Forming a more perfect timeline theory

[Slagr 0]

L IS REEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAL

Mario games are not steeped in hotly debated timeline clues. "L IS REAL" did cause some commotion, but it's completely different and you know it. Your posts have gotten a little spammy, by the way.

[Teto 2609]

Naw.

Anyway, I thnk zras wer in ww bt wer hidn

[Chase 390]

what did the TF say? There's nothing definitive that puts LttP last, and it's actually very unlikely.

I think he makes a good point, actually.

The triforce says that the master sword sleeps forever.

Either it is the last game in the timeline, or the last game to have the master sword.

[Teto 2609]

Slgr, y u ignor me?

[Slagr 0]

I think he makes a good point, actually.

The triforce says that the master sword sleeps forever.

Either it is the last game in the timeline, or the last game to have the master sword.

I'm not a fan of the MS sleeps forever, although my timeline does not have it appear after LttP anyway (other than OoX, which is a cameo).

Slgr, y u ignor me?

because you're spamming. I've posted some solid bleeping evidence and you just reverted to idiocy. I can't believe this is tolerated here.

[Sahaqiel 1232]

It doesn't kill the argument, as WW-on primarily uses modern Hylian, and beforehand existence is possible. Point being, old Hylian died off after Wind Waker just as it had died in Twilight Princess for the alphabet. There are no old Hylian references in Minish Cap that I'm aware of. And besides, chronologically, wider use of modern Hylian happened somewhere between OoT and WW/TP in both timelines, the only difference being it was the standard in Wind Waker and was an uncommon dialect in TP.

Though it does weaken the argument a bit.

"I'd like to interpret it as a means of rectifying its use in tMC. They may have originally wanted the language to imply post-WW, but since tMC used it (assuming they wanted it first) they used it again in TP to show that it does not necessarily imply a WW connection."

Quite a statement for one who thought Nintendo didn't care at all.

"I'm not a fan of the MS sleeps forever"

"We should be looking for what the developers are trying to show us."

Sahaqiel

[Slagr 0]

It doesn't kill the argument, as WW-on primarily uses modern Hylian, and beforehand existence is possible. Point being, old Hylian died off after Wind Waker just as it had died in Twilight Princess for the alphabet. There are no old Hylian references in Minish Cap that I'm aware of. And besides, chronologically, wider use of modern Hylian happened somewhere between OoT and WW/TP in both timelines, the only difference being it was the standard in Wind Waker and was an uncommon dialect in TP.

Well, since the WW Hylian stones are in significantly worse condition than the OoT Hylian stones, they seem to be older. IF WW Hylian is simply older than OoT Hylian, then tMC first is justified, the stones' natural decay is justified, and Twinrova's headbands are justified. I have no idea how it came back in WW unless it was a regional dialect (mountaintop language? Islands=mountains).

"I'd like to interpret it as a means of rectifying its use in tMC. They may have originally wanted the language to imply post-WW, but since tMC used it (assuming they wanted it first) they used it again in TP to show that it does not necessarily imply a WW connection."

Quite a statement for one who thought Nintendo didn't care at all.

Capcom doesn't care. Nintendo does. If Nintendo wanted tMC first, then TP's inclusion of WW Hylian would negate the strongest post-WW evidence.

"I'm not a fan of the MS sleeps forever"

"We should be looking for what the developers are trying to show us."

yes. "Not what they showed us." You have to remember that LttP was the first game to feature the MS (unless Magic Sword=MS), so why would Nintendo go around saying they won't use it in a sequel? Even if they meant it literally in 1991, why would they limit future development possibilities?

"hey, let's make a LttP sequel (not AST) where Link uses the MS!"

"we cant... the LttP ending says the MS sleeps forever."

"oh, yeah... Lets just make another DS WW sequel then."

Edited 16 May 2009 by Slagr (see edit history)

[Teto 2609]

because you're spamming. I've posted some solid bleeping evidence and you just reverted to idiocy. I can't believe this is tolerated here.

Sir, I don't believe your evidence bleeped whatsoever during it's time on this forum.

You must be mistaken.

[Chase 390]

yes. "Not what they showed us." You have to remember that LttP was the first game to feature the MS (unless Magic Sword=MS), so why would Nintendo go around saying they won't use it in a sequel? Even if they meant it literally in 1991, why would they limit future development possibilities?

"hey, let's make a LttP sequel (not AST) where Link uses the MS!"

"we cant... the LttP ending says the MS sleeps forever."

"oh, yeah... Lets just make another DS WW sequel then."

Just because A Link to the Past IS the last game to use the Master Sword, that doesn't mean the master sword can't appear before then. OOT, WW, TP, these games could very well have taken place before A Link to the Past. WW being the least likely, due to the flooding of hyrule, but the koroks were spreading trees, and Link and Tetra went to find a new land and make their own hyrule, so who knows?

What I do know is the Link in ALTTP and the Link in WW are two different Links, that is certain. So, ALTTP could take place many years after WW, this new Link could be a descendant of WW Link. The only flaw in my theory is that the Master Sword in WW is drowned along with hyrule, so perhaps hyrule resurfaced? Who really knows, anyway? This is all just speculation.

Personally, I feel that each Zelda game is its own game, and it doesn't have to follow the timeline if it doesn't want to. The only reason I even believe in the timeline is because of past references to the "Hero of Time" in ALTTP, WW, and TP.

I wish Nintendo would hurry and explain it, though I find it hard to believe they thought this far ahead. Plus, if consumers want more Zelda games to come around, Nintendo is going to have to keep muddling up the timeline. They'll just keep adding game after game after game, without explaining at all where they fit in. It's the perfect plan, they'll keep us speculating and we'll be always interested and always waiting on the next Zelda.

[Slagr 0]

Just because A Link to the Past IS the last game to use the Master Sword, that doesn't mean the master sword can't appear before then. OOT, WW, TP, these games could very well have taken place before A Link to the Past. WW being the least likely, due to the flooding of hyrule, but the koroks were spreading trees, and Link and Tetra went to find a new land and make their own hyrule, so who knows?

prequels are of course possible, but that limits them to the time from Creation to LttP which is significantly shorter than an indefinite amount of time after LttP. As for WW's MS at the bottom of the ocean, I've yet to hear a possible means of it returning to sit in a pedestal in the woods in LttP that wasn't complete fanfic.

What I do know is the Link in ALTTP and the Link in WW are two different Links, that is certain. So, ALTTP could take place many years after WW, this new Link could be a descendant of WW Link. The only flaw in my theory is that the Master Sword in WW is drowned along with hyrule, so perhaps hyrule resurfaced? Who really knows, anyway? This is all just speculation.

But if LttP does occur after WW, OoT can not be LttP's backstory anymore because Ganondorf returns in WW and is NOT sent back to the Sacred Realm. Therefore, LttP and its backstory have no bearing on AT vs. CT placement as many would like them to. The fact that many people put the FSS and LttP on the AT before tMC (the only possible means of arriving at such a conclusion) is a little ridiculous.

Personally, I feel that each Zelda game is its own game, and it doesn't have to follow the timeline if it doesn't want to. The only reason I even believe in the timeline is because of past references to the "Hero of Time" in ALTTP, WW, and TP.

At first, there was a simple timeline, but now it's a little more difficult. The developers have stated on multiple occasions that they are working on clarifying the timeline.

I wish Nintendo would hurry and explain it, though I find it hard to believe they thought this far ahead. Plus, if consumers want more Zelda games to come around, Nintendo is going to have to keep muddling up the timeline. They'll just keep adding game after game after game, without explaining at all where they fit in. It's the perfect plan, they'll keep us speculating and we'll be always interested and always waiting on the next Zelda.

It's more fun to debate than just know, subsequent games are developed with the intention of CLARIFYING the timeline-- not muddling it, and the developers do explain their placement on occasion.

[Chase 390]

Also, consider the split timeline. ALTTP could be the last game on one side of the timeline, they could still continue the master sword on the other side of the timeline.

[Teto 2609]

I concur.

The official timeline is wrong and the creator of the series is a rotten liar.

[Slagr 0]

Also, consider the split timeline. ALTTP could be the last game on one side of the timeline, they could still continue the master sword on the other side of the timeline.

That's what I'm trying to prove: a CT placement of LttP, and thus FSS and LoZ/AoL.

I concur.

The official timeline is wrong and the creator of the series is a rotten liar.

dude, stop posting. My respect for you has already dropped into the negatives.

Edited 19 May 2009 by Slagr (see edit history)

[Teto 2609]

It was sarcasm.

Jerk.

[Slagr 0]

It was sarcasm.

Jerk.

If you had posted relevant contributions to the topic it'd be different. All you've done is post "sarcasm" and it gets hard to tell the difference from spamming.