|
|
Post by Sqrt2 on Mar 4, 2008 8:15:33 GMT -5
I'm still going for the 'current DK = the grown up DK Jr' theory despite this proof. Not that it matters much anyway, as I find the whole thing completely trivial!
|
|
|
|
Post by Spud on Mar 4, 2008 10:43:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by TV Eye on Mar 4, 2008 11:35:18 GMT -5
That page is confusing for me. What is it I'm looking at? |
|
|
|
Post by Spud on Mar 4, 2008 11:53:58 GMT -5
That page is confusing for me. What is it I'm looking at? Err, that would be a wikipedia page edit history. Let me give you some of the highlights.
It's a complete retcon. Interviews have indicated that Cranky being DK's father rather than grandfather is an intentional change, not an accident, and has not been contradicted since (except in ports)
Argh, use BOTH and stop being conclusive when there's no definite answer! Your only proof is the dialogue of Donkey Kong 64, for crying out loud!
Son can be used to refer to a younger male, it doesn't necisarily mean that he was saying he was his father
No it can't be suggested because it isn't true. That was Donkey Kong and his younger self.
There is no proof of that really. All babies were bibs.
Unsourced; also it was the manuals themselves that said he was DK's grandfather, so it must be faulty.
emoved statement due to it being debatable. Keep Wikipedia neutral. Also, the DKC manual said Cranky was his grandfather... Pre-DK64, Cranky was considered grandfather of DK, Diddy, AND Dixie.
Cranky *is* the original Donkey Kong- this is stated explicity in the manual for Donkey Kong Land.
THERE. Now let's keep it like that since that gets to the point. As for the grandfather thing, "Son" isn't tangible proof when it doesn't necessarily mean that, and profiles and other games state it..
Well, it's a possibility. Enspecially since apes age faster than humans.
It's not a contradiction. Rare says it, Nintendo says otherwise. Nintendo never contradicted themselves, because they do not look through the manual to check if the content is to their liking.
It's freaking Wikipedia. |
|
|
|
Post by TV Eye on Mar 4, 2008 12:00:59 GMT -5
lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Koopaul on Mar 4, 2008 15:12:05 GMT -5
I wish people would let the old canon die, and concentrate on DK's future.
|
|
|
|
Post by Game Guru on Mar 4, 2008 15:20:45 GMT -5
Trying to make since of Mario Continuity is like trying to make sense of Doctor Who's continuity. It's pointless and will give you a headache.
|
|
|
|
Post by Manspeed on Mar 4, 2008 16:29:32 GMT -5
Too bad this is Donkey Kong continuity. He has his own franchise, you know.
|
|
|
|
Post by Spud on Mar 4, 2008 16:37:17 GMT -5
Too bad this is Donkey Kong continuity. He has his own franchise, you know. Donkey Kong Continuity relies partially on the Mario Continuity just as the Yoshi Continuity and (for some part) the Wario Continuity do. |
|
|
|
Post by Luke Groundwalker on Mar 4, 2008 16:56:36 GMT -5
Nintendo: Assured to have a true continuity in their games.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arcadenik on Mar 4, 2008 17:08:03 GMT -5
Cranky = Classic DK? DK = Not classic DK? I am sorry but I do not buy that. It simply makes no sense. If Cranky = Classic DK and Mario = Jumpman.... why isn't Mario an old retired carpenter? We mustn't forget Pauline. In Mario vs. Donkey Kong 2, Mario sent the Mini-Marios to save Pauline from DK (who is apparently not classic DK but DK Jr.'s son).... why didn't Mario and Pauline age like classic DK did? If Baby DK is really the not-classic DK and he is DK Jr.'s son, the why did an adult Mario fight baby DK Jr. in Donkey Kong Jr.? I am supposed to buy that this baby DK Jr. aged so fast and had a son named DK who aged so fast he is Mario's age? If Baby DK is really the classic DK, meaning he is Baby Cranky... why did Baby Cranky age so fast to the point he is an elderly gorilla when Baby Mario, Baby Luigi, Baby Peach, Baby Bowser, and Baby Wario aged at the same rate? I am sorry but that statement is inaccurate.... I guess Meta Knight really did debut in Kirby Super Star and not Kirby's Adventure and that the Master Sword did originate in The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time and not The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2008 17:22:47 GMT -5
Hey, Nik? You're not helping.  Have your opinions, don't be an assclown about them.
As for me, I'm more than willing to accept that some Nintendo franchises have continuity (Metroid, Pikmin, Pokémon) and some don't (Mario, Kirby, Donkey Kong). S'all there is to it. Games don't need to be cohesive to be fun.
|
|
|
|
Post by Manspeed on Mar 4, 2008 19:00:56 GMT -5
Taking SSB into account, it could be said that each of Nintendo's worlds has their own time streams that advance idenpendently of one another, thus allowing time to pass more quickly in some worlds than in others. It makes it easer to reason why Mario fights one Link in Melee then two more Links in Brawl.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arcadenik on Mar 4, 2008 19:09:10 GMT -5
Taking SSB into account, it could be said that each of Nintendo's worlds has their own time streams that advance idenpendently of one another, thus allowing time to pass more quickly in some worlds than in others. It makes it easer to reason why Mario fights one Link in Melee then two more Links in Brawl. Yes. I think no one was arguing that. Mario, DK, Yoshi, and Wario all take place in the same world therefore these four franchises must follow the same time stream... which is why DK = Not Classic DK makes absolutely no sense when you factor in Mario, Wario, and Yoshi's franchises. If DK was a standalone franchise in its own world (like Pikmin or Zelda), then DK = Not Classic DK would have made sense since you don't have to factor in Mario's age (why should I when Mario, Wario, and Yoshi are nonexistent in DKC games?) |
|
|
|
Post by Dasher Misire on Mar 4, 2008 19:18:01 GMT -5
Well think about it. Monkeys age faster than humans. They don't live to sixty something, so Cranky probably aged quicker. Then again YIDS is hard to make sense with.
DK series is completely separate from Mario series so please don't say they're the same. Paon's games show the Kongs live on Earth (more realistic planet than Mario's world, anyways). I always assumed much like the American Mario backstories, DK's world is connected to Mario's world via warp pipes and zones. Baby DK prolly grew up on Mario's and ended up in his, and made himself king of an island. If Mario went to that world and in the Brooklyn there, then he and Pauline went to the island at a new construction site, and Cranky got angry at the construction on HIS turf.
I'm gonna say DK right now is DK Jr, and the continuity of is it the grandson or the son is a bit hazy due to Rare's retcon. But yeah, either goes, as long as we know Cranky's the original DK.
As for Smash, why is Ness around Lucas? I'd say the characters enter the tournament and will come from different worlds, dimensions (the game Pokemon and the anime ones that are Mewtwo and Lucario, since they talk with their anime voices and say things that would directly connect them to the anime ones), timelines (TP Link from the main Zelda timeline and Toon Link from thefuture timeline), and years (OoT Zelda characters and TP ones, Ness and Lucas). They're invited and brought in from different times and such. ATs could reason the same. If Roy was in and got sliced by an 18 year old Lyn when she's got to be in her 30's in Fire Emblem 6, clearly there are time differences.
|
|
Have your opinions, don't be an assclown about them.