Yet Another TotK Timeline Placement Theory

[Bowsette Plus-Ultra]

It keeps the original timeline canon and addresses a lot of the inconsistencies brought up in the last 2 games about the timeline itself, while allowing them to tell new stories set in this version of Hyrule's events without muddling up the previous games which on this timeline, are myth and legend. It's not perfect, but the timeline never was nor am I suggesting this is a fix to the timeline, but an opportunity for stronger storytelling between games moving forward.

That isn't solving the problem, it's parsing the problem out. Splitting up the franchise's inconsistent storytelling into another timeline that doesn't actually exist in game is just building another lane in the interstate and hoping it helps with congestion. There is a single real solution to the series' chronic continuity problems: either hire better writers or stop stepping on the toes of the ones you already have.

 

[Turo602]

That isn't solving the problem, it's parsing the problem out. Splitting up the franchise's inconsistent storytelling into another timeline that doesn't actually exist in game is just building another lane in the interstate and hoping it helps with congestion. There is. Single real solution to the series' chronic continuity problems: either hire better writers or stop stepping on the toes of the ones you already have.

Better writers aren't going to fix pre-existing issues from the past 40 years. You're missing the point entirely and I already said this isn't meant to be a "fix" to the timeline.

 

[Bowsette Plus-Ultra]

Better writers aren't going to fix pre-existing issues from the past 40 years. You're missing the point entirely and I already said this isn't meant to be a "fix" to the timeline.

They can't fix stuff that's already written, but they can build new and better things from it and use it to retroactively make that old canon click. Trying to retcon old stuff into some far away closet doesn't actually fix the problem.

When you're writing fanfiction or the next entry for a legacy series like Zelda you don't write with the canon you want, you write with for the canon you have. Is Zelda continuity an incomprehensible mess? Absolutely, so take that and make it into something good and coherent.

 

[Turo602]

They can't fix stuff that's already written, but they can build new and better things from it and use it to retroactively make that old canon click. Trying to retcon old stuff into some far away closet doesn't actually fix the problem.

When you're writing fanfiction or the next entry for a legacy series like Zelda you don't write with the canon you want, you write with for the canon you have. Is Zelda continuity an incomprehensible mess? Absolutely, so take that and make it into something good and coherent.

This has always been an iterative series that exists to sell a concept that can exploit hardware to sell unique devices. How an ambitious game like Ocarina of Time connects to some cash grab multiplayer game like Four Swords or a stand alone story like Link's Awakening isn't important because those games were not developed as brand new chapters in an on-going narrative. It's exploitation of an IP.

It's pointless to work backwards and try to fill a bunch of gaps to games that are already purposely set so far and away from each other that it defeats the purpose of how the games connect anyway. If it's not an entirely stand alone direct sequel, it's some far off prequel, or it picks up from different points in time creating parallel events that can't exist on the same timeline, or it's even far off into the distant future.

Some games obviously have stronger connections to eachother, some are a lot more loose, others don't even connect at all. But given what we know about Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom, a new timeline is not outside the realm of possibility with this series and fits Nintendo's pattern with these releases constantly separating themselves so drastically from the last.

The viability of said timelines or its inconsistencies don't really matter to me. I'm fully aware of why that's so and I really have no interest in trying to make a bunch of old games that were developed with specific purposes that no longer matter make sense to one another. Like I already said, this isn't a solution for the timeline. I'm just playing by Nintendo's own rules and a 4th timeline is simply a way forward for more cohesive lore between new entries given the massive scale in time and lore that these last 2 games created.

 

[GZ Zelda]

The Tunic of Twilight and the Tunic of the Winds shirt existing in the same timeline as they do in Tears of the Kingdom presents a problem! Does Twilight Princess take place before or after Wind Waker in Tears of the Kingdom's past in the 4th timeline?


............../WW>PH>ST
/SS>OoT--MM>TP>FSA
|............. \ALttP>LA>OoS>OoA>ALBW>TFH>EoW>Z1>Z2
\BotW>TotK

You need the parallel events before BotW/TotK. There are SS, MC, OoT, MM, TP, WW, PH, ST, ALttP, LA, OoA, OoS, ALBW, Z1 and Z2 references in BotW/TotK.

What I'm saying is you need to make a parallel event timeline. What's the pitch for that 4th timeline order?

A 4th timeline is not far-fetched when it's abiding by rules established in the series already and can actually serve a purpose. Is it complicated and convoluted? Of course it is, but that’s the nature of time travel. A merging of timelines like it's DC comics or a linear timeline are a lot harder sells here as it is imposing new rules to the series.

I'm not saying it's farfetched, I'm saying it's impractical.

I'm just trying to put myself inside Nintendo and try to see where they're possibly going with this and a 4th timeline just seems very functional from a development standpoint. As a fan, I get wanting the series to feel more connected, but I also think people are putting too much thought into how these games connect to past games as opposed to what they mean for the future.

A 4th timeline is functional if you are going to de-canonize the references to past games in BotW and TotK. That would be unprecedented.

That isn't solving the problem, it's parsing the problem out. Splitting up the franchise's inconsistent storytelling into another timeline that doesn't actually exist in game is just building another lane in the interstate and hoping it helps with congestion. There is a single real solution to the series' chronic continuity problems: either hire better writers or stop stepping on the toes of the ones you already have.

