We store cookies, you can get more info from our privacy policy.
3DSGBAWiiDSGC

Official Legend of Zelda Timeline Revealed

by Daan Koopman - December 21, 2011, 9:44 am PST
Total comments: 75 Source: http://bbs2.ruliweb.daum.net/gaia/do/ruliweb/defau...

Are we about to discover everything about the series that we've held dear for 25 years? UPDATE: Confirmed!

The official timeline for The Legend of Zelda series might be revealed, thanks to a fan translation of the recently released Hyrule Historia book. Update: We've confirmed the timeline is indeed in the book.

We don't know all the details at the moment, but if true, the timeline is even more complex than usually imagined, featuring a trio of alternatives after Ocarina of Time. Nintendo has always been secretive about the franchise's anthology, so to give it all away in this one book is a huge surprise. You can find the rumoured timeline below. We will continue to follow the story as it develops.

Main Timeline
1. Skyward Sword
2. The Minish Cap
3. Four Swords
4. Ocarina of Time

Split 1: Link defeats Ganon - childhood branch
1. Majora's Mask
2. Twilight Princess
3. Four Swords Adventures

Split 2: Link defeats Ganon - adult branch
1. The Wind Waker
2. Phantom Hourglass
3. Spirit Tracks

Split 3: Link fails in Ocarina Of Time
1. A Link to the Past
2. Oracles of Seasons and Ages
3. Link's Awakening
4. The Legend of Zelda
5. Zelda II

Talkback

gtownclownDecember 21, 2011

Wow

SilverQuilavaDecember 21, 2011

....Huh. Looks like it could work. If explained, it'l probably make sense. Feels like it fits too.

steveyDecember 21, 2011

timelines with splits are failures + lttp belongs at the very end

EnnerDecember 21, 2011

Three splits. So tricky.
I'd much rather that this was kept a secret to everybody as it was fun guessing how messed up it is as opposed to knowing exactly how messed up it is.

broodwarsDecember 21, 2011

I really don't see how it makes sense that there's a timeline if Link fails to stop Ganon in Ocarina of Time.  We saw what that future would look like in Ocarina, and it doesn't match up to the games listed.  It seems like Nintendo just wanted to give a reason why there's a group of games that never mention the events of Ocarina, rather than just accept that those games were made before Ocarina and leaving it at that.

While it's nice to have an official (?) Zelda timeline, I don't see the folks who really care about that accepting this one.

JRokujuushiDecember 21, 2011

Quote from: stevey

timelines with splits are failures + lttp belongs at the very end

It says on the back of the box that LttP features "he predecessors of Link and Zelda..."  http://i.imgur.com/uMlPO.jpg

Also, if LttP was at the end, it wouldn't be in the past in relation to any of the other games, meaning it wouldn't actually be a link to the past.

So how does LttP belong at the very end?

TrueNerdDecember 21, 2011

I very much agree with Broodwars on this matter.

WindyManSteven Rodriguez, Staff AlumnusDecember 21, 2011

That's nice, but where does the Wand of Gamelon fall into this?

Retro DeckadesDecember 21, 2011

Interesting, but a little too unnecessarily complex. I always enjoyed the split timeline theory in which the two strands reconvene with the Oracle games.

UncleBobRichard Cook, Guest ContributorDecember 21, 2011

I have two issues with this...

First, I don't like the "three splits" - I was never a huge fan of the split timeline theory.  Although I must reluctantly agree that it works (and that the games have virtually been tailored to make it work), my issue with it is that it seemed like a cheap cop-out.  "Oh, these don't quite fit together?  Split!".

This third split proves that point.  Why stop at two?  three?  Hell, why not just make 15 splits and get it over with?

Second gripe - the ORACLE GAMES DO NOT COME BETWEEN LttP and LA.  Period.  It simply doesn't make sense.  I know some people like to try and claim that the ending of the Oracle games leads directly into the beginning of Link's Awakening... and that sounds all nice and pretty... but...

Link's Awakening is a direct sequel to LttP.  The story clearly works that way (and it's expressed in the manual/etc.).  Obviously, Zelda and Link met in Link to the Past.  He got her out of the castle prison, dropped her off at the sanctuary, then, later, saved her punk ass from Ganon.

