It's not about the style of text, it's about Misko's Journal, as said above.
I'm not talking about the ''EX'' that appears in menus and such; I'm talking specifically about the ''EX'' at the end of Misko's Journal, which is ingame text that Link himself reads.
Which goes into the other in-game EX text; there for player convenience, not there for what Link actually reads. A lot of games do this, even with content that is absolutely considered canon. It's considered an acceptable break from reality.
Sorry, how is using ingame evidence to prove/disprove something ''fanfiction''? Last time I checked, fanfiction was used to describe the opposite, but alright...
So far, your in-game evidence amounts to stuff added purely for player convenience, which logically would not be present inside the actual game world.
That's New Hyrule. BotW obviously takes place in Old Hyrule, as the MS exists in it, and so does the ToT.
The ToT is on the Great Plateau, and the MS is located a massive distance away. If the ToT is the same one as in OoT, then the MS has been moved a massive distance.
Proof of these? Now THIS is what I'd call fanfiction.
I also stated this much earlier in the discussion:
"And, really, there is no canon method as to how BotW is at the end of every timeline; any explanation is pretty much pure fanfiction right now. I'm just going for the one that involves the least amount of headaches (not that it's remotely headache-free, but that it accounts for all elements of lore present in BotW without ruling items in-game as noncanon)."
It doesn't actually say that; it says that the Great Plateau is the birth place of Hyrule, not that all of Hyrule is in that specific region.
And Hyrule post-WW is in an entirely different location than in OoT. If we're going to have this "not all of Hyrule" discussion, we're going to do nothing but go in endless circles around that one point. And it still doesn't change the fact that the Master Sword's pedestal is not anywhere close to the Temple of Time in BotW.
But still, not even ONCE? The Great Calamity was atleast mentioned a handful of times, from what I recall.
Characters in-game basically don't mention anything prior to the first Divine Beast fight with Ganon. So, yes. Not even once.
That literally makes zero sense, though, as they're all contradictory with eachother.
It's a temporal paradox. It doesn't have to make sense or be non-contradictory. And it's not even the first temporal paradox of its kind; OoT used the same paradox in inverse for its three endings. Skyward Sword also features a temporal paradox; its ending, with Demise sealed inside the Master Sword in the past, makes most of the rest of the game impossible to have happened; the ending contradicts the events of the rest of the game. Then there's the temporal paradox in Wind Waker.
Unfortunately, the Legend of Zelda series requires us to wrap our heads around and accept events that outright contradict each other as canon, even when the contradiction should make one set impossible. Having a timeline merger and having three outcomes that contradict each other as canon is not a big stretch compared to the games where the full sequence of events made the full sequence of events self-contradictory.
Would it really be difficult to give one or two NPCs a few lines about something like that?
Not in the least. But, then, BotW is notoriously lacking in that department in general.
You should try giving more satisfactory answers to the ones I've given you already before I do that.
We're discussing a Legend of Zelda game with the possibility of temporal manipulation involved. It is not unusual for canon events within the same timeline to contradict each other when that is involved. So, I don't need to give you a more satisfactory answer because the answers I did give are on the same level as the ones that are established canon.
