Kotaku: Is This the Official Timeline?

[JuicieJ]

While I'm in no way defending the validity of this timeline, is it ever stated that ALttP Link is a blood descendent of a previous hero? Based on our previous knowledge this timeline is outlandish and implausible but it's certainly far from impossible. I'm sure more scans will surface soon and clarify the validity (right or wrong) of this thing.

Right, I should have been clearer on that. ALttP Link is a descendant of one of the Knights of Hyrule in the Imprisoning War. OoT was set as the IW upon release (although it may not be anymore). OoT Link was undoubtedly the ancestor to ALttP Link since he was the one who helped seal Ganon. It also just makes logical sense.

 

[Clearly]

Yes, I agree with you totally that it's a cop out. But it's their own fault for not considering the timeline when making their games in the first place.

My biggest issue is just how arbitrary it seems. "Link fails," but at what point in OoT was the potential of Link's failure a defining and motivating choice of path in the forking timeline? I can't think of one that stands out any more than the possible 'failures' that Link could have experienced in every single game. Without some massive clarification, it just feels arbitrarily tacked on.

 

[JuicieJ]

Yes, I agree with you totally that it's a cop out. But it's their own fault for not considering the timeline when making their games in the first place.

That's kind of harsh. It's not like it's impossible for them to come up with something to make it work, and Nintendo aren't quitters, so I don't see why they would do that.

 

[-KingJason]

If this is true, I'm some what disappointed that there are 3 branches instead of 2.

 

[Red Baron]

My biggest issue is just how arbitrary it seems. "Link fails," but at what point in OoT was the potential of Link's failure a defining and motivating choice of path in the forking timeline? I can't think of one that stands out any more than the possible 'failures' that Link could have experienced in every single game. Without some massive clarification, it just feels arbitrarily tacked on.

Scuttle-but on ZU at the moment says that the "fails" wording was a mistranslation. The split was caused when Link first drew the master sword (causing a world where Link dissapeared, never to return), he is sealed in the sacred realm and then inserted into another timeline, and the third created when he is sent back. Sorry no proof, nothing seems proven yet, rumors seem to be coming from japanese websites/forums.

 

[TheGermanLegend]

Scuttle-but on ZU at the moment says that the "fails" wording was a mistranslation. The split was caused when Link first drew the master sword (causing a world where Link dissapeared, never to return), he is sealed in the sacred realm and then inserted into another timeline, and the third created when he is sent back. Sorry no proof, nothing seems proven yet, rumors seem to be coming from japanese websites/forums.

This makes even less sence. Link never disappeared and reappeared in another tineline. He simply sleept for 7 years.

 

[Ventus]

I don't much like the timeline, but it could make sense. There are multiple spots where Link could have "failed", though none of them really add up. These supposed splits don't truly happen, e.g the whole "when C.Link pulls Master Sword, two splits occur: Adult Link in Chamber of Sages and world with Ganondorf ruling with completed Triforce" doesn't make sense because the seven years never divulge. So unless Nintendo can confirm this, we don't really know for sure if there ARE three or more splits within the timeline. I also don't like MC at the second spot; considering there are already enemies about in SS, there wouldn't be a bound chest. However, I'd like to believe that SS Link is the Hero of Men but we've no proof...

 

[DuckNoises]

Before I start, we have to come to a basic understanding of what a timeline is. Imagine the "official" timeline is a jigsaw puzzle and every game is a puzzle piece; as theorists, we try to complete this jigsaw puzzle but there are always some missing pieces that will never be found. Every time Nintendo makes a new game, they give us another piece to the puzzle, but the shape of the puzzle changes, to the effect that we can never actually make a full, functional puzzle because we will never have all the pieces. This timeline is no exception; it cannot make sense, because it does not have all the pieces. The primary difference between this timeline and Aonuma's magic "official" timeline is that Aonuma has those missing pieces, that are games and stories that have not yet been created. With these magic pieces, the timeline would function; unfortunately, as theorists, we will never have all these magic pieces. We have to work with what we have, and what we create will always be an imperfect product, even if Nintendo makes it (as I believe was the case with this timeline). To extend this metaphor, I'll present what Aonuma's timeline might look like if I were to modify my timeline (which I acknowledge is not without holes) with some of the missing pieces:

