Hyrule Historia: A Timeline for the Trash

by Justin Berube - April 24, 2013, 2:01 pm PDT
Total comments: 49

A look at one of the biggest letdowns in an otherwise-fantastic book.

When Hyrule Historia first released in Japan, I was highly skeptical of the official Zelda timeline it presented, but I managed to keep an open mind. I can’t read Japanese and decided to wait for a translated version that would, hopefully, explain specific confusing events in greater detail. Well, after having time to read the English translation of the book, cover to cover, I still feel the official Zelda timeline has two major flaws.

The Flaws

The first flaw that should be on everyone’s mind is the new Hero is Defeated timeline that supposedly takes place at the end of Ocarina of Time. Before Hyrule Historia was released, most Zelda fans were fully accepting of the fact that the end of Ocarina of Time split the timeline into two braches, the Adult Era and Child Eras. These can be seen in the book, and their branches make total sense. However, the third Hero is Defeated branch never takes place in any game and therefore is clearly nothing more than a terrible, completely unnecessary fabrication.

The second flaw also happens on the Hero is Defeated timeline, and its cause is a direct result of the error of this branch existing in the first place. According to Hyrule Historia, the Link in Ocarina of Time would have lost to Ganondorf in the final battle of the game. Therefore, everything else he did in Ocarina of Time would have happened exactly the way everyone remembers it.

The problem with this is that Link would have killed Kotake and Koume in the Hero is Defeated timeline. This causes a problem, since the twin witches appear again later in the same timeline in the Oracle games without any explanation that I know of.

The Secret Truth About the Hyrule Historia Timeline

Hyrule Historia also presents a hidden secret about the timeline I haven’t seen many people discussing at all. Eiji Aonuma is easily recognized as the number-two man in charge of the Zelda series, only falling behind series creator Shigeru Miyamoto. Importantly, though, Eiji Aonuma is credited as the Supervising Editor of the original Japanese edition of Hyrule Historia and Miyamoto was only given a special thanks. Let’s take a look at the Zelda games Aonuma has worked on according to Hyrule Historia.

Eiji Aonuma's Hyrule History

1998 - The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (Nintendo 64)

2000 - The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask (Nintendo 64)

2002 - The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker (Nintendo GameCube)

2003 - The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past & Four Swords (Game Boy Advance)

2004 - The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventures (Nintendo GameCube)

2004 - The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap (Game Boy Advance)

2006 - The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (Wii and Nintendo GameCube)

2007 - The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass (Nintendo DS)

2008 - Official Wii Zapper with Link's Crossbow Training (Wii)

2009 - The Legend of Zelda: Spirit Tracks (Nintendo DS)

2011 - The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D (Nintendo 3DS)

2011 - The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Anniversary Edition (DSiWare)

2011 - The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword (Wii)

Quite an impressive list of titles, but there is something notable. Not one Zelda title Aonuma worked on appears on the Hero is Defeated timeline. To me, this feels like Aonuma has taken much of my childhood and thrown it in a Zelda lore dumpster. Whether this is because he doesn’t enjoy those titles as much, or just isn’t comfortable enough with their lore to work them into his own main timelines, is something that has left me confused and hurt.

(Haha! Look what I did with the Zelda timeline!)

How to Easily Fix the Zelda Timeline

One of the worst parts of this timeline mess is that the fix is extremely simple. First, we just need to delete the Hero is Defeated timeline. Then, move all the games that appeared on the Hero is Defeated branch and put them in order, right after Four Swords Adventures, on the current end of the Child Era timeline. The resulting Child Era timeline would look as follows:

Majora’s Mask -> Twilight Princess -> Four Swords Adventures -> A Link to the Past -> Oracle of Seasons -> Oracle of Ages -> Link’s Awakening -> The Legend of Zelda -> Adventure of Link

This fix would solve both of my problems with the Hyrule Historia timeline. Firstly, it would eliminate the awful Hero is Defeated branch. Second, Link never defeated Kotake and Koume on the Child Era timeline, having been sent back to the past, so they are free to exist many years later.

