• 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.

Spoiler My views on the timeline placement of BotW/TotK.

Joined
Oct 6, 2016
Gender
Manly man
Addressing the main topic of the thread though, I think this is a really interesting take. It hadn't occurred to me to consider, "how ancient is 'ancient'". My only alternative theory so far was an entirely separate timeline branching from the time paradox in Skyward Sword and taking place around the time OoT would've in the original timeline. My only method rn for determining if that may be the case is reviewing the theories for where BotW is placed with new information in mind.
Yeah, a great thing about my BotW/TotK placement, atleast IMO, is that it not only takes new information into consideration(such as TotK Ganon being a different incarnation from OoT Ganon, or there there being a new IW during the era of Hyrule's founding, Calamity Ganon having a connection to TotK Ganon), but also doesn't invalidate old information(such as Calamity Ganon from BotW having his history firmly tied to OoT Ganon according to BotW--and especially--CaC).
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Could it potentially be both? Totk did the same thing as SS in establishing an ancient history and then implying more history before that. By this I mean the fact fact Rauru and Mineru are stated to be the last of the Zonai. This could imply that the Zonai existed before the time of SS, and ran through until sometime afterwards. So the ancient past we see with Rauru and Sonia takes place after the events of SS. I'm just not sure it would make sense for Hyrule to be founded by Rauru, the last of the zonai die off, Demise wakes up, the Hylians retreat to the sky, the Hylians go back on land and then found Hyrule again having no recollection of their history.
From what I have seen, replaying SS, I am absolutely in the camp of the Zoni existing before SS. I also don't think Rauru and Mineru were actually the last Zoni. The Hero's Aspect, from the very same game, tells us that there was at least one more. On top of that, there is also how similar the aspect looks to the Minish. We see that the Zoni have the ability to change the size of things.

As far as Zelda, and her descendants, re-founding Hyrule, Zelda/Hylia may not see it that way. She may see it more as a temporary move to the sky. If we renovate a house, we really don't say that we moved out, then repurchased it as a new house, a second time. There's also no telling how long it would have been between Rauru's "fall" and Demise's attack. It may have been one of the reasons Zelda and Mineru decided to lift the lands (which comes with it's own rabbit hole of implications) to a few generations later.

But, that's all an aside to the main reason I am still sticking with King Rauru's rule existing before SS. (At least, until we get more official information.) It has less to do with what we do see, and more with what we don't see.
 
Joined
Apr 20, 2023
Gender
Male
Some people may be thinking that Hyule's founding in TotK was the first Hyrule, but this is not the case.
Rather, this version of Hyrule was just one of them.

It would make perfect sense for the Wind Waker's ocean to eventually disappear and then this Hyrule was
then founded upon the ruins of the old.

But it may still seem like TotK is trying to reboot the series.
 

DivineDragoness

Bombergirl Xtreme
Joined
Jul 20, 2023
I thought it was kinda obvious as soon as BotW that it was a reboot. Sure, some version of the events of past games may have occurred, but it seemed impossible to me that the games themselves were compatible due to the timeline split. The 10,000 year number the game casually threw out there convinced me even more.

And then TotK comes along and I was confused as soon as the Zonai dude had the same name as the Ocarina sage and that was just the tip of the iceberg. But then again, looking at BotW and TotK as separate events from the rest of the series makes everything make perfect sense.

I don't have the capacity for the mental gymnastics needed to fit BotW and TotK into the existing timeline. And from all indication, neither do the devs or Nintendo.
 

mαrkαsscoρ

Mr. SidleInYourDMs
ZD Champion
Joined
May 5, 2012
Location
American Wasteland
I don't have the capacity for the mental gymnastics needed to fit BotW and TotK into the existing timeline. And from all indication, neither do the devs or Nintendo.
which makes it all the more annoying when they're the ones that decided to go back in time to jam all their new plot nonsense in the past when botw was trying to be as self contained as possible
 

DivineDragoness

Bombergirl Xtreme
Joined
Jul 20, 2023
which makes it all the more annoying when they're the ones that decided to go back in time to jam all their new plot nonsense in the past when botw was trying to be as self contained as possible
An official timeline was always going to be a mistake, but I'm honestly surprised people still care so much. The moment a fallen timeline was created out of nowhere and a majority of the series was unceremoniously dumped on it was probably the moment people should've realized there's no grand interconnected plan here and shifted expectations accordingly.
 

Mikey the Moblin

if I had a nickel for every time I ran out of spac
Joined
Aug 31, 2014
Location
southworst united states
Gender
Dude
An official timeline was always going to be a mistake, but I'm honestly surprised people still care so much. The moment a fallen timeline was created out of nowhere and a majority of the series was unceremoniously dumped on it was probably the moment people should've realized there's no grand interconnected plan here and shifted expectations accordingly.
lol
 
Joined
Oct 6, 2016
Gender
Manly man
An official timeline was always going to be a mistake, but I'm honestly surprised people still care so much. The moment a fallen timeline was created out of nowhere and a majority of the series was unceremoniously dumped on it was probably the moment people should've realized there's no grand interconnected plan here and shifted expectations accordingly.
The thing is, though, there has always been a chronology built game after game.

Zelda 2 is a direct sequel to Zelda 1, taking place years after Link defeated Ganon and took back the Triforces of Power and Wisdom. This is confirmed both ingame and in the manual. This game introduced the Triforce of Courage and the concept of multiple Zeldas to the lore.

