Minish Cap is NOT First

[Erimgard]

Also, THEY HAVE SAID THAT FS IS FIRST IN THE TIMELINE. I believe it's Aunouma who said this and he later said that he was not working on the game, but he never once said that he didn't think it was first anymore.

So the fact that he said it's first without retracting his statement is evidence that MC is first because it's a prequel to FS.

Correction. He said "we're thinking of it as the oldest tale[/i]" and in the previous paragraph, he stated that they hadn't yet made the timeline to include all the games.

He did no work on FS. He was only producer on FSA for part of the time, and then got trumped by Miyamoto, who changed the plot.

If Aonuma's "uh we think this game that I had nothing to do with might go here, but I don't really know" counts as canon, then why don't you follow the "Miyamoto Order", which was stated definitively, without hesitation, and has ALSO never been contradicted?

Just because Aonuma never went back and said "my bad, I was wrong about FS" doesn't mean his half-*** answer was worth anything.

 

[Zemen]

If Aonuma's "uh we think this game that I had nothing to do with might go here, but I don't really know" counts as canon, then why don't you follow the "Miyamoto Order", which was stated definitively, without hesitation, and has ALSO never been contradicted?

Because, the games clearly contradict his old, linear timeline. He doesn't need to contradict himself if the games do it for him.

FS has absolutely nothing in it that completely destroys it's idea of being before OoT so the fact that someone on the Zelda team, regardless of if he worked on it or not, saying it could be first means it can be first. There is nothing in the plot that suggests that it can't be before OoT, same with MC.

 

[Erimgard]

Confirmation of the Split Timeline does not debunk the Miyamoto Order.

 

[Zemen]

Confirmation of the Split Timeline does not debunk the Miyamoto Order.

So you're saying that because there is a confirmed split timeline BY Miyamoto that doesn't mean his linear timeline is wrong? Him confirming a split timeline DOES contradict his linear timeline.

 

[Erimgard]

...../WW-PH-(LoZ-AoL-aLttP)
OoT
.....\MM-TP-(LoZ-AoL-aLttP)

voila
The Miyamoto Order isn't debunked just becuase there's a split. It can exist on either side of the timeline.

 

[Zemen]

...../WW-PH-(LoZ-AoL-aLttP)
OoT
.....\MM-TP-(LoZ-AoL-aLttP)

voila
The Miyamoto Order isn't debunked just becuase there's a split. It can exist on either side of the timeline.

I don't see what this has to do with anything...

Technically any order you make up could be right then as long as OoT is before LoZ/AoL and ALTTP in that order, so what exactly did anything you just said prove?

And like I said before, the games are more canon than the creators word. The box on ALTTP clearly says that Link is the predescessor of the Link in LoZ/AoL. Whether or not the box is canon (many believe it to be), there is not a creator quote saying that the box isn't canon and the box contradicts Miyamoto. If it's in the game or it's part of the story of the game it's gonna be more canon than Miyamoto's words will ever be.

And this ties in with what I said earlier. Miyamoto doesn't have to give a public statement saying he is wrong if the games do that for him. If he says Link has blue hair and he ends up having pink hair in the game then is it really necessary for him to give a public statement? We already know he's wrong, he doesn't have to straight up admit it every time he's wrong.

 

[Erimgard]

You have yet to prove that Miyamoto is wrong though.
Nothing prevents an arc of OoT-LoZ-AoL-aLttP with newer games between them.

 

[Zemen]

You have yet to prove that Miyamoto is wrong though.
Nothing prevents an arc of OoT-LoZ-AoL-aLttP with newer games between them.

Except what I literally JUST said. The back of the box on the original ALTTP says that Link is the predecessor of Link in LoZ/AoL. In case you don't know what that means, it means he comes BEFORE them which would put ALTTP before LoZ/AoL which means I did just prove that Miyamoto was wrong provided that the box is canon and since it's part of the background of the character in the story and there are no creator quotes saying the box/manual are not canon, it's widely accepted as canon except by those people who just don't want to believe it because it doesn't fit their timeline.

By the way, this topic is about MC being or not being first. Maybe you should stop veering off from that conversation.

 

[Erimgard]

Miyamoto's quote was made after aLttP's box.
If you can discredit a straight-forward timeline answer by Miyamoto, then I can discredit a "well I don't know but maybe it's this but I didn't really work on it" quote by Aonuma.

 

[Zemen]

Miyamoto's quote was made after aLttP's box.
If you can discredit a straight-forward timeline answer by Miyamoto, then I can discredit a "well I don't know but maybe it's this but I didn't really work on it" quote by Aonuma.

I'm not discrediting anything. You obviously aren't getting the point so I will give a simple example.

I make a videogame. The back of the box says that the character was born an orphan with no siblings. Later on, in an interview, I say that the character has a sister. Does this change the game? No, the game still says that he is an orphan with no siblings.

The back of the box says that Link is the predecessor of the Link in LoZ/AoL. Just because Miyamoto says that it goes after those games doesn't change what the game, itself, says. And for the last time, the game is always going to be more canon than the creator ever will be. Him saying it goes after LoZ/AoL doesn't change that the game, itself, says otherwise.

You're basically saying that if Miyamoto came out and decided to tell us that WW was on the child timeline then you would automatically believe him even though the game OBVIOUSLY says otherwise.

 

[Erimgard]

Miymoto produced and directed the game, and also invented the very concept of the series. If he changes his mind about something, then guess what? He can do that. It's his right.

 

[Zemen]

Miymoto produced and directed the game, and also invented the very concept of the series. If he changes his mind about something, then guess what? He can do that. It's his right.

Or not...

You're saying that tomorrow if he decided that there was no split timeline and that OoT was last on the timeline he'd be right?

Sorry, but you have TERRIBLE logic here. The game is going to be right, not him. He can't just change something once it's done unless it's being retconned which they did with ALTTP and only changed one thing, really...the presence of the POTFS. That's like redoing your homework after it's already been graded.

If tomorrow he said "Link has purple hair in every game" then is that going to change the fact that the games clearly show Link with blond and brown and pink hair? No.

 

[Erimgard]

And you're assuming that Miyamoto is mentally ********. Obviously he's not going to change stuff like that. This is his series. He invented it. He owns it. He directs and/or produces almost every game. He supervises every game. Aonua refers to him as "the absolute" when it comes to storyline.

If he says something that contradicts a marketing ploy NoA box, then he can do that.

 

[Zemen]

If he says something that contradicts a marketing ploy NoA box, then he can do that.

And you are assuming that the box is not canon. Give me a statement by Miyamoto that says anything said on the box or in the manual is all incorrect. NoA translates their boxes directly from Japan. This means that whatever that box says, so do the boxes in Japan. He says the games go after LoZ/AoL but the game says otherwise.

No matter what he says, the game is always going to contradict him and it's the games that are set in stone until he redoes them.

You swear like he can change ANY aspect of the game he wants when he can't. He would have to remake the game for his timeline to work and, what's this? He already did remake it and it didn't change it's placement? OMG!

You're not getting it. I'm done. responding to your posts. I'll respond when it has to do with the actual topic of the thread.

 

[sign of table]

I never once believed that Minish Cap came first. Why? Because when OoT was made, Nintendo was very adament on making it clear that it was the prequel to the games. If they had gone ahead and made Minish Cap a prequel, I'm sure that they would have made that clear to us.

Yeah, 11 years ago OoT was first. 11 years ago OoT was the SW. 11 years ago a direct connection between OoT and LttP was possible. 11 years ago there was no TWW. 11 years ago there was most likely no split. Hell 11 years ago LttP was certainly the prequel to LA. Now OoX is possibly the prequel to LA.

A lot of things have come and changed the series. I'm not saying that all of the above has changed, but a lot of it has.

And when have they EVER made a timeline placement clear in a game except for the direct sequels (which aren't always completely clear, either)? Sure OoT contained quite a few origins for things. But TMC contains origins for VERY MANY other things as well. Probably as many as OoT did.

Third, I think people take the whole thing about Link not having a hat at first way too seriously. So what if he didn't have a hat? Whether or not he had a hat doesn't really determine placement in time. I think that they made him without a hat so that they could implement Ezlo. Really, how else could they have done that?

I'd agree with you... if Bill Trinen didn't say that TMC is the origin of Link's hat... that makes it something worth considering.

Most of the information that people come up with to support the theory of TMC being first are easily disproven or argued against.

Ok since symbolic evidence doesn't matter to you, let's try some literal evidence.

Tell me, if Swiftblade the First (the really, really old one) says that he's the only person to ever learn the great spin attack (the one that spins around and around) how does Orca in TWW teach it to Link?

If Aonuma's "uh we think this game that I had nothing to do with might go here, but I don't really know" counts as canon, then why don't you follow the "Miyamoto Order", which was stated definitively, without hesitation, and has ALSO never been contradicted?

Something interesting that KJ Contrarion (spelling?) pointed out on ZU. Even though he may not have done much work on the game, he's still the director of the series. Now I'll agree that FS first isn't likely, but it's just something I thought I'd point out.

FS has absolutely nothing in it that completely destroys it's idea of being before OoT so the fact that someone on the Zelda team, regardless of if he worked on it or not, saying it could be first means it can be first. There is nothing in the plot that suggests that it can't be before OoT, same with MC.

I agree, nothing in Four Swords' plot stops it from being before OoT. But let's look at FSA. The beginning is very clear that they are the same Link. About as clear as LttP is about the Ganon and Dark World of the SW are the same as in LttP P@Erimgard).

Technically any order you make up could be right then as long as OoT is before LoZ/AoL and ALTTP in that order, so what exactly did anything you just said prove?

He just proved exactly what you just said; that it can work as long as they go in that order.

I make a videogame. The back of the box says that the character was born an orphan with no siblings. Later on, in an interview, I say that the character has a sister. Does this change the game? No, the game still says that he is an orphan with no siblings.

It doesn't change the game, but it changes the canon of the series. It's called a retcon, short for retroactive continuity. Also something to note. The GBA box does not state anything of that sort.

Sorry, but you have TERRIBLE logic here. The game is going to be right, not him. He can't just change something once it's done unless it's being retconned which they did with ALTTP and only changed one thing, really...the presence of the POTFS. That's like redoing your homework after it's already been graded.

Actually a lot of people would say that the GBA version changed a LOT of things. By the way, the box of the "retconned" version of LttP does not contain that quote.

Also, you're saying that an older game quote retcons a newer developer quote (LttP being before LoZ), but that Aonuma's FS quote retcons a later made game quote? I'm sorry, but... lol

Just so you know. The FSA manual is even more clear about FS Link being the same as FSA Link than the Japanese LttP box is.

I agree that the box is talking about LttP being before LoZ/AoL, but take a look at Erimgard's thread on the matter on ZI. He does make a good point. (I do think he was over analyzing it a bit, but it does show that it isn't as clear as the NoA version made it out to be.)

Disregarding the FSA manual is disregarding CLEAR intent.

You can say it was referring to a different Link, but it wasn't.