This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

The Zelda Timeline

edited December 2011 in Video Games
image

If you've been keeping up with the news, Nintendo has released a new official Zelda artbook in Japan that details the "actual" Zelda timeline. Scans have been showing up on the internet since last night, and from the translations Kotaku put together this graphic. Not only is it a split timeline, it's a 3-way split timeline based off the three different versions of history in Ocarina: One where Link fails to defeat Ganon and the world falls into chaos(LttP), one where Link defeats Ganon and the story continues from his childhood where he re-meets Zelda(MM), and one where Link defeats Ganon and his story continues as an adult(WW).

Thoughts? If you want to dig through the actual scans themselves and the translations, a lot of it is being posted here.
Post edited by Sail on
«1

Comments

  • I think it's interesting. The one thing that doesn't make sense to me is that in A Link to the Past, Ganon is supposed to have been sealed in the Sacred Realm, meaning that he found the Triforce inside it and turned the Sacred Realm into the Dark World. Ganon's only sealed into the Sacred Realm in the future ending of Ocarina of Time, so...Yeah. If ALttP is after Link fails to beat Ganon, how does Ganon get to the Sacred Realm...XP

    Other than that, I'm glad the developers have the common sense I've had for a while now and put them in the obvious order. I've seen some stupid timelines, but this has a lot of good things (ALttP being a predecessor to Link's Awakening, with Zelda I and II taking place at the end of everything, the split timeline, blah blah blah). While it may require some retconning, it's easily the most logical timeline established thus far, and I'm glad Nintendo hasn't done anything stupid.
  • If ALttP is after Link fails to beat Ganon, how does Ganon get to the Sacred Realm
    A different hero maybe?
  • Thoughts on the Zelda timeline: kill yourself if you have ever, on purpose, thought the words "Zelda timeline."
  • ...
    Okay, Dave's never steered me wrong.
    *suicide*
  • Thoughts on the Zelda timeline: kill yourself if you have ever, on purpose, thought the words "Zelda timeline."
    Saying there is an overall timeline for Zelda is like trying to put together a single narrative that makes Resident Evil make sense. You just can't do it. With some exceptions, the Zelda series has always been a series of one-off narratives pulled together with a web of thematic and gameplay similarities.
  • Except not really, because LOTS of the games have definite links, the timeline ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE when you think about it for five minutes, and there's no real proof of what you say beyond it being your opinion.
  • Thoughts on the Zelda timeline: kill yourself if you have ever, on purpose, thought the words "Zelda timeline."
    BUT WHAT ABOUT TETSURO AND CAPTAIN HARLOCK AND THE NAZIS?
  • Except not really, because LOTS of the games have definite links, the timeline ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE when you think about it for five minutes, and there's no real proof of what you say beyond it being your opinion.
    Hey, you're supposed to be dead!

    I will grant you that Eiji Aonuma, who has helmed most of the games in the last decade or so, has made several references to an overall timeline. In my humble opinion, I think that the timeline he talks about was an attempt to try to tie together a bunch of the original games into a cohesive narrative, and the later games are the glue. The theory that there are three split timelines from OoT would kind of agree with that. That's not exactly looking forward to have something that messed up.
  • edited December 2011
    A Link to the Past was released in 1991/92, no? The title alone is a clue - It was meant to be the story BEFORE Zelda I and Zelda II. It was designed, planned, and marketed as a prequel.
    Post edited by Axel on
  • Quoth Shigeru Miyamoto, in 1998, the year OoT was released:
    Ocarina of Time is the first story, then the original Legend of Zelda, then Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, and finally A Link to the Past.
    On the one hand, this shows that there are still consistency issues. On the other hand, this disproves my point a little. Regardless, I still stand behind the opinion that the creators are not trying to create one narrative, but are rather just thinking up ideas and saying, "Hmm, yeah this story could probably go around here somewhere."
  • Skyward Sword is totally trying it's hardest to be the very beginning. Seriously, the origin green tunic, the bird on the Hyrulian shield, forging of the Master Sword, and I'm pretty god damn sure the founding of Hyrule itself is in that game.
  • Even still, they've never imagined them as one-off vignettes. Zelda II was a direct sequel, ALttP was meant to go before or after or SOMETHING. Link's Awakening makes sense as going after ALttP given that it mentions that it's a Link who wanted to explore after he completed his quest. Ocarina of Time was then planned as being the very first one when it was made. So yeah, they've always had some idea as to where to put them. Planned narrative? God no. One-off narratives? No.
  • The Legend of Zelda wasn't meant to be Gandalf girthed. What next, is someone going to try to put the Mario games in order? Did Galaxy 2 come before or after Mario 3? Give me a break.
  • Could someone explain to me how this matters?
  • Could someone explain to me how this matters?
  • 'Scuse me, I'm going to get laid now.
  • The Legend of Zelda wasn't meant to be Gandalf girthed. What next, is someone going to try to put the Mario games in order? Did Galaxy 2 come before or after Mario 3? Give me a break.
    The thing about Zelda as opposed to Mario, is that there is actual lore behind the series as a whole. Chronicling the timeline is just kind of like fleshing out the history of Hyrule. There definitely isn't the overarching story that Metroid has, but there are certain aspects that keep repeating.

    I do like the speculating, though. It is rather fun.

  • The Legend of Zelda wasn't meant to be Gandalf girthed. What next, is someone going to try to put the Mario games in order? Did Galaxy 2 come before or after Mario 3? Give me a break.
    Remind me, Scott. How many theories do you have about Equestria?
  • Remind me, Scott. How many theories do you have about Equestria?
    But that's different because it's Scott and Ponies.
  • So I'm not allowed to Gandalf Girth the series I like (which, by the way, I'm not completely doing, since most of what I've said thus far has just been based on comments from the developers themselves), but you can do whatever the fuck you like? Scott, you're an ass.
  • edited December 2011
    Actually, I think he has a point. To me, it'd be like trying to link the Final Fantasy games in a shared universe. The Legend of Zelda is a set of iconic characters you can reuse in new settings and stories like one would cast actors. You can definitely Gandalf Girth individual games or sets of games, but I seriously doubt this timeline ever existed for reals when most of these games were made. Not to mention it sort of cheapens it when the Link you are playing is not only not the only Link, but not even an important Link! I mean, what the eff!

    To bring up ponies for the hell of it, just because they have shout-outs to G1 stuff in G4 ponies doesn't mean G1 and G4 exist in the same universe.
    Post edited by open_sketchbook on
  • edited December 2011
    To bring up ponies for the hell of it, just because they have shout-outs to G1 stuff in G4 ponies doesn't mean G1 and G4 exist in the same universe.
    Depends how you view a reboot/semi-reboot.

    The Majority of elements from the original my little pony read like an ingredients list or a spec sheet for the FIM episodes, so I'd call it the same universe. I mean, a ton of the groundwork is laid out there, Spike is lifted from there, Celestia and Luna are very strongly based on characters from there (Fun Fax, back then they were called "Princess Ponies", and were a little more similar to the regulars in FIM, but everybody has to grow up sometime, I guess.) It's more than just a few shout-outs, and just because My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic fans hold the original work in disdain and wish to disassociate themselves and believe that everything MLP:FIM sprang fully formed from the holy Faust's forehead, fact remains, the two are very strongly linked, and no amount of pretending will make that fact go away.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • edited December 2011
    This is the second place I read that Wind Waker is supposed to be the continuation of adult Link after OoT. Mistranslation or something? Or am I just assuming that is a child Link because of the cel shading.
    Post edited by Matt on
  • edited December 2011
    On that particular topic -
    Superplay: How do the Zelda games timelines link together? Is there any connection between the different games, or do you take tell us a new Zelda story each time?

    Shigeru Miyamoto: For every Zelda game we tell a new story, but we actually have an enormous document that explains how the game relates to the others, and bind them together.
    Superplay: But is this the Link you first thought of when you created the first Zelda game?

    Shigeru Miyamoto: Link always looked like the same person, even though different techniques changed some details. But in Ocarina of Time 2 sides were created in him. 1 younger and 1 older. As you see now, the younger Link is the main character in Zelda the Wind Waker. He blended in better in the surroundings than older Link. Adult Link is in Super Smash Bros Melee and Soul Calibur 2. And we started with him as the main character in the new GameCube game before we changed direction and made The Wind Waker.

    It's my responsibility that Link is always Link, the character I once created. And I always think about how he will look in future games.
    Taken from here
    Post edited by Churba on
  • @Matt - It's not saying it's the same Link, it's saying the STORY continues. At the end of OoT, Zelda sends child Link back to the past, that becomes Majora's Mask. The future without a hero continues on, which is the story that's told in the opening of Wind Waker, where Ganon returns and there was no hero to fight him (because Zelda sent him back to the past). 200 years after Zelda sends Link back to the past and that future continues on, Wind Waker happens with a new Link.

    @open_sketchbook - Except Zelda reuses characters, has direct links between the games SINCE the 2nd one came out, since it was made as a direct sequel, inarguably, whereas Final Fantasy never reuses whole characters, just names (ignoring the part of Final Fantasy X-2 where the developers tried to make it be part of the back-story to FFVII by explaining in the FFX Ultimania Guide in Japan that the character Shinra would eventually build a rocket, fly to another planet, and that it was the FFVII planet). Comparing them makes no sense.
  • Is "Gandalf girthing" a term that originated on the show? I've never actually heard it used before. I'm assuming it's related to the My Little Pony thread, which I rarely read these days.
  • Is "Gandalf girthing" a term that originated on the show? I've never actually heard it used before. I'm assuming it's related to the My Little Pony thread, which I rarely read these days.
    It originated when we were walking out of the theater after seeing Inception.
  • Is "Gandalf girthing" a term that originated on the show? I've never actually heard it used before. I'm assuming it's related to the My Little Pony thread, which I rarely read these days.
    It originated when we were walking out of the theater after seeing Inception.
    Ah. And I'm assuming it was spread to the forums through the show? I'm just wondering where the hell I've been.

  • edited December 2011
    Making beer and practicing being a viking?
    Post edited by Rochelle on
Sign In or Register to comment.