My More-or-Less Obvious Timeline

[Caleb, Of Asui]

I'm pretty big about the story, so, while I was first playing the series, I thought about the timeline quite a lot. I never really viewed the concept as a debate like so many other people do. I'm not very great at debating, plus that takes all the fun out of figuring it out.

So, yes, my current timeline is more-or-less obvious. I came up with it quite a while after I finished the series. (That excludes Zelda II, since that's so hard. I do know what happens in the ending, though.) It's more-or-less obvious since it follows the release order so adherantly, but places them on different sides of the timeline. When I came up with it, I was thinking a lot about what side each game goes on. What I came up with was that, since Twilight Princess (less cartoon-y) is in the Young Link timeline and The Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass (more cartoon-y) are in the Adult Link timeline, the side they go on is first based on if it's Ocarina of Time or Majora's Mask (there, it's obvious), then based on if it's cartoony or not.

Quite obviously, we need the 3d games to take place before the 2d games. Otherwise, the story doesn't work. The Minish Cape must also be moved to before Four Swords and Four Swords Adventures. So, here are the three main differences from the release order:

1. 3d games are preceed all the other games.
2. Move The Minish Cap to before Four Swords.
3. Seperate the games to the right side of the timeline.

So, with these changes, the timeline is as follows:

-----Ocarina of Time-----
Majora's Mask----------
----------The Wind Waker
Twilight Princess----------
----------Phantom Hourglass
The Legend of Zelda----------
The Adventure of Link----------
A Link to the Past----------
Link's Awakening----------
First Oracle Game----------
Second Oracle Game----------
----------The Minish Cap
----------Four Swords
----------Four Swords Adventures

There has to be a lot of space between The Wind Waker and The Minish Cap for the flood over Hyrule to recede. It makes sense for this to happen, since this is what ended up happening with a lot of real floods of similar proportions, though it definetely takes a long time.

A lot of what makes it make sense has to do with details I previously figured out a while ago. I'm not taking the time to type everything I'll barely be able to think of right here, so, if you don't understand something, please ask. I'd like to see some people challenge my timeline with something other than "There's no timeline because blah blah blah...." That gets pretty annoying pretty fast.

 

[Matthew_79]

I thought Alttp and LA was before the original 8 bit games. (considering LoZ is the only confermend death of ganon)
Everything else seems to fine by me. The oricale games can go anywhere.

 

[Skull_Kid]

I thought Alttp and LA was before the original 8 bit games. (considering LoZ is the only confermend death of ganon)
Everything else seems to fine by me. The oricale games can go anywhere.

It is implied in the SNES booklet and box that ALttP is before LoZ, and that's why it is called "A Link to the Past"...
And LA is a sure sequel of it

 

[Caleb, Of Asui]

It is implied in the SNES booklet and box that ALttP is before LoZ, and that's why it is called "A Link to the Past"...
And LA is a sure sequel of it

I'm not exactly sure that the booklet and box are considered canon, though. I put The Legend of Zelda before A Link to the Past because it flows better with the ending of Twilight Princess. At the end of Twilight Princess, the Triforce is still seperated. This implies that the next game should have the Triforce seperated, or else explain how it was brought back together between the events of the two games. In The Legend of Zelda and The Adventure of Link, the Triforce is very much seperated. In A Link to the Past, it's in one piece in the Dark World. At the end of The Adventure of Link, Link using the Triforce to wake up Zelda could be similar to the King wishing on the Triforce at the end of the Wind Waker. In that game, it apparently went somewhere, likely the Dark World where it originated, according to the creation story in Ocarina of Time.

Ganon does actually die in both The Legend of Zelda and A Link to the Past. Ganon is probably still alive in The Legend of Zelda because, in Twilight Princess, we see Ganondorf die, but we don't see Ganon die. In A Link to the Past, it is explained or implied (I'm not sure. I haven't played it in a while.) that Ganon was revived, probably by Agahnim. The events in the intro of A Link to the Past would have to be after The Adventure of Link.

 

[Skull_Kid]

No it doesn't... And how can you not be sure of something told by the company who created the games?You can't go against the creators and expect to have people telling you that you're right!

