399 replies to this topic

[Hero of Slime]

It would not be wrong since you convinced me that the methods of Time travel in OoT would make a split impossible.

The Ganon's sealing happens twice but the events are not entirely identical.

[Fyxe]

It would not be wrong since you convinced me that the methods of Time travel in OoT would make a split impossible.

Don't pull that trick on me. ¬.¬ I have only ever stated that it's impossible to have a split during the *normal* time travel using the Master Sword that Link goes through during the gameplay. It's always possible that when Zelda sends Link back, something different happens. However, this is forced speculation based on that quote from Aonuma.

Technically, if OoT was always intended as a retelling of the Imprisoning War, then the events *are* identical, because they were meant to be the same. The similarities are hard to ignore.

[Hero of Slime]

then the events *are* identical,

But they are not. They might have been intended to be but they are not. The difference are big enough for them to be considered separate events when they can be separate events.

Edited by The Zol, 16 June 2006 - 07:59 PM.

[Vazor]

Listen Fyxe, I know you like the idea of OoT being the IW, but the Triforce reigns supreme, you know? At the end of OoT, Ganon only has the ToP, but in LTTP he has the whole Triforce. It just doesn't make any sense for OoT to be the IW. They're similar, and that's it.

[SOAP]

The two may be simmilar because maybe the most effective way to seal someone up is to have eight sages. Seems more methodical than coincental to me.

[MikePetersSucks]

Er....Seven Sages.

[SOAP]

There's eight in OoT. But that's hardly the point.

[Fyxe]

No, there's seven.

Listen Fyxe, I know you like the idea of OoT being the IW

Me and the bloody game designers. And other theorists, don't just pretend it's me alone.

but the Triforce reigns supreme, you know? At the end of OoT, Ganon only has the ToP, but in LTTP he has the whole Triforce. It just doesn't make any sense for OoT to be the IW.

I always thought that was one of the weaker reasons for it not being the same. There's a thousand different ways for Ganon to get the remaining pieces of the Triforce even when sealed in the Dark World. Hell, TWW is an example of an attempt to do so. If he can bypass the seal that the Sages placed and the one created by the gods themselves (with no explaination for how he does so) to get his mitts on the Triforce pieces, then there's going to be plenty of chances for him to recover Wisdom and Courage before ALttP occurs.

When OoT was released, they intended it to be a retelling of the Imprisoning War. From those quotes I showed, this is a given. And if they made OoT in such a way that it's not explained how Ganon gets the other pieces, we must simply assume that they always intended to glaze over that particular plot point and just leave it to fate.

TWW glazes over how Ganon escaped, and plenty of other details. One thing we should remember is that the games never, ever tell us everything, which is the whole reason why there are arguements over all this in the first place.

[Hero of Slime]

Me and the bloody game designers.

No, they changed their beliefs when they made TWW. You are alone. The only quotes from the game creators that I have seen came from the 90's, its very possible that they changed their beliefs, more possible than not since they made TWW.

[Doopliss]

So your main reason to think about the IW and OoT as the same are the words of the creators, right? But couldn't they (the createors) have meant that OoT was a retelling of the IW because they based on its story to make a new game? If they 'copied' the story of the IW to make OoT, it doesn't mean that they are the same story, just that the y were inspired on one to make the other. I mean, that's a possibility as well.

I always thought that was one of the weaker reasons for it not being the same. There's a thousand different ways for Ganon to get the remaining pieces of the Triforce even when sealed in the Dark World. Hell, TWW is an example of an attempt to do so. If he can bypass the seal that the Sages placed and the one created by the gods themselves (with no explaination for how he does so) to get his mitts on the Triforce pieces, then there's going to be plenty of chances for him to recover Wisdom and Courage before ALttP occurs.

Hmm... If we think about OoT and the IW as the same story, then ALttP must take before TWW becuase we know that Ganon wasn't able to escape from the Sacred Realm since he was sealed, and we see him escaping in TWW's backstory and in TWW itself. If ALttP goes before, then Ganon will die in the Sacred Realm and he will lose the Triforce. Then, we would need to use a lot of speulations in order to explain how he is revived, then, how he gets the Triforce of Power and how he is sealed in the Sacred Realm again before TWW, so it would be basically what you are trying to avoid by considering the IW and OoT the same.

[SOAP]

No, there's seven.

My point still stands.

[Doopliss]

Sorry, what's your point? Do you think that the IW and OoT are similar because the best way to seal Ganon is to use seven sages? Then, do you think that their are the same, or different things?

[Fyxe]

So your main reason to think about the IW and OoT as the same are the words of the creators, right? But couldn't they (the createors) have meant that OoT was a retelling of the IW because they based on its story to make a new game? If they 'copied' the story of the IW to make OoT, it doesn't mean that they are the same story, just that the y were inspired on one to make the other. I mean, that's a possibility as well.

It's sort of a possibility, correct, but judging by those quotes, that isn't what they meant. I think 'retelling' is a bad word to use because they didn't actually say that. That's just something I've added extra. Because, well, they basically said OoT is telling the story of the Imprisoning War, and that the towns in AoL have been (retroactively) named after the sages in the Imprisoning War, meaning that OoT and the IW are one and the same event. The reason I consider it a retelling is basically because it's not identical, it's how it really happened.

Sorry to go to the Metroid Zero Mission example again, but it's a pretty good example - the release of Metroid Zero Mission basically overrides what happened in the original Metroid. When it comes to events, Zero Mission takes precedent over the original now, meaning that Kraid began massive, Mother Brain put up a fight, etc.

Now, Super Metroid uses the original Metroid as a basis, meaning it shows flashbacks to the fight with Mother Brain that were based on the old way it happened, and the design of sections of Crateria are based around the old Tourian rather than the one in Zero Mission (although they're obviously very similar in layout anyway).

So, if we imagine the original Metroid is the Imprisoning War how it is told in ALttP, OoT is Zero Mission, and ALttP itself is Super Metroid. OoT overwrites what we know about the Imprisoning War, as Zero Mission did with Metroid, but Super Metroid remains unchanged, as does ALttP. Does this mean Zero Mission/OoT is not the true telling of events? No, it is, and the inconsistencies are simply due to ALttP/Super Metroid being based on an outdated telling of what happened.

Hmm... If we think about OoT and the IW as the same story, then ALttP must take before TWW becuase we know that Ganon wasn't able to escape from the Sacred Realm since he was sealed, and we see him escaping in TWW's backstory and in TWW itself. If ALttP goes before, then Ganon will die in the Sacred Realm and he will lose the Triforce. Then, we would need to use a lot of speulations in order to explain how he is revived, then, how he gets the Triforce of Power and how he is sealed in the Sacred Realm again before TWW, so it would be basically what you are trying to avoid by considering the IW and OoT the same.

Yes, yes, it causes all kind of crappy problems if ALttP occurs before TWW. Don't get me wrong, I think TWW is a direct sequel to OoT. But at the same time, OoT is a prequel to ALttP. Is it possible for these things to be seperate? Can TWW be a sequel to OoT without affecting the concept of OoT being a prequel to ALttP? Imagine the timeline written in a completely different way... Let me go back to this at the end of my post. This is why I like the gaiden timeline concept, or even a form of split timeline.

Alternatively, we could go with my arguement that if TWW doesn't tell us how Ganon escapes... Maybe he never completely did, and that his demon form still lies in the Sacred Realm (which is why we never see it in TWW). If Hyrule regrows thanks to the Deku Tree above where it once was, and if Ganon (the demon, no longer the man) remains in the Sacred Realm, it's possible that he regains the Triforce and then a loooong time in the future, ALttP occurs.

Yes, it's kinda messy and a bit fanficcy but it's much better than the ALttP before TWW concept. Still not as clean as a gaiden timeline, or even a split timeline, although the only real evidence I see for a split is a vague creator quote.

Now, for my alternate concept on the timeline view... Actually goes in cronology of release, when visualising it, but that's not how it actually goes... Bare with me.

TLoZ - TLoZ sequel AoL - TLoZ prequel ALttP - ALttP sequel LA - ALttP prequel OoT - OoT sequel MM - OoT sequel TWW - ALttP sequels OoA & OoS - ALttP sequel(?) Four Swords - Four Swords sequel FSA - Four Swords prequel TMC - OoT sequel TP - TWW sequel PH

Basically, it's written on what appears to be the immediate intentions of the creators upon making each game. Obviously, if you start taking that basis and ordering them in a natural timeline of Hyrule, so that OoT has like, fifty billion sequels or whatever it is now, it causes problems.

