I stopped paying attention to Zelda afterthe disappointment that wasTwilight Princess. I remember all the discussions on here about the split timeline following OoT. Back then everyone thought there were only two timelines, with the two NES Zeldas being situated somewhere at the end of either, or being a separate canon.
Now in the wake of BotW, I saw pic related and was a bit irritated by there being a third timeline. It just doesn't make sense.
The Child and Adult timelines are logical. Adult is the default, where the Hero of Time sleeps for 7 years while Ganondorf conquers Hyrule. The HoT awakens, defeats Ganondorf, and is sent back in time by Zelda, thereby creating the Child timeline and leaving the Adult timeline without a Hero.
The Child timeline is the consequence of Link's actions in the Adult timeline. There's a clear causality and order of events, and both timelines can exist side-by-side without contradicting each other.
The defeat timeline, however, presents an entirely different outcome. If link is defeated in his battle with Ganondorf, he cannot be sent back in time, therefore the Child timeline would not exist, and the Great Flood Wouldn't happen either because Ganondorf is sealed away in the Golden Realm.
The Defeat timeline is mutually exclusive with the two other timelines. It cannot exist if they do, and vice-versa.
Can someone clear this up for me?
>>341843506
I think that picture is trying to represent two different things: A timeline branch (Adult and Child in one continuity) and a continuity branch (Adult and Child versus Defeat).
The Adult and Child timelines would not be causally related to the Defeat timeline; it's like if a franchise were rebooted or retconned something. So you're correct in that they are mutually exclusive, if that's how I'm reading it correctly.
>>341844270
To add to my post, if you want to surmise they are causally related, then there'd need to be some other time travel event. For example, we can assume the Defeat timeline happened first, and at some point later in that timeline, something or someone gets sent back in time, causing the Victory timelines to occur. So it would go Defeat -> Adult -> Child, or perhaps Adult -> Child -> Defeat, if we want to assume that time traveler figured that causing the Hero to be Defeated would ultimately lead to a better outcome in the future.
>>341844503
I read a theory on here that mentioned the Bottom of the Well. Adult Link needs to travel back in time and visit that dungeon as Child Link, then return to the future. (Is this the only instance of travelling back in time being mandatory for progression? I forgot.)
It could be that this created another split in the timeline—when Link travels back in time, the Child—>Adult timeline he was in is left without any Link at all and he never fights Ganondorf, and when he returns to the future, it's a different Adult timeline (that of WW).
I find this dissatisfactory though. The man in the mill says he learned the Song of Storms from Child Link when he teaches it to Adult Link, so that implies that it's still just one timeline.
wrong timeline
>>341843506
The defeat timeline is bullshit, but arguers for it do have some cop-out get of jail cards they can play.
One of those is that Ocarina of Time involves a self-completing loop. Basically, there's an event you never see which is the result of Link's actions before he goes back to the future from the past the second time. This is because you have to go back in time at least once in the game, (it's inconsequential how many times you back because we will assume that it's all crunched in the past no matter how many times).
This is backed by the fact that all the Gerudo and the carpenters, and even a Gossip Stone, know that Nabooru has been brain-washed and haunts the wasteland.
The other thing is the Guru-Guru paradox.
>>341845723
Wrong again.
>>341846197
Another cop-out is the whole idea that Link was suspended for a reason. The idea goes that Link had to be sealed because there is at least some future where he confronts Ganondorf as a child and gets killed after drawing the Master Sword. So it puts him in slumber to prevent this reality from happening.
There is no evidence for this though.
>>341846197
>>341846573
Another theory posits that Link dies against Ganon like the Hyrule Historia says, but that Zelda manages to send herself and the six Sages back in time to the point after which Link drew the sword, but before Ganon ever escaped with the Triforce. They seal up Ganon, thereby leading to the events of ALttP.
But for this to make sense, you have to assume that the Sages are not dead. Alternatively, that they are dead but inhabited their former bodies along with child Zelda before doing the deed, like Link did.
I never actually completed OoT.At the end of OoT when Link is sent back in time, at which point in time does he arrive? Before or after he draws the Master Sword?
If not, or if that isn't made sufficiently clear, you could bullshit that he returns to the Child timeline after Child Link pulls out the sword and falls asleep, so at this point there are TWO Child Links, one in stasis, and the other going on to Termina.
