General Zelda "Failure" Timeline, Such a Tough Word

[NoRush]

I was doing some looking for wallpapers of Zelda, and came across one of the official timeline wallpapers. I hadn't seen it before and saw it said
"Failure Timeline." How sad! Why does Nintendo give us such a horribly down-trodden word for that timeline? It's so sad, isn't it? Like all the time
we spent playing those games were wasted.

Perhaps it is being more realistic, and in a way that's very good. But I'm still sad and shocked about it. Why not "Doomed Timeline" or
"Outlook not so good" timeline (haha).

Also, is that then the end of that specific timeline? Meaning, all new games that are released, we can automatically assume they will be placed on the other timelines?

 

[Ganondork]

Unfortunately, the timeline you provided isn't the official one. As such, the author took the liberty of naming it the "Failure Timeline." I will provide the official timeline so you can see what that other one is missing.

As you can see, that split is actually, "The Hero is Defeated" Timeline. I'm not sure if this naming is much better for you, but it's what we have. It's a bit less blunt than the other timeline, and, in my opinion, the official one is worded much better.

 

[NoRush]

Aahh okay. Thank you sir Keith, you are a gentleman and a scholar.
And yes the wording is better haha. Still dark and gloomy, but it's fitting.

Hmm so looking at this timeline, under AoL it says Ganon's Revival Prevented. Why is it the last hero
if Ganon was prevented?

So sad to see Hyrule was flooded.

Anyways thanks for the real thing! I don't know how to give you Thanks but if I did I would.

 

[Spiritual Mask Salesman]

Who knows why? Pretty much the hero fails timeline is just so sketchy, to assume that the hero can fail and make a alternate time split were he fails theoretically means that every game should have a similiar timeline.

 

[Évariste]

to assume that the hero can fail and make a alternate time split were he fails theoretically means that every game should have a similiar timeline.

But every Zelda game theoretically does have a failure timeline. There are just not enough Zelda games out there.

EDIT: But yeah, I do not get too hung up on the word "Failure". I don't think it's either too negative or super edgy. It is what it is. "The Hero Is Defeated" is more official though.

 

[Spiritual Mask Salesman]

But every Zelda game theoretically does have a failure timeline. There are just not enough Zelda games out there.

EDIT: But yeah, I do not get too hung up on the word "Failure". I don't think it's either too negative or super edgy. It is what it is. "The Hero Is Defeated" is more official though.

What do you mean, there are 16 games in total...

 

[Ganondork]

What do you mean, there are 16 games in total...

But a lot of them are tied together. You have Minish Cap Link, Four Swords Link, Skyward Sword Link, Ocarina of Time-Majora's Mask Link, Twilight Princess Link, A Link to the Past-Oracle Series-Link's Awakening Link, Original-Adventure of Link Link, Wind Waker-Phantom Hourglass-Spirit Tracks Link, and Four Swords Adventure Link. That comes out to 9 Links, which is considerably smaller. It's even smaller if you want to piece the Four Swords Trilogy Links.

 

[Évariste]

What do you mean, there are 16 games in total...

It is logically consistent for there to be only one failure timeline acknowledged by the games, because acknowledging only one failure timeline through several Zelda games is not asserting that other failure timelines don't exist. There just hasn't been interest in exposing what might happen in a hero's failure in The Wind Waker, thus far. I say "not enough" Zelda games because I suppose if there were 10,000 Zelda games, then there might be one that exposes what might happen in a hero's failure in The Wind Waker.

*The notion of a "failure timeline" is acceptance of a great multiverse. It is natural for there to be logical inconsistency when talking about meta-physical topics like this, especially in video games and even more especially in less story-driven video games like Zelda. However, I did want to talk about this because the supposed non-existence of additional failure timelines happens to be something I find consistent.

 

[Jamie]

What do you mean, there are 16 games in total...

There's 17. And I don't think this means anything. There literally cannot be a game that covers the failure timeline for every game because as every game has a failure timeline, new games = new timelines. It would go on forever.

 

[Shadsie]

Better term than "Death Timeline" don't you think? Yeah, what Keith posted is what is in the Hyrule Historia, it's simply "The Hero is Defeated." I guess Nintendo doesn't want to actually say what is obvious - "The Hero was Killed."

I tend to call it "Timeline of Defeat" in my fanworks. If you see someone use that exact term, keep in mind that that it might have just come from them having read my popular tragic/romance fanfic "Flowers for Fi" (which I think I wrote before I got the Hyrule Historia, but after the Timeline was known-but-not-named on the Internet).

 

[NoRush]

If it's called the Hero Dies timelines, it still wouldn't exactly mean it's a failure though. What if Link sacrificed himself to kill Ganon, so both ended up dying, but it
was still considered a "success" given Hyrule was saved, all evil was banished, etc.? I don't know how that game ends..

 

[Jamie]

If it's called the Hero Dies timelines, it still wouldn't exactly mean it's a failure though. What if Link sacrificed himself to kill Ganon, so both ended up dying, but it
was still considered a "success" given Hyrule was saved, all evil was banished, etc.? I don't know how that game ends..

No, it is confirmed that this is what happens if Link dies to Ganon and Ganon takes over Hyrule.

 

[Justac00lguy]

Yeah I don't like the word failure either, it's a name that has just been adopted over time, like others have said, the official name is the "Defeated Timeline".

I seem to prefer the term "Decline Timeline". Defeated and Failure are actually very poor ways to describe that specific branch. I guess it's good for memory's sake, people associate that split with Link dying, however "Decline" actually sums up the whole branch. If you think about it, Hyrule enters a state of decline when Link is defeated with the only up time being the very brief Golden Era.

 

[Spiritual Mask Salesman]

It is logically consistent for there to be only one failure timeline acknowledged by the games, because acknowledging only one failure timeline through several Zelda games is not asserting that other failure timelines don't exist. There just hasn't been interest in exposing what might happen in a hero's failure in The Wind Waker, thus far. I say "not enough" Zelda games because I suppose if there were 10,000 Zelda games, then there might be one that exposes what might happen in a hero's failure in The Wind Waker.

*The notion of a "failure timeline" is acceptance of a great multiverse. It is natural for there to be logical inconsistency when talking about meta-physical topics like this, especially in video games and even more especially in less story-driven video games like Zelda. However, I did want to talk about this because the supposed non-existence of additional failure timelines happens to be something I find consistent.

I don't think you all get what I meant, I didn't mean that the 16/17 games we have should all be moved around to try and make hero failed timelines work, my point is that with the games we have and the amount of time splits branching off those games would just be too confusing. Imagine mutiple games branching off every game we have to date, it would be a huge mess.

 

[NoRush]

Spiritual Mask Salesman, not trying to make you mad or anything haha, but I don't understand WHY you're making that point. I mean yes, every game has 2 possibilities in general (success or failure) but they only end up with one of them (save OoT). Which is why we don't have the great huge mess you referenced. ...but no one was really arguing that.

Or...okay let me approach it this way.

The only reason there is a split timeline is because of the "time situation" we have in OoT. If it wasn't for what actually occurs in OoT, there would be no other timelines. So even though all of the games could have a fail\succeed timeline, if only one of the Links failed in any one of the games, then that's the end of the entire Zelda series (in theory). It wouldn't create a fail timeline...it would just be the end of our Hero. But because OoT deals with time travel, we are given multiple timelines to work with.

After all that, to be honest, I still don't know what the point is here haha.

I do think that having multiple time lines obviously allows for greater flexibility and more stories in the Zelda universe...so having a Decline Timeline, though tragic and perhaps depressing from even before beginning to play the game, gives us more story to enjoy and be a part of.