Why is Ocarina of Time the splitting off point for the Zelda timeline?Are the various “Zelda” games...
A bug in Excel? Conditional formatting for marking duplicates also highlights unique value
I've given my players a lot of magic items. Is it reasonable for me to give them harder encounters?
Should I use HTTPS on a domain that will only be used for redirection?
Why is, for a group scheme of finite type, "smooth" (resp. irreducible) equivalent to "geometrically reduced" (resp. geometrically irreducible)?
Remove object from array based on array of some property of that object
Drawing the Möbius band and the Klein bottle
Deal the cards to the players
How do we objectively assess if a dialogue sounds unnatural or cringy?
Is divide-by-zero a security vulnerability?
How to write a chaotic neutral protagonist and prevent my readers from thinking they are evil?
Are angels creatures (Mark 16:15) and can they repent (Rev 2:5 and Rom 8:21)
Why would the IRS ask for birth certificates or even audit a small tax return?
Rationale to prefer local variables over instance variables?
What is better: yes / no radio, or simple checkbox?
Do natural melee weapons (from racial traits) trigger Improved Divine Smite?
Giving a talk in my old university, how prominently should I tell students my salary?
Who is at the mall?
Why dativ case for the verb widerspricht?
Preparing as much as possible of a cake in advance
Why is there an extra space when I type "ls" on the Desktop?
What does "rhumatis" mean?
Was it really inappropriate to write a pull request for the company I interviewed with?
Calculate total length of edges in select Voronoi diagram
Can inspiration allow the Rogue to make a Sneak Attack?
Why is Ocarina of Time the splitting off point for the Zelda timeline?
Are the various “Zelda” games supposed to take place in a common universe?How are the pieces of the Triforce distributed?What is the timeline for the Mad Max series?What is this symbol in The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker?How is the Legend of Zelda set in so many places?Why hasn't there been a mainstream TV or movie adaptation of The Legend of Zelda?Who are the characters on this Legend of Zelda poster?Do the events of Ancient Stone Tablets fit in the Hyrulian timeline?What is the true Legend of Zelda timeline?What was Coulson doing at the bifurcation point, in the looped branch of the timeline
I have read the other questions and answers related to the Zelda timeline on here. But my question wasn't answered there. A few years ago Nintendo finally released the History of Hyrule book. It, after years of speculation, finally connected all the Zelda timelines.
I'm very confused though. In the Ocarina of Time, two timelines emerge. The first is when the hero is defeated. This timeline makes zero sense to me. Of all the times a player can fail in these timelines, why is it that OoT had the timeline split? Did I miss something here that explains that in OoT another major event happens resulting in Link failing his quest?
I mean I know that with the second timeline two more timelines emerge, one follows the events when Link was returned as a child. The other follows the timeline when Ganon was sealed. But in all the games, it's possible to die. I can't remember an event in OoT where I failed and had to repeat the events over that was any different than another Zelda game.
But the event's of Link failing, is this in the event that all timelines the player fails merge into this timeline? Or have they just not covered all the other timelines the player may fail (i.e. if a player fails in the timeline where the player is defeated)?
In the Zelda wiki, this is explained:
Fallen Hero Timeline
The Fallen Hero Timeline[51] is the timeline in which Link, the Hero
of Time, despite his best efforts, was defeated by Ganondorf in the
final battle.[52] Ganondorf obtained the remaining Triforce pieces
from Link and Zelda,[53] and was subsequently sealed within the
corrupted Sacred Realm by the seven Sages.[54] This timeline branch
contains the events of A Link to the Past, the Oracle series, Link's
Awakening, A Link Between Worlds, Tri Force Heroes, The Legend of
Zelda, and The Adventure of Link in that order.
Ganondorf obtains the complete Triforce
After the Hero of Time is defeated at the hands of Ganondorf, the King
of Evil extracted the Triforce of Courage from Link and the Triforce
of Wisdom from Zelda. Obtaining the true power of the complete
Triforce, he is transformed into the Demon King Ganon. In a desperate
last resort, the Seven Sages seal Ganon along with the complete
Triforce away in the Sacred Realm, which was already transformed into
the Dark World as a reflection of Ganondorf's evil heart
But why would this be any different in any other timeline? Ganon or minion of Ganon defeat Link, Ganon gets eternal power, and the rest of the events somehow unfold. I haven't found a single resource explaining why OoT is this breaking off point.
timeline plot-device the-legend-of-zelda
|
show 2 more comments
I have read the other questions and answers related to the Zelda timeline on here. But my question wasn't answered there. A few years ago Nintendo finally released the History of Hyrule book. It, after years of speculation, finally connected all the Zelda timelines.
I'm very confused though. In the Ocarina of Time, two timelines emerge. The first is when the hero is defeated. This timeline makes zero sense to me. Of all the times a player can fail in these timelines, why is it that OoT had the timeline split? Did I miss something here that explains that in OoT another major event happens resulting in Link failing his quest?
I mean I know that with the second timeline two more timelines emerge, one follows the events when Link was returned as a child. The other follows the timeline when Ganon was sealed. But in all the games, it's possible to die. I can't remember an event in OoT where I failed and had to repeat the events over that was any different than another Zelda game.
But the event's of Link failing, is this in the event that all timelines the player fails merge into this timeline? Or have they just not covered all the other timelines the player may fail (i.e. if a player fails in the timeline where the player is defeated)?
In the Zelda wiki, this is explained:
Fallen Hero Timeline
The Fallen Hero Timeline[51] is the timeline in which Link, the Hero
of Time, despite his best efforts, was defeated by Ganondorf in the
final battle.[52] Ganondorf obtained the remaining Triforce pieces
from Link and Zelda,[53] and was subsequently sealed within the
corrupted Sacred Realm by the seven Sages.[54] This timeline branch
contains the events of A Link to the Past, the Oracle series, Link's
Awakening, A Link Between Worlds, Tri Force Heroes, The Legend of
Zelda, and The Adventure of Link in that order.
Ganondorf obtains the complete Triforce
After the Hero of Time is defeated at the hands of Ganondorf, the King
of Evil extracted the Triforce of Courage from Link and the Triforce
of Wisdom from Zelda. Obtaining the true power of the complete
Triforce, he is transformed into the Demon King Ganon. In a desperate
last resort, the Seven Sages seal Ganon along with the complete
Triforce away in the Sacred Realm, which was already transformed into
the Dark World as a reflection of Ganondorf's evil heart
But why would this be any different in any other timeline? Ganon or minion of Ganon defeat Link, Ganon gets eternal power, and the rest of the events somehow unfold. I haven't found a single resource explaining why OoT is this breaking off point.
timeline plot-device the-legend-of-zelda
1
There might be split timelines for all of the games' potential defeats. We only have games continuing from OOT's defeat.
– Slacklord the Terrible
Sep 13 '16 at 19:23
Yeah, I covered that. What I'm more interested in is if the big names at Nintendo have covered this in an interview, as in "Yes, we do have ideas for more timelines where the player lost in another game" for example. Or maybe that you drank too much Lon-Lon Ranch milk and passed out for eternity...
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:27
4
Ehhhh... probably because that was the only way they could explain the "sealed Ganon" bit in Link to the Past? OoT already has the branching plot, so it gets it by default. There's only so much arc welding you can do without showing some seams.
– Radhil
Sep 13 '16 at 19:30
would this not be better suited to gaming.stackexchange.com?
– NKCampbell
Sep 13 '16 at 19:40
2
@NKCampbell - maybe, but as the question is about the plot, and not about playing the game, it's on-topic here since its a fantasy setting. And actually, I think Arqade closes questions about developer intentions, so they might not even take it.
– Radhil
Sep 13 '16 at 19:42
|
show 2 more comments
I have read the other questions and answers related to the Zelda timeline on here. But my question wasn't answered there. A few years ago Nintendo finally released the History of Hyrule book. It, after years of speculation, finally connected all the Zelda timelines.
I'm very confused though. In the Ocarina of Time, two timelines emerge. The first is when the hero is defeated. This timeline makes zero sense to me. Of all the times a player can fail in these timelines, why is it that OoT had the timeline split? Did I miss something here that explains that in OoT another major event happens resulting in Link failing his quest?
I mean I know that with the second timeline two more timelines emerge, one follows the events when Link was returned as a child. The other follows the timeline when Ganon was sealed. But in all the games, it's possible to die. I can't remember an event in OoT where I failed and had to repeat the events over that was any different than another Zelda game.
But the event's of Link failing, is this in the event that all timelines the player fails merge into this timeline? Or have they just not covered all the other timelines the player may fail (i.e. if a player fails in the timeline where the player is defeated)?
In the Zelda wiki, this is explained:
Fallen Hero Timeline
The Fallen Hero Timeline[51] is the timeline in which Link, the Hero
of Time, despite his best efforts, was defeated by Ganondorf in the
final battle.[52] Ganondorf obtained the remaining Triforce pieces
from Link and Zelda,[53] and was subsequently sealed within the
corrupted Sacred Realm by the seven Sages.[54] This timeline branch
contains the events of A Link to the Past, the Oracle series, Link's
Awakening, A Link Between Worlds, Tri Force Heroes, The Legend of
Zelda, and The Adventure of Link in that order.
Ganondorf obtains the complete Triforce
After the Hero of Time is defeated at the hands of Ganondorf, the King
of Evil extracted the Triforce of Courage from Link and the Triforce
of Wisdom from Zelda. Obtaining the true power of the complete
Triforce, he is transformed into the Demon King Ganon. In a desperate
last resort, the Seven Sages seal Ganon along with the complete
Triforce away in the Sacred Realm, which was already transformed into
the Dark World as a reflection of Ganondorf's evil heart
But why would this be any different in any other timeline? Ganon or minion of Ganon defeat Link, Ganon gets eternal power, and the rest of the events somehow unfold. I haven't found a single resource explaining why OoT is this breaking off point.
timeline plot-device the-legend-of-zelda
I have read the other questions and answers related to the Zelda timeline on here. But my question wasn't answered there. A few years ago Nintendo finally released the History of Hyrule book. It, after years of speculation, finally connected all the Zelda timelines.
I'm very confused though. In the Ocarina of Time, two timelines emerge. The first is when the hero is defeated. This timeline makes zero sense to me. Of all the times a player can fail in these timelines, why is it that OoT had the timeline split? Did I miss something here that explains that in OoT another major event happens resulting in Link failing his quest?
I mean I know that with the second timeline two more timelines emerge, one follows the events when Link was returned as a child. The other follows the timeline when Ganon was sealed. But in all the games, it's possible to die. I can't remember an event in OoT where I failed and had to repeat the events over that was any different than another Zelda game.
But the event's of Link failing, is this in the event that all timelines the player fails merge into this timeline? Or have they just not covered all the other timelines the player may fail (i.e. if a player fails in the timeline where the player is defeated)?
In the Zelda wiki, this is explained:
Fallen Hero Timeline
The Fallen Hero Timeline[51] is the timeline in which Link, the Hero
of Time, despite his best efforts, was defeated by Ganondorf in the
final battle.[52] Ganondorf obtained the remaining Triforce pieces
from Link and Zelda,[53] and was subsequently sealed within the
corrupted Sacred Realm by the seven Sages.[54] This timeline branch
contains the events of A Link to the Past, the Oracle series, Link's
Awakening, A Link Between Worlds, Tri Force Heroes, The Legend of
Zelda, and The Adventure of Link in that order.
