Yeah...GameFAQs...
I really, if you have an account, could use some rational help. These morons keep saying that Eiji Aonuma's quote about TWW and OoT cements the multi-timeline theory, and that the Legend of the Fairy is an Easter Egg...
Hmm...Nintendo Endorses The Multi-Timeline?
Started by
TSA
, Dec 24 2004 11:07 PM
24 replies to this topic
#2
Guest_Kishi_*
Guest_Kishi_*
-
- Guests
Posted 25 December 2004 - 12:07 AM
I'd help, but I genuinely don't care if some GameFAQs goons don't get the Zelda plot. Frankly, I wouldn't expect them to.
#3
Tri-Enforcer
-
- Members
-
- 820 posts
Master
- Gender:Male
Posted 25 December 2004 - 02:06 AM
Yeah...GameFAQs...
I really, if you have an account, could use some rational help. These morons keep saying that Eiji Aonuma's quote about TWW and OoT cements the multi-timeline theory, and that the Legend of the Fairy is an Easter Egg...
TSA, the following is what you once said in another thread in reference to the Master Sword in oracles/ the Four Sword in LTTP:
So why are those mere bonuses or easter eggs...but not the Legend of the Fairy? It is also a bonus feature and unnecessary to finish the game. So why can't it be meaningless to the storyline element? It seems like some people make exceptions for certain elements in order to fit their ideals. Hmmm sounds like some double standards going around.(TSA) R) It's a bonus. Just like the Master Sword in Oracles. It's not a sidequest, it's a bonus feature. ALttP ends when you beat Ganon. You see the ending.
(Kishi)
I'd help, but I genuinely don't care if some GameFAQs goons don't get the Zelda plot. Frankly, I wouldn't expect them to.
Why is that--because it's different from your view? So I suppose you get plot....?
#4
Guest_Zangus_*
Guest_Zangus_*
-
- Guests
Posted 25 December 2004 - 04:55 AM
No, I do believe he means that chaps at GameFAQs really don't get it sometimes, and come up with really fan fictiony weird concepts. Most of it is full of "PWNED AND LOLOZ" so most of it can't be all seriouis. Not that some are bad, but not [img]http://forums.legendsalliance.com/public/ALOT.png[/img] of proof or strong concepts or evidence often fills their theories.Why is that--because it's different from your view? So I suppose you get plot....?
#5
coinilius
-
- Members
-
- 700 posts
Knight
- Location:Queensland, Australia
- Gender:Male
Posted 25 December 2004 - 08:44 AM
Not that the chaps at GameFAQs to be reliable at anything, but I do belive that the whole 'two endings' comment by Aonuma is enough to cement the multiple timeline thoery as is - to assume that it means anything other than multiple timelines seems, to me, to just be a pretty wild interpretation of the comment. If he had intended it to mean that it was one timeline, then surely there would have been an easier way for him to phrase the comment - I know there is the whole 'Japanese to english' translation issue, but even still... assuming he ment that tWW took place 'hundreds of years' after the adult timeline and 'hundreds of years plus seven after the child timeline never really sat well with me. Not that I WANT a multi timeline, just that the comment always seemed to sit better if it was refering to a multi-timeline- I think the references to MM might have just been there way of hedging there bets in case they wanted to take it either way, depending on fan reaction...
(by the way, I'm half cut at the moment, so if my comments don't make sense I'll try to clarify them when I'm a little more sober
)
(by the way, I'm half cut at the moment, so if my comments don't make sense I'll try to clarify them when I'm a little more sober
)
#6
Doopliss
-
- Members
-
- 1,532 posts
Famicom
- Location:UK
- Gender:Male
-
Posted 25 December 2004 - 01:56 PM
Why do the people like to ignore the (as some call them) "Easter Eggs"? They make the timeline more clear and help set some relevant facts that otherwise would have to be guessed or chosen indiscriminately, so they ain't irrelevant after all.
#7
lord-of-shadow
-
- ZL Staff
-
- 1,979 posts
Max Nichols
- Location:Boston.
- Gender:Male
Posted 25 December 2004 - 06:41 PM
The Master Sword in the Oracles makes nothing more clear, and is clearly an easter egg.