Or we all go linear and work it out from there. When all the games reference each other across timelines, a split timeline is a major problem. The more and more we talk about this, the less and less feasible it is for the current in-universe canon status quo to remain.

Some games obviously have stronger connections to eachother, some are a lot more loose, others don't even connect at all. But given what we know about Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom, a new timeline is not outside the realm of possibility with this series and fits Nintendo's pattern with these releases constantly separating themselves so drastically from the last.

It's not outside the realm of possibility, but it doesn't solve the problem.

 

[Bowsette Plus-Ultra]

Or we all go linear and work it out from there. When all the games reference each other across timelines, a split timeline is a major problem. The more and more we talk about this, the less and less feasible it is for the current in-universe canon status quo to remain.

That still falls within the realm of working with the canon you want instead of the canon you have. Make something good with the established lore instead of trying to pick and choose.

This has always been an iterative series that exists to sell a concept that can exploit hardware to sell unique devices. How an ambitious game like Ocarina of Time connects to some cash grab multiplayer game like Four Swords or a stand alone story like Link's Awakening isn't important because those games were not developed as brand new chapters in an on-going narrative. It's exploitation of an IP.

It's pointless to work backwards and try to fill a bunch of gaps to games that are already purposely set so far and away from each other that it defeats the purpose of how the games connect anyway. If it's not an entirely stand alone direct sequel, it's some far off prequel, or it picks up from different points in time creating parallel events that can't exist on the same timeline, or it's even far off into the distant future.

Some games obviously have stronger connections to eachother, some are a lot more loose, others don't even connect at all. But given what we know about Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom, a new timeline is not outside the realm of possibility with this series and fits Nintendo's pattern with these releases constantly separating themselves so drastically from the last.

The viability of said timelines or its inconsistencies don't really matter to me. I'm fully aware of why that's so and I really have no interest in trying to make a bunch of old games that were developed with specific purposes that no longer matter make sense to one another. Like I already said, this isn't a solution for the timeline. I'm just playing by Nintendo's own rules and a 4th timeline is simply a way forward for more cohesive lore between new entries given the massive scale in time and lore that these last 2 games created.

I wouldn't call the timeline split the problem so much as Nintendo's writing style. Change up that writing style, add more casual references to other games and history, and work with the lore we've got. Either bring in a team of writers that care or stop Nintendo from impeding ones who do. If fanfiction has shown anything it's that it's not hard to just make the story work.

 

[Ryuu Kage Desu]

Because to override what is shown in-game in favor of a new hypothetical form of evolution to justify a preconceived notion of a timeline is to exit theory. If you have one connection of a Rito in SS, MC, FS or OoT, I'd love to see it.

Placing the Rito before Wind Waker does not override anything we see in game. We see Rito that are related to Zora in WW, sure. We also see hints that Zora exist off screen, in WW, and the following games (Items, shop menus, and the like). Plus, the Rito we see now are very different from what we see in the WW line. This means that allowing the Rito to exist in the time of the early games in the time line changes nothing from what we do see.

As far as preconceived notions go, demanding that the Rito only came from the Zora, in the time of WWs backstory, and forcing all other theories to fit that, departs from theory craft, in favor of dogma. That theory is older than what is being talked about now, and does not include anything we see in the new games. The idea that the Rito are older than WW is based on the new games.

Finding ways to make what we see in the canon is the very core of theory craft, whether you like it or not. For instance, I may not agree with the main idea of the thread, being a fourth parallel timeline, but I still take it seriously. It has as much merit as a singular linear timeline. Agreeing with a theory, pointing out flaws in the theory, disagreeing with the theory, and trying to shoot it down with flawed arguments are vastly different, and are not mutual to each-other in any way.

And, as I have said, it's a possible connection between the Rito and an earlier game. In Skyward Sword, there are statues in the Skyview Temple that are far closer to the current Rito appearance, in comparison to the generally assumed Loftwing. It may not be a smoking gun, proving without a doubt, that the Rito absolutely had to exist, but it's a stronger case than trying to say that they couldn't exist just because we don't see it.

Better writers aren't going to fix pre-existing issues from the past 40 years. You're missing the point entirely and I already said this isn't meant to be a "fix" to the timeline.

This is true. For that mater, I don't think the writers are the problem at all, simply because the games keep drawing more and more fans in. If the writers were genuinely bad, the franchise would have died a long time ago.

With all the flack you are receiving over this idea, I'll just point out that while I don't think the fix is necessary, I do agree that it could work. In an older theory I talked about how having a time split as it is commonly explained in Ocarina of Time, it should follow that we would have a split in Skyward Sword. Just before the final battle, Link has the opportunity to go back and do more things, before stepping through the portal. Demise "winning," no mater how brief from the player's point of view, does not causally force Link through the portal, otherwise Link would simply leap through in the same cut-scene. If the player has a choice, Link has a choice, a time split is possible. Not to mention, Demise declares that he has conquered time. In that time between Demise going through the portal, and Link choosing to go through (by Ocarina of Time split rules), a whole history of Demise winning un-contested would evolve. Only when Link chooses to step through the portal would we get the time split where the other games take place.

Long story short, If there is a place in the other games to connect your fourth timeline to, I think it would be that moment of Demise's victory.