more easily accessible, because it's all in one place. If anyone dissagrees, go ahead and revert it, then post your problem with it here. Thank you.

No agree, the CD-I games should merged into one. All seem to have the same info except for the storylines and characters, but that's about it. I propose a merge. Magiciandude 22:36, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Are those songs remixed from these games notable enough for mention?

Rikolai, Gux, Crok, Avid Acid, Toilet Duck, Verix.
There might be more, but I didn't look very hard.
They're pretty awesome, but I don't think they're really notable, hence me asking. - Daakun 19:05, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Sequence

Link, feeling increasingly useless in the now safe land of Hyrule, has no idea that the faraway island of Koridai has been taken over by his old nemesis, Ganon. Ganon has also kidnapped the princess of Hyrule, Zelda, and is holding her captive there. A mysterious wizard visits Link on a flying carpet to inform the hero of the dire situation. Only Link, with the aid of the Book of Koridai, can defeat Ganon. After being refused a kiss by Princess Zelda, Link then flies away with the man on the flying carpet and moves toward an island populated by stone statues in the shape of diabolical faces known as the "Faces of Evil."

Mah boi, this currently reads that Link is in Hyrule, is told that Princess Zelda has been kidnapped in Koridai, and asks Zelda to kiss him before leaving Hyrule to go to Koridai? I wonder what's for dinner. ~ Eidako 13:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Given the lack of correction by a person familiar with the plot, I went ahead and removed the first bold sentence. ~ Eidako 06:05, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Resolved

I propose that all Zelda CD-I games be merged to this articles. Each articles are pretty much same when comes to the context except for the storylines which is already summarized in this article. The development section can be added here. A list of characters is not needed. So therefore, not much info will be lost. The game templates can be added here just like how Naruto video game series are set up.Magiciandude 22:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Support - Good idea, maybe we can help get one CD-i Zelda game article to GA status. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Oppose - They're three different games, are they not? And the statement that the articles are "pretty much the same when it comes to the context" is flat out untrue. McJeff (talk) 19:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Tentative Support This has been in the back of my mind for quite a while now. Think about this rationally. What would the development sections of the articles be if separate? They would all have to go into the exact same story about Philips and Nintendo and the failed CD-ROM add-on, as would this article. There isn't much to say about development that would be game-unique. Much of the reception sections would also be repetitive. The articles already have many statements about all three games ("Along with the other two CD-i Zeldas, the game was...", "Like the system they were created for, the three games were never very popular...") or sentences that specify one game but apply to all three (cf. "The Faces Of Evil is considered to be an inferior use of the Legend of Zelda title by most fans who know of the game's existence..." with "The Wand of Gamelon is considered to be an inferior use of the Legend of Zelda title by most fans who know of the game's existence..."). Granted, the plot and gameplay sections are different, but they're so painfully short that this might very well have a stronger presentation if merged. The argument "they're separate games" isn't a per se reason for separate articles—see the Oracle games, which are separate, yet stronger presented together. That article is also the example for how plot and gameplay would be presented here if merged. If the gameplay sections were greatly expanded or significant information about development was found that was game-specific, the articles should definitely be split. However, given the current state of affairs I am willing to consider the merge. Pagrashtak 21:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

And that's why, my friend, I wish to merge all three articles to this one. Magiciandude (talk) 23:04, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Oppose Coolgamer (talk) 19:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Support as per Pagrashtak. Gurko (talk) 22:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Strong Oppose' there are three seperate games that have three seperate story lines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.156.166 (talk)

Having different storylines doesn't mean articles can't merged. The storylines Oracle of Ages and Oracle of Seasons are on the same page, neither OoA or OoS have separate articles. The three games' plots summaries are already shortened and summed up in this article. Magiciandude (talk) 23:55, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Support Provided that all three titles are redirected. 66.68.99.199 (talk) 16:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Oppose The third game has a completely distinct gameplay and development history than the first two. FightingStreet (talk) 16:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

That part is already mentioned in this article in the game section itself in one sentence. Magiciandude (talk) 03:50, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Oppose They're all notable in their own right, and the first two are distinctly different from the last one. Mister Senseless™ (Speak - Contributions) 21:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

