Jump to content

IPBoard Styles©Fisana

Photo

Judge my timeline


  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#1 Aiden

Aiden

    Novice

  • Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 11 October 2010 - 03:30 PM

Hey, I'm new here but I'm a somewhat regular over at ZU. I thought I'd join this Zelda community as it seems pretty active. Anyway, here is my timeline. I've been told it's pretty basic. Before you rip into me for having 3 branches of the timeline, read the explanation I give afterwards to get a better understanding.

The Minish Cap
Skyward Sword
Ocarina of Time

Child:
Majora's Mask
Twilight Princess

Adult:
The Wind Waker
Phantom Hourglass
Spirit Tracks

Classic:
A Link to the Past
Oracle of Ages/Seasons
Link's Awakening
Four Swords
Four Swords Adventures
The Legend of Zelda
The Adventure of Link


Okay, the reason I have two adult timelines isn't necessarily because I think that there are three branches of the timeline. I just don't know if they are going to place the classic branch after TP or after ST. The reason FS and FSA are between LA and TLoZ is that I believe that FSA tells the story of how Ganon came about again in TLoZ. I know it's not a perfect timeline by any means, but please, tell me what you all think.

#2 MikePetersSucks

MikePetersSucks

    Actual Japanese Person

  • ZL Staff
  • 4,174 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 October 2010 - 02:51 PM

Well, first off, the Classic Branch probably goes after TP. ST has a new Hyrule that has no connection to the Triforce, and it seems Ganondorf is permanently dead along with the old Hyrule. It's probably a safer bet to put it on TP since the Wind Waker timeline has this whole "new beginnings" thing going on. So for the purposes of this evaluation, I will be placing the Classic branch there. Hope you don't mind.

First off, the placement of the Minish Cap. Aonuma has implied in Skyward Sword interviews that he's retconned it's placement, and it most likely is grouped with the rest of the Four Sword trilogy. I've always placed it with them anyway because otherwise the narrative doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Twilight Princess to Link to the Past works splendidly, especially with TP's Master Sword being left in the Lost Woods with the decayed ruins of the Temple of Time. Hmm... Though, personally, I wouldn't of placed OOX between LTTP and LA, as it served as a direct sequel to the former. OOX Link is clearly not LTTP Link, and LA Link's adventures clearly reference ATTP, and suspiciously lack any allusions to OOX. That, and OOX fits much better at the end of the timeline, having much more thematic elements in common.

The Four Swords are fine here, I guess, though the Triforce's absence is a bit suspicious. I account for this by placing the trilogy inbetween TP and LTTP. We also have a convenient parallel to killing off the Knights of Hyrule and whatnot on top of this. It should be noted FSA was originally intended to cover the Imprisoning War before they changed it.

The Adult Timeline branch is just dandy, but I don't think anyone can mess that part up.

Anyway, that's my judgement. Welcome to the boards, Aiden!

#3 Showsni

Showsni

    The Fallen

  • Members
  • 13,386 posts
  • Location:Gloucester
  • Gender:Male
  • England

Posted 13 October 2010 - 01:19 PM

Where exactly do you put AoL's backstory? In between FSA and LoZ? Immediately after OoX?

Like MPS, I'd also rather LA follow directly from ALttP; that was it's original intention, after all, and there's not really been anything to change that.


#4 Aiden

Aiden

    Novice

  • Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 02:06 PM

Where exactly do you put AoL's backstory? In between FSA and LoZ? Immediately after OoX?

Like MPS, I'd also rather LA follow directly from ALttP; that was it's original intention, after all, and there's not really been anything to change that.


The sleeping Zelda story will fit anywhere in my timeline from after OoX to before TLoZ. I don't really have a specific place for it.

Also, I prefer to think that the developers like to keep things simple. The boat at the end of OoX is simple. Strong? Weak? That isn't for us to decide. We can, however, know that it is simple evidence. The fact that OoX Link faces all of the enemies that are the Nightmares in LA is also simple. No, we don't see OoX Link sail off with a storm brewing in the background and a shadow of the Wind Fish in the water, but I personally don't believe that all of that is necessary to establish a connection. It's the same reason I place TMC first. I think that the hat, the end statement, and the origin of the Armos are all simple pieces of evidence that support TMC coming before OoT. I'm not trying to convince you that simple evidence is the way to go. I'm just telling you that it is my opinion, and we will probably just have to agree to disagree.

Now I will admit, however, that we have no idea how far before OoT that SS takes place. We don't even know how it will end. Could SS make way for a sequel, will the ToT and other familiar Hylian landmarks be present, or will it be implied that all of those landmarks will be built by the end of SS. We have no idea, so I don't say with even 5% certainty that TMC comes before SS.

Edited by Aiden, 13 October 2010 - 02:09 PM.


#5 MikePetersSucks

MikePetersSucks

    Actual Japanese Person

  • ZL Staff
  • 4,174 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 October 2010 - 03:26 PM

Also, I prefer to think that the developers like to keep things simple. The boat at the end of OoX is simple. Strong? Weak? That isn't for us to decide. We can, however, know that it is simple evidence. The fact that OoX Link faces all of the enemies that are the Nightmares in LA is also simple. No, we don't see OoX Link sail off with a storm brewing in the background and a shadow of the Wind Fish in the water, but I personally don't believe that all of that is necessary to establish a connection.


By that logic, OOX comes right after TP because Link comes in riding Epona. The fact that Link leaves via boat doesn't mean anything, especially since LA's opening specifically says he left Hyrule, not Holodrum or whatever. It's not like any of the Links have a copyright on boat use (OOX Link doesn't even use the same boat as the one that got shipwrecked in LA :P)

It's the same reason I place TMC first. I think that the hat, the end statement, and the origin of the Armos are all simple pieces of evidence that support TMC coming before OoT. I'm not trying to convince you that simple evidence is the way to go. I'm just telling you that it is my opinion, and we will probably just have to agree to disagree.


