• 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.

My Timeline Theory

Zemen

[Insert Funny Statement]
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Location
Illinois
Your timeline has shaped up, but this quote has a big, or small, problem to it. In OoX (meaning both Oracles), Zelda introduces herself to Link. That means that it can't be a direct sequel, as Zelda already knew Link in ALttP. OoX has to be a different generation Link and Zelda from any other. It can still stay where you have it in the timeline, if you decide to keep it there, but it is not a direct sequel.

And to add on what DL01 said, there isn't really any specific order (that we know of) that the Oracle games go in. One game doesn't lead directly into the other one. Both start pretty much the same and both end pretty much the same which seems to be a clear indication that they take place around the same time in no specific order. You can even play the linked game with either game played first. One doesn't have to go before the other which is why many people just refer to them as OoX (one unit) as opposed to 2 separate games when dealing with the timeline.

And just to back up DL01, neither of the Oracle games are direct sequels to ALTTP because of the reason he gave. Zelda has to introduce herself. If it was the same Link then no introductions should be necessary. You could use other evidence to put it there but a direct sequel is seemingly impossible.
 

Clucluclu

Time for waffles
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Location
Los Angeles
I have 2 things
1. Nintendo said that there is no time line

I know this is off topic but I want Link360 to understand why the video stating that there is no timeline doesn't make a difference so that we can help end all this crap that that video has brought.

This has been stated in other articles and now it will be stated again: How do we know that the video saying there is no timeline is legit? We don't have firm proof from that video that it was actually from Nintendo. All we have is the creator of the original video saying that Nintendo told him that there was no timeline. Also, we don't have any footage of Miyamoto or anyone else for that matter, saying that there is no timeline.

If that isn't enough, I have more.

At the end of the video, the guy says that Nintendo calls him stupid and says screw you. First, that would be downright rude, which is something that representatives of anything, including large companies, try to avoid. Second, why would they want to be so rude to someone such a big fan. Also, even if there was no timeline, I don't think that Nintendo would ever want to publicly dismiss it. The timeline theories and speculation are a big part of Zelda and a major factor in keeping us interested in the series. Why would they want to get rid of it? Another thing is that I would imagine Nintendo being proud of all the hype, and enjoy finding out about fan theories. For these reasons there is no way that that video actually contained information from zelda, and I think the author made it just to cause a commotion in the ever-expanding Zelda World.
 

fiercedeity619

Remember the name
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Location
termina
And to add on what DL01 said, there isn't really any specific order (that we know of) that the Oracle games go in. One game doesn't lead directly into the other one. Both start pretty much the same and both end pretty much the same which seems to be a clear indication that they take place around the same time in no specific order. You can even play the linked game with either game played first. One doesn't have to go before the other which is why many people just refer to them as OoX (one unit) as opposed to 2 separate games when dealing with the timeline.

And just to back up DL01, neither of the Oracle games are direct sequels to ALTTP because of the reason he gave. Zelda has to introduce herself. If it was the same Link then no introductions should be necessary. You could use other evidence to put it there but a direct sequel is seemingly impossible.

well i know that OoX doesnt really have a specific placement but this is just my belief so sorry but i won't change it again.
 

Skull_Kid

Bugaboo!
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Location
Portugal
They may not have a specific placement, but they fit perfectly after AoL.
In my belief, and some other people's beliefs(like Zemen), the CT goes:

MM-TP-FS-FSA-ALttP/LA-LoZ/AoL-OoX, AND its pretty much coherent
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom