My Zelda Timeline

[Zemen]

Okay the reason Twilight Princess is not remembered in the backstory of Wind Waker is It lasted a very short time and never became legend. Nobody knew much of Link in TP save for a few friends, Goron elders, etc.

Regardless of how long you think TP lasted, it wouldn't have been forgotten in history for multiple reasons.

1. One very important person knew Link and that person is Zelda. Just the fact that a member of the Royal Family helped Link save Hyrule should tell you that his name WILL go down in history.
2. Ganondorf is the main threat to Hyrule during this time period. The fact that he was sentenced to death, survived it and came back to almost take over Hyrule should also tell you that this event will go down in history along with the hero who stopped him.
3. The people of Hyrule were directly affected by many of the events that the twilight monsters caused ad many villages knew of the adventure that Link went on.

All in all, there were plenty of people, including the princess of Hyrule, who knew of Link and his adventure and Ganondorf, the biggest threat Hyrule has ever known, was trying to take over the world. There is absolutely no way anyone would not know or would just not "remember" this huge point in history.

No offense but you are being extremely stubborn. If you would actually look at the evidence that everyone is throwing at you then you would see how it is IMPOSSIBLE for TP to be not only between OoT and WW but for it to even be on the same timeline as WW. Notice I used the word impossible. Not improbable or unlikely. Impossible. You are making up excuses as to how TP could come between OoT and WW with no evidence. We have given you more than enough evidence you need to understand how it is. I'm not trying to be mean or rude, but if you keep going around saying that TP goes between OoT and WW then I guarantee that more and more people will just dismiss anything you try to pass off as a theory. Again, that is meant in no offense.

 

[MrMosley]

I accidently deleted your "Any Linearists" thread, but since this was is essentially the same, I'm copying my post from that one over here.

This is getting absolutely nowhere. We are using different interpretations of the exact same evidence.

We aren't using different interpretations at all. I've seen time and time again different theorists, including myself, present to you the same facts, the same quotes, and the same reasonings of what those quotes explain. It is apparent to me now that you just aren't going to accept the fact that a linear timeline is impossible. It cannot happen and you have not gave anyone a solid argument to support it being possible. All you keep saying is that it is possible without giving any supporting evidence and using the "multiple Links" theory that you have absolutely no proof or backbone for. So you have not been successful so far.

And for the record, Anouma didn't technically confirm the split timeline. All he said was that WW takes place 100 years after the adult ending of OOT.

See this is another problem you have. You are speaking about things before you know for sure if you are right about them or not. So I'm gonna do you a favor here and post you some good ol' developer quotes to show you where you went wrong with that statement:

~When Wind Waker was released~
Eiji Aonuma: In terms of the storyline, we've decided that this takes place 100 years after the events in The Ocarina of Time. We think that as you play through the game, you'll notice that in the beginning the storyline explains some of the events in The Ocarina of Time. You'll also find hints of things from The Ocarina of Time that exist in The Wind Waker.

There's also a more complicated explanation. If you think back to the end of The Ocarina of Time, there were two endings to that game in different time periods. First Link defeated Ganon as an adult, and then he actually went back to being a child. You could say that The Wind Waker takes place 100 years after the ending in which Link was an adult.
(SOURCE)

Then, later, after TP was released, this interview came. I'm copying it from Zeruda who posted it in another thread a long time ago, but its proven so useful that I have to use it again here.

"About when is the Twilight Princess timeline set?

Aonuma: 'In a world some hundred years after 'Ocarina of Time.'

"And 'Wind Waker"

Aonuma: 'Wind Waker' is parallel. In 'Ocarina of Time,' Link jumps to
a world seven years ahead, defeats Ganon, and returns to the time of
his childhood, right? 'Twilight Princess' is a world a hundred some
years after that pacified childhood time.'
(SOURCE, 2)

The terms "adult and child timelines" are used to specify which side of the timeline split one is talking about. "Child Timeline" is applied to anything that happened after OoT!Link was sent back to his own time and lived his life as a child should. He went on to his adventure in Termina (MM), and so on and so forth. TP takes place centuries later on this side.

"Adult Timeline" refers to events that happened after the sealing of Ganon/dorf. Link was sent back to his own time, and Zelda was alone as an adult to rebuild Hyrule and whatnot. On this side, Hyrule was flooded because OoT!Link was no longer there, he was back in the Child Timeline. TWW takes place centuries later on this side.

Split timeline is no longer a theory, it is canon. Hope that cleared some things up.

And there's links and everything there to click and view the actual interview and such. The Split Timeline has been confirmed.

And WW was NOT made with the split timeline in mind.

Considering the above quote by Mr. Aonuma, who spells it out word for word that Wind Waker is based off one of the TWO ENDINGS that OoT had, and considering they had already made one continuation of the opposite ending in Majora's Mask, I think its pretty safe to say that the Split Timeline was very much in mind when Wind Waker was made.

And you are twisting developer quotes and saying they are in-game evidence. You have not disproven anything I have said.

That's a rediculous accusation to make. Why would I, with 24 hours in the day and 7 days in the week, go as far as to spend my time making up or twisting quotes to get you to believe something? I don't know how anyone else feels but I could really care less if you want to believe me or not, and I surely ain't gonna make crap up to try and get you to believe something. All I've done is point you in the right direction, but you don't seem to want to pay attention to anything.

You've been backed into a corner and can't figure out how to fight your way back out, so you are lashing out about it. That's cool. But word of advice: Do some research before you make accusations about anything.

Everybody who says the linear timeline is impossible is comparable to a religious fanatic to me.

And everyone who says a linear timeline is possible has no proof and theories that can be crushed by one or two developer quotes (like the ones I pasted above). If you wanna go on believing that the world is flat then by all means, you do just that. Don't listen to the few reasonable quotes and evidence that it has taken hardcore theorists years to get. Treat them like garbage.

It's cool, just know that you have not, And I'll say that one more time, NOT given anything solid to prove a linear timeline. Everything you have said has been "I think" and theories that you have no proof for. I can set here and say that the timeline is in the order of release and would have more solid proof of that possibility than you would with your evidence so far.

Why do you even care if I believe in a linear timeline. The possibility of a linear timeline is indisputable fact, so you can keep trying to prove that it is impossible, but it won't do much good.

You are right. If I keep trying to disprove a linear timeline, it wouldn't do any good cause I've already disproven it multiple times. Actually I disproved the linear timeline possibility in this very post. I've disproven it with two little developer quotes that clearly explain two of the major plot aspects of Wind Waker and Twilight Princess that PROVE the Split Timeline.

Bradley, I don't care if you want to believe in a linear timeline. I don't care if you want to believe that the sky is green. What I care about is that you come into a Theory Section and post a linear timeline argument and have absolutely no argument towards it. You've made two threads at this point roughly concerning this same subject, and neither one have you proven your point. Your points have only been disproven by other theorists, yet time and time again you come back, saying that you have evidence and that your theories haven't been disproven, and that Aonuma said this when he actually said that because your really have no clue what he said exactly....

Its just a viscous cycle that keeps going for one simple reason. One undeniable reason that many like yourself have never been able to overcome.... To admit that you are wrong. To admit that you cannot successfully make a linear timeline work considering all the evidence we have (dev. quotes, in-game, and manual). All you do is disregard the evidence that other theorists use to prove a split timeline, make up some story about multiple Link's impossibly not running into each other, and not even taking into consideration that they certainly would have if that were the case in MM, and then set there and say that a linear timeline is possible... over and over again.

Edit: It's not indispuatble, butI have yet to see an argument that completely debunks the possibility.

Just go back and read the posts. Read my posts. Heck read this post right here and you will get an argument that completely debunks the possibility.

 

[Pinecove]

Bradley, you still haven't answered this for me: How does Ganondorf survive from TP to TWW.
And before Mosley butts in about people dying while standing up, I'll say this AGAIN: It's called Rigar Mortis.

Edit: Upon reading above, I think Mosley just won the thread.

 

[bradley]

I was typing a reply and I clicked another link and lost it all. this is the second time this has happened to me. So I have to type it again.
Yes we are using the same evidence. You conveniently skip over the evidence I use when replying to me. Anything is possible unless it can be disproven. Some of the evidence you have given may work toward a split timeline, but it does not prove a linear timeline to be impossible. Please repost the arguments that you think have disproven the linear timeline.

Look man I'm not trying t.o use that as an argument. I was just saying if you want to get technical. And you can still just say WW happens 7 years after TP, not that I believe that. Like I said it is just my opinion and is not meant to be the official timeline. However I will say this: WW happening 100 years after OOT is contradicted by in-game evidence. 100 years is not long enough for old Hyrule to get lost to legend.

Wind Waker was not made with the split timeline in mind. You seem to ignore the Legend of the Green Fairy, which clearly proves this:

Part One
It is said that long ago, a boy garbed in green known as the Hero of Time saved
this land. However, on a certain island, there is also the story of the fairy
who saved that hero...

Part Two
It is said that the Hero of Time met the fairy in the midst of his travels.
The fairy appeared before the Hero, who had found himself lost in darkness.
With a mystic power, it would float in midair, dancing above his head like a
burst balloon.

Part Three
After the fairy handed the lost Hero a map, it flew off as quickly as it had
appeared. Better able to foresee places of danger than the Hero, the fairy
marked them on a map. The Legend goes on to say the quest of the Hero of Time
was saved by this plump figure...

Part Four
Fairies live for thousands of years... but this odd fairy was a bit different.
This mystical fairy was born near a lake, and when he met the Hero, he was but
35. Beyond that, there is little known about that fairy...

Part Five
The little-known Legend of the Fairy's 35th Birthday
On one island they celebrate one's 35th birthday with a green coat and red
pants. They do this in the hopes of becoming like the legendary fairy, Tingle.

I think I just beat you there. While this may not disprove the split timeline (which I have no intention of doing), it does prove the fact that Wind Waker was not made with the split in mind.
I will finish my reply later. I am going to bed.

 

[Locke]

You conveniently skip over the evidence I use when replying to me. Anything is possible unless it can be disproven. Some of the evidence you have given may work toward a split timeline, but it does not prove a linear timeline to be impossible.

-points to blatant proof that you conveniently skipped over:-

'Wind Waker' is parallel.

However I will say this: WW happening 100 years after OOT is contradicted by in-game evidence. 100 years is not long enough for old Hyrule to get lost to legend.

100 years after the flood, not OoT.

re: Legend of the Fairy: Good, you finally got around to using decent evidence. I say either easter egg, or MM Tingle found the dimentional portal.

 

[MrMosley]

Bradley, you still haven't answered this for me: How does Ganondorf survive from TP to TWW.
And before Mosley butts in about people dying while standing up, I'll say this AGAIN: It's called Rigar Mortis.

Technically speaking, Rigor Mortis takes about 3 hours to begin to set in

Please repost the arguments that you think have disproven the linear timeline.

"About when is the Twilight Princess timeline set?

Aonuma: 'In a world some hundred years after 'Ocarina of Time.'

"And 'Wind Waker"

Aonuma: 'Wind Waker' is parallel. In 'Ocarina of Time,' Link jumps to
a world seven years ahead, defeats Ganon, and returns to the time of
his childhood, right? 'Twilight Princess' is a world a hundred some
years after that pacified childhood time.'
(SOURCE, 2)

~Another Aonuma Interview~
–When does Twilight Princess take place?

Aonuma: In the world of Ocarina of Time, a hundred and something years later.

–And the Wind Waker?

Aonuma: The Wind Waker is parallel. In Ocarina of Time, Link flew seven years in time, he beat Ganon and went back to being a kid, remember? Twilight Princess takes place in the world of Ocarina of Time, a hundred and something years after the peace returned to kid Link’s time. In the last scene of Ocarina of Time, kids Link and Zelda have a little talk, and as a consequence of that talk, their relationship with Ganon takes a whole new direction. In the middle of this game [Twilight Princess], there's a scene showing Ganon's execution. It was decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be. That scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time. Ganon was sent to another world and now he wants to obtain the power...

Wind Waker was not made with the split timeline in mind. You seem to ignore the Legend of the Green Fairy, which clearly proves this

Good. You found some in-game evidence. Now here's the problem with the Legend of the Fairy... First, I don't often like to support evidence that has limited accessability to everyone. To even really know about this "legend" in-game, it required the GBA cable using the Tingle tuner. It was essentially a side-quest using that, which I personally think was thrown in as an easter-egg type thing, as Locke suggested above.

Another, perhaps more important, thing that makes this piece of evidence unusable is the fact that it simply is not possible. The intro makes it clear that the last known event of the Hero of Time was him defeating Ganon, then disappearing never to return. This is because he was sent back in time, THEN went on to complete his quest in Majora's Mask. There is no way of anything he done in MM being known now in the string of events leading up to Wind Waker.

What you would have is a timeline looking like this:

....../--WW
OoT
......\MM

and that is the only possible solution. If you are trying to suggest something like this:

OoT--MM--WW

then you have a ton of problems. It is clear that it was Child Link who went on to complete his quest in MM, AFTER he was sent back. In that time-frame, he never went on to defeat Ganon. His quest was over in Hyrule as far as he was concerned, which is why Navi left him and why he went looking for her later.

Now at this point in time, we didn't have TP to back up the equation and show us what took place long after the events of MM, but what we did know is that the timeline was split at this point. It has to be to make any sense at all. You can set and say that there were "multiple Links" running around in the same time-frame, but I have already provided you with reasoning why that is not possible.

Bottom line: The Legend of the Fairy is not that important to me. I have had the legend brought to my attention multiple times in the past, and even the ones who brought it up admitted that it wasn't very important when all other evidence contradicts it. This is just like with anything else in the timeline. You will run into things that just don't make sense and contradict each other. Then, you decide which point has more evidence, and in this case, the Split Timeline has way more evidence.

Last thing... I have came up with a ton of evidence proving a Split and disproving a Linear timeline at this point, so continually asking for more evidence is not necessary. I have seen many theorists come up with wild ideas like three and four different splits in the timeline and such, and they can come up with convincing evidence enough for me to say "Okay, I see how that could work". But here's the thing, you have to take developer quotes for what they are worth when they go hand-in-hand with in-game evidence. All of that makes the Split Timeline canon, and if the Split Timeline is canon, then a Linear Timeline is automatically impossible.

 

[Pinecove]

Technically speaking, Rigor Mortis takes about 3 hours to begin to set in

AH - except if you have been physically exerted before hand in which it sets in a lot faster.

On the legend of the Fairy - it's possible that Termina (being in an alternate world) did not have its time split, resulting in something like this:

........../--Hyrule
Hyrule
..........\--Hyrule

-----------Termina-----------

 

[bradley]

I put the timeline split after MM. I support the split in a what-if sense. On one hand, Link goes and tells Zelda, who warns the king of Ganondorf's plans. The king finally keeps an eye out so Zelda will STFU. On the other hand, Link goes back to become the Hero of time and save Hyrule.

 

[MrMosley]

I put the timeline split after MM. I support the split in a what-if sense. On one hand, Link goes and tells Zelda, who warns the king of Ganondorf's plans. The king finally keeps an eye out so Zelda will STFU. On the other hand, Link goes back to become the Hero of time and save Hyrule.

The entire idea of the Split Timeline is basically based off a "what if" kinda thing. Logically, for one to go back in time and change events then would alter the future. Two different strands of time cannot technically exist, only one that if time travel were possible could be altered at any time. This is why so many people disregard the Split Timeline idea altogether, because they cannot simply comprehend it. It doesn't make sense logically, so they disregard it.

Think of the Child Timeline as the only timeline. Consider that when Link went back to being a child, then went and informed Zelda of what Ganondorf is going to do, it changed the events of the future. Link no longer needed to go forward through time again and save Hyrule because he done so by speaking with Zelda. This is all confirmed in TP when we see Ganondorf being put to death. So in reality, on the CT, young Link would have ventured through time, but that entire adventure would only have been known to him and Zelda after he told her. Logically, the Adult Timeline could not exist at this point because its events would have been altered in the past.

Now, when considering the Adult Timeline (which logically doesn't exist) you had Link going through time and defeated Ganondorf. Link spent seven of his years just waiting to grow old enough to weild the Master Sword. He defeated all the evils within the temples throughout Hyrule and ultimately helped in sealing Ganondorf away. Zelda sent him back to his childhood so that he would not have to do any of this; So that he would not have to waste a good portion of his youth waiting in the Sacred Realm just to clean up a mess that could easily be prevented had he known prior to those events. This is why when he went back, he informed Zelda at a young age, and prevented anything from happening later. However, instead of just disregarding those events that Adult Link done in OoT, Nintendo continues to write stories based on them. The entire Adult Timeline could be considered the "what if" Link did not change anything in the past once he went back.

