121 replies to this topic

[Hero of Slime]

What makes a split timeline a split timeline?

I would define it as any timeline where one line splits into two parallel timelines or alternate realities. The thing that makes a split different form simply having multiple timelines is that the split has some storyline reasoning behind it.

I belive that the OoT split is the only one to have any justification with the canon. I which the split is caused by Link changing the past when he went back in time after OoT, the adult ending goes into TWW, and the child end goes into TP.

This Timeline of mine gives an example of a different kind of split. Although this one was intended as a joke, it gives an example of a split not caused by OoT's ending.

What do you think about conventional vs. non conventional split timelines? Is it possible for somthing other than OoT to have caused the split?

[SOAP]

The split timeline theory is almost eight years old. Possibly older even. Although there have been many versions, I'm surprised people are STILL confused what a split timeline is. It's basically what you just said, the Zol. I don't understand where the confusion lies. Why is this thread even here?

Edited by SOAP, 25 March 2007 - 06:53 PM.

[mohammedali]

The split timeline theory is almost eight years old. Possibly older even. Although there have been many versions, I'm surprised people are STILL confused what a split timeline is. It's basically what you just said, the Zol. I don't understand where the confusion lies. Why is this thread even here?

I think the main idea of the thread is to see where people believe the split actually occurs, and how that affects the storyline. I'm going to point out the 2 main opinions of where the split lies.

Split 1) OoT, where Link is sent back after he has used the MS in the Child Timeline
Split 2) OoT, where Link is sent back before he has used the MS in the Child Timeline

I don't have the time right now, but next I will work on developing the merits and demerits of both. If there are other possibilities I missed out, then someone please post and we'll add them to the list of possible splits.

[Duke Serkol]

Well, one big demerit of "after" is that Nabooru would still be Twinrova's captive at the desert colossus... assuming Link and us should be concerned for her well being

As for non-conventional split-timelines, I never saw anything outside of OoT's ending that may have cause one.
...though Jumbie and I believe there may be hints of split long before the time of OoT. But we don't really have any solid basis for such kurazy ideas.

Also a split timeline doesn't necessarily need to have a justification within the plot (could be a deus ex by the author for example) ...but fortunately that's not OoT's case

[The Missing Link]

What do you think about conventional vs. non conventional split timelines? Is it possible for somthing other than OoT to have caused the split?

IF one is so bold to proclaim the split timeline to be gospel truth solely because Aonuma said it, then one must ALSO be bound by the time period in which Aonuma declares the split to occur... which is Ocarina of Time. To assume the first without the second would be more absurd then not believing the first to begin with.

My 2¢.

[mohammedali]

IF one is so bold to proclaim the split timeline to be gospel truth solely because Aonuma said it, then one must ALSO be bound by the time period in which Aonuma declares the split to occur... which is Ocarina of Time. To assume the first without the second would be more absurd then not believing the first to begin with.

The split has been around for many years before Aonuma made his comments. Indeed, if someone is solely using a split based on his comments, they would be bound by the timeframe he prescribes. However, we are not constricted by these limitations. We are looking into all aspects of a split, so this condition doesn't hold.
Having said that, I presently am unaware of any other possible split outside of OoT, so unless there is a canon justification for why there should be another split, I would not propogate there being one elsewhere in the series. I'm open to ideas, providing there is reasonable justification to them.

Now, on with what I was originally doing:

Split 1: OoT, where Link is sent back after he has used the MS in the Child Timeline

For:
1) The Door of Time is open
Implication: This is after Link has collected the Spiritual Stones
2) Link is touching the MS
Implication: Suggests he may have used it, though not conclusive
3) Link has the ToC mark on his hand when he visits Zelda
Implication: Could be the Triforce resonating as he is near Zelda

Against:
1) Link does not have the Goron Bracelet on
Implication: Link takes off the bracelet (though this is not an option ingame)
2) Zelda is back in the courtyard even though we are told she was in hiding
Implication: Due to Link's actions in Adult Hyrule, there was a reason Zelda could return


Split 2: OoT, where Link is sent back before he has used the MS in the Child Timeline

For:
1) Link does not have the Goron Bracelet on
Implication: This is before he has captured all the spiritual stones
2) Zelda is still in the courtyard looking throught the window
Implication: This is before Ganon has touched the Triforce
3) Zelda has the Ocarina of Time in MM, suggesting she hadn't given it to Link yet
Implication: This is before Zelda has fled the castle

Against:
1) The Door of Time is open
Implicatoin: Zelda opened the Door of Time when sending Link back
2) Link has the ToC mark on his hand when he visits Zelda
Implication: The Triforce mark on his hand is fading similar to Zelda in WW


Next: What this means for each of these types of timelines (e.g. Split 2 means Ganon is free, and does not have the ToP yet etc). Feel free to contribute to what each of these splits mean like Duke's point about Nabouru. Also, if there is a type of split I missed out, then please mention it.

Edited by mohammedali, 26 March 2007 - 03:50 AM.

[Duke Serkol]

2) Link has the ToC mark on his hand when he visits Zelda
Implication: The Triforce mark on his hand is fading similar to Zelda in WW

There are several possible explanations for that (not to mention that Zelda and ganon having the mark while Link does in TWW seems more like a goof than "fading")

Feel free to contribute to what each of these splits mean like Duke's point about Nabouru. Also, if there is a type of split I missed out, then please mention it.

You could add that point to your list, I got no problem with that

[LionHarted]

I would argue that the Goron Bracelet is negligible, since Link still has whatever shield you last had equipped (or no shield, if your shield was eaten/burned) when you last pulled the Master Sword. Programming error, probably along the same lines as the Triforce marks appearing at intervals on the hands of the chosen wielders in TWW, even though it had been separated from them (Zelda's appears some of the time, Ganon's appears during the battle, I think, and Link's doesn't really appear at all during the ending scenes).

[The default models for both Ganondorf and Zelda (not Tetra) have the Triforce marks on their hands; to include these characters in the ending scenes without the marks would have required removing the mark from the models, which they seem to have done at least some of the time.]

Edited by LionHarted, 26 March 2007 - 09:06 AM.

[FDL]

I'm of the "Split 1" persuasion. That Nabooru thing, while a good point, really doesn't matter because it wasn't like Link was completely destroyed when he was sent back. He could have easily freed Nabooru after he came back. Plus, I think the Gorn Bracelet is a bit superfluous as evidence when he has the ToC, something which he only has after he has pulled the Master Sword. And it can't even be because of the AT, because we know it split in that timeline from TWW. And Zelda returning to the courtyard and having the OoT always seemed to have something to do with what happened in the Adult timeline.

I'm not entirely sure, though. I'm still holding out for an artbook or something that may explain the details of what happened in between OoT and TP in more detail. I mean, we've got the references to the "legendary hero", these odd Sages, and it's unclear what did and did not happen in the CT. Actually, I have a theory about Link's destiny and why he was sent forward 7 years in the first place, but I'm still working on it.

[Hero of Slime]

The problem here is that the split timeline might not have existed at the time of OoT ore even MM. If the concept of the split timeline was applied to the timeline after TWW, then the details of the split in OoT and MM might not be appearent.

[MikePetersSucks]

The split either occurred at OOT or not at all. There's no other place to put it.

[Fyxe]

If the concept of the split timeline was applied to the timeline after TWW, then the details of the split in OoT and MM might not be appearent.

Which is EXACTLY what Aonuma said happened, which explains the Majora's Mask references in TWW.

[LionHarted]

Do we consider Majora's Mask references as being retconned, or as never actually having been intended, then?

[Hero of Slime]

We say that the references to MM in TWW are allusions that the creators no longer consider as part of the storyline. I like this idea better than saying that Termina was not included in the split (while the sacred realm was).

[FDL]

There are several possible explanations for that (not to mention that Zelda and ganon having the mark while Link does in TWW seems more like a goof than "fading")

Honestly, now you're just ignoring stuff. What other explanations for it are there? It's the damn Triforce. Don't try to explain it away just because it disagrees with your theory.

[LionHarted]

We say that the references to MM in TWW are allusions that the creators no longer consider as part of the storyline.

So what about the similar FS references in ALttP for GBA (Palace of the Four Sword endgame quest)? They can operatively explain what happened to the Four Sword, and have not yet been contradicted by more recent sources as being an accurate reflection of storyline (FSA's involvement with Ganon actually bolsters the idea, since TP and TWW both render a direct transition from OoT to ALttP unlikely).

[Chaltab]

We say that the references to MM in TWW are allusions that the creators no longer consider as part of the storyline. I like this idea better than saying that Termina was not included in the split (while the sacred realm was).

Hm. I think that, if there is a split, it would only effect Hyrule's timeline and Hyrule's alone. The Sacred Realm and Terminia are seperate dimensions that have their own histories.

[LionHarted]

What other explanations for it are there? It's the damn Triforce.

Its appearance throughout the ending of an admittedly rushed game is inconsistent and sloppy.

Gee, what could possibly be the cause of that?

[FDL]

I'm talking about in the end of OoT. Last time I discussed this with Duke Serkol, the theory DS put out was that the Triforce is not in TP, which I highly disagree with. But the ToC in OoT's ending goes against the idea that no one had the Triforce, I think.

[Vertiboy]

To me, the split timeline is the idea that some games follow after Ocarina of Time's child ending and others follow after it's adult ending. Any timeline that involves any kind of "what if" should be called a gaiden theory or something like that. The terms double or dual timeline seem too vague as in both the split and gaiden could be considered to be double timelines.

[Duke Serkol]

Honestly, now you're just ignoring stuff. What other explanations for it are there? It's the damn Triforce. Don't try to explain it away just because it disagrees with your theory.

I'm not saying it isn't the Triforce (if anything, Ali could be, since he said the mark may be fading... and it IS a possibility though I don't consider it likely). All I was saying is that this doesn't necessarily imply Link has it because Ganondorf has already split it.
I would make a snide remark at the way you assumed things and worded your reply, but I think it speaks for itself.

[LionHarted]

All I was saying is that this doesn't necessarily imply Link has it because Ganondorf has already split it.

Well, unless you want two Triforce of Courages in one timeline, the Triforce in the Sacred Realm is missing a piece no matter how you slice it, and so it's sort of pointless to say the whole thing ain't split.

[Fyxe]

The Sacred Realm and Terminia are seperate dimensions that have their own histories.

No they're not, and no they don't.

They're seperate worlds, and their histories are parallel and interconnected, just like the worlds are.

[Duke Serkol]

Well, unless you want two Triforce of Courages in one timeline, the Triforce in the Sacred Realm is missing a piece

Everybody will jump at me for saying this... but frankly I don't care, so I'll just say it: that's exactly the way I see it.
If the Triforce can leave Link and return to its proper place (once he leaves for Termina, I mean) then I don't see a problem with it returning also to its proper time(line).

[Hero of Slime]

TWW says that the triforce of courage left link when he went back in time.
OoT shows that link had the triforce of courage when he returned to the past.

For some reason, Link must have recived the triforce right when he returned to the past.

Or the Triforce of courage shown in Links hand was one of the details the creators did not think of when creating the split.

[LionHarted]

He doesn't have it (rather, we don't see it) when he returns to the past, just when he meets Zelda.

This means most likely one of two most probable options:

• He got it at some point after he arrived at the past (which implies that the Triforce was touched at some point during the Child ending)
• It resonated only when it came into contact with Zelda's piece (which implies that the Triforce was touched at some point during the Child ending)

Edited by LionHarted, 26 March 2007 - 09:56 PM.

[FDL]

I'm not saying it isn't the Triforce (if anything, Ali could be, since he said the mark may be fading... and it IS a possibility though I don't consider it likely). All I was saying is that this doesn't necessarily imply Link has it because Ganondorf has already split it.
I would make a snide remark at the way you assumed things and worded your reply, but I think it speaks for itself.

No, I'll admit it, that was rude of me. But I'm not really sure what else it could really be implying. Anything else is sort of fanficcy to me. I hate that word, but that's how it seems.

Everybody will jump at me for saying this... but frankly I don't care, so I'll just say it: that's exactly the way I see it.
If the Triforce can leave Link and return to its proper place (once he leaves for Termina, I mean) then I don't see a problem with it returning also to its proper time(line).

But if you go by the split timeline, then the ToC left him when he went back in time. Zelda says that the way between the two times will be closed, and that's how it is. Plus, if you say there are two Triforces in one time until he leaves Hyrule, then you just get needlessly paradoxical. Why is it so hard to believe that he had the Triforce? I mean, in TP, because that's obviously what you're driving at. Why do those crests which scream "Triforce" in appearance and properties have to be something different? That vague "divine prank" line can't be the basis for that, because it's just one line. Compare that to the great deal more evidence that says it is the Triforce in TP. I mean, how could Link inherit the fake Triforce power from the ancient hero if it's not a physical thing?

Honestly, I'd really like it if you explained to me why you're so adamant that it isn't the Triforce.

He doesn't have it (rather, we don't see it) when he returns to the past, just when he meets Zelda.

This means most likely one of two most probable options:

• He got it at some point after he arrived at the past (which implies that the Triforce was touched at some point during the Child ending)
• It resonated only when it came into contact with Zelda's piece (which implies that the Triforce was touched at some point during the Child ending)

Either way, it heavily suggests that Ganondorf already had the Triforce. The scene in the Arbiter's Grounds cannot be concurrent with the very end of OoT, because Ganondorf was apparently executed several years after OoT. The courtyard cene, on the other hand, appears to be just after he left the Temple of Time, or at least very soon after.

Ona related note, does anyone think MM sort of screws around with the ideas brought up by TP? I mean, no matter what did or did not happen, I just can't see Link leaving Ganondorf to wreak havoc on Hyrule. Perhaps the creators have a good answer for why he left.

[Duke Serkol]

TWW says that the triforce of courage left link when he went back in time.

Does it? I could have sworn it said the Hero lost it when he left the land of Hyrule behind (though it is possible that it says both things... that wouldn't surprise me).

No, I'll admit it, that was rude of me.

Apology accepted. I'm glad to see we can have a friendly open minded conversation. This may actually be very interesting: see, I'm really persuaded of this theory of mine, but because I realize it's (at least initially) difficult to get into this is only the second time I debate it

Zelda says that the way between the two times will be closed, and that's how it is.

Well, it certainly is closed for Link but it may not be so for the Triforce (being a relic of the Gods and all). Plus we know there are little reference to MM in TWW, a game set in the adult timeline (Tingle's legend and the postman... the latter may now be a MC reference but it was a MM one at the time), so it's more than possible that Termina may be connected to both timelines of Hyrule (unless we assume that there is only one timestream for all the multiverse, which I don't, also because who'd go save Termina in the adult timeline?)
...I got sidetracked, didn't I?

Plus, if you say there are two Triforces in one time until he leaves Hyrule, then you just get needlessly paradoxical.

Yes, I realize that. I'm not saying it's an awesome plot solution, I'm just trying to figure out what the programmers intended from what we have (which is Link with the Triforce mark while Zelda has none, and the King of Red Lions saying he lost it when he left the land behind him... that and the MM references)

Why is it so hard to believe that he had the Triforce? I mean, in TP, because that's obviously what you're driving at.

Uh? Not at all. I came up with this theory before TP was released actually.

Why do those crests which scream "Triforce" in appearance and properties have to be something different?

Well, if we want to go back to TP we may, but I have to give you an update on my theory. When we last spoke I had just finished playing TP and was still working out the details.
Now I'm done and what I believe is up with the Triforce marks is that they are in relation to the Triforce, yes, but do not signify possession of the actual Triforce parts.
You say they scream Triforce also in properties... but do they? In LoZ and TWW, upon defeat the bearer of a Triforce part would lose it for the winner to take. This does not happen in TP where we see Ganon's mark simply fade out, without the Triforce appearing. That is something I cannot dismiss, and not the only piece of evidence either.

That vague "divine prank" line can't be the basis for that, because it's just one line.

Actually that is one of several lines. In all of the game, the three crested characters are always said to be chosen by the Gods. Even Ganondorf refers to himself as such (and I would expect him to be proud of seizing that power himself if that had been the case). That is the strongest evidence that Triforce or not, this power came to him, not the other way around. Furthermore, the Sages in telling his story go from him trying to conquer the Sacred Realm to being blind and getting captured, which I believe implies he failed.

Compare that to the great deal more evidence that says it is the Triforce in TP. I mean, how could Link inherit the fake Triforce power from the ancient hero if it's not a physical thing?

I don't think I ever said it was a fake, though I certainly used to say it was a power alike to it,
but as I was saying, what I've come to believe once done with my analysis of all details in the game, is that these marks signify a connection to the Triforce.
In short, what I believe is that the Gods decided to connect Ganondorf, Link and Zelda each to a Triforce part, granting them its might without actually taking it out of the Sacred Realm (though in the case of Ganondorf it may have happened as a by product of the split timeline, but that's just an idea I'm throwing there). That, at least, would explain why the Triforce doesn't appear in the game even when Ganon loses it in the end, because it'd be merely a connection withering out when the mark on his hand fades.

Honestly, I'd really like it if you explained to me why you're so adamant that it isn't the Triforce.

There you have it
If you'd like to read more on my take (though I suppose by now you've had quite enough of my yapping ) you can find more here (and above that my take on OoT's ending and Link losing the Triforce upon entering Termina).

no matter what did or did not happen, I just can't see Link leaving Ganondorf to wreak havoc on Hyrule. Perhaps the creators have a good answer for why he left.

Well, that's one excellent reason I don't believe Ganondorf had the Triforce at that time, because Link wouldn't just leave and let Hyrule be attacked by the same power which conquered it in the future. But if Ganondorf had no Triforce, that would explain why Link and Zelda assumed he would be unable to take over (correctly as he's eventually captured by the Sages)

[FDL]

Does it? I could have sworn it said the Hero lost it when he left the land of Hyrule behind (though it is possible that it says both things... that wouldn't surprise me).

He does say something like "went on another journey" but the Hylian writing on the opening "scroll" says that he disappeared into the streams of time, never to be seen again. This sorta implies that his traveling to another land was merely what the people believed, when in fact he went to his own time. At least, that's a popular theory. A theory which I myself believe.

Apology accepted. I'm glad to see we can have a friendly open minded conversation. This may actually be very interesting: see, I'm really persuaded of this theory of mine, but because I realize it's (at least initially) difficult to get into this is only the second time I debate it

Yeah, this is a pretty "controversial" theory, at least for me. It goes against [img]http://forums.legendsalliance.com/public/ALOT.png[/img] of what I believe about the Zelda storyline.

Well, it certainly is closed for Link but it may not be so for the Triforce (being a relic of the Gods and all). Plus we know there are little reference to MM in TWW, a game set in the adult timeline (Tingle's legend and the postman... the latter may now be a MC reference but it was a MM one at the time), so it's more than possible that Termina may be connected to both timelines of Hyrule (unless we assume that there is only one timestream for all the multiverse, which I don't, also because who'd go save Termina in the adult timeline?)

Well, apparently, the main theory of that split group is that now that the creators have decided on a split timeline, the Tingle reference is going to be disregarded. As much as I hate to say it, it appears that's the case.

Yes, I realize that. I'm not saying it's an awesome plot solution, I'm just trying to figure out what the programmers intended from what we have (which is Link with the Triforce mark while Zelda has none, and the King of Red Lions saying he lost it when he left the land behind him... that and the MM references)

But I think we have to take into account the fact that the legend of the Hero of Time was skewed by Hyrule's people. I mean, only Zelda knew that Link actually went back in time, correct? Otherwise, the people wouldn't have assumed that Link could just show up whenever he was needed. Plus, no one really knew what happened with Ganon because they believed he was gone forever, while Zelda said to Link that Hyrule would not always be at peace.

I mean, although I wish it weren't the case, we know that there are two timelines. Neither can really be connected, because it would cause [img]http://forums.legendsalliance.com/public/ALOT.png[/img] of problems for either one, mentally(i.e. the people of TP Hyrule discovering that the other half of the timeline had been flooded). People would go insane from that knowledge, I think, and so I believe that the MM references are just coincidences. As in, the people made up ideas as to why Link was no longer around and it coincidentally sounded like MM in a nutshell. I mean, the scroll says that Link disappeared into the flows of time, but the scroll shows Link riding away from Hyrule. That's an inconsistency, and I've explained what I believe the solution to be. And the Tingle thing has just been disregarded.

Uh? Not at all. I came up with this theory before TP was released actually.

What I'm saying is that now that TP is out, it appears that some of the things we thought we knew about the timeline must be disregarded.

Well, if we want to go back to TP we may, but I have to give you an update on my theory. When we last spoke I had just finished playing TP and was still working out the details.
Now I'm done and what I believe is up with the Triforce marks is that they are in relation to the Triforce, yes, but do not signify possession of the actual Triforce parts.

Well, as you know, I think they are. We've never seen crests like this that did not represent the actual Triforce, either. AoL's was way different in what it was, and in the Oracles it was also quite different(though less so, I must admit).

You say they scream Triforce also in properties... but do they? In LoZ and TWW, upon defeat the bearer of a Triforce part would lose it for the winner to take. This does not happen in TP where we see Ganon's mark simply fade out, without the Triforce appearing. That is something I cannot dismiss, and not the only piece of evidence either.

To be honest, I do. First of all, I don't think that the developers really intended to show off the fact that it was different from the Triforce in that scene, I think it was more or less there because many (casual) gamers would think "Oh no! He's still alive, just as he was before!" Secondly, we don't know what happened with his body and what not. They could have removed the Triforce from his body afterwards, and the fact that the Castle may have been restored by the end just adds to that.

TWW and LoZ are wierd, I think, because the circumstances are so different. In TWW, neither Link nor Zelda were dead, and in LoZ Ganon blew up. So I'm not sure about either of them. Also, I'd like to mention something that HoL, Fyxe, and I have discussed before which has something to do with what we've been talking about. Compare the final fights and scenes of OoT with the Arbiter's Grounds scene in TP. Notice the similaities between what happens when Ganondorf is near death? I'll go into more detail later, maybe you should look up both things on Youtube so you get what I mean.

Actually that is one of several lines. In all of the game, the three crested characters are always said to be chosen by the Gods. Even Ganondorf refers to himself as such (and I would expect him to be proud of seizing that power himself if that had been the case). That is the strongest evidence that Triforce or not, this power came to him, not the other way around. Furthermore, the Sages in telling his story go from him trying to conquer the Sacred Realm to being blind and getting captured, which I believe implies he failed.

Well, Ganondorf was given the Triforce of Power because he most represented it, even in the timeline where he definetly touched it. That's definetly something. As for the implications of what they say, I believe it can be interpreted either way. If we look at how events transpired in OoT, and the way he was supposedly "blind", I don't think he failed in getting into the Sacred Realm. In OoT, at first, he was sneaky. He was using Link, Zelda, and the King to accomplish his goals. I don't see how he'd go into "rampage mode" if he did not have what would allow him to attack Hyrule head on. He was renowned for his ruthlessness and power according TP, while in OoT, before he gets the Triforce, he's more sneaky.

I don't think I ever said it was a fake, though I certainly used to say it was a power alike to it, but as I was saying, what I've come to believe once done with my analysis of all details in the game, is that these marks signify a connection to the Triforce.
In short, what I believe is that the Gods decided to connect Ganondorf, Link and Zelda each to a Triforce part, granting them its might without actually taking it out of the Sacred Realm (though in the case of Ganondorf it may have happened as a by product of the split timeline, but that's just an idea I'm throwing there). That, at least, would explain why the Triforce doesn't appear in the game even when Ganon loses it in the end, because it'd be merely a connection withering out when the mark on his hand fades.

See above for some of my opinion on the ending. And again, how would Link be able to inherit said connection from OoT Link?

Well, that's one excellent reason I don't believe Ganondorf had the Triforce at that time, because Link wouldn't just leave and let Hyrule be attacked by the same power which conquered it in the future. But if Ganondorf had no Triforce, that would explain why Link and Zelda assumed he would be unable to take over (correctly as he's eventually captured by the Sages)

Well I'm of a differing opinion. If Ganondorf was still out and about, he could easily gather the Spiritual Stones and perhaps attack Zelda if he did not know that Link had the OoT. And if he did know, he wouldn't have just said "Aw nuts, you meddling kids!", wagging his finger, he wouyld have taken it from Link.

[MikePetersSucks]

Hm. I think that, if there is a split, it would only effect Hyrule's timeline and Hyrule's alone. The Sacred Realm and Terminia are seperate dimensions that have their own histories.

I'm sorry, I gotta speak up on this one. I'll give you Termina, since you can kind've argue that one, but the Sacred Realm doesn't have it's own history and it's barely a seperate dimension. It's not a normal world like Hyrule, Termina, the Minish Realm, etc. It's a void, malleable to and from the heart, that exists solely as a reflection of Hyrule to hide the Triforce. If it doesn't split with the rest of Hyrule, then you can only have one Triforce for two timelines. Uh huh. Not gonna work.