The Zelda Timeline Dilemma

[Anonymous No.10522926]

What does /vr/ think of the timeline considering that the only relevant ones are from the retro titles?

Starting with Link to the Past’s prologue

[Anonymous No.10522929]

I'm still confused about LA... is it after ALTTP, or Zelda 2?

[Anonymous No.10523184]

>>10522926
Please go back to /v/. Dont want these insufferable faggots here.

[Anonymous No.10523193]

>>10522926
Timeline is a retarded concept

[Anonymous No.10523215]

>>10522926
The split timelines was just Nintendo's way of saying they'll make sequels to whichever games they want regardless of the actual timeline. The only real timelines are the games that are direct sequels to each other, such as Wind Waker, Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks.

[Anonymous No.10523220]

>>10522929
alttp
the final boss has moldorm, agahnim, and ganon as phases

[Anonymous No.10523229]

>>10523184
I don’t care. This board has never addressed this timeline issue so get buckled in because you’re here for the long haul.

btw, Aonuma & Fuji-cock smooch or whatever have been revealing content that pertains to the NES, SNES, & N64 titles… so shut your whore mouth.

[Anonymous No.10523235]

>>10523215
The real timelines are the saves we made along the way

[Anonymous No.10523436]

>>10522926
>What does /vr/ think of the timeline
Obviously real and planned from the very beginning as Zelda 2 is a sequel to Zelda 1, which constitutes a timeline. There are old interviews where Miyamoto talks placing ALttP and LA after OoT. That said, at least
>SS => Oot => split => MM => WW (plus sequels) => TP
is obvious and undeniable, the games making direct reference to one another

Most of the rest doesn't even really matter since they have flimsy story but saying they are part of the timeline is a more discreet solution then arbitrarily singling them out and having them float around in limbo


tl;dr: You are retarded if you deny the entire timeline or get upset about it. Unironically one of the dumbest things in the world to get upset about

[Anonymous No.10523465]

The only thing that really muddied the timeline was Wind Waker (and the Capcom games, but those are pretty easy to write off as third-party nonsense). It would have been much cleaner if the Wind Waker universe were just an alternate universe that has a backstory similar to OoT, instead of the awkward "hero dies" timeline.

[Anonymous No.10523628]

>>10523465
The split happens right before your eyes in OoT and there is nothing unclean or confusing about it. WW has the most solid overarching plot connections and not just for the sake of it but to make the story and exploration more impactful
>instead of the awkward "hero dies" timeline.
True, this is the weakest link in the timeline. Not where WW is placed in, though

[Anonymous No.10523634]

>>10523465
>muh capcom
>muh toon link
Unironically good games. All of them.

[Anonymous No.10523759]

>>10523436
>There are old interviews where Miyamoto talks placing ALttP and LA after OoT. That said, at least
The timeline was still referred to as the "Miyamoto order" 20+ years ago

[Anonymous No.10523915]

>>10523436
>saying they are part of the timeline is a more discreet solution
That's where I disagree. When I'm playing any specific game, the last thing I want to know is that it takes place in an elaborate timeline. Such a timeline involving a game from another console I've perhaps not played yet. The story of a game is often standalone meaning that placing it in a limbo is a very convenient solution and good in its simplicity.

Doing otherwise is more work that requires autism, playing another game, connect dots, look up the official timeline in the internet, etc. All of those are fine on their own but seeing that you *have* to take all these steps just to avoid putting the game in -the limbo- put things into perspectives.
If I play Zelda I, the title screen is all I need to know. I definitely don't care it's placed after Oot.
What if I play MM? Even then, I might prefer to place them in the Oot/MM limbo. Similarly, Zelda II is in the Z1-Z2 limbo.
LA could be placed in a limbo as easily as you could link to alttp because the story is as much about the dream as it is about the alttp connections. There's also Mario connections, so what now? Does the goomba link it to SMB1? Limbo wins again.

[Anonymous No.10524138]

>>10523193
>grug not like story taking place after another story

[Anonymous No.10524159]

>>10523193
Came here to say this. Retroactively trying to apply a timeline is peak retarded.

[Anonymous No.10524180]

>>10524159
not what that post said. stop samefagging

[Anonymous No.10524338]

>>10524138
no make fun og grug. why you no see Ogarina of Tribe is old game with complicated twist

[Anonymous No.10524597]

>>10522926
It exists, but Nintendo doesn't sweat it too hard since it'd be limiting otherwise.
The primary point where it falls apart is Ocarina of Time: It's supposed to be the prequel to ALTTP and works as such for the most part, but the ending has Ganon(dorf) sealed away with only the Triforce of Power when Ganon in ALTTP has the entire thing. Then Wind Waker throws a bigger wrench by exploring the future timeline Link left behind (which, admittedly was already implied by the credits sequence) while Twilight Princess follows from Majora's Mask's events in the past. Leaving no events to properly lead to ALTTP until Nintendo said "Link dies, lmao." Then you get FSA, a game filled with ALTTP references that Nintendo eventually put in the timeline where ALTTP never happens. There's clear continuity between games, but Nintendo's gonna Nintendo.
>>10523229
I'm pretty sure this board has had Zelda timeline discussion before. In the last few months, even.

[Radiochan !!8R5IcuH3PgQ No.10524628]

>>10522926
it's better to just approach it like there is no timeline
>>10522929
that being said LA was advertised as being after LTTP and Zelda 2 after Zelda 1

[Anonymous No.10524629]

>>10524138
Prequels/sequels are fine
But trying to connect games made by different devs makes no sense

[Anonymous No.10524630]

>>10523193
>>10523235
>>10524159
Correct.
>>10522926
>>10523229
>>10524138
>>10524180
Fags.

[Anonymous No.10524721]

>>10523915
>Doing otherwise is more work that requires autism, playing another game, connect dots, look up the official timeline in the internet, etc.
That's the fallacy timeline deniers always commit. Their main complaint is that it's silly to pretend that every Zelda game, 3D and 2D alike, have substantial enough story and continuity to be part of an overarching timeline. At the same time, they pretend it's this annoying conundrum to "connect the dots." The only Zelda games that really reward being understood as a unified whole are the heartpiece of the timeline and the Zelda games you should and will play anyway if you like the series: OoT, MM, WW, TP and maybe SS

What's funnier: IF ANYTHING, you have to play all the games and connect annoying dots because Zelda games don't respect the timeline enough, see all those wacky random references in the Oracle games or even BotW that don't make a lot of sense but will also go over your head otherwise

>>10524159
>Retroactively
There is a timeline since Zelda 2. And Miyamoto discussed placing LA and other Zeldas after OoT before they were released


I don't know why the Zelda timeline attracts so much retardation and people creating problems out of nothing. It's the most autistic shit in the world to complain about

[Anonymous No.10524729]

Nintendo made a dozen Zelda games without anything seriously contradicting that they all play in the same little medieval world with similar history, geography, religious themes and rules, unlike FF games for example. Nintendo would be stupid not to economize on this

[Anonymous No.10525264]

Faggots whining about the timeline are the reason TotK's story is so stupid. It could have been the ultimate Zelda climax where everything flows together but instead we got goat Rauru and Ganondorf doesn't even remember anything that happened in previous games.

[Anonymous No.10525291]

>>10525264
That’s not even the same Ganondorf you fuckin retard. The TotK’s Ganondorf was a preserved mummified Ganondorf from ancient times stuck underground for millions of years. Years before the Ganondorf of OoT, TP, or WW. Probably around the Skyward Swords era. Why do you even post here if you don’t even play Zelda games?

[Anonymous No.10525363]

>>10524721
I don't get if you disagree or agree with my post.
You're saying "OoT, MM, WW, TP. SS?" are the only ''worthy'' games? Who decides what games are 'worthy'? You? That's outrageous. It's subjective what games are worthy or not.
I like Zelda 1 on its own. I don't deny you could put it on a timeline. I also say putting it in a limbo is not a bad idea either and has merits. I agree that OoT->WW->TP is 'a timeline'.
The only thing I wouldn't say is that Z1 is not 'worthy' and only has worth as a prequel to Oot because everything should be Oot-centric. I mean, wew, talk about timeliners showing their true colors...
>IF ANYTHING, you have to play all the games and connect annoying dots because Zelda games don't respect the timeline enough
You're saying yourself that the timeline has problems, and somehow I (or timeline deniers) are the ones committing fallacy?wow...
>>10524729
>FF games
Good example. There's a reason we don't make FF timeline but we make for Megaman. etc. It's stupid.

[Anonymous No.10525370]

Nintendo needs to get their shit together

[Anonymous No.10525489]

>>10525363
Anon's point (I think) is that the only games where "connecting the dots" or "playing another game" in the way you described really matters is the "OoT -> TP/SS" era of 3D games due to the nature of the throughline of all of those games. Take Ganondorf for example, (though I'll include ALTTP as well): In the first two games, he was a generic villain. ALTTP gives him a backstory, revealing he was once a dude named Ganondorf. Ocarina of Time shows Ganondorf's rise to power as described in ALTTP. Wind Waker and Twilight Princess show conflicting portrayals of Ganondorf due to the events of their respective timelines. If you count Demise's curse, then that counts as well. You can take all of those instances as standalone, but the resulting effect is diminished compared to the implication in the games themselves that LTTP, WW and TP are all different outcomes for the same guy. And odds are high that someone who enjoys the series will play those games.
As for the second point, saying that creating a timeline requires playing other games or looking it up on the internet is like Nintendo shouldn't put callbacks to other games in the series because people who didn't play those games won't get it. treating the games as subseries/seperate timelines isn't impossible but you're treating the existence of a timeline as more of a problem than it actually is.

[Anonymous No.10526387]

>>10525363
>You're saying "OoT, MM, WW, TP. SS?" are the only ''worthy'' games?
wat

[Anonymous No.10526494]

>>10526387
>The only Zelda games that really reward being understood as a unified whole are the heartpiece of the timeline and the Zelda games you should and will play anyway if you like the series: OoT, MM, WW, TP and maybe SS
how else am I to understand this? Oot, WW and TP is "the" games you must play to be a Zelda fan. What does that make the others? Zelda 1 isn't? I'm calling bs.
You're illiterate.

[Anonymous No.10526567]

>zelda 2 is pretty clearly a sequel to zelda 1
>Link to the Past was heavily implied to be a prequel in promotional material, to the point where the US version added a subtitle to make it more obvious
>Link's Awakening is self-contained to the point where it REALLY doesn't matter where it goes
>Ocarina of Time shows the Ganondorf backstory that was explained in LttP
>Majora's Mask takes place directly after the last scene of OoT
Everything's pretty clear up until this point.
>suddenly, third party Oracle games that may or may not be canon but seem to want to be a prequel to LA (but it later turns out they aren't?)
>Wind Waker comes along with a plot that directly follows OoT, but doesn't seem to fit with what the other games said happened after OoT
>and a weird Capcom multiplayer spin-off that may or may not be canon
>and Twilight Princess, where nobody was sure whether or not it was supposed to be a sequel to Majora's Mask or something else
It's this era that caused the "there's no continuity in Zelda" autism. Every other game in the series is super clear about it stands in relation to other games (or, in Link's Awakening's case, sticks to their own corner).

[Anonymous No.10526667]

>>10524629
>But trying to connect games made by different devs makes no sense

I feel like it makes perfect sense to consider the Fujibayashi developed games and the Koizumi developed games to be completely different universes that take the series in completely different directions story wise. That way you get to avoid having to explain however the fuck the Capcom games work and OoT can properly be the series origin instead of having to go "but actually Link's hat and the Master Sword were blah blah".

[Anonymous No.10526678]

The amount of lore/timeline autism in the Zelda fandom always amazed me. The creators literally don't care, but the fans try their hardest to headcanon some coherent timeline when one doesn't really exist.

Yes, all later 3D Zelda games reference Ocarina of Time, but those are literally just fan service tier easter eggs, it's not supposed to be an actual timeline.

Still though, the Zelda fags are at least not as unhinged as the Sonic fandom, those are way beyond saving.

[Anonymous No.10527012]

>>10522926
Former timelinefag here. I used to debate this shit endlessly from about 2002 to 2010 on GameFAQs. I even got into cross-website wars with rival theorists from Zelda Universe at one point. I don't regret it, it was a fun past time, but as you'd expect, the release of the Hyrule Historia timeline killed whatever passion I had for the subject.
>mfw reading about the "Link dies" """""timeline"""""

[Anonymous No.10527070]

>>10526567
Even before TWW, there was some confusion about how the games fit togehter. For instance, I remember there being quite a bit of discussion around what exactly happened in OoT and how its ending could lead into ALttP, even though at the time it was pretty clearly supposed to be a prequel detailing the events of ALttP's Imprisoning War from its backstory. There was also IIRC a Miyamoto interview where he said Link's Awakening could go wherever that muddied the waters somewhat, and then there was the debate on whether there was only one Link, an idea which unfortunately was pushed by certain NoA sources for some time. TWW did introduce a huge wrench into everything, but developer interviews from Aonuma made it pretty clear that a timeline split was intended, and TP further sealed the deal, though TP itself is infuriatingly vague about its connections. I should also add the English localizations of both TWW and TP to a lesser extent obscured some crucial details that further supported the idea of the split for some reason. But yeah, even after understanding and accepting all of this, it still leaves ALttP completely disconnected from OoT at the end of the day, so I understand why Nintendo ultimately did what they did regarding the "Link dies" timeline, but I don't think it was the correct way to go.

[Anonymous No.10527369]

>>10526678
>Yes, all later 3D Zelda games reference Ocarina of Time, but those are literally just fan service tier easter eggs, it's not supposed to be an actual timeline.
For fuck's sake, it's easy to take for granted now, but Wind Waker being connected to Ocarina of Time was a HUGE plot twist that a big portion of the game builds up to. Nintendo spent the game's entire pre-release pretending it was a crazy reboot about pirates that was Zelda in name only. Then halfway through the game you find out that you've been in the same land as the other games all along and all of the series staples like Zelda and the Master Sword are still around.

[Anonymous No.10527373]

>another fucking zelda timeline thread for the like tenth time this week

I know school is off for Christmas but go hang out with your family you underage loser

[Anonymous No.10527481]

>>10527369
Eh, it was indeed really cool that it tied into OoT so thoroughly, but let's not overstate the "twist". The prologue makes it abundantly clear that it is a sequel to OoT's events, directly name-dropping the Hero of Time and the "sword of evil's bane", which can only be the Master Sword, and the villain talked about could only be OoT Ganon. I will say, however, when the game gives you the first glimpse of him, accompanied by a quiet rendition of his OoT battle theme song, it sent chills down my spine, and I knew shit was gonna get real.

[Anonymous No.10527508]

>>10526678
>The creators literally don't care
They clearly do and your image is a misquote

[Anonymous No.10527535]

>>10526678
Never underestimate the internet's desire to have everything tied up in a neat little package, no matter how dumb it is. The idea that something might exist for its own sake is too bizarre to comprehend. Just the other day I saw a Simpsons wiki try to argue that Homer's cousin Francine (who was only referenced once in a throwaway joke) may have been featured in another throwaway joke. Two unrelated gags, and now we have people out there who think Homer really does have a cousin called Francine who drives the same car and looks just like Homer.

[Anonymous No.10527658]

>>10522926
it doesnt matter.
it has never mattered.
few games are directly connected, and even when they are, it literally does not matter.
each game is fully stand alone.
none of the events of any game truly affect the events/world of other games.
most connections are even more vague and meaningless than zanzibart shit in souls games.
the timeline is fanfiction tier garbage. even nintendo doesnt care and just halfheartedly tries to not retcon things. when they have things connected, its just small easter eggs and nods, vague meaningless legends, etc. caring about the timeline is a red flag that you're an autist and should not be taken seriously by anybody.

[Anonymous No.10527661]

>>10526494
>how else am I to understand this?
That complaining about having to play the most popular/ambitious/unique/talked about Zeldas if you want to understand Zelda is dumb
>What does that make the others?
>Zelda 1
Next to no overarching plot connections

>>10526678
>Yes, all later 3D Zelda games reference Ocarina of Time, but those are literally just fan service tier easter eggs, it's not supposed to be an actual timeline.
WW rubs it in your face that the game takes place after the princess sent Link back in time in OoT before you can even play

That you need everything spelled out or cutscenes showing what happened in previous games to understand the obvious connections doesn't mean they aren't there. You also aren't making timeline denial look good or attractive to people by being flagrantly deceitful, almost like how all the cringe atheist sophistry on Youtube just turns more people into agnostics. Same goes for >>10527658. Keep it up tho

[Anonymous No.10527665]

>>10527661
>X clearly takes place before Y
>Z is clearly a sequel to Y
even in clear cases like this, explain how it matters and why anyone should care.
you are literally unable to refute any of the points i made.

[Anonymous No.10527678]

>>10525363
>There's a reason we don't make FF timeline
Because it's officially an anthology series that isn't connected?

[Anonymous No.10527749]

>>10527665
>explain how it matters and why anyone should care.
That's like asking why sequels exist and why elements are reused in general. You're already emotionally embedded, there is built-in context and weight to things. FromSoftware tried enacting the same feeling as picrel with Anor Londo. The timeline and how he is that one constant in a (literal) sea of ever-changing variables is what makes Ganondorf a special villain and what made many people fall in love with the character for the first time in Wind Waker, coveting a place and people the game doesn't even show in cutscenes because he's self-evidently talking about OoT

And knowing it's actually supposed to be the same rather than just some reference carries a lot more weight. Obviously not the same roller-coaster ride of emotions that you encounter when revisiting your old home or school or running into your old teacher (rather than just a person reminding you of them), but it's that principle. Not sure why you need something so obvious explained

[Anonymous No.10527804]

>>10522926
I like it up until WW comes out and replaces where LTTP is meant to be

>>10523628
The Fallen Hero timeline exists because of WW, that’s the entire issue. The series has been suffering under Aonuma’s direction ever since he took over as the lead for it

[Anonymous No.10527810]

>>10527804
>first gets WW's timeline wrong
>now blames WW for a timeline it isn't even in anyway
>samefagging for some reason
Is it the wholesomeness that makes Wind Waker trigger degenerate reprobrates so much these days? The Biblical reference? This can't be healthy

[Anonymous No.10527812]

>>10527749
i can take something like darksiders and explain how the timeline of events actually matters to the context of each game.
you cant do that with zelda games.

even with majora's mask being a direct and immediate sequel to oot, using the same incarnation of link, literally nothing in oot matters to it. even if ww take place after oot, its not even the same link. even ganondorf being the same doesnt matter, because he got completely rewritten from "le evil bad guy" to "im just bitter and envious", which either doesnt make sense because he was just a destructive dickbag, or irrelevant because he was just a destructive dickbag.

every time they reuse the "same" characters and basically retell the same story, it doesnt fucking matter. its all just alternate versions of the same thing. same link, same zelda, same ganon; different link, different zelda, different ganon. its all the same core story beats, and none of them really have any bearing on the others. "bad guy showed up and did bad things" is no different from "bad guy that was sealed away broke out and did bad things. so basically sealing him away didnt matter", and "completely new/different bad guy that was sealed away broke out and did bad things".
every "connection" is so meaningless, its nothing more than a tongue in cheek "hey guys, remember this thing that you're also familiar with?"

because everything is so stand-alone and isolated, the "continuity" of zelda is literally less meaningful than the continuity of sonic games.

[Anonymous No.10527815]

>>10525291
>Years before the Ganondorf of OoT, TP, or WW. Probably around the Skyward Swords era.
Except that doesn’t work if you know anything about those games. TotK’s backstory only makes sense within itself and creates large contradictions with the rest of the series, to the point where it makes more sense to believe Hyrule was completely destroyed and later reformed by the Zonai than trying to justify the presence of the Zonai and Rito, lack of Master Sword and Hylia, and complete absence of the Triforce in TotK’s past. You could argue that Zelda games have always had some issues connecting to each other, but TotK legitimately contradicts everything established about the series so far, even the game it’s meant to be a sequel to

[Anonymous No.10527820]

>>10527810
>every reply to me is a samefag
It was my first post in the thread, moron
And yes, WW coming directly after OoT contradicted where LTTP was meant to go, as Ocarina’s story was directly based on LTTP’s backstory, which forced the devs to make a shitty “what if” alternate timeline where LTTP only happens if Link dies. Wind Waker is the root of the third timeline issue

[Anonymous No.10527889]

>>10527812
>you cant do that with zelda games.
I just did in the post you replied to
>even ganondorf being the same doesnt matter, because he got completely rewritten from "le evil bad guy" to "im just bitter and envious"
That's called character development. He's literally centuries older in WW

>>10527815
>even the game it’s meant to be a sequel to
It's obviously a BotW sequel, and BotW obviously takes place long after all the other Zeldas. Nitpicking typical time-travel inconsistencies and such is just desperate Zelda bashing and bears no relation to whether Zelda has a timeline

Even bringing up BotW and acting like it has any bearing on the retro timeline is just naive context denial, though. They obviously wanted to cash in on new players

>>10527820
>It was my first post in the thread, moron
Nah, trying to revalidate an old post is textbook samefagging, doubly so when adding visibility into its context as though you could read the author's mind. This poster >>10523465 is most seemingly talking about where the "Wind Waker universe" is set and wrongly assumes it's the timeline where Link dies. That's not even accounting for the dripping desperation to make all of this about WW or how tiny both /vr/ and the pool of people is who feel offended by Link dying in one of the timelines (because the hero winning and Ganondorf getting the whole Triforce anyway and the world plunging into endless war is somehow better) and blaming WW for it

Keep digging that grave and proving that Zelda shitposting = mental illness

[Anonymous No.10527908]

>>10527889
>That's called character development.
oh yeah, dude, he really developed.
off screen
so much that he's a completely different character
and it doesnt have any impact on ANY other iteration of ganondorf.
and btw he still dies lol.

its really just an isolated telling of the same shit where instead of typical villain "noooooo, this cannot be! GWAAAAWWWWRRRR", he goes down with an "aww, shucks...".
you can say "but look he changed!" and at the same time point to a different game and go "oh look, he didnt change". the "timeline" doesnt really matter. the "timeline" is, and has always been, autistic fanfiction.

