Talk:BS The Legend of Zelda: Ancient Stone Tablets

Why doesn't this page have a detailed layout and summary like the rest of the Zelda Titles? There are playable roms of each week, as well as summaries, walkthroughs, faqs,, lists, etc, detailing most, if not all, information on the game. I think it's an important game in the series, introducing the "fog of war" on the map later used in OoT, and real-time weather that affects gameplay.

Also, why is this game, along with Zelda for the G&W, considered to be of questionable canonicity? Both were published by Nintendo on established Nintendo systems, and neither contradicts any of the other games thus far. If you go be reasoning of publisher, developer, and system, they have more claim to canon than the Oracles series or Four Swords games. Not that I'm trying to start an argument. I'm just curious as to the reasoning of this decision.

Nook 19:50, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


 * To answer your first question, it's all a matter of research done. Pretty much everyone here knows next to nothing about this game, and the ROM I tried to snag didn't work (I need to search for a working copy). I could definitely get one and expand this article if you'd like, though. :P
 * As for your second question, it's all a matter of spin-off-ness. Think of it like the Tales series. They have two main "series" of games: "Mothership" titles, which are all of the main games in the series, and then the spin-off titles; granted, their spin-offs are still considered canon, but I'm stating that merely for the separation of games. This game fits into the spin-off category. Regardless, there are people who still try to fit it, Link's Crossbow Training, Tingle's Balloon Fight DS, etc., into timelines. And really, unless Nintendo says specifically that something is NOT canon (as they did with the CD-i games), we can't say for sure and there's always going to be debate on what is and isn't canon. The generally accepted non-canon games are:


 * 1) The CD-i games
 * 2) The Sattelaview games
 * 3) Tingle's Balloon Fight DS
 * 4) Link's Crossbow Training
 * 5) Game & Watch Zelda
 * 6) Zelda Watch Game
 * 7) In some cases, Freshly-Picked Tingle's Rosy Rupeeland (its canon status is disputed; it may be the one spin-off that is truly canon. I haven't played it so I couldn't say)
 * So that's pretty much that. I need to play these, though. :/ 20:08, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, here's my take on it. These games (Zelda for G&W and Ancient Stone Tablets) are more of the "Fun Games". Akin to Link in Soul Calibur II. Sure it is fun, but it isn't part of the story. The basic guideline is that the game had to have had involvement by Shigeru Miyamoto in development, which the Oracles and the Four Sword line did. In addition, they have to have been released in both Japan and North America, and recently in Europe as well. Not just in Japan. So games that do not fit in this category but had a license from Nintendo, are spin-offs, So they are in their own parallel world of sorts and are not in the main line's canon. 20:19, August 17, 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmm. I did not know that Miyamoto wasn't involved in Ancient Stone Tablets. ANyway, I may make this game my next project after I finish with Four Swords... Nook 20:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


 * It isn't that. It is that Ancient Stone Tablets was never released outside of Japan. 20:54, August 17, 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh I see. My misunderstanding ^_^;;

One potential flaw with that theory though, Matt, is that Miyamoto was involved with Link's Crossbow Training. That hardly seems canon to me, though. :/ 22:19, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The real key here is that Link's Crossbow Training was developed by Nintendo of America. Not by Nintendo of Japan. Also, the purpose of its creation was to demonstrate the use of the Zapper. So it is just a "for fun" game. Just as the Mario Party games are just "for fun" games. No real story ties. That's it. 22:31, August 17, 2008 (UTC)


 * By that reasoning though, that means that Metroid Prime Hunters shouldn't be considered canon because it was developed in the US by NST instead of in Japan by R&D4. Neither should any of the Prime games, for that matter, because they were developed by Retro in the US. All I'm saying is that you shouldn't judge the canonicity of a game by its developers.


 * Also, just being nitpicky now, but the Mario Party games do have a story. >_>


 * Anyway, not to interrupt you two but I didn't intend for this to evolve into a "Which Games Are Canon" thread, just a discussion on Ancient Stone Tablets and possibly Zelda.


 * Nook 22:46, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

The developer thing is just about our standing on the Zelda series. The Mario Party games have a story within themselves but not with the rest of the Mario series. Ando, perhaps we can do something to provide a means of discussing things not related to improving a page. I'll look into it and report the best answer on the Hyrule Castle page. 22:55, August 17, 2008 (UTC)

The title
Is using a translated title really the best idea? Although I do doubt this would ever be localized, it just generally doesn't make sense to use a title that was never used by Nintendo themselves (even Nazo no Murasamejou technically has an official translation, although I still wouldn't use it). Good for a translation in the lead, obviously. ZeldaDoritos 09:49, 29 October 2011 (EDT)
 * Personally I think this page should be under Inishie no Sekiban, as the translated title is open to discussion. However, one thing I am sure on, and that this page should not have a "The" in the title, its unnecessary and makes it even longer than it needs to be. Most Zelda games do not have "the" in the title, and it just makes it longer than it has to be. Fizzle 17:08, 7 November 2011 (EST)


 * Since we've opted to use "BS Zelda no Densetsu: Inishie no Sekiban," shouldn't we also use the literal transliteration, "Zeruda"? It looks odd to me to use "Zelda" and then switch over to Japanese part way through the sentence... 19:39, 2 January 2012 (EST)