Yet, in the Oracle games, there's scenes devoted to Zelda introducing herself to Link.

Of course, the player needs to be introduced to Zelda.  I won't argue that - but for Zelda and Link to pretend that they don't know each other?  IT MAKES NO SENSE.

I simply will not accept any timeline that puts the Oracle games between LttP and Link's Awakening unless there's another game that involves Zelda getting bonked in the head with a coconut.

GoldenPhoenixDecember 21, 2011

Whether one likes it or not, if this is true, it is canon. It is the official timeline. Personally I do not mind it at all.

CaterkillerMatthew Osborne, Contributing WriterDecember 21, 2011

I just stopped caring around the TP day's. The only story I can look forward to that doesn't ever contradict it's self is One Piece.

I'm glad Nintendo released this, because it's entertaining to me to watch people get really upset about it.

Bman87301December 21, 2011

I'm assuming this is BS until I hear otherwise. If this does turn out to be true, I'm going to be very disappointed in Nintendo, because it'll mean they've only just now got someone to come up with their own complex interpretation after the fact, to try to cover up the fact that the original plot got botched beyond repair when Aonuma took over  the series.

Ian SaneDecember 21, 2011

The split timeline shit is just unbearably annoying and it pretty much fucks the whole thing up.  And it was totally unnecessary.  It wasn't until Wind Waker's stupid flood that that even came up.

What if Link failed in OoT?  Um... he didn't.  I beat the fuckin' game, that means he succeeded.  Why don't we have a "what if Link failed" timeline for EVERY game?

I also thought that OoT's story made perfect sense.  Link defeats Ganon and uses some time travel as part of it.  All this two timelines stuff seems like Miyamoto has never encountered any other time travelling fiction and is making it needlessly complex.  Link stops Ganon and the status quo is resumed.  This isn't hard.  This doesn't have to be complicated.

This timeline also destroys one of the cool references by seperating Zelda II from OoT.  The towns have the same names of the sages.  I assumed that was a reference to OoT, like the people named their towns after the sages from history.  And there is also reference to the seven sages in LttP.  So what happened then?  Did the sages seal Ganon without Link?  I always assumed defeating Ganon in OoT was playing out the events in the prologue of LttP.

No one but the most hackneyed writer would ever intentionally have something so complicated and ridiculous on purpose.  This is just Nintendo not paying any attention to this stuff when making a new game, introducing all sorts of idiotic plot holes and then coming up with a complicated explanation later when they get caught on it.  This is like DC Comics Crisis on Infinite Earths bad.

I stopped paying attention to the Zelda timeline after Wind Waker.  They can come up with all the dumb explanations they want.  The second you introduce a world altering Noah-esque flood into the middle of the timeline, the whole thing has jumped the shark.

Another reason to hate Wind Waker: if Nintendo didn't do the infamous Spaceworld switcheroo they might never have done a flood and thus never had to come up with some alternate timeline excuse to explain it away.  They not only bait 'n' switched their fans, screwed the Gamecube out of easily the most anticipated of the first rumoured titles and confirmed their kiddy reputation by turning one of their only franchises anyone thought was cool into a cartoon but also ruined the Zelda timeline!  It's the PR disaster that keeps on giving!

UncleBobRichard Cook, Guest ContributorDecember 21, 2011

Quote from: GoldenPhoenix

Whether one likes it or not, if this is true, it is canon. It is the official timeline. Personally I do not mind it at all.

It's only official canon until Nintendo decides otherwise. :D

Quote from: Ian

No one but the most hackneyed writer...Nintendo

Yeah, that checks out.

UncleBobRichard Cook, Guest ContributorDecember 21, 2011

Quote from: NWR_insanolord

Quote from: Ian

No one but the most hackneyed writer...Nintendo

Yeah, that checks out.

Managing expectations... :D

CericDecember 21, 2011

I am glad to see that Legend of Zelda and Zelda II are put in a spot of being at the very end.  Even if you squished all those timelines together I believe those games be at the very end.  You know the ironic part is that if you think about it the Zelda series is about a post apocalypse world.  With Legend of Zelda being the last hold out branch.  The one with Windwalker is the new blossoming of society, each game the world is more populated and fleshed out. 

