Satsy
~~SaturnStorm
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2010
- Location
- Somewhere small
That doesn't stop your timeline from being hard to read, however. It doesn't help that you're asking us to imagine lines to get an idea of what you're on about. I'm afraid we're not psychic. If you can't get it across using the forum text have you tried drawing your timeline (with all the lines to relevant points) in an art program? It would certainly make seeing your point a little easier, if nothing else. Though if I may be so blunt, some work on your grammar would also work wonders.
I'd also like to point out that what's going on here isn't trolling. Trolling is an act in which a person's post is done specifically to gain a negative reaction from either one person, a group of people, or in extreme cases a whole community. That's not what's going on here at all -- this is debate because, yes, people are going to disagree with your timeline. I mean what's the point of posting your timeline if you're just going to cry every time someone points out what's wrong?
General points aside, your timeline is wrong, not just because an official timeline has been released, though it certainly doesn't help.
Rather than go through it point-by-point, I'd like to bring up only 2 major things:
1: In placing the games, you haven't taken into account 3 important points that should be considered at the very least: The state of Ganon(dorf), the 'life' of the Master Sword, and the state of the Triforce. There are points where the Triforce is complete, which it should not be when you take into account the preceding and following titles in that line. The oracle games, for instance, contains a complete Triforce which OoT/MM and TP do not. During that time the Triforce has been separated. Without delving into non-canon speculation, how do you explain that?
2: You are asserting theories with nothing to back them. Why do you think the Kokiri blade is the Picori blade? Where in the games supports this idea? Why do you assume the Picori, who are only seen once every hundred years, are the kokiri who are clearly round all year long? Why do you believe that Ganon came back as Dark Link for Zelda 2? What is there to back that up? Even if you don't take into account what the developers say during interviews, the games themselves drop some decent hints as to what should follow on from when. Theory with no backing cannot be taken seriously, and basing your theory off someone else's theory creates holes that will get your theory debated to shreds if you make no attempt to patch them.
I appreciate that some creative thought can be taken when considering the timeline. If you concentrate solely on the games there are places where the timeline could have drastically changed which may well have not ended in the 2 splits it officially has! But you need to put more thought into what the games can tell you. You can do better. But you have to accept what's been said, take it on board, and see what can be strengthened in your theory, or moved where necessary.
You also forgot Four Sword Adventures. It can't go before OoT because Ganon is in it.
I'd also like to point out that what's going on here isn't trolling. Trolling is an act in which a person's post is done specifically to gain a negative reaction from either one person, a group of people, or in extreme cases a whole community. That's not what's going on here at all -- this is debate because, yes, people are going to disagree with your timeline. I mean what's the point of posting your timeline if you're just going to cry every time someone points out what's wrong?
General points aside, your timeline is wrong, not just because an official timeline has been released, though it certainly doesn't help.
Rather than go through it point-by-point, I'd like to bring up only 2 major things:
1: In placing the games, you haven't taken into account 3 important points that should be considered at the very least: The state of Ganon(dorf), the 'life' of the Master Sword, and the state of the Triforce. There are points where the Triforce is complete, which it should not be when you take into account the preceding and following titles in that line. The oracle games, for instance, contains a complete Triforce which OoT/MM and TP do not. During that time the Triforce has been separated. Without delving into non-canon speculation, how do you explain that?
2: You are asserting theories with nothing to back them. Why do you think the Kokiri blade is the Picori blade? Where in the games supports this idea? Why do you assume the Picori, who are only seen once every hundred years, are the kokiri who are clearly round all year long? Why do you believe that Ganon came back as Dark Link for Zelda 2? What is there to back that up? Even if you don't take into account what the developers say during interviews, the games themselves drop some decent hints as to what should follow on from when. Theory with no backing cannot be taken seriously, and basing your theory off someone else's theory creates holes that will get your theory debated to shreds if you make no attempt to patch them.
I appreciate that some creative thought can be taken when considering the timeline. If you concentrate solely on the games there are places where the timeline could have drastically changed which may well have not ended in the 2 splits it officially has! But you need to put more thought into what the games can tell you. You can do better. But you have to accept what's been said, take it on board, and see what can be strengthened in your theory, or moved where necessary.
You also forgot Four Sword Adventures. It can't go before OoT because Ganon is in it.