Ganondorf obtains the complete Triforce
After the Hero of Time is defeated at the hands of Ganondorf, the King
of Evil extracted the Triforce of Courage from Link and the Triforce
of Wisdom from Zelda. Obtaining the true power of the complete
Triforce, he is transformed into the Demon King Ganon. In a desperate
last resort, the Seven Sages seal Ganon along with the complete
Triforce away in the Sacred Realm, which was already transformed into
the Dark World as a reflection of Ganondorf's evil heart
But why would this be any different in any other timeline? Ganon or minion of Ganon defeat Link, Ganon gets eternal power, and the rest of the events somehow unfold. I haven't found a single resource explaining why OoT is this breaking off point.
timeline plot-device the-legend-of-zelda
timeline plot-device the-legend-of-zelda
asked Sep 13 '16 at 19:16
El BromistaEl Bromista
2391212
2391212
1
There might be split timelines for all of the games' potential defeats. We only have games continuing from OOT's defeat.
– Slacklord the Terrible
Sep 13 '16 at 19:23
Yeah, I covered that. What I'm more interested in is if the big names at Nintendo have covered this in an interview, as in "Yes, we do have ideas for more timelines where the player lost in another game" for example. Or maybe that you drank too much Lon-Lon Ranch milk and passed out for eternity...
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:27
4
Ehhhh... probably because that was the only way they could explain the "sealed Ganon" bit in Link to the Past? OoT already has the branching plot, so it gets it by default. There's only so much arc welding you can do without showing some seams.
– Radhil
Sep 13 '16 at 19:30
would this not be better suited to gaming.stackexchange.com?
– NKCampbell
Sep 13 '16 at 19:40
2
@NKCampbell - maybe, but as the question is about the plot, and not about playing the game, it's on-topic here since its a fantasy setting. And actually, I think Arqade closes questions about developer intentions, so they might not even take it.
– Radhil
Sep 13 '16 at 19:42
|
show 2 more comments
1
There might be split timelines for all of the games' potential defeats. We only have games continuing from OOT's defeat.
– Slacklord the Terrible
Sep 13 '16 at 19:23
Yeah, I covered that. What I'm more interested in is if the big names at Nintendo have covered this in an interview, as in "Yes, we do have ideas for more timelines where the player lost in another game" for example. Or maybe that you drank too much Lon-Lon Ranch milk and passed out for eternity...
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:27
4
Ehhhh... probably because that was the only way they could explain the "sealed Ganon" bit in Link to the Past? OoT already has the branching plot, so it gets it by default. There's only so much arc welding you can do without showing some seams.
– Radhil
Sep 13 '16 at 19:30
would this not be better suited to gaming.stackexchange.com?
– NKCampbell
Sep 13 '16 at 19:40
2
@NKCampbell - maybe, but as the question is about the plot, and not about playing the game, it's on-topic here since its a fantasy setting. And actually, I think Arqade closes questions about developer intentions, so they might not even take it.
– Radhil
Sep 13 '16 at 19:42
1
1
There might be split timelines for all of the games' potential defeats. We only have games continuing from OOT's defeat.
– Slacklord the Terrible
Sep 13 '16 at 19:23
There might be split timelines for all of the games' potential defeats. We only have games continuing from OOT's defeat.
– Slacklord the Terrible
Sep 13 '16 at 19:23
Yeah, I covered that. What I'm more interested in is if the big names at Nintendo have covered this in an interview, as in "Yes, we do have ideas for more timelines where the player lost in another game" for example. Or maybe that you drank too much Lon-Lon Ranch milk and passed out for eternity...
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:27
Yeah, I covered that. What I'm more interested in is if the big names at Nintendo have covered this in an interview, as in "Yes, we do have ideas for more timelines where the player lost in another game" for example. Or maybe that you drank too much Lon-Lon Ranch milk and passed out for eternity...
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:27
4
4
Ehhhh... probably because that was the only way they could explain the "sealed Ganon" bit in Link to the Past? OoT already has the branching plot, so it gets it by default. There's only so much arc welding you can do without showing some seams.
– Radhil
Sep 13 '16 at 19:30
Ehhhh... probably because that was the only way they could explain the "sealed Ganon" bit in Link to the Past? OoT already has the branching plot, so it gets it by default. There's only so much arc welding you can do without showing some seams.
– Radhil
Sep 13 '16 at 19:30
would this not be better suited to gaming.stackexchange.com?
– NKCampbell
Sep 13 '16 at 19:40
would this not be better suited to gaming.stackexchange.com?
– NKCampbell
Sep 13 '16 at 19:40
2
2
@NKCampbell - maybe, but as the question is about the plot, and not about playing the game, it's on-topic here since its a fantasy setting. And actually, I think Arqade closes questions about developer intentions, so they might not even take it.
– Radhil
Sep 13 '16 at 19:42
@NKCampbell - maybe, but as the question is about the plot, and not about playing the game, it's on-topic here since its a fantasy setting. And actually, I think Arqade closes questions about developer intentions, so they might not even take it.
– Radhil
Sep 13 '16 at 19:42
|
show 2 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
The Split Timeline concept is one that has existed since 2002. Eiji Aonuma first mentioned in an interview that Ocarina of Time had two endings, one where Link returned to his childhood (the one we actually see in-game), and one where he instead disappears forever, leading to the events of Wind Waker. After Wind Waker came out fans hotly debated the idea, as it seemed to make sense to some. The idea gathered steam once again after Twilight Princess was released, as each Ganondorf in all the aforementioned games was contradictory with the established events leading up to the other two. This has given rise to the belief that there are no Dwarf women that there are in fact three different timelines to account for all the inconsistencies across the canon games.
With the release of the Hyrule Historia (see below), the split timeline concept became official canon, branching off of Ocarina of Time in the way Eiji Aonuma mentioned, as well as including the third timeline where the hero is defeated by Ganon.
Essentially, it's Ocarina of Time because Eiji Aonuma said so. As for all the other times when the hero could potentially fail, we are supposed to assume that outside of Ocarina of Time, the hero does not fail.
EDIT: It's probably also worth mentioning that Ocarina of Time was the first game in the series to dabble with Time Travel, so it does kinda make sense that this particular point is the stem from which other timelines branched.

He may have said so-but i'll stick to what was when games were released :D. I don't care for the timeline in general.
– King of NES
Sep 14 '16 at 13:46
Being that this answer is the only one that actually cites interviews, I'm tempted to mark it as the answer if you can actually provide some actual quotes from Aonuma or other Big N personnel.
– El Bromista
Sep 15 '16 at 17:01
1
I've added a link to the 2002 interview. There's also an interview in the December 2006 issue of Nintendo Dream Magazine in which Aonuma confirms that Wind Waker and Twilight Princess are in parallel timelines, but I can't seem to find it.
– DisturbedNeo
Sep 16 '16 at 8:45
add a comment |
I have the Hyrule Historia, and have played Legend of Zelda since i was 6-all the way thru Twilight Princess. The fans argued over Zelda timelines, and even the "Angry Video Game Nerd" did a whole, "confused over zelda timelines video". Up until that book, there really wasn't a timeline at all. Links and Zeldas and Ganons were different characters that had the same look. Ocarina of Time was special when it was released, it really had a larger following that any of the Zelda titles.
The out-of-universe explanation is, this game was the biggest and most loved by the fans, so they made it the most important part of the new "zelda timeline". The in-universe answer is, because of the "time-travel" being used in Ocarina, allowed the storytellers to make alternate time/dimension paths from the game.
Link wins-good wins, evil loses-you get Majora's Mask, or whatever the other game followed the adult timeline(twilight princess i think).
Link loses, land floods-evil wins-new Legend of Zelda era. However, you can argue that because of time travel, the universe changed, and now you have all these continuities.
The series was never meant to be sequels and prequels, just new adventures.
2
Ummm, I'm not sure I really agree with this assessment. Nintendo has gone on record as stating that the timeline existed far before Hyrule Historia. So not knowing OoT would be as big as it was, they still felt before the development of that game the timelines would split with that game. I do agree that the time travel mechanic in OoT would split timelines at the end of that game. So making the failure of the hero split from OoT only makes sense if the big N has came out and stated they altered the timeline because it ended up being so important. Otherwise this seems to be just an opinion.
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:59
They may have claimed a timeline existed, but the truth is none of the games seemed to follow each other, except for a few samples. Legend of Zelda(original) > Zelda 2 Adventures of Link. > Link's Awakening, then going to Ocarina of Time > Majora's Mask, and finally Oracle of Ages/Seasons following each other. Miyamoto himself said more than once that each game that came out was a prequel to the previous, and only several years later, did they actually make a timeline.
– King of NES
Sep 13 '16 at 20:01
Actually, I am pretty convinced that they had a different idea in mind even before the Historia, but then they silently changed their mind and attempted to have the fan believe the new version was planned from the start (I would even go to the point to say that I am not even sure it was Aonuma that first mentioned the split timeline theory. I, for once, saw that spread between the sages on the Nintendo of America forum before ever hearing of the "interview").
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 17:57
Adventures of Link is surely intended as a follow-up to the original game, but then Link to the Past almost seemed to be intended a prequel to those. Even later, Ocarina came to match the "ancient war" described in the LttP intro... Yep, as you say Miyamoto version seems the most realistic one. They changed their plan from a vague "each game is a prequel to the one before" to an actual timeline after the games where already made.
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 18:01
add a comment |
Well, when you think about it, the Ocarina of time is only mentioned to be able to push forward time and take it back. But then I'm gonna use Undertale for this. Every time you restart you create a different timeline. SO it is possible that Link might have kept on trying to fix a possible mistake that he made but it kept on ending up a different situation. So this is one possible way that all of these different timelines because of a split. Also, there's the ending of Super Mario Galaxy, and The Librarians (ep 8, Season 2, "And the Point of Salvation). Every time a new timeline is created or they "reset", something is either taken away or switched around.
New contributor
The Shekiah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "186"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f140542%2fwhy-is-ocarina-of-time-the-splitting-off-point-for-the-zelda-timeline%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The Split Timeline concept is one that has existed since 2002. Eiji Aonuma first mentioned in an interview that Ocarina of Time had two endings, one where Link returned to his childhood (the one we actually see in-game), and one where he instead disappears forever, leading to the events of Wind Waker. After Wind Waker came out fans hotly debated the idea, as it seemed to make sense to some. The idea gathered steam once again after Twilight Princess was released, as each Ganondorf in all the aforementioned games was contradictory with the established events leading up to the other two. This has given rise to the belief that there are no Dwarf women that there are in fact three different timelines to account for all the inconsistencies across the canon games.
With the release of the Hyrule Historia (see below), the split timeline concept became official canon, branching off of Ocarina of Time in the way Eiji Aonuma mentioned, as well as including the third timeline where the hero is defeated by Ganon.
Essentially, it's Ocarina of Time because Eiji Aonuma said so. As for all the other times when the hero could potentially fail, we are supposed to assume that outside of Ocarina of Time, the hero does not fail.
EDIT: It's probably also worth mentioning that Ocarina of Time was the first game in the series to dabble with Time Travel, so it does kinda make sense that this particular point is the stem from which other timelines branched.

He may have said so-but i'll stick to what was when games were released :D. I don't care for the timeline in general.
– King of NES
Sep 14 '16 at 13:46
Being that this answer is the only one that actually cites interviews, I'm tempted to mark it as the answer if you can actually provide some actual quotes from Aonuma or other Big N personnel.
– El Bromista
Sep 15 '16 at 17:01
1
I've added a link to the 2002 interview. There's also an interview in the December 2006 issue of Nintendo Dream Magazine in which Aonuma confirms that Wind Waker and Twilight Princess are in parallel timelines, but I can't seem to find it.
– DisturbedNeo
Sep 16 '16 at 8:45
add a comment |
The Split Timeline concept is one that has existed since 2002. Eiji Aonuma first mentioned in an interview that Ocarina of Time had two endings, one where Link returned to his childhood (the one we actually see in-game), and one where he instead disappears forever, leading to the events of Wind Waker. After Wind Waker came out fans hotly debated the idea, as it seemed to make sense to some. The idea gathered steam once again after Twilight Princess was released, as each Ganondorf in all the aforementioned games was contradictory with the established events leading up to the other two. This has given rise to the belief that there are no Dwarf women that there are in fact three different timelines to account for all the inconsistencies across the canon games.
With the release of the Hyrule Historia (see below), the split timeline concept became official canon, branching off of Ocarina of Time in the way Eiji Aonuma mentioned, as well as including the third timeline where the hero is defeated by Ganon.
Essentially, it's Ocarina of Time because Eiji Aonuma said so. As for all the other times when the hero could potentially fail, we are supposed to assume that outside of Ocarina of Time, the hero does not fail.
EDIT: It's probably also worth mentioning that Ocarina of Time was the first game in the series to dabble with Time Travel, so it does kinda make sense that this particular point is the stem from which other timelines branched.

He may have said so-but i'll stick to what was when games were released :D. I don't care for the timeline in general.
– King of NES
Sep 14 '16 at 13:46
Being that this answer is the only one that actually cites interviews, I'm tempted to mark it as the answer if you can actually provide some actual quotes from Aonuma or other Big N personnel.
– El Bromista
Sep 15 '16 at 17:01
1
I've added a link to the 2002 interview. There's also an interview in the December 2006 issue of Nintendo Dream Magazine in which Aonuma confirms that Wind Waker and Twilight Princess are in parallel timelines, but I can't seem to find it.
– DisturbedNeo
Sep 16 '16 at 8:45
add a comment |
The Split Timeline concept is one that has existed since 2002. Eiji Aonuma first mentioned in an interview that Ocarina of Time had two endings, one where Link returned to his childhood (the one we actually see in-game), and one where he instead disappears forever, leading to the events of Wind Waker. After Wind Waker came out fans hotly debated the idea, as it seemed to make sense to some. The idea gathered steam once again after Twilight Princess was released, as each Ganondorf in all the aforementioned games was contradictory with the established events leading up to the other two. This has given rise to the belief that there are no Dwarf women that there are in fact three different timelines to account for all the inconsistencies across the canon games.
With the release of the Hyrule Historia (see below), the split timeline concept became official canon, branching off of Ocarina of Time in the way Eiji Aonuma mentioned, as well as including the third timeline where the hero is defeated by Ganon.
Essentially, it's Ocarina of Time because Eiji Aonuma said so. As for all the other times when the hero could potentially fail, we are supposed to assume that outside of Ocarina of Time, the hero does not fail.
EDIT: It's probably also worth mentioning that Ocarina of Time was the first game in the series to dabble with Time Travel, so it does kinda make sense that this particular point is the stem from which other timelines branched.

The Split Timeline concept is one that has existed since 2002. Eiji Aonuma first mentioned in an interview that Ocarina of Time had two endings, one where Link returned to his childhood (the one we actually see in-game), and one where he instead disappears forever, leading to the events of Wind Waker. After Wind Waker came out fans hotly debated the idea, as it seemed to make sense to some. The idea gathered steam once again after Twilight Princess was released, as each Ganondorf in all the aforementioned games was contradictory with the established events leading up to the other two. This has given rise to the belief that there are no Dwarf women that there are in fact three different timelines to account for all the inconsistencies across the canon games.
With the release of the Hyrule Historia (see below), the split timeline concept became official canon, branching off of Ocarina of Time in the way Eiji Aonuma mentioned, as well as including the third timeline where the hero is defeated by Ganon.
Essentially, it's Ocarina of Time because Eiji Aonuma said so. As for all the other times when the hero could potentially fail, we are supposed to assume that outside of Ocarina of Time, the hero does not fail.
EDIT: It's probably also worth mentioning that Ocarina of Time was the first game in the series to dabble with Time Travel, so it does kinda make sense that this particular point is the stem from which other timelines branched.

edited Sep 16 '16 at 8:44
answered Sep 14 '16 at 9:24
DisturbedNeoDisturbedNeo
17.4k26388
17.4k26388
He may have said so-but i'll stick to what was when games were released :D. I don't care for the timeline in general.
– King of NES
Sep 14 '16 at 13:46
Being that this answer is the only one that actually cites interviews, I'm tempted to mark it as the answer if you can actually provide some actual quotes from Aonuma or other Big N personnel.
– El Bromista
Sep 15 '16 at 17:01
1
I've added a link to the 2002 interview. There's also an interview in the December 2006 issue of Nintendo Dream Magazine in which Aonuma confirms that Wind Waker and Twilight Princess are in parallel timelines, but I can't seem to find it.
– DisturbedNeo
Sep 16 '16 at 8:45
add a comment |
He may have said so-but i'll stick to what was when games were released :D. I don't care for the timeline in general.
– King of NES
Sep 14 '16 at 13:46
Being that this answer is the only one that actually cites interviews, I'm tempted to mark it as the answer if you can actually provide some actual quotes from Aonuma or other Big N personnel.
– El Bromista
Sep 15 '16 at 17:01
1
I've added a link to the 2002 interview. There's also an interview in the December 2006 issue of Nintendo Dream Magazine in which Aonuma confirms that Wind Waker and Twilight Princess are in parallel timelines, but I can't seem to find it.
– DisturbedNeo
Sep 16 '16 at 8:45
He may have said so-but i'll stick to what was when games were released :D. I don't care for the timeline in general.
– King of NES
Sep 14 '16 at 13:46
He may have said so-but i'll stick to what was when games were released :D. I don't care for the timeline in general.
– King of NES
Sep 14 '16 at 13:46
Being that this answer is the only one that actually cites interviews, I'm tempted to mark it as the answer if you can actually provide some actual quotes from Aonuma or other Big N personnel.
– El Bromista
Sep 15 '16 at 17:01
Being that this answer is the only one that actually cites interviews, I'm tempted to mark it as the answer if you can actually provide some actual quotes from Aonuma or other Big N personnel.
