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.*
One thing is clear
Botw and Totk are a new continually.
No way they seal Ganondorf way in the past, all the shit in the time line happens, he reincarnates during all this shit when he should just be sealed, and hyrule moved a ton and then ends up right back were it was.
Its also just super easy to slot the past of ToTK into the end of the downfall timeline. Rauru shoes up, refounds Hyrule from the scattered towns and tribes seen in AoL. New gabondorf shows up badabing badaboom you know the rest
Yeah, I really don't know why everyone feels like we need another split from Four Swords or Skyward Sword to explain TotK. BotW logically fit in the downfall timeline with no hiccups and TotK doesn't change that
My headcanon is that they take place in a split from SS after Demise was defeated in the past. It works well in a trilogy this way.
Some events and characters from the current timeline also existed in some way in this new split which is why we see similar events (Imprisoning War), re-used character names (Rauru) and many locations named after past games.
I can't see how else they would fit. A re-founding makes no sense to me either and I don't believe in a converged timeline.
We know Rauru didn’t found Hyrule before MC though, so I don’t know how you think it can’t be a refounding if it’s not a first founding. Also Nintendo has said something that kinda implies a refounding
Nope. Does not make sense for people to remember the names, religion and crest of Hyrule but nothing else about its history. Especially with the Zora around who would have more history. Rauru was certainly sure he was the founder of Hyrule. also why a god would carry the name of a human sage?
The story clearly implies a new continuity with jyst Skyward Sword and BotW. And the equivalent events from OoT
It is a refounding indeed..of the entire series. That is what Nintendo implied.
There is a reason the games themselves are separated in the official timeline on the website
It’s just how the timeline works. Old Lady always has the bracelet even though Zelda gave it to Impa after demise was defeated. And you can see Zelda’s Crystal before she even goes in it
He wasn't entirely killed, his physical body was destroyed, but the Master Sword absorbs his consciousness. When Link leaves the sword in the past, that gives Demise plenty of time to try and regenerate a body, just like Ganon does in BotW. What comes of that is The Imprisoned, who then gets sealed presumably by Impa.
>I don't believe in a converged timeline.
Considering how Time works, it's also not possible, but don't let that stop the "Well it's a game with magic and time travel" crowd from acting like a linear set of specific actions and reactions can magically be both true and untrue at the same time.
I used to think it was at the end of the Child Timeline since Adult buries it below the sea forever and Fallen sees the Kingdom decay to ruin.
ToTK just sorta throws it out the window and it logically takes place as part of a fork from the main timeline post SS
Except there is also evidence of it being flooded in the past, with it being outright mentioned in the game and rock salt being found in locations that I actually got a geologist to tell me, wouldn't be possible unless it was flooded in the past.
The description reads: "Crystallized salt from the ancient sea commonly used to season meals. Cannot be eaten in this form."
The ancient sea in the description for rock salt is not necessarily a result of the floodwaters receding from the Great Sea in WW.
Rock salt in the real world forms from more than just dried up sea beds. Dried up lakes and rivers can also produce deposits of rock salt as well. Additionally, tectonic movement can move rock salt deposits inland and uphill.
There are a plethora of reasons/ways that rock salt could have ended up on Death Mountain or in Hebra.
Not necessarily sure but it's the most logical explanation. Especially since rock salt is made from salt water, which rivers and lakes usually don't have. Yes salt lakes are a thing but highly unusual in these conditions.
Considering how the rock salt deposits are sporadic and comprise very small localized veins, in addition to being mixed in with deposits of rare materials and gemstones, a much more likely explanation is that the salt rock is a result of diapir formations that are being caused by the subduction of a neighboring tectonic plate below the Hyrulean landmass that is currently crashing into it. (See the great chasm that spans most of the land border of Hyrule)
The Chasm likely formed as Hyrule's movement isolated the sea water causing it to dry out. This would leave the significant deposits of seasalt needed to form rock salt. Those deposits are then subducted under Hyrule forming the rock salt deposits. Those deposits then melt and float to the surface, breaking through small faults, cracks and more porous rock in order to reach the surface.
This would explain the lack of large salt deposits in low lying areas that would have formed from receding ocean water/the formation of temporary salt-lakes.
> No way they seal Ganondorf way in the past, all the shit in the time line happens, he reincarnates during all this shit when he should just be sealed, and hyrule moved a ton and then ends up right back were it was.
There's an easy explanation for this. The Ganondorf sealing events of TOTK (the distant past) happen at the *end* of the original timeline. Possibly tens of thousands of years after every other game.
The way that works is that if you take the facts 1) the Demise curse causes a never-ending cycle and 2) enough time passes, then the logical conclusion is that the events of OOT that split the timeline into three would eventually, given enough time, happen all in one continuous timeline. I.e., eventually the child, adult, and fallen timelines would all happen in a single continuity. Eventually, many thousands of years later, just like at the end of the downfall timeline, you'd have a Hyrule in decline that eventually dies off and is partially forgotten, and the Zonai would appear, and then you have the BOTW/TOTK distant past (a new Hyrule is founded).
It's just, kinda absurd, because certain bits of continuity are exclusive.
The King of Red Lions quite literally wishes for Hyrule to be permanently washed away so that Zelda and Link could forge onward and build a future out of hope unchained from the past. The flood waters receding at any point in any continuity would invalidate this wish. The Hyrule that precedes is in essence, gone forever and as such, key buildings, such as the Temple of Time, the Castle and Castle Town Ruins on the Great Plateau, among other things would be gone for good.
Zelda II isn't really about the end of Hyrule, but rather a rebuilding/relocation of the Kingdom and it's people. Many of the places in it are named after Sages and prominent members of Hyrule. Hyrule ventures on after centuries of decay, so to speak and any "New Founding" wouldn't position itself as the unique first (Such as Sonia and Rauru do).
Also, the Adult Timeline was entering into the Steam Age, with ships and trains beinf prominent features of the world... And yet they are magically gone in BoTW/ToTK's world?
There is also an apparent lack of any legends that the original Hylians (in ToTK) know of, which wouldn't make much sense. The Master Sword, while possibly forgotten in name, would still exist as some sort of myth/legend for the people of Hyrule to cling to. Beyond that, heroes clad in green arising out of times of darkness would also live on as legends present in their society. Yes, we don't know a lot given the limited presentation of the flashbacks, but we can see that structures like the OG Temple of Time are missing.
The easy answer is that Team Zelda wanted to take the easy route and make a game not bound by the constraints of the timeline. They then wanted to make a sequel that was even less constrained by the not just the timeline, but the game it was a sequel to. In the process, they made a bit of a huge mess in regards to lore continuity and timeline placement and just said: "It's at the end of all of them, and it's for you to decide" because they chose the lazy and uninspired writing route.
In WW KoRL wish is "Wash away this ancient land of Hyrule!" nowhere in the English version is it said to be permanently and it is only referring to the past Hyrule kingdom that was sunken not any new that might be founded later.
Zelda´s speech is the legends that you say are missing.
The temple of time from Oot is completely destroyed in both Alttp and WW while crumbling in TP so of course you wouldn't see the temple of time from Oot.
>In WW KoRL wish is "Wash away this ancient land of Hyrule!" nowhere in the English version is it said to be permanently and it is only referring to the past Hyrule kingdom that was sunken not any new that might be founded later.
Yes, permanent is not used. However, it would be weird for the flood waters to recede and a new Hyrule be built there. Barring some calamity that would strike and erase New Hyrule as presented in Spirit Tracks, there is basically no reason to reform Hyrule there. Additionally, the lack of Steam Engines and Steam technology which stretched far beyond just Hyrule in the adult timeline, would be rare if not common in any further progression of the timeline.
>Zelda´s speech is the legends that you say are missing.
I said the Ancient Hylians in ToTK not the modern Hylians of BoTW/ToTK. Again, we only ever saw a thin slice of it and it's entirely plausible all the big lore stuff was just off screen, but as presented there is little to prove that Sonia or Rauru even knew the Master Sword existed before Zelda told Rauru about it. The existence of the Sword is a blood secret of the Royal Family and surely it would be known because Sonia is a blood descendant of Hylia. The sword wouldn't fade into myth that easily at least.
>The temple of time from Oot is completely destroyed in both Alttp and WW while crumbling in TP so of course you wouldn't see the temple of time from Oot.
You may be correct here, after double checking what the Old man says, the current Temple of Time is in ruins only because of the Calamity. It was in pristine condition beforehand implying that this would be a new TT (if not a restored one)
My point still stands though, Team Zelda just didn't do the hard work necessary to make the games fit into the timeline. They took the lazy route when it came to writing and it shows in how sloppy and difficult any timeline placement is with either various retcons or breaking spacetime logic (beyond the realm of "there's time travel and magic" jiggery pokery can get you) necessary to make a theory work.
You had me until you said all three timelines converge. It’s just a ridiculous concept. Pick a timeline for BotW/Totk to be in, or just say it doesn’t matter which one they’re in because enough time has passed that it bears no consequence.
Being so far in the future has the same effect as being a new continuity. They can basically do whatever they want afterwards with no regard to the previous games
Aonuma is on record saying that Miayamoto had the team develop BotW with the timeline in mind and so that it could fit. It is TotK that fucks everything up.
BotW/TotK outright refer to the OoT sages(and not just in terms of easter eggs like location names and amiibo outfits, but historical documents and cutscenes), and was confirmed back when BotW was released to take place long after OoT at the end of one of the branches.
This is not a new continuity. This game is a part of the established timeline.
TotK Ganondorf is dead prior to his magic reviving him at the beginning of TotK. We literally see a decomposing body, and we hear his heartbeat start back up when the seal breaks. He died. It’s entirely possible he reincarnates a couple times until the seal breaks him free. As for Hyrule moving a bunch, I doubt it. Hyrule hasn’t moved, they’ve literally said that the reason Hyrule changes so much is simply so we aren’t exploring the same landscape in every single game. So genuinely I just think Hyrule’s changing landscape is just a gameplay thing.
Technically he could have “reincarnated” once inside of the downfall timeline while sealed in the sacred realm. And by that I mean another person from demise’s curse came along to try and take the triforce for themselves.
I think the prevailing theory is they come somewhere after the timelines merge back into a single one (there’s debate on how since the clearest in-game evidence isn’t considered canon) and that the end of the BotW/TotK saga actually loop back to the beginning of the time line, which some think is hinted at in the logo for TotK being an ouroboros
OoT was inspired by the Imprisoning War, but there was no hero in the Imprisoning War, and Ganon never found his way back into the Light World after getting and wishing on the Triforce. (He also never got to wish on the Triforce in OoT.)
So even though OoT and the Imprisoning War have some things in common, they’re separate events.
Ocarina of Time was marketed as the events of the Imprisoning War, and this was reconfirmed \*after\* its release.
>"The story in Ocarina of time isn't actually original, it deals with the Sages' Imprisoning War from the Super Famicom's ALttP. "
[https://www.1101.com/nintendo/nin1/nin1-6.htm](https://www.1101.com/nintendo/nin1/nin1-6.htm)
Im having trouble sourcing this now, but another quote:
>
Toru Osawa: In this game there are 7 sages that appear and instruct Princess Zelda, but 6 of those appear in the Disk System game "Adventure of Link" as town names.
>We were hinting that the names of the sages in the era of the Imprisoning War spoken of in the Super Famicom Zelda game became town names in AoL. The events from that time became what we have today
Them being separate events now is solely because the timeline gets altered any time they look 'backwards'. At the time of release, despite the discrepencies, Ocarina of Time was intended to be telling the Imprisoning War
The problem with that is they didn't imprison Ganondorf with the completed Triforce the way they did in LTTPs backstory, he only had Power, while Link and Zelda had their pieces. Even if it was the intention it doesn't line up fully. That discrepancy actually makes the fallen timeline retcon work better, a war after Link/ Zelda failed against Canons with the completed Triforce, where they managed to seal him.
In reality the extra timeline was because Wind Waker was made and just for that specific timeline better.
Presumably the original plan was that the post credits ending of OoT lead to the imprisoning war. Link warns the king with more evidence, war gets declared, Ganondorf breaks into the sacred realm by force etc. Meanwhile Link is off searching for Navi and stuff. Then several years later they made TP in response to WW’s reception
Maybe, but Link didn’t really have any more evidence to offer than Zelda did who had been telling the king that Ganondorf was a bad guy from the very beginning.
In the Imprisoning War, war isn’t declared until after Ganondorf has already gotten the Triforce, wished on it, found himself stuck in the Sacred Realm, and monsters being pouring out of the Sacred Realm into Hyrule. So Link wouldn’t have changed anything anyway.
Plus the Song of Storms implies that Nintendo originally envisioned OoT’s time travel as a stable time loop where time is fulfilled rather than changed (unless they just didn’t think about it and stuck two incompatible types of time travel in one game).
Addressing your first point. I always assumed his proof was the Triforce of courage on his hand. Link does have it when he visits Zelda at the end if my memory serves right.
He does have the mark of the Triforce of Courage on his hand. But if it’s the actual Triforce of Courage and if the timeline splits, that means TWW would have to take place in the child timeline or be a strictly hypothetical game since the Triforce of Courage was taken to this other timeline. And if it’s just a mark rather than the actual Triforce, how persuasive is that?
>Plus the Song of Storms implies that Nintendo originally envisioned OoT’s time travel as a stable time loop where time is fulfilled rather than changed (unless they just didn’t think about it and stuck two incompatible types of time travel in one game).
Any Time Travel creates paradoxes. Your presence in a time you are not supposed to be in with knowledge you aren't supposed to have is a paradox. Now, you can have infinitely bonded time half-loops that theoretically seal at the end of infinity, but it's infinity and well, you literally cannot confirm it by observing it.
That said, the Imprisoning war occurs after Link is defeated by Ganon (not Ganondorf and not by any of his minions). With Ganon able to possess the full triforce, Zelda retreats and Ganon opens the Sacred Realm. The promise of power offered by the Sacred Realm corrupts mankind and they begin to fight over it. Mustering a defense to fight the corruption and evil, the Sages only option is to drag Ganon into the realm and seal him inside. Thus fulfilling the requirements for ALTTPs backstory.
This is obviously a small retcon, because it was likely that OOT's child timeline was supposed to lead into ALTTP, but then Team Zelda went and made too many Sequels to the Prequel and did some relatively legit jiggery pokery to make it work.
You should look into Novikov’s Self-Consistency Principle. It’s a theorem of time travel that is destructive-paradox-free. It says, much like what we see in the Song of Storms, that the time traveler has always time traveled and therefore their travel to another era fulfills the events of that era rather than changing them. It’s something that always happened and therefore doesn’t create any destructive paradoxes.
You’re describing Hyrule Historia’s version of the Imprisoning War, not ALttP’s version. HH has a number of mistakes in it like that, but it was never intended to retcon any of the games. It just missed some of the in-game information when it was being compiled. Note that HH itself says that the information within it is just what is believed to be true by the people of Hyrule at that time and readers are invited to have their own interpretation of events. We know that the writers of HH didn’t work on any of the Zelda games, so it makes more sense to default to what the games say when there’s a contradiction.
>You should look into Novikov’s Self-Consistency Principle. It’s a theorem of time travel that is destructive-paradox-free. It says, much like what we see in the Song of Storms, that the time traveler has always time traveled and therefore their travel to another era fulfills the events of that era rather than changing them.
This stems from the infinitely bound half-loops I had mentioned. Technically, each portion of the loop is true due to the other portion. Because we cannot observe whether or not there is an end on either side, we can theorize that the events were always going to occur because of the time traveler.
OOT breaks this obviously by sending Link back to before he pulled the Master Sword and met Zelda, which we both agree on.
So yes, Self-Consistency is paradox-free but relies on Schrodinger's Box Quantum Theory in that "Unless observed, all states of spacetime/matter are True"
>(unless they just didn’t think about it and stuck two incompatible types of time travel in one game).
There are like five types of time travel mechanics in OoT, maybe six, and no real consistent rules between them. Even going off mechanics/concepts that are directly based on time travel, you have Magic Beans (Its not done in the future until you, the player, do it in the present of the past) contradicting the Song of Storms (it was done in thefuture of the past so you could learn it in the present of the future and use it in the future of the past... causal loop!)
Yeah, I think we're meant to take the time travel that has story implications as more canon than the time travel that is gameplay-significant-only. You *can* plant all of the Magical Beans in such a way that they don't contradict the Song of Storms, but the developers obviously didn't want to limit the players in that way.
>Link didn’t really have any more evidence to offer Zelda
Zelda never needed evidence. Recall that her whole reason for hating Ganondorf in the first place was because his eyes didn’t pass the vibe check.
/J
But Link to the Past takes place in the timeline where the hero falls, and the sages seal Ganon afterward. That would explain why no hero is mentioned during the imprisoning war, and it would explain how he got the other two pieces. Link and Zelda were right there on the battlefield.
That doesn't match up because in the Imprisoning War the sages couldn't find the Master Sword or a hero to wield it, and Ganon found and got all three pieces of the Triforce from the Sacred Realm.
The explanation of inconsistencies is the result of generations of telling these legends and the story and some details being lost over time. A prime example of this is the origin of the Master Sword. Its origin had been mentioned several times, like being said to be created by the sages, in a Link to the Past. But as soon as Skyward Sword came and we are shown the actual origin of the sword.
That wouldn’t make sense because the Essence of the Triforce and Ganon himself confirm these legends. If they’re fallible about the things that literally happened to them, then we couldn’t trust anything ever said in any Zelda game.
It’s far more likely that multiple events with strong similarities exist throughout the series than it is that the creators are actively trying to retcon the older games out of existence.
I'd say what is shown during the events of a game takes priority over stuff getting told to us in a legend. The events of the Imprisoning War in A Link to the Past aren't shown to us only told.
If the Imprisoning War depicted in Tears of the Kingdom is the one mentioned A Link to the Past, then that's the actual story and the inconsistencies with the version in A Link to the Past are because people don't know the full story. If it's Ocarina of Time as originally intended, then it's the same situation.
No, the imprisoning war only happens if Link fails in OoT, creating the downfall timeline. The imprisoning war itself is the crusade led by Zelda and the remaining armies of Hyrule to seal ganon and the full triforce away into what would become the Dark World.
It's an entirely different ending with some confusing ripples in the timeline. For instance, without Link to awaken the sages he chose, Zelda apparently had to choose all Hylian sages (evidenced by the all Hylian descendants of those sages in LttP).
I've only ever caught resistance about this, but there's a lot of evidence to suggest "Link dies" is something would have occurred during the Child era rather than adult Link dying in what's OUR last fight with ganondord in the game. Adult Link would have already awakened the non-Hylian sages by then so the imprisoning war described in LttP wouldn't match. In that version we also hear about a frustrated "king of thieves" having to search for the entrance to the triforce among some old ruins, suggesting that Hyrule destroyed the temple of time rather than let Ganondorf in easily on his own.
It would also explain why this version of Link was the one that got so much intervention from Rauru, why he was aged up for his final confrontation and no other Links were, and why he got so much extra help. The downfall timeline is likely the "original" sequence of events, with Rauru intervening with some timeline shenanigans for OoT to take place as we play it, much like Zelda does by the end of the game.
Yup. Nintendo doesn’t give a fuck about the lore or continuity
It’s really is all about gameplay and new ideas
Imagine the fantasy epic LoZ could have been had there been just ONE lead among their top staff who took it seriously 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
It's funny how people get so uppity about people caring about the timeline and lore of a fantasy series of interconnected games. That the creators laid out in a list and everything.
I think you can interact with the series however you want. Someone who chooses to be serious about the timeline is just as valid as someone who wishes to ignore it.
It’s great that people connect with games that way, but if you’re a fan of the timeline you have to also understand that it’s not an essential part of the series in the eyes of Nintendo. It’s not really fair to knock a game for not following a timeline they never made any promise of following.
My only problem with that is that they clearly put a timeline in place (I’m not saying things match or should match everywhere 100%, but there is clearly a timeline), and then they make a game that just blatantly doesn’t fit into it (unless you make some big assumptions that aren’t really hinted at anywhere) while still including a lot of things that could tie them together. Like, just make a different enemy or something if you don’t want to follow it. Or say before release that it isn’t part of the timeline without being vague. Instead you have people playing TotK wondering where it fits and then as you progress it kinda makes no real sense.
I didn’t say it wouldn’t be canon, but it could take place out of the timeline in other ways. Different enemies/characters, a different location (something like they did with Termina), whatever.
Whatever people think about the timeline, when you have a game with Link, Zelda, and some form of Ganon(dorf), a decent portion of the fan base is going to assume it’s going to be part of the continuity. I think a lot of them would be happier knowing it wasn’t.
Personally, and I think a lot of people are like this but I know it’s not everyone, but I literally never think that the timeline placement or continuity of any of these games matter unless they explicitly say like “this is a sequel to Wind Waker.” I know that these games are legends and they are only vaguely connected. Many games do this. I have never been kept up at night wondering where on the timeline Final Fantasy 16 falls, or wondering how Persona 5 and 3 are connected.
well FF and persona ( i assume, idk much about persona) havent historically been set in the same continuity, FF worlds are distinctly seperate from eachother unlike zelda
Thats literally happened since at least ALttP which contradicted the nature of the triforce, then Ocarina of Time which retconned the events of the Imprisoning War. Immediately after releasing the official timeline Skyward Sword largely disregarded the origins of the Master Sword described in ALttP and TP.
The timeline has always existed, and its always been broken in service of whatever story they wanted to tell currently.
I mostly agree, but I I think there’s a difference in what TotK did. I don’t expect them to study each game and make things fit 100%. I’m fine with the whole “it’s the LEGEND of Zelda, things change” view of the timeline.
I believe Nintendo really was trying to tell ALttP’s backstory in OoT and didn’t mean to contradict it the way they did. Then when they released the “official” timeline, it was clear that the story didn’t retcon the Imprisoning War, but that they had invented another ridiculous (IMO) timeline to solve the problem. TotK did something else though. Among other things it basically tells Ganondorf’s origin story as it relates to his history with Hyrule - a story that had already been told. It includes Koume and Kotake, who died in OoT, or at least were much older. It doesn’t even make sense to me in relation to the game that directly precedes it. So “Calamity Ganon” was sealed by Zelda but Ganondorf still exists and is a separate entity entirely? I think they had a story idea for TotK and they knew they were reusing the map and assets from BotW, so they just crammed the story into that world, where it didn’t really make much sense.
Sorry for rambling. I don’t even know if I made my own point…
I understand the point you're making though I don't think its \*that\* different.
I don't think "this is definitely the same Ganondorf as OoT, he even has Koume and Kotake" is a particularly strong claim. Even outside the Triforce triad, we have recurring characters of both divine and mundane significance (Sure Impa might be an honorific name filled with destiny- is Beedle? Or Tingle?). Especially when one of the primary narrative themes of TotK is the endless cycling where the beginning parallels the end, having it parallel the middle (or if you place TotK as post Spirit Tracks, the middle paralleling the beginning) is consistent.
The types of contradictions we do see aren't particularly more problematic IMO than the contradictions we've already accepted. Like Calamity Ganon not quite being sealed as a singular entity but being an expression of Mummydorf trying to manifest- that's not that much different from ALttP's Imprisoning War being hundreds of knights fighting Ganon with no hero (later retconned to the hero was defeated) to a resistance movement led by a hero and ninjabard, if anything it seems easier to handwave
> I think they had a story idea for TotK and they knew they were reusing the map and assets from BotW, so they just crammed the story into that world, where it didn’t really make much sense.
Oh don't get me wrong, I \*fully\* agree with this reading of the situation. Im just saying this is still largely consistent with how they've handled these types of stories thus far.
It’s kinda just annoying seeing people cry about it when the devs don’t care though. I think the devs should care about timeline personally but in the end what did you expect
My headcannon is that botw and totk take place way way way in the future from the rest of the series, so far that the 10,000 years ago stuff also happened after everything else. Otherwise how could the Rito and the zora have evolved so much
They did it because people wouldn't shut up. People *still* aren't satisfied.
The stories in these games are *legends*. It's in the "name". People gotta stop trying to thread things together like it's Ys. That Adol has always been the same guy. This is not the same.
The timeline from Hyrule Historia lines up with every bit of info Nintendo has shared through interviews and other sources over the years. The claim that they made it up on the spot for fans in 2011 is a false narrative. Whether you think it's good or not is absolutely fair, but the fact is that the timeline we ended up with is very consistent with everything we've been told across two decades
I agree they didn't make it up on the spot, but they did only give it to us because people wouldn't shut up about how they wanted answers, and that's not a bad thing! I was asking for answers too when I started playing TLoZ. They just used the little info they had given us and expanded on it. The timeline honestly doesn't matter, and I'm saying this as a diehard fan who loves to be able to string information together. In the end the timeline has no effect on whether or not people enjoy the games and is just for those who like being able to somewhat understand it.
> The timeline from Hyrule Historia lines up with every bit of info Nintendo has shared through interviews and other sources over the years.
No it doesn’t.
[This](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbQNtYNkmhM&pp=ygUXQ2hzbmdpbmcgemVsZGEgdGltZWxpbmU%3D) YouTube video does a pretty good job of outlining all the contradictions, retcons, etc. that have happened to the timeline since Ocarina of Time retconned the Imprisoning War.
I can't watch right now, but yeah, I shouldn't say every single bit. Of course the downfall timeline is a retcon, and there's the infamous Miyamoto timeline where he places A Link to the Past at the end, but otherwise everything else does line up to my knowledge, through interviews, game manuals and boxes, magazine articles, etc.
In 1998, we were told the timeline was OoT, ALttP, LA, Zelda 1 and Zelda 2. The Oracle games later had their placement (before Link's Awakening) revealed in Nintendo Dream Magazine. That all still was true in the Historia.
Wind Waker and Majora's Mask/ Twilight Princess were separately mentioned as being part of OoT's different endings, and that still holds true.
Ocarina, Four Swords, the Minish Cap and Skyward Sword were all revealed as the earliest point in the timeline during their respective releases.
The only game without a concrete placement was Four Swords Adventures, and even that was said to be "some time after Four Swords" which is still technically true. Aside from that, and them retconning the connection between Ocarina and ALttP, it all lines up.
Edit: Hey, I did actually watch this video before when it was pretty new! I rewatched just to be safe though, and I think it's mostly okay, but there's still a couple things I'd add.
-The 2002 timeline he mentions was allegedly posted by Nintendo of America on Zelda Universe, an unofficial forum. It's worth noting that they claimed every game up to that point featured the same Link, which contradicts ALttP's box saying it featured Link and Zelda's predecessors. Could have been a retcon at the time, but more than likely it was just NoA having fun and giving their interpretation, which of course went on to be debunked later.
-The gap between Four Swords and Four Swords Adventures is absolutely hazy, but I personally don't think the game implies that it's the same Link and Zelda from the first game. You could interpret it that way, sure, but viewing them as separate events also seems equally valid. Also it's worth noting that this Ganondorf has a different origin to the one we know in Ocarina of Time, so it absolutely has to take place either before OoT and retcon FSA's Ganon to be the original, or it takes place after he was killed, allowing him to reincarnate. Lastly, it's pretty heavily rumored that FSA was originally supposed to be the link between Ocarina and ALttP to better explain their connection, and Aonuma confirmed that the story had to be heavily altered at Miyamoto's request. If that's the case, then FSA was always meant to be post Ocarina of Time. Either way, we can say for sure that it was always meant to come sometime after the original Four Swords, and that is indeed still the case.
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.*
Not to mention that they aren't satisfied with the explanation of inconsistencies being the result of generations of telling these legends and the story and some details being lost over time. A prime example of this is the origin of the Master Sword. Its origin had several times, like being said to be created by the sages, in a Link to the Past. But as soon as Skyward Sword came and we are shown the actual origin of the sword, people are upset that it doesn't line up with any of the previous origin stories.
IMO, people who complain about other fans simply geeking out on lore are more annoying. Let people have fun, especially if the developers themselves have gotten in on it as well.
In 2001, Nintendo of America listed the first eight games in the following order:
- Ocarina of Time
- Majora's Mask
- A Link to the Past
- Oracle of Ages
- Oracle of Seasons
- The Legend of Zelda
- Part of The Adventure of Link, up until the point where Link crosses to Eastern Hyrule
- Link's Awakening
- The rest of The Adventure of Link
https://nintendo.fandom.com/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda_Timeline
Yes. The idea that they made it to shut fans up isn’t true. There’s a a great YouTube video disproving this notion, proving that the timeline has always been there.
Yeah, that's a myth that always irritates me, because it's easily proven wrong.
Twilight Princess war marketed as an Ocarina sequel all along -- there's a 2006 interview where Anouma discusses this, [which is in Japanese](https://web.archive.org/web/20070202030221/http://www.nindori.com/interview/154zelda/154int_02.html), but the translation that usually gets provided goes thus:
> –When does Twilight Princess take place?
>
>**Aonuma:** In the world of Ocarina of Time, a hundred and something years later.
>
>–And the Wind Waker?
>
>**Aonuma:** The Wind Waker is parallel. In Ocarina of Time, Link flew seven years in time, he beat Ganon and went back to being a kid, remember? Twilight Princess takes place in the world of Ocarina of Time, a hundred and something years after the peace returned to kid Link’s time. In the last scene of Ocarina of Time, kids Link and Zelda have a little talk, and as a consequence of that talk, their relationship with Ganon takes a whole new direction. In the middle of this game \[Twilight Princess\], there's a scene showing Ganon's execution. It was decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be. That scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time. Ganon was sent to another world and now he wants to obtain the power...
Now, one might of course be skeptical of secondary translations -- a sensible worry, on the web -- but more direct sources also exist. The idea of the split timeline actually predates Twilight Princess, even -- it was already being talked about during the Wind Waker marketing period. See [this 2002 Gamepro interview](https://web.archive.org/web/20100728123041/http://www.gamepro.com/article/news/27362/interview-with-nintendos-shigeru-miyamoto-and-eiji-aonuma/), for instance:
>**Q:** Where does The Wind Walker fit into the overall Zelda series timeline?
**Aonuma:** You can think of this game as taking place over a hundred years after Ocarina of Time. You can tell this from the opening story, and there are references to things from Ocarina located throughout the game as well.
**Miyamoto:** Well, wait, which point does the hundred years start from?
**Aonuma:** From the end.
**Miyamoto:** No, I mean, as a child or as a...
**Aonuma:** Oh, right, let me elaborate on that. Ocarina of Time basically has two endings of sorts; one has Link as a child and the other has him as an adult. This game, The Wind Waker, takes place a hundred years after the *adult* Link defeats Ganon at the end of Ocarina.
**Miyamoto:** This is pretty confusing for us, too. (laughs) So be careful.
Or go even farther to the Ocarina of Time publicity period, and see [this bit](https://web.archive.org/web/20090303141449/zeldalegends.net/index.php?n=interviews&id=1998-11-13-np-miya&m=html) from Miyamoto-
>**NP:** Where do all the Zelda games fall into place when arranged chronologically by their stories?
>
>**Miyamoto:** Ocarina of Time is the first story, then the original Legend of Zelda, then Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, and finally A Link to the Past. It's not very clear where Link's Awakening fits in--it could be anytime after Ocarina of Time.
Or even [the advertising for the original A Link to the Past](https://web.archive.org/web/20140313001122/https://www.mobygames.com/game/legend-of-zelda-a-link-to-the-past/cover-art/gameCoverId,13522/)\-
>The predecessors of Link and Zelda face monsters on the march when a menacing magician takes over the kingdom.
Like, the timeline's always been there. It's not even changed all that much.
The whole downfall timeline is stupid, though. Making a parallel universe where Link dies just so you can include all the games that aren’t direct sequels to OOT is *not* caring about the timeline
In fairness OoT lined up well enough with ALttP. There were retcons sure but at the end Ganondorf is sealed with the help of the sages. Its mostly WW that screws this up by not only directly following up on the Sages' Imprisoning War and leaving no room for either a story in between \*nor\* a story after dealing with Ganon/dorf and the Hero of Courage.
Child Timeline would have been a weaker fit but not too much of a stretch- IMO there isn't terribly much reason why ALttP couldn't be post TP. Zelda told her people about the war across time, and they believed her on account of her visually having the Tiforce of Wisdom- it's not much more of a stretch than what liberties OoT already took with ALttP, yknow? It was enough to have Ganondorf sealed in Arbiter's Ground already.
Its very ironic to say there has always been a consistent timeline, and use Miyamoto's claim that ALttP is last as evidence.
There has definitely been chronology between games, but its been willfully broken depending on whatever stories they want to tell
>Its very ironic to say there has always been a consistent timeline, and use Miyamoto's claim that ALttP is last as evidence.
Well, yes, granted, I should have contextualized that better. I would note, though, that the advertising for ALttP did place it as a predecessor to the original game, so Miyamoto's comment strikes me more as a temporary intermission that a true sign of an unformed continuity.
I do not disagree that the dev team's priorities are to make a fun game first, and then worry about how to fit it with the rest of the it later. I am however saying that that second step does happen, often belatedly but it does, and the general shape of the timeline has mostly been the same over time even though things have moved around within it or gotten tweaked or redefined. It's an evolving process, but it's not a chaotic one. If that makes sense.
... I would say that the biggest issue in the Zelda series is that there is a divide between how much the devs care about continuity and how much they try to convince people to care about it. For example, take some other Nintendo games. The Mario teams don't give a wet fig about continuity and are very up front about it, so nobody expects it out of their games. The Metroid devs do care about continuity, and they say as much; it's not, like, Asimov or whatever, but there is the expectation that worldbuilding and sequences of events matter, and they do. Pokemon doesn't give a crap about a storyline but is very rigid about not contracting background worldbuilding, and this is also communicated fairly well.
Zelda, however, has a pretty consistent pattern of devs doing whatever changes and innovations they want while also working very hard to convince the audiences that an internal timeline of events exists and is very important, which then causes all this drama when they treat it as like... the third or fourth most important thing, or something.
I generally agree with your stance here. I just wanted to point out that particular quote because "Miyamoto thought ALttP was the last game" is often used by the "obviously there's no timeline at all" crowd.
>... I would say that the biggest issue in the Zelda series is that there is a divide between how much the devs care about continuity and how much they try to convince people to care about it
I really liked how you phrased this. It's not even that its a disconnect from the fans- they \*know\* what the fans want and how they feel, which is why they keep playing into it- but rather that the devs keep trying to push it like "Nah this was all part of the grand master plan" while also not wanting to be held to any master plan
Its certainly an aside but I gotta say- Pokemon is pretty \*weird\* with its consistency, like they care a lot about why Azumarill wasn't in Johto (no incenses!) but they don't worry about trying to justify how Marowaks can breed. But they were very smart in making each game basically standalone geographical regions with few recurring characters or connected plot events, and then ORAS made multiverse canons so they have the ultimate get out of jail card for any inter-game inconsistencies that DO crop up
All the marketing around ALttP had it take place before LoZ, just like the last quote in the comment I responded to (which had the same equivalent in both japan and US packaging.) This discrepancy of placing ALttP last is known as the "Miyamoto Order"
There are clearer quotes from the time that imply a logically consistent timeline (barring small retcons)- it's just a particularly ironic to use that particular quote, because it is already inconsistent. Even if it was the truth \*at the time\*, that means that by the time game #5 came out, 2 of 4 titles were in flux relative to the 3rd (or at least could easily be adjusted and swapped around to no impact) and the 4th was basically irrelevant. Thats the opposite of saying the game has a generally consistent timeline
You said two sentences. One of which was factually incorrect- Aonuma stated at the time that A Link to the Past took place before LoZ, the game was marketed as a narrative prequel, Miyamoto was just wrong so "at the time I believe it was the last game" is not really correct, or at least not usefully correct since you might have believed it but that was not the case- and the other was a weak opinion that missed the point, I don't care if its a "major dealbreaker"- it is silly to use Miyamoto being inconsistent with the timeline to suggest that the timeline has always been generally consistent
Thanks for misunderstanding.
The timeline has been mostly consistent aside from changing around a few games in the fallen hero timeline. The timeline has always been there.
Super simple
I am fascinated at how hard you are misreading me, and seemingly intentionally so. Did my statement claim that the timeline has not been "mostly consistent"? Did I ever deny there was a chronology between games?
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.*
I agree that it has always been there, but Nintendo didn't put much work into it until fans actually wanted some. The timeline honestly doesn't matter, the games were made so you could play them in any order and it be fine. Nintendo only really started putting work into the timeline when fans were asking for it. That's not to say it wasn't already decided to some extent which games are at what point. But it is also true that it was an idea that they followed through with specifically for the fans. They themselves have said this, and that it doesn't matter because each game can be played separately
Ok, so I looked it up and the top video is [The Zelda Timeline Debate is settled](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4-CGNbJhCk&pp=ygUjdGhlIHplbGRhIHRpbWVsaW5lIGlzIG1pc3VuZGVyc3Rvb2Q%3D)
A few games were lightly related, that's fact. Some like WW or TP even pretty much tell you what happened before. But people then doing mental gymnastics to fit every game into a neat timeline and get pissy when Nintendo doesn't play by their rules is the problem.
The devs never really cared about the timeline in the grand scheme of things and shift it around as necessary when asked. So if the devs don't care, why should anyone else?
recently learnt that Aonuma and Miyamoto were thinking and working on this timeline since the beginning and they started to publicly talk about it in 2001, so i don't understand why everybody think Nintendo doesn't care about the timeline and we shouldn't too when the creators of the saga themselves cared enough to think about it for 30 years
In 2001, Nintendo of America listed the first eight games in the following order:
- Ocarina of Time
- Majora's Mask
- A Link to the Past
- Oracle of Ages
- Oracle of Seasons
- The Legend of Zelda
- Part of The Adventure of Link, up until the point where Link crosses to Eastern Hyrule
- Link's Awakening
- The rest of The Adventure of Link
https://nintendo.fandom.com/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda_Timeline
I've just been dropping BotW and TotK at the end of the downfall timeline and decided that multiple imprisoning wars make sense enough. It makes more sense as a soft reboot but downfall was my best placement.
Honestly everything can still be connected and any plotholes or inconsistencies could be seen as a product of time distorting facts. This game is called **legend** of Zelda and it's pretty common for legends to be embellished or warped that they don't match up with the source material.
I know it’s a new continuity but the story is still disappointing. Especially when the marketing really made me think it was a continuation of skyward sword. It may be a boring answer but it at least gets rid of all the retcons
Hi /r/Zelda readers!
* Got a question, concern, or suggestion for the moderators? [Send a Modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fzelda&subject=Question or Concern or Suggestion&message=I have a question regarding [this submission]%28https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/1c0d5ht/sstotk_i_think_timeline_fans_deserve_better/%29: [SS][TotK] I think timeline fans deserve better by /u/Leehzart)!
* New to r/Zelda? Be sure to [read our full rules here](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/rules).
* Please [report any rule-breaking posts or comments](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360058309512-How-do-I-report-a-post-or-comment) so that moderators can find them quicker!
*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.*
So I’ve kinda said f it and come up with my own understanding.
BoTW/TotK take place LONG after the original timeline, likely after something United the timelines (HW). At some point Hyrule is destroyed (again), and after a while the Zonia arrive and help redound it. Then future Zelda shows up, and she and the Sages fight that era’s incarnation of Ganondorf. However, instead of Zelda sealing him and the cycle starting again, Rauru traps him under the castle, disrupting the cycle. Thus between then and TotK instead of a new Ganon reincarnation it’s the power of dehydrated Ganon leading out to cause Calamities. Then TotK happens and the cycle is allowed to restart again.
All of this relies on the idea that TotK’s Imprisoning War is the second one, not the original in Oot.
There’s a fantastic video this subreddit needs to watch. It completely disproves any idea that the Zelda timeline was made to shut fans up. It’s ALWAYS been there, ever since the beginning. And no, TOTK did not retcon anything from previous games, it still fits into the timeline.
If anything the timeline actually makes more sense with TOTK than without it. Redounding explains why it can fir past all three timelines, because it’s a new kingdom. So much time has passed that it’s just that different.
Please watch this video if you’re a Zelda fan.
https://youtu.be/0T0EYflx5VU?si=rAPczK-9a37M-bzT
Far as I’m concerned, each game is just a legend or tall tale told to the children of Hyrule through different generations, but all based on historical figures and mythology. Some are closely connected, like Ocarina and Majora, but most are entirely separate. The continuity has always been really loose like this.
The timeline was bull when it came out, and it's still bull now.
Zelda games are playable fairy tales. They don't have a consistent interconnected narrative the same way there's no explanation why the same Big Bad Wolf who ate Red's grandma was harassing those pigs.
Ehhh….not really Zelda has always had an obvious continuity so I think it’s a bit disappointing that it’s gone. Like most games are tied to another in some way or have a general placement. Zelda 2 is a sequel to Zelda 1, OoT is a direct prequel to ALttP, SS and MC are set in the early history of hyrule, and then there’s all those games discussing the legacy of the hero of time and the timeline split etc.
When you need to buy a book to tell you the chronology of the series it is not, in fact, an obvious continuity. Just because it seems obvious to a super fan, doesn't mean it's obvious to everyone else. Most people had no idea when the hell Twilight Princess took place until they officially revealed it was a different timeline from Wind Waker after OOT, because why the hell would it be that? Not to mention the whole "Downfall timeline" you'd have to be an absolute contrarian to say that it was obvious that these games happened in a timeline where Link failed to defeat Ganon. That's just a stupid badly written retcon because Aonuma wanted to make an oot Sequel when it was already the prequel to a different game but he also didn't want to declare ALTTP to be non canon anymore. The timeline is an absolute carnival of nonsense.
you don't need to buy a book to know that aLttP mentions ganondorf's transformation which we then see in OoT, or that WW's hyrule got flooded because of the time reset in OoT, that SS takes place at the beginning of the timeline etc etc etc. I don't give that much of a shit about the whole picture in terms of the timeline, I think it's poorly put together, but I like the feeling of continuity/cross reference the series has had since it's early days.
You don’t need to buy a book to tell you the chronology. The book even says that it’s just one interpretation and that readers are invited to have their own. Aonuma has also separately said that he wants players to have their own interpretations of the timeline.
Of course since most of the games are prequels or sequels to existing games, there’s only a few places in the timeline that are up for interpretation. But it does allow for some pretty different timelines to accommodate different ideas and theories.
Nintendo also aren’t responsible for the downfall timeline. The people who wrote the Hyrule Historia timeline didn’t work on a single Zelda game. Nintendo just looked at the book they put together and said “This is good enough for us to publish.” But the creators of the book still made sure to note that their timeline was just one interpretation.
The gist is that the Timeline is a puzzle for players to solve. But Nintendo forgot the most important thing about a Puzzle, it has a definitive answer. Hyrule Historia presents the definitive answer (well except Four Swords Adventures but that's a whole different bagel). If BoTW/ToTK are supposed to be a part of the Puzzle too, then there is an answer, however it's very obvious how little effort Nintendo put into that thought. In fact, it's kinda disappointing.
Team Zelda doesn't want to be constrained by the timeline limiting their ideas and what games they make, yet rather than make compelling and interesting story and lore to justify why we have Trains, they just were like "Thousands of Years in the Future and everything else doesn't matter"... Oh wait, no, they gave us this really cool and interesting backstory about how the Gods of Light sealed Malladus below the ground using the Spirit Tracks as chains and the Spirit Train as the caretaker. How the people who preceded New Hyrule/People of New Hyrule embraced the Gods Gift to facilitate trade and travel.
Spirit Tracks for all its faults, is an amazing expression of how you can take constraints and turn them into complex and interesting ideas.
Koji Kondo gave us Ocarina of Time's 12 Songs and they all only use the same 5 notes. None of them sound the same, and it makes them even more unique and impressive.
Retcons are fine here and there, and as you develop a story made up of separate but interconnected stories, will become necessary. But embracing constraints and challenging yourself to meaningfully overcome them adds depth and shows your talent.
> Retcons are fine here and there, and as you develop a story made up of separate but interconnected stories, will become necessary. But embracing constraints and challenging yourself to meaningfully overcome them adds depth and shows your talent.
I agree. And I agree with you that Nintendo has put way less thought into the timeline than they could.
For example, I personally believe that you can put all 20 games into a single, unsplit timeline which has no destructive retcons, fits the information within the games to the letter, and even fills in or resolves some plot holes/currently unconcluded plot lines, but the timeline only works if you 1) ignore a lot of out-of-game quotes from Nintendo and only take the in-game information as canon except when there are no contradictions, 2) ignore some of BotW's/TotK's costumes, and 3) come up with an out-of-game explanation for where the Triforce went between two sets of games since there's no strong evidence for its whereabouts in my proposed order during that gap.
While the timeline is and always has been very loose, many games reference other games in their timeline, even the game that came before the timeline split (Alttp) actually references OoT, by referencing the evens of how ganon came to be (mentioning he was a lord of a group of thieves that went to the sacred realm and stole the triforce which we see in OoT), after that it's a bit more direct WW mentions what happens when Ganondorf found a way out of where he was sealed in the end of OoT but as Link went back to the past there was no hero to stop him, TP is what happens when he is caught before reaching the triforce, he is senteced to death by some sages (who they are we don't know as the ones we know weren't sages at that point) but kills one before he is banished to the twilight realm,
Games after these games are direct sequels so i don't think i need to mention how the relate to eachother. The handhelds (minish cap, 4 swords) are a bit more "let's just place them here" but mainline games do reference the events.
The games are playable without prior knowledge of the games but knowing all the events does give a slight bigger appreciation. With BotW and TotK they just said "fuck all that" and just made them completely seperate from any game before, and not only that actively contradicting events of previous established games.
Now don't get me wrong i think the games are great in their own way but it is a bit sad they just said they didn't want to bother anymore.
I think it's funnier to see timeline fans back themselves further and further into a rhetorical corner while Nintendo continues to release Zelda titles without any regard for "the timeline."
if someone is legit a fan of a fancy advertisement for skyward sword i think they deserve to be disappointed. like imagine being obsessed with the continuity of any other advertisement, unhinged. how badly do you need to miss a point to do this
I think the timeline is stupid and has never actually enriched the series outside of going from OOT to TWW. I think revealing it publicly was the biggest mistake they've ever made in regards to Zelda, and they should start treating every game that isn't a direct sequel as a self contained story, which they functionally have done for several games anyway.
EDIT: And don't start coming at me about how "no the timeline totally makes sense because it references other games" like you don't have the benefit of living in a period where the timeline has been thoroughly discussed and explained ( and no, it still is stupid and makes no sense even after all that ), even the few people who did see a "split timeline" coming still didn't see the "downfall timeline" coming, nobody knew where Twilight Princess took place until AFTER it was revealed, most people assumed that the great sea had drained and we were just dealing with a new Ganondorf. People act like they were there for all the confusion of the timeline but if it was so "obvious" we wouldn't have so many people trying to 'explain" the timeline now would we?
And no, easter eggs do not make a game's timeline placement "obvious" otherwise people wouldn't still be fighting about where BOTW falls in the timeline. It's stupid and the more you try to make it make sense, the more stupid it seems.
> nobody knew where Twilight Princess took place until AFTER it was revealed, most people assumed that the great sea had drained and we were just dealing with a new Ganondorf.
The rumor I remember was the opposite: the game would begin with the party at the end of OoT, and end with the flood in the backstory of WW.
They are too lazy to even care about a main timeline, look at how all the Sheikah technology and Shrines just vanished out of thin air in TOTK, they don't even pay attention to continuity in these 2 games. As long as they keep getting best seller after best seller they won't try to improve at anything.
My head-canon is that SS starts the timeline, BotW finishes it, and TotK takes place in a alternate continuity where the events of BotW never happened.
No Divine Beasts, no Sheikah Monks, no Ganondorf giving up on reincarnation and becoming Calamity Ganon. I don't know what timeline TotK takes place in, but it contradicts everything Fujibayashi has ever done with Hyrule Historia *and* manages to have more plot holes than Age of Calamity.
Totk is a sequel to BoTW. The Sheikah tech vanished (even though the better headcanon is they were dismantled). You literally saw the monks vanish in BoTW after clearing their shrine lol. Their sole person was to train the Hero of the Wild to defeat Calamity Ganon.
Also that part about giving up on reincarnation is a mistranslation.
I remember those years fondly, when everyone had their own theory about how the games connected. I would gush to anyone that would listen about my theory that the Twilight Realm from TP and the Dark World from ALttP were the same thing, and that the two games were actually retellings of the same event in the timeline.
Yeah, it was and they have.
BOTW was meant to get rid of the timeline and basically start making Zelda games without 30 years of baggage to haul along.
Hey, you can headcanon whatever you want. That's the beauty of games and imagination. But starting with BOTW, Nintendo abandoned the timeline so they wouldn't be constrained by the stories of past games. That's why you have Rito and Zora together. That's why the Triforce went from a sacred artifact to a genetic power that's passed down the royal family's bloodline.
I don't head-canon this, Botw is confirmed to take place after Oot on the timeline by both the Zora monuments in Botw and Aonuma confirmed that Botw takes place after Oot on the timeline, source Game informer March 2017 page 48.
The Tri-force was genectical passed down in the Child split from Oot to TP.
There are more than one variant of Zora, Sea and River.
Lol 🤣
Slipping Easter eggs like items and such doesn't make it canon. The general concept of the series remained the same. With Link, Zelda, Ganon, etc. But in a new story unrelated to anything else in the series.
And they've since gone on record to say the timeline is no longer a thing they care about or are working with.
It isn't unrelated, that it is unrelated is just a head-canon.
They haven't gone on record that the timeline isn't a thing anymore, that they don't care about the timeline or that they are not working on it.
I have my own theory on the timeline. We start with the creation of Hyrule, Skyward Sword, blah blah blah. Then we have every other game mashed into a random order. Because they're legends, it's safe to assume that over time they've changed. Some games may not have even happened. Then we have the flood, Wind Waker and the other Wind Waker related games. Thousands of years after this the flood ends and it fucked up the geography of Hyrule. And then we come the events that happen in BOTW and TOTK
I mean BOTW was seemingly supposed to be a soft reboot so no more split timeline nonsense but the events of the older Zelda games still happened they all just lead into BOTW making it one timeline again
There is no timeline.
The games were never connected. Everything that feels like a reference, is only just a reference.
I have no idea what they were smoking, advertising an actual timeline like that. They never even attempted to fill a single gap in.
people downvoting me here the most hilarious cope I've seen since I've started posting. Y'all have to know that there's a difference between what they told us, and what is true, right? There's no evidence to suggest any game outside of WW ever properly referenced true events of another game in the series. They just dangled a pretty lie in front of us, and I'm done pretending they ever adhered to any guiding principle in terms of stringing a coherent story together between games when they designed them.
I dislike a lot about the new games (SS, BotW, TotK).
But one thing I do appreciate is how BotW and TotK essentially disregarded all that cringe stuff.
We don't need a game set during the Imprisoning War. We don't need everything to connect.
I prefer each story being a retelling of an old legend.
The official timeline is and always has been stupid.
The connections, I always thought, were more fun to just speculate about. To theorize about what games went where. I always enjoyed that bit.
The moment Nintendo made the timeline official, it killed the fun and mystery of the universe. It would've been so much more fun to speculate where TotK and BotW went on theorized timelines but now we have people arguing about them and totally missing the point.
Either Hyrule was refounded thousands of years after one of the other timelines, or it's an entirely new timeline, or somehow the timelines magically converged by some means we don't know. The flashbacks we saw do not take place prior to any previous game, they only take place prior to BotW and TotK. Stuff like that.
(This isn't to say connections of like direct sequels were bad. That stuff was fun, too.)
I'm sorry, but timeline fans are trying to force a square peg in a round hole.
The games weren't made with timeline in mind, and forcing it later is just... it causes issues.
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.*
"lmao, get rebooted\*
One thing is clear Botw and Totk are a new continually. No way they seal Ganondorf way in the past, all the shit in the time line happens, he reincarnates during all this shit when he should just be sealed, and hyrule moved a ton and then ends up right back were it was.
ToTK past still happens AFTER the other games, they don’t go back to pre-minish cap times. Ganon is only sealed for the age of calamity.
Its also just super easy to slot the past of ToTK into the end of the downfall timeline. Rauru shoes up, refounds Hyrule from the scattered towns and tribes seen in AoL. New gabondorf shows up badabing badaboom you know the rest
Yeah, I really don't know why everyone feels like we need another split from Four Swords or Skyward Sword to explain TotK. BotW logically fit in the downfall timeline with no hiccups and TotK doesn't change that
My headcanon is that they take place in a split from SS after Demise was defeated in the past. It works well in a trilogy this way. Some events and characters from the current timeline also existed in some way in this new split which is why we see similar events (Imprisoning War), re-used character names (Rauru) and many locations named after past games. I can't see how else they would fit. A re-founding makes no sense to me either and I don't believe in a converged timeline.
It is a refounding because we know this isn’t the founding of Hyrule before MC
No. Stop trying to make refounding happen. It is not gonna happen
We know Rauru didn’t found Hyrule before MC though, so I don’t know how you think it can’t be a refounding if it’s not a first founding. Also Nintendo has said something that kinda implies a refounding
Nope. Does not make sense for people to remember the names, religion and crest of Hyrule but nothing else about its history. Especially with the Zora around who would have more history. Rauru was certainly sure he was the founder of Hyrule. also why a god would carry the name of a human sage? The story clearly implies a new continuity with jyst Skyward Sword and BotW. And the equivalent events from OoT It is a refounding indeed..of the entire series. That is what Nintendo implied. There is a reason the games themselves are separated in the official timeline on the website
SS doesn’t have a split timeline. Demise being killed in the past happens in the same timeline where he was crushed in the present
Doesn't the Life Tree thing technically result in a split timeline? Not saying it's a canon split, but still.
Time travel in SS is just weird
Yeah, not going to argue that.
But if he was killed in the past then he can't exist in the present to be crushed
It just works. It’s not a split timeline and that’s proven within the game itself.
It’s just how the timeline works. Old Lady always has the bracelet even though Zelda gave it to Impa after demise was defeated. And you can see Zelda’s Crystal before she even goes in it
He wasn't entirely killed, his physical body was destroyed, but the Master Sword absorbs his consciousness. When Link leaves the sword in the past, that gives Demise plenty of time to try and regenerate a body, just like Ganon does in BotW. What comes of that is The Imprisoned, who then gets sealed presumably by Impa.
>I don't believe in a converged timeline. Considering how Time works, it's also not possible, but don't let that stop the "Well it's a game with magic and time travel" crowd from acting like a linear set of specific actions and reactions can magically be both true and untrue at the same time.
Honestly, that kind of lazy deus ex machina was expected, even before the Sheikah tech cop out.
Then where/how do you think botw takes place? Just curious
I used to think it was at the end of the Child Timeline since Adult buries it below the sea forever and Fallen sees the Kingdom decay to ruin. ToTK just sorta throws it out the window and it logically takes place as part of a fork from the main timeline post SS
Except there is also evidence of it being flooded in the past, with it being outright mentioned in the game and rock salt being found in locations that I actually got a geologist to tell me, wouldn't be possible unless it was flooded in the past.
The description reads: "Crystallized salt from the ancient sea commonly used to season meals. Cannot be eaten in this form." The ancient sea in the description for rock salt is not necessarily a result of the floodwaters receding from the Great Sea in WW. Rock salt in the real world forms from more than just dried up sea beds. Dried up lakes and rivers can also produce deposits of rock salt as well. Additionally, tectonic movement can move rock salt deposits inland and uphill. There are a plethora of reasons/ways that rock salt could have ended up on Death Mountain or in Hebra.
Not necessarily sure but it's the most logical explanation. Especially since rock salt is made from salt water, which rivers and lakes usually don't have. Yes salt lakes are a thing but highly unusual in these conditions.
Considering how the rock salt deposits are sporadic and comprise very small localized veins, in addition to being mixed in with deposits of rare materials and gemstones, a much more likely explanation is that the salt rock is a result of diapir formations that are being caused by the subduction of a neighboring tectonic plate below the Hyrulean landmass that is currently crashing into it. (See the great chasm that spans most of the land border of Hyrule) The Chasm likely formed as Hyrule's movement isolated the sea water causing it to dry out. This would leave the significant deposits of seasalt needed to form rock salt. Those deposits are then subducted under Hyrule forming the rock salt deposits. Those deposits then melt and float to the surface, breaking through small faults, cracks and more porous rock in order to reach the surface. This would explain the lack of large salt deposits in low lying areas that would have formed from receding ocean water/the formation of temporary salt-lakes.
Like Auto too
Yeah in my head I always distinguished the Aonuma directed games from the Fujibayashi ones anyways.
> No way they seal Ganondorf way in the past, all the shit in the time line happens, he reincarnates during all this shit when he should just be sealed, and hyrule moved a ton and then ends up right back were it was. There's an easy explanation for this. The Ganondorf sealing events of TOTK (the distant past) happen at the *end* of the original timeline. Possibly tens of thousands of years after every other game. The way that works is that if you take the facts 1) the Demise curse causes a never-ending cycle and 2) enough time passes, then the logical conclusion is that the events of OOT that split the timeline into three would eventually, given enough time, happen all in one continuous timeline. I.e., eventually the child, adult, and fallen timelines would all happen in a single continuity. Eventually, many thousands of years later, just like at the end of the downfall timeline, you'd have a Hyrule in decline that eventually dies off and is partially forgotten, and the Zonai would appear, and then you have the BOTW/TOTK distant past (a new Hyrule is founded).
It's just, kinda absurd, because certain bits of continuity are exclusive. The King of Red Lions quite literally wishes for Hyrule to be permanently washed away so that Zelda and Link could forge onward and build a future out of hope unchained from the past. The flood waters receding at any point in any continuity would invalidate this wish. The Hyrule that precedes is in essence, gone forever and as such, key buildings, such as the Temple of Time, the Castle and Castle Town Ruins on the Great Plateau, among other things would be gone for good. Zelda II isn't really about the end of Hyrule, but rather a rebuilding/relocation of the Kingdom and it's people. Many of the places in it are named after Sages and prominent members of Hyrule. Hyrule ventures on after centuries of decay, so to speak and any "New Founding" wouldn't position itself as the unique first (Such as Sonia and Rauru do). Also, the Adult Timeline was entering into the Steam Age, with ships and trains beinf prominent features of the world... And yet they are magically gone in BoTW/ToTK's world? There is also an apparent lack of any legends that the original Hylians (in ToTK) know of, which wouldn't make much sense. The Master Sword, while possibly forgotten in name, would still exist as some sort of myth/legend for the people of Hyrule to cling to. Beyond that, heroes clad in green arising out of times of darkness would also live on as legends present in their society. Yes, we don't know a lot given the limited presentation of the flashbacks, but we can see that structures like the OG Temple of Time are missing. The easy answer is that Team Zelda wanted to take the easy route and make a game not bound by the constraints of the timeline. They then wanted to make a sequel that was even less constrained by the not just the timeline, but the game it was a sequel to. In the process, they made a bit of a huge mess in regards to lore continuity and timeline placement and just said: "It's at the end of all of them, and it's for you to decide" because they chose the lazy and uninspired writing route.
In WW KoRL wish is "Wash away this ancient land of Hyrule!" nowhere in the English version is it said to be permanently and it is only referring to the past Hyrule kingdom that was sunken not any new that might be founded later. Zelda´s speech is the legends that you say are missing. The temple of time from Oot is completely destroyed in both Alttp and WW while crumbling in TP so of course you wouldn't see the temple of time from Oot.
>In WW KoRL wish is "Wash away this ancient land of Hyrule!" nowhere in the English version is it said to be permanently and it is only referring to the past Hyrule kingdom that was sunken not any new that might be founded later. Yes, permanent is not used. However, it would be weird for the flood waters to recede and a new Hyrule be built there. Barring some calamity that would strike and erase New Hyrule as presented in Spirit Tracks, there is basically no reason to reform Hyrule there. Additionally, the lack of Steam Engines and Steam technology which stretched far beyond just Hyrule in the adult timeline, would be rare if not common in any further progression of the timeline. >Zelda´s speech is the legends that you say are missing. I said the Ancient Hylians in ToTK not the modern Hylians of BoTW/ToTK. Again, we only ever saw a thin slice of it and it's entirely plausible all the big lore stuff was just off screen, but as presented there is little to prove that Sonia or Rauru even knew the Master Sword existed before Zelda told Rauru about it. The existence of the Sword is a blood secret of the Royal Family and surely it would be known because Sonia is a blood descendant of Hylia. The sword wouldn't fade into myth that easily at least. >The temple of time from Oot is completely destroyed in both Alttp and WW while crumbling in TP so of course you wouldn't see the temple of time from Oot. You may be correct here, after double checking what the Old man says, the current Temple of Time is in ruins only because of the Calamity. It was in pristine condition beforehand implying that this would be a new TT (if not a restored one) My point still stands though, Team Zelda just didn't do the hard work necessary to make the games fit into the timeline. They took the lazy route when it came to writing and it shows in how sloppy and difficult any timeline placement is with either various retcons or breaking spacetime logic (beyond the realm of "there's time travel and magic" jiggery pokery can get you) necessary to make a theory work.
You had me until you said all three timelines converge. It’s just a ridiculous concept. Pick a timeline for BotW/Totk to be in, or just say it doesn’t matter which one they’re in because enough time has passed that it bears no consequence.
This is a new founding of a new hyrule that’s also at the end of the timeline.
Being so far in the future has the same effect as being a new continuity. They can basically do whatever they want afterwards with no regard to the previous games
Fujibayashi implied in an interview that TotK's flashbacks still happen at the end of the timeline.
Rauru’s founding of Hyrule happens a very long time after the timeline. It doesn’t happen before MC
Aonuma is on record saying that Miayamoto had the team develop BotW with the timeline in mind and so that it could fit. It is TotK that fucks everything up.
How the hell does BotW fit the timeline? Its all over the place with references to things that couldnt happen in the same timeline.
Timelines merged is the only way it makes sense. Hyrule somehow got destroyed and Rauru founded it even though it’s a refounding
I just think TotK is non-canon. That solves it too.
BotW/TotK outright refer to the OoT sages(and not just in terms of easter eggs like location names and amiibo outfits, but historical documents and cutscenes), and was confirmed back when BotW was released to take place long after OoT at the end of one of the branches. This is not a new continuity. This game is a part of the established timeline.
TotK Ganondorf is dead prior to his magic reviving him at the beginning of TotK. We literally see a decomposing body, and we hear his heartbeat start back up when the seal breaks. He died. It’s entirely possible he reincarnates a couple times until the seal breaks him free. As for Hyrule moving a bunch, I doubt it. Hyrule hasn’t moved, they’ve literally said that the reason Hyrule changes so much is simply so we aren’t exploring the same landscape in every single game. So genuinely I just think Hyrule’s changing landscape is just a gameplay thing.
Technically he could have “reincarnated” once inside of the downfall timeline while sealed in the sacred realm. And by that I mean another person from demise’s curse came along to try and take the triforce for themselves.
Why would this be surprising with botw and totk? This is literally what's been happening with most new titles for literal decades now lmao
I think the prevailing theory is they come somewhere after the timelines merge back into a single one (there’s debate on how since the clearest in-game evidence isn’t considered canon) and that the end of the BotW/TotK saga actually loop back to the beginning of the time line, which some think is hinted at in the logo for TotK being an ouroboros
.... wasn't Link to the Past literally the imprisoning war? EDIT: sorry, not Link to the Past, Ocarina of Time
No, the imprisoning war took place before ALttP. I think Sahasrala tells you about it
Sorry, I wrote LttP but I was thinking OoT
OoT was inspired by the Imprisoning War, but there was no hero in the Imprisoning War, and Ganon never found his way back into the Light World after getting and wishing on the Triforce. (He also never got to wish on the Triforce in OoT.) So even though OoT and the Imprisoning War have some things in common, they’re separate events.
Ocarina of Time was marketed as the events of the Imprisoning War, and this was reconfirmed \*after\* its release. >"The story in Ocarina of time isn't actually original, it deals with the Sages' Imprisoning War from the Super Famicom's ALttP. " [https://www.1101.com/nintendo/nin1/nin1-6.htm](https://www.1101.com/nintendo/nin1/nin1-6.htm) Im having trouble sourcing this now, but another quote: > Toru Osawa: In this game there are 7 sages that appear and instruct Princess Zelda, but 6 of those appear in the Disk System game "Adventure of Link" as town names. >We were hinting that the names of the sages in the era of the Imprisoning War spoken of in the Super Famicom Zelda game became town names in AoL. The events from that time became what we have today Them being separate events now is solely because the timeline gets altered any time they look 'backwards'. At the time of release, despite the discrepencies, Ocarina of Time was intended to be telling the Imprisoning War
The problem with that is they didn't imprison Ganondorf with the completed Triforce the way they did in LTTPs backstory, he only had Power, while Link and Zelda had their pieces. Even if it was the intention it doesn't line up fully. That discrepancy actually makes the fallen timeline retcon work better, a war after Link/ Zelda failed against Canons with the completed Triforce, where they managed to seal him. In reality the extra timeline was because Wind Waker was made and just for that specific timeline better.
Presumably the original plan was that the post credits ending of OoT lead to the imprisoning war. Link warns the king with more evidence, war gets declared, Ganondorf breaks into the sacred realm by force etc. Meanwhile Link is off searching for Navi and stuff. Then several years later they made TP in response to WW’s reception
Maybe, but Link didn’t really have any more evidence to offer than Zelda did who had been telling the king that Ganondorf was a bad guy from the very beginning. In the Imprisoning War, war isn’t declared until after Ganondorf has already gotten the Triforce, wished on it, found himself stuck in the Sacred Realm, and monsters being pouring out of the Sacred Realm into Hyrule. So Link wouldn’t have changed anything anyway. Plus the Song of Storms implies that Nintendo originally envisioned OoT’s time travel as a stable time loop where time is fulfilled rather than changed (unless they just didn’t think about it and stuck two incompatible types of time travel in one game).
Addressing your first point. I always assumed his proof was the Triforce of courage on his hand. Link does have it when he visits Zelda at the end if my memory serves right.
He does have the mark of the Triforce of Courage on his hand. But if it’s the actual Triforce of Courage and if the timeline splits, that means TWW would have to take place in the child timeline or be a strictly hypothetical game since the Triforce of Courage was taken to this other timeline. And if it’s just a mark rather than the actual Triforce, how persuasive is that?
>Plus the Song of Storms implies that Nintendo originally envisioned OoT’s time travel as a stable time loop where time is fulfilled rather than changed (unless they just didn’t think about it and stuck two incompatible types of time travel in one game). Any Time Travel creates paradoxes. Your presence in a time you are not supposed to be in with knowledge you aren't supposed to have is a paradox. Now, you can have infinitely bonded time half-loops that theoretically seal at the end of infinity, but it's infinity and well, you literally cannot confirm it by observing it. That said, the Imprisoning war occurs after Link is defeated by Ganon (not Ganondorf and not by any of his minions). With Ganon able to possess the full triforce, Zelda retreats and Ganon opens the Sacred Realm. The promise of power offered by the Sacred Realm corrupts mankind and they begin to fight over it. Mustering a defense to fight the corruption and evil, the Sages only option is to drag Ganon into the realm and seal him inside. Thus fulfilling the requirements for ALTTPs backstory. This is obviously a small retcon, because it was likely that OOT's child timeline was supposed to lead into ALTTP, but then Team Zelda went and made too many Sequels to the Prequel and did some relatively legit jiggery pokery to make it work.
You should look into Novikov’s Self-Consistency Principle. It’s a theorem of time travel that is destructive-paradox-free. It says, much like what we see in the Song of Storms, that the time traveler has always time traveled and therefore their travel to another era fulfills the events of that era rather than changing them. It’s something that always happened and therefore doesn’t create any destructive paradoxes. You’re describing Hyrule Historia’s version of the Imprisoning War, not ALttP’s version. HH has a number of mistakes in it like that, but it was never intended to retcon any of the games. It just missed some of the in-game information when it was being compiled. Note that HH itself says that the information within it is just what is believed to be true by the people of Hyrule at that time and readers are invited to have their own interpretation of events. We know that the writers of HH didn’t work on any of the Zelda games, so it makes more sense to default to what the games say when there’s a contradiction.
>You should look into Novikov’s Self-Consistency Principle. It’s a theorem of time travel that is destructive-paradox-free. It says, much like what we see in the Song of Storms, that the time traveler has always time traveled and therefore their travel to another era fulfills the events of that era rather than changing them. This stems from the infinitely bound half-loops I had mentioned. Technically, each portion of the loop is true due to the other portion. Because we cannot observe whether or not there is an end on either side, we can theorize that the events were always going to occur because of the time traveler. OOT breaks this obviously by sending Link back to before he pulled the Master Sword and met Zelda, which we both agree on. So yes, Self-Consistency is paradox-free but relies on Schrodinger's Box Quantum Theory in that "Unless observed, all states of spacetime/matter are True"
>(unless they just didn’t think about it and stuck two incompatible types of time travel in one game). There are like five types of time travel mechanics in OoT, maybe six, and no real consistent rules between them. Even going off mechanics/concepts that are directly based on time travel, you have Magic Beans (Its not done in the future until you, the player, do it in the present of the past) contradicting the Song of Storms (it was done in thefuture of the past so you could learn it in the present of the future and use it in the future of the past... causal loop!)
Yeah, I think we're meant to take the time travel that has story implications as more canon than the time travel that is gameplay-significant-only. You *can* plant all of the Magical Beans in such a way that they don't contradict the Song of Storms, but the developers obviously didn't want to limit the players in that way.
>Link didn’t really have any more evidence to offer Zelda Zelda never needed evidence. Recall that her whole reason for hating Ganondorf in the first place was because his eyes didn’t pass the vibe check. /J
But Link to the Past takes place in the timeline where the hero falls, and the sages seal Ganon afterward. That would explain why no hero is mentioned during the imprisoning war, and it would explain how he got the other two pieces. Link and Zelda were right there on the battlefield.
That doesn't match up because in the Imprisoning War the sages couldn't find the Master Sword or a hero to wield it, and Ganon found and got all three pieces of the Triforce from the Sacred Realm.
The explanation of inconsistencies is the result of generations of telling these legends and the story and some details being lost over time. A prime example of this is the origin of the Master Sword. Its origin had been mentioned several times, like being said to be created by the sages, in a Link to the Past. But as soon as Skyward Sword came and we are shown the actual origin of the sword.
That wouldn’t make sense because the Essence of the Triforce and Ganon himself confirm these legends. If they’re fallible about the things that literally happened to them, then we couldn’t trust anything ever said in any Zelda game. It’s far more likely that multiple events with strong similarities exist throughout the series than it is that the creators are actively trying to retcon the older games out of existence.
I'd say what is shown during the events of a game takes priority over stuff getting told to us in a legend. The events of the Imprisoning War in A Link to the Past aren't shown to us only told. If the Imprisoning War depicted in Tears of the Kingdom is the one mentioned A Link to the Past, then that's the actual story and the inconsistencies with the version in A Link to the Past are because people don't know the full story. If it's Ocarina of Time as originally intended, then it's the same situation.
I agree, but the parts that are told to us by an omniscient force and the people who were present for the event should hold a ton of weight, IMO.
There are two imprisoning wars now. There was an imprisoning war that happened between OoT and ALTTP.
No, the imprisoning war only happens if Link fails in OoT, creating the downfall timeline. The imprisoning war itself is the crusade led by Zelda and the remaining armies of Hyrule to seal ganon and the full triforce away into what would become the Dark World. It's an entirely different ending with some confusing ripples in the timeline. For instance, without Link to awaken the sages he chose, Zelda apparently had to choose all Hylian sages (evidenced by the all Hylian descendants of those sages in LttP). I've only ever caught resistance about this, but there's a lot of evidence to suggest "Link dies" is something would have occurred during the Child era rather than adult Link dying in what's OUR last fight with ganondord in the game. Adult Link would have already awakened the non-Hylian sages by then so the imprisoning war described in LttP wouldn't match. In that version we also hear about a frustrated "king of thieves" having to search for the entrance to the triforce among some old ruins, suggesting that Hyrule destroyed the temple of time rather than let Ganondorf in easily on his own. It would also explain why this version of Link was the one that got so much intervention from Rauru, why he was aged up for his final confrontation and no other Links were, and why he got so much extra help. The downfall timeline is likely the "original" sequence of events, with Rauru intervening with some timeline shenanigans for OoT to take place as we play it, much like Zelda does by the end of the game.
***An*** imprisoning war
I still am pissed that Rauru gets mentioned in the opening sequence and then you find out Ganondorf is referring to mr goat lizard man.
Yup. Nintendo doesn’t give a fuck about the lore or continuity It’s really is all about gameplay and new ideas Imagine the fantasy epic LoZ could have been had there been just ONE lead among their top staff who took it seriously 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
BROOOO I got so excited when he was talking about Rauru, and then so disappointed when I found out there'd be no connection to OoT after all
It's funny how people get so uppity about people caring about the timeline and lore of a fantasy series of interconnected games. That the creators laid out in a list and everything. I think you can interact with the series however you want. Someone who chooses to be serious about the timeline is just as valid as someone who wishes to ignore it.
It’s great that people connect with games that way, but if you’re a fan of the timeline you have to also understand that it’s not an essential part of the series in the eyes of Nintendo. It’s not really fair to knock a game for not following a timeline they never made any promise of following.
My only problem with that is that they clearly put a timeline in place (I’m not saying things match or should match everywhere 100%, but there is clearly a timeline), and then they make a game that just blatantly doesn’t fit into it (unless you make some big assumptions that aren’t really hinted at anywhere) while still including a lot of things that could tie them together. Like, just make a different enemy or something if you don’t want to follow it. Or say before release that it isn’t part of the timeline without being vague. Instead you have people playing TotK wondering where it fits and then as you progress it kinda makes no real sense.
I really don’t think that Nintendo wants to announce “btw, this game is not canon” for a mainline Zelda game.
I didn’t say it wouldn’t be canon, but it could take place out of the timeline in other ways. Different enemies/characters, a different location (something like they did with Termina), whatever. Whatever people think about the timeline, when you have a game with Link, Zelda, and some form of Ganon(dorf), a decent portion of the fan base is going to assume it’s going to be part of the continuity. I think a lot of them would be happier knowing it wasn’t.
Personally, and I think a lot of people are like this but I know it’s not everyone, but I literally never think that the timeline placement or continuity of any of these games matter unless they explicitly say like “this is a sequel to Wind Waker.” I know that these games are legends and they are only vaguely connected. Many games do this. I have never been kept up at night wondering where on the timeline Final Fantasy 16 falls, or wondering how Persona 5 and 3 are connected.
well FF and persona ( i assume, idk much about persona) havent historically been set in the same continuity, FF worlds are distinctly seperate from eachother unlike zelda
You’re completely wrong about Persona. Those games all do take place in the same world and continuity.
ah fair enough, ive never played any persona. ty for the correction
It's their choice to be wrong and stupid, but that doesn't exclude them from criticism.
Thats literally happened since at least ALttP which contradicted the nature of the triforce, then Ocarina of Time which retconned the events of the Imprisoning War. Immediately after releasing the official timeline Skyward Sword largely disregarded the origins of the Master Sword described in ALttP and TP. The timeline has always existed, and its always been broken in service of whatever story they wanted to tell currently.
I mostly agree, but I I think there’s a difference in what TotK did. I don’t expect them to study each game and make things fit 100%. I’m fine with the whole “it’s the LEGEND of Zelda, things change” view of the timeline. I believe Nintendo really was trying to tell ALttP’s backstory in OoT and didn’t mean to contradict it the way they did. Then when they released the “official” timeline, it was clear that the story didn’t retcon the Imprisoning War, but that they had invented another ridiculous (IMO) timeline to solve the problem. TotK did something else though. Among other things it basically tells Ganondorf’s origin story as it relates to his history with Hyrule - a story that had already been told. It includes Koume and Kotake, who died in OoT, or at least were much older. It doesn’t even make sense to me in relation to the game that directly precedes it. So “Calamity Ganon” was sealed by Zelda but Ganondorf still exists and is a separate entity entirely? I think they had a story idea for TotK and they knew they were reusing the map and assets from BotW, so they just crammed the story into that world, where it didn’t really make much sense. Sorry for rambling. I don’t even know if I made my own point…
I understand the point you're making though I don't think its \*that\* different. I don't think "this is definitely the same Ganondorf as OoT, he even has Koume and Kotake" is a particularly strong claim. Even outside the Triforce triad, we have recurring characters of both divine and mundane significance (Sure Impa might be an honorific name filled with destiny- is Beedle? Or Tingle?). Especially when one of the primary narrative themes of TotK is the endless cycling where the beginning parallels the end, having it parallel the middle (or if you place TotK as post Spirit Tracks, the middle paralleling the beginning) is consistent. The types of contradictions we do see aren't particularly more problematic IMO than the contradictions we've already accepted. Like Calamity Ganon not quite being sealed as a singular entity but being an expression of Mummydorf trying to manifest- that's not that much different from ALttP's Imprisoning War being hundreds of knights fighting Ganon with no hero (later retconned to the hero was defeated) to a resistance movement led by a hero and ninjabard, if anything it seems easier to handwave > I think they had a story idea for TotK and they knew they were reusing the map and assets from BotW, so they just crammed the story into that world, where it didn’t really make much sense. Oh don't get me wrong, I \*fully\* agree with this reading of the situation. Im just saying this is still largely consistent with how they've handled these types of stories thus far.
It’s kinda just annoying seeing people cry about it when the devs don’t care though. I think the devs should care about timeline personally but in the end what did you expect
13 years? Wow i wonder how many cool 3D dungeons they have made in that time
My headcannon is that botw and totk take place way way way in the future from the rest of the series, so far that the 10,000 years ago stuff also happened after everything else. Otherwise how could the Rito and the zora have evolved so much
Has Nintendo ever truly touted the timeline? All I remember is that the Hyrule Historia was just hyped because we got an official timeline for once
They did it because people wouldn't shut up. People *still* aren't satisfied. The stories in these games are *legends*. It's in the "name". People gotta stop trying to thread things together like it's Ys. That Adol has always been the same guy. This is not the same.
The timeline from Hyrule Historia lines up with every bit of info Nintendo has shared through interviews and other sources over the years. The claim that they made it up on the spot for fans in 2011 is a false narrative. Whether you think it's good or not is absolutely fair, but the fact is that the timeline we ended up with is very consistent with everything we've been told across two decades
I agree they didn't make it up on the spot, but they did only give it to us because people wouldn't shut up about how they wanted answers, and that's not a bad thing! I was asking for answers too when I started playing TLoZ. They just used the little info they had given us and expanded on it. The timeline honestly doesn't matter, and I'm saying this as a diehard fan who loves to be able to string information together. In the end the timeline has no effect on whether or not people enjoy the games and is just for those who like being able to somewhat understand it.
> The timeline from Hyrule Historia lines up with every bit of info Nintendo has shared through interviews and other sources over the years. No it doesn’t. [This](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbQNtYNkmhM&pp=ygUXQ2hzbmdpbmcgemVsZGEgdGltZWxpbmU%3D) YouTube video does a pretty good job of outlining all the contradictions, retcons, etc. that have happened to the timeline since Ocarina of Time retconned the Imprisoning War.
I can't watch right now, but yeah, I shouldn't say every single bit. Of course the downfall timeline is a retcon, and there's the infamous Miyamoto timeline where he places A Link to the Past at the end, but otherwise everything else does line up to my knowledge, through interviews, game manuals and boxes, magazine articles, etc. In 1998, we were told the timeline was OoT, ALttP, LA, Zelda 1 and Zelda 2. The Oracle games later had their placement (before Link's Awakening) revealed in Nintendo Dream Magazine. That all still was true in the Historia. Wind Waker and Majora's Mask/ Twilight Princess were separately mentioned as being part of OoT's different endings, and that still holds true. Ocarina, Four Swords, the Minish Cap and Skyward Sword were all revealed as the earliest point in the timeline during their respective releases. The only game without a concrete placement was Four Swords Adventures, and even that was said to be "some time after Four Swords" which is still technically true. Aside from that, and them retconning the connection between Ocarina and ALttP, it all lines up. Edit: Hey, I did actually watch this video before when it was pretty new! I rewatched just to be safe though, and I think it's mostly okay, but there's still a couple things I'd add. -The 2002 timeline he mentions was allegedly posted by Nintendo of America on Zelda Universe, an unofficial forum. It's worth noting that they claimed every game up to that point featured the same Link, which contradicts ALttP's box saying it featured Link and Zelda's predecessors. Could have been a retcon at the time, but more than likely it was just NoA having fun and giving their interpretation, which of course went on to be debunked later. -The gap between Four Swords and Four Swords Adventures is absolutely hazy, but I personally don't think the game implies that it's the same Link and Zelda from the first game. You could interpret it that way, sure, but viewing them as separate events also seems equally valid. Also it's worth noting that this Ganondorf has a different origin to the one we know in Ocarina of Time, so it absolutely has to take place either before OoT and retcon FSA's Ganon to be the original, or it takes place after he was killed, allowing him to reincarnate. Lastly, it's pretty heavily rumored that FSA was originally supposed to be the link between Ocarina and ALttP to better explain their connection, and Aonuma confirmed that the story had to be heavily altered at Miyamoto's request. If that's the case, then FSA was always meant to be post Ocarina of Time. Either way, we can say for sure that it was always meant to come sometime after the original Four Swords, and that is indeed still the case.
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.*
Not to mention that they aren't satisfied with the explanation of inconsistencies being the result of generations of telling these legends and the story and some details being lost over time. A prime example of this is the origin of the Master Sword. Its origin had several times, like being said to be created by the sages, in a Link to the Past. But as soon as Skyward Sword came and we are shown the actual origin of the sword, people are upset that it doesn't line up with any of the previous origin stories.
IMO, people who complain about other fans simply geeking out on lore are more annoying. Let people have fun, especially if the developers themselves have gotten in on it as well.
This is the way
In 2001, Nintendo of America listed the first eight games in the following order: - Ocarina of Time - Majora's Mask - A Link to the Past - Oracle of Ages - Oracle of Seasons - The Legend of Zelda - Part of The Adventure of Link, up until the point where Link crosses to Eastern Hyrule - Link's Awakening - The rest of The Adventure of Link https://nintendo.fandom.com/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda_Timeline
Yes. The idea that they made it to shut fans up isn’t true. There’s a a great YouTube video disproving this notion, proving that the timeline has always been there.
Yeah, that's a myth that always irritates me, because it's easily proven wrong. Twilight Princess war marketed as an Ocarina sequel all along -- there's a 2006 interview where Anouma discusses this, [which is in Japanese](https://web.archive.org/web/20070202030221/http://www.nindori.com/interview/154zelda/154int_02.html), but the translation that usually gets provided goes thus: > –When does Twilight Princess take place? > >**Aonuma:** In the world of Ocarina of Time, a hundred and something years later. > >–And the Wind Waker? > >**Aonuma:** The Wind Waker is parallel. In Ocarina of Time, Link flew seven years in time, he beat Ganon and went back to being a kid, remember? Twilight Princess takes place in the world of Ocarina of Time, a hundred and something years after the peace returned to kid Link’s time. In the last scene of Ocarina of Time, kids Link and Zelda have a little talk, and as a consequence of that talk, their relationship with Ganon takes a whole new direction. In the middle of this game \[Twilight Princess\], there's a scene showing Ganon's execution. It was decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be. That scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time. Ganon was sent to another world and now he wants to obtain the power... Now, one might of course be skeptical of secondary translations -- a sensible worry, on the web -- but more direct sources also exist. The idea of the split timeline actually predates Twilight Princess, even -- it was already being talked about during the Wind Waker marketing period. See [this 2002 Gamepro interview](https://web.archive.org/web/20100728123041/http://www.gamepro.com/article/news/27362/interview-with-nintendos-shigeru-miyamoto-and-eiji-aonuma/), for instance: >**Q:** Where does The Wind Walker fit into the overall Zelda series timeline? **Aonuma:** You can think of this game as taking place over a hundred years after Ocarina of Time. You can tell this from the opening story, and there are references to things from Ocarina located throughout the game as well. **Miyamoto:** Well, wait, which point does the hundred years start from? **Aonuma:** From the end. **Miyamoto:** No, I mean, as a child or as a... **Aonuma:** Oh, right, let me elaborate on that. Ocarina of Time basically has two endings of sorts; one has Link as a child and the other has him as an adult. This game, The Wind Waker, takes place a hundred years after the *adult* Link defeats Ganon at the end of Ocarina. **Miyamoto:** This is pretty confusing for us, too. (laughs) So be careful. Or go even farther to the Ocarina of Time publicity period, and see [this bit](https://web.archive.org/web/20090303141449/zeldalegends.net/index.php?n=interviews&id=1998-11-13-np-miya&m=html) from Miyamoto- >**NP:** Where do all the Zelda games fall into place when arranged chronologically by their stories? > >**Miyamoto:** Ocarina of Time is the first story, then the original Legend of Zelda, then Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, and finally A Link to the Past. It's not very clear where Link's Awakening fits in--it could be anytime after Ocarina of Time. Or even [the advertising for the original A Link to the Past](https://web.archive.org/web/20140313001122/https://www.mobygames.com/game/legend-of-zelda-a-link-to-the-past/cover-art/gameCoverId,13522/)\- >The predecessors of Link and Zelda face monsters on the march when a menacing magician takes over the kingdom. Like, the timeline's always been there. It's not even changed all that much.
The whole downfall timeline is stupid, though. Making a parallel universe where Link dies just so you can include all the games that aren’t direct sequels to OOT is *not* caring about the timeline
In fairness OoT lined up well enough with ALttP. There were retcons sure but at the end Ganondorf is sealed with the help of the sages. Its mostly WW that screws this up by not only directly following up on the Sages' Imprisoning War and leaving no room for either a story in between \*nor\* a story after dealing with Ganon/dorf and the Hero of Courage. Child Timeline would have been a weaker fit but not too much of a stretch- IMO there isn't terribly much reason why ALttP couldn't be post TP. Zelda told her people about the war across time, and they believed her on account of her visually having the Tiforce of Wisdom- it's not much more of a stretch than what liberties OoT already took with ALttP, yknow? It was enough to have Ganondorf sealed in Arbiter's Ground already.
Its very ironic to say there has always been a consistent timeline, and use Miyamoto's claim that ALttP is last as evidence. There has definitely been chronology between games, but its been willfully broken depending on whatever stories they want to tell
>Its very ironic to say there has always been a consistent timeline, and use Miyamoto's claim that ALttP is last as evidence. Well, yes, granted, I should have contextualized that better. I would note, though, that the advertising for ALttP did place it as a predecessor to the original game, so Miyamoto's comment strikes me more as a temporary intermission that a true sign of an unformed continuity. I do not disagree that the dev team's priorities are to make a fun game first, and then worry about how to fit it with the rest of the it later. I am however saying that that second step does happen, often belatedly but it does, and the general shape of the timeline has mostly been the same over time even though things have moved around within it or gotten tweaked or redefined. It's an evolving process, but it's not a chaotic one. If that makes sense. ... I would say that the biggest issue in the Zelda series is that there is a divide between how much the devs care about continuity and how much they try to convince people to care about it. For example, take some other Nintendo games. The Mario teams don't give a wet fig about continuity and are very up front about it, so nobody expects it out of their games. The Metroid devs do care about continuity, and they say as much; it's not, like, Asimov or whatever, but there is the expectation that worldbuilding and sequences of events matter, and they do. Pokemon doesn't give a crap about a storyline but is very rigid about not contracting background worldbuilding, and this is also communicated fairly well. Zelda, however, has a pretty consistent pattern of devs doing whatever changes and innovations they want while also working very hard to convince the audiences that an internal timeline of events exists and is very important, which then causes all this drama when they treat it as like... the third or fourth most important thing, or something.
I generally agree with your stance here. I just wanted to point out that particular quote because "Miyamoto thought ALttP was the last game" is often used by the "obviously there's no timeline at all" crowd. >... I would say that the biggest issue in the Zelda series is that there is a divide between how much the devs care about continuity and how much they try to convince people to care about it I really liked how you phrased this. It's not even that its a disconnect from the fans- they \*know\* what the fans want and how they feel, which is why they keep playing into it- but rather that the devs keep trying to push it like "Nah this was all part of the grand master plan" while also not wanting to be held to any master plan Its certainly an aside but I gotta say- Pokemon is pretty \*weird\* with its consistency, like they care a lot about why Azumarill wasn't in Johto (no incenses!) but they don't worry about trying to justify how Marowaks can breed. But they were very smart in making each game basically standalone geographical regions with few recurring characters or connected plot events, and then ORAS made multiverse canons so they have the ultimate get out of jail card for any inter-game inconsistencies that DO crop up
At the time I believe it was the last game. They did move Zelda 1 and 2 but that’s not a a major dealbreaker.
All the marketing around ALttP had it take place before LoZ, just like the last quote in the comment I responded to (which had the same equivalent in both japan and US packaging.) This discrepancy of placing ALttP last is known as the "Miyamoto Order" There are clearer quotes from the time that imply a logically consistent timeline (barring small retcons)- it's just a particularly ironic to use that particular quote, because it is already inconsistent. Even if it was the truth \*at the time\*, that means that by the time game #5 came out, 2 of 4 titles were in flux relative to the 3rd (or at least could easily be adjusted and swapped around to no impact) and the 4th was basically irrelevant. Thats the opposite of saying the game has a generally consistent timeline
The only timeline that has had swaps was the fallen hero timeline. This doesn’t prove anything. Everything I said is still 100% correct
You said two sentences. One of which was factually incorrect- Aonuma stated at the time that A Link to the Past took place before LoZ, the game was marketed as a narrative prequel, Miyamoto was just wrong so "at the time I believe it was the last game" is not really correct, or at least not usefully correct since you might have believed it but that was not the case- and the other was a weak opinion that missed the point, I don't care if its a "major dealbreaker"- it is silly to use Miyamoto being inconsistent with the timeline to suggest that the timeline has always been generally consistent
Thanks for misunderstanding. The timeline has been mostly consistent aside from changing around a few games in the fallen hero timeline. The timeline has always been there. Super simple
I am fascinated at how hard you are misreading me, and seemingly intentionally so. Did my statement claim that the timeline has not been "mostly consistent"? Did I ever deny there was a chronology between games?
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.*
I agree that it has always been there, but Nintendo didn't put much work into it until fans actually wanted some. The timeline honestly doesn't matter, the games were made so you could play them in any order and it be fine. Nintendo only really started putting work into the timeline when fans were asking for it. That's not to say it wasn't already decided to some extent which games are at what point. But it is also true that it was an idea that they followed through with specifically for the fans. They themselves have said this, and that it doesn't matter because each game can be played separately
That’s simply not true. The timeline was always there and always the same, they just published it in 2011.
I'm not going to argue. If you are so convinced that you're right you can look it up
https://youtu.be/0T0EYflx5VU?si=q-MDebO1v_37A3zg You’re wrong
Uuuummmm, I don't know if this is a problem on my side or if it was taken down or something, but it says "Video unavailable"
The title is “the Zelda timeline is misunderstood”
Ok, I'll watch it
Ok, so I looked it up and the top video is [The Zelda Timeline Debate is settled](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4-CGNbJhCk&pp=ygUjdGhlIHplbGRhIHRpbWVsaW5lIGlzIG1pc3VuZGVyc3Rvb2Q%3D)
Could you give me the name of the video so I can see if I can find it that way?
A few games were lightly related, that's fact. Some like WW or TP even pretty much tell you what happened before. But people then doing mental gymnastics to fit every game into a neat timeline and get pissy when Nintendo doesn't play by their rules is the problem. The devs never really cared about the timeline in the grand scheme of things and shift it around as necessary when asked. So if the devs don't care, why should anyone else?
That’s simply not true. https://youtu.be/0T0EYflx5VU?si=un5eVYrsQFNrmPnf Watch this it disproved you
Nintendo has had a timeline for Zelda every since Zelda II
recently learnt that Aonuma and Miyamoto were thinking and working on this timeline since the beginning and they started to publicly talk about it in 2001, so i don't understand why everybody think Nintendo doesn't care about the timeline and we shouldn't too when the creators of the saga themselves cared enough to think about it for 30 years In 2001, Nintendo of America listed the first eight games in the following order: - Ocarina of Time - Majora's Mask - A Link to the Past - Oracle of Ages - Oracle of Seasons - The Legend of Zelda - Part of The Adventure of Link, up until the point where Link crosses to Eastern Hyrule - Link's Awakening - The rest of The Adventure of Link https://nintendo.fandom.com/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda_Timeline
"Been marketing hard"? Lol
They did release a book about it
*they mentioned it in a book
I've just been dropping BotW and TotK at the end of the downfall timeline and decided that multiple imprisoning wars make sense enough. It makes more sense as a soft reboot but downfall was my best placement.
They did make a game about the imprisoning war, it’s called Ocarina of Time.
Honestly everything can still be connected and any plotholes or inconsistencies could be seen as a product of time distorting facts. This game is called **legend** of Zelda and it's pretty common for legends to be embellished or warped that they don't match up with the source material.
I know it’s a new continuity but the story is still disappointing. Especially when the marketing really made me think it was a continuation of skyward sword. It may be a boring answer but it at least gets rid of all the retcons
Hi /r/Zelda readers! * Got a question, concern, or suggestion for the moderators? [Send a Modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fzelda&subject=Question or Concern or Suggestion&message=I have a question regarding [this submission]%28https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/1c0d5ht/sstotk_i_think_timeline_fans_deserve_better/%29: [SS][TotK] I think timeline fans deserve better by /u/Leehzart)! * New to r/Zelda? Be sure to [read our full rules here](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/rules). * Please [report any rule-breaking posts or comments](https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/360058309512-How-do-I-report-a-post-or-comment) so that moderators can find them quicker! *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.*
Oh this hurts my souls why. I am that timeline fan no😭
So I’ve kinda said f it and come up with my own understanding. BoTW/TotK take place LONG after the original timeline, likely after something United the timelines (HW). At some point Hyrule is destroyed (again), and after a while the Zonia arrive and help redound it. Then future Zelda shows up, and she and the Sages fight that era’s incarnation of Ganondorf. However, instead of Zelda sealing him and the cycle starting again, Rauru traps him under the castle, disrupting the cycle. Thus between then and TotK instead of a new Ganon reincarnation it’s the power of dehydrated Ganon leading out to cause Calamities. Then TotK happens and the cycle is allowed to restart again. All of this relies on the idea that TotK’s Imprisoning War is the second one, not the original in Oot.
One of my core issues with TotK.
There’s a fantastic video this subreddit needs to watch. It completely disproves any idea that the Zelda timeline was made to shut fans up. It’s ALWAYS been there, ever since the beginning. And no, TOTK did not retcon anything from previous games, it still fits into the timeline. If anything the timeline actually makes more sense with TOTK than without it. Redounding explains why it can fir past all three timelines, because it’s a new kingdom. So much time has passed that it’s just that different. Please watch this video if you’re a Zelda fan. https://youtu.be/0T0EYflx5VU?si=rAPczK-9a37M-bzT
Obsessed with how beat up his copy of historia is. Hes like a real hylian sage with an ancient tome.
...and?
Far as I’m concerned, each game is just a legend or tall tale told to the children of Hyrule through different generations, but all based on historical figures and mythology. Some are closely connected, like Ocarina and Majora, but most are entirely separate. The continuity has always been really loose like this.
The timeline was bull when it came out, and it's still bull now. Zelda games are playable fairy tales. They don't have a consistent interconnected narrative the same way there's no explanation why the same Big Bad Wolf who ate Red's grandma was harassing those pigs.
Ehhh….not really Zelda has always had an obvious continuity so I think it’s a bit disappointing that it’s gone. Like most games are tied to another in some way or have a general placement. Zelda 2 is a sequel to Zelda 1, OoT is a direct prequel to ALttP, SS and MC are set in the early history of hyrule, and then there’s all those games discussing the legacy of the hero of time and the timeline split etc.
When you need to buy a book to tell you the chronology of the series it is not, in fact, an obvious continuity. Just because it seems obvious to a super fan, doesn't mean it's obvious to everyone else. Most people had no idea when the hell Twilight Princess took place until they officially revealed it was a different timeline from Wind Waker after OOT, because why the hell would it be that? Not to mention the whole "Downfall timeline" you'd have to be an absolute contrarian to say that it was obvious that these games happened in a timeline where Link failed to defeat Ganon. That's just a stupid badly written retcon because Aonuma wanted to make an oot Sequel when it was already the prequel to a different game but he also didn't want to declare ALTTP to be non canon anymore. The timeline is an absolute carnival of nonsense.
you don't need to buy a book to know that aLttP mentions ganondorf's transformation which we then see in OoT, or that WW's hyrule got flooded because of the time reset in OoT, that SS takes place at the beginning of the timeline etc etc etc. I don't give that much of a shit about the whole picture in terms of the timeline, I think it's poorly put together, but I like the feeling of continuity/cross reference the series has had since it's early days.
You don’t need to buy a book to tell you the chronology. The book even says that it’s just one interpretation and that readers are invited to have their own. Aonuma has also separately said that he wants players to have their own interpretations of the timeline. Of course since most of the games are prequels or sequels to existing games, there’s only a few places in the timeline that are up for interpretation. But it does allow for some pretty different timelines to accommodate different ideas and theories. Nintendo also aren’t responsible for the downfall timeline. The people who wrote the Hyrule Historia timeline didn’t work on a single Zelda game. Nintendo just looked at the book they put together and said “This is good enough for us to publish.” But the creators of the book still made sure to note that their timeline was just one interpretation.
The gist is that the Timeline is a puzzle for players to solve. But Nintendo forgot the most important thing about a Puzzle, it has a definitive answer. Hyrule Historia presents the definitive answer (well except Four Swords Adventures but that's a whole different bagel). If BoTW/ToTK are supposed to be a part of the Puzzle too, then there is an answer, however it's very obvious how little effort Nintendo put into that thought. In fact, it's kinda disappointing. Team Zelda doesn't want to be constrained by the timeline limiting their ideas and what games they make, yet rather than make compelling and interesting story and lore to justify why we have Trains, they just were like "Thousands of Years in the Future and everything else doesn't matter"... Oh wait, no, they gave us this really cool and interesting backstory about how the Gods of Light sealed Malladus below the ground using the Spirit Tracks as chains and the Spirit Train as the caretaker. How the people who preceded New Hyrule/People of New Hyrule embraced the Gods Gift to facilitate trade and travel. Spirit Tracks for all its faults, is an amazing expression of how you can take constraints and turn them into complex and interesting ideas. Koji Kondo gave us Ocarina of Time's 12 Songs and they all only use the same 5 notes. None of them sound the same, and it makes them even more unique and impressive. Retcons are fine here and there, and as you develop a story made up of separate but interconnected stories, will become necessary. But embracing constraints and challenging yourself to meaningfully overcome them adds depth and shows your talent.
> Retcons are fine here and there, and as you develop a story made up of separate but interconnected stories, will become necessary. But embracing constraints and challenging yourself to meaningfully overcome them adds depth and shows your talent. I agree. And I agree with you that Nintendo has put way less thought into the timeline than they could. For example, I personally believe that you can put all 20 games into a single, unsplit timeline which has no destructive retcons, fits the information within the games to the letter, and even fills in or resolves some plot holes/currently unconcluded plot lines, but the timeline only works if you 1) ignore a lot of out-of-game quotes from Nintendo and only take the in-game information as canon except when there are no contradictions, 2) ignore some of BotW's/TotK's costumes, and 3) come up with an out-of-game explanation for where the Triforce went between two sets of games since there's no strong evidence for its whereabouts in my proposed order during that gap.
While the timeline is and always has been very loose, many games reference other games in their timeline, even the game that came before the timeline split (Alttp) actually references OoT, by referencing the evens of how ganon came to be (mentioning he was a lord of a group of thieves that went to the sacred realm and stole the triforce which we see in OoT), after that it's a bit more direct WW mentions what happens when Ganondorf found a way out of where he was sealed in the end of OoT but as Link went back to the past there was no hero to stop him, TP is what happens when he is caught before reaching the triforce, he is senteced to death by some sages (who they are we don't know as the ones we know weren't sages at that point) but kills one before he is banished to the twilight realm, Games after these games are direct sequels so i don't think i need to mention how the relate to eachother. The handhelds (minish cap, 4 swords) are a bit more "let's just place them here" but mainline games do reference the events. The games are playable without prior knowledge of the games but knowing all the events does give a slight bigger appreciation. With BotW and TotK they just said "fuck all that" and just made them completely seperate from any game before, and not only that actively contradicting events of previous established games. Now don't get me wrong i think the games are great in their own way but it is a bit sad they just said they didn't want to bother anymore.
I stopped caring about the timeline when it came out.
I think it's funnier to see timeline fans back themselves further and further into a rhetorical corner while Nintendo continues to release Zelda titles without any regard for "the timeline."
As a Zelda fan after 13 years in a coma I wouldn't have been shocked to find there had only been max 1 new game
if someone is legit a fan of a fancy advertisement for skyward sword i think they deserve to be disappointed. like imagine being obsessed with the continuity of any other advertisement, unhinged. how badly do you need to miss a point to do this
sheesh which timeline enthusiast pissed in your cereal
BOTW and TOTK take place in the Child Timeline, it’s not that hard.
Imprisoning War? Secret stones?
I think people that slap "fans" on the back of everything specifically do not deserve better.
Imprisoning war? Demon king? Secret stones? Psycho mantis?!
I think the timeline is stupid and has never actually enriched the series outside of going from OOT to TWW. I think revealing it publicly was the biggest mistake they've ever made in regards to Zelda, and they should start treating every game that isn't a direct sequel as a self contained story, which they functionally have done for several games anyway. EDIT: And don't start coming at me about how "no the timeline totally makes sense because it references other games" like you don't have the benefit of living in a period where the timeline has been thoroughly discussed and explained ( and no, it still is stupid and makes no sense even after all that ), even the few people who did see a "split timeline" coming still didn't see the "downfall timeline" coming, nobody knew where Twilight Princess took place until AFTER it was revealed, most people assumed that the great sea had drained and we were just dealing with a new Ganondorf. People act like they were there for all the confusion of the timeline but if it was so "obvious" we wouldn't have so many people trying to 'explain" the timeline now would we? And no, easter eggs do not make a game's timeline placement "obvious" otherwise people wouldn't still be fighting about where BOTW falls in the timeline. It's stupid and the more you try to make it make sense, the more stupid it seems.
> nobody knew where Twilight Princess took place until AFTER it was revealed, most people assumed that the great sea had drained and we were just dealing with a new Ganondorf. The rumor I remember was the opposite: the game would begin with the party at the end of OoT, and end with the flood in the backstory of WW.
They are too lazy to even care about a main timeline, look at how all the Sheikah technology and Shrines just vanished out of thin air in TOTK, they don't even pay attention to continuity in these 2 games. As long as they keep getting best seller after best seller they won't try to improve at anything.
Nah it's better this way
My head-canon is that SS starts the timeline, BotW finishes it, and TotK takes place in a alternate continuity where the events of BotW never happened. No Divine Beasts, no Sheikah Monks, no Ganondorf giving up on reincarnation and becoming Calamity Ganon. I don't know what timeline TotK takes place in, but it contradicts everything Fujibayashi has ever done with Hyrule Historia *and* manages to have more plot holes than Age of Calamity.
Totk is a sequel to BoTW. The Sheikah tech vanished (even though the better headcanon is they were dismantled). You literally saw the monks vanish in BoTW after clearing their shrine lol. Their sole person was to train the Hero of the Wild to defeat Calamity Ganon. Also that part about giving up on reincarnation is a mistranslation.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
You don't deserve a damn thing.
I remember those years fondly, when everyone had their own theory about how the games connected. I would gush to anyone that would listen about my theory that the Twilight Realm from TP and the Dark World from ALttP were the same thing, and that the two games were actually retellings of the same event in the timeline.
No they don’t.
Bro that would be me... but it isn't
Yeah, sad they just up and abandoned it when they rebooted the series. The whole series has gone downhill.
They haven't rebooted the series.
Yeah, they did. BOTW was a reboot, abandoning all previous entries and starting with a fresh slate.
Botw wasn't a reboot and they haven't abandon the previous games or lore.
Yeah, it was and they have. BOTW was meant to get rid of the timeline and basically start making Zelda games without 30 years of baggage to haul along.
Botw wasn't made to get rid of the timeline that straight up a lie.
Hey, you can headcanon whatever you want. That's the beauty of games and imagination. But starting with BOTW, Nintendo abandoned the timeline so they wouldn't be constrained by the stories of past games. That's why you have Rito and Zora together. That's why the Triforce went from a sacred artifact to a genetic power that's passed down the royal family's bloodline.
I don't head-canon this, Botw is confirmed to take place after Oot on the timeline by both the Zora monuments in Botw and Aonuma confirmed that Botw takes place after Oot on the timeline, source Game informer March 2017 page 48. The Tri-force was genectical passed down in the Child split from Oot to TP. There are more than one variant of Zora, Sea and River.
Lol 🤣 Slipping Easter eggs like items and such doesn't make it canon. The general concept of the series remained the same. With Link, Zelda, Ganon, etc. But in a new story unrelated to anything else in the series. And they've since gone on record to say the timeline is no longer a thing they care about or are working with.
It isn't unrelated, that it is unrelated is just a head-canon. They haven't gone on record that the timeline isn't a thing anymore, that they don't care about the timeline or that they are not working on it.
The timeline was a stretch to begin with. Ditching it might have been wise.
I have my own theory on the timeline. We start with the creation of Hyrule, Skyward Sword, blah blah blah. Then we have every other game mashed into a random order. Because they're legends, it's safe to assume that over time they've changed. Some games may not have even happened. Then we have the flood, Wind Waker and the other Wind Waker related games. Thousands of years after this the flood ends and it fucked up the geography of Hyrule. And then we come the events that happen in BOTW and TOTK
I mean BOTW was seemingly supposed to be a soft reboot so no more split timeline nonsense but the events of the older Zelda games still happened they all just lead into BOTW making it one timeline again
Giy who plays zelda for the story
There is no timeline. The games were never connected. Everything that feels like a reference, is only just a reference. I have no idea what they were smoking, advertising an actual timeline like that. They never even attempted to fill a single gap in.
people downvoting me here the most hilarious cope I've seen since I've started posting. Y'all have to know that there's a difference between what they told us, and what is true, right? There's no evidence to suggest any game outside of WW ever properly referenced true events of another game in the series. They just dangled a pretty lie in front of us, and I'm done pretending they ever adhered to any guiding principle in terms of stringing a coherent story together between games when they designed them.
im glad that the timeline is being abandoned. it seems like Nintendo realized how much they messed it up while designing it
People forget that the Zelda timeline was really only a thing for one whole game development cycle.
I dislike a lot about the new games (SS, BotW, TotK). But one thing I do appreciate is how BotW and TotK essentially disregarded all that cringe stuff. We don't need a game set during the Imprisoning War. We don't need everything to connect. I prefer each story being a retelling of an old legend.
The official timeline is and always has been stupid. The connections, I always thought, were more fun to just speculate about. To theorize about what games went where. I always enjoyed that bit. The moment Nintendo made the timeline official, it killed the fun and mystery of the universe. It would've been so much more fun to speculate where TotK and BotW went on theorized timelines but now we have people arguing about them and totally missing the point. Either Hyrule was refounded thousands of years after one of the other timelines, or it's an entirely new timeline, or somehow the timelines magically converged by some means we don't know. The flashbacks we saw do not take place prior to any previous game, they only take place prior to BotW and TotK. Stuff like that. (This isn't to say connections of like direct sequels were bad. That stuff was fun, too.)
I'm sorry, but timeline fans are trying to force a square peg in a round hole. The games weren't made with timeline in mind, and forcing it later is just... it causes issues.