My More-or-Less Obvious Timeline

[Caleb, Of Asui]

I'm pretty big about the story, so, while I was first playing the series, I thought about the timeline quite a lot. I never really viewed the concept as a debate like so many other people do. I'm not very great at debating, plus that takes all the fun out of figuring it out.:)

So, yes, my current timeline is more-or-less obvious. I came up with it quite a while after I finished the series. (That excludes Zelda II, since that's so hard. I do know what happens in the ending, though.) It's more-or-less obvious since it follows the release order so adherantly, but places them on different sides of the timeline. When I came up with it, I was thinking a lot about what side each game goes on. What I came up with was that, since Twilight Princess (less cartoon-y) is in the Young Link timeline and The Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass (more cartoon-y) are in the Adult Link timeline, the side they go on is first based on if it's Ocarina of Time or Majora's Mask (there, it's obvious), then based on if it's cartoony or not.

Quite obviously, we need the 3d games to take place before the 2d games. Otherwise, the story doesn't work. The Minish Cape must also be moved to before Four Swords and Four Swords Adventures. So, here are the three main differences from the release order:

1. 3d games are preceed all the other games.
2. Move The Minish Cap to before Four Swords.
3. Seperate the games to the right side of the timeline.

So, with these changes, the timeline is as follows:

-----Ocarina of Time-----
Majora's Mask----------
----------The Wind Waker
Twilight Princess----------
----------Phantom Hourglass
The Legend of Zelda----------
The Adventure of Link----------
A Link to the Past----------
Link's Awakening----------
First Oracle Game----------
Second Oracle Game----------
----------The Minish Cap
----------Four Swords
----------Four Swords Adventures

There has to be a lot of space between The Wind Waker and The Minish Cap for the flood over Hyrule to recede. It makes sense for this to happen, since this is what ended up happening with a lot of real floods of similar proportions, though it definetely takes a long time.

A lot of what makes it make sense has to do with details I previously figured out a while ago. I'm not taking the time to type everything I'll barely be able to think of right here, so, if you don't understand something, please ask. I'd like to see some people challenge my timeline with something other than "There's no timeline because blah blah blah...." That gets pretty annoying pretty fast.:dry:

[Matthew_79]

I thought Alttp and LA was before the original 8 bit games. (considering LoZ is the only confermend death of ganon)
Everything else seems to fine by me. The oricale games can go anywhere.

[Skull_Kid]

I thought Alttp and LA was before the original 8 bit games. (considering LoZ is the only confermend death of ganon)
Everything else seems to fine by me. The oricale games can go anywhere.

It is implied in the SNES booklet and box that ALttP is before LoZ, and that's why it is called "A Link to the Past"...
And LA is a sure sequel of it

[Caleb, Of Asui]

It is implied in the SNES booklet and box that ALttP is before LoZ, and that's why it is called "A Link to the Past"...
And LA is a sure sequel of it

I'm not exactly sure that the booklet and box are considered canon, though. I put The Legend of Zelda before A Link to the Past because it flows better with the ending of Twilight Princess. At the end of Twilight Princess, the Triforce is still seperated. This implies that the next game should have the Triforce seperated, or else explain how it was brought back together between the events of the two games. In The Legend of Zelda and The Adventure of Link, the Triforce is very much seperated. In A Link to the Past, it's in one piece in the Dark World. At the end of The Adventure of Link, Link using the Triforce to wake up Zelda could be similar to the King wishing on the Triforce at the end of the Wind Waker. In that game, it apparently went somewhere, likely the Dark World where it originated, according to the creation story in Ocarina of Time.

Ganon does actually die in both The Legend of Zelda and A Link to the Past. Ganon is probably still alive in The Legend of Zelda because, in Twilight Princess, we see Ganondorf die, but we don't see Ganon die. In A Link to the Past, it is explained or implied (I'm not sure. I haven't played it in a while.) that Ganon was revived, probably by Agahnim. The events in the intro of A Link to the Past would have to be after The Adventure of Link.

[Skull_Kid]

No it doesn't... And how can you not be sure of something told by the company who created the games?You can't go against the creators and expect to have people telling you that you're right!

