-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Hyrule Historia, The Zelda 25th anniversary art book.
- Thread starter SilverLunar
- Start date
It kinda fits with the theme of OOT too. In Skyward Sword everything was 'predestined' while in OOT the theme was 'manipulation' especially Zelda's tries to change 'predestined' events and her reckless actions in trying to control time and destiny itself split up the timeline like that.
Trin, not you too.
Duane Cunningham
Member
And those prior to Ocarina. After all, Loz, AoL, LttP and OoT have the most straight forward continuity of all.
- Legend of Zelda is a Game.
- Adventure of Link is its sequel starring the same protagonist who has aged some.
- LttP is clearly their prequel... it used the same world map but with a bustling town instead of a mass graveyard in the same spot, and a lush forest instead of burned up trees in the same spot, etc.
- OoT is once again on the same world map and takes place even earlier. And it tells the story of seven sages throwing a thief in a hole... which is exactly what LttP claims happened a long time ago in its prologue.
You know, to say that "each chapter is a retelling of the same thing" is so ridiculous... the first time there could possibly be a "timeline", that is the moment there was more than one game, there was. Zelda 2 is a sequel to Zelda 1. That's a timeline. From the very beginning.
I was talking about overt references you have to try hard to miss (or dismiss).
thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
I've always believed this. It's more sensible than a timeline where the same three people are constantly reincarnated and the universe is split into three alternate timelines. If you believe that, you guys are going to fucking love DC Comics storylines.
This whole timeline crap only came into being because after Ocarina, everyone tried to reconcile the games into some ridiculous timeline, and Nintendo obliged by including references in future games.
I can guarantee you this wasn't what they intended from the start.
Jesus Christ. What is wrong with you? We're talking about a fucking video game.
Apparently _I'm_ an idiot because I believe that Zelda follows a well-trodden trope used in storytelling for 1000's of years, and everyone else is a genius because they think the whole story is actually a giant multiverse where Link is born over and over again.
Duane Cunningham
Member
Why not say that about Die Hard or the Godfather or something, too? The first four games in the series (not counting LA) are explicit prequels/sequels to each other.
thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
You must realize I'm not talking about them.
You know what ? Forget it. Zelda fans are too crazy for me. You guys get way too heated about something that doesn't fucking matter at all. I'm bailing out of this thread.
I'm confused, when Link lifts the sword he isn't actually doing any time travel. He simply goes to sleep for 7 years.
I think that timeline is fake. The two Four Swords game feature the same Link (which is constantly recognized by Nintendo itself), and we already have a page preview for the original Legend of Zelda:
This page is part of the actual timeline, and there's no mention of a third split. The other pages:
The text specifies in the title of when this takes place that it takes place on the Child Timeline.
This page is part of the actual timeline, and there's no mention of a third split. The other pages:
The text specifies in the title of when this takes place that it takes place on the Child Timeline.
You are not an idiot, you are just wrong. There is a timeline, all the games after Ocarina basically connect to one another. If you want to believe something else that is fine since the timeline doesn't change anything in terms of playing the Zelda games, it's just an extra tidbit for the fans and creators of the series.
Duane Cunningham
Member
I just cannot understand this:
I mean, how is it hard to understand?
There's a work of fiction. It gets a sequel. Chapter 3 is a prequel. Chapter 4 is a prequel to them. The next one, WW, is a sequel to that.
To respond with "they're all re-tellings of the same story" is to make something up.
I mean, how is it hard to understand?
There's a work of fiction. It gets a sequel. Chapter 3 is a prequel. Chapter 4 is a prequel to them. The next one, WW, is a sequel to that.
To respond with "they're all re-tellings of the same story" is to make something up.
Zomba13
Member
Well... SS makes it very clear why that happens. Also it's a video game (like you said) so in a video game it makes perfect sense that three characters get reincarnated again and again forever.
Obviouslly they didn't intend from the start for everything to be all crazy like it is now but they are apparently trying to work with it and give the series a sense of continuity while also being vague so they can add games inbetween entries and still have a time line make some form of sense (even if it does split).
It doesn't make much sense with the whole word of mouth thing if story details are vastly different. Like major plot points. Like how in four swords there are 4 links fighting some random guy and in OoT thee is time travel. I know stories can get distorted as they are passed down but I find it harder to believe a story can get that distorted then a trio of characters getting reincarnated for eternity.
Anyway, it doesn't really matter and there is much more evidence for one theory (time line) than the other (every game is the same story just distorted from being passed down)
Well if game A says it follows game B it pretty much means that they are two separate stories no matter if there is a 1000 year old story telling trope.
And videogames are SERIOUS BUSINESS!!!!!!11111
Aonuma: "This... no wait that won't work... how will we ever connect this?"
Writer: "The events following Ocarina of Time were all a dream during Link's 7 years sleep. There, timeline solved let's go home and get drunk."
