35 replies to this topic

[Vertiboy]

I would just like to know what people think about this debate. To clarify for those who don't understand the question, at the end of Ocarina of Time after Ganon's defeat, Zelda sends Link back to his own time using the Ocarina of Time. When Link arrives at his time as a child, are the events of the adult timeline erased (or at the very least split off), or do they happen 7 years later?

I have to vote that I think they are erased/split off. Don't get me wrong. I know that both theories have their problems. If they could be completely solved, they would no longer be theories. Even if one choice is the definite answer, there are still questions left unanswered with the given canon.

Anyway, here are the problems that both theories have that can only be fixed with assumption/speculation/fan fiction/wtfever you want to call it. I will explain the problems in more depth in a while.

Adult OoT Happens 7 Years Later
1. Does Epona go back to Lon Lon Ranch sometime between Majora's Mask and the adult events for adult Link to ride?
2. Does something happen that would remove the Master Sword from the Pedistal of Time in the adult timeline? (As I have said, I will go in depth later.)
3. Does something happen that would open the Door of Time in the adult timeline?

4. Does something happen that would close the Door of Time between the end of the adult timeline and Twilight Princess?
5. Does something happen between the end of the adult timeline and Twilight Princess that would replant the Master Sword in the Pedistal of Time?
6. Does something happen that would prevent the Sages in Twilight Princess from knowing that Ganondorf got the Triforce of Power by entering the Sacred Realm.

Adult OoT is Erased
1. Do the time travel logics of Majora's Mask apply to the ending of Ocarina of Time, thus erasing/splitting the adult timeline?

Give me time to explain because these are legitimate problems that both theories have.

Let me start with the assumptions of the "7 years later" theory. Before I begin, though, let me start with my understanding of this theory. When Link draws the Master Sword for the first time in Ocarina of Time, he has already (in a chronological timeline of events in the way a normal citizen of Hyrule would see them) left to look for Navi and lived out his life (if he hasn't died yet). Basically, it was almost like he had no choice. Link had to succeed in saving Hyrule because he had already succeeded. That's the best way I know how to describe my understanding. That is important for the first two problems.

Link rides Epona in the adult timeline. Link rides Epona in Majora's Mask. At the end of MM, we see Link riding around the Lost Woods again, and that's all we see. We don't know if Link continues his search for Navi. We don't know if he goes back to Hyrule to take Epona back to Lon Lon Ranch. Basically, in order for Link to ride her in the adult timeline, Epona would somehow have to make her way back to the ranch sometime after MM. The problem lies in the fact that we don't know what becomes of Link and Epona after MM. No backstory of any game provides any insight on their whereabouts (except for "he didn't appear" in The Wind Waker's backstory).

I am also aware that he might be the wolf that teaches Link a song in Twilight Princess.

If we say that Link takes Epona back to the ranch, that's fan fiction. If we say that the second the camera pans off of Link and Epona at the very end of MM, a meteor hits them both and kills them, that is fan fiction. The point is that there is no canon way to explain if Epona got back to the ranch or not. In order for the "7 years later" theory to work, she must make it back to the ranch.

The second problem also involves the fact that Link has saved Hyrule by the time he wakes up in the adult timeline for the first time. In the next to last scene of OoT, Link places the MS back in the pedistal before walking off. If this has already happened by the time Link awakens in the adult timeline, then WhereTF is the MS? After all, Link already placed in the pedistal for good in the child timeline. Plus, I know that Link doesn't draw the sword a second time every time he arrives in the adult timeline. When the scene plays where Link awakens in the Chamber of the Sages, he has the Master Sword with him. That means that every time he draws the MS as a child, the MS goes into the CotS with him. There should be two MSs: the one that goes into the CotS with Link and the one in the Pedistal of Time, still there from when Link placed it there at the end of OoT. That's not the case, though. If Link had already succeeded in saving Hyrule, then the MS should still be in place. Some event would have to happen that's not described in the canon that would remove the MS from the pedistal in order for the "7 years later" theory to work.

Something then, in turn, would have to happen to return the MS to the pedistal between the end of the adult events and TP. I'll have more about the Temple of Time in a rant later.

That brings me to the next problem. Why is the Door of Time open in the adult timeline? Zelda told Link to close it. Link doesn't have any motive not to close the door. Would he forget to close it? I doubt it. There are situations where common sense fills in the gap that canon cannot fill, and this is one of them (well, kind of, as the spoiler will explain). Something not mentioned in the canon would have to open the door.

Furthermore, we know that the Door of Time was closed. Twilight Princess shows us that.

Thanks to www.thehylia.com for these videos.

OMFG! DON'T WATCH THE VIDEOS IF YOU DON'T LIKE HUGE SPOILERS!!!

http://video.google....9...77744&hl=en

http://video.google....3...73580&hl=en

In the video, we see a door open. Now, granted, the Temple of Time doesn't look exactly like the one from Ocarina of Time, and it's location is somewhat south of Lake Hylia, but honestly, you didn't expect the creators to make Hyrule look exactly like it did in OoT, did you? Realistically, it would take thousands to even millions of years for geography to change as much as Hyrule's geography changes from game to game. We are not dealing with the real world, though, so geography changes drastically within centuries, or even as small as decades, in the Zelda universe. With every game that comes out, it's apparent that consistent storylines are more important to the creators than consistent geography. The location of the MS and the state of the Door of Time (granted, the game doesn't call it that or anything at all, but TWW didn't call Death Mountain by that name, but by Dragon Roost Island) are consistent. The MS is in the Pedistal of Time, and the Door of Time is closed. That is consistent with the end of OoT, and that is all that needs to be consistent in order for the story to work. My point is that Link closes the DoT in the next to last scene of OoT, then it's open during the adult timeline, then it's closed again during TP. That's two problems dealing with the DoT that cannot be fixed without fan fiction. It must be opened between the end of the child events in OoT and the beginning of the adult events of OoT. It must be closed between the end of the adult events of OoT and the beginning of TP.

