Support NeoGAF

[Zuo]

It's not even like a care a lot about it, but it's the vitriol that confuses me every time. I randomly stumbled over this thread where people, instead of just ignoring the topic, say the timeline is "for weirdos who can't function" and that "Nintendo clearly never cared about it": https://www.neogaf.com/threads/gamespot-the-complete-legend-of-zelda-timeline-explained.1655585/

I don't understand how people can say such things when Zelda has direct sequels since Zelda 2 and, at the very latest, Majora's Mask; when both Wind Waker and Twilight Princess are obviously parallel narratives unfolding after the events of Ocarina of Time; or when there are interviews way older than the official timeline that _do_ show that Nintendo always kind of cared, even insisting that A Link to the Past and Link's Awakening take place after Ocarina of Time: https://www.zeldadungeon.net/wiki/Interview:Nintendo_Online_Magazine_August_1st_1998

It's not like anyone claims that the timeline is flawless. There are interviews in which Miyamoto himself admitted ignoring "joints not lining up perfectly because it's inevitable anyway" and they rather focus on making a fun game, but there is obviously some continuity going on between at least half of the games. You may criticize that they shoehorn games like Tri Force Heroes into it, but not only do they have their own dedicated branch that makes it easier to ignore them in this regard, it's a more fun and elegant solution than decanonizing arbitrary games and leaving them in an annoying limbo

 

[Thaedolus]

It makes no fucking sense and is unnecessary to enjoy the games

 

[Skifi28]

I can't sleep at night, this is how much it bothers me.

 

[MagiusNecros]

There is no timeline. Just a retelling of events. It's the fans that created the timelines and Nintendo went with it at some point. So here we are. Zelda lore runs deep.

 

[AV]

It's clearly just cobbled together long after the fact and it never needed to happen in the first place. It definitely shouldn't bother anyone, but it's also absolutely there for weirdos who care about story in a game series that's had a good plot exactly zero times.

Alright, Majora's Mask was pretty cool.

 

[Zuo]

It makes no fucking sense and is unnecessary to enjoy the games

How doesn't it make sense?

There is no timeline. Just a retelling of events. It's the fans that created the timelines and Nintendo went with it at some point. So here we are. Zelda lore runs deep.

It's clearly just cobbled together long after the fact and it never needed to happen in the first place. It definitely shouldn't bother anyone, but it's also absolutely there for weirdos who care about story in a game series that's had a good plot exactly zero times.

Alright, Majora's Mask was pretty cool.

No, there is a timeline, and Nintendo came up with it when they made a sequel to Zelda 1: https://www.digitpress.com/library/manuals/nes/Zelda II - The Adventure of Link.pdf


Thanks for serving as live examples

 

[MagiusNecros]

No, there is a timeline

Could at least show the right one and not just two games.

At the end of the day the timeline is insignificant since most games are separate adventures with separate Links/Zeldas.

 

[ADiTAR]

I never understood why people care. It's a legend, it can be retold. Every game for me is happening in it's own timeline.

I can live with it.

 

[Holammer]

The Zelda timeline stuff started as fan discussion that was made official right? Never cared for it, it's all MatPat level Game Theory wank.

Pictured below: a Sonic fan working on a grand unification theory that includes games, cartoons and comics.

 

[MAX PAYMENT]

Let's be real. The games just included minor references and easter eggs to each other and Nintendo slapped something together due to fan demand.

 

[LordOcidax]

Because people like to be angry… Especially the gaming community.

 

[Dacvak]

I like going down the Zelda timeline rabbit hole, even though it doesn’t always make sense.

There’s something inherently satisfying about slotting a bunch of chaos into an amount of order. Yeah, we all know the 40-year Zelda timeline was not planned out from the get go, but it’s kind of fun to see if there’s a way to make the puzzle pieces fit.

 

[Woopah]

There is no timeline. Just a retelling of events. It's the fans that created the timelines and Nintendo went with it at some point. So here we are. Zelda lore runs deep.

The Zelda timeline stuff started as fan discussion that was made official right? Never cared for it, it's all MatPat level Game Theory wank.

Pictured below: a Sonic fan working on a grand unification theory that includes games, cartoons and comics.

I think this exactly what the OP is arguing against.

The Zelda timeline started in the 80s when Nintendo made Zelda II a direct sequel to the original. And then continued throughout the rest of the series, with most games being specifically developed as prequels or sequels to other games.