The only question that would be present in this timeline is how Ganon escaped the seal of the Four Sword at the end of Four Swords Adventures and got sealed in the Sacred Realm before A Link to the Past. While this is a problem, other similar problems exist in the current timeline. For instance:

1. What are the details of what happened before Skyward Sword?

2. Will we learn more about the Hero of Men mentioned in The Minish Cap?

3. On the Adult Era timeline, how did Ganondorf escape the Sacred Realm and manage to cause chaos in The Wind Waker?

The point is there are many different questions people have concerning the specifics of events found in the Zelda timeline. As long as everything else adds up, I feel it’s OK to have a few holes that may someday be filled. However, making up events and causing even more problems is something that ticks me off.

Hope for the Future

My dreams of Nintendo fixing the timeline will, unfortunately, stay dreams for the foreseeable future. However, according to Hyrule Historia, pg. 68:

“This chronicle merely collects information that is believed to be true at this time, and there are many obscured and unanswered secrets that still lie within the tale. As the stories and storytellers of Hyrule change, so, too, does its history. Hyrule’s history is a continuously woven tapestry of events. Changes that seem inconsequential, disregarded without even a shrug, could evolve at some point to hatch new legends and, perhaps, change this tapestry of history itself.”

This passage gives me hope someone at Nintendo will someday fix the Hero is Defeated branch in a way similar to my own theory. Until then, I guess it’s up to fans to either accept or reject what has been written in the otherwise-great book that is Hyrule Historia.

Thanks to Dark Horse for providing the timeline image!

Images

Talkback

SesshaApril 24, 2013

Want some cheese with that whine?

LandStalkerNigelApril 24, 2013

              The "Link is defeated" timeline, I dont believe is trash. If one remembers the story of link to the past, Ganon was sealed away in the dark world by the seven sages. At the end of Ocarina of Time, thats what the seven sages did. Maybe during this "defeat" of Link, the seven sages still managed to do the seal anyway even though Link was killed just beforehand. Or maybe Link sacrificed himself in order for the seal to happen?
              With Kotake and Koume, I suppose an easy explanation is that they were barely defeated and ran off. Maybe this is actually the reason why Link was defeated as Kotake and Koume may have intervened with the fight between link and ganon. I suppose with this mindset, the actual difference between the timelines is whether or not Link actually killed the twins.
              I might be reaching a bit with these ideas but I figured why not try :P

syn4aptikDave Mellert, Associate EditorApril 24, 2013

I hate Nintendo for releasing that timeline at all. The whole past-time of trying to make sense of the Zelda games by connecting them through a timeline needs to die a horrible death.

Quote from: LandStalkerNigel

              The "Link is defeated" timeline, I dont believe is trash. If one remembers the story of link to the past, Ganon was sealed away in the dark world by the seven sages. At the end of Ocarina of Time, thats what the seven sages did. Maybe during this "defeat" of Link, the seven sages still managed to do the seal anyway even though Link was killed just beforehand. Or maybe Link sacrificed himself in order for the seal to happen?
              With Kotake and Koume, I suppose an easy explanation is that they were barely defeated and ran off. Maybe this is actually the reason why Link was defeated as Kotake and Koume may have intervened with the fight between link and ganon. I suppose with this mindset, the actual difference between the timelines is whether or not Link actually killed the twins.
              I might be reaching a bit with these ideas but I figured why not try :P:

Hyrule Historia states, if I'm not mistaken, that the Sages did seal Ganondorf away after Link's death on the Hero is Defeated timeline. Still this doesn't change the fact that Link's defeat was completely made up for the book and anyone that plays the games and reads the manuals would never in a million years come up with it.

Your Kotake and Koume theory still doesn't hold up though as in Ocarina of Time you see their ghosts, unwillingly, raise up to the heavens. Careful reading of the book, as stated in my editorial, states that Link lost after their defeat. Therefore I really can't see how the twins could have been in the final battle.