Why would they just print up a fake timeline in the Historia of Zelda. Honestly, that would make less sense than anything they've done thus far.
He means someone has taken the opportunity to make a fake timeline under the guise it is the one from the book.
They wouldn't print a fake timeline in the book. However the person who posted it hasn't shown any scans of it or anything like that. He just says he has the book and posted that timeline without proof.
jump_button
Banned
I want to know what the new world will be from WW time line *finger cross for wii u*
Well the ordering of the games is consistent to what most believed, just many thought the LTTP-Oracles-LA-LOZ/AOL arch was some how appended after TP instead of another branch. So at least most of the ordering is unchanged.
FS and FSA are always wildcards though
Spirit Tracks
I think that timeline is fake. The two Four Swords game feature the same Link (which is constantly recognized by Nintendo itself), and we already have a page preview for the original Legend of Zelda:
Hey! Pages 106 and 107!
If we take a look at the index:
History of Hyrule
~Finally Revealed, The Genealogy of the Legend~
The Timeline of Hyrule, Kingdom of the Gods ..68
The Legend of Gods and the Hero of Time .70
The Downfall of Hyrule and the last Hero ..92
The Twilight Realm and the Heros Descendant 110
The Hero of Wind and the New World ..122
That means LoZ is in the "Downfall of Hyrule & Last Hero" section..... which is another evidence supporting the triple split timeline.
Thank you very much! That explains it super clearly.
They reveal that in Spirit Tracks...
But actually, you're right. Lets pretend like that didn't happen. (And no, I'm not be sarcastic).
I think I get it now. When Zelda sends Link back into the past using the Ocarina she created a second timeline. Zelda and Link defeat Ganondorf in timeline 2 and that leads to Twilight Princess. Link misses the adult Zelda because he thought he was just on the verge of getting with her so he uses the Ocarina to go back to the future, as a result he ends up creating a third timeline.
jump_button
Banned
-_- no that just a side story and they still alot of water around
Can you wine and dine while
Travelling first class on a train　　　 ☑
Travelling on a smelly horse　　　　 ☒
Travelling by foot　　　　　　　　　　☒
Green Mamba
Member
So Ocarina of Time being A Link to the Past's direct prologue has been vindicated? Awesome.
Green Mamba
Member
Oracle Link potentially being the same Link as A Link to the Past Link sets up some relatively minor plotholes (Link is introduced to Zelda for the first time in both the Oracle games and ALttP). But nothing too major.
Some people don't seem to be okay with the idea that FS Link and FSA Link aren't the same guy, but the game never actually explicitly stated as such.
The Oracle games start out with Link being sent to Holodrum or *other place I don't remember* after touching the Triforce, right? Does Link get the triforce at the end of LTTP? I don't remember.
But basically, OOX link and LTTP link are the same?
The idea isn't that he "failed" just that it exists in the timeframe when Link left for seven years but never came back. InN a lot of ways it's an abandoned timeline.
I guess it is a what if universe =/
Dacvak
No one shall be brought before our LORD David Bowie without the true and secret knowledge of the Photoshop. For in that time, so shall He appear.
This timeline would have been incredible if there was an additional cutscene in Ocarina of Time 3D where Link gets defeated by Ganon, but narrowly escapes or something. If you lost the final battle, that is.
shadyspace
Banned
:lol LTTP is in the shitty "What if?" universe.
Link never "left". He was in hibernation for 7 years and then woke up.
Green Mamba
Member
The Oracle games begin with Link being sent to Holodrum/Labrynna by the Triforce, which was definitely whole by the end of ALttP.
Either this timeline is saying LA Link is not ALttP Link (which LA's manual explicitly states, but that could have been retconned) or Oracle Link is ALttP Link (who is introduced to Zelda as if it were the first time meeting her in both games, but that's a pretty minor plothole in the long run).
Retconned!
shadyspace
Banned
Love how all the Zelda games I have absolutely no interest in are shoved off into their own little special bus. Thanks Aonuma.
Green Mamba
Member
I'm personally interested to see the reasoning behind putting FSA specifically after Twilight Princess and not somewhere else.
Maybe in Timeline 3 he just never woke up? But I guess that doesn't make sense - there'd be no sages to seal Ganondorf away.
I'd prefer that universe. There we go, our first four beloved Zelda games are in a giant What-If.
Yeah Link got the Triforce at ALttP's end, but I'm pretty sure Oracles' Link is different from ALttP's. Plus, doesn't Oracles Link have Epona in the beginning? Oracles Link seems more of a knight-errant type.
Green Mamba
Member
Either way, it's a messy place to put the Oracle games. After Zelda II makes a lot more sense to me, but whatever, it's their timeline.
And I would hold off on full translations before writing off a third timeline as a "What If" scenario.