First Five Titles - Timeline Issue?

[sign of table]

I don't have time to respond to everything, I'm about to leave for an SSBB tourney.

Noooo....

You heard about the King of darkness and ASUMED it was Vaati.
My point is still Valid.

Fair enough. I still don't see what they call Ganon as important, but, yeah, you're right it does make more sense with the Miyamoto order. Although it only made TOTAL sense when OoX came out

WTF? I dare you to read it again. It clearly states that the BS to LoZ is the SW. You can't have the BS to LoZ be the SW if ALttP comes directly after OoT because otherwise BS LoZ would have no reason to talk about the SW in the first place!

That doesn't work; because LttP has the SW as its BS too, and the main story makes connections to it.

If you want to argue current intent now it's fine, but for the love of ****ing god, stop bringing up a topic that's already confirmed for the timeline when the interveiw came out.

Oh no you misunderstand me. I'm not saying that OoT wasn't the SW in 1998. It most definitely was. I'm trying to ADVICE you to NOT take the sage names as evidence for fear of you being a hypocrite. You can't say that thousands of years between OoT and LoZ make the sage names impossible, while believing that the SW story survives a flood in your personal timeline lol

Your point is in no way invalid, but it's a horrible double standard for YOU to accept that point as evidence. You're my friend and I dislike seeing you being so hypocritical

 

[Pinecove]

That doesn't work; because LttP has the SW as its BS too, and the main story makes connections to it.

But ALttP ENDS the Seal war arc. It's when the SR is restored.

Oh no you misunderstand me. I'm not saying that OoT wasn't the SW in 1998. It most definitely was. I'm trying to ADVICE you to NOT take the sage names as evidence for fear of you being a hypocrite. You can't say that thousands of years between OoT and LoZ make the sage names impossible, while believing that the SW story survives a flood in your personal timeline lol

Your point is in no way invalid, but it's a horrible double standard for YOU to accept that point as evidence. You're my friend and I dislike seeing you being so hypocritical

Fair enough.

At any rate I believe I've won this debate.

 

[Alex_Da_Great]

Do you know what I think? The makers of Zelda didn't even think about timelines in the first 5 games. Only after OOT did they follow the previous games in history etc. meaning an issue with the timeline because of the first 5 games.

 

[Zemen]

Do you know what I think? The makers of Zelda didn't even think about timelines in the first 5 games. Only after OOT did they follow the previous games in history etc. meaning an issue with the timeline because of the first 5 games.

I think this is true for the first 2 games. LoZ and AoL weren't made with any sort of future in mind. The series was still a questionmark as were all series back then. ALTTP was made with the intent of being a prequel (despite what Miyamoto says) so that's when they started coming up with the idea of making all of the games connect. LA had to take place after ALTTP because of the shadow becoming Aghanim and OoT was clearly a starter to the series.

I will say that once they made ALTTP, they didn't necessarily start thinking of a timeline but they started thinking about how the game would connect. It was fans that created the idea of a specific timeline, but I would agree that I don't believe LoZ and AoL were created with the idea of "how will the next game we make connect to this one"

I don't believe that thought process came in until ALTTP.

 

[Mases]

Quick question... Is the A Link to the Past 'Player's Guide' considered canon? I've been looking at it and will have scans at the site in the next few weeks. However... at the beginning of the guide, they have a quick history of the first two games, as well as a mention of A Link to the Past... This is the first few lines for 'Legend of Zelda'

Although The Legend of Zelda appeared first in the series of Zelda adventures, it actually takes place many years after the third game. In this time, Hyrule had declined, becoming a rustic land with few remaining signs of its earlier glory

........ (It goes on for a few more paragraphs/pages)

Now... it is one thing to say that the Nintendo of America Box was wrong, but now compounding that with the official Nintendo Player's guide...

Thoughts?

 

[MrMosley]

Now... it is one thing to say that the Nintendo of America Box was wrong, but now compounding that with the official Nintendo Player's guide...

Thoughts?

See, the thing is Mases, that no matter how many things you come up with that prove ALttP as a prequel (as if the in-game evidence wasn't enough), there are still going to be those who hang onto Miyamoto's quote, because it came from Miyamoto. I'm not one of them. I don't personally need anything more than the game to show me that its a prequel. And Miyamoto isn't the best source to go to for timeline information, considering he hasn't been very involved in any of the game's stories since the original LoZ. But as for your question, I would definitely consider the Player's Guide canon; Its just not going to make anyone who hangs onto that quote change their mind.

 

[basement24]

I completely forgot about where I'd seen something about Hyrule not being of it's former glory. I'll have to dig that out now.

I would say that the quote from the Player's Guide fits in with the press statements around ALttP at the time in saying it was before LoZ and AoL. It was a pretty standard statement that was made before ALttP's release that it was indeed a prequel (although the term wasn't coined yet) to the NES titles. This does back that up in print and helps support the box text.

Unfortunately, I think most consider Nintendo Power writings, and by extension those of NOA to not be the truth. I personally would say there's legs behind it since there has to be a clean line in the sand about which we are talking about. We are playing the North American versions of the games, so the official North American writings about said games should be considered canon.

This goes back to a post I made some time ago that most consider what they like best to be canon. It's easy to flip-flop to Japanese texts to back something up, but the fact of the matter is we're all playing the NOA translated games. So, NOA approved writings can't be completely dismissed.

(Yeah, Timeliners are gonna hate me...)

 

[Zemen]

I completely forgot about where I'd seen something about Hyrule not being of it's former glory. I'll have to dig that out now.

I would say that the quote from the Player's Guide fits in with the press statements around ALttP at the time in saying it was before LoZ and AoL. It was a pretty standard statement that was made before ALttP's release that it was indeed a prequel (although the term wasn't coined yet) to the NES titles. This does back that up in print and helps support the box text.

Unfortunately, I think most consider Nintendo Power writings, and by extension those of NOA to not be the truth. I personally would say there's legs behind it since there has to be a clean line in the sand about which we are talking about. We are playing the North American versions of the games, so the official North American writings about said games should be considered canon.

This goes back to a post I made some time ago that most consider what they like best to be canon. It's easy to flip-flop to Japanese texts to back something up, but the fact of the matter is we're all playing the NOA translated games. So, NOA approved writings can't be completely dismissed.

(Yeah, Timeliners are gonna hate me...)

Haha I like that you said "timeliners"...those people are called theorists lol.

Anyway, I'm not one of those theorists who likes to flip flop from American to Japanese. I think that if we get something from NoA that is incorrect, then they will tell us so, like when WW and TP were said to be 100 years after OoT and then some Nintendo people came out and said it was mistranslated and was supposed to say Hundreds of years after OoT for both games (which WW says in game it takes place hundreds of years after the events of OoT).

Anyway, if we get something from NoA and it doesn't fit what people want to believe, unless NoA comes out and corrects something that we think is wrong, then it's not wrong. Miyamoto's quote means nothing to me. He could make any statement he wants about the Zelda series and I will probably never listen to him. The game box flat out says (in so many words) that ALTTP is a prequel. The game itself has plenty of stuff in it to hint at a prequel and now Mases came out with the guide that calls the game a prequel.

What more information do we need? Miyamoto is like a teacher of sorts. Your teachers in class are not ALWAYS right. Sometimes they make a mistake and sometimes the students have to correct them. I have had plenty of teachers who had to ask me what something was even though they were supposed to be the "experts" on that subject. Miyamoto is only human. He can be wrong. The game completely contradicts what he says so I go with the game.

At the end of the day a person can change their mind and make new statements but unless a game is retconned, it always stays the same. ALTTP was retconned but it didn't change anything that would keep it from being a prequel to LoZ/AoL.

 

[Alex_Da_Great]

I think this is true for the first 2 games. LoZ and AoL weren't made with any sort of future in mind. The series was still a questionmark as were all series back then. ALTTP was made with the intent of being a prequel (despite what Miyamoto says) so that's when they started coming up with the idea of making all of the games connect. LA had to take place after ALTTP because of the shadow becoming Aghanim and OoT was clearly a starter to the series.

I will say that once they made ALTTP, they didn't necessarily start thinking of a timeline but they started thinking about how the game would connect. It was fans that created the idea of a specific timeline, but I would agree that I don't believe LoZ and AoL were created with the idea of "how will the next game we make connect to this one"

I don't believe that thought process came in until ALTTP.

Yeah, I think it started out as just the two games and as more games were made, the creators decided to have a connection to the previous games to get a story going, instead of just random games from a series (like Mario). Once Internet was easily accesible to almost everyone, that was when Ocarina of Time came out and fans were thinking of timelines because of the connection.

In the next games leading up to the point, some Zelda games lead up to older, certain Zelda games having a strong connection. (of course with the basic connections of the whole series (green tunic etc.)) This is like Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass with the flood of Hyrule.

I personally think that the creators do not have Hyrule BUT they want to see what their fans would come up with, leading to all theories not right, but not wrong.

So it is good to make theories, but most likely Nintendo doesn't have an official one. So let the best theory win!

 

[basement24]

Haha I like that you said "timeliners"...those people are called theorists lol.

Haha! I just always picture "theorists" as being a stuffy old group of noblemen sitting around in a study in leatherback chairs saying things like "Mmm, yes... quite," as they puff on pipes and talk about nothing. All very boring! Timeliners sounds a little more modern to me.

What more information do we need? Miyamoto is like a teacher of sorts. Your teachers in class are not ALWAYS right. Sometimes they make a mistake and sometimes the students have to correct them.

Thank you! This is what I always preach. There's room for error in anything, even in matters of something that you created. When there's so many people involved in a project, even the person who first concieved it can't keep it all straight. That's why they hire people to do that for them. I never really thought just because the main man said one quote once that it should be considered canon.

I've been to a number of author's forums where they will actually ask their followers questions like "Did I ever say when <insert character name>'s birthday was...?" and such. George Lucas calls lightsabers "Lazer Swords" frequently. These things happen.

Because of this, I would take quotes like in the official players guide or the back of the box to be legit and worth bringing into the dicussion. I was around and anxiously devouring all of the pre-ALttP hype first hand before it's release and it was commonly stated it took place before LoZ/AoL. I don't think it can be retconned in one casual statement when there was so much prior to it's release stating otherwise. Dollars to donuts Miyamoto doesn't even remember stating that!


Mmm, yes... quite!

 

[sign of table]

Now... it is one thing to say that the Nintendo of America Box was wrong, but now compounding that with the official Nintendo Player's guide...

Thoughts?

1991 intent =/= 2009 intent.

The amount of games as nearly quintupled since that quote, and the official timeline said that it was wrong 7 years after that quote.

I think that if we get something from NoA that is incorrect, then they will tell us so, like when WW and TP were said to be 100 years after OoT and then some Nintendo people came out and said it was mistranslated and was supposed to say Hundreds of years after OoT for both games (which WW says in game it takes place hundreds of years after the events of OoT).

That wasn't Nintendo people. That was Jacensolo of LegendsAlliance lol.

Anyway, if we get something from NoA and it doesn't fit what people want to believe, unless NoA comes out and corrects something that we think is wrong, then it's not wrong.

The ONLY thing that NoA has come out and say was wrong was the box of LttP and that the timeline went OoT-LoZ/AoL-LttP. How the hell is the official developer intended timeline going to be based on NoA text when ALL of the text originated from Japanese (and the developers are Japanese).

Miyamoto's quote means nothing to me. He could make any statement he wants about the Zelda series and I will probably never listen to him.

Then you're not looking for the developer intended timeline.

The game box flat out says (in so many words) that ALTTP is a prequel.

AND PEOPLE FROM NINTENDO HAVE COME OUT AND FLAT OUT SAID THAT THE BOX IS WRONG

What more information do we need? Miyamoto is like a teacher of sorts. Your teachers in class are not ALWAYS right. Sometimes they make a mistake and sometimes the students have to correct them. I have had plenty of teachers who had to ask me what something was even though they were supposed to be the "experts" on that subject. Miyamoto is only human. He can be wrong. The game completely contradicts what he says so I go with the game.

If it's Miyamoto who makes the OFFICIAL timeline, then how the hell can he be wrong about the official timeline? He made the damn series and if he makes the official timeline then that's the timeline.

1998 is the ONLY time in the ENTIRE series where we had the official timeline. But you say it's wrong because of a box made 7 years prior to the interview, and that box has been said to be wrong, too.

At the end of the day a person can change their mind and make new statements but unless a game is retconned, it always stays the same. ALTTP was retconned but it didn't change anything that would keep it from being a prequel to LoZ/AoL.

That box quote sure as hell was removed.

Now there is nothing other than an 18 year old box quote that gives evidence for LttP-LoZ.

In 1991 it of course made more sense. But now LttP isn't the origin of everything. We have other games that do that. There's nothing about the LttP story that says it's before LoZ. The only reason it was before LoZ in 1991 was because it was the first game in the timeline, not because it made some sort of reference that still holds now 18 years later with 11 more games.

LttP-LoZ went LttP-LoZ because the SNES manual made it extremely clear that nothing important had happened since creation except for the SW which was immediatly prior to LttP. It simply made LoZ-LttP make no sense.

Then things like BS LoZ, AST, and OoT came out and we got an OFFICIAL timeline which DID make sense.

The text within the game always stays the same, yes. But the intent behind the text can easily change.

For instance, I'd say (and I'm pretty sure you'll agree) that in 2002 Daphnes' speech about Hyrule being gone clearly meant that there wouldn't be another Hyrule.

The whole point of the TWW ending is made absolutely pointless if Tetra and Link find another Hyrule. And TWW-LttP made very, very little sense (less than it does now without FSA). But you believe that ST is after TWW. Wouldn't the meaning behind the ending of TWW have changed, then?

Anyways, it's so completely ridiculous to say that you are looking for the developer intended timeline, while saying that the ONLY official timeline that we have EVER had is wrong. Especially when there was nothing wrong with that timeline, and anything that was left open that didn't make a lot of sense was corrected with later games (OoX and maybe even GBA LttP). OoT-LoZ-LttP was clearly the developer intended timeline because: 1) it was the official timeline. 2) it made just as much sense as OoT-LttP-LoZ, and made even more sense with later releases. 3) IT WAS THE OFFICIAL TIMELINE BY THE ONLY PERSON WHO COULD HAVE EVER RELEASED AN OFFICIAL TIMELINE.

While the in-game evidence is good and all, it was the official timeline which is all that matters.

Thank you! This is what I always preach. There's room for error in anything, even in matters of something that you created. When there's so many people involved in a project, even the person who first concieved it can't keep it all straight. That's why they hire people to do that for them. I never really thought just because the main man said one quote once that it should be considered canon.

Even though other people confirmed that quote in 1999, and that all releases until TWW created more and more evidence for OoT-LoZ-LttP?

And there is NOTHING wrong with the timeline he proposed, anyways. If you think there IS something wrong with it, let's debate that right now.

 

[Zemen]

1991 intent =/= 2009 intent.

The amount of games as nearly quintupled since that quote, and the official timeline said that it was wrong 7 years after that quote. That wasn't Nintendo people. That was Jacensolo of LegendsAlliance lol. The ONLY thing that NoA has come out and say was wrong was the box of LttP and that the timeline went OoT-LoZ/AoL-LttP. How the hell is the official developer intended timeline going to be based on NoA text when ALL of the text originated from Japanese (and the developers are Japanese). Then you're not looking for the developer intended timeline. AND PEOPLE FROM NINTENDO HAVE COME OUT AND FLAT OUT SAID THAT THE BOX IS WRONG If it's Miyamoto who makes the OFFICIAL timeline, then how the hell can he be wrong about the official timeline? He made the damn series and if he makes the official timeline then that's the timeline.

1998 is the ONLY time in the ENTIRE series where we had the official timeline. But you say it's wrong because of a box made 7 years prior to the interview, and that box has been said to be wrong, too. That box quote sure as hell was removed.

Now there is nothing other than an 18 year old box quote that gives evidence for LttP-LoZ.

In 1991 it of course made more sense. But now LttP isn't the origin of everything. We have other games that do that. There's nothing about the LttP story that says it's before LoZ. The only reason it was before LoZ in 1991 was because it was the first game in the timeline, not because it made some sort of reference that still holds now 18 years later with 11 more games.

LttP-LoZ went LttP-LoZ because the SNES manual made it extremely clear that nothing important had happened since creation except for the SW which was immediatly prior to LttP. It simply made LoZ-LttP make no sense.

Then things like BS LoZ, AST, and OoT came out and we got an OFFICIAL timeline which DID make sense.

The text within the game always stays the same, yes. But the intent behind the text can easily change.

For instance, I'd say (and I'm pretty sure you'll agree) that in 2002 Daphnes' speech about Hyrule being gone clearly meant that there wouldn't be another Hyrule.

The whole point of the TWW ending is made absolutely pointless if Tetra and Link find another Hyrule. And TWW-LttP made very, very little sense (less than it does now without FSA). But you believe that ST is after TWW. Wouldn't the meaning behind the ending of TWW have changed, then?

Anyways, it's so completely ridiculous to say that you are looking for the developer intended timeline, while saying that the ONLY official timeline that we have EVER had is wrong. Especially when there was nothing wrong with that timeline, and anything that was left open that didn't make a lot of sense was corrected with later games (OoX and maybe even GBA LttP). OoT-LoZ-LttP was clearly the developer intended timeline because: 1) it was the official timeline. 2) it made just as much sense as OoT-LttP-LoZ, and made even more sense with later releases. 3) IT WAS THE OFFICIAL TIMELINE BY THE ONLY PERSON WHO COULD HAVE EVER RELEASED AN OFFICIAL TIMELINE.

While the in-game evidence is good and all, it was the official timeline which is all that matters. Even though other people confirmed that quote in 1999, and that all releases until TWW created more and more evidence for OoT-LoZ-LttP?

And there is NOTHING wrong with the timeline he proposed, anyways. If you think there IS something wrong with it, let's debate that right now.

I've never heard anyone say that the OFFICIAL strategy guide for the game is wrong, which clearly says that ALTTP takes place before LoZ/AoL. That has never been stated to be wrong. You can argue the box thing all you want, but the strategy guide (the OFFICIAL NINTENDO strategy guide) says the same thing that the box implies.

 

[sign of table]

When was the strategy guide made? 1991? When did Miyamoto's quote come out? 1998? Ahh I see... a retcon. One of the many in the series.

 

[MrMosley]

When was the strategy guide made? 1991? When did Miyamoto's quote come out? 1998? Ahh I see... a retcon. One of the many in the series.

We've already discussed how GBA ALttP has the same meaning in-game as the SNES one did, telling a backstory to Hyrule, the Triforce, and Ganon. And that game came after Miyamoto's quote. In my opinion, that overrules his quote.

Its quite a simple thing to look at...
- Ganon is in Hyrule in LoZ
- ALttP (GBA) says that he was sealed in the Dark World after making his wish on the Triforce. He is still in the Dark World during ALttP

The only possible way that LoZ could have came before ALttP is if something in ALttP pointed to that happening. Nothing does. If the intent of the games changed in 1998, then I'm sure that they would have shown us in the remake of ALttP something that pointed to LoZ being before it. Or, they could have even added something to the text of LoZ's intro signifying that ALttP came later, or that nothing in ALttP had happened yet (remember, they did redo the intro text for Collector's Edition AND the GBA NES Collection release, where they could have easily added something to show this). But none of this happened. The only thing we know, is that ALttP tells how Ganondorf came to be Ganon in the Dark World. In LoZ, Ganon is still Ganon, but he is in Hyrule. That's enough to show ALttP as a prequel and disregard any quote prior to ALttP's GBA release.

 

[sign of table]

Its quite a simple thing to look at...
- Ganon is in Hyrule in LoZ
- ALttP (GBA) says that he was sealed in the Dark World after making his wish on the Triforce. He is still in the Dark World during ALttP

No GBA LttP says that evil was sealed within the Sacred Realm after evil got out. It says that Ganon couldn't get out after he touched the Triforce. There's a big difference.

Here's a question. The DW is clearly Ganon's Makai in LttP. If that Makai is gone after LttP, how can Ganon have a Makai in AoL.
@Erimgard: Yeah I just went to makai's

Or, they could have even added something to the text of LoZ's intro signifying that ALttP came later, or that nothing in ALttP had happened yet (remember, they did redo the intro text for Collector's Edition AND the GBA NES Collection release, where they could have easily added something to show this).

Nothing from ANY of the LoZ rereleases has been changed except for NoA mistranslations. However BS LoZ DID make corrections.

BS LoZ says that the SW happened prior to LoZ. Part of it says: "After the fight in which there were many sacrifices and the sages were successful in their seal, it came to be called the Seal War. Once again, Hyrule was visited by peace." then two lines later it says: "The peace of the moment is destroyed by the mysterious message. Hurry, hero! You must bring peace back to Hyrule once again!"

Hyrule was visited by peace after the SW when Ganon was born. Then what Zelda says destroys the peace. HUH I WONDER IF THE TWO ARE CONNECTED AT ALL?!

- ALttP (GBA) says that he was sealed in the Dark World after making his wish on the Triforce. He is still in the Dark World during ALttP

He is in teh Dark World with the FULL Triforce. This is completely impossible if LttP follows directly after OoT. At the end of OoT he had the ToP not the Triforce.

With GBA LttP the SW doesn't HAVE to be connected directly to LttP. It is impossible for them to be 100% connected (as in LttP immediatly follows the SW) if OoT was the SW, as Ganon in LttP has the full Triforce where OoT Ganon only had the ToP.

Ironically, however, the beginning of LoZ starts with Ganon only having the ToP.