In the "7 Years Later" theory, watch this video from The Hylia

SPOILERS!!!

http://video.google....2...97349&hl=en

In the video, the Sages call Ganondorf an evil thief. Why, if this man took over Hyrule and brought it to it's knees, would they refer to him as a common thief. They also have no idea where he got the Triforce of Power. They call it a divine prank. If adult OoT had happened, they would know where he got it, unless you want to add yet another assumption to the "7 Years Later" theory explaining how the Sages wouldn't know the history of the man they were executing.

As you can see, a lot of fan fiction goes into the "7 years later" theory. I found six assumptions that cannot be proven. That's a large gap compared to the "erased" theory.

If Majora's Mask time travel logic is applied to the end of Ocarina of Time, it fixes all of the problems that would arrise otherwise. Let me explain.

In MM, Link can free a Giant on 5:59 A.M., Day 3, then go back in time using the Ocarina, to 6:00 A.M., Day 1, when Link first stepped out of the doors of the Clock Tower. He can then wait until 12:00 A.M., Day 3, to go to the top of the CT, play the Oath to Order, and call said Giant. Even though the events of the previous 3-day cycle never happen, meaning that the Giant was never freed, the Giant is somehow magically free. This is proof that whenever Link goes back in time in MM, the seal is broken at the very moment Link arrives (6:00 A.M., Day 1).

Some people say that it's a result of multiple Links running around. I can tell you that this is false. If the Link from the previous 3-day cycle still existed and freed the Giant, then the Link in the current 3-day cycle wouldn't be able to summon it until 5:59 A.M., Day 3. That's not the case, though.

Some then go on to say that it just a result of technology. There was no way for the N64 to record the exact motion of previous 3-day cycles and for it to record the exact times that Giants were freed, etc. In short, the reason we can summon the Giant earlier than when it was freed was because the N64's technology sucked. I can agree with part of that. The N64 technology couldn't record everything. I do think, however, that the N64 system was capable of having someone explain that there are multiple Links running around. For example, it's not that hard to have Kaepora Gaebora say, "Link! Hoo-hoot! Did you know that every time you play the Song of Time, you create a new copy of yourself? Hoo-hoot!" The N64 at least had the technology to at least tell us that multiple Links are running around.

Also, let me say this. In 2001, 2002, and 2003, we saw The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Thirty years ago, we wouldn't have been able to make a live action movie like that. Technology back then didn't allow. Yes, we have a few cartoons. There may be some crappy live-action version that no one took seriously and that I've never heard about. Look at all of the special effects and GCI that went into the trilogy. It could not have been accomplished in live-action form thirty years ago. Let's think back to 1976. I wasn't alive then, but I can just picture a writter brainstorming for a new picture. This writter read The Lord of the Rings books as a child. He wants to make a live-action movie out of them. There is only one problem. The technology isn't great enough to tell that story. We would see fields of stop-motion animation soldiers and orcs fighting one another. Stop motion sucks. Anyone ever see Clash of the Titans or King Kong Vs. Godzilla? Yeah, stop motion definitely sucks.

Anyone see what I'm saying yet? Aonuma and the writters of MM wouldn't make a game with the plot of multiple Links running around at the same time because it wasn't possible with the N64 hardware. His best bet was to make a game with time travel laws roughly similar to the movie Groundhog's Day. He told the story where events of the previous 3-day cycle were erased, Giants were still freed, masks were still obtained, and Heart Containers were still present in Link. He did not tell a story where multiple Links are running around at the same time. I guess my point is that there is little to no reason to think that many Links were present by the end of MM.

Also, let me say that many people wonder why the true ending of MM (when you get every mask) can show every problem solved if some of the events in which Link solved them were erased. Well, Majora's Mask caused all of the problems. It has been destroyed, so I would guess that every problem it caused is fixed. Kafei is no longer a child, all of the Great Fairies are whole again, and Tingle is no longer stupid (oh, wait...). Basically, when it's that explaination vs. multple Links running around, the former wins because, in the long run, it causes less problems.

With that being said, let's go back to the seal of the Giant. If the Giant can still be free, even though the events of the previous 3-day cycle didn't happen, then what would that mean when applied to OoT. Just apply it to the Sages' seal on the Sacred Realm. Zelda sends Link back to his own time. Ganondorf is still sealed inside the Sacred Realm, even though the events of adult OoT didn't happen.

That would mean that Ganondorf is sealed in the past at the exact moment that Link arrives in the Temple of Time at the end of the game, even though the events of adult OoT are erased. Ganondorf would no longer have control of HC, so Zelda could go back, and Link could meet her, like he does at the very end of the game. Applying MM time travel logic to OoT's ending makes everything fit together perfectly.

