Support NeoGAF

[jigglet]

When Nintendo talks about timelines, parallel timelines, how they all connect...this was some shit they made up in hindsight, right?

I'm not even talking about the absence of some epic pre-planned roadmap ala George Lucas' Star Wars. I'm suggesting they don't even have a plan on a game-by-game basis. I think they make each game as they go with its own story, characters and aesthetic, and everything else is just roughly (and I do mean roughly) jammed together, whether the pieces fit or not. I mean when they say shit like "it's not even the same Link", that says a lot.

Whenever I hear fans bicker about the timeline I think: what are you even arguing about? It honestly wouldn't surprise me if this isn't even managed by someone from higher up like Miyamoto or Aonuma. I truly believe without any humour that whichever artist is drawing the timeline literally makes it up as they go. As long as it's not too far out there, no one really objects and they say yeah, this is how it all fits.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying this is a bad thing. I hate it when movies or games contort the shit out themselves to shoehorn them into an existing story and try to tie up loose ends (e.g. see Dark Knight Rises). I prefer stories that just ignore everything around them (e.g. Dark Knight, Zelda, Mario) and give us a clean break, no baggage. I just think it's funny when I see fans bicker about it when Nintendo is so bad with creating cohesive universes (again, I see this as a positive, so it's not a criticism).

Thoughts?

 

[SlimeGooGoo]

.

 

[Dr Bass]

For some reason Nintendo has tried to connect the games in some way.

It’s safe to totally ignore it.

 

[cireza]

I can't see the point in wanting to create a time-line for a series where the main events of each game are exactly the same.

 

[StateofMajora]

Some games are directly connected and thought in advance, but some are connected retroactively, yeah.

ocarina, majora, TP and WW were all thought through at the very least. And skyward sword is the origin, but definitely wasn’t planned until later.

 

[jigglet]

I can't see the point in wanting to create a time-line for a series where the main events of each game are exactly the same.

lmao good point

 

[Ezquimacore]

Zelda's timeline was created from the beginning.

Easy to follow if you're paying attention.

The timeline was created AFTER ocarina of time (game number 5) more than 20 years ago and since the beginning every game had an order too. Zelda 1(legend of Zelda) and Zelda 2(Adventure of link) are at the end of the hero defeated timeline and were advertised as a sequel, Zelda 3 (a Link to the past) was advertised as a prequel to Zelda 1 back in the SNES era and Zelda 4(link's awakening) was advertised as a sequel to a Link to the past. Zelda 5 ( ocarina) was advertised as prequel to the whole franchise. And after that they created the different timelines for wind waker and twilight princess. So Nintendo didn't just put everything together from their asses.

Obviously the timeline was not created from day 1, but almost every main game had a place advertised from the beginning. Now is perfect because they can put games between games and now they do care more than before, that's why we have Skyward sword. Not the most coherent or perfect timeline, but for a franchise with more than 3 timelines and They did pretty good.

Btw a lot of the games are direct, for example wind waker is after ocarina of time ( even the intro tells you) then you have phantom hourglass with the same Link and then you have spirit track in the same world years after. A link to the past, oracle games and link's awakening all have the same Link. Ocarina of time and Majora's mask have the same Link. So when people tell you none of the games have connection, they don't know shit.

 

[Touch fuzZy. get BizZay]

The way I remember it, fans were so obsessed over the Zelda timeline that nintendo noticed and gave it consideration when designing new games

 

[John Bilbo]

I don't think there is a precise timeline. Maybe some nods between games, but that's it.

Zelda is a kind of a recurring dream: the story repeats itself with slight variations. The most important part is the differences between gameplay.

 

[jigglet]

Zelda's timeline was created from the beginning.

Easy to follow if you're paying attention.

I don't believe for a minute you managed to perfectly visualise Nintendo's illustration in your head with split timelines and "not the same link" parallel universes well before you ever saw Nintendo's official picture.

Bullshit. I can smell it from here.

If you at least had the honesty to say that their timeline makes a ton of sense and fits when you think about it, then fine. But to say this shit should have been easy if you were paying attention? Rubbish. RUBBISH. That's a straight up lie and you know it.

 

[Ezquimacore]

I don't believe for a minute you managed to visualise Nintendo's illustration in your head with split timelines and "not the same link" parallel universes before you ever saw Nintendo's official picture.

Bullshit. I can smell it from here.

The split timeline was a thing WAY BEFORE Nintendo released the official timeline. Zelda timeline was one of the biggest topics in forums, and people were right about wind waker and tp split timeline. But when Nintendo released the official timeline that's when people found out about the hero defeated timeline. I guess you're younger than me, not your fault.

 

[jigglet]

But when Nintendo released the official timeline that's when people found out about the hero defeated timeline.

Oh, but why would they need that illustration if it should have been easy to deduce?

You've just contradicted yourself there. Why did it take Nintendo to point out something that was so obvious?

 

[Azurro]

Every single game in that series is a remake. What do you think? It's incredible they even attempted to create a timeline.

 

[Georges Chiellins]

I can't see the point in wanting to create a time-line for a series where the main events of each game are exactly the same.

Truth right there!

 

[Ezquimacore]

Oh, but why would they need that illustration if it should have been easy to deduce?

You've just contradicted yourself there. Why did it take Nintendo to point out something that was so obvious?

You're clearly not understanding, themselves advertised the games as sequels and prequels. The official timeline was because fans were pushing Nintendo to officially confirm what people were theorizing since ocarina of time.

 

[RoadHazard]

Yeah, for sure, BUT starting with Skyward Sword they very obviously started actually considering this in the games themselves. SS in particular was explicitly created as the origin story, kicking off the resurrection cycle. Before that there were some connected games and direct sequels, but nothing that really bothered itself with a precise timeline placement in the same way.

 

[Ezquimacore]

Every single game in that series is a remake. What do you think? It's incredible they even attempted to create a timeline.

Says the dude with the MG picture. Every single game add something to the lore and change the gameplay.

 

[jigglet]

You're clearly not understanding, themselves advertised the games as sequels and prequels. The official timeline was because fans were pushing Nintendo to officially confirm what people were theorizing since ocarina of time.

No, you're changing the topic.

You said it should be easy. Your words

These old forum threads you speak of - you claim there was no debate? No back and forth, no speculation, no pages and pages of theories and people providing alternative thoughts? No, you say the whole discussion came to a consensus within like 3 replies, because it was so "easy"? Like everyone just said "yeah, piece of cake, we all collectively agree on the exact timeline". And then when Nintendo released their illustration it was like: "well no shit, it was exactly what we all agreed on, cause it was so easy."

 

[Ezquimacore]

Truth right there!

I can't see the point in wanting to create a time-line for a series where the main events of each game are exactly the same.

This right here shows who don't play the games, I guess you think ganondorf is in every Zelda game too.

 

[Ezquimacore]

No, you're changing the topic.

You said it should be easy. Your words

These old forum threads you speak of - you claim there was no debate? No back and forth, no speculation, no pages and pages of theories and people providing alternative thoughts? No, you say the whole discussion came to a consensus within like 3 replies, because it was so "easy"? Like everyone just said "yeah, piece of cake, we all collectively agree on the exact timeline". And then when Nintendo released their illustration it was like: "well no shit, it was exactly what we all agreed on, cause it was so easy."

Easy to follow now that we have an official timeline. Bro you're a bit slow not gonna lie.

 

[phil_t98]

I just play each game and enjoy it. If some things connect its cool if others don’t I tend to not think about it

 

[Batiman]

You're clearly not understanding, themselves advertised the games as sequels and prequels. The official timeline was because fans were pushing Nintendo to officially confirm what people were theorizing since ocarina of time.

How were they advertised as prequels and sequels?

 

[jigglet]

Easy to follow now that we have an official timeline. Bro you're a bit slow not gonna lie.

Well it's easy when you just move the goal posts.

"Well now Nintendo has revealed the timeline, oh gosh, it's so easy ain't it".

It's almost as if everything is easier in hindsight. Oh dang.

 

[Inviusx]

Anything can be explained away with "it was magic". So an official timeline is absolutely useless.

 

[jigglet]

Anything can be explained away with "it was magic". So an official timeline is absolutely useless.

Well anything can be explained when you quite literally say "it's not the same link" or "it's a different timeline".

I mean lmao how is that not the most obvious sign that they have no clue and are making shit up on the fly.

 

[Ezquimacore]

How were they advertised as prequels and sequels?

Ocarina was advertised as a prequel same as A Link to the past, same as wind waker and tp advertised as events after ocarina of time. Same as Majora's mask advertised as a direct sequel, same as skyward sword advertised as the first in the timeline.

 

[TheInfamousKira]

They always had a timeline in so far as

Zelda I and II were connected
Zelda III, IV, V, and VI were connected
Etc

All the squiggly line multiple timeline Spiderverse bullshit was the fault of fansites and everyone thinking it was an epic saga when it was essentially Mario with swords to Nintendo.

 

[jigglet]

They always had a timeline in so far as

Zelda I and II were connected
Zelda III, IV, V, and VI were connected
Etc

All the squiggly line multiple timeline Spiderverse bullshit was the fault of fansites and everyone thinking it was an epic saga when it was essentially Mario with swords to Nintendo.

Squiggly indeed. I remember in the old days (I think it was mid to late 90's) there was this Zelda fan website...gosh can't remember the name. I just remember reading the theories there and thinking: boy, these guys are grasping at straws lol

EDIT: god even typing that makes me so nostalgic about TooT. The lead up to that...no game will ever surpass that for me. The hype, the speculation...the delays. The delays is probably what will stick with me forever. It was torture.

 

[Davevil]

Who cares?

 

[jigglet]

Who cares?

We're here sitting on a gaming forum. Let's assume none of us have more useful things to do, you and me included.

 

[Ezquimacore]

Well anything can be explained when you quite literally say "it's not the same link" or "it's a different timeline".

I mean lmao how is that not the most obvious sign that they have no clue and are making shit up on the fly.

They obviously don't have the timeline created from the beginning, what I'm trying to explain to you is that Nintendo always connected games that were sequels and prequels way before the official timeline and it was not a Mario scenario where doesn't even matter. Nintendo even said they created the gameplay first and then add the story and the location of the game. But before it was vague as f when it comes to the whole timeline (not sequels and prequels) and now we actually have placements.

 

[jigglet]

They obviously don't have the timeline created from the beginning, what I'm trying to explain to you is that Nintendo always connected games that were sequels and prequels way before the official timeline and it was not a Mario scenario where doesn't even matter. Nintendo even said they created the gameplay first and then add the story and the location of the game. But before it was vague as f when it comes to the whole timeline (not sequels and prequels) and now we actually have placements.

If that's what you think, then sure, I can see it. What I'm debating is that it should have been obvious as hell from the get-go. Like all you had to do was pay attention and everything fell into place. No way: there was so much room for interpretation. The scope for fan theories was massive. There was nothing "easy" at all about figuring out this timeline, if it indeed existed.

 

[Soodanim]

If that's what you think, then sure, I can see it. What I'm debating is that it should have been obvious as hell from the get-go. Like all you had to do was pay attention and everything fell into place. No way: there was so much room for interpretation. The scope for fan theories was massive. There was nothing "easy" at all about figuring out this timeline, if it indeed existed.

To be fair Jig, his first post was a direct response to the bolded in the OP that said there wasn’t any sort of order up until a certain point. His post makes effort to explain how they always advertised games a relative to one another, which is a timeline

Obviously no one had the exact timelines down. He even said that Nintendo didn’t have the exact timeline made from day one - it was you that got caught up on the “Easy” line and accused him of pretending he knew the exact timeline before Nintendo did

 

[nkarafo]

Kinda weird there is a "Hero Fails" timeline after OOT. AFAIK, there is no bad ending in OOT. So that whole timeline assumes you never finished the game?

Not only that but most of the other games, including the original, are based on that assumption.

Also, isn't the "Child Timeline" the same as "Hero Fails"? You can only kill the last boss in OOT as an adult and it doesn't let you play after that so you can go back in time. Which means in the child timeline Ganon was never defeated in OOT.

