+- VGFacts (https://archive.vgfacts.com)
+-- Forum: Gaming Discussions (https://archive.vgfacts.com/forum-5.html)
+--- Forum: General Gaming Discussion (https://archive.vgfacts.com/forum-14.html)
+--- Thread: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? (/thread-2914.html)
Pages:
1
2
Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - Kakariko Kid - 12-28-2015
![[Image: 18j0yyebco7eqjpg.jpg]](http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--1fFdm3x---/c_scale,fl_progressive,q_80,w_800/18j0yyebco7eqjpg.jpg)
Agree?
Disagree?
Don't really care?
Tell us why!
Okay, I haven't read the entire Hyrule Hystoria or played every Zelda game, but I just see inconsistencies.
My biggest issue is with the Child Era and Adult Era after the Hero is successful in Ocarina of Time.
What exactly is the point of Link giving the Ocarina of Time back to Zelda at the end of Ocarina of Time if she's just going to give it back to him in Majora's Mask? Saria's ocarina seemed to have been just as capable to perform songs and the results after.
So, Link pulls the Master Sword out too early and then it splits the time and space continuum. Who exactly is playing God...Godess...Hylia...Din, Farore, Nayru?
I guess the latter 4 goddesses mentioned also help create the Tetraforce theory?
Or is Zelda/Tetra the 4th goddess? Is there 5 now? Should the Tri-force now be a Penta-force?
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - Mass Distraction - 12-28-2015
It's official so what is there not to agree on.
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - Kakariko Kid - 12-28-2015
(12-28-2015, 10:53 AM)Mass Distraction Wrote: It's official so what is there not to agree on.
Haha. True. But....ya know what I'm sayin
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - retrolinkx - 12-28-2015
Honestly, I've never cared about the timeline, but I believe Nintendo just sort of forced it out after people started arguing about what happens when, since it changed nothing from some of the more popular videos detailing on the matter, such as Gametrailers Zelda Retrospective.
I think it's better to consider each Zelda game as what they are, Legends. They might just be a retelling of the same story, but changed for multiple reasons, such as mistranslations, or things lost or added through each retelling.
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - RepentantSky - 12-28-2015
Yeah no, the Zelda timeline makes no damn sense and still excludes several games. For example, where's a link between worlds? I assume that it's not the same Link from "A Link to the Past" but then how do they connect? Honestly, retrolinx's idea about these stories just being retelling's just makes a lot more sense than a branching timeline.
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - MeleeWaluigi - 12-28-2015
I find it suspicious that Link keeps on getting recarnated and that each recarnation of Link is a hero. Other than that I can't argue that it's wrong.
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - Melcadrien - 12-28-2015
If it's the current official timeline then it's the official timeline. For now, anyways. Nintendo has had the tendency to retcon it a few times, though.
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - Arjahn - 12-29-2015
(12-28-2015, 02:48 PM)RepentantSky Wrote: Yeah no, the Zelda timeline makes no damn sense and still excludes several games. For example, where's a link between worlds? I assume that it's not the same Link from "A Link to the Past" but then how do they connect? Honestly, retrolinx's idea about these stories just being retelling's just makes a lot more sense than a branching timeline.
Its my understanding that the reason Link Between Worlds was excluded was because it came out two years after Hyrule Historia was published.
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - RepentantSky - 12-29-2015
(12-29-2015, 04:36 AM)Arjahn Wrote:(12-28-2015, 02:48 PM)RepentantSky Wrote: Yeah no, the Zelda timeline makes no damn sense and still excludes several games. For example, where's a link between worlds? I assume that it's not the same Link from "A Link to the Past" but then how do they connect? Honestly, retrolinx's idea about these stories just being retelling's just makes a lot more sense than a branching timeline.
Its my understanding that the reason Link Between Worlds was excluded was because it came out two years after Hyrule Historia was published.
You aren't wrong, but they've also had a lot of time to include it in the timeline in some way since it's release. Not doing so makes it seem all the more likely that they just made a timeline up to the most recent Zelda game at the release of the Historia with little or no plans to keep updating it afterwards. Something ought to be done before the new Zelda comes out or I really am going to call total crap on this timeline. It's just a really odd one that doesn't make a lot of sense if it doesn't keep updating.
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - Arjahn - 12-29-2015
(12-29-2015, 04:55 AM)RepentantSky Wrote:(12-29-2015, 04:36 AM)Arjahn Wrote:You are wrong, but they've also had a lot of time to include it in the timeline in some way since it's release. Not doing so makes it seem all the more likely that they just made a timeline up to the most recent Zelda game at the release of the Historia with little or no plans to keep updating it afterwards. Something ought to be done before the new Zelda comes out or I really am going to call total crap on this timeline. It's just a really odd one that doesn't make a lot of sense if it doesn't keep updating.(12-28-2015, 02:48 PM)RepentantSky Wrote: Yeah no, the Zelda timeline makes no damn sense and still excludes several games. For example, where's a link between worlds? I assume that it's not the same Link from "A Link to the Past" but then how do they connect? Honestly, retrolinx's idea about these stories just being retelling's just makes a lot more sense than a branching timeline.
Its my understanding that the reason Link Between Worlds was excluded was because it came out two years after Hyrule Historia was published.
How am I wrong? Hyrule Historia was originally released in Japan on December 21st, 2011 in Japan, whereas Link Between Worlds was released at its earliest in November of 2013. The original timeline released with the Japanese version is identical to the English release, and it was being translated by a third party (Dark Horse Comics) while Link Between Worlds was being developed, since the English version was released very shortly after LBW was and thus they wouldn't have had time nor an official space to include it on the timeline.
It's not really Nintendo's responsibility to include the exact time frame of every single game they release either, that's part of the fun of Zelda sometimes, talking about theories and stuff with friends. They threw this one into Historia to settle people who take these things too seriously down as a nice gesture, and evidently it blew up in their face with incessant fans demanding they update it every time they release a game.
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - RepentantSky - 12-29-2015
Check the edit and stop being mad. If you couldn't figure out that was a typo, you are being too sensitive, and if it wasn't a typo you still are. Relax a bit.
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - BumblebeeCody - 12-29-2015
Eh. Skyward Sword completely pooped all over the Zelda timeline to the point I couldn't care. Also, the idea that Ocarina of Time is actually where the timeline splits into 3 is even more. You could make a timeline for every time you die in Zelda then.
I agree with it, but meh. I'm not bothered anymore.
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - Melcadrien - 12-29-2015
One thing I have to point is that "Link Defeated" timeline. Because we know Link wins each final battle that means that timeline is nonexistent. Besides, none of the games has a "Ganon Wins" ending.
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - CosmykTheDolfyn - 12-30-2015
ANY timeline that doesn't include the CD-I games is wrong.
Fight me, Nintendo.
(Also I voted for every option. KTHNXBAI.)
RE: Zelda official timeline. Agree or disagree? - retrolinkx - 12-30-2015
(12-29-2015, 07:39 PM)Melcadrien Wrote: One thing I have to point is that "Link Defeated" timeline. Because we know Link wins each final battle that means that timeline is nonexistent. Besides, none of the games has a "Ganon Wins" ending.
I like to consider that ending is exclusive to the people that don't finish OOT for one reason or another, and I imagine there are a lot of them.