The Legend of Zelda Timeline

[EJ]

Now after beating the legend of zelda: Twilight Princess I been trying to figure out the timeline to this series since I first believe that there was only one ganondorf but from the ending of TP it seems that there may be two.

And there also been this split timeline theory and even Nintendo themselves are not sure of the timeline. But the only thing I know for sure is: Minish Cap>Ocarina>Majora>*rest of the game*>Wind waker as the end til Phantom hourglass comes out.

So anyone else have any thoughts about the zelda timeline?

[Undeadpriest]

I though about making one but i was in need of help and i was feeling lazy to do one.If you want to do one i can lend you a hand just give me an answer.

[Split]

go to gameinformer.com there's an article that explains it

EDIT" o nvm its just in terms of their retail release dates

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Split on 2006-12-25 18:45 ]</font>

[EJ]

the only thing I found on the site was the zelda history not the possible timeline of the games, unless you can provide the link to it yourself sicne I can't find it.

[Undeadpriest]

as i remember in the 2 first zelda on the NES the final boss were both Ganondorf(who was a blue pig WTF)next on the SNES in Link to the past it was indeed Ganondorf again in the blue pig form.Next in Ocarina of Time on N64 he was here again but in HUMAN shape.In Majora Mask it was another new boss,the majora mask,in Windwaker it is Ganondorf in HUMAN again.I don't know about Twilight princess though.I will get it soon.

[EJ]

Ganondorf appears in human form in 3 games; OoT TP and WW

Ever other game he appears as a Giant Pig.

[Undeadpriest]

Not as i remember.In Link awakening on Gameboy color its a giant stuff who is changing of shape.In minish cap and four sword(GC version)its a guy called Vaati.

[EJ]

well I meant in ever game he appeared in Link Awaken is believed to be a dream and Link's worst fear.

The only time Ganon has not appear in a Zelda game was MM, MC, and maybe PH since at the end of WW Ganondorf is killed for good. But in the four swords wasn't ganon still revived by Vaati?

[PJ]

Uh, I don't think Minish Cap is the first game in the timeline.

In fact, I'm pretty sure Ocarina is the first in the series. Ocarina -> Majora's (Same Link) -> *100 year period, I believe* -> Windwaker -> Phantom Hourglass (Same Link as Windwaker)

I have no idea on the rest

[Akdov]

Ocarina is the first or second depending on what you think of Minish Cap. Zelda I and II are at the end. A link to the past is in the middle and all other games fall around them. I have about eight different Zelda timeline theories but what I just mentioned basically stays the same. Twilight Princess is after Ocarina and Majora because the Hylian fisherman is seen in a photo at the fishing hole.

I also believe the Master Sword is never used after A link to the Past which means any Zelda game where the Master Sword is referenced comes before A link to the past, but that contradicts the Magical Sword theory.

[trypticon]

Seems like some people are disagreeing with the Zelda Timeline on youtube. I haven't played any of the Gameboy Zelda games, but I have played all of the home console games. Despite loving all of them, I never really considered a timeline theory, myself. I know Zelda 1 and 2 were connected, because it explained that they were in the manual for Zelda 2. I still have that sitting around somewhere around here. I should dig that up and look at the cool art for it again.

So, the youtube timeline video presents all the games, and the split timeline theory very well, at the end leaving room for any further changes from Twilight Princess and Phantom Hourglass. I finished Twilight Princess today, also, and was surprised to see Ganandorf in both his human, and his pig form! I was half expecting Midna to fill up the world of light with water at the end in order to introduce the arrival for Wind waker, but it didn't happen. The only reason I figured this MIGHT happen, is because Hyrule Castle in Wind Waker is definitely the same one from Ocarina of Time. The producer advised in an interview in Nintendo Power that Twilight Princess is supposed to be about 100 years after Ocarina, and involves a Princess Zelda and a Link that aren't necessarily related to the ones from Ocarina of Time.