I'd argue that the hat thing is a thematic thing, not a literal canonical statement. But aside from that, the "Armos origin" thing doesn't really mean anything placement wise. By the time TMC happens, Armos are already centuries old; they weren't created in the span of the game.

Now I will admit, however, that we have no idea how far before OoT that SS takes place. We don't even know how it will end. Could SS make way for a sequel, will the ToT and other familiar Hylian landmarks be present, or will it be implied that all of those landmarks will be built by the end of SS. We have no idea, so I don't say with even 5% certainty that TMC comes before SS.


Given what we know about the game (People live in the sky, the earth is an uninhabitable wasteland), I'd argue that this is as far back as we go. It doesn't even look like Hyrule exists yet. The Master Sword certainly doesn't.

Edited by MikePetersSucks, 13 October 2010 - 03:27 PM.


#6 Snow

Snow

    Barbarian

  • Members
  • 250 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Sweden

Posted 13 October 2010 - 03:31 PM

Given what we know about the game (People live in the sky, the earth is an uninhabitable wasteland), I'd argue that this is as far back as we go. It doesn't even look like Hyrule exists yet. The Master Sword certainly doesn't.


Was the land below ever said to be an uninhabitable wasteland? All I've heard is that it's controlled by evil forces.

#7 Aiden

Aiden

    Novice

  • Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 05:05 PM

By that logic, OOX comes right after TP because Link comes in riding Epona. The fact that Link leaves via boat doesn't mean anything, especially since LA's opening specifically says he left Hyrule, not Holodrum or whatever. It's not like any of the Links have a copyright on boat use (OOX Link doesn't even use the same boat as the one that got shipwrecked in LA :P)


Well, not that simple. LOL! Kidding aside, I know that using simple evidence can be confusing at times. It's not a perfect system by any means.

Something I do have to point out, though is that OoX Link seemingly doesn't know Zelda (something I heard that you are very quick to point out, MPS :P), so by simple logic OoX couldn't follow TP in that way just because it ends with Link on a horse. I mean, the boat isn't the only reason I believe that LA follows OoX. There are also the nightmares, and the fact that OoX somewhat matches up with LA's backstory. I do, however, believe that it was the original intent for LA to follow ALttP directly. I'm not going to argue with anyone on that point.

Also, I looked at the pics of the boats side by side, and the LA boat looks exactly like the OoX boat, except the sails are drawn. Again, though, I don't think that the boat alone proves anything.

Honestly, I think that we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. I mean, I've heard you are a pretty good debater, MPS.

#8 ganonlord6000

ganonlord6000

    Warrior

  • Members
  • 612 posts
  • Location:Arizona
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 October 2010 - 07:29 PM


By that logic, OOX comes right after TP because Link comes in riding Epona. The fact that Link leaves via boat doesn't mean anything, especially since LA's opening specifically says he left Hyrule, not Holodrum or whatever. It's not like any of the Links have a copyright on boat use (OOX Link doesn't even use the same boat as the one that got shipwrecked in LA :P)


Well, not that simple. LOL! Kidding aside, I know that using simple evidence can be confusing at times. It's not a perfect system by any means.

Something I do have to point out, though is that OoX Link seemingly doesn't know Zelda (something I heard that you are very quick to point out, MPS :P), so by simple logic OoX couldn't follow TP in that way just because it ends with Link on a horse. I mean, the boat isn't the only reason I believe that LA follows OoX. There are also the nightmares, and the fact that OoX somewhat matches up with LA's backstory. I do, however, believe that it was the original intent for LA to follow ALttP directly. I'm not going to argue with anyone on that point.

Also, I looked at the pics of the boats side by side, and the LA boat looks exactly like the OoX boat, except the sails are drawn. Again, though, I don't think that the boat alone proves anything.

Honestly, I think that we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. I mean, I've heard you are a pretty good debater, MPS.


Um, explain Agahnim in LA. Only ALTTP Link fought him. I always place OOX after AOL(ignore the timeline in my signature. I rarely update it) since the oracles were originally intended to be a sequel to LOZ, including an LOZ remake idea that was dropped. Your timeline isn't that bad. Mine was like that (except for the oracles placement) when I first came here a year ago, but my FS/FSA placement (between ALTTP and LOZ) was shot down very quickly by most of the members here. Welcome to the boards. And you haven't seen anything regarding MPS yet (lol). Or the rest of us.

Edited by ganonlord6000, 13 October 2010 - 07:30 PM.


#9 Aiden

Aiden

    Novice

  • Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 08:03 PM

Um, explain Agahnim in LA. Only ALTTP Link fought him. I always place OOX after AOL(ignore the timeline in my signature. I rarely update it) since the oracles were originally intended to be a sequel to LOZ, including an LOZ remake idea that was dropped. Your timeline isn't that bad. Mine was like that (except for the oracles placement) when I first came here a year ago, but my FS/FSA placement (between ALTTP and LOZ) was shot down very quickly by most of the members here. Welcome to the boards. And you haven't seen anything regarding MPS yet (lol). Or the rest of us.


There is a mini-boss in one of the dungeons that many have called Agahnim. It behaves a lot like Agahnim. Actually, this mini-boss more closely resembles the Nightmare version found in LA than ALttP Agahnim does.

#10 Average Gamer

Average Gamer

    Master

  • Members
  • 818 posts
  • Location:The Haunted Wasteland

Posted 13 October 2010 - 08:56 PM

There is a mini-boss in one of the dungeons that many have called Agahnim. It behaves a lot like Agahnim. Actually, this mini-boss more closely resembles the Nightmare version found in LA than ALttP Agahnim does.


However, that mini-boss has nothing to do with Agahnim from ALttP, and the two don't even dress or fight in a similar manner. Also, why would Link remember a random mini-boss from OoS rather than a major figure or a full-blown boss from his previous adventures? If that weren't enough, I've heard that the OoS mini-boss is only called Agahnim in the NoA guide, and I can't even confirm that. The OoS mini-boss resembles Carock from AoL more than anything, and we ultimately don't know if NoA just tossed the name into the guide for the heck of it.

#11 Person

Person

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,047 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 October 2010 - 11:42 PM

If this Agahnim clone mini-boss was significant enough to Link to be included in his nightmares, why didn't major villains like Onox and Veran get a spot there, too?

#12 Aiden

Aiden

    Novice

  • Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 13 October 2010 - 11:50 PM

However, that mini-boss has nothing to do with Agahnim from ALttP, and the two don't even dress or fight in a similar manner. Also, why would Link remember a random mini-boss from OoS rather than a major figure or a full-blown boss from his previous adventures? If that weren't enough, I've heard that the OoS mini-boss is only called Agahnim in the NoA guide, and I can't even confirm that. The OoS mini-boss resembles Carock from AoL more than anything, and we ultimately don't know if NoA just tossed the name into the guide for the heck of it.


Here's something to keep in mind. LA is essentially a dream, or more specifically the land that he visits. I doubt that too many people here would argue against that. The island, its inhabitants, and the enemies all come from Link's mind. We know it isn't piece by piece from his memory, or else Marin would in fact be Zelda in Link's dream world. This dream world seems to be a combination of Link's adventures and his imagination. Basically what I'm trying to say is that not everything has to come from his travels. Some of the enemies, or more specifically the Nightmare version of Agahnim, could just be explained to be a part of Link's imagination. Maybe he's heard of Agahnim before. Maybe not. In my theory, it doesn't really matter. All that matters is that Link encounters enough in the Oracles that could be attributed to him remembering them in LA, and the rest is just his imagination. Saying that it's a combination of his memories and imagination isn't a ridiculous idea, either, because I would be saying the same thing if I believed that LA followed ALttP. The island isn't just a carbon copy of Link's adventures. It mixes it up a little with some of Link's own imagination, and I doubt that too many people would argue against that, either.

This is a pretty good discussion. Nobody here has said anything stupid like I would hear trying to debate the timeline on the IGN boards.

Also, I'm not trying to convince you guys that I'm right. I'm trying to convince you that I could be right. In other words, if Aonuma, Miyamoto, and Capcom all made statements one day that LA follows the Oracles, people wouldn't say, "OMFGWTFSTFU!!!" and would say, "Well, I didn't agree with that, but I see how it could be right."

Edited by Aiden, 13 October 2010 - 11:54 PM.


#13 MikePetersSucks

MikePetersSucks

    Actual Japanese Person

  • ZL Staff
  • 4,174 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 October 2010 - 01:53 PM

Was the land below ever said to be an uninhabitable wasteland? All I've heard is that it's controlled by evil forces.


It's totally implied with the "no one fucking lives down there" thing.

Here's something to keep in mind. LA is essentially a dream, or more specifically the land that he visits. I doubt that too many people here would argue against that. The island, its inhabitants, and the enemies all come from Link's mind. We know it isn't piece by piece from his memory, or else Marin would in fact be Zelda in Link's dream world. This dream world seems to be a combination of Link's adventures and his imagination. Basically what I'm trying to say is that not everything has to come from his travels. Some of the enemies, or more specifically the Nightmare version of Agahnim, could just be explained to be a part of Link's imagination. Maybe he's heard of Agahnim before. Maybe not. In my theory, it doesn't really matter. All that matters is that Link encounters enough in the Oracles that could be attributed to him remembering them in LA, and the rest is just his imagination. Saying that it's a combination of his memories and imagination isn't a ridiculous idea, either, because I would be saying the same thing if I believed that LA followed ALttP. The island isn't just a carbon copy of Link's adventures. It mixes it up a little with some of Link's own imagination, and I doubt that too many people would argue against that, either.


It's not Link's imagination that causes these discrepancies, it's because he's sharing a dream with the Wind Fish. Therefore, we can rest assured that the Agahnim boss is from Link's memories, not some convenient "imagination" excuse.

#14 Snow

Snow

    Barbarian

  • Members
  • 250 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Sweden

Posted 14 October 2010 - 03:48 PM

It's totally implied with the "no one fucking lives down there" thing.


Have they ever said that no one lives down there, though? Sure, the land below is said to be overrun by evil forces, but that doesn't necessarily mean it isn't inhabited by good races as well.

Edited by Snow, 14 October 2010 - 03:48 PM.


#15 Aiden

Aiden

    Novice

  • Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 14 October 2010 - 04:56 PM

It's not Link's imagination that causes these discrepancies, it's because he's sharing a dream with the Wind Fish. Therefore, we can rest assured that the Agahnim boss is from Link's memories, not some convenient "imagination" excuse.


Never said it was a perfect matchup ;). In a fictitious world, it doesn't have to be.

Actually, I'm gonna stick with this being Agahnim. http://www.zeldalege...lbum=122&pos=21

Looks enough like him to me. May not look like him to you. We'll just have to agree to disagree. Besides, who are we to say that the developers of OoS didn't intend for Link to remember Agahnim from OoS?

http://www.zeldalegends.net/gallery/displayimage.php?album=63&pos=22 Shadow Agahnim

Edited by Aiden, 14 October 2010 - 05:07 PM.


#16 Average Gamer

Average Gamer

    Master

  • Members
  • 818 posts
  • Location:The Haunted Wasteland

Posted 15 October 2010 - 12:04 AM

Actually, I'm gonna stick with this being Agahnim. http://www.zeldalege...lbum=122&pos=21

Looks enough like him to me. May not look like him to you. We'll just have to agree to disagree.


I don't know if this will matter much to you, but here's Carock for comparison:

http://www.zeldalegends.net/gallery/displayimage.php?album=27&pos=3

Besides, who are we to say that the developers of OoS didn't intend for Link to remember Agahnim from OoS?


The imitation of Agahnim encountered in LA neither dresses nor fights like OoS "Agahnim." Also, seeing as how Agahnim was Ganon in ALttP, I don't see why he'd be a random mini-boss when the Twinrova sisters were ultimately trying to revive Ganon in OoX.

Edited by Average Gamer, 15 October 2010 - 12:15 AM.


