35 replies to this topic

[LionHarted]

If anything the map similarities indicate progress, not decline, and therefore a LoZ/AoL-OoS/OoA order. This is how I place them presently anyway. Beyond that, OoS's map, in my opinion, more closely resembles LoZ's, mostly because of the placement of Gnarled Root and the Graveyard and the inclusion of Lost Woods.

Has anyone considered them as, instead of being remakes of LoZ/AoL, instead being intended to take their place in the timeline?

[Raien]

I don't feel comfortable with the concept that Oracles replace LoZ/AoL, and I don't think Nintendo would have liked that either. Personal opinion there. But you're right that arguments for the games' timeline placement centre completely around their original identities as the remakes of LoZ/AoL, which is at least some indication of where the games could go.

However, LoZ/AoL parallels don't really tell us whether Oracles take place before or after LoZ/AoL, so I guess on that basis there is no real justification for either placement. Back to square one.

[LionHarted]

Fair enough. Since they were originally intended to be remakes at least of LoZ and do a better job of accounting for Ganon's appearance than LoZ itself in the modern timeline, I just wanted to throw the idea out there.

[Mourngriever]

If your going to talk about OOA/S in the timeline, split the thread. This is a geography topic XD And we all know deep down that OOA/S comes before the Imprisoning War XD (ooh im gonna get flamed for that)

But to the kind person who asked about my BS Zelda and ALTTP referance i made, it may not be as relevent now ive seen the 2nd map. But it still works.

Compare the BS Zelda maps to Zelda 1. There is definately more playable land East on the NES game.

At the moment i can't see what i originally thought about it being closer to ALTTP. Maybe something to do with the large waterfall. I will continue to examine the maps and see if i can remember my original idea.

[Duke Serkol]

to the kind person who asked about my BS Zelda and ALTTP referance i made, it may not be as relevent now ive seen the 2nd map. But it still works.

Compare the BS Zelda maps to Zelda 1. There is definately more playable land East on the NES game.

Kind person here

So essentially you're saying the map of BS Zelda, being smaller than that of LoZ and seemingly cut to have the east part removed is, because of this, more like that of ALttP, right?
I suppose one could say this yes, but that would be simply because of a common omission, not because of a greater number of similarities within the maps of the two games (at least I don't see any more similarities to ALttP within the map of BS LoZ than I can see in that of LoZ).

I will continue to examine the maps and see if i can remember my original idea.

I'll be looking forward to your next post then!

[Jumbie]

If anything the map similarities indicate progress, not decline, and therefore a LoZ/AoL-OoS/OoA order. This is how I place them presently anyway.

You're making that up. No one can tell if, for example, woods have declined or rather grown larger, or if a town was abandoned or newly founded.
I bet the real reason why you place OoX after LoZ+AoL is that you have to, because your Miyamoto timeline requires you to move LoZ+AoL before ALttP and you apparently want OoX to stay after ALttP.

Beyond that, OoS's map, in my opinion, more closely resembles LoZ's, mostly because of the placement of Gnarled Root and the Graveyard and the inclusion of Lost Woods.

It's irrelevant whether OoX's countries resemble a map of South Hyrule, because they don't take place there. However, they could well take place in areas that much later become parts of North Hyrule.

However, LoZ/AoL parallels don't really tell us whether Oracles take place before or after LoZ/AoL, so I guess on that basis there is no real justification for either placement. Back to square one.

That's exactly it.