25th June 2008, 9:30 PM
(This post was last modified: 25th June 2008, 9:52 PM by Dark Jaguar.)
I thought I explained all that in my posts above. It's all pretty much made clear. It's only them that's messing it all up. Never heard of that site before, but I tend to avoid the big guns about these things. Look what they did to the otherwise straightforward Warcraft continuity... They actually think Garona was half-Draenai at this point.
The title and instruction booklet are hardly all I'm going on with LTTP. There's the fact that Zelda 1 and 2 CAN'T fit BEFORE the events in LTTP (as the Triforce is possessed by Hyrule before Zelda 1 starts). Even excluding that, official statements before LTTP came out in interviews in Nintendo Power sort of make it clear where they intended the story to fit. If they aren't after, they must be alternate universe stories too. One last thing. The title actually still matters. Even in a translation's title change, why do you think they would have changed it to that? It's not like they are going to make up something like it taking place centuries before Zelda 1 out of whole cloth. I'd say more than likely they added that because that was their original idea. It's still a valid point to point to the title then.
The timeline of the "Zelda name" backstory must have happened after LTTP as well, for the same reason. While that doesn't do much to explain all those OTHER Zeldas, it was only meant to explain two Zeldas in Zelda 2. One can be generous and assume that the Zelda put to sleep was LTTP's Zelda. I see no conflict there.
Where do you think they came up with the story of OOT anyway? They even changed the translation from "Wise Men" to "Sages" (and a few other translation issues) in the GBA rerelease to make it fit better! The development kept talking about it too, also in Nintendo Power. I'd say that's pretty much set beyond reasonable doubt. It "could go almost anywhere" only if you are willing to just make up random stuff about the timeline and force fit it. Look at the storyline elements for a moment. The start of LTTP goes into detail about how eons ago, Ganondorf invaded the Sacred Realm to acquire the Golden Power for himself, and when he did he used it's power for great evil, and 7 sages used their power to seal him into the sacred realm. That seal should have remained for all eternity. Now look at OOT. In this game Ganon does NOT have the triforce at all, it's made clear the kingdom has never had it but that they had recently ended a war over it with Hyrule guarding the temple of time, a place rumored to be connected to the golden land. Ganon breaks in, claims the triforce (but only in part, I attribute this to the hazy nature of myths), and 7 sages banish him into the Sacred Realm, where he specifically states he will kill Link, Zelda, and the Sage's descendants when he breaks free. I mean how much more direct can the two games possibly be? What other possible placement can you come up with?
Regarding the Four Swords games, he may not have worked on them, but that's the best statement we have to go on and I have no reason to doubt it. They do fit the timeline after all. We could of course strike the Capcom games from the continuity if you like. However, the statements I've heard don't really justify that.
Have you played Four Sword Adventures? It's as clear as the OOT/MM and Zelda1/2 connection. The opening of the game actually is a synopsis of the events in the first Four Swords game. There's really no wiggle room at all.
Minish Cap has been officially stated to occur before the Four Swords games. Further, the storyline of that game makes it very clear. It's supposed to be Vaati's origin story.
That's why I came up with that timeline. I had very good reasons for sticking all that stuff where I did. The only stickler is LA after LTTP. How they managed to agree on that being after LTTP (which I readily admit is just my personal preference based on an old statement about it) while managing to dispute when OOT took place (which no one can honestly say isn't clearly supposed to be the imprisonment of Ganon mentioned in the very start of LTTP) is beyond me.
There are other ways to interpret it, and it's all fiction so it doesn't really matter. With enough imagination you could come up with all sorts of alternate scenarios, but this is the most parsimonious one I can see that only goes directly on the official story and statements we've been given.
I'm a huge nerd.
The title and instruction booklet are hardly all I'm going on with LTTP. There's the fact that Zelda 1 and 2 CAN'T fit BEFORE the events in LTTP (as the Triforce is possessed by Hyrule before Zelda 1 starts). Even excluding that, official statements before LTTP came out in interviews in Nintendo Power sort of make it clear where they intended the story to fit. If they aren't after, they must be alternate universe stories too. One last thing. The title actually still matters. Even in a translation's title change, why do you think they would have changed it to that? It's not like they are going to make up something like it taking place centuries before Zelda 1 out of whole cloth. I'd say more than likely they added that because that was their original idea. It's still a valid point to point to the title then.
The timeline of the "Zelda name" backstory must have happened after LTTP as well, for the same reason. While that doesn't do much to explain all those OTHER Zeldas, it was only meant to explain two Zeldas in Zelda 2. One can be generous and assume that the Zelda put to sleep was LTTP's Zelda. I see no conflict there.
Where do you think they came up with the story of OOT anyway? They even changed the translation from "Wise Men" to "Sages" (and a few other translation issues) in the GBA rerelease to make it fit better! The development kept talking about it too, also in Nintendo Power. I'd say that's pretty much set beyond reasonable doubt. It "could go almost anywhere" only if you are willing to just make up random stuff about the timeline and force fit it. Look at the storyline elements for a moment. The start of LTTP goes into detail about how eons ago, Ganondorf invaded the Sacred Realm to acquire the Golden Power for himself, and when he did he used it's power for great evil, and 7 sages used their power to seal him into the sacred realm. That seal should have remained for all eternity. Now look at OOT. In this game Ganon does NOT have the triforce at all, it's made clear the kingdom has never had it but that they had recently ended a war over it with Hyrule guarding the temple of time, a place rumored to be connected to the golden land. Ganon breaks in, claims the triforce (but only in part, I attribute this to the hazy nature of myths), and 7 sages banish him into the Sacred Realm, where he specifically states he will kill Link, Zelda, and the Sage's descendants when he breaks free. I mean how much more direct can the two games possibly be? What other possible placement can you come up with?
Regarding the Four Swords games, he may not have worked on them, but that's the best statement we have to go on and I have no reason to doubt it. They do fit the timeline after all. We could of course strike the Capcom games from the continuity if you like. However, the statements I've heard don't really justify that.
Have you played Four Sword Adventures? It's as clear as the OOT/MM and Zelda1/2 connection. The opening of the game actually is a synopsis of the events in the first Four Swords game. There's really no wiggle room at all.
Minish Cap has been officially stated to occur before the Four Swords games. Further, the storyline of that game makes it very clear. It's supposed to be Vaati's origin story.
That's why I came up with that timeline. I had very good reasons for sticking all that stuff where I did. The only stickler is LA after LTTP. How they managed to agree on that being after LTTP (which I readily admit is just my personal preference based on an old statement about it) while managing to dispute when OOT took place (which no one can honestly say isn't clearly supposed to be the imprisonment of Ganon mentioned in the very start of LTTP) is beyond me.
There are other ways to interpret it, and it's all fiction so it doesn't really matter. With enough imagination you could come up with all sorts of alternate scenarios, but this is the most parsimonious one I can see that only goes directly on the official story and statements we've been given.
I'm a huge nerd.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)