Now I will address a false problem of the "erased" theory. In A Link to the Past and The Wind Waker, events of the adult timeline are mentioned. How can they be remembered if the events never chronologically happened? I can say that I don't know, and it doesn't matter. Here's why.

In the land of Hyrule, there echoes a legend. A legend held dearly by the Royal Family that tells of a boy...

A boy who, after battling evil and saving Hyrule, crept away from the land that had made him a legend...

Done with the battles he once waged across time, he embarked on a journey. A secret and personal journey...

A journey in search of a beloved and invaluable friend...

A friend whom with he parted ways when he finally fullfilled his heroic destiny and took his place among the legends...

The verb tense is very important. Hyrule had made him a legend, not will make him a legend. He finally fulfilled his heroic destiny, not will fulfill his heroic destiny. He took his place among the legends, not will take his place among the legends. It had already happened before MM. MM doesn't specify exactly how he is a legend. Have the people of Hyrule somehow found out about his journey across time? It doesn't matter. All that matters is that before MM begins, Link is already known throughout Hyrule, so the adult events of OoT can be described in games occuring chronologically after OoT's child ending. The erasing of adult OoT does not hurt the "erased" theory at all, and MM's intro is proof of that.

To summarize, the evidence in Ocarina of Time basically proves that adult OoT is erased, or at the very least, splits off. I doubt that Miyamoto and Aonuma will come out with another game that directly fills in all of the holes of the "7 years later" theory. Usually, I don't really call the "erased" theory a theory. It is a fact, unless more evidence comes along retconning the old evidence in OoT. I don't see why people choose the most complicated explaination when there is a very simple one that surprisingly stays consistent with MM. It is not a coincidence that it all falls into place perfectly.

I guess that's all I have to say. For those of you who read all of this post, congradulations.

Edited by Vertiboy, 04 February 2007 - 03:03 PM.

[Hero of Winds]

I'm just going to address this one point for now.

In MM, Link can free a Giant on 5:59 A.M., Day 3, then go back in time using the Ocarina, to 6:00 A.M., Day 1, when Link first stepped out of the doors of the Clock Tower. He can then wait until 12:00 A.M., Day 3, to go to the top of the CT, play the Oath to Order, and call said Giant. Even though the events of the previous 3-day cycle never happen, meaning that the Giant was never freed, the Giant is somehow magically free. This is proof that whenever Link goes back in time in MM, the seal is broken at the very moment Link arrives (6:00 A.M., Day 1).

The reason the seals on the Giants are broken, even if you don't physically free them again everytime you travel back in time, is because Link retains the Boss Remains masks.

We know that Link retains his masks whenever he travels back in time. We also know that the four bosses (Goht, Gyorg, Twinmold, and whoever the first one was) are what prevent the Giants from doing their job. When Link defeats a boss, he obtains their remains in the form of a mask. So whenever Link travels back to 6 AM, Day 1 with a Boss Remains mask, the boss corresponding to that mask ceases to exist. It's because of that that Link only has to defeat a boss, thereby freeing a Giant, once.


Hmm... looking over what I just wrote, I don't know if I supported or opposed your theory. Heh.

[Reflectionist]

1. Link opens the Door of Time.
2. Link draws the Master Sword and disappears into a blue light.
3. Moments later, Ganondorf walks into the Temple of Time, and he enters the Sacred Realm, disappearing from sight.
4. Shortly after, Link steps out of the blue light, placing the Master Sword back into the Pedistal of Time, appearing to have sealed the evil man away with the blade of evil's bane.

Very nice. But how does this explain such things as the Spirit Temple? And the times when Link goes back and forth between Child and Adult?

Does it at all?

[Vertiboy]

The reason the seals on the Giants are broken, even if you don't physically free them again everytime you travel back in time, is because Link retains the Boss Remains masks.

That isn't true. There is no quote in Majora's Mask proving that the Giants remain the masks. Actually, there are quotes proving the opposite.

You've seized Odolwa's Remains!

You have just freed the innocent
spirit that this dark mask had
kept imprisoned within the body
of evil Odolwa.


You've seized Goht's Remains!

You have just freed the innocent
spirit that this dark mask had
kept imprisoned within the body
of evil Goht.


You've seized Gyorg's Remains!

You have just freed the innocent
spirit that this dark mask had
kept imprisoned within the body
of evil Gyorg.


You've seized Twinmold's Remains!

You have just freed the innocent
spirit that this dark mask had
kept imprisoned within the body
of evil Twinmold.

It says that they were freed. How can they be freed if they are still in the masks? Anyway, there is no quote in Majora's Mask that says the Giants are trapped in the masks.

Very nice. But how does this explain such things as the Spirit Temple? And the times when Link goes back and forth between Child and Adult?

Does it at all?

I'm saying that the events of the Spirit Temple, child and adults, are erased. Everything that happened shortly after Ganondorf entered the Sacred Realm would be erased because that's when Link would return.

Now keep in mind that the MM time travel logic doesn't apply until OoT's ending. Every time that Link draws and/or plants the Master Sword, he hasn't yet sealed Ganon, so the future or past wouldn't change.

[Reflectionist]

That isn't true. There is no quote in Majora's Mask proving that the Giants remain the masks. Actually, there are quotes proving the opposite.
It says that they were freed. How can they be freed if they are still in the masks? Anyway, there is no quote in Majora's Mask that says the Giants are trapped in the masks.

The Giants, according to your quote, would be in the body of the bosses.

The bosses cease to exist since you have their remains (in the form of a mask), so there's no way the Giants can still be imprisoned.

I'm saying that the events of the Spirit Temple, child and adults, are erased. Everything that happened shortly after Ganondorf entered the Sacred Realm would be erased because that's when Link would return.

Now keep in mind that the MM time travel logic doesn't apply until OoT's ending. Every time that Link draws and/or plants the Master Sword, he hasn't yet sealed Ganon, so the future or past wouldn't change.

So where does that come in in your little timeline?

1. Link opens the Door of Time.
2. Link draws the Master Sword and disappears into a blue light.
3. Moments later, Ganondorf walks into the Temple of Time, and he enters the Sacred Realm, disappearing from sight.
4. Shortly after, Link steps out of the blue light, placing the Master Sword back into the Pedistal of Time, appearing to have sealed the evil man away with the blade of evil's bane.

Between 1 and 2.... 2 and 3... 3 and 4.... or what?

[BourgeoisJerry]

Okay, since I wasted so much time reading that post, I think I'll wait until later to check your other topic. Anyway, I'm going to try to keep my post short. I'd vote in the poll as well, but you don't give an option for Link returning after Ganondorf already had the ToP. Anyway, I seem to interpret the way time travel works in the games differently than you do. I've always seen the events of OoT as happening in a time loop, especially because Link was remembered for draining the well in the future before he went back and actually drained it. Anyway, to answer to the assumptions required...

1. Does Epona go back to Lon Lon Ranch sometime between Majora's Mask and the adult events for adult Link to ride?

It's an assumption, but it's the kind of assumption that's easy to make. By easy to make, I mean this kinda piggy-backs along with the next thing I'm gonna mention.

2. Does something happen that would remove the Master Sword from the Pedistal of Time in the adult timeline? (As I have said, I will go in depth later.)

Okay, let's start applying time travel logic as it has been seen in the games here. First of all, I can't think of a single object that has ever gone back or forth in time, not even a human body. It's always Link's soul, and in MM any items that he had with him when he went back would teleport from wherever they were to his possession. Now, I don't recall Rauru actually stating that Link's body was in the Sacred Realm for seven years, just that his soul was. According to my theory, Link returns seven years later, picks up the Master Sword, then his past self inhabits his body, having the Master Sword in hand since... well, he kinda just pulled it from the pedistal. From there the adult half of the game happens and future Link returns to his body when Zelda sends past Link home.

3. Does something happen that would open the Door of Time in the adult timeline?

Future Link opens it when he comes back. We know he's got the necessary items to do so, and he's certainly gotten practice playing the Song of Time. Again, this piggy-backs with the belief that Link returns so his past self can fulfill his destiny.

4. Does something happen that would close the Door of Time between the end of the adult timeline and Twilight Princess?

You're joking, right? All I probably have to say is that Zelda (or maybe Link) did it. I can explain further if I have to, but I seriously doubt that and I'd rather not answer in such a way that I need to spoiler tag this. If you think about it, there's really no way neither one of them would do it.

5. Does something happen between the end of the adult timeline and Twilight Princess that would replant the Master Sword in the Pedistal of Time?

I'm not sure I really need to spoiler tag this one, but I'll go ahead anyway.

Same thing that replanted the Master Sword at the end of Link to the Past. Link himself.

6. Does Zelda return to Hyrule Castle after being chased away by Ganondorf, even though the castle is under his control?

I haven't played the game in a while, but if you still have it could you please check the road to Hyrule Castle as child Link? It's worth noting that Impa's quote gives a relative term, which might not actually mean "in a few minutes, maybe an hour or two." Yes, I admit that it's a bit odd for Zelda to be back in the Castle, but we actually aren't given any indication that the Castle was occupied by Ganondorf's forces on the day he attacked, and if memory serves, there's actually some indication that the surrender Impa mentioned takes place after all of that stuff Link did as a kid during OoT. Again, if you have the game you can check for me on the road to Hyrule Castle.

7. Does Zelda leave the Ganondorf-controlled Hyrule Castle after Link visits her at the very end of Ocarina of Time?

Assuming she returned to the castle, which is kinda required for that scene to work, yes she does leave the Castle. However, I don't think it is controlled by Ganondorf at the time she leaves. Also, while this doesn't completely nullify it being strange for Zelda to return to the Castle, it is a safe place for her as long as it hasn't yet surrendered, and Ganondorf doesn't realize she's returned. In fact, if she can return to the castle undetected it's probably the safest place there is for her until it surrenders. Ganondorf likely searched every other place, so the only plausible way for her to not get found would be if she mastered the art of disguise right away (or had already mastered it) or if Impa turned out to be really good at not being seen (which would make the undetected return to Hyrule Castle easy.) I'm not trying to say that Zelda returning is the perfectly logical course of action, I'm just saying that it's possible.

Also, about the mark not appearing on Zelda's hand in the ending: I'm not gonna go back and watch every scene in which Link was near Zelda to make sure, but I personally don't recall his or her mark glowing every time (wouldn't that have been a dead giveaway that Shiek was Zelda?) The mark glows when the people making the game decide for it to glow. It's a cinematic thing that appears whenever it would look good cinematically. The fact that they decided to make Link's glow in the ending scene but not Zelda's could simply be because they didn't feel it was necessary to get a shot of both of their hands in which you can easily see the mark. They may have very well figured that one was enough to get the point across, and not felt it worth the effort to make it glow on Zelda's hand if you would have to look to see if it was there anyway. There is no set rule for when the mark will or will not show, so it showing or not showing at certain times doesn't really mean anything.