Saying that easter eggs in general make things more clear is a pretty encompassing statement, and one I wouldn't be making.
I think the multi-timeline theory is absolutely ridiculous, TSA, but I've wasted far too much time trying to convince people of that. I wouldn't even bother arguing it here, with people I respect. There's no way in hell I'd waste time on mindless Gamefaqs drones.
Saying that easter eggs in general make things more clear is a pretty encompassing statement, and one I wouldn't be making.
I think the multi-timeline theory is absolutely ridiculous, TSA, but I've wasted far too much time trying to convince people of that. I wouldn't even bother arguing it here, with people I respect. There's no way in hell I'd waste time on mindless Gamefaqs drones.
#8
MikePetersSucks
-
- ZL Staff
-
- 4,174 posts
Actual Japanese Person
- Gender:Male
Posted 25 December 2004 - 08:35 PM
I am not touching the Single/Multi debate with a 10 mile pole when it comes to GameFAQs people *shudder of death* Besides, If Nintendo do reveal there's a multi-timeline, they'll probably be a Nintendo-esque twist that actually makes the idea tolerable or cool that we haven't come up with, and if it doesn't, well, atleast the GameFAQ people will STILL be wrong, and that's pretty much my Christmas Present ^_____^
#9
Guest_Darkseid_*
Guest_Darkseid_*
-
- Guests
Posted 25 December 2004 - 09:56 PM
Not that the chaps at GameFAQs to be reliable at anything, but I do belive that the whole 'two endings' comment by Aonuma is enough to cement the multiple timeline thoery as is - to assume that it means anything other than multiple timelines seems, to me, to just be a pretty wild interpretation of the comment. If he had intended it to mean that it was one timeline, then surely there would have been an easier way for him to phrase the comment - I know there is the whole 'Japanese to english' translation issue, but even still... assuming he ment that tWW took place 'hundreds of years' after the adult timeline and 'hundreds of years plus seven after the child timeline never really sat well with me. Not that I WANT a multi timeline, just that the comment always seemed to sit better if it was refering to a multi-timeline- I think the references to MM might have just been there way of hedging there bets in case they wanted to take it either way, depending on fan reaction...
(by the way, I'm half cut at the moment, so if my comments don't make sense I'll try to clarify them when I'm a little more sober
It seems though when the Wind Waker actually made its release however they still didn't place it right after the Adult Link timeline, as generations pass making his exploits become legend, and then hundreds of years happen before the Wind Waker saga, so it still seems like they weren't completely set on where exactly they was going to place its time at. Plus I have read the article, and it doesn't seem assume there is a multiple timeline, but that is just my opinion.
#10
Guest_TanakaBros06_*
Guest_TanakaBros06_*
-
- Guests
Posted 25 December 2004 - 10:31 PM
I agree with Coin. Any other interpretation of that quote is ridiculous, and makes Aonuma look retarded.
#11
Guest_Va._*
Guest_Va._*
-
- Guests
Posted 26 December 2004 - 12:14 AM
That interpretation is taken under the assumption that Miyamoto and Aonuma care way more about the timeline than they actually do. The quote quite clearly says to me that he is simply differentiating the chronological ending of Ocarina of Time (imprisonment of Ganon) from its inclusive story ending (Link meeting Zelda in the courtyard). Basically Aonuma is saying, "yes, at the end of Ocarina of Time Link is in the past with Zelda, and even though this is the end of the journey for the Hero of Time, we must also remember Ganon still must be conquered in the future. That and the Hero's disapearance is much more important to The Wind Waker than the ending in the past." This could also be used to clarify that Ocarina of Time's adult ending was not erased, as many (including me) had speculated before The Wind Waker's release.
Also it would be important to note that something so significant to the Zelda Universe as multiple timelines would be explicitly stated by the developers (not just vague comments), especially after considering how they're more concerned with the timeline than before. Its not like they haven't had any time. That interview is atleast two years old, and four games have been released since then to help clear things up if needed (also note none of those games have included any specific references to multiple timelines, just inconcistencies. Inconcistencies do not prove multiple timelines).
