BS-Zelda FAQ

1, Who was involved in the creation of the BS-Zelda games? Were they really broadcasted over satellite?
2, Were the last levels and Ganon's lair created by fans?
3, What about the rumored Map2
4, Were the players awarded for their score?
5, Do these games count as "canon"? Or were they just made for fun and not meant to be a serious addition to the Zelda series?

Not just everybody can answer these interesting questions, so I decided to write this little FAQ and share what I have learned.

Who created the BS-Zelda games?

Some believe Bandai made the BS Zelda games. I dont. Unfortunately most of these games (at least as we can play them) don't have credits sequences at the end (the list of voice actors for BS Zelda Kodai no Sekiban doesnt help). However I'm pretty sure Nintendo made the BS Zelda games (and others like the various BS Mario) themselves.
I don't think Bandai's involvement with the development of the BS-X peripheral can be used as indication that they were also responsible for the games, consider in this sense that the Satellaview was (I'm pretty sure) Nintendo's idea in the first place, and note the number of Nintendo games to make it on the BS-X (nearly every franchise appeared on it, could Bandai really make -all- of those?). In several of these games Nintendo goes as far as to credit St. Giga and thus, through it, the company that allowed these games to be weekly broadcasted on satellite for a limited time. But they do not credit Bandai, who made the receiver device. Perhaps it was just to avoid such confusion, being Bandai a software house of its own.

Furthermore, what of those games by other software houses like Square?
They couldn't have been made by Bandai. Some of these games were also completely new and they were not credited as Bandais; like Nintendo's Sutte Hakkun or Square's Treasure Conflix.

Were the last levels and Ganon's lair created by fans?

All BS Zelda games were in fact completed in Japan, the reason we needed to patch BS Zelda to get to the last levels is because most emulators play this game as week 3 out of 4 (while others will run the game as week 2).

But despite the above, this was either really week 4 or (perhaps because the game was an original creation) each week did in fact contain the whole thing. Why otherwise would we find the tiles for Ganon and his lair into it? On that note, I can't easily give you irrefutable proof of this, but Roto did not create the last part of the game out of nothing, he merely unlocked it. I can say this because he told Con, because of the tiles I mentioned above and because before releasing his patch he hacked a save state that allowed people to fight Ganon, and I don't think it would be possible to program the whole final battle sequence into a save state.

However, I can see why people would believe the games to be incomplete. I myself was perplexed when I learned that there was no final dungeon and that after collecting the eight Triforce parts youd just go fight Ganon. At first I thought that maybe we did not have week 4 and that if we did there would have been a ninth dungeon; but then I went to play AST and I found something that sustains my other guess on the subject: there is no final dungeon because of the Satellaview's nature. Each week contains two dungeons, no more no less. Thus Because there are eight Triforce pieces to divide into four weeks they could not stuff a ninth dungeon into the last one. The same happens in AST with its eight stone tablets. Perhaps this is because the programmers thought it would be too hard for players to run through more than two dungeons in one hour. But in conclusion we do know that weve got the complete game.

Wondering about how complete the game was brings us to the next topic.

The Map 2 mystery

Rumor has it that not only the game was completed and aired, Nintendo it seems actually released a second map (or should we say set of maps, considering that there are several in a Zelda game between overworld and dungeons). I call it a rumor because, sedly, we have no dump to point at and say "There's Map2", but so many sites about the Satellaview have listed this "Fourth Quest" that its existence seems almost certain. We can only hope somebody pulls another Starfox2 on us.

Scoring Awards

Another rumor likely to be true. Several BS games had a scoring system (among these Kodai no Sekiban); well it seems the scoring system wasn't used only to determine winners among groups of playuers, it is said that high scores would actually get you some prizes. What prizes could be won and other such details, we do not know present time.

Are the BS-Zelda serious and canon games?

I've heard of people who dismissed the games as soon as they saw the baseball cap, and certainly if I had a say in it, that would not have made it into the game.
But if we are to analyze the games for canon and seriousness, we ought to make a distinction between the two original Zelda games released on the BS-X.

The first, BS The Legend of Zelda, was subtitled The Third Quest, something that I idly did not point out until now for fear that some people may confuse it with the so called BS Zelda 3 (which is confusing in it's own right since Nintendo released what we call Zelda 3 on the Satellaview, as well as a similar all new game). Yet, I suppose this was a mistake on my part and that I should have spread the word long ago.

In any case, the game is clearly meant as a third quest to the first Zelda, so if you consider the second quest from the NES game canon, you may wish to apply the same conclusions to this game. BUT with the significant exception of its starring characters, because if we consider the second quest to be a retelling of the same story as the first one and apply the same reasoning to this third quest, then certainly the starring character cannot be different or it would be another story altogether. Therefore my opinion is the Satellaview mascottes only replaced Link in this case to promote the peripheral (after all BS The Legend of Zelda was its first game).

Ancient Stone Tablets (Kodai no Sekiban):
The situation is very different in Ancient Stone Tablets (AST). Even without a translation it was possible to guess that this game had an all new story that takes place not long after ALttP. Now that I do know the whole story this is a fact, no longer to be debated.
The premise is simple (and, we may add, so is the whole story) Link is no longer in Hyrule (which ties in with LA) and Zelda has a prophetic vision that warns her of an incoming danger. As the game begins a boy or girl is brought to Hyrule by a mysterious light. Zelda and Sahasrahla find this youth whom they shelter in Sahasrahla's abode next to the Eastern Palace. Once the youth wakes, Sahasrahla explains Zelda's prophecy and that she believes the light has brought them their savior. The youth accepts (silently) to collect the Stone Tablets as in Zelda's vision.

You can find out the rest in the Story section of The BS-Zelda Homepage, but this should be enough to see that this game is as serious as most Zelda games (I dare say more than TWW with its many goofs), despite the apparently silly premise of a boy from another dimension; ours if we are to understand that from the baseball cap.

Also as you can see it is closely tied with ALttP (same Hyrule with the same people who continue their lives after Link helped them) and with LA (because of Links absence).

It is certainly a shame that we did not get to play this game (though we are working on that... ;) but it is storyline-wise a relative little loss. Whether this be a good or bad thing it's up to debate. Personally I was hoping AST could help us connect ALttP with LoZ (for one by explaining how Ganon was revived in the latter), but it is not so as the game is only connected to those of its same generation.

In conclusion, I would consider both BS Zelda games as "canon with a grain of salt". That is, canon as long as they don't contradict other Zelda games. By which principle we are, for example, to disregard the fact that the starring character of the first game is not Link (a specific case that, of course, doesn't apply to the other one as it is a new story in which the hero not being Link is, in fact, a plot point).

But that example aside, I see very little that could be considered conflicting (less in fact than in more important games, probably because as said this games do not tie in with those set in other ages) and the only reason I say this, is because they are so very little known that Nintendo might choose to deliberately ignore and contradict them (heck, you could say they do so with famous Zelda games too...).

While debating their being canon, these games have often been compared to Soul Calibur II. Many have rejected it because it doesn't seem to be a serious Zelda game, partly because it has Link traveling to a different world. But now, learning that there's an earlier example of such a thing (in AST) perhaps we'll be more open to the idea.

It could be said that the games are akin yet opposite: in one we have a youth of our world in a Zelda game, in the other we have a character from a Zelda game in our world (emphasizing Zelda game as AST is not just in Hyrule, it also plays like any other adventure in it, unlike SCII).
And in fact I have adopted a similar criteria when working them into my story section: as I did with AST, I accepted SCII as part of the story as long as it doesn't contradict an actual Zelda game. For example, I like SCII because it answers two long standing questions: "was Agahnim a real person?" and "was the Magic Sword actually the Master Sword?". Again both of these I take as good answers only for as long as a full fledged Zelda game doesn't come and prove the contrary (hopefully never).
Another objection against Soul Calibur II is that it seems to have a "generic" Link, that is a Link with the look he had in OoT and the background story from ALttP. This understandably doesnt sit well with concerned fans of the Zelda series, but on the other hand, the Four Swords games have a Link that looks exactly like the one in TWW, yet it appears clearly that they are not the same Link. So it would seem that Nintendo is simply getting sloppy/lazy these days.
Furthermore, because this doesn't play as a Zelda game and is a cross over with another series, one may not consider it fully part of the Zelda series, so I keep it on its own, not among the story synopsis and timeline. You could say I take it as canon with a whole handful of salt!

Made in 2004 by Duke Serkol (dukeserkol@bszelda.zeldalegends.net), Webmaster of the BS-Zelda Homepage (http://www.bszelda.zeldalegends.net).

General: [Main] [BS-X] [Info] [About Emulation] [E-Mail] [E-Mail Form] [Zelda Storyline] [Forum] [Chat]
BS The Legend of Zelda - Map1: [Screens] [Files] [Help] [Ideas]
BS The Legend of Zelda - Map2: [Screens] [Files] [Help] [Ideas]
BS The Legend of Zelda Ancient Stone Tablets: [Screens] [Files] [Help] [Ideas]
BS The Legend of Zelda Triforce of the Gods (ALttP Jap): [Screens] [Files]
Misc: [BS Zelda on PC] [Other Games] [Links] [Webrings] [Articles] [Hall of Fame] [Site History] [Awards] [Mailing List]