Not trying to be a jerk with my response. Just stating some things to help clear up any confusion. If you have a different theory you prefer, that's fine.

oldscoolApril 24, 2013

I haven't purchased the english version of Hyrule Historia, but in the Japanese version, Aounuma made the following statement:

“While reading over The Full History of Hyrule, it’s possible that some parts may look contradictory… I’d like to ask everyone just to enjoy the book and to be broad-minded, and to think that those parts are the way they are because of the way Zelda games are developed.” (translated by Patas and posted at Glitterberri)

Also, the argument that Aounuma has not made a game in that fork of the timeline is likely negated by the new 3DS sequel to A Link to the Past.  Assuming he is involved, does that mean he's going dumpster diving?

zenspathApril 24, 2013

He may have been involved in putting the book together, but I honestly doubt they would not consider Miyamoto for the timeline as he was the one that started the series in the first place.  The timeline makes sense to me as you are looking at two worlds that are created if you succeed, and then the story of what happens when you die.  I love the fact they actually went with that because not every story has to end happily and this goes to show the consequences of that final failure. 


I just find it odd that a series that deals with everything from time travel, multiple universes, magic, etc is ok, but as soon as you put in a possible timeline people freak.  So the games are put into this line...does that go back and destroy your enjoyment of them anymore?


Heck, Zelda II can be taken the same way because if you beat the game, great, but if you die it says directly that Ganon has been revived.  It's just that in OoT you simply did not live through the final battle, but the sages were able to seal Ganon away along with the Triforce he now possessed.  This lead to the wars mentioned in the beginning of Link to the Past as well as its telling of the Sages sealing him in.  With the Triforce, he was able to bend the Darkworld to his will which is why it was so twisted and changed anyone that went there.  This actually makes perfect sense to me because while he "won", he still lost by being sealed away in another dimension.


Now as for the witch sisters, I went back and watched the fight and the conversation at the end.  The sisters don't "die" like any normal character where they burn up or explode...they simply get "halos".  They are completely aware of what they are doing and as they go up, they say they will come back and haunt you.  Being 400 year old witches (or 380 depending on which was right lol) I could see them finding a way back or just haunting new bodies later on....but honestly characters show back up in later games in a series all of the time so I wouldn't let it mess up your enjoyment. 

PokemonTrainerZApril 24, 2013

You know the timeline wouldn't have been made if people didn't complain about Zelda not having a timeline. Honestly it doesn't matter, a Zelda game can happen during any period of time since each incarnation of Link is a reincarnation of the original hero, except for Majora's Mask of course. Thus to be complaining about the timeline itself is just a waste of time. We play Zelda games to be entertained not to keep track of the course of time.

Quote from: oldscool

I haven't purchased the english version of Hyrule Historia, but in the Japanese version, Aounuma made the following statement:

“While reading over The Full History of Hyrule, it’s possible that some parts may look contradictory… I’d like to ask everyone just to enjoy the book and to be broad-minded, and to think that those parts are the way they are because of the way Zelda games are developed.” (translated by Patas and posted at Glitterberri)

Also, the argument that Aounuma has not made a game in that fork of the timeline is likely negated by the new 3DS sequel to A Link to the Past.  Assuming he is involved, does that mean he's going dumpster diving?

I knew someone was going to bring that up since Aonuma is working on A Link to the Past 2, but I actually wrote this before the new game was announced. Even then I still stick to my editorial since it focuses on the book before A Link to the Past 2 was announced.

One could argue that Miyamoto, the man who was talking about how great a 3D version of a Link to the Past would be, told Aonuma to go with it. Is Aonuma dumpster diving? I don't know, but it will be his first game on this timeline which I find interesting.

UncleBobRichard Cook, Guest ContributorApril 24, 2013

You know, I always hated the split time line theory.  Many people argued with me and said that it was official because Nintendo said so.  I said it was stupid, because, why stop at two then?  Anything you have trouble fitting in somewhere, just create a new timeline!

