[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   
File: 131 KB, 800x720, shop.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5169508 No.5169508 [Reply] [Original]

When did the idea of the "Zelda timeline" first appear? Did anyone care before OoT?

>> No.5169514

I feel like it wasn't really a thing til WW. After the success of OoT, Nintendo decided every game had to be connected to it in some way.

>> No.5169537

>>5169508
With LttP. There was a bunch of initial confusion whether it was supposed to star the same Link as the one from Zelda 1 and 2 or not.

>> No.5169541

It happened as soon as Link to the Past came out. 2 was a direct sequel to 1, and LttP wasn't clearly connected to either.

Every game after that changed how the timeline looked. Ocarina of Time made things worse, because it was another start from zero. The gameboy games did a good job of being connected to themselves and could be connected to either LttP or OoT, so they didn't matter.

>> No.5169546

>>5169508
I'm surprised anyone managed to care AFTER OoT, which was one of the dullest entries in the series. Seriously each episode following the boy "adventurer" and his pals from Hyrule as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the cartoonish imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of repetitive puzzles, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.
Perhaps the die was cast when Nintendo vetoed the idea of a third party producing the games; Miyanoto made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody- just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for their annual "party games" and childish fighting franchise. The Zelda series might be anti-Sony (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-Spyro series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact.

>a-at least the platforming elements were good though

"No!"

The writing is dreadful; the exploration was nonexistent. As I played, I noticed that every time Link went to "explore" a largely empty world, Nintendo shoehorned in some repetitive puzzles to pad out the game. I began marking on the back of a Nintendo Power magazine every time I came to the same rehashed box pushing/lever pulling puzzles. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Nintendo's team is so governed by cliches and milking tired franchises ad nauseum that they have no other style of development. Later I watched a lavish, loving Let's Play of The Ocarina of Time by some YouTube manchild. He said something to the effect of, "If these kids are playing Ocarina of Time at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to owning a Nintendo Switch." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you play The Ocarina of Time you are, in fact, trained to play the same dull Nintendo rehashes decade after decade.

>> No.5169558

>>5169546
Stale pasta

>> No.5169581

Zelda timelines were exclusively a fan creation. The one you see in Hyrule Historia is pretty much a direct copy of some fan-made chart made just a couple years prior.

>> No.5169583

>>5169558
It's a good one

>> No.5169587

>>5169508
Nobody cared, I played the games just assuming they were in chronological order as a kid and nobody at school ever mentioned a word about Zelda lore, even though we all played Zelda. It was in OoT when the young Link / older Link mechanic appeared and gaming magazines in previewing the game kept mentioning over and over again how it was technically a "prequel." That's when it kind of started, but still nobody really cared. Then WW came out, and they made up this shit about how there are different Links and Zeldas throughout time or whatever, a new younger generation who never grew up with the originals started with these games and an explosion of autism about lore and timelines occurred.

>> No.5169608

Nobody gave a fuck. People enjoyed the story of each individual game and took it for what it was, realizing that making truly defining video games is hard enough as it is without trying to worry about trying to tie together a narrative of games that only release every five or so years.. It was only until retards started pushing their retarded fan theories that Nintendo realized they could bank off that by selling a book of said fan theories disguised as having some sort of continuity.

>> No.5169654

>>5169508
perfect example of dx's colors being ugly

>> No.5169674

>>5169587
>Then WW came out, and they made up this shit about how there are different Links and Zeldas throughout time or whatever

OoT actually did that. Going into the game we knew it was a prequel to Zelda 1, then at the end Ganondorf says he's going to come back to get revenge on Link and Zelda's descendants. It was then that we collectively realized that it's the same Ganon in every game, but different Links and Zeldas that all happen to have the same name and look identical and go on the same adventures over and over. Everyone I knew just wrote it off as retarded and it still shocks me that people now take that shit seriously.

>> No.5169782

>>5169508
Zelda 2 was pretty explicit about its place in the timeline, so, probably then?