 

[jigglet]

To be fair Jig, his first post was a direct response to the bolded in the OP that said there wasn’t any sort of order up until a certain point. His post makes effort to explain how they always advertised games a relative to one another.

Obviously no one had the exact timelines down. He even said that Nintendo didn’t have the exact timeline made from day one - it was you that got caught up on the “Easy” line and accused him of pretending he knew the exact timeline before Nintendo did

Ok if that's the case then yes I'm man enough to say I'm wrong.

 

[Soodanim]

Ok if that's the case then yes I'm man enough to say I'm wrong.

Likewise, if I missed something then the same applies

 

[Ezquimacore]

If that's what you think, then sure, I can see it. What I'm debating is that it should have been obvious as hell from the get-go. Like all you had to do was pay attention and everything fell into place. No way: there was so much room for interpretation. The scope for fan theories was massive. There was nothing "easy" at all about figuring out this timeline, if it indeed existed.

That was one of the best marketing decisions at the time. People think it was not on purpose but Nintendo is very capable of creating a coherent timeline if they want. Metroid to Metroid dread feels like tv show if you play it in order.

 

[RoadHazard]

Every single game in that series is a remake. What do you think? It's incredible they even attempted to create a timeline.

This isn't true though. It might have been somewhat the case at one point (although Zelda 2 was clearly never a "remake" of the original), but it's definitely not anymore.

 

[RoadHazard]

Kinda weird there is a "Hero Fails" timeline after OOT. AFAIK, there is no bad ending in OOT. So that whole timeline assumes you never finished the game?

Not only that but most of the other games, including the original, are based on that assumption.

Also, isn't the "Child Timeline" the same as "Hero Fails"? You can only kill the last boss in OOT as an adult and it doesn't let you play after that so you can go back in time. Which means in the child timeline Ganon was never defeated in OOT.

Yeah, that's the biggest contrivance Nintendo just pulled out of their asses to try to make things make sense. Was very obviously never planned.

But no, they're not the same. In the child timeline Ganon was stopped before he ever came to power, in the hero fails timeline he was never stopped at all.

 

[Ezquimacore]

Kinda weird there is a "Hero Fails" timeline after OOT. AFAIK, there is no bad ending in OOT. So that whole timeline assumes you never finished the game?

Not only that but most of the other games, including the original, are based on that assumption.

Also, isn't the "Child Timeline" the same as "Hero Fails"? You can only kill the last boss in OOT as an adult and it doesn't let you play after that so you can go back in time. Which means in the child timeline Ganon was never defeated in OOT.

The child timeline is when Link goes back and explain to Zelda what happened so the king can capture ganondorf before anything happens. That's when Zelda gives link the ocarina of time again(for the first time) then Majora's mask happened.

Ganondorf from the child timeline is sealed in the twilight realm before destroying Hyrule.

 

[Ezquimacore]

Yeah, that's the biggest contrivance Nintendo just pulled out of their asses to try to make things make sense. Was very obviously never planned.

But no, they're not the same. In the child timeline Ganon was stopped before he ever came to power, in the hero fails timeline he was never stopped at all.

How Nintendo pulled that out their asses when wind waker and tp are sequels to ocarina of time, and actually the games were released right after ocarina of time.

 

[Business]

Of course it wasn’t. I’d say it’s very common in Japanese game universes too, series like Resident Evil or even Metal Gear Solid feel totally like they make the game and somehow try to fit it in some main overarching story with the rest of the games. There’s no big plan from the start.

 

[RoadHazard]

How Nintendo pulled that out their asses when wind waker and tp are sequels to ocarina of time, and actually the games were released right after ocarina of time.

Those games are on the child and adult timelines. I'm talking about the third timeline, which was clearly created just to have somewhere to put the games that didn't make sense anywhere else.

 

[AV]

"created retroactively" is putting it very nicely. They didn't even try to officially stitch the games together until many, many games later and even then it was a total mess with 3 alternate timelines. It's nonsense.

 

[Ezquimacore]

Those games are on the child and adult timeline. I'm taking about the third timeline, which was clearly created just to have somewhere to put the games that didn't make sense anywhere else.

Yeah, that's true. But that one is very easy to follow too since it has 4 games with the same Link, then a successor to that link with two games, and then og link with two more games. Not saying it makes sense or not, just talking about the placement.

 

[Soodanim]

Kinda weird there is a "Hero Fails" timeline after OOT. AFAIK, there is no bad ending in OOT. So that whole timeline assumes you never finished the game?

Not only that but most of the other games, including the original, are based on that assumption.

Also, isn't the "Child Timeline" the same as "Hero Fails"? You can only kill the last boss in OOT as an adult and it doesn't let you play after that so you can go back in time. Which means in the child timeline Ganon was never defeated in OOT.

I’m not going to pretend I understand how it works, but the idea is that when you beat Ganon as Adult Link that’s one timeline, then you travel back in time with Zelda and she gets Ganondorf executed which creates the Child timeline. That leaves the Hero Defeated timeline as one of infinite, or the origin of the entire series is retroactively a “What If” timeline.

To start with the time travel in OOT is clear, because it’s simply you being held in stasis for 7 years while you age up which isn’t actually time travel. But I don’t know what their explanation is for the repeated travelling back and forth after that. Then again it’s a world full of magic where the ultimate power is three goddess triangles, I guess Fi controls the time travel magic.

 

[Ezquimacore]

I’m not going to pretend I understand how it works, but the idea is that when you beat Ganon as Adult Link that’s one timeline, then you travel back in time with Zelda and she gets Ganondorf executed which creates the Child timeline. That leaves the Hero Defeated timeline as one of infinite, or the origin of the entire series is retroactively a “What If” timeline.

To start with the time travel in OOT is clear, because it’s simply you being held in stasis for 7 years while you age up which isn’t actually time travel. But I don’t know what their explanation is for the repeated travelling back and forth after that. Then again it’s a world full of magic where the ultimate power is three goddess triangles, I guess Fi controls the time travel magic.

Remember this, we always thought it was just magic but skyward sword made it clear that the original Hyrule was actually a technological place, just like the sheikah are the guards of that tech in breath of the wild. The time travel is explained in skyward sword with the timeshift stones so it's safe to assume most of those items are made with that tech.

 

[Robb]

They probably had some idea of which game came before/after but I’d guess the whole split timeline thing was constructed in retrospect in some kind of attempt to please fans.

I don’t take it seriously, but I still kinda like it and enjoy the speculation it brings with it as to where new games would ‘fit’.

 

[BadBurger]

I have their big lore book, and I have to say, I think maybe they did have a loose idea of where they were going.

 

[Shut0wen]

When Nintendo talks about timelines, parallel timelines, how they all connect...this was some shit they made up in hindsight, right?

I'm not even talking about the absence of some epic pre-planned roadmap ala George Lucas' Star Wars. I'm suggesting they don't even have a plan on a game-by-game basis. I think they make each game as they go with its own story, characters and aesthetic, and everything else is just roughly (and I do mean roughly) jammed together, whether the pieces fit or not. I mean when they say shit like "it's not even the same Link", that says a lot.

Whenever I hear fans bicker about the timeline I think: what are you even arguing about? It honestly wouldn't surprise me if this isn't even managed by someone from higher up like Miyamoto or Aonuma. I truly believe without any humour that whichever artist is drawing the timeline literally makes it up as they go. As long as it's not too far out there, no one really objects and they say yeah, this is how it all fits.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying this is a bad thing. I hate it when movies or games contort the shit out themselves to shoehorn them into an existing story and try to tie up loose ends (e.g. see Dark Knight Rises). I prefer stories that just ignore everything around them (e.g. Dark Knight, Zelda, Mario) and give us a clean break, no baggage. I just think it's funny when I see fans bicker about it when Nintendo is so bad with creating cohesive universes (again, I see this as a positive, so it's not a criticism).

Thoughts?

Im 90% certain nintendo made it up after revealing wind waker as the game got alot of hate for its art style at the time it was revealed so yes the whole timeline is bullshit but i do think with every game thats came out after wind waker is connected in someway the rest isnt but ninte do will say otherwise, especially with twilight princess having the hero of time teach link moves and with skyward sword being the prequel to all the zelda games