[Anonymous No.10527915]

>>10527908
>oh yeah, dude, he really developed.
Glad we agree. Not reading the rest of this poorly formatted autism soup

[Anonymous No.10527919]

>>10527915
i accept your concession and admission that you lack reading comprehension and critical thinking skills.

[Anonymous No.10527923]

>>10522926
Let's count only the following games:
LoZ, AoL, ALttP, LA, OoT, MM.

There are three Links

Publication order:
Link 1: LoZ, AoL
Link 2: ALttP, LA
Link 3: OoT, MM

Chronological order:
OoT, MM, ALttP, LoZ, AoL


There are four Zeldas (publication order)
Zelda 1: LoZ
Zelda 2: AoL
Zelda 3: ALttP
Zelda 4: OoT

Chronological order:
OoT, ALttP, AoL*, LoZ
* AoL Zelda was born before LoZ, but she is a AoL which happens after LoZ.

The Chronology is this:
OoT -> MM -> ALttP -> LA -> LoZ -> AoL

All the other games Aonuma shit and non-canon.

[Anonymous No.10527925]

>>10527923
lmao schizo cope.

[Anonymous No.10527930]

>>10527919
>i accept your concession
You conceded the second you moved the goalposts. From
>explain how it matters that WW is after OoT
to psychoanalyzing Ganondorf

[Anonymous No.10527939]

They clearly did care about the timeline and making actual Hyrule lore up to and including OoT. The turn of the century changed that.

[Anonymous No.10527945]

>>10527930
you took a character from one game, put them in another game, and changed them dramatically for no real reason or significant impact. you have yet to explain how it tying to oot matters in the slightest. you have yet to explain how "bad guy comes back from being sealed away" is not like an isolated thing like it is for other games, but that coming after oot MATTERS. i never "moved goal posts". you simply cant comprehend the question, because you're still scrambling and grasping at straws to fit your conclusion that it does, when the actual answer is that it doesnt.

[Anonymous No.10527950]

>>10527939
they had a couple of games loosely relate to each other, but it never really mattered. moving forward beyond that, it continued to not matter. it was always a cute afterthought, and nothing more. they created a system of repeats/rebirth so that everything can "fit" no matter what, but chronology was never important.

[Anonymous No.10527968]

>>10527945
>you took a character from one game, put them in another game, and changed them dramatically for no real reason or significant impact.
The game literally tells you the reason. And I wouldn't say dramatically. He's older and more sentimental. He obviously had calm moments in the very few scenes he had in OoT and was obviously cunning enough to trick the king. You're acting like there were a million scenes with him where he acted like Zant or Ghirahim in OoT, which just isn't the case. It was a younger, cockier version of WW Ganondorf through and through
>you have yet to explain how it tying to oot matters in the slightest.
You can just repeat this, but I already explained it here >>10527749. And you are still retarded for not getting obvious things

[Anonymous No.10527970]

Why does a timeline matter anyway

[Anonymous No.10527972]

>>10527970
Triggers autists for some reason. You can easily ignore it for the most part

[Anonymous No.10527994]

>>10527968
>You can just repeat this, but I already explained it here
no, you copped out and said "you might as well ask why sequels exist".
direct sequels, with direct continuations of plots and characters, are just that DIRECT CONTINUATIONS. sonic games have more continuity than zelda games. "oh look, you have to do the same thing again, this time some chunk of time in the future" does not matter as a sequel. franchise sequel? sure. continuity? meaningless. every character is different, and every past interaction is irrelevant. oh, ganondorf is actually the same? well what happens there? absolutely nothing? got it. like i said, the timeline is meaningless. while you may be ABLE to place a few things directly before/after each other, it never MATTERS. fire emblem radiant dawn is a sequel to path of radiance, and it MATTERS because it directly continues a story. ww connecting to oot doesnt matter because its so far removed that literally zero aspects of oot matter in it. the same way ganondorf existing in totk as "an ancient evil awakened" and is separate from all others, ganondorf awakening in ww literally does not matter that "its the same one sealed away from oot". it all boils down to "bad guy is unsealed, go stop him". also his "character growth" is laughably irrelevant. 1) because he's just just a dickbag, and 2) has zero bearing on any other iteration of himself. you can contrive a timeline all you autistically want, but it holds zero meaning or bearing over anything. zanzibart shit in souls games at least helps slowly paint together a cohesive world. zelda games are just a bunch of isolated bubbles.

at MOST what you can get from zelda chronology is "oh? neat." because none of it really matters, and nintendo doesnt think so either.

[Anonymous No.10528003]

>>10527889
>Nitpicking typical time-travel inconsistencies and such is just desperate Zelda bashing and bears no relation to whether Zelda has a timeline
It’s not “desperate” bashing when they ultimately contradict important aspects of the story being told and go against what the time travel is trying to convey. The fact that people are even resorting to TotK’s past being a refounding should highlight just how scuffed the presentation and handling of the past was, assuming it was even actually meant to be OG Hyrule’s foundation
>Even bringing up BotW and acting like it has any bearing on the retro timeline is just naive context denial, though
BotW in spite of everything still tried to keep itself connected to the old timeline (albeit mostly OoT and SS), both in-game and the CaC book that further reinforced that BotW’s Ganon traces back all the way to Ocarina. TotK introducing new origins for Dorf, Hyrule and Rauru (along with unnamed sages who are likely OoT stand-ins) recontextualized all of that
>Nah, trying to revalidate an old post is textbook samefagging, doubly so when adding visibility into its context as though you could read the author's mind.
It’s not about adding context to the original anon’s post, my point was that Wind Waker did ultimately lead to the creation of the Downfall timeline through rewriting LTTP’s placement.
>That's not even accounting for the dripping desperation to make all of this about WW
Considering it’s when Aonuma took over and started many issues going forward, it’s easy to pin the blame
>(because the hero winning and Ganondorf getting the whole Triforce anyway and the world plunging into endless war is somehow better)
And WW doesn’t already undermine OoT’s ending with the flood?
>Keep digging that grave and proving that Zelda shitposting = mental illness
The irony of writing this after making a massive assumption that every person commenting on one thing must be the same person or part of some cabal

[Anonymous No.10528013]

>>10527970
It helps keeps the games connected and it’s fun seeing how the events of one title lead into another. It gets kind of stupid when you bring the multiplayer games into things though since they clearly weren’t built around maintaining any kind of connection to other titles

[Anonymous No.10528017]

>>10528013
the events of one title have literally never lead directly into the events of another title. they are always so far removed. (although i suppose i cant say for certain in regards to some of the smaller titles, like the oracle games. never played those).

[Anonymous No.10528024]

>>10528017
Zelda 1 didn’t lead directly into Zelda 2 with Ganon dead, Link aged up and Hyrule recovering now that it had both Triforces back?

[Anonymous No.10528035]

>>10528024
sorry, i only played the games, never dealt with outside stuff. just checked, and i suppose you're right. however, i would contest that story written completely outside of the game ought to be inadmissible for the argument. this seems to be the only time that a sequel ever had directly connecting events. even majora's mask is so separate from oot, despite being "right after it".

[Anonymous No.10528524]

>>10528017
Majora's Mask and Ocarina of Time

[Anonymous No.10528542]

Why do Zelda fans specifically struggle with continuity in a long-running franchise with multiple different creators? You don't see Castlevania, Mega Man, or Breath of Fire fans getting worked up like this.

[Anonymous No.10528826]

>>10527970
In other series like Street Fighter, the chronology of the series can get messy (1 -> Alpha -> 2 -> 4, etc), so having a timeline is helpful. Zelda's a fringe case where if you ignore the Capcom games (or at least the Four Swords trilogy), then each part of the timeline clearly belongs to an era: You have the classic games (NES-SNES), Ocarina of Time + its sequels (N64-Gamecube) and the latest prequel game (Wii).
People get upset about the "Hero Dies" timeline, but that was born more or less out of Wind Waker taking LTTP's spot in the future timeline, but also out of needing to explain how Ganon has the full Triforce in LTTP when he was sealed away with only the Triforce of Power in OoT.

[Anonymous No.10528834]

the zelda games are not that complex are normies to retarded to understand time travel in ocarina of time?

[Anonymous No.10528841]

the zelda games are not that complex are normies too retarded to understand time travel in ocarina of time?

[Anonymous No.10528852]

>>10528035
> i would contest that story written completely outside of the game
https://youtu.be/Ue5KL9IFS5k?t=50
>After Ganon was destroyed, Impa told Link a sleeping spell was cast on Princess Zelda. She will only wake up with the power of NO.3 Triforce in a palace in Hyrule
Anon...

[Anonymous No.10528885]

>>10527889
>This poster >>10523465 is most seemingly talking about where the "Wind Waker universe" is set and wrongly assumes it's the timeline where Link dies.
No anon. I'm the one who made that post. I phrased it poorly. The last line should have said "instead of having to make the awkward 'hero dies' timeline". The point it was making was that if Wind Waker were an alternate universe, there would be no "hero dies" timeline needed at all.

[Anonymous No.10528904]

>>10527889
>This poster >>10523465 is most seemingly talking about where the "Wind Waker universe" is set and wrongly assumes it's the timeline where Link dies.
That was my post. I admit I phrased it poorly. Let me try rephrasing it:
>It would have been much cleaner if [they had decided to make] the Wind Waker universe an alternate universe that has a backstory similar to OoT, instead of [resorting to] the awkward "hero dies" timeline [to explain why there are three sequels to OoT that contradict each other].
What I meant was that they needed to do SOMETHING to explain the third branch and making Wind Waker an alternate universe would have been cleaner than coming up with the convoluted "Link dies" timeline.

[Anonymous No.10528920]

>>10523193
mega man have like 4 timelines metal gear have his own timeline if you dont like this autism maybe you should dont play games

[Anonymous No.10529027]

>>10527012
>mfw reading about the "Link dies" """""timeline"""""
This was when I knew Nintendo begrudgingly released a timeline after being asked enough. This showed they didn't care about it at all and just wanted to make a game.

[Anonymous No.10529176]

>>10528904
Give him some slack, Zelda fans haven't played the games.

[Anonymous No.10529187]

>>10522926
Zelda is honestly a shit and overrated series. It's like a soulless attempt at Western fantasy from people who don't understand it but want to market it to kids anyway.

[Anonymous No.10529292]

>>10529027
I mean, throughout several interviews Aonuma had made reference to some internal document that supposedly outlined how each game fit together. Of course, we don't know if this document, assuming it actually existed and it wasn't Aonuma talking out of his ass, was what ended up in the Hyrule Historia, and that they had the "downfall" timeline thought out already. If you ask me, though, it was contrived less out of the problems presented by TWW (and arguably TP) and more out of convenience to get the classic games out in their own little place where they don't affect anything and nothing affects them.

If you ask me how I would've done it differently without the "what-if" bullshit they resorted to, simply place them after FSA. The latter has an all-new Ganondorf that turns into the pig-like Ganon anyway, and the events of FSA are quite close to ALttP's backstory in many ways, needing only minor changes (instead of seven sages, we have seven maidens, for example). The only big hangup is that Ganon is sealed inside the Four Sword and not the Sacred Realm, and he doesn't appear to have gotten the Triforce (he gains his power through the Magic Trident instead). This, too can be bridged. Just say the resting place of the Four Sword is within the Sacred Realm, and Ganon managed to break out, and since doing so put him inside the SR, the Triforce was there for the taking. Hell, the GBA version of ALttP even has the Palace of the Four Sword inside the Dark World, which was the Sacred Realm, within the Pyramid of Power to boot, which could've lent credence to the idea. So ALttP's backstory would now be retconned to be a reference to FSA rather than OoT, which admittedly is a pretty big retcon, but it's still better than relegating ALttP and everything after it to being "what-if" scenarios.

[Anonymous No.10529305]

>>10529187
i could say the same about other franchises like Resident Evil

[Anonymous No.10529327]

>>10527815
I really don't see how TotK contradicts anything about BotW, and I don't think you do either, unless you deeply misunderstood BotW's story.

[Anonymous No.10529330]

>>10529187
based take. timeline shit is people grasping at straws to find deeper meaning in a series that otherwise has extremely generic, basic, shit writing.

[Anonymous No.10529341]

>>10529027
I think you're the one putting too much thought into it. It more likely just went like this during development:
>"So, the Wind Waker is going to be a sequel to Ocarina of Time where the world gets flooded after Ganon was sealed"
>"Wasn't Link to the Past already a sequel to Ocarina of Time?"
>(joking) "Maybe that's the version of the story that happens when you get killed by the final boss or something"
Then that just ended up as the canon they went with.

[Anonymous No.10529363]

>>10528542
Nintendo fans constantly in-fight and trip over themselves in debates over whether the company or their nostalgia is more important

[Anonymous No.10529376]

>>10529327
The Zonai were magical barbarians in BotW, but TotK makes them a clone of the Sheikah

[Anonymous No.10530183]

I've seen similar arguing over SMT. Which does have a main branching timeline but it gets thrown out of the window by the time Nocturne and Persona 3 come out, SMT IV muddies things up with callbacks and references, and even before that you had games that didn't fit anywhere
I don't think jap developers really care too much

[Anonymous No.10530371]

>>10530183
I think it's more that they only care so long as it isn't too inconvenient. For a lot of these franchises, it's more of an "oh, neat" thing rather than something they adhere to very hard (outside of cases where they intentionally use it for dramatic effect, like Wind Waker or Dragon Quest 3). They're not afraid to contradict themselves if it gets in the way of something else, like how Pokemon XY has a random Mewtwo running around that shouldn't canonically exist.

[Anonymous No.10530397]

>>10528920
I like it but it's usually not done right

[Anonymous No.10530464]

>>10523436
>Unironically one of the dumbest things in the world to get upset about
/thread

[Anonymous No.10530623]

>dude link fell into an alternate universe that's why everyone looks identical to oot
>dude hyrule is fucking dead forever and flooded away, every game set after oot can't happen
I stopped caring about a Zelda timeline the same moment Nintendo did

[Anonymous No.10530687]

1. Just because certain titles have loosely canonical sequels doesn't mean you can create an entire timeline from that, especially when it become evidently clear that these loose connections are made after the fact

2. Vague references, reoccuring elements, Easter Eggs or cameos to other titles also doesn't mean that you can create an entire timeline from that

3. With that said, at one point you could say there was a time when Nintendo tried to care about some timeline somewhat. This was only when Miyamoto and Koizumi were much more heavily involved though. The more their influence waned, the less coherent the Zelda story became, and even back then Miyamoto was tired of trying to be keep it coherent

4. The minute they outsourced the franchise to Capcom and started making spin-offs was when a coherent timeline because completely impossible.

5. You can tell just how much Nintendo regrets the timeline shit. It really only exists to shill Skyward Sword but since SS flopped it didn't even pay off

[Anonymous No.10530704]

>>10530687
>You can tell just how much Nintendo regrets the timeline shit
I can't. Not /vr/ but there was no reason to reuse BotW's world other than to keep a timeline consistent. If they didn't give a shit about the timeline, they could've (and should've) asset flipped BotW into an entirely new map like they did with OoT and MM. Making new terrain and plopping old assets onto it is absurdly easy, the terrain is the extremely easy part. They chose not to do it for lore reasons. And then they proceeded to act as if they don't give a shit about the lore. Well why didn't you make a new map then you dumb fucks. Excuse my non /vr/ outburst

[Anonymous No.10530776]

>>10522926
there's a timeline? what? i kill bad guy and have fun right

[Anonymous No.10530784]

Do people argue over a Mario timeline too

[Anonymous No.10530791]

>>10530776
>>10530784
>whaaaat Zelda has a story???
Is tLoZ1 the only one you've played? Every game since had about as much story as your average JRPG.

[Anonymous No.10530792]

>>10530784
https://seandwalsh.tumblr.com/timeline

[Anonymous No.10530819]

>>10522926
TotK doesn't even have good continuity with BotW. The Zelda "timeline" is a joke.

[Anonymous No.10530820]

>>10522926
Zelda doesn't need a timeline. It would have made infinitely more sense to just say it's an anthology series with some recurring elements and references

[Anonymous No.10530840]

>>10530791
>Is tLoZ1 the only one you've played
unironicaly yeah

[Anonymous No.10530970]

>>10530704
>there was no reason to reuse BotW's world
they made totk because they had more ideas for abilities and functions, puzzles, and things to do in the world with the systems they developed. most of totk is stuff that simply never made it into botw, or at most just an alternate take on the way things could have been (from a game design standpoint, not a plot/storyline/timeline standpoint).
>They chose not to do it for lore reasons. And then they proceeded to act as if they don't give a shit about the lore.
because instead of crafting a whole massive world, its a lot easier to just reuse and slightly modify an existing one, especially because of the above. and yes, they DONT really give a shit about the lore. this is what we've been trying to tell you. they dont care, and the timeline is an irrelevant afterthought. first and foremost, every game is meant to be able to stand alone and allow new players to jump into the series whenever.

[Anonymous No.10530991]

>>10523436
This. There are only potential positives and no negatives. Either you like it or you don't in which case why care.

[Anonymous No.10530996]

>>10530623
>>dude link fell into an alternate universe that's why everyone looks identical to oot
Why is that a problem but
>dude link got lost at sea and woke up on a magic island filled with people and enemies he met on his previous travels
is fine?

[Anonymous No.10531000]

>>10522926
i'm ok with a vague timeline. i'm not ok with THE SPLIT TIMELINE OF THE FALLEN HERO fucking nonsense. especially when you hinge it on LINK LOSE BECOME STALFOS. no miyamoto-san, link not become stalfos. no stalfos in the lost woods in any zelda game. literally not one.

[Anonymous No.10531006]

>>10530784
No because Mario’s is a lot more straightforward
>baby Mario/Yoshi games are the start
>90% of the rest of the timeline is just the games in chronological order
>handful of games take place before others, but generally it doesn’t matter that much (Captain Toad is before 3D World and Odyssey but it doesn’t really matter)

[Anonymous No.10531019]

>>10530970
It's people like you who mentally connect "zelda games have a timeline" with "deep lore" who create all of the annoying debate in the first place. The Zelda timeline is as simple as the developers deciding whether their game is a sequel or prequel to a past one when they're making it. You people always make it sound way more complicated than that.

"Nintendo regrets making the timeline"? What do they regret? Saying "Ocarina of Time is a prequel"? Because that's as complicated as the "timeline" is. The ONLY oddity is Link to the Past and Wind Waker conflicting with each other, which Nintendo just handwaved as both happening under different circumstances.

Goddamn. You make it sound like Nintendo published some kind of complicated lorebook that explains Link killing Bongo Bongo caused the Wallmasters to build the Zelda 2 cities.

[Anonymous No.10531039]

>>10531019
>Link killing Bongo Bongo caused the Wallmasters to build the Zelda 2 cities.
kino. the reason why the stalfos in link to the past can remove their heads and attack with them is because they're actually the ikana royal army that got displaced when the timelines split.

[Anonymous No.10531041]

>>10531000
> especially when you hinge it on LINK LOSE BECOME STALFOS
I think you're conflating the Hero Dies timeline (which is implied to happen during the fight with Ganon) with the Hero's Shade (I can't remember if the theory that he was OoT Link was prominent before, but that's what Historia runs with).
>>10530784
Not argue, but there are people out there who put too much thought into it, despite the entire point of Miyamoto's "actors" comment being to say that Mario continuity is flexible.

[Anonymous No.10531137]

>>10531041
It was implied in TP, but TP is a bit weird in this respect because it doesn't really outright spell out any of its connections to OoT out to you, unlike, say, TWW, which was overtly explicit at just about every turn. So when it talks about some past legendary hero that saved Hyrule, it just leaves it at that, so for all you know it could be OoT Link, or some other Link, or who knows, because it never tells you exactly what this hero actually did. Shit, even Ganondorf, who is the only OoT character who is specifically name-dropped, isn't even stated to be the same character, and you'd be forgiven for thinking he was just another incarnation of him if you were not aware of Aonuma's interview where he states exactly how OoT leads into TP. This is part of what I mean when I say TP is infuriatingly vague about its connection to OoT.

[Anonymous No.10531184]

>>10531019
>It's people like you
>You people always make it sound way more complicated than that.
you, sir, have no idea who are are talking to. i've been saying this entire time that the timeline is meaningless. theres nothing wrong with "having a timeline", but autistic obsession that every game NEEDS to be put on a timeline, and things NEED to connect and be explained through it is the retarded problem.
>"Nintendo regrets making the timeline"? What do they regret?
nigger read it yourself. they dont like trying to operate within restrictions, and much prefer to just create isolated bubbles that contain familiar entities. they dont like being held to the expectations of fans. they dont like fans imposing implications and expectations on them. fucking read >>10530687

[Anonymous No.10531187]

>>10531137
>infuriatingly vague
its only infuriating if you're trying to force connections and scrounge for every minute detail to conclusion shop. if you take it for what it ACTUALLY is (an isolated game), all of that frustration disappears.

[Anonymous No.10531452]

>>10531137
Don’t forget Skull Kid potentially being the same one from OoT and MM due to him playing Saria’s Song and being linked to Lost Woods/OoT Link/the Temple of Time, or how the game saves the Sage of Light for a big dramatic reveal as if it’s meant to be Rauru. TP’s presentation as a whole is just really odd.

>>10531187
NTA but it wasn’t designed to be isolated to begin with, the connections aren’t as overt but you’ve still got OoT Link showing up (with many, many tells that indicate it’s him) and Ganondorf continuing off of what happened to him at the end of Ocarina, hell everything regarding the Triforce in TP is due to the state of it at the end of OoT. Really the only contentious issue is Hyrule’s layout compared to the other games, but it’s not like that’s exclusive to TP. Only Zelda 1, ALTTP and OoT really have any kind of consistency in regard to their Hyrule depictions

[Anonymous No.10531598]

>>10531452
>it wasn’t designed to be isolated to begin with
you are laughably oblivious to nintendo's intent/approach of game design. having some story connections doesnt really mean anything. they are DELIBERATELY vague, BECAUSE they dont really care so much. the connections are there for people to smile and muse about if they played the other games and if they care, but they are vague and removed enough that any game can be played completely on its own without relying on another to exist or a player to have played others. every game has a gimmick that sets it apart from others, so that every game gets to be its own isolated experience. the timeline is nothing more than some irrelevant and trivial technicality that LITERALLY. DOES. NOT. MATTER. there is no real depth of lore, because its just the same set pieces going through the same motions over and over. just like mario. just like sonic. just like megaman. etc etc etc.

[Anonymous No.10532031]

>>10531598
What you’re describing is just how many games are designed so as to not alienate any potential newcomers who didnt play the previous games and bought the sequels because of the higher budget attributed to them. You could technically play Sonic Adventure 2 before 1 and still follow the plot just fine without needing much context from 1 at all but that doesn’t mean both games exist independently.

[Anonymous No.10532483]

>>10532031
again, that doesnt justify timeline autism. whether order technically exists, or whether you can prove an order of events, it literally does not matter. there isnt really a deep lore, because the lore isnt that deep.

people like to clown on zanzibart shit, but in a game like bloodborne, each item description, dialogue line, and set piece is like an individual jigsaw puzzle piece that you can put together to craft a more detailed image of a complicated world. sure you can ignore all of that and just kill ghoulies, but that lore depth is at least actually THERE. zelda games will have entire races, civilizations, and dimensions, and then never have any of them matter or mentioned ever again. the notion that the lore is deep is so falsely pretentious, and even dumber once you consider that nintendo themselves admit to not giving a shit.

[Anonymous No.10532705]

>>10532483
> there isnt really a deep lore, because the lore isnt that deep.
NTA, but a timeline is not deep lore.
You're right in that the series isn't that deep. The timeline is more or less a matter of looking at the situation at the beginning or the end of a given game and that's usually enough to tell you where that game goes. Ganon is dead and the the Triforce is in Hyrule Castle, so the Oracle games probably go after LTTP. Ganondorf is being executed at the beginning of TP and he gets the Triforce of Power, so OoT probably has something to do with that, and considering Wind Waker makes it pretty clear it takes place in the adult timeline and Ganondorf seems to permanently be Ganon in the classic timeline, it likely takes place in the child timeline. Usually there's enough hints that you can make a reasonable assumption if you look at the big picture. Not always, but usually.
But just because it's not deep doesn't mean that the merits of a timeline disappear, especially with Nintendo still bothering to put some consideration in, even if they're also willing to not let it get in the way of them wanting to do something. Ganondorf is way more interesting when you realize he's the same person across almost every appearance than he would be if all of them were strictly isolated. It's just neat bonus for the fans who've played the other games without gatekeeping the series.

[Anonymous No.10532739]

>>10523193
this. its obvious they just made they games without giving it any thought

[Anonymous No.10532743]

>>10532705
right. my point is that sperging about the timeline or whether some game detail is contradictory or whatever is fucking pointless. also arguing over specific placements is also pointless, because that placement doesnt really AFFECT, or have meaningful implications towards, other games.

[Anonymous No.10532851]

>>10532031
Adventure 2 coming after 1 is reasonable. It's how a game usually operates. They have the same name, a number, same protagonist, the dialogue might make a nod or two and you safely assume it's the next game, that's how it typically (read: ideally) goes anyway. Sonic, Megaman, do this. Zelda 2 does the same and follow 1. You can believably say they follow the next up to this point.
Now imagine if it was revealed that this Sonic is Eggman in a suit because we are in the timeline where Eggman turned superhero Sonicman. Meanwhile the one acting as Eggman is a lookalike who happens to look exactly like him with the same IQ. The prior game, Sonic 1, actually happens after 2 when the original Sonic gets offended at Eggman using his suit. Every game from then on might or might not be a different larper as Sonic. Knuckles is an immortal bean who never ages though. That's the Zelda timeline.
I point out this is stupid and not 'k, someone goes "hah! these are minor details! what's one minor inconsistency or two amirite?"
No. It's stupid. I don't buy into it because it's bonkers.

[Anonymous No.10532859]

>>10532483
Nobody is saying Zelda has the deepest lore of all games, just that having an order for what game happens when is more interesting than just having them be standalone, and many of the games themselves have connections that support some type of ordering. Obviously Nintendo cares a lot less than the fans but that’s because they don’t want to commit to something if it ends up that they want to change in the future, but that’s on them

>>10532743
People complain about contradictions because of how long Nintendo allowed the timeline to go on and manifest, not to mention encouraging it with an official book. They want the sales and interest it generates without being willing to fully commit to it. Take the newest game for instance, fans essentially gaslit themselves for six years that Nintendo gave a shit about storytelling and were thoroughly disappointed when TotK was basically a repeat of BotW but with the Zonai replacing the Sheikah and brand new origins for Ganondorf and Hyrule. Nintendo was incredibly stingy with story details prior to release because that kind of intrigue encourages speculation and discussion. They got their money but the fans have been burned as a result, though I doubt they’ll recognize the signs for next time and just let it all happen again since they seem to love building up hype then pulling the rug out from Zelda fans with the full game

[Anonymous No.10532868]

>>10532851
>Now imagine if it was revealed that this Sonic is Eggman in a suit because we are in the timeline where Eggman turned superhero Sonicman. Meanwhile the one acting as Eggman is a lookalike who happens to look exactly like him with the same IQ. The prior game, Sonic 1, actually happens after 2 when the original Sonic gets offended at Eggman using his suit. Every game from then on might or might not be a different larper as Sonic. Knuckles is an immortal bean who never ages though. That's the Zelda timeline.
What you’re describing sounds more like Kingdom Hearts than Zelda, LoZ is nowhere near that messy or complex

[Anonymous No.10532908]

>>10532868
...and yet you got a bunch different people cosplaying as Zelda/Link! Hah, gotcha.

[Anonymous No.10532914]

>>10532908
What makes it cosplay?

[Anonymous No.10532935]

>>10532851
I know you say it's how a game 'usually' operates, but Castlevania did the exact same thing as Zelda (game, direct sequel, prequel) and then one upped it by having the fourth game be a retelling of the first game.
A better analogy for the Zelda timeline is if Sega made three different games spinning out of SA2 or Shadow the Hedgehog where Shadow was either dead, alive or a robot and then rebooted (and then rebooted Shadow and had him die in a completely different way)

[Anonymous No.10532969]

>>10532935
You mean like whatever the fuck is going on with Blaze the Cat?

[Anonymous No.10532995]

>>10532969
> Blaze the Cat
Eggman Nega.
Sega has seemingly settled on his Rivals backstory (Eggman's descendant who hates him) being canon, though his Sonic Channel comic still treats him as Blaze's nemesis. It helps that he's never going to be relevant outside of the Olympic games series ever again and from what I've seen, few people care about him anyway.

[Anonymous No.10533025]

>>10523229
>I don’t care. This board has never addressed this timeline issue
Yea because this board used to not be retarded.

[Anonymous No.10533035]

>>10524597
i haven't been here for at least 5 years and back then people were talking about the fucking timeline, every month for years. This place is a dementia circlejerk about the same twenty topics

[Anonymous No.10533081]

>>10527889
Character development is only when you see the development happen.

[Anonymous No.10533092]

>>10529305
And you would be right,but at least RElore fags arent as deeply autistic as zeldatimeline fags.

[Anonymous No.10533094]

>>10529341
That was my exact thought process!

[Anonymous No.10533132]

>>10530791
>Every game since had about as much story as your average JRPG
Nes jrpg maybe,or are you seriously gonna say that the stories in zelda game is as developed as games like FF7/8 or even snes jrpg.
My god zelda autist are delusional.

[Anonymous No.10533181]

[Anonymous No.10533189]

>>10522926
Is this thread botted? Who the fuck gives a shit

[Anonymous No.10533192]

>>10533181
More like the day you realized the timeline is a fun little thing you can appreciate but shouldn't take too seriously

[Anonymous No.10533231]

>>10533192
More like the day Nintendo made it transparent the timeline only existed to fleece autists out of their money. "N-no the shitty game is actually part of the timeline, you should buy it"

[Anonymous No.10533447]

>>10533192
Don't tell the autists that

[Anonymous No.10533570]

>>10533181
nu nintendo is non canon the zelda timeline ends in twilight princess

[Anonymous No.10533789]

>>10532859
>is more interesting than just having them be standalone
autism, because it literally does not matter. there is no weight, impact, or REAL continuity, because everything is just repeats and gimmicks.
>the fans have been burned as a result
most actual fans just take the game for what they are and enjoy them, without concerning themselves with timeline bullshit, because its an irrelevant waste of time. snubbing the autists by not catering to timeline shit will have zero effect in sales, interest, discussion, or the actual fanbase. while i agree that completely WIPING the sheikah from totk was fucking stupid, since it was trying to be a direct continuity of same characters/world, it was still a fun game and the franchise is no worse off for it.
>pulling the rug out from Zelda fans
oot zealots are not zelda fans, and its absurd they keep expecting them to just make oot again, when EVERY game has had some sort of defining gimmick. also timeline autists arent worth catering to. there is no rug to pull. the ONLY time i can think of a rug-pull was the gamecube tech demo for graphics, and then the release of wind waker instead.

[Anonymous No.10533795]

>>10533570
>it stops fitting MY needs and MY narrative, so its NOT REAL
literally kill yourself.

[Anonymous No.10533845]

>>10533789
>it literally does not matter. there is no weight, impact, or REAL continuity
Define each of these because there’s plenty of titles that lead into each other and continue off of what previous titles set up
>most actual fans just take the game for what they are and enjoy them, without concerning themselves with timeline bullshit
Not at all, the biggest criticisms towards TotK have all been story and continuity related
>oot zealots are not zelda fans, and its absurd they keep expecting them to just make oot again
I’m not talking about OoT, moron, I’m referring to how each game in the Wild era has relied on misleading trailers in order to sell. Age of Calamity was particularly bad in that regard and only sold the numbers that it did because people assumed it would be an actual prequel story and not a what-if alternate universe with no bearing on the main game.
>also timeline autists arent worth catering to. there is no rug to pull
The timeline is the only thing that gives Zelda any kind of substance and clearly doesn’t take that much effort if they can get away with it by only including the bare minimum of connectivity.

[Anonymous No.10533904]

>>10533845
>Define each of these
none of the solved problems for peoples matter. no vanquished villains matter. no saved people matter. even when characters share names and/or roles, they are brand new incarnations and nothing of the past affects who they are. every time you win against ganon, it doesnt matter, because either "he was sealed away, but now he broke out again", or "he died. but now heres a new incarnation of him (the same way you're a new link)". entire dimensions and races get mentioned once, and never again. hell, even windwaker itself is a laughable DUMP on everything because regardless of ganon being sealed, the world still gets FUCKED. literally none of the events of oot matter to ww because the world is fucking WASHED.

and this is also completely disregarding any contradictions/retcons.
>Not at all, the biggest criticisms towards TotK have all been story and continuity related
yes, it can rightfully be criticized for it, but people still bought the fuck out of it and enjoy it and rate it highly. its not enough to really dock points. its not that critical.
>each game in the Wild era has relied on misleading trailers in order to sell
lmao wtf are you even talking about? in what way were people mislead exactly?
>Age of Calamity
>a what-if alternate universe with no bearing on the main game.
you're so close to having a massive realization about the timeline as a whole.
>The timeline is the only thing that gives Zelda any kind of substance
WRONG. each game can easily be taken as a standalone rehash of the same characters/set-pieces and still be fully enjoyed. just like mario, just like sonic, just like megaman, etc etc etc. hell, even just like final fantasy, which explicitly do NOT have anything to do with each other. you're literally kidding yourself if you think it makes zelda special in any way, ESPECIALLY with how minimal and irrelevant it is.

[Anonymous No.10533927]

>>10533845
>>10533904
comment too long, but i also wanted to add this:
you can have a story in ancient babylon, and then a story in america and say "this one takes place after the first one" and it literally does not fucking matter. nothing that happened in the first story affects anything in the second story. the first civilization isnt even around anymore in the second story. even if some scholar mentions some long ago legend as a reference and "proof of continuity", it literally does not matter or affect anything. the first story is so far fucking removed.

hell, you can take something like majoras mask taking place right after oot and using the same link. it doesnt matter, because our character stays exactly the fucking same. theres no "character growth" or anything. its just another set of tasks/chores/puzzles/enemies, just like every other game. theres no real meaning to it being "a sequel". just like how we can have our silent protagonist go from ancient babylon to ancient china and do a bunch of unrelated shit, it doesnt really matter. literally, AT MOST, "oh is that the order? huh, neat." because there is no depth or meaning to it.

meanwhile, you take something like darksiders, and the sequels illustrate why nobody helped war, and how meaningful breaking the seal at the end of 1 really was. THATS a story where timeline matters and things affect each other. zelda is not.

[Anonymous No.10534023]

>>10530792
this is the wildest thing I've ever seen

[Anonymous No.10534072]

>>10522926
All the console games prior to BotW along with LA, PH, and ST all fit effortlessly (if you accept the three-way split) into a logical timeline. The Capcom games kinda do their own thing, and FSA is Nintendo's take on the Capcom lore and fails at both, ending up as some continuity abomination but it doesn't really matter since no one can or ever could play it do to the absurd setup it required and the lack of re-releases. BotW is a hard reboot.

[Anonymous No.10534080]

>>10523915
>When I'm playing any specific movie, the last thing I want to know is that it takes place in an elaborate timeline. Such a timeline involving a movie from another director I've perhaps not seen yet.
If you can wrap you mind around Return of the Jedi coming after The Empire Strikes back, surely Majora's Mask coming after Ocarina of Time is not unreasonable.

[Anonymous No.10534084]

>>10534072
Wot, FSA is perfectly playable single-player with the GameCube controller. It's the original Four Swords game that most people didn't play because it was strictly multiplayer, requiring at least two GBAs, two copies of the game, and a link cable.

[Anonymous No.10534103]

>>10530784
Yeah, I was in a Discord server with a bunch of wokeys once who debated it and Mario "lore" in general with the utmost sincerity.

[Anonymous No.10534109]

>>10530792
I used to know that guy. Bridge burned, unfortunately. Too woke.

[Anonymous No.10534113]

>>10534084
FS was re-released for free on 3DS tho. FSA has never been ported.

[Anonymous No.10534135]

>>10533904
>none of the solved problems for peoples matter
You can make this argument towards quite literally any long running franchise with a number of sequels. Another antagonist or threat will always pop up to keep the series going and the stories being told. It doesn’t undermine the stories that were told unless you want everything ever to be standalone
>it can rightfully be criticized for it, but people still bought the fuck out of it and enjoy it and rate it highly.
People bought it based on goodwill and hype, but the honeymoon period died fast. “It sold well” is not an infallible defense for everything
>wtf are you even talking about? in what way were people mislead exactly?
Every trailer for the Wild era games relies on misdirection, painting them as story-heavy games with actual narratives. Go back and look at the comments for those trailers and see how people talk about how they feel misdirected
>you're so close to having a massive realization about the timeline as a whole.
This is separate from the main timeline talk, it’s a game that was advertised as the prequel to a mainline story before being revealed to be an alternate time travel story. That’s not the same thing as a legitimate prequel in a series
>each game can easily be taken as a standalone rehash of the same characters/set-pieces and still be fully enjoyed. just like mario, just like sonic, just like megaman
Most games let you do that, but that does not mean they are better off for it or that the stories in them suddenly cease to matter. Mario is maybe the one exception since it’s like worrying about a timeline for Mickey Mouse, but even then it still has the bare minimum sense of “continuity”

[Anonymous No.10534142]

>>10533927
>>you can have a story in ancient babylon, and then a story in america and say "this one takes place after the first one" and it literally does not fucking matter.
Yes it would, moron, using real world history is a horrible example since the events of ancient Babylon have to happen first regardless of what events transpire, and if there’s zero connecting threads between both then why would they even be considered in the same series? This is such a shit hypothetical to try and make your point seem like it holds water that I’m stunned you even posted it.

[Anonymous No.10534163]

>>10534135
>You can make this argument towards quite literally any long running franchise
no, you cant. in anything where sequels have any sort of actual continuity, things MATTER. when characters are dealing with the consequences of actions in the previous story, or unresolved things, or exhibiting growth and lessons of the previous events, continuity matters. zelda games do not have that sort of continuity. its just "oh look, its ganon again". every victory means nothing because every cycle is so far removed that its just starting from scratch again.
>People bought it based on goodwill and hype
headcanon and cope
>story-heavy games with actual narratives.
they have just as much or more story/narrative as other zelda games. i dont understand where the confusion is coming from.
>advertised as the prequel to a mainline story before being revealed to be an alternate time travel story. That’s not the same thing as a legitimate prequel in a series
how exactly is that different from the rest of your timeline autism with branching timelines and shit? why is that suddenly inexcusable? you can accept "oh, through in game stuff, we can seemingly deduce that this takes place after that, under these circumstances", but you lose your shit over the petty difference between being advertised as "a/the prequel" and "an alternative prequel"? lmao absolute clownshoes. this is why anybody with brains doesnt take you autists seriously.
>or that the stories in them suddenly cease to matter
they quite literally do, because they objectively lack any meaningful continuity.

[Anonymous No.10534168]

>>10534142
>yes it would
and yet you refuse to elaborate how
>if there’s zero connecting threads between both then why would they even be considered in the same series?
and then you stumble into the realization that literally wouldnt matter, but fail to understand how you contradict yourself from your first statement.

zelda games reusing the "same" characters and set pieces gives the illusion of continuity the same way jumping from ancient babylon to modern america both share taking place on earth but are completely unrelated. you can flimsily say "its cycles of reincarnation" and such, but all that does is explain why you're reusing assets. theres no REAL continuity. why is that so hard to understand? why are you so fucking MAD about being so completely btfo by such a simple point and illustration of it? stop being tricked by the reused assets and the concept of vague cycles.

[Anonymous No.10534173]

>>10534163
>no, you cant.
Yes, you can. The vast majority of game sequels are designed so that they can still catch new players up to speed on the events that happened and led to the sequel in the first place. You can play Witcher 3 without needing to play the first two and be completely fine without context from the first two, in spite of that series being far more narrative driven. It’s a non-argument.
>>People bought it based on goodwill and hype
>headcanon and cope
Go back to /v/ with this dogshit rhetoric. 90% of the game’s sales were during its first week, it has been months and the numbers have barely budged. It has no legs because people realized whole much of a copycat it was after launch.
>how exactly is that different from the rest of your timeline autism with branching timelines and shit?
You clearly didn’t play it but the game literally starts off with the original backstory from BotW playing out unaltered followed by a magic R2D2 egg robot creating a portal to the part that rewrites history and changes the past so that the prequel now ends with a happy ending and not the doomed century it originally came from. It’s not the same thing as an actual prequel
>they quite literally do, because they objectively lack any meaningful continuity.
Events from one game carry over to the next and shape the course of how things play out, how is that not meaningful continuity?

[Anonymous No.10534178]

>>10534168
>Zelda games are comparable to two stories set in Babylon and modern America, there’s nothing connecting them and there’s too much disconnect
>Zelda games are too similar, they repeat characters, locations and themes too often and they’re virtually indistinguishable
Pick one, retard.
>reused assets
You’re not using that term correctly, locations and characters sharing names and similar items appearing within the same series is not “reused assets”. The entire DKC trilogy reusing the same sprites and models between games is reused assets.

[Anonymous No.10534192]

>>10534173
>catch new players up to speed on the events that happened
1) relies on continuity actually existing
2) you said that you can apply "solving people's problems (ie: general events) doesnt matter" to anything, and now you're talking about how it they take time to explain how it matters. pick a fucking lane, dipshit.
>numbers have barely budged. It has no legs
tell me more about all of the returns and buyer's remorse
>much of a copycat it was after launch.
this was the actual biggest limiting factor. "why buy the same game twice?" and "why pay full price for a dlc?" you're actually delusional to think it has anything to do with "story" or "misdirection", especially when it never pretended to not reuse the map. it still pulled numbers and rates very highly. you're just seething and coping.
>It’s not the same thing as an actual prequel
i fully understand that. you didnt answer the question. how is that different from the rest of the timeline autism? why can you accept a "hypothetical/alternate sequel" but you cant accept a hypothetical/alternate prequel? literally every game ends with triumph, sunshine, and rainbows. why can you accept "but that DIDNT actually happen in the thing you already played", but you cant accept "but that didnt actually happen in the thing you JUST played"?
>Events from one game carry over
not really. "ganon was sealed before. now he's breaking out again" is hardly a meaningful carry over, especially with how its basically the conflict of (almost) EVERY game.
>how is that not meaningful continuity?
because "the cycle repeats itself. each time from absolute scratch with a new incarnation of familiar named/looking characters" is literally the opposite of meaningful continuity.

[Anonymous No.10534197]

>>10534178
try actually addressing things, and not missing the forest for the trees, and maybe i'll actually respond to you. otherwise, you're either too retarded to be worth conversing with, or willfully disingenuous and trolling by getting hung up on misinterpreting terms while ignoring actual points.

[Anonymous No.10534216]

I've been an LoZ fan for 31 of my 38 years and I've thoroughly played most of the games. I've never given a thought to the "timeline" and can't imagine why other people would.

[Anonymous No.10534218]

>>10533927
>literally, AT MOST, "oh is that the order? huh, neat."
So, a timeline?

[Anonymous No.10534220]

>>10534218
and thats worth sperging out over?

[Anonymous No.10534227]

>>10534192
>1) relies on continuity actually existing
It does
>2) you said that you can apply "solving people's problems (ie: general events) doesnt matter" to anything, and now you're talking about how it they take time to explain how it matters
They don’t “take time to explain” in that they don’t sit the player down and give an entire recap of the previous titles, it’s kept to maybe a few sentences at most. If you hadn’t touched any of the others and it was your first introduction you wouldn’t bat an eye
You don’t need to play Witcher 1 and 2 to get into 3, but it helps
You don’t need to play Fallout 1 and 2 to get into New Vegas, but it helps
You don’t need to play OoT and MM to get into TP, but it helps
>you're actually delusional to think it has anything to do with "story" or "misdirection", especially when it never pretended to not reuse the map.
Go look up any videos that criticize the game and what it delivered and you’ll find all three mentioned
>it still pulled numbers and rates very highly.
For reasons already specified. If it had more merits beyond relying on early hype, its sales would have actual legs by now
>why can you accept a "hypothetical/alternate sequel" but you cant accept a hypothetical/alternate prequel?
Because the "hypothetical/alternate sequel" timeline is literally witnessed and explored in a game prior to the games that continue off of the respective timelines. Did you even play Ocarina?
>not really
Yes really. The NES games connect to each other, ALTTP was designed as a prequel, OoT was designed as a prequel to a prequel, WW and TP continue off of the two splits you literally create in OoT, WW has its own sequels that continue based on events from that game, etc etc
At this point I’m convinced you don’t actually play Zelda games or at best only played one and think you understand everything based on that

[Anonymous No.10534230]

>>10534197
What actual points? You’ve made a completely incompatible comparison and contradicted yourself in the same post.

[Anonymous No.10534281]

>>10534227
>You don’t need to play OoT and MM to get into TP, but it helps
it literally doesnt because its brand new shit. its a new bubble. a new cycle.
maybe it will help if i put it to you this way: its not so much that you need to play things in order, or the latter games dont make sense. a bigger thing is that if you are familiar with the former entries, you recognize actual impact, meaning, and progression. also, another big part about "meaningful continuity" that you CANT place sequels before prequels. you cant place a sequel where a character is an adult before a game where the same character is a child. but for zelda, you can place pretty much anything anywhere, because nothing matters. ganon is defeated/sealed at the end of every game, and he's back at it again at the start of every game. even if you can technically order and number the bubbles due to some trite detail, that order does not MATTER the same way a story with actual continuity matters. you dont need to watch empire strikes back to enjoy return of the jedi, but it helps. but you DO need have empire strikes back HAPPEN in order for return of the jedi to even happen. the sequel is RELIANT on the prequel. there is no RELIANT CONTINUITY in zelda games. its all just isolated bubbles of the same shit.
>sequel is already explored in a game prior
you're actually retarded.
>the games were designed to be connected
extremely loosely. which has been my point the entire time: the timeline isnt important, the chronology of events does not affect subsequent games/stories, there is no real depth of lore and nothing deep enough for the timeline to be worth sperging out over. the trace amount of continuity dont really matter because its all summed up as just repeating cycles. dont fall for the illusion of meaningful continuity just because it reuses the same story assets.

[Anonymous No.10534305]

>>10534230
reading comprehension is hard, huh

[Anonymous No.10534316]

>>10534281
>it literally doesnt because its brand new shit. its a new bubble. a new cycle.
It’s the same Ganondorf returning to the same land he previously tried to conquer with a different Link and Zelda being aided by the same Link from the previous game(s), carrying over a key moment from the previous game being the splitting of the Triforce. It’s not entirely disconnected by any means
>but for zelda, you can place pretty much anything anywhere, because nothing matters. ganon is defeated/sealed at the end of every game,
No, you cant. ALTTP, TP and WW all come after Ocarina and cannot be placed ahead of it due to what occurs in those respective games.
>you dont need to watch empire strikes back to enjoy return of the jedi, but it helps. but you DO need have empire strikes back HAPPEN in order for return of the jedi to even happen.
It’s literally the same shit here.
>its all just isolated bubbles of the same shit.
It’s not, you are being willfully ignorant. How many of these games have you even played?
>>sequel is already explored in a game prior
>you're actually retarded.
It’s not that the sequel is explored, it’s that the events that cause the sequel (i.e. two different time splits with their own continuity) are seen and explored beforehand, not made up in the introduction of the game after months of marketing insisting that the game will be an actual prequel.
>the timeline isnt important, the chronology of events does not affect subsequent games/stories
They do, though. Spirit Tracks doesn’t happen without the events of WW, which doesn’t happen without the adult timeline events of Ocarina. All of this shit is super straightforward
>there is no real depth of lore
Nobody is acting like the timeline is deep
>and nothing deep enough for the timeline to be worth sperging out over
The only people who sperg out about it are the ones vehemently trying to deny connections that are readily apparent if you play even a handful of games in the series

[Anonymous No.10534327]

>>10534305
It’s not a fault of reading comprehension when the other person says two contradictory things in their post and expects to be taken seriously. Your stance is
>Zelda stories are too disconnected and lack any continuity between them, they’re all isolated
and
>Zelda reuses too many characters, places, items, themes, etc. for connections to matter
Both of those are conflicting takes, and only go into surface level criticism rather than actually bringing up comparisons between titles like I’ve been doing this whole time. You just keep dismissing them because you don’t actually know what connections are made and have a very narrow view of the series with refusal to accept any other viewpoint

[Anonymous No.10534346]

>>10534327
>Zelda reuses too many characters, places, items, themes, etc. for connections to matter
literally never said anything of the sort. and super DEFINITELY not in the specific post in question. try again, retard.

[Anonymous No.10534372]

>>10534316
>ALTTP, TP and WW all come after Ocarina and cannot be placed ahead of it due to what occurs in those respective games.
they are so far removed from each other that it literally would not matter if one came before the other.
saying "lttp takes place after oot" carries the same weight as saying "lttp takes place before oot". my response would literally be "oh, does it?" because having played both, nothing really matters between them in either direction. in either order, the events are "gotta stop ganon. ganon is stopped. gotta stop ganon again".
>WW, which doesn’t happen without the adult timeline events of Ocarina. All of this shit is super straightforward
sadly, i cant comment on spirit tracks. but saying ww doesnt happen without oot is like saying the fall of rome doesnt happen without the pyramids being built. yes they are subsequent events, but they are so far removed from each other that it doesnt matter.

>Nobody is acting like the timeline is deep
you are WILLFULLY ignorant and retarded.
>the ones vehemently trying to deny connections
nobody is saying there arent connections. all im saying is that the connections are exceedingly trivial and inconsequential, and even nintendo doesnt take them that seriously. so much so that each game can basically be considered an isolated occurrence in a cycle. thats why its stupid to sperg out about specific placements in the timeline and grasping at straws for anything that seems like a connection.

[Anonymous No.10534387]

>>10534346
>literally never said anything of the sort. and super DEFINITELY not in the specific post in question. try again, retard.
>>10534168
>you can flimsily say "its cycles of reincarnation" and such, but all that does is explain why you're reusing assets. theres no REAL continuity.
You’re complaining about subsequent games in a series having recurring elements and then saying those recurring elements are the reason why the continuity shouldn’t be taken seriously. You have no idea what you’re talking about

[Anonymous No.10534396]

>>10534372
>they are so far removed from each other that it literally would not matter if one came before the other
All three of those games follow off of Ocarina in deliberate ways
>saying "lttp takes place after oot" carries the same weight as saying "lttp takes place before oot"
It does not. Ocarina builds on the backstory of Ganondorf introduced in ALTTP and Ganon is only sealed in OoT while he is killed in ALTTP, which directly leads into the Oracles games where Twinrova attempts to revive him. Again, this is not anything new.
>but saying ww doesnt happen without oot is like saying the fall of rome doesnt happen without the pyramids being built. yes they are subsequent events, but they are so far removed from each other that it doesnt matter.
Hyrule is flooded in WW because of the results of OoT and the game constantly reminds you of Ocarina throughout its runtime. The distance between them does not negate their correlation
>>Nobody is acting like the timeline is deep
>you are WILLFULLY ignorant and retarded.
I can tell that comment got to you but no, nobody thinks the timeline (or any Zelda lore) is that deep. The existence of a timeline does not mean people are trying to insinuate Zelda has the deepest lore either, that badge goes to Mario
>all im saying is that the connections are exceedingly trivial and inconsequential, and even nintendo doesnt take them that seriously. so much so that each game can basically be considered an isolated occurrence in a cycle
But that’s wrong for all the reasons already listed. There is no Zelda game that truly exists in isolation without connections to another and the fact that you can play a game without needing to know about the full extent of those connections does not suddenly erase them or remove the events that led to that game away from the canon.

[Anonymous No.10534403]

>>10534281
>ganon is defeated/sealed at the end of every game, and he's back at it again at the start of every game
That's probably the one major exception to the point you're trying to make. Ocarina of Time is the game that established Ganondorf as a character (although he was mentioned in LttP). I know that when I played Super Smash Bros Melee for the first time, I was confused as fuck about why Ganon was a humanoid instead of a pig, since I didn't have OoT growing up. I'm sure I'd have had the same reaction if Wind Waker was my first exposure to him, especially since Ganon's only really referenced as whatever the fuck Puppet Ganon was supposed to be.

[Anonymous No.10534404]

>>10522926
i think it's all a bunch of hogwash to appeal to fans who kept asking for a timeline.

[Anonymous No.10534408]

>>10534387
>You’re complaining about subsequent games in a series having recurring elements
im not "complaining" about anything at all there. thank you for illustrating how terrible you are at reading comprehension.
>then saying those recurring elements are the reason why the continuity shouldn’t be taken seriously
not saying that either. thank you for illustrating how terrible you are at reading comprehension.
what i DID say was: dont confuse recurring elements for actual, meaningful continuity.

[Anonymous No.10534412]

>>10534408
>im not "complaining" about anything at all there.
Commenting on the lack of “REAL” continuity isn’t complaining? You seem pretty adamant about it
>what i DID say was: dont confuse recurring elements for actual, meaningful continuity
Your definition of what constitutes as “meaningful” is completely arbitrary considering multiple examples of concrete events that lead into into later games and have an effect on the world itself somehow don’t count. You are arguing for the sake of arguing with no real point to your words and keep trying to finagle around when faced with pushback

[Anonymous No.10534441]

>>10534396
>killed vs sealed
laughably irrelevant since he keeps coming back. kind of like how link and zelda keep reincarnating or whatever.
>Hyrule is flooded in WW because of the results of OoT
actually incorrect. its because ganon came back, but no hero showed up to stop him, so the people prayed to the goddesses, and the goddesses flooded the land. whether ganon was unsealed, revived, or reincarnated, it literally does not matter. its simply "ganon came back", and where he came back from, does not matter. just like it doesnt matter for any of the other games where he comes back from. it is 100% arbitrary.
>nobody thinks the timeline (or any Zelda lore) is that deep.
no, thats just provably false. you're just willfully ignorant of other posters in this thread and others. or you're being disingenuous and trolling. lurk moar faggot.
>But that’s wrong
you've missed the point. im fairly certain you dont even know what we're arguing about anymore.
>>10534403
he's always the bad guy though. whether he's always the monster, always the human, or both human and monster, he's always the bad guy and always sharing the same root of "ganon" in his name. getting thrown off by appearances is falling for the illusion of meaningful continuity just because they reuse certain elements, but in that case not reusing specific others. thats also like getting hung up on designs and being like "why is he a fat pig thing here, but a towering horned BEAST here, and a massive fiery thing here?" its really just arbitrary to each iteration, and not an important detail of "continuity" or whatever.

[Anonymous No.10534449]

>>10534412
>You’re complaining ABOUT subsequent games in a series HAVING RECURRING ELEMENTS
let me cut the fluff for you too
>ABOUT HAVING RECURRING ELEMENTS
and your follow up is
>Commenting on the lack of “REAL” continuity isn’t complaining?
you are beyond retarded.

also, no, im not complaining, lmao. i am explaining the semantics how flimsy and irrelevant the timeline is, and how its not worth sperging out over or taking too seriously. i am certain that that concept is too complicated for you to understand though, your abysmal reading comprehension being what it is and all.
>Your definition of what constitutes as “meaningful”
is also obviously something beyond your understanding, simple as the concept may be. its quite sad how inept you are. stay in school, kid.

[Anonymous No.10534495]

>>10534441
>laughably irrelevant since he keeps coming back. kind of like how link and zelda keep reincarnating or whatever.
Him being killed vs sealed does affect how later games play out. In the WW line he doesn’t come back and as previously explained the Oracles focuses on reviving him while the primary antagonists for both games are entirely new villains
>actually incorrect. its because ganon came back, but no hero showed up to stop him
And the reason for that is due to how OoT ends, WW’s opening about the flood is literally about Ocarina and the Hero of Time. You are deliberately omitting details to push a false narrative, stop being disingenuous.
>no, thats just provably false. you're just willfully ignorant of other posters in this thread
Posters like >>10532705?
>you've missed the point. im fairly certain you dont even know what we're arguing about anymore.
I’m saying that the timeline exists, the games aren’t isolated, the events create an actual continuity and denying any of that is just flat out wrong.
>>10534449
>no, im not complaining
>i am explaining
You aren’t explaining anything, all you keep doing is recycling the same statements about how because the continuity doesn’t fit your arbitrary standards it’s therefore completely negligible and every game is interchangeable, which is definitely not the case if you actually played the series
>how it’s not worth sperging out over or taking too seriously.
Meanwhile you keep insisting your viewpoint is the correct one in the face of all evidence pointing to the contrary. Don’t bother replying unless you’re actually willing to list out what games in the series you’ve actually played because at this point I’m convinced you’re a Switch newfag that stumbled onto /vr/ by accident

[Anonymous No.10534545]

>>10534495
>And the reason for that is due to how OoT ends
holy shitfuck dude, no it does not.
ganon gets sealed away
GENERATIONS LATER, he breaks out.
oops, no hero shows up to save us, despite cycles being a thing. goddesses please help!
goddesses flood the earth and seal hyrule with ganon in it beneath the ocean.
CENTURIES PASS
ganon breaks out again after the second time skip
now a new hero shows up.
straight from the fucking wiki. go brush up on it some time.

the timeline is irrelevant bullshit that not even nintendo really cares about. that statement doesnt mean "the timeline doesnt exist". it means that it does not deepen the lore in the slightest. there is extremely little continuity in the series, and none of it is truly meaningful or impactful. caring about how something fits the timeline, and whether certain details fit or contradict, is fucking retarded. its not that deep, and its not taken that seriously by its own creators. i've played 1, 2, lttp, la (both), oot, mm, ww, tp, lbw, ss, botw, totk.

[Anonymous No.10534560]

>>10534495
>the events create an actual continuity and denying any of that is just flat out wrong.
and also, nobody is denying that a timeline of events exist. all i said was that the "continuity" of things isnt worth regarding. things are so far removed from each other that they MIGHT AS WELL BE CONSIDERED ISOLATED. but it seems that your abysmal reading comprehension cant understand that sentence and things that im saying "they are isolated and not connected". this is exactly what people mean when they talk about "timeline autists". you're so fucking dense, i couldnt even put it all in one post because your stupidity was just that astounding. the events of the games dont truly affect each other. in fact, the settups for the "branching timelines" are all shit that happens off screen, long removed and after the fact, or from "what ifs" asked off screen. ganon comes back and its a new cycle/bubble. if you think the order truly MATTERS, you're a timeline autist and fucking retarded. thats the point. thank you for proving it.

[Anonymous No.10535116]

>>10534545
>holy shitfuck dude, no it does not.
ganon gets sealed away
GENERATIONS LATER, he breaks out.
He breaks out because he was sealed with the Triforce of Power AT THE END OF OCARINA.
Wind Waker’s opening is literally recapping Ocarina and everything in WW pulls from Ocarina. It is not interchangeable. You are deliberately ignoring key details. Nobody is going to put WW ahead or separate from OoT because it’s deliberately designed as a sequel around it.
>all i said was that the "continuity" of things isnt worth regarding. things are so far removed from each other that they MIGHT AS WELL BE CONSIDERED ISOLATED.
But that’s wrong, retard. You can’t seem to wrap your head around the notion that that sequels dont have to be a few years apart and that events from them somehow cannot be divided by a long period of time. You can dismiss the continuity that’s staring you in the face but it only makes you look more blind as a result.

[Anonymous No.10535285]

You guys are so fucking stupid. I’m legitimately upset with you guys.

[Anonymous No.10535296]

>>10522926
Caring about timelines is lame and pansexual.

[Anonymous No.10535716]

>>10534327
I'mma just point out this isn't a contradiction. I don't care about the order of episodes in Looney Tunes because it reuses characters at random. A timeline would be silly. The only contradiction is,
>there's a coherent timeline
>inconsistencies don't matter lol (??)
>>10534412
If I say I don't want a Looney Tunes timeline this doesn't mean I'm complaining about the lack of coherency?? what if I like them reusing characters at random, that's why I don't want the timeline.

[Anonymous No.10535802]

>>10535716
Zelda isn’t Looney Tunes, though. They’re not at all alike, so that comparison is meaningless.

[Anonymous No.10535829]

>>10522926
AoL is after TLoZ
LA after ALttP
One of the Oracle games happens after the other
Wind Waker happens a long time after one of those and has a direct non retro sequel so it never happened
Majoras Mask happens after OoT
Zelda Unleashed and the CDi games never happened.

[Anonymous No.10535910]

>>10535802
its actually a REALLY good comparison.

[Anonymous No.10535949]

>>10535910
It’s not, something like Evil Dead is more appropriate, where there’s a continuous story being told but every entry will alter certain details in order for it to work both as a standalone entry and a continued story. Nobody is going to say Army of Darkness isn’t Evil Dead 3 or that it goes before the other films because certain things are changed. There’s examples like this across all types of media but for some reason only Zelda has people applying these weird double standards to it where the continuity doesn’t matter even though it’s had continuity since the second game in franchise.

[Anonymous No.10536049]

>>10535949
It goes before Evil Dead 2. Nothing in Evil Dead 2 would have happened if not for the events of Army of Darkness.

[Anonymous No.10536054]

>>10536049
>>>/v/

[Anonymous No.10536351]

>>10534109
I'm curious, in what way? I've never seen him talk anything remotely political.