Aonuma and Fujibayashi on BotW 's timeline placement.

[YIGAhim]

Well, maybe no one knows. Maybe in history class, they are taught that those were things that may have happened

 

[Ryuken]

It makes no sense because multiple histories would exist in the same reality, and that's just not how time works. If the three timelines united into one, what do the kids learn in history class for example? Do they learn that the Hero of Time defeated Ganon, or that he died trying? Or both? Do you see where the theory is lacking? Also, if the timelines did converge, it must have happened at a certain point in time, right? Let's say someone was alive in two of the timelines, but he lost a hand in one of them. Then at some point the timelines merge. Does this individual have one or two hands after that merge? Or are there two of him all of a sudden? No matter how I look at it I cannot get it to make sense. I'm certain there are many other ways to explain the coexistence of the Rito and the Zora.

The game takes place 10k years after any other game. Perhaps some of the history was lost to time, which is why I said in my earlier speculation that the goddesses converged the timelines in a way that no one would remember. Why else is there no in-game explanation for Zelda having the full Triforce?

 

[Pen]

Why else is there no in-game explanation for Zelda having the full Triforce?

Again, this is another question which could have countless potential answers. The unified timeline theory feels to me like a cop out way to give a complicated question a simple answer. I'm not saying that it's definitely not the case, but to me it doesn't make sense and it seems to be rather unfounded.

 

[el :BeoWolf:]

Perhaps some of the history was lost to time, which is why I said in my earlier speculation that the goddesses converged the timelines in a way that no one would remember.

Just because we don't remember it or it took place a long time ago doesn't mean it didn't happen. Look at the dinosaurs for example.

 

[DragonEleven]

I'm still in favour of the fourth timeline theory... one where similar events to all of the other timelines occurred (which would explain all of the references in BotW) but they wouldn't be the exact same events, allowing them all to coexist within the same timeline without contradicting one another.

 

[Ryuken]

I'm still in favour of the fourth timeline theory... one where similar events to all of the other timelines occurred (which would explain all of the references in BotW) but they wouldn't be the exact same events, allowing them all to coexist within the same timeline without contradicting one another.

I've heard quite a bit about that theory, and it seems plausuble. However, the point of contention is where on the timeline the fourth split would occur, and what would make that split happen.

 

[DragonEleven]

I've heard quite a bit about that theory, and it seems plausuble. However, the point of contention is where on the timeline the fourth split would occur, and what would make that split happen.

My own theory is that it would split in the adult timeline, before the Great Flood, with a failure/success split similar to the existing downfall/adult timeline split... nowhere does it say that there was no Link during this period, only that the Hero of Time specifically did not appear... there could easily have been a different Link present at that time who was ignored as he was not the Hero of Time, and failed on his quest, leading to the 'Era without a Hero' and the Great Flood.
On the other hand, if he had instead succeeded on his quest and defeated Ganondorf, then the Great Flood may have been prevented and the events of that timeline could have gone very differently... the 'Era with a Hero'.