• 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.

Nintendo's Foolish Conundrum?

A

Ace_Strife

Guest
I truly feel that The Legend of Zelda has no actual timeline, and that the games are similar to "series" such as Pokemon or Final Fantasy, where in many of the games, previous ones are mentioned, but the games really aren't that related at all for the most part.

However, we're all well aware of Nintendo reps claiming that there is some connection to the worlds somewhere, and two different Nintendo reps stating that Twilight Princess occurred 20 or a hundred years after Ocarina of Time, and Wind Waker occurring some time after Ocarina of Time as well. Now, no one knows why Nintendo did that because it's perfectly plausible, and many people thought this way, that the world's were not really conneccted in any way, that each game was contained in its own universe. The worlds don't really fit either, so Nintendo may have foolishly created a conundrum. Or perhaps not, because it adds to the mystique of the series, and may bolster sales...

Well, one day, just for the fun of it (my friends were arguing about it with each other), I came up with a "Timeline Theory" if the Zelda series really did have a timeline, but as I said, I really don't believe it.

First, I'm a split timeline "believer", a "believer" just for the sake of discussion.

However, I would believe that there are two Zelda universes, and in one of those universes, there is a split timeline.

DISCLAIMER: I've never, ever been in a Zelda forum before, and have never heard or read anyone's timeline theory before. If mine is exactly the same as someone else's cool, but I assure you I didn't steal it, nor was I influenced by it. After I post my own theory, I will look at others for the purpose of not being influenced beforehand.

The first Universe starts with the original NES Zelda and supposedly ends with A link to the Past. In between are Link's awakening and the oracle games, in that order.

I have no idea what to make of Minish Cap. It's the odd game out. Unfortunately, i haven't played Zelda 2 so I don't know where to place it either, though I'd assume it follows the original NES version (I wouldn't be surprised at all if I'm wrong.

Now, to the split timeline universe.

Ocarina of Time starts it off with two ages. Link as a kid and Link as an adult see two different ages, and, at the end of the game, adult Link returns to his own age (seven years in the past). However, unless I'm mistaken, I'm under the impression that the Princess Zelda of the future mentioned that she was only sending Link back to his own time, and she wouldn't come with him. I'm further convinced of this possibility because when Link sees the Princess in the ending movie, she seems completely shocked to see Link, as if she's never seen him before. In addition, I'm sure that she's spying on ganondorf, but the two don't do anything about, because Link's actions are what cause ganondorf to obtain the triforce in the first place. In Majora's Mask, Zelda "teaches" Link the song of time, as if she thought he's never heard it before. That must mean that Zelda never had to part with the Ocarina because ganondorf was never after her. Now, I will note that Link is completely aware of his journeys in OoT, as in Majora's Mask, you "relearn" (as the game points out) Epona's Song, the Song of Storms, and the Song of Time. However, Zelda must not be because she teaches him the Song of Time in person when Link embarks on a journey to find Navi (or so it's implied).

So, what do I make of this mess?

In the past, the timeline Link is sent back to, ganondorf never gains power of the triforce during Link's lifetime. Thus, evil does not spread into the world, and Wind Waker would never happen (the drowning of Hyrule). However, in the future, Ganondorf is sealed away, and as a safety measure, Hyrule is drowned and locked in time to make sure ganondorf is never released. That is the world of Wind Waker, and so, perhaps Wind Waker exists in the split timeline of the future.

Now, we know ganondorf lusts for power. That does not make him evil, just, greedy. His greed may have led to his attempts to seize power in a dangerous way, and the original sages (or the sages of the Dark World, where Midna comes from) seal him away. He emerges, however, because his actions gave him the triforce of power, as that piece allies itself with the most powerful being. that would lead to the events of Twilight Princess. Perhaps the skull knight (Stalfos) that teaches Twilight Princess Link the sword arts in Twilight Princess is Link, the Hero of Time (from OoT) himself, as he claims he was a previous hero/past-life of the TP Link.

So Ocarina of Time has a split timeline.

The future world of ruin where the legendary fight with Ganondorf occurred in OoT leads to Wind Waker. The past, where Link was sent back home to without the older Zelda reverting back leads to Majora's Mask and then much, much later, Twilight Princess.

Now, I'm sure there are holes in this theory, and I welcome anyone to point them out. Also, if anyone needs clarifying, I'm all ears. If anyone wants to debate, shoot for it! I may agree with you beccause I haven't read anyone else's theories.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Mike Pothier

Lord Shaper
Joined
Apr 5, 2008
Location
Southern California
I don't have time for a huge post right now. Let me just say that yes, there is a timeline, and the only reason its not airtight is because Nintendo puts gameplay ahead of story. In other words, they start with a premise and where it fits in the overall timeline, but instead of worrying about every little detail to make the timeline a perfect thread, they'll switch things up if that makes a better game. That leads to a lot of debates, but it also means we get the high quality of games we've seen for the past 20 years.
 

MrMosley

ZD Marathon Majora's Mask Champion
Joined
May 15, 2008
Location
Kentucky, USA
Pokemon has a timeline. Red and blue (or green in Japan), take place at the same time because they are the same game, same characters, just with different monsters to catch. Yellow was based on the same story as the first two with added features, but it still was the same characters and story. They kept the same setup for the different versions which were released, but Gold, Silver, or Crystal, took place after Red and Blue. The ones following those games didn't make, or at least I dont remember them making, any references to Red, blue, gold, or silver, but they obviously took place after the games because there are advances in the technology used by the people in the games. You must also look at the characters and their placement in the games. There are many characters within each new version of Pokemon that have changed their position from a previous one mentioned in earlier versions. Hence you have a timeline.

The Final Fantasy series always has different characters in a different setting, and dosent use too much of the same characters or storyline. So it does not need a timeline because each one is different, a timeline dosent matter when you have characters that do not connect.

Zelda, however, used the same character (Link) as the Hero in all the games. Even though it is not the same Link in every game, most of them use Ganon (or Ganondorf), which is the same Ganon in every game, most include Zelda or a new generation of Zelda, and many of them take place in Hyrule. Not to mention a lot of the games making references to events or people that possibly came from a game plot that took place before the game being played. That is why Zelda, even though a timeline is hard to figure out and confusing, must have a timeline in order for it to make the least bit of sense.
 
A

Ace_Strife

Guest
The thing is, Pokemon Ruby and Saphire would take place at the same time as Red and Blue because of certain quests in the game hinting at such, however, as I've said, I don't feel as if the games are actually connected because you rarely get character overlap that references the main character from another game or anything. That's what I mean. Glod and Silver do follow Red and Silver, that's the exception.

Final Fantasies actually do seem to have connections. 1 and 3 seem to be connected, 7 and 10 may have some connection, and 2, 4, and 9 supposedly have some connection to each other as well.

Note also that I say "related" and not "timeline" when referencing Pokemon and Final Fantasy.

Mike Pothier said:
I don't have time for a huge post right now. Let me just say that yes, there is a timeline, and the only reason its not airtight is because Nintendo puts gameplay ahead of story. In other words, they start with a premise and where it fits in the overall timeline, but instead of worrying about every little detail to make the timeline a perfect thread, they'll switch things up if that makes a better game. That leads to a lot of debates, but it also means we get the high quality of games we've seen for the past 20 years.
Huh...I never thought of it that way, but you do have a point. I was thinking more along the lines of Nintendo wanting to please everyone by alluding to a "timeline" per se, but leaving it vague enough to keep everyone happy and discussing.
 

MrMosley

ZD Marathon Majora's Mask Champion
Joined
May 15, 2008
Location
Kentucky, USA
The thing is, Pokemon Ruby and Saphire would take place at the same time as Red and Blue because of certain quests in the game hinting at such, however, as I've said, I don't feel as if the games are actually connected because you rarely get character overlap that references the main character from another game or anything. That's what I mean. Glod and Silver do follow Red and Silver, that's the exception.


I do not remember any quests hinting at Ruby and Sapphire making reference to Red and Blue taking place at the same time, but I'm open to whatever these quests and hints are if you would like to let me know.

As of right now I cannot think of anything right off that would prove that the games came after Gold and Silver as far as character plots are concerned, but you are really making the obvious too complicated here. Pokemon is a continuing series. Each game there are more monsters discovered in a different region of the world. Remember, pokemon takes place in "regions" of the same world. The Pokedex advances with each version. I believe if the Ruby and Sapphire pokedex existed at the same time of Red and Blue, then Professor Oak would know, and give you that pokedex, and those creatures would be available.

For example, Pikachu is introduced in Red and Blue, and Pichu is introduced in Gold and Silver. Wouldn't you think that is Ruby and Sapphire took place simultaneously with Red and Blue that we would have seen the pre-evolved form of Pikachu then? Or maybe its just because that idea hadn't been thought of yet. But then you must think about Leaf Green and Fire Red. Those were remakes that came after Ruby and Sapphire, and if Nintendo wanted RS to take place at the same time as RB, they would have put Pichus in the areas where you would catch a Pikachu




Final Fantasies actually do seem to have connections. 1 and 3 seem to be connected, 7 and 10 may have some connection, and 2, 4, and 9 supposedly have some connection to each other as well.


I have not played the Final Fantasy series enough times through to know how each connect, but what little I have played seems to me that Chocobos are about the only thing that shows up in many of the games that are the same. I do have friends who are big fans of the series and tell me that they do not connect in any way officially though.

Note also that I say "related" and not "timeline" when referencing Pokemon and Final Fantasy.
True, but the thing is when comparing Zelda to Pokemon or Final Fantasy, you contradict yourself when you say that the series does not relate because it makes no reference to characters from previous games. The Zelda series makes references to previous generations of Link, Zelda, and of course Ganon....The only exception being Ganon is the same Ganon we have always had.
 
A

Ace_Strife

Guest
This is getting off the line of discussion I meant to have, but I guess I need to clarify anyway.

When I say "relate," I mean that the games may not exist in the same universe, regardless of time line, though you do see references. Perhaps places from other games do exist, but it does not seem as if the quests themselves that occurred in the other games would have occurred in the game in question.

For example, and this answers your other question, pokemon fire red and leaf green have a side quest where you need to fix a machine that allows you to trade and communicate "with far away places," meaning the world of Hoenn in Ruby, Sapphire, and Emerald. That of course clears up trading requirements, but is really unneeded because Ruby and Sapphire give you a message telling you that you cannot trade at the current time if Fire Red or Leaf Green has not completed the quest to link the communication between regions.

However, I guess now that Pokemon may not be the best example, but Final Fantasy still is.

More clarification needed on my part:

Some Final Fantasy games seem to be "spiritual sequels" of others, and I would think the same is true of many Zelda games.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top Bottom