Topic: Hyrule Historia: A Timeline for the Trash

[UncleBob]

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.

[MegaByte]

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 Spyke]

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

[MegaByte]

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 Spyke]

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.

[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.

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.

[MegaByte]

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 Spyke]

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?

[MegaByte]

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:

Our current story is that the seven Koopalings are not Bowser's children.

[MegaByte]

Actually, this is a more broad 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 [cartoon] 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.

[jaytalks]

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.

[azeke]

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

[AnGer]

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.

[Sundoulos]

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.

[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

[azeke]

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.

[ShyGuy]

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

[Plugabugz]

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

[Fjurbanski]

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

[Ian Sane]

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 "**** yeah, I saved the day".  The hero is defeated?!  Who the **** 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.

[AnGer]

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

Hasn't that already happened?

[NWR_insanolord]

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.

[pokepal148]

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

[pokepal148]

[EdMcMuffin]

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.