>> No.5169841

>>5169587
>>5169674
Actually, it was like this
>LttP: prequel but only idiots who can't read think it's a sequel.
>OoT: very obviously a prequel, timeline is still normal and everything makes sense
>Oracle games: here's where things start getting shakey. Is it LttP Link? OoT Link? A new Link?
>Wind Waker: The timeline gets fucked up the ass because Aonuma had to have Muh Water. Series cannot cohesively get along with the games that came before it, forces the first notion of "branching timelines" to the audience

And we've been suffering ever since. Wind Waker ruined everything.

>> No.5169969

Why did people believe (or care) that ALttP was a prequel or sequel? That game could easily be interpreted as a reboot/re-imagining, which it essentially is. All the games really could be separate entities, it's not like there's a greater understanding to be learned from trying to connect them. You may as well be making a timeline for Mario or Final Fantasy; the new stories are generally just whatever the designer feels like. 'There's an apocalypse' or 'it's set in the past', those are just vehicles for the game to occur. And on top of that, ALttP originally had a futuristic overworld with an advanced sci-fi theme - how do hardcore timeline believers rationalize that fact?

>> No.5170000

>>5169508
The timeline's been around since Zelda II and a lot of people cared. Zelda was a huge deal with a cartoon and comics and shit. Things got sketchy with Zelda II adding a second Princess Zelda and ALttP adding a second Link but people on the internet were probably more familiar with the official Zelda timeline than they were with the fact that Final Fantasy was numbered wrong. Of course half the people who played these games thought Zelda was the boy so...

It was the game boy games that messed the lore up. They were the subjective ones officially stated "to go anywhere" so that was what started the whole fan theory bullshit. I mean, the first one people could deal with, but the oracle games added too many moving parts to the lore.

I guess, you could argue that was when people REALLY started caring about timelines because it led to a lot of fan-fiction explanations and arguments where there were none before.

>>5169581
The Zelda timeline comes entirely from manual/box/game lore. I made the exact timeline structure the day Hyrule Historia was announced and posted it on /v/ using only official sources, although I thought of it in terms of alternate canons and not timelines.

>> No.5170001

>>5169558
No one ever has a counter argument for any of the points in it

>> No.5170003

>>5169841
Branching timelines have been around since at least Majora.

>> No.5170006

>>5169587
this. I legit get depressed thinking about how many people over the age of 13 take the idea of a timeline seriously.

>>5169841
>LttP: prequel but only idiots who can't read think it's a sequel.
You have to be clueless about what console game lore was like in the late 80s and early 90s to think that a few lines of flavor text in a Zelda game counts as being a "Prequel."

>>5169969
>Why did people believe (or care) that ALttP was a prequel or sequel?
No one really cared. I vaguely recall imagining it to be a prequel when I was a kid. But I knew it was headcanon even if I didn't know that word yet. It was obvious the game lore wasn't actually connected in any kind of meaningful way in-setting, and I was just making shit up for fun.

>> No.5170008

>>5170000
>Zelda was a huge deal with a cartoon and comics and shit.
This was:
>wow look at all these fools talking about a timeline. Let's sell them one it will be easy and they will eat it up 100%.

>> No.5170012

>>5169969
The game box says:
"Venture back to Hyrule..."
"The predecessors of Link and Zelda..."
"the exciting Super NES sequel to "The Legend of Zelda" and "The Adventure of Link""

See, this is what I don't get about these arguments. It's the idea that Zelda games aren't connected that is fan-fiction. Plus, why on Earth would anyone assume Zelda games aren't connected. Like, no one ever looks at "Ys part 3: Wanderers of Ys" and is like "Bullshit, there is no Ys timeline, it's just a bunch of unconnected games with red-haired characters you dolts!"

>> No.5170014

>>5170008
Well at least we both admit there is an official time line then.

>> No.5170015

if you are playing Zelda and care about the lore you are doing it wrong.

its just a simple adventure game. you are a hero, there is an evil magician, go save the princess. thats all there is to it and it doesn't need to be anything more

>> No.5170016

>>5170012
>"Venture back to Hyrule..."
>"the exciting Super NES sequel to "The Legend of Zelda" and "The Adventure of Link""
These are just saying that it's the next game in an established series. Nothing else.

>"The predecessors of Link and Zelda..."
No idea what the original Japanese text is, but it could merely be a reference to "the past" in the title, or something. Again, The game could easily be interpreted as a reboot/re-imagining. It doesn't have any direct story related to Zelda 1 and 2.

>> No.5170047

>>5170016
"Again, The game could easily be interpreted as a reboot/re-imagining."

But see, that's the problem. You are "interpreting". If I have to explain why I think Zelda games are related using actual facts and evidence at the very least anti-timeline people need to start coming up with an explanation for their views that doesn't require phrases like "I think", "could be", and "it was obvious" along with conjecturing about what "sells", "original Japanese text", and "developer intent". I mean, you can't because there is no evidence that Zelda games was ever a series of unrelated games with similar themes, but you could at least try.

>> No.5170049

>>5169508
Im still wondering how the loop happened in the first place. Its never really explained how the ying and yang of link and ganon began in the first place. Its always some bullshit.

>> No.5170050

>>5170047
Cringe

>> No.5170057

>>5169508
Around the time women started pretending to like video games. Turns out they're not interested in gameplay at all and think that people play games for the story.

>> No.5170062

>>5170001
I don't argue with my ravioli either. What's your point?

>> No.5170070

When I was young, nobody really questioned Link to the Past being a prequel. It was just a fact that everyone accepted. Nobody really seemed to particularly care where Link's Awakening fit into it, since Mario Land had already conditioned people to write Gameboy games off as weird side things. When Ocarina of Time came out, people who had played the hell out of Link to the Past immediately came to the consensus that it was another prequel, while more casual Zelda players didn't really know or care. Majora's Mask's place in the story was also pretty obvious. This was all stuff nobody would really argue too much about.

It was Wind Waker, and especially the Capcom games, that really got people autistic about trying to figure out how they fit into the story. Then a bunch of contrarians cropped up and started swearing up and down LttP and OoT weren't prequels. Then things escalated into the whole "there is a timeline" vs "every game is a standalone adventure" shit everyone had to put up with for the next decade.

>> No.5170076

>>5170049
Did you finish squidward sword?

>> No.5170084 [DELETED] 

>>5170057
criiinge.....

>> No.5170086

What I don't understand about this timeline bullshit is why anyone would really care. Why would Link's defeat in OoT lead to LttP? Wouldn't Ganon just destroy the master sword if he had won? And then when it branches off into the WW timeline it states that ganon is revived, the world is flooded and then ganon is revived again.
To be honest it feels like LttP and Oracles should precede OoT with the first two games taking place after TP as the worlds seemed more desolate. I've never played SS or the new one so idgaf about those.

I just don't understand the need for a timeline when there is almost 0 direct link between games. Link's Awakening is to LttP what MM is to OoT and Wind Waker was clearly the Megaman Legends of Zelda as in >world gets flooded in the future.

>> No.5170207

>>5170000
>It was the game boy games that messed the lore up. They were the subjective ones officially stated "to go anywhere" so that was what started the whole fan theory bullshit. I mean, the first one people could deal with, but the oracle games added too many moving parts to the lore.
Link's Awakening's manual very explicitly said you were playing as "the hero of A Link to the Past". It was the oracle games that got messy because nothing in them really said anything about when they took place.

>> No.5170213

>>5170084
He isnt wrong. And why would you cringe? You're a man...

>> No.5170246

>>5170084

I mean, since you are a man of course you like video games princess.

>> No.5170287

>>5170057
Ow, don't cut yourself on all that edge.

>> No.5170386

>>5170287
Not an argument.

>> No.5170446

>>5170386
>he thinks his original point was an actual argument
Criiinge indeed lmao

>> No.5170482

>>5169508
Why aren't people this autistic about Mario games? I think the world needs to know when Mario Paint happened in relation to Punch Out

>> No.5170549

>>5170482
Mario most of the time just has an excuse plot that's used to introduce/justify whatever gimmick the game is using and to explain its different stages.

Zelda usually has a more traditional narrative. You may get an ounce or two of world-building and lore and you're also engaging with the story throughout the game. It's natural to want to piece things together.

It doesn't matter though, they aren't "real" sequels or prequels. One game being a prequel or sequel to another game has absolutely no bearing on any of the games' plot or characters. You can easily say that all games take place concurrently on different planets or that it's about a group of people being reincarnated and having these grand adventures over and over again. The only thing that makes these points wrong is that "Nintendo said otherwise" but you can go on to apply Death of the Author here and say that it doesn't matter what Nintendo says after the fact as within the works they don't go through with these links between the games.

There's no case where these links between the games are revealed in any of the games.

The timeline is nothing more than a cheap attempt from Nintendo to "create discussion" surrounding the games and trying to make people piece together a nonexistent and non-consequential puzzle.

>> No.5170634

>>5170549
The way I like to think about it is that the Legend of Zelda games are like the myths and legends of Hyrule. Similar to King Arthur in England or Hercules in Greece or what have you. It explains why they're not always consistent and adds an interesting layer of abstraction onto the games and their stories. For example, the manual of LttP describes that the Master Sword was forged by the people of Hyrule to be a magic-resistant sword, but then in Skyward Sword we see Link taking the Goddess Sword to various shrines to empower it and turn it into the Master Sword. That's because these are simply different takes on the myths and legends that describe the history of Hyrule: Link to the Past being a slightly more historically-grounded tale like Arthurian legends, while Skyward Sword is more of a fantastical myth about the origins of evil.

I know it's all headcanon, maybe it's autistic or whatever, but it's how I like to think of all the games' stories, like they are themselves the legends and myths that the people of "real" Hyrule share with each other and pass on as various moral lessons, cautionary tales, exaggerated/fantasized ancient history, etc.

>> No.5170671

>>5170634
That's not a bad way to look at it, I like that. Each game is just some retelling of the Legend of Zelda.

>> No.5170680

>>5170671
Truly, he was, a Legend of Zelda

>> No.5170789

There's been a loose timeline since LttP and OoT, when one game begins with "a long time ago people sealed Ganon" and the next game ends with sealing Ganon and him saying he'll be back for your descendants it's a case of willful ignorance to deny that there's some continuity.

>> No.5170839

>>5170671
And it even works well for the ones that are more of sidestories like Majora's Mask or Link's Awakening. It's like taking familiar elements from common stories in your culture and using them as a base to tell a new story.

>> No.5170845

>>5169969
You're thinking about it from the wrong perspective. Imagine you were a kid back when Link to the Past came out. The first two Zelda games didn't have much plot to speak of. Suddenly there's a third game called "Link to the Past" and the back of the box says it's about Link and Zelda's ancestors. There was no real reason to be critical or question whether the game actually takes place in the past. You just go "oh, this game's a prequel. Neat." and don't give it any real thought beyond that.

>> No.5170875

>>5170634
This is literally how the Ys games work. The games are not "events taking place", they're "retellings of what actually happened", which is why they're able to go back and do remakes and alter shit and whatnot and just explain inconsistencies as "well maybe this is how it happened instead. Or maybe not."

>> No.5170876

>>5170213
>>5170246
Stop samefagging you tripfag. No matter how much you're trying to make it think like that, nobody gives a damn about you and your off-topic blogging.

>>5170482
That's a good question actually. If Nintendo is going out of its way to make some fan headcannon official then they might as well do the same with their IPs. I mean, it's not like that's going to change anything substantially to the games themselves except for some manchildren who argue what happened earlier or whether it's in the same timeline or a parallel one.

>> No.5170883
File: 3.76 MB, 3488x2700, Mario-Timeline-Smaller-Web2-noscale.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5170883

>>5170482
>>5170876

>> No.5170902

>>5170014
>caring what's official
The only lore that matters to a game is the lore that actually informs the game itself.

>Plus, why on Earth would anyone assume Zelda games aren't connected
Because they've played more than one and intuitively recognize the concept of a fairy tale world instanced to each particular game.
It's like thinking Sleeping Beauty is a prequel or sequel to Cinderella.

>> No.5170915

>>5170902
As someone old enough to remember the release of the original Legend of Zelda, this mentality is the most baffling thing to me. Everyone knew since Zelda 3 that the series wasn't trying to tell some epic, continuous story, but absolutely nobody would try to claim to that games were disconnected. Like, where did this thought process even come from and why did it become so common? Link to the Past was a prequel. Ocarina of Time was a prequel. Was it fucking Wind Waker that made people start claiming that they weren't anymore?

>> No.5170926

>>5170915
>absolutely nobody would try to claim to that games were disconnected
Because there was also nobody sperging out about timeline details and expecting anyone else to follow along or care even a little.
>Like, where did this thought process even come from and why did it become so common?
It comes from growing up, anon. It's similar to the way people figure it out on their own that Santa Clause isn't real.

>> No.5170927

>>5170047
>conjecturing about "developer intent"
Ok then. How about you stick to primary source material from the actual games and demonstrate how ALTTP is either a prequel or a sequel to a previous game in any meaningful way.

>> No.5170940

>>5170883
fucking kek

>> No.5170941

>>5170926
>Because there was also nobody sperging out about timeline details and expecting anyone else to follow along or care even a little.
So it really is just a reactionary thing because people are tired of listening to people talk about the timeline?

>> No.5170948

>>5170883
How does Smash Brothers work into all of this?

>> No.5170968
File: 1.20 MB, 1290x1761, Hyrule-Historia-Timeline-translated-Graphics.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5170968

>>5170941
I think it was the fact that the official timeline is fucked. So much of it is just forced and weird because when they're making the games they aren't actually thinking about how it connects to the complete timeline, that's just implanted retroactively. So at a certain point you look at the spaghetti clusterfuck of pic related and realize it's not worth actually connecting every single game directly. Sure, there are games that are clear direct sequels to one another like Zelda 1/2 and OoT/MM/WW and so on, but when you have to make 4 different timelines and make up events that barely make sense when superimposed onto the oldest games to force everything to work together it's just out of hand and not worth worrying about at all.

>> No.5170971

>>5170948
Smash Bros is a separate canon because you play as action figures and not the real characters.

>> No.5171019

>>5170968
It looks to me like the Wind Waker-based games really should have just been their own universe. It would have simplified things to "LttP and OoT are prequels to the original, while everything after is a sequel to Majora's Mask (except Skyward Sword)". The Capcom games might as well be non-canon like the CDi games.

>> No.5171030

>>5170941
More or less.
This guy gets it: >>5170968
In the worst case, it can lead to a developer taking continuity and coherence more seriously than they should when developing future games.

>> No.5171041

>>5171030
Given Breath of the Wild, I don't think the developers really care too much about the timeline. There was one passing mention of Twilight Princess for people who care about the timeline shit, but the game was otherwise pretty stand-alone.

>> No.5171052

>>5171041
yeah I would say Zelda series hasn't fallen prey to that kind of thing. One example of a game that foolishly tried to take continuity seriously in a setting where it was never intended to be is the Dark Souls series.

>> No.5171053

>>5171030
Zelda's been around for three decades and the only time it ever got blatant about continuity was Skyward Sword screaming at you "THIS IS AN ORIGIN STORY". The fact that people can even argue about whether the timeline exists or not says a lot about how good Nintendo has been about not letting it affect the games.

>> No.5171058

>>5171053
agreed, see:>>5171052
Mostly, the response with Zelda is just exasperation with maybe a bit of mild contempt.

>> No.5171060

>>5171041
BotW was literally set 10,000 years into the future, presumably just so they wouldn't have to give a fuck about the timeline. They could easily just say every timeline merges into BotW at some point and be done with it.

>> No.5171084

>>5171060
>They could easily just say every timeline merges into BotW at some point and be done with it.
That's exactly what they did:
https://www.nintendo.co.jp/character/zelda/history/index.html

>> No.5171117

>>5171084
I can't read Japanese but I choose to trust you, anon.

>> No.5171231

>>5170287
>>5170446
Sure is Reddit in here.

>> No.5171416

>>5169841
>LttP: prequel but only idiots who can't read think it's a sequel.
Many of us didn't read the manual seriously and a lot of times as a kid you simply mashed buttons as fast as possible through dialog, or you sat there with siblings / cousins and did funny voices reading the dialogue. That was the extent of it, we didn't give a shit about the actual overarching narrative, we weren't even sure what it was besides go find the princess and go to these different castles to get these things, that will help you save the princess. We played the games to play them, nothing else mattered or was even paid attention to most of the time.

>>5170549
>Mario most of the time just has an excuse plot that's used to introduce/justify whatever gimmick the game is using and to explain its different stages.
>Zelda usually has a more traditional narrative.
I would say Zelda storylines, traditionally, are not much beyond an excuse either. It's not as barebones as Mario, but it's not much more either. It's just copy pasting old traditional stories about going to save the princess and needing to put together a magical item to defeat a powerful evil. It's basically we have 8 levels so we need each level to be one of pieces of the item. That's about it set in a traditional medieval fantasy setting that was very commonplace in the 1980s. In LttP they gave it a little more, but not much, it's still very simple and just an excuse to explore two worlds and have that number of castles. It was later on that they started shoehorning more and more story into the games and started making the games more of a linear narrative than "here's your sword now go find stuff" that everything became a mess and all this awful loreshit started.

>> No.5171459

>>5171060
>>5171084
Makes even less sense than the timeline already did
>and in this year, Link defeated Ganon, and died before he could defeat Ganon
>"Wait which is it, he can't do both"
>He did both.

>> No.5171470

>>5170001
The first 100 times you see stupid shit being said, there are people disproving it. After a while you realize the spaghetti is shit and you ignore it.

>> No.5171485

>>5169508
the entire timeline stuff is null and void because of a few different things happening that made a couple of games not cannon unless you accept the simple cold truth that was obvious from the start

link, gannon and zelda are reborn over and over and they each have a triforce. its not a story about 1 guy in 1 body within 1 life time. when you accept that you understand how meaningless all of it is and that each installment can be seen as a standalone with no real need for chronological order being taken into account

for instance in wind waker there is the statue in the starting viliage that looks like link. he was the hero that saved the world and gannon had the master sword stuck in his face in that underwater city dungeon

>> No.5171614

>>5171416
>Many of us didn't read the manual seriously
Even those of us who did quickly realized that Hyrule wasn't the same kind of setting as Middle Earth or the Galaxy Far, Far Away.

>> No.5171617

>>5171470
or you can just tell right off the bad that it's a stupid waste of time. This one is particularly retarded.

>> No.5171620

>>5171485
What are you talking about? You have to understand the timeline in order to get the overarching theme of the franchise. People spent years trying to sort out, decode, and debate the timeline before Nintendo finally revealed that not only did it exist, but it was even more complex than most people had considered. Then Breath of the Wild came out and went "Remember all of those timelines? They don't matter, because they all end up like this in the end". The overarching Zelda narrative is one about how you should stop caring about arbitrary things like timelines and just enjoy things for what they are.

>> No.5171638

>>5171620
So the person you replied to is right.

>> No.5171718

>>5171620
>the overarching theme of the franchise
The theme of the franchise is this:
>Once upon a time, a young boy went on a daring adventure to recover the Triforce and defeat the evil Ganon to rescue the Princess.
It's a straightforward archetypal narrative.

>> No.5171940

>>5171620
BotW is just Ultima IX. In fact, the entire Zelda franchise is just ideas stolen from Ultima on inferior hardware made as simple as possible. Ultima IX had no load screens either.

>> No.5171957

>>5171485
There is no statue on Outset Island that looks like the Hero of Time. There's the Hero's Shield, which is owned by Link's grandma and is implied to come from the HoT, and the Fairy Fountain, which is hinted to be one of the OoT-era fairy fountains by the sign next to it. There is also the Stone Head, which blocks the entrance to the Savage Labyrinth. This looks nothing like Link from any era, and also blocks the entrance to the Earth Temple so it's most definitely just a generic motif.

The only HoT statue in the game is in flooded Hyrule Castle.

>> No.5171958

>>5171940
>on inferior hardware
>compared to the ultima series
A Pentium III could run every Ultima game save for IX, what crack are you smoking?

>> No.5171960

>>5171459
>>and in this year, Link defeated Ganon, and died before he could defeat Ganon
No, what happens in OoT is that Ganon gets defeated by being sealed away, not killed for good. So then he gets released, a few more games happen, then 9,900 years later the BotW Link comes around and dies fighting off Ganon's latest form and gets put to sleep for 100 more years until the start of the game.

>> No.5171965

>>5169508
There was always a simple timeline. Zelda 2 was a direct sequel to Zelda 1, and LA was a direct sequel to ALttP.

Timeline theorizing started with people trying to fit OoT in as the Imprisoning War.

>> No.5171975

>>5171965
LttP says Ganon used to be a thief named Ganondorf until he was warped by the Dark World. It's not hard to understand why people saw a game where the main villain is a guy named Ganondorf who gets warped into Ganon at the end and assumed it was a prequel to LttP.

>> No.5171981

>>5171975
Not disputing that. But there were enough murky details that that's where the theorizing started.

The official timeline suffers from trying to make things consistent when there's really no consistency to be had. Latest revision (post-Hyrule Historia) swaps LA and Oracles so LA comes first. Most likely because there's a big plothole, that Oracles Link meets Zelda for the first time. Rather than accepting that as a simple plothole, they instead swapped the games around (thus breaking the obvious prequel/sequel tie of the boat at the end of Oracles being the same as the boat at the beginning of LA).

>> No.5171995

Wind Waker had the intro/prologue about OoT and the whole 'hero clothes' thing. The "timeline" was irrelevant/varying degrees of canon until WW made the idea more prominent.

>> No.5172006
File: 347 KB, 900x1440, kisspng-the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time-3d-link-the-l-the-legend-of-zelda-5acc3e2b2e3312.0515933415233346991892.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5172006

>>5169508
Zelda timeline always seemed like pure autism to me.

Growing up we had Mario, and Final Fantasy which each told their own story, and nobody gave a shit about continuity because all we cared about was playing great games. Everyone knew Metroid had continuity because each game references the other in clear, no unspecific terms. It wasn't like Super Metroid was just a retelling of Samus defeating all the metroids and then motherbrain (well it was... but they at least went through the effort of tying the games together in a way that wasn't completely cryptic and lacking in common sense).

With the Link games, continuity never felt like it influenced the game at all. Zelda 1 and 2 were different enough from one another, and LttP just felt like "Super Zelda" and we just rolled with it that way. It was only much later that Zelda timeline autism on the internet became a thing, and by then I thoroughly did not give a shit, treating each game like its own stand-alone story like I had always been doing, with the background references to other Zelda just there for background flavor and shouldn't be taken all that seriously

>b-but the manual said--
Nigga, do you know how long manuals lasted in the average kid's house? Only autists gave a shit about the manual, it's not like these games were exactly hard to figure out.

>> No.5172013

>>5169841
SSJSAMUS!?
I haven't seen you since the Nsider forums shut down. How have you been?

>> No.5172048

>>5172006
Nintendo Power also reiterated it, and those generally lasted a lot longer.

>> No.5174091

>>5169541
>The gameboy games could be connected to either LttP or OoT
Are you sure? I was always under the impression they were intended as direct sequels to LttP, especially since MM came out immediately after OoT

>> No.5174096

>>5169546
Your asshole is faggot

>> No.5174108

>>5169514
OoT was supposed to be the Imprisoning War as told of in ALTTP, iirc (although much of it presumably happened while Link was sleeping for 6 years?)

>> No.5174202

>>5170015
absolutely this, any correlation between titles should be taken as just a nod towards them
another simple way to see it is every title is the same "legend" being told in many different ways

>> No.5174419

>>5171940
>ultima
>Zelda
You're thinking of the wrong franchise buddy. It's Dragon Quest that's influenced by the Ultima series, not so much Zelda. If you're going to play that game then at least connect it to another franchise like Hydlide or Tower of Druaga so it makes a little more sense.

>> No.5174435

>>5169841
>And we've been suffering ever since. Wind Waker ruined everything.

>triggers people for the lore
good
>best game in the series
good

Idk man its the best 3d zelda

>> No.5174524

>>5174091
links awakening is definitely a direct sequel tho I did hear that the only games might be a different link I'm not sure

>> No.5174764

>>5174435
>its the best 3d zelda
It's certainly the most tedious. It's far from best. Keeping it /vr/, both OoT and MM are better. But the true best 3D Zeldas are BOTW and TP (if you ignore TP's cringey edgelord elements)