I crashed hard sorry gang, anyway.
You need full hearts to unleash the beam, and I think skyward sword explains what I mean better, when Impa talks about how Link and the sword grow together, the power of the sword imbues Link's own body as well.
You again just sabotaged your argument. If that's the case, then the ALBW sword is
stronger as it has the stronger sword beams, which cycles back around into the Yuganon contradiction given you've been aguing damage values.
This also misses the point tho, if the sword amps Link, then by proxy that isn't Link's own strength, it's still the sword's? He still needs that sword to do what he does, it's not his innate power, it's him being amped, which yeah is the case, and nobody was arguing otherwise. That doesn't change any statement in ALTTP though involving it as it is explicitly noted he needs the MS's evil negative properties to defeat Aghanim explicitly and he can not do so without it.
You've gone off track now and arguing details that don't help your case that nobody was arguing anyway.
You are just using the statement being ambiguous, so leading to your own interpretation as being possible and making more sense,
You just conceded the argument.
The main fact is it
isn't ambiguous; if mine makes more sense, by proxy yours makes less sense, so why would we take the interpretation that makes less sense with hundreds of contradictions instead of the zero contradiction one that checks out?
We would not.
the problem is that the official guide explicitly states that the army and the wizard, both were actually empowered by the triforce,
What guide? Please do not say Nintendo Power.
You know the rules, we have canon guidelines, and you also know that the actual current guidebooks that are made solely for lore purposes say
the opposite, mostly because I just pointed it out.
You need to stop cherry picking, there's much context and info outside of this that it's daunting, yet you're just ignoring it all.
so if the game has a dialogue line that can imply both my and your interpretation,
Mine isn't exactly an interpretation. It's outright confirmed.
I even pointed out three reasons why no less but you kind of just didn't reply to a single one.
but one is supported by a Canon source of the game,
Yes, that would be mine though, being supported by Hyrule Historia. Not yours supported by Nintendo Power written, by,
Well honestly, idk who these people even are bar like one or two, which of these writers actually have any say over canon?
the one that the supporting material well supports, should have the upper hand over the other "well but it can also be read as that" argument.
Unfortunately, that isn't quite the case.
Why'd you go your post without tackling each point or info I brought up?
I told you I'd appreciate it if you didn't just ignore most of it or the contradictions, if you can't actually reply properly and tackle everything...
I can't be expected to continuously argue with you if you just ignore every single thing that shuts down your argument, it's absurd, at that point we're not having a proper debate anymore.
Why ignore specific word nuance as well?
Also, I never stated that Agahnim is as powerful as Ganon, even though he is pretty powerful enough to surprise Ganon itself that Link could beat him.
You'd have to be though, otherwise
it doesn't matter.
Your argument now hinges on "Aghanim was empowered by it too", ignoring the fact that isn't true; you
just conceded even if it were, he
wouldn't be amped to the same degree as Ganon, and if he isn't amped to the
same exact degree as Ganon, it's completely useless for scaling to the threshold you want this Link to be.
You would need to prove how amped he is then if he isn't amped by the same amount, and the only thing you could prove is some negligible degree of tier 6 via scaling
off Link, ergo, Aghanim would only be tier 6 anyway in lack of options.
Do you actually need me to post the two times that the guide says that the army was empowered by triforce and that Agahnim was as well?
The guide? If you have a guide that passes canon wiki rules, is authorized by a legitimate source, and is consistent with more recent info, be my guest. I'd legitimately be interested in seeing it, might be helpful.
It best not be Nintendo Power though, that isn't allowed (unless you can prove canonical validity).
I will accept Encyclopedia or Historia, or
any guide noted within the Encyclopedia's table tho, they'd all be usable for canon.
I think you know this already, the thing is that you cannot disgard the guide when gives us the intented implication of a dialogue which you can give double meaning to.
I can when canon sources contradict that notion, and ironically when actual canon newer guides state the contrary.
