Where Do YOU Place Minish Cap in the Zelda Time Line?

[MrLuigi]

I haven't placed it yet in my time lineand I would like some opinions, facts.

Vote in the poll.

 

[Jarsh]

I think Flagship's intention was for TMC (and probably FS, since they also developed that) to be early in the timeline (perhaps this is why Aonuma thought FS was the "earliest tale", because he was working more with Flagship and TMC at the time way more than he was with FSA), but it seems Nintendo wanted them placed later (FSA, the FS game that Nintendo themselves developed). Hidemaro Fujibayashi, director of TMC, probably agreed with this once TMC was finished with development and that's why PH and ST have FS series references. So, I place them on the adult timeline because of that.

This also ties into the development of SS: Fujibayashi is also the director this game, and it seems to be using elements from TMC's story (there's theories that TMC was meant to have the Master Sword in it since its beta logo had the Master Sword so it's possible that's why the Picori Blade looks so similar); this leads me to believe that SS is doing what TMC was "supposed" to do and that's being sort of an origin for important elements for the series.

 

[collinbollin]

i would put it in the AT cause they triumph forks and the absence of the triforse, and i just think it would fit right before ST

 

[T Edoc]

I put it in the Adult Timeline because it shares most similarities with the Four Swords games, Phantom Hourglass, Spirit Tracks, and even Wind Waker, especially for the design of the shield. I didn't find a way to fit it elsewhere, also because of Hyrule's map. (Though, I didn't study on Minish Cap for a little while, so I don't remember everything.)
Well, that's my idea until I get more evidences that it occurs before Ocarina of Time, that is. :-)

 

[Zemen]

I love debating Minish Cap (as it's my favorite handheld game) and I haven't had a long winded response to anything on this site in a LONG time. I used to be very active and still try to be but I've been busy and also haven't seen a lot of newer threads that required my knowledge. Anyway, here is my opinion.

I believe MC goes before OoT. My reasons are as follows. ALSO AS A NOTE THIS DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT SKYWARD SWORD. I don't think any assumptions should be made with SS in mind til the game comes out.

1. The Backstory: We all surely remember the BS of MC talking about the Hero of Men and the evil that took over the land and the Minish people brining the HoM a sword and golden light. In the pictures of the BS the hero is in no way portrayed to look much like any previous Link. Any of the games that talks about a past hero who saved the world is 99.99% of the time talking about a Link of a previous game, but this one depicts a hatless (I'll get to that later) and long, blonde haired warrior. The only resemblance to Link is the green tunic (but again, there is no hat). I believe that this is a hero that has never been seen or heard of before and I believe it is a hero not of the Link lineage, thus putting it before any game with Link as the hero. It doesn't make sense to me that all these games would have Link as a hero and then in the middle of the timeline there was a non-Link who saved the day.

2. The Hat: Everyone hates this argument but it works SO well. I'll make it as short as possible. The hero in the BS (HoM) Doesn't wear a hat. Every Link ever has worn a hat at some point in their adventure, but the HoM is never depicted with a hat thus leading me to believe the HoM is not a previous Link and was around before any Link was around. In MC, Link doesn't have a hat, he has Ezlo. Had Link never met Ezlo, he probably never would have had a hat, thus it's obvious the hat tradition doesn't start til AFTER MC meaning any game with Link wearing a hat would take place after MC. At the end of the game Link is given a hat because Ezlo thought it suited him well. This is a possible sign that the hat tradition starts there. If you would like to argue that OoT starts the tradition because the Kokiri wear hats and tunics then listen to this. I beleive the Piccori become the Kokir somehow. I don't want to go too much detail into that because it would take forever but if you would like to hear more on my theory then PM me. Anyway, if the Picorri became the Kokiri then the tunic and hat tradition makes sense because the majority of the Piccori wera green tunics with some colored, pointy hat. The whole basis of the game is about a magic cap and stopping it's user. My whole point is that many hate the hat argument but the whole game is centered around the concept and importance of hats so saying the hat means nothing is stupid.

3. If this game took place anywhere but before OoT then Ganon/dorf would be a well known threat or well known, past threat, but he's not mentioned anywhere or even hinted at to exist. There are only three games in the series that don't mention Ganon/dorf at all. MC, FS and ST. FS has a direct sequel (FSA) that does feature Ganon/dorf so it doesn't matter that he's not mentioned in FS. ST is a direct sequel to WW/PH and in WW Ganon/dorf was the antagonist so it doesn't matter that he's not mentioned in ST. MC is not at all directly connected to any game with Ganon/dorf (based on my placement I put FS/FSA hundreds of years after MC) and if MC took place after OoT then Ganon/dorf would still be a threat but no one knows of him and no one mentions him. Some will say it doesn't matter because the game isn't about Ganon/dorf but another thing to note is that MC is the ONLY game that is Hyrule based and doesn't have Ganon/dorf in it (ST is new Hyrule after Ganon/dorf has been defeated so I don't count it). Strange that the greatest threat to Hyrule makes no easter egg mention/appearance whatsoever in a Hyrule based game.

I feel like there was more. I'll think about it and wait for some feedback before I go any further. PM me if there are any specific questions about any of my theories.

 

[Pinecove]

ALSO AS A NOTE THIS DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT SKYWARD SWORD.

Why not? I see no reason for SS NOT to be placed in a timeline considering the placement of it has been confirmed by Aonuma.

 

[Zemen]

Why not? I see no reason for SS NOT to be placed in a timeline considering the placement of it has been confirmed by Aonuma.

There have plenty of other games that have had the same developer quotes given before the games release and then the game content counteracts the developer quote.

For example, FS was said by developers to be the oldest tale, except FSA makes it seem like FS occurs directly beforehand which would make it impossible for it to be the oldest tale. ALTTP was said to be a prequel to LoZ but the game box and the content of the game blatantly say and strongly suggest that it goes after LoZ. WW was initially said to take place 100 years after OoT but the game says that the events explained in the BS (the events of OoT) happened hundreds of years prior.

Developers and translators have proven themselves to be morons at times so the bottom line for me is that I am not placing SS or using it to place other games until I physically have it and am playing it and have completed it.

 

[Djinn]

Actually the box for Link to the past says that is stars the predecessors of Link and Zelda. Making it a prequel.

And the 100 years quote for Wind Waker was actually a mistranslation.

それから、数百年・・・ あのガノンさえ、蘇らなければ このハイラルは永遠に 眠りから覚めることは、なかったのだ
Hundreds of years passed… If Ganon had never been revived, this land of Hyrule would never have woken from its eternal sleep.
Hundreds of years have passed since then... So long as Ganondorf was not revived, Hyrule would remain below, never waking from its slumber.

Which is actually what I think is happening more often. I doubt the game developers would actually get the storyline wrong on a game they have been working on for over a year when talking to an interviewer. But a Nintendo of America translator localizing and not proofreading their work just might. Which leads to speculation based on mistranslations vs. better translations that are made by fans. Discovering what is actually accurate cannon information become very cloudy and leads to confusion on what is true and what is not.

 

[MrLuigi]

Link got a hat in Twilight Princess. Looks like Twilight Princess goes before Ocarina of Time now.

 

[T Edoc]

@Zemen : Your theory is actualy very interresting. I know there are inconsistencies due to what Minish Cap IS compared to what it WAS MEANT TO BE, but I might change my mind soon and put MC before OoT on my own timeline anyway. Thanks!

@Others : Well, I believe we really should avoid worshiping the interviews with the creators. Yes, they're supposed to know more than we do, but they also prooved us they are able to contradict themselves, either with their answers in interviews, either with the in-game dialogues. Or at least, not to worship the statements we read in the translations (it seems like even the Japanese box for A Link to the Past don't refer at all to it being a prequel to TLoZ and AoL).

 

[Zemen]

Actually the box for Link to the past says that is stars the predecessors of Link and Zelda. Making it a prequel.

And the 100 years quote for Wind Waker was actually a mistranslation.



Which is actually what I think is happening more often. I doubt the game developers would actually get the storyline wrong on a game they have been working on for over a year when talking to an interviewer. But a Nintendo of America translator localizing and not proofreading their work just might. Which leads to speculation based on mistranslations vs. better translations that are made by fans. Discovering what is actually accurate cannon information become very cloudy and leads to confusion on what is true and what is not.

That's what I meant was ALTTP being a prequel. Sorry for the mix up and thanks for clarifying that to me and thanks for adding the sources and such. Also, I did mention mistranslation in my previous post. I'm aware that the 100 years thing was a mistranslation and that still makes a good example of why I'm not going to listen to Nintendo reps until SS comes out.

Link got a hat in Twilight Princess. Looks like Twilight Princess goes before Ocarina of Time now.

I'm glad to see that you are actually adding something to this thread and not just posting spam. Oh wait.... you are just spamming.... I clearly gave a ton of reasons as to why the hat (and hats, in general) is important in MC considering the game revolves entirely around hats (Minish CAP, Ezlo is a hat, the hero in the BS has no hat, you start the game without a hat and technically don't get a real hat til the end of the game). TP has nothing to do with hats and your argument there did nothing for you. You should probably try to actual give reasons why you think the hat in MC isn't important as opposed to trying (and failing) to make a point with this post. Also, I see that you only have 39 posts here so I'm assuming you are somewhat of a new poster. I've been with this site for a LONG time and I'm sure some people could tell you some stories about me, but one thing I don't tolerate is senseless posts like this. Next time you post, try and make it worth reading. Just some friendly advice.

@Zemen : Your theory is actualy very interresting. I know there are inconsistencies due to what Minish Cap IS compared to what it WAS MEANT TO BE, but I might change my mind soon and put MC before OoT on my own timeline anyway. Thanks!

@Others : Well, I believe we really should avoid worshiping the interviews with the creators. Yes, they're supposed to know more than we do, but they also prooved us they are able to contradict themselves, either with their answers in interviews, either with the in-game dialogues. Or at least, not to worship the statements we read in the translations (it seems like even the Japanese box for A Link to the Past don't refer at all to it being a prequel to TLoZ and AoL).

Agreed. I've never been one to put much stake in what developers say. If they something and the game confirms it then I will listen but if they say something and the game goes against it then in the end you have to go with what the game says because that's written in stone until retconned by a remake. I have heard all the time people saying that the developers are God and what they say goes but if Miyamoto showed up tomorrow saying that they decided that all Link's have really been named Fred all this time then are you gonna listen? That's like whatever creator you believe in (God, Allah, Whoever) coming to you and saying that you aren't really named (insert name) but instead you are (insert new name) to which you would say "uh, no, I've been (insert name) all my life and you, sir, are wrong."

 

[Locke]

2. The Hat: Everyone hates this argument but it works SO well. I'll make it as short as possible. The hero in the BS (HoM) Doesn't wear a hat. Every Link ever has worn a hat at some point in their adventure, but the HoM is never depicted with a hat thus leading me to believe the HoM is not a previous Link and was around before any Link was around. In MC, Link doesn't have a hat, he has Ezlo. Had Link never met Ezlo, he probably never would have had a hat, thus it's obvious the hat tradition doesn't start til AFTER MC meaning any game with Link wearing a hat would take place after MC. At the end of the game Link is given a hat because Ezlo thought it suited him well. This is a possible sign that the hat tradition starts there. If you would like to argue that OoT starts the tradition because the Kokiri wear hats and tunics then listen to this. I beleive the Piccori become the Kokir somehow. I don't want to go too much detail into that because it would take forever but if you would like to hear more on my theory then PM me. Anyway, if the Picorri became the Kokiri then the tunic and hat tradition makes sense because the majority of the Piccori wera green tunics with some colored, pointy hat. The whole basis of the game is about a magic cap and stopping it's user. My whole point is that many hate the hat argument but the whole game is centered around the concept and importance of hats so saying the hat means nothing is stupid.

I've changed my position since I've last argued this subject with you. I now agree that the hat was important. Some of those reasons are fairly compelling, and I'd like to add some more.
-Vaati's power came from a hat that Ezlo created, right?
-Director Fujibayashi explained what he wanted out of the character Ezlo. When he asked the character developer to create it, he wasn't looking for a bird, but he specifically asked for a talking hat. The hat was important to him even in the early stages of development.

Considering also the source of Zelda's power, the Master Sword in early development (and even the Piccori Blade in the final version), things being hidden in the grass, and more, it's obvious that the game was supposed to be one big origin story. But in the end, I share Jarsh's opinion.

 

[Jimmy]

Next time you post, try and make it worth reading. Just some friendly advice.

As incendiary as Mr Luigi's post was, your reply was equally rude. You'd have done better to show your maturity by countering his point which was "Link receives a hat in TP, so could one not argue, using your logic, that TP is the first game in timeline?"

I've never been one to put much stake in what developers say. If they [say] something and the game confirms it then I will listen but if they say something and the game goes against it then in the end you have to go with what the game says because that's written in stone until retconned by a remake. I have heard all the time people saying that the developers are God and what they say goes but if Miyamoto showed up tomorrow saying that they decided that all Link's have really been named Fred all this time then are you gonna listen? That's like whatever creator you believe in (God, Allah, Whoever) coming to you and saying that you aren't really named (insert name) but instead you are (insert new name) to which you would say "uh, no, I've been (insert name) all my life and you, sir, are wrong."

Since many of the original games were made without a timeline in mind it is certainly possible that the developers could rearrange it at will. It's quite feasible that in 20 Zelda games time the parts of the timeline we are certain of will have been rearranged.

Your examples were ridiculous. If Miyamoto released a statement tomorrow saying "Actually there is no split timeline, when Link went back in time in OoT he erased the Adult Timeline from existence through his actions and all games either precede or follow the Child Timeline." then everyone would listen, despite the fact it disagrees with previous statements and fundamentally alters our current understanding of it.

 

[MrLuigi]

I can't give any reasons or backup because I have never played Minish Cap, if I gave something it would be completely biased and I try to avoid that.

 

[Pinecove]

There have plenty of other games that have had the same developer quotes given before the games release and then the game content counteracts the developer quote.

For example, FS was said by developers to be the oldest tale, except FSA makes it seem like FS occurs directly beforehand which would make it impossible for it to be the oldest tale.

The game being referred to was "GBA FS." The interview was conducted TWO DAYS after a new FS Zelda was announced which would later become known as TMC.
This however proves nothing as TMC has the MS in it at that point in development - exactly what SS is taking from it - SS is becoming what Nintendo wanted TMC to originally be.

ALTTP was said to be a prequel to LoZ but the game box and the content of the game blatantly say and strongly suggest that it goes after LoZ.

I know you're mis speaking here, but: ALttP WAS stated to be a prequel to LoZ. In 1999 by Miyamoto.

WW was initially said to take place 100 years after OoT but the game says that the events explained in the BS (the events of OoT) happened hundreds of years prior.

Translation error. There are no plurals in Japanese, so it's easy to mix that one up.

Developers and translators have proven themselves to be morons at times so the bottom line for me is that I am not placing SS or using it to place other games until I physically have it and am playing it and have completed it.

We're talking about Aonuma.

I'm aware that the 100 years thing was a mistranslation and that still makes a good example of why I'm not going to listen to Nintendo reps until SS comes out.

Once again, we're talking about Aonuma - the guy who SAYS the stuff. The guy who MAKES the timeline.