 

[Zemen]

I'm not exactly sure that the booklet and box are considered canon, though. I put The Legend of Zelda before A Link to the Past because it flows better with the ending of Twilight Princess. At the end of Twilight Princess, the Triforce is still seperated. This implies that the next game should have the Triforce seperated, or else explain how it was brought back together between the events of the two games. In The Legend of Zelda and The Adventure of Link, the Triforce is very much seperated. In A Link to the Past, it's in one piece in the Dark World. At the end of The Adventure of Link, Link using the Triforce to wake up Zelda could be similar to the King wishing on the Triforce at the end of the Wind Waker. In that game, it apparently went somewhere, likely the Dark World where it originated, according to the creation story in Ocarina of Time.

Ganon does actually die in both The Legend of Zelda and A Link to the Past. Ganon is probably still alive in The Legend of Zelda because, in Twilight Princess, we see Ganondorf die, but we don't see Ganon die. In A Link to the Past, it is explained or implied (I'm not sure. I haven't played it in a while.) that Ganon was revived, probably by Agahnim. The events in the intro of A Link to the Past would have to be after The Adventure of Link.

how would the manual for the game and the box for the game not be canon? thats like saying that Miyamoto's word is not canon and hes the creator for crying out loud.

No it doesn't... And how can you not be sure of something told by the company who created the games?You can't go against the creators and expect to have people telling you that you're right!

agreed. no one (except for crazy people) will agree with a fanboy over the creator.

 

[blackice_cc]

Well, like everyone else is saying, ALttP and LA should come before LoZ. I mean, Ganon is not dead in ALttP, whereas in LoZ, he dies in the end. The Oracle games could fit anywhere after LoZ, seeing as in those Ganon is dead and trying to be revived by the Twinrova (in the linked game).
Also, why couldn't MC, FS, and FSA come before WW? I don't see any reason that it couldn't be. It would make more sense than the flood going away and Hyrule being quickly populated again, at least to me.

 

[Zemen]

Well, like everyone else is saying, ALttP and LA should come before LoZ. I mean, Ganon is not dead in ALttP, whereas in LoZ, he dies in the end. The Oracle games could fit anywhere after LoZ, seeing as in those Ganon is dead and trying to be revived by the Twinrova (in the linked game).
Also, why couldn't MC, FS, and FSA come before WW? I don't see any reason that it couldn't be. It would make more sense than the flood going away and Hyrule being quickly populated again, at least to me.

i also agree with this. in fact, Miyamoto says that the original FS comes before OoT in a timeline which would mean that MC comes first in the timeline because its an obvious prequel to FS

 

[Matthew_79]

I didnt know that Miyamoto said that
then why are moblins in it?

 

[Zemen]

I didnt know that Miyamoto said that
then why are moblins in it?

the pretty obvious answer is that when Vaati opened the chest, they escaped. my thoughts on this is that there were only certain monsters in the world (such as the more animal like monsters such as the things that spit rocks and the moles and what not) and then after Vaati opened the chest, many new monsters from ancient hyrule that were sealed are released. this would explain why there are monsters in the world in every game after MC. Link never reseals the monsters, only Vaati.

also, the back story of MC never talks about ONE ancient enemy. usually the back stories to zelda games talk about a great enemy (like ganondorf) that threatened hyrule and a hero needed to save the day. MC talks about a war rather than one enemy. this is a hint that there are no previous super powers, only monsters or other creatures that threatened the land.

also the back story doesnt talk about a previous link, it talks about a completely different hero who has his own name and everything. thats a hint that there was a hero before there were any links. i doubt there was a random hero named gustav somewhere inbetween there being a bunch of links.

and my final word is that the presence or absence of a monster in a certain game hardly helps decide where it goes in a timeline unless the monster happens to be the main antagonist in the game which moblins are not.

there are plenty of monsters in some zelda games that dont appear in other ones

 

[blackice_cc]

the pretty obvious answer is that when Vaati opened the chest, they escaped. my thoughts on this is that there were only certain monsters in the world (such as the more animal like monsters such as the things that spit rocks and the moles and what not) and then after Vaati opened the chest, many new monsters from ancient hyrule that were sealed are released. this would explain why there are monsters in the world in every game after MC. Link never reseals the monsters, only Vaati.

