A few things ...
First,
@Hyrulian Hero , my comment(s) was/were not directly pointed at you. I was just using your quote because it hit the bullseye on my main point.
@Moblinking5000 ... to continue my statement above to Hyrulian Hero, and to address you ... While elements and issues (actions) of one game (or many games) have carried over into the story of another game, that doesn't mean they are on a timeline with each other, or even meant to be true "sequels" to each other. Yes, some games are most definitely sequels to others, and that's been made known with "fact", and the games were designed/developed to be just that - with great continuity and no real "problems" with the story, history, geography, etc. However, I still stand fast on my point that with as many games as have been made in the LoZ franchise, not all of them are meant to be a direct continuation, in-fill, prequel, etc.
I'm not - to state again - a Zelda historian or timeline follower or expert. In fact, I'm very green in that regard. I just think from what I've read here and in other places, it's pretty obvious to me that trying to place every single game within some certain timeline, as if every little aspect of the history, story, geography, events, etc. were that well thought out by the devs to make sure that the entirety of all the games ever released are in perfect harmony with each other ... well, that's just plain crazy-town.
I stress again that the best way to view all these games - and their stories and events that happened in each - is to first take each game for what it is, on its own. If they (Nintendo) say that MM is the direct sequel to OoT, then that's all I need to know. If they don't delcare game X to be on timeline A, B, or C ... or make any statements about it ... then I don't even think it should be pondered. That game (X, in this case) is just another installment of the franchise, and is meant to exist on its own.
Quite frankly, if you ask me ... the only "story" that needs to be know of any importance is that somehow Ganon and "the evil that is Ganon" continues to rear its ugly head ... and Link/Zelda continue to fight it and ultimately succeed. Worrying about the trivial details of things such as where Zora's domain was in one game vs. another ... or if the Rito people evolved from the Zora ... or if at one time the Rito didn't get their wings until they A) got a scale from the dragon at Dragon's Roost and
![Cool :cool: :cool:](/forum/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/cool.gif)
were adults ... Seriously, none of that matters. Case in point, maybe the way the Rito were in WW is how Nintendo wanted them to be ... but for BotW, it didn't fit the game they wanted to make ... so they changed them, gave the kids wings, allowed them to fly, and we ended up with a shrine quest using 5 of the kids practicing their song.
What's wrong with that? It's just a game. The story doesn't have to be perfect, and every game doesn't have to fit into a timeline ... and even if some do, what's the difference? Nobody is writing the history of Hyrule, where we need to place all this stuff perfectly into a historically accurate context and sequence of events.
I do appreciate the zeal so many of you have about the lore, history, geography, evolution of the races, etc. I really do, and I'm sincere about saying that. I just find it very odd that you all revel in debating each other about something that was never meant to be "perfect', but you all try to make points about how this or that is how the pieces fit together, when you (the collective you) admit that there is "evidence" everywhere that can be used to support multiple different claims of how it all fits together.
I'm happy that I just enjoy the games for what they are ... and that the stories are relatively cool - even though I don't really care about the stories. These games are meant to be enjoyed, and we should all just sit back, relax, and enjoy them.
That's all I'm really saying.