I
ItsJustTheChad
Guest
I made a revised version of the timeline theory. Check it out.
Last edited by a moderator:
What I meant was don't think about developer statements. Just think about the timeline. We're looking at the story presented here. It's my first post. If it offends you sorry. Just a theory ya know...To be frank, there is so much wrong with that. It goes against about a billion developer statements (not to mention generally accepted fact). I'm not going to point out everything that was wrong with that, but it's wrong.
Wow... Thank you. I totally smiled reading this. Haha.That is a very interesting perspective on the Timeline. I never would have thought to place the games in that order. Although I can sort of see the first three, because the Zelda in Zelda 2 might have been the first Zelda, and SS is supposedly earlier than OoT, though no one has said it was the first game.
I will be very interested in seeing your YouTube video and explanation for the timeline, because it's fairly original... which is good, because it increases the likelihood that you're seeing a pattern the rest of us have overlooked.
Of course, don't be surprised if you take a lot of flack on here. A lot of people take these theories very seriously, and grill you mercilessly if you depart too much from accepted convention, don't rely enough on evidence or developer quotes, flatly being told you're "wrong" when we have no certainty regarding what's "right." They can be such sticklers for detail, not really able to appreciate imagination. Kind of sad, really.
5. In Minish Cap a story is told that tells of a blade coming from the sky, the picori blade which later is turned into the master sword. I believe this to be the Skyward Sword.
Hoo boy. I didn't take ANY of that into account. I'm gonna do my original theory first and then i'm gonna try a new theory newly adopted from your advice. Thanks!Hey, you have an interesting theory. But let me point out some of your mistakes:
1) ALttP is before LoZ/AoL - it states it in the back of the SNES version box
2) LA is a direct sequel to ALttP, therefore also before LoZ/AoL
3) Ganondorf is born in OoT, which puts it before ALttP, and taking MM with it since it is OoT's direct sequel
4) This is not really a mistake, but you need to come up with an explanation of how Ganon in FSA exists, and how Ganon from WW came out of his stone form
That's all I can think of right now, hope I helped
Your first mistake.It's my theory for a single timeline.
prince, not king; and impa, not zelda (if that's from the manual)3. In Zelda 2 the prince or King (i forget) in his sorrow declares all princess' born of the royal family shall be named Zelda. Also when Link discovers the Triforce on his hand Zelda explains that Link is a part of the triforce of Courage and vice versa.
The picori blade becomes the four sword. Both the FS and the MS appear in the same game (GBA LttP) as two different swords. There are lots of other contradictions, but I'll refrain from using them as evidence until we know more about SS.5. In Minish Cap a story is told that tells of a blade coming from the sky, the picori blade which later is turned into the master sword. I believe this to be the Skyward Sword.
6. The first 2 Zelda games don't have the master sword. Some believe them to be the last games because the four sword which was formerly the master sword was eventually destroyed.
These must come after OoT and/or FSA.Zelda->Zelda 2->
Again, after OoT, for mostly the same reasons.A Link to the Past->Oracle of Seasons/Ages->
OoT was stated as recently as this year to have been the first game before SS is added to the timeline.Ocarina of Time->
There are some very long threads describing how this can't work. It goes against dev quotes, Ganondorf is inconsistent, and more.Twilight Princess->Windwaker->
Why would the ToP be any different than the other pieces? By that logic there should be one Link and one Zelda as well. I'm not saying that there is necessarily more than one Ganondorf, just that your reasoning doesn't make sense to me.Since he is a part of that piece he will never be destroyed permanently.
Welcome to ZD and to Zelda theorizing. The developers made the stories. What they say about the stories have just as much clout as the games themselves, unless they are in direct conflict. Developers, developers, developers, developers!What I meant was don't think about developer statements. Just think about the timeline. We're looking at the story presented here. It's my first post. If it offends you sorry. Just a theory ya know...
Zelda from the SZS being first or not has no impact on AoL's placement, as there is an unspecified time period inbetween in which other games could have taken place.I can sort of see the first three, because the Zelda in Zelda 2 might have been the first Zelda
I also anxiously await this video. I'll try not to let my preconceptions from reading this thread interfere with analyzing the evidence you present. I will still probably scoff at your lack of faith in the developers.Yea the video is DEEP in detail. I guess this timeline just doesn't seem right yet because it lacks detail.
By this you mean you're just moving the one game between MM and TP?OH! And Twilight Princess should be AFTER Link's Awakening. Shoot. Because this explains the complete change of scenery. In my opinion. Who knows. I'm probably wrong. Still fun to imagine though.
The time period before OoT is a single timeline, and they're adding backstory just fine. In fact, Aonuma just recently refused to state that SS was the 'first' game because he said that would prevent them from making more prequels.I have one reason why there shouldn't be a single timeline.
They wouldn't be able to add in any more back story.
Basically, if there is a single timeline, there has to be a "FIRST" game. therefore meaning that they can never make anymore prequels, and wouldn't be able to add any backstory. without the ability to add extra back story, the newer games would get lame stories after a while, because time would only be able to move forward, they couldn't go back to the beginning, in between the middle, or in a completely different universe altogether.
There's my two cents, feel free to say what you like