Its an interesting way to think about it.

nickmitchDecember 21, 2011

The problem with time travel in any story is that it creates a paradox. Personally, I don't think the time line splits at the end of Ocarina of Time. Why should it? The events of that game never actually happen. Link goes back in time, and then Gannon gets executed or sealed away or whatever. Link never gets the Master Sword, blah, blah, blah.

I can deal with two, but 3 time splits feels unnecessary. However, if that's what Nintendo says, then I'll just accept it and hope there's an English version so I can better understand it.

Art_de_CatDecember 21, 2011

I don't understand why there is a third split.  Much less why it is called Link Fails to stop Ganon. Ganon was stopped and sealed in the dark world.  He never fully opens the doorway to escape, but just a part of him as Aghanim is able to to undo the seal.  Once that mess is settled, he is not resealed.  Maybe they could do a game inbetween ALTTP and Zelda 1 to explain how he gets out and gets the triforce of power again, and why they had to hide the triforce of courage the way they did. 

Ian SaneDecember 21, 2011

This whole thing also suggests that it's so easier and safer to go with sequels.  If you just make each game/movie/book go chronologically in the same order they are released in, it is much easier to avoid introducing plot holes or having to "fit" stories in the middle.  It's so much easier to answer "what happens next?" then to answer "what happened then?"

Metroid worked quite well when it did not have any prequels.  The first three games just go through sequentially and Metroid Fusion even works well with those original three as well if you ignore Metroid Prime.

It's even easier to do things the way Nintendo likes to and do whatever they feel like, continuity be damned.

martyDecember 21, 2011

Pretty much what I expected.  Zelda games stopped being Zelda games, as defined by the previous games, after the 16 bit era.

PlugabugzDecember 21, 2011

So it's official, The Legend of Zelda is basically Fringe but with a third universe.

Prequel and interquels are always messy. Look at Star Trek Enterprise (creatively limited knowing it has to explain its setup being chronologically before everything else). If you planned the story going forward you can jump back along it, but Nintendo obviously hasn't and mishmash it in to make sense.

Mop it upDecember 21, 2011

At this point, I think Nintendo would be better off leaving the timeline up to the imagination of the fans. After so many games, most people have built up a certain idea of what the timeline is like, and no matter what Nintendo come up with, it won't match up to what a majority of people are thinking. Since they focus on gameplay first and the story usually takes a backseat to everything else, just let people wonder instead of trying to make everything fit in some silly way that won't make sense no matter what.

Quote from: broodwars

It seems like Nintendo just wanted to give a reason why there's a group of games that never mention the events of Ocarina, rather than just accept that those games were made before Ocarina and leaving it at that.

Oracle of Ages and Seasons were not made before Ocarina of Time.

ThePermDecember 21, 2011

i think they are just going to keep fucking up the timeline for sake of discussion.

UncleBobRichard Cook, Guest ContributorDecember 21, 2011

This goes back to something I've been saying for awhile (and something which annoys a lot of Zelda fanatics...)... basically, there is no time line.

I truly believe that Nintendo (i.e.: Miyamoto and Co.) have a basic idea of how the games fit together - but it would never hold up to scrutiny, as there's no way to piece the games together without issues coming up (like trying to piece the Oracle games between LttP and LA, which everyone friggin' tries to do).  Additionally, it's only the time line until the next game comes out, which could effect how the "official" time line fits and works together.

Basically, Nintendo isn't going to let the idea of a "timeline" get in the way of making a good game - and the story told in that game is always going to play a second fiddle to the game play.  If someone comes up with a great idea, but it doesn't fit into the story line, they're going to shoe-horn it in.

i.e.: the timeline only exists until it's changed again.

NintendoFanboyDecember 21, 2011

proving there is no real time line, if he beats ganon, then.... if not then.... as a child... as an etc.
come on folks, its a bunch of loosely connected stand alone games except for,
OoT and MM , and wind waker, phantom hour glass.
Now can we get off the time line crap and enjoy the games.

