It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
QC: Interestingly, there's only 3 pairs of games that have any direct connection to one another: Zelda 1 and 2, OoT and MM, and OA with LA. The connections with OA and LA is a bit of a stretch to be fair, but the set-up of the story for OA makes it concurrent with OS, and the story beginning the games means they probably occur directly ahead of another game, one with a horse. However, with the linked game's ending, it makes it unlikely that this game has been made yet.
LA explicitly stated that it was the same Link as in LttP. OoS and OoA are obviously closely connected (officially, OoS is before OoA, although either would really work), but since they are connected to the LttP-LA pair, they must go between the two games (making the order LttP-OoS-OoA-LA, all with the same incarnation of Link).

Furthermore, WW and PH also explicitly have the same Link (and multiple other characters).

Arguably, LttP has a direct connection to ALBW (in Japan, they actually named it "LttP 2"), but it's a different incarnation of Link than LttP/OoS/OoA/LA.
The timeline to me doesn't make sense with regards to how things happen differently between the fallen and adult timeline.

Why was the fallen timeline not flooded, but instead a war occurs? Why was the adult timeline flooded instead of a giant civil war?

Both are missing a hero, so what's really different? Why does an army and sages rise up to defeat Ganon in one timeline, but not another? Why does there even have to be an alternate timeline? Why does Zelda send Link back if she knows by doing so she is abandoning one timeline for another? I always just assumed that the adult timeline just faded away. On the topic of assumptions, I always assumed it was always one timeline, and I think that's the most sensible chronology really, or at least equally plot hole ridden.
avatar
JCD-Bionicman: The timeline to me doesn't make sense with regards to how things happen differently between the fallen and adult timeline.

Why was the fallen timeline not flooded, but instead a war occurs? Why was the adult timeline flooded instead of a giant civil war?

Both are missing a hero, so what's really different? Why does an army and sages rise up to defeat Ganon in one timeline, but not another? Why does there even have to be an alternate timeline? Why does Zelda send Link back if she knows by doing so she is abandoning one timeline for another? I always just assumed that the adult timeline just faded away. On the topic of assumptions, I always assumed it was always one timeline, and I think that's the most sensible chronology really, or at least equally plot hole ridden.
The primary difference is that in the fallen timeline, Ganon obtains the complete Triforce, allowing him to corrupt the Sacred Realm. In the adult timeline, he only has the Triforce of Power. However, he is still very dangerous with just that, and there is no hero to stop him. The king therefore trusts the gods to stop him, and this happens by having them flood the place.

Flooding wouldn't stop Ganon in the fallen timeline; the only option is to keep him sealed away, along with the Triforce itself.
(it really bothered me when playing LBW that there were 7 sage descendants + Zelda, when in LttP there were 7 sage descendents including Zelda and OoT had 7 sages counting Zelda >____>)
avatar
QC: Interestingly, there's only 3 pairs of games that have any direct connection to one another: Zelda 1 and 2, OoT and MM, and OA with LA. The connections with OA and LA is a bit of a stretch to be fair, but the set-up of the story for OA makes it concurrent with OS, and the story beginning the games means they probably occur directly ahead of another game, one with a horse. However, with the linked game's ending, it makes it unlikely that this game has been made yet.
avatar
Pidgeot: LA explicitly stated that it was the same Link as in LttP. OoS and OoA are obviously closely connected (officially, OoS is before OoA, although either would really work), but since they are connected to the LttP-LA pair, they must go between the two games (making the order LttP-OoS-OoA-LA, all with the same incarnation of Link).

Furthermore, WW and PH also explicitly have the same Link (and multiple other characters).

Arguably, LttP has a direct connection to ALBW (in Japan, they actually named it "LttP 2"), but it's a different incarnation of Link than LttP/OoS/OoA/LA.
I forgot about Phantom Hourglass actually. The way OoA is connected to LA is that in the end of OoA, Link leaves on a raft for other destinations, and that's the start of LA's game where it's destroyed in the middle of the ocean. I don't think LA is connected to LTTP directly though, but I don't have the manual to check.
avatar
SirPrimalform: I'm not sure what them being aware of the GBA has to do with anything...
Its simple: The GBA could link multiple units together. Had it been further along in development, the logistical issue wouldn't be, and the third game likely would have been made.
avatar
QC: Well, it's not like the piece totally vanishes. Link is unaware he has it until the last medallion is gathered, perhaps he hadn't earned the right to wield the piece until that happens, in which case it's found by someone else in the world.
avatar
Pidgeot: That doesn't work, because the Triforce divides itself at the moment Ganondorf attempts to claim it. The Triforce picked Link for the Triforce of Courage. Quoting Zelda in OoT:

If the heart of the one who holds the sacred triangle has all three forces in balance, that one will gain the True Force to govern all. But, if that one's heart is not in balance, the Triforce will separate into three parts: Power, Wisdom and Courage. Only one part will remain for the one who touched the Triforce...the part representing the force that one most believes in. If that one seeks the True Force, that one must acquire the two lost parts. Those two parts will be held within others chosen by destiny, who will bear the Triforce mark on the backs of their hands.
avatar
Pidgeot: This all happens before Link is sealed away for seven years, while he is still a child. If the Triforce of Courage did not choose Link at this point, then where did it go? How (and when) does Link end up with the Triforce of Courage?

avatar
QC: As for the second point, again this assumes Link always has the piece of courage. Zelda trains as Sheik expecting Link to return. If we go by the assumption this follows the ALTTP pathway, then Link's failure to return leads to war, the sacrificing of maidens to open up the holy realm in place of the hero. With the child viewpoint, Zelda returns to wage war with an army of desperate civilians, and the owners of those medallions being 6 of the wise men that seal Gannon away at the start of the story. That would leave either the King of Hyrule, or Zelda herself being the last, as the new Zelda is the last maiden to be sent to unlock Ganon and the Dark Realm. With the split occurring as an adult instead, then the war is delayed, Ganon having time to unlock the powers of his piece and building his own army, and probably making Zelda the last of the wise-men that seal him away. That's just a thought of course.
avatar
Pidgeot: The above questions still apply, but there seems to be even more problems with this scenario.

First of all, the OoT-era Sacred Realm is opened by the time Link first claims the Master Sword (as a child). There are no Maidens to be sacrificed; the Maidens are descendents of the seven Sages used to seal Ganon in the Dark World and that hasn't happened yet.

Zelda's goal is to seal Ganondorf away so he can no longer do any harm. Her plan requires all seven Sages to participate in the sealing process, so Link must be successful before revealing her identity has any benefit - she cannot defeat him in any other way, and she knows this - that's why she doesn't reveal her identity until that has happened.

LttP tells us that in this branch, Ganon is sealed away. However, before that happens, he needs to complete the Triforce, because this is what causes the Sacred Realm to be corrupted into the Dark World (and LttP states that this had already happened when he becomes sealed away).

This alone seems to suggest that the seven Sages mentioned in LttP are different from the OoT sages, since Zelda is the seventh Sage. Zelda would somehow need to be captured by Ganondorf, have her piece of the Triforce taken from her, and then escape alive. Everything we've seen so far suggests that this isn't possible.
Like I said it's all speculation. We're trying to discuss a point where Link simply stops existing. Any number of things can change when that happens, be it the triforce of courage leaving Link when he's removed, or the act of his removal changing the actions in Zelda to be a soldier rather than a leader and not being worthy of the Triforce of Wisdom. It could be Impa instead of Zelda for all I know. We're at a point where everything is guesswork, because we haven't seen it. But the point is I can't see Zelda and Link being the owners as children, when the power does not do them any good. The pieces wait for one worthy to wield them or find another body, I honestly have no idea.

Another thing that came up when I was browsing is that the sages existed in the Sacred Realm, killed by Ganon except for Rauru. Something, happens, something we haven't seen, don't know about, but whatever it is, there is a definitive point where there is a second split, and it's just a question of where, and what changes because of it.
avatar
Darvond: Its simple: The GBA could link multiple units together. Had it been further along in development, the logistical issue wouldn't be, and the third game likely would have been made.
ehhhh

the problem isn't that the gbc link can only connect two games at a time. Like if there were three games, you'd still link just the one you completed and the one you'd play next.

The problem is that it would be starting to get into too many variables to actually thoroughly test out all the possible combinations of linked games for bugs since it would triple the number of paths through the games (and that's not counting the other paths/test cases for the animal partners or other flags that show up in a linked game).

Budget/dev time/testing time would swell, and the project would probably miss the window where it would have been marketable (since it was kinda late in the GBC life).
bump for Hyrule Historia of the non-mystical kind ;-)
avatar
Darvond: Its simple: The GBA could link multiple units together. Had it been further along in development, the logistical issue wouldn't be, and the third game likely would have been made.
The GBA can link multiple units together in GBA mode. When playing a GBC game, the GBA was simply a GBC with a darker screen and a little flag in the BIOS that said it was a GBA. You can't access any GBA features in GBC mode so the only way it could have made any difference was if they switched development to the GBA.
avatar
QC: I forgot about Phantom Hourglass actually. The way OoA is connected to LA is that in the end of OoA, Link leaves on a raft for other destinations, and that's the start of LA's game where it's destroyed in the middle of the ocean. I don't think LA is connected to LTTP directly though, but I don't have the manual to check.
It is, it was a direct sequel to LttP just as AoL is to LoZ and MM is to OoT.
Post edited January 07, 2014 by SirPrimalform
avatar
Darvond: Its simple: The GBA could link multiple units together. Had it been further along in development, the logistical issue wouldn't be, and the third game likely would have been made.
avatar
mrcrispy83: ehhhh

the problem isn't that the gbc link can only connect two games at a time. Like if there were three games, you'd still link just the one you completed and the one you'd play next.

The problem is that it would be starting to get into too many variables to actually thoroughly test out all the possible combinations of linked games for bugs since it would triple the number of paths through the games (and that's not counting the other paths/test cases for the animal partners or other flags that show up in a linked game).

Budget/dev time/testing time would swell, and the project would probably miss the window where it would have been marketable (since it was kinda late in the GBC life).
...Or they could have made them into GBA launch titles and sold horribly seeing as the models before the SP were a bloody mess.
avatar
JCD-Bionicman: The timeline to me doesn't make sense with regards to how things happen differently between the fallen and adult timeline.

Why was the fallen timeline not flooded, but instead a war occurs? Why was the adult timeline flooded instead of a giant civil war?

Both are missing a hero, so what's really different? Why does an army and sages rise up to defeat Ganon in one timeline, but not another? Why does there even have to be an alternate timeline? Why does Zelda send Link back if she knows by doing so she is abandoning one timeline for another? I always just assumed that the adult timeline just faded away. On the topic of assumptions, I always assumed it was always one timeline, and I think that's the most sensible chronology really, or at least equally plot hole ridden.
And why defeating Ganon? I mean, if you win, all goes bad, if you lose...too :D
Just a quick update. My friend just lend me the book, and now I'm reading the timeline (I'm looking at Link's Awakening now).

It's all connected.

Ganondorf aquire the Triforce in Ocarina of Time when Link is defeated.

Also Oracle of Season and Ages are a DIRECT sequel to A Link to the Past (but I'm wondering how this could be possible, because checking the images in the book in A Link to the Past Link is around 16-17, while on Oracle he is a 13-14 years old looking kid).

Also Link's Awakening is settled right after the end of Oracle of Ages, because Link takes a boat here and then there's the dream.
avatar
Punished_Snake: Just a quick update. My friend just lend me the book, and now I'm reading the timeline (I'm looking at Link's Awakening now).

It's all connected.

Ganondorf aquire the Triforce in Ocarina of Time when Link is defeated.

Also Oracle of Season and Ages are a DIRECT sequel to A Link to the Past (but I'm wondering how this could be possible, because checking the images in the book in A Link to the Past Link is around 16-17, while on Oracle he is a 13-14 years old looking kid).

Also Link's Awakening is settled right after the end of Oracle of Ages, because Link takes a boat here and then there's the dream.
The only games I don't think should be connected is the Four Sword Trilogy,

Or at the very least Four Sword Adventures in the Child Timeline. I personally think it should be in the "Link Dies" Timeline because Four Sword Adeventure's Hyrule has simmlarities to A Link to the Past.
avatar
Punished_Snake: Also Oracle of Season and Ages are a DIRECT sequel to A Link to the Past (but I'm wondering how this could be possible, because checking the images in the book in A Link to the Past Link is around 16-17, while on Oracle he is a 13-14 years old looking kid).
Answer: High quality lotion


Seriously, though, you can put some stock in the timeline, but know that most of the timeline was built after the games were built. There was no official timeline when most of them were built. They built them using gameplay and basic archetypes as a guide. Only later, after pressure from the community, did they build the timeline. (my source on this is probably that gametrailers video, but it may have been another one -- definitely a youtube video with some credibility)

It's a neat timeline, I'll admit. But I'd prefer no timeline at all, personally.