302: Ocarina of Timelines

anonymity88

New member
Sep 20, 2010
337
0
0
I always thought the games existed in parallel dimensions with the exception of the direct sequels.
 

vxicepickxv

Slayer of Bothan Spies
Sep 28, 2008
3,126
0
0
anonymity88 said:
I always thought the games existed in parallel dimensions with the exception of the direct sequels.
I was about to say, is it time for Crisis on Infinite Hyrules?
 

dante brevity

New member
Apr 15, 2009
199
0
0
Forget a coherent timeline: how about somebody putting together a coherent geography. Hyrule is different with almost every game. I know that we occasionally move to different areas, but you can't explain to me how Death Mountain is in a different place for every game.
 

Murmur95

New member
Sep 18, 2008
67
0
0
umm there is no timeline, Nintendo already stated this.

http://www.destructoid.com/there-is-no-zelda-timeline-stop-trying-139498.phtml
 

RJ Dalton

New member
Aug 13, 2009
2,285
0
0
You know, I personally never gave a shit about the timeline. I always thought of it in terms of legends and folklore. You know how there are multiple versions of the Arthur legend and how folk tales sometimes have up to thirty different variations of the same story across cultures? Yeah, I always imagined the Zelda games were like that. Except for the direct sequels, they were all the same story, just told different ways by different people, just as it is with real legends.

Heart of Darkness said:
Why does The Legend of Zelda need a timeline, anyway? I always just saw it as variants on a single legend: the main elements of the legend (Hyrule, Link, Zelda, Ganon(dorf), the Triforce) are usually there in the legend, but the exact characters, locations, and story vary from storyteller to storyteller.
I just noticed somebody already beat me to the punch on this point.
 

subtlefuge

Lord Cromulent
May 21, 2010
1,107
0
0
I try not to get too wrapped up in the timeline, but I can't help but be fascinated by it. I tend to believe that "Link" is really more of a title than a name (as in "James Bond"), or perhaps there's a reincarnation aspect. Who knows, it's just fun for those who like near impossible puzzles.
 

Heart of Darkness

The final days of His Trolliness
Jul 1, 2009
9,745
0
0
dante brevity said:
Forget a coherent timeline: how about somebody putting together a coherent geography. Hyrule is different with almost every game. I know that we occasionally move to different areas, but you can't explain to me how Death Mountain is in a different place for every game.
This is part of the reason why I don't buy the timeline theories. If Wind Waker is supposed to be a direct sequel to Wind Waker and set in the same Hyrule, then you'd think for the geography to somewhat match. But the location of the Castle, Fire Island (Death Mountain), Dragon Roost (I've heard that the Rito people are supposed to be distant relatives of the Zoras), and the Forest Haven (Kokiri Forest/Lost Woods), are way out of position. Sure, there's always continental drift to explain it, but continental drift is a bit of a stretch.
 

AgentNein

New member
Jun 14, 2008
1,476
0
0
Just gonna start by saying that I don't believe for a second that Nintendo actually gives that much of a crap about an overarching continuity between these games. And I'm okay with that. I think they tend to just throw a bone to the fans from time to time. The least mentally taxing way to look at it all is that Link is a mythic hero, who's tale is told many times over. It's always a little different in the specifics, but more often than not you had the hero Link, the antagonist Ganon, and the titular Zelda, almost always in need of saving.

With all of that said, I don't knock those who mess around with this timeline stuff as long as they don't take it all too seriously and realize that no one at Nintendo probably gives a shit about a coherent timeline, and that it's all just fun to be had with fiction. I actually find the split timeline theory to be quite engaging myself and not that much of a stretch. I'm a fan of scifi mind you, so the instant I finished Ocarina all those years ago I had to ask myself if the adult link reality just vanished? Did everybody there disappear? Or did it split into it's own timeline?

Hope things continue like this. Cuz the way Nintendo is doing it is fun, as opposed to some continuity nightmare chart that sucks all the wonder out of it.
 

Lagslayer

New member
Apr 18, 2011
152
0
0
I don't feel the exact timeline is all that important, but it might be fun to hear what Miyamoto's take on it really is.

semi off topic:
Am I the only one who thinks the future Zelda had potential? I know it was a joke now, but I was excited about it. And even after I learned it wasn't real, It still seemed like it fit into the whole legendary hero thing. The joke about a game chronicling the great flood could have been great too.
 

Sniper Team 4

New member
Apr 28, 2010
5,433
0
0
Georgie_Leech said:
I still think my favourite timeline theory was this one here:


Also,

-Dragmire- said:
EDIT: Also their should be a Zelda game where you play as Zelda. It's like Super Mario bros. being named the Chronicles of a Toadstool named Peach.
There was. It was for the Cd-i. The less we say about it the better.
THIS was the timeline video that I thought of the moment I read this title. Thank you for tracking it down. Always fun to watch.

And I saw a few screen shots and gameplay footage from that Cd-i Zelda game. You are completely correct--less said, the better. Although, it would be awesome if Nintendo did actually pull a true Zelda game off. I'd play that.
 

BehattedWanderer

Fell off the Alligator.
Jun 24, 2009
5,237
0
0
I always thought the assumption that Zelda 1/2 come later because there is no Master sword was silly, mostly because it feels like something invented later. While there is a mild amount of continuity, I was never overly concerned with it. Far as I could tell from the games I have played, Majora's Mask comes both between and after Ocarina of Time--after if he's just a kid, having gone back, and between if he remains an adult, on this simple premise: Link learns the Song of Storms from the guy with the organ in Majora's Mask, and forgets the melody. Later, in the windmill in OoT, he's re-taught the melody.

This might be true, might not, might be two different organ players, might all be in Link's mind, learning a melody through self introspection as if he were Ninten in Magicant, or something.
 

Logic 0

New member
Aug 28, 2009
1,676
0
0
Mr.myamoto is probably hiding the real zelda time line along with english hard copys of mother 1&3 guarded by a fifty foot tall monster.
 

malestrithe

New member
Aug 18, 2008
1,818
0
0
Once upon a time, a boy named "Link" goes on a quest. He needs to rescue his kingdom from a great evil. Along the way, he discovers magical items that aid him, as well as help from friendly citizens that did not leave like him. Eventually, after much world travelling, he finds the evil that took over his kingdom and vanquishes him. He is rewarded with the title of hero and he goes back home, living happily with his friends and family.
That is the basic story of every Legend of Zelda game. The boy goes on a quest to rescue his kingdom. I know that he rescues the princess, but the actual goal is the kingdom being safe.

Every time the story gets told, however, his adventures become more elaborate each being a different version of the same adventure. In some tellings, he is hopping across parallel dimensions, while others have him travelling through time, In earlier stories, he does not meet the Gorons or the Zora, but later ones have him doing things for them. If an item gets added to the story.

The best way to explain the Legend of Zelda is to use mythology. There are numerous tales of the great heroes, like Perseus, Heracles, Thor, and Gilgamesh. The stories started out simple, but each time a story is told, things get added to it.

The Hercules myth has many known authors to it. Each time an author comes in, he fills in the blanks, adds a few more tales, and embellishes certain parts to make it better. The early versions of the Hercules myth is basic compared to what came afterwards. The same is true with other myths.

Basically, for me, trying to find a continuity to these game and to see where they fit in the overall cannon is missing the point of the series. It is mythic storytelling and a parable for civic duty more than any sort of chronological series of events.
 

Grand_Marquis

New member
Feb 9, 2009
137
0
0
The theory I've always heard about why Legend of Zelda and Zelda 2 come last or near-last was because A) The ruined, abandoned exploration area in LoZ approximately conforms to the classical layout of Hyrule proper, suggesting that you're adventuring in ancient ruins; and B) because the land of greater Hyrule (or whatever you want to call that huge space) in Zelda 2 is HUGE and filled with many bustling cities and castles, suggesting that the people of Hyrule have prospered and expanded as a country into a larger realm. Which in turn implies that a great amount of time has passed.

Also, there's just something nice and tidy about the notion that the first two games are the final acts of the story. :D


Exterminas said:
Why does something like Legend of Zelda need continuity?

It is like asking a company that makes instant meals for a nutrition philosophy.

