79 replies to this topic

[bjamez7573]

So, I've been thinking about reconsidering my timeline - specifically my placement of LOZ/AOL - but I am trying to look at all of the evidence before I decide. As some of you know from my last thread, I strongly supported LOZ/AOL pre-OOT. Now, after thinking about it and doing some research, I am not quite sure.

I want to make sure I don't overlook anything, so if y'all could help me in finding all of the evidence that shows ALTTP to be LOZ's intended prequel, it would be appreciated .

So far, I know of these three:

1) the back of the ALTTP box

2) The quote by OOT Script Director Toru Osawa, who talks about the town names being named after the sages, indicating LOZ/AOL after ALTTP.

3) The reconfirmation of that idea by Anouma in that recent interview (although he was talking about the intent back then, not now)

I can't find anything in-game that shows a connection between them.

Is there anything else?

[Fin]

There's also the bit in the Japanese LttP manual that tells of Ganon's origin.

ハイラルをおびやかした邪悪の王ガノンは、まさにこの時、誕生したのです。

Indeed, the King of Evil Ganon, the one who has threatened Hyrule so, was born at this time.

At this time the evil King Ganon, who threatened Hyrule, was born.

The wording implies that the reader should already be aware of who Ganon is.

[Person]

The AoL backstory says that it took place when Hyrule was still one kingdom, and the back of the box uses language very similar to that, as if ALttP was supposed to take place when the kingdom was still united.

[ganonlord6000]

It is also stated that ALTTP was a prequel to LOZ in ALTTP's official players guide. I am debating if LOZ/AOL should go after ALTTP or after ST.

[Erimgard]

1) the back of the ALTTP box

Which has since been changed.

2) The quote by OOT Script Director Toru Osawa, who talks about the town names being named after the sages, indicating LOZ/AOL after ALTTP.

It was only stated that LoZ/AoL happen after the imprisoning war. Not after aLttP. The imprisoning war was "centuries" before aLttP.

3) The reconfirmation of that idea by Anouma in that recent interview (although he was talking about the intent back then, not now)

Aonuma only said they take place after OoT, not aLttP.

The wording implies that the reader should already be aware of who Ganon is.

Which is actually moreso evidence that LoZ is before aLttP, as the manual is written as a historical account starting with creation and ending with Aganhim's manipulation of the soldiers. If the reader is already supposed to be aware of who Ganon is, and the manual is a historical account...


Also, I find it interesting that Takashi Tezuka, the man who directed most of the old games, wrote the plot for them, and still directs/produces today, saw it fit to, when he remade LoZ for the Broadcast Satelleview

A: Change the game's backstory so that it implied LoZ took place after the Imprisoning War
B: Imply that Ganon only got one piece of the Triforce, and not the whole thing during the Imprisoning War
C: Imply that Hylians (who are extinct in aLttP) are alive, or were recently alive, by changing Link's shield into the Hylian Shield in BS-X Zelda, as opposed to the Magic Shield
D: Changed the Magical Sword into the Master Sword (which according to aLttP, sleeps "FOREVER!" after aLttP)

So why died the man who wrote the plot for all the games put so much implication into the BS-X edition of Zelda that LoZ was pre-aLttP? And why did Miyamoto state in 1998 that LoZ was in between OoT (The Imprisoning War of the time) and aLttP, just as BS-X Zelda also stated, if it wasn't true?

Yeah, I know. I'm an ignorant fool who isn't at your level of theorizing, becuase I let Lex force feed me my opinions. I've heard it all. Fire away boys.

[Average Gamer]

Which has since been changed.

Source?

Which is actually moreso evidence that LoZ is before aLttP,

How? Ganon being "born" in the IW doesn't mean that LoZ has to come before ALttP.

Regarding the BS games, I don't consider them canon, not to mention that BS LoZ was an illusion within the game itself. Some people (on ZU) have even speculated that BS LoZ was just a random, generic "training session" to groom that hero for AST.

And why did Miyamoto state in 1998 that LoZ was in between OoT (The Imprisoning War of the time) and aLttP,

Because, as has been pointed out before, he apparently didn't know the timeline back then. Also, the "Miyamoto Order" was supposedly mistranslated and taken down from official sites years ago.

