53 replies to this topic

[Beno]

All right, it's been a while since I've done this stuff. I used to hang around these forums for a while; some of you may remember me. To those who do... I hope you've been doing well! But here's the timeline I'm working on these days and I wanted some thoughts. I know it's a bit unconventional, but just curious what others have to say about it... All criticism welcome - I won't be offended.

TMC - FS/FSA - LoZ/AoL - OoT/Child/MM - TP - LttP/LA - Oracles
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - /Adult - WW/PH - ST

Some explanation (attempting to go in chronological order here...):
First, of course, Hyrule is created... blah, blah. After Hyrule was created, I have the backstory of the Twili and the backstory of AoL. The King of Hyrule ruled with the Triforce, but then split up, Zelda is put to sleep. Then the "Hero of Men" story, which if you want you can consider the "Light Force" part of the Triforce (either Power or Wisdom) being brought by the Minish back to the Princess of Hyrule. (it's ambiguous in the AoL backstory to me how much of the Triforce was inherited/where all the pieces are other than Courage) TMC happens, Four Sword is created... FS's backstory happens sometime later, and then the events of FS/FSA. The first Ganon/Ganondorf is created during this time and then sealed inside the Four Sword. (The Dark World and Dark Mirror could be the same as the Twilight, but it doesn't matter to me either way) Some time passes and Ganon is able to escape from the Four Sword. (we've seen this seal weaken before) The events of LoZ/AoL happen. After the Triforce is reunited, the Master Sword is created to protect it as a key to close off the Sacred Realm. Split in the timeline with OoT, and birth of new Ganondorf. The Adult timeline is pretty self explanatory and confirmed. In the child timeline, MM happens. Ganondorf at some point is captured and sealed in the Twilight Realm. The events of TP happen, and Ganon is killed once again. A new Ganondorf is reborn and the events of the Imprisoning War happen, leading up to the events of LttP/LA. You can throw in Ancient Stone Tablet (BS Zelda) in there too, if it suits you. Ganon is once again dead, and Triforce safe. Then the Oracles happen, Ganon is revived and killed again.

Let me know what you think. I am going with broader story strokes to build this timeline I guess, and not getting into the more nitpicky stuff like geography, etc...

Edited by Beno, 24 March 2011 - 12:37 PM.

[Snow]

Your timeline makes sense for the most part, but I can't say I agree with your pre-OoT placings. What is your reasoning for putting FS/FSA and LoZ/AoL before OoT?

[Beno]

The reason I place them there is because after reading over the stories and backstories of LoZ/AoL there are really only very few criteria that allow for placing the game.

Link and Zelda don't know each other.
Ganon's alive at the beginning.
Hyrule is in a state of chaos.
The Triforce is split up - Power, Wisdom reside in the Kingdom, while Courage is locked away.

All that is pretty vague, and could honestly place the series almost anywhere. The only defining story aspect of these games to me is the backstory to AoL and it's telling of the King of Hyrule and the "first" Princess Zelda, which I know most people now consider retconned. But without this aspect of the story, you could really place these games anywhere you wanted because of how vague the story is. So going off that idea, I placed them as the first games, to allow that to be the first Princess.

The only thing missing from this was a Ganon origin story, so I looked for a game where Ganon is not killed, or where there is not a confirmed sequel in which he is killed. Also, a game that could fill that role and does not involve the full Triforce (since Courage is still locked away) FSA is the only game that could obviously fit that description as at the end Ganon is just locked in the Four Sword. FSA provides the description of Ganon's origin. Of course, along with FSA comes the other two in the trilogy so I place them before it.

[MikePetersSucks]

Eeeeeh....I'm not feeling it. I'm not a fan of putting so much crap before OOT, especially since Word of God seems to insist it was the first game when it came out which would thus preempt LOZ/AOL and what not, blah blah blah...

[Beno]

Yeah, I understand, I've always had a problem putting anything before OoT but I just don't see how it's possible to not now. Is there anything in OoT itself that precludes any games from coming before it that I'm not thinking of? The big reason I always felt that it was the first is because I assumed the Triforce had never been taken from the Sacred Realm or touched before that point, but I read through a lot of the quotes in OoT and I don't see anything that necessarily implies that. In fact it makes more sense to me that the Triforce had been used/tainted/whatever and that would provide an impetus for the ancient sages creating the Master Sword as a key to prevent it's use.