[spunky-monkey]

Oh my goodness, you've made so many points Vertiboy that I'll try and respond to some of them, and hope everyone here will answer the rest later (I'm not even going to bother with geography). ;P

Adult OoT Happens 7 Years Later
1. Does Epona go back to Lon Lon Ranch sometime between Majora's Mask and the adult events for adult Link to ride?

Adult OoT carries on it doesn't stop cause because a new timeline was created. Fully grown Epona in the future ending wanders aimlessly around Hyrule Field ;_; whereas Epona (Mare) is with Link after Majora's Mask. Epona in the child timeline was already in Lon Lon Ranch to start with.

6. Does Zelda return to Hyrule Castle after being chased away by Ganondorf, even though the castle is under his control?
7. Does Zelda leave the Ganondorf-controlled Hyrule Castle after Link visits her at the very end of Ocarina of Time?

It is difficult to answer that question but since Ganondorf had just been sealed in the Sacred Realm by Link travelling back in time then logically that version of Hyrule Castle is no longer under threat. It was shown in MM flashback in a peaceful state and we know by that time in the original OoT timeline it was already destroyed by Ganon.

1. Do the time travel logics of Majora's Mask apply to the ending of Ocarina of Time, thus erasing/splitting the adult timeline?

There are different methods of time travel with both games so the logics cannot apply to both endings.

When Link draws the Master Sword for the first time in Ocarina of Time, he has already (in a chronological timeline of events in the way a normal citizen of Hyrule would see them) left to look for Navi and lived out his life (if he hasn't died yet). Basically, it was almost like he had no choice. Link had to succeed in saving Hyrule because he had already succeeded.

He saved both versions of Hyrule and that Link isn't called the 'Hero of Time' for nothing now is he? Zelda explained that some unseen force was protecting him... he probably lived many lives just being trapped in that 3-day loop (Majora's Mask).

Link rides Epona in the adult timeline. Link rides Epona in Majora's Mask. At the end of MM, we see Link riding around the Lost Woods again, and that's all we see. We don't know if Link continues his search for Navi. We don't know if he goes back to Hyrule to take Epona back to Lon Lon Ranch. Basically, in order for Link to ride her in the adult timeline, Epona would somehow have to make her way back to the ranch sometime after MM. The problem lies in the fact that we don't know what becomes of Link and Epona after MM.

The child and adult timeline exist together independently after OoT ending. Zelda said 'the road between times would be closed', she did not ever say 'you must save the past so that this world will disappear forever'. Time paradoxes mean Epona isn't required to be somewhere she doesn't have to be.

If Link had already succeeded in saving Hyrule, then the MS should still be in place. Some event would have to happen that's not described in the canon that would remove the MS from the pedistal in order for the "7 years later" theory to work.

We don't know for sure how the Pedestal of Time works, it is likely the MS didn't leave the adult timeline only Link did and came back with a Master Sword in the past. It is the same cloning nightmare that somehow duplicated the Triforce of Courage. And the Door of Time was closed to the past, not essentially the future Hyrule.

Some then go on to say that it just a result of technology. There was no way for the N64 to record the exact motion of previous 3-day cycles and for it to record the exact times that Giants were freed, etc. In short, the reason we can summon the Giant earlier than when it was freed was because the N64's technology sucked.

What the... Majora's Mask time travel logic is purely conceptual, also linked to an unseen supernatural force in the storyline, and from a game-design perspective was a newly implemented original feature. IT'S SHORTCOMINGS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH N64 TECHNOLOGY. >:3

*storms out of debate*

[mmmmm_PIE]

[Recurring rant]
*Sigh* Even longer than the last one.

It wouldn't be very difficult to spend the rest of my day, breaking your post down quote by quote, and poiting out the minor problems of each. Afterwards, I could even adress some of the single timeline inconcistencies you failed to credity such as development order and Immutability of time.

Of course, were I to do so, you would very liekly return tommorow with a point by point breakdown of my points, and, in yet a longer post, you would present an improved body of information; even longer, more consistent, even less worth the ime it takes to read.

As a theorist who has spent a couple months in such a cycle, I'll be happy to avoid that, but I'd like you to consider the outcomes anyway. All of this would only result in longer posts. Nothing more, nothing less. More information, more induction, fewer contradictions, fewer obvious points of debate, zero progress.

The fact of the matter is that the perceived descprencies between the canon presented in OOT and MM cannot be reconciled by deductive reasoning. There is no perfect solution, because of things such as the magic beans and the Garden scene, such a resolution is impossible.

Any attempt to reason the connection is an induction. An induction, in a world where the continuation os the scientific method is impossible, does not create a hypothesis but an unprovable, nigh undisputable fan fiction.

If you choose to form a personal solution, an answer in a timeline that works for you and you alone, then your sweet. Take th answer you find to be most appealing and run with it, if you stay sharp, you should beable o defend your theory in all circumstance. The information is just that vauge.