Funny.  Now, we have three.

At some point after I argued that the split time line was stupid and before this book came out, I simply accepted the fact that there is no real time line, and while there are some connections between some of the games, they simply aren't intended to flow together.

The biggest flaw with this time line is that Wind Waker directly references Majora's Mask.  Which, according to the Wind Waker timeline, didn't happen.

Thus, this proposed time line is bunk.

FjurbanskiApril 24, 2013

Where does wind waker directly reference majora's mask? I can't remember... I know it directly references Ocarina because it shows the sages in stained glass where you get the master sword, but I don't remember any Majora references.

TJ SpykeApril 24, 2013

Quote from: Fjurbanski

Where does wind waker directly reference majora's mask? I can't remember... I know it directly references Ocarina because it shows the sages in stained glass where you get the master sword, but I don't remember any Majora references.

I was thinking the same thing, I dont recall any MM references. In fact, I have never seen anyone  before say there was a MM reference in TWW.

UncleBobRichard Cook, Guest ContributorApril 24, 2013

Wind Waker Tingle makes references to Majora's Mask Tingle - Including the "Legend of the Fairy" side-quest with the Tingle Tuner.

broodwarsApril 24, 2013

Quote from: TJ

Quote from: Fjurbanski

Where does wind waker directly reference majora's mask? I can't remember... I know it directly references Ocarina because it shows the sages in stained glass where you get the master sword, but I don't remember any Majora references.

I was thinking the same thing, I dont recall any MM references. In fact, I have never seen anyone  before say there was a MM reference in TWW.

I believe there was a line of dialogue that stated that the Hero of Time left the Kingdom for adventures elsewhere (and because of this, he wasn't there when Ganon invaded again), and that when he did his Triforce piece was scattered across the land. I think that's as close as Wind Waker comes to a direct reference to Majora's Mask's intro that Link left Hyrule to find someone important to him.

pokepal148April 24, 2013

who cares about tingle, he probably had too much pixie dust for his own good at the time

Quote from: broodwars

Quote from: TJ

Quote from: Fjurbanski

Where does wind waker directly reference majora's mask? I can't remember... I know it directly references Ocarina because it shows the sages in stained glass where you get the master sword, but I don't remember any Majora references.

I was thinking the same thing, I dont recall any MM references. In fact, I have never seen anyone  before say there was a MM reference in TWW.

I believe there was a line of dialogue that stated that the Hero of Time left the Kingdom for adventures elsewhere (and because of this, he wasn't there when Ganon invaded again), and that when he did his Triforce piece was scattered across the land. I think that's as close as Wind Waker comes to a direct reference to Majora's Mask's intro that Link left Hyrule to find someone important to him.

I always thought that was a reference to Princess Zelda sending Link back in time, and thus to the Child Era timeline. Because he wasn't there he couldn't come back to face Ganondorf.

UncleBobRichard Cook, Guest ContributorApril 25, 2013

Quote from: broodwars

I think that's as close as Wind Waker comes to a direct reference to Majora's Mask's intro that Link left Hyrule to find someone important to him.

You may have been typing this as I provided my info, but this is incorrect.  In one of the Tingle Tuner side-quests, you learn the "Legend of the Fairy", which talks about a 35-year old man-who-wants-to-be-a-fairy and floats with a balloon who makes maps for the Hero of Time.

The Hero of Time is specifically Ocarina of Time Link (and thus, by extension, Majora's Mask Link).  The stuff being described is directly referencing events that happened in Majora's Mask well after the game started and Link entered Terminia.

KeyBillyApril 25, 2013

I like the timeline because it is a somewhat official way for us to think of the progression of the series and makes the Zelda universe richer, with a unified history.  I doubt that there is any proposed timeline that would avoid any contradictions.  Screenwriters seems to have trouble writing two hours of content without plot holes.  Rather than fret over it not being completely consistent, I choose to enjoy it and the thought put into it.

jaytalksApril 25, 2013

The "Hero is Defeated" has taken place many times in OoT for me, especially when I was younger. It was a pretty hard game back in the day. I don't see what makes the "Hero is Defeated" timeline such a bad timeline. Just because I don't beat a game, doesn't make me any less of a gamer. And just because Link fails in his quest to defeat Ganon, doesn't make him any less of a hero. In fact, dying to save the world makes him an even greater hero. I don't see what makes this timeline trash.

I think the answer to why the "Hero is Defeated" timeline exists is a bit more practical rather than being a slight on Aonuma's part. A Link to The Past never mentions Link or the Hero of Time, just that it was Knights of Hyrule. That is a pretty big omission, and make more sense to why the "Hero is Defeated" Timeline exists.

Also three equal branches follows one of the series motifs: a trio of existing forces. The timelines in a way each reflect a separate era where a different triangle of the triforce is dominant. In the "Hero is Defeated" Timeline, the triforce of power dominates as it leads to decline of Hyrule. The "Child Era" timeline follows the triforce of wisdom as its Zelda's powers that allow Link to become a child again. Wisdom allows Hyrule to defeat Gannondorf before his rise. Finally, the "Adult Era" timeline speaks of the legacy of heroes and courage, as its the timeline where Link truly defeats Gannon with his courage.

I don't have a strong response for the second flaw, other than Twinrova maybe being some type of reincarnation/ later generations. It is never stated how far apart LTTP is from OoT, other than it beings ages. Meaning probably a long time, and enough time for later generations to be born and take up the task of reviving Ganon.

For the Tingle/ MM/ WW thing, I never played the Tingle Tuner side-quests, but from the sound of it just a legend, which means its certainity is in doubt (at least within the Adult Era). It could be an echo of a story, heard across timelines and worlds. That is how great the Legend of Tingle is!

ShyGuyApril 25, 2013

It's a bunch of prequels. I want to see a Zelda game after The OG Legend of Zelda, when Christianity was introduced to Hyrule.

UncleBobRichard Cook, Guest ContributorApril 25, 2013

Quote from: jaytalks

For the Tingle/ MM/ WW thing, I never played the Tingle Tuner side-quests, but from the sound of it just a legend, which means its certainity is in doubt (at least within the Adult Era). It could be an echo of a story, heard across timelines and worlds. That is how great the Legend of Tingle is!

A Legend, eh?  Sorta like The Legend of Zelda? :D

Retro DeckadesApril 25, 2013

The one theory that I had hoped to be true was that both of the Oracle games took place at the end of different timelines, and that the conclusion of those games resulted in the split timeline once again converging. How that might exactly be explained, I don't know, but if they could have done it with any two games, it would have been those two.

SonofMrPeanutApril 25, 2013

Interestingly, I also did a 3-way split when designing a line back in 2009, also involving a decline of the kingdom leading to the NES Zelda games.  However, I'd never considered "Link being defeated" as a reason for one split to exist, and I don't feel it's even necessary.  The way I see it, the 3 lines are possibilities rather than parallel events that all occur.  One is informed by the past, one is informed by the future, and the flood scenario is an alternate version of either of the first two (in effect making 4 basic paths).  I never saw any form of a timeline being some strict history book where every game had an indisputable place, but I never bought the "Literal Legend Theory*" either.  It's somewhere in between:  There's a sense of connection between titles, but the inconsistencies between stories lend themselves to the "legend" aesthetic.  I also consider Tingle to be a 4th-Wall breaker who can be wherever and do whatever he wants.

While I'm reminiscing, the line I made ended up looking like a sword and shield going down and Ganon's trident going up.  Because of this, I called it the Sword-Trident Theory.


* Literal Legend Theory:  Every game involving Hyrule/Triforce/Demise/etc. is literally a single story told in different ways.  You can see why I don't lend this idea much creedence.

