Query, since you know the lore, if Sonia and Rauru reset Zelda and Link to pre-Totk stuff, how was that isolated? How did it not reset everything? I have never seen in Zelds where time travel vsn be generated over a field on to one or two persons and leave the planet or world untouched.
Am I forgetting something about Zelda time travel?
Azure Sage hits the nail on the head:
It's not time travel. Recall moves a thing through time. Time itself at large does not rewind.
Skyward Sword timeshift stones did exactly what you're describing btw.
Additionally, there are many times throughout the series, where individuals are aware of a change to the past, indicating that the time alteration is far more localized, and the entire line of causality is not changed.
Honestly, I have found evidence for different types of time travel, through the series. The main three in pop culture being multiverse (or string theory), predetermination, and dynamic. I have another theory I can dig up, if you want a discussion on where those are found in the series. Far more prevalent throughout the series, are what I have dubbed time echoes. Put as simply as I have figured out, Information from one time-frame is copped to another, then the later one is updated to reflect any changes. It's easiest to see with the Time Shift Stones; where the past is copped over the present, and any changes only effect the present.
Recall, in TotK, follows the same rules. The teacup falls, then it's past state is recalled, then the present of the teacup is updated to put it back where it started. The teacup still fell, and the memory of it falling is still intact. When Zelda is recalled, she was still a dragon. Nothing about the past was actually changed, only the present.
But Link and Zelda are not objects. So was it a gamble to try?
From the perspective of causality, and every level of physics I can think of, atoms are atoms. One complex grouping of materials is not made different from another because one is considered to be alive.
That said, it does fit Rauru's personality to perform such a gamble as boosting Link's recall to try saving Zelda. Though, there is really no gamble, as there is no negative downside to failure.
The real issue with it has always been the emphasis the story places on that transformation being irreversible. If there was a side quest to unlock a true ending where you learn there is a way to save zelda that would be one thing, but it happens literally non sequitur
You will get no argument from me against the idea that there should have been more story with recalling Zelda from being a dragon. There should have absolutely been more, in my opinion.
That said, there were story elements to support the empowered recall, at the end. After all, we know that when a teacup falls (without getting caught), there is no getting it back either. Using recall relies on the memories of what is being recalled, and collecting Zelda's memories is a big issue, in this game. We are shown that individuals can combine powers to boost another's power. Then there's the visual elements of the empowered recall. (This is just off the top of my head, so there may be more story elements.)
The story about the irrevocability of going through draconification highlights Zelda's willingness to sacrifice her self. But, we still have story to connect the ending.
If it's the sort of conclusion that has to be confirmed by outside material after the game doesn't offer an explanation (and after saying multiple times that it's a one way transformation) then it's bad writing.
Why weren't they using super duper recall the whole time if it was so effortless to turn people back from dragons? Why emphasize how much of a one way street that transformation is if it's immediately and effortlessly undone at the end of the game? It's not a dramatic reveal or buildup, Zelda is back to normal.
This supposes quite a bit.
The conclusion that Zelda was recalled at the end was settled on by many, if not the majority. To many of us, the outside material is just stating the obvious.
If the writing is not something you like, it's not "bad." You just don't like it. It's fine if you don't like it. To state that something is categorically bad, requires more than saying that you don't get it.
We also know that Zelda didn't actually want to become a dragon. She did it as a sacrifice. We don't know the motivations of the other dragons. We don't even know if recalling the other dragons would be a good thing.
We also don't know if there is a limit for using the amped up recall. Did the ghosts still draw from their stones? Could they only manifest their power for a limited time? We don't know the in depth cost of what it really took. We are shown that the stones are not as limitless as the Triforce, and even that had limits that kept it from being spammed. We see two ghosts joining Link to cast a joined recall, before passing on. That doesn't seem easily repeatable.
I do agree that there should have been more story leading up to the ending, but there was story leading up to it.
