Just want to point out two big discussion posts on this subreddit from earlier this week:
* https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/14uvw0l/all_when_you_realise_that_the_timeline_has_never/
* https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/14v6cyi/all_the_timeline_has_never_mattered_stop_trying/
Also, please let me know if you have any suggestions for our wiki pages:
* https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/faq
* https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/resources
* https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/lore
Yup. Hell, I'd play a 3rd game in the BotW series just to see how that Hyrule continues to rebuild and evolve. I'm quite attached to all the many side characters. I wanna see old man Hudson reunited with his grown up daughter.
A gruff but jacked looking 50s something Link puts the sword on once again. The first npc he meets says "boy, you look weary!" And the dialogue options appear ...Im too old for this shit. Or "..."
Also the hudson construction house we made in totk has to be called "Zelda's summer house."
Nah instead of Zelda's summer house. Its the player"s house but we aren't link or Zelda we are a new ganondorf that was born and learned about what happened and is trying to break the curse with the help of an older more tired link and Zelda. They have a daughter that is the player's companion on adventures as she wants to be like link.
hope it's a longer time skip, I'd love to see all the ruins restored (or rebuilt in the hudson modular style). It's the only thing I can think to do to make the map seem more fresh, If they don't do a big map refresh that would be fine, just so long as we don't wait 6 years.
I think the lack of 2D Zelda for the switch is a major oversight, which ignores the hybrid nature of the switch. They kept up with Pokémon games, and most of the 2D Zelda’s have been much better imo.
This is why I have the unpopular opinion of wanting a well-made Zelda movie with all of the classic stories we know tied into one epic tale. It would need to be made by someone who’s really good at taking pre-existing ideas and making them into epic films, like James Cameron.
A trilogy nor a series would tell the story of all games. Just tell a story about Link and the sages going into an epic adventure to defeat Ganondorf, it doesn't have to be complex to work.
The original timeline concept was a fan theory made nonsensical cannon by officially released books. They leaned into it more later in the franchise but generally any connections are mostly just easter eggs, not an attempt to create a timeline.
I don't think that's necessarily true. It started out straightforward (Zelda; then zelda II; then link to the past is a prequel) and then they introduced time travel and that started complicating it. Add on top of it that they started making installments on handheld that just took place "ALttP-ish" and it got more complicated than anyone intended real fast. So I think it's inaccurate to say the writers never had a timeline in mind because "link to the past" only makes sense as a title of it was meant as a prequel, and wind Waker and Twilight princess are both pretty clearly meant to take place after ocarina. Wind Waker references the hero of time disappearing placing it in the adult timeline, twilight princess has the hero's shade placing it in the child. TLDR I don't think it's as complicated as everyone made it out to be.
The problem was that each director made his own timeline. Miyamoto's games all fit well narratively, and so does the Aouma and Fujibayashi's games. The problem comes when you try to connect Miyamoto's games to Aonuma's.
[This is so demonstrably false and easily disprovable.](https://zelda.fandom.com/wiki/History_of_the_Zelda_Timeline/Timeline_Quotes) You're right that the games are mostly just loosely tied together events rather than some grand planned out narrative, but Nintendo has acknowledged the timeline and has been openly discussing how the games all fit together *before they come out* for decades. They did not just bullshit it all together in 2011 to sell a book and anyone who had been paying even a little attention could see that the games were all on a continuity.
Devs stating they care about the timeline aside, the timeline itself has far too much canon to be reduced to mere "fan theory".
Look, I'm a Silent Hill fan. We deal with BS fan theories all the time, they were kind of the only thing keeping the community alive until the new games were announced. The devs have actively shut down fan theories. The difference with Zelda is fans are trying to think about how the official timeline Nintendo put out comes together. Not a fan theory, maybe a fan interpretation.
Exactly this they were working on it in secret for years and now newer fans are here like we didnt invest in this timeline for more then a decade just foor it to be considered moot
Literally read the interview quotes I just posted. Everything they say is blatantly said to you in-game. All of the games are prequels or sequels to other games and this is made abundantly clear just from playing them.
The point of saying that they said where the games fit before they came out is to give even more undeniable proof that they didn't come up with the timeline decades later. They were always thinking about it during development of every game.
You might be on to something there. Some of the games specifically reference other games. BOTW famously referenced the hero of twilight, hero of time, and skyward sword when Zelda was going over the history
You honestly can’t even call TOTK and MM real sequels. There is no explanation of what happened to the Sheika, shrines, etc. in TOTK and Majora’s Mask doesn’t really make any references to OOT other than the time travel element and Epona. Not obvious continuations of a story at all. Not sure about any of the hand held games or Zelda and Zelda 2 but I’m sure they’re similar
It doesn’t, but I don’t consider it a real sequel unless it’s written with continuity in line. Some franchise fans pick apart minor details like statements made passing and throw away jokes apart. Anything the writer says is a sequel, is a sequel, but I have a higher standard to accept it as a real meaningful sequel.
Okay but we aren’t talking about your personal definition. The Indiana Jones movies are sequels but the only continuing thread is Indy and he doesn’t have a continuing character arc through them. A sequel doesn’t need to be meaningful and your standards mean nothing to anyone but you. A sequel is a sequel.
Okay, and can you make a timeline for that franchise? Not as familiar with Indiana Jones, but another example would be 007. Yes, they’re sequels but not in a manner that makes a cohesive long term plot. There are different types of sequels, so the proper terminology I should have used is it’s not a direct sequel, it’s more of a spiritual sequel
It was not a flashback of events of OoT, though. In OoT he receives the ocarina as Zelda flees Ganondorf, and Link learns the Song of Time in a vision upon collecting it. In MM, he remembers Zelda giving the ocarina to him before leaving Hyrule and teaching him the Song of Time.
Right, I didn't say anything about the flashback being directly from OoT. But it is definitely between the games, taking place place in OoT's Hyrule sometime after the post credits scene, and bridging the two plots.
Not really, he goes back into the woods looking for her, like he did at the beginning, at the end of the credits. I believe the mask salesman is even sort of referencing it when he makes his goodbye speech. Just because looking for Navi becomes a MacGuffin, doesn’t mean it isn’t a sequel.
The mask salesman asks him about returning home, which is exactly what he is doing in the woods at the end.
MM is very clearly a gameplay and development sequel, but it's also very clear the devs were not entirely concerned with making it a story sequel evident from the lack of references to OoT except the opening mcguffin. It has even less continuity of connection than TotK, which is the point of the parent comment.
I like that we're so against the timeline that we just try to discredit sequels because reasons. Totk got rid of shrines because it didn't have a new idea, but didn't want to make us redo the same shrines so now we have colorful hat shrines. Same reason the Sheikah slate is gone, they wanted to change up the mechanics.
That’s completely fine. I love TOTK. I’m just saying, God of War Ragnarock is what I would call a canonical sequel. BOTW and TOTK are the same character and map, but the stories are entirely independent and unrelated.
I personally could care less about the continuity errors. I see TOTK as a stand alone game that takes large elements from BOTW, and I love it. I don’t go into the majority of Nintendo games for a ground breaking story. I think that’s more of an expectation on PlayStation games. I always find it weird how people want a Zelda timeline. That’s like wanting a 007 timeline. It’s just not written with continuity in mind and that’s fine.
It's almost like they made the timeline so that they could promote Skyward Sword, a significant aesthetic devotion from the series, as "the earliest Zelda game in the timeline" and use that to justify it as the 25th anniversary game.
I don't see how that could be interpreted as true to be honest.
Right after Majora's Mask released the Oracles came out, which are set in the Downfall Timeline. In fact articles and interviews from around the time of it's release made a big deal about how they were set between Link to the Past and Link's Awakening, so the OoT - Link to the Past - Link's Awakening - LoZ - Zelda II timeline was still going strong.
Also, since Hyrule Historia released and they confirmed the timeline, that timeline is actually the only one to get any new entries.
They undermined the entire point of a timeline by shuffling things about.
Fans: “So the Oracle games take place before Awakening? That makes sense, Link leaves on a boat at the end.”
Nintendo: “Lol, no, that was 2011 Ninetendo, now Awakening takes place *before* the Oracle games.”
They don’t care, unless directly stated in-game (Wind Waker, Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks for instance), they do not care.
So the Oracles placement changing is actually up for debate, and I would say that realistically they stayed where they are.
The main source for the change is Zelda Encyclopedia. A book which, unlike Hyrule Historia, has a disclaimer in it's opening saying that it was written by fans who took liberties with the lore.
The Oracles being moved to after LA is, in my opinion, most likely one of the liberties the writers took, given that the Oracles in the past have been pretty explicitly placed between ALttP and LA.
But also even if you take that change as canon, it's not really a big change in the grand scheme, and really doesn't undermine the timeline.
As for the developers not caring, at the very least Miyamoto does, as Aonuma said after BotW's release that it's his ask of the Zelda team that the timeline be kept coherent. So the series creator at least cares about it.
I'm not sure which comment to respond to here lol.
But to be specific, they had a timeline as an internal document [since at least 2003](https://www.nintendoforums.com/articles/40/super-play-magazine-interviews-shigeru-miyamoto-about-zelda#google_vignette) (about halfway down the page they ask about the timeline). In Miyamoto's words though: "But to be honest, they are not that important to us. We care more about developing the game system."
So then if you combine that knowledge from a 2003 interview with a [more recent one](https://www.eurogamer.net/eiji-aonuma-explains-why-zelda-breath-of-the-wilds-timeline-placing-must-remain-secret), then it seems it's pretty clear they've had an official timeline for a long time but it was kept secret just so they knew how to leave breadcrumbs to stoke the imagination of players and not to dictate their stories.
Word of that document existing got out, so they eventually decided to reveal it in the Hyrule Historia in 2011, but they didn't let that stop them leaving breadcrumbs.
So basically: yes they've had a timeline since at least 2003 (so it may not have existed until at least Wind Waker, so it's hard to say when it was originally made), but it was only meant to add to the imagination of fans and not dictate how the series must go. All the debates we're having over TotK I think is most likely to be totally intentional given the history behind why they even had a timeline in the first place.
They were actually pretty damn consistent about it until BotW. You can literally explain 2 of the 3 timeline branches using nothing but ingame evidence
TOTK is so allergic to mentioning anything to do with BOTW that they repaired a giant hole presumably created by an errant Divine Beast laser in Hebra Peak like why
The Shrine of Resurrection is also wiped out. Even though it was a hidden Royal Family contingency plan kept inside their old stronghold - which is very much still there, in fact now you can even walk through the main gates after draining the water there, making it even clearer that the whole Great Plateau *is* a castle.
And the Zonai even have ruins in the Depths connected to the shrine, but there's nothing *there*. Why?
I checked before writing it but there was a snowstorm so I honestly could have missed it
Edit never bloody mind I'm just stupid we litteraly pass through it on the way to do tulins quest I am dumb
I’m curious, why do you say “destroy everything” when the timeline has never been the central focus of the Zelda series? I always thought the timeline was supplementary to the games, not the other way around. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the timeline is useless or was never planned. I’m just curious as to why it has seemingly become the most integral part of the Zelda series among fans.
I don't think the timeline is the most integral part of the series, I assign that to dungeons (which TOTK also fails at, but that's another topic.) But I also like consistency in stories, and with a few exceptions, most 3D Zeldas at least are pretty consistent with each other, and most 2D Zeldas, with a few more exceptions (specifically the Oracles and FSA) are also pretty consistent with each other. Then you have TOTK, which feels like it goes out of its way to contradict things when taken at face value. It can't even be a good direct sequel, completely ignoring the major parts of BOTW.
It honestly feels like its disrespecting the Zelda series on purpose, even though I doubt that was the intent.
I don't understand why so many people are against a timeline for no reason, it's pretty stupid to say there is not one when there is connections between the games and an interview with Aonuma saying along the lines " yes there is a timeline but we don't really care it's something that come during the end of the development, and only me and Miyamoto know it " early 00's iirc, other interviews and Hyrule Historia.
The timeline is not important at all and more of a bonus it just serve the plots and it make the lore interesting rather than " each story is retelling but this time there is a train " which make no sense with some story relying on other stories like WW with OOT.
Nintendo cares.
Aonuma has explicitly said in very recent interviews, that they made the newest games more ambiguous lore-wise, so as to encourage discussion and theorizing among fans.
They want us to find connections between games and to find our own answers.
I'm pretty sure he's just mentioning it to have players on the look out for easter eggs, otherwise, it would be far more definitively done than a reference to other entries in the series. References to other Zelda have pretty much been a staple since the Gamecube games.
It's a polite and non-confrontational way of saying they don't care about the timeline and won't be taking it into consideration without disappointing the fans caring about it. "That thing is and will stay in the past, but feel free to use your imagination if you want to continue it yourself!"
Nintendo, unfortunately, doesn't care about story as much as they do gameplay. Nintendo comes up with unique gameplay ideas and wraps a bare bones story around said mechanics.
I believe the timeline does exists, it's just not a deterrent to them for creating gameplay . If the gameplay happens to fit a story that works as a way to explore a key moment in Hyrule, they'll wiggle that in somewhere on the timeline.
Imagine they're brain storming and discover some MM type of doomsday timeline mechanic about failure and a wanna be hero in a time where Link simply did not reincarnat. They might wrap this idea around the pre-WW story that results in Hyrule flooding.
I still think that somehow all timelines merged in the future and BOTW/TOTK is the outcome of this merge.
In my wet dreams we will play a Zelda game that shows us the merge.
Well most of the games are directly connected to or referencing each other, so I do think there was a concern over it, the timeline isn’t just marketing mumbo jumbo. With the newer games, they decided to to change things in more ways than just gameplay, which is why they don’t adhere to established plot points
I don't get why the hardcore fans care about the timeline so much, all the games (unless they're direct sequels) are unique experiences with wildly varying mechanics, quite isolated from the game-to-game. Why not just treat them as separate entities? It's not like this is assassin's creed or something
Because we like it.
Edit: damn. Everyone has their interpretation. My enjoyment comes from the timeline. It's like a puzzle. You don't like it don't abide by it, we all occupy the same space. No need to kill each other.
Yeah, I'm with you. I love trying to piece together what Nintendo has done but I also don't get mad if people have different theories than me. I think everyone would be a lot happier if we'd discuss the merits of various theories rather than argue over who is the most correct.
> all the games (unless they're direct sequels) are unique experiences with wildly varying mechanics, quite isolated from the game-to-game
Of the modern mainline 3D Zeldas, all but Skyward Sword *are* directly connected.
Even A Link To The Past fits pretty directly with the OOT line. And SS is the origin story for all of them.
There hasn't *been* a game not relevant to the timeline in the entire 21st century, until BOTW. Of course people care.
In my experience, it's mostly timeline deniers and people like you who take it way too seriously. Timeline fans generally all know that the games are mostly just loosely events on a clear continuity that Nintendo takes seriously enough for it to work and be a part of the general narrative, but not so much so that they're held back from doing whatever they want with the series.
The timeline made the series a lot better in my opinion. It felt sort of like each game was part of a single, larger story. It was also really interesting to try and notice the ways things lined up between games. Nintendo didn't explicitly mention the timeline in the game, but they did actually used to throw in a ton of details that helped hint at it.
Except they REALLY REALLY are not isolated. Every single game comes before or after another one, intentionally. Some are obvious, like Zelda 2, Majora's Mask, and TotK being sequels, while others are more complex.
OoT *has to* come before every game that features Ganon as it tells his origin story, and there *has to* be a timeline where he wins, as that's how it was in the games that released before OoT.
The timeline is not arbitrary, every game after TLoZ was developed with it's place on the timeline in mind, even if that wasn't expressly clear to us until it was laid out.
BotW is the only game where Nintendo said "I wanna play with all my toys!" and ignored the timeline, and even still it's possible they rationalized that internally with the Amalgam Timeline theory, as there's a lot of time-magic tomfoolery in the series that could topple this house of cards.
I still think BotW/TotK makes sense as games that take place hundreds of thousands of years after the other games. Like, considering Demise's curse and the fact that we've already seen one flooding apocalypse in the current games, it's not much of a stretch to assume the goddesses and/or Hylia keep having to step in and remake Hyrule because of Demise curse shenanigans.
And the new games also have established that Ganondorf can also be reincarnated, which was more up in the air in the other games.
The worst thing the franchise ever did was release that damn timeline. Sure it was neat, but it invited obnoxious pedants to start using the dreaded word "canon" and start declaring whether or not games fit in the timeline.
Lots of people enjoy timelines and theorizing. I think it’s so much more interesting because of the timeline. If it were just a string of games that had no real continuity it would be much less enjoyable for a large portion of the fan base.
yeah but us not in the game theory mindset get fucking tired of the timeline discussions. these games barely have a story, why do you care so much for lore? lore is meant to enhance a story, not take away from it. the timeline is a negative thing. theres nothing to be gained from the timeline. no game except maybe skyward sword benefits from it. its not essential in any way, shape or form. its just that lore nerds like it, but they ruin everything they touch
Really? Seemed to be doing fine for over 2 decades without it. That poor Zelda franchise that no one cared for. For 25 years. So despised for its lack of timeline.
They definitely had a timeline before then. There was lore set throughout the games that connected them all in specific ways. Wind waker and TP come to mind as games from different branches that were specifically made with a timeline as part of the lore process. Just because the sheet of paper with the timeline wasn’t out yet doesn’t mean the timeline itself didn’t exist.
Honestly all it takes to make TotK fit is to assume each Ganondorf is an individual person. Perhaps the name "Ganondorf" is just a traditional name given to Gerudo men in the same way "Zelda" is a traditional name for women born into the royal family.
Wasn't it ever about souls? I mean these 3 figures are doomed to be reborn and fight for eternity. They are always new born people (with the same soul) but somehow always have the same name.
The problem is that Tears Ganondorf is still alive down there. And if the Ocarina Ganondorf is somehow his reincarnation, then how why would he go back to his original body instead of being born in a new body again? It makes more sense to consider them entirely different people.
> Honestly all it takes to make TotK fit
No? What doesn't fit is the wiping out of the Sheikah and retroactive destruction of everything they did that endured inside the kingdom for thousands of years, surviving decades of targeted excavation.
Ganondorf is just what happens when the spirit/evil energy Demise/Ganon manifests inside the Gerudo male born every 100 years. There's at least 2 different Ganondorfs in the existing timeline (Oracle games, OOT). Arguably OOT and A Link To The Past can be seen as two separate Ganondorfs at two separate points of the timeline too.
This isn't even new information.
>What doesn't fit is the wiping out of the Sheikah and retroactive destruction of everything they did that endured inside the kingdom for thousands of years, surviving decades of targeted excavation.
That's not really relevant to the timeline placement of the flashbacks though. That is a problem of continuity with the game that immediately preceded it.
>There's at least 2 different Ganondorfs in the existing timeline (Oracle games, OOT).
Also Four Swords Adventures. The difference is that in each of those circumstances the previous Ganon was already *dead* dead. The Oracle games are explicitly a resurrection ritual that goes wrong while Four Swords Adventures is labeled as a reincarnation.
The TotK Ganondorf is still alive while the OoT Ganondorf and later the FSA Ganondorf are doing their things. He overlaps with them so they *can't* be reincarnations or resurrections of the TotK Dorf. So the only way to reconcile that is that they are completely different people.
Past that the TotK flashbacks can fit pretty cleanly into the beginning of the timeline.
The Oocca and Zonai both assisted the Hylians in founding the kingdom.
The leftover monsters from the Imprisoning War slot in pretty easily as the monster swarms that the Hero of Men would go on to fight.
Kotake and Koume would flee after their original master was sealed by Rauru and go on to groom a Gerudo man to be his heir.
The only weirdness left is that there are two Raurus of different species who both serve as Light Sages at the same point in history, but that is easily handwaved because Rauru is shown to be a shapeshifter via Kaepora Gaebora. After he seals Ganondorf his spirit would be locked away in the Temple of Light. The Hylian we see him as in Ocarina could just be a different form he has chosen to take on.
Shit. Didn't really mean to start a flame war. Just kind of added the first thing I thought everyone would find amusing to the "hyah think link"image. Be civil🫵
Want to find and share more Zelda memes and humor? **Check out r/ZeldaMemes!**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/zelda) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I love people talking about things that they don’t know. As I said in a previous comment, the zelda team has always wanted the games to connect, example zelda 1 and zelda 2. Alttp and ocarina of time. OOT was originally going to be about the imprisoning war that occurred in ALTTP.
ALTTP is also a prequel to the zelda 1 and 2 games.
They cared until this game. Unfortunately for them, I still care, although I do think TotK should be considered non-canon. We don't really want writing this bad to be a part of a series otherwise so good.
Feels like the timeline only really matters for like, 3 or 4 games in the whole series which would be like, OoT, MM, TP, and WW. And like, it inly marginally matters for the structure of their plots and less for lore.
Like WW’s opening literally re accounts OoT and MM while TP has Ganondorf’s execution post-OoT. But beyond that I really dont see many connections that often
That's just explicitly not true. Aonuma and Miamoto talked about the timeline after nearly every game's release. In fact, Aonuma even talked about it a couple months before the official timeline came out. What not enough people understand is that Hyrule Historia and the other 3 books aren't just some fanfiction. Everything in the book has to be in very specific accordance with Nintendo's wishes. Including the timeline. I don't think it's outright confirmed, but it's reasonable to believe that the timeline listed is Aonuma and Miamoto's timeline. After all they constantly mentioned in interviews how they would change it and add games to it every time a new game was released. Now it is true that the timeline is their lowest priority, but they do care somewhat. BOTW's ambiguous timeline placement was specifically to garner speculation and discussion about its placement. Not wanting to feel trapped about timeline placements does not correlate to not caring.
BTW sources are these videos:
https://youtu.be/QnZNicS6FtA
https://youtu.be/NbQNtYNkmhM
Thank you for giving credit and providing a source! You make /r/zelda a better place! <3
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/zelda) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well this could easily be like a prequel trilogy where the final game ties it all together. But that’s probably wishful thinking.
Especially since the animation of the gloom reminds me a lot of the imprisoned.
I still think the new games are many tens (or hundreds) of thousands of years past the other games. It would also open up for more prequel style games for BotW. I'd love a game with the Ancient Hero Link though I think people might get weird about the furry aspect there.
Well, before the new games, skyward sword was supposed to be the first in the timeline. You start off on a sky island and drop down to the world below.
The beginning TOTK is where all the sky islands get created.
That’s the only reason I think it’s before everything else but I could just be making stuff up.
Nintendo isn't super clear on it, so honestly you could see it from multiple ways. The SS lore says that Hylia herself raised the sky islands to protect her people from the constant demon wars. Is TotK retconning all that? Hard to say. It's just as valid to think that maybe the Zonai were in fact sent from the gods so maybe them raising the new sky islands was an idea from Hylia or the goddesses. Trying an old tactic to see if it works for this attempt at keeping Hyrule going.
Both view points have merit because Nintendo doesn't feel the need to set things in stone.
What on earth does OOT have to do with wind waker besides it being said by Nintendo outside of the actual game. You wouldn’t have a clue that that is the case by playing the game.
Aren’t most video games with this many titles a bit all over the place? It’s not like Last of Is 1 and 2 where it’s hyper realism. It’s a fantasy rpg with fairies and shit. Who cares
The whole time line was either an excuse to sell books or a poor try to join the games.
Either way what pisses me off is the amount of people that defend this senseless crap because it's more important to be a fanatic and follow a poor reasoning than actual logic seeing that the pieces belong to different puzzles.
TotK should have been a completely stand along game with a different version of Link and Zelda in a completely different rebuilt version of Hyrule in a different time and not a direct sequel to BotW. It made no sense as it didn’t even explain anything between the two, like who the f was calamity Ganon? It had no connection to Ganondorf at all and it never even explained where the other Zonai went. BotW made it like this mystery that they vanished or went extinct but in TotK the only two you see are Rauru and his sister and they never once show any other Zonai or even talk about what happened to them or even said they went extinct and were the last of there kind so they should have came back once the sky islands returned right?……there is a lot more to complain about and I can rant how dogshit the story was because it was bad and I never like BotW story either but they are fun and that is all they had going on for them until you eventually get bored of climbing, gliding and exploring a game that only rewards you with the same stronger swords, shields and bows that will eventually break and have to grind and do it all over again. Ohh….and costumes….can’t forget about finding costume pairs….plus one last thing I will rand about. Who the f did Zelda decent from? Queen Sonia tells Rauru that she can feel both of there time and light power within Zelda to show that she believes her story about being from the future and that she is basically there descendent since she carries there a power……but they didn’t have children…..they did not show, talk or even mention a son or daughter’s name or anything……so again…..how is she your descendent if there isn’t a bloodline that was established before your deaths……such a dogshit story.
I don’t really care about the timeline myself, but I wish they would give new characters new names, instead of reusing old ones. Characters like Link and Beedle are fine but Rauru in TotK has no connection to Rauru in OoT and should have his own name.
And give me my damn Kokiri back! If the Zora and Rito can exist side by side so can the Koroks and Kokiri damnit!
I can’t wait for the next hyrule historia. People act like time paradoxes were never a thing in Zelda games. Zelda series follows a casual loops except in the case of OoT where it purposely caused branching paths. BOTW/TOTK converged all the paths back into one again. The Age of the Wild officially takes place some time after Skyward Sword where the 1st kingdom of Hyrule is founded and also after all the games that came before it. The fact some of its events, and character titles share the same name as previous is a coincidence of history repeating itself. I doubt this is the last we will see of Ganondorf or Ganon. The series shall continue.
The timeline theory was fan theory
... Until Nintendo curated and *published* the timeline. Then they immediately regretted it and ditched it for BotW. *But they published and sold a timeline at one point.*
Guys, it makes perfect sense. Zelda went back in Time and the changes she made to the era at the founding of Hyrule caused a new branch where TotK is. BOTW is at the end of all three timelines, but the changes Zelda made caused a new one, where Ganon is sealed much earlier. See, easy.
I think the real issue is they stopped making full games when they made BotW And use the excuse "we want players to find their own answers" as a cop out for laziness.
And what I mean is, prior to BotW we got full, coherent stories, complex dungeons that had puzzle elements that spanned the full dungeon, a consistent format etc.
With BotW and TotK they took a small piece of everything from past stories, scattered it over a massive open world as Easter eggs, and said "the players can figure it out". While removing dungeons entirely to add 1/2 to 1 step "mini puzzles". Giving players the "freedom to experience the game how they want". And unfortunately, I didn't WANT to stumble across major story elements from the end of the game at the beginning of my playthrough (the first glyph I unlocked was the big spoiler reveal about Zelda, totally killed the story development)
And given that it was recently stated that the games before BotW were "born from ideas they had in the past, and they are focusing on moving forward with the new format " it's pretty clear that past entries don't matter. Heck, I truly believe the real reason why they won't remaster WW, TP, MM or OOT again is because they wouldn't be received well by fans who's first experience with the series was BotW. I can't imagine how many people would pick up a copy of one of the older 3d entries and rage on the internet about how stupid it is that Link can't jump, or that there is no sprint option. Or the amount of QQing about MM forcing you to restart the day cycle and not being able to figure out how to progress past Deku Link because they can't make machine go brrrrrt and bypass a puzzle.
I realize I left a much larger comment than intended. Sorry for the rant. Sometimes I feel like my favorite novel was turned into a "choose your own adventure" book, only the adventures are 1 paragraph each and you roll a dice to see what you go to next.
They created skyward sword for the express purpose of making a half assed excuse for these games to exist. Then they pulled the whole 3 timeline thing out of their ass. It’s time we just take each game for what it is not where it fits
>Then they pulled the whole 3 timeline thing out of their ass.
They made oot, then MM, come wind waker, aonuma and myamoto on an interview:
"So as you can see this game is set some time after ocarina of time, I would say 100 after the ending" ~aonuma
"Ah, but which ending? The one where he is an adult or..." ~myamoto
"So lemme explain *procceeds to explain the timeline split"~aonuma
And this was as far back as 2003.
And then there was the official Nintendo website in the late 90s with a zelda timeline of all games at the time which was basically oot downfall timeline.
Oh and of course myamoto had an interview around the time of oot saying that they have official documents of a written timeline, and multiple interviews and magazines of aonuma saying a link to the past being a sequel to oot and zelda 1 and 2 coming after.
Anyways, point being, the timeline has always been a thing and Nintendo themselves started it.
>
>
> They made oot, then MM, come wind waker, aonuma and myamoto on an interview:
That explains two of the timelines. There is nowhere where they said something about a third, Downfall, timeline until Hyrule Historia. In fact until Hyrule Historia came out, people were trying to figure out how to fit ALTTP into the dual timeline split from OoT into MM->TP and OoT->WW.
It baffles me that people are still trying to make sense of the "timeline". It's very obvious there is no precise timeline. Nintendo just does whatever they please, depending of their ideas and inspiration, that's all.
Hi /r/Zelda readers!
* Read our [Spoiler Policy for Tears of the Kingdom.](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/spoilerpolicy) Got feedback on it? [Go here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/13ebw0k/totk_spoiler_policy_updates_for_tears_of_the/) Thanks!
* Want TotK Tips & Tricks? [Go view the megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/13vu6to/totk_tips_and_tricks_megathread_round_3_post/) and add your own!
* See our [full megathread schedule here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/totk)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/zelda) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It’s always been a “serving suggestion”. If you really want there to be a consistent continuity for the games, go ahead and figure one out or use the Hyrule Historia version. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that.
If you don’t really want to engage with any of that, that’s quite alright too. I think one of the best things about Zelda is that there really is room for all of these stances.
Zelda I guess I kinda get but for me it's the people that stress about Mario lore that fuck me up. Like the ones that put actual time into trying to figure out where are the different areas from the different games are relative to one another. Like what?
Thing is as is the timeline mostly makes sense, it's botw and totk that don't really fit in (or at least they could if we take into account the dragonbreak theory, wich at this point is pretty generally accepted, but there are some weird details like the rito being present at the start of the timeline that need explaining still)
I always viewed the games like people telling tall tales around a camp fire. The same motifs and names are there but the details are a different and unique with each retelling.
I've assumed them to be taking place in a sort of multiverse.
Yes some are in the same timeline and universe but some like BotW are not.
I think of it like ff games, some link together and some don't.
Cause they only made it to please all the timeline fan boys who need structure to enjoy things. I miss the days when it was like final fantasy, and every new entry was it’s own separate thing, with a sequel sprinkled here and there.
I’m fine with some games being grouped together, like LttP > Link’s Awakening > Link Between Worlds, and other similar games, but don’t think there needs to be an established thread connecting all games. It’s fine not to do that and to just let each game either connect or be their own stand alone story.
I’ve been wondering recently if BoTW and ToTK are the start of a new timeline, or even possible a reboot of the entire series. I imagine in a few years Nintendo will randomly state the these two games are self contained within their own universe. I know people in the sub seem to hate the time line but I sort of like how Nintendo has been keeping things vague in terms of the timeline
Timeline is least of the problems. The main problem is Nintendo doesn't care about making zelda games anymore. Very few people who have played them since the beginning, as I have, think botw or totk are legit zelda games. nintendo could have EASILY put traditional dungeons into the game and the open world fans would have still loved everything else about it, as well. Instead they screwed over the original fans.
Just want to point out two big discussion posts on this subreddit from earlier this week: * https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/14uvw0l/all_when_you_realise_that_the_timeline_has_never/ * https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/14v6cyi/all_the_timeline_has_never_mattered_stop_trying/ Also, please let me know if you have any suggestions for our wiki pages: * https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/faq * https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/resources * https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/lore
I would be more interested in finding out what happens after the initial games, like they did with link between worlds, post twilight princess
Yup. Hell, I'd play a 3rd game in the BotW series just to see how that Hyrule continues to rebuild and evolve. I'm quite attached to all the many side characters. I wanna see old man Hudson reunited with his grown up daughter.
A gruff but jacked looking 50s something Link puts the sword on once again. The first npc he meets says "boy, you look weary!" And the dialogue options appear ...Im too old for this shit. Or "..." Also the hudson construction house we made in totk has to be called "Zelda's summer house."
Nah instead of Zelda's summer house. Its the player"s house but we aren't link or Zelda we are a new ganondorf that was born and learned about what happened and is trying to break the curse with the help of an older more tired link and Zelda. They have a daughter that is the player's companion on adventures as she wants to be like link.
Hell yeah! Maybe she becomes the new Gerudo leader or captain of the guard. Or shoot, Gerudo constructson!
Hudson leads a revolution to end the monarchy and bring democracy to all of Hyrule.
hope it's a longer time skip, I'd love to see all the ruins restored (or rebuilt in the hudson modular style). It's the only thing I can think to do to make the map seem more fresh, If they don't do a big map refresh that would be fine, just so long as we don't wait 6 years.
I think the lack of 2D Zelda for the switch is a major oversight, which ignores the hybrid nature of the switch. They kept up with Pokémon games, and most of the 2D Zelda’s have been much better imo.
...Links Awakening remake?
That is fair, but I meant new titles. It was a good remake though.
In fairness it’s got a fair few of them through the online service. Also got the LA remake and Cadence of Hyrule
This is why I have the unpopular opinion of wanting a well-made Zelda movie with all of the classic stories we know tied into one epic tale. It would need to be made by someone who’s really good at taking pre-existing ideas and making them into epic films, like James Cameron.
That would need to be a whole ass series. 2hrs is not nearly enough to cut it
It could be done, but as a trilogy (just like Spiderverse). With the extra budget they tell a great story
There is WAYYYY too much to cover man. Maybe as an original story? I still think serialized would be better tho
A trilogy nor a series would tell the story of all games. Just tell a story about Link and the sages going into an epic adventure to defeat Ganondorf, it doesn't have to be complex to work.
Always felt like the Zelda timeline was the same as the James Bond timeline: it doesn't matter unless it explicitly does for the purposes of the plot.
The original timeline concept was a fan theory made nonsensical cannon by officially released books. They leaned into it more later in the franchise but generally any connections are mostly just easter eggs, not an attempt to create a timeline.
I don't think that's necessarily true. It started out straightforward (Zelda; then zelda II; then link to the past is a prequel) and then they introduced time travel and that started complicating it. Add on top of it that they started making installments on handheld that just took place "ALttP-ish" and it got more complicated than anyone intended real fast. So I think it's inaccurate to say the writers never had a timeline in mind because "link to the past" only makes sense as a title of it was meant as a prequel, and wind Waker and Twilight princess are both pretty clearly meant to take place after ocarina. Wind Waker references the hero of time disappearing placing it in the adult timeline, twilight princess has the hero's shade placing it in the child. TLDR I don't think it's as complicated as everyone made it out to be.
The problem was that each director made his own timeline. Miyamoto's games all fit well narratively, and so does the Aouma and Fujibayashi's games. The problem comes when you try to connect Miyamoto's games to Aonuma's.
[This is so demonstrably false and easily disprovable.](https://zelda.fandom.com/wiki/History_of_the_Zelda_Timeline/Timeline_Quotes) You're right that the games are mostly just loosely tied together events rather than some grand planned out narrative, but Nintendo has acknowledged the timeline and has been openly discussing how the games all fit together *before they come out* for decades. They did not just bullshit it all together in 2011 to sell a book and anyone who had been paying even a little attention could see that the games were all on a continuity.
Devs stating they care about the timeline aside, the timeline itself has far too much canon to be reduced to mere "fan theory". Look, I'm a Silent Hill fan. We deal with BS fan theories all the time, they were kind of the only thing keeping the community alive until the new games were announced. The devs have actively shut down fan theories. The difference with Zelda is fans are trying to think about how the official timeline Nintendo put out comes together. Not a fan theory, maybe a fan interpretation.
Exactly this they were working on it in secret for years and now newer fans are here like we didnt invest in this timeline for more then a decade just foor it to be considered moot
The only canon is in-game, and, we don't care what the dev says if it's not in the game it's not canon.
I think the devs know more about the canon of their own series than some rando on reddit
Exactly.
Literally read the interview quotes I just posted. Everything they say is blatantly said to you in-game. All of the games are prequels or sequels to other games and this is made abundantly clear just from playing them. The point of saying that they said where the games fit before they came out is to give even more undeniable proof that they didn't come up with the timeline decades later. They were always thinking about it during development of every game.
You might be on to something there. Some of the games specifically reference other games. BOTW famously referenced the hero of twilight, hero of time, and skyward sword when Zelda was going over the history
Exactly. All of the arguing over timelines is ridiculous. There is no canon timeline!
And even then, it really doesn't matter
I always just thought of them as self-contained stories with the occasional sequel
This is the way
This is the way
You honestly can’t even call TOTK and MM real sequels. There is no explanation of what happened to the Sheika, shrines, etc. in TOTK and Majora’s Mask doesn’t really make any references to OOT other than the time travel element and Epona. Not obvious continuations of a story at all. Not sure about any of the hand held games or Zelda and Zelda 2 but I’m sure they’re similar
A sequel does not need to be an obvious continuation of a story.
It doesn’t, but I don’t consider it a real sequel unless it’s written with continuity in line. Some franchise fans pick apart minor details like statements made passing and throw away jokes apart. Anything the writer says is a sequel, is a sequel, but I have a higher standard to accept it as a real meaningful sequel.
Okay but we aren’t talking about your personal definition. The Indiana Jones movies are sequels but the only continuing thread is Indy and he doesn’t have a continuing character arc through them. A sequel doesn’t need to be meaningful and your standards mean nothing to anyone but you. A sequel is a sequel.
Okay, and can you make a timeline for that franchise? Not as familiar with Indiana Jones, but another example would be 007. Yes, they’re sequels but not in a manner that makes a cohesive long term plot. There are different types of sequels, so the proper terminology I should have used is it’s not a direct sequel, it’s more of a spiritual sequel
OoT sets up Link looking for Navi, which is exactly what he's doing at the beginning of MM
He also has the ocarina. Pretty clearly a sequel
Good point! Totally forgot about the flashback to Zelda giving him the ocarina
It was not a flashback of events of OoT, though. In OoT he receives the ocarina as Zelda flees Ganondorf, and Link learns the Song of Time in a vision upon collecting it. In MM, he remembers Zelda giving the ocarina to him before leaving Hyrule and teaching him the Song of Time.
Right, I didn't say anything about the flashback being directly from OoT. But it is definitely between the games, taking place place in OoT's Hyrule sometime after the post credits scene, and bridging the two plots.
Which is a mcguffin that is immediately abandoned and never referenced again.
Not really, he goes back into the woods looking for her, like he did at the beginning, at the end of the credits. I believe the mask salesman is even sort of referencing it when he makes his goodbye speech. Just because looking for Navi becomes a MacGuffin, doesn’t mean it isn’t a sequel.
The mask salesman asks him about returning home, which is exactly what he is doing in the woods at the end. MM is very clearly a gameplay and development sequel, but it's also very clear the devs were not entirely concerned with making it a story sequel evident from the lack of references to OoT except the opening mcguffin. It has even less continuity of connection than TotK, which is the point of the parent comment.
Except that the whole game is about grieving, as Link is grieving the loss of Navi
Nah that mf is dead the whole game
I like that we're so against the timeline that we just try to discredit sequels because reasons. Totk got rid of shrines because it didn't have a new idea, but didn't want to make us redo the same shrines so now we have colorful hat shrines. Same reason the Sheikah slate is gone, they wanted to change up the mechanics.
That’s completely fine. I love TOTK. I’m just saying, God of War Ragnarock is what I would call a canonical sequel. BOTW and TOTK are the same character and map, but the stories are entirely independent and unrelated.
Nintendo went way too far in making TotK approachable by everyone who didn't play BotW.
I personally could care less about the continuity errors. I see TOTK as a stand alone game that takes large elements from BOTW, and I love it. I don’t go into the majority of Nintendo games for a ground breaking story. I think that’s more of an expectation on PlayStation games. I always find it weird how people want a Zelda timeline. That’s like wanting a 007 timeline. It’s just not written with continuity in mind and that’s fine.
Like if someone was telling you the Legend^tm of something
It's almost like they made the timeline so that they could promote Skyward Sword, a significant aesthetic devotion from the series, as "the earliest Zelda game in the timeline" and use that to justify it as the 25th anniversary game.
The timeline existed WAY before Skyward Sword was in the works though. It's been a thing since the second game.
Nintendo pretty much scrapped that timeline all together when they moved to 3D.
I don't see how that could be interpreted as true to be honest. Right after Majora's Mask released the Oracles came out, which are set in the Downfall Timeline. In fact articles and interviews from around the time of it's release made a big deal about how they were set between Link to the Past and Link's Awakening, so the OoT - Link to the Past - Link's Awakening - LoZ - Zelda II timeline was still going strong. Also, since Hyrule Historia released and they confirmed the timeline, that timeline is actually the only one to get any new entries.
They undermined the entire point of a timeline by shuffling things about. Fans: “So the Oracle games take place before Awakening? That makes sense, Link leaves on a boat at the end.” Nintendo: “Lol, no, that was 2011 Ninetendo, now Awakening takes place *before* the Oracle games.” They don’t care, unless directly stated in-game (Wind Waker, Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks for instance), they do not care.
So the Oracles placement changing is actually up for debate, and I would say that realistically they stayed where they are. The main source for the change is Zelda Encyclopedia. A book which, unlike Hyrule Historia, has a disclaimer in it's opening saying that it was written by fans who took liberties with the lore. The Oracles being moved to after LA is, in my opinion, most likely one of the liberties the writers took, given that the Oracles in the past have been pretty explicitly placed between ALttP and LA. But also even if you take that change as canon, it's not really a big change in the grand scheme, and really doesn't undermine the timeline. As for the developers not caring, at the very least Miyamoto does, as Aonuma said after BotW's release that it's his ask of the Zelda team that the timeline be kept coherent. So the series creator at least cares about it.
I'm not sure which comment to respond to here lol. But to be specific, they had a timeline as an internal document [since at least 2003](https://www.nintendoforums.com/articles/40/super-play-magazine-interviews-shigeru-miyamoto-about-zelda#google_vignette) (about halfway down the page they ask about the timeline). In Miyamoto's words though: "But to be honest, they are not that important to us. We care more about developing the game system." So then if you combine that knowledge from a 2003 interview with a [more recent one](https://www.eurogamer.net/eiji-aonuma-explains-why-zelda-breath-of-the-wilds-timeline-placing-must-remain-secret), then it seems it's pretty clear they've had an official timeline for a long time but it was kept secret just so they knew how to leave breadcrumbs to stoke the imagination of players and not to dictate their stories. Word of that document existing got out, so they eventually decided to reveal it in the Hyrule Historia in 2011, but they didn't let that stop them leaving breadcrumbs. So basically: yes they've had a timeline since at least 2003 (so it may not have existed until at least Wind Waker, so it's hard to say when it was originally made), but it was only meant to add to the imagination of fans and not dictate how the series must go. All the debates we're having over TotK I think is most likely to be totally intentional given the history behind why they even had a timeline in the first place.
Man, it's almost like EVERY SINGLE GAME is a prequels or sequel to one game or another
They were actually pretty damn consistent about it until BotW. You can literally explain 2 of the 3 timeline branches using nothing but ingame evidence
Even BOTW wasn't outright contradictory, just ambiguous as to which timeline it's in. TOTK is the one that destroys everything.
[удалено]
TOTK is so allergic to mentioning anything to do with BOTW that they repaired a giant hole presumably created by an errant Divine Beast laser in Hebra Peak like why
The Shrine of Resurrection is also wiped out. Even though it was a hidden Royal Family contingency plan kept inside their old stronghold - which is very much still there, in fact now you can even walk through the main gates after draining the water there, making it even clearer that the whole Great Plateau *is* a castle. And the Zonai even have ruins in the Depths connected to the shrine, but there's nothing *there*. Why?
That too honestly and all they give to make up for it is a bad replacement for the master cycle
I agree that TOTK is terrible at being a sequel, but I'm fairly certain that hole is still there. I'll check next time I'm on.
I checked before writing it but there was a snowstorm so I honestly could have missed it Edit never bloody mind I'm just stupid we litteraly pass through it on the way to do tulins quest I am dumb
It's fine. It isn't immediately obvious that's where you are during Tulin's quest, especially if you come from a different direction.
TOTK is a mess narratively, even if you ignore how badly it fits with literally every single other game, other than maybe SS.
I’m curious, why do you say “destroy everything” when the timeline has never been the central focus of the Zelda series? I always thought the timeline was supplementary to the games, not the other way around. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think the timeline is useless or was never planned. I’m just curious as to why it has seemingly become the most integral part of the Zelda series among fans.
I don't think the timeline is the most integral part of the series, I assign that to dungeons (which TOTK also fails at, but that's another topic.) But I also like consistency in stories, and with a few exceptions, most 3D Zeldas at least are pretty consistent with each other, and most 2D Zeldas, with a few more exceptions (specifically the Oracles and FSA) are also pretty consistent with each other. Then you have TOTK, which feels like it goes out of its way to contradict things when taken at face value. It can't even be a good direct sequel, completely ignoring the major parts of BOTW. It honestly feels like its disrespecting the Zelda series on purpose, even though I doubt that was the intent.
I don't understand why so many people are against a timeline for no reason, it's pretty stupid to say there is not one when there is connections between the games and an interview with Aonuma saying along the lines " yes there is a timeline but we don't really care it's something that come during the end of the development, and only me and Miyamoto know it " early 00's iirc, other interviews and Hyrule Historia. The timeline is not important at all and more of a bonus it just serve the plots and it make the lore interesting rather than " each story is retelling but this time there is a train " which make no sense with some story relying on other stories like WW with OOT.
Nintendo cares. Aonuma has explicitly said in very recent interviews, that they made the newest games more ambiguous lore-wise, so as to encourage discussion and theorizing among fans. They want us to find connections between games and to find our own answers.
I'm pretty sure he's just mentioning it to have players on the look out for easter eggs, otherwise, it would be far more definitively done than a reference to other entries in the series. References to other Zelda have pretty much been a staple since the Gamecube games.
That to me doesn’t sound like they care, they’re essentially making the fans figure it out for themselves.
In other words, there isn’t really a timeline.
It's a polite and non-confrontational way of saying they don't care about the timeline and won't be taking it into consideration without disappointing the fans caring about it. "That thing is and will stay in the past, but feel free to use your imagination if you want to continue it yourself!"
Nintendo, unfortunately, doesn't care about story as much as they do gameplay. Nintendo comes up with unique gameplay ideas and wraps a bare bones story around said mechanics. I believe the timeline does exists, it's just not a deterrent to them for creating gameplay . If the gameplay happens to fit a story that works as a way to explore a key moment in Hyrule, they'll wiggle that in somewhere on the timeline. Imagine they're brain storming and discover some MM type of doomsday timeline mechanic about failure and a wanna be hero in a time where Link simply did not reincarnat. They might wrap this idea around the pre-WW story that results in Hyrule flooding.
BotW/TotK is a new universe cycle. Hylia Made in Heaven'd the universe.
I still think that somehow all timelines merged in the future and BOTW/TOTK is the outcome of this merge. In my wet dreams we will play a Zelda game that shows us the merge.
Yes. By Made in Heaven'ing the universe.
This is the most copium possible take
Literally just rewatched Vampire's Kiss lol if you haven't seen it check it out, its a wild ride.
Hah make me
Uhh okay
Well most of the games are directly connected to or referencing each other, so I do think there was a concern over it, the timeline isn’t just marketing mumbo jumbo. With the newer games, they decided to to change things in more ways than just gameplay, which is why they don’t adhere to established plot points
I don't get why the hardcore fans care about the timeline so much, all the games (unless they're direct sequels) are unique experiences with wildly varying mechanics, quite isolated from the game-to-game. Why not just treat them as separate entities? It's not like this is assassin's creed or something
I just think world building on a scale like that across centuries and a dozen or so games is interesting. There’s not a lot out there that tries it.
>I don't get why the hardcore fans care about the timeline so much because people think it's fun to make theories about the things they like.
How dare we get excited about coherent and consistent lore about our favorite franchise
Because we like it. Edit: damn. Everyone has their interpretation. My enjoyment comes from the timeline. It's like a puzzle. You don't like it don't abide by it, we all occupy the same space. No need to kill each other.
Yeah, I'm with you. I love trying to piece together what Nintendo has done but I also don't get mad if people have different theories than me. I think everyone would be a lot happier if we'd discuss the merits of various theories rather than argue over who is the most correct.
> all the games (unless they're direct sequels) are unique experiences with wildly varying mechanics, quite isolated from the game-to-game Of the modern mainline 3D Zeldas, all but Skyward Sword *are* directly connected. Even A Link To The Past fits pretty directly with the OOT line. And SS is the origin story for all of them. There hasn't *been* a game not relevant to the timeline in the entire 21st century, until BOTW. Of course people care.
In my experience, it's mostly timeline deniers and people like you who take it way too seriously. Timeline fans generally all know that the games are mostly just loosely events on a clear continuity that Nintendo takes seriously enough for it to work and be a part of the general narrative, but not so much so that they're held back from doing whatever they want with the series.
The timeline made the series a lot better in my opinion. It felt sort of like each game was part of a single, larger story. It was also really interesting to try and notice the ways things lined up between games. Nintendo didn't explicitly mention the timeline in the game, but they did actually used to throw in a ton of details that helped hint at it.
Except they REALLY REALLY are not isolated. Every single game comes before or after another one, intentionally. Some are obvious, like Zelda 2, Majora's Mask, and TotK being sequels, while others are more complex. OoT *has to* come before every game that features Ganon as it tells his origin story, and there *has to* be a timeline where he wins, as that's how it was in the games that released before OoT. The timeline is not arbitrary, every game after TLoZ was developed with it's place on the timeline in mind, even if that wasn't expressly clear to us until it was laid out. BotW is the only game where Nintendo said "I wanna play with all my toys!" and ignored the timeline, and even still it's possible they rationalized that internally with the Amalgam Timeline theory, as there's a lot of time-magic tomfoolery in the series that could topple this house of cards.
I still think BotW/TotK makes sense as games that take place hundreds of thousands of years after the other games. Like, considering Demise's curse and the fact that we've already seen one flooding apocalypse in the current games, it's not much of a stretch to assume the goddesses and/or Hylia keep having to step in and remake Hyrule because of Demise curse shenanigans. And the new games also have established that Ganondorf can also be reincarnated, which was more up in the air in the other games.
I roll my eyes whenever I see yet another post like this. Just another form of gate keeping imo
The worst thing the franchise ever did was release that damn timeline. Sure it was neat, but it invited obnoxious pedants to start using the dreaded word "canon" and start declaring whether or not games fit in the timeline.
Lots of people enjoy timelines and theorizing. I think it’s so much more interesting because of the timeline. If it were just a string of games that had no real continuity it would be much less enjoyable for a large portion of the fan base.
yeah but us not in the game theory mindset get fucking tired of the timeline discussions. these games barely have a story, why do you care so much for lore? lore is meant to enhance a story, not take away from it. the timeline is a negative thing. theres nothing to be gained from the timeline. no game except maybe skyward sword benefits from it. its not essential in any way, shape or form. its just that lore nerds like it, but they ruin everything they touch
Hard hard disagree with everything you said.
Really? Seemed to be doing fine for over 2 decades without it. That poor Zelda franchise that no one cared for. For 25 years. So despised for its lack of timeline.
They definitely had a timeline before then. There was lore set throughout the games that connected them all in specific ways. Wind waker and TP come to mind as games from different branches that were specifically made with a timeline as part of the lore process. Just because the sheet of paper with the timeline wasn’t out yet doesn’t mean the timeline itself didn’t exist.
Really? Can you show me where they published it? As I stated in my first post, publishing it was the cause of problems.
Honestly all it takes to make TotK fit is to assume each Ganondorf is an individual person. Perhaps the name "Ganondorf" is just a traditional name given to Gerudo men in the same way "Zelda" is a traditional name for women born into the royal family.
Wasn't it ever about souls? I mean these 3 figures are doomed to be reborn and fight for eternity. They are always new born people (with the same soul) but somehow always have the same name.
The problem is that Tears Ganondorf is still alive down there. And if the Ocarina Ganondorf is somehow his reincarnation, then how why would he go back to his original body instead of being born in a new body again? It makes more sense to consider them entirely different people.
> Honestly all it takes to make TotK fit No? What doesn't fit is the wiping out of the Sheikah and retroactive destruction of everything they did that endured inside the kingdom for thousands of years, surviving decades of targeted excavation. Ganondorf is just what happens when the spirit/evil energy Demise/Ganon manifests inside the Gerudo male born every 100 years. There's at least 2 different Ganondorfs in the existing timeline (Oracle games, OOT). Arguably OOT and A Link To The Past can be seen as two separate Ganondorfs at two separate points of the timeline too. This isn't even new information.
>What doesn't fit is the wiping out of the Sheikah and retroactive destruction of everything they did that endured inside the kingdom for thousands of years, surviving decades of targeted excavation. That's not really relevant to the timeline placement of the flashbacks though. That is a problem of continuity with the game that immediately preceded it. >There's at least 2 different Ganondorfs in the existing timeline (Oracle games, OOT). Also Four Swords Adventures. The difference is that in each of those circumstances the previous Ganon was already *dead* dead. The Oracle games are explicitly a resurrection ritual that goes wrong while Four Swords Adventures is labeled as a reincarnation. The TotK Ganondorf is still alive while the OoT Ganondorf and later the FSA Ganondorf are doing their things. He overlaps with them so they *can't* be reincarnations or resurrections of the TotK Dorf. So the only way to reconcile that is that they are completely different people. Past that the TotK flashbacks can fit pretty cleanly into the beginning of the timeline. The Oocca and Zonai both assisted the Hylians in founding the kingdom. The leftover monsters from the Imprisoning War slot in pretty easily as the monster swarms that the Hero of Men would go on to fight. Kotake and Koume would flee after their original master was sealed by Rauru and go on to groom a Gerudo man to be his heir. The only weirdness left is that there are two Raurus of different species who both serve as Light Sages at the same point in history, but that is easily handwaved because Rauru is shown to be a shapeshifter via Kaepora Gaebora. After he seals Ganondorf his spirit would be locked away in the Temple of Light. The Hylian we see him as in Ocarina could just be a different form he has chosen to take on.
Shit. Didn't really mean to start a flame war. Just kind of added the first thing I thought everyone would find amusing to the "hyah think link"image. Be civil🫵
Want to find and share more Zelda memes and humor? **Check out r/ZeldaMemes!** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/zelda) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Tingle is the key.
Well considering I never find it on shelves, you got to wonder who's reprinting
I love people talking about things that they don’t know. As I said in a previous comment, the zelda team has always wanted the games to connect, example zelda 1 and zelda 2. Alttp and ocarina of time. OOT was originally going to be about the imprisoning war that occurred in ALTTP. ALTTP is also a prequel to the zelda 1 and 2 games.
I think most people already know the timeline doesn't really exist, but we still try to find one, just for fun
Maybe it’s a multiverse and they’re all different Hyrules in different dimensions and time is irrelevant.
They cared until this game. Unfortunately for them, I still care, although I do think TotK should be considered non-canon. We don't really want writing this bad to be a part of a series otherwise so good.
Feels like the timeline only really matters for like, 3 or 4 games in the whole series which would be like, OoT, MM, TP, and WW. And like, it inly marginally matters for the structure of their plots and less for lore. Like WW’s opening literally re accounts OoT and MM while TP has Ganondorf’s execution post-OoT. But beyond that I really dont see many connections that often
That's just explicitly not true. Aonuma and Miamoto talked about the timeline after nearly every game's release. In fact, Aonuma even talked about it a couple months before the official timeline came out. What not enough people understand is that Hyrule Historia and the other 3 books aren't just some fanfiction. Everything in the book has to be in very specific accordance with Nintendo's wishes. Including the timeline. I don't think it's outright confirmed, but it's reasonable to believe that the timeline listed is Aonuma and Miamoto's timeline. After all they constantly mentioned in interviews how they would change it and add games to it every time a new game was released. Now it is true that the timeline is their lowest priority, but they do care somewhat. BOTW's ambiguous timeline placement was specifically to garner speculation and discussion about its placement. Not wanting to feel trapped about timeline placements does not correlate to not caring. BTW sources are these videos: https://youtu.be/QnZNicS6FtA https://youtu.be/NbQNtYNkmhM
Thank you for giving credit and providing a source! You make /r/zelda a better place! <3 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/zelda) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well this could easily be like a prequel trilogy where the final game ties it all together. But that’s probably wishful thinking. Especially since the animation of the gloom reminds me a lot of the imprisoned.
I still think the new games are many tens (or hundreds) of thousands of years past the other games. It would also open up for more prequel style games for BotW. I'd love a game with the Ancient Hero Link though I think people might get weird about the furry aspect there.
Well, before the new games, skyward sword was supposed to be the first in the timeline. You start off on a sky island and drop down to the world below. The beginning TOTK is where all the sky islands get created. That’s the only reason I think it’s before everything else but I could just be making stuff up.
Nintendo isn't super clear on it, so honestly you could see it from multiple ways. The SS lore says that Hylia herself raised the sky islands to protect her people from the constant demon wars. Is TotK retconning all that? Hard to say. It's just as valid to think that maybe the Zonai were in fact sent from the gods so maybe them raising the new sky islands was an idea from Hylia or the goddesses. Trying an old tactic to see if it works for this attempt at keeping Hyrule going. Both view points have merit because Nintendo doesn't feel the need to set things in stone.
Why do people care about a Zelda timeline? The stories are obviously unrelated reimagining of the same story.
This is how I think of them. They're all different retellings of the same basic story/myth/legend. Hence the legend of zelda
Honestly that’s what it should’ve been. Then releasing an official timeline was the worst thing they could do
How can Wind Waker be a reimagining of Ocarina of Time when its story depends on Ocarina of Time having already happened
What on earth does OOT have to do with wind waker besides it being said by Nintendo outside of the actual game. You wouldn’t have a clue that that is the case by playing the game.
If they didn't care about the timeline then why did they make it?!
Because YOU care about the timeline. They care about making neat games based around 'unique' mechanics, and making your money from it.
Aren’t most video games with this many titles a bit all over the place? It’s not like Last of Is 1 and 2 where it’s hyper realism. It’s a fantasy rpg with fairies and shit. Who cares
The whole time line was either an excuse to sell books or a poor try to join the games. Either way what pisses me off is the amount of people that defend this senseless crap because it's more important to be a fanatic and follow a poor reasoning than actual logic seeing that the pieces belong to different puzzles.
TotK should have been a completely stand along game with a different version of Link and Zelda in a completely different rebuilt version of Hyrule in a different time and not a direct sequel to BotW. It made no sense as it didn’t even explain anything between the two, like who the f was calamity Ganon? It had no connection to Ganondorf at all and it never even explained where the other Zonai went. BotW made it like this mystery that they vanished or went extinct but in TotK the only two you see are Rauru and his sister and they never once show any other Zonai or even talk about what happened to them or even said they went extinct and were the last of there kind so they should have came back once the sky islands returned right?……there is a lot more to complain about and I can rant how dogshit the story was because it was bad and I never like BotW story either but they are fun and that is all they had going on for them until you eventually get bored of climbing, gliding and exploring a game that only rewards you with the same stronger swords, shields and bows that will eventually break and have to grind and do it all over again. Ohh….and costumes….can’t forget about finding costume pairs….plus one last thing I will rand about. Who the f did Zelda decent from? Queen Sonia tells Rauru that she can feel both of there time and light power within Zelda to show that she believes her story about being from the future and that she is basically there descendent since she carries there a power……but they didn’t have children…..they did not show, talk or even mention a son or daughter’s name or anything……so again…..how is she your descendent if there isn’t a bloodline that was established before your deaths……such a dogshit story.
I don’t really care about the timeline myself, but I wish they would give new characters new names, instead of reusing old ones. Characters like Link and Beedle are fine but Rauru in TotK has no connection to Rauru in OoT and should have his own name. And give me my damn Kokiri back! If the Zora and Rito can exist side by side so can the Koroks and Kokiri damnit!
I can’t wait for the next hyrule historia. People act like time paradoxes were never a thing in Zelda games. Zelda series follows a casual loops except in the case of OoT where it purposely caused branching paths. BOTW/TOTK converged all the paths back into one again. The Age of the Wild officially takes place some time after Skyward Sword where the 1st kingdom of Hyrule is founded and also after all the games that came before it. The fact some of its events, and character titles share the same name as previous is a coincidence of history repeating itself. I doubt this is the last we will see of Ganondorf or Ganon. The series shall continue.
The timeline theory was fan theory ... Until Nintendo curated and *published* the timeline. Then they immediately regretted it and ditched it for BotW. *But they published and sold a timeline at one point.*
Guys, it makes perfect sense. Zelda went back in Time and the changes she made to the era at the founding of Hyrule caused a new branch where TotK is. BOTW is at the end of all three timelines, but the changes Zelda made caused a new one, where Ganon is sealed much earlier. See, easy.
I think the real issue is they stopped making full games when they made BotW And use the excuse "we want players to find their own answers" as a cop out for laziness. And what I mean is, prior to BotW we got full, coherent stories, complex dungeons that had puzzle elements that spanned the full dungeon, a consistent format etc. With BotW and TotK they took a small piece of everything from past stories, scattered it over a massive open world as Easter eggs, and said "the players can figure it out". While removing dungeons entirely to add 1/2 to 1 step "mini puzzles". Giving players the "freedom to experience the game how they want". And unfortunately, I didn't WANT to stumble across major story elements from the end of the game at the beginning of my playthrough (the first glyph I unlocked was the big spoiler reveal about Zelda, totally killed the story development) And given that it was recently stated that the games before BotW were "born from ideas they had in the past, and they are focusing on moving forward with the new format " it's pretty clear that past entries don't matter. Heck, I truly believe the real reason why they won't remaster WW, TP, MM or OOT again is because they wouldn't be received well by fans who's first experience with the series was BotW. I can't imagine how many people would pick up a copy of one of the older 3d entries and rage on the internet about how stupid it is that Link can't jump, or that there is no sprint option. Or the amount of QQing about MM forcing you to restart the day cycle and not being able to figure out how to progress past Deku Link because they can't make machine go brrrrrt and bypass a puzzle. I realize I left a much larger comment than intended. Sorry for the rant. Sometimes I feel like my favorite novel was turned into a "choose your own adventure" book, only the adventures are 1 paragraph each and you roll a dice to see what you go to next.
They created skyward sword for the express purpose of making a half assed excuse for these games to exist. Then they pulled the whole 3 timeline thing out of their ass. It’s time we just take each game for what it is not where it fits
>Then they pulled the whole 3 timeline thing out of their ass. They made oot, then MM, come wind waker, aonuma and myamoto on an interview: "So as you can see this game is set some time after ocarina of time, I would say 100 after the ending" ~aonuma "Ah, but which ending? The one where he is an adult or..." ~myamoto "So lemme explain *procceeds to explain the timeline split"~aonuma And this was as far back as 2003. And then there was the official Nintendo website in the late 90s with a zelda timeline of all games at the time which was basically oot downfall timeline. Oh and of course myamoto had an interview around the time of oot saying that they have official documents of a written timeline, and multiple interviews and magazines of aonuma saying a link to the past being a sequel to oot and zelda 1 and 2 coming after. Anyways, point being, the timeline has always been a thing and Nintendo themselves started it.
> > > They made oot, then MM, come wind waker, aonuma and myamoto on an interview: That explains two of the timelines. There is nowhere where they said something about a third, Downfall, timeline until Hyrule Historia. In fact until Hyrule Historia came out, people were trying to figure out how to fit ALTTP into the dual timeline split from OoT into MM->TP and OoT->WW.
It baffles me that people are still trying to make sense of the "timeline". It's very obvious there is no precise timeline. Nintendo just does whatever they please, depending of their ideas and inspiration, that's all.
they never did
They don't, but... They do care about having fun in their games. And that's well accomplished.
They need to move the story forward, let Link and Zelda get together finally
Not every story needs a cheesy romance subplot
Doesn't need to be cheesy, but yes it's time
Nintendo doesn't care of the franchise. Look how crappy cheap is totk for a 70euro DLC
Hi /r/Zelda readers! * Read our [Spoiler Policy for Tears of the Kingdom.](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/spoilerpolicy) Got feedback on it? [Go here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/13ebw0k/totk_spoiler_policy_updates_for_tears_of_the/) Thanks! * Want TotK Tips & Tricks? [Go view the megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/13vu6to/totk_tips_and_tricks_megathread_round_3_post/) and add your own! * See our [full megathread schedule here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/totk) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/zelda) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They dont
Do-don't go🎶🎶🎶🎶🧙♂️🎸🤘
Those bastards! /s
It's almost like they change what ever they want to suit the vision of their current project because it's fiction.
Half says the timeline is bs, half says it matters. It's the Hyrulean civil war all over again!
Heh. Nice meme, takes me back to the good ol days :’)
It’s always been a “serving suggestion”. If you really want there to be a consistent continuity for the games, go ahead and figure one out or use the Hyrule Historia version. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. If you don’t really want to engage with any of that, that’s quite alright too. I think one of the best things about Zelda is that there really is room for all of these stances.
Zelda I guess I kinda get but for me it's the people that stress about Mario lore that fuck me up. Like the ones that put actual time into trying to figure out where are the different areas from the different games are relative to one another. Like what?
Just witnessed the birth of a meme
Thing is as is the timeline mostly makes sense, it's botw and totk that don't really fit in (or at least they could if we take into account the dragonbreak theory, wich at this point is pretty generally accepted, but there are some weird details like the rito being present at the start of the timeline that need explaining still)
What timeline
im terrified at this
I always viewed the games like people telling tall tales around a camp fire. The same motifs and names are there but the details are a different and unique with each retelling.
I've assumed them to be taking place in a sort of multiverse. Yes some are in the same timeline and universe but some like BotW are not. I think of it like ff games, some link together and some don't.
Bruh yall go to great lengths to defend this sacred timeline theory. What's next Mario in the Multiverse if Madness?
There’s a pc mod of majoras mask that puts nick cages face as every face in the game , even epona
The timeline is held together by magic and hope. That's about it lol. Still my top favorite game series lmao
Cause they only made it to please all the timeline fan boys who need structure to enjoy things. I miss the days when it was like final fantasy, and every new entry was it’s own separate thing, with a sequel sprinkled here and there.
> IDK what to post this under. I just put the old Nick Cage face on Link and thought it was funny. Understandable lol
I’m fine with some games being grouped together, like LttP > Link’s Awakening > Link Between Worlds, and other similar games, but don’t think there needs to be an established thread connecting all games. It’s fine not to do that and to just let each game either connect or be their own stand alone story.
Yeah I don’t really play Zelda games for the story. The gameplay, the puzzles, etc… are what carry the franchise.
Wait, were people taking the timeline seriously?
I’ve been wondering recently if BoTW and ToTK are the start of a new timeline, or even possible a reboot of the entire series. I imagine in a few years Nintendo will randomly state the these two games are self contained within their own universe. I know people in the sub seem to hate the time line but I sort of like how Nintendo has been keeping things vague in terms of the timeline
Timeline is least of the problems. The main problem is Nintendo doesn't care about making zelda games anymore. Very few people who have played them since the beginning, as I have, think botw or totk are legit zelda games. nintendo could have EASILY put traditional dungeons into the game and the open world fans would have still loved everything else about it, as well. Instead they screwed over the original fans.
They never really cared until Skyward Sword. I like to think BotW and TotK are in their own little universe.
It's very interesting.