MagicCow64April 25, 2013

I think I'm a bit confused about the "Hero is defeated timeline." This is just supposed to be the outcome if Link had happened to lose at the end of OoT? Wouldn't every single game then have an alternate timeline where the player wussed out and never beat the final boss?

AdmanAbouApril 25, 2013

What about the timeline where Link is an eight year old girl who's brother got her to clock town and she only ever played minigames? I call it the "Second File Theory"

UncleBobRichard Cook, Guest ContributorApril 25, 2013

Quote from: SonofMrPeanut

I also consider Tingle to be a 4th-Wall breaker who can be wherever and do whatever he wants.

The major problem with a line of thinking like this is that it basically boils down to "Well, this is inconvenient for my personal theory wrong, so we'll just say it doesn't count for whatever reason."

If we're going to allow that, then one could just throw anything out the window that they don't like.

You can see why I don't lend this idea much credence. :D

Quote from: zenspath

He may have been involved in putting the book together, but I honestly doubt they would not consider Miyamoto for the timeline as he was the one that started the series in the first place.

I'm sure Miyamoto was consulted, but I have to think that Aonuma put together the timeline because Miyamoto probably doesn't care. He's often shown blatant disdain for series continuity (e.g. Star Fox 64 rewriting the Star Fox timeline, Yoshi's Island rewriting the Mario timeline) and story itself (e.g. removal of the story from Galaxy 2).

TJ SpykeApril 25, 2013

Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island expanded the Mario storyline by giving us background on their past, it didn't rewrite anything.

Quote from: TJ

Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island expanded the Mario storyline by giving us background on their past, it didn't rewrite anything.

For instance, in the original Super Mario Bros., Mario is an outsider who hears about the Mushroom People and their plight. In Yoshi's Island, he is dropped on the doorstep of a mushroom house as a baby.  There was also a TON of non-canon, but Nintendo-approved stuff (e.g. Mario is older than Luigi) that was internally consistent until Yoshi's Island came around.

TJ SpykeApril 25, 2013

YI doesnt change Mario not being older, even in twins one is technically older. And the manual for SMB says nothing about him being an outsider, just that he hears about their plight and decides to help. Within the limited canon of the games, YI does not contradict anything.

SonofMrPeanutApril 25, 2013

Quote from: UncleBob

Quote from: SonofMrPeanut

I also consider Tingle to be a 4th-Wall breaker who can be wherever and do whatever he wants.

The major problem with a line of thinking like this is that it basically boils down to "Well, this is inconvenient for my personal theory wrong, so we'll just say it doesn't count for whatever reason."

If we're going to allow that, then one could just throw anything out the window that they don't like.

You can see why I don't lend this idea much credence. :D

1.  I see what you did there. ;)


2.  Consider that Tingle is the only character I give this role to, as he explicitly mentions Majora's Mask in a line where that game may be skipped and the flood happens.  Sure this wasn't something Nintendo decided to go with, but again I've stated my line was a base set of lines (with a couple set games) for permutations to occur on, though I do tend to come up with similar orders for each.  However, MM is heavily hinted to occur prior to WW, so Tingle's explanation itself may be unnecessary.  Still, if any character would have that role it would be him. 


Too, given the fact that characters can be reincarnated over generations, that can explain multiple appearances like the Twinrova.  Rather than simply being the same Twinrova that were in OoT who we saw die, this could be a reincarnation of the sisters.

Quote from: TJ

YI doesnt change Mario not being older, even in twins one is technically older. And the manual for SMB says nothing about him being an outsider, just that he hears about their plight and decides to help. Within the limited canon of the games, YI does not contradict anything.

It's pretty well implied at the end of Donkey Kong '94 that when Mario and Pauline end up in the Mushroom Kingdom, he does not recognize the Super Mushroom power-up. You can argue lots of tiny technicalities, but it all flies in the face of what the established world was at the time.

TJ SpykeApril 25, 2013

Wouldn't that imply that DK94 is contradicting things? The Super Mushroom was first introduced in SMB, and was also in SMB:TLL, SMB3, and SMW (all of which came out before DK94). What does it have to do with SMW2:YI?