NWR_pap64Pedro Hernandez, Contributing WriterDecember 21, 2011

Haha oh man.... Every time I think how gloriously messy the timeline for Kingdom Hearts is, I look back and realize that it isn't as awful as Zelda's own timeline.


I have said before that I think this is the product of poor writing and the fact that they likely never expected the first game to be as monumental as it is today. Really, the basic story of the first one was that you were Link, Ganon took over Hyrule, and you needed to destroy him and save Zelda.


That's it. But it is clear that after Zelda II they felt the need to justify certain things, like why Link, Zelda and Ganon are in the games despite the clearly different settings and time periods.


And this is what we have today: a messy timeline theory that has a very loose connection due to a lack of plans and poor writing.

Chozo GhostDecember 21, 2011

Quote from: NWR_insanolord

It's even easier to do things the way Nintendo likes to and do whatever they feel like, continuity be damned.

This is the same logic which killed Star Trek.

Some franchises that deal with this kind of stuff have internal wikis to keep it all straight, and they still end up messing up.

My reaction to this thread:

http://threadbombing.com/data/media/2/th_popcorncat.gif

Carry on.

I can't speak for the timelines of the games beyond Ocarina of Time (Haven't played the oracle games, and couldn't bring myself to finish the DS games), but this image I found is an interesting interpretation of the timeline listed below.

http://i.imgur.com/7xTWE.jpg

So, based on this timeline/theory, every time Link has to go "back in time", he really abandons one timeline and exists in the following one.  The first timeline isn't technically Link "dying" or "failing", as much as it's him abandoning his post as "hero of time" in that timeline.

Again, just something I found that's interesting to think about.  Reading all this news/info about Zelda makes me want to track down the ones I haven't finished/played.

JRokujuushiDecember 21, 2011

Nintendo should do like Capcom did with the RE Chronicles games and create a game that summarizes the plots of all the Zelda games in the order that they happened and shows some of the time between games to connect them better.

Making it an on-rails shooter is both optional and discouraged.

joshnickersonDecember 21, 2011

Quote from: Chozo

Quote from: NWR_insanolord

It's even easier to do things the way Nintendo likes to and do whatever they feel like, continuity be damned.

This is the same logic which killed Star Trek.

Star Trek is a series of television shows, where the focus is on the story.
Zelda is a series of video games, where the focus is on the gameplay and the story is merely an after thought.

I agree with Insanolord, it's not something to take too terribly seriously, though it is fun to see how people with too much free time on their hands over-react to it. :)

EnnerDecember 21, 2011

Quote from: Chozo

Quote from: NWR_insanolord

It's even easier to do things the way Nintendo likes to and do whatever they feel like, continuity be damned.

This is the same logic which killed Star Trek.

Never got the feeling that some Star Trek TV series were damning continuity. If anything, the series (i.e. Voyager and Enterprise) were trying to do something new while simultaneously being told to retread the old and suffered because of the two pulls.

You want to see someone damn a series continuity, look at Macross. Only there will you find a TV series and a pair of TV-series-adapting movies that have wildly different endings because the series director doesn't care if they are different as long as they are good story.

NeoStar9XDecember 21, 2011

Interesting reveal. The split timeline as a result of OoT was a given but a third is one I haven't counted on. Should be interesting going forward to see how they fill in some gaps as there are some more questions that result from this with the new timeline.

AdrockDecember 22, 2011

The series doesn't need a timeline. I'm not really sure why people are so passionate about it. Before Nintendo started planning loose story connections, they were just making games. The worst thing they did was try to put it all together. If Nintendo really cares about the plots of these games, they should just reboot the series or boot some games from the canon.

I'm okay aknowledging that an official timeline exist but ignoring that it does for my own sanity. If the 3-way timeline split is to be believed, A Link to the Past has to be at the end of one of them due to the whole "The Master Sword Sleeps Again... Forever" line. This supposed timeline doesn't reflect that at all. Does Link even use The Master Sword to defeat Ganon in the original? I don't think he does (it's the "Magical Sword" or something) which supposedly can't happen so there's that. Nothing gained. There are too many issues and no discernable payoff with any timeline in a series that didn't adhere to one until several installments in.

