Link to the Past->Oracle Games: Same Link?

[Forlong]

I was thinking, is the Link in the Oracle games the same one in "Link to the Past". They have to occur after LttP because the Triforce is in a shrine. I think it makes sense for it to be the same Link who put it there. However, I haven't played the games through completely yet and want to be sure. Is there anything else backing up this theory in the games? Any going against it?

 

[coolperson135]

Well, there is the whole deal with OoX's ending and LA's beginning being the same. As you said, the Triforce's condition in OoX also supports the two games having the same Link. In OoX, the Triforce was in Hyrule and in control of the royal family, not in the the sacred realm. This would imply that before OoX, Link either assembled the Triforce (meaning it comes after AoL) or defeated Ganon in the sacred realm and brought the triforce back to the light world (Meaning it comes after lttp). OoX coming after either title is acceptable, since Ganon dies or is dead in AoL and lttp. Either way, OoX must come in the child timeline, since Twinrova is alive (she only dies in the adult timeline). However, I personally think it comes in between lttp and LA.

 

[DuckNoises]

There is a common belief that OoX Link is the same as the one from ALttP, given the placement of the Triforce and the way the OoX ending coincides with the beginning of LA.
OoX can also be placed after AoL, but that doesn't necessarily disprove that they are the same Link. The strongest argument against it are a few lines of dialogue spoken by Princess Zelda when OoA is your second quest. I could give you a link to a thread with this discussion, but it has spoilers:
http://zeldadungeon.net/forum/showt...XII-s-Tri-Timeline-Theory&p=148962#post148962

 

[JuicieJ]

It's nowhere near confirmed, but it's most likely what was intended, as at the end of the OoX, Link is sailing off on a ship that is almost identical to the one at the beginning of LA (the OoX's just has a couple more sails). And since the Link in LA is confirmed to be the same one in ALttP... The evidence points heavily towards them being the same.

 

[Hero of Time]

ALttP Link:



OoX Link:



A bit of an inconsistency there. You can say "Oh, official artwork doesn't matter," but no. First of all, it's official artwork; hobos on the street aren't making these pictures, Nintendo is. Second, it would be different if OoX came first, but it wouldn't work that way. Disagree if you wish, but that's all the evidence I need. If you can so me stronger evidence to show me wrong, I applaud you.

 

[coolperson135]

ALttP Link:

View attachment 16154

OoX Link:

View attachment 16155

A bit of an inconsistency there. You can say "Oh, official artwork doesn't matter," but no. First of all, it's official artwork; hobos on the street aren't making these pictures, Nintendo is. Second, it would be different if OoX came first, but it wouldn't work that way. Disagree if you wish, but that's all the evidence I need. If you can so me stronger evidence to show me wrong, I applaud you.

The only difference see is that Link decided to wear pants on one of his adventures. The whole pants thing isn't even a valid reason, considering how in OoT Link suddenly got pants and earrings after sleeping for seven years. Other than the pants, they share just about the same features: same hair color, same hair style, same undergarment color, giant side burns, etc. They even have the same shield design, if you look at OoX Link's other art work. Most other differences (if there are any) can be attributed to the different art styles. Lttp Link was drawn in a more "serious" style , while OoX Link was drawn in a more "cartoon" style (not as extreme as WW Link, though). When they made OoX, They took artistic liberty with the artstyle and a few minor details.

 

[Hero of Time]

The only difference see is that Link decided to wear pants on one of his adventures. The whole pants thing isn't even a valid reason, considering how in OoT Link suddenly got pants and earrings after sleeping for seven years. Other than the pants, they share just about the same features: same hair color, same hair style, same undergarment color, giant side burns, etc. They even have the same shield design, if you look at OoX Link's other art work. Most other differences (if there are any) can be attributed to the different art styles. Lttp Link was drawn in a more "serious" style , while OoX Link was drawn in a more "cartoon" style (not as extreme as WW Link, though). When they made OoX, They took artistic liberty with the artstyle and a few minor details.

I was talking about how ALttP Link looks about 5 years older.:facepalm:

 

[coolperson135]

I was talking about how ALttP Link looks about 5 years older.:facepalm:

He doesn't look older. They are just about the same age. It's just the artistic liberty they took with the art style. Notice how OoX Link's hands and face are drawn in relation to that of Lttp Link's. He has a noticeably wider face and bulkier hands, even while taking into account the image size difference. Also, look at the general color scheme they used with Oox. While Oox and lttp link share the same colors, Oox's color scheme utilizes more cartoony shades, as opposed to lttp's color scheme.

 

[JuicieJ]

ALttP Link:

View attachment 16154

OoX Link:

View attachment 16155

A bit of an inconsistency there. You can say "Oh, official artwork doesn't matter," but no. First of all, it's official artwork; hobos on the street aren't making these pictures, Nintendo is. Second, it would be different if OoX came first, but it wouldn't work that way. Disagree if you wish, but that's all the evidence I need. If you can so me stronger evidence to show me wrong, I applaud you.

Well, as far away as the Oracle games were, I think that's understandable. Plus, the Oracle games were actually going to be three different games each based around certain seeds, but one of them was dropped (the green one), and the OoX was born. The design of Link in those three games was surely the same before it was changed to the OoX, so I don't think this evidence is sound.

I was talking about how ALttP Link looks about 5 years older.

He really doesn't look that much older. It just has to do with the different styles of art.

 

[Jarsh]

Either way, OoX must come in the child timeline, since Twinrova is alive (she only dies in the adult timeline).

OoX wasn't made with the intention of coming on the child timeline. When it was released, before TWW, ALttP was most certainly still on the adult timeline. Plus, it's Flagship, and they will reuse characters as they see fit.

 

[Forlong]

OoX wasn't made with the intention of coming on the child timeline. When it was released, before TWW, ALttP was most certainly still on the adult timeline. Plus, it's Flagship, and they will reuse characters as they see fit.

And you would know this how? I mean, we don't know when Nintendo decided to split the timeline, just that they did.

 

[Locke]

And you would know this how? I mean, we don't know when Nintendo decided to split the timeline, just that they did.

Even if the split hadn't been conceived yet, then the AT was all that existed. A world with Twinrova still alive only exists in a split timeline, on the CT. In 2001, either the timeline was linear, meaning when Twinrova died, Twinrova died in all known continuities; or all the games (except the MM side-game) were on the AT, meaning the same thing.

 

[Capitaine]

The director of OoX said that when he directed TMC, he made the world first and then chose characters that he thought fit that world (like the "drippy-nose kid"). I would assume it's the same case for OoX. Flagship chooses characters for the kind of environment their looking for, not for story or timeline purposes.

Nintendo Power: We see many familiar characters in this game (even the kid with the dripping nose from The Wind Waker!). Did you refer to any particular Zelda game for development of this game?

Hidemaro Fujibayashi: In a kind of reverse way. We created the world of the Minish Cap first, then chose characters to fit this world.

 

[JuicieJ]

OoX wasn't made with the intention of coming on the child timeline. When it was released, before TWW, ALttP was most certainly still on the adult timeline. Plus, it's Flagship, and they will reuse characters as they see fit.

I find that hard to believe. They were originally going to be retelling the original game, which is on the CT. And they wouldn't put Twinrova in if it was supposed to be on the AT. That'd be a direct contradiction of them dying.

And you would know this how? I mean, we don't know when Nintendo decided to split the timeline, just that they did.

The split has always been there since OoT. If there wasn't a split, the festival in the credits wouldn't have been happening, as none of the events in the future would have occurred.

 

[Garo]

The director of OoX said that when he directed TMC, he made the world first and then chose characters that he thought fit that world (like the "drippy-nose kid"). I would assume it's the same case for OoX. Flagship chooses characters for the kind of environment their looking for, not for story or timeline purposes.

Yes, perhaps, but regardless of how those characters came to be included in the game, they are still there, and the timeline placement of the games must not contradict their presence.