................./--TWW/PH--ST
(SS)--OoT
.................\MM--TP--a--TMC--FS/FSA--b--ALttP/OoX/LA--c--LoZ/AoL

Where a, b, and c are:
a) A game/event that explains the Hero of Men in the intro to TMC and explains the Minish
b) A game/event that clarifies the whole debacle that is the Seal War and the origins of ALttP
c) A game/event that explains why Ganon is alive and is up to evil again, or explains why/how there is another Ganon

Even then, there are still many holes, but my point is that Aonuma probably has events in the "official" timeline that he can't release because the games in question don't exist yet.

Now, my second point. I've actually thought about this timeline for a couple hours and there is a fairly simple reason why this timeline cannot work. The split timeline itself is entirely dependent on the Hero of Time's success in OoT; it cannot exist without it. Recall that what causes the split is Zelda sending Link back in time with magic and the Ocarina of Time. If the Hero of Time dies at any point in his adventure, the split will never have been created, because he was not there to be sent back in time, and the timeline becomes linear, rendering this proposed timeline impossible.
If the Hero of Time dies before he removes the Master Sword, Ganondorf touches the Triforce and it splits because his heart is impure (see the quotation below), which results in events that have yet to be seen in any game; one could attempt to argue that this could be how the timeline in question places ALttP there, but that timeline does not explain the split, nor is it consistent with the backstory of ALttP and the Seal War (I can explain this in a subsequent post, if requested). In any event, this also causes the child timeline not to exist because he was never alive to defeat Ganon and be sent back in time to trigger the split in the first place. The events of TWW also probably cannot happen because the Hero of Time was never successful in the first place, which results in incredible, unexplained inconsistencies with TWW even if you do try to explain it away.

If the heart of the one who holds
the sacred triangle has all three
forces in balance, that one will
gain the True Force to govern all.
But, if that one's heart is not in
balance, the Triforce will separate
into three parts:
Power, Wisdom and Courage.
Only one part will remain for the
one who touched the Triforce...the
part representing the force that
one most believes in.

If he dies after he removes the Master Sword but before he defeats Ganondorf, a similar set of events ensue, except the Triforce definitely splits in this event, because we know it happens while the Hero of Time is in the Sacred Realm. In this case, Ganondorf would probably retrieve the other Triforce fragments as there is no one to stop him. Again, this butchers the entire split timeline, causing the Hero of Time never to be sent back in time and the split is never created.

As far as I can tell, there is no circumstance where the Hero of Time fails that can result in a timeline with a split in it, because the required events never happened in the first place. There is also little to no explanation for why there can be a third "split" that results in ALttP, as there are massive inconsistencies with the back story of ALttP and the Seal War. You can only have one or the other, not both; either the timeline is linear or it is not, and there cannot be a third split in this fashion. It seems to me like Nintendo just haphazardly put together two of their previously confirmed timelines from post-OoT but pre-WW and the one that consists of all games released between 1998 and 2011. These cannot be meshed together as they have done, because there is no reason apparent to me that allows for a third split. Even if there is a logical reason, what they have proposed here is most certainly not it.

In conclusion, Nintendo has provided us with "confirmed" timelines in the past that have been retconned since; many times, in fact. This is not a new thing in the slightest, because people have released information that has been incorrect, claiming it to be irrefutable, and then going back on it and saying it was untrue, the most famous example being Miyamoto himself, who was not in a place to discuss timelines. I see this timeline as just being another in a series of retconned timelines that have been taken back because there was an error or Nintendo changed their mind; what makes this different than any other development statement? Developer statements have been proven to be incorrect not long after they were said almost half the time. If this one doesn't make much sense, why should we believe it is the be-all and end-all of timelines? Don't think making timelines is a thing of the past; in fact, Nintendo is still doing it themselves, because timelines are always works in progress that are malleable and often drastically reshaped. Without the missing puzzle pieces, the timeline will never be solved, and I don't see this statement as an exception to the rule.