CericDecember 22, 2011

We all like to talk about the Zelda timeline the same reason we like talking specs for the next system.  We have enough clues and information to make educated guesses and make debates but, we have nothing that can give a definitive ruling.

Ian SaneDecember 22, 2011

I like to talk about the timeline because I like the Zelda series a lot.  It is my favourite videogame series by far.  The screwed up nature of the timeline is annoying because it gives the impression that Nintendo doesn't care.  To them Zelda is just some product to sell to us.

With creative works, though I know money is almost always a factor, I like it best when it feels like the artist cares about and has passion for his work.  This new album or new movie is a product they are trying to sell to me but within that it seems like the artist wanted to make something he could be really proud of.  Even if there is no real artistic intention, I like it when at least the illusion of that is there.  Who here just sees the songs, books, movies, TV shows, or videogames they love as just mindless entertainment?  There are always the ones that we form some emotional attachment to.

So Zelda having a shit timeline hurts the series for me because it's a big marker saying "this is just some product we make to sell you.  We don't give a fuck as long as you give us your money."  In a similar way I hate stuff like Link's Crossbow Training because Zelda didn't used to have spin-offs and spin-offs are sheer product.  Zelda is less "special" with spin-offs or sloppy execution of the timeline.  If Nintendo cared as much about Zelda as the fans do, they wouldn't have any problems with the timeline.

ShyGuyDecember 22, 2011

How does Link have a green cap in Skyward Sword if Minish Cap comes afterwards?

Also, Link's shield bears a cross in Legend of Zelda, so sometime after Link's Awakening Christian Missionaries arrive in Hyrule.

CericDecember 22, 2011

Quote from: ShyGuy

How does Link have a green cap in Skyward Sword if Minish Cap comes afterwards?

Also, Link's shield bears a cross in Legend of Zelda, so sometime after Link's Awakening Christian Missionaries arrive in Hyrule.

Green just happened to be the Knight's graduating color his year of graduate.  Notice some people are in Yellow and Purple.

Legend of Zelda is the second to Last game. (Links Adventures being the last game.)

ShyGuyDecember 22, 2011

Besides the CD-I blasphemy, Nintendo left out a few games out of the timeline, but they should be easy to fit in.

Tetra's Trackers
Link's Crossbow Training
Tingle's Rosie Rupee Land.

Quote from: Ian

I like to talk about the timeline because I like the Zelda series a lot.  It is my favourite videogame series by far.  The screwed up nature of the timeline is annoying because it gives the impression that Nintendo doesn't care.  To them Zelda is just some product to sell to us.

With creative works, though I know money is almost always a factor, I like it best when it feels like the artist cares about and has passion for his work.  This new album or new movie is a product they are trying to sell to me but within that it seems like the artist wanted to make something he could be really proud of.  Even if there is no real artistic intention, I like it when at least the illusion of that is there.  Who here just sees the songs, books, movies, TV shows, or videogames they love as just mindless entertainment?  There are always the ones that we form some emotional attachment to.

So Zelda having a shit timeline hurts the series for me because it's a big marker saying "this is just some product we make to sell you.  We don't give a fuck as long as you give us your money."  In a similar way I hate stuff like Link's Crossbow Training because Zelda didn't used to have spin-offs and spin-offs are sheer product.  Zelda is less "special" with spin-offs or sloppy execution of the timeline.  If Nintendo cared as much about Zelda as the fans do, they wouldn't have any problems with the timeline.

What you should take from this isn't that they don't care, but that they care more about making each game work and not being too limited in what they can do by having to stick to an established strict timeline. I'm very happy that they have this attitude, that if they come up with what they think is a great idea for a Zelda game they're not going to let the timeline talk them out of it.

AdrockDecember 22, 2011

+1 insanolord (again)

I always got the impression that there was no timeline until fans demanded that the games be fit into one. Nintendo is choosing to care more about the game they're currently making instead of how it fits into those that came before. I feel like that gives them a certain amount of freedom not afforded with strictly adhering to chronology. The games can be understood independently of a timeline. It only gets muddled when one tries to package the series as a whole. I never questioned why people liked talking about the timeline. Obviously, people like to talk about things they enjoy. I don't understand why fans get so mad about it.

