39 replies to this topic

[ganonlord6000]

Some might not notice it, but we do have many timeline segments revealed throughout the years.

Piece 1:

OOT/MM-ALTTP/LA-LOZ/AOL (one of few orders we are 100 % sure of)

Piece 2:

TMC-FS/FSA

Piece 3:

CT: OOT/MM/TP
AT: OOT-TWW/PH-ST

Possible piece 4: TMC-FS-FSA-OOT

now all we need to place these together. Think of all of the possible combinaitons. Using creators comments and in game evidence, the timeline in my signature makes a lot of sense.

[Pinecove]

OOT/MM-ALTTP/LA-LOZ/AOL (one of few orders we are 100 % sure of)

This is not fact.

The arcs we're sure of are:

OoT/MM-TP
OoT-TWW/PH

TMC-----FS/FSA

OoS/OoA

LoZ/AoL

ALttP/LA

And that's it.

Anything past that point is purely speculation. (Although good speculation some of it like Loz/AoL-OoS/OoA)

[ganonlord6000]

OOT/MM-ALTTP/LA-LOZ/AOL (one of few orders we are 100 % sure of)

This is not fact.

The arcs we're sure of are:

OoT/MM-TP
OoT-TWW/PH

TMC-----FS/FSA

OoS/OoA

LoZ/AoL

ALttP/LA

And that's it.

Anything past that point is purely speculation. (Although good speculation some of it like Loz/AoL-OoS/OoA)

Actually, ALTTP was a prequel to LOZ. the backs of the japanese and US boxes (as well as Nintendo's official ALTTP players guide) say that it takes place many years before LOZ. We are certain of that order. And you forgot ST.

Edited by ganonlord6000, 25 December 2009 - 12:22 PM.

[Sign of Justice]

^The box order is completely and utterly outdated. It's really not evidence at this point. I mean it's like using the SW=OoT confirmation from 1998 as evidence for OoT=SW in 2009/2010.

And TP-LttP/LA-LoZ/AoL as fact? What? I mean, sure, I agree with that as the most likely order, but FACT? Definitely not.

The arcs we're sure of are:

OoT/MM-TP
OoT-TWW/PH

TMC-----FS/FSA

OoS/OoA

LoZ/AoL

ALttP/LA

OoA/OoS is possible. And OoX/LA IS possible (depending on your interpretation of evidence. Sure LttP/LA is probably more likely, but if we're talking facts that we know FOR SURE, OoX/LA is definitely a possibility).

Edited by Sign of Justice, 25 December 2009 - 06:51 PM.

[MikePetersSucks]

^The box order is completely and utterly outdated. It's really not evidence at this point. I mean it's like using the SW=OoT confirmation from 1998 as evidence for OoT=SW in 2009/2010.

Except the OOT=SW thing is directly contradicted by newer information. Despite it's age, nothing at all discredits the boxes. So fail.

OOT/MM-TP-LTTP/LA-LOZ/AOL is a fact, since there's nothing to the contrary and everything is leaning towards it.

OOX is pretty much freefloater, and TMC-FS/FSA is another chunk.

OOT-TWW/PH-ST is another chunk. I would put the Four Swords chunk inbetween TP and LTTP, but that's just me.

[Sign of Justice]

Except the OOT=SW thing is directly contradicted by newer information. Despite it's age, nothing at all discredits the boxes. So fail.

Nothing directly contradicts LoZ-LttP which was confirmed in 1998. (OoT=SW is a completely different quote and interview than OoT-LoZ-LttP)

OOT/MM-TP-LTTP/LA-LOZ/AOL is a fact, since there's nothing to the contrary and everything is leaning towards it.

That doesn't make it fact.

This is about FACTS. TP-LttP-LoZ, however logical, is a subjective opinion, NOT a fact.

[Nerushi]

Nothing directly contradicts LoZ-LttP which was confirmed in 1998.

OoT cannot progress into LoZ without directly contradicting AoLs backstory, and it also destroys the notion that OoT would be the SW in the first place. It is directly contradicting and that is why most with some sense of contiunity considers the Miyamoto timeline infamous.

[Emiko]

why does everyone think the stories have to link? why can't they be their own parallel worlds. Sure some stories can be linked...like wind waker and spirit tracks seems to have similar character histories..

you guys are so funny...with all your theories...

