FSA, FS, and TMC Place in the Timeline?

[Matthew_79]

What's cannon?

Canon means its part of the official timeline and such

Non-canon means its an official game, just not part of the timeline. like a half spin off. EX: Metal Gear Babel

 

[bob]

I think that these are totaly part of the zelda time line to say there not would be like saying that the wind waker isn't part of the zelda time line it dosn't make sense

 

[blackice_cc]

Yeah, these titles are definitely canon, and if FS and FSA are proved to not be, then MC is no matter what. MC is just like any classic 2d Zelda, not including AoL.

 

[Leix]

Anything that uses 'force gems' or whatnot instead of rupees in the Zelda series is immediately non-canon, in my opinion.
Also, Minish Cap's story dosen't really have alot to do with the backstory of FS. One's a four sword, ones a piccori sword.

 

[Mehplep]

Anything that uses 'force gems' or whatnot instead of rupees in the Zelda series is immediately non-canon, in my opinion.
Also, Minish Cap's story dosen't really have alot to do with the backstory of FS. One's a four sword, ones a piccori sword.

If you play through Minish Cap though, you'll find out that the Piccori Sword, when enchanted with the four elements, actually is the Four Sword. So I would say they have alot in common. Minish Cap must've happened before FS.

 

[El Bagu]

Well... it really depends on what you want to believe in. You can of course put aside the Four Sword-saga completely from the timeline and see it as a spin-off, but it is not impossible to fit in all three games in a normal timeline at all. In fact, many people see it as three installments in the timeline. The perhaps biggest factor is that Ganon appears at the end of FSA, where he claims his weapon he uses in other games, the Trident. But it is fine to exclude them, just as long the theory works.

I could not agree totally with you. Excluding is never good!!

 

[Yumil]

All three of these games are a part of the timeline. Zelda Wiki has a nice amount of information on these subjects, and some quotes regarding Four Swords in particular: http://www.zeldawiki.org/Timeline_Quotes. Please note that I do not agree entirely with the additional information on that page. I am simply using the quotes.

It was clearly stated that Four Swords was the first game in the storyline at the time of its release:

Aonuma: The GBA Four Swords Zelda is what we’re thinking as the oldest tale in the Zelda timeline. With this one on the GameCube [(FSA)] being a sequel to that, and taking place sometime after that.

There is a second quote on Zelda Wiki that some people say would make this one false, but I don't see it that way. The second quote was regarding FSA's storyline, not the placement of the original game. If anything, that second quote could only help argue that FSA comes before FS (which I also don't believe is the case).

The Minish Cap is clearly the prequel to Four Swords, which would make it the new earliest game in the series. Leix argued the following:

Also, Minish Cap's story dosen't really have alot to do with the backstory of FS. One's a four sword, ones a piccori sword.

This is not the case. If you finish The Minish Cap then you realize a few things. First off, the Minish/Picori did create a sword, but that sword is destroyed. Your goal is to create a new sword to replace it and that new sword becomes the Four Sword. It even allows you to split into 4 people during the final areas of the game. The Minish Cap is the backstory for Four Swords.

I would say Four Swords comes soon after that, and then we get into Ocarina of Time and the timeline split.

Four Swords Adventure's placement could still be debated, but I would argue that it is close to and/or related to ALTTP because of the geography, the dark world, and the trident that Ganon has. It also does a great job of combining the two series (proving that they belong in the timeline). Vaati is working with Ganon and now Vaati is destroyed. I wouldn't be surprised if the Four Swords series is simply over now.

If it is over, then Four Swords really isn't all that relevant to the storyline, but it still fits in the timeline easily.

 

[Zemen]

Why do People Place FSA, FS, and TMC in the timeline?

We all know the FS is a spinoff so usually thats not in the timeline, but FSA is a sequle to FS is it not?

TMC is also a prequle to FS.

Could you not legetly say They all are part of the Hyrule C, a Spinoff that dosnt actually count.

first of all, FS was made just as a way to better sell the remake of ALTTP. it was just a multiplayer game for people to enjoy. after it was pretty succesful they decided to make FSA which was a MUCH more expanded game. because FSA was established as a legit Zelda game then they decided to make another with a reason as to why there was this four sword and evil sorcerer in the first place. they went with a story that was working. just like the timeline was never really meant to be but once everything started adding up, nintendo and the creators went with it and started basing games off of a timeline somewhat. FS, FSA and MC definitely belong on the timeline. if you were gonna take any of those games out the only one that would be legit at all to take out would be FS because it was just a fun thing added to a remake.

