269 replies to this topic

[spunky-monkey]

...my God this thread has become so pathetic.


Take a gander at the name of the forum - it says Zelda Storyline. Believe it or not we make storyline connections to other games in the series.

Now look Jumbie, I can assure you that geography is absolutely non-existent from any workable timeline that is not already pure fanfic simply because the layout of Hyrule is always inconsistent for every single game. I appreciate your efforts in making these obscure connections but what you're trying to do is impossible. It's a game design issue.

You're trying to undo the principal element of all Zelda games which is exploration, Miyamoto was inspired by venturing into hidden forests, lakes, caves and rural villages which is exactly why Hyrule is always different because the creator wants to give the gamer those same experiences he had from his childhood.

[Fyxe]

Well, I think I have had ENOUGH

Calm. Breath.

Fyxe, I think you are missing a little tiny point. Debating the timelines is pointless. So you cannot say other things are pointless, because everything we are doing here is.

There are degrees of 'pointlessness'. In doing the pointless action of debating the timeline, discussing the geography is pointless.

To put an example. Timeline using Fyxe's geographical rules:

LoZ>AoL
OoT>ALttP
OoT>MM
OoT>TWW
ALttP>LA
OoX
TMC>FS>FSA

WONDERFUL, INCREDIBLE!!!!!! WE GOT THE PERFECT TIMELINE!

What ARE you talking about? 'Fyxe's geographical rules'? I think it's fairly obvious I don't give a damn about the geography. Besides, I quite like that timeline - that is an undisputable timeline, quite frankly, because that's the timeline according to the creator's obvious intentions. However, the designers have also implied that *all* the games fit together in a larger timeline. How they do this is the question, and looking at geography is not a good way to do that.

This is what you have been doing with geography, but applied to timeline. Of course creators don't think of geography... but do they really think that much in timeline? NO

Ah, I see what you're going for. Want an answer? No, I don't think they think that much about the timeline, that's exactly my point. But if they do think about the timeline at all, you know what they're not going to care about in relation to the timeline? Geography, because they're not going to change their games simply to fit them into a timeline they don't really care about either, are they?

I believe we can use Hyrule's geography, to an extent, for timeline purporses, though I don't use it for creating my theories, but to ground done theories.

I don't think it's a sensible method of arguing a timeline. It just isn't. It may be vaguely interesting to think about but it's not a reasonable debate.

Try to be open-minded, and read Jumbie's posts, because you are missing his points.

And he's missing mine. Geography is not a legitimate arguement because it's primarily a game design issue.

And a little bit of respect for the one that is above all us.... that some of the theories (Nothern Lost Woods) wasn't Jumbie's but Davogones' (Read that article, please) and has been confirmed by another game, that is FSA, where it is said that Lost Woods are a generic kind of Hyrulean forest, like if we said "Rainforest":

That's just an assumption based on a certain interpretation of the dialogue in FSA. That isn't what I thought when I played FSA, personally. And I've read Davogone's articles, they came across as a bit of fun thinking but I think the creator intentions are paramount, and they simply aren't going to adjust the geography they have for the sake of the timeline but to the detriment of the game design.

P.S. And I like your Avatar Image!

Me? Really? Most people only say that about my avatars involving big boobs. *Blinks* Do you know who Bridget is? ¬.¬

[Arturo]

Calm. Breath.

I forgot to take my Yoga lessons!!!! I am stressed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There are degrees of 'pointlessness'. In doing the pointless action of debating the timeline, discussing the geography is pointless.

But it's fun, and it tends to go with my timeline, so I use it as an argument. And I am not the only one. I would never create a Timeline basing just on Geography, but use it as an aditional argument.

What ARE you talking about? 'Fyxe's geographical rules'? I think it's fairly obvious I don't give a damn about the geography. Besides, I quite like that timeline - that is an undisputable timeline, quite frankly, because that's the timeline according to the creator's obvious intentions. However, the designers have also implied that *all* the games fit together in a larger timeline. How they do this is the question, and looking at geography is not a good way to do that.

"Fyxe's geographical rules" (Do I really have to explain this?):

I don't give a damn about the geography

This is the rule I mean. Aonuma and Miyamoto have said there is a timeline. So, there is a timeline.

In various games we have seen a reocurrance of some important geographical ellements, such as the Death Mountain, the Desert, the Castle.... that almost always tend to be in the same place. There is a geographical constance, seen even in TWW.

Ah, I see what you're going for. Want an answer? No, I don't think they think that much about the timeline, that's exactly my point. But if they do think about the timeline at all, you know what they're not going to care about in relation to the timeline? Geography, because they're not going to change their games simply to fit them into a timeline they don't really care about either, are they?

Aonuma seems to care about the timeline. And I have never seen them change

I don't think it's a sensible method of arguing a timeline. It just isn't. It may be vaguely interesting to think about but it's not a reasonable debate.

This surpassed time ago the limits of a reasonable debate.

That's just an assumption based on a certain interpretation of the dialogue in FSA. That isn't what I thought when I played FSA, personally.

It's not an assumption. It's a fact. Let's put a real example:

"Soon, Lord Ganon's power
will change all of Earth's
forests into the German Black Forest!"

It's stupid, isn't it? It would sound better for example:

"Soon, Lord Ganon's power
will change all of Earth's
forests into a pine grove!"

Me? Really? Most people only say that about my avatars involving big boobs. *Blinks* Do you know who Bridget is? ¬.¬

I like this one much better than the others. Bridget.... I only know Bridget Jones.... No idea.

[Jumbie]

...Kasuto hasn't appeared in any other game other than AoL. Again, even more fanfic.

Eh, what?! I just used Kasuto as an example where *a similar thing* happened, in no way did I equate Kasuto with Kakariko. Seriously, how much extra stuff do you always read into my quotes..!

Explain why the entrance suddenly moved down to ground level.

No question I couldn't answer. The water level has risen, as in ALttP it is a strong river anyway, not a shallow little creek anymore like in OoT.

The Spirit Temple goes up, the Desert Palace goes down.

The first two floors have been buried under sand. And btw, the statue of the goddess has been modified to resemble the Lanmolas, which the Gerudo now worship in fear. (Sorry for the fanfic, but I just can't help making sense of everything...)

Cos, y'know, if the rim collapsed but Spectacle Rock was still there, surely they would still be below the level of the rest of Death Mountain. Yet they are as tall as the very peak of the mountain? Odd, I'd say.

Spectacle Rock is now (in ALttP) the highest peak of Death Mountain, although the mountain was much higher when the crater was still existent (in OoT).

Forests don't just move. Locations don't just get new names for no reason. Castles don't just hop around.

Who talks about moving forests? The Northern Lost Woods have always grown there, even during OoT, just outside of the map.
How can you forbid the Hyruleans to rename their landmarks?!
Haha, of course does Hyrule Castle move. HC in OoT: to the north. HC in ALttP: centre of Hyrule Fields. No castles in Zelda look the same, because they aren't the same buildings. You know, brick by brick, we're building a new palace if the old one has been destroyed!

WAY TO MISS THE POINT. Ocarina of Time is a 3D game that therefore did not have to bow to the specific issue I just mentioned.

For your info, I missed it *on purpose*

...A rather tiny part of Hyrule to fit in a desert, a swamp, a lake, a castle, a village, blah blah blah blah...

That's the way it is. Our beloved Hyrule isn't exactly that vast, face it.

Take a gander at the name of the forum - it says Zelda Storyline. Believe it or not we make storyline connections to other games in the series.

Strangely enough, I haven't seen too many people do that here, lately...
Btw, which one is the forum for Zelda Geography? I'm sure there would be some request.

I appreciate your efforts in making these obscure connections but what you're trying to do is impossible.

So, what am I actually trying to do? Have you ever seen me base a timeline on geography? No. I only make the "obscure" connections after all the storyline connections make sense. And since ALttP's place directly after OoT is otherwise proven for me, there's nothing wrong with matching up the landmarks.

That's just an assumption based on a certain interpretation of the dialogue in FSA. That isn't what I thought when I played FSA, personally.

I can't really imagine how you can interpret this in another way. Lost Woods is a random landscape description, not a set place name. Other proof: the changing location of the Woods, and the Lost Woods in Holodrum which have nothing to do with Hyrule at all. Some things just explain themselves...

Someone can not come up with somthing that does not exist. TMC can be anywhere in the timeline as long as it is before FS, FSA, and OoX.

HUH?! Is this to be taken as a wish for letting this thread come to an (unfinished) end?!

[Fyxe]

Ooookay, I think I'm dropping this particular arguement. You can stick to your fanficiness, Jumbie. You are quite often missing and ignoring points I have tried to make, and taking stuff I say in an incredibly stupid manner. For example, I said...

Locations don't just get new names for no reason.

And your reply was...

How can you forbid the Hyruleans to rename their landmarks?!

I mean, seriously. What the fuck. I make a point, and then you run away from it screaming.

Castles don't just hop around.

Haha, of course does Hyrule Castle move.

HYRULE CASTLE HAS LEGS. Ahhhh.

[Doopliss]

Personally, I don't find it particulary fun to discuss Hyrule's geography. I think that we shouldn't take this too seriously when trying to find the connection betwenn games. It is difficult to use the geography when discussing the timeline because it is highly inconsistent and it is really difficult to explain the differences between the different Hyrules. I think that there are more important aspects of the games, such as character quotes, and vital items locations.

[Jumbie]

Personally, I don't find it particulary fun to discuss Hyrule's geography. I think that we shouldn't take this too seriously when trying to find the connection betwenn games. It is difficult to use the geography when discussing the timeline because it is highly inconsistent and it is really difficult to explain the differences between the different Hyrules. I think that there are more important aspects of the games, such as character quotes, and vital items locations.

Okay, I got it. It's not like I build whole theories upon my geographical observations, and quotes are of course the first thing any sane person will go for first. Only, this whole argument went out of hand, partly because of people's urge to disprove me, partly because of my need to show them that anything can be explained.

If everything has calmed down, why not let this thread rest until MoALttP will return and find out what a mess we made here
I mean, The Zol said that TMC cannot be clearly placed, so what's this thread for any longer...

Edited by Jumbie, 01 August 2006 - 06:41 PM.

[MikePetersSucks]

The....timeline placement of TMC. Duh?

Just because Zol says something doesn't make it fact. Not to mention the entire TIMELINE is impossible to CLEARLY place together.

[Jumbie]

I know, I know. I just wanted to address the fact that no one brings other evidence on TMC's placement. I know of myself that I'm not able to, but I guess there are people here who just don't care, and that's a bit weird to me...

[Fyxe]

...The thing is, you consider the fact that the shields look the same to be evidence that TMC occurs 'post flood'. This isn't proof. This is nothing. This is merely proof that the games use the same graphical design. Moblins look the same. Darknuts look the same. LINK looks the same. Zelda looks the same. Even the king looks the same.

So, I don't mean to be rude, but you have merely spotted how the graphic style has evolved over the course of the series.

Also, you failed to analyse that some of the shields look different in the item art in the manual, the official art of Link, and in game. Case in point, the shield in ALttP, which can look quite different depending on what part of the manual you're looking at or if you're looking at the game itself.

Again, the reason the shields of ALttP and the Oracle games look the same is because the Oracle games borrowed the same art style from ALttP and LA. This, however, MAY imply some connection within the designer's minds. If they had intended the Oracle games to occur in relation to ALttP and LA (which they almost certainly did) that might of influenced them borrowing the style.

Edited by Fyxe, 02 August 2006 - 07:26 PM.

[Jumbie]

I've got a thread over at Zelda Universe about the history of Hylian shields.

While I really like your idea to make a shield comparison, I completely agree with Fyxe's reply. The used graphics/artwork style is the criterion which I think has least canonicity of all 'evidence'.

For example, in the beta versions of OoT, you can spot a shield design that's different from the eventual Hylian Shield, but close to the shield that only appeared in ALttP's title logo. So obviously, they experimented a bit with the design.
The final version in OoT is again resembling the ALttP artwork one, but through its rearranged shape and coat of arms more realistic to the player. What else would be the reason they now reuse it only slightly modified in TP.
TWW introduced a new shield one again, but this time a brown one. This I always interpreted as rust which had attacked the blue colouring over the centuries (since it's an heirloom). Then however, its reappearance in FS+FSA can only be due to the same artwork style, no implication of rust or timeline connection.

You have given examples of the evolution of creatures. Since Moblin moblins hadn't taken on their TMC appearance until TWW was made, then that means they have evolved over the years from bulldog-like creatures into more piggish monsters.

Well, there are screenshots of TP around where you can see moblins which look the same as in TWW, only with armour on, and seeing as TP happens much closer to OoT as to TWW... so you gotta accept, the enemy style has no timeline value either!

You don't see things from one era of time being used centuries before they came about, now do you? This is because of the gradual progression of technology. I use real-world scenarios when explaining timeline theories. Things can't be used before they're invented. It's just common sense.

Now, what can I say here.. But hey, nobody can compare your practice to mine with geography. This item progression concept doesn't work to determine timeline places, as neither does my concept. Difference between us: I use it after the theory stands, you use it to build the theory.

I'm just in the stages of finding anything that I can use to prove my placement of TMC.

Yay, go ahead!

[Fyxe]

You have given examples of the evolution of creatures. Since Moblin moblins hadn't taken on their TMC appearance until TWW was made, then that means they have evolved over the years from bulldog-like creatures into more piggish monsters.

No... For one thing they have always been piggish in other games. For another, way to totally miss my point. I take it their spears magically evolved as well?

Also, AoL looks extremely different from TLoZ. Does that mean AoL is not a sequel? No.

And in case you didn't know, I take art styles to be as official as in-game statements.

No offense, but that's rather foolish, if you ask me. Is music a way of figuring out the timeline as well?

I used their general appearance. Whatever Link is seen holding in the artwork is what I used. There are only discrepancies in the earlier games due to localization issues.

Localisation issues? No, the official art looks the same in all territories.

And perhaps you're right about this. Regardless, items have progressed over time. The same goes for shields. You don't see things from one era of time being used centuries before they came about, now do you?

They're SHIELDS, for heck's sake. They're the same basic thing. Also, it's a video game.

This is because of the gradual progression of technology. I use real-world scenarios when explaining timeline theories.

Not sensible when talking about a video game. Go ask the creators about real-world scenarios. They won't give a monkeys.

Oh, and nice avatar. It's very sexy, to say the least.

Boobs are the way to a man's heart.

[Hero of Slime]

Again I bring up the example of the time of day changing in some games while not changing in others. Is it logical to believe that someone cursed the sun to make high-noon last forever and all games in which time changes are before the games in which it does not? These little differences don't mean anything.

Moblins in TMC look like the ones in TWW because TMC's art was based on TWW.

[spunky-monkey]

And in case you didn't know, I take art styles to be as official as in-game statements.

Not wise, the art style has been changing constantly throughout the series and will naturally continue to vary among artists.

Regardless, items have progressed over time. The same goes for shields. You don't see things from one era of time being used centuries before they came about, now do you? This is because of the gradual progression of technology.

It's ZELDA, not Chrono Trigger or Final Fantasy. Technology has always played second fiddle to magic, the supernatural and spell-casting.

[Fyxe]

Magitech? There has been no indication that magic is a common component to the technology in Zelda. This isn't Final Fantasy.

Yes, but I have found that the artwork in my fully assembled theory runs together flawlessly. We have realistic OoT/MM, super-realistic but cel-shaded TP, cel shaded TWW, realistic anime ALttP, and 1980's anime at LoZ.

Wow. 1980s anime in the 1980s? More modern anime in the 90s? Realistic graphics in the 3D generation? Postmodern cel-shaded graphics as a homage to the old games? Back to realistic after a few games to mix things up and appease the fans? Y'know, the change in graphical style is synonymous with the releases of the games, not with the timeline.

Oh, and guys, I could be doing something even less relevant. I found a support strut thing in TMC's houses that's identical to the ones in ALttP's houses. If I wanted to, I could have tried to use it as proof.

I find it worrying that you even spotted it. ¬.¬

I put this up on three sites, and you're the only site to give me a bit of trouble. Even the stubborn folks over at GameFAQs enjoyed my analysis.

Lets not be compared to GameFAQs. They're, for the most part, dribbling idiots who'll either slate a poster to death or lap up whatever it is like rabid dogs. Ok, an exaggeration, but they're all completely freakin' crazy over there.
The thing is, we've had this sort of discussion over and over and over. We're a bit more discerning when it comes to evidence. We've seen hundreds of arguements where people use geography and graphical style and the Hylian language itself and generally these conversations boil down to 'these elements are 99% game design'. I mean, like I said before, nobody uses the music to place games in a timeline. You may make a timeline where the music seams to 'evolve' in style but that doesn't make your timeline any better if it otherwise doesn't work when it comes to the plot.

I'm not using this to prove that games go anywhere, I'm just using it to group them and then explain how the shields change in my timeline is perfectly logical.

But as has been made clear, we don't know your timeline, and the way you looked at the shields is only relevant to someone who uses your timeline. And even then, it doesn't make the timeline any more valid or worse than any other, because it's a video game, and the designers of the Zelda series did *not* take all these little things into consideration in relation to the timeline.

Aonuma and Miyamoto have said that they concentrate on the game design first and the plot and timeline issues come as a bit of an afterthought in comparison.

[Jumbie]

I put this up on three sites, and you're the only site to give me a bit of trouble.

I wanna misunderstand that as a compliment.

I'm not using this to prove that games go anywhere, I'm just using it to group them and then explain how the shields change in my timeline is perfectly logical.

Ah, in that case it's fine. So you work basically the same as I do. But from just reading your shield thread, it sounded like you used the graphics style as timeline evidence in the first place.

I find it worrying that you even spotted it. ¬.¬

That's what also led to our argument, Fyxe. You just aren't as relaxed about such things as you could. People aren't automatically beyond hope if they are inclined to take non-evidence for evidence, you know

My timeline is as follows.

Fierce War
1. Ocarina of Time(Seal War)/Majora's Mask
2. Twilight Princess
Great Flood
3. The Wind Waker/Phantom Hourglass
Discovery of New Hyrule
Legend of the Hero of Men
4. The Minish Cap
Lost Chapter in the Four Swords Saga
5. Four Swords
6. Four Swords Adventures
Second Seal War
7. A Link to the Past/Link's Awakening
8. Oracle of Ages/Oracle of Seasons
Fall of New Hyrule
9. The Legend of Zelda/Zelda II: The Adventure of Link

You will have many supporters of that order among us LA members. I would even say, if Single Timelines could possibly exist, this would be a correct solution. But as I see it, there's no way to deny the validity of Split Timelines - but that's a different thread.
This explains why you can put TMC after OoT, namely after TWW, which is never possible in my timeline. Still we can debate about if TMC is after or before OoT, since I would just put it before ALttP if it wasn't before OoT.

By the way, I found another argument for TMC after OoT: the institutions and shops in TMC are so modern compared to OoT's. And I don't talk about the graphics, but the things themselves - a Virtual Reality simulator, a post office, a school... Who could honestly imagine something like that existing in a medieval world before or in OoT?!

Edited by Jumbie, 03 August 2006 - 12:11 PM.

[MikePetersSucks]

Heh. If Fyxe and Jumbie agree on something, they HAVE to be right. And thus the other person wrong.

[Arturo]

I agree with them, shields and all those stuff don't have anything to do with timeline.

And you should be glad to read them agree on something

Edited by Arturo, 03 August 2006 - 12:08 PM.

[Showsni]

By the way, I found another argument for TMC after OoT: the institutions and shops in TMC are so modern compared to OoT's. And I don't talk about the graphics, but the things themselves - a Virtual Reality simulator, a post office, a school... Who could honestly imagine something like that existing in a medieval world before or in OoT?!

OoT has a bowling alley with a jukebox in. It's hardly strictly true to a real medieval world. If we going to look at technological advancements as a timeline placement, then it seems to me as though the technology evolves in nearly exact chronological order (the order they were released, that is.) LoZ and AoL have nothing too advanced in; they're properly old fashioned. Except maybe for lifts in the dungeons... I think ALttP is too... I can't remember anything too advanced in it, anyway. LA then has that crane machine, but it is a dream after all. Then OoT has things like the Bombchu Bowling alley, with flashing lights and an R2D2 clone, and it gets more advanced from there, until Minish Cap has virtual reality and stuff.

[Hero of Slime]

By the way, I found another argument for TMC after OoT: the institutions and shops in TMC are so modern compared to OoT's.And I don't talk about the graphics, but the things themselves - a Virtual Reality simulator, a post office, a school... Who could honestly imagine something like that existing in a medieval world before or in OoT?!

A post office and a school? Those arn't major advancements, I could certainly see the people of OoT being capable of having mailing and education systems. MM takes place during the same time as OoT and they have education and Mailing systems. As for the virtual reality simulator, isn't it nothing more then a bed that Link sleeps in. I don't see why that could not have been around before OoT.

[Jumbie]

OoT has a bowling alley with a jukebox in. It's hardly strictly true to a real medieval world. If we going to look at technological advancements as a timeline placement, then it seems to me as though the technology evolves in nearly exact chronological order (the order they were released, that is.)

Hmm, you're right about that... But to fit it in the timeline, it's totally illogical: how can a world develop backwards? I mean, the machines and devices in TWW still make sense, as it happens in a post-apocalyptical world. Also, the game with the greatest variety of futuristic (or at least non-medieval) devices is MM, which is explained by Termina being another world where science is much more progressed than in Hyrule.
But then, TMC... The only explanation I can think of is that Hyrule is simply a world which has always had some advanced technology in it, like in Final Fantasy.

Still it's really strange to imagine TMC happening before OoT, with a modern-day town transforming back into a deep-medieval town. And don't try the graphics style arguments here - TMC just wasn't designed to represent a medieval town, that's not debatable.

[Hero of Slime]

We know Hyrule was invaded some time between TMC and OoT. Could that explain the change in Hyrule Town? If the town was attacked during the war, new buildings could have been built in a different style.

[Fyxe]

It's the first time THAT Tingle met Link. Although I don't place any Tingle before MM anyway, personally. But that line doesn't mean anything.

[Hero of Slime]

Right now there are five tingles in the Zelda series (MM, TMC, TWW, FSA and OoA) and based on how they all introduce themselves to Link, I would say they are all meeting Link for the first time.