The individual plots of the games bother me more than overall arc of the series. None of those stories are especially strong. I'm more lenient on the early games due to tehnological limitations. In 2011, there's no reason Nintendo should be having this much trouble telling an engaging story. I'd even go back to 2003 with The Wind Waker (or 2002 for those of you who like to use the Japanese release dates). This is just my personal opinion. The games can exist outside of a timeline. Zelda wouldn't be the first or only franchise to do this. However, the plots within the each game moving foward need to be better. That affects the experience more than fitting the games into a timeline.

LithiumDecember 22, 2011

just pretend that its just oral history screwing up the same legend and then you don't have to think about it.

chaosmasterzeroDecember 22, 2011

this makes a bit more sense if you have ever read marvel comics and heard the theory behind dr dooms time machine every time someone time travels and changes history the old history doesn't stop existing instead it creates a new universe with the changes in other words if link went back in time from OoT and stopped ganon from being born he it wouldn't stop the one who took over hyrule in OoT he would just make a new hyrule without ganon this makes perfect sense for nintendo because they can explain the games that don't fit together and fit in any new games they make later down the road into any of these timelines that they want or make a new one if they really need to  i don't think it jumps the shark but comes pretty close to it though

ShyGuyDecember 22, 2011

What if.... Zelda Wii U united the timelines?

Is such a thing even possible?

CericDecember 22, 2011

Quote from: ShyGuy

What if.... Zelda Wii U united the timelines?

Is such a thing even possible?

Sure, It could be like Sonic Generations from what I hear.

ShyGuyDecember 22, 2011

Quote from: Ceric

Quote from: ShyGuy

What if.... Zelda Wii U united the timelines?

Is such a thing even possible?

Sure, It could be like Sonic Generations from what I hear.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

CericDecember 22, 2011

Quote from: ShyGuy

Quote from: Ceric

Quote from: ShyGuy

What if.... Zelda Wii U united the timelines?

Is such a thing even possible?

Sure, It could be like Sonic Generations from what I hear.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Feel the Hate for the Game you have brought.  Now Channel that.  Come with me to the Dark Side.  We will let you Use your own mask.

The whole series was a dream.

Chozo GhostDecember 22, 2011

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHIP9UtkQDQ

Everyone interested in this topic should watch this video.

joshnickersonDecember 22, 2011

So are there any indications of this book coming stateside?

chaosmasterzeroDecember 22, 2011

can i just say though that alot of you who are complaining about the timeline are ungrateful brats, think about it the people who made the first game had no way of knowing that there would be a sequel much less that they were working on what would be one of the best video game franchises of all time there was no timeline in mind for it eiji aonuma has even been quoted as saying that he would rather focus on gameplay than the developers be distracted by where the story should fit in despite the fact that a way to tie it all together was not the first thing on their mind the fans have still been asking for it and nintendo finally gives it to you because its what the fans have been asking for it and you are complaining that it's not how you wanted it to be this is how it is it doesn't cheapen the game any it in fact it doesn't change anything you already know or love about the games it just shows that nintendo gives a damn about what the fans want and how do you thank them by bitching that it's not good enough

EnnerDecember 23, 2011

Now the mess is official.


Here's to the future where Nintendo retcons it to twilight and back!

broodwarsDecember 23, 2011

Quote from: chaosmasterzero

can i just say though that alot of you who are complaining about the timeline are ungrateful brats, think about it the people who made the first game had no way of knowing that there would be a sequel much less that they were working on what would be one of the best video game franchises of all time there was no timeline in mind for it eiji aonuma has even been quoted as saying that he would rather focus on gameplay than the developers be distracted by where the story should fit in despite the fact that a way to tie it all together was not the first thing on their mind the fans have still been asking for it and nintendo finally gives it to you because its what the fans have been asking for it and you are complaining that it's not how you wanted it to be this is how it is it doesn't cheapen the game any it in fact it doesn't change anything you already know or love about the games it just shows that nintendo gives a damn about what the fans want and how do you thank them by bitching that it's not good enough

People aren't faulting this timeline because "it's not good enough".  They're faulting it because it doesn't make any sense within the context of the actual games, and the sticking point is really that supposed "3rd split" after Ocarina.  Nintendo basically took all the games they didn't want to deal with and threw them into a single group  regardless of whether that made sense.