ALttP is a prequel to the NES games, made clear by the back of the box confirming Link and Zelda in this game as being the ancestors of their NES counterparts, and the Japanese manual stating that it sets the stage for ''The Legend of Zelda''. The manual reveals quite alot about Ganon's backstory, revealing that the name ''Ganon'' was merely a nickname for the angry blue piggy all this time and that his actual full first name is Ganondorf, and that he wasn't always an angry blue piggy, but was once a mortal man who was the King of Thieves who found his way into the Sacred Realm and accessed the Triforce. This game introduced these details about Ganon's backstory, the Master Sword, multiple Links, and the Goddesses(although they wouldn't get names until OoT) to the lore.

LA is said to take place after ALttP in the official timeline with the same Link, and even though LA itself doesn't outright CONFIRM it(the only hard fact at its release is that it takes place after an incarnation of Link has destroyed Ganon, according to the manual), it makes the most sense considering that dream world contains many places and enemies from ALttP such as Turtle Rock and Agahnim. It was also confirmed to feature ALttP Link on the old 1998 official JP site for the DX version, so this connection was officially confirmed before HH, if it wasn't already apparent by the constant bits and bits of evidence, but due to how obscure it is and how ****ty the internet was back then, not many people knew about it.

OoT is said to deal with the backstory of ALttP in multiple interviews around its release, which makes sense as we finally see Ganondorf in his human form for the first time, and he enters the SR and touches the Triforce, just like in the backstory of ALttP.

MM is obviously a very short time after OoT, after the ending where Link has been sent back to live out his childhood, in a branch of time where Ganon never rules Hyrule. He has the OoT(the actual instrument I mean), the intro is an obvious reference to OoT, etc. do I really have to explain THIS one?

Four Swords was said to be the earliest tale by Aonuma at its release. This places it before even OoT. The only two games to seemingly contradict this fact by being before it(SS and TMC) are games that came out after it.

The Wind Waker is a sequel to OoT, in the future where Ganon was sealed by Link as an adult. This was not only confirmed by Aonuma in an interview, but the game itself makes this explicitly clear in of itself by talking about the Hero of Time and how he sealed Ganon, there's references to the events of OoT throughout the game, and there's stained paintings of the OoT sages and a statue of the Hero of Time in Hyrule Castle.

The Minish Cap deals with the origins of Vaati and the Four Sword, placing it before FS at the (current) start of the timeline.

Twilight Princess is a sequel to Majora's Mask, as it is confirmed to take place in the branch of time at the end of OoT where Ganon is prevented from ruling Hyrule for seven years by Aonuma, the same branch that MM is in. While the events of OoT themselves aren't really mentioned due to most of them being prevented in this branch, the game cleverly references the era in certain ways that would be possible if the actual events of OoT never happened in that era. Examples include making it clear that the OoT fisherman is a legend in the fishing culture of this era, making Link go back in time to the OoT Temple of Time, not to mention the strong implication that the Hero's Shade is OoT Link (which would be confirmed to be the case by HH and HE) due to him being a previous hero who you summon by howling ocarina songs from both OoT and MM.

Phantom Hourglass is an obvious sequel to TWW, the intro recaps the game and it has Tetra in it.

Spirit Tracks is a century after TWW/PH. Niko is still alive as an old man, and Tetra is mentioned.

Skyward Sword takes place before Hyrule Kingdom exists, and features the orgin of the Master Sword, making it first by default.

HH is released, giving us the official timeline. All the connections I made up to this point are still true to this day.

A Link Between Worlds is after ALttP, as confirmed in interviews and implied by a nearly identical game world.

Tri Force Heroes is after ALBW with the same Link, confirmed in an interview, although to be fair, you wouldn;t be able to tell if it weren't for it. It doesn't really contradict anything, though, and it is official, so what's the problem here?

Breath of the Wild was confirmed in an interview with Aonuma to take place after OoT(also confirmed ingame due to Nabooru being mentioned as an ancient sage by Urbosa, and Ruto being mentioned in a monument and having the events of OoT being retold through her perspective) AND taking place at the end of a branch where there's been many battles with Ganon. Tears of the Kingdom is an obvious direct sequel to BotW with the same Link and Zelda, due to the game mentioning the events of BotW through dialogue, discoverable lore, and character profiles.

Every game except for the Oracles and FSA(and to a lesser extent, BotW and TotK), everything was fairly clear upon release or close to it.
 
Last edited:

Bowsette Plus-Ultra

wah
ZD Legend
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Location
Iowa
Gender
Lizard
If you've gotta jump through hoops to explain how the games relate to each other then the chronology is probably ****ed five ways to Saturday. :eyes:
 
Joined
Oct 6, 2016
Gender
Manly man

Bowsette Plus-Ultra

wah
ZD Legend
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Location
Iowa
Gender
Lizard


Explaining facts that you could google yourself if you wanted to is FAR from jumping through hoops, quite frankly.
Counterpoint: Lemme explain the Assassins Creed timeline:

Assassins Creed Odyssey, Assassins Creed Origins, Assassins Creed Valhalla, Ass Creed 1, Ass Cred 2, Ass Cred 4, Ass Cred 3, Ass Cred Unity, and onward. I didn't even have to jump through hoops to justify why one takes place after the other, since the timeline placement is self-****ing-evident within the games themselves.

If your explanation of a series' chronology requires a graduate thesis to explain then it's a bad chronology.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom