Nintendo Doesn't Know Yet (NDKY) theory

[YIGAhim]

Breath of the Wild is full of hints towards what timeline the game falls in. Unfortunately, there are several hints for EACH timeline, making it impossible to know for sure which one of the 3 timelines it is on, if it even is on one of the 3 (there could possibly be a 4th timeline).

My theory, is that Nintendo is waiting for one of us to "crack the code", and give the world some good enough logic as to which timeline the game is on. I believe that even Nintendo isn't sure which timeline it is on, and is waiting for a very crazy explanation for everything (possibly https://zeldadungeon.net/forum/threads/could-botw-have-been-a-dream.60728/#post-1104898 is an answer).

My reasoning, is that Nintendo has given us so much information, it would be almost impossible to give an easy, straightforward answer to the question, which is kind of what Nintendo wanted. They want us to keep arguing about where the timeline is, until they finally draw the line, and pick whatever theory they find the best fitting for where they want the series to go.

With no answer, the question can be debated forever, until there is a real answer, which is what I think Nintendo is doing right about now.

Any thoughts?

Crap. It's the NDKY, not the NDNY....



@Vanessa28

 

[Castle]

My theory is that ninty doesn't know and doesn't care about timelines so to throw off appease fans they just gave allusions to all available timelines.

Remember, Twilight Princess draws a clear connection between Ocarina of Time and ALttP despite ALttP being on a different branch of the timeline.

Nope, ninty's not nearly this clever. Just lazy. Though when it comes to timelines, I'm with them for once.

 

[pyjamas5189]

I feel the time line was only created to keep people happy and that Nintendo didn't make the games with any kind of link between them

 

[Deleted member 14134]

There was no timeline. They made an official timeline to please their fans and of course they put they're very own "innovative twist" on it by having it split into 3 instead of two like everyone thought. Most of Zeldas lore is created by fan theories anyways, not Nintendo. I believe the same is the case with BOTW. There are too many contradictions for it to be in any timeline so unless it's a convergence it doesn't really make sense anywhere. I think they just made the game they wanted to and put the story on the backburner which is honestly what they should do from now on.

 

[Dio]

They are aware of the timeline and know exactly where the game is supposed to go. Many games in the series are obviously connected and had continuity in mind. The official timeline may have been created to appease fans and placed games without connections into certain spaces they didn't fit, however SS-OOT-WW-PH-ST and SS-OOT-MM-TP are clearly part of one split timeline. With ALTTP-LA-ALBW being part of another with the rest of the games being unconnected to the main timelines.

Anything seemingly out of place in BoTW is just because they are careless about the contradictions they create. I also think they don't remember their own lore a lot of the time which leads to discrepancy.

 

[Moblinking5000]

Breath of the Wild is full of hints towards what timeline the game falls in. Unfortunately, there are several hints for EACH timeline, making it impossible to know for sure which one of the 3 timelines it is on, if it even is on one of the 3 (there could possibly be a 4th timeline).

There are several hints, sure, but in the case of the AT and CT, they're vague enough to be explained, and they both have some HUGE problems. The DT has the most evidence and least contradictions in my honest opinion. If you wish to know why I think this, here's a link to my topic on this matter:

https://zeldadungeon.net/forum/thre...ne-placement-of-botw-and-my-conclusion.60315/

My theory, is that Nintendo is waiting for one of us to "crack the code", and give the world some good enough logic as to which timeline the game is on. I believe that even Nintendo isn't sure which timeline it is on, and is waiting for a very crazy explanation for everything (possibly https://zeldadungeon.net/forum/threads/could-botw-have-been-a-dream.60728/#post-1104898 is an answer).

Sorry, but this is one of the most bizarre theories I've seen, especially when the brunt of the evidence for it is your own interpretations of events of past games being somewhat almost-similar, and making up headcanons about AoL and OoT, and being based on of the worst and most overused tropes used in fiction.

My theory is that ninty doesn't know and doesn't care about timelines so to throw off appease fans they just gave allusions to all available timelines.

Every game since the second has been connected to one other game.

And there's no reason why the MS can't be in a similar state on both the CT and DT.

 

[DragonEleven]

I think there was a time when the timeline placements of the games didn't matter to them, but they've since realised how important it is to fans, which led them to piece together the existing games into the official timeline and since then have been trying to fit new games into that timeline.
However, I think they've now realised that in doing so they've essentially trapped themselves... there's only so many places within the timeline where they can fit in new games without conflicting with the existing lore, and each of the timeline branches already has it's climax in the fight against Ganon, with attempts to continue the story after that falling short of what their predecessors achieved.
What they've done with BotW I think is their way of getting out of that situation... a new climax for a new timeline branch with a potentially unlimited number of places where they can add games in the future, potentially even revisiting concepts and locations they've used before, without conflicting with the existing lore.
BotW's timeline placement is so vague that they could fit in as many future games as they want, completely free of the constraints that had been imposed by the existing timeline... essentially giving them a clean slate to work with, while preserving the existing timeline.

 

[Aku]

However, I think they've now realised that in doing so they've essentially trapped themselves... there's only so many places within the timeline where they can fit in new games without conflicting with the existing lore, and each of the timeline branches already has it's climax in the fight against Ganon, with attempts to continue the story after that falling short of what their predecessors achieved.
What they've done with BotW I think is their way of getting out of that situation... a new climax for a new timeline branch with a potentially unlimited number of places where they can add games in the future, potentially even revisiting concepts and locations they've used before, without conflicting with the existing lore.

