Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Tri Force Heroes

Canonicity
There's really no reason to doubt the canonicity of this game, unless the site policy is to add the ambiguously canon template to all as of yet unreleased video games, in which case, I'll add the ambig template to Zelda Wii U. I would think the unreleased template would be enough for that, tho. --Zero-ELEC (talk) 22:00, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Zelda U is unmistakably a main series game. It's pointless to consider it as ambiguous, whereas this is up in the air. The ambig template isn't quite here because it's unreleased (although that's a major factor as natural consequence), we just can't discern where it stands yet. 22:07, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * We cannot discern where Zelda U stands, either, since we have practically no story information for it. There's no reason not to believe that both games are canon, what with them having the full title (Note that modern day spin-offs that are ambiguous or non-canon do not have "The Legend of Zelda" in their title). --Zero-ELEC (talk) 22:14, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I don't agree either that TFH needed the ambiguous marker, but was asked to add it. I guess it's because it's a really different Zelda game that people are uncertain of it? Still, FS and FSA are both canon. 22:25, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Again, this is definitely a main series game, even if it's for a portable console and has multiplayer as it's main focus, just as Four Swords and FSA are. We have it listed as the eighteenth official entry, and I really see nothing to dissuade that notion. It's developed internally by Nintendo, has the title of "The Legend of Zelda" (which again, modern spin-offs don't), and there's precedence for multiplayer focused Zelda games. As far as I can see, the question isn't whether it's canonical or not, but more where does it take place in canon. (Which some interviewer should totally ask, while everyone's at E3!) --Zero-ELEC (talk) 23:04, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I concur. Linebeck II (talk) 04:25, 18 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Hey. Have any of you guys heard of this? This is a direct quote: “Sometimes you have Zelda sequels and what we have today with Zelda: Triforce [sic] Heroes is completely different and not in the timeline of Zelda.” That's from an official at Nintendo of Canada. Does this mean TFH isn't canon? I've been discussing it with my friends. If it's truly not in the Timeline at all, it's pretty much non-canon by definition. And the game does seem VERY silly and cartoonish, even by Zelda standards. It's just not as story-driven as the other games in the series. It all seems to make TFH a spin-off. —ℕʘℬʘⅅㄚℕʘ1 (ㄒaʟҡ) 02:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)


 * We've known that quote for awhile now. It is however conflicting. You have a producer who worked on the actual game saying they're not sure about the placement, and a representative who mainly speaks from one side of the entire company and who had no role in the game saying otherwise. It might be worth a mention on the article, but I still find this all very debatable.


 * And honestly, I'm getting really tired of the whole timeline = canonity thing. I'd rather that people ask Nintendo if the game is a main series game, not whether it is on the timeline or not. If the game is a main series game, then I consider it canon. 03:53, 8 July 2015 (UTC)