Legend of Zelda Timeline Discussion

[libertyernie]

No, OoT is normally near the begining

Sorry, I meant OoS. Abbreviations are confusing.

 

[Dragoon Fighter]

Question how many zelda games have the gurado in them? (wish to know for time line purposes.)

 

[Ganonsburg]

http://www.zeldawiki.org/Gerudo

 

[Dragoon Fighter]

Thank you!

 

[Ct.O.B.]

I came up with a possible timeline theory that adjusts to Skyward Sword...
-Minish Cap
-Four Swords
-Four Swords Adventures
-Skyward Sword
-Ocarina of Time
CHILD TIMELINE
-Majora's Mask
-A Link to the Past
-Oracles (one or the other)
-Link's Awakening
-Twilight Princess
ADULT TIMELINE
-Wind Waker
-Phantom Hourglass
-Legend of Zelda
-Adventure of Link
-Spirit Tracks

This is my first time working on a timeline theory, so please point out anything you see out of place!
THINGS TO NOTE IN THIS THEORY
-The Four Swords Series comes first due to Four Swords Adventures portraying Vaati as an end-of-his-reign villain, meaning Ganon is about to make a rise (and he does). Also, most of these games feature a Cloud region of some sort, and if Skyward Sword Link is born and raised in the clouds, wouldn't it make sense that these regions became or connected to the Sky Loft? Plus, we've heard the developers say this came BEFORE Ocarina of Time.
-My placement on the first four games (LoZ, Z2:LA, ALttP, LA) may be entirely off, I have found very mixed information about their connections. All I know is that ALttP has to be in the Child Timeline because Twilight Princess seemingly references it AND Ocarina of Time.

 

[majora_787]

There's one timeline that I really like, I'll see if I can find the youtube video... I don't believe, personally, that TMC comes before OoT. But that's just me.

Oops, here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2g65jL3HDg

I think this timeline came right before Spirit Tracks, I don't remember, but we know where that goes.

I always wanted to try my own personal timeline, regardless of who I believe though. Does anyone have any poinyers on timeline research? Like, the sort of stuff I should look for? =P

 

[Ct.O.B.]

Majora, google "legend of zelda timeline." The Zelda Wiki's and other Zelda fansites have lots of information concerning bits and pieces of the timeline (overall placement of a certain game, placement of Game A relative to Game B, etc.)

 

[majora_787]

I've been looking over this a while now, so far it's working out... But I'm a little confused.

This is what I almost think makes more sense... I thought the Wind Waker would go sooner, but it wouldn't make sense for Phantom Hourglass to go before A Link to the Past... Well, I guess that's why the WInd Waker goes afterwards. Okay...

But then I thought about this a bit, the Oracle games and Link's Awakening. =\ I'm confused as to where those go on this side, because Link's Awakening is supposed to be a direct sequel, but it does fit in nicely after Phantom Hourglass... Bleh. Alright...

But then I was also thinking, couldn't TLoZ go here?

OoT > ALttP > OoX > TWW > PH > LA > TLoZ > TAoL > ST

Like that? I was thinking about it, because the hyrule in TLoZ and TAoL seems very unpopulated like New Hyrule in Spirit Tracks. Only, Spirit Tracks is... You know, more populated. Sort of.

EDIT: I got this to make sense to me. The only issue I'm having is where TLoZ and TAoL go.

Basically what I have is this for the child timeline: The events of OoT occur, Link is sent back in time, goes on to the events of Majora's Mask. Ganondorf is sealed away, then killed, and TMC features the villain Vaati. FS and FSA also have Vaati, FS telling of previous incidents involving him(non existed on this timeline other than in TMC), and FSA is supposedly a couple of years later, still with Vaati as the villain.

On the other side, I'm not entirely sure. What I see it as, is that Link is gone, and a new "Link" arises to defeat Ganon as he breaks out of the seal. Using the triforce, Link visits other lands to save them from Ganon and his minions as well. Afterwards the world is flooded, leading to The Wind Waker, and afterwards is Phantom Hourglass. After Phantom Hourglass would be Link's Awakening, an interruption in Link going to New Hyrule I suppose... Then I would place TLoZ and TAoL here I think, simply because the hyrule in the game is completely uncivilized and unpopulated. Then that changes for Spirit Tracks, which I feel goes last on this side.

ALttP > OoX > TWW > PH > LA > TLoZ > TAoL > ST
/
OoT
\
MM > TP > TMC > FS > FSA

My only issue is, TLoZ and TAoL would actually have to be the same link as in Link's Awakening, because there's only like... one century between PH and ST.

 

[Ct.O.B.]

Remember, by the time of Spirit Tracks, New Hyrule was fully developed, which opens up this possibility for the adult timeline...
WW->PH->LoZ->AoL->ST
Backing this up is the fact that the Hyrule in LoZ is ruinous, which could imply that Link split up with the others some time after PH and stumbled upon what became New Hyrule. The fact the AoL is a direct sequel also opens up the possibility that the others were either killed or left Link on his own. The killing would exclude Zelda and Niko, because Zelda would have to continue the Royal bloodline with the next Zelda, who Link saves in LoZ; and Niko, who appears in ST. This is all under the assumption that LoZ and AoL even DO go before ST.

 

[MattV1]

..... Wait.... what?

*in regards to majora's timeline*

 

[majora_787]

..... Wait.... what?

*in regards to majora's timeline*

What part lost you? I just went with what made sense to me. o_O

And honestly, I just feel like TLoZ and AoL go before Spirit Tracks because of the barren-ness and size of Hyrule in those games. It's completely devoid of human life almost, which is a trait of a newly founded land like New Hyrule. But the actual kingdom and towns were established in Spirit Tracks for some time, so I think it works nicely enough.

 

[Ct.O.B.]

i sort of agree.. if wind waker doesn't come next after ocarina of time, ALttP couldn't be in betwen, because it takes place in HYRULE. Since Hyrule is flooded soon after the Adult ending of OoT, that wouldn't work. I have it on the child timeline because TP references both ALttP and OoT, and TP is on the child side.

Additionally, have you considered my theory about the Four Swords Series and Skyward Sword?

I do agree with you on the LoZ->AoL->ST though

 

[Dragoon Fighter]

The CDI game time line theory

I think that the CDI games go in the following order

LoZ faces of evil/LoZ Wand of camalon (goes in any order)(That looks misspelled how do you spell that correctly?)---Adventure of Zelda

I also theories that in the CDI series that because of the fact that link is kidnapped twice that this ganon and link already know each other. There for the unholy triforce goes off of what has been already established.

LoZ---LA---FoE/WoC---AoZ

That is how the arch goes in my theory.

 

[Ct.O.B.]

Dragoon, where do the CD-i games fit in on the overall timeline? I'm not sure if they're considered plausible additions to the series.

 

[majora_787]

To the best of my knowledge, CD-i games were NEVER plausible parts of the series. And I don't mean like Four Swords Adventures or Oracle of Ages, I mean like, they AREN'T PLAUSIBLE.

 

[Ct.O.B.]

Yeah, they're the equivalent of the Mario Teaches Typing games to the Mario series. Not full installments.

This is my updated timeline-
OoT-WW-PH-LoZ-AoL-ST
TMC-FS-FSA-SS-OoT
OoT-MM-OoX-LA-ALttP-TP
Notes- Since the ending of ALttP shows an era of peace in Hyrule and was supposedly the last time the Master Sword was ever used on account of it being put to rest, it precedes TP, but not directly. There should be close to a century of space in between to account for the "golden age" Hyrule experiences. It can't be on the end, because TP references it and Oot. LA+OoX placements are still not solid.

 

[majora_787]

Yeah, they're the equivalent of the Mario Teaches Typing games to the Mario series. Not full installments.

This is my updated timeline-
OoT-WW-PH-LoZ-AoL-ST
TMC-FS-FSA-SS-OoT
OoT-MM-OoX-LA-ALttP-TP
Notes- Since the ending of ALttP shows an era of peace in Hyrule and was supposedly the last time the Master Sword was ever used on account of it being put to rest, it precedes TP, but not directly. There should be close to a century of space in between to account for the "golden age" Hyrule experiences. It can't be on the end, because TP references it and Oot. LA+OoX placements are still not solid.

I still don't like The Minish Cap being before Ocarina of Time. I know the hat thing, but I choose to see it as, on the TMC side of the timeline, Ganondorf is gone after TP and Vaati has taken his place as villain for TMC, FS, and FSA.

And I really don't think you should put Skyward Sword on a timeline until we actually know the whole story. I mean, it's better that way.

 

[Spire]

The thing with TMC is that it features the "Hylian age" as mentioned in ALttP. In OoT, Link is said to be one of the last of the Hylians, and in ALttP, he is a descendent of Link, one of the last Hylians. TMC introduces many small tidbits such as the hero's shield (that is revived in WW) and also has geographical locations similar to the OoT/TP Hyrule we know, but named differently. Lon Lon Ranch exists, and the story is about the transformation of a sword from the sky (Picori Blade) into a greater guardian sword of Hyrule (Four Sword). SS is a story about a sword from the sky (Skyward Sword) into a greater guardian sword of Hyrule (Master Sword). It seems like the timeline goes like this:
-----------------------MM → TP → ALttP
SS → TMC → OoT -{
------------------------------WW/PH → ST

I'm not including LoZ/AoL, LA, OoX, FS, and FSA because what's seen above is concrete and the aforementioned games would only weaken it.

 

[majora_787]

Well, I guess that does make sense... But how is Link the last of the hylians in Ocarina of Time? I remember seeing plenty of hylians. =\ Even at the end of the game.

 

[Ct.O.B.]

Ok, I was making it as an experimental timeline that would most likely change as information was uncovered. The thing I noticed about Spire's timeline is that it has TP before ALttP. After looking it up, I realized I must've missed the part with the sword being in the same place that he drew it from IN THE FOREST... That said, your timeline makes sense. As for TMC going before OoT, I see Vaati as an older villain than Ganon, but there IS the possibility of TMC going on a part of the timeline where there is no Ganon...

 

[majora_787]

Ok, I was making it as an experimental timeline that would most likely change as information was uncovered. The thing I noticed about Spire's timeline is that it has TP before ALttP. After looking it up, I realized I must've missed the part with the sword being in the same place that he drew it from IN THE FOREST... That said, your timeline makes sense. As for TMC going before OoT, I see Vaati as an older villain than Ganon, but there IS the possibility of TMC going on a part of the timeline where there is no Ganon...

Aside from Majora's Mask, Spirit Tracks and Phantom Hourglass, I think any game with anyone who isn't ganondorf or ganon could go anywhere where there is no ganon.

=\ I just like to believe that Ganondorf is more powerful than Vaati, which is why I personally feel he came first.

 

[Masky]

Aside from Majora's Mask, Spirit Tracks and Phantom Hourglass, I think any game with anyone who isn't ganondorf or ganon could go anywhere where there is no ganon.

=\ I just like to believe that Ganondorf is more powerful than Vaati, which is why I personally feel he came first.

there are other factors besides ganondorf that make some placings impossible. for instance, at the beginning of OoX the triforce is clearly not split, so it obviously can't come after OoT. (then again, OoX may not be canon, lol)

if Ganondorf has the Triforce of Power, he is unquestionably more powerful than Vaati

 

[Ct.O.B.]

there are other factors besides ganondorf that make some placings impossible. for instance, at the beginning of OoX the triforce is clearly not split, so it obviously can't come after OoT. (then again, OoX may not be canon, lol)

if Ganondorf has the Triforce of Power, he is unquestionably more powerful than Vaati

It could be that since Ganon is dead, he no longer holds the Triforce of Power, and assuming that it isn't mentioned at all, the Triforces of Courage and Wisdom were not inherited by the Oracles Link and Zelda.

Back to the Four Swords arc.. FSA would have to be a prequel to ALttP (Imprisoning War) and also LoZ (shows the creation of the Pig Beast, Ganon), and FS and TMC would come before it, although TMC taking place long beforehand. I think it would be possible for the Four Swords arc to occur before any game with Pig Beast Ganon.

 

[majora_787]

It could be that since Ganon is dead, he no longer holds the Triforce of Power, and assuming that it isn't mentioned at all, the Triforces of Courage and Wisdom were not inherited by the Oracles Link and Zelda.

Back to the Four Swords arc.. FSA would have to be a prequel to ALttP (Imprisoning War) and also LoZ (shows the creation of the Pig Beast, Ganon), and FS and TMC would come before it, although TMC taking place long beforehand. I think it would be possible for the Four Swords arc to occur before any game with Pig Beast Ganon.

I guess the specifics are purely speculation, we may never have a real timeline. xP Oh well, it's fun to get into usually.

I still personally choose to see Ganondorf as the original great evil, coming before any other villain except for myself.

 

[Ct.O.B.]

That's one way to look at it, and in certain child timeline theories, Ganon goes several games without a major appearance as a villain, suggesting the possibility of the FS arc occurring then.

 

[majora_787]

That's one way to look at it, and in certain child timeline theories, Ganon goes several games without a major appearance as a villain, suggesting the possibility of the FS arc occurring then.

It's probably because I've played games where Ganondorf was the greatest evil for so many years, I never saw anything different until Beldum. And that's one of the latest zelda games I've played.

 

[Ct.O.B.]

Yeah, I've been a fan of the Vaati games for a while, so I still like to see to it that he's not overlooked.

 

[Dragoon Fighter]

I wish to figure out what we all can agree on timeline wise.

 

[Ct.O.B.]

I wish to figure out what we all can agree on timeline wise.

Don't we all? Truth aside, there's pretty much ONE definite fact I see most everyone agrees with.

OoT leads to the split timeline.

No joke, that's pretty much it.

 

[theunabletable]

Just so you guys know, a little while back (maybe a month or so) the idea of games taking place before OoT (other than SS) was pretty much killed.

Source: http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2010/214/4/2/SS_News_pgs__7_and_8_by_Moshata.png

Reaffirming OoT as first in the timeline other than SS kinda disproves the idea of TMC-FS/FSA going before OoT, sadly...

 

[Ct.O.B.]

Just so you guys know, a little while back (maybe a month or so) the idea of games taking place before OoT (other than SS) was pretty much killed.

Source: http://fc01.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2010/214/4/2/SS_News_pgs__7_and_8_by_Moshata.png

Reaffirming OoT as first in the timeline other than SS kinda disproves the idea of TMC-FS/FSA going before OoT, sadly...

A little disappointing to hear, but I guess it's bound to happen. Now I can worry about where the Four Swords arc goes!

 

[Ganonsburg]

They said that they've talked about how it is "sort of" the first story in the continuity. So...

A) That's not very certain
B) This implies we already knew that it was the first. Considering people put MC prior to OoT, I'd say it's safe to say people will continue doing it.

 

[Ct.O.B.]

Yeah, and the whole thing where Vaati is "replaced" by Ganon in FSA is a pretty considerable factor, but it can be (and IS, by a lot of people) seen as Vaati stepping in after Ganon is killed in a previous game.

 

[theunabletable]

A) That's not very certain

Does it really matter?

Actually him not being certain fits extremely well with his previous statement that somewhat implied OoT first, but not really confirmed it much, from a few weeks before this most recent quote:

this title [Skyward Sword] takes place before Ocarina of Time. if I said that a certain title was 'the first Zelda game', then that means that we cant ever make a title that takes place before that! So for us to add titles to the series, we have to have a way of putting the titles before or after each other.

These things are clearly always tentative in relation to the timeline, and they obviously don't want to design a game with a hard placement in mind because they don't want to be restricted.

Him saying "sort of" fits perfectly with this. He's not calling it "the very first Zelda game" because he already said in a previous recent interview that he doesn't want to make a title "the first Zelda game".

I don't see how it can get any clearer if he's saying that he doesn't want to call a game "the first Zelda game", that Ocarina of Time is sort of the oldest game, and that SS takes place before it.

Hell imagine how weird this paragraph would sound without the sort of.
Ocarina of time is the oldest game in the Zelda timeline. But SS takes place before it.

I mean it'd just be weird for him to say that Ocarina of Time is the oldest, and that SS takes place before it, without having any kind of "sort of" surrounding the Ocarina of Time, and without saying "this is the first Zelda game" outright.

B) This implies we already knew that it was the first. Considering people put MC prior to OoT, I'd say it's safe to say people will continue doing it.

...What? How does Aonuma implying that we already assumed OoT was first (which has been confirmed by developers in the past) mean that TMC can still be placed prior to OoT, logically? Wouldn't that more imply that we've been wrong all along, instead of implying that Aonuma knew about people placing TMC first and made his statement assuming that people would assume that since he implied that everyone already knew that OoT was first, they would continue to place TMC first.

That last part really doesn't want to come out right... I'm tired so I'm having trouble making 100% coherent, well worded points...

 

[Ganonsburg]

Does it really matter?

Actually him not being certain fits extremely well with his previous statement that somewhat implied OoT first, but not really confirmed it much, from a few weeks before this most recent quote:


These things are clearly always tentative in relation to the timeline, and they obviously don't want to design a game with a hard placement in mind because they don't want to be restricted.

Him saying "sort of" fits perfectly with this. He's not calling it "the very first Zelda game" because he already said in a previous recent interview that he doesn't want to make a title "the first Zelda game".

I don't see how it can get any clearer if he's saying that he doesn't want to call a game "the first Zelda game", that Ocarina of Time is sort of the oldest game, and that SS takes place before it.

Hell imagine how weird this paragraph would sound without the sort of.
Ocarina of time is the oldest game in the Zelda timeline. But SS takes place before it.

I mean it'd just be weird for him to say that Ocarina of Time is the oldest, and that SS takes place before it, without having any kind of "sort of" surrounding the Ocarina of Time, and without saying "this is the first Zelda game" outright.

It matters because that means the statement is not set in stone. He could have easily said, "Up until now, OoT has been the first game in the timeline." And bam, instant SS>OoT>...>MC. Him saying "sort of" still allows us to put other games prior to OoT.

...What? How does Aonuma implying that we already assumed OoT was first (which has been confirmed by developers in the past) mean that TMC can still be placed prior to OoT, logically? Wouldn't that more imply that we've been wrong all along, instead of implying that Aonuma knew about people placing TMC first and made his statement assuming that people would assume that since he implied that everyone already knew that OoT was first, they would continue to place TMC first.

That last part really doesn't want to come out right... I'm tired so I'm having trouble making 100% coherent, well worded points...

My point was that according to his statement, fans had known that OoT was the first game chronologically (before SS was known about). But if we did know that, why did we continue saying MC was the first? And if we continued before, this one (weak) statement probably won't stop us from continuing in the future.

Not to mention, we all know that the timeline that they keep giving us is not set in stone, a la the first 4 Zelda games. So chances are, until they give us a whole picture and show us why theirs is right, fans will keep doing what they like.

 

[Ct.O.B.]

And when they reveal theirs, the fans can either sleep at night or try to disprove it. OoT and TMC both have substantial evidence of being first, but of course the makers have made no statement regarding TMC in the timeline, so OoT is placed at the beginning almost for lack of reason to put TMC first, aside from developer statements.

 

[Ct.O.B.]

Zelda Universe Timeline
"Child" Line: SS - OoT/MM - TP
"Adult" Line: SS - OoT - TWW/PH/ST - (LoZ/AoL) - OoS/OoA(/LA) - TMC - FS/FSA - ALttP(/LA) - (LoZ/AoL)

-This is what Zelda Universe has come up with a timeline

Typical 2D Child order

Child: SS - OoT/MM – TP - FS/FSA – ALttP/LA – LoZ/AoL
Adult: SS - OoT – TWW/PH - ST
(NOTE: The Oracles placement is debatable and irrelevant to this issue, and the same is true for the placement of TMC. For reference purposes, most theorists place the Oracle games either after ALttP/LA or after LoZ/AoL, and most place TMC either before OoT or immediately before FS/FSA.)
Strengths of the 2D Child order

* There are significant similarities between TP and ALttP.
* The resting place of the Master Sword in ALttP is accounted for in TP, and TP appears to bridge OoT and ALttP's Master Sword locations.
* Documented existence of a hero's bloodline exists in TP as well as ALttP.
* The implication of the ending of TWW is that Hyrule is gone, which would have placed the 2D games in the Child Timeline by default at the time, which can remain true until a new game indicates an alternate placement.
* Sometime between the OoT and TWW, it has been confirmed by Aonuma that at least a group of Zora evolved into Rito, and set up base at Dragon Roost Island. This timeline is in agreement with the fact that no Zora have been found in subsequent titles after TWW. However, this does not imply that all the Zora had evolved or became extinct by the time of TWW.
Weaknesses of the 2D Child order

* No documented existence of a sages' seal on the Sacred Realm in the Child timeline, and this must be speculated as a separate event.
* There is no cohesiveness regarding the state of the Triforce between TP and ALttP.

- And this is what Zeldawiki.org has, as its 2D Child Timeline, plus strengths and weaknesses of the theory.

Clearly we have varying opinions. Headache much? The only solid portion I can see based on these two is:
SS-OoT/MM-TP
SS-OoT-WW/PH-ST
Shall we start here?

 

[Dragoon Fighter]

There is time manipulation in games other than OoT (PH & MM for example.) so what if the time line is split three or even four ways?

 

[Ct.O.B.]

There is time manipulation in games other than OoT (PH & MM for example.) so what if the time line is split three or even four ways?

If that's the case, it's pretty much impossible with the games we have to work with at the moment.

The only way I can see a split after MM is if another game were to take place in Termina, or an area surrounding it. But since the only possible split is exactly this:
OoT/MM-(Link saves Termina)
OoT/MM-(Link DOESN'T save Termina, he and HMS escape the apocalypse)
I can see potential, but not much.

As for PH... That's more of a dream sequence-vs.-real life adventure, so unless you know how a split can occur, I got nothing.

 

[Masky]

So, I decided to challenge myself by trying to definitively fit OoA/OoS into a timeline, lol. Here's a list of the basic conditions I could figure out that need to be satisfied in order to correctly place OoX:

• The Triforce is not possessed by anyone (at the beginning of the game, it is shown sitting in a room)
• Ganondorf is dead (Twinrova is trying to resurrect him)
• Link and Princess Zelda have not met previously (Zelda talks like she hasn't met Link before)
• Hyrule Castle is in the middle of a forest, seemingly abandoned. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8LArj0CMAZM 1:43)

The only placement I can think of that makes sense for OoX is some time after ST. As the flood water has started to recede, the TWW Hyrule Castle resurfaces and is stumbled upon by a traveler (Link). The Princess Zelda that Link meets is a Zelda from New Hyrule, a descendant of Tetra. Twinrova is attempting to resurrect Ganon from his death in TWW. The Triforce was previously seen assembled at Hyrule Castle in TWW, and seems to disappear after being used to make a wish by the King, so it makes sense that it would be there.

Feedback? Has this idea been explored before? Is OoX a sequel to WW?