...Basically the timeline is a mess and they're just messing with our heads.

Edited by Fyxe, 17 June 2006 - 08:54 PM.

[Doopliss]

I think that we can ignore the creators if their statements need a considerable amount of fanfic to work. And, what is the point of a Gaiden timeline? I mean, aren't we trying to put all the games into one timeline?

[Fyxe]

And likewise, what's the point of doing that? Surely what we're trying to do is work out how the games are meant to be connected. That doesn't necessarily mean a bog-standard timeline has to be involved.

I don't think the 'perfect timeline' exists. I don't believe it's possible unless Aonuma comes out and says 'it goes like this', and that's probably never going to happen unless he really *does* fit the games together and fix plotholes like he apparently wants to. And that's not going to happen overnight.

So, instead I merely look at how each individual game was designed and what it's relation is with the rest of the series and what it was meant to be a sequel or prequel to. And that's what that list is. Obviously I'm slightly unsure of the intended placement of the original Four Swords, I'm not sure whether I'm going for prequel or sequel to ALttP, it all depends on what can be interpreted from the Palace of the Four Sword.

Edited by Fyxe, 17 June 2006 - 09:17 PM.

[Doopliss]

So basically, we have three ways of connecting the games: single timeline, multiple timelines and the gaiden timeline. It's difficult to prove how one of them could be the 'correct' one, so I think it depends on what each one of us thinks to be the right way to connect the games. Maybe we should start theorizing using the three of them?

[coinilius]

So basically, we have three ways of connecting the games: single timeline, multiple timelines and the gaiden timeline. It's difficult to prove how one of them could be the 'correct' one, so I think it depends on what each one of us thinks to be the right way to connect the games. Maybe we should start theorizing using the three of them?

Well, I think quite a few people out there probably have done some theorizing along those lines in the past - I know that I have considered timelines using all three of those assumptions before.

[Showsni]

People do normally argue that Oot is the IW... Odd that Fyxe is alone for once. Opinion must be swinging the right way!

Your main dislike of IW=/=OoT seems to be that the events happen twice, right? There aren't really that many similarities - basically, the similar theme is:
Ganondorf, the leader of a group of thieves, enters the SR. He touches the triforce. The SR becomes dark. He is later sealed in the SR by seven magical beings.

Of course, very similar events also happen in Four Swords Adventures - again, Ganondorf is sealed away by seven sages. The SR is dark (presumably. Or just weird...).

So very similar events are going to be repeated anyway. It may well be, as SOAP said, that sealing Ganondorf with seven sages is the best way to stop him - in which case, it's no wonder that it's happened more than once. In OoT, they may even have decided to seal him exactly because they remembered the story of the other Ganondorf who was sealed away so long ago.

The "best" possible timeline will minimise the discrepencies. I think having OoT not the Imprisoning War does a better job of this than trying to combine the events, thus avoiding a similar event happening but introducing many innaccuracies.
After all, history does repeat itself. Or so they say.

[Fyxe]

Opinion must be swinging the right way!

Wrong way, and this is hardly the entire Zelda population. ¬.¬ Besides, I'm always alone in fighting my theories, because nobody else bothers to back me up even if they agree with me. Probably cos I post so quickly and babble so much.

Ganondorf, the leader of a group of thieves, enters the SR. He touches the triforce. The SR becomes dark. He is later sealed in the SR by seven magical beings.

'Seven magical beings'? They have, and will always be, seven sages. ALttP is very clear on the fact that there are seven sages that sealed Ganon in the Dark World, and OoT is also very clear that they are seven sages, and what do they do? Seal him in the Dark World.

Of course, very similar events also happen in Four Swords Adventures - again, Ganondorf is sealed away by seven sages. The SR is dark (presumably. Or just weird...).

Now, this is the difference between a similar and a near identical event. In FSA, Ganon is sealed in the Four Sword. That's a major difference right there. In FSA, the Triforce is not involved, another major difference. The Dark World is not created in FSA, it already exists to a degree, that's a third major difference. And finally, they were maidens, not sages, they were never called sages, which is slightly more pedantic but it means they're more similar to the seven maidens from ALttP rather than the seven sages from OoT/IW.