How so? The plots are already summarized in this article, the differences is already mentioned between the first-two and the third, and the gameplays are already mentioned. The development sections for each article are the same. The reception and beginning intro paragraph for Zelda's Adventure is the same as the first-two. There isn't much written in the gameplay and plot that couldn't be summarized for the articles. This isn't much different than Zelda: Oracle of Seasons & Ages, even with the addition of Zelda's Adventure. Magiciandude (talk) 01:40, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Oppose: They're three separate games, and therefore they should have three separate articles. Really pretty simple. Wizardman 18:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Not all games neccessarily need their own article. As I've mentioned, Zelda: OoA and Zelda: OoS are merged into one article despite being different games. Even with Zelda's Adventure having different gameplay, the plot summary, development, and its gameplay is already summarized in this article. As a matter of fact, Zelda's Adventure's section on gameplay is barely a paragraph long. Magiciandude (talk) 05:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

If there's any differences in the games, which you acknowledge there are, then it's inherently better to keep them as separate articles. Your arguments for merging remain unconvincing. Wizardman 20:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, nobody has given me a real reason why the articles shouldn't be merged. Other than the few anonymous opps, and the same arguement used against me that I already pointed out the solution, the articles are merged. Magiciandude (talk) 05:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

And almost GA! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't bet on it. The introduction and gameplay section are too short. But don't worry. I'll take care of the gameplay. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 16:32, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, the reception section is heavily lacking in sources from the time of the game's release. Currently there's only modern websites in the section. It would be more interesting to use magazines from the '90s. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 16:43, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's resolved. But at this point I no longer care to fight the rampant mergists. You win :( Wizardman 14:19, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, the only reason we "won" is because we managed to turn three messy stubs into one comprehensive, potentially-GA article. Is the situation that bad? Megata Sanshiro (talk) 16:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Gee, it sure is boring round' here

Although it hasn't been "truly" mentioned, just by looking at YouTube alone, there have been many remixes and parodies of the CD-i games, mostly involving remixing them to change the context and add humorous value to them. We don't need a "true" source, since looking at a search result for "CD-i Zelda" shows many different remixes and parodies of this along with the straight clips.

So, think this whole subculture involving them should be added? ViperSnake151 21:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I think YouTube Poop should have its own article. It is a self-contained internet phenomenon, increasingly popular as can be seen by statistics for these kind of videos on You Tube, and they don't always involve the Zelda games - for instance, the Doctor Rabbit dental hygiene video and Volvic mineral water commercials are also widely parodied. 80.56.35.62 (talk) 18:06, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.156.166 (talk) 09:20, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Youtube Poop

Why isn't there an artical for it/them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.144.151.36 (talk) 23:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

There was a section on this page about Youtube Poop. An anonymous user removed it seemingly for no apparent reason. I have added it back in. 85.232.209.158 (talk) 20:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Odvious vandalism?

How so, Clegs? None of this section is of any way vandalism at all. You can search on YouTube yourself for proof, or visit http://www.youchewpoop.com for the official site. YouTube Poop is more notable than some of the other memes that have articles on this site. 85.232.209.158 (talk) 20:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm about to be blocked because of my adding Youtube Poop back in. Oh boy, isn't this fair.99.167.231.124 (talk) 23:25, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Great, great idea.

I mean, really. The only notability for these games are the extremely low quality of them, and they're mostly discussed as a whole rather than separately. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationals

The following images do not have fair use rationals:

• Image:Zeldawandofgamelon1.jpg
• Image:Zeldasadventure1.jpg
• Image:Zeldawandofgamelon2.jpg
• Image:Zeldafacesofevil2.jpg
• Image:Zelda wandofgamelon packaging.jpg
• Image:Zelda facesofevil box.jpg

Epass (talk) 21:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Added rationales to all of them, need to replace a few as they are huge. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

All fixed! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I have a potentially silly question, but...

