Timeline Discussion

[darklordoftech]

I think the Hero of Time defeated split was created to explain 1. The Sages being remembered in an unflooded Hyrule in AOL. 2. Ganon having all three Triforce pieces in ALTTP.

The interview that first talked about the town names also says that they considered not including pig Ganon at all and that Miyamoto gave them permission not to include pig Ganon. If OOT was the Imprisoning War itself, they wouldn’t have considered not including pig Ganon. https://www.angelfire.com/games5/makzelda/interviews/kiootcomments.html

I think it would have made more sense if OOT didn’t include the dialogue about the Sacred Realm changing. If they stuck to the Sacred Realm only changing as a result of Ganon’s wish being granted, things would be less confusing. In ALTTP, the Triforce itself says that granting Ganon’s wish created the Dark World, but OOT makes it sounds like the Dark World exists in spite of Ganondorf failing to aquire the complete Triforce.

I suppose ALTTP could be remade so that Ganon only has the Triforce of Power and AOL could be remade with different town names.

 

[Moblinking5000]

When do you all think the Downfall Timeline was decided on by Nintendo?

I ask not only because of the OoT-ALttP connection, but also because of the village names in Adventure of Link. It was reconfirmed in 2008 that the towns are named in honour of the OoT sages in universe, which was well after the split timeline was fleshed out quite a bit, and yet before the official chronology was revealed.

This doesn't work on the Adult Timeline because Ganon and Hyrule were annihilated in the ending of The Wind Waker, nor does it work on the Child Timeline since the sages never awakened there.

In order for this connection to work, it would require a branch where the later part of OoT still happened, only without the Great Flood. That's why I feel the Downfall Timeline may have existed then.

 

[Mikey the Gengar]

i think it existed shortly after ocarina of time, either after wind waker or twilight princess; they basically confirm the existence of the downfall timeline because ganondorf appears as a man in those timelines, only remaining a beast in the downfall timeline

 

[Spiritual Mask Salesman]

When do you all think the Downfall Timeline was decided on by Nintendo?

I ask not only because of the OoT-ALttP connection, but also because of the village names in Adventure of Link. It was reconfirmed in 2008 that the towns are named in honour of the OoT sages in universe, which was well after the split timeline was fleshed out quite a bit, and yet before the official chronology was revealed.

This doesn't work on the Adult Timeline because Ganon and Hyrule were annihilated in the ending of The Wind Waker, nor does it work on the Child Timeline since the sages never awakened there.

In order for this connection to work, it would require a branch where the later part of OoT still happened, only without the Great Flood. That's why I feel the Downfall Timeline may have existed then.

I would like to think it became a concept with The Wind Waker. Ocarina of Time was always intended as a prequel to A Link to the Past. Majora's Mask was created as a sequel to Ocarina of Time, and so was The Wind Waker. So I feel like by time they made The Wind Waker, they must have realized they had three games all supposedly coming directly after Ocarina of Time.

 

[Moblinking5000]

I would like to think it became a concept with The Wind Waker. Ocarina of Time was always intended as a prequel to A Link to the Past. Majora's Mask was created as a sequel to Ocarina of Time, and so was The Wind Waker. So I feel like by time they made The Wind Waker, they must have realized they had three games all supposedly coming directly after Ocarina of Time.

Do you think the exact details of the third branch (Link dying to Ganon, etc.) were always meant to be the same?

 

[Spiritual Mask Salesman]

Do you think the exact details of the third branch (Link dying to Ganon, etc.) were always meant to be the same?

I'm not sure, honestly. I feel like in an attempt to rationalize it, the possibility of proposing that it's a diverging history where Link dies instead of winning could have happened that early. It could just as easily be a point they tacked on in retrospect later on too, closer to Hyrule Historia's release maybe.

Either way, I'm pretty certain the Downfall Timeline has existed longer than fans want to admit.

 

[Uwu_Oocoo2]

So I don't know if anyone has said this already, since I couldn't be bothered to read all 11 pages, but when it comes to the downfall timeline, I will always believe the Hyrule Historia version. LA just doesn't work coming before OoA and OoS. You lose a lot of that story with him coming home to Hyrule. Not to mention the Encyclopedia version implies that LA happens, he says "welp that sucked" and continues on his merry way. I don't buy it.

Also, I am positive Nintendo is just making this up as they go along and getting surprised when it actually makes sense.

 

[Moblinking5000]

So I don't know if anyone has said this already, since I couldn't be bothered to read all 11 pages, but when it comes to the downfall timeline, I will always believe the Hyrule Historia version. LA just doesn't work coming before OoA and OoS. You lose a lot of that story with him coming home to Hyrule. Not to mention the Encyclopedia version implies that LA happens, he says "welp that sucked" and continues on his merry way. I don't buy it.

I mean the Encyclopedia version is more up to date than the Historia version, so that is the up to date timeline. The OoX makes more sense this way anyway, as Link and Zelda don't know each other in the Oracle games.

Also, I am positive Nintendo is just making this up as they go along and getting surprised when it actually makes sense.

I mean, every franchise makes things up as they go along, but that doesn't mean it's invalid, otherwise the Triforce of Courage and Ganon having once been a man wouldn't count. And what about the timeline doesn't make sense?

Also, to copy and paste what I said, there's been a timeline since the second game:


Zelda 2 is a direct sequel to Zelda 1, as mentioned in game and the manual as taking place after Link retrieved the ToP and ToW and defeated Ganon.

ALttP is a prequel to the NES games, as mentioned on the box and in the JP manual.

OoT is a prequel to ALttP, confirmed in interviews after OoT's release, and made obvious by the fact that Ganondorf, the original human form of Ganon mentioned in the backstory of ALttP, is the main antagonist.

MM is a direct sequel to OoT, being made obvious by the game mentioning him defeating evil and saving Hyrule by traveling through time and him having the OoT ingame.

TWW is a sequel to OoT, being made obvious by the fact that the Hero of Time is directly referenced countless times.

FSGBA was called ''the oldest tale'' by Aonuma at its release, placing it before any of the other games that existed at that time.

TMC deals with the origins of the FS and Vaati, so it's before FS.

TP is a sequel to OoT, confirmed in interviews, and implied ingame by the Pedestal of Time still existing in the ToT, the fact that there's a picture of the OoT Fisherman in Lake Hylia, that the Hero's Shade teaches you OoT/MM songs, etc.

PH is an obvious direct sequel to TWW, as the events of TWW are summarized in the backstory and Tetra is present.

ST is a sequel to TWW as Tetra is mentioned and Niko is still alive.

SS is an obvious prequel to the series. Hyrule Kingdom doesn't exist yet, and the MS is forged. Not to mention this was confirmed in interviews.

ALBW is a sequel to ALttP as confirmed in interviews, and the world is more or less the same as the one in ALttP.

BotW was confirmed to take place at the end of a branch that has many attacks by Ganon. Similarly to Zelda 2, we have a Hyrule where the OoT sages are mentioned, with the events of OoT being retold from the perspective of the Zora with Ruto being given the focus.

 

[GZ Zelda]

I read somewhere that there was an official timeline released with the Oracle games that went OoT>MM>ALttP>OOX>Z1>Z2 (Western Hyrule)>LA>Z2 (Eastern Hyrule).

 

[Spiritual Mask Salesman]

I mean the Encyclopedia version is more up to date than the Historia version, so that is the up to date timeline. The OoX makes more sense this way anyway, as Link and Zelda don't know each other in the Oracle games.

I chalk this up to a formality to players, I don't think it's a calculated plot point that Zelda introduces herself. I think the bigger issue is that with the Encyclopedia's placement the Triforce is united. The collective Triforce calls out to Link, and I think this could only be possible if it was familar with him. This isn't like an individual Triforce piece choosing a host based on virtue either. I think this is the biggest point in favor of Oracle Link being the same hero from A Link to the Past.

Putting the Oracles between ALttP and LA also doesn't disrupt the lead up to ALBW where Ganon is resurrected and still mindless since LA is self-contained.

I'm more willing to overlook a character introduction that we can explain away with ludo-narrative dissonance than a plot hole that has no tangible resolution. Something would have to happen for a new hero to be familar with the Triforce, but whatever quest this Link may have went on prior to the Oracle games is overshadowed by the deeds of the hero from A Link to the Past, which doesn't really add up because if they remember events from ALttP why would they neglate to chronicle what happened after with that new hero?

 

[Moblinking5000]

I chalk this up to a formality to players, I don't think it's a calculated plot point that Zelda introduces herself. I think the bigger issue is that with the Encyclopedia's placement the Triforce is united. The collective Triforce calls out to Link, and I think this could only be possible if it was familar with him. This isn't like an individual Triforce piece choosing a host based on virtue either. I think this is the biggest point in favor of Oracle Link being the same hero from A Link to the Past.

I think it's easier to think of it more along the lines of the Triforce calling out for the hero (of this era), with Link being the one to hear the call, as he's the one destined to be the hero. This is even implied in Encyclopedia which says that the Triforce calls out for a boy with ''the qualities of a hero'', as well the fact that it refers to the Oracle games as ''trials''(which I think is acknowledged in the games themselves, but I may be wrong). Why would someone who already proved themselves a hero by saving Hyrule be put through trials?

Putting the Oracles between ALttP and LA also doesn't disrupt the lead up to ALBW where Ganon is resurrected and still mindless since LA is self-contained.

I'm more willing to overlook a character introduction that we can explain away with ludo-narrative dissonance than a plot hole that has no tangible resolution. Something would have to happen for a new hero to be familar with the Triforce, but whatever quest this Link may have went on prior to the Oracle games is overshadowed by the deeds of the hero from A Link to the Past, which doesn't really add up because if they remember events from ALttP why would they neglate to chronicle what happened after with that new hero?

I mean, we know that there's another event involving Ganon and the Triforce with another hero that happens prior to ALBW anyway, since Ganon's attack in the backstory of ALBW is too different from ALttP(sages not maidens, Zelda isn't a part of the sages that help the hero of the ALBW BS seal Ganon in ''darkness'' wheras she was part of the Maidens in ALttP, Ganon is sealed not destroyed, and the Triforce is split at the end not unified like in ALttP, the sages actually helped this hero seal Ganon wheras the Maiden didn't play a part in the final battle of ALttP, etc.).

 

[Mangrove]

When do you all think the Downfall Timeline was decided on by Nintendo?

I ask not only because of the OoT-ALttP connection, but also because of the village names in Adventure of Link. It was reconfirmed in 2008 that the towns are named in honour of the OoT sages in universe, which was well after the split timeline was fleshed out quite a bit, and yet before the official chronology was revealed.

This doesn't work on the Adult Timeline because Ganon and Hyrule were annihilated in the ending of The Wind Waker, nor does it work on the Child Timeline since the sages never awakened there.

In order for this connection to work, it would require a branch where the later part of OoT still happened, only without the Great Flood. That's why I feel the Downfall Timeline may have existed then.

Here's that 2008 source for anyone interested!:

Nintendo Power November 2008

While countless games have been released over the past 10 years, previous few are considered turning points in gaming history. Fewer still can be credit with introducing features that have helped shape nearly every game to come after them. And only one game-a decade after its release-still holds...

www.zeldadungeon.net

Eiji Aonuma: "Each of the races has a character fated to become on the sages later on. We named them after towns in The Adventure of Link so it would appear that the towns had been named after them. (In the world of Zelda, the ventus of Ocarina of Time occur before the events of The Adventure of Link.)"

Mind-melting highlights from the latest Zelda: Ocarina of Time beta leak

Things we obsessed over in the early internet of the nineties are now real.

www.vg247.com

Today, there's beta leaks of Mido being the original Shadow Sage instead of Impa, which makes sense considering she isn't included in the AoL Town names but Mido is. I don't think Kasuto has been identified yet, though. These two little inconsistencies make me feel like it was more referential, since there was an interview in 1998 that said something similar but with 'Marin and Tarin' being said to be references.

Ocarina of Time Development - Parts They Want You To See Part 1

The original interview can be found in its entirety at <a href="http://www.1101.com/nintendo/nin1/nin1-12.htm" target="new">1101</a>. Translation thanks to <a href="https://www.glitterberri.com/ocarina-of-time/1101-interviews/parts-they-want-you-to-see" target="new">Glitterberri</a>

www.zeldadungeon.net

Toru Osawa (Script Director): "In this game there are 7 sages that appear and instruct Princess Zelda, but 6 of those appear in the Disk System game "Adventure of Link" as town names. We were hinting that the names of the sages in the era of the Imprisoning War spoken of in the Super Famicom Zelda game became town names in AoL. The events from that time became what we have today."
"A father and daughter named Marin and Tarin that were introduced in Link's Awakening for GameBoy also appeared in this Zelda game. We're hoping that people who've played the Zelda series from the very beginning will recognize them. If you wonder "is this a reference to then?" we'll be happy."

To be honest, I'm even still of the opinion that "In the land of Hyrule, there echoes a legend. A legend held dearly by the Royal Family that tells of a boy..." from MM's intro is an easy enough excuse to have inconsistent legend recollection for naming towns.

To stay on the *official* timeline topic though, the 'third' split simply being made after OoT makes sense in my mind with a different ending that can't really lead to ALttP. Even though OoT was intended to be the Imprisoning War, it still doesn't work out unless it's a separate event after OoT (like what with HH had). But, the events are too close together as well as developer interviews straight saying they are the same, so going back on that isn't optimal. So, the games have to be together. It's like how FS and FSA are so unnecessarily separated on the timeline since FS was said to be thought of as the earliest game, but FSA contradicts OoT so now they have to be separate; they kinda put themselves in a corner.

 

[Moblinking5000]

The difference is that the Tarin Marin thing is meant to be a reference for players more than anything; the OoT-AoL town names are given lore implications, with them saying that they named them as such to make it clear that the sages were named after them in universe. Mido and Kasuto can be explained with Mido being the Kokiri leader, and Kasuto being an important person offscreen. We know thanks to the 2008 interview, the Historia, and the Encyclopedia that it's not just left over beta intent.

To be honest, I'm even still of the opinion that "In the land of Hyrule, there echoes a legend. A legend held dearly by the Royal Family that tells of a boy..." from MM's intro is an easy enough excuse to have inconsistent legend recollection for naming towns.

No, because Hyrule Historia mentions that the Hero of Time was not remembered on the CT. Not to mention that it wouldn't make sense to remember them as sages when they lived normal lives on the CT.

 

[Ryuu Kage Desu]

One of the ideas that I don't see people talking about, is Link's defeat, for the downfall timeline. I've always taken that more as Gannon winning. The more recent timeline sugests this by the uneven lines. It's not that Link actually dies, but was never there to face him. That's why I originally thought Wind Waker made more sense at the beginning of the downfall timeline. Link just vanished (while young, in Ocarina of Time). Gannon wins, by default. Then, our hero is placed back in the timeline, creating the adult timeline, then is sent back, creating the child timeline.

An alternative way to lookat it, which doesn't change much, would include the canonization of Hyrule Warriors (which I know may people hate the idea of). Basically, the events naturally progress to the downfall timeline. Then, someone, like Cia, would basically change the flow of time, creating the splits, essentially before the player starts the game.

 

[GZ Zelda]

One of the ideas that I don't see people talking about, is Link's defeat, for the downfall timeline. I've always taken that more as Gannon winning. The more recent timeline sugests this by the uneven lines. It's not that Link actually dies, but was never there to face him. That's why I originally thought Wind Waker made more sense at the beginning of the downfall timeline. Link just vanished (while young, in Ocarina of Time). Gannon wins, by default. Then, our hero is placed back in the timeline, creating the adult timeline, then is sent back, creating the child timeline.

This is also something I don't like about the Downfall Timeline. Like, why did you need Link to do the battle at the end? It would have led to the same result. Ganon "wins" or he "loses," but either way he is sealed by the sages. It's the same result whether he vanishes or not and so ALttP and Wind Waker are responses to Ganon unsealing himself (in the canon timeline).