As for the difference between The Master Sword in Oracles and the Legend of the Fairy in The Wind Waker, they are entirely unrelated subjects. There is no reason or story at all why the Master Sword is given to you, while the Legend of the Fairy is just that, a description of the works of Tingle. To deny the canon of the Legend of the Fairy is to open up so many loopholes. Without it, how do you explain Tingle's existence (one integral to the plot) in The Wind Waker? Nintendo gives you exactly that. The Legend of the Fairy destroys inconcistencies, the Master Sword in Oracles creates them.
You could even work its existence into Zelda canon if you had to. Hell, a fucking Oracle gives it to you. Who knows what they can do? Perhaps she was allowed by the gods to break the seal to give it to Link so he may destroy Ganon again?
Even the theory that Capcom is a bunch of unimaginative greedy whores works fine.
Also it would be important to note that something so significant to the Zelda Universe as multiple timelines would be explicitly stated by the developers (not just vague comments), especially after considering how they're more concerned with the timeline than before. Its not like they haven't had any time. That interview is atleast two years old, and four games have been released since then to help clear things up if needed (also note none of those games have included any specific references to multiple timelines, just inconcistencies. Inconcistencies do not prove multiple timelines).
As for the difference between The Master Sword in Oracles and the Legend of the Fairy in The Wind Waker, they are entirely unrelated subjects. There is no reason or story at all why the Master Sword is given to you, while the Legend of the Fairy is just that, a description of the works of Tingle. To deny the canon of the Legend of the Fairy is to open up so many loopholes. Without it, how do you explain Tingle's existence (one integral to the plot) in The Wind Waker? Nintendo gives you exactly that. The Legend of the Fairy destroys inconcistencies, the Master Sword in Oracles creates them.
You could even work its existence into Zelda canon if you had to. Hell, a fucking Oracle gives it to you. Who knows what they can do? Perhaps she was allowed by the gods to break the seal to give it to Link so he may destroy Ganon again?
Even the theory that Capcom is a bunch of unimaginative greedy whores works fine.
#12
coinilius
-
- Members
-
- 700 posts
Knight
- Location:Queensland, Australia
- Gender:Male
Posted 26 December 2004 - 12:46 AM
One problem with saying that the Legend of the Fairy is needed to explain Tingle's presence in tWW - don't forget that there is no explanation for Tingle's presence in OoA, or HA, or tMC.
I can't get the GameFAQs link to work either.
Also, are there two Aonuma qoutes out there? There's one where Myamoto and him are both explaning it, but I've also seen one which just seems to be Aonuma explaining it by himself.
I can't get the GameFAQs link to work either.
Also, are there two Aonuma qoutes out there? There's one where Myamoto and him are both explaning it, but I've also seen one which just seems to be Aonuma explaining it by himself.
#13
Tri-Enforcer
-
- Members
-
- 820 posts
Master
- Gender:Male
Posted 26 December 2004 - 01:27 AM
That interview is atleast two years old, and four games have been released since then to help clear things up if needed (also note none of those games have included any specific references to multiple timelines, just inconcistencies. Inconcistencies do not prove multiple timelines).
And they surely don't prove single timelines....
#14
Guest_Va._*
Guest_Va._*
-
- Guests
Posted 26 December 2004 - 01:44 AM
You could assume its just another member of the Tingle cult following the Legend of the Fairy. Honestly, I wouldn't even worry about OoA as its a Capcom game. One very sketchy area comes when placing the Four Swords games before OoT, which is why I like TSA's attempts at placing them at the end of the timeline.One problem with saying that the Legend of the Fairy is needed to explain Tingle's presence in tWW - don't forget that there is no explanation for Tingle's presence in OoA, or HA, or tMC.
I can't get the GameFAQs link to work either.
Add an 'h' at the beginning of the url.
There is only one quote I am aware of that multi timeline users try to use as evidence.Also, are there two Aonuma qoutes out there? There's one where Myamoto and him are both explaning it, but I've also seen one which just seems to be Aonuma explaining it by himself.
And they surely don't prove single timelines....
Maybe not directly, but they do imply sequels. And when you have sequels to fix inconcistencies instead of just using multi timelines as an easy way out, it implies a single timeline.
