A Third Split in the Timeline: Possible Causes

It’s been a while since I’ve attempted a theory. And quite frankly, I’m not gonna try. Instead, I’m gonna update one of my oldest Zelda theories: How and why the timeline split. And like before, it’s confusing as hell. But now, I’ve added more content and cleared up and temporal miscommunications from the first. First and foremost, if you want the original, read it here:

How and Why the timeline split
It’s locked of course, but I feel as if I need to get this out.
As I stated it before, it wasn’t wrong. How and why the timeline split was indirectly spelled out in the games. I’m also adding new points and reclaiming some things.

With no further ado, I begin.

As everyone knows, the Zelda timeline is split. It splits at the end of Ocarina of Time due to Zelda’s temporal hijinx. Until the point Zelda sends Link back, there is only one timeline. Nothing predestined, just time as its happening; which goes like this:

SS – MCBS – OoT

I believe that the WBC and the HoM existed prior to OoT. However, that has nothing to do with this theory. So I will not discuss it further.
Upon Link receiving the Ocarina of Time [The item, which will be from here on out referred to as TO.] Link uses it to go into the future. How is this done? Does he skip time? The answer to that is no. If one were to just skip over time, they’d be the same age as when they left. Does he move forward? No, because that would wield the same result. No. Link does not skip or travel to the future. Link trains during that 7 year period.
This notion is furthered by the fact that his ears are pierced. Links ears didn’t happen like that by themselves. So rather, Link is sealed during those seven years. But what about travelling backwards?

When Link goes back in time, he reverts to his original age carrying both his adult items and adult Link knowledge and the timeline he leaves is destroyed. Because were it not, there’d be multiple splits, but as explained before, no they’re not. The future Link leaves is the result of the Unchecked Past, which upon arrival becomes the Present. And when he leaves, it becomes a Hypothetical Future.

Basically what I’m saying is:

UP -> F [Pr]
And Pa <- Pr [HF]

And now you’re thinking “Pepper, what about the items? Shouldn’t they be destroyed?” And the answer is a resounding no. The items from the future are on Link’s person. This grants them immunity from deletion. It is possible that each item [special, not every day] are granted the Hyperspatial Immunity the Goddesses are and only exist as one, whichever time it may be in. But personally, I believe in the Replacement Method, which OoT indirectly confirms. Because, if there was multiple simultaneous Links, it’d solve all of our problems. I think Aonuma spoke on this recently but do not quote me on it.

So Link obtains an item that needs to be used now, but can only be used in the future. There’s only two timeframes: The Past/Resent and the Future/Present. So the obvious thing to do is to take it into the past and deal with it then. Once Link returns to the Past, it automatically updates. The Link that was there is updated to now be the Link that returned. And the Past itself became the Present. Since the future doesn’t exist yet, this Present is now Perfect Present. It is where time technically ends. [The World Ends with Link. Imagine that.]

Say that Link gives the item from the future to someone in the past, and then goes to the future again. This is now the Future Revised. Depending on when he travels, the item in particular may still be with the recipient. Technically, since he went back again, he should have undone the original giving of the item, which should result in the future item's deletion. Instead, because it's on his person, he keeps the item and the past even didn't happen. More on that subject later though.

Each travel back and forth through time updates the Perfect Present and the Future; or more specifically Future Revised. The previous Future Revised is destroyed and replaced with a new Future Revised. The Past, which becomes the Present, as opposed to Perfect Present is containing a Link to which has knowledge of a Hypothetical Future yet to come; or even has come but prevented. [It only becomes Perfect Present when something new happens that didn't happen in the previous Perfect Present. The Present or Past, in any temporal tense, does not get destroyed, just updated. Since it's the start of his journey, its deletion would result in Link's deletion; Present, Perfect Present, Past, Hypothetical Future, Future, Future Revised, and Perfect Future alike.
Now at the very end of Ocarina, Link does not travel to the past. No, he is sent back. The OT is an item that prevents a paradox. Sort of like a Paradox Inhibitor. Like Perfect Present Link running into Present Link during the giving of the item during a previous travel. This Paradox Inhibitor also allows for items to remain on Link’s person, causing them to update their status and location upon Link’s arrival into the Past, aka the Perfect Present.

The Paradox Inhibitor is removed from Adult Link, or Present Adult Link, and he is sent to his childhood. Since the inhibitor is removed from the article in question [Link], it no longer protects him from a paradox. So this iteration of Adult Link isn’t sent back in time, but is instead removed from time itself and placed into the Perfect Past; which, as it should, automatically updates itself into Perfect Present.

