The Zelda Timeline...FINALLY REVEALED!?

[Mysterious F.]

Oh, I never noticed that.

[Keaton]

But guys, this means...

...LINK SPEAKS

[Mysterious F.]

He spoke in the second game too, you know.

[MagmarFire]

And in The Wind Waker! :D

And he kind of talks through dialogue options. YMMV.

[MagmarFire]

Important update is important.

Hyrule Historia will no longer be Japan-only.

That's right. It's getting localized.

Here's some toilet paper if you need it.

[Keaton]

Important update is important.

Hyrule Historia will no longer be Japan-only.

That's right. It's getting localized.

Here's some toilet paper if you need it.

Saw that, shax brit.

[MagmarFire]

It seems you can get quite the discount on Amazon, too. Not a bad idea for you guys to check it out there!

[MasterKeyX]

Look, I've gotta say it. The timeline disappointed me for a few reasons. Basically, these are the reasons why:

First, it takes away from the mystery of the series. One of my personal favorite things about the Zelda community was the happy amount of constructive debate concerning the placement of the games. This timeline destroys that.

Second, I'm going to be kind of angry if they split the timeline into a fourth branch somehow. I'm not a fan of diluting the universe further, and on top of that, where exactly are you supposed to go from here? Which branch do you place the next game? Releasing so much information constricts the creativity of team Zelda. Instead of making any game they want nearly carefree, they now have to worry: "Oh, but where does this go in the timeline?" Think about it. A fantastic game like Majora's Mask would never have been released if a timeline model existed in 2000. It would never fit anywhere, at least not well. It stunts on entire branch

And third, every time a new game comes out, all anyone is going to talk about is WHERE to place it, and they'll have to update it every year. I'm not so pleased with that.

[MagmarFire]

First, it takes away from the mystery of the series. One of my personal favorite things about the Zelda community was the happy amount of constructive debate concerning the placement of the games. This timeline destroys that.

There's plenty more mystery in the series aside from the timeline. There are theories on characters' identities (just who is the Goddess of Time?), about the nature of Termina as a separate dimension (the Tower of Babel-esque theory, anyone?), symbolism, theorizing where the future of the series is headed, etc. Heck, Majora's Mask alone is has enough epileptic trees to landscape an entire forest...

Sure, there's less room for debate about the placement on the games in the series, but there is still theorizing going on, including still some timeline theories. Just a few months ago did someone post his/her theory on how the Failed Timeline could work while assuming the proposition that Link was defeated in that timeline was false.

Honestly, I'd rather be led on to a mystery and end up having it concluded than never finding out about it, period. That is bad storytelling--leading an audience through a mystery that never gets resolved. That completely renders the purpose of a mystery meaningless because, unless the storyteller intends to actually reveal it to you, there's no point in trying to solve it. It's wasted time.

Remember the GS Ball subplot in the Pokémon anime? That's a quintessential example of a mystery being set up quite nicely and being led on for quite awhile...to ultimately being dropped like a rock halfway through Johto Journeys and half***edly left with a character-of-the-week in the hopes of the audience "forgetting about it."

Second, I'm going to be kind of angry if they split the timeline into a fourth branch somehow. I'm not a fan of diluting the universe further, and on top of that, where exactly are you supposed to go from here? Which branch do you place the next game? Releasing so much information constricts the creativity of team Zelda. Instead of making any game they want nearly carefree, they now have to worry: "Oh, but where does this go in the timeline?"

The timeline has been confirmed to exist. Therefore, we can conclude that there really was a master document that contained the entire timeline and that the Zelda team has always had to worry about timeline placement, even if the majority of the dev teams didn't know it themselves. A public reveal changes absolutely nothing. In fact, I'd go so far to say that it's a positive thing. It gives the dev team a chance to bounce more and more ideas off of each other, and this time with a confirmed canon to refer to. Assuming they study it well, they'll be infused with a similar collective vision of creating games that fit more snuggly with the canon, as opposed to blindly making up a story and hoping that it doesn't contradict anything previously stated in the series.

Think about it. A fantastic game like Majora's Mask would never have been released if a timeline model existed in 2000. It would never fit anywhere, at least not well.

I mean this as respectfully as possible, but...what can I say? Assuming you're talking about Majora's Mask specifically, that's ridiculous. It's pretty darn obvious that Majora's Mask is a sequel to Ocarina of Time. Even without the timeline split, one can assume that it took place from Link's point of view after he was sent back in time and had the future "changed," as what was most likely assumed by almost everyone at the time before the Split Timeline Theory surfaced and was confirmed.

We have the Ocarina of Time itself in the game, as evidence. And the Kokiri's Sword (well, its cousin). And the fact that Link was searching for "a beloved and invaluable friend," confirmed to have been Navi herself in Hyrule Historia and theorized by almost everyone before its release. And the Skull Kid even referencing an event that happened in that game ("You smell just like that fairy boy who taught me that song in the woods."). And Epona.

I could probably go on, but you get my point. It would've existed. Look at The Minish Cap. Good game, but its placement in the timeline was a complete mystery, and it was, indeed, released in the time when the timeline theories became rampant.