…actually, that wouldn't affect the outcome at all.
Although, wasn't it that Ganondorf gained access to the Triforce when Child Link pulled out the sword?
>>341845454
>Is this the only instance of travelling back in time being mandatory for progression?
also spirit temple
>>341846197
>>341846573
>>341847064
Finally, there is what I call, the Monkey's Paw theory.
Basically when Ganon touched the Triforce he wished for not only Hyrule, but the entire world to be his, like he and a Gossip Stone reiterate. The supposition is the third timeline is all an artifice to fulfill this wish.
>>341847318
He goes back before. Zelda is still peeping on Ganondorf's arrival at the time, and the Skull Kid never got the Skull Mask from Link in Majora's Mask.
>>341846573
>>341847064
I suppose that makes sense. It's all speculation since there's nothing in the games supporting the Defeat timeline, but it's logical.
Child Link faces Ganondorf with the Master Sword and loses, but Ganondorf is sufficiently weakened for the Sages to be able to seal him away in the Golden Realm, as told in ALttP.
Then, at some point afterwards, the sages go back in time (or somehow communicate with their past selves to warn them), in order to get Child Link put into stasis so that he can actually defeat Ganondorf.
Since you are playing a descendant of the Hero of Time (unless the knight mentioned in the prologue is really just a random knight), and save the descendants of the Sages, none of them would have died in the Defeat timeline, so maybe Child Link just got his ass handed to him but barely survived (leading to BotW?).
>>341847695
>He goes back before. Zelda is still peeping on Ganondorf's arrival at the time, and the Skull Kid never got the Skull Mask from Link in Majora's Mask.
Ah, all right then.
>>341843506
Whats the point in the defeat timeline again?
Its just an ass pull from nintendo to explain the no lore from the zelda games in those golden times?
>>341848153
>create OoT as a prequel to ALttP
>create WW and TP as sequels to OoT
>no space for ALttP left in either timeline
>shit shit shit
>asspull a third timeline so that ALttP can still exist in the same canon
>>341845723
>Link ask to be excused
kok tep
>>341848419
>>341848153
Basically this. They had a basic time line up until Wind Waker. LoZ then AoL as a direct sequel, ALttP was a prequel to both of those, with LA as a direct sequel. OoT as a prequel to those and the original 'origin story' of the series, then MM as a direct sequel. When WW came out, that's when they started adding much more emphasis on the lore and each game after that started being built around the dual ending to OoT, but that left the early games in a place where the events didn't really match up with all the new lore heavy entries, so the third time line was created to give them a place.
Sahasrahla in ALttP:
“Generations ago, an order of
knights protected the Hylian
royalty. These Knights of
Hyrule were also guardians
of the Pendant of Courage.
It has been said that whenever
disaster waylays the royal
family, a Hero shall emerge
from the bloodline of the
Knights of Hyrule...
Unfortunately, most of them
were destroyed in the great
war against evil that took
place when the seven sages
created their seal, so it was
thought that a hero would
never again emerge...
But lo! I believe you are our
hero, Link! Find the
remaining Pendants.”
The Hero of Time certainly wasn't a knight yet at the end of OoT.
The defeat timeline is mutually exclusive to the other 2, it's just what would happen if Link lost to Ganon at the end of OoT
It is an asspull to give the older games a place but it the funny part is that it still makes sense with the context of the games plots
Now what's bullshit is that Zelda is a "seventh sage" of sorts in OoT, TP, and ALttP, but ALBW has 7 sages NOT INCLUDING Zelda for no reason
>>341850210
Maybe the 7th sage in ALBW is a distant relative of Zelda. At one point there were siblings: one was designated to continue the royal Zelda line, the other was designated to continue the 7th sage line.
>>341847695
That Monkey's Paw theory is probably the most sound one I've heard so far. I personally find it to be less bullshit than how he gets the Triforce of Power in TP.
>>341847695
But Ganon never got a wish, the Triforce split when he touched it due to his unbalanced heart.
He only got the full force AFTER defeating Link and causing the Downfalll timeline.
>>341850324
That's what I always thought. The youngest child one generation that never became king/queen. The line continues on and on until they are far enough removed from the royal family that they weren't living in the castle anymore.