That stuff is obviously not intented to be part of some bigger picture, which is a huge part of the series appeal: You can sit down and play any Zelda game and get right into the story, because "Save the princess" is something anyone can understand. You don't need to get buckled down and reread what the hell an Ocarina is to enjoy the experience.

Just like an instant meal can be enjoyable without any further planning around it.
It wouldn't have ever been a problem if Nintendo itself hadn't said there was a continuity. I could've totally accepted "eh, it's like Final Fantasy or somethin'. They're just different stories" as an explanation. But noooo, they had to go and say - on the record - that every Zelda game exists in the same universe somehow. So...here we are.
 

Houshou

New member
Oct 20, 2010
13
0
0
BehattedWanderer said:
I always thought the assumption that Zelda 1/2 come later because there is no Master sword was silly, mostly because it feels like something invented later...
There's a bit more to this theory that I have thought about, and when looked at from this perspective makes more sense than anything else out there. No I will not put the series in order from beginning to end, but I think people need to think about this from a new point of view. If you so choose.

Thee first games in the timeline ARE the first games in the series. No, just hear me out. In the First Game. Gannon, has the Tri-Force of Power. Zelda HAD the Tri-Force of Wisdom, and Link has... NOTHING but a Wooden Sword! In fact his "Mission" in the First game is to piece together Zelda's Tri-Force of Wisdom. That she had the Wisdom to split into pieces to keep it out of Gannon's hands in the first place.
Most people assume that the Magical Sword is the Master Sword. This simply is not the case. First of all, the Master Sword is usually bestowed unto Link in a Holy Place. The closest spot to this is the cave above the Waterfall. Placing the Master Sword as the earlier named "White Sword". If this is true, this would also place this game as the First Game in which Link does Not pull "The Sword from the Stone". Consequentially, The Magical Sword, is given unto link in a Graveyard. (Of course I am merely implying this from the "First Play Through" of the Game.)

Also, this is THEE ONLY Zelda Game that does NOT have all 3 Tri-Force pieces. In fact, the very Tri-Force that is missing is Link's iconic Tri-Force of Courage. Which leads into the much loathed (but my personal favorite) Zelda II.

In Zelda II Link sets out on a quest because Zelda has fallen into a slumber. And it is on this Quest that he seeks out The Tri-Force of Courage. For the first time since Ancient Hyrulean time bringing the 3 pieces together. Again, this is yet another game in which Link does NOT wield the Power of The Tri-Force of Courage. But is instead, seeking to acquire it. Link has to travel to 7 different Temples to place in 7 different Statues a gem that shields this statue from radiating its power to the Final Temple; The Temple of Courage.
More importantly, than all of this, is the mere fact that upon reaching the Final Room, before everything goes dark and you have the viscous fight with your Dark-Self. There's an Old Man, waiting beside the Tri-Force of Courage. It's because of his Magic that you must fight yourself, before earning it.
From that moment on, Dark-Link is supposed to be each Link's Test that he deserves to retain the power of The Tri-Force of Courage. For EVERY Link here after undoubtably has The Tri-Force of Courage. The only thing I can say about this, is that Each Link is tested. Forcing one to think that some of the Series is the same Link. Not the same as the original Link, but the same for his time-line.

Also, since the Tri-Force of Courage was released; Gannon, Zelda, and Link have become the living Avatar's of their respective piece of the Tri-Force. When the 3 pieces are brought together, one is allowed to make a wish upon them. Then they split and disappear. When they return to the Hyrulean World, is when their Avatars are brought back to life. Thus it is by the Power of the Tri-Force that stops Gannon, but it is by that same Power that brings him back to life. The viscous cycle will never end... until the Tri-Force can either be destroyed permanently or sealed away in a manner similar to which the Tri-Force of Courage was.

And it is with this, that I hope the World would find much more easily available to believe than any other that could be put together.
 

the1ultimate

New member
Apr 7, 2009
769
0
0
Nintendo don't plan to reveal anything. The best we can hope for is that they don't make things to hard for the people who make these workable timelines... Although they seem to enjoy it.
 

Scrythe

Premium Gasoline
Jun 23, 2009
2,368
0
0
My friends and I are the type who can argue endlessly about timelines and themes in a fictional setting, but even we won't touch Zelda. There are so many interpretations and theories that it's just messy. A lot of the people I've met that do argue storyline are the brash, spiteful type that will cling to their theories like some kind of religion or political stance.