And third, every time a new game comes out, all anyone is going to talk about is WHERE to place it, and they'll have to update it every year. I'm not so pleased with that.

Er...hasn't that happened every time a game was released, barring direct sequels? Not to mention the fact that even if it hasn't, placing titles all over the place and fitting them together in the timeline like puzzle pieces has been done in other series before. Kingdom Hearts comes to mind.

[MasterKeyX]

All excellent points, MagmarFire. Excellent points.

You're correct about my statement about Majora's Mask being... silly. It's true that it is a direct sequel, so placement was never really a problem as it was always bundled directly with Ocarina. On an unrelated note, I'd love to see a sequel to that game. Termina is awesome!

As for the theorizing about other things, you also have a point there. I browse other theories every now and then, and that aspect of the community isn't going anywhere anytime soon (the Tower of Babel theory is amazing). Maybe it's just the nostalgia goggles. I'll miss that part of the series, the debate about the timeline, you know? And you're right.. besides, releasing a a canon timeline on the 25th anniversary seems fittingly placed.

As for the problem of placement... my only complaint is that all of the timelines, at least to me, seem to end somewhat vaguely. You could basically go anywhere with adult era windwaker timeline, although I honestly do not like New Hyrule very much (it's too childish and cartoony thus far for my liking; what I mean by that is something like this: Golden Godesses, cool. Spirits of Good? Kind of lame). The Child era ends with Vaati being defeated and Ganondorf being resurrected again (and defeated). You can basically go anywhere; I'd like to see a full 3D console game featuring Vaati as the main villain. He needs more characterization so he can stop playing second fiddle to Ganondorf. I often get the feeling you play games with Vaati as the star, get to the end, beat him, and abruptly learn that somehow Ganondorf is the REAL menace. That's kind of half-***ed and lame. It'd be like playing MM and realizing at the end that Ganondorf was suddenly a threat and Majora was nothing to truly fear.

As for the Hero fails split, it seems a bit dead. Ganondorf's revival is prevented at the end of AoL and Zelda is finally awakened. I'm not really a fan of that part of Hyrule (people theorize it's an area north of where Hyrule is located in OoT, and that the Hyrule below is a wasteland of monsters. Or is that canon.. not even sure anymore...) because I find it a bit dull, but I bet a 3D remake or even a 2D remake (like a 3DS game; Shigeru mentioned wanting to remake a Zelda game in 2D form for the funzies) could have a ton of expansive potential.

[MagmarFire]

On an unrelated note, I'd love to see a sequel to that game. Termina is awesome!

I certainly wouldn't complain about that, either. ;)

As for the theorizing about other things, you also have a point there. I browse other theories every now and then, and that aspect of the community isn't going anywhere anytime soon (the Tower of Babel theory is amazing). Maybe it's just the nostalgia goggles. I'll miss that part of the series, the debate about the timeline, you know? And you're right.. besides, releasing a a canon timeline on the 25th anniversary seems fittingly placed.

Alternatively, they could leave the placement of the next game ambiguous and leave it to the fans to debate about it, and then they could reveal it themselves sometime in the future. I really doubt it, though, as Aonuma has always cared about a coherent timeline. But yeah, there will be other theorizing going on.

As for the problem of placement... my only complaint is that all of the timelines, at least to me, seem to end somewhat vaguely. You could basically go anywhere with adult era windwaker timeline, although I honestly do not like New Hyrule very much (it's too childish and cartoony thus far for my liking; what I mean by that is something like this: Golden Godesses, cool. Spirits of Good? Kind of lame). The Child era ends with Vaati being defeated and Ganondorf being resurrected again (and defeated). You can basically go anywhere; I'd like to see a full 3D console game featuring Vaati as the main villain. He needs more characterization so he can stop playing second fiddle to Ganondorf. I often get the feeling you play games with Vaati as the star, get to the end, beat him, and abruptly learn that somehow Ganondorf is the REAL menace. That's kind of half-***ed and lame. It'd be like playing MM and realizing at the end that Ganondorf was suddenly a threat and Majora was nothing to truly fear.

The cartoony stigma New Hyrule's gotten can be fixed simply by putting in a 3D console game with a slightly more realistic aesthetic, such as Skyward Sword's or Ocarina of Time's.

As for the Hero fails split, it seems a bit dead. Ganondorf's revival is prevented at the end of AoL and Zelda is finally awakened. I'm not really a fan of that part of Hyrule (people theorize it's an area north of where Hyrule is located in OoT, and that the Hyrule below is a wasteland of monsters. Or is that canon.. not even sure anymore...) because I find it a bit dull, but I bet a 3D remake or even a 2D remake (like a 3DS game; Shigeru mentioned wanting to remake a Zelda game in 2D form for the funzies) could have a ton of expansive potential.

It seems dead because an addition to it hasn't been done since the Oracle games. That could very well change, too. Going back to Majora's Mask, that game admittedly doesn't have an important placement in the overall storyline (the dev team themselves have regarded it as a gaiden game during its development), so we may see more of that later, too.