#17 SOAP

SOAP

    So Oo Ap Puh

  • Members
  • 7,750 posts
  • Location:Savannah, GA Hell Yeah!
  • Gender:Male
  • World

Posted 15 October 2010 - 01:33 PM

Looks like my timeline, only I choose to keep my "Classic Timeline" it's own seperate continuity until the Creators finally tell us how the 2D games connect with the rest of the series. I even take it a step futher and make the Four Sword games their own timeline too though I can see them fitting in both the Classic and Split Timelines.

And MPS, there hasn't been anything to suggest that no one lives "down there." The only info we know so far is that Link's people don't live there and have no knowlege of the land below at all. That's not t6p say that they're the only people to exist ever in existense. Right now, everything is up in the air. Literally. :balloon:

Edited by SOAP, 15 October 2010 - 01:41 PM.


#18 Person

Person

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,047 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 October 2010 - 03:20 PM

The thing is, how many straws does one have to grasp at to make OoX-LA work? The only piece of evidence in its favor is the boat in the ending. That's it. This presumes that there is only one boat in the entire universe. As a corollary, perhaps OoX is a direct continuation from MM or TP because Link rides on Epona in the opening?

Here is the evidence in favor of putting LA right after ALttP, as it was originally intended.
1. No proof that the original intent of the game has been overridden.
2. AST features Easter-egg references to Link being lost in a dream seven years after ALttP.
3. The manual refers to how Link saved Hyrule from Ganon. In OoX, he saved Holodrum and Labrynna. Hyrule never makes an appearance.
4. Link leaves in the beginning of LA to hone his skills in case Ganon should ever return. In OoX, we have no indication of his intent.
5. LA and ALttP share the same official artwork.
6. All of the Nightmare bosses except for DethI are enemies that Link fought in ALttP.

#19 Aiden

Aiden

    Novice

  • Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 15 October 2010 - 05:34 PM

If this Agahnim clone mini-boss was significant enough to Link to be included in his nightmares, why didn't major villains like Onox and Veran get a spot there, too?


Where is it said that every Nightmare has to be based on a major enemy in Link's life? Where is it said that any of the Nightmares have to be based of enemies that Link has faced, for that matter? Nowhere. Pst! Let me tell you a secret.IT'S OPINION!!! Keep it a secret from everybody. Actually, no. Tell everybody. Explain the difference between canon Zelda fact and uncanon Zelda fan fiction like that. It's dangerous to go alone. Take this. This knowledge, that is. That's why, even if the miniboss in OoS isn't Agahnim, it doesn't matter. Unless you can find a developer's quote saying that the Nightmares are based of enemies that Link has faced, it's speculation and theory. Um, that's it. Oh, and I AM ERROR.

The imitation of Agahnim encountered in LA neither dresses nor fights like OoS "Agahnim." Also, seeing as how Agahnim was Ganon in ALttP, I don't see why he'd be a random mini-boss when the Twinrova sisters were ultimately trying to revive Ganon in OoX


ALttP Agahnim shoots fireballs. OoS Agahnim shoots fireballs. ALttP Agahnim wears a red cloak. OoS Agahnim wears a red cloak (so I guess he does dress like ALttP Agahnim). ALttP Agahnim copies himself to confuse Link. OoS Agahnim copies himself to confuse Link. Actually, the only similarity between ALttP Agahnim and LA Shadow Agahnim is how you defeat him. He fights the same, you just don't fight back the same. He may not fight exactly like Shadow Agahnim, but he is a lot like him. I am not denying similarities to OoS Agahnim and Carock, though. If you read above, you will find that nowhere in the game does it say that the Nightmares are from Link's memory, anyway. You can't say it's implied, either because it isn't implied anywhere. It is just opinion.

The thing is, how many straws does one have to grasp at to make OoX-LA work? The only piece of evidence in its favor is the boat in the ending. That's it. This presumes that there is only one boat in the entire universe. As a corollary, perhaps OoX is a direct continuation from MM or TP because Link rides on Epona in the opening?


No one is grasping at straws. OoX fits all of the requirements of LA's backstory even better than ALttP because we actually see Link leaving Hyrule by boat. And if you read on, you will find that the boat isn't the only piece of evidence. Actually, I've stated the other pieces of evidence supporting it, such as Link saving Hyrule from Ganon, and Link facing all of the Nightmare bosses, etc., and you ignored that and continued to say that the boat is the only piece of evidence that supports an OoX/LA connection. It's okay, though. I just assume you didn't read what I wrote.

No, OoX couldn't be a continuation of MM because (1) Ganon isn't dead, (2)Link knows Zelda, and (3) the Triforce isn't complete. TP couldn't continue into OoX because (1)Link is far too young in OoX, (2)Link knows Zelda, and (3) the Triforce isn't complete. Simple evidence doesn't mean being stupid and ignoring contradictions. Read on, and you will se my counterpoints.

1. No proof that the original intent of the game has been overridden.


That is a matter of opinion. Some think that the boat and other references to LA are, in fact, enough to override and retcon orginal intent. Just because a supposed majority doesn't believe it (I say supposed because no one has yet to pole the entire Zelda online community to see their opinion), that doesn't mean it's not true. I mean, how many people believed in the split timeline at first?

2. AST features Easter-egg references to Link being lost in a dream seven years after ALttP.


Good for AST. Great for AST, in fact. I agree that the original intent was for LA to follow ALttP. I've said that. I wouldn't dare argue against that. However, AST was made before the Oracles, so of course AST is going to agree with the orignal intent. Hell, I'll agree that was the original intent.

3. The manual refers to how Link saved Hyrule from Ganon. In OoX, he saved Holodrum and Labrynna. Hyrule never makes an appearance.


Link did save Hyrule from Ganon. Think about it. If Link had failed, and Ganon had stayed around, where would Ganon have went. Would he have stopped to visit his good friend Tingle in Termina? No. Would he have went to steal Holodrum's or Labrynna's Triforce. (Do they even have a Triforce?) No. Would he have sailed the Great Sea on a journey of enlightenment to prepare himself for the next Hero of Hyrule to come from Link's ashes? Well, maybe... (J/K, btw.) Ganon would have went straight to Hyrule to steal the Triforce, kidnap and do God knows what to Zelda, and rule the land, and eventually the world, with the sacred golden triangles. Link did save Hyrule from Ganon. It just isn't as apparent as it is in ALttP.
4. Link leaves in the beginning of LA to hone his skills in case Ganon should ever return. In OoX, we have no indication of his intent.

5. LA and ALttP share the same official artwork.


And... By that logic, the HoT depicted in TWW isn't the same as the HoT in OoT because they are portrayed in different artwork.

6. All of the Nightmare bosses except for DethI are enemies that Link fought in ALttP.

All of the Nightmar bosses except for Dethl are enemies that Link fought in ALttP.
Plus, if you read above, it is fan fiction that all of the enemies that Link faces in LA have to be from his memory.

In my opinion (note that I said in my opinion; I don't claim it to be fact), OoX fits LA's backstory better because it meets every requirement that ALttP does, like facing all of the enemies that will become Nightmares, defeating Ganon, etc., and it also shows Link leaving Hyrule by boat [note that you can't say that it's TWW Link because (1)he knows Zelda, and (2)he saved the Great Sea from Ganon, not Hyrule, which was already screwed at that point being underwater and all].

Yes, yes. I am aware of AST. It shows original intent. I believe that IMO OoX fits better than ALttP, and that is enough, again IMO, to show that intent has been changed and LA's placement has been retconned. Don't bring up AST again unless you can't do more than rehash what you have said, please.


TL;DR? LA does not say that the Nightmares are based off enemies that Link has faced before. OoX Link meets more requirements of LA's backstory better than ALttP Link because he meets all of the requirements ALttP Link does and he is shown leaving Hyrule by boat, unlike ALttP Link. That alone is enough to show that LA's placement has been retconned from the original intent, which was after ALttP. I will not argue that it was the original intent.

Edited by Aiden, 15 October 2010 - 07:06 PM.


#20 Average Gamer

Average Gamer

    Master

  • Members
  • 818 posts
  • Location:The Haunted Wasteland

Posted 15 October 2010 - 10:27 PM

The imitation of Agahnim encountered in LA neither dresses nor fights like OoS "Agahnim." Also, seeing as how Agahnim was Ganon in ALttP, I don't see why he'd be a random mini-boss when the Twinrova sisters were ultimately trying to revive Ganon in OoX


ALttP Agahnim shoots fireballs. OoS Agahnim shoots fireballs.


But there are differences between the blasts, most notably that Agahnim's can be knocked back at him. Also, Agahnim has the cluster blast while the OoS mini-boss does not. Regarding defenses, Link cannot harm Agahnim with his blade or any other weapon, but the OoS mini-boss can be attacked like any other enemy. As for movement, Agahnim turns into a shadow and slides across the floor, whereas the OoS mini-boss flies.

ALttP Agahnim wears a red cloak. OoS Agahnim wears a red cloak (so I guess he does dress like ALttP Agahnim).


Actually, Agahnim wears a red middle eastern head cloth and a long red coat with large sleeves. The OoS mini-boss just wears a red robe with a hood and a necklace. Also, keep in mind that Agahnim was actually dressed in green in ALttP; his clothing was only red in the concept art.

ALttP Agahnim copies himself to confuse Link. OoS Agahnim copies himself to confuse Link.


But in two different manners, and Agahnim's copies could be easily spotted.

Actually, the only similarity between ALttP Agahnim and LA Shadow Agahnim is how you defeat him.


They both have defenses that can only be bested by their own magical blasts, they both can fire a cluster of blasts, they both slide along the floor as shadows, they both spin around repeatedly when defeated, etc.

I am not denying similarities to OoS Agahnim and Carock, though. If you read above, you will find that nowhere in the game does it say that the Nightmares are from Link's memory, anyway.


I recall seeing something about the final enemies being based off of foes that Link once fought, but I can't remember enough to locate it. It would make some sense though, as Link would essentially be confronting his nightmares and the fears that led to him sailing away to train in the first place.

I don't want to get into the OoX placement discussion occurring between Aiden and Person right now, but I do want to make one comment. In LA's manual, it is stated that Link left Hyrule to train because he felt on edge and wanted to make sure he could take on any threat.

邪悪の王ガノンの魔の手からハイラルの平和を取り戻したあなたは、手に入れた安らぎを楽しむ間もなく、新たな災いにそなえて修行の旅に出ていました。
You, who regained the peace of Hyrule from the demonic hands of the king of evil, Ganon, had not enjoyed the achieved tranquility for too long, and had embarked on a journey of training in preparation for new disasters.

Though you fulfilled the Hyrulian prophecy of the Legendary Hero and destroyed the evil tyrant Ganon, the land of Hyrule enjoyed only a precarious peace. "Who knows what threats may arise from Ganon's ashes?", the restless people murmured as they knitted their brows and shook their heads. Ever vigilant, you decided to journey away from Hyrule on a quest for enlightenment, in search of wisdom that would make you better able to withstand the next threat to your homeland.


However, in OoX's ending, Link doesn't appear to be worried at all. If anything, he's sailing for the heck of it.

Edited by Average Gamer, 15 October 2010 - 10:29 PM.


#21 ganonlord6000

ganonlord6000

    Warrior

  • Members
  • 612 posts
  • Location:Arizona
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 October 2010 - 01:06 PM

The imitation of Agahnim encountered in LA neither dresses nor fights like OoS "Agahnim." Also, seeing as how Agahnim was Ganon in ALttP, I don't see why he'd be a random mini-boss when the Twinrova sisters were ultimately trying to revive Ganon in OoX


ALttP Agahnim shoots fireballs. OoS Agahnim shoots fireballs.


But there are differences between the blasts, most notably that Agahnim's can be knocked back at him. Also, Agahnim has the cluster blast while the OoS mini-boss does not. Regarding defenses, Link cannot harm Agahnim with his blade or any other weapon, but the OoS mini-boss can be attacked like any other enemy. As for movement, Agahnim turns into a shadow and slides across the floor, whereas the OoS mini-boss flies.

ALttP Agahnim wears a red cloak. OoS Agahnim wears a red cloak (so I guess he does dress like ALttP Agahnim).


Actually, Agahnim wears a red middle eastern head cloth and a long red coat with large sleeves. The OoS mini-boss just wears a red robe with a hood and a necklace. Also, keep in mind that Agahnim was actually dressed in green in ALttP; his clothing was only red in the concept art.

ALttP Agahnim copies himself to confuse Link. OoS Agahnim copies himself to confuse Link.


But in two different manners, and Agahnim's copies could be easily spotted.

Actually, the only similarity between ALttP Agahnim and LA Shadow Agahnim is how you defeat him.


They both have defenses that can only be bested by their own magical blasts, they both can fire a cluster of blasts, they both slide along the floor as shadows, they both spin around repeatedly when defeated, etc.

I am not denying similarities to OoS Agahnim and Carock, though. If you read above, you will find that nowhere in the game does it say that the Nightmares are from Link's memory, anyway.


I recall seeing something about the final enemies being based off of foes that Link once fought, but I can't remember enough to locate it. It would make some sense though, as Link would essentially be confronting his nightmares and the fears that led to him sailing away to train in the first place.

I don't want to get into the OoX placement discussion occurring between Aiden and Person right now, but I do want to make one comment. In LA's manual, it is stated that Link left Hyrule to train because he felt on edge and wanted to make sure he could take on any threat.

邪悪の王ガノンの魔の手からハイラルの平和を取り戻したあなたは、手に入れた安らぎを楽しむ間もなく、新たな災いにそなえて修行の旅に出ていました。
You, who regained the peace of Hyrule from the demonic hands of the king of evil, Ganon, had not enjoyed the achieved tranquility for too long, and had embarked on a journey of training in preparation for new disasters.

Though you fulfilled the Hyrulian prophecy of the Legendary Hero and destroyed the evil tyrant Ganon, the land of Hyrule enjoyed only a precarious peace. "Who knows what threats may arise from Ganon's ashes?", the restless people murmured as they knitted their brows and shook their heads. Ever vigilant, you decided to journey away from Hyrule on a quest for enlightenment, in search of wisdom that would make you better able to withstand the next threat to your homeland.


However, in OoX's ending, Link doesn't appear to be worried at all. If anything, he's sailing for the heck of it.

And why would Nintendo and Capcom make OOX lead to a game that was already a direct sequel? That sounds pretty stupid to me. Nintendo has never tampered with their older games by destroying a sequel/direct sequel connection.

All of the Nightmar bosses except for Dethl are enemies that Link fought in ALttP.

That was because Dethl was the one behibd what was going on in LA. It is more believeable that LA is still a direct sequel to ALTTP as in the original oracles project, there was one game in which there was supposed to be a sequel to LOZ. As for the OOS Agahnim thing, when did official materials ever call that mini boss Agahnim? I know the brandygames guide did, but that guide isn't canon, and the official NOA guides are also questionable. Was there ever a JAPANESE source that called the mini boss Agahnim? I doubt there are any, but if there are, I would like to see them. I think the only reason so many OOX enemies are similar to LA enemies is because they seem to run on the same game engine. Similar to how PH and ST have the same engine and thus have similar enemies. Most of the oracles enemies also appeared in ALTTP as well, just in a different form.

#22 MikePetersSucks

MikePetersSucks

    Actual Japanese Person

  • ZL Staff
  • 4,174 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 October 2010 - 01:44 PM

To add on to this, and here's the clincher.

LA Link doesn't have a Triforce mark on his hand.

Your move.

#23 Person

Person

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 1,047 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 October 2010 - 02:20 PM

The NoA guide never called the wizard Agahnim, either. So if he was only called Agahnim in unofficial sources like the Bradygames guide, then he probably isn't Agahnim. Back when I first played the game, I never made the connection to Agahnim until all the theorists tried to use it as evidence.

And about the Nightmare, we can look at its various forms and see that Link has indeed fought them before.

1. Bot/Slime: Common enemy in both ALttP and LA.
2. Agahnim: Boss in ALttP
3. Moldorm: Boss in both ALttP and LA
4. Ganon: Boss in ALttP
5. Lanmola: Boss in both ALttP and LA

We can't just write this off as Link's imagination when each form is a clear reference to an enemy he has previously fought. The only reason we would need to write this off is the discrepancy caused by putting OoX before LA, which would make Agahnim's appearance inexplicable.

We also can't just write off AST, either. That game explicitly takes place seven years after ALttP, when Link is away on his voyage.

#24 ganonlord6000

ganonlord6000

    Warrior

  • Members
  • 612 posts
  • Location:Arizona
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 October 2010 - 02:34 PM

To add on to this, and here's the clincher.

LA Link doesn't have a Triforce mark on his hand.

Your move.

I forgot about that. Good luck getting around that one.

The NoA guide never called the wizard Agahnim, either. So if he was only called Agahnim in unofficial sources like the Bradygames guide, then he probably isn't Agahnim. Back when I first played the game, I never made the connection to Agahnim until all the theorists tried to use it as evidence.

And about the Nightmare, we can look at its various forms and see that Link has indeed fought them before.

1. Bot/Slime: Common enemy in both ALttP and LA.
2. Agahnim: Boss in ALttP
3. Moldorm: Boss in both ALttP and LA
4. Ganon: Boss in ALttP
5. Lanmola: Boss in both ALttP and LA

We can't just write this off as Link's imagination when each form is a clear reference to an enemy he has previously fought. The only reason we would need to write this off is the discrepancy caused by putting OoX before LA, which would make Agahnim's appearance inexplicable.

We also can't just write off AST, either. That game explicitly takes place seven years after ALttP, when Link is away on his voyage.

Thanks for that, Person. I think I should add that the oracles Link never fought most of those enemies listed above. I never even heard of the Agahnim connection until I found the brandygames guide for the oracles at some library and saw that they called that miniboss Agahnim. Hmmm. I wonder if that is where all of this began. This isn't the first time unofficial(usually American from what I can see) sources have been used to support arguements like this.

#25 Aiden

Aiden

    Novice

  • Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 18 October 2010 - 05:09 PM

Not to be rude, but I didn't read the responses after my last one because I'm done debating for now. I mean, I've said everything I can say, you've said everything you can say, and nobody has said, "Oh, gee! I agree with you now!" We've all made some pretty good points, but there isn't anything else we can say without repeating ourselves. Anyway, it was fun debating with all of you.

EDIT: Actually, I don't mind still debating, but let's take it one issue at a time. When one person discusses an issue or two, then that brings up four more issues, and you have three or four people responding to all four of those issues, it takes a lot for one person to respond to it all. Simply put, it could get overwhelming for me if I don't try to take this debate a little slower. I just want to try to focus on one issue at a time if possible.

I want to address this first.

LA Link doesn't have a Triforce mark on his hand.


I forgot about that. Good luck getting around that one.


OH, YOU GOT ME!!!! ACK!!!!!!!!

Why are you acting like that's a big deal? It's not. It's just a Triforce mark. That is my short response. Since the language of simple evidence doesn't seem to speak to you all, though, let me elaborate. Kidding aside, all of the official art of Link, except for one or two pics, is lifted directly from ALttP. Since the original intent was for LA to follow ALttP (nobody is arguing against that), and since ALttP Link didn't have a Triforce mark on the back of his hand, it only makes sense that LA Link wouldn't have a Triforce mark on the back of his hand. That begs the question, though, of why would Capcom place a Triforce mark on the back of Link's hand in the Oracles if they intended for them to come before LA? Well, let me answer your question with an example from a movie series, The Mummy. In the second installment, The Mummy Returns, Rick O'Connel, the main character, has a tattoo relevant to a treasure that the O'Connel family is trying to find. The tattoo is implied to have been there since before the start of the first movie. In the first installment, however, the tattoo is nowhere to be found. Now why would the writers of the second movie place a tattoo on his arm that has been there since before the first movie if Rick, in fact, did not have a tattoo on that arm in the first movie? The story that the writers wanted to tell involved a tattoo on Rick's arm, so they introduced a minor retcon in order to tell that story. I propose that the same thing applies to the Triforce mark on the back of Link's hand in the Oracles. Capcom wanted to tell a story that took place before LA, but they also wanted to tell a story with Link having a Triforce mark on the back of his hand. They introduced a minor retcon saying that Link had the Triforce mark on the back of his hand. It's not really that big of a deal. I mean, honestly, if you were to make a Zelda game, would you be so anal about continuity between games, or would you put telling the story you want above making sure every little detail is perfect? I know I would be the latter. I can't really speak for you, but if you have any imagination at all, I would assume that you would be the latter as well. Even if you were very anal about continuity, I'm sure you would leave something out that would rub fans the wrong way, and people like you and me would be debating about it now. The fact of the matter is that the Triforce mark on the back of the hand isn't a big deal. That is why I believe it has been retconned. How is it that people who think that the boat is too weak of evidence to even be considered can nitpick about even smaller things, like a Triforce mark on the back of Link's hand? Seems rather inconsistent to me. I don't think that the boat or the Triforce mark are a big deal. I believe that they are both simple examples of a simple retconnnect.

Edited by Aiden, 20 October 2010 - 12:18 AM.


#26 Aiden

Aiden

    Novice

  • Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 20 October 2010 - 08:45 PM

I know we aren't supposed to double post, but I have a question. What kind of continuity do you think that Zelda has? Is it a continuity like The Simpson's, where story is before continuity, or is it like Lost, where continuity is before story? Basically, do you think that the Zelda series has a decent continuity or a very anal continuity? The reason I ask is that I think that the problem we are having is that you seem to think for some reason Zelda has the continuity of Lost, when it has the continuity similar to The Simpson's. Just look at the evidence. ALttP was originally supposed to come before TLoZ, but Ganon dies in ALttP, with no reason for his revival given. OoT was intended to be the IW, despite the differences because Miyamoto wanted to tell a slightly modified story. With the split timeline, we aren't even sure if OoT is the IW anymore because Aonuma wanted to tell his own stories (TWW and TP). The legend of the fairy exists, even though there is a split timeline. Miyamoto and Aonuma have contradicted themselves in interviews. If the Zelda series had a Lost type continuity, why are there so many holes, retconnects, ambiguities, inconsistencies, etc. in the Zelda series? That is why Zelda has a continuity similar to that of The Simpson's. The Simpson's has a very inconsistent continuity, not unlike that of Zelda. Lisa Simpson may have turned 8 several times over the course of the series, but sometimes specific references are made to other episodes or sometimes a particular gag from another episode. It all depends on what's funny first. That is the way the Zelda series is. A boat and fitting LA's backstory is all it takes to establish a retconnect in this kind of continuity. A Triforce mark that is absent from the back of LA Link's hand isn't a big deal in this kind of continuity. Link not facing all of the enemies in OoX that he faces as Nightmares is not a big deal. That's it. It's that simple. You make Zelda continuity out to be very complex when I have just proven it isn't. I'll even admit something to you that you probably would like to hear, so read carefully. If Zelda in fact has a Lost-like continuity, then I would be more inclined to believe that LA still follows ALttP as originally intended. As a matter of fact, if the "Super Secret Master Timeline Document" is ever revealed to the public, and it is revealed that Capcom did not intend for OoX to precede LA, I will meet up with you in person just to shake your hand, buy you lunch, and apologize to you. I rarely say that I'm sure of something, but I am 100% positive that the Zelda series does not have the hyperanal type of continuity that you believe that it has.

Okay, now it's your turn. I know what your responses will be. You will either try to argue that I am wrong, and that Zelda continuity is similar to (not exactly the same as) Lost continuity, to my response is reread the paragraph above until you get it. You could also choose to argue that The Simpson's doesn't have a continuity that is that bad, which in that case, you obviously don't watch the show enough to know that it's riddled with continuity errors simply for the sake of jokes. Unless there is some third kind of option you have that I can't think of right now, I've pretty much ran out of things to say. Our different beliefs in what Zelda continuity is causes the problems in this debate.

Edited by Aiden, 20 October 2010 - 11:28 PM.


#27 Snow

Snow

    Barbarian

  • Members
  • 250 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Sweden

Posted 21 October 2010 - 07:42 AM

I don't follow your logic. First, you say that small details like Link's Triforce mark are insignificant, and then you go and base an entire theory around one of the details you earlier deemed irrelevant. You act as if only minor details prevent OoX from happening between ALttP and LA despite the fact that such a placement causes numerous major contradictions and inconsistencies in the series' continuity. For a theory to be deemed plausible, it has to be supported by lots of substantial evidence; all you have is a boat. It's just not reasonable to believe that Flagship would completely destroy the ALttP-LA connection for no apparent reason and then not give as much as a hint of doing so other than a single image at the end of the game. Not only that, but LA Link is noticeably older than OoX Link, making it even less plausible that the creators of the game intended them to be the same. If they had, they would've made OoX Link the same age as LA Link. And finally, the official Japanese website for Link's Awakening still states that it does take place directly after ALttP, and not anywhere else.

Also, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make in your second post. The Legend of Zelda games can not be compared to The Simpsons in terms of story, as they're all part of a (vaguely) defined continuity. Yes, retcons do exist and yes, some elements in the series aren't relevant to the timeline as a whole. That, however, does not mean it's reasonable to discredit all evidence that contradicts an OoX-LA placement because of a picture of a boat.

Edited by Snow, 21 October 2010 - 08:06 AM.


#28 MikePetersSucks

MikePetersSucks

    Actual Japanese Person

  • ZL Staff
  • 4,174 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 October 2010 - 01:44 PM

The Triforce mark isn't an insignificant detail. It's a mark that's supposed to be present for Link's entire life for then on, marking him as a Hero chosen by the Gods.

Also, thanks for inadvertently insulting the intelligence of everyone on this forum. Really, thanks, we appreciate it.

#29 Aiden

Aiden

    Novice

  • Members
  • 20 posts

Posted 21 October 2010 - 07:37 PM

I don't follow your logic. First, you say that small details like Link's Triforce mark are insignificant, and then you go and base an entire theory around one of the details you earlier deemed irrelevant. You act as if only minor details prevent OoX from happening between ALttP and LA despite the fact that such a placement causes numerous major contradictions and inconsistencies in the series' continuity. For a theory to be deemed plausible, it has to be supported by lots of substantial evidence; all you have is a boat. It's just not reasonable to believe that Flagship would completely destroy the ALttP-LA connection for no apparent reason and then not give as much as a hint of doing so other than a single image at the end of the game. Not only that, but LA Link is noticeably older than OoX Link, making it even less plausible that the creators of the game intended them to be the same. If they had, they would've made OoX Link the same age as LA Link. And finally, the official Japanese website for Link's Awakening still states that it does take place directly after ALttP, and not anywhere else.

Also, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make in your second post. The Legend of Zelda games can not be compared to The Simpsons in terms of story, as they're all part of a (vaguely) defined continuity. Yes, retcons do exist and yes, some elements in the series aren't relevant to the timeline as a whole. That, however, does not mean it's reasonable to discredit all evidence that contradicts an OoX-LA placement because of a picture of a boat.


I bases a theory around something I deemed irrelevant because I know that you didn't agree with me. I was just speaking your tight continuity hardcore Zelda timeline theorist language.

Also, I already told you how Zelda and The Simpson's continuities are similar. If you didn't read it, don't be embarrassed to admit it. I mean, clearly you didn't read it, or absorb it's message. You also didn't pay attention to the fact that I said that the official Japanese website was updated in 1998, nearly 4 years before the Oracles came out, so of course the website is going to agree. I would bother to argue other points, but I'm not going to waste my time on people like you who ignore my points, and then restate them as if I have never addressed them. No offense to you or anything, but I debate for fun, and when people act ignorant like that, the debate turns from fun to irritating, and I just won't stand for that. I will still acknowledge you in other debates. Don't get me wrong. As far as this debate is concerned, however, I will ignore all future post from you, just as you did from me, just to see how you like it. Goodbye, Snow.

The Triforce mark isn't an insignificant detail. It's a mark that's supposed to be present for Link's entire life for then on, marking him as a Hero chosen by the Gods.

Also, thanks for inadvertently insulting the intelligence of everyone on this forum. Really, thanks, we appreciate it.


Sorry I wasn't really trying to insult anyone's intelligence. Everyone has had great ideas so far.

As for the first part, we will just have to agree to disagree. If you truly want to believe that Zelda has a continuity similar to Lost in which every single detail matters, despite the evidence I have given you for the contrary, then that is just your opinion. I am not insulting your intelligence by saying that. If anyone is insulting your intelligence, it's yourselves for believing the Zelda has a tight continuity even though all of the evidence suggest otherwise. Sorry that you feel your own intelligence is worth degrading like that.

Edited by Aiden, 21 October 2010 - 07:38 PM.


#30 Jarsh

Jarsh

    Scout

  • Members
  • 164 posts
  • Location:Heiuso's Sea
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 October 2010 - 07:51 PM

I'll admit I haven't followed the debate that closely, but why do you suddenly think the Triforce mark doesn't matter (it seems like you even tried theorizing around it earlier)? You don't have to think Zelda has a Lost-esque continuity if you think something like an important mark of an important relic on Link's hand means something. I think you'd be better off theorizing it's not there because Flagship doesn't keep to continuity terribly well or something.




Copyright © 2020 Your Company Name