For example, the idea of the split timeline came from Aonuma, not from fans. The idea that each game is supposed to be a retelling simply isn't true.

What is true to say is that the timeline was messy and convoluted and required recons to work. As another example, Ocarina of Time was originslly written as a prequel to LtttP to show the Imprisoning War.

But the story changed during development and ended up not really working (especially after Twilight Princess and Wink Waker). That'd why Nintendo had to retcon in the idea that the timeline split into 3 instead of 2.

 

[BootsLoader]

I never really thought about the Zelda timeline. My first Zelda game which I played from start to end was Ocarina of Time. After that game I played and enjoyed almost every entry except the switch games.

I enjoy every Zelda game for what it is, never really bothered about the timeline.

 

[RagnarokIV]

I thought the idea is that it's the Legend of Zelda.

Hence it can just be retold in many different ways. It isn't fucken marvel or Metal Gear, not everything needs to be explained or have a timeline.

Either way I just play them as and when I feel it, never missed out on anything.

 

[FinalBossWithTheMostPower]

The only Zelda timeline I care about, is the one for the development of the next game.

 

[Dynasty8]

I don't think anyone is bothered by this... Except maybe the Purple people...they're bothered by EVERYTHING.

 

[ShirAhava]

The timeline is the most interesting thing about Zelda for me. (its really RAD)
That said I'm not shocked most Zelda fans don't care for it most of them desperately need to touch Hyrule grass

 

[JimboJones]

The Zelda timeline stuff started as fan discussion that was made official right? Never cared for it, it's all MatPat level Game Theory wank.

Pictured below: a Sonic fan working on a grand unification theory that includes games, cartoons and comics.

But where will the movie fit in the timeline!

 

[Lucie Goosey]

It makes no fucking sense and is unnecessary to enjoy the games

For you dude. There's 8 billion other perspectives on this Earth thinking and feeling differently to different degrees.

Timelines are cool to me. I'm not even a Zelda fan and I would be interested in learning more about continuity in this universe.

 

[Arcadialane]

I just wish they would emphasize the fact that Link is a christian more, we dont really get to see them much in media anymore

 

[-Zelda-]

Because they are idiots.

 

[Moses85]

It is important.
It is a fact!

 

[Woopah]

For you dude. There's 8 billion other perspectives on this Earth thinking and feeling differently to different degrees.

Timelines are cool to me. I'm not even a Zelda fan and I would be interested in learning more about continuity in this universe.

This AVGN episode gives a good look at it from the developers' point of view (at least the first half, the video is quite out of date now)

And this video gives a good overview of the Timeline as a whole -

I'm sure there are plenty of people here who can answer any other questions you have!

 

[TexMex]

The Zelda timeline is for weirdos who can’t function, and Nintendo does not care about it.

 

[Ikutachi]

It's plainly obvious The Wind Waker has strong ties with Ocarina of Time.

 

[nikos]

The games barely even tell a story.

 

[Danjin44]

The so called the “timeline“ doesn’t add anything to story or gameplay of Zelda games.

Games with story heavy the timeline matters like Drakengard/Nier series.

 

[DownLikeBCPowder]

I love Zelda and I don't even think about the plot outside of the immediate Zelda game I'm playing aside from maybe general themes. Ever.

 

[Zuo]

I think this exactly what the OP is arguing against.

The Zelda timeline started in the 80s when Nintendo made Zelda II a direct sequel to the original. And then continued throughout the rest of the series, with most games being specifically developed as prequels or sequels to other games.

For example, the idea of the split timeline came from Anouma, not from fans. The idea that each game is supposed to be a retelling simply isn't true.

What is true to say is that the timeline was messy and convoluted and required recons to work. As another example, Ocarina of Time was originslly written as a prequel to LtttP to show the Imprisoning War.

But the story changed during development and ended up not really working (especially after Twilight Princess and Wink Waker). That'd why Nintendo had to retcon in the idea that the timeline split into 3 instead of 2.

Indeed. And from everything I've seen, Nintendo is quite humble about the messiness and retconning, not at all trying to hide it

For you dude. There's 8 billion other perspectives on this Earth thinking and feeling differently to different degrees.

Timelines are cool to me. I'm not even a Zelda fan and I would be interested in learning more about continuity in this universe.

