Wait let me get this straight. Somone asked for a timeline continuity connecting Zelda games? Worse yet they got an answer? BWahahaha. Oh here I'll give you a hint. The games have nothing to do with each other. They have common themes and characters but could be more closely equated to members of bizaar expiriments in live action RPGs where the subjects are dropped into a somewhat familiar world with somewhat familiar rules and tools but the story is a little diffrent. When they complete the adventure everyone is gassed and they wake up at the start of a new one with no memory of anything ever. There's your Zelda timeline, enjoy it. It's like the G-man, you think he's mysterious to you? Valve has no ffin clue what's going on with him. It's not the answer that makes him interesting but the question. Topicaly applied flouride does not prevent tooth decay, it can however be tracked by spy satalite. The plastic tips on shoelaces are called anglets, thier true nature is sinister.
Nintendo Places Skyward Sword in Zelda Timeline
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm not saying there is a grand unifying timeline for everything, some of it does stand alone and that's fine. OoT had vague indirect references to A Link to The Past at best. Saying they're related is nuance you infer from looking too hard and filling the gaps with fan fiction. There are a lot of Zelda's that don't even reference others and their disconnected status does not bother me. Twilight Princess is Twilight Princess. I can't begin to say where it "goes" and I don't want to.Pyode said:
I'm talking about when a game deliberately references a prior game multiple times but Nintendo has officially declared (reported on this very site) that there is no timeline unless they step up and say so (like now), any semblance of sequence is in our heads. Ergo, unless Nintendo expressly said so in some media I missed, Spirit Tracks doesn't officially relate to Phantom Hourglass, whose Link is not the Hero of Winds from Wind Waker, whose story DIRECTLY refers (the green suit was a local custom in remembrance) to a different Hero of Time and not the one from Ocarina. THAT is not excusable.
There are some already known parts to the timeline. (Although it should be stated that Shigeru Myamoto did say that every zelda game is a completely different link, unless specifically stated.) Minish Cap comes from the same time as four swords (both of them), Wind Waker takes place 100 years after ocarina of time. Majora's mask comes right after ocarina of time. Link's awakening, oracle of ages, oracle of seasons, all happen at similar times because link is on a quest away from hyrule in all three games. Zelda 2: Adventure of Link happens right after Legend of Zelda. And phantom hourglass is the direct sequel to Wind Waker.
I don't understand the need for a "timeline" in Link. It's like asking for the Super Mario Bros. series to be chronological, or every movie an actor makes to be related, regardless of the franchise itself.
Why can't it just be about Link, Gannon, Zelda and the eternal fight of Good vs Evil?
Why can't it just be about Link, Gannon, Zelda and the eternal fight of Good vs Evil?
They don't have a choice in the matter. If they say:"There's no continuity." Fans goes apeshit. If they say that there's One true answers, they'll get assaulted until they reveal it. Look at the James Bond fandom for example. Some couldn't cope with the movie Casino Royal since it's the first Bond story and character from later (M and the absence of Q... yeah, i know) are changed. So, they came with the explanation that JAMES BOND is a Code Name for the agent. But why the hell 007 then? Part of the Code name? Anyways, in reality, all the story is about ONE badass agent through all his missions. That is all.
As for I, i don't believe in any Zelda timeline. To me, it's a Legend and legend change and evolve from mouth to ears.
As for I, i don't believe in any Zelda timeline. To me, it's a Legend and legend change and evolve from mouth to ears.
Better that Nintendo should not have vainly tried to tie the entire series together by implication ("official" vs "unofficial" timelines...uh huh. Sure).
Most of the newer games have clear continuity because they were designed that way (Majora's Mask is the obvious example. Wind Waker directly alludes to Ocarina of Time), but half of the series' placement literally wouldn't make any sense. You can't have that many "Kingdom of Hyrules" in history and expect me to buy it.
Most of the newer games have clear continuity because they were designed that way (Majora's Mask is the obvious example. Wind Waker directly alludes to Ocarina of Time), but half of the series' placement literally wouldn't make any sense. You can't have that many "Kingdom of Hyrules" in history and expect me to buy it.
Nintendo: Trolling Legend of Zelda fans since 1986.
I wonder why they're so waffly about this thing. First, there is a timeline. Then there isn't. Now there's a timeline again? C'mon, make up your mind!
I'd also post my essay arguing against the timeline theory here, but I'm not too into shameless self plugs. Especially when they're over 1,000 words...
I wonder why they're so waffly about this thing. First, there is a timeline. Then there isn't. Now there's a timeline again? C'mon, make up your mind!
I'd also post my essay arguing against the timeline theory here, but I'm not too into shameless self plugs. Especially when they're over 1,000 words...
I think the whole reason that the Zelda timeline is so confusing is because there shouldn't be one. It's the 'LEGEND' of Zelda, and Legends are often told in many different ways but with the same base and outcome, i.e. generally Zelda is in the shizzle and you have to kick Ganon's arse by the end. I thik trying to create a timeline out of it, (excluding games with follow ons, (like OoT then MM), then it's just reading a little too far into it.
The Zelda Timeline is one of those things that man will never know, like where is area 51, or what the hell does Stonehenge do, or why cats with lazer eyes are so awesome, or... I'm sorry what was I talking about again?
OT: The purpose of there being no definitve timeline, but there being a timeline at all, is that they can make direct sequels like MM or Zelda II, but in different ones, they don't have to worry about continuity. It's evily ingenious.
OT: The purpose of there being no definitve timeline, but there being a timeline at all, is that they can make direct sequels like MM or Zelda II, but in different ones, they don't have to worry about continuity. It's evily ingenious.
Wait a minute... if Skyward Sword comes BEFORE Ocarina of Time, then why is Link an adult in this game?
Maybe it's a different Link. Or some kind of time loop. Maybe Link became an adult in OoT by traveling through time, then traveled back in time to turn the Skyward Sword into the Master Sword, then forgot he did that, and traveled forward in time to defeat Ganon. But if he had to pull the Master Sword out to get the Skyward Sword, then how did the Master Sword come into existence?!
Maybe each Link in each game is a completely distinct individual in a distinct universe (games with more traditional continuity like Wind Waker/Spirit Tracks/Phantom Hourglass and the Oracle of Seasons/Ages games notwithstanding), replaying the same events over and over like the kids in Higurashi no Naku Koro Ni.
Maybe Nintendo just likes putting out these games without bothering to consider continuity or things making any God damn sense. I mean shit, they didn't do this with Metroid!
Well, I guess it doesn't matter; I agree with Yahtzee in that all Zelda games are essentially the same. Personally, I'd prefer it if Nintendo made a Zelda with less emphasis on puzzle solving and item hunting and more emphasis on combat (a-la Devil May Cry or God of War). Not because those games are any better than your standard Zelda, just to mix things up a little.
Maybe it's a different Link. Or some kind of time loop. Maybe Link became an adult in OoT by traveling through time, then traveled back in time to turn the Skyward Sword into the Master Sword, then forgot he did that, and traveled forward in time to defeat Ganon. But if he had to pull the Master Sword out to get the Skyward Sword, then how did the Master Sword come into existence?!
Maybe each Link in each game is a completely distinct individual in a distinct universe (games with more traditional continuity like Wind Waker/Spirit Tracks/Phantom Hourglass and the Oracle of Seasons/Ages games notwithstanding), replaying the same events over and over like the kids in Higurashi no Naku Koro Ni.
Maybe Nintendo just likes putting out these games without bothering to consider continuity or things making any God damn sense. I mean shit, they didn't do this with Metroid!
Well, I guess it doesn't matter; I agree with Yahtzee in that all Zelda games are essentially the same. Personally, I'd prefer it if Nintendo made a Zelda with less emphasis on puzzle solving and item hunting and more emphasis on combat (a-la Devil May Cry or God of War). Not because those games are any better than your standard Zelda, just to mix things up a little.
As soon as I saw this news piece, I knew that this would be a relevant video for everyone interested in this subject to see:
Basically, there really is no point to try and set the Zelda games chronologically, beacuse they weren't created with a specific timeline in mind. They were made at random and independantly of each other. So trying to sort them in some sort of meaningful order is an excercise in futility.
Basically, there really is no point to try and set the Zelda games chronologically, beacuse they weren't created with a specific timeline in mind. They were made at random and independantly of each other. So trying to sort them in some sort of meaningful order is an excercise in futility.
