Search This Blog

April 5, 2017

Nintendo still push the timeline, yet this game is full of contradictions

  1. Boards
  2. The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild
  3. So Nintendo still push the timeline, yet this game is full of contradictions...
WonkyKong 6 hours ago#1
In the 30th anniversary Hyrule encyclopedia, the timelines still there, updated to Triforce Heroes, and with a few minor tweaks.
Of course they havent said a word on BotW, and looking at it, its full of contradictions.
Rito and Koroks, as well as Arbiter grounds and the mention of Twilight in Zeldas speech.
Will the DLC story answer the questions, or are Nintendo being real short sighted?
If they cant make it coherent then they should at least abandon it, as its starting to make the series look stupid as a whole.
The_Bones 5 hours ago#2
They probably would abandon it if fans stopped pushing it
freedumbdclxvi 5 hours ago#3
The_Bones posted...
They probably would abandon it if fans stopped pushing it

They've stated before they use it when developing the games. So, I don't think fan demand is the only factor in it.
3DS FC: 0490-7858-5102
NS FC: SW-6739-0520-9699
Hauke 5 hours ago#4
Which of this is a contradiction?
Rito and Koroks can appeare in ALL timelines. They are not restricted to one.
Arbiter's Grouznd already existed pre-OoT TP is just the only game in which it appeares it still existed in all timelines.
And Zelda's Speech could easily a ancient prophecy which is older than Twilight princess. Especially since she references also Wind Waker in her speech (in the background if all the others are talking in japanese she's saying 'The Hero crosses the ocean, finding the Golden Power')
CleaverDrummer 5 hours ago#5
Hauke posted...
Which of this is a contradiction?
Rito and Koroks can appeare in ALL timelines. They are not restricted to one.


I think the Rito thing is that in Wind Waker they imply that Zora's evolved into Rito
monkyby87 5 hours ago#6
Am I the only one that's never really paid attention the timelines?
3DS FC: 5344-0417-6988
Dream Address: 5900-4847-1461
mortis242 4 hours ago#7
Yeah, it only exists in the first place because so many fans want to know how the games connect to each other, despite the fact that they are all stand alone games.
Bahamut_10th 4 hours ago#8
THIS game? It actually tries to stabilish a continuity harder than past Zeldas. And it still has contradictions.
There are contradictions and holes everywhere if you keep trying to connect every game in a timeline. The series really functions better as many retellings of a same legend.
Would also get rid of any "link and zelda destinated to constantly seal Ganon" bulls*** explanations. The story repeats because it is literally the same legend told in different manners.
AND would fit the series name better.

freedumbdclxvi posted...
The_Bones posted...
They probably would abandon it if fans stopped pushing it

They've stated before they use it when developing the games. So, I don't think fan demand is the only factor in it.


They also stated the timeline is the last thing they think about, only for deciding where to place a game after its pretty much finished. If it doesnt affect what they want to do with the game itself its as good as pointless.

They flip flop around the timeline bogus because in the end it barely matters. The only reason they mentioned there being one was because people were asking about it.
Trying a fresh start. If I offended you at any point know I'm sorry even though it can't be undone.
(edited 4 hours ago)quote
mortis242 4 hours ago#9
The only thing I have found that this game does to link itself to other games is to have ruins that match iconic places found in other games. That being said, most of the places (and older music) come from OoT
Helix snake 4 hours ago#10
Bahamut_10th posted...
The series really functions better as many retellings of a same legend.


Yeah the same legend that makes specific references previous retellings of the same legend

I'm tired of hearing this "theory" that's so obviously wrong.
[Nintendo fans] are killing Nintendo by continuing to buy and support Nintendo games. - Bebi Boy
Hauke 4 hours ago#11
CleaverDrummer posted...
Hauke posted...
Which of this is a contradiction?
Rito and Koroks can appeare in ALL timelines. They are not restricted to one.


I think the Rito thing is that in Wind Waker they imply that Zora's evolved into Rito


And why can't this be the case here?
You know how evolution works? A species can evolve into two species. Humans and monkeys for exemple have the same ancestor.
GhoullyX 4 hours ago#12
Vah Ruta and Vah Nabooris are specifically mentioned in this game to be named after Ruto and Nabooru, thus the same could probably be said about Vah Rudania and Vah Medoh. This would confirm that Medli existed in this timeline, making it the Adult Timeline.

At least this is the most solid evidence for any one timeline I've seen.
"Success is 1% inspiration, 98% perspiration, and 2% attention to detail."
FC: 3823-9481-7474 Do what you must, I have already won.
M-Watcher 4 hours ago#13
Hauke posted...

You know how evolution works? A species can evolve into two species. Humans and monkeys for exemple have the same ancestor.

Not only that, but Ritos were never a natural evolution for Zora in the first place. It's magically-induced evolution from divine forces such as Valoo.