I have left out the Perfect Past previously on purpose, so I will try to explain. You see, Link could travel to the past an infinite amount of times and never come across a Perfect Past. Instead, by going into the Future, Link nullified the original Perfect Past so that it could never come to be. A Perfect Past is a Past, as viewed from the Future, which would lead into Twilight Princess. If he had never removed the sword, the Perfect Past would remain the Present but would still not lead into Twilight Princess. Only by preventing the events of the Future half of Ocarina of Time, Link destroys a Hypothetical Future.

Zelda removes Link from time; he is de-aged, and sent to his time to live as a child. But this poses a problem because Link, as a child, already exists in that timeframe of this particular Perfect Future’ Past. Like I said before, the Present [in the sense of the Original Past Link left] doesn’t get destroyed; because none of the Links in OoT [the game] would exist after that if it did. Link’s arrival into the Perfect Past does not destroy or replace, but instead displaces that Original Imperfect Past which caused the Original Imperfect Future Link to correct things during the events of the game. This displacement becomes known as the Adult Timeline seven years into its future. But what about the Perfect Past/Perfect Present? It continues to exist and a separate timeline is created due to the Perfect Past becoming the Perfect Present. This is what is known as the Child Timeline.

Unfortunately, because of all of the updating of the Past/Present/Future in all incarnations, Perfect Present does not lead directly into Perfect Future. Imperfect Past/Present leads into Perfect Future by way of the game itself, through the use of Revised Pasts and Revised Futures. And that Perfect Future leads into Perfect Past/Perfect Present by way of Zelda removing Link from time.

TL;DR: Link was actually removed from time instead of being sent back. This effs up, I mean, updates the Perfect Present, formerly the Perfect Past. If Perfect Present Link [Post Ganon’s defeat] was sent to Imperfect Past, that would result in a paradox of 2 Links on one timeline. So Perfect Future Zelda sent Perfect Future Adult Link to Perfect Past [Perfect Present] as it was updated upon Link's arrival.

This is how and why two timelines were born instead of just one. I'd love some criticism. Positive and Negative feedback is appreciated.

First of all, I have to say this theory looks very good, and you obviously put lots of thoughts in it. Nevertheless, there are two points I disagree with, about the revised futur and the items.

If I understood correctly, in (very) short your theory says that whenever Link travels back in time, the Futur gets "destroyed", or rather, updated in function of his actions.


I feel as though the futur is set in stone ever since the moment Link first took hold of the Master Sword. Whenever Link travels back in time, I do not think it is ever updated or destroyed. By going back to the past, Link merely accomplishes the futur he has witnessed. The prime example would be the Song of Storm; the man remembers Young Link playing the song, yet Link didn't go back in time to play it yet, he didn't even know the song. By going back in time, Link merely fulfils the futur, he doesn't updates it, IMO.

It's kind of like Terminator. The machines traveled back in time in the hope to change the futur, but in fact they merely accomplished the futur they came from.


Also; I don't know if Link carries over the items from the futur to the past. If I recall correctly, there are no items from the futur that YL can use, aside from bombs and stuff (which I see as gameplay device). It could be simply because, YL cannot use them. I remember trying to enter the Gerudo Fortress as a child, and I expected the guard to ask Link where he got his Member Card. Yet, nothing happened. It could be a mistake on Nintendo's part, or just to prevent us from visiting the Fortress as a child, but I always thought this meant Adult Link's items remains with AL's body, only Link's soul gets transported when he travels in time.


Maybe I just have misunderstood part of your theories. In all cases, I agree with the other conclusions of your theory.

Having two Links in the past at the same time would be less of a paradox than the Song of Storms, and we know it exists in the game. In fact, just because of how time travel works on every single level in every story ever, there is no reason that there wouldn't be two Links in the past at the end of OoT unless:

1) Zelda's magic that sent Link back in time simultaneously killed past Link (which doesn't seem to be a very Zelda-like thing to do)

OR

2) Zelda's magic sent Link to a universe that had never had a Link in it in the first place rather than just sending him back in time. And since Zelda wanted Link to go back in time in order to regain his lost time, it's only logical that she would want him to do that in the very universe he belonged to. Trying to grow up in a universe where you never existed previously would seriously hinder your ability to live out your life as it was supposed to be lived out. And if Link had never been in this universe before, would the Triforce of that time have recognized him as being destined to carry it since in that universe Link was never previously destined to exist? (And if the answer is "no", since that's what makes sense, then what's up with the Triforce of Courage mark on his hand at the end of the game?)

And I see no reason for the future to be destroyed every time Link goes back in time. Things work out just fine with time rewinding whenever Link places the Master Sword in the pedestal. After all, we don't know how long Link was asleep before Ganondorf showed up. If Link had pulled the Master Sword and slept for two months before Ganondorf showed up and found the Door of Time open, we would have seen the exact same cut scenes with the exact same dialogue as if Link had pulled the Master Sword and slept for two seconds before Ganondorf showed up. As long as Ganondorf didn't show up the moment Link first pulled the Master Sword (which we know he shouldn't have since whenever Link goes back to the past Ganondorf hasn't shown up to the Pedestal of Time yet, and Link deciding not to pick up the sword wouldn't change Ganondorf's whereabouts in Hyrule), and the Master Sword always rewinds time to the moment before Link pulls the sword, then the future could stay perfectly preserved every single time. (And since the sages that you saved and temples you cleansed as an adult remain saved and cleansed when you return to the future, it makes no sense to say that the future was destroyed every time and Link redid all of those events off-screen to catch us back up.)

P.S. What's WBC stand for?

P.P.S. Let me apologize up front in case something I said indicates that I didn't read your post. I got bogged down by all the nomenclature, so I really only thoroughly read the first 8 or so paragraphs and the tl;dr section.

OK, I can't be the only one that doesn't understand most of the acronyms.

SS = Spirit Slacks?
MCBS = Majora's Crappy Bull S***?

And don't get me started on:
UP -> F [Pr]
And Pa <- Pr [HF]

... I don't even know where I could go with that.

Originally Posted by jellotime91

OK, I can't be the only one that doesn't understand most of the acronyms.

SS = Spirit Slacks?
MCBS = Majora's Crappy Bull S***?

And don't get me started on:
UP -> F [Pr]
And Pa <- Pr [HF]

... I don't even know where I could go with that.

SS = Skyward Sword
MCBS = Minish Cap Backstory

And the other two are explained in the paragraph immedietly above it.

Originally Posted by Mr Wilhelm

First of all, I have to say this theory looks very good, and you obviously put lots of thoughts in it. Nevertheless, there are two points I disagree with, about the revised futur and the items.

But it is what happens. If Link walks by a patch of dirt to grow a plant in the Future, once he goes back to the past and plants it, the future is changed. It becomes a Future Revised. So that literally happens in game.

I feel as though the futur is set in stone ever since the moment Link first took hold of the Master Sword.

By taking the MS, Link erased the events of what would have happened; which more than likely would have been ALttP. Only by taking the sword, does Link allow the events of OoT to happen. So the events aren't set in stone.

Whenever Link travels back in time, I do not think it is ever updated or destroyed.

Were that the case, then there'd be more than two branches. If Link leaving the timeline of the future allowed time to continue there, there'd be more than just the AT and the CT. Which there isn't.

By going back to the past, Link merely accomplishes the futur he has witnessed.

At no point in time [during Ocarina] has Link gone back into the past just to do the same thing he did, but earlier. Which, as stated before, would only cause multiple paradoxes and multiple timelines. But as said before, there's only the CT and the AT.

The prime example would be the Song of Storm; the man remembers Young Link playing the song, yet Link didn't go back in time to play it yet, he didn't even know the song. By going back in time, Link merely fulfils the futur, he doesn't updates it, IMO.

You have no idea what it means to update. I refer you to the plant.

YL has a seed. He travels to the future. No plant was grown from the time that he was gone.

AL returns to the past and plants the seed. This changes the future.

The Future is now Updated/Revised. It was changed, even so slightly, from its previous iteration. The fact of the matter is something changed.

And as for the SoS, it's a Temporaly Anomaly which remains constant on a loop. Its origin is unknown, but it doesn't mean anything else.

It's kind of like Terminator. The machines traveled back in time in the hope to change the futur, but in fact they merely accomplished the futur they came from.

Except that's not what happens in Zelda. Link goes to the Future to stop Ganondorf, which he does and is then sent to the past. Which also stops Ganondorf there too.

Even still, it's far different. Terminator has people coming to the future to stop the past, which only created the future in the first place. It's a paradox from the getgo.

Zelda has a starting point which comes in on no temporal paradoxes, creates and then corrects said paradoxes So the only one left is still the SoS.

Also; I don't know if Link carries over the items from the futur to the past. If I recall correctly, there are no items from the futur that YL can use, aside from bombs and stuff (which I see as gameplay device). It could be simply because, YL cannot use them. I remember trying to enter the Gerudo Fortress as a child, and I expected the guard to ask Link where he got his Member Card. Yet, nothing happened. It could be a mistake on Nintendo's part, or just to prevent us from visiting the Fortress as a child

clearly.

but I always thought this meant Adult Link's items remains with AL's body, only Link's soul gets transported when he travels in time.

