Correct by Ganondorfs, But Could You Check by Triforce, Etc.

[Locke]

Minimal details are minimal xD.
But yeah, it's a pain in the arse to correctly fit LoZ and AoL ANYWHERE

What about after WW? Ganondorf died, but Ganon probably still lives. The land comes back thanks to the GDT:
"Soon, a day will come when all the islands
are one, connected by earth and grove." -Great Deku Tree
The triforce was united at the end of wind waker, and was probably put in the hands of the rulers of the new Hyrule
The MS sunk to the bottom of the ocean, and never appears in LoZ/AoL
etc. I don't see much difficulty in placing it there.

Yeahh =/, Another thing I don't understand is why everyone thinks MC is at the beginning. Sure, he got a hat. But what other reasonings are there?

I haven't played MC, so I don't really have an opinion on its placement atm, but most of what I have read was either "MC goes before OoT" or "where is the proof that MC goes before OoT?"
One thing I haven't read is proof that MC doesn't go before OoT, so could you enlighten me please?
(not trying to argue, just trying to gain information.)

 

[ironknuckle1]

i put MC before the four swords because in it the picori sword ( which i think is another name for the master sword since they look the same ) is turned into the Four sword and due to my above statement if MC was in the front their would be no master sword in the other zeldas. And most people have concluded that OOT is the beginning of the timeline

 

[sign of table]

If you payed attention, ALttP specifies that it was Ganondorf who stole the triforce and not Ganon, so LoZ and AoL cannot be before ALttP

Ganondorf stealing the Triforce pre-LttP is impossible unless FSA is not attached to LttP. Just sayin'

But you can't say the CT works perfectly your way, after all Ganon suddenly comes alive between ALttP and LoZ. Although I think we have to accept that due to the fact LoZ/AoL were made a long time ago, before the timeline as a whole was imagined, the timeline is bound to have holes.

Ganon is dead after LoZ, OoX, and LttP. It's practically impossible to have a Ganon that makes sense in the timeline unless you go with something like:
----TWW/PH-TMC-FS/FSA-LoZ/AoL(-OoX)
OoT
----MM-TP-LttP/LA(-OoX)

The land comes back thanks to the GDT

From what we know of ST (which could change, but we know a good deal about it for what I am talking about) the GDT bringing the land together theory is pretty ****ed.

The triforce was united at the end of wind waker, and was probably put in the hands of the rulers of the new Hyrule

Proof? I mean we see it come together then fly away. But nothing EVER implies that it got into the hands of the rulers of New Hyrule. And when we consider that the Hyrule logo for ST has a Force Gem instead of a Triforce... (once again, this could mean nothing. God I can't wait until Monday when we can actually use ST as evidence without doubting the evidence...)

 

[Skull_Kid]

Well, Aonouma or Myiamoto(I don't remember wich one said it) saying so?

 

[Pablo]

What about after WW? Ganondorf died, but Ganon probably still lives. The land comes back thanks to the GDT:
"Soon, a day will come when all the islands
are one, connected by earth and grove." -Great Deku Tree
The triforce was united at the end of wind waker, and was probably put in the hands of the rulers of the new Hyrule
The MS sunk to the bottom of the ocean, and never appears in LoZ/AoL
etc. I don't see much difficulty in placing it there.


I haven't played MC, so I don't really have an opinion on its placement atm, but most of what I have read was either "MC goes before OoT" or "where is the proof that MC goes before OoT?"
One thing I haven't read is proof that MC doesn't go before OoT, so could you enlighten me please?
(not trying to argue, just trying to gain information.)

Woah there!?! I've know its quite an accepted theory, but I refuse to see Ganondorf and Ganon as different people, they may be separate entities but in one body. But I'm sure if one dies, the other does.

i put MC before the four swords because in it the picori sword ( which i think is another name for the master sword since they look the same ) is turned into the Four sword and due to my above statement if MC was in the front their would be no master sword in the other zeldas. And most people have concluded that OOT is the beginning of the timeline

It definitely goes before FS, after all it goes MC--FS--FSA, or possibly FS/FSA. I agree that OoT should be first, but wasn't entirely sure, so I went with what appeared to be the general contentious.

Ganondorf stealing the Triforce pre-LttP is impossible unless FSA is not attached to LttP. Just sayin' Ganon is dead after LoZ, OoX, and LttP. It's practically impossible to have a Ganon that makes sense in the timeline unless you go with something like:
----TWW/PH-TMC-FS/FSA-LoZ/AoL(-OoX)
OoT
----MM-TP-LttP/LA(-OoX) From what we know of ST (which could change, but we know a good deal about it for what I am talking about) the GDT bringing the land together theory is pretty ****ed. Proof? I mean we see it come together then fly away. But nothing EVER implies that it got into the hands of the rulers of New Hyrule. And when we consider that the Hyrule logo for ST has a Force Gem instead of a Triforce... (once again, this could mean nothing. God I can't wait until Monday when we can actually use ST as evidence without doubting the evidence...)

Could you explain the FS-ALttP connection? I've heard of that, but only little.

Also the Force gem, rather than Triforce, on the shield is, I think, very important. It is possible that after the end of WW, the triforce wasn't seen of again. Of course this would suggest the FS trilogy on the adult timeline. But I'm just chucking ideas around here.

 

[Locke]

Also the Force gem, rather than Triforce, on the shield is, I think, very important. It is possible that after the end of WW, the triforce wasn't seen of again. Of course this would suggest the FS trilogy on the adult timeline. But I'm just chucking ideas around here.

What I was suggesting was that the Triforce stayed in the vicinity of the original Hyrule, while Link et al. went far away to a new land with force gems instead of the Triforce. Therefore everything after ST would have only force gems (which, as you say, makes me think about the placement of the FS trilogy), but the Triforce would still exist in the land of Hyrule. Hence my geographical split:
....../PH -- ST (no Triforce because far away)
WW
......\ -- LoZ/AoL (Triforce still in Hyrule)

But, as SoJ said, I have no proof. I just say that because it makes more sense to me than any other LoZ/AoL placement.
And of course ST could change all that.

 

[Pablo]

What I was suggesting was that the Triforce stayed in the vicinity of the original Hyrule, while Link et al. went far away to a new land with force gems instead of the Triforce. Therefore everything after ST would have only force gems (which, as you say, makes me think about the placement of the FS trilogy), but the Triforce would still exist in the land of Hyrule. Hence my geographical split:
....../PH -- ST (no Triforce because far away)
WW
......\ -- LoZ/AoL (Triforce still in Hyrule)

But, as SoJ said, I have no proof. I just say that because it makes more sense to me than any other LoZ/AoL placement.
And of course ST could change all that.

Thats what I meant, Triforce staying in old Hyrule. But the problem with the force gems in ST, is the FS trilogy is 3 games, and then theres the Temple of the four sword, or whatever its called, in LttP, and then the master sword placements in OoT, TP, LttP, means we will have gone from an CT heavy timeline to a AT heavy timeline. In addition to this, I'm fairly sure someone [Official of course] said TP is on CT?

So one hole is fixed, and another opens.

EDIT: Several are opened :L

 

[Zemen]

i put MC before the four swords because in it the picori sword ( which i think is another name for the master sword since they look the same ) is turned into the Four sword and due to my above statement if MC was in the front their would be no master sword in the other zeldas. And most people have concluded that OOT is the beginning of the timeline

The Picori Sword is NOT the Master Sword. It becomes the Four Sword but the Four Sword and the Master Sword are 2 completely different swords.

Therefore everything after ST would have only force gems (which, as you say, makes me think about the placement of the FS trilogy

Well if forcegems in ST are significant, then you just gave a reason why MC wouldn't go after ST along with FS/FSA.

MC is the only game of the FS trilogy that DOESN'T have forcegems, so one could conclude that MC takes place during a time before forcegems were discovered. If forcegems weren't discovered until new Hyrule then MC must take place in old Hyrule. The only place it would make sense to put MC (where it takes place in old Hyrule) would be before OoT, at the beginning of the timeline.

Of course, I don't believe that any games other than the WW series games should go on the AT so that argument only works for you AT placers.

The main reason I'm not an AT placer is because it's impossible to explain how everything gets from old Hyrule to new Hyrule. Things such as the Master Sword, the Four Sword (if you put MC first), the Triforce, old traditions of old Hyrule, history books and things like that are all seemingly lost forever to new Hyrule. For all of those things to exist later on in the timeline it only makes sense for them to be on the CT.

