Talk:Hidden Village

Couldn't there have possibly been more than one Shiekah Villages?

The fact that Hidden Village is Ocarina of Time's Kakariko isn't an "unconfrimed fan-made theory", so why is it treated as such? The sign that says 'Welcome to Old Kakarico' should be proof enough, even if it does contain a misspelling. It is also clear, through Impaz, that Hidden Village was the Kakariko where the Sheikah lived, and since the Kakariko in Ocarina of Time is also the Kakariko where the Sheikah lived, it is clear that they are one and the same. Rob 64 12:10, 28 July 2008 (UTC)Rob 64

Well I think that you need to understand that the Hidden Village's location is way off of Death Mountain's in Twilight Princess. The village is north of Death Mountain, OoT's Kakariko was south of it. However If we look at the difference between OoT's Hyrule Map and TP's, we would find that Death mountain would be Northwest of Hyrule, since Zora's Domain is now North in TP, but it's not. In other words, Hyrule went through some major shifts between OoT and TP, as far as I'm concerned, TP can ruin every timeline theory because of its differences in locations. The fact of the Hidden Village being OoT's Kakariko can never be known for sure until the reason for Hyrule's major overhaul between Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess is revealed.

What about the fact that the 'Kakariko Shootout' stage in Link's Crossbow Training takes place in Hidden Village? Rob 64 14:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)Rob 64

Nintendo is very vague when it comes to the timeline of the Zelda franchise. For all we know, the Kakariko Village in OoT was a moved location meaning the "Old Kakariko" was before OoT. Now let's tak a look at the Hidden Village's characteristics, it doesn't have a graveyard, but Kakariko does. HV isn't connected to Death Mountain at all while KV is and its over all location is way off.

True enough, but that was simply for the purposes of gameplay. Don't you ever wonder why the temple of time is now situated in the middle of the Lost Woods? It shouldn't be, but it makes things simpler for the purposes of a stand-alone story. I think it's fair enough to assume, since:

1. Impaz is descended from Impa, and Impa clearly resided in Ocarina of Time's Kakariko (even founded it). 2. The sign which reads 'Welcome to Old Kakarico' could have meant another Kakariko, if Twilght Princess didn't take place right after Ocarina of Time (which is first in the timeline, apart from The Minish Cap and Four Swords, where Kakariko didn't exist anyway. If you remember, OoT's Kakariko has to be the first anyway, since it was founded by Impa), which it clearly does. 3. Who's to say that the mountain range around Hidden Village isn't the old Death Mountain Trail? It could easily have linked to Death Mountain in times gone by (and there are Tektites present like in OoT). 4. They were very clear about it in Link's Crossbow Training. Hidden Village stage; Kakariko Shootout. This is one thing they haven't been vague about, as Impaz, the sign, and the LCT stage all point towards.

Put simply, the sign is a link to an Old Kakariko, but Impaz is the link to the Old kakariko.

I'm not trying to start an argument, and I understand what you are saying (good points, by the way), but your points are more relative to the elements of gameplay, and Twilight Princess as a stand-alone story. My points however, aren't exactly refutable without resorting to wild conjecture. In fact, the three key points I've mentioned are pretty clear, more so than anything else Nintendo have done continuity-wise. Crossbow Training pretty much acts as confirmation.

We really need some more opinions here though, eh, MARKOL? Rob 64 15:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)Rob 64