– El Bromista
Sep 15 '16 at 17:01
1
1
I've added a link to the 2002 interview. There's also an interview in the December 2006 issue of Nintendo Dream Magazine in which Aonuma confirms that Wind Waker and Twilight Princess are in parallel timelines, but I can't seem to find it.
– DisturbedNeo
Sep 16 '16 at 8:45
I've added a link to the 2002 interview. There's also an interview in the December 2006 issue of Nintendo Dream Magazine in which Aonuma confirms that Wind Waker and Twilight Princess are in parallel timelines, but I can't seem to find it.
– DisturbedNeo
Sep 16 '16 at 8:45
add a comment |
I have the Hyrule Historia, and have played Legend of Zelda since i was 6-all the way thru Twilight Princess. The fans argued over Zelda timelines, and even the "Angry Video Game Nerd" did a whole, "confused over zelda timelines video". Up until that book, there really wasn't a timeline at all. Links and Zeldas and Ganons were different characters that had the same look. Ocarina of Time was special when it was released, it really had a larger following that any of the Zelda titles.
The out-of-universe explanation is, this game was the biggest and most loved by the fans, so they made it the most important part of the new "zelda timeline". The in-universe answer is, because of the "time-travel" being used in Ocarina, allowed the storytellers to make alternate time/dimension paths from the game.
Link wins-good wins, evil loses-you get Majora's Mask, or whatever the other game followed the adult timeline(twilight princess i think).
Link loses, land floods-evil wins-new Legend of Zelda era. However, you can argue that because of time travel, the universe changed, and now you have all these continuities.
The series was never meant to be sequels and prequels, just new adventures.
2
Ummm, I'm not sure I really agree with this assessment. Nintendo has gone on record as stating that the timeline existed far before Hyrule Historia. So not knowing OoT would be as big as it was, they still felt before the development of that game the timelines would split with that game. I do agree that the time travel mechanic in OoT would split timelines at the end of that game. So making the failure of the hero split from OoT only makes sense if the big N has came out and stated they altered the timeline because it ended up being so important. Otherwise this seems to be just an opinion.
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:59
They may have claimed a timeline existed, but the truth is none of the games seemed to follow each other, except for a few samples. Legend of Zelda(original) > Zelda 2 Adventures of Link. > Link's Awakening, then going to Ocarina of Time > Majora's Mask, and finally Oracle of Ages/Seasons following each other. Miyamoto himself said more than once that each game that came out was a prequel to the previous, and only several years later, did they actually make a timeline.
– King of NES
Sep 13 '16 at 20:01
Actually, I am pretty convinced that they had a different idea in mind even before the Historia, but then they silently changed their mind and attempted to have the fan believe the new version was planned from the start (I would even go to the point to say that I am not even sure it was Aonuma that first mentioned the split timeline theory. I, for once, saw that spread between the sages on the Nintendo of America forum before ever hearing of the "interview").
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 17:57
Adventures of Link is surely intended as a follow-up to the original game, but then Link to the Past almost seemed to be intended a prequel to those. Even later, Ocarina came to match the "ancient war" described in the LttP intro... Yep, as you say Miyamoto version seems the most realistic one. They changed their plan from a vague "each game is a prequel to the one before" to an actual timeline after the games where already made.
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 18:01
add a comment |
I have the Hyrule Historia, and have played Legend of Zelda since i was 6-all the way thru Twilight Princess. The fans argued over Zelda timelines, and even the "Angry Video Game Nerd" did a whole, "confused over zelda timelines video". Up until that book, there really wasn't a timeline at all. Links and Zeldas and Ganons were different characters that had the same look. Ocarina of Time was special when it was released, it really had a larger following that any of the Zelda titles.
The out-of-universe explanation is, this game was the biggest and most loved by the fans, so they made it the most important part of the new "zelda timeline". The in-universe answer is, because of the "time-travel" being used in Ocarina, allowed the storytellers to make alternate time/dimension paths from the game.
Link wins-good wins, evil loses-you get Majora's Mask, or whatever the other game followed the adult timeline(twilight princess i think).
Link loses, land floods-evil wins-new Legend of Zelda era. However, you can argue that because of time travel, the universe changed, and now you have all these continuities.
The series was never meant to be sequels and prequels, just new adventures.
2
Ummm, I'm not sure I really agree with this assessment. Nintendo has gone on record as stating that the timeline existed far before Hyrule Historia. So not knowing OoT would be as big as it was, they still felt before the development of that game the timelines would split with that game. I do agree that the time travel mechanic in OoT would split timelines at the end of that game. So making the failure of the hero split from OoT only makes sense if the big N has came out and stated they altered the timeline because it ended up being so important. Otherwise this seems to be just an opinion.
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:59
They may have claimed a timeline existed, but the truth is none of the games seemed to follow each other, except for a few samples. Legend of Zelda(original) > Zelda 2 Adventures of Link. > Link's Awakening, then going to Ocarina of Time > Majora's Mask, and finally Oracle of Ages/Seasons following each other. Miyamoto himself said more than once that each game that came out was a prequel to the previous, and only several years later, did they actually make a timeline.
– King of NES
Sep 13 '16 at 20:01
Actually, I am pretty convinced that they had a different idea in mind even before the Historia, but then they silently changed their mind and attempted to have the fan believe the new version was planned from the start (I would even go to the point to say that I am not even sure it was Aonuma that first mentioned the split timeline theory. I, for once, saw that spread between the sages on the Nintendo of America forum before ever hearing of the "interview").
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 17:57
Adventures of Link is surely intended as a follow-up to the original game, but then Link to the Past almost seemed to be intended a prequel to those. Even later, Ocarina came to match the "ancient war" described in the LttP intro... Yep, as you say Miyamoto version seems the most realistic one. They changed their plan from a vague "each game is a prequel to the one before" to an actual timeline after the games where already made.