 

[Steve]

AH - except if you have been physically exerted before hand in which it sets in a lot faster.

On the legend of the Fairy - it's possible that Termina (being in an alternate world) did not have its time split, resulting in something like this:

........../--Hyrule
Hyrule
..........\--Hyrule

-----------Termina-----------

That is correct, being that Termina is a separate dimension, it exists within it's own time frame, unaffected by events within other universes.

Now, when considering the Adult Timeline (which logically doesn't exist) you had Link going through time and defeated Ganondorf.

I somewhat disagree, as it is not illogical at all. The Child Timeline is merely a second, continuum of time, parallel to the Adult Timeline (the original chain of events). You also seem to have it backwards, for Link doesn't truly travel through time into the future; he basically "waits" out those seven years, in a sense (when his body "hibernates" within the Temple of Time). In hindsight, that would make it still the present, and it is when he travels back in time that the Child Timeline is created. With that said, both timelines are just as real as the other.

 

[MrMosley]

I somewhat disagree, as it is not illogical at all. The Child Timeline is merely a second, continuum of time, parallel to the Adult Timeline (the original chain of events). You also seem to have it backwards, for Link doesn't truly travel through time into the future; he basically "waits" out those seven years, in a sense (when his body "hibernates" within the Temple of Time). In hindsight, that would make it still the present, and it is when he travels back in time that the Child Timeline is created. With that said, both timelines are just as real as the other.

What I am saying is that, thinking of it in a first-person perspective, only one strand of time is possible (in real-life sense, not the video game world). Link would have waited the seven years then completed his quest as Adult Link. When he was done, he went back in time seven years. Instead of waiting in the Sacred Realm, this time he had the opportunity to go and tell Zelda of what happened, which he did. Logically, in a real-world sense, by choosing not to wait in the Sacred Realm this time, those events would have never taken place, which they didn't.

The last thing Link done in OoT was go and have his talk with Zelda. Therefore, there are technically two endings, one in the Adult Link portion which he left behind, and another from when he returned to his childhood. The AT events were altered by what he done when he got back, so they do not exist now. Yet they do, but only because Nintendo kept writing stories based off the world left behind in OoT. Logically, it doesn't make sense to be possible. I was simply pointing out that fact, that the game itself does not have to abide by real-world logic.

Each timeline exists only because we have played those games and as theorists, understand it to exist that way. Link can undo the events of his future by changing them in the past, which he done at the end of OoT. The only way that the events of the AT can logically exist is if Link were to have went back in time at the end, then pulled the Master Sword out again to wait seven years and do it all over again. This doesn't happen, so logically, the AT shouldn't exist. I was merely pointing out that it does exist because Nintendo wrote games from that ending, and only for that reason alone. Nintendo allowed the other timeline to exist because they can, not because it makes any sense to exist.

 

[Pinecove]

I agree with Steve.
The reason the events of the child timeline don't overwrite the adult timeline at the end of OoT (unlike when you grow a beanstalk) is because the door of time (the "road between times" as Zelda states) is closed.

 

[Locke]

When Link travelled back in time, he created a new chain of events that didn't affect the orininal timeline(AT), but created a new one that had a similar relationship with the AT to the one Termina had with Hyrule before the split.

 

[bradley]

I have been playing TP and the Zora that sells you water bombs in Lake Hylia says

Sir, you wear the garb of the hero in my people's legends...

You can only talk to that Zora wearing the Zora armor, not wearing the Hero's clothes, I tried. In OoT, you can only obtain and wear the Zora Tunic as an adult.
In OoT, Rauru was already a sage and did not need to be awakened, so saying the sages in TP were the sages in OoT before the new sages were awakened does not work.

 

[Firice da Vinci]

Who really cares about whether the timeline is linear or split? Right now at the current time the timeline is just a form of fan fiction. And until that haunting document of pure zelda timeline evil is released to the public it dosent really matter what the developers say, so just believe what you want. (I am a split theorist. It was the first timeline I ever head of.)