Castlevania Dungeon Forums

The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => Hardcore Gaming 101 => Topic started by: KaZudra on October 25, 2011, 04:54:02 AM

Title: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: KaZudra on October 25, 2011, 04:54:02 AM

well, it seems there is alot of talk on theorys on the Purposed timelines of the Zelda games, and here's mine.
SPOILER: Mine actually makes the most sense....

Okay, first off the Title itsself is essential, The LEGEND of Zelda.

You are the Audience, The game is essentially the person who is telling you the Legend.
Now we have different people telling the same story, with the effect of retelling, each story is identically different.
This explains why half of the games are basically the same (get items, kill Ganon, save princess)
each Teller has a different story and sometime different tellers will go off of another teller's base story for the "sequel"
Example:
Teller A Tells OoT and Tells MM afterwards
Teller B States MM didn't happen, but WW did
Teller C States MM did happen and adds TP

This also fixes the MAJOR Flaws in a Linear Timeline
Every Princess isn't named Zelda
There Wouldn't be generations of Retarded Kings who trust Every Gannondorf
it explains perfectly why areas are shuffled around in the progression of the games
it also explains why every main character is Link
it solves alot of chronological confusion between games

The events of the stories however are based on event of hyule's Real timeline, this is a Storyteller's tendacy.

In a ctimeline, the games form a very loose timeline yet most games would have nothing to do with each other.

this is the best attempt to explain my thoery in tyoed format because it is super easy to explain it from person to person.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Neobelmont on October 26, 2011, 12:36:47 AM

At the moment all what I know is that there are two different timelines and that the beginning of them both will start of with skyward sword. Again this is at the moment most of the time I just go what ever with this zelda timeline. But I will get back to this once I refresh my mind.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: KaZudra on October 26, 2011, 12:59:46 AM

Quote from: Neobelmont on October 26, 2011, 12:36:47 AM

At the moment all what I know is that there are two different timelines and that the beginning of them both will start of with skyward sword. Again this is at the moment most of the time I just go what ever with this zelda timeline. But I will get back to this once I refresh my mind.

ah the Ocarina Timeline, it goes like this..

Skyward Sword -> Ocarina of Time -> Split timeline
Timeline A (Future - Adult Link)-> Wind Waker -> Phantom Hourglass -> Spirit Tracks
Timeline B (Present- Child Link)-> Majora's Mask -> Twilight Princess

I'll add the only other timeline that makes sense...
Minish cap-> Four Sword-> Four Sword Adventure

These are the only games that can be plausible to connect (TP is a bit Shakey since they prevented ganondorf from getting to the sacred realm in OoT) but there is a few timeline theories that try to connect ALL the games which is crazy.

on a Side note, Skyward Sword may be the game to finally drive me into buying a wii and soon flood in with the rest of the wii titles Like Sonic Colors

This is the only timeline oth

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: X on October 26, 2011, 01:06:45 AM

The Zelda timeline is perhaps the most convoluted in all of video game history. It even outdoes the CV timeline. But unlike CV, Zelda has been produced by the same guy since it's conception. So I really have to wonder what's going through his mind every time a new Zelda title is released. Personally I'm still waiting for a proper sequel to Zelda II: The Adventures of Link. Instead we keep going further and further back in time and some of the games he brought out are just...ugh. Not only that but the new characters (races) that he introduces don't exist in the NES titles which brings up another whole slew of issues. As much as I love the Zelda series there are just some games that make me question the direction in which it is going. At this point I have absolutely no theory what-so-ever about the timeline. It's just way too skewed to the point where I'd have to sit down and think about it for a long while.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Neobelmont on October 26, 2011, 01:24:30 AM

Quote from: Kamui Zero on October 26, 2011, 12:59:46 AM

on a Side note, Skyward Sword may be the game to finally drive me into buying a wii and soon flood in with the rest of the wii titles Like Sonic Colors

On my note it's the main reason why I will undust my wii in january on my birthday for the first time since playing other m when it came out. I like the theme of it and how the song is really an just other song from an older title.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Inccubus on October 26, 2011, 12:33:25 PM

I would like to point out that Shigeru Miyamoto said in an interview that the Zelda series DOES have a timeline and that it WAS thought out in advance. It's also a reasonable presumption that the timeline DOES connect all games and DOES include at least one split one split. Oh and it's clearly stated in the manual for Zelda II that all the princesses in the royal line of Hyrule are named Zelda. The only reason that (sorta) stops in the WW branch is because there is no longer a Hyrule and thus no royal family to keep the tradition.

PS- You forgot to mention LoZ -> ZII -> OoA/OoS, and LoZIII -> LA.

Most of the debate is centered on how each pocket of related games fits together more than anything..

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: KaZudra on October 26, 2011, 04:37:23 PM

Quote from: Inccubus on October 26, 2011, 12:33:25 PM

I would like to point out that Shigeru Miyamoto said in an interview that the Zelda series DOES have a timeline and that it WAS thought out in advance. It's also a reasonable presumption that the timeline DOES connect all games and DOES include at least one split one split. Oh and it's clearly stated in the manual for Zelda II that all the princesses in the royal line of Hyrule are named Zelda. The only reason that (sorta) stops in the WW branch is because there is no longer a Hyrule and thus no royal family to keep the tradition.

PS- You forgot to mention LoZ -> ZII -> OoA/OoS, and LoZIII -> LA.

Most of the debate is centered on how each pocket of related games fits together more than anything..

I can't say all the games connect together, there is too many continuity errors and Obvious Common sense flaws in there too, I'm agreeing that Certain games have timelines, but they all do not intersect. especially when LoZ, LttP, OoT, and TP are pretty much the exact same game with a few things tweaked, in fact TP is just the lost OoT Beta with a different story and added wolf mode.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 26, 2011, 05:02:34 PM

In my mind, it goes like this:

Skyward Sword (supposedly takes place in the far past)

Minish Cap (supposedly takes place in the far past as well)
Ocarina of Time (Linchpin game)
TIMELINE SPLITS
Link Returns (Zelda returns him after End of Game after TimeJump)|   Link Never Returns (Temporary universe created during TimeJump)
Majora's Mask                | Four Swords Adventures
Twilight Princess      |**The Great Flood**
A Link to the Past |     The Wind Waker
Link's Awakening   | Phantom Hourglass
Oracle of Ages  |        Spirit Tracks
Oracle of Seasons{!}  |     The Legend of Zelda
************* | Adventure of Link
Zelda's Adventure |   Wand of Gamelon
********* | Faces of Evil

{!} It seems Oracle of Seasons takes place in either a distant land or in another dimension, as the Triforce makes Link jump from one dimension to another.  It's not far-fetched to think, then, that the Triforce may have Dimensional-Jump powers, allowing a hero like Link to jump between the two universes.  Because of this, I'm not sure which universe of the two (maybe it's a neither, like the land of Termina, or a dream universe like Koholint or whatever crazyness happens in Phantom Hourglass).

Just because a game has a location adjacent to another doesn't mean they take place at the same time.  I just wanted to do a double table and didn't wanna be bothered. ;)

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: KaZudra on October 26, 2011, 05:07:11 PM

Quote from: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 26, 2011, 05:02:34 PM

In my mind, it goes like this:

Skyward Sword (supposedly takes place in the far past)

Minish Cap (supposedly takes place in the far past as well)
Ocarina of Time (Linchpin game)
TIMELINE SPLITS
Link Returns (Zelda returns him after End of Game after TimeJump)|   Link Never Returns (Temporary universe created during TimeJump)
Majora's Mask                | Four Swords Adventures
Twilight Princess      |**The Great Flood**
A Link to the Past |     The Wind Waker
Link's Awakening   | Phantom Hourglass
Oracle of Ages  |        Spirit Tracks
Oracle of Seasons{!}  |     The Legend of Zelda
************* | Adventure of Link
Zelda's Adventure |   Wand of Gamelon
********* | Faces of Evil

{!} It seems Oracle of Seasons takes place in either a distant land or in another dimension, as the Triforce makes Link jump from one dimension to another.  It's not far-fetched to think, then, that the Triforce may have Dimensional-Jump powers, allowing a hero like Link to jump between the two universes.  Because of this, I'm not sure which universe of the two (maybe it's a neither, like the land of Termina, or a dream universe like Koholint or whatever crazyness happens in Phantom Hourglass).

Just because a game has a location adjacent to another doesn't mean they take place at the same time.  I just wanted to do a double table and didn't wanna be bothered. ;)

wow wow wow wow wow. I beg of you Never to mention those certain 3 games, to all fans everywhere those didn't happen, trust me, certain things are better forgotten.

on an added note, this one is pretty solid too, I've seen one where Orcales is the last but I'm certain Spirit Track wuld be last since its shouing modernization in the Zelda Universe.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 26, 2011, 05:22:15 PM

Now now, we wanna be All-Encompassing, don't we?
Also, "Wand of Gamelon" wasn't as terrible as they say.  It's like a weird ZeldaII/Monkey Island game.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: X on October 26, 2011, 06:11:50 PM

Interesting layout there Jorge. but last time I checked LoZ: AlttP and it's sequel LA were set a century before the original Zelda and Zelda II. To my knowledge that hasn't changed unless the creator did another continuity U-turn on us fans once more.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 26, 2011, 06:31:57 PM

Technically it still is in my timeline(s)... only in different universes.
With vast continents different due to the Great Flood, I just don't see Zelda 1 being set in the same land mass as Zelda 3.
If anything, I'm more inclined to think that the land mass of Zelda 3 is actually underwater and it's what Link runs into in the bottom of the ocean... but that throws my entire continuity into hilarious weirdness.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Inccubus on October 26, 2011, 07:34:40 PM

Quote from: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 26, 2011, 05:22:15 PM

Now now, we wanna be All-Encompassing, don't we?
Also, "Wand of Gamelon" wasn't as terrible as they say.  It's like a weird ZeldaII/Monkey Island game.

Nintendo officially dropped those 3 from canon. Also, as interesting as your timeline is, I'm pretty sure that it's implicitly understood that the two (three if you count the 'lost' one) take place right after eachother in no particular order. However, seeing as both orders count, that does point to some sort of dimensional cross event that could conceivably indicate each scenario exists in a different either one of the two dimensions.


Edit: On a personal note, I'd like to remake all three of those abominations into proper LoZ titles.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 26, 2011, 08:26:30 PM

Timeline should still work even without the three CD-I titles, as they're at the very end, after Zelda II.
I still say they play more like Monkey Island titles.  Aside from the crazy animation they're not terrible (I've played far worse).

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: KaZudra on October 26, 2011, 11:29:35 PM

question, how would you figure LoZ happened after/during the Steam age?

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 27, 2011, 07:59:51 AM

What's the "Steam" age?

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: KaZudra on October 27, 2011, 09:05:06 AM

Quote from: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 27, 2011, 07:59:51 AM

What's the "Steam" age?

the period of time where technology is using Steam works, perfect example being trains.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Inccubus on October 27, 2011, 01:33:47 PM

Good point.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 27, 2011, 02:16:28 PM

Is

Quote from: Kamui Zero on October 27, 2011, 09:05:06 AM

the period of time where technology is using Steam works, perfect example being trains.

How is this relevant to Zelda games?  I mean, Spirit Tracks uses steam for its trains and its boats in the Wind Waker games and afterwards, but.... again, how is this relevant?

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: KaZudra on October 27, 2011, 05:49:03 PM

Quote from: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 27, 2011, 02:16:28 PM

Is
How is this relevant to Zelda games?  I mean, Spirit Tracks uses steam for its trains and its boats in the Wind Waker games and afterwards, but.... again, how is this relevant?

it's relevent because it's a revolution that changes the entire world, in this case, hyrule.
LoZ takes place in a more medieval time, LoZ II proves the time setting as there are no signs above primitive.

The Only Zelda Game (I Called it first!) that could happen would be a western like game.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 27, 2011, 06:50:44 PM

Ah... although I see your way of thinking, it's more of a fanon/preference thing.  After all, who's to say an event in between those games can send civilization back?  If something like the Great Flood can exist and wipe everything away, something like that could conceivably happen again.  Why use Trains if you can teleport?

Who needs Steam when you've got Magic?

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: KaZudra on October 27, 2011, 07:01:12 PM

Quote from: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 27, 2011, 06:50:44 PM

Ah... although I see your way of thinking, it's more of a fanon/preference thing.  After all, who's to say an event in between those games can send civilization back?  If something like the Great Flood can exist and wipe everything away, something like that could conceivably happen again.  Why use Trains if you can teleport?

Who needs Steam when you've got Magic?

If that'll be the case I'd say the story has something bigger and much more sinister than any other Zelda villain.

Steam? Magic? I HAVE SCIENCE! (always wanted to say that)

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 27, 2011, 08:28:45 PM

The way I see it, the land masses in Zelda 1 and 2 are just way too different than anything in the older games.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: X on October 27, 2011, 09:04:33 PM

Quote

The way I see it, the land masses in Zelda 1 and 2 are just way too different than anything in the older games.

True, there are some big differences however the maps of original Zelda and AlttP also contain similarities. For instance Death Mountain is in exactly the same place. The pond where Hyrule castle resides in AlttP is where one of the dungeon islands is located in Zelda. dungeon 5 I think. But I did some playing around and by turning the map for AlttP on it's side so that Hyrule castle's gate is facing east rather then south, the resemblance is even more striking. the lost woods in AlttP is exactly where it is in Zelda. So is the cemetery (to an extent). Once more Hyrule castle shares the same spot as the dungeon on the pond. I think it's all up to interpretation at this point and that's due to the fact that the map of Zelda is far more rectangle then squared like AlttP is. But if you're not convinced Jorge then give this little map tilt a try and see for yourself. It's really interesting.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 27, 2011, 09:22:08 PM

That's way too much finagling to get one thing to resemble another.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Inccubus on October 28, 2011, 12:26:44 AM

However don't take the point of view of the land being the same in different games for granted. Plus we don't know the amount of time that passes between most games. Also, Zelda 2 happens just a few years after LoZ and the maps don't match at all from any angle.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: X on October 28, 2011, 01:45:38 AM

Quote

However don't take the point of view of the land being the same in different games for granted. Plus we don't know the amount of time that passes between most games. Also, Zelda 2 happens just a few years after LoZ and the maps don't match at all from any angle.

The original map of Zelda is actually in Zelda II. It's located an the very bottom-left portion of the world map. It's a lot smaller then when you last traversed it but it is the exact same area. I even had a Nintendo player's guide that specifically stated this in a screen capture. In order to get there you have to go through the Death mountain maze until you reach the coast at the bottom of the world map. Hint: You get the magic hammer in this part of the game.

Here's the 'link'  ;D  http://vgmaps.com/Atlas/NES/LegendOfZelda-FirstQuest-Hyrule.png (http://vgmaps.com/Atlas/NES/LegendOfZelda-FirstQuest-Hyrule.png)

Now compare the above to the small lower-left portion of the world map in Zelda II:
http://vgmaps.com/Atlas/NES/ZeldaII-AdventureOfLink-Hyrule.png (http://vgmaps.com/Atlas/NES/ZeldaII-AdventureOfLink-Hyrule.png)

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: crisis on October 28, 2011, 07:34:01 AM

That said, I wonder if Nintendo will ever create a Zelda game based in a "modern" setting. I'm not talking futuristic, but modern elements such as [primitive] pistols and technology here & there would really change the dynamic, but still keep the same aesthetic & style. I think a slight transition-style game would be pretty cool. (20+ years of "old times" games, a single modern one wouldn't hurt)

But I know that's a slippery slope, but if done right I think fans would accept it.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Neobelmont on October 28, 2011, 02:30:00 PM

Quote from: Crisis on October 28, 2011, 07:34:01 AM

That said, I wonder if Nintendo will ever create a Zelda game based in a "modern" setting. I'm not talking futuristic, but modern elements such as [primitive] pistols and technology here & there would really change the dynamic, but still keep the same aesthetic & style. I think a slight transition-style game would be pretty cool. (20+ years of "old times" games, a single modern one wouldn't hurt)

But I know that's a slippery slope, but if done right I think fans would accept it.

Thought about it at some point as well but how would link fight against a gunner would he use a musket as well and for some reason I think an arquebus should be the choice but then again they have remote bombs and bombchus so maybe a more advance musket than an arquebus.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: KaZudra on October 28, 2011, 02:41:39 PM

Quote from: Crisis on October 28, 2011, 07:34:01 AM

That said, I wonder if Nintendo will ever create a Zelda game based in a "modern" setting. I'm not talking futuristic, but modern elements such as [primitive] pistols and technology here & there would really change the dynamic, but still keep the same aesthetic & style. I think a slight transition-style game would be pretty cool. (20+ years of "old times" games, a single modern one wouldn't hurt)

But I know that's a slippery slope, but if done right I think fans would accept it.

It can happen, assassin's Creed is kinda doing it (if they move on from Ezio)

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 28, 2011, 04:14:18 PM

It's funny 'cuz "Ezio" is also the name of Link's Cap in Minish Cap. :P :P :P

I'm all for an Assassin's Creed thread.  That series is awesomesauce.  Revelations next month! ^_^

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Neobelmont on October 28, 2011, 08:07:57 PM

Quote from: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 28, 2011, 04:14:18 PM

It's funny 'cuz "Ezio" is also the name of Link's Cap in Minish Cap. :P :P :P

I'm all for an Assassin's Creed thread.  That series is awesomesauce.  Revelations next month! ^_^

You know he's in soul calibur V right?

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 28, 2011, 09:53:56 PM

I'm aware.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Neobelmont on October 28, 2011, 10:51:17 PM

Quote from: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 28, 2011, 09:53:56 PM

I'm aware.

Ok and well since it seems your a fan and others most likely how is it would you recommend it I have never played an assassin's creed game. In fact I have not played a lot of "new" games lately just retro. But that is getting off topic and my memory still has not come back yet.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 30, 2011, 11:31:50 AM

Yeah... I don't want to derail the thread.

I'm not sure how a modern Zelda would play out. It always seems as if some cataclysm causes the zelda worlds to feel lonely. I would also imagine that such an event would usually set civilization advancement back. It seems the more ancient civilizations have harnessed the power of magic, etc. This seems evidenced by the floating magical continents in Skyward Sword and Minish Cap (i wonder if Twilight Princess's "City in the Sky" is derived from some continent in the upcoming Skyward Sword title).

In the future, things look bleak and straight out of the Dark Ages.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: KaZudra on October 30, 2011, 02:56:51 PM

Skyward sword is the best thing that's happening to the Franchise as it's doing one thing it hasn't done since OoT, Evolving.
I'm glad they learned from thier mistake (TP) and decided on something new and fresh (Gameplay elements-wise).

Story wise, as long as those butt-ass ugly chicken people don't appear in Skyward Sword, I'm A-okay.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Jorge D. Fuentes on October 30, 2011, 06:15:48 PM

Eh, I actually really really liked Twilight Princess, though admittedly, there were some things about it that just made it seem boring.
BUT I LOVE FISHING ZOMG!

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: Neobelmont on October 30, 2011, 08:02:29 PM

Quote from: Kamui Zero on October 30, 2011, 02:56:51 PM

Skyward sword is the best thing that's happening to the Franchise as it's doing one thing it hasn't done since OoT, Evolving.
I'm glad they learned from thier mistake (TP) and decided on something new and fresh (Gameplay elements-wise).

Story wise, as long as those butt-ass ugly chicken people don't appear in Skyward Sword, I'm A-okay.

No we need those big heads!!!

Also I don't know what was wrong with Twilight Princess but if I were to have some kind of con for that game it  would be that the color was not bright and I for one am glad SS will have bright colors which makes it more easy for my eyes.

Title: Re: LoZ "Timeline" Theory
Post by: KaZudra on October 30, 2011, 10:24:05 PM

Quote from: Neobelmont on October 30, 2011, 08:02:29 PM

No we need those big heads!!!

Also I don't know what was wrong with Twilight Princess but if I were to have some kind of con for that game it  would be that the color was not bright and I for one am glad SS will have bright colors which makes it more easy for my eyes.

it was major gameplay issues that rendered TP "bad" a few examples include:
Literatley recycled bosses made easier.
1 dungeon Items
Forcing the story elements (locking you in areas until you talk to someone)
Major lack of side quests
Constantly being compaired to OoT

It's a good one playthrough, but I'm a person who normally dislikes one playthroughs (mostly because they charge full price for a game that's only worth 1/3rd of full price)

Twilight Princess isn't a bad game, but it's not good. It does have a good solid story but its padded with a ton of forgettable content that makes a full completion seem very short, the first few dungeons were really good  but the rest are both forgettable and way too easy.

There were alot, ALOT of good ideas that went into this game but sadly only a few were applied.

I don't hate the game, but I will turn it down.

BTW does it mean something that the GC version was better than the Wii version?