Personally, I've been of the inclination for quite a few years now that Nintendo has no earthly idea what they're doing with the Zelda "timeline", and that they never had one to begin with.  So long as the games are good and the individual stories are engaging, that's fine.  I just wish Nintendo would stop publicly pretending that there is a grand plan when it's obvious that they really didn't have one.  Skyward Sword seems the first real stab by Nintendo to establish a continuous story, so I'd rather they just established that SS is a complete story reboot and leave it at that.

Killer_Man_JaroTom Malina, Associate Editor (Europe)December 23, 2011

As I expected, the official timeline is just as impossible to wrap your head around as the crackpot theories. Best not to think about it, in my view. It's much easier to appreciate a Zelda game's story in self-containment than in the context of all the others. Trying to do the latter is time consuming and will probably just leave you with a headache.

KnowsNothingDecember 23, 2011

Quote from: Ian

Why don't we have a "what if Link failed" timeline for EVERY game?

There is a "what if Link failed" timeline for every game, they just haven't been made yet.

Actually, it makes sense that it splits that way at Ocarina if you accept the general rules of time travel that writers over the years have established. When you go back in time to change things, you create a new timeline, so splitting it three ways there is logical according to those rules. That explains why there are three splits, and also why Ocarina is where it splits, being as focused on time travel as it is (though you'd then have to look at Oracle of Ages more closely).

Luigi DudeDecember 24, 2011

Quote from: NWR_insanolord

Actually, it makes sense that it splits that way at Ocarina if you accept the general rules of time travel that writers over the years have established. When you go back in time to change things, you create a new timeline, so splitting it three ways there is logical according to those rules. That explains why there are three splits, and also why Ocarina is where it splits, being as focused on time travel as it is (though you'd then have to look at Oracle of Ages more closely).

Oracle of Ages though has Link defeating the villain of that game, Veran, in the past and then returning to the present.  Since Veran was from the present and went back in time, killing her in the past kills her for good since she no longer exist in the present time because she left the present for the past. 

Unlike Ocarina of Time where Link defeated Gannondorf in the future, but was then sent back to a time where Gannondorf wasn't defeated, resulting in that Gannondorf eventually being sent to the Twilight Realm by the Sages, instead of being sealed in the Sacred Realm like he was in the future.  This results in Gannodorf returning in two completely different ways which makes two completely different timelines.  And now with the new timeline having Gannon win and take the complete Triforce resulting in another huge change.

This is why Oracle of Ages doesn't make a radically different timeline while Ocarina does because Ages involves Link stopping someone from the present from messing with the past and than killing that person in the past so nothing major really happens to alter the present, except for Tree falling in love with Link and the kingdom creating a giant stone statue to honor him, two things that have minor consequences on altering the future.

It could still be argued that there would be at least one alternate timeline stemming from that. Nintendo just hasn't used it for anything. So obviously, the Wii U Zelda is going to take place in the timeline in which Link was unsuccessful in Oracle of Ages, and now everything is in outer space for some reason.

EnnerDecember 24, 2011

I wouldn't mind a cosmic Legend of Zelda where you interact and fight against or fight alongside Nayru, Din, and Farore.

broodwarsDecember 24, 2011

Quote from: Enner

I wouldn't mind a cosmic Legend of Zelda where you interact and fight against or fight alongside Nayru, Din, and Farore.

It's really weird that Skyward Sword barely even pays lip service to those characters, considering the role they played in Hyrule's creation.  I guess we'll probably see that story the next time Nintendo decides to create a "true" beginning to the Zelda timeline.

