325 replies to this topic

[canas is back]

nintendo should do a movie on the divine prank.

[Impossible]

Alright, that's reasonable. So what, pray tell, causes Ganondorf to gain the ToP at that moment, according to you? It's a mess following everyone's theories.

Fate. The Japanese version of that scene says that he was chosen by the gods to have that power. The removed ending says that he is always fated to appear to balance good and evil, which is the general theme of the game ("light and shadow are two sides of the same coin"). Ganondorf was not supposed to die at that time, so it was fated for him to live and eventually be killed with the Master Sword. (Remember how TP and TWW are "parallel"? They have parallel events of the Triforce splitting, Ganondorf getting a piece, getting sealed for a while, then escaping and getting killed by the MS.) If there's an actual reason why the Triforce split, it's either because it was fated to do so (see: adult timeline), so Link changing events just forced it to happen that way (not necessarily at the same time because there's no way they had this planned in 1998), or just because of some weird fuck up which could also be a result of weirdness surrounding the timeline split (which I nicknamed the "divine hiccup").

I always thought there was something weird and stupid about Ganon being sealed in the Four Sword, so it actually makes sense if we figure it was a rush job solution when they removed all these oddly IW-like elements that would suggest he was supposed to be sealed in the SR. The Four Sword just replaced it because it was a convenient part of the story at that point... Honestly, though, haven't Link and Zelda learnt by now how unreliable the Four Sword seal is?

Edit: Oh god, what the hell is wrong with this guy? (Yes, the Miyamoto timeline is creator intent, that's why every trace of evidence in existence, both in-game using the basic logic connecting the games, and from creators, says it was OoT-ALttP, except for one particular creator quote which has been completely discredited. Also, do these people miss the part where Ganon dies in LoZ?) Actually, I don't think my original post particularly emphasised the fact that this was Miyamoto in the 90's, not Aonuma in the 00's, and that this has no relevance on the current existence of the timeline, but I did say things have changed. People seem to have missed that. Also, I love how they twist my discrediting of Dan Owsen into an excuse to say that he's also a liar and would completely misquote a clear statement from Miyamoto. Good old ZU... He may not know about the timeline, but he still worked on the games and had contact with Miyamoto. Anyway, the point is that it directly impacts on the argument in Erimgard's FSA topic right now. Someone needs to catch on to that.

Edited by Impossible, 28 March 2009 - 07:17 PM.

[Viral]

Also, do these people miss the part where Ganon dies in LoZ?

Unless I am mistaken, he dies at the end of LttP as well. Hence, that's an invalid point.

[Impossible]

Er, no it's not. That's completely irrelevant. Like, it couldn't be further from my point... See, OoT's Ganon was meant to be sealed in the Sacred/Evil Realm (the Dark World) until ALttP. That was ALttP's backstory. So the canon at the time was OoT-ALttP-LoZ, not OoT-LoZ-ALttP. LoZ prevents ALttP's story from making sense, AND massively contradicts OoT with respect to Ganon, the Triforce pieces (even the ToP, while appearing consistent, is not, because Ganon is supposed to have stolen the ToP just before the game starts) and most other things. Also, it means there's no logical time for AoL's backstory to occur - because there needs to be someone with the entire Triforce, who then hides the ToC, before LoZ. But the Triforce is split after OoT, and the ToC is already accounted for prior to and during OoT.

Edited by Impossible, 02 February 2009 - 05:52 AM.

[Raien]

Impossible, if you want people to understand the intricacies of context, you need to teach it to them. Experience (and consequent perspective) doesn't develop by itself; people are not going to take your word on a subject without question. It also stands to reason that a lot of ZU supports Lex because Lex is the only one of the good old UWM to debate there. I recommend you create a ZU account if you want people to understand your arguments on this subject.

Edited by Raien, 02 February 2009 - 07:34 AM.

[Impossible]

Bah, does anyone have that huge post I wrote on context (mainly in TWW) a few months back? I could just paste that if I remembered what topic it was in.

[bjamez7573]

Ok, I'm somewhat new to the forums so bear with me if some stuff is repeated. Anyway, here is my timeline
-------------WW--PH
TMC--OoT<
-------------MM--FS--FSA--ALttP--LA--TP??--LoZ--AoL--OoX

(TP is questionable)

after reading (skimming ) Impossible's very loooooooong timeline anaylsis (how did you manage to write that whole thing anyway? It must have taken forever) I mostly agree with his timeline as he gives some good solid arguments for his position and they makes sense to me.

One thing that doesn't make sense to me is the placement of FSA after TP. Talon, Malon, and the Lon Lon Ranch exist in FSA and I think they are supposed to be the same people as OoT. It seems to reason that FSA was intended to come directly after OoT (although it is a relatively minor piece of evidence). Therefore it doesn't make sense to place FSA after TP, as at least a century (more likely many) has gone by and they would be dead. Although I suppose you could have a second generation of Talon and Malon, but that would just be too weird and I don't think the creators would have intended that. Even though they they did play a role in the main quest in both OoT and FSA.

Here are some of my reasons for placing TP after ALttP and LA (although I was really trying to move FSA right after MM, but ALttP makes sense as its sequal):

One, the Ganondorf in FSA could be the same as the one from OoT. If FSA is right after it, Ganondorf hasn't done anything yet, and in OoT before he attacked, he was supposedly allied with the King and the Gerudos (for the most part) respected him as their leader. So those quotes in FSA of him breaking Gerudo Law (and acting like it was the first time) would make sense as no prior history of mischief is known.

Also, as far as TP goes, when the sages were talking about his arrogance in trying to enter the Sacred Realm, that could be referencing the end of ALttP when he is defeated. Logically, it would follow that the sages (which seem like spirits, not Hylians) would put him to death.

Now this is speculation, but ToP on Ganondorf's hand that was given by some "divine prank" could be the natural splitting of the Triforce when Link was in possession of it. Remember that the Triforce splits in 3 if the possessor does not believe in all three parts equally? It could be that for a time he believed it, but could have swayed from that and believed mostly in courage (especially after the dream world in LA, which heavily emphasized courage to overcome fear). At that time the Triforce would go to those chosen by destiny (the divine prank).

Considering the ending of TP was a foreshadowing of more conflict, it would make sense to place it before LoZ even though Ganondorf is dead and there is no idea how he came back to life. However, that could be filled in a future game as we all know that there will plot holes left for the Zelda creators to fill

To me, it seems like it could fit there, and it would remove the inconsistency with the Lon Lon Ranch

Correct me if I'm wrong about some of the facts. I was too lazy to get the exact quotes,

Thoughts on this anybody?

Edited by bjamez7573, 03 February 2009 - 01:05 AM.

[Impossible]

One thing that doesn't make sense to me is the placement of FSA after TP. Talon, Malon, and the Lon Lon Ranch exist in FSA and I think they are supposed to be the same people as OoT. It seems to reason that FSA was intended to come directly after OoT (although it is a relatively minor piece of evidence). Therefore it doesn't make sense to place FSA after TP, as at least a century (more likely many) has gone by and they would be dead. Although I suppose you could have a second generation of Talon and Malon, but that would just be too weird and I don't think the creators would have intended that. Even though they they did play a role in the main quest in both OoT and FSA.

No, Malon and Talon are cameos. As I'm sure my document says somewhere (>_<), cameos aren't really relevant to the timeline. A lot of the minor games in the series especially use characters familiar from the main games as cameos, but it is not the same character. Keep in mind that Link and Zelda reappear everywhere throughout Hyrule's history, and they aren't the only ones. In reality, it's just a way for the developers to add familiarity and recognisable characters across the series. Even Malon and Talon were based on Marin and Tarin.

FSA also can't be right after OoT, as this would imply it has the same Link... Which doesn't work, as Link and Zelda have no idea who Ganondorf is. After OoT, Ganon's treason IS known to some people. Also, Eiji Aonuma confirmed what happened to Ganondorf after OoT on the Child Timeline - it leads directly to TP. I have an issue with people taking evidence out of proportion - cameos in FSA vs the confirmed plot connections of OoT and TP. It's really not enough to suggest that you think they are the same people. I don't believe Malon recognises Link, either. It seems like you're searching through the plots of the games for ways to reinterpret them, all to deal with, as you say, a contradiction with minor characters in FSA. Which, as I pointed out, is a cameo. The problem with this is covered pretty thoroughly in the introduction of my document. What you're saying about TP's backstory is obviously not what was intended, because we know the intent of that scene from what Aonuma has said.

Edited by Impossible, 03 February 2009 - 01:04 AM.

[bjamez7573]

Keep in mind that Link and Zelda reappear everywhere throughout Hyrule's history, and they aren't the only ones.

However, Zelda, as part of the royal linage, could be the names of many princesses. Also, Link seems like the name that was chosen to represent the hero. Seems like the creators wouldn't treat other characters names in the series like Link's name, but that is just my opinion. I am not disagreeing with your argument, though

FSA also can't be right after OoT, as this would imply it has the same Link... Which doesn't work, as Link and Zelda have no idea who Ganondorf is. After OoT, Ganon's treason IS known to some people. Also, Eiji Aonuma confirmed what happened to Ganondorf after OoT on the Child Timeline - it leads directly to TP. It's really not enough to suggest that you think they are the same people. I don't believe Malon recognises Link, either. It seems like you're searching through the plots of the games for ways to reinterpret them, all to deal with, as you say, a contradiction with minor characters in FSA. Which, as I pointed out, is a cameo. The problem with this is covered pretty thoroughly in the introduction of my document. What you're saying about TP's backstory is obviously not what was intended, because we know the intent of that scene from what Aonuma has said.

You're right. I overlooked those quotes which would obviously confirm that connection.

[MikePetersSucks]

Tingle appears in multiple games too, and I doubt it's the same one. Everyone in Hyrule seems to have clone descendants or reincarnations or something, it's not really a big deal.

Also, TP probably goes between OOT and LTTP. Why do you put it after them both?

[Sign of Justice]

Tingle appears in multiple games too, and I doubt it's the same one. Everyone in Hyrule seems to have clone descendants or reincarnations or something, it's not really a big deal.

No, they aren't. Actually TRR gives an explanation for Tingle. If the Salona aren't Subrosians then the game doesn't mean anything except the origin of Tingle's from a storyline point of view.

Fun game though. I definitely recommend it.

[Impossible]

However, Zelda, as part of the royal linage, could be the names of many princesses. Also, Link seems like the name that was chosen to represent the hero. Seems like the creators wouldn't treat other characters names in the series like Link's name, but that is just my opinion. I am not disagreeing with your argument, though

But they DO. There are so many cameos in the Zelda games it's just ridiculous. Usually, they just borrow a lot of characters from recent Zelda games because they're familiar. TMC was FILLED with TWW characters, with the same names and everything (although it was explicitly stated that this has nothing to do with the story/timeline by the game's director, as they add those characters in later and it's just for Zelda fan familiarity). The Oracles usually used OoT and MM characters for the side-quests, as well as in the main story (Twinrova, although I see that as potential timeline evidence by virtue of being part of the main story). FSA borrows from all over the series, including ALttP, OoT and TWW. It's really a tribute to all of Zelda history, and the appearance of Lon Lon Ranch and its characters is one part of that. Malon and Talon have no relevance to the plot, they're just non-story cameos that have no impact on the timeline. They aren't the same people as in OoT.

[MikePetersSucks]

No, they aren't. Actually TRR gives an explanation for Tingle. If the Salona aren't Subrosians then the game doesn't mean anything except the origin of Tingle's from a storyline point of view.

Well, for one thing, TRR never really meant anything because...well, it's just too ridiculous to be any more canon than a story Tingle is trying to tell. Plus, the Rupee King only successfully made one Tingle, so it's moot.

[Lexxi Aileron]

See, OoT's Ganon was meant to be sealed in the Sacred/Evil Realm (the Dark World) until ALttP. That was ALttP's backstory. So the canon at the time was OoT-ALttP-LoZ, not OoT-LoZ-ALttP.

How did Ganon get and wish on the entire Triforce between OoT and ALttP?

[Lexxi Aileron]

LoZ prevents ALttP's story from making sense, AND massively contradicts OoT with respect to Ganon, the Triforce pieces (even the ToP, while appearing consistent, is not, because Ganon is supposed to have stolen the ToP just before the game starts) and most other things.

I don't see how LoZ prevents ALttP's story from making sense, because it ends with the very situation required for ALttP that was missing from OoT- the Triforce being whole. I also don't see how it affects Ganon, who ALttP already posited had "rediscovered the Sacred Realm after its location had been lost to those chosen" (and its location is known by those chosen to guard it in OoT) and had been "unable to return to the light world" (even though Ganon clearly did so in OoT). If anything, offering a new Ganon after OoT makes ALttP make more sense in light of OoT's direct and blatant discrepancies.

Also, it means there's no logical time for AoL's backstory to occur - because there needs to be someone with the entire Triforce, who then hides the ToC, before LoZ. But the Triforce is split after OoT, and the ToC is already accounted for prior to and during OoT.

Well, strictly speaking, the person who hides the ToC never claims to have had the rest of the Triforce. He (or she) merely says that "of the three, Power and Wisdom remain in the kingdom and can be received." At the time of AoL's release, this probably meant "Power and Wisdom are being passed down in the kingdom," naturally. If we were to take Miyamoto's timeline into account, however, at the end of OoT Power is in Ganondorf's hands and Wisdom in Zelda's - but then Link goes into the past with Courage. So what became of Courage? Early on, I imagine this was the scenario that led to the idea (whether in Miyamoto's head or otherwise) that LoZ and AoL were the interlude between OoT and ALttP, because now we had a situation in which Power and Wisdom were separate from Courage.

The Triforce being split in OoT and inevitably resolved in TWW by- guess what, the Triforce of Courage being hidden- seems to support this idea. Why else would they have shoehorned it in the game that way?

(apologies for the double-post, I meant to edit my last post)

Edited by Lexxi Aileron, 03 February 2009 - 11:46 AM.

[NM87]

How did Ganon get and wish on the entire Triforce between OoT and ALttP?

The IW.

I don't see how LoZ prevents ALttP's story from making sense, because it ends with the very situation required for ALttP that was missing from OoT- the Triforce being whole.

The Triforce is not in the SR.

Early on, I imagine this was the scenario that led to the idea (whether in Miyamoto's head or otherwise) that LoZ and AoL were the interlude between OoT and ALttP, because now we had a situation in which Power and Wisdom were separate from Courage.

You are ignoring the AOL back-story, which states that the Triforce was used outside of the SR, yet during OOT it has not been used yet.

Edited by NM87, 03 February 2009 - 12:51 PM.

[Erimgard]

http://www.zeldauniv...-bits-text.html

SHIT. I am so pissed off right now. I suspected this from the quote mentioning sages, but combining it with all these other quotes I didn't know about adds some validity to my suspicions. FSA was meant to be the new Imprisoning War. It heavily hints at being on the Child Timeline (the Hylian language is dying out, but not lost as in TWW), and at having the involvement of sages and the REAL Dark World (the Sacred Realm). There's a good chance it would have further extended the strong evidence connecting the Master Sword/Temple of Time/Lost Woods through OoT-TP-ALttP, as the Master Sword was apparently supposed to play a role. And I do so love that MS thing already, having the MS in the Forest of Light would have perfected it and the entire COST. MS + Ganon + sages + Sacred Realm (=> Triforce)... Yeah, this was supposed to be the IW. Ugh, WHY did they have to go and screw it up? Maybe it would have been too complex to understand for people not familiar with ALttP, but it's stupid.

Pleased to be of service

Of course, just the fact that this stuff was in there adds an insane amount of credibility to the placement of FSA, ALttP, etc. in the Child Timeline, because even without FSA's original story, it sounds like they were probably treating the timeline in that way.

The original story? Yeah.
The current one? No.

Everything linking FSA to the child timeline was removed, and they even put the whole kingdom on a island, directly contradicting aLttP's quote that Hyrule at the time of the fierce wars and the Seal War was a beautiful land "surrounded by forests and mountains". FSA still has strong connections to aLttP yes, but its connections with the child timeline are nonexistent.

Edit: Some of the ZU guys are still obsessed with the Miyamoto timeline. Can someone please link them to the topic I made?

Meh, I said it over at ZU, but I'll say it here too:
The reason that the timeline Lex and I follow became so popular at ZU had nothing to do with Miyamoto's words. Most people came to that timeline because of the potential of a post-flood but pre-FSA OoX placement. AoL's strong connections to OoX made most move LoZ/AoL there as well. It had nothing to do with Miyamoto.

[Impossible]

Everything linking FSA to the child timeline was removed, and they even put the whole kingdom on a island, directly contradicting aLttP's quote that Hyrule at the time of the fierce wars and the Seal War was a beautiful land "surrounded by forests and mountains". FSA still has strong connections to aLttP yes, but its connections with the child timeline are nonexistent.

I fail to see how this is the case. I mean, the whole "Hyrule" connection is pretty powerful. Note how the Adult Timeline lacks this, which would appear to make the Child Timeline a superior place for it, especially now that we know that was originally intended. The thing is, they were treating ALttP and FSA as Child Timeline games. Which is a pretty major point. They didn't change the story because there was a problem with that, they changed it because Miyamoto thought it was confusing. There's no reason why its timeline placement would have changed; it's still a prequel to ALttP. TP also hints at ALttP, and it's fair to say by now that such hints would be deliberate.

The reason that the timeline Lex and I follow became so popular at ZU had nothing to do with Miyamoto's words. Most people came to that timeline because of the potential of a post-flood but pre-FSA OoX placement. AoL's strong connections to OoX made most move LoZ/AoL there as well. It had nothing to do with Miyamoto.

I call bull. I always see this justified with Miyamoto's quote, which by this point should be ignored entirely. If people really had faith in this theory they would justify it with real evidence, but anyone can see that the evidence is very lacking compared to the endless reasons why no games actually make any sense after TWW.

The idea of a pre-FSA OoX placement strikes me as complete nonsense, because whatever theories people have involving the trident were obviously never intended at any point, and trident Ganon himself didn't get killed until ALttP. Please don't tell me that's supposed to be TWW's Ganon. Honestly, the Twinrova only being alive on the Child Timeline point sounds more credible than the fan fiction people come up with. Plus, the Triforce has to magically appear in Hyrule, along with magically returning to the Sacred Realm later. Oh, and Hyrule has to magically appear, did I mention that part? When the hell did huge Triforce inconsistencies stop mattering to the timeline? Oh wait, I forgot, they only matter if they're after TP where new games are basically certain to be taking place. Anywhere else, and you can speculate it going back and forth multiple times in one timeline, if you want!

Edited by Impossible, 03 February 2009 - 02:42 PM.

[Raien]

Hang on. Erimgard, is this post-TWW placement of Oracles based on the water rising in Labrynna? Because if you think about that for just a moment, it makes no sense whatsoever. Labrynna would be submerged if the flood occurred during the game's timeline.

Edited by Raien, 03 February 2009 - 02:50 PM.

[MikePetersSucks]

Everything linking FSA to the child timeline was removed, and they even put the whole kingdom on a island, directly contradicting aLttP's quote that Hyrule at the time of the fierce wars and the Seal War was a beautiful land "surrounded by forests and mountains". FSA still has strong connections to aLttP yes, but its connections with the child timeline are nonexistent.

Yea, everything was removed. Except for all that stuff that makes it an obvious LTTP companion.

And it's not on an island, there's a fucking mountain range at the back, meaning that there has to be more land on the other side. At best, it's a penisula, but for all we know, it could be a large, curved sea which Hyrule surrounds.

[Erimgard]

I fail to see how this is the case. I mean, the whole "Hyrule" connection is pretty powerful. But the thing is, they were treating ALttP and FSA as Child Timeline games. Which is a pretty major point. They didn't change the story because there was a problem with that, they changed it because Miyamoto thought it was confusing. There's no reason why its timeline placement would have changed; it's still a prequel to ALttP. TP also hints at ALttP, and it's fair to say by now that such hints would be deliberate.

Of course FSA is still likely prequeling aLttP, but what indication is there that at this present time they are considered child timeline games, and why was the geography changed to that of an island Hyrule, instead of a land surrounded by forests and mountains?

I call bull. I always see this justified with Miyamoto's quote, which by this point should be ignored entirely. If people really had faith in this theory they would justify it with real evidence, but anyone can see that the evidence is very lacking compared to the endless reasons why no games actually make any sense after TWW.

Call bull all you want. Lex and I came to this timeline by completely different means [I didn't even realize it was his timeline till about a week after I settled on it] and I didn't even make the connection that I was upholding the "Miyamoto Order" until a ZU member [dallascowboy927] pointed it out.

I can't speak for everyone in saying that the Miyamoto quote wasn't the influencing factor, but from what I've observed at ZU...it wasn't. The big swing in the thought process happened after TheManInTheMoon and I had some discussions at ZI about the Oracles, Minish Cap, FPTRR, Jumbie's FSA translations etc...When I took these discussiont to ZU and shared the thoughts we had, people started changing their timelines. I don't even think I mentioned the Miyamoto aspect of my timeline when I posted it and defended it at ZU, but I can't remember for sure. It's been a while, and ZU is currently down.

The point is, while some may like the fact that it coincides with Miyamoto, that was not the reason for the change by most people.

As for games not being able to happen post-WW:

A: AoL and aLttP both require that there is a dead, ancient language. Wind Waker makes a point of killing the language.
B: aLttP references the Hylians as a near-extinct race. Wind Waker makes a point of indicating their bloodline is thinning.
C: AoL and FSA both feature continent/island-based Hyrules. Wind Waker flooded the land, and introduced the Koroks who plan to make the islands grow and eventually connect.

The idea of a pre-FSA OoX placement strikes me as complete nonsense, because whatever theories people have involving the trident were obviously never intended at any point, and trident Ganon himself didn't get killed until ALttP. Please don't tell me that's supposed to be TWW's Ganon.

OoT, WW, and LoZ feature Ganon as "The Great Demon King"
OoS/OoA features a dead Ganon who Twinrova calls The Great Demon King, but when he is revived, he gives himself a new title of "The Demon King of Darkness"
FSA features a Ganondorf who is transformed by the Trident into the Demon King of Darkness. The Trident [according to Jumbie's translations] was previously used by a Demon.
aLttP has Ganon bearing the title of Demon King of Darkness [as in FSA].

Plus, the Triforce has to magically appear in Hyrule, along with magically returning to the Sacred Realm later. Oh, and Hyrule has to magically appear, did I mention that part?

A: The King wished for the washing away of Hyrule, and a hope for the future. We physically see Hyrule get washed away, and then the Triforce flies off. If the first part of his wish was physically fulfilled in front of our eyes, I believe the Triforce flying away was the physical fulfillment of the second part of that wish.
B: Again, the Koroks are unting the islands together. AoL and FSA feature island/continent Hyrules.

And it's not on an island, there's a fucking mountain range at the back, meaning that there has to be more land on the other side. At best, it's a penisula, but for all we know, it could be a large, curved sea which Hyrule surrounds.

http://img218.images...zzfsamaprx1.png

uh?
When ZU is back up, I'll get the topview of it.

Edited by Erimgard, 03 February 2009 - 02:58 PM.

[NM87]

I have a few questions, Erimgrad.

1. If LOZ takes place right after OOT/WW, then this means the AOL back-story occurs sometime before OOT or between OOT and LOZ. Explain the inconsistency of having the Triforce in Hyrule during either of these times. The inconsisteny being, pre-OOT there is no evidence of the Triforce being in Hyrule and post-OOT when it is split up.

2. The entrance to the SR was said to be somewhere in Hyrule, the original Hyrule. If a new Hyrule should somehow come about on the Great Sea, what proof is there that an entrance to the SR should ever be there? Without a SR, ALTTP can never take place.

3. Where, in this theory, does the Trident come from?

I would help if you posted the timeline, but I am guessing its OOT-WW-LOZ-FSA-ALTTP?

Edited by NM87, 03 February 2009 - 04:23 PM.

[Lexxi Aileron]

I don't follow my timeline strictly because Miyamoto said it. After TP's release I actually looked into LoZ possibly following TP and from there reexamined its place in general. In the end I happened to settle with the Miyamoto Order, which was fine because I was trying to incorporate more creator quotes anyway.

The IW.

But OoT is (or was) the IW, according to the developers (and according to the argument Impossible is making).

The Triforce is not in the SR.

ALttP never claims it was [when Ganon took it]; S&D confirms it wasn't (although no one takes this as canon because it means their ideas about their precious ALttP are wrong).

You are ignoring the AOL back-story, which states that the Triforce was used outside of the SR, yet during OOT it has not been used yet.

Define "used." If the Triforce "governed" Hyrule or served as its "providence" (in other words, if it was the divine guide for Hyrule), then by merely safeguarding it in the Sacred Realm to prevent it from being misused the king would be "using" it to help maintain the peace.

FSA still has strong connections to aLttP yes, but its connections with the child timeline are nonexistent.

Especially given the Child timeline literally blew up the darkened mirror, the "last link between light and darkness." I take that as a pretty strong message from the developers.

When ZU is back up, I'll get the topview of it.

Done.

http://s221.photobuc...FSAbirdseye.jpg

There is no larger continent. FSA's Hyrule is self-contained.

Edited by Lexxi Aileron, 03 February 2009 - 07:20 PM.

[NM87]

But OoT is (or was) the IW, according to the developers (and according to the argument Impossible is making).

True. Although, that might not be the case today. Recent games have made an effort to disconnect OOT from ALTTP, so I think some sort of ret-con is in the mind of the developers. We all know what discussion this leads into, ~so lets leave it low, cause we can't see eye to eye. There ain't no good guy, there ain't no bad guy, there's just you and me and we just disagree~

ALttP never claims it was [when Ganon took it]; S&D confirms it wasn't (although no one takes this as canon because it means their ideas about their precious ALttP are wrong).

*rolls eyes* ALTTP chronicles the events of Ganondorf finding the Golden Land and obtaining the Golden Power. I don't want to begin some great argument without knowing what you think, so please tell me about ALTTP according to you, for some good clean debating.

Define "used." If the Triforce "governed" Hyrule or served as its "providence" (in other words, if it was the divine guide for Hyrule), then by merely safeguarding it in the Sacred Realm to prevent it from being misused the king would be "using" it to help maintain the peace.

whats this i dont even

Edited by NM87, 04 February 2009 - 12:52 PM.

[Impossible]

Edit: I changed my mind, I know Arturo will just get pissed if I say that. Don't have time to post properly now, I'll edit this later.

Double edit: Oh god, but even after saying that, Lex's post is making me physically ill.

I LOVE the hypocritical blatant misuse of geography, in the very same post as all geographical similarities (or IDENTICAL maps) between OoT and ALttP are completely ignored. Even though that's the actual point of geography arguments. Differences between maps are NOT timeline evidence. The differences you're pointing out aren't even consistent, as they seem to change between every 2D game (TMC's map stretches far beyond where you go in the game, for example, based on some backgrounds). There are a million reasons for maps to change - gameplay, and in the case of FSA, artistic reasons. It's such a ridiculous argument, when there was no evidence BEFORE that Hyrule didn't have any ocean around it, to say that the presence of any water is proof of anything. Focusing on these stupid minute details isn't exactly the way to work out what might be the intended timeline.

A: The King wished for the washing away of Hyrule, and a hope for the future. We physically see Hyrule get washed away, and then the Triforce flies off. If the first part of his wish was physically fulfilled in front of our eyes, I believe the Triforce flying away was the physical fulfillment of the second part of that wish.

I can't even comprehend what you're saying here. How does this mean that the Triforce ends up back exactly where it should be after ALttP or AoL? The other thing is that you utterly ignore the release order of these games, even though there's no logical evidence of any retcon. No, what you do is take a game released in 2001 and find references in it to a game released years later. Yeah, that's a real show of intent there.

A: AoL and aLttP both require that there is a dead, ancient language. Wind Waker makes a point of killing the language.

Because, just like in real life, languages only become dead languages when the whole world is flooded. There are no other believable explanations, like the one you pointed out in FSA. Or the one that existed before TWW came out.

B: aLttP references the Hylians as a near-extinct race. Wind Waker makes a point of indicating their bloodline is thinning.

And TMC makes a point of giving every fucking human in the game long Hylian ears. Their blood can thin on either timeline, so just like the above point, there was no need for a flood to ever explain this before TWW came along (at which point it completely retconned ALttP being on the Adult Timeline anyway). This idea of bizarre retroactive references and evidence is so far removed from anything the developers could have had in mind.

C: AoL and FSA both feature continent/island-based Hyrules.

As opposed to other Hyrules, which we know nothing about? FSA's Hyrule is identical to ALttP's. ALttP's Hyrule (from and to Link was SAILING in LA) is identical to OoT's, and before TWW, there was no possibility of those Hyrules being different to LoZ/AoL's, which both have oceans. So don't give me this garbage that Hyrule wasn't a continent when there have been in-game references to it since the series began.

Wind Waker flooded the land, and introduced the Koroks who plan to make the islands grow and eventually connect.

WHY DO PEOPLE ALWAYS MISS THE POINT ENTIRELY. And for someone who is so intent on using the maps, you seem to be ignoring the fact that this would produce a completely different Hyrule, not an identical one. And not one THAT CONTRADICTS TWW'S ENDING IN EVERY POSSIBLE WAY. You don't get it, do you? Any hints at Hyrule's return earlier in TWW were done deliberately to mislead the player so that the ending would come as even more of a shock. This overused garbage is superseded by the ending, which you insist on ignoring. The entire point is for the people to NOT be bound to Hyrule, or the Triforce, or any of the things they represent... Which is why ALttP is exactly like OoT. Completely ruining the king's wish. Plus, the Deku Tree's line is not part of the main story at all. You've taken it completely out of context: Its context is TWW, and TWW says that, regardless of any NEW lands that appear, Hyrule is gone forever. Anything else is fan fiction.

The removed FSA text just tells me that the Zelda team agree with that. It's ridiculous to say that they completely changed which TIMELINE it was in just because they dumbed down the story. The fact is, ALttP's timeline placement was decided BEFORE FSA came out. FSA was only an addendum to that, intended to explain some of it. Why the hell would Aonuma take a forced change to the story of a minor Zelda, and use that to completely crush the meaning and purpose of his magnum opus (plot wise)?

Lex's post is still making me hate all of humanity, I'll see if I can stomach it later.

Edited by Impossible, 04 February 2009 - 12:57 AM.

[Impossible]

Okay, here we go...

I don't follow my timeline strictly because Miyamoto said it.

Oh yeah, I forgot about all that other evidence you gave based solely on semantics and overly literal interpretations of precise wording in completely random sentences that have nothing to do with other games and were never written with the timeline in mind. All of which were disproved by retranslations. If you want to follow creator quotes, why not listen to the credible ones?

ALttP never claims it was [when Ganon took it]; S&D confirms it wasn't (although no one takes this as canon because it means their ideas about their precious ALttP are wrong).

Oh god. First of all, you're clearly going against the story intended by ALttP. Secondly, how can you claim ALttP's manual no longer counts, but the just as outdated S&D does? S&D has no goddamn timeline relevance, it's like counting the manga. The old connections aren't even possible in light of TWW. So why the hell do you think Ganon went to the SR if not, as we canonically know, to get the Triforce? Why can't you just accept that ALttP-LoZ is free of any Triforce contradictions?

Define "used." If the Triforce "governed" Hyrule or served as its "providence" (in other words, if it was the divine guide for Hyrule), then by merely safeguarding it in the Sacred Realm to prevent it from being misused the king would be "using" it to help maintain the peace.

Oh god, AGAIN? Does anyone buy this shit? There is absolutely no way that this interpretation was ever at any point considered or intended by anyone involved with any of the games.

Especially given the Child timeline literally blew up the darkened mirror, the "last link between light and darkness." I take that as a pretty strong message from the developers.

Okay, HERE'S the vomit part. WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU. SO MANY GODDAMN TIMES AND YOU NEVER, EVER LISTEN. It's been established every time you've brought up this horrible argument that even if the mirrors COULD be the same in both games, despite numerous crucial contradictions in basically EVERYTHING about them, it is NOT evidence. I'm sure when I accused you of trying to use this as evidence for your timeline, you lied and defended yourself by claiming it was merely a part of your timeline, not evidence. YOU CAN NOT PROVE A THEORY WITH A THEORY THAT IS ONLY TRUE IF THE THEORY IT IS PROVING IS ASSUMED TO BE TRUE. It's insanity. This is not evidence, it's a meaningless theory. You don't like the real evidence of intent (i.e. TWW's ending, or TMC), so you MAKE UP YOUR OWN. It's disgusting. There are far stronger indications of messages from the developers that you completely ignore simply because you refuse to look from any other perspective.

The funniest thing is that if the mirrors are the same, that's still a hole in TWW-FSA because the mirror should obviously have been destroyed when Hyrule was "erased". Just like all the history of Hyrule's origins, the names of basically every place, and various other information that would be impossible to possess above the Great Sea, yet somehow exists in FSA and ALttP. It's beyond rediscovery; a new land above the sea still has no access to those things. It would break the king's Triforce wish, which is for Hyrule to be completely destroyed.

The other thing is, I'm yet to see anyone point out evidence that would make LoZ-ALttP have any logic to it. The Triforce and IW issues are pretty heavily fucked up. The other order is simply better, I don't understand what the problem with it is. Why do you insist on a timeline filled with fan fiction that ignores the true intent of the games?

Edit: Here we go, THIS is why I got so pissed off at Lex's post that I initially broke the rules when I posted before. God, now I know how Raian feels when Lex lies about crap.

Even if the mirrors could be the same on the Adult Timeline, it's simply a fact that this is NOT evidence. It can't be, it's completely fucking circular and in no way supports any game placement. It's not necessary for the mirrors to be the same... Hell, it's not possible, either, but you can't seem to see that.

And I never said it was evidence. I argued that that the Mirror of Twilight appears to have been so closely based on the Dark Mirror that there is a good chance they might be the same

It's not evidence. It's a theory. It has NO relevance to this debate. And it was never a solution to anything, considering, as I said, it doesn't actually help any placement (it contradicts both placements of FSA), nor is it necessary to any timeline theory or anything else in the timeline. You can't make a purely speculative theory that is in no way necessitated into evidence. Especially when, as was already established, the histories of the two mirrors directly contradict each other - it would have to have been in two places at once, before OoT.

I warned you against pulling this shit, I knew you would start it again eventually.

Edited by Impossible, 04 February 2009 - 03:56 AM.

[Raien]

Edit: Here we go, THIS is why I got so pissed off at Lex's post that I initially broke the rules when I posted before. God, now I know how Raian feels when Lex lies about crap.

You're not quite there yet; you still have to comprehend the futility of arguing with Lex. Right now, if an argument reaches a point where I'm having to spend half an hour on a single post deconstructing Lex's fallacies, then I'd rather hang myself. It won't accomplish anything anyway; arguments such as "the King of Hyrule used the Triforce by not using it" prove that Lex really hasn't learned what's important about theorising over the last two years since he argued "sealed away from the world". Lex, it doesn't matter whether you dropped a controversial timeline if you continue to dispute the fucking obvious.

PS: Actually, since Lex has been getting increasingly pissed off at my references to "sealed away from the world", I could quite happily replace it with this new "King used the Triforce by not using it" argument. It's just as hilariously bad as "sealed away from the world", if not more so. In fact, it's sig-worthy.

Edited by Raien, 04 February 2009 - 07:21 AM.

[Fin]

Is Lex trying to argue for his interpretation, damn the creators, or is he arguing that his intrepation is in line with creator intent? Because if it's the former, this isn't gonna go anywhere, since his philosophy on canon interpration is so fundamentally different to yours. If it's the latter, this still isn't going to anywhere, because Lex is really, really bad at interpreting intent.

[Impossible]

The Death of the Author trope is just a simplified way to refer to post-modernism. The Zelda series is not post-modernist. Lex has said screw the creators on various occasions, but for some reason isn't right now. I mean, he thinks he isn't...

[Raien]

If the Zelda timeline was written by an author, then that is the official timeline; post-modernism doesn't apply. Only if a theorist decides not to care about the official timeline can they choose to ignore authorial intent, but then this comes at the sacrifice of other theorists not caring about their personal unofficial timeline.