Here's a tip for any future rulers of Hyrule: if you have a daughter, and want to keep her out of trouble, DON'T name her Zelda!

Then again, maybe it's like a cultural thing, or something.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: trypticon on 2006-12-25 21:52 ]</font>

[Akdov]

as i remember in the 2 first zelda on the NES the final boss were both Ganondorf

I assume any one who causally walks into a Zelda timeline theory debate isn't so worried about spoilers so I am just going to say this.

I n Zelda II if I remember correctly most of the story exposition in the manual explains or implies Ganon died in Zelda I. Ganon's minions are trying to revive Ganon with Link's blood that's why he mocks you when you die. The final boss of Zelda II is actually Dark Link.

[Jehosaphaty]

lovely; I can't make sense of half of this since I've yet to play twilight. alas, so jealous.



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jehosaphaty on 2006-12-25 22:21 ]</font>

[EJ]

well according to the minish cap intro and the text in it, tells of a hero that wore a green tunic but no green hat so it can be assume that it was the first to introduce the hero and the legend and their was no master sword in that game just the piano sword (not sure if I spelled that right).

Even though they said Oot was the first that was 5 years before minish cap was release so nintendo was wrong in saying that but at the time I don't think plays of a zelda game conflicting with Oot would be release since in minish it explains the beginning of the legend and all that stuff.

[Akdov]

Minish Cap and Four Swords are the hardest to place. Some theories argue that the games should not be considered part of Zelda continuity.

Personally I don't like the idea of dismissing either game but they are hard to place in a timeline. Four Swords is difficult because they game seems to take place before and after A Link to the Past.

As for Minish Cap it is definitely the most unique Zelda game. It is the only game to metion the Picori for instance. For a while I contemplated using a loose interpretation of Zelda games treating them as legends and folk lore passed by oral tradition rather than written document.

With this train of thought I consider the possibility that Picori may actually be fairies. My argument was based on several points. One Picori have only appeared in one Zelda game and then subsequently vanished. Secondly Picori only appear to children similar to the Kokiri who are a race of children. Kokiri also has a similar sound to Picori and could have easily changed in sound over hundreds of years worth of legends. Third the Picori Link first meets are in a forest which draws another parallel with Kokiri forest. Forth the Picori bestow a sword to a hero in green and also are significant in reforging the sword Link carries. In Majora's Mask a great fairy gives Link the "Great Fairy Sword" and in A Link to the past the great fairy turns Link's tempered sword into the Gold Sword.

Under this interpretation I consider Minish Cap to be the first game. Picori would simply be an archaic form of fairies and Minish Cap could flow easier into Ocarina of Time. However the more I think about it the more I think that Minish Cap is bound to Four Swords and as a result I am hesitant to place it in the beginning of the series.

[HUnewearl_Meira]

The Legend of Zelda, Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, A Link to the Past and Link's Awakening all make up one series, and are an entirely separate story from Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask and Wind Waker. I personally have no idea where Twilight Princess, Four Swords or Minish Cap fall in. I don't know about the later games, but the original games have this sequence:

A Link to the Past >> The Legend of Zelda >> Zelda II: The Adventure of Link >> Link's Awakening

If Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask were to be included in this (which I don't believe they can-- A Link to the Past would be in direct conflict with Ocarina of Time, in explaining Link's childhood), Then Ocarina of Time would have to appear before A Link to the Past and Majora's Mask would have to appear between The Adventure of Link and Link's Awakening; this because A Link to the Past features a Link in his early teens, and Ocarina of Time features an even younger link than that. The trouble is, Ocarina of Time describes a Link raised by faeries and that tree, while A Link to the Past describes a Link raised by his Uncle.

[Moo2u]

I haven't read this thread, in case of TP spoilers, but here's a possible timeline video (http://youtube.com/watch?v=SF8Ve2Dk6-0) which I posted before. Some people might get a kick out of it.

[EJ]

But didn't Nintendo say that it not always the same Link. Sure some games can be connected as the same Link in about 2 games but the rest are always a different person chosen to save Hyrule just as it's never the same Zelda and Now I think it may be atleast 3 Gannondorf since the more I look into it the more I think that it's true.

It would have been cool to know it was the same Gannodorf and over these years getting frustrated by some kid in a green tunic messing his plans up and its never the same person.

[Undeadpriest]

We forgot about Oracle of age/season the final boss is again ganondorf i forgot to mention it in my post above.

[MaximusLight]

Can someone make some pictures, this is hurting my brain...

[HUnewearl_Meira]

On 2006-12-26 11:54, EJ wrote:
But didn't Nintendo say that it not always the same Link. Sure some games can be connected as the same Link in about 2 games but the rest are always a different person chosen to save Hyrule just as it's never the same Zelda and Now I think it may be atleast 3 Gannondorf since the more I look into it the more I think that it's true.

It would have been cool to know it was the same Gannodorf and over these years getting frustrated by some kid in a green tunic messing his plans up and its never the same person.



I believe that in the first four, it's all the same Link; the first two in succession to eachother, the third going back to his childhood, and the fourth long after the second. In the fourth, as the Champion of Hyrule, he supposedly began travelling the world, looking for more challenges and adventures.

Now, at the same time, we know that Link from Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask are also the same, as Majora's Mask again settles in on Link travelling the world, looking for adventure, after becoming the Hero of Hyrule.

Meanwhile, we know for certain that Link from Windwaker is a different Link altogether, as the game explicitly refers to a different Link in ages passed, that just came out of fucking nowhere and saved Hyrule. Now, whether that refers to Ocarina of Time or the original series, I dunno.

So it's not always the same Link, nor is it always a different Link.

[PJ]

It's almost NEVER the same Link, unless they're in the same, "Timeline," ala Ocarina of Time -> Majora's Mask, Windwaker -> Phantom Hourglass, etc.

I'm not too sure on the first 4 Links being the same. Zelda 1 and 2 are the same, and I THINK Link to the Past and Awakening are the same, but those 2 sets are different Links I believe.

EDIT: The Zelda timeline is probably the most fun topic of discussion EVER.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: PJ on 2006-12-27 10:54 ]</font>

[EJ]

ok I know only these games are the same Link the rest is anyone's guess.
Ocarina of Time > Majora Mask
the Wind Waker > Phantom Hourglass
Zelda 1 > Zelda 2 *since the manual said it*
Link's awakening > Orcale of season/ages *since season/ages ends with him on the ocean and awakening begins with him on the ocean*

A link to the Past conflicts with Ocarina since he was raise by his uncle in Link to the Past and in Ocarina he was raise by the forest tree. Plus if it's my understanding if they were link together how is the landscape in every game different? And each adventure takes place years after/before the others beside the connected ones. I disagree Miera that the first four are the same since Awakening and Past have to be different Links.

[Dek]

I was reading this topic on the Internet Channel on my Wii, but I knew I was going to type a bit too much, so I'm back on my PC http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_wacko.gif

Anyways, I was always told that for each Nintendo console that was released (the handhelds included), the Link was always a different incarnation, so to speak. Now of course, when I look at it, I see a few flaws...

1. Re-releases: This happened not only with Link to the Past on the GBA, but with the two Ocarina of Time re-releases for the GC. With something like this, I looked at which console the game was originally released on.

2. Gameboy/Pocket/Color/Advance: Several models were released, so then what happens?

3. Multi-platform release: Similar to the problem with re-releases, what about a game, such as Twilight Princess, that was released on two consoles?

4. Mutliple games released on the same console that look like they may not have matched up. The best (or only) example is the fact that Wind Waker, Four Swords ADVENTURES (remember that were two Four Swords games; one on the GC, and one that was released with the re-release of Link to the Past), and Twilight Princess were all released on the GC...

And of course, flaw #5: a combination of any of these flaws... http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_disapprove.gif

After watching the video that Moo2u posted, I did agree with several things, such as how there are two Hyrules (so to speak) at the ending of Ocarina of Time. However, they never mentioned anything regarding the first Four Swords (the one for GBA), as that was the first time we were ever introduced to Vaati. Whether or not the first Four Swords had any real storyline behind it can be debated somewhere else...

To be honest, the only thing I know currently that makes sense is the fact that Ocarina of Time does split the storyline into two.

The Hyrule A (as mentioned in the video) involves Zelda and Link when they were kids and, therefore, leads to Majora's Mask (also note the flashback that Link has in MM with Zelda).

The Hyrule B involves Hyrule in it's current state. They recover, Ganondorf uses the Triforce of Power to escape, and all hell breaks loose again. That's when Wind Waker comes into play.

If anything, I believe that Oracle of Ages and Oracle of Seasons have nothing to do with the storyline. At first, I truly thought that they would have taken place before Ocarina of Time since Din, Nayru, and Faroe (the three goddesses) were still around as well as Ganon with the Trident of Power. If this was the case, this could mean one of my theories is true...

That we actually have two different storylines that never meet at any specific point

Oracle of Ages and Oracle of Seasons can be a sequel of each other, so to debate over which one came first is pointless. However, I do believe that Oracle of Seasons and Ages does have it's own storyline. This is mostly because Din, Nayru, and Farroe (or however it's spelled) still exist. If they were responsible for the creation of Hyrule and for creating the Triforce, that could mean that they may not have a physical body to use. If this is correct, then Ocarina of Time couldn't fit in this timeline since Hyrule has been mentioned in the two games and their instruction manuals.

The other storyline then involes the other games that we have left, which there is no way in hell I could figure that one out http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_wacko.gif

If anything, I think what comes first is Link to the Past (where Ganon is defeated, and the Trident of Power is possibly sealed away), then Four Swords (Vaati is defeated and is sealed away in the Four Sword), then Four Sword Adventures (Four Sword is removed from the pedestal, Vaati comes back, and tries to revive Ganon).

My two rupees http://www.pso-world.com/images/phpbb/icons/smiles/icon_wacko.gif

[HUnewearl_Meira]

On 2006-12-27 10:51, PJ wrote:
I'm not too sure on the first 4 Links being the same. Zelda 1 and 2 are the same, and I THINK Link to the Past and Awakening are the same, but those 2 sets are different Links I believe.


The entire reason it was called "A Link to the Past" was because it specifically took place before the previous two games. Now, maybe I'm wrong, and they just randomly strung words together, but before you can refer to "the Past" you have to have an established "Present." Thus, A Link to the Past is a prequel to Zelda and Zelda II. As for Link's Awakening, it's the fourth game in the series, and it speaks specifically about Link already being Hyrule's "Hero" and "Champion", implying that he has had previous adventures, therefore leading you to assume a connection to the previous games.

It generally won't be argued that Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask are also connected, so I won't go back into that. We can establish, however, that Ocarina of Time and A Link to the Past are not connected to eachother, as they are in conflict with eachother. Ocarina of Time also presents Gannon as a person; a rare, Male Garudo, while Zelda, Adventure of Link and A Link to the Past present Gannon as being a boar-ish wizard/warlock of sorts.

Windwaker is definitely connected to a previous series; I assume Ocarina of Time. It is expressedly, not the same Link, however.

I have no clue where Twilight Princess fits in. I suspect it's a new Link, and a new Hyrule.

The way I view it, is that Nintendo continued on the same world through the first four games, but when the presentation of graphics changed so vastly for Ocarina of Time, they created a new, more realistically conveyed Hyrule, and continued with that world line for the next several games. I suspect they've done this again for Twilight Princess, though without having played the game, I don't really know, yet.