GX Timeline Theory

[Garo]

Nintendo or Aonuma has not confirmed any sequels that take place after ALttP that used the Master Sword again. The only game that could take place after ALttP to use the Master Sword again is the TWW but there's a couple of flaws. Now the reason why some people would say ALttP takes place between OoT and TWW (at least to my knowledge) is that they believe that when the seven sages sealed Ganon in the evil realm that was the imprisoning war that is talked about in LttP's backstory, but even that is not officially confirmed and I don't believe it to be the imprisoning war to be honest because for OoT to be the imprisoning war, Ganondorf would have to remain imprisoned in the evil realm until the events of ALttP, and yet he is clearly released and killed in the events before and during TWW. Also, don't forget when Ganondorf was sealed in the evil realm he still retained the Triforce of Power and in TWW he still has the Triforce of Power. In ALttP, he has the full Triforce but he was also killed at the end, not sealed. So clearly, ALttP cannot take place between OoT and TWW.

So, as of right now the Master Sword does sleep again FOREVER at the end of ALttP.

True, true.

I understand that there aren't any confirmed sequels after A Link to the Past, and I think that is the way that Aonuma and Miyamoto like it. I do seem to recall, however, one of them stating that when they plan a new Zelda game, they have to have a meeting to discuss it's placement on the timeline. Given that Aonuma wants a looser timeline, I don't think they wanted to cuckold themselves from including the Master Sword in any future sequels to A Link to the Past. That said, your other arguments are pretty solid, and fit with my revised timeline a few posts up. :yes:

 

[Simon]

I personally would place MC after ST, and have kept the FST as a trilogy on one part of the timeline. There don't seem to be many obvious flaws though.

 

[JuicieJ]

I personally would place MC after ST, and have kept the FST as a trilogy on one part of the timeline. There don't seem to be many obvious flaws though.

If MC were to come after ST, FS and FSA would come along later, and that would require Ganondorf to come back, which is impossible after WW. Plus, the Tower of Spirits wouldn't just go away. If it could have been truly destroyed, Byrne and Cole would have done so.

 

[Garo]

The only reason I place Minish Cap first is because I find it extremely unlikely that after the events of Twilight Princess, Hyrule would just completely forget about Ganondorf. There are no mentions of him whatsoever in Minish Cap (that I remember... please correct me if I am wrong), and nor is there mention of the Triforce (only the "light force" that Vaati seeks). Also, the Hyrule Royal Family has, since Ocarina, put a very heavy emphasis on the importance and sanctity of the Master Sword. Since in The Minish Cap their emphasis is on the Picori Sword/Four Sword, I again find it immensely unlikely that they would just drop the Master Sword - having just killed Ganondorf - and replace it with a sword crafted by small Picori that purports to have no such evil repelling power like the Master Sword.

Minish Cap just feels like a "clean-slate" Hyrule, much less like a "oh yeah Ganon has screwed us over a few times" Hyrule.

 

[Slash Dart]

I can see where you are coming from placing MC as the very first in the timeline. The only thing is though that it hasn't be officially confirmed to be the very first right now it's all speculation but it can work, I just haven't supported it yet either. SS is the only game right now to be a direct prequel to OoT. Once more story comes out of SS then we'll see if it will still be possible to place MC before it.

 

[JuicieJ]

The only reason I place Minish Cap first is because I find it extremely unlikely that after the events of Twilight Princess, Hyrule would just completely forget about Ganondorf. There are no mentions of him whatsoever in Minish Cap (that I remember... please correct me if I am wrong), and nor is there mention of the Triforce (only the "light force" that Vaati seeks). Also, the Hyrule Royal Family has, since Ocarina, put a very heavy emphasis on the importance and sanctity of the Master Sword. Since in The Minish Cap their emphasis is on the Picori Sword/Four Sword, I again find it immensely unlikely that they would just drop the Master Sword - having just killed Ganondorf - and replace it with a sword crafted by small Picori that purports to have no such evil repelling power like the Master Sword.

Minish Cap just feels like a "clean-slate" Hyrule, much less like a "oh yeah Ganon has screwed us over a few times" Hyrule.

The FSS may very well just be a separate legend, though. I can understand where you're coming from, but that kind of reasoning isn't really a good argument. There needs to be hardcore facts to back up a "timeline" theory.

 

[Simon]

The FSS may very well just be a separate legend, though. I can understand where you're coming from, but that kind of reasoning isn't really a good argument. There needs to be hardcore facts to back up a "timeline" theory.

To be frank there is no evidence that MC can be placed anywhere, and certainly not on the CT. I don't see any hard evidence that Ganondorf is killed in TWW.

 

[JuicieJ]

To be frank there is no evidence that MC can be placed anywhere, and certainly not on the CT. I don't see any hard evidence that Ganondorf is killed in TWW.

Well that's not any evidence to say it can't go on the CT. While I know it can't be accurately placed there, it also can't go on the AT. I'm quite certain Ganondorf can't come back. Again, turned into stone (not sealed in a stone), flooded along with Hyrule, Triforce whole again, no getting to the Sacred Realm to access it... Ganondorf's dead. He's gone. And there's no way he can return, as no one's gonna be able to reach him or the Triforce. After WW, the threats are new. Hence PH and ST not having him as a factor at all.

 

[Simon]

Well that's not any evidence to say it can't go on the CT. While I know it can't be accurately placed there, it also can't go on the AT. I'm quite certain Ganondorf can't come back. Again, turned into stone (not sealed in a stone), flooded along with Hyrule, Triforce whole again, no getting to the Sacred Realm to access it... Ganondorf's dead. He's gone. And there's no way he can return, as no one's gonna be able to reach him or the Triforce. After WW, the threats are new. Hence PH and ST not having him as a factor at all.

There's nothing to say he can't be reached. If he's completely dead, gone, can't come back, then why leave the MS in his head? It's possible that some aquatic race could reach him and (possible) revive him. He's no more dead in TWW than he is in TP.

 

[JuicieJ]

There's nothing to say he can't be reached. If he's completely dead, gone, can't come back, then why leave the MS in his head? It's possible that some aquatic race could reach him and (possible) revive him. He's no more dead in TWW than he is in TP.

Dude, why not leave it in him? What'd be the point of taking it out and putting it back in the Temple of Time? Like they had time for that, anyway. The MS being left there wasn't a hint. That was just them leaving it there. And, again, he's not coming back because he's completely dead (turned into stone, as he didn't have his ToP when he was stabbed, unlike in TP) and no one can get to the Triforce. They would have done something with him by now if he could come back.

 

[Garo]

I'm pretty sure that Miyamoto/Aonuma said that Ganon was definitely killed in Wind Waker, but they showed him being turned to stone to keep an E rating.

The FSS may very well just be a separate legend, though. I can understand where you're coming from, but that kind of reasoning isn't really a good argument. There needs to be hardcore facts to back up a "timeline" theory.

FSS can't be a separate legend, though, because Ganon not only appears in FSA, but several characters also refer to a "great evil" from the past when speaking of Ganon.

There are no "hard facts" to back up placing Minish Cap anywhere, so if you put it anywhere in your timeline at all, there is going to be speculation. I place mine at the beginning, because it logically makes sense and it doesn't distort the rest of the timeline. Is there anything that says it MUST be placed in X or Y location? Nope. It makes sense though, and should evidence arise saying "yeah, can't be there. sorry." then I'd move it.

 

[JuicieJ]

FSS can't be a separate legend, though, because Ganon not only appears in FSA, but several characters also refer to a "great evil" from the past when speaking of Ganon.

What makes you say that? Just because he's mentioned as a "great evil" doesn't mean it can't be a separate legend. I guess the better term would be an alternate legend. As in it still has Link, Zelda, and Ganon, but has no connections to the other games. That's very possible.

There are no "hard facts" to back up placing Minish Cap anywhere, so if you put it anywhere in your timeline at all, there is going to be speculation. I place mine at the beginning, because it logically makes sense and it doesn't distort the rest of the timeline. Is there anything that says it MUST be placed in X or Y location? Nope. It makes sense though, and should evidence arise saying "yeah, can't be there. sorry." then I'd move it.

Well, it has no connections or references to Ocarina of Time at all. If it's gonna be before it, something in it is gonna have to explain something in OoT, as that's the most important game in the canon. It's the centerpiece of any "timeline".

 

[Garo]

What makes you say that? Just because he's mentioned as a "great evil" doesn't mean it can't be a separate legend. I guess the better term would be an alternate legend. As in it still has Link, Zelda, and Ganon, but has no connections to the other games. That's very possible.

If we can take that as possible, we may as well go with the Literal Legend theory (which I do really like, in all honesty. It gives the whole series a very historical, Arthurian feel). There isn't evidence to support it being a separate legend, but there is evidence to support it existing within the timeline of the series as a whole. Ganon is there, and there are references to a previous Ganon.

Well, it has no connections or references to Ocarina of Time at all. If it's gonna be before it, something in it is gonna have to explain something in OoT, as that's the most important game in the canon. It's the centerpiece of any "timeline".

Not necessarily. Skyward Sword comes between MC and OoT in my proposed Timeline; Skyward being the origin of the Master Sword, it can likely bridge the gap between the events of the game and Ocarina. But, your point about it making no connection or reference to Ocarina of Time is exactly why I place it at the front of the timeline, before Ocarina of Time. No references to the Master Sword, to Ganon, to the Sages, nothing. If Ocarina of Time hadn't happened yet, it makes total sense that there wouldn't be these references. I don't understand why you would think that it would need to reference events that hadn't happened yet in order to be placed before Ocarina.

 

[JuicieJ]

If we can take that as possible, we may as well go with the Literal Legend theory (which I do really like, in all honesty. It gives the whole series a very historical, Arthurian feel). There isn't evidence to support it being a separate legend, but there is evidence to support it existing within the timeline of the series as a whole. Ganon is there, and there are references to a previous Ganon.

A previous Ganon? There are no multiple Ganons. If FSA is on the main canon, it'd be the OoT one, as he's described as a boy who grew up in the desert and was corrupted over time. That's a very accurate description of the Ganondorf that would have grown up in the Gerudo Desert. Plus we're told that by a Gerudo woman. She would have known the history of her people.

Not necessarily. Skyward Sword comes between MC and OoT in my proposed Timeline; Skyward being the origin of the Master Sword, it can likely bridge the gap between the events of the game and Ocarina. But, your point about it making no connection or reference to Ocarina of Time is exactly why I place it at the front of the timeline, before Ocarina of Time. No references to the Master Sword, to Ganon, to the Sages, nothing. If Ocarina of Time hadn't happened yet, it makes total sense that there wouldn't be these references. I don't understand why you would think that it would need to reference events that hadn't happened yet in order to be placed before Ocarina.

We haven't gotten Skyward Sword yet and you're placing a game before it? That's pretty dangerous. The only thing we can say is that it comes before OoT. And what I'm saying with references is that many games have made references to it to show where they are placed on the canon, such as WW, MM (mentioning Link waging battles across time and going on a personal mission), and TP. And those came after. If there's gonna be something before something as important as OoT, surely there'd be origins in it. Which is what they're doing in SS. I know I can't exacly prove this 100%, but there's really nothing to suggest that it goes there. Using negative evidence (almost always) isn't going to win arguments, especially something like you're suggesting. I'm not downing on your opinion, I'm just saying it's not a sound argument. So don't take me the wrong way.

 

[Locke]

If there's gonna be something before something as important as OoT, surely there'd be origins in it.

• Link's hat
• treasures hidden in grass
• Zelda's magical/prophetic power

to name a few.

but there's really nothing to suggest that it goes there. Using negative evidence (almost always) isn't going to win arguments, especially something like you're suggesting.

What's this?

Well that's not any evidence to say it can't go on the CT.

Negative evidence is meaningless in this debate. There's nothing to suggest it can't go in either of these two places.