What the frick is Youtube Poop? Is it videos that no one wants to claim as posted by them? Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 06:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

A YouTube Poop is a mashup video posted on YouTube with the intention to annoy, confuse, or entertain whoever watches it. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 13:45, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

So it's a YouTube cultural thing? Why does it keep coming up here? Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 06:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Because the animations from these games have been uploaded onto the net and made available, they are now one of several games/shows lampooned in the 'poops' on a regular basis. Other examples include Sonic the Hedgehog, Mario and the Cillit Bang advert. Someoneanother 05:57, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm looking for reasons for them to be incesantly included in the article. Are they particularly rampant, particularly popular, particularly venomous, ect? Because as Someone stated, it's not unique to these games. Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 23:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

^^^^^^^^ Yes, they are 71.163.117.33 (talk) 02:34, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

GAN on hold

• "and the final one by Viridis on 5 June 1994." - the final one sounds a bit... sucky. Just refer to it by its name (ie. and Zelda’s Adventure 's by Viridis...)
• "Nintendo rarely acknowledges the game's existence and are a source of ridicule by many reviewers." - sounds like Nintendo are a source of ridicule... reword
• "All the CDi" - should that have a hyphen?
• Release date section in infobox needs italics
• Check overlinking in Plot section (Link a few times, etc.)
• Same with Nintendo (and others) in the Dev section
• "Philips insisted that all the aspects of the CD-is capabilities including FMV; however, the fact that it was not designed as a stand alone game console and the infrared controller lagged behind the on screen action" - first part (before semi colon) makes no sense...lacking verbs, I think
• "(which does not include the CD-i games)" - better with commas, rather than brackets (or perhaps em dashes)

Leave me a note when done. Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 10:42, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not the nominator, but I believe I've addressed these except for the confusing sentence. I'll let Judgesurreal handle that one, as I can't tell what the intent is. Pagrashtak 14:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I expanded two of the three plot summaries. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 17:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Rephrased the sentence, so all the GA issues should be fixed! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 18:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

All passed! dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 01:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Currency

I noticed that the currency in these games is apparently reversed to that of the rest of the series. Green Rupees being usually worth one, Blue being 5 and Red being 10, if I remember correctly (which I may not). If the article is incorrect, which I can't say as this might be the first time I've even heard of them, then it should be corrected. If the article is correct, is this worth noting? It seems like yet another departure and failing of the titles. --Epynephrin (talk) 19:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

You'll notice that these games use "rubies" instead of "rupees", so I don't know if such a comparison is even meaningful. Pagrashtak 19:43, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thats because this is the earliest... well only Zelda game that uses voices, no one was really sure how the word Rupees is pronounced. If you say it over afew times you would noticed that the P and the B arn't very different. Not to mention that the Rupees seem to be mostly red. 86.128.33.12 (talk) 01:43, 4 May 2008 (UTC) Mystic Monkey

What's with the citations?

I'm not sure the standard format for citations in a wikipedia article, but I don't think every sentence needs to have a cite after it, resulting in a paragraph with a dozen or more citations that lead to only one or two citations at the bottom. Is that how we're supposed to do it or is there a more concise way? Errick (talk) 01:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes. That's how we do it here. It's to make sure every statement is referenced and therefore believable. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 10:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

There are other ways to do it but yes that's how we do it here. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 10:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't look right, though. Isn't there some way to have an entire paragraph point to the citation, instead of every sentence in the paragaph pointing ot the same citation? I'm just saying, it looks terribly messy that way. I do know every statement needs citations, I understand that much, but surely there's a format for citing the entire paragraph at once?Errick (talk) 04:36, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

It's possible but I think you need to discuss it first as people may object. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 11:00, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

...your face the GREATEST in Koridai!

I don't think he could mean physical attraction.. Not saying that Link denying physical attraction would be stupid... CDi Link, not the others... I think what Ganon ment was having Links head as one of the Faces of Evil... and with a mug like that not even the 3 Goddesses would love that face.

Just what I thought he ment when I herd that line.

--86.128.33.12 (talk) 01:39, 4 May 2008 (UTC) Mystic Monkey

Agreed. I changed "physical attractiveness" to "great power". Tubba Blubba (talk) 00:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)