Why Isnt the City in the Sky in Wind Waker.

[Cincoplation]

If the the split time line theory is right and TP and Wind Waker are both in seperate time lines, then where is the city in the sky in Wind Waker?

 

[Ember Incubus]

It is not thought of yet? The Split Time Line has be confirmed multiple times, so there is no doubt. Just because they are at the same time, it does not mean you go to the same places. Were is Link's Oasis in TP? Hmm? Exactly!

 

[Xinnamin]

The City in the Sky is located far above the land's surface, far enough that you can't see the City from the ground nor the ground from the City. If you want to believe that the City in the Sky does indeed exist on the Adult Timeline, which it very well could, then nothing is stopping you from believing it because there is no way to verify that it doesn't. In WW Link had no need to go into the sky, and from sea-level there is no way to see that far up. The City could very well be up way above the clouds of the Great Sea, but it doesn't really matter since no one can see it and there's no way to get up there anyways.

 

[Emma]

It's called retconning. Adding something to an area that is implied to have been there before too, just not seen. The Earth and Wind temples in The Wind Waker are implied to have been there the whole time, just were not seen in Ocarina of Time. So... the City in the Sky is in world depicted in The Wind Waker, we just don't see it because it wasn't thought of until later. We'll probably see both of these two things actually in Skyward Sword. The City in the Sky, or a variation of it instead of just Skyloft, as well as the Wind and Earth Temples as it's supposed to be the Master Sword origin story and they are part of its origin.

 

[Petman1325]

For starters, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess happen in two completely separate timelines. Wind Waker happens in the adult timeline (I think) and Twilight Princess takes place in the child timeline. Side by side, there's still a few hundred years of difference between Wind Waker and Twilight Princess.

In addition, when you were in Twilight Princess, when you looked up, did you see the City in the Sky? If you did, then I don't know what to tell you. If you didn't, then that is exactly why. The City in the Sky is far above Hyrule, almost into space if you take into consideration the required height for something that large to be illegible for the naked eye. The International Space Station is quite large as well, but you cannot see it from the ground with the naked eye (or a weak brand of telescope) due to the distance.

Now, that's all theory. In actuality, I believe the people down at Nintendo hadn't thought of it yet at that time.

 

[Pancakes]

Even if there is no split timeline WW takes place at mountain tops and we're talking about a city in the HEAVENS

 

[PhantomTriforce]

Just because they're on separate timelines doesn't mean they have to have the same places. WW overworld is totally different from TP's.

 

[Diablo]

It's probably still up there but there is no need to go there.

 

[Pinecove]

Just because they're on separate timelines doesn't mean they have to have the same places. WW overworld is totally different from TP's.

TWW's over world is flooded. But there's no doubt they're the same place.

As for the original post: Do we visit the sky in TWW? No we do not. Hence, there's no way that we can tell whether the city in the sky exists or not (although it's definitively likely that they did.)

 

[MrMosley]

* The City in the Sky concept hadn't been thought of yet. TP came after WW, and that was when we saw the debut of the City in the Sky.

* The City in the Sky was technically there all along and is still there. In-game text of TP hints to the Ooccoo race (who live in the City) helping to create Hyrule. That would make the City in the Sky older than Hyrule itself and if it was around during TP, it would be around during WW which happens at roughly the same time on the opposite timeline.


~Thread Closed~