• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Three-Branched Timeline Split Explanations

Fierce

Deity Link
Joined
May 17, 2011
Location
East Coast USA
Shouldn't the timeline then split when Link goes back in time to defeat Demise in SS as well?

It may very well split, however since we do not have any current games that take place in this alternate timeline it isn't relevant to our theorizing. :)
I would love to see a new Zelda game where Demise rules the land personally. That alternate timeline would be Dark and twisted... awesome even. The reason there isn't much clash however (like at the end of OOT) is that Link is merely thwarting Ghirahim in reviving an already fallen Demise, whose fate was already to be ultimately destroyed by the Triforce.

Honestly, due to the whole tree of life and sleeping Zelda, Impa bracelet nonsense... I've concluded that the Door of Time travels in a much different way than the Ocarina of Time or the Master Sword. I still have much analysis to do on that particular aspect of the game. Seeing as how Skyward Sword is so easy to place on the Timeline, I don't think Nintendo worried too much about conflicts with other games like they did Wind Waker and Twilight Princess.
 

LinkPTY

Skyward Wiimote
Joined
Nov 21, 2011
Location
Panama
Triple Timeline Explanation

This guy explains the triple timeline very well and it finally made me understood how it came to be.

[video=youtube;umS4flaa-20]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umS4flaa-20[/video]

What do you guys think of this explanation? This theory makes sense to me.
 
T

Tadock

Guest
When you pull out the Master Sword you are not transported anywhere. You just sleep in the Chamber of Sages for seven years.
 

Locke

Hegemon
Site Staff
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Location
Redmond, Washington
lol I think he's making it more confusing; he should have used a script. Fortunately I know what he's trying to say.

First, I'm going to point out some flawed logic in his green arrows. With green arrow #1, he claims that Link changes the past and therefore green arrow #2 must go to an alternate future. Okay, I've seen that argument before. I've countered it in other threads, but that's not what I'm getting at here. His problem comes with arrows #3 and #4. #3 has Link going to the past again and changing more things. Arrow #4 then would go to another alternate future. Another alternate future. If #2 and #3 can lead to the same future, why can't #2 lead to the same future as the original timeline? According to his logic, there should be 4 futures.

lol "Zelda II: Link's Awakening"

"In all these games, they never talk about the Hero of Time at all." Well duh, they were all (with the exception of OoX) released before OoT.

He evidently is not using "everything" we know about the Historia timeline, since OoT's ending has been translated. The result of Link's discussion with Zelda is that Zelda sends him on his side journey instead of into the ToT. Ganondorf is caught later. Admittedly, the section of TP's backstory describing Ganondorf's execution has not been translated.

And finally, as I've been saying a lot recently, "The Hero is Defeated".... this does not happen in his original timeline.

...and ima merge this with some other similar threads.
 
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
A shorter explanation:

There are three timelines because three people created these timelines - first Ganon when he enters the Sacred Realm to take over the world, then Link when he goes back in time to get the Lens of Truth, and then Zelda when she sends Link back in time to be a child again. In other words, the second timeline came from the first, and then the third timeline came from the second.

In a nutshell, when you go back in time to change something, the future changes and creates a new timeline.
 

Locke

Hegemon
Site Staff
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Location
Redmond, Washington
Hi, new to the forums but I got interested with all this timeline talk recently. Someone posted this a few days ago and I wanted you guys to take a look at it and tell me if it seems legit and logical. I'm just curious what you think and your opinions. Thanks. :)

View attachment 21050

EDIT: sorry that appears too small, try this link http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/862/1324627263931.jpg/
Welcome, and thanks for showing us that image. I think that's a little better than what others in this thread have presented because it attempts to resolve the Song of Storms issue while for the most part preserving the established effects of MS time travel, but it still has many of the same problems and adds some new ones.

"The next time he travels into the future there must be a split to prevent a time paradox." I don't fully understand the reasoning here. First, why "must" time split in order to prevent paradoxes? And second, how does this split actually prevent said paradox? It's already said and done by that point. Link learned the song from Guru-Guru in the future, and taught it to him in the past. Perhaps I'm missing something here.

After the song is played, the author claims that Link travels back and forth between the two timelines. The way the graphic is layed out, it seems that In the past, Link is still on the original timeline, then goes to the new timeline when he travels to the future. Is that to say that the split doesn't actually happen until young Link finally rests for his 7 years, after he's completed the child portion of his quest? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of time splitting when he plays the song?

Those are the new problems this specific theory brings up, but it also shares the major oversight of the explanation in the Historia itself: "The Hero is Defeated." Not "Left for another timeline" like in WW's backstory. He was actually defeated.
 
(before i start i have to say i haven't played FS or FSA.. because i can't... but i do know the story plot etc to the best that i can without playing it... anyway, on with what i have to say)

I could make peace with the third split, it does make a lot of sense in a lot of places with relative ease that other theorists just overlooked. But a couple of things bother me.