One of the YouTube Zelda timeline theory... people, sent their video to Nintendo to see how close he was. They sent him back a reply [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/93128-Nintendo-Lays-To-Rest-Zelda-Timeline-Mystery] denouncing there ever being a timeline. After this was brought to light, a lot of these people predictably went on the offensive and were furiously denying the letter, or claiming that it was some sort of autoresponce by a low-level Nintendo employee. Some of the rants I've read felt like they were saying "God put those dinosaur bones in the ground to test our faith".

But the most disturbing part about ALL of this is that even after years of sifting through every nook, cranny and tidbit with the finest of toothed combs, every one of these people forgot one very important fact about Zelda:

Nintendo has been remaking the same fucking game since 1986.
 

Steelskin

New member
Mar 30, 2009
4
0
0
Interestingly, in a 2004 interview with Game Informer, Aonuma said that Four Swords - which was a multiplayer expansion that piggybacked on the GBA re-release of A Link to the Past - was the "oldest tale" in the timeline. Unfortunately, this seems to be an occasion where information from Nintendo doesn't hold up to scrutiny, as Minish Cap seems to show Vaati's origin story, putting it earlier in the timeline. If this really is the case - and there's not a lot to suggest otherwise - it means that Four Swords can't be the oldest tale, unless there's some time travelling going on that Nintendo isn't telling anyone about.
This is simply because this interview happened before Minish Cap's release (Q4 2004), so Minish Cap as the first game in the series makes sense. Especially since that's where Link symbolically gets his hat.
 

smudgey

New member
May 8, 2008
347
0
0
Steelskin said:
Interestingly, in a 2004 interview with Game Informer, Aonuma said that Four Swords - which was a multiplayer expansion that piggybacked on the GBA re-release of A Link to the Past - was the "oldest tale" in the timeline. Unfortunately, this seems to be an occasion where information from Nintendo doesn't hold up to scrutiny, as Minish Cap seems to show Vaati's origin story, putting it earlier in the timeline. If this really is the case - and there's not a lot to suggest otherwise - it means that Four Swords can't be the oldest tale, unless there's some time travelling going on that Nintendo isn't telling anyone about.
This is simply because this interview happened before Minish Cap's release (Q4 2004), so Minish Cap as the first game in the series makes sense. Especially since that's where Link symbolically gets his hat.
Minish Cap comes later. People seem to forget about one pretty important thing with the timeline: Humans and Hylians. Several games (Link to the Past, Windwaker, Minish Cap) directly refer to the people within those games as humans, and Hylians as people who existed long ago.
 

Steelskin

New member
Mar 30, 2009
4
0
0
smudgey said:
Steelskin said:
Interestingly, in a 2004 interview with Game Informer, Aonuma said that Four Swords - which was a multiplayer expansion that piggybacked on the GBA re-release of A Link to the Past - was the "oldest tale" in the timeline. Unfortunately, this seems to be an occasion where information from Nintendo doesn't hold up to scrutiny, as Minish Cap seems to show Vaati's origin story, putting it earlier in the timeline. If this really is the case - and there's not a lot to suggest otherwise - it means that Four Swords can't be the oldest tale, unless there's some time travelling going on that Nintendo isn't telling anyone about.
This is simply because this interview happened before Minish Cap's release (Q4 2004), so Minish Cap as the first game in the series makes sense. Especially since that's where Link symbolically gets his hat.
Minish Cap comes later. People seem to forget about one pretty important thing with the timeline: Humans and Hylians. Several games (Link to the Past, Windwaker, Minish Cap) directly refer to the people within those games as humans, and Hylians as people who existed long ago.
Hmm, I was under the impression that Hylians was merely used to refer to the citizens of Hyrule... You may very well be right though but I don't think it matters as to the placement in the timeline. It's one of those things that makes arguing about the timeline so complicated: people keep referring to events in the past as legends and they get deformed.

... And here I am talking about Zelda timeline AGAIN. Because it's extremely important. And, y'know, it's not like it doesn't matter when you play the games.