[Zemen]

I'm not exactly sure that the booklet and box are considered canon, though. I put The Legend of Zelda before A Link to the Past because it flows better with the ending of Twilight Princess. At the end of Twilight Princess, the Triforce is still seperated. This implies that the next game should have the Triforce seperated, or else explain how it was brought back together between the events of the two games. In The Legend of Zelda and The Adventure of Link, the Triforce is very much seperated. In A Link to the Past, it's in one piece in the Dark World. At the end of The Adventure of Link, Link using the Triforce to wake up Zelda could be similar to the King wishing on the Triforce at the end of the Wind Waker. In that game, it apparently went somewhere, likely the Dark World where it originated, according to the creation story in Ocarina of Time.

Ganon does actually die in both The Legend of Zelda and A Link to the Past. Ganon is probably still alive in The Legend of Zelda because, in Twilight Princess, we see Ganondorf die, but we don't see Ganon die. In A Link to the Past, it is explained or implied (I'm not sure. I haven't played it in a while.) that Ganon was revived, probably by Agahnim. The events in the intro of A Link to the Past would have to be after The Adventure of Link.


how would the manual for the game and the box for the game not be canon? thats like saying that Miyamoto's word is not canon and hes the creator for crying out loud.


No it doesn't... And how can you not be sure of something told by the company who created the games?You can't go against the creators and expect to have people telling you that you're right!

agreed. no one (except for crazy people) will agree with a fanboy over the creator.

[blackice_cc]

Well, like everyone else is saying, ALttP and LA should come before LoZ. I mean, Ganon is not dead in ALttP, whereas in LoZ, he dies in the end. The Oracle games could fit anywhere after LoZ, seeing as in those Ganon is dead and trying to be revived by the Twinrova (in the linked game).
Also, why couldn't MC, FS, and FSA come before WW? I don't see any reason that it couldn't be. It would make more sense than the flood going away and Hyrule being quickly populated again, at least to me.

[Zemen]

Well, like everyone else is saying, ALttP and LA should come before LoZ. I mean, Ganon is not dead in ALttP, whereas in LoZ, he dies in the end. The Oracle games could fit anywhere after LoZ, seeing as in those Ganon is dead and trying to be revived by the Twinrova (in the linked game).
Also, why couldn't MC, FS, and FSA come before WW? I don't see any reason that it couldn't be. It would make more sense than the flood going away and Hyrule being quickly populated again, at least to me.

i also agree with this. in fact, Miyamoto says that the original FS comes before OoT in a timeline which would mean that MC comes first in the timeline because its an obvious prequel to FS

[Matthew_79]

I didnt know that Miyamoto said that o.O
then why are moblins in it?

[Zemen]

I didnt know that Miyamoto said that o.O
then why are moblins in it?

the pretty obvious answer is that when Vaati opened the chest, they escaped. my thoughts on this is that there were only certain monsters in the world (such as the more animal like monsters such as the things that spit rocks and the moles and what not) and then after Vaati opened the chest, many new monsters from ancient hyrule that were sealed are released. this would explain why there are monsters in the world in every game after MC. Link never reseals the monsters, only Vaati.

also, the back story of MC never talks about ONE ancient enemy. usually the back stories to zelda games talk about a great enemy (like ganondorf) that threatened hyrule and a hero needed to save the day. MC talks about a war rather than one enemy. this is a hint that there are no previous super powers, only monsters or other creatures that threatened the land.

also the back story doesnt talk about a previous link, it talks about a completely different hero who has his own name and everything. thats a hint that there was a hero before there were any links. i doubt there was a random hero named gustav somewhere inbetween there being a bunch of links.

and my final word is that the presence or absence of a monster in a certain game hardly helps decide where it goes in a timeline unless the monster happens to be the main antagonist in the game which moblins are not.

there are plenty of monsters in some zelda games that dont appear in other ones

[blackice_cc]

the pretty obvious answer is that when Vaati opened the chest, they escaped. my thoughts on this is that there were only certain monsters in the world (such as the more animal like monsters such as the things that spit rocks and the moles and what not) and then after Vaati opened the chest, many new monsters from ancient hyrule that were sealed are released. this would explain why there are monsters in the world in every game after MC. Link never reseals the monsters, only Vaati.

also, the back story of MC never talks about ONE ancient enemy. usually the back stories to zelda games talk about a great enemy (like ganondorf) that threatened hyrule and a hero needed to save the day. MC talks about a war rather than one enemy. this is a hint that there are no previous super powers, only monsters or other creatures that threatened the land.

also the back story doesnt talk about a previous link, it talks about a completely different hero who has his own name and everything. thats a hint that there was a hero before there were any links. i doubt there was a random hero named gustav somewhere inbetween there being a bunch of links.

and my final word is that the presence or absence of a monster in a certain game hardly helps decide where it goes in a timeline unless the monster happens to be the main antagonist in the game which moblins are not.

there are plenty of monsters in some zelda games that dont appear in other ones

Totally agreed. Makes sense that MC could be first, seeing as (yes, it's a poor bit of evidence, but is relevant no-the-less) it explains how Link got his hat. And like you were saying, that could explain how the enemies came to be.
@Matthew_76: I don't get how the Moblin being in MC has anything to do with it's placement. I mean, there were Moblins in OoT, right?

[Caleb, Of Asui]

how would the manual for the game and the box for the game not be canon? thats like saying that Miyamoto's word is not canon and hes the creator for crying out loud.
The only problem with that statement is that Nintendo of America made the manual and box for the American release, not Miyamoto. They could easily make implications that weren't intended by Miyamoto. And besides, Miyamato definitely didn't say that the order was OoT, LoZ, AoL, LttP. *sarcastic*

Part of my idea that I probably should have mentioned in the first post is that the order is likely somewhat similar to the order they were made, with the obvious exceptions.

The last time I played the ending of A Link to the Past, it definitely seemed like Ganon died just as explicitly as he did in The Legend of Zelda. So, why are people assuming that Ganon didn't just completely die.

By the way, how exactly does the manual imply that A Link to the Past precedes The Legend of Zelda?

About The Minish Cap... I did think that it was first for a while. It certainly seems plausible, but that would have to have Ocarina of Time at least between The Minish Cap and Four Swords Adventures. I'm saying it's later, since that seems closer to what the creators probably intended. Remember, people, we're trying to figure out what the creators intend the timeline to be.

Hold on a second... I kind of skimmed the other posts before typing this. Now I'm noticing that people are saying that Miyamato said that the Four Swords trilogy was first. I know I'm already asking for quite a bit of proof to some things, but could someone please give me a link to whatever interview/letter/whatever Miyamato said this in?

[Matthew_79]

Totally agreed. Makes sense that MC could be first, seeing as (yes, it's a poor bit of evidence, but is relevant no-the-less) it explains how Link got his hat. And like you were saying, that could explain how the enemies came to be.
@Matthew_76: I don't get how the Moblin being in MC has anything to do with it's placement. I mean, there were Moblins in OoT, right?

Moblins were made by Ganon in his image, If there was no ganondorf, then there are no Moblins
That is really the only flaw I can see in MC being first theory, its not much, but it still dosnt make it any clearer

[MrMosley]

Thats actually quite similar, if not dead on, with my timeline. I haven't looked at mine in a while, but it was mainly based on things we already know, plus putting the Four Swords Saga in New Hyrule after the WW/PH stories. I like it.

[blackice_cc]

Moblins were made by Ganon in his image, If there was no ganondorf, then there are no Moblins
That is really the only flaw I can see in MC being first theory, its not much, but it still dosnt make it any clearer

Quote or reference please? Because I don't remember that at all.

Anyways, I haven't beaten ALttP yet, but I guess it seems like he dies in that. Well, there are a couple of answers as to how that would work. I mean, he can't die for good twice in one timeline. So, either he was revived after ALttP by Agahnim, he didn't actually die, or ALttP takes place in the opposite timeline compared to LoZ. Think about it; if Ganondorf died in TP, yet Ganon didn't, couldn't the same thing have happened in WW? So yeah, most likely MC FS and FSA wouldn't come first then. It would have to be after PH, when the sea dries up after many many years (perhaps thousands) and then Vaati comes along. After that, LoZ and AoL, or ALttP and then OoX.

[Skull_Kid]

Moblins were made by Ganon in his image, If there was no ganondorf, then there are no Moblins
That is really the only flaw I can see in MC being first theory, its not much, but it still dosnt make it any clearer

I have played ALL Zeldas recently and I didn't remember that being said not even once... If you by any chance used a non-canon source(i.e. the manga or the cartoons), then that is completely wrong...

And the only minimal thing, wich might probably be an easter egg is the mention of the Fork Shards or whatever they are called in a book that's in the library, but Myiamoto said FS was before OoT, so that puts MC before Oot

[Zemen]

I have played ALL Zeldas recently and I didn't remember that being said not even once... If you by any chance used a non-canon source(i.e. the manga or the cartoons), then that is completely wrong...

And the only minimal thing, wich might probably be an easter egg is the mention of the Fork Shards or whatever they are called in a book that's in the library, but Myiamoto said FS was before OoT, so that puts MC before Oot

THANK YOU! i think youre like the only other person who knows that miyamoto said that. i cant give any interview quotes or anything but i remember reading up on MC like a while ago when it first came out and this article said that it was a prequel to FS and then i was reading up on FS because i didnt know much about it and i found some article review with quotes about it and one of them said something along the lines of "think of the events in four swords as if they come before ocarina of time" or something like that.

also, it seems that most people are just assuming that MC, FS, and FSA come right after one another. someone stated that because FSA has Vaati trying to ressurect ganon, that means all three of those games have to come after PH. thats not true at all. MC could take place hundreds of years before FSA. who's to say that MC and FS cant come before OoT and then hundreds of years later the events of FSA take place? just because the games are connected doesnt mean they all happen in relatively close times.

[Skull_Kid]

THANK YOU! i think youre like the only other person who knows that miyamoto said that. i cant give any interview quotes or anything but i remember reading up on MC like a while ago when it first came out and this article said that it was a prequel to FS and then i was reading up on FS because i didnt know much about it and i found some article review with quotes about it and one of them said something along the lines of "think of the events in four swords as if they come before ocarina of time" or something like that.

also, it seems that most people are just assuming that MC, FS, and FSA come right after one another. someone stated that because FSA has Vaati trying to ressurect ganon, that means all three of those games have to come after PH. thats not true at all. MC could take place hundreds of years before FSA. who's to say that MC and FS cant come before OoT and then hundreds of years later the events of FSA take place? just because the games are connected doesnt mean they all happen in relatively close times.


You don't have to thank me... I always thought they didn't have to be next to each other, and after paying lots of attention to in-game details, i came across the conclusion that FSA is probably a prequel to ALttP... It makes lots of sense... I guess they weren't using ALttP's visual style, and name locations just by coincidence, but they were trying to hint at something... Also, if it comes before ALttP, it explains how Ganon got the Trident of Power, and makes LoZ and AoL come also in the Child Timeline, probably after LA... And the Oracles fit too better after AoL to be coincidence

[Typhingblade]

Links awakening goes after the oracles... because it is the oracle link traveling the world and he gets shipwrecked... to a dream world...

[Zemen]

Links awakening goes after the oracles... because it is the oracle link traveling the world and he gets shipwrecked... to a dream world...

and how do you know that its the same link? i dont remember anything in either game that hints to that at all.

[MrMosley]

Links awakening goes after the oracles... because it is the oracle link traveling the world and he gets shipwrecked... to a dream world...

I believe you posted this in another thread as well. However LA does not take place after the Oracles. Like I stated in the other thread, LA takes place directly after ALttP with the same Link as in ALttP. That is stated within the manual of LA. The manual of the Oracle games, at least the one for Seasons, states that it is an entirely new adventure for Link. It dosen't specify whether or not the Link in the Oracle titles is another Link from another Zelda game, but he is definitely not the same one as in LA.

[Caleb, Of Asui]

I'm getting a bit confused about what some of you guys are saying.
Actually, Link's Awakening can be after the Oracle games if you put the Oracle games earlier in the timeline. XP Some people tend to think that A Link to the Past / Link's Awakening have the same Link and the Oracle games because of the official artwork.
http://www.zeldadungeon.net/gallery/displayimage.php?album=52&pos=11
http://www.zeldadungeon.net/gallery/displayimage.php?album=62&pos=3
I think the really long bangs are the main similarity.

It's a little hard to make a continuation of Four Swords Adventures out of any of the other games, even A Link to the Past. At the end of FSA, we see Ganon trapped in the Four Sword, just like Vaati was previously. The only other games that include the Four Sword are The Minish Cap and Four Swords, which I think everyone mutually agrees precede Four Swords Adventures. You might assume that this takes Ganon directly to the Dark World. If that's after Ocarina of Time, Ganondorf's already in the Dark World, so... it's a bit weird.

[MrMosley]

I'm getting a bit confused about what some of you guys are saying.
Actually, Link's Awakening can be after the Oracle games if you put the Oracle games earlier in the timeline. XP Some people tend to think that A Link to the Past / Link's Awakening have the same Link and the Oracle games because of the official artwork.

Yeah, you "can" put them in that order. But that would be going against what we already have written as fact. Not trying to be rude by any means, but there is a lot of information out there, plus what has been confirmed by the developers that help us to put certain games in certain places in a timeline. It just so happens that Link's Awakening comes after ALttP, and not the Oracles. Here is a link to the manual:

http://www.desertcolossus.com/guide.php?page=zelda4/story&menu=iv

Of course this is a typed version of what is in the manual and not a scan, but it is taken directly from the manual. Because this game was made after ALttP, the manual would make no sense to be talking about any other event in Hyrule in which Link defeated Ganon. Plus, in the Oracles, you defeat Ganon in Labrynna or Holodrum, not Hyrule, so the people of Hyrule at this time would not be worried about Ganon's return. And even if somehow they were worried, the point that was trying to be made was that after Link sails away at the end of the Oracle games, he is caught in a storm which leads to the events of LA. This wouldn't make sense, as the LA manual clearly states that Link sailed away from Hyrule after the fact that the people of Hyrule were worried about Ganon's return. In order for this to be possible and have LA come after OoX, Link would have had to sailed back to Hyrule after he was done in the Oracles, then the people be worried for some reason about Ganon's return, then Link to sail back away from Hyrule, and that all makes absolutely no sense when the manual continuation from ALttP is so clear.

[Skull_Kid]

It's a little hard to make a continuation of Four Swords Adventures out of any of the other games, even A Link to the Past. At the end of FSA, we see Ganon trapped in the Four Sword, just like Vaati was previously. The only other games that include the Four Sword are The Minish Cap and Four Swords, which I think everyone mutually agrees precede Four Swords Adventures. You might assume that this takes Ganon directly to the Dark World. If that's after Ocarina of Time, Ganondorf's already in the Dark World, so... it's a bit weird.

In the GBA version of ALttP, in The Palace of The Four Swords mini dungeon(wich is located in the Pyramid of Power) you find the broken Four Sword(need anymore connections?), that's why the SNES version of ALttP was retconned from canon and replaced by the GBA version

[Caleb, Of Asui]

Yeah, you "can" put them in that order. But that would be going against what we already have written as fact. Not trying to be rude by any means, but there is a lot of information out there, plus what has been confirmed by the developers that help us to put certain games in certain places in a timeline. It just so happens that Link's Awakening comes after ALttP, and not the Oracles. Here is a link to the manual:

http://www.desertcolossus.com/guide.php?page=zelda4/story&menu=iv

Of course this is a typed version of what is in the manual and not a scan, but it is taken directly from the manual. Because this game was made after ALttP, the manual would make no sense to be talking about any other event in Hyrule in which Link defeated Ganon. Plus, in the Oracles, you defeat Ganon in Labrynna or Holodrum, not Hyrule, so the people of Hyrule at this time would not be worried about Ganon's return. And even if somehow they were worried, the point that was trying to be made was that after Link sails away at the end of the Oracle games, he is caught in a storm which leads to the events of LA. This wouldn't make sense, as the LA manual clearly states that Link sailed away from Hyrule after the fact that the people of Hyrule were worried about Ganon's return. In order for this to be possible and have LA come after OoX, Link would have had to sailed back to Hyrule after he was done in the Oracles, then the people be worried for some reason about Ganon's return, then Link to sail back away from Hyrule, and that all makes absolutely no sense when the manual continuation from ALttP is so clear.

I wasn't really trying to argue that they go together. I was just pointing out that some people could (and do) think that it works that way. You made a good argument, though. Good job.;)


In the GBA version of ALttP, in The Palace of The Four Swords mini dungeon(wich is located in the Pyramid of Power) you find the broken Four Sword(need anymore connections?), that's why the SNES version of ALttP was retconned from canon and replaced by the GBA version

Holy crap! I totally forgot about that! I haven't played that part of the game, so I'm in a bit of a loss there. I know it is really close to where Ganon is.

[Skull_Kid]

I wasn't really trying to argue that they go together. I was just pointing out that some people could (and do) think that it works that way. You made a good argument, though. Good job.;)



Holy crap! I totally forgot about that! I haven't played that part of the game, so I'm in a bit of a loss there. I know it is really close to where Ganon is.


Some people think that, and that's why were here, the story gurus xD, to enlighten them... About the FS Palace, it's okay, a lot of people haven't played that part of the Game... I admit that I only recently played that part of the game, but hey, there's always Youtube to see it:D