254 replies to this topic

[LionHarted]

We have Ganondorf attacking Hyrule Castle, Impa and Zelda fleeing...

Zelda and Impa clearly flee long before Hyrule Castle is attacked (at least, before the attack that destroys it), since Hyrule Castle continues to be accessible all throughout the playable Child portion of OoT.

Since Zelda told us to lay the MS and close the DoT and the DoT was open, it's clear that Link comes back to a time where he has already opened the DoT.

Of course, you're assuming that Link laid the sword to rest and closed the Door in the past, when clearly the sword was already there when he got back and closing the Door would have prevented the future from ever occurring. I do not share this belief. I believe that he laid the sword to rest and closed the Door in the future, so that the sword could be there for TP Link to claim in TP (which is strangely impossible in a double timeline, in which he takes the sword into the Child timeline, making it impossible for TP/TWW Link to ever obtain). I believe it is very well possible that he arrived in the past at a time long before Ganondorf ever made his move for the Ocarina of Time. It is also possible that Zelda returned to the castle for a short time after Ganondorf entered the Sacred Realm for whatever reason.

This can only mean something: that Ganondorf is not around anymore: he has been sealed. So the thing is done.

No, I'm sorry, there are more possibilities than the one that supports your conclusion.

Remember also that Ganondorf labels Zelda a "traitor", which means that she certainly resisted him at some point after he became the King of Evil. This could mean that she, as a Sage and member of the Royal Family, led the Hylian Knights into battle against Ganondorf's forces when they attacked the castle--which means she would have had to be there. Quite frankly, we don't know how much time passed between Ganon entering the Sacred Realm and the attack on the Royal Palace. Certainly long enough time for them to search for a Hero--a Hero who happened to be spending his time with Zelda all the while, no doubt.

But only the Royal Family knows it because those things happened in the Adult Timeline.

If there is a double timeline, and Link's victory happened in the Adult timeline, no one in the Child timeline knows about it. If anyone does, then it happened as a result of your own invention. Guess what?--a timeline-transcending seal is not the canonical solution. It's a conclusion you and your cronies came to to explain your theory.

Edited by LionHarted, 22 October 2006 - 03:13 PM.

[Arturo]

ALARM!!!! Contradiction of canon!!!

Ganondorf attacks Hyrule Castle and because of this, Zelda and Impa flee:

On that day seven years ago, Ganondorf suddenly attacked... and Hyrule Castle surrendered after a short time.
Ganondorf's target was one of the keys to the Sacred Realm...the hidden treasure of the Royal Family... The Ocarina of Time!
My duty bound me to take Zelda out of Ganondorf's reach. When last I saw you, as we made our escape from the castle, you were just a lad...
Now I see that you have become a fine hero...

And the Royal Familty would know it if Link told Zelda, something that is really possible.

[LionHarted]

You're right; canon contradicts itself. It's entirely possible that the text was translated in the wrong order, or that something is missing, but it's obvious that Ganondorf doesn't actually succeed in capturing Hyrule Castle until long after Zelda escapes with the Ocarina of Time.

Also, it might be possible, but Link never speaks.

[MikePetersSucks]

What he meant is that YOU contradicted canon >_>

[LionHarted]

What he meant is that YOU contradicted canon >_>

Ganon didn't destroy Hyrule Castle until AFTER Child OoT. That's a fact, and that's what I said. If I'm contradicting canon, canon is contradicting itself.

Edited by LionHarted, 22 October 2006 - 07:11 PM.

[Fyxe]

Ganon attacked Hyrule Castle once, killed at least one soldier at some point (the soldier in the alley that 90% of players probably never saw) and forced Impa and Zelda to flee.

As we know, Hyrule Castle was obviously not destroyed by this, or even damaged in any significant way. It isn't until an undisclosed period of time after Ganondorf enters the Sacred Realm that he returns to destroy it entirely.

[Arturo]

It doesn't matter whether the Cstle is destroyed or not. What matters is that, since Hyrule Castle isn't anymore a safe place for Zelda, she doesn't come back. So in the Child Ending of OoT Ganondorf CANNOT be around anymore, because while he's around, Zelda is not safe in a castle that "surrended after a short time"

[Alardonin]

Of course, you're assuming that Link laid the sword to rest and closed the Door in the past, when clearly the sword was already there when he got back and closing the Door would have prevented the future from ever occurring. I do not share this belief. I believe that he laid the sword to rest and closed the Door in the future, so that the sword could be there for TP Link to claim in TP (which is strangely impossible in a double timeline, in which he takes the sword into the Child timeline, making it impossible for TP/TWW Link to ever obtain). I believe it is very well possible that he arrived in the past at a time long before Ganondorf ever made his move for the Ocarina of Time. It is also possible that Zelda returned to the castle for a short time after Ganondorf entered the Sacred Realm for whatever reason.

There is nothing wrong in not sharing the belief of the split timeline! But your making an assumption in itself and you are also showing that your not fully taking into acount what Arturo and Jumbie article tried to tell us. Regardless of your accordance to it or not. To be honest for some time now ive been noticing some stuff that is opening some assumptions in my head. Let's see not too long ago i made a huge assumption regarding the WW shield and i know you have seen it since you presented an interesting piece right after it. If taking into account that the shield has a connection with TP the hole thing just mixes up itself and offers a possible link of Link from TP to WW. I know it is a huge assumption but bear with me.

Seeing this from the past timeline. Link goes to the past, after that, nobody knows anything untill TP, except for MM wich seems to indicate that the royal family are aware of the legend, also that is shown in WW with Tetra and the King of Red Lions. Now, the question i want you, to ask yourself. If going by the past timeline and only the royal family knowing the legend how in any way does Outset Island know the legend of the hero. This is where the strange part comes in and it could work for the future timeline, but since we have no more shred of evidence from the past timeline, this could be one of the many ways, that could work out with the past timeline. If the story of the shield is correct, could perhaps the villagers of Outset Island have a connection to the hero from TP and not the one from OOT, could they be descendents of something that would know the legend of the Link from TP. This could also take place in the continuation of the future timeline, you could really see this story in both and i could continue with the assumptions but i think that is enough.

[Jumbie]

I believe that he laid the sword to rest and closed the Door in the future, so that the sword could be there for TP Link to claim in TP (which is strangely impossible in a double timeline, in which he takes the sword into the Child timeline, making it impossible for TP/TWW Link to ever obtain).

Um.. Logically the Master Sword of the Adult timeline remains in the future when Link is sent back This also explains why the Master Sword is in the pedestal already when Young Link re-emerges.

It is also possible that Zelda returned to the castle for a short time after Ganondorf entered the Sacred Realm for whatever reason.

No, it isn't. Take the flashback in MM. According to you, this would logically happen between the two halves of OoT, although everything appears so peaceful in that scene, also from how Zelda speaks. So how can this be?

[Showsni]

No, it isn't. Take the flashback in MM. According to you, this would logically happen between the two halves of OoT, although everything appears so peaceful in that scene, also from how Zelda speaks. So how can this be?

Why shouldn't it be? For all we know, Hyrule could have been very peaceful for months or even longer after Ganondorf first got the ToP. Indeed, if he was still in the SR, it might be even more peaceful than previously for a while.

[LionHarted]

Um.. Logically the Master Sword of the Adult timeline remains in the future when Link is sent back This also explains why the Master Sword is in the pedestal already when Young Link re-emerges.

Then he didn't "lay the Master Sword to rest and close the Door of Time" in the past, did he? He did it in the future.

[Fyxe]

LionHarted, he didn't do it in the future, because Zelda sent him back to the past right after she said that. He wouldn't of been bloody able to. By sending him back the Master Sword was laid to rest - all Link had to do was leave it there, but he also had to close the Door of Time, which was still open.

As for the future, well, Zelda would have to close that one.

[LionHarted]

LionHarted, he didn't do it in the future, because Zelda sent him back to the past right after she said that.

This is your interpretation. When I watch the scene with Link and Zelda, I see the "teleportation" warping light appear when she plays the Ocarina of Time, not the "time travel" light--therefore I do not jump to conclusions and assume that she is sending him back in time at that point.

By sending him back the Master Sword was laid to rest - all Link had to do was leave it there

So Zelda told him to do something, when effectively, he didn't even ever do it?

<.<

Edited by LionHarted, 24 October 2006 - 08:26 AM.

[Fyxe]

This is your interpretation. When I watch the scene with Link and Zelda, I see the "teleportation" warping light appear when she plays the Ocarina of Time, not the "time travel" light--therefore I do not jump to conclusions and assume that she is sending him back in time at that point.

...
Are you SERIOUS? She *said* outright that that was precisely what she was doing. My god. Why teleport him at all? The Temple of Time is just down the road. They could say goodbye there. Besides, Link presumably couldn't close the Door of Time without the Ocarina of Time.

Teleportation. What nonsense. Use common sense. And read the dialogue properly. ¬.¬ She says she will send him back to his own time and asks him to leave the Master Sword to rest and close the Door of Time. It's that simple.

Edited by Fyxe, 24 October 2006 - 08:32 AM.

[LionHarted]

She *said* outright that that was precisely what she was doing.

"I can return you to your original time with it."

That's funny. I don't see anything in that quote to suggest that that's what she was doing at that precise moment... just that she can send him back to his original time.

[Arturo]

Lion, there is something called implication. Even if she doesn't say "Through this light I am sending you to the past" it's OBVIOUS that she's doing so. If he came back by simply returning the Sword to the Pedsetal, why would she say "AS a Sage I can return you to YOUR ORIGINAL time"? Does she like lying or do you like contradicting canon?

[LionHarted]

Lion, there is something called implication. Even if she doesn't say "Through this light I am sending you to the past" it's OBVIOUS that she's doing so.

Actually, all she says is that she can use the Ocarina to return him to his original time. It does not say whether or not she does so in this scene, nor does it tell us how this power will be accessed or manifested. You simply assume that her playing the song in this scene initiates the time travel, when you could easily be mistaken. Again, this is entirely interpretational. I'm going by the visual cues just as much as the vocal ones, and the visual cues do not match up with your interpretation.

If he came back by simply returning the Sword to the Pedsetal, why would she say "AS a Sage I can return you to YOUR ORIGINAL time"?

If he simply returned the Sword to the Pedestal, he would not return to a point before he ever drew the sword, he would simply return to the last point at which he drew the sword, as is the case in every other trip to the past. I believe that through Zelda's use of the Ocarina he can use the sword to return, once again, to his original time--but not that the playing of the Ocarina directly causes this time travel to happen. This intepretation is supported by the visual cues.

Edited by LionHarted, 24 October 2006 - 09:31 AM.

[Fyxe]

Lion, you're grasping at teeny tiny straws. It's simply rediculous that Zelda would teleport Link anywhere just for the heck of it, and you know it.

Edited by Fyxe, 24 October 2006 - 03:25 PM.

[Jumbie]

Why shouldn't it be? For all we know, Hyrule could have been very peaceful for months or even longer after Ganondorf first got the ToP. Indeed, if he was still in the SR, it might be even more peaceful than previously for a while.

That's not my point. Of course I can see that for a certain amount of time there would be no danger to anyone in Hyrule when Ganondorf was still around, but what I mean is the inlogical acting of Adult Zelda who would've knowingly sent Link back to relive his years in a time where only a precarious peace lay over Hyrule. If this can't be agreed on to contradict evidence, then at least it defies any logic of storytelling.

This is your interpretation. When I watch the scene with Link and Zelda, I see the "teleportation" warping light appear when she plays the Ocarina of Time, not the "time travel" light--therefore I do not jump to conclusions and assume that she is sending him back in time at that point.
So Zelda told him to do something, when effectively, he didn't even ever do it?<.<

Sure, why not? That's the same as when your mother tells you to tidy up your room, and you don't do it.

LionHarted, really now, what are you thinking?! You did the very same thing in defending your entirely wrong interpretation of where Ganon was sealed at the end of FSA, but now you've shot the fattest bird! ..To deny that Zelda sent Link back by use of the Ocarina... *shakes head*
Tell me, do you really think anyone outside of your homebase takes your theorizing serious? Without any offense, but you're one of the biggest misinterpreters and canon-benders around.

[MikePetersSucks]

*reads all of this nonsense, and slaps Lion with an Occam's Razor.*

Go to the corner and think about what you've done, young man.

[LionHarted]

Of course I can see that for a certain amount of time there would be no danger to anyone in Hyrule when Ganondorf was still around, but what I mean is the inlogical acting of Adult Zelda who would've knowingly sent Link back to relive his years in a time where only a precarious peace lay over Hyrule.

Of course, both timelines result in a "precarious peace", according to most of you, but, whatever.

LionHarted, really now, what are you thinking?! You did the very same thing in defending your entirely wrong interpretation of where Ganon was sealed at the end of FSA

WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

To deny that Zelda sent Link back by use of the Ocarina...

To tell me that something happens that visual cues defy... Simple logic says that when two visual cues contradict, they are not compatible. So you'd like to tell me that the visual warp portal we see in the Zelda scene leads to the time travel portal we see in the Temple scene? You might as well tell me that a Heart Piece is a Heart Container, and that you need to play Zelda's Lullaby to open the Door of Time.

Tell me, do you really think anyone outside of your homebase takes your theorizing serious? Without any offense, but you're one of the biggest misinterpreters and canon-benders around.

Everywhere but here, actually.

And I don't "bend" canon. I take into account the necessary and obvious retcons.

Edited by LionHarted, 24 October 2006 - 11:54 PM.

[Fyxe]

To tell me that something happens that visual cues defy... Simple logic says that when two visual cues contradict, they are not compatible.

Simple logic says that you're defying the BLATANT meaning of in-game text and simple logic says that the altnernative you've suggested is completely *stupid*. ¬.¬

Everywhere but here, actually.

Like we really, um, give a monkeys.

And I don't "bend" canon. I take into account the necessary and obvious retcons.

You mean you make up retcons where you see 'necessary' for your own theory.

[Arturo]

WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

You said that in FSA he's not sealed inside the Four Sword, but inside the Sacred Realm. That is denying everytning you are told and you see. Occam's Razor, for God's sake.

To tell me that something happens that visual cues defy... Simple logic says that when two visual cues contradict, they are not compatible. So you'd like to tell me that the visual warp portal we see in the Zelda scene leads to the time travel portal we see in the Temple scene? You might as well tell me that a Heart Piece is a Heart Container, and that you need to play Zelda's Lullaby to open the Door of Time.

Zelda says nothing about opening the Door of Time, and last time I checked, her lullaby was not a teleporting song. She's just sending him to the past. It doesn't say anything about portals and doors:

Link, give the Ocarina to me...
As a Sage, I can return you to your original time with it.

Text is above visuals.

Link, give the Ocarina to me...
As a Sage, I can return you to your original time with it.

Everywhere but here, actually.

I don't give a damn about what they think about your way of theorizing in ZU or GameFAQs. I can be as nice as you want, but simply, your way of theorizing consists in bending and/or misinterpreting canon to fit your theories. And by bending canon I mean things like saying that ALttP references clearly to TP or FSA, something it clearly doesn't.

Theories should be made to fit facts.

But what you do is making facts fit your theories.

And that's wrong. I am sorry.

[LionHarted]

You said that in FSA he's not sealed inside the Four Sword, but inside the Sacred Realm.

When? If I did, it was a long time ago, and I have modified my theory immensely since then.

Zelda says nothing about opening the Door of Time, and last time I checked, her lullaby was not a teleporting song.

You don't even know what I'm arguing, do you?

She's just sending him to the past. It doesn't say anything about portals and doors:

Text is above visuals.

Link, give the Ocarina to me...
As a Sage, I can return you to your original time with it.

That does not say that she is returning him to the past immediately. It says he is giving her the Ocarina so that she "can" return him to the past. Now prove to me that she's sending him to the past in that scene. Saying it's obvious doesn't cut it, because, were it obvious, it would be explicit, and it is far from explicit. The visuals, again, do not match up, and the text is hardly conclusive.

I don't give a damn about what they think about your way of theorizing in ZU or GameFAQs. I can be as nice as you want, but simply, your way of theorizing consists in bending and/or misinterpreting canon to fit your theories. And by bending canon I mean things like saying that ALttP references clearly to TP or FSA, something it clearly doesn't.

So, claiming that the Hero title is the result of an avatarial transmission, that the Sages receive their power directly from the gods, and that there's a timeline transcending seal does not involve a comparable amount of canon-bending? That's... hmm... three times you use creative license with your interpretation of the ending of OoT and... *once*, maybe *twice* for me?

Also, you might be interested to know that the views of this community are not given much regard elsewhere, on the very same grounds you're saying I'm incredible, too.

Edited by LionHarted, 25 October 2006 - 09:57 AM.

[Showsni]

That does not say that she is returning him to the past immediately. It says he is giving her the Ocarina so that she "can" return him to the past. Now prove to me that she's sending him to the past in that scene. Saying it's obvious doesn't cut it, because, were it obvious, it would be explicit, and it is far from explicit. The visuals, again, do not match up, and the text is hardly conclusive.

Prove that Ganon is being sealed at the end of OoT then. He could just be teleporting himself back to the Gerudo desert. The text is hardly conclusive.

[MikePetersSucks]

Everywhere but here, actually.

Everywhere meaning GameFAQs and ZU, where everyone there is a bunch of 13 year olds who found Mike Peters to be a timeline genius?

Pfft.

[Jumbie]

Of course, both timelines result in a "precarious peace", according to most of you, but, whatever.

Um no, not that I knew of. I won't say the peace in Hyrule was precarious when it did last for centuries that passed between OoT/MM and ALttP (with no other games in between). In my definition, a precarious peace is when it lasts some weeks or months, like it would in a Single Timeline explanation of OoT's Child ending.

WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

You know very well what I'm talking about: that time when you denied that in FSA, Ganon was sealed inside the blade of the Four Sword, and you claimed he was rather sealed in the Dark World, just to suit your fanficcy theory. That was the most tiring and pointless argument I've ever had.

When? If I did, it was a long time ago, and I have modified my theory immensely since then.

Not that long ago, two months at the most. How should anyone notice that you've got rid of some of the nonsensical interpretations in your theory?!

So you'd like to tell me that the visual warp portal we see in the Zelda scene leads to the time travel portal we see in the Temple scene?

Sure, and the game itself would like to tell you the same thing, actually.

and that you need to play Zelda's Lullaby to open the Door of Time.

This not, but the game tells you that Zelda plays her lullaby to send Link back in time, whether this makes sense to you or not.
When 1000 Zelda fans watch OoT's ending, 999 take it for granted that Zelda's playing the lullaby sends Link to the past. The remaining one are you. But hey, if it makes you happy, feel free to believe you were the most intelligent person of us all by "realizing" that the true intention behind the blue light was that of a teleport to the Temple of Time..

Everywhere but here, actually.

I guess that's why it would be no good to theorize anywhere but here.

And I don't "bend" canon. I take into account the necessary and obvious retcons.

You're retconning everything on your own, pal! You shouldn't assume the creators retconned something unless they say so. I myself don't retcon OoT's ending if I put ALttP after the Child ending instead of after TWW, simply because it was never stated after which of OoT's endings ALttP happens, whereas it was stated by developers that ALttP follows relatively short after OoT, and that TWW happens after the Adult ending. So my timeline is consistent with creator quotes.

So, claiming that the Hero title is the result of an avatarial transmission

It's never stated to be so, but since it provides a simple explanation to the whole character recycling thing, among many other things, and since it fits the feel of the Zelda series best, it's just pointless to assume anything else.

that the Sages receive their power directly from the gods

Also this is backed by canon. Rauru prays to the Goddesses to give them their power. In TWW, the two sages do the very same thing.

and that there's a timeline transcending seal

Technically it wouldn't be necessary to state that the seal transcends timelines, because OoT's ending simply shows that it must have been so. The past is peaceful without Ganondorf, so he has to be sealed, and I don't wonder how that happened.

That's... hmm... three times you use creative license with your interpretation of the ending of OoT and... *once*, maybe *twice* for me?

I'd say your entire timeline is built upon use of creative license.

Edited by Jumbie, 25 October 2006 - 06:19 PM.

[LionHarted]

Prove that Ganon is being sealed at the end of OoT then. He could just be teleporting himself back to the Gerudo desert. The text is hardly conclusive.

The text is very conclusive. "Ganondorf has been sealed inside the Evil Realm!"

The later text, "I can return you to your original time with it", is not conclusive. In fact, looking at the follow-up quote, "when peace returns to Hyrule... It will be time for us to say good-bye... Now, go home, Link", this even further suggests that Link's departure comes about as a result of his own doing, at a later time, "when peace returns to Hyrule." However, even so, the text is still far from conclusive. Is Link supposed to go home, or his he supposed to "lay the Master Sword to rest and close the Door of Time"?

[Showsni]

How's that conclusive? Zelda doesn't know for sure; she just believes it to be true. You're going to have to do better than that to prove it.

[Raien]

To everyone, as the individual who actually got LionHarted to stop debating that Ganon was sealed in the Sacred Realm in FSA's ending (even though it was two months ago) on ZU, I can vouch for the fact that LionHarted has seriously rewritten that area of his timeline theory.

To LionHarted, since Link wasn't in the Temple of Time when Zelda played the Ocarina, it can be argued that Zelda both teleported Link to the Temple of Time AND sent Link back to the past. You are right that it is silly when she is playing Zelda's Lullaby though. Perhaps the event is just meant to be metaphorical of their friendship, since that is what the song symbolises for the most part.

Edited by jhurvid, 26 October 2006 - 10:05 AM.