Your Continuity theory?

[LadyNintendo]

I've read it already half way once, but for the fact he/they, like so many others, think OOT's timeline is very difficult while it is not, I didn't read 'til the end. I did now though, and I continue to say: there's no need for a split timeline. Time and the people that live in it, are unaffected by Link's time traveling. Link is not the one who manipulates time, time manipulates Link. Otherwise, he wouldn't be a child and an adult depending on the time he was is. And if we believe Link and Zelda's meeting at the end of OOT was true, then the game contradicts itself. Which it does anyway, so technically, split timelines and single timelines both are possible. OOT has no timeline if you think about it. But for what exists of it:

I don't understand everybody is overlooking one small fact that tells us: OOT's timeline can not be changed! Three words: Song of Storms. If time was a changeable thing in OOT, you could never have learned that song. At least not the way Link did. Things can only be locked up in time if time in unchangeable.

[Evilslayer]

Ladynintendo? It seems like, that you have a rival. http://www.zeldalegends.net/index.php?p=848

He says, that there are 2 timelines and i agree with him. Read it if you have VERY MUCH time.

So the King commanded Seven Sages and the Knights to seal the gate to the Land of the Golden Power.

That guy bases some of it on mistranslations from ALttP. I think a split timeline might be interesting, but Nintendo hardly cares about the storyline. There's no way they would make it that complicated.

[Mysterious F.]

I have a timeline theory in the Theories topic Remotely possible... MC first?

[Evilslayer]

I've now read that Split Timeline Theory (yes, the WHOLE article) and ind myself starting to believe in it. I don't agree with everything he say, like that there can't be a new Hyrule after TWW (no matter what Link and Zelda names 'New Hyrule', the resurrected Hyrule will still be Hyrule).

However, some of the other things he pointed out does make sense. Why defeat Ganon in the future if he can just seal him away in his own time if it doesn't create a split timeline? And then there's the feast at Lon Lon Ranch. That's pretty obviously AFTER Link returned to his own time.

I believe that the two different timelines are alternate dimentions, rather than two different timelines that exist next to each others. Zelda's comment about the road between times being closed when Link closes the Door of Times also makes me believe that it is possible to travel between the two dimentions.

Now, THAT would make an interesting theme for a future Zelda game, and possibly offer two-player gaming. Imagine a Zelda game where you have to travel between Child Timeline Hyrule and Adult Timeline Hyrule and you control TWO Link (one is Adult Link and the other Young Link) and you often have to switch between them to solve certain puzzles.

Anyway, I believe that the two timelines somewhat affects each others. At the moment I believe TP is the counterpart to ALttP, the Great Flood is the counterpart to Ganon's invation before LoZ, the shattering and hiding of the Triforce of Courage is the counterpart of the hiding of the Triforce of Courage in the Great Temple, and TWW is the counterpart of LoZ.

I'm not so sure about TMC, the FS duology or the Oracles, though. I think TMC can be the counterpart of the Oracles. I think that what eventually became TMC was originally going to be the third Oracle game.

That might explain the different geography and Vaati as the final boss.

As for my comment in my last post about Nintendo, I was obviously referring to Miyamoto and Aonuma. However, their jobs are only to overlook the development of the games and approve the ideas of the developers. There are other people who writes the storylines of the games. Maybe they care!

Besides, Miyamoto did once mention a document that describes how all the games fit together. The way he talked about it suggests to me that he didn't know where it is, only that it's hidden away somewhere. Again, it seems like it's the storyline-writers who writes the timeline.

Actually, I believe there might be several stories within that document that tells happenings that might turn into future Zelda games. The Legend of the Picori is a possible example of that.

[LadyNintendo]

I don't believe the split time theory for several reasons:

1. The Song Of Storms. The event of obtaining that "item" is triggered in the future. The future taught the song to Link and caused him to go back in time and use it. But at the same time, that event (playing the song to drain the well) in the past caused the future event to happen. This is not possible if time is not unchangeable. Also, if there's something like a split time, Link would be sleeping in the dimension, that featured the future events, at the time he's supposed to play that song in the windmill. Therefor, the future event cannot happen, yet it did. This would cause a big paradox.

2. Give me one game in which Ganondorf got sealed and did not escape in a later game. All right, if you believe the split timeline theory, TWW could. However, even if you believe that theory, you'll have to admit he escaped both his seals in OOT. So why wouldn't he be able to have escaped the seal caused by young Link in less than seven years, causing the future to still need to be saved. And why didn't Rauru send Link back to Hyrule's dimension immediately either, to seal Ganondorf? It seems Ganondorf stayed in the Sacred Realm for quite a long time.

3. Is it that hard for people to comprehend that traveling through time is not different from traveling through space? Closing the door of Time might just as well cause the link between times to vanish, like a portal being closed. The gate in the future still will be opened, because that's where the bridge ends that was started on the other end.