I too disagree with people who say the timeline adds nothing to the experience. It added a fuckton to Wind Waker, be it the very premise and the flooding of the Hyrule you explored in OoT, reading about the Hero of Time not coming back to save the day again (apparently for reasons not everyone in this thread grasped), the grown-up Deku Tree, the sunken kingdom, noticing things like the Kokiri symbols on the doors or the stained glass depicting the OoT sages, and of course Ganondorf being the same person you faced before, which is what makes him such a special villain

It's plainly obvious The Wind Waker has strong ties with Ocarina of Time.

Not obvious enough for some. And it's probably the same people who say that Zelda stories are too simple or "barely exist"

 

[RoboFu]

becaus its dumb. there was no timeline for a long time before idiots who couldn't cope demanded it. so some intern at Nintendo threw one together.

 

[Woopah]

becaus its dumb. there was no timeline for a long time before idiots who couldn't cope demanded it. so some intern at Nintendo threw one together.

As an official document yes, but the actual timeline existed since Zelda 2.

 

[RoboFu]

As an official document yes, but the actual timeline existed since Zelda 2.

no

 

[Woopah]

no

What do you mean no? Zelda 2 takes place four years after the original. Its plot directly continues from the first game.

 

[Trilobit]

I remember reading fan theories about the timeline, but it was pretty clear that Nintendo never had any plans for an overarching timeline. It was cute that they made an official "timeline", but you can pretty much make up your own head canon if you want.

 

[Soodanim]

There is no timeline. Just a retelling of events. It's the fans that created the timelines and Nintendo went with it at some point. So here we are. Zelda lore runs deep.

I've seen this a hundred times and I've always thought it was retarded. The second game ever made is a direct sequel, and it's a known fact that the same Links exist in multiple games. So the idea that it's just one story retold is wrong straight away.

That's not to say the games all fit neatly into one coherent timeline, but it's better than pretending they're all the same game. They don't even all have the same antagonist.

 

[Zuo]

becaus its dumb. there was no timeline for a long time before idiots who couldn't cope demanded it. so some intern at Nintendo threw one together.

The "Miyamoto Order" is probably older than some people in this thread. Miyamoto already talked about an overarching timeline and established that Zelda 1, Zelda 2, ALttP and LA take place after OoT as far back as 1998

no

There is a timeline in the mundane sense of the word since Zelda 2 and later Majora's Mask and other direct and indirect sequels. That's not subjective. You may disagree with Nintendo's official timeline, but Zelda obviously has at least one timeline. It's not even anything special or a big deal. It's just how it is

 

[22:22:22]

Omg you're so right and yet I have my doubts. Many night keep me awake from this conundrum =/

 

[Gaiff]

How doesn't it make sense?

It doesn't and don't pretend that it does. They had to do a bunch of retcons and there are a million holes in the timeline because there was no forethought put into it. Whenever asked in the past, Miyamoto and Aonuma would be coy about it and refer a so-called timeline document they had stashed away somewhere. The timeline they published in Hyrule Historia doesn't hold to scrutiny and that's fine, it doesn't make Zelda less good, but it will tend to piss off people when you try to explain away what doesn't need to be explained with senseless and convoluted explanations.

That's like Star Wars with the Midichlorians. It just annoyed longtime fans and wasn't needed.

 

[Guilty_AI]

It's not even like a care a lot about it, but it's the vitriol that confuses me every time. I randomly stumbled over this thread where people, instead of just ignoring the topic, say the timeline is "for weirdos who can't function" and that "Nintendo clearly never cared about it": https://www.neogaf.com/threads/gamespot-the-complete-legend-of-zelda-timeline-explained.1655585/

seems you cared enough to make a thread about it.

This timeline is dumb, and people will rightfully point out its dumb. Thats all there is to this

 

[swaffles23]

I've always looked at the series as more of an anthology. The timeline makes no sense

 

[MagiusNecros]

I've seen this a hundred times and I've always thought it was retarded. The second game ever made is a direct sequel, and it's a known fact that the same Link exists in multiple games. So the idea that it's just one story retold is wrong straight away.

That's not to say the games all fit neatly into one coherent timeline, but it's better than pretending they're all the same game. They don't even all have the same antagonist.

Technically they do since every big bad per Skyward Sword is just another incarnation of Demise's curse.

In some games Link is the same but in other's clearly it is not. What is the same is the reincarnation of the "Hero's Spirit" which is just the player.