also, the back story of MC never talks about ONE ancient enemy. usually the back stories to zelda games talk about a great enemy (like ganondorf) that threatened hyrule and a hero needed to save the day. MC talks about a war rather than one enemy. this is a hint that there are no previous super powers, only monsters or other creatures that threatened the land.

also the back story doesnt talk about a previous link, it talks about a completely different hero who has his own name and everything. thats a hint that there was a hero before there were any links. i doubt there was a random hero named gustav somewhere inbetween there being a bunch of links.

and my final word is that the presence or absence of a monster in a certain game hardly helps decide where it goes in a timeline unless the monster happens to be the main antagonist in the game which moblins are not.

there are plenty of monsters in some zelda games that dont appear in other ones

Totally agreed. Makes sense that MC could be first, seeing as (yes, it's a poor bit of evidence, but is relevant no-the-less) it explains how Link got his hat. And like you were saying, that could explain how the enemies came to be.
@Matthew_76: I don't get how the Moblin being in MC has anything to do with it's placement. I mean, there were Moblins in OoT, right?

 

[Caleb, Of Asui]

how would the manual for the game and the box for the game not be canon? thats like saying that Miyamoto's word is not canon and hes the creator for crying out loud.

The only problem with that statement is that Nintendo of America made the manual and box for the American release, not Miyamoto. They could easily make implications that weren't intended by Miyamoto. And besides, Miyamato definitely didn't say that the order was OoT, LoZ, AoL, LttP. *sarcastic*

Part of my idea that I probably should have mentioned in the first post is that the order is likely somewhat similar to the order they were made, with the obvious exceptions.

The last time I played the ending of A Link to the Past, it definitely seemed like Ganon died just as explicitly as he did in The Legend of Zelda. So, why are people assuming that Ganon didn't just completely die.

By the way, how exactly does the manual imply that A Link to the Past precedes The Legend of Zelda?

About The Minish Cap... I did think that it was first for a while. It certainly seems plausible, but that would have to have Ocarina of Time at least between The Minish Cap and Four Swords Adventures. I'm saying it's later, since that seems closer to what the creators probably intended. Remember, people, we're trying to figure out what the creators intend the timeline to be.

Hold on a second... I kind of skimmed the other posts before typing this. Now I'm noticing that people are saying that Miyamato said that the Four Swords trilogy was first. I know I'm already asking for quite a bit of proof to some things, but could someone please give me a link to whatever interview/letter/whatever Miyamato said this in?

 

[Matthew_79]

Totally agreed. Makes sense that MC could be first, seeing as (yes, it's a poor bit of evidence, but is relevant no-the-less) it explains how Link got his hat. And like you were saying, that could explain how the enemies came to be.
@Matthew_76: I don't get how the Moblin being in MC has anything to do with it's placement. I mean, there were Moblins in OoT, right?

Moblins were made by Ganon in his image, If there was no ganondorf, then there are no Moblins
That is really the only flaw I can see in MC being first theory, its not much, but it still dosnt make it any clearer

 

[MrMosley]

Thats actually quite similar, if not dead on, with my timeline. I haven't looked at mine in a while, but it was mainly based on things we already know, plus putting the Four Swords Saga in New Hyrule after the WW/PH stories. I like it.

 

[blackice_cc]

Moblins were made by Ganon in his image, If there was no ganondorf, then there are no Moblins
That is really the only flaw I can see in MC being first theory, its not much, but it still dosnt make it any clearer

Quote or reference please? Because I don't remember that at all.

Anyways, I haven't beaten ALttP yet, but I guess it seems like he dies in that. Well, there are a couple of answers as to how that would work. I mean, he can't die for good twice in one timeline. So, either he was revived after ALttP by Agahnim, he didn't actually die, or ALttP takes place in the opposite timeline compared to LoZ. Think about it; if Ganondorf died in TP, yet Ganon didn't, couldn't the same thing have happened in WW? So yeah, most likely MC FS and FSA wouldn't come first then. It would have to be after PH, when the sea dries up after many many years (perhaps thousands) and then Vaati comes along. After that, LoZ and AoL, or ALttP and then OoX.