4. TWW's intro. It both "stated" that the Hero went back in time and that he traveled by horse. I admit the writers' explanation for the horse could very well be true, but look at it this way. Link went back in time and then left on Epona. At least young Zelda and Malon know that. So future Zelda and Malon know that too, and the drawing could be about Link's entire leaving, both in time and space, as told by Zelda, Malon and possibly others.

I'll leave it at that.

I doubt TMC is anywhere near what Oracle Of Secrets (:)) was supposed to be. TMC's Hyrule is almost identical to OOT's (hardly any geographical difference), while the other Oracle Of games clearly featured different lands. It's most likely the cancelled game was supposed to be in a different land too. Also, TMC's main theme is size, while, if it really would be the missing Oracle Of game, it should either be time or colour.

People actually believe that story about a timeline document? It sounds like the biggest cowcrap to me, seeing that most games still have rather vague connections, are seperated by huge amounts of time in which very important events took place, and are inconsistent when it comes to small, yet important facts. My guess: they make things up as they go.

[LadyNintendo]

Just for the record: don't compare OOT's time traveling with MM's and OOA's. Different devices and methods were used to travel between times in those games, so results may vary. If Link would've used OOA's method of time traveling, he might have been able to change things in time. However, he used the Master Sword.

I just thought of the following. I can't believe I forgot to add these.

5. The ending of OOT seems not likely to have happened. I don't doubt the part about the party, but about Link visiting Zelda. It is not a memory (or at least, likely not. I'm somewhat reminded of LA.). Navi was one of the reasons Zelda recognized Link, but she's not with Link during the ending visit. Actually, I don't even think she seemed to know Link in the ending. That, or she's VERY surprised he's still alive. Also, Link's Triforce symbol is NOT on his hand when he returns, but is there when he visits Zelda. I'm also missing a Goron's Bracelet, but I don't think that's relevant right now (feel free to prove me wrong). We know the Triforce symbol only appears when it's resonating with the others or during the event of receiving it. It could be Ganondorf at that moment touched the Triforce, causing Courage to go to Link. But why doesn't Zelda have hers then? If Zelda doesn't have hers, it can't resonate. So it must be because Ganondorf touched the Triforce. But where's Zelda's part? Why does Link have it, but she doesn't? Why would her piece not come to her? Especially if it did happen in the so-called other dimension.

Okay, I'm getting a bit confused about when the article states the split should've happened. I'm thinking I made a mistake by thinking they meant the first time Link went back in time caused the split, while after rereading everything, I think they meant Link's final return. Doesn't change any of my earlier made arguments. Time still cannot change, Ganondorf still can escape any Seal, traveling through time still can be through time and not dimensions and TWW's intro is also still the same.
My big question now: why exactly did the split happen at the end of OOT and not earlier? It's illogical that the same way of traveling has different effects. Was it Zelda who caused anything? That's believable, if only the Master Sword wasn't needed to close the road between times again (and to seal Ganondorf, I know). Two different keys don't work for the same lock.

Trying to follow the timeline as described in the article, it would mean: Link goes on an adventure, sleeps 7 years, continues adventure and hops back a few times causing him to do some things while he's also asleep at the same time, saves the day and then gets send back into time to a "dimension" that is called his original time, while it is actually just a replica of the original time that for some reason failed to start existing the first two times Link went back in time. Suppose the first thing he did was saving/warning Nabooru. Another thing the ending did not show! Link MUST have gotten the Ocarina from adult Zelda, otherwise it could not exist anymore in the past. Anyway, suppose he did that, which would take like, an hour? Shouldn't be much more, because otherwise they both will be captured by Kotake and Koume. Possibly, he first returned the stones too. After that, he went to Zelda. Question, if in this dimension Ganondorf touches the Triforce within a few hours, why didn't Link have it during his quests as child? Because that definetly took a few days if not weeks. He didn't have it during those times and nothing happened that could change time until this point.

And off course, why sending Link back if the other dimension doesn't exist yet (and therefor can't be in danger)? Sure, he lost seven years of his life. So what? Some even lost their entire life because of the war. Everyone has paid some price. Link should be happy he was saved from all the misery that happened during those seven years.

Dual Timeline also doesn't give any explanation for Navi leaving, while the Single Timeline could. No argument, but worth considering.

Statements made by Miyamoto or Aonuma are so overrated. I already said what I think of the "timeline document". I consider statements inferior in every possible way, and this is why.
Miyamoto around the time of the release of OOT: 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
Seems that they either don't know what they are doing or that A Link To The Past in any case is seperated from Ocarina Of Time by very important events that took place over enormous amounts of time. So why couldn't TWW have happened inbetween either, if that's "supposed to be the case"? It's not a direct sequal if we trust those statements. Same goes for the story of OOT. The original Zelda64 did not feature time traveling and Link did not "start" as a Kokiri (or kid for that matter). My guess is that the entire tloz-story came into existance (a little) with TWW. And for that reason, OOT's timeline is something they are making up now. No matter the outcome, I hope they'll give it enough thought.

A final comment I'd like to make that doesn't prove anything, but I want it to be said. Nothing suggests that Link ever went back to his "home" after MM. Yes, he was in the Lost Woods (supposedly), but why would he return to the for him familiar surroundings? He still had not found that friend he was looking for. And besides "Shouldn't you be going home too?". Fine, what is Link's home? He has no specific place to go to. He's not a Kokiri anymore and not a true Hylian either. If Hyrule itself is his home, then the HMS's "suggestion" could have become true.

[darkphantomime]

Alack, Lady Nintendo, why do you spurn the creators of all that is sacred and holy?

BLASPHEMER!!!

And besides, what things may be in such ideas as a split timeline, not all creators long over every single detail. So I must ponder the question: What use is it to say that the end sequence of OoT happened only as a memory? It's like we're going crazy, just going over every detail. But I am lost with this constant work of every detail. No enjoyment to the game, no essence to the story. And before you start going at my comments again, please just calm down. It's like we're just going word for words and debating like crazy without any meaning to the context of what we say. It drives on to the point where conversing in this topic becomes unbearable...

So please,  give this one a chance, and let this one's theories be of his own idea, not open to attack or harsh stabbing. It ruins the points which I am trying to make on my own, getting harder to commune with what's happening.

[LadyNintendo]

What part of  "it's not a memory" can be read as "it's a memory"? :)

I did not go over every little detail. I gave two reasons that show a huge inconsistency in the zelda/link ending. I could think of quite a few really minor details. Wanna hear them? ;D

I have the right to "fight" back. I'm not being aggresive or something, just showing that theory has just as many flaws as the single timeline, if not more. The article suggests the single timeline is impossible, while it's very much not. Just a bit awkward at some points.

[Master Dragmire]

No matter how much we splitters ( people who belieive the split timeline theory ) try to convince the naive, there's always resistence.
Lady Nintendo I suggest you read this for enlightenment:
http://www.zeldalegends.net/index.php?p=848

A single timeline is simply impossible!  ???

[LadyNintendo]

My head hurts in a way it hasn't hurt anymore ever since I figured out what the new World Of Darkness' concepts were (Nothing, ignore. It is/was a storyline its money-hungry creators changed in such a way they managed to annihilated everything that made me love the original stuff.)

I have yet to play Twilight Princess, but it sounds like two other theories/concepts I've always believed and had a few discussions about, are being supported by it. So why not sweet number 3? I'm not going to change my theory because of an article I can find more than a few mistakes in and is apparently everything the dual-timeline people can come up with.

I said it once, and I say it again: The single timeline is possible, even likely, if only everything in it ALWAYS happened. And that's not unlikely.

[darkphantomime]

I must argue for the sake of Lady Nintendo about what's said in that article. It takes certain notions and details and uses them to give proof, but it also overlooks willingly, IE: The legend of tingle, in order to mark any voice going against, as not supportive. But you have to look at things as a whole. I have a theory that WW takes place about 800 years, or close to a millenium after OoT. 100 or 200 years is simply too short a time for all these things to happen, espicially once we take into consideration of TP taking place itself, 100 years post OoT.

I'm going to have to go to the support of single timeline, while the article makes many assertions twixt the similarities between LttP and WW, and even to go so far as to say that the KoRL says that zelda and Link of WW are forbidden  to call a new land 'Hyrule'. I think that LttP may actually take place AFTER WW, perhaps several millenia. The intro sequences are actually things that are things that are only superficial, but bear no insight to what is within the game itself. IE: many other zelda's could possibly have a similar intro,and thus it might evolve to the point of multiple timelines, but I'm not going to accept the multiple timeline theory now. The reason being that "Multiple Timelilne" Is just an excuse by gamers to not REALLY delve into everything. And simply end it at that point. Because there are already so many games in the series, so they would say 'put it in a split wave' in order to make things easier. But there are way too many hints in WW that we would relate in MM that they acknowledgebly refute as innaccurate, even though the creators themselves would've made these subtle hints as REAL evidence.

I REALLY think OoT exists as the 'true' first game (chronologically) of the history of hyrule.

[Evilslayer]

Really? The Master Sword has been used before, the Sages has been gathered before, Ganon is hinted to have been REINCARNATED. I think it's very likely that there may one day be games that takes place before OoT. :-*

I don't think any of the current games (except PH, if you count those we know of but hasn't been released) fits after TWW. I, at least, feel very uneasy about putting a game after TWW before Ninty has fully explained what really happens after TWW.

Do Link and Zelda find New Hyrule? What about Old Hyrule? We know the Koroks are planning to revive Old Hyrule, but do Link and Zelda's descendants, if they find New Hyrule, return to Old Hyrule? I personally prefer to have as few holes as possible, therefore the only way, at the moment, one can have a somewhat complete timeline theory is if TWW/PH is put in the end. Unless it's a split timeline. :-*

In my current timeline the TMC BS comes first (which do hint to an earlier Link). Although I don't really have any strong evidence supporting it (except, maybe, Vaati's hint that the Light Force, though he don't know that it's THE Light Force at the time, has been in Zelda's family since her people were given their powers), that before the TMC BS the Hylians were a tribal people, and that the Hero of Men became their first King.

Anyway, another theory I have is that the Light Force isn't anything like the Triforce, which I originally believed, but a force that grants you the power to be the Master of the Triforce.

Sometime after the TMC BS the Royal Family gets their hands on the Triforce, and Hyrule enters a Golden Age, or the Hylian Age, as it's called in ALttP. That eventually leads to the AoL BS. One might ask if the Royal Family has the Light Force, and it grants them the Power, Wisdom and Courage to wield the Triforce, how come it split up when the new King touched it? Well, I can think of two answers.

1. It's possible that all the other kings before the one who dies in the AoL BS married close kin, to keep their blood pure. The King who died in the AoL BS, however, married a low-borne woman. Thus the Light Force didn't pass on to his son.

2. It's not impossible that TMC takes place before the AoL BS. Just because the Triforce isn't mentioned doesn't mean the Royal Family doesn't have it. It may be locked away in a safe place. Also, it's possible that Vaati knows that it will split if he touches it, and he don't want to take any risk that a hero, bearing the Triforce of Courage, will rise to challenge him. Don't forget, the reason he turns Zelda to stone is to AVOID such risks.

If the latter is correct, then my guess is that the young King in the AoL BS is TMC Link and Zelda's grandson. Why grandson and not son? Because Link and Zelda are both very powerful, and I bet that even with only 1/3 of the Light Force their son will possess the power to get the whole Triforce.

The spirits in the Shadow Temple in OoT talks about Hyrule's 'bloody history'. I think that's a Dark Age between the AoL BS, and ends with the unification by OoT Zelda's father.

However, I don't think it's a complete unification. The Japanese LoZ manual refers to Hyrule as a region, not a kingdom. And the AoL manual refers to the BS as a time when all the kingdoms of Hyrule were united. Furthermore, the leaders of the other 'kingdoms' seems to keep their royal titles. My theory on that is that the King of Hyrule is more of a military leader.

Anyways, after OoT/MM comes TP, of course. As to not spoil it to anyone, I won't say anything about that. Except that the ending has forced me to change my view on where FSA, ALttP and LoZ fits into the timeline.

First, however, comes the FS BS, and then the original FS. Then FSA, where Ganon has been reincarnated. He's sealed away in the Four Sword.

In TMC it's clear that without the elements the Four Sword becomes the White Sword, which is a sword in LoZ. My theory is that the Four Sword loses the elements somehow, and Ganon breaks free. The sword is later found at Death Mountain.

This is just an assumption, but I have a theory that when Ganon breaks free he attacks Hyrule Castle and reclaims the Triforce of Power. He is then either sealed away, or makes his escape to the Dark World (having no army), and later invades Hyrule. After all, according to the Japanese manual he invaded from a 'world of evil', so the escape from the Four Sword doesn't directly connect to the invasion (unless the Four Sword is somewhat like Anomander Rake's sword in the Malazan Book of the Fallen).

Anyway, centuries pass (it's an Age of Darkness, after all) and eventually a new Link is borne. Ganon kidnaps Zelda, who already has shattered the Triforce of Wisdom, and Link sets out to save her.

Several years later, in AoL, Link breaks the curse on the Sleeping Princess and reunites the Triforce. Hyrule enters another Golden Age. Anyway, it's only a matter of time before someone whose heart is not in balance touches the Triforce, so in the Oracles a new Link finds them in an abandoned castle. He goes on a journey to save Holodrum and Labrynna, and eventually fights a resurrected Ganon.

Here is the only big hole, but that cannot be avoided, sadly. I only hope Nintendo makes a game that can fill this hole. Anyway, somehow the Triforce AND Ganon ends up in the Dark World. That's because this is where I put ALttP in my newest timeline theory.

After this (and LA, which I think is its direct sequel) there's another Golden Age, but following it the Hylians declines again, and when Ganon attacks again the Goddesses floods Hyrule. And then finally there's TWW and PH.

[D.Nohansen Hyrule]

Marin Im sorry in your timeline yout mising some games (ike TP