A ZD Timeline Project

[Erimgard]

Unless the game completely contradicts him...which it does...

lol
You go right ahead and think that Zemen Doesn't damper my day.

 

[Caleb, Of Asui]

Wow, you guys always surprise me in one way or another. XD Go ahead and contradict the split timeline if you want, you'll just get slammed in the face. Now, everyone who is looking at existing evidence (and agreeing with the split timeline) are going with the second order (that one was the second one, right?), so that's that. Time to get into some stickier placements.

MO Revisited Discussion Closed

10.5 Miyamoto Order Revisited
- Discussion Closed -
Details: The Legend of Zelda and The Adventure of Link were placed to coincide with the Miyamoto Order because it "bridges" the Seal War in Ocarina of Time to A Link to the Past (exact details are a little complicated); however, The Wind Waker makes it clear that Nintendo no longer intends for Ocarina of Time to be the Seal War. We no longer need the first two games to be a "bridge," so do we follow all existing evidence and move them back to where they originally belonged? (Probably yes.)
Conclusion: Yes, The Wind Waker definitely debunks the Miyamoto Order.

Order so Far:
....../--TWW
OoT
......\MM--ALttP/LA--LoZ/AoL--OoS/OoA

11. Four Swords Adventures
- Current Discussion -

First Possibility:
............../--TWW
FSA--OoT
..............\MM--ALttP/LA--LoZ/AoL--OoS/OoA

Second Possibility:
....../--TWW
OoT
......\MM--FSA--ALttP/LA--LoZ/AoL--OoS/OoA

Third Possibility:
....../--TWW
OoT
......\MM--ALttP/LA--FSA--LoZ/AoL--OoS/OoA

Fourth Possibility:
....../--TWW
OoT
......\MM--ALttP/LA--LoZ/AoL--FSA--OoS/OoA

Fifth Possibility:
....../--TWW
OoT
......\MM--ALttP/LA--LoZ/AoL--OoS/OoA--FSA

Sixth Possibility:
....../--FSA--TWW
OoT
......\MM--ALttP/LA--LoZ/AoL--OoS/OoA

Seventh Possibility:
....../--TWW--FSA
OoT
......\MM--ALttP/LA--LoZ/AoL--OoS/OoA

NOTE: These aren't necessarily all justifiable; these are just all the open slots. Rather than ridiculing the obviously ridiculous ones, tell us which one you think is right (and remember: we want to come to a general consensus).

 

[MrMosley]

From what I have read/seen, FSA talks a lot about Ganondorf (as a man). For some reason, he is seeking out the Trident of Power, which he must obtain from a pyramid somewhere. I relate this to the Pyramid in the Dark World of ALttP, but it could be a different one so if someone could, correct me if I'm wrong. Now even though this kinda makes the SW a bit confusing, it still might fit. Therefore, this game has to happen before Ganondorf became Ganon in the BS of ALttP. That alone tells you that it has to come before ALttP, and after OoT because OoT was the first time Ganondorf did anything at all.

Ok, so Ganondorf goes somewhere after OoT's CT. He later shows up, hunting for the Trident of Power. He gets it, transforms into Ganon, and is beaten and sealed within it. This kinda messes with how Ganondorf was said to have became Ganon by means of his wish in ALttP's BS. But anyway, back to what I was saying. So at the end, we have Ganon sealed in the Four Sword. Then, later, we could assume that he broke out. We can assume that he reverted back to his human form, then the Seal War happened some time after he broke out. So, once the Seal War happened, the same events occured as talked about in ALttP. And that's the only way I can figure out the multiple transforming of Ganondorf into Ganon.

My order now would be:

....../--WW
OoT
......\MM--FSA--(SW)--ALttP/LA--LoZ/AoL

 

[Caleb, Of Asui]

That is where I normally place it, too, but I usually consider Four Swords Adventures to be the Seal War itself, or at least with the Seal War happening somewhere around the same time, perhaps toward the end or possibly even afterward.

In some older topic, somebody linked to some quotes in the data for Four Swords Adventures that didn't make it into the final version. If these were in the game, it would definitely be the Seal War, beyond the shadow of a doubt. When Miyamoto "turned the table over" (or whatever it was) and got rid of these quotes, he wasn't trying to eliminate Four Swords Adventures as the Seal War - he was trying to make it less complicated.

The seal itself was probably cast after the game ended. The part at the very end where we see Zelda walk hesitantly into a room may be hinting that Ganon is about to be sealed under higher security.

The fact that Ganon is in his original (game-wise) blue beast form rather than the one from Ocarina of Time (and Twilight Princess), further supports that when he enters this form, he cannot go back. Saying he changes back at some point is a bit preposterous. So, even if the events specific to the seal happen much later, it's obvious that they intend for the bit about Ganon to be happening here.

The Four Sword Palace in Four Swords further supports that the seal is related to Four Swords Adventures. It's possible that the opening to the Sacred Realm spawned there, and the Four Sword was sealed inside, then later broken in order to release Ganon, but only into the Dark World. (I realize that some people don't like to look at that dungeon as canon, but there's really no justification there - after all, they were revising the story a little bit with the remake.)

If Ganon had to have touched the Triforce in order to enter his blue beast form, then that's what happened at the final battle of Four Swords Adventures; we just aren't told anything about the Triforce. So, if Link hadn't defeated Ganon in the final battle of that game, he would have gained control of Hyrule; but, he was sealed instead, and gained control of wherever he was sealed.

So, that's what I (personally) have to say. This does not, however, mean I am closing this discussion. We need more input to what we have before we can call the thread's decision. Whether or not Four Swords Adveuntures is the Seal War itself is slightly irrelevant, as long as we get the order down.

 

[MrMosley]

Are we discussing Four Swords as well right now? I know you (Caleb) mentioned it.

 

[sign of table]

Which would be what? I don't remember this story.

It'd help if you people actually read the translations we have. You know, there's this awesome thread on ZI that LOZH made that even organizes every single translation we have. You might wanna read it, or study from the thread on LA/ZU that Impossible made which gives links to all the translations.

Understand that part first, then work on the fact that Miyamoto doesn't have to know anything big about the timelines in general. Or just read my last post and figure it out. I gave reason for this and I'm not going to waste time by re-quoting my entire last post.

He doesn't need to know everything about the series to always be right. He created it, he has full control over it, therefore Miyamoto is correct. No matter what. His quotes may be retconned at a later date, but when he makes his quotes he is correct. I am going to compare him to god because him and Aonuma are essentially god in what pertains to the Zelda universe.

How doesn't the AoL BS work? It can fit anywhere after ALttP or OoX.

I really wish the theorists of this place would, you know, actually read the Japanese translations. http://www.zeldalegends.net/files/text/z2translation/z2_manual_story.html The sleeping Zelda is the first generation/founder Zelda. How does that work after OoT (or TMC).

Well I can honestly say I have no idea what story you are talking about but it sounds to me like it's a side quest or add on to the game that doesn't pertain to the main story in any way. I am talking about ALTTP as a whole whereas you are trying to argue something that seems to be unknown to most people.

You might know if you actually read the translations that Prime Blue/Jumbie/Jacensolo kindly make for us. Read it, now. It is in-game text that 100% contradicts the split timeline. But it doesn't freaken matter because what Aonuma/Miyamoto say goes.

Yay I get to use my argument again! You're one of those people who would start calling Link, Fred, if Miyamoto told you that Link was Fred all along. You hate this argument so much, yet everything you says just backs up the fact that you completely agree with it and that is the stance you would take. He can't go and erase every copy of the series that calls Link, Link. No matter what he says, we all know there are games where he is called Link. You can call him Fred all you want, but he WAS Link no matter what Miyamoto says. No matter what Miyamoto says, the original box for ALTTP clearly calls Link and Zelda predecessors. His words don't magically change that. The retcon doesn't make the Miyamoto timeline any more correct. He is wrong. The game has done a fantastic job of proving that.

And I would; because Miyamoto would be correct. It doesn't matter if he can't erase what the previous games said. Aonuma can't erase the text of TWW that completely and utterly contradicts the split timeline, but the split timeline is still fact because he says it is. I don't personally agree with the Miyamoto timeline at this time, but in 1998 it was fact, no matter what the games said.

I think I'll take "game creators who don't know what they're talking about" for 500, Alex.

You need to change your timeline before I flip out over your terrible hypocrisy.

I always have fun with your posts. They give me a good chuckle.

You know, there's something I'd call you right now, but with this sites strict rules on swearing, I won't for fear of getting banned.

Miyamoto is a real person. God is a theory. Let's try and use real world/existing analogies as that might actually hold some ground in this argument. God is a 3000 year old theory. Miyamoto is a (insert his age here) proven to be in existence person. Don't make analogies where half of it is something that you don't even know exists. My argument involves someone who actually exists.

Your argument that if Miyamoto turned out to be a nutcase and hypothetically rename Link to Fred is an argument that has any logical basis in fact?!?!

But if god were to exist (I personally don't think there is a god), everything he says would be inherently true. As with Miyamoto with Zelda.

 

[angelkid]

Bit late sign, and wrong again. Not everything Miyamoto says about Zelda is correct.

I agree with the second option. I think that it has to be that FSA comes after OoT and before ALttP. Ganondorf basically proves that. Unless it is a different Ganon/dorf there is no way that it could be any other order. He is a man in OoT he turns from man to beast in FSA and he is a beast in all the games that follow on from that (So far.)

If you would have asked me like a month ago, purely for the reason that I always thought MC, FS and FSA were a seperate trilogy in which all the games are direct sequels (meaning MC/FS/FSA) However, when you look at Ganondorf you realise this is ridiculous and it can be no other way.

 

[MrMosley]

It'd help if you people actually read the translations we have. You know, there's this awesome thread on ZI that LOZH made that even organizes every single translation we have. You might wanna read it, or study from the thread on LA/ZU that Impossible made which gives links to all the translations.

Translations are all well and good, Sign. But I don't care what the Japanese games say personally. Whether they contradict the Split Timeline or not, we know its there. You come in here and throw some random fairy story around for absolutely no reason because first, it doesn't help anything, and second, we know the split exists. I'm not Japanese, and I'm not going to waste my time reading the entire text of all the Zelda games, translated, to try and prove a point. Some translations are good, or more helpful, so don't get me wrong on that. But generally, I'm gonna go with what I've been given and can actually understand as I'm playing it.

And I would; because Miyamoto would be correct. It doesn't matter if he can't erase what the previous games said. Aonuma can't erase the text of TWW that completely and utterly contradicts the split timeline, but the split timeline is still fact because he says it is. I don't personally agree with the Miyamoto timeline at this time, but in 1998 it was fact, no matter what the games said.

Well have fun believing everything Miyamoto says because at the end of the day, what the game says is final. Again, read some of the reasoning in my posts. Miyamoto is not involved in much of the story part of the series. It is illogical, and ignorant, to believe him about the timeline. If he came out tomorrow and said that the timeline is the order of the games' releases, he would be right if there were no specific timeline at all. But otherwise, he would be wrong.

Now before this thread gets completely off topic and turns into another useless timeline thread, let me make something pretty clear:

The point of this thread is for all ZD timeline theorists to come up with a timeline to represent the site. If you can't do that, I suggest you go elsewhere. We don't need any input towards anything if its just going to be going against theories and not providing your own.

Next time you post, Sign, it would be helpful if you gave your theories instead of rambling on just to disagree with someone or act like your gonna call someone a name. Its a freaking forum, so calm down. Use your knowledge to try and help with the discussion.

 

[Caleb, Of Asui]

I would suggest making your own topic about the Fairy-thing, Sign, or at least stop rambling about it here. And one suggestion for if you do make your own topic: show exactly what part you're talking about, rather than telling people to read the game's entire text.