But in that vain, why are
you ignoring guides? You've this entire conversation have time again ignored not one, not two, not even 3, but dozens of contradictions to your stance, and simply kept arguing anyway? Like how many is "enough"? There has to come a point where when everything is so against a specific stance that you acknowledge it might just not work.
You haven't actually given any new evidence either, almost every single thing you've brought up sabotages your argument, whether it be the moon pearl, the master sword, the silver arrows, etc.
They all confirm the exact opposite of what it is you want, that being Link, somehow, despite everything both in that very game, and everything since,
should not, and moreover was not, capable of contending with Ganon with the full Triforce.
I'd take over an official source instead of a possible other interpretation that makes semantic sense but that's it.
Then why are you arguing with about 100 sources that suggest the opposite of your suggestion?
It's not semantic, why did you ignore the two statements that say Ganon held it all himself, i.e. it would not have been spread among thousands of entities?
Why'd you ignore the Triforce doesn't even work like that either?
It'd only be a semantics issue if we didn't literally know these caveats were true, and them being true denies your interpretation outright, leaving the only other possible meaning to be what I said above.
If you're going to take an official
canon source over a interpretation, I expect you to be true to your word, as it stands the canon sources shut down this idea of yours provably.
So if a dialogue possibly supports them being empowered by triforce, and then that interpretation is proven to be true in the game official guide, why should I take the other sentence that makes sense semantically,
Because linguistically the sentence
doesn't say what you're trying to argue it does.
Because that
isn't how the Triforce works for that to even be an option.
Because
the game literally tells us Ganon took it all for himself.
Because
the actual real lore guide says Ganon took it all for himself.
Because
the game itself literally shows us blatantly that Ganon, who had it all, is incomparably far above every single other character in the game BECAUSE he had it all, ergo, the others couldn't have also had its power or they'd have been just as strong.
Because
if you argue the above point doesn't have to be the case and just as strong, then they're irrelevant for scaling anyway.
You'd take it because it's
not semantics. It's the plot and statements as a whole instead of taking one line within a vacuum and then framing it to mean something it can't possibly actually mean without breaking every single other piece of info we have.
I do repeat that, it's not like I am stupid and I don't get what you mean by that, it's just that the sentence can objectively mean both, but only one of the twos is supported by something official.
The sentence can only mean both
in a vacuum.
It
can not mean both in context though without breaking multiple rules and other established facts we have to work with.
You say "Only one of the two", yet you replied to me and nowhere in this reply did you comment on the fact that Hyrule Historia states the opposite?
Notwithstanding you can't even use the Nintendo Power, a fact I've been nudging at the last few posts due to our canon guidelines.
I'm going to be real with you, what's the goal here, what do you expect you to happen? This has been over a week now, I'm legitimately just kind of confused.
You're not getting cosmic Link with the information you've shown, I'm sorry dude but it just isn't possible, to get it you'd have to ignore:
Every single game since.
The direct sequel to that very game and it's extremely blatant scaling contradiction.
Thousands (non-hyperbole) of statements and showings conveying otherwise.
The very game itself stating Link can only defeat Ganon via soulhax and nothing he has can hurt him besides it.
You've made such arguments as the Moon Pearl (only exists for this argument as an excuse to justify Ganon becoming weaker, not Link scaling higher), the cloak (excuse for him not being hit), the MS (can't actually hurt Ganon only briefly stun him via funny hax), the arrows (hard confirmation Link needed duraneg hax to win, didn't win via stats), the MS in ALTTP being above ALBW (going by your own damage argument, they either tie or ALBW wins if you factor in their peak output), honestly I could go on. It's at the point you're now arguing Aghanim was amped by it, while also conceding he absolutely isn't on par with Ganon regardless is there's nothing to scale to even if he was.
I can't keep this up man, ya gotta stop ignoring everything that shuts this down, and if you want to continue it, find a new, recent proper explanation that justifies this scaling that coincides with all the contradictions.