I wouldn't include them in the storyline.

If so, where would Smash Bros. and Soul Caliber fit into the storyline =P

smash bros. and soul calibur are not made by the creators of the zelda series. the people who made those games got permission to use the chracter in those games just as a fun factor and to see a familiar face. if youre asking where Soul Calibur fits on the Zelda Timeline then you should be asking why Master Chief is fighting random people in Dead or Alive 4 and not out fighting aliens or being cryogenically frozen...

 

[Alter]

Why do People Place FSA, FS, and TMC in the timeline?

We all know the FS is a spinoff so usually thats not in the timeline, but FSA is a sequle to FS is it not?

TMC is also a prequle to FS.

Could you not legetly say They all are part of the Hyrule C, a Spinoff that dosnt actually count.

I disagree. We do not "all know" that it is a "spinoff". Those Zelda games seemed as real as any, other than the missing Ganon.

Yes, FSA is a sequel to FS. But... TMC is in the middle. Read this- it's the official story from FSA:

"Long ago in the inner reaches of Hyrule, an evil wind sorcerer known as Vaati began kidnapping beautiful young maidens, one after another. Nobody could stop Vaati, and the people of Hyrule despaired.

Then, a brave young wanderer carrying a single sword appeared. When the young lad took out his sword, he split into four separate beings. The legends say that these beings worked as one and defeated Vaati.

The wanderer, united once again, imprisoned Vaati deep in Hyrule and sealed the prison withhis own sword. This place became known as the Realm of the Four Sword.

After that, a long time passed...

Then the wind sorcerer Vaati broke out of his prison, and snatched Princess Zelda of Hyrule. Zelda's childhood friend, a young boy named Link, claimed the strange power of the Four Sword, and fought Vaati fiercely. In the end, he succeeded in sealing Vaati away once again.

And so peace was restored to Hyrule. Or so everyone thought..."

So anyway, FS was the green part, and TMC was the yellow. This is just my theory, but it holds water.

 

[Zemen]

I disagree. We do not "all know" that it is a "spinoff". Those Zelda games seemed as real as any, other than the missing Ganon.

Yes, FSA is a sequel to FS. But... TMC is in the middle. Read this- it's the official story from FSA:



So anyway, FS was the green part, and TMC was the yellow. This is just my theory, but it holds water.

as i stated in your other thread, this holds no water whatsoever. Zelda is never kidnapped. MC shows the BS of Vaati much like OoT shows the BS of Ganondorf.

i have no idea why you believe in your theory so strongly because it is totally, and utterly false. everyone will agree.

 

[Alter]

as i stated in your other thread, this holds no water whatsoever. Zelda is never kidnapped. MC shows the BS of Vaati much like OoT shows the BS of Ganondorf.

i have no idea why you believe in your theory so strongly because it is totally, and utterly false. everyone will agree.

Zemen, don't bring that into this thread. I never said anything here about her being kidnapped. Fight what I say here, not what I said there.

Edit: Actually, I did mention kidnapping, but that text is of the official story. I doubt you'll argue with that.

 

[Zemen]

Zemen, don't bring that into this thread. I never said anything here about her being kidnapped. Fight what I say here, not what I said there.

Edit: Actually, I did mention kidnapping, but that text is of the official story. I doubt you'll argue with that.

whether or not that text is from the manual of FSA does not mean that it is about MC. thats totally YOUR opinion. not a single person will agree with you. that theory is about as good as the theory of link being in Termina because hes high..

 

[Welbanks]

that theory is about as good as the theory of link being in Termina because hes high..

Dude, thats totally my theory!

No, but seriously though, I do agree with you completely.

Having MC coming after FS just dosent make sense it too many ways for it too work, that text in the manual would have to be a mistake.

The only way the whole Vaati kidnapping girls thing could ever make sense is if some new game came out that had that happen in it, which i highly doubt will happen, but anything possible.