The placement of Four Swords will be the next discussion, after this one. You can still reference it, though, since it was released before Four Swords Adventures.

It looks like we have two people (excluding myself) going for OoT/MM--FSA--LttP/LA, and nobody going for anything else. I'd like a little bit more input first, though.

 

[Hayzer]

Well, you got three. It's the only placement that makes sense (even though more problems are created than sloved). I'd have to agree with a FSA--ALttP order. You guys have pretty much covered both sides of the theory for it, so I don't really need to say anything...

 

[Erimgard]

Quick note:

If the only reason for WW debunking the "Miyamoto Order" is that the Seal War can no longer be OoT's adult ending...then so what? Miyamoto himself never even said that was the order. His character designer and script writer did. All he did was lay out the order, not the fine details.

So if we can assume OoT-MM-Seal War-aLttP
Then there's no reason we can't still believe OoT-MM-Seal War-LoZ-AoL-aLttP

You don't have to change Miyamoto's order based on WW. You just have to change interpretation of the Seal War. Food for thought.

 

[MrMosley]

So if we can assume OoT-MM-Seal War-aLttP
Then there's no reason we can't still believe OoT-MM-Seal War-LoZ-AoL-aLttP

No because you follow the same rules of ALttP's Seal War, being that Ganon was sealed and did not come out. That putting LoZ directly after the SW completely contradicts this idea. The fact that the seal was not broke until ALttP is what makes WW break the idea of OoT being the SW. It also breaks the idea of LoZ being directly after the SW.

 

[Erimgard]

No because you follow the same rules of ALttP's Seal War, being that Ganon was sealed and did not come out. That putting LoZ directly after the SW completely contradicts this idea. The fact that the seal was not broke until ALttP is what makes WW break the idea of OoT being the SW. It also breaks the idea of LoZ being directly after the SW.

See my previous arguments, which were considered logical in the final conclusion by Caleb, which state that this is retconned by BS-LoZ stating that Ganon only got the ToP during the Seal War.

Also, I'd like to point out that this point in time (actually, just before Wind Waker) is when aLttP GBA/Four Swords was released which does not say that Ganon was present during the Seal War.

Since we're up to 2004 materials by Caleb's rules at this point, the Seal War no longer requires Ganon to have been sealed from the time of the Seal War until aLttP.

In fact, Ganon's no longer even required to be present for the Sealing. I personally believe him to be, but logic does not confine it to that one possibility.

 

[MrMosley]

Also, I'd like to point out that this point in time (actually, just before Wind Waker) is when aLttP GBA/Four Swords was released which does not say that Ganon was present during the Seal War.

If he wasn't present, how did he get "Sealed" in there? The point of the SW was to close the opening to the SR because Ganon had went in and wished on the Triforce, turning it into the Dark World, and causing evil creatures to pour out. I've played both games and I even gave reasons before (on pg.4) that say the SNES version and GBA follow the same story. So what if it doesn't specifically state that Ganon wasn't present. It doesn't have to for us to obviously know he was. I've read the BS Zelda stuff, and it doesn't change anything. If it did, it is re-retconned by GBA ALttP anyway. Ganon was sealed in there because he entered and wished on the Triforce. This is the Seal War.

Since we're up to 2004 materials by Caleb's rules at this point, the Seal War no longer requires Ganon to have been sealed from the time of the Seal War until aLttP.

If you can provide quotes from GBA ALttP that say otherwise, then I would believe you. But that's not gonna happen because they don't exist. The plot is the same. Unless you come to me with something that says Ganon was not sealed in the SR, then the plot stays the same. But again, that's not gonna happen, because I've given quotes from the game that say he was sealed.

 

[Hayzer]

I think DL's got it spot on. When I entered this discussion, I would've taken ole Erim at about anything, but after I learned all the details about the SW, ALttP cannot take place after LoZ and AoL, unless you would place the SW after AoL, and that doesn't even make much sense...