1 - this is what most people consider to be the weakest reason so ill start with it. the hat. you start off with no hat. you play the game with a hat like creature on your head. after you save him from being a hat permanantly he gives you a hat saying it suits you. its the only game in the series where you dont start out with the hat and then recieve it saying that the hero of legends wore it.
example - in WW you dont start out with any of the clothing but when you do recieve it you are told that the hero of time wore a similar outfit.
this doesnt happen in MC. no one tells you that an ancient hero wore a hat like that. he just gives it to you because he thinks it suits you. thats a good explanation as to why any link wears a hat. if MC is first and that is the original Link then it explains why all other Links wear a hat.
i will be coming back to this idea a little bit later.
It is a good point you have, but why only the hat then? Why not tell the story of how Link got the whole green clothes?
2 - the BS of the game does not speak of any previous Zelda game.
example - the BS for WW obviously is talking about OoT. the BS for TP is what many believe to be what happens after Link returns to his childhood. the manual BS for FSA talks about FS. many believe that the BS for ALTTP is talking about OoT. every game that has a BS, has a BS that is obviously related to a previous game in the series.
this isnt the case with MC. the BS for MC is not at all related to any other title. also, the hero spoken of in the BS is the hero of men, Gustav...NOT LINK. also, even if you argue that it isnt Gustav in the BS, the hero in the BS still is not wearing a hat. if it was a Link from a previous game than the portraits/glass in the kingdom that shows the legend would have the hero wearing a hat. link is never referred to as the hero of men in any zelda game.
(this was where i went back to the hat idea).
The BS of FS also doesn't mention any game. Neither does the LoZ BS nor the AoL BS.
Only games that are logical sequels do so...
3 - the BS does not talk about any ONE super evil being. it only talks about an army of creatures. there is no mention of Ganon/dorf or any other higher being which leads many to believe that there is no higher being, just monsters. the hero of men sealed those creatures away. they obviously have a legend thats passed down but this legend never speaks of an evil leader. im also pretty sure that this is the only zelda game that takes place in Hyrule that doesnt have Ganon/dorf in it and if Ganon/dorf had existed before this game, then he would have been mentioned somewhere by someone. (FS too but FS isnt considered to be a full blown game).
I have to give you this. The OoT BS and TP BS also mention wars with no specific major villains, but since those would have happened bfore OoT, that can't be used as an example.
But please notice that originally, LttP BS (about the IW) didn't mention ganon at all...
4 - this is Vaati's introduction. Vaati was a picori. he wanted more power so he stole the hat that his master made so he could become a powerful sorcerer. Vaati releases the monsters onto the world from the chest that they once were sealed in. at the end of the game, Vaati is sealed in the chest but the monsters are not. this could explain why Hyrule/the world has monsters to begin with. also, this could explain why no other game has picori in it. after they saw how powerful the picori are and could become, the people could have gotten scared and made them go back to their own world thinking that it is best. we know that the royal family has made a group move out of fear (the gerudo into the gerudo desert) so its possible. if this is the first game in the timeline and the picori are sent back to their world it would explain why they are in no other game.
Well, the fact that the monsters (and I think the only monsters trapped in the chest were moblins, goriyas etc, not normal animals like octorocks) were there before being sealed into the bound chest by the Hero of Men makes this point invalid. It's pretty logical to assume that they were trapped in TMC BS and then released in TMC, not influencing any other games.
And the picori could have come to the "normal" world anytime. They could have traveled between TWW and TMC and then left again in the end of TMC. So, even though I have to agree that it's plausible, I don't think this point s conclusive. and please notice that we don't really see a lot of peoples/races anywhere in other games (the rito, the wind tribe, the oocca, the anouki, the yooks/yetis etc.)
5 - this is a recent theory i came up with so im going to see how it goes with this explanation. the light force is never spoken of in any game. if this power was fought over in ancient times and if this game takes place after WW/PH then why did it take so long to be fought over again? dont you think that Ganon/dorf would be after this power too? its the only game that mentions the light force and a war over the light force. now here is my theory. in the game, the power of the light force is given to Zelda. this could explain why the royal family has magical powers. it is never explained why the ocarina of time has the power it has. what if the royal family used their magic recieved from the light force to give the ocarina power. if we remember correctly, in some of the games the kings seem to have some magic power to them. they obviously dont get their power from a triforce so they have to get it from somewhere. if MC goes first on the timeline, it would help explain why the royal family has the powers that it has.
this isnt really meant to be an argument just a theory i came up with.
Well, the Light Force was pretty much residing in the Picori Realm before TMC BS. That would explain why it doesn't appear in any game that comes before TMC in my timeline. I don't know what happened after it, but you should have in mind that the Force Gems from FSA (or TWW? i don't really know) are called the same as the Light Force in japanese. And apparently in some other game (i don't really know much about this subject, but i can research it later) there is something called Life Force in the american version that has the same japanese name as the Light Force and the Force Gems.
So I don't really think the Light Force is such a powerfull/important iten...
you wanted me to explain why it could go first on a timeline. there ya go.