 

[Pablo]

The Picori Sword is NOT the Master Sword. It becomes the Four Sword but the Four Sword and the Master Sword are 2 completely different swords.



Well if forcegems in ST are significant, then you just gave a reason why MC wouldn't go after ST along with FS/FSA.

MC is the only game of the FS trilogy that DOESN'T have forcegems, so one could conclude that MC takes place during a time before forcegems were discovered. If forcegems weren't discovered until new Hyrule then MC must take place in old Hyrule. The only place it would make sense to put MC (where it takes place in old Hyrule) would be before OoT, at the beginning of the timeline.

Of course, I don't believe that any games other than the WW series games should go on the AT so that argument only works for you AT placers.

The main reason I'm not an AT placer is because it's impossible to explain how everything gets from old Hyrule to new Hyrule. Things such as the Master Sword, the Four Sword (if you put MC first), the Triforce, old traditions of old Hyrule, history books and things like that are all seemingly lost forever to new Hyrule. For all of those things to exist later on in the timeline it only makes sense for them to be on the CT.

And yet a giant flood which doesn't destroy anything bellow it makes perfect sense? I'm not trolling, but just pointing out how not much makes sense.

 

[Zemen]

And yet a giant flood which doesn't destroy anything bellow it makes perfect sense? I'm not trolling, but just pointing out how not much makes sense.

Well the game is centered around magic and since Hyrule is a magical kingdom it makes sense that it could somehow survive. You're making it sound like EVERYTHING survived underwater when only Hyrule survived. And at the end of the game you can clearly see Hyrule ultimately flooded forever.

It would make no sense to say that magic brings back all of the artifacts that are lost but it's clear that magic is what kept old Hyrule preserved but at the end of WW it's not preserved anymore.

 

[Pablo]

I know, I know, it was just the first example that sprung to mind. But, just to be the devils advocate, what if the people remembered, and then took it there in their brains, or maybe the Book of Murdor was stored upon some ship somewhere, and taken to New Hyrule?

 

[Locke]

Why would anything have to move? All the games (if any) on the AT besides PH and ST take place directly over old Hyrule.

 

[Zemen]

I know, I know, it was just the first example that sprung to mind. But, just to be the devils advocate, what if the people remembered, and then took it there in their brains, or maybe the Book of Murdor was stored upon some ship somewhere, and taken to New Hyrule?

Because during WW no one seemed to have any knowledge that Hyrule existed, not even Tetra who is the descendant of old Hyrule's royal family and the current princess of Hyrule (which doesn't really exist during WW). It's made pretty clear in WW that old Hyrule has been forgotten. Also, SoJ has pointed this out many, many times and I love using it as advice and it's funny how EVERYONE ignores it. In the Japanese version of WW, the king wishes for old Hyrule to be ERASED. This means it's gone forever. Kind of hard to get history from an erased place.

Why would anything have to move? All the games (if any) on the AT besides PH and ST take place directly over old Hyrule.

False. Link and Tetra leave the part of the Great Sea that they grew up on which is where old Hyrule was. They travel far and wide to find new land for a new home. Old Hyrule is not directly under new Hyrule. I would venture to guess that it's actually quite far away from old Hyrule.

 

[Locke]

False. Link and Tetra leave the part of the Great Sea that they grew up on which is where old Hyrule was. They travel far and wide to find new land for a new home. Old Hyrule is not directly under new Hyrule. I would venture to guess that it's actually quite far away from old Hyrule.

I mean after the water recedes/GDT's success.
What I'm suggesting is that after WW there are TWO Hyrules. one that 'formed out the the ashes' of the old one (directly above it), and one formed by Link/Tetra far away.

 

[Zemen]

I mean after the water recedes/GDT's success.
What I'm suggesting is that after WW there are TWO Hyrules. one that 'formed out the the ashes' of the old one (directly above it), and one formed by Link/Tetra far away.

That would make no sense. Why would there be 2 Hyrules? Also, did you read what I posted about how the king in the Japanese WW wished for old Hyrule to be erased? That means it's completely gone.

Nintendo/Miyamoto/Aonuma are a lot smarter with their plots for them to have to create a second Hyrule. I think the fact that ST shows a new Hyrule is proof that the GDT's plan didn't work or has not worked or doesn't even need to work since an obvious abundance of land was found. The GDT's plan, to me, is just a sidequest in WW. Nothing more.