So... They're alternative prequels to the rest of the series? As opposed to Skyward Sword?
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
So... They're alternative prequels to the rest of the series? As opposed to Skyward Sword?
the website has them at the bottom after some undisclosed amount of time
nintendo.co.jp/character/zelda/history/index.html
Had no idea BOTW and TOTK are the first Links and Zeldas canonically
They're not.
Oh, which ones are?
Currently it's Skyward Sword Link and Zelda.
Oh so the list is backwards?
lol are you serious?
yeah, the oldest is at the top and the newest is at the bottom
Doesn't make sense for it to be ascending instead of descending imo, but thank you I understand now
Thank you
Yes you're probably reading it backwards.
Nintendo does in fact say that story takes a backseat to gameplay, but Miyamoto, Aonuma and Fuyibayashi have quotes that say it's not like they don't care about how the games fit and its in fact the opposite. The inconsistencies are in part of the design to generate discussion and theories. You're literally moronic if you think Nintendo doesn't care about their 35 year old cash cow.
>The inconsistencies are in part of the design to generate discussion and theories.
lmao
they only care in that it makes money.
They just handed the keys to zelda storytelling to illumination studios ffs.
>i-it's moronic and doesn't fit on purpose!
You are right in that its not that they "dont care". But they carr in a different way and priority than what many people understands. They just keep track of the decisions that they make lorewise for each game, but they dont have much of a problem abandoning ideas and retroactively resignifying stuff in order to make new games.
The whole timeline thing was made public because they decided to market SS as a story heavy game and having it be the oldest story in the lore could give it some character. But the game doesnt do much to tell this by itself and needs a fricking poster for people to notice. In BotW they needed a fresh looking hyrule with a fresh set of characters and decided that they wouldnt put these in the timeline for now because who the frick cares.
Larping as a fantasy writer and making up your own lore based on the games used to be have the fun of talking about this series. And the games themselves include plenty of nods towards this mentality, like the towns in Zelda 2 retroactively being named after characters in OoT.
>like the towns in Zelda 2 retroactively being named after characters in OoT.
Zelda 2 came out before OoT, that's not what retroactively means.
that's exactly what retroactively means, dumbass
BOTW and TOTK Link and Zelda are the most recent ones.
All the other titles have a line connecting them, but when it gets to BoTW it's just a separation line, implying it's not really connected
And nobody replied (you). Sequelgays btfo
They're self contained stories, they barely even have continuity between eachother. Zelda was never meant to have an official timeline, they just made that shit to appease autists. It's pretty obvious they don't think about canon when writing these stories, only with a few exceptions.
stop repeating this lie, you're a moron
its true, do you really think they considered canon at all before people starting whining about it? just play the games and its obvious they were never meant to have a cohesive canon.
This. Hell the version of the Sealing War talked about in LttP's opening didn't even happen in OoT despite the latter supposedly being the direct prequel to the former. The sages' descendants in LttP were all Hylian too while there has never been an all Hylian sage group in later games (with the possible exception of TP although we never get a look into them or their identities).
>Hell the version of the Sealing War talked about in LttP's opening didn't even happen in OoT despite the latter supposedly being the direct prequel to the former.
Lol you literally think World War 2 made World War 1 non-canon, that's how stupid you sound.
>the latter supposedly being the direct prequel to the former. The sages' descendants in LttP were all Hylian too while there has never been an all Hylian sage group in later games (with the possible exception of TP although we never get a look into them or their identities).
This is a confirmed mistranslation error, the original text says that they're the sages Successors - not necessarily related by blood.
>Hell the version of the Sealing War talked about in LttP's opening didn't even happen in OoT despite the latter supposedly being the direct prequel to the former. The sages' descendants in LttP
>the latter supposedly being the direct prequel to the former
>direct prequel
homie it's set like eons after OoT. It isn't a "direct prequel" if none of the characters from one are even alive by the time the chronologically second game occurs. That's just called a "prequel" the word "direct" has a meaning here.
>do you really think they considered canon at all before people starting whining about it?
Before WW Aonuma said that he hadba document showing how all the games fit, and only him and Miyamoto were allowed to look at it. That's what made it into Hyrule Historia 10 years later.
are you a mormon?
No but I think you might be autistic.
>muh interconnected lore
Your shit tier franchise for toddlers has no continuity, the plot is an afterthought, you eat whatever Nintendo decides to shart in your mouth, and as you swallow the turd your npc brain reconceptualizes it as a 5 course meal. Unironically have sex.
you're a zoomer who didn't follow these games as they came out, and you think you're clever but you're just too fricking stupid to put the games in order
its fanboys like you who thought they were soo clever for putting the timeline together, and again, nintendo just made that shit official to appease you guys and you ate it up.
I do know what you're referring to, that there is a very loose continuity of the games up through OoT. But if you actually played those games, you would realize they didn't put any thought into that beyond the most superficial level. And after OoT/MM, they completely abandoned any attempt at continuity, until they had to come up with the convoluted split timeline shit. Skyward Sword was probably the only time they ever gave a shit about the timeline at large, and they promptly stopped caring again with botw. Like, use your brain cells man, just because something is stated as a sequel/prequel, do you really think that means it was written with that intent? Do you really, unironically think Nintendo had the whole split timeline planned when writing OoT, WW & TP? they had some master plan for that, huh? Do you really think that when making ALLTP, they were being careful to make a lore accurate prequel to LoZ? no disphit. It's just marketing. they write whatever they want in the moment and then fit it into the 'canon' retroactively
oh and to add on, even Skyward Sword didn't really take the canon seriously. It retconned a bunch of other shit, and misplaced previous origin stories like Minish Cap.
the fact is, even if there is a loose timeline, there are so many idiosyncrasies and shifting details, that it's just pointless to take any of it at face value.
so what? do you care about the star wars canon? Just because something is granted status in canon, do you think that has any effect on what the writers intended? it's all just justification made up after the fact. Has nothing to do with the actual story they were telling in individual games.
The fact that it triggers you this much makes you the autistic one here.
>do you think that has any effect on what the writers intended?
This is starting to sound like "Toriyama wanted to end Dragonball after the fight with Freeza" or "Toriyama wanted to end Dragonball after the fight with Cell" nonsense, lmao. Insert headcanon here.
All I'm saying is that they've acknowledged the timeline exists and even have the Skyward Sword prequel manga as the starting point to the series.
>and misplaced previous origin stories like Minish Cap.
Capcom games are as canon as the CD-I Zeldas
>he plays games for the story
lol
This is the kid that cries when you don't follow monopoly rules.
you are the liar anon. Zelda games are not connected.
I don't even think Nintendo really cares tbh.
For the record, is 100% correct. Certain Zelda games do reference or connect directly to each other, but they don't make these games after looking into muh zelda Bible. That's all fan autism shit. The fact that we now have fans claiming that Ganondorf predates Demise is proof that it's just trying to fit the round peg into the square hole.
This always comes down to autism. Autists don't think like normal people, they instead more or less require explanations for everything. It should be no surprise therefor that the Sonic fanbase is even worse about shit like this.
Pretty much. I like to think of zelda games as stories that get told verbally through the ages, so whatever references each game has to the rest are heavily distorted information that only has some resemblance to what actually happened.
I think nintendo probably started this timeline stuff after ocarina of time given that majora was a direct sequel and wind waker used Oot's events as a distant background. I guess at this point they just tried to keep track of how the games reference each other in order to see oportunities and draw inspiration for the settings, but never as limitations. If they have a new idea thats contradictory or difficult to link with the rest of the series just say it tales 10000000 years after the rest of the games and call it a day.
>. I like to think of zelda games as stories that get told verbally through the ages,
That's great but that's your literal headcanon.
>I like to think of zelda games as stories that get told verbally through the ages,
FRICK OFF FRICK OFF FRICK OOOOOOFFFFF WITH THIS moronic BS
its worse than headcanon its straight up fricking false
>FRICK OFF FRICK OFF FRICK OOOOOOFFFFF WITH THIS moronic BS
are you ok?
>Pretty much. I like to think of zelda games as stories that get told verbally through the ages, so whatever references each game has to the rest are heavily distorted information that only has some resemblance to what actually happened.
Yeah, almost as if they were '''legends''' or something.
Yeah huh. Who would have thought they were going for a fairy tale tone and pretensions and not for a tolkien autistic worldbuilding ripoff.
Doesn't matter what you think though, still not what Nintendo actually says.
"Nintendo" doesn't say anything in all fairness.
And the devs of any particular zelda game don't sit around a table asking "well how does this fit into the timeline" when they're making a game.
Somebody tweeting out something off hand isn't "nintendo" saying something, no matter how much you want it to be.
Nintendo has said a lot of stuff during the years, before and after that official timeline was out. If you're just mildly interested in the series you may take the timeline at face value and call it a day. But if you pay attention to the developers and writers and how they have been making the games, they tell you more stuff, what is important and what is not when making these stories.
It's like twin peaks. You may just take everything at face value and not enjoy half of what it offers, but if you understand the medium and how the directors go about it, you get the whole picture.
I know im basically talking to a wall here. But for whoever is truly interested.
>You may just take everything at face value and not enjoy half of what it offers
It's your loss then. The rest of us will enjoy the series as it's was made.
Me getting the whole picture is my loss, right. Brilliant retort.
Lol you're not getting the full picture, you're cutting out the bits you don't like to fit your headcanon.
Im not cutting them at all. I include them with the rest of information i have, and it allows me to forgive any timeline incoherence or awkward turn because I understand how this games are made and what is important for the devs since i have all of the information. It doesnt invalidate the official timeline, it just doesnt matter that much even if its true.
Its you who needs to defend details and nitpicks that were never meant to be setfor deep scrutiny to keep your very shallow take on zelda games from collapsing.
Thing is, pretty every zelda game relates to a previous game, they just don't make sense as a whole.
Zelda 2 is a direct sequel to the first game
AlttP is a prequel to the NES games
Link's Awakening is unrelated to other games, but makes most sense to be set after alltp
OoT is a prequel yet again
Majora's Mask is a sequel to OoT
Oracles and Four Swords aren't related to other entries
Wind Waker is a sequel to OoT
FSA is a sequel to FS
Minish Cap is prequel set before OoT
Twilight Princess is a sequel to OoT
Phantom Hourglass is a sequel to TWW
Spirit Tracks is a sequel to PH
Skyward Sword is a prequel to all previous game
A Link Between Worlds is a direct sequel to Alltp
Tri Force Heroes happens after ALBW but the connection does not make sense other than Aonuma saying so.
>Link's Awakening is unrelated to other games, but makes most sense to be set after alltp
Wasn't there an old version of the timeline that said Link's Awakening happens DURING Zelda 2?
>I like to think of zelda games as stories that get told verbally through the ages, so whatever references each game has to the rest are heavily distorted information that only has some resemblance to what actually happened.
Yep, that's what it is. Here's an excerpt from WW's opening:
>What became of that kingdom? None remained who knew. The memory of the kingdom vanished, but its legend survived on the wind's breath. On a certain island, it became customary to garb boys in green when they came of age. Clothed in the green of fields, they aspired to find heroic blades and cast down evil. The elders wished only for the youths to know courage like the hero of legend...
>Yep, that's what it is.
Yea until you reach Hyrule Castle and you learn the events of OoT are historical in WW.
Do you even play the games? Why are you here.
No one says the games dont reference each other. Just vaguely in most cases. WW is very on the nose with its references, yet some things just dont make any sense. This thing about Zoras evolving into Ritos because of the rising sea level is just bonkers no matter how you want to see it, and it's only properly explained outside the game's lore, because having zoras in wind waker would have meant making the water transparent, diving mechanics and a bunch of other shit they could not integrate properly.
Its really not worth to get hung up on the timeline over details.
>No one says the games dont reference each other. Just vaguely in most cases. WW is very on the nose with its references,
Bro how did you even end up this way. The events of OoT are literally shown to be history in WW, it's not a reference.
Wind Waker is actually the first game to frick things up though. It has a story that's completely incompatible with the first Zelda or aLttP. the whole parallel universes shit started with wind waker.
Yes, and yet it doesnt make sense that the zora got wiped out because there was too much water for them. Oot is part of WW's story in a very explicit way, but it doesnt make any sense in some aspects, and it's okay because the game's story works on its own, and details like that dont matter in how zelda games work.
>Yes, and yet it doesnt make sense that the zora got wiped out because there was too much water for them.
Read
Pay attention and maybe it wouldn't be so confusing for you.
>game introduces time paradox
>succeeding game follows its lead and explores one of the branches
It didn't frick up anything, it was just being a sequel to the story established in the previous games.
>This thing about Zoras evolving into Ritos because of the rising sea level is just bonkers no matter how you want to see it
it's not that complicated, Zoras may be fish people, but the environment of the great sea just isn't safe for them. Zoras have always been amphibians really rather than fish and thus live near coasts and in lakes. they aren't cut out to survive in a full on ocean, so instead they moved to land and somehow the sky.
>This thing about Zoras evolving into Ritos because of the rising sea level is just bonkers no matter how you want to see it,
Because you don't play the games and don't care. Tired of you posers posting in these threads.
First answer: Zora in OoT are fresh water and wouldn't fare well in salt water.
But more importantly and the actual answer is that the golden godesses didn't want anyone finding the sunken kingdom and that would have been easily done by the Zora.
And these are not afterthoughts right? They clearly had to kill the zora from the beginning of development because obviously the sea is such an unwelcomming place for acuatic creatures. These happen to be fresh water only which is such a shame, but the obvious evolutionary move is to grow fricking wings and become birds instead of tolerating salt water, like many creatures have done in actual planet earth.
Nevermind majora's mask saltwater zoras because majora's mask is a completely different dimension with crazy preposterous shit like that.
You can eat a wiener right away my friends.
>like many creatures have done in actual planet earth.
Good thing this is Hyrule and not some bullshit darwinist version of what you think should happen.
Evolving wings is a darwinist concept by itself. Why say shit like that is hyrule doesnt work like this?
Man, there is such a thing as bad writing and patching things up. Since zelda games are not books, its completely fine that not everything falls elegantly into place.
Not having the aquatic civilization dominate the seas is plain absurd from a writing point of view, no matter how many justifications you invent for it, it's a glaring missed oportunity.
You see, in itchy and scratchy show when they decided to get rid of poochy, they said he had to come back to his planet to never be seen again. This had no inconsistencies lorewise and was an explicit justification for poochy never appearing again in the show. But it was bad writing that was obviously affected by other parameters more important than the story itself.
bro you have lost your mind
its a fanatsy race of fantasy fish people in a fantasy setting where the entire fabric of their world is held together by a magic triangle
So youre basically saying that it doesnt matter that much to justify anything because it's magic or something? Because its pretty similar to my point.
>Not having the aquatic civilization dominate the seas is plain absurd from a writing point of view, no matter how many justifications you invent for it, it's a glaring missed oportunity.
Din, Farore, and Nayru didn't want Hyrule to be found. Sorry that doesn't satisfy you.
And poochy cant come back to itchy and scratchy because he is in his home planet now. It's a perfectly satisfying reason.
No, he fricking died, pay attention.
Even better.
It doesn't because you made a shitty excuse to make an empty half finished game that backpedaled on the promise of next gen graphics. That's 3 strikes.
You're not arguing in good faith, you're just a dopamine addicted, pathetic little monkey.
You have nothing and now you're crying.
I genuinely hope your skull is crushed by a car running over your head while your entire family burns to death.
Keep crying timeline Black person maybe they'll throw together another timeline for you makes no sense and never reference it again, again.
They don't get their wings naturally. They need a scale from a literal dragon.
>fish people grow wings to deal with the planet being flooded
Midwit game. People raving over Ganondorf being unexplainable evil just like every other game is hilarious.
>Midwit game
Yea true, let's leave this thread and leave the midwits their game lel
No it's more fun to laugh at the 3 year Olds WW appeals to.
>has to add an asterisk to his reasoning before his post is even finished
Lol
>. This thing about Zoras evolving into Ritos because of the rising sea level is just bonkers no matter how you want to see it
Not really, I mean of course the meta reason that you stated is the real reason, but within universe there are at least two decent explanations
1. The golden godesses made them evolve to be rito, cause otherside they'd be swimming around and playing in old hyrule, which is supposed to be forbiden
2. they are freshwater and not seawater so the entire world becoming an ocean basically fricks up their habitat. They already have fins, and that's not a far cry away from mutating into wings.
Either way its just a videogame , not a hard scifi manifesto. If the creators say the fantasy creatures evolve from one fantasy creature into a next, there isnt really much room to argue
>>What became of that kingdom? None remained who knew. The memory of the kingdom vanished, but its legend survived on the wind's breath. On a certain island, it became customary to garb boys in green when they came of age. Clothed in the green of fields, they aspired to find heroic blades and cast down evil. The elders wished only for the youths to know courage like the hero of legend...
I got fricking goosebumps from reading this because i can hear the music. We need koizumi back so bad bros.
>Zelda was never meant to have an official timeline
Adventure of Link is literally a sequel to the original Legend of Zelda. There has been continuity from the very start, and it's continued with almost every single game.
You "muh retelling" autists are completely divorced from reality, to the point you have to make up conspiracy theories about Nintendo lying about it.
Which Zelda did you rescue on Zelda II? Where the hell is your boomerang?
>Which Zelda did you rescue on Zelda II?
It's another Zelda who's been asleep for many years because of a curse.
>Where the hell is your boomerang?
There's a ton of games with explicit continuity where you lose all your shit between sequels. Some of them explain it and some of them don't. It's a video game thing.
>And then the third game came out and had nothing to do with 2
A Link to the Past is a prequel to The Legend of Zelda.
>There is no timeline outside of direct sequels
Again, you are completely divorced from reality and rejecting everything Nintendo has said on the subject. The only argument you have is that they are secretly lying, which is deranged.
>Majoras mask isn't one either.
u wot
>2 Zeldas
>continuity
Bullshit, they say Zelda, when the frick did she fall asleep, they would have said,
>Holy shit link, this secret second Zelda fell upon a curse
But no, they just say that she has been like that
Bro read the manual.
They even say Ganon is dead and his minions are trying to revive him, how the frick would he be dead already if it's a "retelling"? It's clearly a direct sequel.
>ignore everything Nintendo has said
>make up conspiracy theories and lies
>y-you're the one coping!
lol
"Retelling" autists are a joke.
>it's all connected just believe me!
No.
Why are you arguing with Nintendo's canon?
Ganon is dead or banished in half of all zelda games.
Gee anon I wonder why that is?
Could it be there's a continuity?
It's honestly such a headache arguing with you, you are speaking complete gibberish.
>well AKSTUALLY what about this typo
Do you think Aeris and Aerith are two different characters? Come on now.
just shut the frick up
No. It's not. Ganon being dead every time and awakening is a simple plot device to get le bad man into the game. There is no reason for him being dead beyond this. He is literally the same character every single time because the games aren't about him. He is just the mustache twirling villian who stuck after OoT made a good design.
You mean the exact same plot of BotW? The princess is under a curse and the evil is about to revive? That doesn't make it a sequel to anything, it just means that the guy is about to revive.
>Ganon
First Zelda enemy is called Gannon
>its a prequel!
Cope
And then the third game came out and had nothing to do with 2. There is no timeline outside of direct sequels. Majoras mask isn't one either.
>And then the third game came out and had nothing to do with 2
it's literally called a link to the past
but somehow this flies over moron's heads.
you do know the zelda timeline itself was never consistent there was a time when Links Awakening took place in the middle of zelda 2.
The Zelda timeline doesnt matter because they constantly change it and TOTK made it only more confusing by having it only make sense if you assume characters in the story are lying and making up head canons for why things didnt even carry over between botw to totk. It's a complete shit show.
That was just NoA fanfiction, back when they weren't monitored so much. The Japanese LA website said it was a direct sequel to ALttP and Ancient Stone Tablets corroborated that.
They never cared about continuity and anything that tried to Link them beyond some references is just a meme. Look how much the Lanayru region has jumped around since TP. I know the game was mirrored between two consoles, but even between SS and BOTW it's nonsensical. They throw out shit and replace it literally every Zelda game.
How can ninetndo ever top totk, Zelda in space? Kohga was sent to the depths in botw, now he was sent to space. clue clue hint hint?
No, why do people think that Skyward Sword isn't canon to Tears? SS Zelda didn't establish the Kingdom of Hyrule, she simply started to repopulate the surface and led a primitive society of Hylians until her Descendant Sonia became the first Queen after being a priestess in the primitive society.
Because people forget a Goddess/Pharaoh is not the same as Queen
They take place after all of the other games
Its a reboot you dip
The Past that Zelda travels back to in TotK predates all other Zelda games. This game features the original Ganondorf, aka, the Demon King. Note that he does NOT have a "Ganon" transformation. He is defeated and Frozen, but his influence, also known as Malice, slowly seeps out and poisons Hyrule. This eventually takes the form of Demise, who in turn is defeated by the first incarnation of Link. This Demise then casts a curse on Link and Zelda whereby he reincarnated as "Ganon" throughout time. This is where all the other games take place. Ganon is defeated every time (except for one scenario where the timeline splits at the end of OOT) and all the while over tens of thousands of years, the REAL original Ganondorf is still underground slowly becoming stronger. Eventually he becomes strong enough to influence the Ganon curse into creating the Calamity, hence the events of Age of Calamity and later BotW. In the main timeline era of TotK, the original demon King Ganondorf finally breaks free of the seal. He is of course defeated at the end of the game, in his strongest form.
So yeah, it's a bit confusing, but basically:
Demon King Ganondorf > Demise > Ganon (manifests occasionally as a lesser Ganondorf, which in turn can create other copies like "phantom" Ganon)
None of that predates skyward sword you tard.
>The Past that Zelda travels back to in TotK predates all other Zelda games.
This is wrong.
The timelines split with OoT, into the adult, the child, and the failed hero timelines. After the final games in each timeline, an unspecified but VERY large amount of time passes (10s of thousands of years probably) until you reach the point where the Zonai appear. THAT is the era in which Zelda goes back in time to.
Then, thousands of years after that, the Sheikah civilization builds the Divine Beasts, all that shit happens, thousands of years after THAT, BoTW occurs, and then ToTK in the 'present day' takes place.
The evidence for this is extremely fricking simple: there are no god damn dragons in any of the games until BoTW, the only exception being Volvaga from OoT, who is CLEARLY not one of the dragons from the recent two games given their differences in size, appearance, temperament, and so forth. Additionally, there is no evidence of the Zonai in the era of Skyward Sword, which is the earliest chronologically speaking.
Addendum; extremely simplified timeline for non-Zelda nerds:
In the beginning, the world is made by the three goddesses, Din, Farore, and Nayru. After it was made, they created the Triforce and then departed, leaving the world in the care of Hylia, another goddess.
Eventually, Demise appears and attempts to conquer the world. He is beaten by the first Link, at the behest of Hylia. Though Link succeeds in sealing Demise away, he dies, and Hylia promises to shed her divinity and return as a human endlessly, reincarnating herself and Link when Demise eventually breaks free.
Then Skyward Sword happens. Demise breaks free, Skyward Sword link inherits the soul of the hero, Hylia is reincarnated as Zelda, and the two destroy Demise. But Demise uses Hylia's own trick against her by using his own power to ensure his endless reincarnation, trapping all three to endlessly return to fight until the end of time.
After Skyward Sword, Minish Cap happens. Then Four Swords. Then the Ocarina of Time, which is the lynchpin of the entire timeline. In OoT, Link & Zelda are reincarnated, and Demise is reincarnated as Ganondorf, who then seeks the Triforce to gain ultimate power and all that jazz. He gets into the Sacred Realm where it was located by manipulating Link, but the Triforce separates, with each piece going to one of the three. Power goes to Ganondorf, Wisdom to Zelda, and Courage to Link. Link defeats Ganondorf and Ganon, the Triforce of Power version of Ganondorf, and the sages seal him away in the Sacred Realm that he conquered. This leads to the Child and Adult timelines, centered around when Zelda returns Link to his childhood to relive it, splitting the world into the one wherein Link is a child, and the one that goes on with no Link, as he was sent back. If Link FAILED to defeat Ganondorf, it leads to the Failed Hero timeline.
This is already getting long so I'll just give you a list:
Adult Timeline: Wind Waker -> Phantom Hourglass -> Spirit Tracks
Child Timeline: Majora's Mask -> Twilight Princess -> Four Swords Adventures
Failed Hero Timeline: Link to the Past -> Link's Awakening -> Oracle of Ages & Seasons -> Link Between Worlds -> Triforce Heroes -> The Legend of Zelda -> Adventure of Link
ALTP, Oracle of Ages/Seasons, Link Between Worlds, Legend of Zelda, Adventure of Link, Twilight Princess, Four Swords Adventures, Wind Waker, and Spirit Tracks all revolve around the resurrection (or attempted) of Demise's spirit, most of them in the form of Ganondorf; though Spirit Tracks resurrects into Malladus, I believe it's the same soul.
