Dark Posted July 23, 2010 Report Share Posted July 23, 2010 Look, I have played a bunch of Zelda games. Like, almost all of them. Except the DS ones. And some really obscure ones. But I played most of them. Although I don't own any. Never got into buying from the franchise. But that is besides the point. Discuss the Zelda timeline theory. Damn, that is messed up. All I can say is that Wind Waker can't be part of the actual timeline, right? Since he didn't know he was the Hero of Time, and the Link in every other game knew that. Unless WW was at the beginning, but that still doesn't make much sense. Sure, granted the Link in WW was Young Link, but it doesn't tell you much about the backstory. They give you mythological crap in the prologue, telling about the Hero of Time locking away Ganon, but what game does that turn out to be? im are confuzzld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poseidon© Posted July 23, 2010 Report Share Posted July 23, 2010 In an interview that Nintendo Dream conducted with Eiji Aonuma in December 2006, he explained that the Zelda timeline contains two parallel worlds. The split in the timeline occurs during Ocarina of Time, when, at the end of the game, Link is sent back in time by Princess Zelda. Once returned to his original time, Link goes to see her again, and the result of this meeting is an alternate future in which the villain Ganondorf is arrested and tried by the Ancient Sages, which causes him to get banished to the Twilight Realm; Twilight Princess then occurs several hundred years after the Ocarina of Time child Link's era. Meanwhile, The Wind Waker occurs in the 'original' timeline, hundreds of years after the adventure of adult Link in Ocarina.[2][3] In any case, the creators maintain that the series has a set timeline, but due to the poor translation protocols in the 1990s and the constant debate over what counts as being canonical, the publicly available information is disputed and may not be reconciled any time soon. Eiji Aonuma has stated that he will do his best to connect the games together and hopefully reveal the timeline someday, and both he and Shigeru Miyamoto have publicly stated there is a master document containing the timeline. http://zelda.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline So, so far, all of it is basically speculation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted July 23, 2010 Report Share Posted July 23, 2010 Here is some new news about the time line. The new games takes place BEFORE OoT http://www.zeldauniverse.net/zelda-news/eiji-aonuma-skyward-sword-takes-place-before-ocarina-of-time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted July 24, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 24, 2010 Saying something is before OoT doesn't help, since OoT isn't the first game, so it could be anywhere in the timeline (ofc, before OoT). But yeah, it's so damn confusing. It gets even worse that there are like 15 games in the series. But I really like how some of the story elements do link up. But not well enough to make a timeline. D': Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAG Posted July 24, 2010 Report Share Posted July 24, 2010 Here is some new news about the time line. The new games takes place BEFORE OoT http://www.zeldauniverse.net/zelda-news/eiji-aonuma-skyward-sword-takes-place-before-ocarina-of-time “Yes' date=' there is a master timeline, but it is a confidential document! The only people who have access to that document are myself, Mr. Miyamoto, and the director of the [current'] title [at the time]. We can’t share it with anyone else!”Ooooooooooh...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mehmani Posted July 24, 2010 Report Share Posted July 24, 2010 It's just confusing and hotly debated. Who really cares? The Zelda games are fantastic and I'm happy with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icy Posted July 24, 2010 Report Share Posted July 24, 2010 It's just confusing and hotly debated. Who really cares? The Zelda games are fantastic and I'm happy with that. This. I treat every Zelda game like a New Final Fantasy. Great Gameplay, Great Story (for its game) and excellent presentation (usually). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiyo Posted July 24, 2010 Report Share Posted July 24, 2010 This is what I think, but as I've only played AlttP and PH, I'm basing this on what I've heard. OoT > MM > TP > LoZ > AoL > AlttP > OoA/OoS > MC > FS > FSA > WW > PH OoT seems to be the first, as the next few (MM, TP, WW) games all seem to happen after it.MM is obviously next.TP is said to have happened a hundred years after OoT (if what I've heard is right).LoZ then seems to be next, based on the games after it (AoL, ALttP).AoL is obviously after it.AlttP seems to be the next, as Miyamoto said it's AoL's sequel.OoA/OoS then MC should be next, as neither make use of the Master Sword, and ALttP's ending stated "The Master Sword forever sleeps in the Lost Woods" or something, and the geography is similar to AlttP's.Then come FS and FSA.WW is technically towards the end, as Hyrule is pretty much sunken beneath the great sea and is deserted by this time.And finally, WW's sequel, PH, should be last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted July 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 Yes, there is a master timeline Damn. It's just confusing and hotly debated. Who really cares? The Zelda games are fantastic and I'm happy with that. It makes you think critically' date=' even though it is the stupidest thing to debate about. Pretty much shows off your Zelda knowledge. =P This is what I think, but as I've only played AlttP and PH, I'm basing this on what I've heard. OoT > MM > TP > LoZ > AoL > AlttP > OoA/OoS > MC > FS > FSA > WW > PH OoT seems to be the first, as the next few (MM, TP, WW) games all seem to happen after it.MM is obviously next.TP is said to have happened a hundred years after OoT (if what I've heard is right).LoZ then seems to be next, based on the games after it (AoL, ALttP).AoL is obviously after it.AlttP seems to be the next, as Miyamoto said it's AoL's sequel.OoA/OoS then MC should be next, as neither make use of the Master Sword, and ALttP's ending stated "The Master Sword forever sleeps in the Lost Woods" or something, and the geography is similar to AlttP's.Then come FS and FSA.WW is technically towards the end, as Hyrule is pretty much sunken beneath the great sea and is deserted by this time.And finally, WW's sequel, PH, should be last. How the hell is OoT first? I never understood that at all. :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiyo Posted July 25, 2010 Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 It's what it seems like to me, but remember, I've based this mostly on what I've read and heard from friends.But according to Zeldapedia, most fans say OoT is first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted July 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 I know most people say it's first, but unless I am confusing the plot, it can't be. Was OoT the game where you can switch between Old Link and Young Link? And after the game ended, Old Link was sent back to the past to live out his childhood (as Young Link)? If that's the case, that "living of his childhood" had to grow out to be another game, but the Young Link in OoT had to come from somewhere, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Berserker- Posted July 25, 2010 Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiyo Posted July 25, 2010 Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 I did some more research, and apparently Ocarina of Time caused a big timesplit, literally.The unaltered timeline, which is adult Link's future, leads to Wind Waker and then Phantom Hourglass.The altered timeline, which is the saved child Link's future, leads directly to Majora's Mask, and then Twilight Princess, then the remaining games.Also, Eiji Anouma stated that Four Swords was the "oldest tale in Hyrule", along with FSA. It would seem that MC happens a long time before either of the games, though. The revised timeline would be: ---------------------OoT Adult Link > WW > PHMC > FS > FSA >---------------------OoT Child Link > MM > TP > LoZ > AoL > ALttP > LA > OoA/OoS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted July 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 That makes a lot, lot more sense to me. Since there is no way the timeline could be straight, seeing as how two Links were created from OoT. But, in the grand scheme of things, where is PH compared to OoA/OoS? And does that mean that every game after OoT (within the splits) did not take place in the same time period? Otherwise it's probable that Link would have met Link. :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiyo Posted July 25, 2010 Report Share Posted July 25, 2010 It depends on how long it is between OoT Adult and WW. I'd say a few centuries, since Hyrule is pretty much sunken and almost completely forgotten. So not too far apart. Well, so far only the two cel-shaded games break away from the original timeline. All but those two took place on one, big timeline.So unless Link can go somehow go through alternate futures, I doubt they'd meet each other. (Though that'd make for some weird crossover fanfiction :P) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Headmaster Monokuma Posted July 26, 2010 Report Share Posted July 26, 2010 I'm too lazy to come up with my own theory, but it is an interesting topic. But then again, I don't care if there is a timeline or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.