So very similar events are going to be repeated anyway.

Similar, but with major differences that are very important, like where Ganon is sealed. With OoT and the IW, there are NO major differences, all the differences are pretty minor. OoT and the IW tell the story of the initial creation of both Ganon and the Dark World. ALttP specifically states that this was the creation of Ganon as we know him. These are epic Zelda events and they're not going to occur twice in an almost identical fashion just for the hell of it.

The "best" possible timeline will minimise the discrepencies.

And what bigger discrepency is there than the exact same event occuring twice? Just because it technically could happen doesn't mean it's even remotely feasible. Triforce rediscovered from it's hiding place by Ganon, twice, Sacred Realm turned into Dark World, twice, Ganon attacking Hyrule then being sealed in the Sacred Realm, twice. These are not minor events, this is the CRUX of the Zelda storyline. It is the primary event from which ALL other events stem. You can't just say it happens twice because it's convenient to do so.

After all, history does repeat itself. Or so they say.

FSA is an example of history repeating itself. OoT and IW is an example of history *being the same*. You don't think that if ALttP happens before OoT (an idea that just makes me want to hit things due to it being *blatantly* against what the creators intended) that someone like Rauru in OoT would have mentioned 'y'know, someone called Ganon appeared before and got the whole Triforce and nearly took over the world'. There's no mention of it. No history. No indication of anything like that ever occuring. The backstory of OoT (and the backstory of the IW) is the creation of the world. You'd think they'd mention something as massive as the Triforce already being used. I think people would remember. Especially if it was used by someone with the exact same name, job description and sinister behavior as the one who lives beyond Gerudo Valley or whatever.

On the other hand, ALttP is full, full of indications that OoT and the IW are one and the same event. The creators say they were working with the Imprisoning War story, and I'm not going to disagree with them because of convenience's sake. There are other ways to look at the timeline than to just go 'eh, it probably just happened twice'. You know what that is? More than anything, it's just bloody lazy.

Edited by Fyxe, 18 June 2006 - 07:04 PM.

[Showsni]

You may as well argue that since Oo(is it A?) was designed as a "retelling" of LoZ, they're the same story too.

There are major differences between OoT and the IW. I said "magical beings" because the sages are old Hylian men in the IW, and not in OoT.

And what bigger discrepency is there than the exact same event occuring twice? Just because it technically could happen doesn't mean it's even remotely feasible. Triforce rediscovered from it's hiding place by Ganon, twice, Sacred Realm turned into Dark World, twice, Ganon attacking Hyrule then being sealed in the Sacred Realm, twice. These are not minor events, this is the CRUX of the Zelda storyline. It is the primary event from which ALL other events stem. You can't just say it happens twice because it's convenient to do so.

And why not? It's not only convenient, it's the only way to make sense of the timeline without a lot of fanfiction. So Ganon gets the triforce twice. That's hardly surprising; it is what he's trying to do in every game. And the circumstances are completely different. In ALttP he just stumbles over the entrance, seizes the oppurtunity and takes the triforce. In OoT the SR is guarded. There's a very complicated lock on the door. Ganondorf is actively trying to get into the SR from the first, and take the triforce. And he never would have succeeded without Link, which answers why the triforce was back in the SR - it was the safest palce for it. So the SR turns dark twice - well, if it's going to turn dark whenever an evil person enters it, then that's not surprising. It must yoyo about every time anyone enters it, based on OoT. And Ganondorf is sealed away an awful lot. It seems to be the general response to him. IW, OoT, FSA, WoG, FoE, TWW BS, possibly TWW itself...

It's not the exact same event, even though it might have been intended as a retelling of the story. In any case, it hasn't turned out as an exact retelling, so it needs its own spot in the timeline. As I said above, Oo(one or t'other) was designed as a LoZ retelling. That doesn;t mean you equate them in a timeline. The person in the quote says they put secret references in for people who knew the game; it's more of a covert nod to the IW than an overt redoing of the story.

[coinilius]

'You may as well argue that since Oo(is it A?) was designed as a "retelling" of LoZ, they're the same story too.'

That's not actually a terribly good arguement - the Oracles were originally intended as a remake of LoZ and AoL, yes, but that was dropped in the production stage and then the Oracle storylines were developed. The quotes talking about how they were using the IW story from ALttP were made after the OoT story had been finalised... after the game had been released even, possibly.

