254 replies to this topic

[lord-of-shadow]

http://www.zeldalege...n=updates&s=908

The article isn't as good as the last one in my mind; it's not as strong, didn't convince me nearly as well. That's partly due to the length of it, I'm sure. Length is anathema to strength when you're trying convince someone of something, in my experience. And the logic isn't quite as good, plain and simple; there were several times where they examined something, looked at two explanations, disproved one, leaving the option that supported their theory... proclaimed it proof or strong evidence, all the while ignoring a third or fourth explanation. And then they might go ahead and build their other logic on these not-quite-strong conclusions.

Plus I disagree with trying to build a complete timeline in the first place, these days, but that's just me and I won't go into it any further...

[Fyxe]

Ahhhhhh-*falls asleep*

Imma too young and old for this at the same time. o.o

[Hero of Slime]

I don't like how they only go into their version of the split timeline as if it is the only possible explination. There are many other versions, which I think are better than this one.

Edited by The Zol, 16 October 2006 - 09:42 PM.

[mmmmm_PIE]

And the logic isn't quite as good, plain and simple; there were several times where they examined something, looked at two explanations, disproved one, leaving the option that supported their theory... proclaimed it proof or strong evidence, all the while ignoring a third or fourth

Well of course, half harted inductive reasoning has always been a staple of any OOT/MM connection theory.

Anyway, a big ol' article requires a bid ol disection; I'll put a nice rebuttal togeather over the next couple of days. In the mean; here's my favorite part of the article;

For all those who still deny the OoT+ALttP connection, davogones, on his last Storyline article, wrote a fantastic defence of the OoT-AlttP connection, resolving all the inconsistencies and showing that the creators implied OoT to be AlttP’s prequel

the Sealing War account in ALttP seems to be a mixture of real and invented events. It's possible that this "war" was made up by Young Zelda to explain to the commoners what had happened to Ganondorf in OoT's Child half.

Made me lol long time...

Edited by mmmmm_PIE, 17 October 2006 - 08:59 AM.

[Arturo]

http://www.zeldalege...n=updates&s=908

The article isn't as good as the last one in my mind; it's not as strong, didn't convince me nearly as well. That's partly due to the length of it, I'm sure. Length is anathema to strength when you're trying convince someone of something, in my experience. And the logic isn't quite as good, plain and simple; there were several times where they examined something, looked at two explanations, disproved one, leaving the option that supported their theory... proclaimed it proof or strong evidence, all the while ignoring a third or fourth explanation. And then they might go ahead and build their other logic on these not-quite-strong conclusions.

Plus I disagree with trying to build a complete timeline in the first place, these days, but that's just me and I won't go into it any further...

I perfectly understand your opinion. But this article is not the same kind of article as the last one. In this what we tried to do is to back the Split Timeline theory, which we consider a fact, with proofs from OoT and the comparison between TWW and ALttP, which is, BTW the part I am most proud of. And I know we have left many things out, and have not backed up most things. That's because of three reasons:

a)The article is long enough as it is
b)We didn't concentrate much on details, because our opbjective was plain and siomple the Split Timeline.
c)Those are things I have left for another article.

Ahhhhhh-*falls asleep*

Imma too young and old for this at the same time. o.o

Imagine writing it

This is a shortened version, though, at one point I think we had more than 16 pages.

But the basic text was written in a day or two. Blame my boring personal life.

I don't like how they only go into their version of the split timeline as if it is the only possible explination. There are many other versions, which I think are better than this one.

Well, as I have said we had one clear objective. If we had spoken more about the other versions, we would have had it twice as long as it is.

Well of course, half harted inductive reasoning has always been a staple of any OOT/MM connection theory.

Anyway, a big ol' article requires a bid ol disection; I'll put a nice rebuttal togeather over the next couple of days. In the mean; here's my favorite part of the article;
Made me lol long time...

I am not really smart today, but what do you mean?

I think you are talking about the apparent contradictioon of both statements:

Well, I can tell you it's apparent. But I am too lazy now to ellaborate on this.

[Hero of Slime]

If we had spoken more about the other versions, we would have had it twice as long as it is.

You still should not make generalizations like that. Your article made it seem like all split timelines involve trancending and that all single timelines involve the future of OoT being eraced.

[MikePetersSucks]

Now, many people think the Zelda timeline has to be one single, straightforward line because the idea of a timeline split is not scientifically backed up. But in fact, multiple timelines are nothing else than parallel universes, which according to quantum mechanics may exist in reality. Also, Stephen Hawking, the most well known cosmologist of our time, has explained in his books that one of the possible consequences of travelling to the past is creating a split in time: an unaffected dimension and another one, affected by the time travel.

LOL. That has N-O-T-H-I-N-G to do with Zelda, a magic-based universe.

The rest of the article is kind've ok.

[Arturo]

You still should not make generalizations like that. Your article made it seem like all split timelines involve trancending and that all single timelines involve the future of OoT being eraced.

We presented all the different possibiities. And said which one our PERSONAL election was. And about the single thing, we had arguments agains both conceptions of the Single Timeline, the one that says that OoT was erased (which is kinda unlogical) and the one that says it wasn't (that would mean in turn that Link wouldn't come back from Termina).

LOL. That has N-O-T-H-I-N-G to do with Zelda, a magic-based universe.

The rest of the article is kind've ok.

We had that just to say that Split Timelines are not something that impossible, since they are possible in the REAL, non-magic based world. That was only for the people that didn't accept it just because they thought that dividing time is a stupid idea. And note that in OoT what provokes the Split is Link traveling forward in time, not back, as Hawking says.

[mmmmm_PIE]

And note that in OoT what provokes the Split is Link traveling forward in time, not back, as Hawking says.

Here, again, is what the ZOL is talking about; many DTers would vehemently disagree, and you don't even bother to back your statement. Why does Link's travelling forward cause the split?

[Arturo]

We backed it on the article. Anyway, I will repeat. Nothing of what you do in the Child Universe changes anything on the Adult one. To give you an example: Nabooru is already an Iron Knuckle, even if you haven't done the Child part of the temple:
One of the carpenters:

The leader of the gang of thieves is Nabooru. She is experimenting with brainwashing many people at the ruins in the desert.

When Nabooru was a lone wolf thief, she never stole from the weak, but...
Now, Nabooru's gang of thieves stands for cruelty and brutality. She claims to be a chivalrous robber, but...no way!

And don't mention things like Magic Beans and all those things:
1st) Because they are not Storyline important things like the Nabooru thing

2nd)Because it's game mechanics

3rd) Because it would be impossible for the game to know wich chests you are going to open, before you do so, for example.

[Hero of Slime]

(that would mean in turn that Link wouldn't come back from Termina).

This is not true either.

[Arturo]

In TWW it's said that Link didn't come back. If there was a Sinmgle Timeline that would mean in turn that Link wouldn't come back to Hyrule.

[Hero of Slime]

TWW said that the Hero never Returned to stop Ganon, not that Link never came back to Hyrule. We know that Link came back to hyrule based on the neding of MM. It's possible that Ganon came back many years after OoT, the Link from OoT might have already been dead. It's also a possibility that Link returned to the world of Hyrule but continued his journey.

If it were a single timeline it would just mean that Link was not around when Ganon escaped from his seal, not that Link was still trapped in Termina.

[LionHarted]

In TWW it's said that Link didn't come back. If there was a Sinmgle Timeline that would mean in turn that Link wouldn't come back to Hyrule.

Given that Ganon doesn't reappear in Hyrule until at least TP, which happens decades after OoT's end, OoT/MM Link would either be either
1) dead OR 2) too old to fight;
whether or not he comes back to Hyrule is irrelevant. Whether or not he appears to fight, however, is relevant, and we do have a Hero in TP--one who looks exactly the same and has the same name (assuming that the name Link is part of canon), even. So there's some other, more complicated factor at work here.

While I understand some of what you were trying to convey, I think (no offense meant to anyone) that the presentation was very, very ineffective. Looking back at the span of time over which it was written, it definitely shows that you (Arturo) only took 2 days to compose what should have been at least a week-long project.

For one, you left out entirely a description of how the split comes about. Secondly, your argument essentially caved in on itself with the comments about "rewinding the flow of time" resulting in a single timeline in MM, since this is exactly the diction used to describe time travel in OoT (you even supplied the quotes--how kind of you). Thirdly, your analyzation of the developer quotes was poor at best. There were some very good points in that article--for example, you're right that the seven-year difference in the time period between the end of OoT and TWW is negligible, and that MM time travel works in the same manner as "Groundhog Day" (did you pull that one from Zelda.com, too?)--but most of your points--for example, the point that "[since] TWW follows OoT's Adult ending, [that] meant as a consequence that ALttP has to be after the Child ending and after MM"--were remarkably unsupported. You did a good job of showing me why you think a split is important, but hardly convinced me. In fact, you gave me a lot of ammo to use against your theory, like Aonuma's referring to the endings as taking place in "different time periods" (i.e., past and future), and you never did anything to show how those quotes could be used to promote your theory.

Edited by LionHarted, 18 October 2006 - 12:27 PM.

[Arturo]

The game just says that he didn't come back from his journey. The fact that they expect him to come back even a long time after Link defeated Ganondorf, proves that they expected him to come back. They ahdn't seen him die, they believed him to be immortal. That means they haven't seen OoT Link die. Why? Because he didn' come back.

[LionHarted]

The game just says that he didn't come back from his journey.

Where? I only recall it saying that he "did not appear."

The fact that they expect him to come back even a long time after Link defeated Ganondorf, proves that they expected him to come back. They ahdn't seen him die, they believed him to be immortal.

So the fact that the King of Red Lions expects to find the Hero of Time hundreds of years later, but instead finds TWW Link, the Hero of Winds, who fulfills the very purpose that the King was literally destined to guide the Hero he sought towards is totally irrelevant, right?

Edited by LionHarted, 18 October 2006 - 12:11 PM.

[Arturo]

Where? I only recall it saying that he "did not appear."

So the fact that the King of Red Lions expects to find the Hero of Time hundreds of years later, but instead finds TWW Link, the Hero of Winds, who fulfills the very purpose that the King was literally destined to guide the Hero he sought towards is totally irrelevant, right?

They expected the very same Hero to come back. This is prved bny the fact they expect TWW Link to speak Ancient Hylian, something he doesn't even though he's the Hero of Time reborn, as Ganondorf says.

[LionHarted]

They expected the very same Hero to come back. This is prved bny the fact they expect TWW Link to speak Ancient Hylian, something he doesn't even though he's the Hero of Time reborn, as Ganondorf says.

So they were wrong. This proves absolutely nothing with regards to your argument; in fact, it makes it meaningless, as it doesn't matter what the people expected--their expectations were unrealistic either way.

[Arturo]

The Great Deku Tree expected that. And that, proves that they believed him to be immortal (everyone except Ganon thought so) and that proves that they didn't see him die. And that proves that Link wasn't in Hyrule when he died.

Edited by Arturo, 18 October 2006 - 12:17 PM.

[LionHarted]

Goodness.

How do you know that he doesn't later go to Ordon Village to start a family (TP Link)? And I don't even get the point of your "they didn't see him die" argument. He can die without them seeing him die in Hyrule or outside of Hyrule or on the moon or wherever the hell else he wants to die. It doesn't matter.

Edited by LionHarted, 18 October 2006 - 12:23 PM.

[Hero of Slime]

The Haro of Time was a time traveler. The people probably thought he would come to save them by traveling to their time.

The fact that no one saw him die does not mean that he did not get out of Termina, we saw him get out of Termina in MM's ending. He might have escaped Termina but went to some other place in the world of Hyrule

[Arturo]

He's strongly tied to Princess Zelda in MM:

Even though it was only a short
time, I feel like I've known you
forever.

I'll never forget the days we
spent together in Hyrule...

And I believe in my heart that a
day will come when I shall meet
you again...

Until that day comes, please...
Take this...

I cannot imagine him going anywhere apart from Hyrule Castle.

[Hero of Slime]

You are making a very big assumption, nothing actually says that he certainly will meet Zelda again, just that Zelda believes it. Even if he did return to hyrule castle when he finished his quest, what makes you think he would stay and die there? He could return to Hyrule castle for a while and then leave again for some other part of the world. If the people see the Hero of Time leave for a while they might believe that he is in the future.

Edited by The Zol, 18 October 2006 - 03:34 PM.

[Arturo]

They don't remember him ever coming back. And also, Zelda has prophetic powers.

And why should he go around the world?

Also, in TWW Hylian introduction it says that Link left Hyrule "through the flows of time" that's not the way he left in MM. He left riding a horse, that's not what I would call "the currents of time"

Edited by Arturo, 18 October 2006 - 03:43 PM.

[Jumbie]

Looking back at the span of time over which it was written, it definitely shows that you (Arturo) only took 2 days to compose what should have been at least a week-long project.

What the heck..!! Tell me, something wrong with you?! In spite of the fact that until now only Arturo was available to defend OUR (his and my collaboration article), it's been made very very clear that I'm also one to address.
Secondly, what the heck is with this "2 days" assumption?! You don't wanna know how long we've worked on that project, you really don't. "Week-long"... Heh, year-long would be more precise..!

and that MM time travel works in the same manner as "Groundhog Day" (did you pull that one from Zelda.com, too?)

Um no, not to my knowledge... I've never really browsed Zelda.com. It's just that I've watched the film years ago and always have had it in mind while playing MM.

most of your points--for example, the point that "[since]TWW follows OoT's Adult ending, [that] meant as a consequence that ALttP has to be after the Child ending and after MM"--were remarkably unsupported.

Excuse me, how else could we have supported that than by proving that TWW and ALttP CANNOT co-exist in the same timeline?!

[Hero of Slime]

Your assumption is still that Link would return to the same places in Hyrule he visited before. He might have left termina but continued to travel around the world to look fro the friend he lost. Even if he did find that friend nothing actually says that he would return to the castle. Zelda believes they will meet, even if you think that this is a definite must, what says they will meet in the castle?

The people who said that the hero never returned were the ones living when Ganon came back. If this was many generations after OoT they would not really know where the hero went or how many times he came back during his life time. They would only know that he did not come to save them, which they expected him to do because he was a time traveler, not because they thought he was still alive.

I can't speak for all single timelines but in my single timeline the adult ending is not eraced. After Link sealed Ganon, he did leave by time travel. Which is what is remembered by the people who wrote TWW's BS, as this is the last time he appears in hyrule. It is because they remember him traveling through time that the people living when Ganon returns believe that he will come and save them.

[LionHarted]

He's strongly tied to Princess Zelda in MM:
I cannot imagine him going anywhere apart from Hyrule Castle.

The end of that quote--that suggests that he will return the Ocarina--could easily be referring to her meeting him again in the OoT Future. Since we never see MM Link come into contact with Zelda again, this is the only real option we have that doesn't include events that never happen.

You are making a very big assumption, nothing actually says that he certainly will meet Zelda again, just that Zelda believes it.

We are led to believe in OoT that Zelda's power of prophecy is always accurate.

Excuse me, how else could we have supported that than by proving that TWW and ALttP CANNOT co-exist in the same timeline?!

Which would be nice, but you didn't accomplish this at all. Looking at the in-game backstories to ALttP and TWW, it seems that they do a nice job of representing two sides to the same story:

This is but one of the legends of which the people speak... Long ago, there existed a kingdom where a golden power lay hidden. It was a prosperous land blessed with green forests, tall mountains, and peace. But one day a man of great evil found the golden power and took it for himself... With its strength at his command, he spread darkness across the kingdom. But then, when all hope had died, and the hour of doom seemed at hand...a young boy clothed in green appeared as if from nowhere. Wielding the blade of evil's bane, he sealed the dark one away and gave the land light.

Long ago, in the beautiful kingdom of Hyrule surrounded by mountains and forests... legends told of an omnipotent and omniscient Golden Power that resided in a hidden land. Many people aggressively sought to enter the hidden Golden Land... But no one ever returned. One day evil power began to flow from the Golden Land... So the King commanded seven Sages to seal the gate to the Land of the Golden Power. That seal should have remained for all time...

If you look only at the bolded parts of the intro stories to TWW and ALttP--they're shockingly similar. Now, given, one mentions Ganon directly, while the other mentions "many people aggressively" searching for the entrance, but we know that the two go hand-in-hand in the Seal War story. It's only the emphasis placed on the resolution to the problem that differ--one focuses on the Hero and ignores the Sages, the other focuses on the Sages and ignores the Hero.

Edited by LionHarted, 18 October 2006 - 05:58 PM.

[Jumbie]

But you still haven't explained why the two accounts focus on different things.
We, however, have shown that ALttP's legend remembers many more things than TWW's, which means that ALttP has to happen earlier than TWW in any timeline, single or split.
The most logical reason for the striking similarity of ALttP's and TWW's legends has to be that a similar account was passed on in the two timelines, differing only regarding the Hero, Sages and Knights.

[LionHarted]

But you still haven't explained why the two accounts focus on different things.

Possibly because the Sages had all been killed by TWW, and the Hero tradition was at the center of the society (explains the emphasis on the Hero in TWW), and, by ALttP, the "Maiden descendents of the Sages" tradition had been established, and the Hero tradition had vanished (explains the emphasis on Sages/Maidens in ALttP).

We, however, have shown that ALttP's legend remembers many more things than TWW's, which means that ALttP has to happen earlier than TWW in any timeline, single or split.

Oh, really? Like what?

The most logical reason for the striking similarity of ALttP's and TWW's legends has to be that a similar account was passed on in the two timelines, differing only regarding the Hero, Sages and Knights.

How can the Child timeline have an account of events that never occur?

[Jumbie]

Possibly because the Sages had all been killed by TWW, and the Hero tradition was at the center of the society (explains the emphasis on the Hero in TWW), and, by ALttP, the "Maiden descendents of the Sages" tradition had been established, and the Hero tradition had vanished (explains the emphasis on Sages/Maidens in ALttP).

It can work, but I don't quite like it.

Oh, really? Like what?

Oh, there's lots of things that TWW seems to have forgotten already, while ALttP mysteriously remembers them.
Take the Creation Myth. Take the forging of the Master Sword. Take the fierce wars before OoT. Ganondorf is mentioned by name, and said to have entered the Sacred Realm, all of which TWW doesn't know.

How can the Child timeline have an account of events that never occur?

Very easy: Link travelled back to the past and told Young Zelda the whole story of how Ganon was sealed by the Seven Sages and the "Knights of Hyrule" (which would be a metaphor for Link himself, as he isn't very keen on going down into history, as portrayed in the ending of MM and also OoT's future ending).
MM's intro legend states that the story was passed on in the Royal Family, so Young Link *must* have told it to Young Zelda before MM happened.