But that is not my goal in theorising, my goal is to create a universal timeline, approachable to and agreeable by all theorists. I cannot accomplish that through silly, unening bouts of induction and imagination, and so, for me atleast, this is a non issue.
[/rant]

[Tri-Enforcer]

OOO

[TheAvengerLever]

But that is not my goal in theorising, my goal is to create a universal timeline, approachable to and agreeable by all theorists. I cannot accomplish that through silly, unening bouts of induction and imagination, and so, for me atleast, this is a non issue.
[/rant]

You couldn't accomplish that at all, for that matter. Just like the Americans started political parties, people are always going to have different ideals.

[Showsni]

Being unable to read the spoilers yet (but I'm getting there!) probably hinders me from arguing effectively, but here goes...
As an adherent to the "travelling in spirit" idea, I believe that OoT future does still happen, and that Link returns after all the other times he's returned. It does have some problems (e.g. items) but also accounts for some others - your points on Epona, for example, and the MS.
R.E. Ganon holding Hyrule castle - yes, it surrenders when he attacks seven years ago, but I don't think he holds it for long. His only goal was to obtain the Ocarina of Time, remember, so that he can get the triforce. He doesn't care about holding the castle, since he knows he will be able to easily crush it once he gets the triforce. Remember it's being guarded by Hyrulian soldiers still when you return. An invading force wouldn't leave them their weapons.

[mmmmm_PIE]

You couldn't accomplish that at all, for that matter. Just like the Americans started political parties, people are always going to have different ideals.

Nope, everybody beleives that the leaves are green and the sky is blue.
The fact that people argue about where these things came from and why there here and what we should do about it, but none of that argument chqnges these simple facts.

Timelinewise, I'm interested in the facts. The other stuff is hradly worth fighting over.

Edited by mmmmm_PIE, 11 December 2006 - 11:33 PM.

[BourgeoisJerry]

R.E. Ganon holding Hyrule castle - yes, it surrenders when he attacks seven years ago, but I don't think he holds it for long. His only goal was to obtain the Ocarina of Time, remember, so that he can get the triforce. He doesn't care about holding the castle, since he knows he will be able to easily crush it once he gets the triforce. Remember it's being guarded by Hyrulian soldiers still when you return. An invading force wouldn't leave them their weapons.

I always took it still being guarded to mean that it hadn't surrendered yet. Seriously, short is a relative term that could very well have meant weeks, maybe even months. Do you really think Ganondorf, without the Triforce of Power, was capable of taking Hyrule Castle? I'm not saying the Gerudo would get swept aside like gnats, but I seriously don't think they'd be able to take Hyrule Castle, especially in just one day and without their leader.

Edited by BourgeoisJerry, 12 December 2006 - 12:17 AM.

[MikePetersSucks]

I would just like to know what people think about this debate. To clarify for those who don't understand the question, at the end of Ocarina of Time after Ganon's defeat, Zelda sends Link back to his own time using the Ocarina of Time. When Link arrives at his time as a child, are the events of the adult timeline erased (or at the very least split off), or do they happen 7 years later?

Split off, personally.

[Arturo]

It splits of and he arrives after Link drew the MS.

One thing.... next time, please don't put erasing as the same option as deleted. It makes me feel... bad

Edited by Arturo, 13 December 2006 - 09:07 AM.

[Travuko]

I agree with what mmmmm_PIE said. And if I understand his point correctly, Vertiboy ideas are just personal interpretation of the events in question. I'm not going to say I would probably agree with mmmmm_PIE if he had spent the rest of his day breaking Vertiboy's post quote by quote because I liked his ideas. It made sense. But, to put into perspective what a lot of people have already said on this board, I'm going to share an idea I have.

There are three levels of theorizing here.

1) Just the facts. That’s taking all the events mentioned in the canon and putting them into a logical order based solely on facts. This is hardly a timeline theory as it only states the chronological order of events. It often takes the form of "This Game -> followed by This Game -> followed by This Game -> etc..."

2) Filling in the holes. This is where one uses deductive reasoning, (and very, very little inductive reasoning because these games do require it at some points,) to fill in some parts that are left unexplained because the information just isn't there. 'Why did this happen, well because this person has to have been here because that is the only way to explain why other event happened.' This could be considered a complete time line because everything would fit nicely and it's based mostly on fact. I believe Vertiboy's ideas fit here best.

3) Using your imagination. This is where fan fiction comes into play. This is the part where one makes up part of the story in order to make sense of it all. And there's nothing wrong with that, it makes the story fun. But, everybody will have something to say against that idea because the part the author makes up doesn't come from the canon and therefore it wrong. And that's true, if it isn't in the canon, then it is fan fiction. And fan fiction is what most true theorist are trying to avoid.

There is a very good and more detailed look on how one should theorize on another post by non other than mmmmm_PIE here A correct method for theorizing (His is several posts down, I don't know how to jump to a specific post.)

But comming back to what he said earlier:

...my goal is to create a universal timeline, approachable to and agreeable by all theorists.

and

Timelinewise, I'm interested in the facts. The other stuff is hradly worth fighting over.

Ok then mmmmm_PIE, what is your theory, currently?

[Duke Serkol]

Nice polls. Just wanted to say I voted the first option for both questions.

[Vertiboy]

I think that I will let the numbers speak for themselves.

Anyway, let me put it this way. There are some people who do not believe that the Holocaust during World War II happened. There are photographs of the camps and the people, first hand accounts from people in the camps and soldiers who liberated the camps, etc. Despite this, people think that it's one elaborate hoax. What kind of person would choose, despite the evidence against it, an option that makes a number of assumptions instead of a much easier option that is consistent with the evidence? If you think that adult OoT happens 7 years later, you are similar to those people. I am not saying that you hate people of the Jewish race. I am not saying that you are a Nazi or a certain type of Muslim. I am saying that your personal beliefs and expectations of the way things should be are preventing you from clearly looking at the evidence and coming to the best conclusion.

You are right to say that this is a personal interpretation of the evidence. It just so happens that my personal interpretation of the evidence is the one that math, logic, and common sense support. Those are three very powerful allies in any debate.

I don't think that Miyamoto spelled everything out for us on purpose. He expected us to use common sense and come to a conclusion based on that. Miyamoto expects us not to think as if we have a learning disability and start thinking like a rational human being. He put the evidence into the games. You can either accept that evidence, or make up your own evidence. To each his own, but not every opinion is equal. Some are supported by fact, and others are supported by fan fiction. Come to a reasonable conclusion based on that.

[mmmmm_PIE]

the numbers speak for themselves.

Tis a biast poiling sample, the same question asked of Zelda Universe would have been atleast 14/3 the other way. Other sites would have had a bigger split (I'd guess GameFAQs 10/7 for split, Hylia 10/7 for single). Whether you like it or not, LA has a reputation for bias against the ST.

personal interpretation of the evidence is the one that math, logic, and common sense support

You used no math, the mechanics are logically fallible (as evidenced by the Windmill/Magic Bean conflict), and the ideqa of common sence is completely personal. An STer could say exactly the same thing (and they have done so)

What kind of person would choose, despite the evidence against it, an option that makes a number of assumptions instead of a much easier option that is consistent with the evidence?

Ya see, here is where it seems you fail to understand the scientific method. The Holocaust is not factual history because of the evidence; We have evidence because the Holocaust is fatucal history...

Let me use another example.

In Universe (A), an event, let's call it the "Exocost" occurs, and result in a physical body of evidence.
In Universe (B), a group of people manufacture an exact replica of a body of evidence suggesting an event called the "Exocost".

YOU enter one of the universes, but are not sure which, only that there is a 50% chance of it being A and a 50% chance of it being B. You are then given a bo of evidence and asked to tell me of the Exocost actually occured... what is your answer?

Edited by mmmmm_PIE, 17 December 2006 - 08:59 PM.

[BourgeoisJerry]

I find it interesting that he should use the word common sense when he keeps saying things the defy common sense.

To some random person witnessing the sealing the way he claims it happened in the child timeline, it would not appear as if Link came from nowhere and sealed Ganondorf with the Master Sword (the backstory of Wind Waker doesn't really say he sealed him with the Master Sword, just says that he sealed him and was wielding the Master Sword) because there was no observer within the Temple of Time. At most a random observer would see Link enter the Temple of Time, Ganondorf follow, then Link exit.

Using the same time travel logic as Majora's Mask, the Triforce of Courage and the Master Sword would not be cloned, nor would anything else. The past versions of them may teleport to where Link is, but the future versions would remain in the future.

The Door of Time not being closed after either ending of Ocarina of Time makes absolutely no sense. Saying the Door of Time being closed is an assumption may technically be true, but it's very easy to assume that Zelda, who had the Ocarina of Time and just told Link to close the Door of Time in the past, would close the Door of Time in the future.

There are probably others I'm forgetting at the moment, but I'm not going to sit around trying to remember them. Oh, right, one more before I go. The Wind Waker backstory saying that "Wielding the blade of evil's bane, he sealed the dark one away and gave the land light," is like somebody saying that "Frodo Baggins destroyed the Ring of Power." It isn't technically true, but do you really think that detail would be technically correct in all the songs and tales of Frodo Baggins and Samwise the Brave for centuries to come?

Edited by BourgeoisJerry, 18 December 2006 - 07:00 PM.

[Showsni]

I'm curious as to how many believe they were erased, and how many believe they were split off. Combining those choices into one option changes a few things. How many people believe that the future events never happen at all?

[Arturo]

I sincerely hope no-one, since they are clearly described in TWW...

[Wolf O'Donnell]

I'm curious as to how many believe they were erased, and how many believe they were split off. Combining those choices into one option changes a few things. How many people believe that the future events never happen at all?

No one with a functioning brain, I hope.

The future events have already happened. You can't undo something that's happened.

[Duke Serkol]

Well, you can in Majora's Mask (not that I believe this is the case, but you know...)

[Vertiboy]

No one with a functioning brain, I hope.

The future events have already happened. You can't undo something that's happened.

As Duke Serkol has said, you can do just that in Majora's Mask. You can also do it in Oracle of Ages.

If we were talking about real life, then no, you could not undo something that has already happened. That is where the arguement you mentions fails. The Zelda universe is imaginary. If Link takes Doc Brown's DeLorian to the past in order to erase it, then so be it. In a fictional universe, we can have paradoxes in time travel, like we do in Ocarina of Time, MM, and OoA because it is not real. Not everything has to consistently come together in order for the fictional Zelda universe to exist. If the adult events of OoT are erased when Link is sent back, but Ganondorf is still sealed regardless, then so be it. If those events are erased, but they are still remembered in A Link to the Past, then so be it.

Think about what you are saying. You are saying that someone believes in a paradox in a fictional universe, so they do not have a functioning brain. Fictionaluniverse. In a fictional universe, anything is possible. We cannot apply what we believe to be the time travel logics of reality to a fictional Zelda game. That is not in any way, shape, or form possible.

[Hero of Winds]

Think about what you are saying. You are saying that someone believes in a paradox in a fictional universe, so they do not have a functioning brain. Fictionaluniverse. In a fictional universe, anything is possible. We cannot apply what we believe to be the time travel logics of reality to a fictional Zelda game. That is not in any way, shape, or form possible.

So then why are you so adamant about applying mathematics and other forms of "real world logic" to theorizing about this fictional universe?

[Nimiety]

In a fictional universe, we can have paradoxes in time travel, like we do in Ocarina of Time, MM, and OoA because it is not real. Not everything has to consistently come together in order for the fictional Zelda universe to exist.

This is true. Any so-called paradoxes found within any of the time-travel based games are the result of the developers not thinking through the consequences of their game-play mechanics. Since the mechanism isn't consistent between games, and the results aren't consistent throughout games, we can't apply a consistent rule of causality.

However...

If the adult events of OoT are erased when Link is sent back, but Ganondorf is still sealed regardless, then so be it.

This is cherry picking. This is not a result of the game developers intending one result but ultimately implying another. This is you playing what-if games and telling just-so stories. You're adding new logical inconsistencies, and justifying it by saying "if the devs don't have to make their universe consistent, then I'm free to muck it up some more".

If those events are erased, but they are still remembered in A Link to the Past, then so be it.

Or, alternatively, they're not erased. Or they are erased, but other events happen. We just don't know, and we can't know. Nintendo hasn't told that story. When they've been pushed to clarify their intentions for the ending of OoT, they've just sort of shrugged. It's their story to tell, and so far, they're not telling it.

Think about what you are saying. You are saying that someone believes in a paradox in a fictional universe, so they do not have a functioning brain. Fictionaluniverse. In a fictional universe, anything is possible. We cannot apply what we believe to be the time travel logics of reality to a fictional Zelda game. That is not in any way, shape, or form possible.

Now, all that said, you're right. We can't apply what we believe to be "the time travel logics of reality" to fiction. We can't do it for a couple of reasons, the most notable of which is that there are no "time travel logics of reality". Time travel into the past always produces a causality paradox, since the future ends up in the past. In reality, we use this as a fundamental argument against this kind of time travel.

Another reason is that the sentence

The future events have already happened. You can't undo something that's happened.

doesn't make much sense. "The future events have already happened" places the future in the past. That will make anyone's brain cramp if they think about it long enough.

The best argument against the erasure of the future events is this one:

I sincerely hope no-one, since they are clearly described in TWW..

TWW goes to pretty great lengths to tie its story to that of OoT. Greater lengths, even than OoT went to tie its story to that of aLttP.

In fact, as far as I can tell, neither tWW nor aLttP necessarily spawn from the "child" timeline of OoT. They both reference the adult timeline. Having it disappear just requires adding complexity to the whole situation, and increasing the number of logical inconsistencies in the Zelda universe. Occam says no.

[Vertiboy]

In fact, as far as I can tell, neither tWW nor aLttP necessarily spawn from the "child" timeline of OoT. They both reference the adult timeline. Having it disappear just requires adding complexity to the whole situation, and increasing the number of logical inconsistencies in the Zelda universe. Occam says no.

That is the problem with this. There are problems with both theories no matter what.

The difference is that one theory only has one problem, while the other has 7.

If it will please the Occam Razor Diety, we could even add an assumption to the "Erased/Split" theory, saying that something happened in order for the events of the adult timeline to be remembered in the child timeline. All the problems that are started by erasing the events of adult OoT can be fixed by one more assumption. Even then, it is still 2 problems vs. 8 problems.

2 problems < 8 problems.

Erased/Split > 7 Years Later.

Occam says yes.

Plus, I explained in the initial post about how the Hero of Time legend in TWW is more related to events in the child timeline than events in the adult timeline. TWW may be more connected to OoT in general than ALttP is, but it is more connected to the events of the child timeline than anything else.

Edited by Vertiboy, 31 December 2006 - 08:27 PM.

[BourgeoisJerry]

Plus, I explained in the initial post about how the Hero of Time legend in TWW is more related to events in the child timeline than events in the adult timeline. TWW may be more connected to OoT in general than ALttP is, but it is more connected to the events of the child timeline than anything else.

Not really. The common observer wasn't in the temple of time, so the details of Wind Waker's backstory don't really match up with the idea that Link simply returned and placed the Master Sword in the pedistal while Ganondorf was in the Sacred Realm.

With its strength at his command, he
spread darkness across the kingdom.

Common observer wouldn't observe this.

But then, when all hope had died, and the
hour of doom seemed at hand...

All hope sure died fast if Link sealed Ganondorf away in the Sacred Realm before he ever left.

...a young boy clothed in green appeared
as if from nowhere.

Since the common observer didn't head into the Temple of Time at just the right moment to observe Link 'appearing out of nowhere,' the common observer would just see Link entering the Temple of Time, Ganondorf Following, then Link walking out.

Wielding the blade of evil's bane, he sealed
the dark one away and gave the land light.

This quote doesn't really say Link used the Master Sword to seal Ganon away, it just says that he was wielding the Master Sword and he sealed Ganon away (not technically true, but about as true as somebody claiming 'Bush' did something that was technically done by American troops.)

[Amrod Minyatur]

I believe the timeline split and that he arrived before he met Zelda for the first time.