MC,FS FSA /WW connection

Originally Posted by Sparty

Fine, he burps out the sword if anything.

All I'm saying is we have yet to see what Link's ultimate sword will be in this upcoming DS Zelda title. Perhaps the wooden sword of LoZ will make a reappearance, as well as the old man that hands it to him.

Hello little one, come touch my "sword". Unfortunately Link took it as a literal meaning.

Anyway, I've no problem with this time line really. And though every game has the wind in it in some matter, it really is only the ones he mentioned that took it to that extra level. Anyway, I'd like ZWii to be about recovering the Master Sword from the head of Ganon, but maybe releasing it causes Ganon to be set free, and some really gay kiddish thing happens like he wasn't actually dead. Then that leads into ALttP. But, as I always say "too early to speculate" so I can't take that in any seriousness.

ST probably won't have Ganon, and if it does, he'll appear in a smaller matter, like in LA, AoL.

obviously there are SOME references to wind in other games, but in none of these games is it important to the plot in any way. Besides all of these games are theoretically on the AT except TP anyway, so that's a pretty weak arguement.

My piont was that WW, MC FS, and FSA all incorporate wind as a key part of their story and plot, which i think is very interesting.

I also find it hard to say that the HoM story is pre-OoT unless MC is pre-OoT, or at least on the childtimeline, there is no reason for this legend, and more specifically, the four sword in general to survive the flood.

Admittedly we don't no the status of the Ms in spirit tracks, but assuming its not there, it makes sense that a new weapon needs to emerge. Now that i think about it, wasn't the FS called the white sword for at least part of that game? not sure about that one though. SO here is my revised timeline

/ WW-PH-ST?-Aol BS-MC-LoZ/AoL--FS-FSA-ZW?-ALttP/OoX/LA
O oT
\ MM-TP
which is essentially what you just said Beemrov

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

Please explain why we must disregard: MC(yet we do regard FSA) and OOX.

Because Capcom can't be expected to uphold the same level of continuity that Nintendo attempts to keep. Almost every character in OoX and tMC is a cameo. FSA is Nintendo and follows the core Ganon-based story of the series while allowing the placements of other FSS games by default. While WW-tMC makes some sense, WW-FSA makes none, and TP-FSA makes so much more.

LA, PH, MM, and FS aren't really argued about because they either A) Have a concrete placement or B) Don't do much for or against the timeline. However if one is to have a post-WW timeline of any kind then I think it would be very hard to accomplish this without the placement of FSA. OOX might not affect the timeline although I like to think that it is sort of a bridge for ALTTP/LA-LOZ/AOL.

OoX should be irrelevant, although I've noticed that this particular forum's popular AT line features OoX as a major story bridge. The Trident, particularly.

Ok the coast alone shoots a big hole through TP-FSA. Also how can you say that WW-MC makes sense but WW-FSA doesn't? By default if one made sense(MC) and the other is a sequel to that one(FSA) then both should make sense.

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

Ok the coast alone shoots a big hole through TP-FSA.

It is a coast. Not some grand remains of an anicent flood. The coast was nod toward LoZ, but I think you simply overestimating its value as timeline reference.

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

Also how can you say that WW-MC makes sense but WW-FSA doesn't? By default if one made sense(MC) and the other is a sequel to that one(FSA) then both should make sense.

TMC could work as a new 'Hyrule', as it has the Hyrule which looks least alike any Hyrule seen in the Zelda series. However, FSA Hyrule, has plenty of landmarks in common with games as ALTTP, OoT and TP. It's in my opinion more likely that TMC Hyrule, as first before OoT, progressed into what we would be more familiar with seen in OoT, FSA, ALTTP, TP etc - Rather than saying that OoT Hyrule gets flooded, a new Hyrule emerges one way or another, which in this case is TMC Hyrule, which later turns out to become exactly same Hyrule that we knew from the pre-flood era.

Nerushi: By itself it is pointless but when one considers that fact that TP never shows us one and it probably would if they wanted their to be a connection then it could be taken as a significant Timeline indicator.

I don't see how FSA looks terribly like OOT Hyrule. Death Mountain is in too much of a northern position. Zora's domain was retconned to being in DM's position(TP) so it's not in the proper place for FSA. The forest is still there but according to FSA Ordon must have broken off from Hyrule or something(the coast is in its place), there's a forest to the Northwest which is where Snowpeak should be. Pretty much the only things that line up are the desert the castle. Also if you rotate MC's map 90 degrees clockwise then it seems to line up fairly well with ALTTP.

B

ecause Capcom can't be expected to uphold the same level of continuity that Nintendo attempts to keep. Almost every character in OoX and tMC is a cameo. FSA is Nintendo and follows the core Ganon-based story of the series while allowing the placements of other FSS games by default. While WW-tMC makes some sense, WW-FSA makes none, and TP-FSA makes so much more.

Nintendo hasn't been known to keep that much continuity either, just saying. The placement of FSA depends largely on the placement of MC. IF MC is first, i think a CT- FSA placement is better than an AT placement, but there are serious flaws there too. Why is there a magical reappearence of the FS? where did the island come from (ik geography's weak but still a decent question).

