Ok, I put this here as I couldn't see a forum for general Zelda talk, and OoT/WW are pretty much the pivotal points in any timeline.

First off - while I enjoy a generic timeline, I'm not hugely set on it. Mainly because I feel it tends to put rules on the imagination and I don't like being told that this must have happened irrevocably. ALTTP Link for example. At one point it was believed OoT was the direct prequel..and therefore Link could never have ended up with Zelda because of the two bloodlines in ALTTP.

But anyways: a loose timeline, IMO.

MC - FSA - OoT ( split ) - ( Adult ) WW-PH
- ( Child ) MM - TP - ALTTP/LA - LoZ/AoL

- I put MC first because it states Link and Zelda will have future adventures
- FSA is linked to MC and contains intact Gerudo.
- WW comes after Adult OoT obviously.
- TP after MM as per the interview stating so.
- ALTTP because of similarities to TP and Hyrule seems to similar to OoT to be after-flood.
- LoZ because I think the box linked it to ALTTP. ( Though this is disputed.

The big problem I see is that ALTTP seems to be referencing Adult OoT, yet Hyrule is intact as per the Child Timeline. One solution I saw was making ALTTP an alternate timeline from Adult OoT ( where Link never got sent back ) but this not a common theory.

I've always believed that TMC is the first Zelda game in timeline, because
1) Link gets his signature hat from Ezlo -> he doesn't have any hat before him
2) King Gustav (or something like that) is mentioned to be the first hero with green clothes.

I think OoT comes after it and then the split happens.

Tetra also seems to have the Light Force based on hints given in PH: they call her "the voice of a sacred light", and she has an abnormally large amount of life force, explaining the villian's interest in her.
The game was made by the same team that did FSA I think so you could call it a reference, but I think it's a huge hint. That puts MC before PH/WW, and then before OoT.
I think everyone wants to think of OoT as first, but there's no reason why it has to be.

Oh, and in MC it's the Hero of Men who is dressed in green in the legends, but he has no hat. Some ( including myself ) believe King Gustav IS the Hero of Men, but others Swiftblade the First, because he claims to have held the sacred sword before.
My proof of Gustav is that the Hero of Men was given the Light Force, and this shows up in his descendants. ( Zelda, as he says ) But the end of the legend says the Light Force was in the end ( after the Hero of Men's quest ) embodied in Hyrule's Princess ( way before MC Zelda) so I'm thinking it was the Hero of Men's daughter ( a Zelda ) perhaps that inherited it.

Er- I haven't played MC or FSA, so I'm completely lost on the Light Force thing you're talking about. *sweat*

But ok, the reason I have a hard time seeing any game predate OoT is because of two reasons. First being that was when the Triforce was obtained and split into the three parts, tied to the souls of Link, Zelda, and Ganondorf. Now, with that in mind, since OoT is when Ganondorf obtains the Triforce and turns into the immortal evil of the land basically, any game that references the Triforce on any of the 3 or Ganon has to come after OoT. Logically, right?

So, by my reasoning, in order for a game to predate OoT, there would have to be no Ganondorf, and no Triforce mentioned- except in legends, not counting the split-, shown on the hands, or referenced. Is that the case with MC or FSA?

I also believe OoT came before any game that mentions Ganon, since I see OoT as basically an explanation on how a mortal Gerudo thief became a giant, immortal pig.
And both the hat and green tunic is explained by the Kokiri fashion.
But I must finish MC before throwing in my thoughts on it.
I don't even know if Ganon's in there. DX If my curiosity doesn't pwn me (yes, I mean pwn), I'll avoid coming back to this thread for fear of more spoilers. :whistle:

SPOILERS FOR MINISH CAP AND FOUR SWORD ADVENTURE BELOW!!!

Alantie

MC has no reference to Ganon, the Master Sword, or any of the Triforce legends we see in the other games. And like Toxo said, MC explains the origins of Link's signature hat, so this game could easily come first.

FSA, on the other hand, deals with how Vaati (the villian sealed away in MC) is set free by Ganondorf, so that he will, in turn, set Ganondorf free. He does end up getting free, and while we don't see him, Ganondorf remains Ganondorf throughout most of the game. He aims to change that, though, by retrieving Ganon's signature Tridents, and you end up fighting a fully powered Ganon by the end of the game. With that in mind, this game probably comes after MM.

Another good indicator of where a Zelda game is in the timeline is to go by whatever form Ganondorf is in predominantly. Unless otherwise stated (like in WW, for example, which we know to be set well after the events of MM) a game with Ganondorf the man who later becomes Ganon the beast is probably closer to the beginning of the timeline, whereas a game where Ganon is so corrupted by evil that he can no longer become Ganondorf is most likely at the other end of said timeline.


On to other things, the Light Force is the sacred power that the Princess of Hyrule guards, though it has nothing to do with the Triforce. Vaati spends most of MC looking for it, and only realizes that Zelda has it rather late in the game. In a way, I suppose the Light Force is Zelda's soul.

I had a theory that the Light Force was what Zelda gave to Midna in TP to allow her to survive in the Light World (and possible kept Zelda from transforming into something, like Link did).
In MC, the game says that if the Light Force is taken from Zelda, then she'll die. This is proven true when during one of the final battles to reach Vaati, if you fail to defeat his minions before a bell toles a certain number, Vaati will have enough time to pull the Light Force from Zelda, and she dies.
And in TP, when Zelda saves Midna, she disappears and seemingly dies as well. But it only turned out that she was unconscious, and teleported somewhere, most likely by Ganondorf.
Dialogue in the game can support the soul theory. I'm paraphrasing here, but Midna says something along the lines that Zelda "gave everything she had, though I did not want it," whereas Zelda later said that they "were one, if only for a moment," both statements which could mean that it was her soul that Zelda gave to protect Midna.
Now, in regards to Zelda's soul being the Light Force, the only reason Zelda dies is because Vaati tears the Light Force from her. She wasn't parting with it willingly. But with Midna, she gives of her free will, and so this non-violent parting with the Light Force didn't harm Zelda.

Kk, if that's the case, then MC could be a prequel to OoT, though that still makes me wrinkle my nose, lol. In the official art or in the game though, do Link or Zelda bear the Triforce marks on their hands, out of curiousity?

And from what you're saying, it does sound like FSA does come after OoT since it deals with Ganondorf.

This is a good indicator, I agree. It's interesting, in WW Ganon doesn't turn into a beast form at all. The closest we get is Puppet Ganon, but Ganondorf himself doesn't turn into anything other than what he is. A friend and I were tossing around ideas and were thinking that towards the end of the timeline Ganondorf starts to regain the ability to take his human form rather than appearing as a mindless raging evil.

The Light Force as you speak of it sounds an awful lot like the Light that the Light Spirits protect in TP. Perhaps Zelda and the spirits both protect the Light Force? And in later games it's Zelda alone who guards it?

While your theory is interesting, I was always of the opinion that the power that Zelda gave to Midna was that of the Triforce itself. My main reason for this is you keep seeing Minda glancing down at her right hand or holding it close to her heart, the same hand that Zelda bears her Triforce of Wisdom on. Since the Triforces seem to be closely tied to the souls of the bearers, Zelda also transfered her own soul as well- maybe in additon if she's the bearer of the Light Force, that came along too since it's a part of her soul. Zelda speaks in TP of being quite aware of Midna's feelings and thoughts and of exactly what had happened while she had seemingly died.

What about events after WW/PH? There is a possibility for Link and Tetra to find that so-called New Hyrule, they just don't have any kind of Triforce tales or like that with them. But yeah, I don't think that there is a New Hyrule-based game yet.

Yes, it is a possibility for MC to be the first on the timeline, because it isn't just a hat, is it a symbol for Hero and gets its start when this talkie-birdie appears to be lay and hops onto Link's blonde head. That would make TMC to be first on the timeline.

OoT, there happens that famous split, and I still agree with this:

Especially the TP comes before ALTTP part.

Here are a couple of reasons why;

- Master Sword's location. In TP it's that a little ruined Sacred Grove, which soon ends up being a forest as the years go by. That would explain why the Master Sword is in Lost Woods at ALTTP since in OoT it's at the Temple of Time.

- Twilis! They have that slight mentioning on the start of ALTTP's intro, they aren't just called by the name "Twili", just as intruders to Sacred Realm.

Yes, my oh-so-awesome reasoning!

FSA, it's naturally following TMC, since that's kind of like the end of Vaati, and there is still stories told only about this certain Hero that used the Four Sword, not even a slightest mentioning of Master Sword or such.

The famous split, I certainly see it as Ganondorf had destroyed the Hyrule too much (the reason why Zelda sent Link back to his childhood) and the flood happed because Hyrule was already too corrupted and impossible to rebuild back to its former glory. Zelda got a statue of Link in the Castle and it still is there, just a memory of the Hero of Time.

So we get to the TWW and PH, Zelda probably hid the piece of Triforce she had to prevent stuff like that from happening ever again. Didn't Tetra have some sorts of Triforce stuff in her room at the pirate ship? I don't remember correctly since it's been way too long without playing it.

Nah, I did not see any Triforce marks on their hands. There were no signs of Triforce on Link's had in the official art, and the game is rather hard to check since the character sizes are what they are.

About LOZ and AOL though, I am not quite sure about their places, their storylines just happened to be so simple that they would be easy to put almost everywhere.

Sort of off track, but one thing that's always bothered me about AoL is that it takes place a couple years after the original LoZ, and the Link from that game had just turned 16 (if memory serves). Anyway, the whole point of the game is to awaken Zelda, who's been in an enchanted sleep for quite a long while, which Link eventually does. But that Zelda wasn't the same Zelda from LoZ, so what happened to her? With EnchantedSleep!Zelda awake, and with LoZ!Zelda still around, wouldn't that mean there would be two Zeldas at once? And which one of them would rule? :blink:

For TP, just because there are certain elements from other games that are incorporated into the story doesn't mean that it takes place after previous games. For example, in other games Link obtains different colored tunics and different types of items used for actions such as swimming (AttP), but that doesn't mean that Oot is related to the previous ones. TP is its own new beginning, giving the Zelda series a fresh start. Sure, it has similar things that the other games have, but there are new and other unexplainable elements that are unique to TP alone. There is no evidence in the game that points towards the fact that a preceding game comes before it.

P.S The fact that the Master Sword was in a sacred grove doesn't prove anything except for the fact that TP is seperated from previous games; in the other games that precede Oot the Master Sword was located in a special area of the forest/grove, but that doesn't mean that the similar locations have any relevance to one another. It just means that the same elements of the main story are being retold in another perspective; Link is summoned by the Gods (which is signified by his green robes), obtains items that give him special abilities, locates the Master Sword, hunts down Ganondorf, and ultimately saves the princess. All of these elements are retold in different versions of the same story.

You could say that all Zelda games are the same story - and to a certain extent that's mostly true. ( Excepting LA, MM, PH among others...the common factor in these is a dream like quality. MM is a parallel universe, kind of like a bad dream, and PH is up in the air, another realm for sure as per the Ocean King's words. )

But the creators have stated there IS a timeline, I just don't think it's a huge priority when they make these games. Often you get references for the sake of references and it can be utterly impossible to tell the difference between a mere reference and a timeline indicator.
It's probably more likely near the end of the process of making these games that they try to sort out where to put it on a theoretical timeline that no-one has ever seen. I bet WW was decided to be a game with sailing, and then they later came up with the excuse that Hyrule had flooded.

Is there an interview to this effect? There is one linking TP to OoT even if the in-game proof is tenuous.

Honestly, I hope it's not a sign of things to come as a game. Because then we can expect to see little of Zelda and her importance diminishing. I'd rather hope WW is the direction they take that way. Integrating her more into the story and letting us get a better look at her was the result.

I've read GamePro articles/interviews that state that TP doesn't take after previous games. However, even if it did, it wouldn't make any difference; Link and Zelda are always going to be the central characters (whom, btw, aren't related).

In my opinion, TP is a fresh start to it's own series, and despite the fact that Zelda didn't have a lot of screentime, she did play a significant role in Link's life nonetheless. Upon first meeting her Link immediately sensed the kind of person she was (he was a wolf, therefore he was able to sense things that people would normally miss) and thus automatically was drawn to her. Anyway, I have a feeling that the next game that they make is going to involve her a lot more than TP. It's kinda what they did for PH, only it's in the reverse (Tetra/Zelda didn't have a lot of screentime either). Perhaps we'll see more of her in the future (it did end with a snapshot of the castle after it shows Link leaving Ordon). ^_^

Hmmm..and the interview I read I believe was Nintendo Dream or the sort? It was translated from Japanese. I find in general interviews tend to shed light on timeline things...or not. ( Famous interview with Miyamoto where he said, OoT- LoZ - ALTTP vs the ALTTP box, ALTTP - LoZ )

I have a hard time seeing TP as a fresh start as it pretty much re-did OoT, just rearranged some very important things ( namely Link and Zelda having little bond vs alot in OoT ) for the sake of pretending to be new. Ilia = Saria/Malon. Cor Goron = Darunia. Rutella = Ruto. Midna's true form = Zelda revealing herself...I could go on and on. Even Zant being a puppet was taken from ALTTP.

Again, I'd say WW is the way to go. I thought WW was far more OoT's successor in terms of how Link and Zelda interacted..they became incredibly close, with an unspoken bond and attraction to each other. Tetra was hugely important too, I'll always love how she kept showing up. It's too bad they can't take the feeling of WW, and transplant it into TP's environment.

Anyways, timeline related. I like the idea of a split...it's ironic how two "parallel" games ( TP and WW ) can be so utterly different in feel and focus.

Nope. They are drawn in WW style too, and characters from WW appear in MC. One could place it after WW in new Hyrule, but I don't like that so much. To much is the same. ( The presence of Gorons, Lake Hylia, memory of old Hyrule is supposed to have died out. Even Link and Zelda in WW knew nothing of old Hyrule. )

Not sure. I recall hearing second hand of an interview that had Miyamoto say Link would marry Zelda and rule Hyrule together with her...that would probably be the Zelda he kissed, I think. But then again, new Zelda is already ruling Hyrule, and has the history with Link. But the backstory supports romance with old Zelda. It's like new Zelda just up and disappeared.

Mkay. . . the thing is, with what you've all been saying about MC, it doesn't seem to fit in very well; explaining how Link got his green hat? OoT already did that; wearing the green clothes and hat of the Kokiri since he was raised one. To me that was a satisfactory explanation. Then we get MC. So then is MC implying that the Link of that game is responsible for the dress of the Kokiri? :unsure:

The idea of the timeline split works in many ways. It especially works well if you're placing TP some time after OoT. What we're shown in TP of Ganondorf's 'execution' fits in very well with the Child Timeline of OoT. After being returned to his original time, Link would have had more than enough evidence to incriminate Ganondorf, which would fit with the execution scene we see in TP. Not only this, but we're given the impression that the geography of Hyrule did indeed change- the orignal Temple of Time stood where the Sacred Grove is- thus, the sword really isn't in a grove, it's still in the same spot it was when Link in OoT left it before the door of time was sealed behind him. It remained untouched there.

I remember someone was talking about the Twili having pointed ears- easy enough to explain. They were originally from Hyrule, so they were most likely Hylians. So maybe Midna is a Twili version of a Hylian, hmm?

Technically, though, Link has green clothes in all of the games. In TP, the tunic was just a symbol of the fact that he was a chosen hero. Now, the fact that Ganondorf was shown having an execution doesn't really prove anything other than the fact that TP is just another version of the same story. For all we know, TP could be an abstract remake of Oot (I felt that I was playing as the same Link from Oot, so that was kinda like a Deja vu moment).

But they say flat out that the Hero's tunic once belonged to an ancient hero. That should be a massive hint that TP Link is not the first. Considering the world, and the state of it, it should be obvious it's OoT Link. They keep referencing an ancient hero too.

( Actually, that's what many people plainly say: it's a remake of OoT. I will never cease to cringe at that, again mainly because I thought the focus of the story was so different. But rather than going off topic anymore, I'll go start a thread about it. )

He does have green clothes in all the game, but OoT was the first game that explained why that was. OoT Link was the first to wear the green outfit and made it a trademark of the hero, like Link's grandmother says in WW it was symbolic of the hero from the past. It was OoT Link that brought that about. Which is why I'm puzzling over MC claiming to be the game that is the origin of Link's hat- OoT already answered that question, so I don't know why they did that. . .

Ack, I want to say more, but I got to run. Will come back with more!

As for TP being an OOT remake I understand in some aspects in recurring themes. Storyline NO WAY. :yay: Its simple:

OOT Link and Zelda = Close friendship

TP Link and Zelda = No friendship whatsoever

Currently I'm with the camp that says TP in the CT after OOT timeline wise.

Link and Zelda may have not gotten to spend as much time together as they did in OoT, but what connection they have in TP is the begining of a strong relationship that clearly is going to develop further. A lot of people also forget that after Zelda saved Midna, she was within her for the rest of the game and therefore with Link. But this isn't the proper thread to discuss what kind of relationship Link and Zelda had in TP- back on topic. XD

Timeline. I got to thinking about the Oracle games and what you were speaking of in regards to the Light Force that Zelda protects. In the Oracle games, Twinrova are trying to light the torches of. . . I can't remember the names. Anyway, they're the torches to revive Ganon. Zelda is to be the sacrifice to light the torch of despair I think. Anyway, it speaks of Zelda being the hope of the people and if something happens to her. . .well, basically it reminded me of the Light Force. I can't recall why. Maybe the Light Force is something Zelda has always been the guardian of. I don't remember where I was going with this. *sweat* I think my main point was wondering where you guys thought the Oracle games fit in.

Can't help you there. I have never played any of the handheld Zeldas. But I hope to play them in the future for sure.

Ah, the timeline debate, one of the most popular debates of the Zelda fandom. On one hand, I like the thought of the Zelda series having a chronological timeline, but on the other hand, I'm happy with the thought that each game (aside from direct sequels) is a retelling of the same story of a boy named Link who saves the world from Ganondorf and rescues (and falls in love with ;)) the princess Zelda. Kind of like the King Arthur legend, you know? But as far as timelines go, so far, I'd say:

Child Timeline: OoT -> MM -> TP
Adult Timeline: OoT -> WW -> PH -> ST

But as for the rest of the games (LoZ/AoL, ALttP, LA, OoS/OoA, MC/FS/FSA), I have no idea where they would go on the timeline.