As far as I am concerned especially with BotW/TotK it very much is a retelling of events since just like in reality, history repeats itself.

 

[Lucie Goosey]

This AVGN episode gives a good look at it from the developers' point of view (at least the first half, the video is quite out of date now)

And this video gives a good overview of the Timeline as a whole -

I'm sure there are plenty of people here who can answer any other questions you have!

Very cool, thanks mate.

 

[TheDreadBaron]

The timeline is dumb because it’s disingenuous. It’s forcing stories to fit together that don’t quite fit when they were never intended to connect that way originally, and they worked just fine as they were. Now I can appreciate the craft of retroactively stringing lore together to make some grand unified timeline theory, it’s an interesting thought puzzle and all, but it’s pure fan fiction. Official adoption of the timeline in any way was a mistake.

The real connection is that Link is the hero of time, Ganon is the big bad, Zelda is the princess, and the games are echoes and rhymes of each other. That’s all it needs to be.

 

[Zuo]

It doesn't and don't pretend that it does. They had to do a bunch of retcons and there are a million holes in the timeline because there was no forethought put into it. Whenever asked in the past, Miyamoto and Aonuma would be coy about it and refer a so-called timeline document they had stashed away somewhere. The timeline they published in Hyrule Historia doesn't hold to scrutiny and that's fine, it doesn't make Zelda less good, but it will tend to piss off people when you try to explain away what doesn't need to be explained with senseless and convoluted explanations.

No one claims there are no inconsistencies (many of which are by design to maintain for themselves the freedom and absolute focus on making a fun game). A lot of inconsistencies also can be explained away with the fact that, as people in this thread pointed out, Zelda stories are "legends"

No one posted any "convoluted explanations" here. Saying this just makes it look like you have a preconceived opinion and take the timeline more seriously than the people who are fine with it

Personally, I don't even understand how someone can love Wind Waker while denying that it takes place after Ocarina of Time. So much of WW's sense of sublimity and emotional frission comes from the fact that it's OoT's world and characters that had all that shit happen to them because "we" were sent back into our timeline at the end of OoT and that even Ganondorf "covets" that old world. I vividly remember how almost everyone loved this about WW, too. And none of that is convoluted

The timeline is dumb because it’s disingenuous. It’s forcing stories to fit together that don’t quite fit when they were never intended to connect that way originally, and they worked just fine as they were. Now I can appreciate the craft of retroactively stringing lore together to make some grand unified timeline theory, it’s an interesting thought puzzle and all, but it’s pure fan fiction. Official adoption of the timeline in any way was a mistake.

The problem with your argument is that all the somewhat complex Zelda games fit together quite nicely (OoT, MM, WW, TP and SS being the centerpiece of the timeline), and all the Zeldas that don't seem to fit in anywhere are the 2D ones that have very simple stories. No one needs to disingenuously string any lore together if they don't enjoy it. And as mentioned in the OP, most of the black sheep also have their own little timeline that makes it even easier to see them in isolation... Or does it really bother you this much that the stupid acid dream Link has in LA takes place sometime after ALttP and a bazillion years after OoT? Maybe you people really care more about the timeline than the people who don't mind it

 

[mcjmetroid]

ugh because it doesnt make sense and Nintendo doesnt care about it.

If you want to believe there is a timeline then fair enough.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Alright fine, I will name every strand of pasta before cooking it.

 

[Zuo]

ugh because it doesnt make sense and Nintendo doesnt care about it.

You base this on mind reading, though. Nintendo never told us that they don't care. In actuality, Nintendo makes Zelda sequels (that's a timeline) since Zelda 2

If you want to believe there is a timeline then fair enough.

I know that there is a timeline because I played the games

 

[CamHostage]

Any one or two of the games can harken back to memories of other games in the franchise, that's fine. Some games even use a "sequel" continuity if there's some aspect of the story that Nintendo wants to build upon for whatever reason benefits the new game. And if headcanon is comfortable to think of ones that fit as being before or after one another, enjoy that vision of the experience.

Caring for a timeline or trying to make all of these games fit together, however, is maddening and fruitless. And arguing about there being an actual timeline of all the Zeldas on the internet is going to hurt for everybody involved. Just enjoy each of the games as you play them.

 

[Bruno_Arrais85]

That's the beauty of the franchise. The fans can go deeper into the story but you can enjoy it just as much by ignoring that.

I do like the lore and the theories around all the Zelda games.