By having WW-TMC you solve the serious problem with the HoM BS, Why would they create the MS if they have the FS? it seriously undermines Oot's BS. Whereas after WW, the FS was created because the MS was gone. Why can't FSA follow this? The gerudo can just have found there way to new hyrule, or be a divergence of the Wind Tribe, its beem theorized that there is a legitimate connection between the two. Especially since the gerudo in FSA don't act much like the gerudo in any other game. There is also the wind connection on the adult timeline, now ik that's hardly concrete, but it makes sense to have games that deal with a certain part of the history be in relatively close proximity to each other.

Oni, implementing a coast in a 2D game, is way way waay easier than doing the same in an 3D. Particulary considering FSA is stage based, and does not like TP have an complete connecting overworld. I see buckets of reason for the developers to spare themselves not making an coast in TP, if all they're ever gonna use it for as timeline reference. That is not Nintendo way of doing thing. Consider this with Miyamoto who puts gameplay way ahead of story.

Also, OoT Hyrule was meant to be the same Hyrule as ALTTP Hyrule - The same way TP was made to be the same Hyrule as in OoT. FSA, shows us an Hyrule made after ALTTP and LoZ. Either way, what is important isn't "The forest in X isn't in the same spot as the forest in Y!!!". What is important is the that the landmarks themselves exist! Death Mountain, Lake Hylia, Kakariko Village, Lost Woods etc. You name them. If we went by 'exact' location then there is no way TMC could be followed by FSA. But that doesn't matter, since we already know it does.
Because of that, trying to match up landmarks or similar location by where they are in relations to each other is quite worthless. Particulary these so called 'rotation'. There no way the creators had that intent in mind.

If you can't prove there's no coast under old Hyrule's clouds, you can't prove the coast is relevant to the timeline.

If you can't prove there's no coast under old Hyrule's clouds, you can't prove the coast is relevant to the timeline.

agreed

cukeman: Very well TP shows that Hyrule is surrounded by mountains. No matter how high a vantage point you look from there's not a coast in sight.

Nerushi: I just find it interesting that the only game that is 100% CT doesn't have a coast yet many 2D games do have one. Wait Hylians are notorious for naming things the same things. Also I think the positioning of things is rather relevant. If the lost woods was on an island a mile away from Hyrule would you still connect the game it is in to ALTTP just because the landmark exists?

Oni, positioning could be relevant. However, positioning, geography and all that follows are primarily made with gameplay in mind. Story comes only second in that regard. Because of that we have to consider what is practical, particulary if TP was to made looking like OoT Hyrule, or ALTTP Hyrule, which one gets the most priority? Also, in terms of whats relevant, I think TP having MS in an grove, with a scenario looking exactly like the one in ALTTP far outweights any 'positioning'.

Nerushi: I can see why you put ALTTP on the timeline i merely disagree about its likelyhood.

no matter what vantage point you get in TP, you can't see coast or land off the TP map...

...cause they didn't make any...

Originally Posted by Twilit Mask of Time

Now that i think about it, wasn't the FS called the white sword for at least part of that game? not sure about that one though.

In TMC: Picori Blade - White Sword (x elements) - Four Sword

The Noble Sword in OoX is also called the White Sword in the Japanese version.

SO here is my revised timeline

/ WW-PH-ST?-Aol BS-MC-LoZ/AoL--FS-FSA-ZW?-ALttP/OoX/LA
O oT
\ MM-TP

Awesome, except for the fact that Link and Zelda have never met before in OoX. OoX has to be on its own.

which is essentially what you just said Beemrov

Yep. I'm glad to help.

Heh heh..."Beemrov".

In TMC: Picori Blade - White Sword (x elements) - Four Sword

The Noble Sword in OoX is also called the White Sword in the Japanese version.

could we then say that the white sword= picori sword? cuz that would cement MC being after LoZ-AoL and the Oracles.

Originally Posted by Twilit Mask of Time

could we then say that the white sword= picori sword? cuz that would cement MC being after LoZ-AoL and the Oracles.

other way around. No one used the sword from HoM-tMC. Also, we know the FS is found in LttP, so tMC-LttP-LoZ is what is implied by that. I'm not sure why we decided they were the same sword?

The White Sword is a temporary phase between Picori Blade and Four Sword. The White Sword
in Minish Cap is never seen in any other game.

yea ur right, it was renamed the white sword, but if you put LoZ after ALttP then you once again have n0 explanation for ganon in that game and it was just an idea that might solidify the timeline.
Unless the HoM story only predates MC, and the blade was found from LoZ link by the picori, and given to the hero of men. I don't recall the picori ever calling it the picori blade, but i have serious doubts about that.

Originally Posted by Twilit Mask of Time

yea ur right, it was renamed the white sword, but if you put LoZ after ALttP then you once again have n0 explanation for ganon in that game and it was just an idea that might solidify the timeline.

there is and never will be an explanation for LoZ Ganon. Stop framing it as a LttP-LoZ specific problem.

Unless the HoM story only predates MC, and the blade was found from LoZ link by the picori, and given to the hero of men. I don't recall the picori ever calling it the picori blade, but i have serious doubts about that.

The Picori produced the sword from the sky. They didn't find it in Hyrule and give it back ceremoniously.