DK94 is an expansion of DK and thus takes place before all of those games in the timeline. The ending of that game links the story to the SMB series. YI came out after that.

And anyway, my main point is best summed up like this:

Quote from: Miyamoto]Our

Actually, this is a more broad quote:

Quote:

If you're familiar with things like Popeye and some of the old comic characters, you would oftentimes see this cast of characters that takes on different roles depending on the comic or cartoon. They might be businessman in one or a pirate in another. Depending on the story that was being told, they would change roles. So, to a certain degree, I look at our characters in a similar way and feel that they can take on different roles in different games. It's more like they're one big family, or maybe a troupe of actors.

You can see this idea reappear often in Miyamoto's games... even SMB3 was designed as if it was being played out on a stage.

I always thought the Zelda explanation of the hero stories being inconsistent because they're mutated retellings of mythology to be the most satisfactory explanation in that universe.

jaytalksApril 25, 2013

Quote from: MagicCow64

I think I'm a bit confused about the "Hero is defeated timeline." This is just supposed to be the outcome if Link had happened to lose at the end of OoT? Wouldn't every single game then have an alternate timeline where the player wussed out and never beat the final boss?

Yes, that is a distinct possibility considering the game over screen in AoL. However, the Zelda timeline consists of only the legends that have been told so far. Also it's not the player wussing out. It's Link dying a hero's death.

The reason why a timeline exists is to create a great tapestry that the series can play off of. Although a retelling of the legend makes a lot of sense, as a series of video games, it needs to be timeline because they have to build off each other. The games have to matter in relation to each other, whether they are prequels and sequels.

I don't think of Tingle as a fourth wall breaker but just as a fun character. I mean his origin is just ridiculous. He's supposed to be this big joke in this legendary series. Don't take anything he says to seriously; people do that in the US so they absolutely hate him.

azekeApril 25, 2013

I don't understand people seriously debating on Zelda timeline and on coherency in Mario world.

AnGerApril 25, 2013

If I were someone working at Nintendo, I'd look at the timeline, say "wtf is this?" and then proceed to tell the people working the Zelda IP that they should really rethink what they're doing.

Is a timeline really that necessary for Zelda to work? I believe it is not. And if it were necessary, Nintendo would be better off if they did it right from scratch than to try making the puzzle fit in a way that is based a lot on hypothetical scenarios.

But, if you ask me, the timeline should be the least thing of concern for Nintendo – or rather, the Zelda team – right now.

SundoulosApril 25, 2013

I don't really care about the connective tissue between the Zelda games anymore.  After TP, it became extremely evident that they didn't really care about connecting the games in a truly coherent way...outside of placing a few references in each one.  I like time-travel and time stories in fantasy/sci-fi, but it is too easily used as a cheat to resolve sloppy writing.

The thing that irritates me to the most about many of the games lately is that they keep trying to re-origin the origin story.  Originally, both Link To The Past and Ocarina of Time both did this (with respect to the games that had been released before them), and the tradition has continued with The Minish Cap, Four Swords, and Skyward Sword.  At some point, I found that I really just didn't care anymore, and that's sad because I was to be obsessed with the Legend of Zelda  throughout my childhood.  I used to buy all the comic books (both the Valiant comics and versions in Nintendo Power; I even watched the awful cartoon,

In retrospect, I have a lot of respect for the chances taken in Wind Waker because it introduced real change in the Zelda Universe.  It was also left a lot of mysteries and questions about the tragedy of Hyrule unanswered, which I think gave the game a good bit of narrative resonance.  I wish that they would continue to go that route, mostly because I feel that continuing to write stories about Hyrule's past are just a way to avoid change.

syn4aptikDave Mellert, Associate EditorApril 25, 2013

OMG you all are NOT looking to tie together the Mario games into one timeline are you? Zelda was bad enough ><


There is some serious ASD going on in this thread ;)

azekeApril 25, 2013

Quote from: syn4aptik

OMG you all are NOT looking to tie together the Mario games into one timeline are you? Zelda was bad enough ><


There is some serious ASD going on in this thread ;)

Too late.