[Fyxe]

You may as well argue that since Oo(is it A?) was designed as a "retelling" of LoZ, they're the same story too.

Uh, not in the freakin' slightest. Clearly you have never played any of the Oracle games. Which is a shame.

There are major differences between OoT and the IW. I said "magical beings" because the sages are old Hylian men in the IW, and not in OoT.

They're called sages in both. Their age is irrelevant and they were never actually ever called old, just that the word for 'sage' is often translated as 'wise man', which implies old and male. They were only ever depicted as (apparently) old men(?) in robes, but that means nothing really, as it was just a vague depiction, akin to the images we see at the start of TWW, for instance.

And why not? It's not only convenient, it's the only way to make sense of the timeline without a lot of fanfiction.

As is a gaiden or split timeline. And I've already said why it's unfeasible.

So Ganon gets the triforce twice. That's hardly surprising; it is what he's trying to do in every game.

The difference is, he gets it for the first time from the Sacred Realm twice. This isn't just him hunting out the pieces that lie in Hyrule somewhere, this is him collecting it from where the Gods placed it, turning the Sacred Realm into the Dark World, and signifying the birth of Ganon as a demon and not just a man.

And the circumstances are completely different. In ALttP he just stumbles over the entrance, seizes the oppurtunity and takes the triforce. In OoT the SR is guarded. There's a very complicated lock on the door. Ganondorf is actively trying to get into the SR from the first, and take the triforce. And he never would have succeeded without Link,

You just answered that for me. In the backstory to ALttP it says he discovered it 'by chance', it never states whether he was looking for it beforehand or not, but his actual entry was by chance. And what defines this more than Link opening it for him and happening to get sealed?

which answers why the triforce was back in the SR - it was the safest palce for it. So the SR turns dark twice - well, if it's going to turn dark whenever an evil person enters it, then that's not surprising. It must yoyo about every time anyone enters it, based on OoT.

Clearly it's not the safest place for it. Better off hiding it in a Great Palace somewhere with a hugely complex and gigantic lock system. And I don't think OoT was implying that it changes whenever someone enters it - it seemed to imply that it changes due to the *influence* of the person entering it. Otherwise it would change whenever someone else goes in, which it clearly doesn't.

And Ganondorf is sealed away an awful lot. It seems to be the general response to him. IW, OoT, FSA, WoG, FoE, TWW BS, possibly TWW itself...

Did you just cite the CD-i Zeldas as a source? You deserve a bloody Gannon-ban for that. Anyway, we know that OoT is TWW's backstory, so actually, Ganon is only sealed three times, and only twice if you count OoT and the IW as the same thing. He's killed more often than sealed, and if IW is the same as OoT, Ganon has only ever been sealed in the Dark World once.

In any case, it hasn't turned out as an exact retelling, so it needs its own spot in the timeline.

Of course it's not an EXACT retelling, otherwise it wouldn't be a retelling! ARGH. Did you not listen to my well-thought out Zero Mission example?

As I said above, Oo(one or t'other) was designed as a LoZ retelling. That doesn;t mean you equate them in a timeline. The person in the quote says they put secret references in for people who knew the game; it's more of a covert nod to the IW than an overt redoing of the story.

No, it was originally designed as a port, then it became a remake, then it became a completely different plot and merely uses elements from TLoZ (bosses and some dungeony features). Oracle of Seasons as a game only existed well after they ditched the remake idea.

The creators of OoT however, judging by those interviews, have never shyed away from the idea of it being the Imprisoning War. They did not change this idea during development. And those references were to AoL, he was not talking about references to ALttP. The references to ALttP are far less subtle. By a massive margin.

It was always designed to go OoT - ALttP - LA - TLoZ - AoL. That was how it went, there was no disputing this. And just because TWW has confused the timeline doesn't mean we should be immediately jumping to conclusions about the timeline of the original five games in the series with no clear reason other than for convenience's sake.

Again, it's still entirely unfeasible from the perspective of ALttP and OoT that the IW and OoT are seperate. If the IW happened before OoT (ugh) then in OoT, there should have been a reference to Ganon existing before, and some concept of the Triforce being used in the past. There is none. If the IW happens after OoT, then there should be some reference in the backstory of ALttP to the Triforce being used before the IW. There is none. Nothing. Not even a smidgen.

