See, the difference between OoT-ALttP and ALttP-LA is that OoT makes it clear beyond reasonable doubt that it IS (supposed to be) the prequel to ALttP, and even if that is no longer the case, the game itself has not changed. ALttP makes no such claims about LA, and neither does LA strongly reference ALttP. In fact, the game is so ambiguous that it would be reasonable to suspect it could take place after any other game. Yet, it works the best after the Oracles - because of the ending. Now, why did the developers make it so? Like you said, it could be anything from ignorance to deliberate (but unsubstantial) changes to the timeline. I make no illusions about knowing the thought behind these games, but I assume what the games tell me is correct, and thus I must believe there was a point to the ending of the Oracles, and that it ties with the only game it could tie with. As you yourself said, most original intensions have already been discarded, so what strength of argument do they now possess? I, for one, will always go with the latest information, and in this case, it is the notion that LA follows from the Oracles. The fact that LA's placement is entirely irrelevant to the rest of the timeline only furthers the possibility of a retcon.
As for your points, I agree with them, except I don't believe they specifically support your conclusion.
Anyway, I've justified my stance. If you have anything to add, feel free to do so, but otherwise let's end this charade. Repeating arguments ad nauseam evidently does not get us anywhere.
But shouldn't people at least accept the disconnection of OOT from the Seal War? There are no facts being changed. The context simply shifts. One could even argue that this shift is more responsible to the timeline since it upholds LTTP's original backstory, at least depending on how one interprets it. Supporting OOT as the Seal War doesn't even make for a pure transition to LTTP, so either way that sort of timeline is not possible. Though it is within the manual, LA at least makes very heavy allusions to LTTP. Therefore it would need to be a complete upheaval. There is no precedence for this within the Zelda timeline. OOT isn't even so bold. Never before have the games simply been shifted around. Parallel universes have been added. The timeline has been filled in. But so far there has been no proof that things have changed so drastically. Sequels, even a psuedo sequel like LA, have never been ripped apart from each other and placed somewhere else.
Speaking of the manual, I want to dig up an old post.
It makes possible that this Ganon was an indirect threat to Hyrule's peace (as in Oracles). That is no evidence, nothing in this translated portion is, but it greatly evens out the possibilities for either ALttP or Oracles being LA's prequel.
(I am not trying to argue with Jumbie, I'm just using this to prove my point) If you're going to retcon, then retcon facts, not intentions. I think we can all agree that LTTP was the only thing the manual could have been referring to at the time, so I'll spare us that argument. Reinterpreting it is using unclear language that has a clear intention against people who couldn't see future outcomes. It's like going back in time and using a gun to kill a man with a knife. There either is a retcon or there isn't. Either the manual counts and it refers to LTTP, or the manual doesn't count and it can't be used.
We know what the intention was. We know that it took place after LTTP. We know that the developers tried to communicate that. Previously held facts would have to be utterly abolished. Changing it would be based on an assumption of the ending of the Oracles. The game does not tell you anything, so you must use extrapolation as evidence. I try to be the least obtuse person there is. If there was clear and obvious intention behind it, then it must be heavily considered. But it cannot simply override previously held facts without thought for the repurcusions. One must go through great pains to make sure that it is not a coincidence or a product of error. I have a simple line of thought: if there was a chance that Nintendo could override a theory tomorrow, then is it worth believing? In other words, is it a theory that they might hold to and build future games around? If they don't have a place for LA, then the Oracle ending is simply left up to interpretation where as the LA manual is fact. If they do, then one must evaluate the evidence based on the evidence itself rather than in a chronological context. It must be solid in order to Drumpf what we previously knew. In other words, when two pieces of information are on equal planes, then the last piece of information we recieved must be taken as the more accurate. If there is any doubt in that piece of information, then there must be equal doubt in how we apply that. A recent but ambiguous piece of information cannot just automatically supercede something that was pretty much told to us.
And so what they meant must matter. Unfortunately we don't know that, though the reasons probably aren't all that great. However, I know the intention behind LA. With so much conflicting information, I must go to the one clear thing in this argument. If I ever found out that they did retcon LA, then I will accept that, though I think it's stupid to change the continuity of story and style between LTTP and LA. At least with OOT they retconned to begin with, screwing up LTTP's story. A retcon back is understandable. And everybody can look at the games afterward and clearly see the pattern. I see absolutely no reason to touch the equlibrium between LTTP and LA and confuse things so badly.
As a final note, I never said that most original intentions have been discarded. In fact, I still believe in LTTP-LoZ-AoL, I still believe in LTTP-LA, I still believe that OOT was a Seal War of sorts (though not the Seal War of LTTP) and that it is a long ago prequel to LTTP, so at least most original intentions are preserved, and I still believe in most of the other commonly held beliefs for game placement with FSA being the only one that I can't figure out. OOT being the Seal War of LTTP is perhaps the only major thing I believe had changed, and that was only because it needed to change and the developers agreed: the games eventually bore that out, and I changed my theories when I saw that. Give me more than an ambiguous boat at the end that overrides a decade of beliefs and facts, and I'll change that too.
We shouldn't forget that ALttP is one of Aonuma's favourite games and that he said he'd like to do a remake of it. I'm sure they would think of a good solution while doing so.
TP already was one huge homage to ALttP, from locales over design down to the literal reuse of ALttP manual quotes, so certainly they have not forgotten its significance. How a relatively unpopular and minor game as FSA could ever attempt to retcon things in ALttP is beyond me. FSA is simply an amalgamation of homages to a long list of popular and unforgotten Zelda games. Heh, Aonuma himself was in an interview surprised to see any storyline connections being drawn between FSA and ALttP!
Although I'm aware that Mgoblue did not directly speak about FSA, that game is the only way I've seen anyone try to bridge a potential gap between TP and ALttP (thereby retconning OoT's being the Seal War).
And in response to Impossible: Just as well as some may interpret the Knights of Hyrule's involvement in FSA as evidence for FSA>ALttP, I may interpret the involvement of a dark mirror in FSA as evidence for putting the two games in separate timelines.
Btw, I think FSA is a great game, but in my opinion it would fail to retell the Seal War as good as OoT does, for the sole reason of that it never bothers to mention the main point of ALttP's backstory - the Triforce.
And I believe that TP in some small way does lead into LTTP. Though I have not played FSA, I also think that it has nothing to do with LTTP (I am more inclined to agree with Aonuma's original supposition despite some of the difficulties that would mean redefining a few things, but I'm not aware of all of the details of that game to argue). Besides the Triforce, I also hear that the ending is nothing like anything that was recounted in LTTP.
No, I don't accept that answer, and I don't particularly have an answer, though I do have theories. The problem with these theories is that there are several variables that are unknown at present. I am not actually opposed to previous facts being overwritten. Though I believe that OOT is a pale imitation of the Seal War in LTTP, I was fully accepting of OOT overwriting LTTP's backstory had OOT actually led into LTTP competently (the Triforce pieces being separate). But I must know for sure if this happens. In OOT's case it made sense. It was simply a more up to date telling of what was basically the same story. With LA and the Oracles there are so many weird questions that I don't know the answer to of why they would do so much to change something that needed so little change, and I must know that before I decide that something must be overwritten. And the central question of LTTP is as follows: does the Seal War the way it was originally told still hold value? If it doesn't, then any possibility is still open. If it does, then the Seal War must still happen in the child timeline. Of course in this case I don't have to accept any answer, as I can simply say that I don't know.