 

[A Link In Time]

If the timeline is indeed a triple split, then it is more complex than we ever surmised.

 

[sf8]

I like it, but I just can't wrap my head around how there could ever be a third split from OoT. That's the only problem I have with it. And FSA. I don't know where it should be placed, but definitely not directly after TP.

 

[Locke]

Scuttle-but on ZU at the moment says that the "fails" wording was a mistranslation. The split was caused when Link first drew the master sword (causing a world where Link dissapeared, never to return), he is sealed in the sacred realm and then inserted into another timeline, and the third created when he is sent back. Sorry no proof, nothing seems proven yet, rumors seem to be coming from japanese websites/forums.

So Link creates a new timeline when he goes to the future... and then another one when he goes to the past... and another when he goes to the future again... and finally the CT when Zelda sends him back. What about the Song of Storms paradox? How can Link teach Guru-Guru the song if he abandons that timeline when he returns to the past?

I'm not completely against a third split, but so far I haven't heard a good explanation for it. Link failing and trying to modify the MS time-travel mechanics are both pathetic attempts at reconciling two incompatible sequels. There's a point when you just have to admit that they're incompatible.

 

[SilentLink]

it seems that if we are told that there is a three way split, there should be a place in OoT that the second (or first depending on where along the story it happens) split occurs. having the split be a "what if" where link simply fails to defeat ganon is just simply is a terrible idea, and wouldn't work or be accepted. the fact that the games on the "third" timeline were the first games made, and they are trying to say they aren't part of the "real" or "main" timeline is absurd. So their must be a way to explain this split logically to connect the games without losing any of the important events in the AlttP backstory.

so first lets look at the main events that happen in OoT and if they might create a split timeline. starting from the earliest in the story.

Death of the Deku tree: the first major occurrence in the story is the death of the deku tree due to the curse put on him by Ganondorf. Would this create a split? the only way this could happen is by the magic of the tree itself, he would have to use his dying power to create a second universe where he doesn't die. The only problem with this is that there is no evidence of the Deku tree in AlttP, and in LoZ the first dungeon could be the dead deku tree. also, the deku tree being alive wouldn't necessarily effect the events of OoT very much (link would still prevail all other things constant). So this cannot be where the split happens.

the next Major event to the story that could possibly create a split is Ganondorf's entrance into the sacred realm and touching the Triforce. His entrance into the sacred realm could be seen as an ironic accident not meant to happen since he was not the one to open the door of time. If this is true, him crossing the magical threshold could cause a disturbance in whatever energy was present causing a split. the only problem with this is that is causes a good deal of speculation as to how this would cause a split, and what exactly would happen on the other side of the split. since we need to find the most plausible option the causes the least discrepancies and guess work. lets look at the other ones.

now, technically we could say that by a few theories on time travel every time link drew or placed the master sword it created a new timeline. although this has been argued before, and is generally accepted to not happen because of the nature of the travel.

the only way that we could assume that the split happened from the master swords time travel is by the first time you place it back into the pedestal or the last time.

the first time. if placing the sword back into the pedestal to travel back in time created a split, then we would need to assume that every time we traveled to the past and back we were actually traveling to a separate universe. however, this cannot be the case because of the well and windmill events. where the well is emptied by link as a child and is empty in the "present", and the man in the windmill citing the reason being that a magic song caused the windmill to drain the well. so they cannot be separate universes.

the other one is the last time. before zelda uses the ocarina to send link back to his childhood and creating the confirmed child line split. what we are told is that by placing the sword back, we are closing the rift that allows us to travel. the door will be closed. and assuming that the travel of time is relative to the passing of time in each time. being that is you are placed at 330pm on october 12th in the present, you travel back to 330pm october 12th in the past. that would mean the rift would close on both sides simultaneously. now can we assume that this means that the "loop is closed" so to speak permanently on both sides? if this is the case, then how would the "loop" be open for us in the first place if it was closed in the past permanently as well? unless only the present side of the door is closed and the past stays open until its closed by link. but that would mean the time is distorted being that it creates a one way road so to speak. but it is pretty clearly stated that "the road between times will be closed". so it could be argued that the action of placing the sword created a second split. however, this was after link had succeeded in his quest. the only way it could be is if it split the past at the time it was closed. so its unlikely that this would cause a split anywhere. unless there is more research done into the effects of this and how it effects the timeline within the game we can't assume this split to happen.