It's likely why they flung BOTW so far into the 'future.' They were starting to run out of creative breathing space, and they knew it. I am wondering if they had been starting to feel 'cramped' by the timeline itself, adding in stuff that was supposedly 'limited' to one timeline, muddying up placement so they wouldn't have to 'conform' to any particular timeline's do's and don'ts. Even other stuff seems to show a desire to creatively 'break free' from (expected) old tropes. Having Zelda have all of the Triforce. Having the Master Sword be 'optional' instead of mandatory to defeat Ganon. Heck, even adding ambiguity as to what Ganon might be, either he's human from the get go or the demon pig is his 'true form.' I think the devs want now to avoid being locked into 'This is what it will be for ever and ever and ever' which is what (I suspect) the timeline, HH, maybe even OOT, was starting to push them into.

 

[Moblinking5000]

It's likely why they flung BOTW so far into the 'future.' They were starting to run out of creative breathing space, and they knew it. I am wondering if they had been starting to feel 'cramped' by the timeline itself, adding in stuff that was supposedly 'limited' to one timeline, muddying up placement so they wouldn't have to 'conform' to any particular timeline's do's and don'ts. Even other stuff seems to show a desire to creatively 'break free' from (expected) old tropes. Having Zelda have all of the Triforce. Having the Master Sword be 'optional' instead of mandatory to defeat Ganon. Heck, even adding ambiguity as to what Ganon might be, either he's human from the get go or the demon pig is his 'true form.' I think the devs want now to avoid being locked into 'This is what it will be for ever and ever and ever' which is what (I suspect) the timeline, HH, maybe even OOT, was starting to push them into.

Having Zelda have all the Triforce is perfectly possible, considering the fact that the DT has the RF possessing the Triforce multiple times.

As for the ambiguity as to whether Ganon was originally a human or whether Ganondorf was just some disguise or avatar or something, If you're referring to how Urbosa says that Ganon once adopted the form of a Gerudo, in the JP version she outright says that he was ORIGINALLY a Gerudo; although Ganon(dorf)'s portrayal in OoT makes it pretty obvious that he was originally a human, as well as his backstory since then(including the JP version of BotW). And the MS hasn't always been used to defeat/kill Ganon.

 

[Aku]

As for the ambiguity as to whether Ganon was originally a human or whether Ganondorf was just some disguise or avatar or something, If you're referring to how Urbosa says that Ganon once adopted the form of a Gerudo, in the JP version she outright says that he was ORIGINALLY a Gerudo; although Ganon(dorf)'s portrayal in OoT makes it pretty obvious that he was originally a human, as well as his backstory since then(including the JP version of BotW). And the MS hasn't always been used to defeat/kill Ganon.

The Japanese translation says : "According to the fairy tales, that thing was originally also a member of the Gerudo Tribe.'

Which I know of and am actually not disputing. What I am considering ambiguous is the fact that his Compendium entry is saying that Beast Ganon is considered the true/ original form. (I have read the Japanese translation for this too, however, it's a royal ***** even finding that again on Google. )

Now we do know that 'Ganondorf' had been of the Gerudo tribe. But what I am saying is strange is that the Shiekah Slate, being likely 10,000 years old, would have as it's entry that Beast Ganon is considered the true form, rather then clearing up misinformation and definitively saying that this thing's true form is that of a Gerudo. The ancient Shiekah, much closer to the time of Ganondorf and less likely to hear distorted 'fairy tales,' should be writing verified, researched fact rather then stuff born of ignorant hearsay. It would be important for any Hero to know as much accurate things about Ganon, just in case there is any chance of an exploitable weakness through them.

As such, it is making me wonder if the Shiekah ended up finding out something new about Ganon that we didn't know before, that despite his seemingly original human appearance there was something more sinister that stopped them from writing: 'This thing's true form is Ganondorf, former King of Thieves of the Gerudo.'

It's one of the reasons that I am beginning to doubt that Nintendo will remain with his static representation out of OoT, because originally he had been considered a bipedal demon pig in the earliest two Zeldas, then he was 'revealed' to have once been Ganondorf King of Thieves, in SS he was 'revealed' again to be a product of an ancient Demon King's hate-filled curse, and they will probably keep that 'revealing' going. I doubt they will stop his evolution, as much as fans like it now, even the Ganondorf incarnation will grow stale if Nintendo just stops his evolution there for ever and ever.

 

[Moblinking5000]

If you're going to deny Urbosa's statement due to the use of the term ''fairy tales'', then you should deny the Compendium due to the term ''considered'' being used. Also, due to the amount of time into the future, it makes sense that most cultures would have forgotten his origin. However, the Gerudo, being Ganon's original culture before he became the Demon King, would naturally have a better idea then other cultures, bringing up a good reason as to why Urbosa's statement holds more weight then the Compendium. Also, Urbosa's statement is more in your face due to it being a voice acted cutscene that you encounter in the Main Quest, whereas the Compendium entry is easily missable for the non completionist, which could say a lot about which is the ''correct'' statement. And 10,000 years prior to BotW wasn't close to OoT, especially not in the DT where Ganon isn't mentioned as Ganondorf in LoZ/AoL, which could support the DT even more.

Also none of Ganon's ''evolutions'' so far have actually been contradictory: Him being a demon king in Zelda I and II doesn't contradict the fact that he was originally a thief king; Zelda I and II don't mention it, yes, because they didn't plan to give him a backstory until ALttP was made to be a prequel to the first two games, but it doesn't DENY him originally being a thief king either. ALttP didn't say he was a Gerudo thief for similar reasons, but it doesn't say he WASN'T either. OoT didn't say that he was born because of the curse of a prior demon king, but it doesn't deny that fact either.

If, however, it was confirmed that his human form wasn't his original form, it would be the first time that an addition to his backstory actually contradicts what came before; Nintendo has proven that they don't need to do that, so why bother?