My Linear and Split Timeline Theories.
View Single Post
) [ ]
01-23-2009, 03:01 PM
Bow down before the one you serve, you're going to get what you deserve.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Zelda Theorizing
Re: My Linear and Split Timeline Theories.
Originally Posted by
Because the hero in at that time (Gustaf) was referred to as the Hero of Men. The HoT was not mentioned yet. Also, the Minish were tired of the fighting in Hyrule, which could possibly be the great war of unifying Hyrule which is spoken of in
You've obviously seen the GameTrailers Timeline...forget EVERYTHING you saw in it, it's all a lie. Seriously. I wrote an article about it. ZI is still down, but I might be able to find it somewhere.
-The Hero of Men is NEVER stated to be Gustaf
-Just because the Hero of Time isn't mentioned dosen't mean MC is first. Only
, and WW mention the Hero of Time [and
implies it]...does that mean the other 10 games ALL come before
-The Minish were not "tired of the fighting". What Minish Cap REALLY says is that the world was about to be swallowed up by shadows/evil, and the Minish Came in and helped the Hero of Men save the day.
Well, I was just thinking on how many years could have passed between each game, and so I figured that anything could've easily happened to the Triforce.
It's usually not a good idea to leave something important like that up to imagination. You should have some sort of explanation for how it happened, as it's a very significant storyline element. Especially when you consider that
ends with the Triforce complete and in the castle, and OoX begins with the Triforce complete and in the castle.
If you think about,
was one of the first Zelda games. Therefore, not any of the future games existed yet, so the backstory was near the beginning. But,
, according to Nintendo (before
came out), was the first game in the timeline. The
backstory could've happened at the very beginning, but
happens in the closer ending of the timeline due to the fact that: 1.)Link comes back from Holodrum/Labrynna and finds that Hyrule has moved North (in
, you must get all of his items again, and he finds that the Hyruleans DID move North, as seen in
occurs only seasons after
, according to Nintendo.
The Hyruleans didn't just "move" north. The kingdom we see in
has existed for quite some time. The kingdom of
got destroyed though, leaving only
Hyrule. It wasn't "moving", it's just that
Hyrule is all that was left.
I personally believe that either a split or linear timeline could BOTH work, if you place facts correctly. Any of those timeline interviews could easily be fake, made by either linear or split supporters.
They're not fake. There's three documented interviews in which they state there's a split, and they're not translated by splittists...they're translated by un-biased Nintendo workers.
Nintendo's Missed Opportunity: Four Swords DS
Voted Best Zelda Theorist Summer 2008, Winter 2008, and Summer 2009
Voted Most Knowledgeable of Zelda Winter 2008.
Voted Most Dedicated Theorist Summer 2009
View Public Profile
Find all posts by Erimgard