325 replies to this topic

[Showsni]

eruntalon, on Apr 3 2009, 01:12 AM, said:

Showsni, on Apr 2 2009, 07:26 PM, said:

Noncanon as they are, I'm curious about why you've put the CDi games there. WoG and FoE pretty much beg to be placed in the same place as the comic books; that is, post AoL. Impa roaming around holding the triforce of wisdom on its own seems quite an obvious reference. ZA, of course, needs to go somewhere with a new Link and Zelda not seen in any other game.

I'm not familiar with the comics, but the general theme of the CD-i games, with Link traveling to other lands and Ganon resurrecting spontaneously, seems to fall in line with what we know of the period between ALttP and LA. FoE most likely came first, as Link claims that "it sure is boring around here". Of course, "my boy, this is the peace all true warriors strive for." But he "just wonders what"-AAAAAAGGHH!!! Sorry about that. Anyway, considering that Link was captured and imprisoned by Ganon in WoG, I doubt he'd have been very bored after that, so I placed WoG second. ZA is quite possibly the most bizarre entry in the series. I placed it after WoG because, well, a wand is Zelda's main weapon, and we never really see her returning it in the ending of WoG, so... it seemed like less of a coincidence when I first thought of it. Also, at the end of ALttP, we see the Triforce fly away to an unknown destination. If that destination were, say, Hyrule Castle, then that would be just dandy. As you can see, I'm not being nearly as strict about details with these games due to their non-canonicity, but you have to admit that sets things up for AoL's backstory pretty nicely.

While we've seen Ganon revive without any good reason in the past, I'm finding a post-AoL resurrection (for the CD-i games) unlikely, especially since the resurrection attempt in AoL seemed to hinge on Link biting the big one. What gives you the impression that ZA contains a unique Zelda and Link?

EDIT: I hate to nitpick, but... that doesn't look like a Charmander in your sig.

An immediately post AoL resurrection is certainly very unlikely for the real series, but it's a necessity in the comic books; they're definitely immediately after AoL and they contain Ganon. Well, either that or they're from a slightly alternate retelling where Ganon wasn't totally killed in LoZ. They're basically the exact same setting as the cartoon, except they're after AoL rather than just after LoZ. (Thunderbird and Dark Link are also alive and well in the comics, and servants to Ganon, it seems.) WoG and FoE seem as if they've been made by someone who's only seen the comics and cartoon; the pyramid shaped triforces certainly imply that, anyway.

Zelda's Adventure needs a seperate Zelda and Link, because at the start of the game Link has been captured for many years, whereas Gaspra has only just discovered Zelda, whom he believes can defeat Ganon. Well, we don't get all that much story info... There's no sign of the king, or Impa, or anyone familiar.

I named it whilst it was still an egg.

[Arturo]

Raien, on Apr 3 2009, 07:53 PM, said:

eruntalon, on Apr 3 2009, 06:42 PM, said:

There is no official definition of what makes a fictional work canon.

I just linked you to one. Maybe you didn't realise that the underlines in my post represent a link.

Ahem. Rule 5.

[Raien]

Arturo, on Apr 3 2009, 11:17 PM, said:

Ahem. Rule 5.

Rule 5?

[Arturo]

Quote

Elitism will not be tolerated. Just because you have been at the boards a long time, you have a high post count, you know a moderator/supermod/administrator: it does not grant you any more prestige than anyone else. Similarly, do not act like a mod or admin when you are not one. Members should not enforce rules themselves, rather they should inform somebody equipped to deal with the situation.

Similarly, Rule 15.

[eruntalon]

For what it's worth, I didn't perceive that remark as elitist. I figured he thought I saw the underline as emphasis rather than a link.

[Raien]

I'll be honest, I was actually concerned that the underline would be seen as an emphasis. It does sound silly now, though, as a lot of people are internet-literate enough nowadays.

[Arturo]

It sounded to me like a snide remark, but now that you say it, it can be interpreted the other way.

Not like I did anything irreparable to him

[Impossible]

Quote

To me, it's "common sense" that if Nintendo goes to the trouble to release a game with connections to one of their big franchises, then that game takes place in the same universe of said franchise unless there's overwhelming evidence against it.
...
However, there are no such glaring issues in FPTRR, TBF, and LCT. Considering the nebulous nature of the timeline, their events are not mutually exclusive to anything, and so there is no concrete reason to discard them.

Uh. Do you know ANYTHING about Tingle's Balloon Fight? You may want to do some research there. Talking about that in the context of the timeline is borderline insanity. The game doesn't even have a story, and it sure as hell wouldn't make any sense in the Zelda continuity. Basically the same applies to LCT, except unlike TBF, LCT actually got released as a normal game.

[eruntalon]

Impossible, on Apr 3 2009, 09:40 PM, said:

Uh. Do you know ANYTHING about Tingle's Balloon Fight? You may want to do some research there. Talking about that in the context of the timeline is borderline insanity. The game doesn't even have a story, and it sure as hell wouldn't make any sense in the Zelda continuity. Basically the same applies to LCT, except unlike TBF, LCT actually got released as a normal game.

Well, I don't know Japanese, and no one's translated the manual, yet, so I can only go by hearsay, but the basic story I've heard is that a tree-spirit challenges Tingle to overcome his balloon fight courses in exchange for... something. It takes place in the general vicinity of TWW/PH, because Tingle's Island is visible in the background, although there's nothing I've seen that indicates whether it is before, after, or between said games. I'm trying to play through it to see if there are any visual cues, but no luck so far (I kind of suck at it). I don't see any contradictions, there. It's simply the continuing adventures of TWW Tingle and it doesn't interfere with anything, so the way I see it, there's no legitimate reason to toss it aside.

[Impossible]

Please. Please. Don't try. It's a remake of a NES game with Tingle replacing the main character.

Can we have a new topic with these posts moved into it?

[Wolf O'Donnell]

My official stance is that there is no timeline and Nintendo are just making it up as they go along. That's why my timeline, featured in my signature, makes the most sense out of the lot of yours.

Edited by Wolf_ODonnell, 04 April 2009 - 05:05 AM.

[Fin]

Hey, my sig's timeline makes a lot of sense.

[TheAvengerLever]

^ that's my timeline too.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

Although I'm sure we're all agreed that OoT makes sense somewhere near the beginning, right? Although... putting Minish Cap near the beginning also works well.

EDIT: Oh, wait no! Showsni seems to disagree. OoT near the end? Well, I guess OoT isn't much of an Imprisoning War.

Edited by Wolf_ODonnell, 05 April 2009 - 11:01 AM.

[MikePetersSucks]

Wolf O'Donnell has the best timeline imo. However, he has one flaw, in that he forgot to put Link to the Pimp before Link's Arousal. Come on, man, it's in the instruction manual!

[Wolf O'Donnell]

MikePetersSucks, on Apr 5 2009, 08:34 PM, said:

Wolf O'Donnell has the best timeline imo. However, he has one flaw, in that he forgot to put Link to the Pimp before Link's Arousal. Come on, man, it's in the instruction manual!

Nah. On Uncyclopedia, I called it Blink 182 is passé because quite frankly, I was getting fed up of the sexual imagery that somehow manages to pervade every single Zelda Uncyclopedia entry. It didn't work, because even the plot descended into perverseness and I wrote it in its entirety...

[Showsni]

Wolf_ODonnell, on Apr 5 2009, 04:57 PM, said:

Although I'm sure we're all agreed that OoT makes sense somewhere near the beginning, right? Although... putting Minish Cap near the beginning also works well.

EDIT: Oh, wait no! Showsni seems to disagree. OoT near the end? Well, I guess OoT isn't much of an Imprisoning War.

Once you realise it's not connected to the IW, it fits much better nearer the end. I had a perfect single timeline until TP came out... Sleeping Zelda really early, Oracles to explain the building of the Temple of Time pre OoT, TWW right at the end, TWW's prologue explained due to ALttP warp points... It was brilliant! Now I have to shoehorn in a split just for TP on its own.

[TheAvengerLever]

Impossible, on Apr 3 2009, 10:36 PM, said:

Please. Please. Don't try. It's a remake of a NES game with Tingle replacing the main character.

Can we have a new topic with these posts moved into it?

I hate to break it to you, and I'd absolutely hate to intercede in your "Spread Lex Hate" topic, but eruntalon is right. Tingle's Balloon Fight has a (loose) story. And yes, it's a remake of the NES game Balloon Fight. But it has it's own story.

[Sir Turtlelot]

Personally, I've always liked Showsni's timeline, its very unique and it connects well. Its hard to find a timeline that can do both of those.

[Psytronic]

My current stance on the timeline is that there isn't one anymore.

AoL was a direct sequel to LoZ, LttP was a prequel to both, and OoT was meant to be a prequel to LttP, but quite literally destroyed the seamlessness of the timeline. Link's Awakening sort of fits wherever you'd like to slap it in, I'd probably stick it after LttP or more likely between LoZ and AoL. The Oracle Games are clearly based on insane Capcom logic, and TMC is basically FS's prequel, while FSA is its sequel in their own weirdass Four-Sword-oriented-timeline. TWW was created to jive with the messed up inconsistencies of OoT and MM, while PH is its direct sequel. TP doesn't give a shit and kind of just ignores the other games as best as possible.

[Impossible]

Quote

I hate to break it to you, and I'd absolutely hate to intercede in your "Spread Lex Hate" topic,

I prefer to think of it as a "Spread Lex Awareness" topic. But you missed the point somewhat. This topic was dead. If you want to post about something that's been discussed before, it should be done in a new topic, not a dead one, and this should really be moved when the discussion is completely disjointed from the original topic.

Quote

but eruntalon is right. Tingle's Balloon Fight has a (loose) story. And yes, it's a remake of the NES game Balloon Fight. But it has it's own story.

So? Doesn't really change the facts... They made up some random stupid story for it. Doesn't make it any more than a remake of Balloon Fight. Which was never commercially released.

[eruntalon]

Impossible, on Apr 6 2009, 02:30 AM, said:

So? Doesn't really change the facts... They made up some random stupid story for it. Doesn't make it any more than a remake of Balloon Fight. Which was never commercially released.

It's not our place to judge whether a story is "worthy" of the timeline or not. We're just fans. All we can do is speculate.

Edited by eruntalon, 06 April 2009 - 07:51 AM.

[TheAvengerLever]

Impossible, on Apr 6 2009, 01:30 AM, said:

I prefer to think of it as a "Spread Lex Awareness" topic. But you missed the point somewhat. This topic was dead. If you want to post about something that's been discussed before, it should be done in a new topic, not a dead one, and this should really be moved when the discussion is completely disjointed from the original topic.

Discussion ISN'T disjointed from the original topic. Eruntalon gave his timeline and now he's backing it up.

Quote

So? Doesn't really change the facts... They made up some random stupid story for it. Doesn't make it any more than a remake of Balloon Fight. Which was never commercially released.

eruntalon said

It's not our place to judge whether a story is "worthy" of the timeline or not. We're just fans. All we can do is speculate.

Hell, I don't really care either way. But if you're going to act stubborn about something then at least have the right information before you're rude to others.

[Impossible]

Er, if that's on topic and not necroposting, then from now on, all discussions of everyone's timelines should be in this topic. Let's never make a new topic again. Read the original post - this topic had a specific point which it was derailed from long ago, and I don't believe we're even talking in light of what prompted the topic (the translations and whatnot). And the context of that is 6 months old.

[MikePetersSucks]

Quote

TP doesn't give a shit and kind of just ignores the other games as best as possible.

Are you are that there's plenty of evidence of TP linking OOT and LTTP?

[TheAvengerLever]

Impossible, on Apr 6 2009, 09:41 AM, said:

Er, if that's on topic and not necroposting, then from now on, all discussions of everyone's timelines should be in this topic. Let's never make a new topic again. Read the original post - this topic had a specific point which it was derailed from long ago, and I don't believe we're even talking in light of what prompted the topic (the translations and whatnot). And the context of that is 6 months old.

To quote the original post:

Quote

So now would be a good time to evaluate where we all stand.

It. Wasn't. Disjointed.

The specific point of the topic was for us all to explain where we stood on the Zelda timeline.

He did just that.

And if you think it was necroposting, then why haven't any of the mods closed the thread? In fact, Showsni continued to post in this thread despite his position.

Anyway, I'm out.

[Showsni]

My stance is, if it's still on the first page, it's probably not a necropost. I guess turnover has been pretty slow for new threads recently, though...

[Arturo]

I'd say that, with low activity, one has to be more permissive about necroposting.

[SOAP]

Showsni, on Apr 6 2009, 07:23 PM, said:

My stance is, if it's still on the first page, it's probably not a necropost. I guess turnover has been pretty slow for new threads recently, though...

Arturo, on Apr 6 2009, 07:38 PM, said:

I'd say that, with low activity, one has to be more permissive about necroposting.

I was just about to bring that up earlier today (buut I was too lazy). The Storyline section has been very dead lately. It's this very kind of attitude that kills it. Just because it's an old thread, if new faces come over and want to discuss it, and there's people who are willing to participate as well, why complain about it?

Also, people these days seem unwilling to talk about their timelines. I remember the day we used to sport our timelines proudly in our sigs. Well, some of us still do but we barely talk about it and when we do people start bailing out left and right and it's so frustrating! This used to be fun guys. We don't need to act like we're walking on eggshells here...

I hope once the new Zelda game comes out, it'd spark new interesting in timeline theorizing.

[Raien]

Timeline discussion is dead because everyone (except the Lex-negationists) has got the official timeline more-or-less worked out. And this time, all the original ambiguous quotations have been given precise translations.

There are really only two things left on the agenda (which we can't explain due to a lack of information):
1) Connecting ALttP to OoT.
2) Placing the FS trilogy.

Edited by Raien, 06 April 2009 - 03:50 PM.