I agree that it's valid evidence, but none of them is really conclusive (but, again, neither are the ones i gave you), so I have to say that, even though I accept that TMC can come first in the timeline, I don't believe it for the reasons i posted already. You believe so for the reasons you said, which I think are valid. So I'd say that we can't really know for sure where TMC comes. It can be before OoT, after TWW or after TP...
Smertios, what Red Zoras are you referring to, in PH?The Zora Warriors that fight like Dark Nuts?
Yes, they are identical to the ones from LttP, except for the swords and shields and the different battle style.
I don't know if there rae any dark nuts in PH though, because i only played till the wind island and I only found one of those zoras to be honest.
Also, no matter what they say in the Japanese version... In the end we all know that the Tetra crew says that they've been only in the Ghost Ship for what,?10 minutes?
I have to give you that, but we see Lineback with the hourglass, so I'd say that the events really happened, even though time was slower there.
Even though I don't really agree with your timeline, you raised some good points, and I must congrat you about that, smertios
Thank you. As I said, currently we don't have any conclusive evidence to place most of the games. I'd say that TMC and FS can indeed come before OoT and the 2 games can come either in the CT or in the AT. There is evidence for both placements...
OoT was made before MC. there is absolutely no in game quotes that say there wasnt anyone who wore a green hat and tunic before the kokiri did. what if the kokiri wear those clothes in honor of a past hero? theres no in game quotes saying that they started that outfit.
The same could be said about TMC, they don't say that it was the first time ever that a hero used a green cap...
once again, OoT was made before MC so OBVIOUSLY the BS for OoT isnt going to be about a game that isnt created yet and wouldnt be created for many years.
Well, Lttp was also created before OoT, but they made sure to make it clear that OoT is LttP BS...
you said that its unlikely everyone would forget Vaati befor flood then just suddently remember after the flood. its the same thing with ganon. the only people that knew who he was after the flood was the king of red lions, the sages and the different gods. no regular person knew of him but something happened where he came back so in games after that they know him. its possible that this could happen with Vaati. he causes trouble, gets sealed, world floods later, defloods, he gets loose thus casuing him to be reintroduced to world just like ganondorf.
It's perfectly possible that a new Ganondorf was born after TWW. It happens a lot with Link, Zelda and Impa.
Or he could have been ressurected and caused trouble, that way people would know about him after the flood. OoX and AoL make it clear that ressurections are possible.
ill admit that there are arguments against MC being first but there are also arguments saying that it could be first and please dont talk like what youre saying is fact. it sounds like you know everything perfectly and that MC cant possibly go first and that kind of tone is annoying.
After you theorize about the same timeline for a while you start to state your beliefs as facts. It's natural even though it's wrong. But that doesn't make your beliefs either better or worse than mine. So i agree with you there.
And don't get too mad at SoJ, he just likes a good discussion and sometimes he sounds arrogant about it, but he is not. He is just like that when he is arguing about something. I had to get used to that...
Sure, but Aonuma has said he wants to connect the new games to the old games. So they should have made tMC fit with the OoT BS. tMC could go first. But there is almost no evidence for it. And the exact same evidence for it can be used for OoT to go first.
I wouldn't say that there is almost no evidence for TMC to go first, but that about Aonuma is a good point.
Like, when they created FS (and Nintendo didn't have much to do with that), i believe that the idea was to have a multiplayer zelda spinoff, with no connections to the timeline at all. When they released TMC, it was clearly supposed to be a prequel to FS (with easter eggs from other zelda games, like TWW, OoX and LoZ), but still not part of the 'canon' timeline.
When Nintendo created FSA though (2 years later), they decided to make it timeline relevant, adding many connections to LttP. Recently discovered removed text from the game shows that there was supposed to be a triforce in the game and that it was indeed the IW. But they removed that at request of Miyamoto.
So the original idea could have been to take LttP (and possibly LA) out of the 'main' timeline and create an alternative timeline that would start with FS (later TMC) as first and then it would go as TMCbs-TMC-FSbs-FS/FSA-LttP/(LA), but they never really stated anything else about that.
And please notice that Aonuma said that they 'were thinking' of making FS the oldest tale of Hyrule, but he never said anything about a conclusion. (FS was clearly supposed to be just a mere spinoff with no storyline purposes before they decided to make FSA.) And, of course, when he said that about FS, TMC was already being developed (it was released in the same year). That's why I think that he wanted to make the timeline go something like this:
TMC-FS/FSA-LttP/LA
...../-TWW/PH-LoZ/AoL
OoT
.....\MM-TP
with OoX coming absolutely anywhere. That's what I believe he meant when he said that he "is working" on a timeline. He probably gave up that idea to reconsider the original intent (and, hopefully, place TMC-FS/FSA in the main timeline again).
The fact that it takes place in a flooded land. The reference to the oracles. The triumph forks. That is all solid evidence for tMC to go on the AT after tWW.
Solid, definitely; but arguably conclusive. Everything is circunstancial, even though I believe that it's what makes more sense now.
The evidence for it to go first can be used for OoT to go first, too.
This is true...