I'm sorry, but something like that doesn't just vanish from history.

And again, OoT/IW tells the most important story in Zelda - the origin and first use of the Triforce, the creation of Ganon, and the origin of the Dark World. This happening twice is just silly.

Edited by Fyxe, 18 June 2006 - 08:16 PM.

[Hero of Slime]

Fyxe if there are multiple Ganons, like there are multiple of other characters, it is possible for all those events to happen twice.

The creators say they were working with the Imprisoning War story,

No, the creators said that in 90's. You do not know that they still think that now. Especially since they made TWW and FSA in the time since then.

[Fyxe]

Hey, I never said it wasn't possible. Yes, it is technically possible for it to happen twice. But is it feasible? Logical? Does it make any sense when related to the backstory of OoT and ALttP for it to happen twice? I find it *extremely* unlikely.

No, I don't know what they think now, but since we can't ask them, and since they've implied the existence of two timelines more than ever implying the existence of two Imprisoning Wars, I'm going to stick with what they originally said.

Bit harsh to say 90's, despite being accurate, it was very much the late nineties, so you don't have to make it sound like it was an age ago.

Until they say 'y'know, all that stuff we said about the design of OoT is bollocks, we changed it' then I'm going to stick with what they told the fans, because there are still options. That's the key. There are ways to make the timeline work without falling on lazy and unlikely explainations. I haven't seen any way the IW could logically happen twice. Technically it could, but not without screwing with the logic of the backstory of either OoT or ALttP. Or both.

[Arturo]

OoT is the Imprisoning War, that is what the creators stated, and what they implied when they changed the translation of ALttP so that it might fit better with OoT. But ALttP and TWW are absolutely incompatioble, so I think, while there is just one Imprisoning War, there atre two possibilities, that the Hero appears on the Cataclysm Eve (ALttP) and that he doesn't appear (TWW Background Story). Thus, Two Timelines.

It's just an opinion. If you don't like it, listen to Navi , she thinks I'm right (Hey! Look! Listen! Have you ever agreed with the opinions of Arturo? Have you? Have you?)

[Fyxe]

It's a nice idea that the 'Cataclysm' of Cataclysm's Eve is actually the flooding of Hyrule rather than the attack of Ganon. However, on the original Japanese translation, the Cataclysm has already begun when Link gets around to drawing the Master Sword. Minor point, though.

It's still a nice variation on the gaiden timeline. That's basically what I see TWW as - a 'what if'. It doesn't matter if Ganon's escape occurs before or during when ALttP takes place, it's a 'what if no hero shows up' sort of thing.

The only problem is that in ALttP, knowledge of the 'Hero of Time' has been lost. However, in TWW's backstory, it's still known, and there's a statue of him in Hyrule Castle. So I see the flooding of Hyrule occuring closer to the events of OoT than ALttP. Also, Ganon doesn't have the whole Triforce in TWW.

Basically, it's like TWW is a number of centuries after OoT, while ALttP is a number of millenia. So instead of a 'what if a hero doesn't show up' it's more of a 'what if Ganon escapes early'.

Edited by Fyxe, 19 June 2006 - 09:58 AM.

[coinilius]

According to SNES version of ALttP, it was only 3 or 4 generations between the IW and the events of ALttP..

The GBA version changes it to a more vague 'generations'...

[Fyxe]

The SNES version was never accurate, that was an addition of the bad NoA translation.

[Hero of Slime]

Since this thread is about the perfect timeline, the Gaiden timeline is not an option as it is a MikePeters-ism. Split timelines may be possible, but not the gaiden timeline.

Until they say 'y'know, all that stuff we said about the design of OoT is bollocks, we changed it'

They did that by making TWW and FSA.

[Fyxe]

Since this thread is about the perfect timeline, the Gaiden timeline is not an option as it is a MikePeters-ism.

Who made you King of the Timelines? It's not a Mike Peters-ism in the slightest.

Split timelines may be possible, but not the gaiden timeline.

Seriously, who died and made you Timey McTimelord? Thou speaks words without giving reasoning.

They did that by making TWW and FSA.

No. Not really. Especially not FSA. But not TWW either.