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 18:01
add a comment |
I have the Hyrule Historia, and have played Legend of Zelda since i was 6-all the way thru Twilight Princess. The fans argued over Zelda timelines, and even the "Angry Video Game Nerd" did a whole, "confused over zelda timelines video". Up until that book, there really wasn't a timeline at all. Links and Zeldas and Ganons were different characters that had the same look. Ocarina of Time was special when it was released, it really had a larger following that any of the Zelda titles.
The out-of-universe explanation is, this game was the biggest and most loved by the fans, so they made it the most important part of the new "zelda timeline". The in-universe answer is, because of the "time-travel" being used in Ocarina, allowed the storytellers to make alternate time/dimension paths from the game.
Link wins-good wins, evil loses-you get Majora's Mask, or whatever the other game followed the adult timeline(twilight princess i think).
Link loses, land floods-evil wins-new Legend of Zelda era. However, you can argue that because of time travel, the universe changed, and now you have all these continuities.
The series was never meant to be sequels and prequels, just new adventures.
I have the Hyrule Historia, and have played Legend of Zelda since i was 6-all the way thru Twilight Princess. The fans argued over Zelda timelines, and even the "Angry Video Game Nerd" did a whole, "confused over zelda timelines video". Up until that book, there really wasn't a timeline at all. Links and Zeldas and Ganons were different characters that had the same look. Ocarina of Time was special when it was released, it really had a larger following that any of the Zelda titles.
The out-of-universe explanation is, this game was the biggest and most loved by the fans, so they made it the most important part of the new "zelda timeline". The in-universe answer is, because of the "time-travel" being used in Ocarina, allowed the storytellers to make alternate time/dimension paths from the game.
Link wins-good wins, evil loses-you get Majora's Mask, or whatever the other game followed the adult timeline(twilight princess i think).
Link loses, land floods-evil wins-new Legend of Zelda era. However, you can argue that because of time travel, the universe changed, and now you have all these continuities.
The series was never meant to be sequels and prequels, just new adventures.
answered Sep 13 '16 at 19:42
King of NESKing of NES
2,45721336
2,45721336
2
Ummm, I'm not sure I really agree with this assessment. Nintendo has gone on record as stating that the timeline existed far before Hyrule Historia. So not knowing OoT would be as big as it was, they still felt before the development of that game the timelines would split with that game. I do agree that the time travel mechanic in OoT would split timelines at the end of that game. So making the failure of the hero split from OoT only makes sense if the big N has came out and stated they altered the timeline because it ended up being so important. Otherwise this seems to be just an opinion.
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:59
They may have claimed a timeline existed, but the truth is none of the games seemed to follow each other, except for a few samples. Legend of Zelda(original) > Zelda 2 Adventures of Link. > Link's Awakening, then going to Ocarina of Time > Majora's Mask, and finally Oracle of Ages/Seasons following each other. Miyamoto himself said more than once that each game that came out was a prequel to the previous, and only several years later, did they actually make a timeline.
– King of NES
Sep 13 '16 at 20:01
Actually, I am pretty convinced that they had a different idea in mind even before the Historia, but then they silently changed their mind and attempted to have the fan believe the new version was planned from the start (I would even go to the point to say that I am not even sure it was Aonuma that first mentioned the split timeline theory. I, for once, saw that spread between the sages on the Nintendo of America forum before ever hearing of the "interview").
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 17:57
Adventures of Link is surely intended as a follow-up to the original game, but then Link to the Past almost seemed to be intended a prequel to those. Even later, Ocarina came to match the "ancient war" described in the LttP intro... Yep, as you say Miyamoto version seems the most realistic one. They changed their plan from a vague "each game is a prequel to the one before" to an actual timeline after the games where already made.
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 18:01
add a comment |
2
Ummm, I'm not sure I really agree with this assessment. Nintendo has gone on record as stating that the timeline existed far before Hyrule Historia. So not knowing OoT would be as big as it was, they still felt before the development of that game the timelines would split with that game. I do agree that the time travel mechanic in OoT would split timelines at the end of that game. So making the failure of the hero split from OoT only makes sense if the big N has came out and stated they altered the timeline because it ended up being so important. Otherwise this seems to be just an opinion.
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:59
They may have claimed a timeline existed, but the truth is none of the games seemed to follow each other, except for a few samples. Legend of Zelda(original) > Zelda 2 Adventures of Link. > Link's Awakening, then going to Ocarina of Time > Majora's Mask, and finally Oracle of Ages/Seasons following each other. Miyamoto himself said more than once that each game that came out was a prequel to the previous, and only several years later, did they actually make a timeline.
– King of NES
Sep 13 '16 at 20:01
Actually, I am pretty convinced that they had a different idea in mind even before the Historia, but then they silently changed their mind and attempted to have the fan believe the new version was planned from the start (I would even go to the point to say that I am not even sure it was Aonuma that first mentioned the split timeline theory. I, for once, saw that spread between the sages on the Nintendo of America forum before ever hearing of the "interview").
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 17:57
Adventures of Link is surely intended as a follow-up to the original game, but then Link to the Past almost seemed to be intended a prequel to those. Even later, Ocarina came to match the "ancient war" described in the LttP intro... Yep, as you say Miyamoto version seems the most realistic one. They changed their plan from a vague "each game is a prequel to the one before" to an actual timeline after the games where already made.
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 18:01
2
2
Ummm, I'm not sure I really agree with this assessment. Nintendo has gone on record as stating that the timeline existed far before Hyrule Historia. So not knowing OoT would be as big as it was, they still felt before the development of that game the timelines would split with that game. I do agree that the time travel mechanic in OoT would split timelines at the end of that game. So making the failure of the hero split from OoT only makes sense if the big N has came out and stated they altered the timeline because it ended up being so important. Otherwise this seems to be just an opinion.
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:59
Ummm, I'm not sure I really agree with this assessment. Nintendo has gone on record as stating that the timeline existed far before Hyrule Historia. So not knowing OoT would be as big as it was, they still felt before the development of that game the timelines would split with that game. I do agree that the time travel mechanic in OoT would split timelines at the end of that game. So making the failure of the hero split from OoT only makes sense if the big N has came out and stated they altered the timeline because it ended up being so important. Otherwise this seems to be just an opinion.