No matter what you do, you are left with the OoT/MM/TWW paradox and no multitimeline theory fixes this, which implies OoT is inherently flawed when it comes to placing it into a timeline (and thus cancels any reason to use a multitimeline).
#15
coinilius
-
- Members
-
- 700 posts
Knight
- Location:Queensland, Australia
- Gender:Male
Posted 26 December 2004 - 08:29 AM
If you're not worry about the Oracles as they are Capcom games, Va, then you might as well forget about trying to place tMC as well - it's a Capcom game. So was the original FS (the GBA one).
#16
Zythe
-
- Banned
- 1 posts
Beginner
Posted 26 December 2004 - 01:15 PM
Yeah. By that logic, any updates or changes to the text in the LTTP update don't count, cause Capcom did it. So he didn't keep the shovel after all?
#17
MikePetersSucks
-
- ZL Staff
-
- 4,174 posts
Actual Japanese Person
- Gender:Male
Posted 26 December 2004 - 01:58 PM
Thing is, If everyone argues over there being multiple timelines because of OOT, then why not OOA? It had time travel too, but you don't see people ranting about a new timeline where the evil timeline of OOA lives -.-; Or even MM, you don't get theories about a timeline where Termina dies. Why is OOT so special? Why does that one event get it's own timeline? There is no reason, this multi timeline thing is total bullcrap.
#18
Guest_Va._*
Guest_Va._*
-
- Guests
Posted 26 December 2004 - 03:21 PM
I'm not totally discrediting Capcom (Oracles, Four Sword, and TMC definitely have a place in the timeline), I'm just stating they should be taken less seriously than Nintendo. If a Nintendo game discredits something from a Capcom game, the Nintendo version should be accepted.
For example, when trying to place the Oracles, you look for something basic like the state of the Triforce. It is unified in Hyrule. There is no evidence the Triforce was unified in Hyrule until sometime between A Link to the Past and Legend of Zelda (except briefly during TWW). Therefore Oracles cannot take place before the Triforce is unified and thus cannot be before A Link to the Past. However, if it is after ALttP, then how do you explain the Master Sword's inclusion? Simple, you discard it because Nintendo clearly stated the Master Sword sleeps forever after ALttP. The definite state of the Triforce is more important than the questionable inclusion of the Master Sword. Therefore Nintendo explanation rules out Capcoms and the Master Sword in Oracles should be removed from canon.
For example, when trying to place the Oracles, you look for something basic like the state of the Triforce. It is unified in Hyrule. There is no evidence the Triforce was unified in Hyrule until sometime between A Link to the Past and Legend of Zelda (except briefly during TWW). Therefore Oracles cannot take place before the Triforce is unified and thus cannot be before A Link to the Past. However, if it is after ALttP, then how do you explain the Master Sword's inclusion? Simple, you discard it because Nintendo clearly stated the Master Sword sleeps forever after ALttP. The definite state of the Triforce is more important than the questionable inclusion of the Master Sword. Therefore Nintendo explanation rules out Capcoms and the Master Sword in Oracles should be removed from canon.
#19
Tri-Enforcer
-
- Members
-
- 820 posts
Master
- Gender:Male
Posted 26 December 2004 - 05:20 PM
Thing is, If everyone argues over there being multiple timelines because of OOT, then why not OOA? It had time travel too, but you don't see people ranting about a new timeline where the evil timeline of OOA lives -.-; Or even MM, you don't get theories about a timeline where Termina dies. Why is OOT so special? Why does that one event get it's own timeline? There is no reason, this multi timeline thing is total bullcrap.
Well actually there could very well be multiple timelines that stem from everytime one timetravels. The reason why the timelines stemming from OOT are so important is because OOT was such a pivotal title not only in story, but even in success and lore amongst Zelda fans. So Nintendo...may only want to focus on the timelines that came directly from OOT....
#20
coinilius
-
- Members
-
- 700 posts
Knight
- Location:Queensland, Australia
- Gender:Male
Posted 26 December 2004 - 08:45 PM
Also, in MM and OoA, the storyline and timelines are all pretty neatly resolved by the end of the game - in OoT, you are left with many questions such as the state of Ganon, if the future was supposed to be overwritten, if Link went back and then just hid for seven years so the same stuff could happen all over again...
