130 replies to this topic

[Masamune]

Until we meet again!

As an aside, I wasn't able to find that quote you mentioned. Are you sure it was the director of The Minish Cap? Because my Google-Fu wasn't enough to find it.

[Raien]

As an aside, I wasn't able to find that quote you mentioned. Are you sure it was the director of The Minish Cap? Because my Google-Fu wasn't enough to find it.

It was certainly one of the higher-up developers of TMC.

[joeymartin64]

I wanted to say why this is stupid, but Raien beat me to it. Since it's so fucking stupid, though, it bears saying twice. This is the exact kind of mentality that leads to horrible timelines and communities with horrible timeline theorising standards. What kind of fucked up field of debate allows for evidence to be assessed AFTER deciding on a theory, or judged selectively based on someone's preferred theory? Either evidence is good/valid/significant/existent/canon or it's not, you don't decide based on your own biases how it should be treated. If you're going to go off and live in your own world with your own rules like that, why bother discussing the timeline with others? You aren't working towards any kind of common end. It just creates shitstorm after shitstorm due to dozens of people all living inside their own twisted worlds and working towards their own objectives, basing their entire perception of evidence around what they want to be true.

Oh, boo-goddamn-hoo. Someone has a different approach to the timeline than the norm! Guy, let me break something to you: This is a fucking hobby. There is no right answer. There is no "common end." Why discuss it? It's entertaining. I get what you're saying about fitting the evidence to the theory, but I don't think it necessarily applies here. Yeah, if the matter were serious, doing what you've outlined above would be a pretty horrific mistake. But it's not. It's the Zelda timeline. There is no right answer. This kind of hard-assed attitude is what drives people away from these discussions.

In other words, ZU. Of course, no other place where the Zelda timeline is debated is innocent of this either... Funny how low a standard we have as a debating community. Is that what we get for having serious business debates about the chronology of video games?

Well... yeah.

Anyway, I'd be more than willing to discuss the PotFS, but put the fucking attitude away.

EDIT:

The difference here is that I take a broader approach to canon than you do.

Also, this.

Edited by joeymartin64, 28 August 2009 - 02:29 PM.

[Zola Revolution]

Yeah, I will have to see the quotes before taking Mysterious Hat, Four Swords, and Four Swords +; however, I would love to take the games out for two reasons:

1) I think they are ridiculous stories and most of the content of each game doesn't match very well.

2) It would further my point that there are games with Zelda characters in them (by this, of course I mean the Tingle games) that don't go in the timeline in the first place.

Besides, I have never liked the cartoon Link over the realistic Link.

[Raien]

While I respect that people will always do what entertains them, the idea that "there is no right answer" is simple not true. The development of the Zelda timeline is a real history, and there do exist facts and "right answers" like everything else.

[Zola Revolution]

Yes, and these right answers have yet to be released in full; i.e. the real timeline thought up by Miyamoto and Aonuma.

[joeymartin64]

Sure there are right answers. The big bad's name is Ganon, the hero wears green, ect. My point is that for many points of contention, not the least of which being the order the games take place in, there really is no universal truth.

I do see what you guys are getting at, and I agree, to an extent. Using something of questionable canon status is a bad idea, because it's not established as fact, right? I can see that.

First, I do consider it canon, going by the same "It's in the game" school of thought as the 'hiker.

Second, I don't believe anybody using it as "evidence" is holding anyone else to its canon status. It's really more a case of it appearing to resolve something that needed resolving. If someone else's timeline doesn't include it, on the grounds that it doesn't need to, I'm not going to begrudge them that, but that sort of speaks to a more casual, live-and-let-live approach to timelining as a whole, rather than the super serious quest for the absolute truth (which doesn't exist) that some people seem to have undertaken.

Edited by joeymartin64, 28 August 2009 - 03:20 PM.

[Raien]

Yes, and these right answers have yet to be released in full; i.e. the real timeline thought up by Miyamoto and Aonuma.

Real historians rarely have all the answers, but you never hear them saying "We can never know the truth" or "It's all just people's opinions". Such a perspective would be obstructive to education, and furthermore, it would justify misinformation as it has done in Zelda theorising.

If you stick to professional historical analysis, you at least guarantee a more realistic picture of the Zelda timeline, even if it's not the whole picture.

[Masamune]

While I respect that people will always do what entertains them, the idea that "there is no right answer" is simple not true. The development of the Zelda timeline is a real history, and there do exist facts and "right answers" like everything else.

While I certainly do agree with that, we don't know what it is yet. If and when they do give us the full timeline, there WILL be serious retcons in order to achieve this. Right now the facts don't lead to the right answer because it's impossible for us to reach it, because we hold ourselves to a stricter sense of canon than the developers do. They can change canon anytime they want, we can't.

Yes, and these right answers have yet to be released in full; i.e. the real timeline thought up by Miyamoto and Aonuma.

Real historians rarely have all the answers, but you never hear them saying "We can never know the truth" or "It's all just people's opinions". Such a perspective would be obstructive to education, and furthermore, it would justify misinformation as it has done in Zelda theorising.

If you stick to professional historical analysis, you at least guarantee a more realistic picture of the Zelda timeline, even if it's not the whole picture.

But this isn't real history. Because real history actually happened, there IS a real series of events that do follow. There are no contradictions except those left by biased historians. There is a real actual history that can be formed. This cannot work in the Zelda series, because these events did NOT occur and the only way TO create a type of order to them is to ignore facts.

Edited by Masamune, 28 August 2009 - 03:32 PM.

[joeymartin64]

The difference there is the word "real." Real historians deal with stuff that really happened. All that has ever "really" happened in the Zelda series are the events of each game, and events referred to in each game. I'm not going to say you can't compare real-world chronology and fictional chronology, but it's not a perfect comparison. Also, I'd like to point out that I never said we'll "never know," just that we can't know as it stands. This being the case, I tend to consider all not-completely-ridiculous viewpoints regarding any given set of facts as equally valid, since, at this point, it really is just a matter of opinion. I do have my own timeline, but I don't really consider it any "better" or more "valid" than anyone else's.

Sticking to professional analysis can also bog the hobby down in seriousness, and make it less entertaining. If that's how you like to do it, fine and dandy. I'm not going to hold it against you, but it's just not quite how I roll.

[Raien]

Perhaps the best way to express my perspective is to look at superhero comics. Throughout the last fifty years, series like Superman and Spider-man have gone through numerous stories, visions, and of course, retcons. They all have documented histories that encompass the internal mythology and behind-the-scenes development. Just look at wikipedia.

I want to see a documented history of this nature for the Legend of Zelda series, and I'm quite happy for my timeline theory to incorporate both the mythology and the development. If I am dismissive of things like the PotFS, it's because I feel it doesn't really work in the bigger picture.

Edited by Raien, 28 August 2009 - 03:51 PM.

[joeymartin64]

Um, no offense, but you're starting to lose me here. A minute ago, you were using comparisons to real historians, and it seemed as though you were concerned with Zelda's history in an in-universe fashion. Now you're talking about incorporating mythology and development. I'm a bit unclear as to how those jive, and how either would apply to there being or not being a universally right answer.

As for working in the bigger picture, it's been discussed how it can be explained in-universe, as well as that explanation helping to resolve a significant plot hole.

Edited by joeymartin64, 29 August 2009 - 02:53 AM.

[Raien]

I was never concerned about Zelda's history in an in-universe fashion. When I referred to real historians, I was referring to the fact that the Zelda timeline has a real world factual, step-by-step development like all real historical events.

For example, OoT's story incorporates events in the non-canon Sound & Drama CD. In another random example, the Batman mythology was inspired by the non-canon mini-series, "The Dark Knight Returns". This is how real history changes an in-universe mythology. This is what I use to determine the nature of the canon.

Edited by Raien, 28 August 2009 - 04:11 PM.

[Average Gamer]

It's not justified, but I am absolutely done with debating Lex theories. I refuse to debate with someone who actively twists evidence to suit their agenda.

Chill out man. His statement doesn't put him near Lex's level.

[Zola Revolution]

If you stick to professional historical analysis, you at least guarantee a more realistic picture of the Zelda timeline

It's a split timeline, it can't get very realistic after OT. So why not be creative with it, now? That's what I am doing. I am daring to go where no person has gone before with this damn thing.

Because real history actually happened, there IS a real series of events that do follow. There are no contradictions except those left by biased historians. There is a real actual history that can be formed. This cannot work in the Zelda series, because these events did NOT occur and the only way TO create a type of order to them is to ignore facts.

Well, there are still facts to follow, I think. Like the fact that MM goes after OT; or the fact that FS+ goes directly after FS. It is the unofficial information that gets accepted as fact that needs to be ignored.

Perhaps the best way to express my perspective is to look at superhero comics.

And these were, I think, un-creatively made in christian-America. Zelda was made in Japan; where they actually come out with unique ideas from imagination. Besides, American comics promote the thought that absolute violence is the answer to a problem. Whereas Zelda promotes the thought that if one has courage and wisdom, he/she can overcome a corrupt power.

So as I said, since the timeline is confirmed as split and that it hasn't been released officially; all we can do is put the timeline together as we think it should go and we might as well get creative with it as we go along. After all, no matter what any of us do, none of us may end up being right anyway. Might as well have fun before being wrong rather than being serious and racking your brain about it and then turn out to be wrong.

[Average Gamer]

Why do you always call it "Christian–America"? Why not America?

[Zola Revolution]

78.5% of America is christian
51.3% Protestant
23.9% Catholic
1.7% Mormon
1.6% Other christian

That is why I call is christian-America. Now, if we could get back on topic before this thread gets locked...

(See: post I made before this one)

[Raien]

It's a split timeline, it can't get very realistic after OT. So why not be creative with it, now? That's what I am doing. I am daring to go where no person has gone before with this damn thing.

Lol, trust me. You are not the first person with a creative spin on timeline theorising. Not by a mile.

As for why I choose my approach, it's simply because I have an interest in the history of one of my favourite franchises.

And these were, I think, un-creatively made in christian-America. Zelda was made in Japan; where they actually come out with unique ideas from imagination. Besides, American comics promote the thought that absolute violence is the answer to a problem. Whereas Zelda promotes the thought that if one has courage and wisdom, he/she can overcome a corrupt power.

Wow. That's the most ignorant bullshit about the comic book industry I've ever read. In absolutely every single stupid way. Not only have you completely ignored the numerous ultra-violent manga that exceed comic books in their ability to sicken and exploit the general public, but you've insulted every comic book writer who has brought emotionally sophisticated stories over the past thirty years.

[Zola Revolution]

That's the most ignorant bullshit about the comic book industry I've ever read.

I couldn't give two shits about the comic book industry. They are all lame ideas and suitable for only a child under the age of 8 to read, in my opinion. I will discuss nothing further about American comics for this is a Zelda forum and I would like this conversation to continue.

I enjoy the history of the Zelda franchise, too; but now that it is a split timeline, what else is there to document historically. History has nothing to do with Zelda now that some of the stories never happen historically on one tangent. It is purely creativity, now. Who is to stop us who love Zelda but want to be creative with it?

[Sir Turtlelot]

And these were, I think, un-creatively made in christian-America. Zelda was made in Japan; where they actually come out with unique ideas from imagination. Besides, American comics promote the thought that absolute violence is the answer to a problem. Whereas Zelda promotes the thought that if one has courage and wisdom, he/she can overcome a corrupt power.

Wow. That's the most ignorant bullshit about the comic book industry I've ever read. In absolutely every single stupid way. Not only have you completely ignored the numerous ultra-violent manga that exceed comic books in their ability to sicken and exploit the general public, but you've insulted every comic book writer who has brought emotionally sophisticated stories over the past thirty years.

My thoughts exactly.

[Raien]

I couldn't give two shits about the comic book industry. They are all lame ideas and suitable for only a child under the age of 8 to read, in my opinion.

I once read a story about how the Lord of Dreams made a bargain with William Shakespeare; the power of imagination in exchange for two plays. One day, the Lord of Dreams called Shakespeare's performing troupe to perform A Midsummer Night's Dream for a fairytale kingdom, who saw themselves mirrored in the mind of Shakespeare, and moved by him.

And that's a comic book. You can take your head out of your ass now.

I enjoy the history of the Zelda franchise, too; but now that it is a split timeline, what else is there to document historically. History has nothing to do with Zelda now that some of the stories never happen historically on one tangent. It is purely creativity, now. Who is to stop us who love Zelda but want to be creative with it?

I'm not talking about in-universe history. I'm talking about REAL history. I'm talking about a developer reading a non-canon Zelda dramatisation and saying "We can use these ideas in our next Zelda game." That is always interesting.

Edited by Raien, 28 August 2009 - 06:00 PM.

[Zola Revolution]

I'm not talking about in-universe history. I'm talking about REAL history. I'm talking about a developer reading a non-canon Zelda dramatisation and saying "We can use these ideas in our next Zelda game." That is always interesting.

Ah, well then; I suppose we can move on now that that is all cleared up.

[Masamune]

I'm not talking about in-universe history. I'm talking about REAL history. I'm talking about a developer reading a non-canon Zelda dramatisation and saying "We can use these ideas in our next Zelda game." That is always interesting.

That's an approach I hadn't expected. That's an interesting way of looking at it. No wonder we don't see eye to eye.

[Raien]

Well, we've already established that the in-universe mythology is interconnected with the changing vision from developers over the years. Just look at how the Silver Arrows, clearly chosen for the mythical demon-killing properties of silver, disappeared as soon as Nintendo introduced the power of Light in OoT (with the Light Arrows).

My timeline theory is, in actuality, a historical documentation of how the timeline has developed over the years. That's why I dismiss things that don't have a positive evidential basis.

[Zola Revolution]

Ah, so not really a story timeline. More like a timeline of the creations of the games themselves?

[joeymartin64]

I'm not talking about in-universe history. I'm talking about REAL history. I'm talking about a developer reading a non-canon Zelda dramatisation and saying "We can use these ideas in our next Zelda game." That is always interesting.

That's an approach I hadn't expected. That's an interesting way of looking at it. No wonder we don't see eye to eye.

This. This this this.

I will say, however, that FSA supposedly matching up with a possible pre-ALttP time period might fall under this "interesting" category of yours. Staffers taking ideas from drama CDs? Awesome. How about staffers using a bonus dungeon from one game and possibly taking some inspiration from that to frame another game as the prequel to the first one, connecting them via that bonus dungeon? Not saying that is what happened, but it's food for thought, no?

[Impossible]

Jesus, it's like we've been given some future version of Lex who has dropped all pretenses of wanting to be taken seriously, or of having any purpose other than derailing topics and trolling. So basically, it's Lex at the end of a debate. For the entire debate. We skipped the whole downward spiral!

[joeymartin64]

Forgive me for lacking a basis for comparison (I don't know who Lex is), but who are referring to there?

[Raien]

Ah, so not really a story timeline. More like a timeline of the creations of the games themselves?

It's a mixture of both. The only real difference between my timeline and most others is that I don't try to force old inconsistencies into the current mythology. There are some old ideas, like the Sleeping Zelda legend and the Silver Arrows, that have simply been left to die in the wake of later ideas, and I say we should let them rest as the creators have done.

I will say, however, that FSA supposedly matching up with a possible pre-ALttP time period might fall under this "interesting" category of yours. Staffers taking ideas from drama CDs? Awesome. How about staffers using a bonus dungeon from one game and possibly taking some inspiration from that to frame another game as the prequel to the first one, connecting them via that bonus dungeon? Not saying that is what happened, but it's food for thought, no?

The problem is evidence. You're talking about Ganon, who while sealed inside a magical sword, was somehow able to break into the Sacred Realm, which he was never able to do while free. That makes no sense, and there's absolutely no evidence to suggest it's true. Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

Give me evidence of a connection, and I'll happily accept it to be true. But not before then.

Forgive me for lacking a basis for comparison (I don't know who Lex is), but who are referring to there?

Lex is one of the old old theorists who now goes by other names ("Seran Aileron, Artemicon"). In essence, he is a historical revisionist; someone who twists the evidence to suggest they support his theories. Now, I know other people twist evidence, but this guy takes it to the absolute extreme. He once said something along the lines of "The King of Hyrule in AoL's backstory used the Triforce by not using the Triforce".

Anyone who's debated with Lex has good reason to be annoyed. I have to wonder if he's a polemicist.

[Masamune]

I ran into a 'book' or something of his timeline while quote hunting yesterday. I should have looked at it some more. Oh well.