Did the Idea of the Timeline Shape What Zelda is Today?

[Ugea]

im sure back in the NES/SNES days Nitendo did not have much thought into a time line in the for the LOZ games, not until OOT came on the N64 and MM and WW on the game cube the Fans have seance Debated about a possible split or linear time line, seems like then Nintendo has caught on to this and then started making games on these timelines to fill in major gaps that each story told, MM was originally going to be apart of OOT with the N64DD but seance the 64DD failed they did turn it into a full game and made it into a Direct sequel to OOT, i think thats when Nitendo started working the time line out putting MM on the child timeline, but wasent too shure about WW or the other previous Zelda games. and from their started working on other games that continued the story around others because fans were wondering and asking Nintendo about a possible timeline. so out of curiosity Do you think the timeline helped shaped what the Zelda stories are. or Like mario would Zelda be more of a random story with no connection to their previous games with out an idea of a time line? Personally i think the idea of the timeline helped shaped the Series dramatically, and not until they had enough games to connect them did they release their official statement about it ( HH) what do you think?

 

[DarkestLink]

Nah not really. Nintendo sorta updates their timeline as an after thought as a poor attempt to link things together when they really shouldn't. Before the original games (y'know...with the ORIGIN STORY) were supposed to be first, but that ended up not working out because Nintendo wasn't paying attention to continuity.

The timeline is like trying to put 3 different puzzles together when they really don't work. Eventually, after mashing pieces together and using your scissors to change the shape of others, it finally comes together, but it doesn't look pretty.

 

[Ugea]

The timeline is like trying to put 3 different puzzles together when they really don't work. Eventually, after mashing pieces together and using your scissors to change the shape of others, it finally comes together, but it doesn't look pretty.

lol awesome analogy

 

[Terminus]

No, I think they just started referencing them and only made a timeline themselves a few years ago.

 

[Ventus]

I'm with DarkestLink; I believe Nintendo merely starting to chain nonexistent links in order to give the series a "cohesive" look -- but only after the first four games. Of course, that ruse was easily dropped after OoT released, and Nintendo began to [somewhat lax] craft Zelda games around what was known as the Split Timeline. Fans have been crazy about linking all the games together, then they upped and created the fanfic official statement known as Hyrule Historia, and even put the fanfic game Skyward Sword as the (current) forerunner to the series.

So basically...the Timeline had no hold on the series UNTIL OoT released. That's my opinion, anyway.

 

[Spirit]

it does and it doesn't with me. Like Ven said they seem to be just references. WW starts with what happened after OoT and has a lot of links to it but they can all be seen as references and it isn't necessary to play OoT to find out what WW means when it mentions it. Same with MM, you don't really need OoT. In the beginning games like LoZ and AoL seemed to be linked but we had nothing to go on. Then ALttP happened and LA really has no place anywhere since it isn't real. and if you choose to believe it then OoT retcons ALttPs backstory... there is just so much going on that i believe any timeline link is simply a reference.

Once upon a time i thought Nintendo were doing something very clever and weaving an intricate story with in-game fact that they didnt draw attention to wholesale but then the official timeline happened and they didnt seem to care. That, coupled with Aonuma saying ''the storyline is an appendix to the game'' really makes me think that nintendo dont give a damn aboutt he timeline and perhaps never did. So its hard to say.

 

[Curmudgeon]

The pre-OoT games were placed in a deliberate chronological order. AoL's manual tells us it's after LoZ. LttP, by the very virtue of its title, is set in the past. LA was billed as a direct sequel to LttP. Despite this, I don't think it was meant to have a ton of importance. Nearly 100% of AoL's major plot occurs outside of game play.

Of course in 1993, they had no idea they were going to be making games in the series for another 20 years and from the success of the first tile have been making it up as they go along. I see HH as a deliberate attempt to fit a fish-shaped peg into a purple hole...

 

[DarkestLink]

That, coupled with Aonuma saying ''the storyline is an appendix to the game'' really makes me think that nintendo dont give a damn aboutt he timeline and perhaps never did. So its hard to say.

I know it isn't the same, but Miyamoto has been pretty blunt on his feelings toward story...the only reason it's even there is because his coworkers push him into it. If he had his way, he would get rid of it entirely no matter how important it was to the series (Sticker Star).