the only other way there could be a split is when ganon is actually sealed away, and the split occurs after the events on the Adult timeline when the seal is broken. however, the inconsistency hear is that in AlttP, Ganon has the full triforce, and in WW he only has the ToP. so what would have happened that would cause a split after and cause him to gain the full triforce. it can't be.

so the only logical thing to assume is that the split is caused by Ganondorf entering the sacred realm creating one universe where he has the full triforce upon touching it and one where he only receives the ToP. but, how would the six sages have the power to seal ganon in the sacred realm without the power of the master sword wielded by the hero of time? the good thing is that the backstory of AlttP explains this, but I can't remember if it is said that Ganon acquires the triforce in the backstory. however, I don't believe there to be enough evidence for this to be the case, until more theorists delve into this and find ways for it to work. I don't accept this 3 split in OoT timeline. It would make Much much more sense to have a split in a different game. although this would cause us to assume the split occured in SS but, there isn't anything to support this timeline being correct and Alttp happening directly after SS since there is no existence of ganon before Alttp unless putting a game with an origin of ganon within it (being FSS or OoT).

So in conclusion, if nintendo is going to cement this as the official timeline (assuming that the deciphered timeline ends up being the one they offer). they would need to make a few games to explain the connectivity and existence of a multi split in OoT.

The only way I see them doing this is if they decide they are done with this timeline and would like to either make games only before or after the ending games in each split. although the three split would be good if they want to offer a solid timeline to the fans and still keep an open ability to make games that don't need to adhere to one storyline.

end WALL OF TEXT.

 

[Kombatgod]

I'm so angry that people are surprised by this, while I already stated it one year ago! Check it!
http://zeldadungeon.net/forum/showthread.php?16570-The-What-If-Theory-a-Double-Split-in-the-Timeline!
The only thing that to me makes no absolute sense is to split FS from FSA.

 

[Red Baron]

So Link creates a new timeline when he goes to the future... and then another one when he goes to the past... and another when he goes to the future again... and finally the CT when Zelda sends him back. What about the Song of Storms paradox? How can Link teach Guru-Guru the song if he abandons that timeline when he returns to the past?

I'm not completely against a third split, but so far I haven't heard a good explanation for it. Link failing and trying to modify the MS time-travel mechanics are both pathetic attempts at reconciling two incompatible sequels. There's a point when you just have to admit that they're incompatible.

The way I understand it, when Link pulls the Master Sword for the first time and is sealed he is removed from that timeline. The only way I can simply explain it is to view the sacred realm as removed from time. When Link returns to Hyrule seven years later, there are now two timelines (both identical until Link enters the SR): the one he just entered, and the one he left seven years ago (thus, in one timeline he returns and in the other he doesn't). Link defeats and seals Ganondorf on one timeline, but on the other Ganondorf has free reign.

It makes some sense, but not really. It could be entirely wrong, or I could have interpreted other posts wrong, best to wait for scans and more translations. DARN TIME TRAVEL.

 

[Kombatgod]

Another major problem I see is that FS and FSA are intended to be direct sequels (FS coming first), not FS being a sequel of MC.

Yeah! In FS they talk of the Four Sword and the first attack of Vaati as an ancient legend, so there's absolutely no way they can be direct sequels with the same Link, instead in FSA they already know of the Four Sword and Vaati, and the intro itself says something like "Vaati once kidnapped SOME MAIDENS and SOMEONE defeated him, than he returned and kidnapped ZELDA, but LINK saved her." it's not talking about "another hero", it says "Link", so it is referring to the same Link from the current game!
The only way it could work is to say that MC and FS are sequels but many years passed between them and feature different heroes, and that FSA says "Link" because the previous hero was called Link, but it's not the same one (or that the FSA Zelda was kidnapped by Vaati and saved by Link before FSA in events that are not FS), but it's a stretch! It makes no sense to choose this placement!