After all that, THIS is when the Zonai appear, and Hyrule is founded anew, and the events of ToTK's past time-travel with Zelda occur. After King Rauru seals Ganondorf away under the castle, thousands of years pass again until the Sheikah civilization emerges, and Ganon's resurrection is prevented via the Divine Beasts. Then thousands more years pass, and you get BoTW, and then finally ToTK.
The only wrinkle in this is that if this is the case, which all evidence seems to point to, then a version of Demise's soul would exist in two places at once; that being in Ganondorf's sealed remains under the castle and when it attempted to resurrect again during the time of the Sheikah and DOES resurrect during the events of BoTW in the form of Calamity Ganon. Personally, I think this may either be an oversight or possibly that the soul just jumped out of the mummy Ganondorf's form in an attempt to keep resurrecting, returning once Calamity Ganon was destroyed.
>After all that, THIS is when the Zonai appear,
Its not set in a distant future dude. Its an alternate universe. There is frick all connecting it to the continuity.
OoT Ganondorf is the original Ganondorf
Wind Waker happens. No queens because Tetra doesn't want to be one even after discovering she Zelda. Flood ceases. Agriculture revolution happens. Kingdoms emerge. People with mythical powers become kings and queens. Hyrule first one was the deer and the niger because cheating yellow piss time power and puke green grabbing masturbator hand
This was written lore canon from uncle John Nintendo
>2023
>morons still have discussion about zelda timeline
holy shit just let this die, there never was a timeline
What about
?
that's just them appealing to autists.
The timeline itself doesn't even work and contradicts itself.
>appealing to autists
In other words, making it real. Doesn't matter that it has contradictions. Developers acknowledge its existence on official website.
it's literally just fricking marketing
they saw that skyward sword was gonna be shit so they brought up that and the whole anniversary shit (which they never did for TP)
You can continue to close your eyes and ears and pretend it doesn't exist with a bunch of meaningless conjecture but what's out there is out there.
the website literally doesnt fit the new ones anywhere because they were made after skyward sword and the timeline only existed to sell that fricking game
hence them never remaking it
Isn't it more so because they're in the highly distance future where timelines don't matter?
no, it's just nintendo being lazy
Oh, and i forgot to mention, ZLBW and Triforce Heroes are in the lose timeline so that invalidates your argument about any games after Skyward Sword not being in the timeline.
aka "we don't give a shit about the "timeline" and never did, frick off with that shit and just let us make what we want without having to crack open the non existent Zelda bible to make sure the mobiln we designed has "downfall timeline" traits instead of "windwaker timeline" traits or whatever"
LMAO it's pointless to try and convince somebody who's already convinced himself there that the truth doesn't exist. I hope you'll eventually be able to cope properly.
The only thing that matters is that there is Link, Zelda, and Ganon and that they are bound together via the Triforce. It's a take that repeats. Each game is a retelling of this, with some exceptions.
It's literally called the LEGEND of Zelda.
Cool headcanon but that's all it'll ever be
as I said, only autists believe it all fits
This is the kind of autist that would defend humans not being forerunners
That's literally the truth though. It's paraphrasing what miyamoto and the rest always say in the interviews and rules over any microscopic lore afterthough decision they make.
>That's literally the truth though
Yes it's the truth that your personal headcanon isn't canon.
It's miyamoto's headcannon too. It's the only canon that you should pay attention to if you are not a moronic nerd.
miyamoto is a senile moron
>Triforce barely exists in Breath/Tears
They're shit.
a849
Oot's ganondorf was as much the real deal as totk's. Leader of gerudos who pleads loyalty to the king and then betrays him. They are just different takes of the same story.
The Master Sword makes Fi's sound effect a few times in those games. Skyward Sword is still the earliest in the timeline.
Doesn't Fi also talk to Zelda in BotW?
Tears of the Kingdom's story isn't very good.
When Zelda started exposition dumping 5 minutes in about the imprisoning war I started rolling my eyes
The Zelda Timeline is an IQ gate
dimwits don't get it and it makes them angry, midwits get it but care too much, geniuses just assume it makes sense and don't care about the specifics
I wonder what happened in the years leading up to BOTW/TOTK that no one can make weapons that don't break in 5 swings
they all decayed when ganon was released
>Zelda lore
How did you conclude this, they even advertised it as some distant future.
troony Fi is cannon to both titles, the Master sword talks to both Link and Zelda, meaning the events take place after Skyward Sword, (where the Zonai fit in the story still makes no sense) so stop pretending the games are in a new continuity
>there can't be a fi on each universe
ITS IN YOU FRICKING moron
LEARN PROPER ENGLISH
What is in?
Dr. Purahor: How I learned to stop worrying and ignore the timeline
Doesn't the escapades of Misko's prove that BotW and TotK are connected to the Zelda timeline?
The point of BoTW/ToTk is that the games take place so far in the future it's where all the timelines converge and end. Everything prior is in the End of Myth. BoTW is a soft reboot of the franchise.
So Rito evolved from Zora. So why do they co-exist in the BotW and TotK?
Same reason Zoras were evil on the first games, there's no timeline
The imprisoning war timeline is the only one that has them as enemies. That's proof of the timeline being a thing, moron.
>imprisoning war
>Zora enemies
No
Stop.
Accept the reality: they do not care about the timeline.
Why should you?
Your life will only improve by stop caring about zelda timeline.
WHO CARES NINTENDO CLEARLY DOESNT
They never put more than 2 seconds of thought into the timeline.
The timeline makes perfect sense if you ignore the Fujibayashi games. Dude shoved in his dumb fan fiction and ruined the lore. Fi being the Master Sword, Demise being the ancient evil who caused Ganon, Hylia being more important than the golden goddesses, everything in TotK, etc.
The only explanation that even sort of makes sense is that they take place so far in the future that it's no longer possible to discern what timeline they're on. Other than that, they'd have to be in a completely separate continuity. They can't be prequels because they would directly contradict both OoT and ALttP and everything that stems from them.
Yes, anon, that is exactly correct. Furthermore, we see evidence of ALL THREE timelines in BoTW/ToTk, such as rock salt referencing an ancient sea, all but guaranteeing that BoTW/ToTK take place in a distant future where all three timelines have converged.
No, it's set so far in the future it's barely connected
There is no connection, there is no timeline, Zelda games are standalone unconnected titles and always have been
The fact that people, including Nintendo, split the timeline based on Ocarina is all the proof you need that none of it really matters. It just speaks to fundamentally misunderstanding the time travel mechanics and the ending, and everyone goes along with it out of convenience.
Oh, the timeline split during one of our in-game deaths? So does that mean there are infinitely more timelines where Ganon wins every game, like in Bioshock Infinite?
You're required to time travel several times in Ocarina and Majora. Why is there only one time-based split from one game?
whooshed over your head but yes there can be games on all kinds of splits in the timeline, but shocker, Nintendo hasn't developed and released games to put in those splits
Infinite timeline branches is equivalent to no timeline, since any game that's not a direct sequel can go anywhere it wants.
it's a timeline to place the games you low iq midwit. only a moron would say "there could be infinite branches! no timeline!"
place the damn games in chronology after you get done being a gorilla Black person
>Oh, the timeline split during one of our in-game deaths?
No. That one is a hypothetical "off camera" one that only exists because they accidentally didn't explain how ALttP happens in the prequel that was specifically supposed to explain that. The two proper timelines that are seen and make sense in game are the one where Ganondorf steals the triforce of power from the sacred realm, turns into a pig demon, and is defeated by an adult Link and the one that Link was sent back to where, as a child, he intervenes to have Ganondorf arrested and executed before he can carry out his plot.
You're a moron with a sub-50 IQ. Re-read what Sheik first tells you about time traveling via the Master Sword and how she compares it traveling up and down a river. Zelda sending Link back splits the timeline because she sends you back to an earlier point. And since you're really fricking stupid, pay attention to the party thrown after Link gets sent back to the past: clearly the future wasn't erased thus a split timeline was always the most logical explanation even back when OoT first came out.
OoT is a closed timeloop. Zelda sends Link back to live his childhood, but he meets her in the garden anyway (despite having no proof against Ganondorf other than the word of two children, exactly what they started with). Majora retconned this, however.
you are so stupid
One of the children is the princess and the other is some random forest child that somehow knows about everyone in Hyrule despite none of them having ever met him. That's at least sufficient to start an investigation, at which point it would be discovered that Ganondorf is an evil sorcerer raised by a pair of witches.
>the Princess dumped Hyrule lore on this poor child to make him sound convincing, is there no end to her games?
She only knows the history and theology stuff that everyone in the royal family would know, hence why no one believes her dreams on their own. When Link starts bringing up Twinrova or mentions the headless, handless fellow in the Kakariko well the king will 1) tell him to keep quiet about that second one and 2) start taking him seriously. Link can also get a giant talking owl to vouch for him being a time traveler by knowing his actual name.
but didnt zelda say she was telling the king about ganondorf being evil but he just told her lol
Not him, but I thought the implication is that Link brought the Triforce of Courage back with him and that was the proof that won them over. Ganondorf in TP has the Triforce of Power despite never getting to actually touch it in that timeline, implying that the Triforce's fracturing applies across spacetime or whatever. The sages are baffled and call it a "divine prank" during his execution
Couldn't he have gotten it from some unseen incident between MM and TP?
No, you see the mark on Link's hand in OoT's ending.
Dorf getting to the Triforce in OOT fricked the whole world up despite it splitting into thirds. Even if he found another way into the Sacred Realm in the Child Timeline (there's no indication of there being another way), him getting it would cause enough consequences that the TP Sages wouldn't be surprised that he has a piece of it during his execution.
Also this
All she had were prophetic dreams. It's easy enough to dismiss those as merely dreams. A time traveling shota is much more convincing.
Link going back might actually be the reason Ganondorf still ended up with the triforce of power. Link already had the triforce of courage from when original timeline Ganondorf broke it. So when he went back to before Ganondorf entered the sacred realm it would have caused there to be a triforce of courage both with Link and in the sacred realm, which is obviously no good. So instead it could have "fixed" things by going ahead and splitting anyway so that there is only the one with Link, and consequently Ganondorf and Zelda got theirs too.
That's not a closed timeloop. Link warning Zelda about the future with the mark of the Triforce on his hand creates a split in the timeline because it prevents Ganondorf's plan from happening.
The timeline splits anytime something different COULD have happened. We've just gotten games following several consistent "channels" thus far. As for why specifically OoT has a split where Link fails, I would hazard a guess that the potentiality of his failure is "more significant" there because its time travel occurs outside a closed loop.
OoT also explains how Ganon gets the triforce of power that he has in Zelda 1 already
*fixes the timeline*
Played a tiny bit of ALttP yesterday for the first time in years, kinda wild that the game that introduced the Master Sword has you look for it just to power scale you to an evil wizard that you don't even know is possessed by Ganon.
Nintendo has softly stated they don't give a frick about canon unless the games are direct sequels (think of ALBW to ALTTP). moron lifeless elitists (think of Soulsgays) are the ones that care about muh interconnected lore. Most of us only want a decent game to spend the afternoon with and Nintendo knows that targeting to those consumers is what leaves them dollars.
The majority of zelda games have an explicitly stated place in the series' continuity within the games themselves. And, until botw, this included every 3d zelda.
Is there anywhere I can read really well laid put timeliness arguments that aren't just autistic back and forth's on forums? I kind of interested in the Zelda timeliness, but not that interested
Play the games. It's all there.
>timeliness arguments that aren't just autistic back and forth's on forums
You could read the official Zelda timeline. Otherwise, all debate and discussion on the timeline happens on forums.
There's really no argument to be had for every game other than the most recent 2. There's an official timeline for everything else, you can just look at that. I think the Downfall Timeline is stupid but it's official so what am I gonna argue about. BOTW and TOTK don't seem at all interested in confirming where they are on the timeline other than being at the end so there's not much to discuss outside of conjecture
youtube videos
maybe a good way to think about it is all the various stories of each game in the timeline really happened, in (roughly) that order, but they happened long ago and hyrule has a lot of catastrophes, so the historical record is "fuzzy" and doesn't quite fit together perfectly because the precise details were wiped out and only the mythological stories remain, which are what we see in the games.
or "a wizard did it" also works
That's exactly what happened.
7:51
Stupid people can't comprehend BOTW/TOTK simply being so disconnected from the other games by virtue of happening hundreds of thousands of years later. Past events don't really matter, BoTW is the start of a new era.
The fact is that ultimately none of the games are technically beholden to one another. And that's fine. But we had basically two decades in which the mainline Zelda games all had direct and obvious canonical links to one another.
>OOT as an ALTTP prequel
>WW as an OOT sequel following another timeline
>TP as another OOT sequel
>SS as a prequel to all known games
Trying to undersell the value of that is pretty scummy.
Unrelated, but I feel that SS really squandered being the first in the timeline. Where did the holy sword come from before we found it in the pedestal? Oh it was another sword in a different pedestal that got powered up. Why is there always a princess named Zelda who helps you save the world? Oh she's the reincarnation of a goddess that looks just like her and wants to save the world. Why is there always a hero chosen by fate to help the princess? Oh he's the reincarnation of the spirit of the first guy who helped the goddess. Why is there always an evil tyrant? Oh he's the reincarnation of another older evil-er tyrant that looked just like him but with flaming hair. It goes out of its way to address these characters always reincarnating in an eternal conflict of good vs evil but it doesn't add much depth to that other than to say "yeah that is what's happening," which we already knew after a dozen games of it always happening. At least Groose was based
actually, a great way to think about it is: it's just a fricking game
it's a 3d version of an 8bit game nintendo made 30 years ago to sell a piece of hardware and make some money. there were some bips. there were some boops. it fricking sucked. but it was the first game a lot of morons played, so they fell in love.
kind of like getting touched by an uncle and getting aroused at weird thoughts for the next 30 years because you dont know any better.
anyway, no, there is no connection between each game. there is no magical myth passed between eons of people. there is no tax policy for hyrule. it's just way to enjoy some hardware so enjoy it.
if you want to play a game where chronology matters and story is important and plays a part, please, do that and enjoy yourself. but this insistence to headcanon link as this Groundhogs Day type hero is asinine and forcing the brain virus of an idea onto others is like molesting kids so you can create more freaks because you cant produce naturally.
>actually, a great way to think about it is: it's just a fricking game
i'm not sure if this guy is the most autistic or least autistic poster ITT
just read the rest of the post and i'm leaning towards "most autistic"
Telling people to chill out about the lore of a children's video game is anti-autism. But rambling about a molesting uncle tips it back towards terminal autism.