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:59
They may have claimed a timeline existed, but the truth is none of the games seemed to follow each other, except for a few samples. Legend of Zelda(original) > Zelda 2 Adventures of Link. > Link's Awakening, then going to Ocarina of Time > Majora's Mask, and finally Oracle of Ages/Seasons following each other. Miyamoto himself said more than once that each game that came out was a prequel to the previous, and only several years later, did they actually make a timeline.
– King of NES
Sep 13 '16 at 20:01
They may have claimed a timeline existed, but the truth is none of the games seemed to follow each other, except for a few samples. Legend of Zelda(original) > Zelda 2 Adventures of Link. > Link's Awakening, then going to Ocarina of Time > Majora's Mask, and finally Oracle of Ages/Seasons following each other. Miyamoto himself said more than once that each game that came out was a prequel to the previous, and only several years later, did they actually make a timeline.
– King of NES
Sep 13 '16 at 20:01
Actually, I am pretty convinced that they had a different idea in mind even before the Historia, but then they silently changed their mind and attempted to have the fan believe the new version was planned from the start (I would even go to the point to say that I am not even sure it was Aonuma that first mentioned the split timeline theory. I, for once, saw that spread between the sages on the Nintendo of America forum before ever hearing of the "interview").
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 17:57
Actually, I am pretty convinced that they had a different idea in mind even before the Historia, but then they silently changed their mind and attempted to have the fan believe the new version was planned from the start (I would even go to the point to say that I am not even sure it was Aonuma that first mentioned the split timeline theory. I, for once, saw that spread between the sages on the Nintendo of America forum before ever hearing of the "interview").
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 17:57
Adventures of Link is surely intended as a follow-up to the original game, but then Link to the Past almost seemed to be intended a prequel to those. Even later, Ocarina came to match the "ancient war" described in the LttP intro... Yep, as you say Miyamoto version seems the most realistic one. They changed their plan from a vague "each game is a prequel to the one before" to an actual timeline after the games where already made.
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 18:01
Adventures of Link is surely intended as a follow-up to the original game, but then Link to the Past almost seemed to be intended a prequel to those. Even later, Ocarina came to match the "ancient war" described in the LttP intro... Yep, as you say Miyamoto version seems the most realistic one. They changed their plan from a vague "each game is a prequel to the one before" to an actual timeline after the games where already made.
– SPArchaeologist
Sep 14 '16 at 18:01
add a comment |
Well, when you think about it, the Ocarina of time is only mentioned to be able to push forward time and take it back. But then I'm gonna use Undertale for this. Every time you restart you create a different timeline. SO it is possible that Link might have kept on trying to fix a possible mistake that he made but it kept on ending up a different situation. So this is one possible way that all of these different timelines because of a split. Also, there's the ending of Super Mario Galaxy, and The Librarians (ep 8, Season 2, "And the Point of Salvation). Every time a new timeline is created or they "reset", something is either taken away or switched around.
New contributor
The Shekiah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Well, when you think about it, the Ocarina of time is only mentioned to be able to push forward time and take it back. But then I'm gonna use Undertale for this. Every time you restart you create a different timeline. SO it is possible that Link might have kept on trying to fix a possible mistake that he made but it kept on ending up a different situation. So this is one possible way that all of these different timelines because of a split. Also, there's the ending of Super Mario Galaxy, and The Librarians (ep 8, Season 2, "And the Point of Salvation). Every time a new timeline is created or they "reset", something is either taken away or switched around.
New contributor
The Shekiah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Well, when you think about it, the Ocarina of time is only mentioned to be able to push forward time and take it back. But then I'm gonna use Undertale for this. Every time you restart you create a different timeline. SO it is possible that Link might have kept on trying to fix a possible mistake that he made but it kept on ending up a different situation. So this is one possible way that all of these different timelines because of a split. Also, there's the ending of Super Mario Galaxy, and The Librarians (ep 8, Season 2, "And the Point of Salvation). Every time a new timeline is created or they "reset", something is either taken away or switched around.
New contributor
The Shekiah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Well, when you think about it, the Ocarina of time is only mentioned to be able to push forward time and take it back. But then I'm gonna use Undertale for this. Every time you restart you create a different timeline. SO it is possible that Link might have kept on trying to fix a possible mistake that he made but it kept on ending up a different situation. So this is one possible way that all of these different timelines because of a split. Also, there's the ending of Super Mario Galaxy, and The Librarians (ep 8, Season 2, "And the Point of Salvation). Every time a new timeline is created or they "reset", something is either taken away or switched around.
New contributor
The Shekiah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
The Shekiah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 10 mins ago
The ShekiahThe Shekiah
124
124
New contributor
The Shekiah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
The Shekiah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
The Shekiah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f140542%2fwhy-is-ocarina-of-time-the-splitting-off-point-for-the-zelda-timeline%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
There might be split timelines for all of the games' potential defeats. We only have games continuing from OOT's defeat.
– Slacklord the Terrible
Sep 13 '16 at 19:23
Yeah, I covered that. What I'm more interested in is if the big names at Nintendo have covered this in an interview, as in "Yes, we do have ideas for more timelines where the player lost in another game" for example. Or maybe that you drank too much Lon-Lon Ranch milk and passed out for eternity...
– El Bromista
Sep 13 '16 at 19:27
4
Ehhhh... probably because that was the only way they could explain the "sealed Ganon" bit in Link to the Past? OoT already has the branching plot, so it gets it by default. There's only so much arc welding you can do without showing some seams.
– Radhil
Sep 13 '16 at 19:30
would this not be better suited to gaming.stackexchange.com?
– NKCampbell
Sep 13 '16 at 19:40
2
@NKCampbell - maybe, but as the question is about the plot, and not about playing the game, it's on-topic here since its a fantasy setting. And actually, I think Arqade closes questions about developer intentions, so they might not even take it.
– Radhil
Sep 13 '16 at 19:42