Now, to quote myself:

If the order was OoT-LoZ-AoL-ALttP, Ganon's Makai would have to be the Sacred Realm. In AoL's manual, it is said that Ganon's minions can bring lackeys out of Ganon's Makai without difficulty. Thus the Sages' Seal from OoT would logically be broken. After Link assembles and uses the entire Triforce, Ganon's Makai should cease to exist.

With that in mind, ALttP would have to feature a new Ganondorf wandering into a pristine Sacred Realm and corrupting it before a new Sages' Seal is made. Thus, there would be no point in mentioning the IW, seeing as how that Ganon was dead, that seal was broken, and that Dark World had ceased to exist.

OoT-LoZ-AoL-ALttP doesn't make sense.

[Showsni]

Well, prior to A Link to the Past the triforce has never left the Sacred Realm; and during LoZ-AoL, it clearly has. So they have to come after it.

[bjamez7573]

Which has since been changed.

Source?

GBA ALTTP box doesn't make such a statement, and it replaces SNES ALTTP, so that how that has changed.

There's also the bit in the Japanese LttP manual that tells of Ganon's origin.

ハイラルをおびやかした邪悪の王ガノンは、まさにこの時、誕生したのです。

Indeed, the King of Evil Ganon, the one who has threatened Hyrule so, was born at this time.

At this time the evil King Ganon, who threatened Hyrule, was born.

The wording implies that the reader should already be aware of who Ganon is.

Yeah, I can see that if you assume that there is only one Ganon. Of course, there were only 3 games back then, so that seems reasonable (I guess the reader's would see that the name of Ganondorf, who is the main villian in ALTTP, gets a name change to Ganon, so therefore they would think that is the same bad guy from the NES games), but they would also recognize Link, too in a similiar way. On the other hand, considering the massive time gap between the two games, it would also seem logical to assume a different Ganon, just like there is a different Link. To me it could go either way, unless there is a creator quote that specifically mentions ALTTP as the origin's story for LOZ Ganon that I missed.

However, most of this is moot because GBA ALTTP manual doesn't mention that anyway.

Average Gamer, what does Ganon's Makai mean?

Well, prior to A Link to the Past the triforce has never left the Sacred Realm; and during LoZ-AoL, it clearly has. So they have to come after it.

Where do you get this from? Where has it said that it never left?

[Showsni]

Well, it's pretty heavily implied, if not outright stated, in the IW story. We're told how the gods made the land and left the triforce in the SR; that legends spread about the triforce, and people began searching for the SR; but that no one ever found it, until one day Ganondorf did. The story doesn't allow for a previous discovery of the SR.

[Average Gamer]

GBA ALTTP box doesn't make such a statement, and it replaces SNES ALTTP, so that how that has changed.

Alright. Not sure how significant that is though, since it was a port and the GBA manual just looks like a condensed version of the SNES one due to space reasons.

Average Gamer, what does Ganon's Makai mean?

It's essentially a demonic realm that Ganon rules over. In OoT the Sacred Realm presumably became a Makai, and demons presumably resided within it, giving Ganondorf a Mazoku (Demon Clan). In OoT, we last see Ganondorf enraged and bloodthirsty, and his desire to own the Triforce still exists. If LoZ came after OoT, Ganondorf would presumably invade and crush Hyrule ASAP, and his Makai would be the corrupted Sacred Realm.

[bjamez7573]

Well, it's pretty heavily implied, if not outright stated, in the IW story. We're told how the gods made the land and left the triforce in the SR; that legends spread about the triforce, and people began searching for the SR; but that no one ever found it, until one day Ganondorf did. The story doesn't allow for a previous discovery of the SR.

The Myth

(the talk about creation of the world, yada yada)
The Triforce, respectively: "one who would Conquer Power," "one who would Govern Wisdom," and "one who would Temper Courage" held three different emblems. It would shine in the Sacred Realm, somewhere in the world, until one who was worthy of inheriting those powers appeared.
..............................

This seems to suggest that this is how the Triforce functions, not that it hasn't been touched before (of course, at the beginning of the time, the setting for this section of the manual, this would be the case).

The Sacred Realm

Hyrule, where many Hylian relics have been left, is an area very much tied to myth. One such example is an old saying about the Triforce. "The golden power lies somewhere descended from the heavens. He who claims it as his own shall have their desires granted by the gods."
The people, seeking the Golden Power, began searching for the Sacred Realm. Many reports began to surface; lying beneath the relics of the desert, inside the graves of the race of people in the high mountains, but no one ever found it. Longing soon became greed, and it was not uncommon for blood to be spilled for certain information. The more carefree people had to live days of disquiet.
That is, until one day, completely by chance, the entrance to the Sacred Realm was opened by by a certain group of thieves. It was a world different from our own. The Triforce was there, casting a golden light in the midst of twilight. The group began to push aside one another, changing the color of their eyes, and tried to pressed forward.
After the bloody confrontation among comrades had ended, the victor was the leader of the group. When the leader touched the Triforce, his hands stained in fresh blood, the emblems' spirits began to whisper.
"If thou hast a desire, then I shall desire it as well."
Crossing time and space, the leader began to laugh so loudly that it is said to have echoed all the way to the distant Hyrule. The man's name was Ganondorf, and his common name was Ganon of the race of evil thieves. Indeed, the King of Evil Ganon, the one who has threatened Hyrule so, was born at this time.

When this section starts, it sets a new time setting (That isn't just 'after creation'), based on the fact that they said many hylian relics were left, indicating a previous Hyrule before. Nothing is stated or implied that the Triforce was never taken before. Its just that people didn't know where it was.

Aside from game evidence, are there any creator quotes that back up ALTTP-LOZ?

Edited by bjamez7573, 30 September 2009 - 08:10 PM.

[Person]

The Imprisoning War story says that the people returned to peaceful living until Agahnim showed up and that Ganon couldn't figure out how to return to the Light World. If that's true, then what is he doing mucking about in LoZ?

As for the back of the box, that statement has not been contradicted. Simply not mentioning a game's timeline placement on the back of the GBA box does not mean that it changed. The manual was compressed for space reasons, and almost nothing was changed.

[bjamez7573]

As for the back of the box, that statement has not been contradicted. Simply not mentioning a game's timeline placement on the back of the GBA box does not mean that it changed. The manual was compressed for space reasons, and almost nothing was changed.

That statement has been removed, however, and to me that shows intent to fix what the box shows as clearly false, given the newer games out at the time. Not to mention, I don't see anything in ALTTP that connects it to LOZ, so that statement was one of the only clues to tell us that it was a prequel.

How do you know that it was compressed for space reasons? I suppose it would be a much thicker manual, but they could have added many more of the essential details of the IW in the manual and still shortened it without butchering the entire thing.

Edited by bjamez7573, 01 October 2009 - 12:45 AM.

[Person]

The removal of information from a newer release does not mean that this information has been invalidated. If that's the case, then the Master Sword has no backstory and Ganon wasn't involved in the IW at all. And I seriously have heard people try to argue those based on the GBA manual alone. The GBA version just tells the essential info in two paragraphs instead of 6 pages. That's clearly space compression, not retcon.

[MikePetersSucks]

It was only stated that LoZ/AoL happen after the imprisoning war. Not after aLttP. The imprisoning war was "centuries" before aLttP.

Nothing involving the Triforce can go inbetween the Imprisoning War and LTTP, since the Triforce is in Ganon's possession.

[Erimgard]

It was only stated that LoZ/AoL happen after the imprisoning war. Not after aLttP. The imprisoning war was "centuries" before aLttP.

Nothing involving the Triforce can go inbetween the Imprisoning War and LTTP, since the Triforce is in Ganon's possession.

Not according to BS-LoZ.

@Average Gamer
Very good point on the AoL manual thing about calling up enemies from the Makai. That however is an inconsistency that exists in aLttP-LoZ as well though. The Makai vanished after aLttP, yet it's present in the AoL manual.

How? Ganon being "born" in the IW doesn't mean that LoZ has to come before ALttP.

Not the being "born" part. The fact that the reader is supposed to already know about the original LoZ game, and the manual is written as historical account.

[Jarsh]

Not according to BS-LoZ.

Not sure if I'm understanding this correctly, but BS LoZ may not have really happened and could have been some sort of test:

Fortune Teller:
Ahem, so it's you? I've been waiting.

Character:
Huh!?

Fortune Teller:
This event is performed every Sunday. When the fourth story ends you will receive the password for subscription. Of course if you get a good score, other people will be able to see that on the memory pack.

Character:
Memory pack?

Fortune Teller:
Hahahahah..... If you collect all of the Triforce, I will give you a secret membership certificate... Now, would you please enter that door. Hahahahah....



Character:
What's.....going..... on?

Seems like the 'hero' was just warped to a time that is not his own, no way to know if it's before ALttP or not.

That statement has been removed, however, and to me that shows intent to fix what the box shows as clearly false, given the newer games out at the time. Not to mention, I don't see anything in ALTTP that connects it to LOZ, so that statement was one of the only clues to tell us that it was a prequel.

They probably took that quote off of the box because there are far more Zelda games now. Back then, the only other main games were the two NES ones and then ALttP. So, it was easy for the ALttP box to refer to one of the only Zelda games released at the time.

How do you know that it was compressed for space reasons? I suppose it would be a much thicker manual, but they could have added many more of the essential details of the IW in the manual and still shortened it without butchering the entire thing.

It would have been a really thick manual, actually the GBA ALttP manual is one of the thickest GBA manuals I've ever seen (it's about 45 pages). Compare that to, say, Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga which is also around 45 pages, but is only ONE game. Also consider they needed to include story and gameplay controls for TWO games in the ALttP GBA manual. So, logically, they'd have to scale back many elements of the story just to make all of the gameplay controls for both games to fit in one manual. So it was pretty much inevitable that we'd see many aspects of the story cut out to fit it.

Edited by Jarsh, 01 January 2010 - 04:37 AM.

[Average Gamer]

Very good point on the AoL manual thing about calling up enemies from the Makai. That however is an inconsistency that exists in aLttP-LoZ as well though. The Makai vanished after aLttP, yet it's present in the AoL manual.

However, LoZ Ganon is never given a real origin. He may have actually been born as a demon and his Makai may have been something other than the Sacred Realm.

Not the being "born" part. The fact that the reader is supposed to already know about the original LoZ game, and the manual is written as historical account.

Yet if the manual is treated as though it's an excerpt from Hyrulian history, Ganon may have "since antagonized" Hyrule in a symbolic or passive sense, seeing as how the manual states that nothing happened between the IW and ALttP.

[Sign of Justice]

The removal of information from a newer release does not mean that this information has been invalidated. If that's the case, then the Master Sword has no backstory and Ganon wasn't involved in the IW at all. And I seriously have heard people try to argue those based on the GBA manual alone. The GBA version just tells the essential info in two paragraphs instead of 6 pages. That's clearly space compression, not retcon.

Dan Owsen said that the box is wrong (take that with a grain of salt, however)

[Jarsh]

Dan Owsen said that the box is wrong (take that with a grain of salt, however)

That's true, but would you rather say that your boss is wrong, or the box?

Question: Dan, it appears something about the Legend of Zelda: Link to the Past translation is jumbled. It is said the events played out in Ocarina of Time were the events that happened in the story of A Link to the Past, and therefore were to solve many story holes. But if Zelda 3's instruction manual is read, these events sound completely different, and now there seem to be more holes than ever. It clearly states on the back of the box of A Link to the Past that it was a prequel to Zelda’s 1 and 2, but Miyamoto says it comes after them. What's the truth?

Dan: The truth is, the text on the box (and possibly the Nintendo Power guide) is wrong. D'oh! If you just ignore the box text, the stories fit together better. Basically, the events in Ocarina are the "Imprisoning War" described in the SNES version's story. The Golden Land was the Sacred Realm before Ganondorf corrupted it. The order of the stories is: Ocarina, Zelda 1, Zelda 2, A Link to the Past. Since Link's Awakening was a dream (or was it?) it's hard to say where it fits.

It doesn't seem like he knows what he's talking about, because the way he says the stories "fit together better" can also be applied to ALttP-LoZ/AoL. Also, this quote was released less than a year after Miyamoto said his timeline, so he's just regurgitating exactly what Miyamoto said.

Edited by Jarsh, 01 October 2009 - 06:22 PM.

[KJ Contrarian]

Neither theory (OoT-LoZ-Alttp or OoT-Alttp-LoZ) is correct.

LoZ-Alttp makes no sense for the reasons Average Gamer stated.

OoT-Alttp makes no sense because at the end of OoT (Adult) Ganon is sealed with the ToP, but at the beginning of Alttp Ganon is sealed with the entire Triforce.

Therefore, neither is correct.

The answer is the split :
OoT-LoZ-AoL (Adult)
OoT-MM-Alttp-LA (Child)

I believe this is what the OoT writers, Osawa and Tanabe, intended with their “split” ending to OoT. They wanted to find a way for both LoZ and Alttp to fit in the overall timeline scheme and it make sense.

Miyamoto’s timeline was half correct. He somehow grasped from his writing team that LoZ came after the Adult ending, with Ganon in possession of the ToP (The LoZ manual backstory basically is OoT’s adult ending). However, Miyamoto just wasn’t aware of the writer's split concept for Alttp – Miyamoto in his quote threw it after AoL in a linear timeline because that was the level of his understanding as Producer – Especially since he thought of Alttp as the “True” gameplay sequel to LoZ. At that time, he wasn’t in full understanding of the split idea – That explains why we never even heard the split confirmed by Miyamoto/Aonuma until TP’s development.

I ask this: Why else would Osawa/Tanabe have done the split ending to OoT? Why? Just so MM could come next? Perhaps, but was MM even conceptualized when OoT’s ending was written? The answer to the prequel/sequel debate for LoZ/Alttp is that they are in opposite timelines.

[Jarsh]

Neither theory (OoT-LoZ-Alttp or OoT-Alttp-LoZ) is correct.

LoZ-Alttp makes no sense for the reasons Average Gamer stated.

OoT-Alttp makes no sense because at the end of OoT (Adult) Ganon is sealed with the ToP, but at the beginning of Alttp Ganon is sealed with the entire Triforce.

Therefore, neither is correct.

The answer is the split :
OoT-LoZ-AoL (Adult)
OoT-MM-Alttp-LA (Child)

I believe this is what the OoT writers, Osawa and Tanabe, intended with their “split” ending to OoT. They wanted to find a way for both LoZ and Alttp to fit in the overall timeline scheme and it make sense.

Miyamoto’s timeline was half correct. He somehow grasped from his writing team that LoZ came after the Adult ending, with Ganon in possession of the ToP (The LoZ manual backstory basically is OoT’s adult ending). However, Miyamoto just wasn’t aware of the writer's split concept for Alttp – Miyamoto in his quote threw it after AoL in a linear timeline because that was the level of his understanding as Producer – Especially since he thought of Alttp as the “True” gameplay sequel to LoZ. At that time, he wasn’t in full understanding of the split idea – That explains why we never even heard the split confirmed by Miyamoto/Aonuma until TP’s development.

I ask this: Why else would Osawa/Tanabe have done the split ending to OoT? Why? Just so MM could come next? Perhaps, but was MM even conceptualized when OoT’s ending was written? The answer to the prequel/sequel debate for LoZ/Alttp is that they are in opposite timelines.

Just to make it clear: I'm not arguing against an ALttP CT placement, it's one of the placements I support.

However, if we are traveling back in time to old intent, why would Osawa say that OoT was the Imprisoning War in ALttP (at the time) if he meant for it to be on the CT?

And if there was an in-game explanation in OoT for Ganondorf getting the ToP, why wouldn't they do the same to have an in-game explanation for Ganon to have the full Triforce in time for ALttP?

Edited by Jarsh, 01 October 2009 - 08:50 PM.

[Sign of Justice]

It doesn't seem like he knows what he's talking about, because the way he says the stories "fit together better" can also be applied to ALttP-LoZ/AoL. Also, this quote was released less than a year after Miyamoto said his timeline, so he's just regurgitating exactly what Miyamoto said.

What makes Miyamoto wrong? I mean I'd say that OoT-LttP-LoZ/AoL made more sense at the time, but, you know, OoT-LoZ/AoL-LttP WAS the official timeline (at the time).

I'm really hesitant to say that the intent behind the split existed in 1998. I mean nothing implied it at the time. A linear timeline worked just as well and the official timeline WAS linear. It was only since TWW's release that anything implying a split ever appeared.

[Jarsh]

It doesn't seem like he knows what he's talking about, because the way he says the stories "fit together better" can also be applied to ALttP-LoZ/AoL. Also, this quote was released less than a year after Miyamoto said his timeline, so he's just regurgitating exactly what Miyamoto said.

What makes Miyamoto wrong? I mean I'd say that OoT-LttP-LoZ/AoL made more sense at the time, but, you know, OoT-LoZ/AoL-LttP WAS the official timeline (at the time).

I'm really hesitant to say that the intent behind the split existed in 1998. I mean nothing implied it at the time. A linear timeline worked just as well and the official timeline WAS linear. It was only since TWW's release that anything implying a split ever appeared.

I'm not really insinuating that Miyamoto doesn't know what he's talking about, just Dan Owsen. Like I said, he's just repeating whatever his boss said about seven months ago. He justifies how OoT-LoZ/AoL-ALttP works with the same points that could be applied to OoT-ALttP-LoZ/AoL, which is why I reason that.

Also, I'll just quote Average Gamer from his recent post on ZU as to why there was probably a split intended upon OoT's release:

In OoT's ending, we see Link get sent back in time by Zelda, with Zelda stating that she is trying to make up for the mistake of getting Link involved in her plans. Afterward, even though Link has been sent back and one would expect that we'd see him or an altered future, we see the same timeline that Link just left, possibly even days later due to the organized party at Lon Lon Ranch. Link is nowhere to be found; the shot of Epona aimlessly running across Hyrule Field almost seems to emphasize that Link is gone. After that, we see where Link went. The camera effect transitioning from Death Mountain to Link even appears to be some sort of cosmic rift or tunnel.

Personally, it looks like a split timeline was intended within OoT itself.

Edited by Jarsh, 01 October 2009 - 10:17 PM.

[bjamez7573]

The removal of information from a newer release does not mean that this information has been invalidated

In the case of the box text, I see the removal as intent by the developers to correct what really doesn't make sense in the light of other games being released. Therefore, that info on the box is no longer evidence that can be used to connect ALTTP-LOZ. And, I don't see anything in ALTTP's story that connects to LOZ at all. That quote on the back of the box was one of the only clues we had to place ALTTP. That is, unless you know of a creator quote that reinforces ALTTP-LOZ connection. I've been looking, and aside from the quotes I listed (which aren't very direct and not easy to necessarily understand their intent in regards to ALTTP-LOZ), I haven't been able to find any others.

The GBA version just tells the essential info in two paragraphs instead of 6 pages. That's clearly space compression, not retcon.

It would have been a really thick manual, actually the GBA ALttP manual is one of the thickest GBA manuals I've ever seen (it's about 45 pages). Compare that to, say, Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time which is also around 45 pages, but is only ONE game. Also consider they needed to include story and gameplay controls for TWO games in the ALttP GBA manual. So, logically, they'd have to scale back many elements of the story just to make all of the gameplay controls for both games to fit in one manual. So it was pretty much inevitable that we'd see many aspects of the story cut out to fit it.

Ok, I can see that it was done for space compression. I agree that the main story is still intact, but some of the details that we cling to are not relevent. They had to decide which details were most important to summarize the story, therefore some details left out were not of importance. Although, they did skip history sections such as creation and the master sword, which won't make any difference to the overall timeline in terms of conflicts with other games.

Example: Ganon the Evil King being "born" and how that conflicts with Ganon being "born" in FSA. Since they left that out, it obviously wasn't important enough to the story. Not to mention, they were depending on the game to tell us how Ganon was involved in the Seal War, but that statement about him being "born" is not reinforced in-game, at least from what I remember. Therefore it shouldn't be used as evidence of a contradiction. Again, this is just an example.

I'm really hesitant to say that the intent behind the split existed in 1998. I mean nothing implied it at the time. A linear timeline worked just as well and the official timeline WAS linear. It was only since TWW's release that anything implying a split ever appeared.

Just as Average Gamer has argued, it does seem that a split was intended, based on the ending. However, the timeline looks linear because there were only 5 games in it, none of which were on the child timeline yet.
I think it looked something like this:
---------Adult-/ALTTP-LA-LOZ-AOL
------------OOT
---------Child-\
At the time, however, we didn't think of creating a split where one split had no games on it. We just wanted to know how the games connected together. Therefore it looked linear, but the intention probably was that it was split.

Edited by bjamez7573, 01 October 2009 - 11:40 PM.

[KJ Contrarian]

Just to make it clear: I'm not arguing against an ALttP CT placement, it's one of the placements I support.

However, if we are traveling back in time to old intent, why would Osawa say that OoT was the Imprisoning War in ALttP (at the time) if he meant for it to be on the CT?

And if there was an in-game explanation in OoT for Ganondorf getting the ToP, why wouldn't they do the same to have an in-game explanation for Ganon to have the full Triforce in time for ALttP?

Both good questions. Both require speculation to some extent, but my thoughts are this:

As to the first question, Yes. Osawa clearly stated OoT as the Imprisoning war at that time. I believe he wrote OoT as the IW, but decided to retcon the IW as no longer the "set-up" event for Ganon's appearance in Alttp. They likely may have had intentions of addressing this "set-up" event later. This is what I believe - And FSA is likely that new "set-up" event - Especially with a Alttp GBA manual with significant shrinkage and modifications.

As to the second question, I use the same answer as to the first one. They didn't have an in-game explanation for Ganon to have the full Triforce in Alttp because it was left open for a future game to explain. And again, I believe a future game did (FSA).

Edited by KJ Contrarian, 02 October 2009 - 06:49 AM.

[MikePetersSucks]

Neither theory (OoT-LoZ-Alttp or OoT-Alttp-LoZ) is correct.

LoZ-Alttp makes no sense for the reasons Average Gamer stated.

OoT-Alttp makes no sense because at the end of OoT (Adult) Ganon is sealed with the ToP, but at the beginning of Alttp Ganon is sealed with the entire Triforce.

Therefore, neither is correct.

The answer is the split :
OoT-LoZ-AoL (Adult)
OoT-MM-Alttp-LA (Child)

I believe this is what the OoT writers, Osawa and Tanabe, intended with their “split” ending to OoT. They wanted to find a way for both LoZ and Alttp to fit in the overall timeline scheme and it make sense.

Miyamoto’s timeline was half correct. He somehow grasped from his writing team that LoZ came after the Adult ending, with Ganon in possession of the ToP (The LoZ manual backstory basically is OoT’s adult ending). However, Miyamoto just wasn’t aware of the writer's split concept for Alttp – Miyamoto in his quote threw it after AoL in a linear timeline because that was the level of his understanding as Producer – Especially since he thought of Alttp as the “True” gameplay sequel to LoZ. At that time, he wasn’t in full understanding of the split idea – That explains why we never even heard the split confirmed by Miyamoto/Aonuma until TP’s development.

I ask this: Why else would Osawa/Tanabe have done the split ending to OoT? Why? Just so MM could come next? Perhaps, but was MM even conceptualized when OoT’s ending was written? The answer to the prequel/sequel debate for LoZ/Alttp is that they are in opposite timelines.

That's complete and utter bunk. For one thing, TWW, natch.

Not according to BS-LoZ.

Uh, how so? It doesn't even seem to take place in the real Hyrule.

[KJ Contrarian]

For one thing, TWW, natch.

Please explain - I haven't a clue what you mean by that phrase. It's no secret to anyone here that TWW significantly changed whatever timeline scheme the developers had prior that game's release in 2003.

The point being discussed in this particular post was the thinking of the writing team at the time OoT was made (1998).

Again, how does it make sense in 1998 that Alttp can follow OoT's adult events? Ganon is sealed with the ToP, but at the outset of Alttp Ganon is sealed with the whole Triforce. Alttp must have been meant at that point to follow the Child ending, and LoZ the Adult.

[Erimgard]

The point isn't whether BS-LoZ was a real event.

The point is that the man who supervised the creation of the two BS games is the man who wrote the plot for all the old games, and continues to direct/produce/script write/supervise just as much, if not more, than Eiji Aonuma, and he saw it fit to make changes to the LoZ story to make it take place after the Seal War, and to only involve the ToP in the Seal War, not the whole Triforce.

Then suddenly Ocarina of Time comes out, is stated by several developers to be the Seal War, and only involves the ToP, and has conections to BS-LoZ (Hylian Shield/Master Sword changes)

Edited by Erimgard, 02 October 2009 - 03:35 PM.

[Person]

For one thing, TWW, natch.

Please explain - I haven't a clue what you mean by that phrase. It's no secret to anyone here that TWW significantly changed whatever timeline scheme the developers had prior that game's release in 2003.

The point being discussed in this particular post was the thinking of the writing team at the time OoT was made (1998).

Again, how does it make sense in 1998 that Alttp can follow OoT's adult events? Ganon is sealed with the ToP, but at the outset of Alttp Ganon is sealed with the whole Triforce. Alttp must have been meant at that point to follow the Child ending, and LoZ the Adult.

How could the Imprisoning War be OoT and yet have ALttP take place in the Child timeline? OoT was the IW in 1998, that much is for certain. The split timeline wasn't really thought of until TWW, maybe MM at the earliest.

Note that LoZ makes no mention of Ganon breaking out of the Dark World or whatnot. Those were added by NoA on their website and the VC descriptions.