I never wanted Minish Cap to come so early in the timeline, nor the Four Swords, because the Four Sword is very similar to the Master Sword which can lock away/repel/trap evil like a very convoluted lock and key effect when coupled with a dark entity and or the pedestal of time. For the Four Sword to exist while the Master Sword is alive and well... being Dormant after SS with Impa guarding it until Demise's essence has faded means nothing, since at the end of ALttP the epilogue said the Mast Sword sleeps forever/eternally... which is why in the timeline that we have now LoZ link goes ahead and pulls it... it just seems pointless to have both the Four Sword and Master Sword side by side and not at all mentioned in games surrounding it. THEN for some reason FSA occurs after MM and TP... i don't get that at all. It makes me think the Gods/Zelda have preferences on which Sword to pick up and use... 'Do we want four Links or just the one...?' Both swords seemingly do the same thing and exist side by side... it feels really messy, i'dve preferred MC, FS and FSA being the third timeline or a trilogy farther down the line on any of the splits rather than right at the beginning and then seemingly randomly at the end. Its just bizarre so if anyone can tell me why....

Another thing, on the third 'fail' split, i'm not too much interested in finding out how or when Link died... or if he even did... my main problem with it is that there are some damn good games in there and a lot of heritage. I've heard it said that the 'fail' timeline is a 'what if' scenario... which to me just feels as if it detracts from so much ALttP is one of the best Zelda games with one hell of a story both during the game and outside of it like the imprisoning war, to have that as only a what if? Though that is just personal feeling on the subject... the Four Sword thing is what bugs me the most... it doesn't really have any place outside of TP does it? Where is the Master Sword at the beginning of FSA? it should still be in Ganondorf....(is it?, again i haven't played FSA or FS) which makes sense for Link to then pick up the Four Sword as a way of taking out Vaati... but still, for the Four sword to go unmentioned for so long...

So can anyone help me out on this aspect of the timeline? Wjhy the Four Sword is lorded and then neglected and only ends up existing in the Child timeline when it was first introduced in the main timeline (SS, MC, FS, OOT) therefore should really still exist in the 'fail' and 'adult' timelines too?
 

Ventus

Mad haters lmao
Joined
May 26, 2010
Location
Akkala
Gender
Hylian Champion
the Four Sword thing is what bugs me the most... it doesn't really have any place outside of TP does it? Where is the Master Sword at the beginning of FSA? it should still be in Ganondorf....(is it?, again i haven't played FSA or FS) which makes sense
Ganon in FSA is a reincarnated version, not the same one that we defeated in TP.
 
Hmm.. i still don't like it, the Four Sword would have been a nice alternative to the Master Sword in a situation where Link was unable to use the Master Sword... it just doesn't sound right. I guess that means though, that if anything were to follow FSA there would be nothing stopping that Link taking up the Master Sword from where ever it is... (ganondorf's old body?... still standing there...) :-P i think the series as a whole could have done without the FS and FSA games..
 
Joined
Dec 25, 2011
Could anyone list the times Link actually goes to the past, what he changes, and why? I've been trying to find a list to see what he's actually up to but I haven't been able to locate one. The only time I know for sure is when he goes back to play the song of storms.
 
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Ithink you only go back twice in an official capacity. Official being on doing what you have to do to complete the game, not going back for heart pieces, magic beans, etc.

1st: Go back to drain the well and get the Lens of Truth
Only changes I can think of- you drain the Well and teach the Song of Storms to the Windmill guy

2nd: Go back to get the Silver Gauntlets in the Spirit Temple
I don't think you change anything here

Maybe someone could add/correct to what I've said but I do believe that's it.
 
K

kroni

Guest
Why There is a Third Timeline in OOT

I have a plausible theory for why there are three splits in the timeline. There are actually three different timelines shown in Ocarina of Time in-game.

The Defeated Timeline: This is the original timeline, and the one that you see in game during OOT while Link is a child. The Link of this timeline gets transported to the adult timeline after unsealing the Temple of Time. (For all those people out there who complain that the original games became what-ifs, they actually are the most official because they stem from the original version of history) According to Nintendo, when Link slept for 7 years, he was actually transported to another timeline. The Defeated Timeline is also the one Link returns to when he pulls out the master sword in-game, like he did when he helped Nabooru in the desert. It's definitely not the child timeline, because that doesn't even exist yet. Even if it did, the temple of time shouldn't be open in the child timeline. After Link finishes helping Nabooru, he leaves this timeline forever and never comes back. This causes a timeline to exist where Link is not present and Ganondorf is victorious.

The Adult Timeline: Link has become an adult and awakens in the temple of time. He did not have a childhood in this timeline. He defeats Ganondorf and then gets sent to the newly created child timeline.

The Child Timeline: Link is sent back in time to the moment he meets Zelda in the courtyard (see Hyrule Historia) and creates the third parallel timeline. He undergoes a secret mission which allows Zelda to expose Ganondorf, which leads to MM and TP. (Note at this point only the Deku tree's stone has been collected, and none of the other events from OOT have occurred)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom