"Is Age of Calamity Canon?" Debate

[Bowsette Plus-Ultra]

The chronology has a major impact on the lore.


To say that the official timeline is THE timeline is to say that there is NO timeline and here is why: "My next statement is true. My previous statement is false" in order for for statement A to be true statement B must also be true however in order for statement B to be true statement A must be false. In order for the official timeline to be canon then ALL the games that it is comprised of must also be canon however since many of the games of those games directly contradict the official timeline at a fundamental level in order for them to be canon the official timeline must be NON CANON as such the official timeline DECANONIZES ITSELF. Thus to say that it is the true canon is to say that there is no canon.

Which part of the company? Because its not Zelda team since they are putting their time into the creation of the games and they have NEVER CONFORMED TO THE OFFICIAL TIMELINE as proven earlier in this thread multiple times. The TRUE timeline is woven into the games by the Zelda team THIS is the timeline that I seek because THIS is THE timeline.

Most of the official timeline is pieced together correctly however its the mistakes that tear it apart and make it useless.

My point isn't that the time travel is the problem. My point is that everything BEFORE the branch MUST REMAIN THE SAME between the two games in order for Age of calamity to be canon. And since they don't line up in that part of their chronology Age of calamity is non canon.

I don't think you understand creative control or intellectual property.

 

[DarkDagger52]

That is fair, Nintendo said yes, so yes.

I don't think you understand creative control or intellectual property.

So a lesson in intellectual property rights out of the twenty one mainline Zelda games Nintendo only has full rights to thirteen games the other eight are mostly held by Capcom, Monolth soft and Grezzo. Of the twenty games listed on the official timeline a fourth of them are mostly held by Capcom and a tenth of them are mostly held by Monolith soft so the official timeline is null and void without Capcom's and Monolith soft's stamp of approval. Add Grezzo to that list when Echoes of wisdom is added to the official timeline.

 

[Commander_Has]

Nintendo owns the rights to Zelda as a whole, so any time line they make is final, no matter what any other compony says.

 

[DarkDagger52]

Nintendo owns the rights to Zelda as a whole, so any time line they make is final, no matter what any other compony says.

Legally they don't.

 

[Commander_Has]

Now will you please stop going on about things you obviously don't put any research into.

 

[DarkDagger52]

View attachment 78327
Now will you please stop going on about things you obviously don't put any research into.

That argument would only hold weight if it was for one of the games co-created by another company as a new title.

 

[mαrkαsscoρ]

Legally they don't.

if you're such a stickler for "legal documents", where's the proof that those companies own any major part of the zelda games they made?

 

[Bowsette Plus-Ultra]

Now this just smells like trolling.

 

[DarkDagger52]

Nintendo's intellectual property rights. On Nintendo.com

Section 3rd party intellectual property owners.
Nintendo licenses a number of independent third party publishers to use its intellectual property in developing, creating and marketing their own video games. There are a number of intellectual property rights associated with these games that are owned by these publishers. In addition, many independent property owners from such sources as movies, television, sports leagues, etc. license their intellectual properties for use in Nintendo and third party video games.

if you're such a stickler for "legal documents", where's the proof that those companies own any major part of the zelda games they made?

This counts as proof.

View attachment 78327
Now will you please stop going on about things you obviously don't put any research into.

4. Intellectual Property Rights
（1） The intellectual property rights for the Program belongs to Capcom or any legitimate third party, and shall be protected under the Japanese Copyright Act, International Treaty, convention and any other applicable laws (including in users’ country of residence). Upon users failure to comply with this EULA and violating applicable laws, including copyright and trademark laws and applicable communications regulations and statutes, Capcom or the owner of such intellectual property rights may file injunction, request compensation of damage and take necessary legal means in order to protect their rights.
（2） This EULA is only for the purpose of granting the usage rights for the Program from Capcom to the users and any or whole part of the intellectual property rights for the Program is not to be transferred or assigned to the users.

This is Capcom's version of the same legal situation.

 

[DarkDagger52]

So we can either argue legalities because for some unknown reason you feel the need to defend the worst debater in the thread and their misinformation or we can discuss the actual lore of the Zelda series.

 

[Commander_Has]

and who are you calling the worst debater, first of all, because this has been a mostly civil discussion among everyone except when either you are talking, or the response is directed at you.

This is a debate on the timeline, so the validity of the official timeline is greatly in question. It is a great resource in any timeline debate. Calling it unimportant is like saying the writing on the walls of the pyramids is unimportant. you can't just do that.

 

[GZ Zelda]

By the definition you gave ALL information from Nintendo is EQUALLY canon SIMULTANEOUSLY as long as they still hold there legal connection therefor since they haven't given up ANY of that by YOUR definition of canon EVERY iteration of the official timeline plus EVERY piece of CONTRADICTING lore must be canon SIMULTANEOUSLY.

"The canon timeline has unreconcilable contradictions and alternative timelines are far superior" is not the same as "the canon timeline isn't canon." I agree with your point, and perhaps we can decanonize the books, but that's a move you have to acknowledge you are making.

 

[GZ Zelda]

Is there an article or video where he stated that?

It was actually Iwata about the first HW, my bad.

The Zelda wiki says that's its not canon because it's too different from BotW, but I don't agree with that. I'd say we should consider it ambiguously canon until we get further clarification, but really, who cares about canon; we're in Zelda theory.

 

[DarkDagger52]

and who are you calling the worst debater, first of all, because this has been a mostly civil discussion among everyone except when either you are talking, or the response is directed at you.

I'm referring to Bowsette they are a broken record always showing up with one argument and that is that they can throw around whatever misinformation they want and blame it on Nintendo. Whenever this type of argument pops up most people in the community impulsively agrees with them and then clings to that answer without any consideration for what is actually being said (this isn't just a problem here its a problem with the theory community as a whole). I don't sugarcoat my statements if there is a flaw I will point it out because that's just being honest.

This is a debate on the timeline, so the validity of the official timeline is greatly in question. It is a great resource in any timeline debate. Calling it unimportant is like saying the writing on the walls of the pyramids is unimportant. you can't just do that.

The official timeline has quite frankly been a blight on the theory community ever since Hyrule historia popularized it. People will cling to lies and misinformation far more than the truth and as such whenever a theory connects to the chronology of the series someone always appears to claim that the official timeline is the absolute canon ignoring the thousands of times its been debunked in the past.

"The canon timeline has unreconcilable contradictions and alternative timelines are far superior" is not the same as "the canon timeline isn't canon." I agree with your point, and perhaps we can decanonize the books, but that's a move you have to acknowledge you are making.

Quite frankly the Zelda team has been against the official timeline since Ocarina of time deviated from the Sealing war. Ever notice how BOTH endings of Ocarina of time had the Triforce shown to be in a split state making BOTH endings fully incompatible with A link to the past or how after they were told to make Oracle come sometime after Ocarina of time they used Twinrova to resurrect Ganon AND made it to where Jabu-jabu had been in Labrynna since he was a small fry ensuring that it couldn't come after Ocarina of time or the fact that they continued to use A link to the past's telling of events for A link between worlds even after Hyrule historia popularized the official timeline? Actions speak louder than words if the Zelda team approved the official timeline then they would have conformed to it and since they write the lore they control the canon far more than the PR team that's pushing for a new official timeline every decade or so. The current Zelda director has even been pushing against the official timeline in interviews with quotes like "even we could be wrong" in reference to Nintendo's attempts at piecing together the timeline and "inconsistency in the lore would be betraying the fanbase" (I don't remember the exact wording but this is close) both of these are from an interview about the timeline placement of Tears of the kingdom in this same interview they also said that the timeline is a puzzle for the fanbase to solve.

With all of this evidence its clear that the official timeline is NON CANON. As for the books their lore needs to be fact checked against the games and manuals all lore in the books that is contradicted by the games and manuals should be discarded however the remaining lore is still useful.

The director of Zelda himself has challenged the community to solve the true timeline and a few new theorists now rise to face his challenge while many of the older theorists continue to argue over weather or not the official timeline is canon or believe the timeline to be broken and they make attempts to fix it. I should start a thread about this.

Most of the frustration I've shown here is at the community as a whole and is not a personal attack. The community has been going in circles for so long that the lore has become alien to many theorists causing them to no longer be able to tell what's canon and what's not canon and thus they retire.

 

[Commander_Has]

It's already know that LttP is an unshown ending, we can all agree with you there. Also, I'm not saying it's perfect, looking back, I realized I worded it slightly different from what I Thought, It's just a base line for everything else to be based off of. It's a theory, and we can't just disregard it without something to take it's place.