darklink01's timeline theory

[MrMosley]

http://i341.photobucket.com/albums/o372/calebm_89/possiblezeldatimeline-1.png

The first thing many might notice about this timeline is that Minish Cap is not first. I stated in a previous thread that I had changed my initial perception and decided that it was fine for Minish Cap to come first for a few reasons. However, the game really can come anywhere in the timeline, as long as it is after Wind Waker, which is shown on the Adult Side.

This is because the game connects to Four Swords, which then connects to Four Swords Adventures (as a direct sequel in my timeline). FSA actually shows Ganon in his beast form and without the Triforce of Power. Since my timeline relies heavily on Ganondorf's death, meaning the loss of the Triforce of Power and his human body. Games which come later have Ganon being reborn in his beast form. So since MC connects to FS, and then FSA, the games have to take place after the destruction of Ganondorf's human form and his loss of the Triforce of Power.

[Master94]

i can't read the text. its too blurry for me

[Matt]

Eh... Not bad. Makes enough sense for me.

[MrMosley]

i can't read the text. its too blurry for me

I uploaded a new file which you can make larger to the actual size. The text is legible in this one. It basically tells what happens in the games and has some reference to why the game happens when it does. It dosen't tell every single detail that I took into consideration, both for lack of space on the image and for discussion purposes.

[Master94]

i can't find any mistakes about the timeline. seems plausible to me.

[Zemen]

http://i341.photobucket.com/albums/o372/calebm_89/possiblezeldatimeline-1.png

The first thing many might notice about this timeline is that Minish Cap is not first. I stated in a previous thread that I had changed my initial perception and decided that it was fine for Minish Cap to come first for a few reasons. However, the game really can come anywhere in the timeline, as long as it is after Wind Waker, which is shown on the Adult Side.

This is because the game connects to Four Swords, which then connects to Four Swords Adventures (as a direct sequel in my timeline). FSA actually shows Ganon in his beast form and without the Triforce of Power. Since my timeline relies heavily on Ganondorf's death, meaning the loss of the Triforce of Power and his human body. Games which come later have Ganon being reborn in his beast form. So since MC connects to FS, and then FSA, the games have to take place after the destruction of Ganondorf's human form and his loss of the Triforce of Power.

not sure if you knew this, but, in FSA ganon recieves the trident of power (or whatever the trident is called) and i cannot recall what other game he has the trident in but i think it is ALTTP or LoZ or something like that, which means that FSA has to be on the same timeline as that game because FSA explains how he gets the trident, so it could not take place in the adult timeline with WW.

also, you said MC had to be after WW because it connects with the four swords games. its true that it connects with those games, but it could take place hundreds of years before the times of those games. in both four swords games, Link is a body guard of Zelda, but in MC Link is a childhood friend and not a body guard at all. obviously it is not the same Link and Zelda in the FS games as the ones in the MC game.

[MrMosley]

not sure if you knew this, but, in FSA ganon recieves the trident of power (or whatever the trident is called) and i cannot recall what other game he has the trident in but i think it is ALTTP or LoZ or something like that, which means that FSA has to be on the same timeline as that game because FSA explains how he gets the trident, so it could not take place in the adult timeline with WW.

also, you said MC had to be after WW because it connects with the four swords games. its true that it connects with those games, but it could take place hundreds of years before the times of those games. in both four swords games, Link is a body guard of Zelda, but in MC Link is a childhood friend and not a body guard at all. obviously it is not the same Link and Zelda in the FS games as the ones in the MC game.



I think the trident is more or less just Ganon's general weapon. Yes it does have some power, but Ganon has had trident-like weapons in Ocarina of Time, Phantom Ganon in OoT also had a trident weapon. Though it is a good point that ALttP is the other game which he uses this weapon more like in FSA, to me its not enough to make it have to come during that same timeline.

MC, FS, and FSA all are about the Four Sword and Vaati. There is no previous mention of Ganon anywhere during either game until the end of FSA. There are also no connections to the Hyrule from the Zelda titles within my Child Timeline and the Hyrule depicted in MC, FS, and FSA. I think if those three titles occured within the Child Timeline, they would have at least had the Master Sword in them. But if they were to have occured in a completely different Hyrule, the "New Hyrule" that Link and Tetra (Zelda) were supposed to find at the end of WW, then it would be obvious that the absense of the Master Sword was a result of it being at the bottom of the ocean, stabbed in Ganondorf's head.

Therefore, I believe that it is more reasonable that Link and Tetra discovered a new Hyrule and that the threat of Ganon was gone because of his death during WW. No one believed he would return, that is why there is no previous mention of him in these games. Until, of course, FSA, when he does come back and is reborn in his pig form.


Also, in my timeline I do have MC Link and Zelda as the generation before those in FS and FSA, however it dosen't state that Link is specifically a "body guard" and not a friend. In fact, if you read the opening of FSA, it clearly states that the second time Vaati was sealed within the Four Sword, during the events of FS, it was by "Zelda's childhood friend, Link". I know you may think I am confused by the "childhood friend" thing in MC, but watch the FSA intro and you'll see what I mean. In both games, Link is referred to as Zelda's childhood friend.

[Zemen]

its true that all the games are about Vaati (with the exception of FSA being more about ganon near the end), but just because the master sword is not in the game does not really mean anything.

the piccori/four sword was used to defeat Vaati the first time he appeared. maybe the reason they dont use the master sword is beacuse they know that the piccori/four sword defeated him in the past so they are gonna use that sword to fight him again, just like they always use the master sword to fight ganondorf.

i have played FSA and dont remember them calling Link, Zelda's childhood friend so sorry about that.

i think the fact that Ganon gets the trident of power is a HUGE piece of evidence, and you dont think it is. if ganon has the trident of power in ALTTP, which is on the child timeline, then there has to be a reason as to how he got it, which is what FSA basically explains, so in my opinion, it would HAVE to go on the child timeline because it explains something else that happened on the child timeline. you have good ideas, but i just think that there is way too much solid evidence that is obvious and in the game that puts it on the child timeline.

and im going to recall something you said in a different thread. you were talking about how certain things dont matter when placing something on a timeline, because those games could be a very long time apart. this is true for this. just because the games have the same basic play, doesnt mean they go one after the other. MC could be a thousand years apart from FS and FSA (which seem to be right in the same time period almost). in MC there are no maidens or anything like that, there is just an evil mage and the king asks Link to stop him by repairing the piccori sword and restoring its power

[MrMosley]

Well I haven't played through every bit of FSA, but the only time I remember Ganon even being in it is right at the very end. He made like, one appearance and that's when he had the trident. I don't recall or have never seen in a video of him actually obtaining the trident through any certain process, he just kinda popped up with it already. But if there was a point where he actually obtained it, I would like to know.

I mean yeah you could say it goes in the child timeline. And I do still stand by what I said in that other thread about you could really place many of them anywhere. But the thing is that MC, FS, and FSA all have a common storyline, a common enemy, and a common weapon. To me, they honestly aren't even that important. The only thing that makes them even interesting to me is the fact that Ganon happens to be at the end of the last one. And unfortunately, that means considering them as being in a certain place in a timeline. Otherwise, I would put them off to the side somewhere.

We do disagree on one thing that we probably are never gonna agree on, and that is the importance of the trident. Like I said, I would like to see a part of the game where it talks about it more in depth and actually tells of how Ganon acquired such a sorce of power. And you say that the Master Sword isn't important? Come on, thats stretching it a little. To say that Ganon's trident is more important than the absence of the Master Sword?

The Master Sword is way more important to me, and even if its not to most, it has to be at least considered as important as the trident. It has been in every other Zelda title, and it makes no sense why it cannot be apart of the Four Swords trilogy. Unless, of course, it is somewhere unobtainable. (hint: stuck in Ganondorf's head). Plus, you have to also consider the fact that the Four Sword has never been mentioned in any other game. Yeah, the trilogy is a newer series, but still if MC was to take place long before FS and FSA, and on the Child Timeline, then FS and FSA would have to take place before ALttP, like you said, which leaves the rest of the games on that timeline with absolutely no reference to the Four Sword, but about all of them referencing the Master Sword.


Oh yeah, here's exactly what the intro to FSA tells:

Long ago, in the kingdom of Hyrule,
a wind sorcerer named Vaati appeared.

Vaati terrorized the people of Hyrule and
kidnapped many beautiful girls from their
homes.

When all hope seemed lost, a young boy
carrying little more than a sword appeared.

According to the legends, when the boy
drew his sword, he split into four, the four-
who-are-one worked together to vanquish
Vaati.

The hero used his sword to bing Vaati in a
remote area of Hyrule. The people
christened the blade the Four Sword and
built a shrine around it. There it remained
undisturbed for many years.

Ages flowed by...

The wind sorerer Vaati broke free of his prison
and kidnapped Zelda, the princess of Hyrule.

Princess Zelda's childhood friend Link used the
power of the Four Sword to defeat Vaati and
seal him away once again.

And, for a time, the people of Hyrule believed
that their land was safe.

Until...


Notice the first few paragraphs talk about Link and Zelda in MC, where during the first of the game they are called "childhood friends". However, the portion of the last two paragraphs is referring to the events of Four Swords, where many years had passed. Therefore, the Link and Zelda in FS were the next generation, but are still "childhood friends".

[Zeanith]

Good job. Very good work. That blows my theory away.

[Zemen]

Oh yeah, here's exactly what the intro to FSA tells:

Long ago, in the kingdom of Hyrule,
a wind sorcerer named Vaati appeared.

Vaati terrorized the people of Hyrule and
kidnapped many beautiful girls from their
homes.

When all hope seemed lost, a young boy
carrying little more than a sword appeared.

According to the legends, when the boy
drew his sword, he split into four, the four-
who-are-one worked together to vanquish
Vaati.

The hero used his sword to bing Vaati in a
remote area of Hyrule. The people
christened the blade the Four Sword and
built a shrine around it. There it remained
undisturbed for many years.

Ages flowed by...

The wind sorerer Vaati broke free of his prison
and kidnapped Zelda, the princess of Hyrule.

Princess Zelda's childhood friend Link used the
power of the Four Sword to defeat Vaati and
seal him away once again.

And, for a time, the people of Hyrule believed
that their land was safe.

Until...


Notice the first few paragraphs talk about Link and Zelda in MC, where during the first of the game they are called "childhood friends". However, the portion of the last two paragraphs is referring to the events of Four Swords, where many years had passed. Therefore, the Link and Zelda in FS were the next generation, but are still "childhood friends".

actually, the back story of FSA is NOT talking about MC. if you notice, it says that the hero split into 4 heroes when he drew the sword. that didnt happen in MC. in MC you had to collect the 4 elements before you could even split into to 4 different heroes, and even then you cuold only stay that way for a very short time. the back story of FSA is CLEARLY talking about FS.

there were never any girls kidnapped in MC, and Link was never permanantly split into 4 heroes in MC and in MC the sword is NEVER called the four sword, it is only called the piccori blade/sword.

[MrMosley]

actually, the back story of FSA is NOT talking about MC. if you notice, it says that the hero split into 4 heroes when he drew the sword. that didnt happen in MC. in MC you had to collect the 4 elements before you could even split into to 4 different heroes, and even then you cuold only stay that way for a very short time. the back story of FSA is CLEARLY talking about FS.

there were never any girls kidnapped in MC, and Link was never permanantly split into 4 heroes in MC and in MC the sword is NEVER called the four sword, it is only called the piccori blade/sword.


So your saying that the story there, which talks about Vaati breaking out, being sealed by Link, many ages flowing by, Vaati breaking out AGAIN, and being sealed again all happend within FS? It talks about two events, two times that Link had to seal Vaati. In FS, that only happend once. The only other time it happend was in MC. There wasn't two separate times that Link had to do this in FS. It dosen't make sense to say that the backstory is only talking about one game when it clearly talks about two times of a hero defeating Vaati.

[Zemen]

if its clearly talking about two games then it CANT be MC because if you actually read what its saying and compare it to MC it makes absolutely no sense with MCs story line whatsoever.

as i said before, and these are facts from gameplay.

no one was kidnapped in MC, let alone pretty girls. the sword was never called the four sword. in teh back story in FSA it says that link split into four heroes when he drew the four sword, but that didnt happen in MC. you couldnt split at all until you got the first element. link didnt just appear out of no where when everyone thought "all hope was lost", link was there when vaati appeared and was fighting him from the beginning of MC.

i have no idea what the first game that back story is talking about, but i can promise you it is NOT minish cap, seeing as how minish cap revolved around obtaining the elemental pieces to power up the piccori sword to stop vaati who stole a hat. the game had absolutely nothing to do with any girls getting kidnapped. if you dont want to believe me then go play the game yourself. you can beat it in 2-3 days and you will see that MC is clearly not either of the stories spoken of in the back story of FSA.

i agree there are two stories told, but neither of them is MC.

[MrMosley]

Why would it make reference to a game that dosen't even exist? The whole thing about kidnapping girls, maybe thats questionable. But it still dosen't make any sense to argue the point just because of that. I have played MC enough to where I know what happens in it. The backstory to FSA does not say anything about "when he drew a four sword", it just says sword. It says that after Vaati was sealed, a shrine was then built around the sword and THEN it was named the Four Sword. In MC, the sword has no name yet and no shrine to put it in. It isn't until AFTER Vaati is sealed for the first time that the blade is named the Four Sword. MC is the first time Vaati is sealed, therefore the backstory is refering to MC.

[Zemen]

Long ago, in the kingdom of Hyrule,
a wind sorcerer named Vaati appeared.

Vaati terrorized the people of Hyrule and
kidnapped many beautiful girls from their
homes.

When all hope seemed lost, a young boy
carrying little more than a sword appeared.

According to the legends, when the boy
drew his sword, he split into four, the four-
who-are-one worked together to vanquish
Vaati.

The hero used his sword to bing Vaati in a
remote area of Hyrule. The people
christened the blade the Four Sword and
built a shrine around it. There it remained
undisturbed for many years.



you are trying to tell me that this right here is talking about MC. this is not flaming you or anything, but you are a moron if you think this is MC. i dont care if that means that the back story is talking about a game that doesnt exist. that makes more sense than saying it is talking about MC.

it clearly says "Vaati terrorized the people of Hyrule and
kidnapped many beautiful girls from their
homes." that never happened in MC

it clearly says "According to the legends, when the boy
drew his sword, he split into four, the four-
who-are-one worked together to vanquish
Vaati." that never happened until the game FS.

it clearly says "The people
christened the blade the Four Sword and
built a shrine around it." which implies that they did call it the four sword after he defeated Vaati but that didnt happen at the end of MC, and there was technically already a shrine for the piccori sword (the chest that was holding the monsters at the beginning).

it clearly says "When all hope seemed lost, a young boy
carrying little more than a sword appeared." except Link was there when Vaati appeared so he obviously didnt just appear when all hope was lost. infact, the king specifically asks Link to try and stop vaati, which means he didnt just come out of no where to stand up to Vaati.

there you go, i literally told you why every single one of those passages that you think are about MC, cant possibly be about MC.

and for the record, MC has a back story that doesnt talk about an existing game, so why would it be so weird for FSA to have a back story that mentions a non existing game?

[MrMosley]

Long ago, in the kingdom of Hyrule,
a wind sorcerer named Vaati appeared.

Vaati terrorized the people of Hyrule and
kidnapped many beautiful girls from their
homes.

When all hope seemed lost, a young boy
carrying little more than a sword appeared.

According to the legends, when the boy
drew his sword, he split into four, the four-
who-are-one worked together to vanquish
Vaati.

The hero used his sword to bing Vaati in a
remote area of Hyrule. The people
christened the blade the Four Sword and
built a shrine around it. There it remained
undisturbed for many years.



you are trying to tell me that this right here is talking about MC. this is not flaming you or anything, but you are a moron if you think this is MC. i dont care if that means that the back story is talking about a game that doesnt exist. that makes more sense than saying it is talking about MC.

it clearly says "Vaati terrorized the people of Hyrule and
kidnapped many beautiful girls from their
homes." that never happened in MC

it clearly says "According to the legends, when the boy
drew his sword, he split into four, the four-
who-are-one worked together to vanquish
Vaati." that never happened until the game FS.

it clearly says "The people
christened the blade the Four Sword and
built a shrine around it." which implies that they did call it the four sword after he defeated Vaati but that didnt happen at the end of MC, and there was technically already a shrine for the piccori sword (the chest that was holding the monsters at the beginning).

it clearly says "When all hope seemed lost, a young boy
carrying little more than a sword appeared." except Link was there when Vaati appeared so he obviously didnt just appear when all hope was lost. infact, the king specifically asks Link to try and stop vaati, which means he didnt just come out of no where to stand up to Vaati.

there you go, i literally told you why every single one of those passages that you think are about MC, cant possibly be about MC.

and for the record, MC has a back story that doesnt talk about an existing game, so why would it be so weird for FSA to have a back story that mentions a non existing game?



Yes, I do believe it is talking about MC. And you are aguing for the sake of argument. And its not called being a moron that I think that. Its called not thinking of the story as if it were a college class. Zelda isn't meant to be that difficult to figure out. I really, really doubt Nintendo has a master plan for a timeline and spends every waking moment thinking of each precise words to use because it might mess something up.

But lets go with what your saying for a minute. So the entire backstory, which mentions the hero splitting into four by use of a sword, which DID happen in MC, and mentions the building of a shrine AFTER Vaati was sealed, which happend for the FIRST TIME in MC (sorry, a box to hold the sword dosen't count as a shrine), and because its states when all hoped seemed lost that he appeared, and not "when all hope seemed lost, there was a boy running around the whole time until finally he beat all the dungeons and defeated Vaati", that is can't be talking about MC. Then if all those are correct, then I guess it must not be talking about MC.

But, never the less, its not changing my mind about it. It fits better within my timeline, which is what this is about anyway. So stop spamming it up with senseless statements and saying your are right and everyone else who believes the way my timeline is is a moron.

[Zemen]

Yes, I do believe it is talking about MC. And you are aguing for the sake of argument. And its not called being a moron that I think that. Its called not thinking of the story as if it were a college class. Zelda isn't meant to be that difficult to figure out. I really, really doubt Nintendo has a master plan for a timeline and spends every waking moment thinking of each precise words to use because it might mess something up.

But lets go with what your saying for a minute. So the entire backstory, which mentions the hero splitting into four by use of a sword, which DID happen in MC, and mentions the building of a shrine AFTER Vaati was sealed, which happend for the FIRST TIME in MC (sorry, a box to hold the sword dosen't count as a shrine), and because its states when all hoped seemed lost that he appeared, and not "when all hope seemed lost, there was a boy running around the whole time until finally he beat all the dungeons and defeated Vaati", that is can't be talking about MC. Then if all those are correct, then I guess it must not be talking about MC.

But, never the less, its not changing my mind about it. It fits better within my timeline, which is what this is about anyway. So stop spamming it up with senseless statements and saying your are right and everyone else who believes the way my timeline is is a moron.

lol i do believe you were spamming a different thread that i started. plus, no one else is really contributing to this conversation except to say "nice ideas, you could be right"

yes, link does split into 4 different links at some point in the game, but the quote you got specifically says when he drew the sword he split into 4 heroes, which definitely did not happen in MC.

and the BIGGEST part of that quote that MOST DEFINITELY should be a SURE FIRE SIGN to you that it is not talkin about MC is when it says that Vaati kidnapped pretty girls. that never happened nor was even mentioned ANYWHERE in MC. so unless there is a part of the game that the creators forgot to put in it, that back story has absolutely nothing to do with MC.

this will be my last post on this thread because youre obviously gonna stick with the idea that you think it is talking about MC when it clearly isnt and i have no time to waste on people who cant tell the difference between FACT and what they BELIEVE.

[Ver-go-a-go-go]

I don't really care about a timeline as long as the games are fun, but your theory makes the most sense to me.

[LoZfan]

according to my theory although i forgot to mention, Vattii was just another random ******* that woke up wanting to take over the land of hyrule, let alone the world. so fourswords don't count

[gerudo goyo]

I don't understand how Minish Cap comes after WW/PH

[MrMosley]

I don't understand how Minish Cap comes after WW/PH

Its supposed to be in the New Hyrule. Its not a direct sequel, just the next generational game. Where there is no mention of the Master Sword or Ganon in MC or FS, my thoughts were that the Master Sword was stuck in Ganondorf's head at the bottom of the ocean in the old Hyrule. That would answer both questions, as they would have no way of getting the Master Sword, and the threat of Ganondorf returning would not be there because he was destroyed.

[Zemen]

Its supposed to be in the New Hyrule. Its not a direct sequel, just the next generational game. Where there is no mention of the Master Sword or Ganon in MC or FS, my thoughts were that the Master Sword was stuck in Ganondorf's head at the bottom of the ocean in the old Hyrule. That would answer both questions, as they would have no way of getting the Master Sword, and the threat of Ganondorf returning would not be there because he was destroyed.

except ganondorf wasnt destroyed, seeing as how in FSA, Vaati is trying to bring him back, and succeeds in a way so obviously ganondorf/ganon is not COMPLETELY gone. now lets see, if he is ressurecting ganon dont you think he would know where ganondorfs body is? and if he knows where the body is then he would know where the master sword is and would either use its power or destroy the sword, but this is not mentioned or hinted to which would lead me to assume that the master sword has nothing to do with any of this logic, and also, even if the master sword wasnt there cus it was stuck in his head i still think there would have been some mention of such an amazing sword. and exactly why would the back story for the game be about someone other than link? the back story is about gustav and is not at all related to any other game in the series. every game at least has a back story that has to do with a previous game EXCEPT for MC, therefor i dont think it goes after WW/PH at all. i think its first in the series.

incase no one noticed, the back story was not at all about Link, the triforce, or a fight over it. infact, the back story was about a completely different type of power which implies that there was something more powerful than the triforce that he was after, but for some reason this same power is no longer searched for in any other Zelda game because at the end of the game we know that Zelda has the power in herself, and the power will be passed down through Zeldas bloodline and cant be taken away. the light force of the royal family.

this game has absolutely NO mention of the triforce whatsoever. in every game, link has the triforce of courage but not in MC. (i dont think so in four swords either but i dont think four swords is a canon game really).

in FSA we can assume he does have the triforce of courage because Ganon is mentioned in the game and we know he has the triforce of power.

[MrMosley]

except ganondorf wasnt destroyed, seeing as how in FSA, Vaati is trying to bring him back, and succeeds in a way so obviously ganondorf/ganon is not COMPLETELY gone. now lets see, if he is ressurecting ganon dont you think he would know where ganondorfs body is? and if he knows where the body is then he would know where the master sword is and would either use its power or destroy the sword, but this is not mentioned or hinted to which would lead me to assume that the master sword has nothing to do with any of this logic, and also, even if the master sword wasnt there cus it was stuck in his head i still think there would have been some mention of such an amazing sword. and exactly why would the back story for the game be about someone other than link? the back story is about gustav and is not at all related to any other game in the series. every game at least has a back story that has to do with a previous game EXCEPT for MC, therefor i dont think it goes after WW/PH at all. i think its first in the series.

incase no one noticed, the back story was not at all about Link, the triforce, or a fight over it. infact, the back story was about a completely different type of power which implies that there was something more powerful than the triforce that he was after, but for some reason this same power is no longer searched for in any other Zelda game because at the end of the game we know that Zelda has the power in herself, and the power will be passed down through Zeldas bloodline and cant be taken away. the light force of the royal family.

this game has absolutely NO mention of the triforce whatsoever. in every game, link has the triforce of courage but not in MC. (i dont think so in four swords either but i dont think four swords is a canon game really).

in FSA we can assume he does have the triforce of courage because Ganon is mentioned in the game and we know he has the triforce of power.


My point was that Ganondorf (human) was destroyed. If he wasn't, he would have used the Triforce of Power to come back as he did in WW, and in TP when he should have died at the hands of the Sages. The idea is that whenever the Master Sword impaled Ganondorf (WW and TP), it removed the Triforce of Power from him and, without that power, he died.

Vaati would have no reason to have to know where Ganondorf's body is to resurect him. Twinrova attempted the same thing in the Oracle series and were halfway successful. Also, I do not believe the backstory of MC refers to a previous Link or adventure/event which Link was apart of. I do understand that it refers to Gustaf.

This timeline is based on simplistic ideas which are given from the in game context, opening, and ending scenes/contexts. Therefore, whenever we see Ganondorf impaled by the Master Sword, thus losing the Triforce and dying, he would have to be resurrected in order to return. He could not be resurrected, apparently, in his former human form. This is why every game which comes after WW and TP which has the evil king as its antagonist, we see that he is now Ganon (beast) and not Ganondorf (human).