#21
Wolf O'Donnell
-
- Members
-
- 6,486 posts
BSc (Hons) MSc
- Location:Near the Mausoleum of Napoleon III
- Gender:Male
-
Posted 27 December 2004 - 10:08 AM
Thing is, If everyone argues over there being multiple timelines because of OOT, then why not OOA? It had time travel too, but you don't see people ranting about a new timeline where the evil timeline of OOA lives -.-; Or even MM, you don't get theories about a timeline where Termina dies. Why is OOT so special? Why does that one event get it's own timeline? There is no reason, this multi timeline thing is total bullcrap.
Don't be so close minded.
If you take into account every single time when Link time travels, you end up with an insane number of timelines to account for and frankly, there hasn't been a single game made for every single outcome of everytime Link has travelled. That would just be stupid.
Besides, Oracles contains paradoxes that cannot be resolved like the one where Link is given a rare antique from a Goron as a gift and then Link gives it to the Goron's ancestor whom passes it down through the generations so that it ends up in the hands of the Goron that gives the antique to Link in the first place.
Also, in MM and OoA, the storyline and timelines are all pretty neatly resolved by the end of the game - in OoT, you are left with many questions such as the state of Ganon, if the future was supposed to be overwritten, if Link went back and then just hid for seven years so the same stuff could happen all over again...
What has done cannot be erased. That is where there are multiple timelines but no split timelines or erasing of histories. Quantum physics states that there must be several different alternate universes that already exist, regardless of time travel.
Still, let's face it, all this Single/Multiple argument happened when Miyamoto introduced time travel into the equation. In doing so, he introduced a Sci Fi element that started the entire argument. OoT screwed up back histories and the future of the very series.
What we shouldn't do, however, is make these debates so inflamed that the Zelda creators start listening. Things start to go wrong when creators start listening to fans. If the Zelda creators start listening to fans, they might end up being pressurised into doing stupid things like trying to fix timeline discrepancies when they should be concentrating on making a decent game.
#22
Zythe
-
- Banned
- 1 posts
Beginner
Posted 27 December 2004 - 11:12 AM
Thing is, If everyone argues over there being multiple timelines because of OOT, then why not OOA? It had time travel too, but you don't see people ranting about a new timeline where the evil timeline of OOA lives -.-; Or even MM, you don't get theories about a timeline where Termina dies. Why is OOT so special? Why does that one event get it's own timeline? There is no reason, this multi timeline thing is total bullcrap.
Is it even possible to find split timelines that split at OoA?
#23
MikePetersSucks
-
- ZL Staff
-
- 4,174 posts
Actual Japanese Person
- Gender:Male
Posted 27 December 2004 - 02:15 PM
What I'm trying to state is, regardless of how the time travel took place or how it was resolved, if one case of Time Travel causes a split timeline, why not MM or OOA? it's like when people questioned why the minor time travels of Link in OOT didn't make new timelines 
but meh, the point is multi timelines is just stupid
but meh, the point is multi timelines is just stupid
#24
Tri-Enforcer
-
- Members
-
- 820 posts
Master
- Gender:Male
Posted 27 December 2004 - 04:42 PM
Dude, are u listening to anything we just said. We just awknowledged that other timeline do occur each time Link timetravels--it would just be ridiculous to make a game about everytimeline. So Nintendo may just be focusing on the ones that are essential to our perspective of the Zelda story--the timeline Link goes back, and the one he leaves behind (which are the timelines spurned in OOT--and are more relevant and essential for story-telling sake). It was probably not necessary for Nintendo to focus on possible splits that may have occured in OoA or MM.What I'm trying to state is, regardless of how the time travel took place or how it was resolved, if one case of Time Travel causes a split timeline, why not MM or OOA? it's like when people questioned why the minor time travels of Link in OOT didn't make new timelines
#25
Hana-Nezumi
-
- Members
-
- 6,040 posts
Flower Mouse
- Gender:Androgynous Male Rodent
Posted 27 December 2004 - 06:04 PM
now that quantum physics is involved, enchantedtoast is clueless.
