Legend of Zelda Zelda Discussion Thread

[LexCorp]

Eh Somehow I just did it. Now I'm looking for Shad in Kakariko Village but he's not in the basement of the Shaman's house where he's supposed to be.

Is that the Indian chief dude? Smeg I don't remember but he never leaves the village I think so he must be there.

 

[SuBe]

What is everyone's Favorite version of the Charactors? Do you prefer the TP, Wind Waker, Link to the Past, Original. I think that my favorite is the Ocarina character sets. The designs introduced were great.

 

[LexCorp]

What is everyone's Favorite version of the Charactors? Do you prefer the TP, Wind Waker, Link to the Past, Original. I think that my favorite is the Ocarina character sets. The designs introduced were great.

I used to really love the great fairies in OoT as they were only covered in leaves.....sexy!

I look back and think how lame I was lol

 

[Majik1387]

Is that the Indian chief dude? Smeg I don't remember but he never leaves the village I think so he must be there.

No, Shad is the guy with the glasses part of Telma's group. BTW, Telma looks more like Impa than a Hyrule common.
Eh apparently I forgot to pick up one of the book's spell pages or something. I did, and followed on through the game. Now I'm lost in the Hylian Castle.

What is everyone's Favorite version of the Charactors? Do you prefer the TP, Wind Waker, Link to the Past, Original. I think that my favorite is the Ocarina character sets. The designs introduced were great.

Mine would be a mix of Link to the Past, OoT, and TP. TP is already sort of a mix to the first two.

 

[Timstuff]

http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/4870/zeldatimelinerm0.gif

*sigh* Why do people even try to make a "time line" for a series that clearly was not designed with continuity in mind? It's like trying to make a timeline for the James Bond movies. It just doesn't work. I take each iteration of the Legend of Zelda for what it is-- a Legend. And most legends have multiple versions that share some things, but not others. To try and rationalize the Zelda series as being set in one coherent continuity is not only impossible, but it's pointless. There's no need for the Zelda series to take place in one continuity, so I don't know why so many misguided fanboys try to.

 

[Majik1387]

^Exactly Timstuff.

 

[Timstuff]

Thank you. ^_^

 

[Majik1387]

The only games that I do believe have some sort of a timeline together are OoT and MM.

 

[LexCorp]

The only games that I do believe have some sort of a timeline together are OoT and MM.

I would chuck in TP too.

 

[Majik1387]

Well TP has a different version of Link which is why I wouldn't throw that in. In OoT, he was part of those forest people, in this one he's a villager ala Link to the Past.

 

[Timstuff]

Too many discrepancies between Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess for that to work, like, for example, how the Siekkah in OoT hail from Kakariko, and in TP they're from somewhere else, and aren't even necessarily called Shiekkah. At best, I'd say "Ocarina of Time" acts as a "vague history" for some of the other games, but the events of it aren't canon to any game except for Majora's Mask. I'd break the "legend sets" down as such:

Legend of Zelda, Adventure of Link

A Link to the Past, Link's Awakening

Ocarina of time, Majora's Mask

Oracle of Seasons, Oracle of Ages

Four Swords, Minish Cap

Wind Waker, Phantom Hourglass

Twilight Princess

It's not uncommon for say, two Zelda games to have continuity with each other, but if you're looking to sew a continuity around the entire series, you're barking up the wrong tree.

 

[LexCorp]

Well TP has a different version of Link which is why I wouldn't throw that in. In OoT, he was part of those forest people, in this one he's a villager ala Link to the Past.

Yes I guess so.

Not to tred on toes I agree with TimStuff about how all the games are very seperate in their own right. But I do like the parts that are kept through. Like Gorons, Hyrule castle etc....

Not to day its one nice timeline, they are seperate stories. But the links through each game are nice and welcome.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Too many discrepancies between Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess for that to work, like, for example, how the Siekkah in OoT hail from Kakariko, and in TP they're from somewhere else, and aren't even necessarily called Shiekkah.

The Sheikah are a very mysterious race. They could have helped establish Kakariko Village but not been from it.

At best, I'd say "Ocarina of Time" acts as a "vague history" for some of the other games, but the events of it aren't canon to any game except for Majora's Mask. I'd break the "legend sets" down as such:

It's not uncommon for say, two Zelda games to have continuity with each other, but if you're looking to sew a continuity around the entire series, you're barking up the wrong tree.

One continuous timeline is possible.

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/7323/zeldatimelinejr7.gif


This timeline doesn't have any holes. The placement of Oracle of Ages/Seasons isn't one specific spot. I place it after Adventure of Link because Link destroyed Ganon and retrieved the Triforce of Power from his ashes. This suggests that a physical triforce exists which is seen in the prologue to the Oracle games.

 

[LexCorp]

The Sheikah are a very mysterious race. They could have helped establish Kakariko Village but not been from it.



One continuous timeline is possible.

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/7323/zeldatimelinejr7.gif


This timeline doesn't have any holes. The placement of Oracle of Ages/Seasons isn't one specific spot. I place it after Adventure of Link because Link destroyed Ganon and retrieved the Triforce of Power from his ashes. This suggests that a physical triforce exists which is seen in the prologue to the Oracle games.

Why does that timeline hav ethe events of TP in the child timeline?

The link from TP was in his 20s.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

The Child Timeline is just the name. After he defeats Ganon, Zelda sends him back to the past so he can have his childhood. The world he leaves is Link-less (which is why the Hero of Time never returns when Ganon escapes from the Sacred Realm). The timeline he returns to is one where he never becomes the Hero of Time. He goes back to being 11. He grows up and becomes the Link in TP.

 

[LexCorp]

The Child Timeline is just the name. It is the Timeline that Zelda returned Link to after Ganon was sealed in the Sacred Realm. It is the timeline where he is not the Hero of Time. Ganondorf never calls Link the Hero of Time when he sees him in TP.

Fair enough

 

[Spidey-Bat]

I edited my post to explain it better.

 

[LexCorp]

I edited my post to explain it better.

How very polite of you

 

[Timstuff]

The Sheikah are a very mysterious race. They could have helped establish Kakariko Village but not been from it.



One continuous timeline is possible.

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/7323/zeldatimelinejr7.gif


This timeline doesn't have any holes. The placement of Oracle of Ages/Seasons isn't one specific spot. I place it after Adventure of Link because Link destroyed Ganon and retrieved the Triforce of Power from his ashes. This suggests that a physical triforce exists which is seen in the prologue to the Oracle games.

Your right, that timeline has no holes, because, it's barely got anything holding it together, thus making it more "hole" than "narrative," which is not really a hole at all. There are way too many things that are just flat out different in the various Zelda mythos in the different versions. You could do the same thing with the James Bond movies, and on paper it would almost make sense, but when you start thinking about all the reasons why it DOESN'T work, it falls apart.

However, the big thing for me isn't just the fact that an all-inclusive timeline for the Zelda series doesn't work. What I want to know, is why so many fanboys think that it's necessary? Why do you think that all of the Zelda games need to take place in the same continuity? Does the idea that there are multiple versions of the Zelda universe somehow threaten the integrity of the franchise?

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Your right, that timeline has no holes, because, it's barely got anything holding it together, thus making it more "hole" than "narrative," which is not really a hole at all. There are way too many things that are just flat out different in the various Zelda mythos in the different versions. You could do the same thing with the James Bond movies, and on paper it would almost make sense, but when you start thinking about all the reasons why it DOESN'T work, it falls apart.

There is evidence to suggest that everything in the placing of these games works. And it's not just things like what happens in the game, but also geography, art, and the legends characters talk about in the game.

What reasons do you see that it doesn't work?

However, the big thing for me isn't just the fact that an all-inclusive timeline for the Zelda series doesn't work. What I want to know, is why so many fanboys think that it's necessary? Why do you think that all of the Zelda games need to take place in the same continuity? Does the idea that there are multiple versions of the Zelda universe somehow threaten the integrity of the franchise?

People have a desire to put an order to things. Doing so with the Zelda games is something interesting to discuss.

Multiple versions of the Zelda universe does hurt it. It compromises the mythology of which the game is based on. The fact that everything relates to everything gives the feeling of a grand epic. Saying that it's strictly limited to 2 or 3 games makes it seem smaller.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Too many discrepancies between Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess for that to work, like, for example, how the Siekkah in OoT hail from Kakariko, and in TP they're from somewhere else, and aren't even necessarily called Shiekkah. At best, I'd say "Ocarina of Time" acts as a "vague history" for some of the other games, but the events of it aren't canon to any game except for Majora's Mask. I'd break the "legend sets" down as such:

Legend of Zelda, Adventure of Link

A Link to the Past, Link's Awakening

Ocarina of time, Majora's Mask

Oracle of Seasons, Oracle of Ages

Four Swords, Minish Cap

Wind Waker, Phantom Hourglass

Twilight Princess

It's not uncommon for say, two Zelda games to have continuity with each other, but if you're looking to sew a continuity around the entire series, you're barking up the wrong tree.

Actually Twilight Princess and the Wind Waker/Phantom Hourglass games have been specifically stated to take place AFTER Ocarina of Time. The Link in Twilight Princess was given the clothes of the Hero of Time and the Hero of Time was mentioned numerous times in the Wind Waker.

And A Link to the Past/Link's Awakening have been specifically stated to take place BEFORE the Legend of Zelda/Adventure of Link.

And the Four Swords timeline goes like this: The Minish Cap ---> Four Swords ---> Four Swords Adventures.

So yes there is continuity within the series. The problem is that Nintendo hasn't directly addressed it and there is most definetely confusion over it.

There are definete positions within the series

If you are in favor of the timeloop/linear timeline theory it looks like this:

Ocarina of Time ---> Majora's Mask ---> Twilight Princess ---> The Wind Waker ---> Phantom Hourglass ---> A Link to the Past ---> Link's Awakening ---> the Legend of Zelda ---> Adventure of Link

If you are in favor of the split timeline theory it would look like this:

Ocarina of Time (Adult Link) ---> The Wind Waker ---> Phantom Hourglass ---> A Link to the Past ---> Link's Awakening ---> the Legend of Zelda ---> Adventure of Link

Ocarina of Time (Young Link) ---> Majora's Mask ---> Twilight Princess

The main question is just where the hell do The Minish Cap, Four Sword games, and the Oracles games go? Are they even in continuity?

 

[hippie_hunter]

The Sheikah are a very mysterious race. They could have helped establish Kakariko Village but not been from it.



One continuous timeline is possible.

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/7323/zeldatimelinejr7.gif


This timeline doesn't have any holes. The placement of Oracle of Ages/Seasons isn't one specific spot. I place it after Adventure of Link because Link destroyed Ganon and retrieved the Triforce of Power from his ashes. This suggests that a physical triforce exists which is seen in the prologue to the Oracle games.

I'm sorry to put a bugger in your timeline theory but the Oracles games have to take place before A Link to the Past.

The Master Sword is supposed to be "rested forever" at the end of A Link to the Past and the Master Sword is in use in the Oracles games.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

I'm sorry to put a bugger in your timeline theory but the Oracles games have to take place before A Link to the Past.

The Master Sword is supposed to be "rested forever" at the end of A Link to the Past and the Master Sword is in use in the Oracles games.

You can argue it should be rested forever in Ocarina of Time and TP. It rests until it is needed again.

As I told you before, Oracle games have to be after LoZ (and AoL is a direct sequel to LoZ, so they have to be after AoL as well). Ganon has been killed and a physical Triforce exists.

 

[hippie_hunter]

You can argue it should be rested forever in Ocarina of Time and TP. It rests until it is needed again.

As I told you before, Oracle games have to be after LoZ (and AoL is a direct sequel to LoZ, so they have to be after AoL as well). Ganon has been killed and a physical Triforce exists.

In Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess it is not stated that the Master Sword is "rested forever" like in A Link to the Past.

Personally I would put the Oracle games before the Four Swords games. Ganon is resurected in an insane form (hence why we don't see Ganondorf at all in games supposedly taking after it), he doesn't have the Trident in the Oracles games like he did in Four Swords Adventures and A Link to the Past.

My guess is that if the Flagship games are in continuity it would go like this:

Phantom Hourglass ---> The Minish Cap ---> Oracles of Ages/Seasons ---> Four Swords ---> Four Swords Adventures ---> A Link to the Past

 

[Timstuff]

See, here is the problem. A Link to the Past was meant to be a "vague history" for the Legend of Zelda. But then, Ocarina of Time was meant to be a "Vague history" for A Link to the Past, and then "The Legend of Zelda" got "forgotten" (and let's face it, a lot of us barely even remembered it by the time OoT came out). But then, something else weird happened. Wind Waker came along and used OoT as a "vague history," and then "a Link to the Past" got "forgotten," with Wind Waker effectively taking it's place on the hypothetical "vague timeline." And then, along comes Twilight Princess, which also uses OoT as a "vague history," but pays no attention at all to Wind Waker, so it's clearly on an alternate time line. The point is, you can't try and weave a coherent timeline throughout the entire series when Nintendo cared about chronology so little that they didn't even try to keep one throughout the whole series.

There is evidence to suggest that everything in the placing of these games works. And it's not just things like what happens in the game, but also geography, art, and the legends characters talk about in the game.

What reasons do you see that it doesn't work?

Because the geography and legends are NOT consistant throughout the series. Hyrule's geography gets jumbled around every generation of consoles, and it's because NINTENDO DOES NOT CARE ABOUT CONTINUITY. Why is it that in Ocarina of Time, Kakariko Villaige was the home of the Shiekkah, but in Twilight Princess, it wasn't, and in fact it was in a completely different part of the country? And why does the desert keep moving? And why does Hyrule Castle keep moving? Why do Zora Lake and Death Mountain move? Why was the Temple of Time originally next to the Castle, but in TP it's in the Lost Woods? The "timeline" theory also falls apart when you start comparing mythology between games as well, but I'm not nerdy enough to get into all of that.

People have a desire to put an order to things. Doing so with the Zelda games is something interesting to discuss.

Multiple versions of the Zelda universe does hurt it. It compromises the mythology of which the game is based on. The fact that everything relates to everything gives the feeling of a grand epic. Saying that it's strictly limited to 2 or 3 games makes it seem smaller.

I agree that some people find weaving a narrative between all Zelda games interesting, but personally, I think that it's a waste of time, and I think that it's actually counter productive to the integrity of the series, because it turns the story into a huge convoluted mess. There are some guys at school who I hear talking about it from time to time, and I have to struggle not to laugh just because the things they say sound so ridiculous.

The Zelda games spanning multiple continuities does not make them any less epic, just like Batman spanning multiple continuities doesn't make his story less compelling. I just think it's ridiculous that people think that Zelda is better if it's a convoluted mess that you need multiple charts, graphs, and fan-fictions to tie together, when that's not even how Nintendo themselves designed the series. That's like taking a series of buildings that an architect made, dismantling them, and trying to put them together as one big building, even though the architect specifically wanted all of his buildings to be unique from one another. You end up with a big mess that does not represent the what the originals stood for, just because you want to be able to view it all as one unified piece.