Haha, I assume by the Word of God, you mean the creators? I thought that newer quote from Eiji kind of disregarded the whole OoT first thing:

"...this title [Skyward Sword] takes place before Ocarina of Time. If I said that a certain title was 'the first Zelda game', then that means that we cant ever make a title that takes place before that! So for us to add titles to the series, we have to have a way of putting the titles before or after each other."

I kind of took that to mean that SS was not necessarily the "first" Zelda game, but maybe I'm reading it differently?

[Snow]

A Link to the Past is a prequel to the first two games, though. I don't see why they'd retcon this.

And as for OoT being first, Aonuma did say this a few months ago:

I think we've talked to the media about this before, about Ocarina of Time being sort of the oldest story in the Zelda timeline, but, of course, in Ocarina of Time the Maser Sword already exists, so it's obviously safe to say that [Skyward Sword] takes place before Ocarina of Time.

Granted, he only says that Ocarina is "sort of the oldest story", so it's not necessarily the first game in the series. However, I think it's safe to say that it's definitely one of the first.

Edited by Snow, 24 March 2011 - 03:37 PM.

[Beno]

A Link to the Past is a prequel to the first two games, though. I don't see why they'd retcon this.

The box says that, but I think it is debatable since on multiple occasions Miyamoto stated that LoZ/AoL came before LttP. I'm not saying creator quotes are the end-all since they are often contradictory, but it goes to show that LttP is not necessarily a hard and fast prequel to LoZ/AoL.

Miyamoto (1998): Ocarina of Time is the first story, then the original Legend of Zelda, then Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, and finally A Link to the Past.

Miyamoto (2003): Exactly. We actually see A Link to the Past as the real sequel to Legend of Zelda.

I still don't think that newer Aonuma quote states that OoT of time was the first. I don't understand why he would purposely leave it ambiguous and say "sort of the oldest story" and not just say the oldest current story before the introduction of SS. All it really confirms to me is that Master Sword can't exist before SS or OoT, and it is not mentioned in any of the games I placed before OoT.

[Showsni]

Hm, looks kind of similar to mine; but I go the whole hog and put ALttP/LA prior to OoT too, keeping the prequel to LoZ relationship intact. (And my Oracles then move as well.) Nice to see someone else unbound by thinking OoT must go first. By moving ALttP from its current position to before LoZ, you clear up any problems with TP leading into ALttP (namely, how the triforce managed to get reunited and returned to the SR in time for the IW), and maintain the stated prequel relationship. (The problem it does add is that ALttP then needs to predate the Sleeping Zelda story, which doesn't mesh well with the origin of the naming tradition, but that's a contradiciton that's always going to be apparent (either you go against the "prequel to LoZ" line or you go against the "first generation Zelda" line. A hard contradiction with the third game released? Thanks Nintendo.))

Oracles I have as a sequel to AoL, to try and explain the link between AoL and OoT (my logic: in AoL, the triforce is sitting (seemingly unguarded) in Hyrule Castle. At that time, Ganon is almost resurrected. I theorise this acted as somewhat of a wake up call to the people of Hyrule, causing them to try and protect the Triforce by building the Temple of Time and creating the locking system seen in OoT, using the Master Sword (which was recently rediscovered during Oracles)).

Edited by Showsni, 25 March 2011 - 04:29 AM.

[Snow]

A Link to the Past is a prequel to the first two games, though. I don't see why they'd retcon this.

The box says that, but I think it is debatable since on multiple occasions Miyamoto stated that LoZ/AoL came before LttP. I'm not saying creator quotes are the end-all since they are often contradictory, but it goes to show that LttP is not necessarily a hard and fast prequel to LoZ/AoL.

Miyamoto (1998): Ocarina of Time is the first story, then the original Legend of Zelda, then Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, and finally A Link to the Past.

Miyamoto (2003): Exactly. We actually see A Link to the Past as the real sequel to Legend of Zelda.

I thought it was generally accepted that the first quote was either a mistranslation of an error on Miyamoto's part. After all, that very interview was taken down from NoA's official Zelda site for inaccuracies -at the request of Miyamoto himself. And as for the second quote, I think you're taking it out of context. Miyamoto doesn't refer to the timeline in that quote, he talks about how AoL was a bit of an experiment that didn't go as well as planned, which is why ALttP went back to the gameplay of the original, making it the true successor of LoZ.

Besides, Miyamoto did confirm that ALttP is a prequel back in 1999, something which is further implied by both the game's title and the manual (and, of course, the back of the box).

I still don't think that newer Aonuma quote states that OoT of time was the first. I don't understand why he would purposely leave it ambiguous and say "sort of the oldest story" and not just say the oldest current story before the introduction of SS. All it really confirms to me is that Master Sword can't exist before SS or OoT, and it is not mentioned in any of the games I placed before OoT.

I agree that "sort of the oldest story" doesn't necessarily mean that OoT is the very first game in the series, but I think it's rather safe to say that it doesn't take place in the middle of the timeline.

[SOAP]

I used to do timelines like that, just to justify the whole Sleeping Zelda is the first Zelda thing. Now adays I just regard the series several different canons linked only tenuously as bunch of muddled myths.

Let's see if it can still work after SS comes out. We're told it takes place before OoT but they were also adamant about not calling it the first game so maybe other games can fit before SS... as long as they're not Master Sword titles. LoZ could work before OoT since it doesn't involve the Master Sword but it goes against established creator intent (such as LoZ repeatedly stated to be after ALttP, a Master Sword game).

[MikePetersSucks]

Yeah, I understand, I've always had a problem putting anything before OoT but I just don't see how it's possible to not now.

Let me clarify; there's a big difference between putting 'anything' before OOT, and effectively making it the middle of the timeline, imo.

Especially something like LOZ/AOL, which has no reason to be moved earlier when it sat fine where it was. Plus I'm personally not gonna budge on the LTTP/LA-LOZ/AOL thing

[Beno]

Other than creator quotes, does anyone have any game story elements that contradict my placement that I am missing?

[Fin]

I tend to read Ganondorf's dying words in Twilight Princess as a way of telling us that the ongoing conflict between Link and Ganondorf has just begun, but other than that rather subjective example nothing comes to mind.

[Beno]

Wasn't Ganondorf's dying speech not used in the game though? I thought it was just found in the text dump.

[Fin]

The last couple of lines still made the cut. In fact, now that I'm looking over them again, I think the Japanese lines are pretty explicit about it being the beginning.

これで、全てが終わったと思うなよ
Do not think everything ends with this...
Do not think this ends here...

これが、光と闇の血塗られた歴史の始まりだと思え！
Think of this as the beginning of a bloodsmeared history of light and darkness!
The history of light and shadow will be written in blood!

[Beno]

All right. I'll buy that. But like you already said, fairly subjective still, since Ganondorf may not necessarily be aware of possible previous or later Ganons.

[Snow]

Other than creator quotes, does anyone have any game story elements that contradict my placement that I am missing?

No huge ones, but FSA makes it fairly clear that the game takes place in an era where Hylians have started to become extinct. The Triforce doesn't really make any sense being split up before OoT either.

[Beno]

Where does it say that in FSA? I believe you, but I'm currently replaying through that game right now, and I haven't picked up on that sentiment. Where should I look for this quote?

And why can the Triforce not be split up before OoT?

[Snow]

Where does it say that in FSA? I believe you, but I'm currently replaying through that game right now, and I haven't picked up on that sentiment. Where should I look for this quote?

Most of the actual quotes were unused, but they still exist within the text dump. However, if you look at the sprites of all human NPCs, you'll notice that all of them lack the pointy ears that Hylians have. This becomes particularly clear if you compare the sprites to those of Link or the maidens, who all have noticeably pointy ears.

And why can the Triforce not be split up before OoT?

It doesn't seem to fit with how the Triforce is presented in both OoT and ALttP. Both games talk about the Triforce as though it had been untouched since the creation of Hyrule which is inconsistent with AoL's backstory, which says that it had been used by the Hyrulean Royalty for centuries.

[SOAP]

Where does it say that in FSA? I believe you, but I'm currently replaying through that game right now, and I haven't picked up on that sentiment. Where should I look for this quote?

Most of the actual quotes were unused, but they still exist within the text dump. However, if you look at the sprites of all human NPCs, you'll notice that all of them lack the pointy ears that Hylians have. This becomes particularly clear if you compare the sprites to those of Link or the maidens, who all have noticeably pointy ears.

And why can the Triforce not be split up before OoT?

It doesn't seem to fit with how the Triforce is presented in both OoT and ALttP. Both games talk about the Triforce as though it had been untouched since the creation of Hyrule which is inconsistent with AoL's backstory, which says that it had been used by the Hyrulean Royalty for centuries.

It is implied by OoT that no one touched it since the Goddesses went and hid it This could have been right before they departed to the Heavens in Hyrule's Creation Story or they could have returned later and hid it after the Interloper Incident and no one touched it after that until OoT, which is what Beno seems to be implying here. The former was the common belief for a while but looking back at some quotes in OoT, I'd have to say Beno's theory could work, even if it's not in line with creator intent so far.

The three great goddesses,
their labors completed,
departed for the heavens.
And golden sacred triangles
remained at the point where the
goddesses left the world.
Since then, the sacred triangles
have become the basis of our
world's providence.
And, the resting place of the
triangles has become the
Sacred Realm.

The three goddesses hid the
Triforce containing the power of
the gods somewhere in Hyrule.
The power
to grant the wish of the one who
holds the Triforce in his hands.
If someone with a righteous heart
makes a wish, it will lead Hyrule
to a golden age of prosperity....
If someone with an evil mind has
his wish granted, the world will
be consumed by evil...That is what
has been told....
So, the ancient Sages built
the Temple of Time to protect the
Triforce from evil ones.

From these two quotes it's easy to assume that Goddesses hide the Triforce sometime after the create the world but before they depart for Heaven. But upon closer examination, it appears when they initially leave the Triforce it seems to imply that it was for the whole world to share so it initially it may have been more accessible. The the second quote seems to contradict this by saying the Goddesses hid it and warned that if any evil hands touched it, it would bring about a dark age upon Hyrule. Subsequently the Sages then build the Temple of Time to seal off the Sacred Realm and access to the Triforce. So what happened? I you take the Inteloper Incident in TP to actually hold some weight then it starts to paint a very different scenario than what we're used to:

In the begining the Goddesses create the world. Then after their work is done and they declare it good they decide to leave for the heavens but not before leaving the Triforce, an essense of their power, behind. This was a gift for their creations and served as link to call the Goddesses back to Hyrule to intervene if they should ever need their aid. Something akin to parents leaving a cell phone with their kids while they go out so they can reach them in a case of an emergency. They probably expcted the people of Hyrule to use the power wisely. And they probably did. But then jealousy started to develope amongst the people as people started wondering why the Hylians got monopoly over the Triforce. Like spoiled children the people start to bicker and qaurrel over the Triforce. The Goddeses are forced to intervene and send the Light Spirits to punish all the instigators and send them to 'time out" in the Twilight Realm. The Goddesses then snatch up the Triforce and hide it this time. If the people couldn't share and play nice then no one would have the Triforce. They then instruct the wisest of the Hylians to build the Temple of Time to close off access to the Triforce.

[MikePetersSucks]

This element is rather minor, but I personally tie LOZ/AOL and Oracles together because of the Triforce; if you put the two together, you have the split Triforce which is used together, but never united again, and then it's enshrined as three triangles in the castle or whatever. It's nice and neat, and it even gives Oracles Link a Triforce mark that has nothing in common with any other Triforce marking except the one in AOL.

Also AOL is full of towns that share names with OOT Sages, but you put it before OOT so suddenly what the fuck? "Saria, O child of the Deku Tree, thou shalt be named after some random ass Hylian village like a thousand miles north." Then we have the Four Sword being unaccounted for for a few games then appearing in LTTP, and canon issues aside we won't know what the hell happened to the thing where if we put them immediately around each other, you can atleast fanwank something more smooth.

[Beno]

Also AOL is full of towns that share names with OOT Sages, but you put it before OOT so suddenly what the fuck? "Saria, O child of the Deku Tree, thou shalt be named after some random ass Hylian village like a thousand miles north."

Lol. See, I see the town names as more of a "retconnable" item than the Sleeping Zelda story which is a more integral story element. I'm just not sure how people consider some stuff retconned and others not, when as far as I know the developer's have never implicitly said that anything has been retconned. I just can't justify the whole town name/sage thing since Mido is also a town name and he did nothing that would have gotten a town named after him. I just feel like they reused the names in OoT to provide some nostalgia to those who had played AoL, but they don't make for hard timeline evidence to me, but I understand why they do for some.

One thing that seems to imply to me that the Triforce wasn't locked away permanently in the Sacred Realm immediately upon it's creation is the creation story told by Lanayru:

The goddesses descended to the world of chaos where there was nothing at all, and created life and order.
And after granting power equally to all people, they returned to the heavens.
The place where the goddesses first landed is called the holy land.
For a long time, the world was at peace, with people's hearts being deeply faithful…
But at length, a rivalry ensued over Hyrule, the holy land.

Even with TP going seemingly crazy out of it's way not to mention the Triforce, this quote seems to imply to me that the "power" (Triforce) was meant for all people and wasn't immediately locked away. Of course, I know this quote gets kinda weird, what with Hyrule itself essentially being called the Sacred Realm in the Japanese...

[Snow]

While I'm not against the idea of the Trifore having a more prominent role in the past, I highly doubt that it ever got split up or even left the Sacred Realm before OoT, as that seems to clash with how its presented in ALttP and OoT. If Nintendo really had intended LoZ and AoL to take place before both OoT and ALttP, I doubt they would've implied the opposite.

Lol. See, I see the town names as more of a "retconnable" item than the Sleeping Zelda story which is a more integral story element. I'm just not sure how people consider some stuff retconned and others not, when as far as I know the developer's have never implicitly said that anything has been retconned. I just can't justify the whole town name/sage thing since Mido is also a town name and he did nothing that would have gotten a town named after him. I just feel like they reused the names in OoT to provide some nostalgia to those who had played AoL, but they don't make for hard timeline evidence to me, but I understand why they do for some.

Aonuma did say that the sages' names in OoT were put in as a subtle way of implying that the towns were named after the sages, though.

[MikePetersSucks]

Lol. See, I see the town names as more of a "retconnable" item than the Sleeping Zelda story which is a more integral story element.

The town thing was more of a joke inclusion.

But Seriously, the Sleeping Zelda story, as it stands, conflicts with other information which is equally canon. Why the hell is it even all that special to preserve it since it doesn't really change anything?

Edited by MikePetersSucks, 28 March 2011 - 02:25 PM.

[Beno]

But Seriously, the Sleeping Zelda story, as it stands, conflicts with other information which is equally canon. Why the hell is it even all that special to preserve it since it doesn't really change anything?

Let me just say that I fucking HATE the Sleeping Zelda story. I always have since it has seemed like the bane of my timelining existence. The only reason I find it special at all is because the Zelda naming foundation story in it is the only thing in the LoZ/AoL arc that allows for a placement on the timeline in my opinion. Without that the only thing to rely on in placing those games is developer quotes mentioning it. And I don't see how putting it before OoT directly contradicts anything canon, except for the fact that most people assume the Triforce always remained in the Sacred Realm. I always assumed that too but I don't feel like that is the intent anymore. The more I look at the stories the more it makes sense that the Triforce was left behind in the Sacred Realm FOR people to use (a good King maybe) and then people (possibly by divine oracle) sealed off the entrance to the Sacred Realm once they realized it's potential for misuse. In fact, I don't see the point in the Goddesses leaving behind some holy power and asking the people to just seal it away so no one can use it. It's clear from Ocarina of Time that ancient sages built the Temple of Time and created the Master Sword implying that those weren't always obstacles to reaching the Triforce. I guess it just depends on how "ancient" those sages are.

[MikePetersSucks]

Let me just say that I fucking HATE the Sleeping Zelda story. I always have since it has seemed like the bane of my timelining existence. The only reason I find it special at all is because the Zelda naming foundation story in it is the only thing in the LoZ/AoL arc that allows for a placement on the timeline in my opinion. Without that the only thing to rely on in placing those games is developer quotes mentioning it. And I don't see how putting it before OoT directly contradicts anything canon, except for the fact that most people assume the Triforce always remained in the Sacred Realm.

Well, there IS the whole "LTTP comes before the first two games" thing.

[Beno]

The sources saying that LttP comes before LoZ/AoL are: Back of LttP box and Dengeki64 quote in 1999, right? Are there any I am missing?

Edited by Beno, 29 March 2011 - 02:46 PM.

[Snow]

ALttP's manual implies that it does as well, although it doesn't outright state it.

[Beno]

The quote about Ganon being the Ganon we are familiar with, right?

Edited by Beno, 29 March 2011 - 03:13 PM.

[Snow]

Yeah.