ShyGuyApril 25, 2013

Super Mario 2 (USA) was a dream
Super Mario 3 was a stage play.

PlugabugzApril 25, 2013

Can we just do a Fringe and put it all in a parallel universe?

FjurbanskiApril 25, 2013

I thought they were all toys controlled by a sentient glove... : /

Ian SaneApril 25, 2013

I felt the timeline, which at that point was pretty much entirely unofficial and pieced together by the fans, made sense until Wind Waker's dumb stupid flood fucked it all up.  The timeline was fine until Nintendo actually paid attention to it and then they fucked it to all hell.

I always found the OoT split to be unnecessarily complicated.  I never for a second after beating that game thought there was any other option than "fuck yeah, I saved the day".  The hero is defeated?!  Who the fuck comes up with that nonsense?!  Couldn't I come up with a "what if you lost?" option for EVERY game if I wanted?  It's just idiotic.  And then kid and adult Link have their own timeline?  Where does that come from?  At the end of OoT it seems that I'm a kid again and I've stopped Ganon so why would there be two timelines?  Why couldn't they just keep it simple?  I never thought at the time "oh I'm a kid again, so I guess the stuff I do as an adult doesn't happen so the whole problem with Ganon starts again."  Why would anyone assume that?  The obvious implication is that what I have done has stopped Ganon when I'm a kid and everything is now fine.

I think all this complication came from Nintendo, for whatever dumb reason, wanting a flooded world for WW and the huge problem that stems from fucking inserting a worldwide flood in the middle of timeline involving dry land on both sides.  And for what?  The big blue ocean of nothing SUCKS and sailing is a huge chore.  Gee, thanks for destroying the whole Zelda timeline for that.

AnGerApril 25, 2013

Quote from: Plugabugz

Can we just do a Fringe and put it all in a parallel universe?

Hasn't that already happened?

I always liked the theory that they're all slightly different retellings of the same story, like the Legend of Zelda is an oral tradition passed through the ages that changes a bit every time someone tells it.

pokepal148April 25, 2013

You want to make a better timeline be my guest...

pokepal148May 01, 2013

http://www.halolz.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/halolz-dot-com-legendofzelda-missinglink.jpg

EdMcMuffinNovember 16, 2013

Here is an alternate reason for the decline timeline.
When Link wins and is sent back as a child, this creates two distinct timelines, also two distinct realities. Sending Link back in time would not take him out of the adult timeline, as he would just grow up as normal, so the only other option is that it creates a rift, meaning that there are 2 new dimensions. When child Link is sealed in by the master sword, wakes as an adult, yet comes back as a child by placing the master sword back, this event creates a new third rift timeline in which adult Link doesn't defeat Ganon because he went back to his own time/dimension, and the world is left without a hero, much like the timeline where Ganon is defeated and Link is sent back. Without a hero to fight him, Ganon is victorious, he gets the other triforce pieces, I'm guessing when Link disappears, his piece remains behind, which after Ganon gets Zelda, he ultimately gets all three pieces, of course, his first wish when first touching and scattering the triforce could have been the cause of the dark world, when Link vanishes, the sages could trap him in along with the scattered pieces, meaning they aren't complete but are with him in the dark world leading to the decline timeline... When Link defeats Ganon in LTTP, he comes across the spirit of the triforce which brings the pieces together for him to touch(since they had been separated by Ganon's wish), which after his restorative wish should have scattered them again. As for Twinrova, I agree that she/they is/are resurrected. As for two more timelines since there are two oracle games, I feel this is unneeded since they both, no matter which you start with, end the same way(with Twinrova's sacrifice and Crazy Ganon defeated) besides the two differing timelines wouldn't even matter to the timeline of Hyrule as they both take place elsewhere.

Got a news tip? Send it in!
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement