Spoiler Why Must There Be a Split Time-line?

[Pinecove]

@The OP:

I know what Nintendo said about the split time-line. I simply don't care

If that's the case, then you're not looking for the developer intended timeline, and may as well make up facts to suit your theories.

Anybody watch Lost? that's how I view time travel if that explains anything I've said further to anyone.

But Zelda has multiple time traveling explanations.

If you want an explanation as to how the linear timeline DOES NOT work, I'll provide it for you right now.
At the end of OoT, Ganon is sealed in the Sacred Realm. In TWW, he breaks out of the sacred realm, and the great flood occurs. In TP's backstory however, Ganondorf has not been sealed in the Sacred Realm. He is captured by the six ancient sages (not the ones we awaken on the adult timeline, the ancient ones that Ganondorf kills on the adult half of OoT) and then sealed in the Twilight realm. At the end of TP he is killed. So going by your version of events (OoT-TP-TWW) we should have:

[Ganondorf kills the ancient sages (OoT)] - [Ganondorf is sealed in the Sacred Realm (OoT)] - [Ganondorf is captured by the ancient sages and sealed in the twilight realm (TP backstory)] - [Ganondorf is killed (TP)] - [Ganondorf breaks out of the sacred realm (TWW Backstory)]

Which makes mo sense at all.

 

[Onilink89]

I have discussed this whole split timeline subject ALOT in the past. But i will keep this post short.

Nintendo first makes the game, and then the whole timeline and other logical stuff comes later. Here is the annoying part, some things doesn't fit with eachother, therfore some things are not logical.

Even if Nintendo stated that there is a split timeline, its not entirely logical. First of all, Link's soul was trapped for 7 years after he pulled the Master Sword. He did not timetravel, he was just taking a nap for 7 years. In other words its still the same timeline, the flow of time is just going back and forth with the pedastal and master sword. If he leaped/traveled 7 years in the future, then he would be in a different timeline, meaning that there occured a split timeline.

 

[DeletedUser9]

Even if Nintendo stated that there is a split timeline, its not entirely logical. First of all, Link's soul was trapped for 7 years after he pulled the Master Sword. He did not timetravel, he was just taking a nap for 7 years. In other words its still the same timeline, the flow of time is just going back and forth with the pedastal and master sword. If he leaped/traveled 7 years in the future, then he would be in a different timeline, meaning that there occured a split timeline.

I think the basic idea was, yes, it's still the same timeline, but when Zelda sent him back it was different. He did not go back by placing the Master Sword in the pedestal, he went back by being SENT back. So THAT was actual time travel.


Anyway, in regards to this thread, I have actually always believed that the Split Timeline didn't exist until Twilight Princess. When Ocarina of Time came out, not only do I think Nintendo didn't intend for the Split Timeline, but I think that even today the ending and the entire rest of the series is easily explainable.

Here's how I see the ending to Ocarina of Time...

Link sleeps in the Temple of Time for 7 years because he took the Master Sword. Him traveling back and forth is just him returning to the Temple of Time, and somehow placing the sword and taking it again is transferring his consciousness back and forth between the moment where he took the sword and the moment when he woke up with the sword. There is no timeline mixup here.

Then Link defeats Ganon. Zelda sends him back in time. Key word there. SHE SENDS HIM. He did not place the sword. Somehow, the sword is gone when he comes back, which could be because his past self has already taken it and is now sleeping, but there are issues with that. Still, that could be it, and if that is the case, that would explain why he takes the Master Sword with him and it DISAPPEARS FROM THE "ADULT TIMELINE" DESPITE APPEARING IN THE WIND WAKER. He placed it in the pedestal, replacing it from when it went missing in the future, so that even though he disappears with it in the future, they will still find it again because he left it in the Temple of Time in the past. This is an obviously intentional thing, and if you believe in the split timeline this falls apart and suddenly there can't be any Master Sword in The Wind Waker.

Now, this hero, Link, who defeated Ganon and went back in time knows he cannot mess with events. His past self is still sleeping in the Temple of Time, and will wait until the future when he defeats Ganon. He's returned the Master Sword, so he can't mess with things any more. He leaves to find Navi, and goes to Termina. Whether or not he comes back (he probably didn't, just went somewhere else), he doesn't mess with the flow of time. Thus, when Ganon comes to power again (which was to be hundreds of years later anyway, thus Link would be dead either way), Link isn't there to stop him. The Wind Waker happens.

Bammo. There you have it. A complete, logical, and in many ways obviously originally intended explanation for everything that happens in Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, and The Wind Waker. The Split Timeline was invented by fans (it was not mentioned by Nintendo until Twilight Princess came out), probably because some people didn't make these connections or try to understand the time travel stuff, which to be fair can get really complicated, and later Nintendo decided to run with the popular theory and confirm the Split Timeline, creating Twilight Princess to be the first game (well after Majora's Mask) on the Child Timeline.

Makes me sad, too, because this "original" explanation makes much more sense and is even cooler. The Split Timeline is interesting, but it really isn't as cool as this one, nice, concise explanation.

 

[JuicieJ]

I think the basic idea was, yes, it's still the same timeline, but when Zelda sent him back it was different. He did not go back by placing the Master Sword in the pedestal, he went back by being SENT back. So THAT was actual time travel.


Anyway, in regards to this thread, I have actually always believed that the Split Timeline didn't exist until Twilight Princess. When Ocarina of Time came out, not only do I think Nintendo didn't intend for the Split Timeline, but I think that even today the ending and the entire rest of the series is easily explainable.

Here's how I see the ending to Ocarina of Time...

Link sleeps in the Temple of Time for 7 years because he took the Master Sword. Him traveling back and forth is just him returning to the Temple of Time, and somehow placing the sword and taking it again is transferring his consciousness back and forth between the moment where he took the sword and the moment when he woke up with the sword. There is no timeline mixup here.

Then Link defeats Ganon. Zelda sends him back in time. Key word there. SHE SENDS HIM. He did not place the sword. Somehow, the sword is gone when he comes back, which could be because his past self has already taken it and is now sleeping, but there are issues with that. Still, that could be it, and if that is the case, that would explain why he takes the Master Sword with him and it DISAPPEARS FROM THE "ADULT TIMELINE" DESPITE APPEARING IN THE WIND WAKER. He placed it in the pedestal, replacing it from when it went missing in the future, so that even though he disappears with it in the future, they will still find it again because he left it in the Temple of Time in the past. This is an obviously intentional thing, and if you believe in the split timeline this falls apart and suddenly there can't be any Master Sword in The Wind Waker.

Now, this hero, Link, who defeated Ganon and went back in time knows he cannot mess with events. His past self is still sleeping in the Temple of Time, and will wait until the future when he defeats Ganon. He's returned the Master Sword, so he can't mess with things any more. He leaves to find Navi, and goes to Termina. Whether or not he comes back (he probably didn't, just went somewhere else), he doesn't mess with the flow of time. Thus, when Ganon comes to power again (which was to be hundreds of years later anyway, thus Link would be dead either way), Link isn't there to stop him. The Wind Waker happens.

Bammo. There you have it. A complete, logical, and in many ways obviously originally intended explanation for everything that happens in Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, and The Wind Waker. The Split Timeline was invented by fans (it was not mentioned by Nintendo until Twilight Princess came out), probably because some people didn't make these connections or try to understand the time travel stuff, which to be fair can get really complicated, and later Nintendo decided to run with the popular theory and confirm the Split Timeline, creating Twilight Princess to be the first game (well after Majora's Mask) on the Child Timeline.

Makes me sad, too, because this "original" explanation makes much more sense and is even cooler. The Split Timeline is interesting, but it really isn't as cool as this one, nice, concise explanation.

I really don't understand what you're getting at. What's all this "he was still sleeping in the Temple and knew to not mess with time" stuff? When Zelda sent Link back to his own time, he sealed the Master Sword behind the Door of Time and sealed the Door of Time. When he did that, the time he left behind still existed. There was no Link left behind. There's only one Link, as he's the time-traveler. In sealing the Master Sword behind the Door of Time, the Master Sword was left open for both times. It's really simple. Now I don't think it was intended for a sequel to the time he left behind to happen, but they did it. That's all that matters.

 

[DeletedUser9]

I really don't understand what you're getting at. What's all this "he was still sleeping in the Temple and knew to not mess with time" stuff? When Zelda sent Link back to his own time, he sealed the Master Sword behind the Door of Time and sealed the Door of Time. When he did that, the time he left behind still existed. There was no Link left behind. There's only one Link, as he's the time-traveler. In sealing the Master Sword behind the Door of Time, the Master Sword was left open for both times. It's really simple. Now I don't think it was intended for a sequel to the time he left behind to happen, but they did it. That's all that matters.

Look, here's the whole point:

The Timeline Split is based on the idea that Link went back in time and stopped Ganondorf from coming to power. That's Twilight Princess' story. This would have changed the future. This is why there is a timeline split, because the future is now its own story, and the new future created by Link stopping Ganon in the past is now its own story.

The original story of OoT that I am suggesting, is that Link defeats Ganon, then goes back in time. What happens when you travel back in time to a period where you lived? You could theoretically meet yourself, thus now there are two Links. But in 7 years, one of those Links will awaken from the Temple of Time and defeat Ganon. That way the timeline is linear. Ganon is defeated and Link goes back and lives out a peaceful life.

Does that help?

 

[JuicieJ]

Look, here's the whole point:

The Timeline Split is based on the idea that Link went back in time and stopped Ganondorf from coming to power. That's Twilight Princess' story. This would have changed the future. This is why there is a timeline split, because the future is now its own story, and the new future created by Link stopping Ganon in the past is now its own story.

The original story of OoT that I am suggesting, is that Link defeats Ganon, then goes back in time. What happens when you travel back in time to a period where you lived? You could theoretically meet yourself, thus now there are two Links. But in 7 years, one of those Links will awaken from the Temple of Time and defeat Ganon. That way the timeline is linear. Ganon is defeated and Link goes back and lives out a peaceful life.

Does that help?

The first part of this is right. The second part about "meeting yourself?" No, see, he was sent back and, as he's the Hero of Time (plus Zelda sending back with power to do whatever and what not), him going back was just him ther...where are you coming from with "meeting himself?" There's only one Link. ONE! Another wasn't left behind. He was sent back but in the same way he returned by placing the Master Sword in the Pedestal of Time. That was clearly shown in how the blue portal-like thing faded away when Link returned to his own time, as the Master Sword was back in its pedestal.

 

[Locke]

Link sleeps in the Temple of Time for 7 years because he took the Master Sword. Him traveling back and forth is just him returning to the Temple of Time, and somehow placing the sword and taking it again is transferring his consciousness back and forth between the moment where he took the sword and the moment when he woke up with the sword. There is no timeline mixup here.

QFT

Then Link defeats Ganon. Zelda sends him back in time. Key word there. SHE SENDS HIM. He did not place the sword. Somehow, the sword is gone when he comes back, which could be because his past self has already taken it and is now sleeping, but there are issues with that. Still, that could be it, and if that is the case, that would explain why he takes the Master Sword with him and it DISAPPEARS FROM THE "ADULT TIMELINE" DESPITE APPEARING IN THE WIND WAKER. He placed it in the pedestal, replacing it from when it went missing in the future, so that even though he disappears with it in the future, they will still find it again because he left it in the Temple of Time in the past. This is an obviously intentional thing, and if you believe in the split timeline this falls apart and suddenly there can't be any Master Sword in The Wind Waker.

Now, this hero, Link, who defeated Ganon and went back in time knows he cannot mess with events. His past self is still sleeping in the Temple of Time, and will wait until the future when he defeats Ganon. He's returned the Master Sword, so he can't mess with things any more.

You must lay the Master Sword to rest and close the Door of Time...
However, by doing this, the road between times will be closed...

Yes, he replaced the MS in the pedestal on the AT. Whether Zelda transported him into the ToT with the sword in the PoT so he would go back to being a child, or something similar to the ToC splitting happened is unclear. Secondly, he closed the DoT, closing the road between times. If there's another Link in the ToT, he's trapped.

He leaves to find Navi

Just for clarification, this is the Navi that went with him back in time, not the original one?

(it was not mentioned by Nintendo until Twilight Princess came out)

Question: Where does The Wind Walker fit into the overall Zelda series timeline?

Eiji Aonuma: You can think of this game as taking place over a hundred years after Ocarina of Time. You can tell this from the opening story, and there are references to things from Ocarina located throughout the game as well.

Shigeru Miyamoto: Well, wait, which point does the hundred years start from?

Eiji Aonuma: From the end.

Shigeru Miyamoto: No, I mean, as a child or as a...

Eiji Aonuma: Oh, right, let me elaborate on that. Ocarina of Time basically has two endings of sorts; one has Link as a child and the other has him as an adult. This game, The Wind Waker, takes place a hundred years after the adult Link defeats Ganon at the end of Ocarina.

Shigeru Miyamoto: This is pretty confusing for us, too. (laughs) So be careful.

(GamePro, 4 Dec 2002)

I hate to ask "why would they" questions, but if the two endings are just seven years apart, as opposed to being separated on a higher dimension, I think it would be safe to assume he meant the 100(s) years started after the latest event of OoT, the adult ending. But Miyamoto asks for clarification and admits that it is confusing.

 

[JuicieJ]

Oh, I forgot something that contradicts (and basically disproves) A Link to the Past taking place in-between Ocarina of Time and A Link to the Past. When Ganon escaped from the bondage that had held him for so long, "...the people belived that the Hero of Time would once again come to save them. ...But the Hero did not return." Hold on...there was no Hero that came to save them. Well, that's when the gods flooded Hyrule. With that, there's no possible way it could have taken place before The Wind Waker. It's just not logical. At all.

And, the "split timeline" was basically around when The Wind Waker was released, as it was a direct sequal to the time Link left behind. We'd already had a direct sequal to the time Link came back to: Majora's Mask. Maybe not "confirmed," but definately what it was supposed to be.

 

[Onilink89]

The first part of this is right. The second part about "meeting yourself?" No, see, he was sent back and, as he's the Hero of Time (plus Zelda sending back with power to do whatever and what not), him going back was just him ther...where are you coming from with "meeting himself?" There's only one Link. ONE! Another wasn't left behind. He was sent back but in the same way he returned by placing the Master Sword in the Pedestal of Time. That was clearly shown in how the blue portal-like thing faded away when Link returned to his own time, as the Master Sword was back in its pedestal.

According to the game (Rauru to be specificly), Link was trapped 7 years because he was to young to be the Hero of Time. In theory, Link is just going back and forth 7 years. In other words, Link is still in the same/own timeline, therefore there is only one Link.

What Axle was trying to say is, if Link actually traveled from one timeline to an other timeline, then in theory there should be an other Link since its a seprate timeline.

 

[Locke]

What Axle was trying to say is, if Link actually traveled from one timeline to an other timeline, then in theory there should be an other Link since its a seprate timeline.

That does make some sense. We know that Link completely disappeared from the AT. If we started with two, we should logically end with two.

 

[JuicieJ]

According to the game (Rauru to be specificly), Link was trapped 7 years because he was to young to be the Hero of Time. In theory, Link is just going back and forth 7 years. In other words, Link is still in the same/own timeline, therefore there is only one Link.

What Axle was trying to say is, if Link actually traveled from one timeline to an other timeline, then in theory there should be an other Link since its a seprate timeline.

That does make some sense. We know that Link completely disappeared from the AT. If we started with two, we should logically end with two.

I thought about this today, and I realized what he was saying. However, there never were two Links. There wasn't a Link left still waiting for seven years. When he was sent back to his own time, that wasn't time travel. That was still him going through the sequence of reversing time, just landing further back than when he pulled the sword out. I'm sure Zelda along with the Ocarina of Time could do that. Link left that time period behind never to return to it. When he sealed the Master Sword behind the Door of Time, the two separate times were made to where it was impossible to get from one to the other. Link wouldn't have been able to meet himself when he went back because it wasn't real time travel like Axle suggested. Otherwise that would have happened no matter what. He had the Master Sword, which is the "ship that can sail across time's flow," or something like that (quoting Sheik, there). Link being the Hero of Time would have made what I said happen like it is, as he's, well, the Hero of Time. Anyway, all this stuff Axle's making really has no merit, as it just doesn't add up to what we know. Plus with the thing with Ganon in The Wind Wakers's back-story, well... Yeah, kind of impossible for A Link to the Past to take place in-between Ocarina of Time and The Wind Waker.

 

[Caleb, Of Asui]

You can't move from one timeline to another, though, once the split has been made. People seem to have a hard time understanding the concept. Each timeline is an alternate future. Key word: alternate. They're not two worlds sitting next to each other; they're alternate scenarios. If you're on the adult timeline, there's no way for the child timeline to occur in any way, shape, or form, and vice-versa. When Link is sent back in time, he changes the course of events to lead to something completely different, so Hyrule doesn't end up being essentially demolished as it was in the future he just came from. He's preventing that future from occurring.

 

[JuicieJ]

You can't move from one timeline to another, though, once the split has been made. People seem to have a hard time understanding the concept. Each timeline is an alternate future. Key word: alternate. They're not two worlds sitting next to each other; they're alternate scenarios. If you're on the adult timeline, there's no way for the child timeline to occur in any way, shape, or form, and vice-versa. When Link is sent back in time, he changes the course of events to lead to something completely different, so Hyrule doesn't end up being essentially demolished as it was in the future he just came from. He's preventing that future from occurring.

Yeah, exactly what I said. And, if there are really people who can't understand that you can't travel back and forth...wow.

 

[Onilink89]

I thought about this today, and I realized what he was saying. However, there never were two Links. There wasn't a Link left still waiting for seven years. When he was sent back to his own time, that wasn't time travel. That was still him going through the sequence of reversing time, just landing further back than when he pulled the sword out. I'm sure Zelda along with the Ocarina of Time could do that. Link left that time period behind never to return to it. When he sealed the Master Sword behind the Door of Time, the two separate times were made to where it was impossible to get from one to the other. Link wouldn't have been able to meet himself when he went back because it wasn't real time travel like Axle suggested. Otherwise that would have happened no matter what. He had the Master Sword, which is the "ship that can sail across time's flow," or something like that (quoting Sheik, there). Link being the Hero of Time would have made what I said happen like it is, as he's, well, the Hero of Time. Anyway, all this stuff Axle's making really has no merit, as it just doesn't add up to what we know. Plus with the thing with Ganon in The Wind Wakers's back-story, well... Yeah, kind of impossible for A Link to the Past to take place in-between Ocarina of Time and The Wind Waker.

I can see you understand the difference now but, Axle did not stated there was two Links. He said "in theory". He was just saying that there should be an other Link, if Link actually traveled to a different timeline. Which is not the case according to the game.

You can't move from one timeline to another, though, once the split has been made. People seem to have a hard time understanding the concept. Each timeline is an alternate future. Key word: alternate. They're not two worlds sitting next to each other; they're alternate scenarios. If you're on the adult timeline, there's no way for the child timeline to occur in any way, shape, or form, and vice-versa. When Link is sent back in time, he changes the course of events to lead to something completely different, so Hyrule doesn't end up being essentially demolished as it was in the future he just came from. He's preventing that future from occurring.

Now i'm going to make this subject more complicated. Because there are also illogical factors about this.

1. I think most people assume that the split was made when Link is trying to warn Zelda, re-creating the first encounter between them. How is it possible to travel even further back in time, before Link actually meets Zelda? The 7 year limit is set at the moment Link draws/inserts the Master sword. To make it worse, why does Link and Zelda still have the Trifcorce in the child timeline? Its supposed to be their first encounter. They should not have the Triforce, especialy Zelda of the child timeline. The Triforce was split at the moment Link draws the Master Sword. The whole encounter thing occured before Link draws the Master Sword.

2. Next, if the ending was their second time seeing each other (in the child timeline), then this also make things complicated. If you think very deep about this, then this event creates a loop in the timeline. And yet again, its still illogical why they both have the Triforce. Oh and i thought Zelda fled the castle with Impa? What a coincidence and how convenient that Zelda is back at the castle during the ending.

3. Some Zelda fans think that the split was made the moment that Link draws the sword. This is a logical statement, since Link keeps its progress in the future, even if Link goes back in time. Or else it should be like MM. If Link goes to the future every time, he is supposed to start from scratch. Even if this statement about the split is logical, its still illogical according to Rauru and the whole "trapped for 7 years" story again.

There u have it, the puzzle pieces does not fit. Yet Nintendo is just trying to "hammer" the pieces to make it fit.

 

[JuicieJ]

I can see you understand the difference now but, Axle did not stated there was two Links. He said "in theory". He was just saying that there should be an other Link, if Link actually traveled to a different timeline. Which is not the case according to the game.

I saw the difference from the start, it just didn't make logical sense with the information and inferences we have. I'd never heard anyone suggest anything like that before.