There's something major missing from this list: Where the hell is Link's Crossbow Training?

chaosmasterzeroDecember 24, 2011

Quote from: broodwars

Quote from: chaosmasterzero

can i just say though that alot of you who are complaining about the timeline are ungrateful brats, think about it the people who made the first game had no way of knowing that there would be a sequel much less that they were working on what would be one of the best video game franchises of all time there was no timeline in mind for it eiji aonuma has even been quoted as saying that he would rather focus on gameplay than the developers be distracted by where the story should fit in despite the fact that a way to tie it all together was not the first thing on their mind the fans have still been asking for it and nintendo finally gives it to you because its what the fans have been asking for it and you are complaining that it's not how you wanted it to be this is how it is it doesn't cheapen the game any it in fact it doesn't change anything you already know or love about the games it just shows that nintendo gives a damn about what the fans want and how do you thank them by bitching that it's not good enough

People aren't faulting this timeline because "it's not good enough".  They're faulting it because it doesn't make any sense within the context of the actual games, and the sticking point is really that supposed "3rd split" after Ocarina.  Nintendo basically took all the games they didn't want to deal with and threw them into a single group  regardless of whether that made sense.

Personally, I've been of the inclination for quite a few years now that Nintendo has no earthly idea what they're doing with the Zelda "timeline", and that they never had one to begin with.  So long as the games are good and the individual stories are engaging, that's fine.  I just wish Nintendo would stop publicly pretending that there is a grand plan when it's obvious that they really didn't have one.  Skyward Sword seems the first real stab by Nintendo to establish a continuous story, so I'd rather they just established that SS is a complete story reboot and leave it at that.

i agree that i don't think nintendo ever really had anything in mind to connect the games but i also believe that depending on how you look at this timeline it makes alot of sense but thats not the point i am arguing i am saying that nintendo wanted to please the fans who all wanted to "Link" get it? the games together and they made this to do that when they could have just as easily ignored it or kept teasing us with a non existent timeline they aren't doing this as a money grabbing move they did it to please the fans and you guys still aren't happy like it or not you got what you wished for now you have to live with it i doubt its gonna get changed anytime soon or at all i personally like it and think it makes sense

chaosmasterzeroDecember 24, 2011

Quote from: Shaymin

There's something major missing from this list: Where the hell is Link's Crossbow Training?

who cares about that where is smash bros and soul calibur 2 man

EnnerDecember 24, 2011

Quote from: broodwars

Quote from: Enner

I wouldn't mind a cosmic Legend of Zelda where you interact and fight against or fight alongside Nayru, Din, and Farore.

It's really weird that Skyward Sword barely even pays lip service to those characters, considering the role they played in Hyrule's creation.  I guess we'll probably see that story the next time Nintendo decides to create a "true" beginning to the Zelda timeline.

Mm hm. To be fair, the three goddesses are hardly mentioned in The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess (at least to my recollection). I have never played Majora's Mask. From what I've read about that game, it doesn't seem it talks about the three goddesses much. This is in contrast to Ocarina of Time where entire cut scenes are devoted to the creation myth that involves the three goddesses.

And now we have Skyward Sword throwing a fourth goddess in the mix. Maybe Rosalina can make a cameo sometime.

This thread makes me believe I am not as big a Nintendo fan as the rest of you, because I don't care one bit about the official timeline or any other.

I'm far more interested in seeing the official Mario timeline.

CericDecember 28, 2011

Quote from: Jonnyboy117

This thread makes me believe I am not as big a Nintendo fan as the rest of you, because I don't care one bit about the official timeline or any other.

Doubting your Belief You Are.

Quote from: NWR_insanolord

I'm far more interested in seeing the official Mario timeline.

All alternate reality.  Main series takes place in the same point just different Multiverses.

UncleBobRichard Cook, Guest ContributorJanuary 06, 2012
Chozo GhostJanuary 06, 2012

Quote from: NWR_insanolord

I'm far more interested in seeing the official Mario timeline.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_xQ-ns5whw

Evan_BJanuary 17, 2012

Well, personally I'm just gonna keep playing them and enjoying each separate story instead of caring about how they all fit together, thanks.

Share + Bookmark





Got a news tip? Send it in!
Advertisement
Advertisement