[Nerushi]

No need to be jealous or spiteful. You can theorise too...

[Emiko]

No need to be jealous or spiteful. You can theorise too...

so according to everyone's theories...

Games:

NES: Legend of Zelda, Legend of Zelda II

SNES: A Link to The Past

64: Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask

GC: Wind Waker

Wii: Twilight Princess

Gameboy/DS: Links Awaking, four seasons, Spirit Tracks, Phantom Glass (any others?)

SO let my try my own "theory"..based off of some of yours.

I say that there are different universes...

OoT and MM are directly following each other

And LttP is followed by LA

I never played the two for the NES...well I played the second one for a few minutes...

So.

Twilight Princess is in it's own universe all of it's own with no following and no beginning.

*cough*

so here is what I have..in no particular order

Universe 1:

Lttp, LA

Universe 2:

WW, PHG, ST

Universe 3:

TP

....thats all I have. lol

there is my theories xD

[MikePetersSucks]

OoT cannot progress into LoZ without directly contradicting AoLs backstory, and it also destroys the notion that OoT would be the SW in the first place. It is directly contradicting and that is why most with some sense of contiunity considers the Miyamoto timeline infamous.

TWW and TP both make it impossible for the SW and Sleeping Zelda stories to exist as they were originally conceived. Nothing breaks the "LTTP/LA-LOZ-AOL" thing, though.

why does everyone think the stories have to link? why can't they be their own parallel worlds. Sure some stories can be linked...like wind waker and spirit tracks seems to have similar character histories..

Nothing wrong with that. It's just that, since some games link, and most Nintendo franchises have a coherent timeline of some sort, it's fun to try to assemble a cohesive Zelda timeline. It's a hobby.

Twilight Princess is in it's own universe all of it's own with no following and no beginning.

This is impossible. Even with the Parallel Universe idea, TP keeps making continuous connections to OOT.

Universe 1:

Lttp, LA

Universe 2:

WW, PHG, ST

Universe 3:

TP

So, where do OOT and MM go? Are they a prequel to all three universes in some weird triple timeline split? Where does the Oracle games go? The two NES games? The Four Swords trilogy?

[Emiko]

I didn't say it was concrete...plus I stated I never played the first two games...so =P

[Altum]

OOT/MM-ALTTP/LA-LOZ/AOL (one of few orders we are 100 % sure of)

While I agree this is pretty logical, I wouldn't say it's something we are 100% sure of. And, if we are, we know as a fact that TP comes in between MM and ALttP.

TMC-FS/FSA

Yes, but keep in mind that this doesn't mean that there can't be other games in-between TMC and FS/FSA.

Possible piece 4: TMC-FS-FSA-OOT

I don't see anything in the games supporting this idea. While people can speculate FS/FSA's placement, there's nothing concrete and it creates some problems everywhere it goes. TMC pre-OoT is a given in my opinion, but FS/FSA is a wild card right now.

[MikePetersSucks]

TMC pre-OoT is a given in my opinion, but FS/FSA is a wild card right now.

IMO, TMC has more problems than benefits in that position.

[Altum]

IMO, TMC has more problems than benefits in that position.

Care to elaborate? I'm curious. I can't think of anything that it interferes with off the top of my head.

[Erimgard]

Nothing directly contradicts LoZ-LttP which was confirmed in 1998.

OoT cannot progress into LoZ without directly contradicting AoLs backstory,

lol. What doesn't directly contradict the AoL backstory?

[Nerushi]

lol. What doesn't directly contradict the AoL backstory?

The only problem with AoL backstory as of now is the fact that Sleeping Zelda was actually the first Zelda. However, people argue that OoT-LoZ/AoL has Triforce consistency with Ganon having ToP - Which it does not. You'll have to completely disregard that the king ever ruled with the full triforce and then hid away the ToC.

I agree that OoT-LoZ/AoL-ALTTP both sets up for the next game with Triforce, only if you disregard the BS of each game.

OoT-ALTTP-LoZ/AoL works much better in regards to the BS, although OoT as the SW is still slightly ambiguous with Ganon only having ToP. Imo, OoT is only loosely based on SW, even when they made the game. I don't think they would limit newer games to the point that they would try to keep OoT as the SW.

[KJ Contrarian]

OoT-ALTTP-LoZ/AoL works much better in regards to the BS

Doesn't the AoL back story say that sleeping Zelda had an older brother, the "Prince"? I remember that the royal family in ALTTP only consisted of Zelda and her father the King. Wouldn't that make ALTTP-LoZ/AoL just as bad a candidate for the AoL back story?

[Average Gamer]

Doesn't the AoL back story say that sleeping Zelda had an older brother, the "Prince"? I remember that the royal family in ALTTP only consisted of Zelda and her father the King. Wouldn't that make ALTTP-LoZ/AoL just as bad a candidate for the AoL back story?

The Great King wouldn't necessarily have to be the ALttP king though.

[Pinecove]

The only problem with AoL backstory as of now is the fact that Sleeping Zelda was actually the first Zelda. However, people argue that OoT-LoZ/AoL has Triforce consistency with Ganon having ToP - Which it does not. You'll have to completely disregard that the king ever ruled with the full triforce and then hid away the ToC.

Is there any proof to him ruling with the entire Triforce? He could simply just be ruling with the ToW...

[Jarsh]

^
Then how would he have hid the ToC if he didn't have it? It's kind of implied since when AoL was made, LoZ was the only other game before it, and we see the Royal Family possessing both the ToP and ToW.

Personally, I thought the AoL manual made it clear the Great King once ruled the land with the entire Triforce.

Also, I agree with everything Nerushi said about OoT-ALttP/LA-LoZ/AoL

Edited by Jarsh, 01 January 2010 - 01:26 AM.

[KJ Contrarian]

The Great King wouldn't necessarily have to be the ALttP king though.

Oh, I agree, you are correct - In that case the assumption would have to be that ALTTP Link is the likely "Great King", especially since the ALTTP King, as far we know, did not use the full Triforce..........Unless you take S&D as canon.

SIDE QUESTION: In regards to the sleeping Zelda being "First", couldn't that problem be resolved simply by saying she is the "Founding" Zelda of a "New" Hyrule that moved north, with the North Castle as its capital? I would think the fact Sleeping Zelda is in the North Castle, and the fact the scroll references the Great Palace island as the "Biggest" island in Hyrule, are indications that the entire AoL back-story MUST take place close to the events of LoZ/AoL.

Edited by KJ Contrarian, 01 January 2010 - 07:36 AM.

[Average Gamer]

Oh, I agree, you are correct - In that case the assumption would have to be that ALTTP Link is the likely "Great King", especially since the ALTTP King, as far we know, did not use the full Triforce

The Great King wouldn't have to be ALttP Link either. ALttP Link could just give the Triforce to the next king out of trust and to prevent someone like Ganon from entering the Sacred Realm and taking the Triforce.

SIDE QUESTION: In regards to the sleeping Zelda being "First", couldn't that problem be resolved simply by saying she is the "Founding" Zelda of a "New" Hyrule that moved north, with the North Castle as its capital?

My stance is that she'd be the "founding" Zelda of the naming tradition. Before the tradition, Zelda would presumably be a royal name that coincidentally belonged to all of the princesses that interacted with a hero or had to save their kingdom in some way.

Edited by Average Gamer, 01 January 2010 - 09:01 AM.

[Pinecove]

^
Then how would he have hid the ToC if he didn't have it? It's kind of implied since when AoL was made, LoZ was the only other game before it, and we see the Royal Family possessing both the ToP and ToW.

The ToW and the ToC then. Asuming the order is OoT-LoZ-ALttP...

-King rules with Triforce.
-King gets ToW and ToC at the end of OoT.
-Secret is ToC.
-Sleeping Zelda
-???
-PROFIT!!!

I see no flaws.

[Jarsh]

-King rules with Triforce.
-King gets ToW and ToC at the end of OoT.

Not quite sure what you're saying here. What Triforce is he ruling with if he doesn't have the ToW and ToC before the end of OoT?

And isn't is just as much speculation that Link and Zelda would return their pieces of the Triforce to the Royal Family, thus disowning them, as saying that they eventually return to the Sacred Realm after they lose their masters for OoT-ALttP to work?

Edited by Jarsh, 01 January 2010 - 04:38 PM.

[SOAP]

Oh, I agree, you are correct - In that case the assumption would have to be that ALTTP Link is the likely "Great King", especially since the ALTTP King, as far we know, did not use the full Triforce

The Great King wouldn't have to be ALttP Link either. ALttP Link could just give the Triforce to the next king out of trust and to prevent someone like Ganon from entering the Sacred Realm and taking the Triforce.

SIDE QUESTION: In regards to the sleeping Zelda being "First", couldn't that problem be resolved simply by saying she is the "Founding" Zelda of a "New" Hyrule that moved north, with the North Castle as its capital?

My stance is that she'd be the "founding" Zelda of the naming tradition. Before the tradition, Zelda would presumably be a royal name that coincidentally belonged to all of the princesses that interacted with a hero or had to save their kingdom in some way.

I have a few problems with that.

Firstly, the Zeldas are very important characters in the series. It can't just a mere coincidence that they're all named Zelda, generations before a Zelda naming tradition was ever conceived. At least with Link, that can be handwaved by the fact that the player can name him whatever they want. But it doesn't exactly follow suit to push the Sleeping Zelda story so close to the end of the timeline and have five or six prominent figures named Zelda and only have one other princess named after the Sleeping Zelda that we know of. Or maybe two if squeeze in Oracles.

Of course with weighed against the even greater inconsistencies created putting the Sleeping Zelda story towards the beginning of the timeline, it's actually minor hitch in the timeline that I have to live with. Personally I justify by saying that Zelda is the same person reincarnated over and over and that since the Sleeping Zelda is cursed into eternal slumber (possibly as virgin), no new true Zelda's could be born (either directly from her bloodline of decent or reincarnation since she never actually dies), so the naming tradition is started in her memory in some futile hope that one of great grand nieces or something will become the next Zelda. This works better for me and gives some extra meaning to the naming tradition. It also gives a little irony in that the first Zelda players were introduced to (LoZ Zelda) is probably not a true Zelda, just a spiritual successor.

[Pinecove]

Not quite sure what you're saying here. What Triforce is he ruling with if he doesn't have the ToW and ToC before the end of OoT?

Who says the AoL BS starts at the beginning of OoT? Why can't it start at the end?

And isn't is just as much speculation that Link and Zelda would return their pieces of the Triforce to the Royal Family, thus disowning them, as saying that they eventually return to the Sacred Realm after they lose their masters for OoT-ALttP to work?

We know from TWW for a fact that the ToW is given back to the royal family.

[Jarsh]

Who says the AoL BS starts at the beginning of OoT? Why can't it start at the end?

Because the King ruled Hyrule with the entire Triforce, according to the scroll written:

Of the three, "power" and "wisdom" remain in this Kingdom and can be received.

He had the full Triforce, but then he hid the ToC and wrote this scroll. At the time he wrote this scroll, the Kingdom of Hyrule had the ToP and ToW. This doesn't work because Ganon had the ToP when he was sealed, which means it wasn't in the Kingdom of Hyrule. Therefore, AoL's backstory can't take place after OoT and before LoZ. Also, the translator's notes make it clear that the ToP and ToW were easily accessible at the time of writing it, rather than one of them being sealed away or hidden:

It is clear that Power and Wisdom are "accessible" - i.e. they can simply be picked up (as opposed to being hidden away).

We know from TWW for a fact that the ToW is given back to the royal family.

Well yeah, but I thought we were talking about back then, 1998. Because TWW also destroys any direct connectivity OoT and ALttP once had, so I wouldn't even be arguing OoT-ALttP if we were talking about more recent intent, but I still would argue ALttP-LoZ.

Edited by Jarsh, 02 January 2010 - 01:10 AM.

[Average Gamer]

I have a few problems with that.

Firstly, the Zeldas are very important characters in the series. It can't just a mere coincidence that they're all named Zelda, generations before a Zelda naming tradition was ever conceived.

I didn't say that they'd all be named Zelda. It'd go like this:

Zelda-Elizabeth-Mary-Catherine-Zelda-Elizabeth etc.

The idea is that all of the princesses that interacted with a hero and/or had to save their kingdom were named Zelda, like how all of the heroes are canonically named Link.

[Jarsh]

...So did we pretty much come to the conclusion that the Miyamoto order can't really work with AoL's backstory? The alternative is that the king rules with the Triforce, but not really having it; I highly doubt that this is what was intended upon AoL's conception.