• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Kotaku: Is This the Official Timeline?

C

Caleb, Of Asui

Guest
Let's take a look at Zelda Dungeon's most recent news post:

http://www.zeldadungeon.net/2011/12/a-closer-look-at-the-new-hyrule-historia-book/

Part-way through the video, the person comes to the page that actually shows the timeline in its entirety, and even if you can't read Japanese or speak French, you can clearly see that it's the purported official timeline everyone's been talking about. It does appear to clarify, however, what does and doesn't involve the same Link and Zelda (and Impa :p).

/--TWW/PH--ST
SS--TMC--FS--OoT/MM--TP--FSA
\--LttP\OoX\LA--LoZ\AoL

Not that there was much room to debate what involved the same Link or a different Link, but I was a bit curious about A Link to the Past and the Oracle games. In a lot of ways, this actually makes a lot more sense. When I first looked at the timeline, I first thought "Holy crap, triple split," then "What's with Four Swords Adventures?"

The more I think about it, the more certain things make sense. An old interview around the release of Four Swords stated it was the "oldest legend" or something like that, and clearly it is the beginning of the timeline at the time of its release. This also seems to make clearer sense of the many, many interviews during Ocarina of Time's development stating that it is the Seal War. Still, though, I can't make a ton of sense of Four Swords Adventures. :/ I mean, it works, but... why?

The really scary thing about this, though, is that this is the second time that I've filmed a video blog that has to do with Zelda and the very next day a news article on Zelda Dungeon debunks it. Before I have the video published. >_< When did I get jinxed? The first video was about Operation Moonfall, by the way, and was followed by "oh we need to make an original 3DS Zelda title before that happens." I did publish my timeline theory video, though. I really need to make a follow-up, in which I'll probably say a lot of the things I said here.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2014
The only explanation i can give about FSA being after TP is hat there are going to be games in between that explain that connection
 
Joined
Aug 1, 2011
Location
Kalamazoo, MI
I'm not entirely comfortable with it yet. The placement of FSA is a bit odd to me, but not as big as that third split. I'll have to figure that out before I completely trash my own timeline.
 
Joined
Nov 29, 2011
I am just in utter disbelief. I'm surprised the "official" timeline has been released now and it came at us with no warning, nothing. Not even a hint of an announcement. Which makes me wonder, is this really it? How come there's nothing about it on the official Zelda webpage? You would think they would put something on there, right? :suspicious:

A "what if Link failed in OoT" split - ALttP/OoX/LA--LoZ/AoL... That is ridiculous! If this is the actual timeline from Nintendo then I feel jipped. I'm getting the message from Nintendo saying, "those games don't matter because they are WHAT IF's". Ouch. Notice they're the classics that started it all (except OoX)? A slap in the face and a kick in the groin for people who grew up with those games is what that is.

Oh please not make this official. Otherwise, IMO the Zelda series is ruined.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2008
Location
In my coffin
Gender
Non-binary
Despite the sillyness of the third timeline split, I really have no problems with this timeline.

The Nes games, ALTTP, LA, and the Oracle games never really seem to fit with the 3-D games.

A third timeline is really the only way to make sense of ALTTP backstory.

I also like the fact that none of the old games go on the Adult Timeline. I think it would have ruined Wind Waker's ending if the "New Hyrule" had to face the same problems that the old Hyrule had(such as Ganon, and people who want to use the Triforce for their own purposes).
 
Z

Zagardal

Guest
TTL

I am just in utter disbelief. I'm surprised the "official" timeline has been released now and it came at us with no warning, nothing. Not even a hint of an announcement. Which makes me wonder, is this really it? How come there's nothing about it on the official Zelda webpage? You would think they would put something on there, right? :suspicious:

A "what if Link failed in OoT" split - ALttP/OoX/LA--LoZ/AoL... That is ridiculous! If this is the actual timeline from Nintendo then I feel jipped. I'm getting the message from Nintendo saying, "those games don't matter because they are WHAT IF's". Ouch. Notice they're the classics that started it all (except OoX)? A slap in the face and a kick in the groin for people who grew up with those games is what that is.

Oh please not make this official. Otherwise, IMO the Zelda series is ruined.

I don't believe they're saying "what if". Link failed in the first timeline cause he "jumped" to the second one. If he had jumped from the 2nd to the third before defeating ganon, there would be two failed timelines. The moment he returned to the past the first time, he split the timeline by changing the past.

The failed timeline is the original minus Link. Think of Back to the Future, Martin comes back to family with cool parents but that implies that the original family probably believes Martin disappeared over night and never came back, you can't just negate that timeline because we already know it exists. I made a graphic to illustrate this... perhaps the first split should be even after pulling the master sword, but i believe it makes more sense this way

nerdgasm__official_zelda_timeline_theory_by_zagardal-d4k0vud.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Locke

Hegemon
Site Staff
Joined
Nov 24, 2009
Location
Redmond, Washington
That graphic is very good, but I think it fails to accurately describe how the Master Sword works. It's supposed to be a ship on which one can sail up and down the river of time, implying one line. The events in OoT also seem to follow in one timeline.

But to really counter your argument, the Hyrule Hystoria specifically states that Link is defeated by Ganondorf. That means the split doesn't happen until after he travels the seven years with the MS.
 
R

Rauru

Guest
I think I have an explanation for the 3-way split:

OoT Ending 1: Link tells Zelda what is to come after being sent back to before he pulled the sword from it's pedestal

OoT Ending 2: Link dissapears from the world after defeating Ganon, but sooner or later after he leaves - Ganondorf breaks out. It's interesting to note that Ganon reverts back into Ganondorf and is sealed as such, and that's how he appears in the next game in this timeline, The Wind Waker

OoT Ending 3: Link loses the fight against Ganon and so Ganon is able to get all three-pieces of the Triforce and is then sealed by the sages after that fight or some epic war of some kind. This works well because in A Link to the Past, Ganondorf is in his 'Ganon' state and has all three pieces of the Triforce, which would be the result of Link losing. The only problem with this timeline I can think of is the fact it relies purely on a hypothetical situation rather than something that actually concretely happened and the fact that Twinrova are still alive in the Oracle games, and they would have to be dead if link had awakened all the sages. And those sages had to be the sages from OoT since later on in the timeline they get towns named after them (Zelda II).

So, it's not perfect, but it definately works. You could even say that in FSA it's the same Link from TP but that is a STRETCH, a large stretch. A very large stretch. Edit: A very, very large stretch
 
Z

Zagardal

Guest
That graphic is very good, but I think it fails to accurately describe how the Master Sword works. It's supposed to be a ship on which one can sail up and down the river of time, implying one line. The events in OoT also seem to follow in one timeline.

But to really counter your argument, the Hyrule Hystoria specifically states that Link is defeated by Ganondorf. That means the split doesn't happen until after he travels the seven years with the MS.

If the split happens after Link is "Defeated by Ganondorf" that could mean a number of things. Even if henchmen got him, it would still be Ganon the one to win... perhaps it's open to interpretation, as japanese often is; either way you're probably right about that but it wouldn't be the first time Nintendo pulls a stunt like this to justify some future change; hell, the whole timeline is one big excuse to justify unforeseeable inconsistencies in the franchise, after all it's been 25 years already. If it were the way you're describing, the original timeline would be "hypothetical" from that point on, which doesn't really sit right with me.

Concerning the sword, one way to justify the split and Link being defeated would be that Link opens the door to the sacred realm but he doesn't make a transtition; many zelda games have had Link adquiring the sword without anything major happening. A child Link with a big sword against Ganondorf would fit as a win for the latter, but I guess it also falls in the hypotetical. I don't believe the time travel is that linear, big rivers always have many deltas that branch out from the main source, and it would give Nintendo so much room for future games that closing that posibility wouldn't be good for bussiness. As for why Link would jump instantaniously to a second timeline and then grow up instead of just growing up in the first timeline, I don't have a good enough theory. The best I can come up with is that if the Ocarina can create an alternate timeline via time travel, maybe the sword can too. You could even argue that the adult timeline is the distortion of the Sacred Realm (like the Dark World in LttP) after Ganondorf was able to access it cause Link opened the seal for him.

If we get really technical, the real jump would be before the Spirit Temple (Haunted Wasteland) as an adult and needing to go back and find the Lens of Truth, thus rejuvenating for the first time; jumping foward through time won't change the timeline but doing it backwards will, every time. Depending the degree of change in the world during your visit to the past, the timeline could stay practically the same OR change dramatically as many times as you travel back, leaving a great (potencially infinite) number of discarted timelines with and incomplete OoT story, but that would be too much of a headache for such meaningless events for the actual franchise, I don't think they have the butterfly effect in mind when thinking this, it's unpractical.

I moved things around a bit to graphic the Haunted Wasteland/Lens of Truth idea

nerdgasm__official_zelda_timeline___theory_2_by_zagardal-d4k1oqi.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dio

~ It's me, Dio!~
ZD Champion
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Location
England
Gender
Absolute unit
I'm not entirely comfortable with it yet. The placement of FSA is a bit odd to me, but not as big as that third split. I'll have to figure that out before I completely trash my own timeline.

FSA talks about a tribe sealed in a mirror though, so it would probably be referring to the Twili.
 
E

ebilly99

Guest
The three splits are evident. One must always remember the original timeline
In the first timeline Link never pulls the sword (Time travel creates a split) this story has link slowly age fighting Ganons minions everywhere and eventually failing. The second timeline is adult Link and the final one is child Link (a new timeline is created with every new time traveler, not jump in time)
 
Z

Zagardal

Guest
What doesn't fit on the traditional time travel concept is that Link goes from adult to kid and viceversa every time he uses the temple, not just once... that alone contradicts most theories as he doesn't retain his age in any situation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom