Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Battle Quest
Shouldn't we put the bosses of this game?--Jigglypuff123 22:13, 27 November 2012 (UTC)MEEPA PIZZA!
- Well...I haven't played the game, but if there ARE bosses in this game, then of course we should add them! If you have an info of them, then feel free to create or edit the necessary articles for that. :] --Dany36 22:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Well,I have seen the bosses in this game, yet i have no visible pictures. Idk where to get get pictures, but that will get done as soon as possible! :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jigglypuff123 (talk) 21:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Shouldn't the game be set as ambiguously canon? (like Ancient Stone Tablets), they both feature a character similar to Link in a completely new plot, and as far as I know the game has not been confirmed non-canon.--LordM (talk) 12:30, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- There's no real plot to the game as such, it's just a series of set pieces. If I remember correctly, all the Nintendo Land games are described as attractions, and all the characters within it are just representations, which is why everything has a makeshift look. You play as a Mii "taking on the role" of Link, I think is what's said. It's about as canon as Super Smash Bros., in that while the trophy descriptions and character behavior might include potentially canon information, the game itself is not canon to the Zelda series. The "plot" such as it is is just a cute nod to the Zelda series. AST is somewhat similar in that you play as an avatar on the BS-X system and then enter the game, but in that game you actually enter the real Zelda world and from that point on the game is played as a straight Zelda game set as a direct sequel to ALttP. It also at least got a mention in Hyrule Historia.
- Also, if Battle Quest was canon, then the other games in Nintendo Land would be too, and they're very much not. Basically they're attractions run by Monita and shouldn't be taken as genuine crossovers. ※Fizzle (talk) 14:36, 6 December 2013 (UTC)