818 replies to this topic

[ganonlord6000]

Interesting note (not really a kooky theory, but it's the best place to mention this):

The UK's Nintendo Official Magazine have recently published what they believe to be the Zelda timeline. As timelines from mainstream publications go, this is probably the best, although they do make one major mistake. The timeline goes like this:

TMC-FS-FSA-OoT-MM-TP-LoZ-AoL-ALttP-LA-OoS-OoA
TMC-FS-FSA-OoT-TWW-PH

Obviously, the big mistake is that it places LoZ-AoL before ALttP-LA. Otherwise, all the other placements are either accurate or up for debate anyway.

That isn't too bad. I think FSA might work best either before ALTTP or OOT. But the loz-alttp will never make sense to me. I'd like to see timelines from other publications. Actually, how would LOZ-FSA-ALTTP work out?

It doesn't, really.

I just figured out it doesn't.

[Smertios]

Hi, people, I don't really come here much, but I saw a thread that pretty much reminded me of this topic in specific, so I thought I'd stop by...

http://www.zeldauniv...dos-bulbos.html

This has got to be the best theory I have ever seen
lol

[MikePetersSucks]

Wow that's totally one of the stupidest things I've ever read. Thankfully no one in that thread took it seriously, or else that would've been the final straw in wiping out ZU-ers like Hitler tried to do to the Jews. >_o

[Moriatti]

MMM PIGS

[Sir Turtlelot]

Wow that's totally one of the stupidest things I've ever read. Thankfully no one in that thread took it seriously, or else that would've been the final straw in wiping out ZU-ers like Hitler tried to do to the Jews. >_o

I don't think I'd object to the idea...

[Person]

Sometimes I feel like going to ZU under a fake account and posting a completely off-the-wall theory just to see how many people take it seriously and agree with me.

[Person]

Most of the stuff on this guy's page. Seriously. He thinks that the King of Red Lions is a Gerudo and that the Twilight Realm and Sacred Realm are the same thing.

[TheAvengerLever]

Picori Man?


...Picman!?

o.o

[MikePetersSucks]

FFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUU

[Average Gamer]

http://www.zeldawiki...t#Miscellaneous

When was Zant ever called the "Prince of Twilight?"

Edited by Average Gamer, 07 March 2010 - 08:10 AM.

[MikePetersSucks]

I think that's being based on the fact that he stated he was the next in line if not for Midna.

[Average Gamer]

Yes, but no one in TP ever claimed that he was a prince, and Midna didn't even remotely suggest that he was her brother. Zant could have just as easily been a chancellor of sorts.

[MikePetersSucks]

Right, he was probably an Onmyoji. But it's a reasonable conclusion to come to if you lack enough information like we do, and we have no idea how the Twili do things (the two don't even have to be siblings, for instance). I don't think the theory is wacky enough to be in this thread with the rest of the crap.

[Average Gamer]

I really just put it here because no other thread fit. Anyway, the problem is that the fake title is stated as though it's fact.

While I'm talking about Zelda Wiki, Agahnim's page used to have some BS about his three attacks being based on different elements and his robes being burnt in the second fight. That was thankfully taken down.

[Person]

I really just put it here because no other thread fit. Anyway, the problem is that the fake title is stated as though it's fact.

While I'm talking about Zelda Wiki, Agahnim's page used to have some BS about his three attacks being based on different elements and his robes being burnt in the second fight. That was thankfully taken down.

I nixed it when I redid a ton of the Agahnim page. I think the guidelines on theories in articles need to be a bit stricter than what they have now.

[ganonlord6000]

I really just put it here because no other thread fit. Anyway, the problem is that the fake title is stated as though it's fact.

While I'm talking about Zelda Wiki, Agahnim's page used to have some BS about his three attacks being based on different elements and his robes being burnt in the second fight. That was thankfully taken down.

I nixed it when I redid a ton of the Agahnim page. I think the guidelines on theories in articles need to be a bit stricter than what they have now.

I didn't think Zelda Wiki had problems like that. Zeldapedia on the other hand....(I have given up editing pages there)

Edited by ganonlord6000, 13 March 2010 - 02:18 PM.

[Person]

I really just put it here because no other thread fit. Anyway, the problem is that the fake title is stated as though it's fact.

While I'm talking about Zelda Wiki, Agahnim's page used to have some BS about his three attacks being based on different elements and his robes being burnt in the second fight. That was thankfully taken down.

I nixed it when I redid a ton of the Agahnim page. I think the guidelines on theories in articles need to be a bit stricter than what they have now.

I didn't think Zelda Wiki had problems like that. Zeldapedia on the other hand....(I have given up editing pages there)

The theory guidelines prohibit timeline stuff and theories that aren't supported by a large portion of the fanbase. Stuff like "Fierce Deity is Link's Terminan double" or "Hero's Spirit is the OoT Link" are allowed, but stuff like that was on the Agahnim page gets nixed pretty quickly.

[Average Gamer]

Stuff like "Fierce Deity is Link's Terminan double" or "Hero's Spirit is the OoT Link" are allowed, but stuff like that was on the Agahnim page gets nixed pretty quickly.

The Agahnim spells and burns BS was actually up there for months, if not years.

[Person]

Stuff like "Fierce Deity is Link's Terminan double" or "Hero's Spirit is the OoT Link" are allowed, but stuff like that was on the Agahnim page gets nixed pretty quickly.

The Agahnim spells and burns BS was actually up there for months, if not years.

The Agahnim page was also generally in terrible shape before it got cleaned up.

[ganonlord6000]

Stuff like "Fierce Deity is Link's Terminan double" or "Hero's Spirit is the OoT Link" are allowed, but stuff like that was on the Agahnim page gets nixed pretty quickly.

The Agahnim spells and burns BS was actually up there for months, if not years.

The Agahnim page was also generally in terrible shape before it got cleaned up.

Why would there be any theories on Agahnim in the first place? All we know about him is that he was Ganon. Unless I'm misinterpreting the ending.

And here's something I always thought was a little kooky: all of the theories about the book of mudora in ALTTP. Why do people like the theorize with something that only appears in one game and is only used twice?! I'm surprised those theories haven't been mentioned here yet.

Edited by ganonlord6000, 17 March 2010 - 10:19 AM.

[Person]

Well, people just like to make stuff up where the games are ambiguous.

[ganonlord6000]

Well, people just like to make stuff up where the games are ambiguous.

There's probably a reason why.

[Fin]

Well, people just like to make stuff up where the games are ambiguous.

There's probably a reason why.

Because people like to try to figure out unexplained things in pretty much any story, and whatever theory they reason out they'll generally think of as the most likely/obvious explanation.

[ganonlord6000]

Well, people just like to make stuff up where the games are ambiguous.

There's probably a reason why.

Because people like to try to figure out unexplained things in pretty much any story, and whatever theory they reason out they'll generally think of as the most likely/obvious explanation.

I've lost count of the theories I have seen that have tried to do that.

[Average Gamer]

You can always count on ZU:

http://www.zeldauniv...yal-family.html

[MikePetersSucks]

That's clearly a WMG, to be fair.

[Jarsh]

Well, the Miyamoto order may be a kooky theory now. I got two quotes from a Japanese magazine in 1999 I found here in which Miyamoto says the order is OoT-ALttP-LoZ/AoL.

宮本氏:(時オカ→神トラ)それから初代ときてリンクの冒険という順番になる。
(電撃64、1999年1月号)

and

宮本氏:(時のオカリナの)次にSFC。
（電撃64、1999年1月号）

The best translation via online translator (never mind, he didn't use an online translator) for both of these that Pinecove of ZU made are:

Miyamoto: Oca(rina of time) is first then leads to Triforce of (the) Gods. The older then becomes Link's Adventure

and

"Ocarina of time then SFC."

"SFC" probably means "Super Famicom" which is referring to the Super Famicom game, Triforce of the Gods (ALttP, of course).

A translator at Zelda Informer will soon translate both of these, but I think it's clear the infamous quote made in '98 was either a mistranslation or Miyamoto being confused (the former sounds more likely considering the poor translation work done back then).

Edited by Jarsh, 30 March 2010 - 10:06 PM.

[ganonlord6000]

Well, the Miyamoto order may be a kooky theory now. I got two quotes from a Japanese magazine in 1999 I found here in which Miyamoto says the order is OoT-ALttP-LoZ/AoL.

宮本氏時オカ→神トラ)それから初代ときてリンクの冒険という順番になる。
(電撃64、1999年1月号)

and

宮本氏時のオカリナの)次にSFC。
（電撃64、1999年1月号）

The best translation via online translator for both of these that Pinecove of ZU made are:

Miyamoto: Oca(rina of time) is first then leads to Triforce of (the) Gods. The older then becomes Link's Adventure

and

"Ocarina of time then SFC."

"SFC" probably means "Super Famicom" which is referring to the Super Famicom game, Triforce of the Gods (ALttP, of course).

A translator at Zelda Informer will soon translate both of these, but I think it's clear the infamous quote made in '98 was either a mistranslation or Miyamoto being confused (the former sounds more likely considering the poor translation work done back then).

It is clear. I can only imagine the responces this will get on ZI. This is newer than the 1998 quote. And was there ever any doubt that Nintendo always has, and always will, intended for ALTTP to precede LOZ? But where is LA? Then again, that game wasn't a problem until 2001. That page has to have been made last year because it mentions TP occuring a few hundred years after OOT (that actually makes more sense than just 100 years)! Not only that, it gives us most of the timeline!

Work has confirmed that the same person links

• Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask
• Twilight, Crossbow Training
• Tact of the wind, Four Swords + (Nabitorakkazu), Phantom Hourglass
• Triforce of the Gods, explore the island dream
• The Legend of Zelda, Adventure of Link

Notice the problem with the bolded text?

Edited by ganonlord6000, 30 March 2010 - 05:54 PM.

[Jarsh]

It is clear. I can only imagine the responces this will get on ZI. This is newer than the 1998 quote. And was there ever any doubt that Nintendo always has, and always will, intended for ALTTP to precede LOZ? But where is LA? Then again, that game wasn't a problem until 2001. That page has to have been made last year because it mentions TP occuring a few hundred years after OOT (that actually makes more sense than just 100 years)! Not only that, it gives us most of the timeline!

I talked about it with some of the people on ZU and they were fairly okay with it. I just hope the actual magazine in question doesn't have to be scanned before we can finally let go of the '98 (likely mistranslated) Miyamoto quote.

On another note, at what year did the offical Japanese website say that LA was a sequel to ALttP? Personally, I'd say the official Japanese site counts for something.

Notice the problem with the bolded text?

Yeah, I noticed that too. That's why I only paid attention to the site when the article cited any magazines/sources in general. That list doesn't cite any sources, so it seems more like speculation.

[ganonlord6000]

It is clear. I can only imagine the responces this will get on ZI. This is newer than the 1998 quote. And was there ever any doubt that Nintendo always has, and always will, intended for ALTTP to precede LOZ? But where is LA? Then again, that game wasn't a problem until 2001. That page has to have been made last year because it mentions TP occuring a few hundred years after OOT (that actually makes more sense than just 100 years)! Not only that, it gives us most of the timeline!

I talked about it with some of the people on ZU and they were fairly okay with it. I just hope the actual magazine in question doesn't have to be scanned before we can finally let go of the '98 (likely mistranslated) Miyamoto quote.

On another note, at what year did the offical Japanese website say that LA was a sequel to ALttP? Personally, I'd say the official Japanese site counts for something.

Notice the problem with the bolded text?

Yeah, I noticed that too. That's why I only paid attention to the site when the article cited any magazines/sources in general. That list doesn't cite any sources, so it seems more like speculation.

I believe the japanese LA website still says it's a sequel to ALTTP. The 1998 Miyamoto timeline never made any sense anyway. It's a good thing Miyamoto himself said ALTTP occurs before LOZ. Has this been mentioned on ZI yet? And thanks for posting the link on the thread I started on this topic on ZU. I would have posted the link myself if the forums wern't down.