And we know that some Great Spirits have a preference to what kind of people they want serving them, like Lanayru in Skyward Sword preferring the company of robots.
NNID: MWatcher27 / 3DS FC: 1203 - 9408 - 2283
http://steamcommunity.com/id/MWatcher/wishlist
kvmer 3 hours ago#14
I wouldn't pay too much attention to the official timeline. It hardly made any sense to begin with. Especially the "the hero dies" timeline. Why does that create a different timeline in OoT? You can easily make a "the hero dies" timeline in every single Zelda game and have the path branch off from there.

This game makes references to both the Ancient Sea and the Twilight. There are Ritos (who evolved from Zoras) and Zoras at the same time. Vah Medoh is a reference to Medli from Wind Waker. Arbiter's Grounds can't exist anymore post WW because the entirety of Hyrule was flooded.

This game just makes references to pretty much all of the previous games and disregards the timeline split, simple as that. There's not really a point in trying to make excuses to make it fit.

I always look at it like this: let's take BotW as the basis here. All of the previous Zelda games eventually became legends. Stories about the Hero of Time, the Hero of Winds, the Ancient Sea, Twilight,... Some people in Hyrule talk about the legend of the Hero of Time disappearing, causing the events of the Wind Waker. Other people tell their children another story, about the events that lead to Twilight Princess. And some more people even tell stories about the Hero dying. Did any of it ever happen? Who knows. These stories have become legend. No one knows what is true and what isn't. That's my way of looking at it. Seeing how Hyrule is a magical world, anything could be true.
(edited 3 hours ago)quote
Katellox 3 hours ago#15
hey kids, it's the ten millionth timeline thread, i'm sure there will be something new in here
kaliskonig 3 hours ago#16
freedumbdclxvi posted...
The_Bones posted...
They probably would abandon it if fans stopped pushing it

They've stated before they use it when developing the games. So, I don't think fan demand is the only factor in it.

At this point it is nintendo pushing it to please fans. triforce heroes didnt get a spot in the timeline until after it was released. The dev said flat out that he didnt even think of were to put it and also thought that it shouldnt be added at all.
Today is the day: Bomberman, Paper Mario, K.Rool, Wonder Red, and Goku for Smash.
M-Watcher 3 hours ago#17
kvmer posted...
Why does that create a different timeline in OoT? You can easily make a "the hero dies" timeline in every single Zelda game and have the path branch off from there.

So, instead of having three tidied up branches, you want them to create even MORE branches and complicate something that apparently many people already found complicated?

The timeline is not that complicated, by the way. It's three different histories with the same beginning point, and the games connect to each other pretty easily.
NNID: MWatcher27 / 3DS FC: 1203 - 9408 - 2283
http://steamcommunity.com/id/MWatcher/wishlist
(edited 3 hours ago)quote
Katellox 3 hours ago#18
M-Watcher posted...
kvmer posted...
Why does that create a different timeline in OoT? You can easily make a "the hero dies" timeline in every single Zelda game and have the path branch off from there.

So, instead of having three tidied up branches, you want them to create even MORE branches and complicate something that apparently many people already found complicated?

The timeline is not that complicated, by the way. It's three different histories with the same beginning point, and the games connect to each other pretty easily.


well, he raises a valid point. ocarina's split ending is the only one officially recognized as having its own timeline, but you can apply this to literally any decision made in any zelda game. it's a totally valid conversation point and precisely how nintendo can continue making more zelda games forever.
The_Bones 3 hours ago#19
Katellox posted...
M-Watcher posted...
kvmer posted...
Why does that create a different timeline in OoT? You can easily make a "the hero dies" timeline in every single Zelda game and have the path branch off from there.

So, instead of having three tidied up branches, you want them to create even MORE branches and complicate something that apparently many people already found complicated?

The timeline is not that complicated, by the way. It's three different histories with the same beginning point, and the games connect to each other pretty easily.


well, he raises a valid point. ocarina's split ending is the only one officially recognized as having its own timeline, but you can apply this to literally any decision made in any zelda game. it's a totally valid conversation point and precisely how nintendo can continue making more zelda games forever.


Exactly. Once the third timeline was introduced they opened up the can of infinite possibilities probably so they could have more freedom when making the games. There can be as many branches as they want there to be in the timeline.
M-Watcher 3 hours ago#20
The_Bones posted...
Katellox posted...
M-Watcher posted...
kvmer posted...
Why does that create a different timeline in OoT? You can easily make a "the hero dies" timeline in every single Zelda game and have the path branch off from there.

So, instead of having three tidied up branches, you want them to create even MORE branches and complicate something that apparently many people already found complicated?

The timeline is not that complicated, by the way. It's three different histories with the same beginning point, and the games connect to each other pretty easily.


well, he raises a valid point. ocarina's split ending is the only one officially recognized as having its own timeline, but you can apply this to literally any decision made in any zelda game. it's a totally valid conversation point and precisely how nintendo can continue making more zelda games forever.


Exactly. Once the third timeline was introduced they opened up the can of infinite possibilities probably so they could have more freedom when making the games. There can be as many branches as they want there to be in the timeline.

Nothing in the timeline has stopped Nintendo from doing what they want anyway. So, the what if scenario of including more what if scenarios for "more freedom" is exactly that: A what if scenario based on a notion that Nintendo is somehow limited in what they can do.
NNID: MWatcher27 / 3DS FC: 1203 - 9408 - 2283
http://steamcommunity.com/id/MWatcher/wishlist
TheCraigadile 3 hours ago#21
@Hauke posted...
Which of this is a contradiction?
Rito and Koroks can appeare in ALL timelines. They are not restricted to one.
Arbiter's Grouznd already existed pre-OoT TP is just the only game in which it appeares it still existed in all timelines.
And Zelda's Speech could easily a ancient prophecy which is older than Twilight princess. Especially since she references also Wind Waker in her speech (in the background if all the others are talking in japanese she's saying 'The Hero crosses the ocean, finding the Golden Power')

Does Zelda say anything else while the others are talking?
"..."-Link
I don't have anything good to go here so have a llama: https://i.imgur.com/e5Gm6Kb.jpg
Bahamut_10th 3 hours ago#22
Helix snake posted...
Bahamut_10th posted...
The series really functions better as many retellings of a same legend.


Yeah the same legend that makes specific references previous retellings of the same legend

I'm tired of hearing this "theory" that's so obviously wrong.


A lot of games do that. You don't need to be literally connected in plot to throw references.

Xenoblade X has nothing to do with Xenoblade's story yet there are Nopon and references thrown in it.

Final Fantasy games have no connections yet there are chocobos, summons, Cids, and references in form of equipment, sidequests, bosses and even some characters. Hell XIV references ALL games from I through XII and integrate the references into its plot, quests or lore and the game isn't an actual sequel to any.

Phantasy Star Online has no plot connection to the original four games yet it keeps some of the distant lore.

It seems for the timeline Zelda fan the notion games can reference to past titles without being part of a convoluted excuse for a timeline is too complex. They're all part of the Zelda franchise, they don't necessarily need to be direct sequels or prequels to reference one another.
Trying a fresh start. If I offended you at any point know I'm sorry even though it can't be undone.
(edited 3 hours ago)quote
M-Watcher 3 hours ago#23
Bahamut_10th posted...

It seems for the timeline Zelda fan the notion games can reference to past titles without being part of a convoluted excuse for a timeline is too complex.

As a timeline theorist myself who actually enjoys the existence of the timeline (and doesn't consider it really all that convoluted) and enjoys the discussions, I agree. It seems my fellow theorists get too ingrained into the references and HAVE to include every single reference instead of just throwing some things under the Easter Egg pile and others into the Lore pile.

I look at Hyrule as a living, breathing world where misinformation and the ravages of time can and do effect how the information is presented in-game.
NNID: MWatcher27 / 3DS FC: 1203 - 9408 - 2283
http://steamcommunity.com/id/MWatcher/wishlist
(edited 3 hours ago)quote
Broosh 2 hours ago#24
The Zelda timeline is already reaching, not upset that this one doesn't fit neatly in a slot. If it isn't a direct sequel it doesn't have to matter in an overall timeline that was obviously designed in a board meeting.
alpachec 2 hours ago#25
M-Watcher posted...
I look at Hyrule as a living, breathing world where misinformation and the ravages of time can and do effect how the information is presented in-game.
This so much. At least that it's my interpretation of why he's named Calamity Ganon in this game; and in less serious note, the Master Torch.

And that's not even in BotW only, for example in WW there are great examples: the Golden Forks of Thriumph, anyone? Also right at the beginning, in Outset Island we had doors with the Triforce sign upside-down.
Where can I get a sarcasm detector? Mine is broken
ss21vegito 2 hours ago#26
When did the timeline confirm species of monsters or residents exist in only one timeline?
never

Is it possible things happened in timelines that no gake was made about? 
yes

TC. Nothing is wrong. Once they tell us which one it goes to, it will be so with no plot holes.
KurzWeber72 2 hours ago#27
It's been 10,000 years at least since the latest game in the timeline, maybe almost identical events from every other game, even ones in different timelines, occurred again.

I mean I still believe the reason there's so much rain is because Hylia is trying to flood Hyrule again. The gods waited about 9 seconds after Link was sent back to his childhood to flood Hyrule when Ganondorf returned and 100 years later Windwaker occurs. This time 100 years has passed with no Link, the gods became impatient waiting for him to recover and said let it f***ing rain!

They say history oftwn repeats itself (which is especially true in this series with Link Zelda and Ganon being reborn constantly to do the same thing over and over again) so it makes sense that alternate history would repeat itself as well
Fc:4768-7618-5314
Or 2638-3926-9055
(edited 2 hours ago)quote
zonobia 2 hours ago#28
Broosh posted...
The Zelda timeline is already reaching, not upset that this one doesn't fit neatly in a slot. If it isn't a direct sequel it doesn't have to matter in an overall timeline that was obviously designed in a board meeting.


This. The amount of bone-headed rationale I see so often to justify the way things are, so that it all fits into a grand timeline, is comical. You can frequently see people dismiss 1 contradiction at the same time as justifying a different, but equally guilty, contraction.
zonobia 2 hours ago#29
KurzWeber72 posted...
I still believe the reason there's so much rain is because Hylia is trying to flood Hyrule again.


I've got a better reason, and probably more accurate: The developers liked the gameplay mechanic, so upped the frequency. Not everything in the games HAS to have some sort of lore justification.
KurzWeber72 2 hours ago#30
zonobia posted...
KurzWeber72 posted...
I still believe the reason there's so much rain is because Hylia is trying to flood Hyrule again.


I've got a better reason, and probably more accurate: The developers liked the gameplay mechanic, so upped the frequency. Not everything in the games HAS to have some sort of lore justification.

So you're saying Zelda fans are looking too deep into small details Nintendo didn't think would be blown out of proportion? Ridiculous!
Fc:4768-7618-5314
Or 2638-3926-9055
Bahamut_10th posted...
Helix snake posted...
Bahamut_10th posted...
The series really functions better as many retellings of a same legend.


Yeah the same legend that makes specific references previous retellings of the same legend

I'm tired of hearing this "theory" that's so obviously wrong.


A lot of games do that. You don't need to be literally connected in plot to throw references.

Xenoblade X has nothing to do with Xenoblade's story yet there are Nopon and references thrown in it.

Final Fantasy games have no connections yet there are chocobos, summons, Cids, and references in form of equipment, sidequests, bosses and even some characters. Hell XIV references ALL games from I through XII and integrate the references into its plot, quests or lore and the game isn't an actual sequel to any.

Phantasy Star Online has no plot connection to the original four games yet it keeps some of the distant lore.

It seems for the timeline Zelda fan the notion games can reference to past titles without being part of a convoluted excuse for a timeline is too complex. They're all part of the Zelda franchise, they don't necessarily need to be direct sequels or prequels to reference one another.


There is a huge, HUGE difference between "these games are unrelated but have similar monsters and an occasional reference" (everything you stated) and "this game literally quotes events from previous games as having literally happened before" (Breath of the Wild).

Your theory is dumb and you should feel dumb.
RICKYthe1ST 2 hours ago#32
I really hate what they did to the continuity of Link's Awakening and the Oracle games. I mean, it made so much sense that the Goddesses would choose Link in OoX since he proved himself after defeating Ganon in ALttP. Also, after beating the OoX games you see him sail away in a raft back to Hyrule, setting up LA pretty nicely. 

Goes to show that Nintendo doesn't even know what they are doing with the timeline.
3DS Friend Code: 5043-3678-1366, PSN: RickyZ_PR
fastdak25 2 hours ago#33
OoT and MM are the only two zeldas I have ever played, so I know f*** all when it comes to this. Does that matter playing BoTW?
luckyrusty007 2 hours ago#34
WonkyKong posted...
In the 30th anniversary Hyrule encyclopedia, the timelines still there, updated to Triforce Heroes, and with a few minor tweaks.
Of course they havent said a word on BotW, and looking at it, its full of contradictions.
Rito and Koroks, as well as Arbiter grounds and the mention of Twilight in Zeldas speech.
Will the DLC story answer the questions, or are Nintendo being real short sighted?
If they cant make it coherent then they should at least abandon it, as its starting to make the series look stupid as a whole.


What if...

everything has been unified? :O
zonobia 2 hours ago#35
KurzWeber72 posted...
So you're saying Zelda fans are looking too deep into small details Nintendo didn't think would be blown out of proportion? Ridiculous!


That would be a gargantuan understatement.
IMNOTRAGED 2 hours ago#36
Bahamut_10th posted...
The series really functions better as many retellings of a same legend.


Wind Waker and BotW both directly reference OoT's events. ST and PH are pretty clearly sequels to WW for obvious reasons. MM is obviously a sequel to OoT. AoL directly references LoZ. In Skyward Sword Hyrule doesn't even exist. OoX and LA all take place in entirely different lands.

That's over half of the games of the series that either make a direct reference to another or feature a story/setting that's fairly unique to the others. This whole "retelling of the same legend" idea has no merit whatsoever.
M-Watcher 2 hours ago#37
zonobia posted...
KurzWeber72 posted...
I still believe the reason there's so much rain is because Hylia is trying to flood Hyrule again.


I've got a better reason, and probably more accurate: The developers liked the gameplay mechanic, so upped the frequency. Not everything in the games HAS to have some sort of lore justification.

I got an interesting reason: What happens when you put a lot of water into the atmosphere? It rains more.
...Hey, wasn't there a Divine Beast that can generate endless amounts of water? Surely that can't f*** up the weather patterns or anything...

RICKYthe1ST posted...
I really hate what they did to the continuity of Link's Awakening and the Oracle games. I mean, it made so much sense that the Goddesses would choose Link in OoX since he proved himself after defeating Ganon in ALttP. Also, after beating the OoX games you see him sail away in a raft back to Hyrule, setting up LA pretty nicely. 

Goes to show that Nintendo doesn't even know what they are doing with the timeline.

This is sarcasm, right? I don't see anything to hate about this tidy connection between four games.

EDIT: Oh, you mean Hyrule Encyclopedia's timeline. I'm still going off of Hyrule Historia's.
NNID: MWatcher27 / 3DS FC: 1203 - 9408 - 2283
http://steamcommunity.com/id/MWatcher/wishlist
(edited 1 hour ago)quote
zonobia 2 hours ago#38
fastdak25 posted...
OoT and MM are the only two zeldas I have ever played, so I know f*** all when it comes to this. Does that matter playing BoTW?


It really does not matter in ANY Zelda game. You don't even have to know that Majora's Mask is a direct sequel to Ocarina of Time....it just doesn't matter to the game, really. The only place this stuff matters is to timeline fanboy's that easily get bent out of shape about something not fitting into an timeline that was an afterthought addition to the series.
AarturoSc 1 hour ago#39
kvmer posted...
I wouldn't pay too much attention to the official timeline. It hardly made any sense to begin with. Especially the "the hero dies" timeline. Why does that create a different timeline in OoT? You can easily make a "the hero dies" timeline in every single Zelda game and have the path branch off from there.


It doesn't. It's just an alternative universe using that outcome as its starting point. It's like in Dragon Ball there's the main timeline and Trunks's future timeline. Then there's the movies that take place in another reality. Something like that.
Simba hangs himself in the bootleg Lion King 5 game over screen.
Yeeh!
neji721 1 hour ago#40
Does it matter? Only a minority really cares of a concrete timeline, and if it makes them happy it's a win win.
IMNOTRAGED 1 hour ago#41
WonkyKong posted...
Rito and Koroks, as well as Arbiter grounds and the mention of Twilight in Zeldas speech.


Also, none of this contradicts anything. There's nothing precluding rito and koroks from existing in other timelines and we already knew the Twilight and (most likely) Arbiter Grounds existed before OoT.
zonobia 1 hour ago#42
AarturoSc posted...
kvmer posted...
I wouldn't pay too much attention to the official timeline. It hardly made any sense to begin with. Especially the "the hero dies" timeline. Why does that create a different timeline in OoT? You can easily make a "the hero dies" timeline in every single Zelda game and have the path branch off from there.


It doesn't. It's just an alternative universe using that outcome as its starting point. It's like in Dragon Ball there's the main timeline and Trunks's future timeline. Then there's the movies that take place in another reality. Something like that.


This IS a timeline (in regards to the Zelda timeline). They are ALL "what if" scenarios. Alternate universe type situations. If Link did this thing, then follow this path, if he instead did this, follow this path, etc.
KevinCC 1 hour ago#43
The timeline placement basically restricts itself to Downfall.

Adult is out because of the Master Sword being around.
Child is out because Ruto is a celebrated sage and Nabooru is a legend.

Now, where in Downfall? There are two options:
- After Triforce Heroes, before Legend of Zelda.
- After Adventure of Link.

The former is enticing because the Master Sword is still in use and the events of the game are a good sharp decline from a golden age, that would only be compounded shortly after with The Tragedy of Zelda I.

The latter is not fully out, though, as there is a line "I named her Zelda, as per tradition". That "tradition" was noted to have truly begun with said Tragedy, though there were at least six prior Princesses Zelda (MC, FS, OoT, LttP, OoS/A, LBW).

Either of those two places is a strong contender - I lean towards the former, but I'm open to what the next iteration of the timeline states.
Kissed-by-fire Emblem: You know nothing, Prince Chrom.
I used to have thoughts like the one expressed in the OP/ITT, about gaming and fantasy lore.

Then I realized that there is ab so lutely no point in trying to treat a work of FICTION as a historical document.

It's one thing to get into it and have an interest, but another completely to get upset when it doesn't all fit into place like a puzzle piece.

You're not some kind of zelda historian, or archaeologist. It's just a video game. Why isn't it perfect? Because it doesnt matter maybe?

Used to love Dark Souls lore too. But now it's all topics like this. Doesn't it ever make you wonder "Gee, none of this makes sense? I wonder why? OH Y EAH because some dude in japan pulled it ou t his ass, literally working a 9 to 5 just like me AKA another human being and not a godly historian like st peter!"
http://tinyurl.com/myofwa4 - Played Mystical Ninja 64? Click this. 
The only games I want: Dark Souls III, Fallout 4, FFXV, Just Cause 3
I have this weird feeling it's a new timeline that doesn't connect to anything yet, the sequels which will connect the previous games to Breath of the Wild are probably going to come next.
Video-Game PERFEKTION <3
Super Metroid & Xenoblade Chronicles.
deathwave21 1 hour ago#46
freedumbdclxvi posted...
The_Bones posted...
They probably would abandon it if fans stopped pushing it

They've stated before they use it when developing the games. So, I don't think fan demand is the only factor in it.

Just because they stated it, doesn't make it true. I could piece anything together into a cohesive tale. If that convoluted timeline was intentional from the beginning, someone is an idiot. It is more an afterthought than me washing my hands 2 blocks down the road, after taking a s*** 20 minutes prior.
Sorry, you missed your chance.
alpachec 1 hour ago#47
PPPPLAASSUMA posted...
I used to have thoughts like the one expressed in the OP/ITT, about gaming and fantasy lore.

Then I realized that there is ab so lutely no point in trying to treat a work of FICTION as a historical document.

It's one thing to get into it and have an interest, but another completely to get upset when it doesn't all fit into place like a puzzle piece.

You're not some kind of zelda historian, or archaeologist. It's just a video game. Why isn't it perfect? Because it doesnt matter maybe?

Used to love Dark Souls lore too. But now it's all topics like this. Doesn't it ever make you wonder "Gee, none of this makes sense? I wonder why? OH Y EAH because some dude in japan pulled it ou t his ass, literally working a 9 to 5 just like me AKA another human being and not a godly historian like st peter!"
It doesn't really matter, that much it's true. However, trying to tie all Zelda games together in a timeline (and just discussion about BotW in general) is yet another way to have fun with what the game gives us. So why not do it?
Where can I get a sarcasm detector? Mine is broken
kvmer 1 hour ago#48
AarturoSc posted...
kvmer posted...
I wouldn't pay too much attention to the official timeline. It hardly made any sense to begin with. Especially the "the hero dies" timeline. Why does that create a different timeline in OoT? You can easily make a "the hero dies" timeline in every single Zelda game and have the path branch off from there.


It doesn't. It's just an alternative universe using that outcome as its starting point. It's like in Dragon Ball there's the main timeline and Trunks's future timeline. Then there's the movies that take place in another reality. Something like that.

I'm just wondering why that was necessary, you know. The timeline split from OoT was already established with The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess. And it made sense due to the time travel. There was now a Hyrule in which Ganondorf was killed before he rose to power (Twilight Princess), and there was a Hyrule where Ganondorf did rise to power and was killed when Link was an adult, who then vanished (Wind Waker).

It did not make any sense whatsoever to create a third timeline here. Timeline isn't even the right word, the ALttP branch is an alternate reality. The other two timelines made sense, as they were both the result of Link's triumph. The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess timeline, is well, a timeline split. "Link dies" isn't a timeline split, it's an alternate reality. There's a big difference between those two things. Where did that alternate reality suddenly come from?

It makes even less sense when you realise that they could've easily placed the events from ALttP, the Oracles series and the NES games after Twilight Princess.
(edited 1 hour ago)quote
ShippFFXI 1 hour ago#49
deathwave21 posted...
freedumbdclxvi posted...
The_Bones posted...
They probably would abandon it if fans stopped pushing it

They've stated before they use it when developing the games. So, I don't think fan demand is the only factor in it.

Just because they stated it, doesn't make it true. I could piece anything together into a cohesive tale. If that convoluted timeline was intentional from the beginning, someone is an idiot. It is more an afterthought than me washing my hands 2 blocks down the road, after taking a s*** 20 minutes prior.

You do realize how far this is reaching right?

"There's no timeline."
"They said they use a timeline."
"They're lying, there's no timeline!"
"But multiple games have referenced the timeline, and even the official Nintendo guide for OoT had the time line in it."
"THERE IS NO TIMELINE!!!"
I feel like they are making some great points, but the name-calling and volcano-based murder-ideation are chipping away at their position somewhat.
zonobia 1 hour ago#50
ShippFFXI posted...
deathwave21 posted...
freedumbdclxvi posted...
The_Bones posted...
They probably would abandon it if fans stopped pushing it

They've stated before they use it when developing the games. So, I don't think fan demand is the only factor in it.

Just because they stated it, doesn't make it true. I could piece anything together into a cohesive tale. If that convoluted timeline was intentional from the beginning, someone is an idiot. It is more an afterthought than me washing my hands 2 blocks down the road, after taking a s*** 20 minutes prior.

You do realize how far this is reaching right?

"There's no timeline."
"They said they use a timeline."
"They're lying, there's no timeline!"
"But multiple games have referenced the timeline, and even the official Nintendo guide for OoT had the time line in it."
"THERE IS NO TIMELINE!!!"


There IS a timeline....but it has very little integrity to it. It was introduced (as an afterthought) late in the series, and there's a massive amount of contradictions in it. You basically have to suspend logical thought to accept it as something of any true merit.
  1. Boards
  2. The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild
  3. So Nintendo still push the timeline, yet this game is full of contradictions...
kvmer 1 hour ago#51
zonobia posted...
AarturoSc posted...
kvmer posted...
I wouldn't pay too much attention to the official timeline. It hardly made any sense to begin with. Especially the "the hero dies" timeline. Why does that create a different timeline in OoT? You can easily make a "the hero dies" timeline in every single Zelda game and have the path branch off from there.


It doesn't. It's just an alternative universe using that outcome as its starting point. It's like in Dragon Ball there's the main timeline and Trunks's future timeline. Then there's the movies that take place in another reality. Something like that.


This IS a timeline (in regards to the Zelda timeline). They are ALL "what if" scenarios. Alternate universe type situations. If Link did this thing, then follow this path, if he instead did this, follow this path, etc.

Even though the official timeline was an afterthought and poorly conceived, I could follow your reasoning.

However, Breath of the Wild completely disregards the official timeline. You can claim that Rito can exist in other timelines and so forth, the fact is that BotW makes references to both Adult Link timeline and Young Link timeline, while incidentally, it would only make sense for it to take place in the downfall timeline. You have an Ancient Sea and Medli reference. You have a Twilight reference. And so forth. The truth is that Nintendo simply made the decision to refer to the events of all these games.

And honestly, I don't care. I enjoy reading the Ancient Sea reference, the Twilight reference, and so forth. All I'm saying is that people are going out of their way to puzzle this game into the "official timeline" when the official timeline is really a load of crap that Nintendo only introduced to sell the damn book. And it worked pretty well, sure. They arbitrarily put Triforce Heroes in somewhere, and they may even try to puzzle in Breath of the Wild somewhere, but the plot holes are evident.
(edited 1 hour ago)quote
zonobia 1 hour ago#52
kvmer posted...
The truth is that Nintendo simply made the decision to refer to the events of all these games.


I agree with you. While I acknowledge there IS a timeline...I think it is a joke in the grand scheme of things.
M-Watcher 58 minutes ago#53
zonobia posted...

I agree with you. While I acknowledge there IS a timeline...I think it is a joke in the grand scheme of things.

Then get out of discussions where people have fun with theorizing.

The timeline is not that complicated.

zonobia posted...
massive amount of contradictions in it. You basically have to suspend logical thought to accept it as something of any true merit.

What massive contradictions? A bunch of references in Breath of the Wild? What about before that? I don't see much in the way of contradictions in other games, and usually they aren't even that big.
NNID: MWatcher27 / 3DS FC: 1203 - 9408 - 2283
http://steamcommunity.com/id/MWatcher/wishlist
(edited 58 minutes ago)quote
kvmer 53 minutes ago#54
For one thing, the maidens from ALttP are supposedly descendants from the seven sages. None of them looked like a Goron or Zora to me.

Why is this even important to you? Nintendo said themselves more than once that they don't have an official timeline. They cooked up the timeline to please fans as an afterthought, nothing more. There are plenty of things that don't make sense.

Bottomline: it doesn't matter.
Darkest-Lord122 51 minutes ago#55
M-Watcher posted...
kvmer posted...
Why does that create a different timeline in OoT? You can easily make a "the hero dies" timeline in every single Zelda game and have the path branch off from there.

So, instead of having three tidied up branches, you want them to create even MORE branches and complicate something that apparently many people already found complicated?

The timeline is not that complicated, by the way. It's three different histories with the same beginning point, and the games connect to each other pretty easily.


I'd honestly just rather Nintendo declare all the games on the downfall timeline to be non-canon. It's not like we'd be losing a lot of lore over this.
Welcome to the Internet, where stating your opinion is a declaration of war.
ShippFFXI 47 minutes ago#56
kvmer posted...
For one thing, the maidens from ALttP are supposedly descendants from the seven sages. None of them looked like a Goron or Zora to me.

Why is this even important to you? Nintendo said themselves more than once that they don't have an official timeline. They cooked up the timeline to please fans as an afterthought, nothing more. There are plenty of things that don't make sense.

Bottomline: it doesn't matter.

People keep saying this, but I've never read it. There existed a time line since the second game.
I feel like they are making some great points, but the name-calling and volcano-based murder-ideation are chipping away at their position somewhat.
(edited 47 minutes ago)quote
AarturoSc 37 minutes ago#57
kvmer posted...
AarturoSc posted...
kvmer posted...
I wouldn't pay too much attention to the official timeline. It hardly made any sense to begin with. Especially the "the hero dies" timeline. Why does that create a different timeline in OoT? You can easily make a "the hero dies" timeline in every single Zelda game and have the path branch off from there.


It doesn't. It's just an alternative universe using that outcome as its starting point. It's like in Dragon Ball there's the main timeline and Trunks's future timeline. Then there's the movies that take place in another reality. Something like that.

I'm just wondering why that was necessary, you know. The timeline split from OoT was already established with The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess. And it made sense due to the time travel. There was now a Hyrule in which Ganondorf was killed before he rose to power (Twilight Princess), and there was a Hyrule where Ganondorf did rise to power and was killed when Link was an adult, who then vanished (Wind Waker).

It did not make any sense whatsoever to create a third timeline here. Timeline isn't even the right word, the ALttP branch is an alternate reality. The other two timelines made sense, as they were both the result of Link's triumph. The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess timeline, is well, a timeline split. "Link dies" isn't a timeline split, it's an alternate reality. There's a big difference between those two things. Where did that alternate reality suddenly come from?

It makes even less sense when you realise that they could've easily placed the events from ALttP, the Oracles series and the NES games after Twilight Princess.



I'm with you. The most likely answer is because they couldn't find a way to fit those games in either the Child Timeline or the Adult one. And OoT was initially intended to be the prequel to Alttp, so maybe they just didn't wanted to have a game were the protagonist died in the story, so came up with that excuse. 

I see it in this way: Both the Child and Adult timeline co-exist in the same "main" universe, while the Downfall timeline is a What-If/Alternative Universe similar to those of Marvel Comics or DC.
Simba hangs himself in the bootleg Lion King 5 game over screen.
Yeeh!
mankdemefactory 34 minutes ago#58
The Twilight realm has always existed, and Rito+Koroks are not mutually exclusive.
Being "politically incorrect" isn't an excuse to be an a-hole
freedumbdclxvi 31 minutes ago#59
kaliskonig posted...
freedumbdclxvi posted...
The_Bones posted...
They probably would abandon it if fans stopped pushing it

They've stated before they use it when developing the games. So, I don't think fan demand is the only factor in it.

At this point it is nintendo pushing it to please fans. triforce heroes didnt get a spot in the timeline until after it was released. The dev said flat out that he didnt even think of were to put it and also thought that it shouldnt be added at all.

Triforce Heroes was added after it was released because it came out in 2015 - Hyrule Historia came out in 2011. The revised editions have been updated to included new titles.
3DS FC: 0490-7858-5102
NS FC: SW-6739-0520-9699
freedumbdclxvi 18 minutes ago#60
freedumbdclxvi posted...
kaliskonig posted...
freedumbdclxvi posted...
The_Bones posted...
They probably would abandon it if fans stopped pushing it

They've stated before they use it when developing the games. So, I don't think fan demand is the only factor in it.

At this point it is nintendo pushing it to please fans. triforce heroes didnt get a spot in the timeline until after it was released. The dev said flat out that he didnt even think of were to put it and also thought that it shouldnt be added at all.

Triforce Heroes was added after it was released because it came out in 2015 - Hyrule Historia came out in 2011. The revised editions have been updated to included new titles.

Also, where did the developer say he didn't think of where to place it? Here is an interview with the director explicitly saying why it's placed where it is:

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-story-behind-triforce-heroes-an-interview-with/1100-6431697/
3DS FC: 0490-7858-5102
NS FC: SW-6739-0520-9699
GoldLiger 6 minutes ago#61
There is no contradictions. What people are complaining about are simple EASTER EGGS. Nintendo had Easter Eggs in Zelda since A Link to the Past(you all know what I am referring to). 

Breath of the Wild has lots of nods to the previous Zelda games but none of those nods are lore driven. There are only two things about Breath of the Wild that are lore driven that connects it to the downfall timeline:
1. Princess Ruto becoming a Sage - This only happened in two of the branched timelines(Adult and Downfall). Also remember that the Adult Timeline was confirmed to not be the timeline BotW follows

2. Princess Zelda having the full Triforce - Only the downfall timeline has the full Triforce in the hands of the Royal Family(as we see in Zelda 2 with Link using the full Triforce to wake up the Zelda that is Hylia's blood descendant/reincarnation. In the child timeline the Triforce of Power was lost when Ganondorf died in TP and even Four Swords Adventures never shown the full Triforce. In the Adult Timeline the Triforce disappeared after the King made the last wish.

So no matter what anyone says(even the stupid people at commonwealth realms for using the "Dragon Break" from Skyrim to justify their "Timeline Convergence" theory even when Aonuma stated that no story elements from that game was used in BotW) BotW takes place in the downfall timeline more than 10,000 years after the events of Zelda 2: The Adventures of Link.

We will get the official confirmation of this after the second DLC. Mark my words.
Waiting: Kingdom Hearts 3, Splatoon 2, RISE: Race The Future, Xenoblade Chronicles 2, Yooka Laylee(Switch)and Super Mario Odyssey.
  1. Boards
  2. The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild
  3. So Nintendo still push the timeline, yet this game is full of contradictions...

No comments:

Post a Comment

Public Comments