Legend of Zelda Offical The Legend of Zelda Thread

[GoblinWhirlwind]

Yeah, controllers aren't that cheap no matter what console they're for. It doesn't matter to me, I'd buy a Wii itself just for a new Zelda.

 

[spidey-dude]

I basicly bought the wii just for the last zelda tbh so yeh another $20 dosnt bother me too much financially, its just the principle - especially with this motionplus stuff this was all stuff I was led to believe the wii would be able to do when it was released

 

[hippie_hunter]

 

[Spidey-Bat]

The problem with his timeline is he never takes into account the geography of the games.

 

[Grommers]

There is massive issues with timelines etc, with aonumu or whatever saying theres multiple time lines, with wind waker happening after link was an adult in OoT, and twilight princess happening if that old link just went back to being the kid he was supposed to be (as Zelda returns him to his youth)

Really, I hope one day we can almost get a lore book of Zelda, it'd be nice for all this information to be in detail etc.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

This timeline works

http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/8949/zeldatimeline2.gif

 

[hippie_hunter]

Except A Link to the Past and Link's Awakening happen in the same timeline as the first two games.

I still believe in the single timeline theory on the basis that time travel does not work that way. You can't create two timelines

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Link to the Past and Link's Awakening aren't the first games. Ganon was already sealed in the Sacred Realm at the start of LttP. Link's Awakening can fit in several places but it was intended to be a sequel to LttP so it's often put following LttP.

Alternate realities can be created through time travel. Look at Back to the Future Part 2.

 

[Mogwai]

^and star trek.

 

[Reek]

links awakening was a dream...

 

[Spidey-Bat]

The entire thing wasn't a dream like Super Mario Bros. 2 though.

 

[Grommers]

The entire thing wasn't a dream like Super Mario Bros. 2 though.

Don't remind me, I was so disappointed when I beat that game....



I wonder where this next Zelda will fit in, I always felt there was something before OoT

 

[Timstuff]

Someone needs to get over themselves, methinks. What's really hilarious though are some of the comments the video has, where a bunch of timeline fans seem to be stuck on this idea that Miyamoto has some kind of secret document mapping out the entire series in a timeline. This isn't friggin' Star Wars, and it never was. They're making it up as they go, and if anything I think by this point they might actually be throwing stuff in just to make fun of the timeline pushers. I actually read one that said "If they're not the same timeline, WHY DID THEY EVEN BOTHER MAKING SEQUELS!? They have to be lying!" :facepalm

They're taking a bunch of stories that aren't meant to be connected, and trying to draw a timeline through them. The continuous timeline concept just plain doesn't work. Sure, there are some games that connect, like LTTP and LA, WW and PH, OoT and MM, etc., and both of the Gamecube games used OoT as a "vague history" (but at the same time presented alternate, incompatible versions of a post-OoT Hyrule), but they are not meant to be strung together. Any attempts at shoehorning them all into the same continuity is at best fanfiction, and at worst desperate fanwankery. Nintendo says that a continuous timeline doesn't exist, and yet so many people insist that Nintendo is wrong about their own product, just because they can't grasp the concept of more than one Zelda continuity existing.

BTW, Link's Awakening wasn't a dream. Link was on the Island of Dreams, where his dream manifested itself physically. It was very much real when it was happening, it's just that when Link and the Wind Fish were able to break the spell and "awaken," the island disintigrated. The fact that the Wind Fish still exists after the awakening is meant to be proof to the gamer that it was far more than just a dream bubbling in Link's inner psyche.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Where has Nintendo said there is no timeline?

It's obvious they were going for one at first b/c they have said were certain games take place. I think they've just given up on it because they made it too complex.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Where has Nintendo said there is no timeline?

It's obvious they were going for one at first b/c they have said were certain games take place. I think they've just given up on it because they made it too complex.

 

[Reek]

yea theres obviously no timeline. there may have been one at first, but theres not now. dont you think nintendo would have told everyone the time line if there was meant to be one? theres no mario timeline that i know of, i feel like it should be calle the LegendS of Zelda since there is so many.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Nintendo just says there's no timeline b/c they never take it into consideration when they develop the game. There is clearly a continuity amongst some of the games. Ocarina of Time is obviously the first. Majoras' Mask and Twilight Princess take place after Ocarina as do Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass. The rest aren't as connected. Obviously Legend of Zelda and Zelda II go together. No game with the Master Sword takes place after Link to the Past b/c it says "The Master Sword rests forever" at the end.

 

[Timstuff]

There is a split timeline, but it only goes OoT --> TWW --> PH and alternately OoT --> TP. Some of the other games do have vague connections previous gens' games as well, but none of it is canon, because they were never designed to fit into a continuity. The timeline pushers are trying to see something in the Zelda games that Nintendo didn't put there, and when the Word of God comes down and says "there is no timeline," some of them started whining and writing silly petitions, acting as if they somehow know the Zelda series better than the people who actually made it.

Nintendo is never going to release an official timeline, because to do so they'd have to retroactively weave a story around a bunch of games that aren't connected. You could try doing the same thing with the James Bond movies, but why bother? It's easier to enjoy them when you don't have to swallow a massive fan fiction pill and ignore hundreds of glaring plot holes, and just accept that there are multiple Zelda universes.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

There is a split timeline, but it only goes OoT --> TWW --> PH and alternately OoT --> TP.

Majora's Mask would go between OoT and TP.

Some of the other games do have vague connections previous gens' games as well, but none of it is canon, because they were never designed to fit into a continuity. The timeline pushers are trying to see something in the Zelda games that Nintendo didn't put there, and when the Word of God comes down and says "there is no timeline," some of them started whining and writing silly petitions, acting as if they somehow know the Zelda series better than the people who actually made it.

When did Nintendo say there was no timeline?

Nintendo is never going to release an official timeline, because to do so they'd have to retroactively weave a story around a bunch of games that aren't connected.

They don't need to create a story to connect all of the games. Most of what happens before or after a game is told by the game itself like the creation of Hyrule in OoT, the Dark Interlopers in TP, and the flood in WW.

 

[Timstuff]

When did Nintendo say there was no timeline?

When the guy who (rather obsessively) made that timeline video on the previous page sent it to Nintendo, they sent him a response that basically confirmed that there is no timeline connecting the entire series, and that there are many versions of Hyrule. Which, in turn, prompted him to release the video on the previous page where he basically pisses and moans about how he knows more about Zelda than Nintendo, how they're ruining the Zelda series by not making a timeline, and peddles his petition at the viewers to try and make Nintendo change their minds and "save Zelda."

They don't need to create a story to connect all of the games.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

When the guy who (rather obsessively) made that timeline video on the previous page sent it to Nintendo, they sent him a response that basically confirmed that there is no timeline connecting the entire series, and that there are many versions of Hyrule. Which, in turn, prompted him to release the video on the previous page where he basically pisses and moans about how he knows more about Zelda than Nintendo, how they're ruining the Zelda series by not making a timeline, and peddles his petition at the viewers to try and make Nintendo change their minds and "save Zelda."

I would take that with a grain of salt. I think that's just an ambiguous reply they send to the hundreds of people who send in their timeline theories. There obviously is a "frame of reference"/timeline possible for the series even if there is only a concrete connection between several games.

Couldn't agree more.

My point was more that they don't need to make a story since there's already some there. Like the prologue of WW which is basically what happens after OoT. And why release a story when they could release a game? Tell the story that way.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

I started a new game in Majora's Mask. I never beat it and stopped after I got the Zora mask in my first file. I'm enjoying it more than I did the first time. I'd like to see the shapeshifting return in a future game.

 

[Timstuff]

My point was more that they don't need to make a story since there's already some there. Like the prologue of WW which is basically what happens after OoT. And why release a story when they could release a game? Tell the story that way.

The thing is though, the games were not made with the intention of being connected that way. To try and place all of the games into a time line is a futile effort, because the people making them weren't thinking "OK, this game is going to be set 200 years after a game that's not coming out for another 10 years." It's fanwankery, and fanwankery isn't canon. This isn't like Star Wars, where Lucas had the basic frame for the entire 6-movie saga planned before the first script was even completed. Miyamoto and Nintendo just make it up as they go, so the people who insist on a single continuity existing have a different vision for the series than the people making it, and I personally think that's silly.

You could try doing the same thing with the James Bond movies, but why bother? Forcing a bunch of non-connected stories to fit into the same continuity only adds an extra layer of unnecessary complication to what's otherwise a fairly easy to digest concept.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

The thing is though, the games were not made with the intention of being connected that way. To try and place all of the games into a time line is a futile effort, because the people making them weren't thinking "OK, this game is going to be set 200 years after a game that's not coming out for another 10 years." It's fanwankery, and fanwankery isn't canon. This isn't like Star Wars, where Lucas had the basic frame for the entire 6-movie saga planned before the first script was even completed. Miyamoto and Nintendo just make it up as they go, so the people who insist on a single continuity existing have a different vision for the series than the people making it, and I personally think that's silly.

Not really. Everything that fans use to determine the order of which the games take place is from the games. Most of the inbetween stuff is mentioned in prologues.

 

[Mogwai]

I started a new game in Majora's Mask. I never beat it and stopped after I got the Zora mask in my first file. I'm enjoying it more than I did the first time. I'd like to see the shapeshifting return in a future game.

yeah, they need to visit that concept again.