They're there on his person when you look in the menu. The reason he was sent to the future was so that he could use the MS. It stands to reason that he couldn't use some of his adult items because he was too inexperienced or unable due to age.

2) Zelda's magic sent Link to a universe that had never had a Link in it in the first place rather than just sending him back in time.

For that to happen, there'd have to be previously [to OoT] existing other timelines [universes] for him to be sent to, which Aonuma just confirmed is false not too long ago.

And since Zelda wanted Link to go back in time in order to regain his lost time, it's only logical that she would want him to do that in the very universe he belonged to.

Which is the one that she's in. You don't get it?

There's the Original Past, which leads to Ganon taking over and Link stopping him.

And there's the Perfect Past. Which is constantly changed throughout the game. It was created by the events of the game itself. And that's where Zelda stuck him. Because this Past does not lead to Ganon entering the SR.

Trying to grow up in a universe where you never existed previously would seriously hinder your ability to live out your life as it was supposed to be lived out.

The universe Link landed in was not one where he never existed. I have NO idea where you're getting this. Because when Link originally was sealed, the Original Past wasn't destroyed. As I said, it would result in the destruction of all Links in every tense.

And if Link had never been in this universe before, would the Triforce of that time have recognized him as being destined to carry it since in that universe Link was never previously destined to exist? (And if the answer is "no", since that's what makes sense, then what's up with the Triforce of Courage mark on his hand at the end of the game?)

Link got the Triforce because he was destined to. And the only logical explanation of Ganondorf and Link having the pieces on the CT is because they had them on the AT.

And I see no reason for the future to be destroyed every time Link goes back in time. Things work out just fine with time rewinding whenever Link places the Master Sword in the pedestal.

Things work out less than fine. With time rewinding, there still leaves a Hypothetical Future which could take on another direction and change the course of events to become FSA for all we know. In this, time is constant. Existing at all times. You remove the future, you remove the constant.

That, and the thing about 3+ timeline being fanfiction.

and the Master Sword always rewinds time to the moment before Link pulls the sword, then the future could stay perfectly preserved every single time. (And since the sages that you saved and temples you cleansed as an adult remain saved and cleansed when you return to the future, it makes no sense to say that the future was destroyed every time and Link redid all of those events off-screen to catch us back up.)

But that's the beauty of it. Once Link goes back to the future, it updates itself as if it was still the same future. It only exist because Link did it previously. Because if they weren't as I explained them, once Link left the fuure, a new timeline would be created stemming from the point he left. One where he did awaken a sage and one where he came back to the future to do it again because rewinding undid it.

Which is why it's the "FUTURE....REVISED!"vised vised vised vised

P.S. What's WBC stand for?

War of Bound Chest
MCBS = Minish Cap BS
SS = Skyward Sword
UP = Unckecked Past
Pr = Present
F= Future
Pa = Past
HF = Hypothetical Future

Originally Posted by Cayenne Pepper

But it is what happens. If Link walks by a patch of dirt to grow a plant in the Future, once he goes back to the past and plants it, the future is changed. It becomes a Future Revised. So that literally happens in game.

I had entirely forgotten about the plants. It makes more sense now; but I'll come back to it latter.

By taking the MS, Link erased the events of what would have happened; which more than likely would have been ALttP. Only by taking the sword, does Link allow the events of OoT to happen. So the events aren't set in stone.

I know it's not the topic, but how do you think it would have been ALttP? Mere curiosity really. As it is, even if Ganondorf had found a portal to the Sacred Realm, I doubt he would have gotten the Triforce.

I don't remember Ganondorf ever getting the entire Triforce in any Zelda game to be true, so ALTTP remains an entire mystery to me.

Were that the case, then there'd be more than two branches. If Link leaving the timeline of the future allowed time to continue there, there'd be more than just the AT and the CT. Which there isn't.

Time doesn't continue, it merely is suspended until Link's return.

If someone was to watch Link as he traveled to the past, less than a second would pass for them before he returns, even if Link had remained days in the past. Odds is that they wouldn't even realize he actually traveled to the past.

You have no idea what it means to update. I refer you to the plant.

YL has a seed. He travels to the future. No plant was grown from the time that he was gone.

AL returns to the past and plants the seed. This changes the future.

The Future is now Updated/Revised. It was changed, even so slightly, from its previous iteration. The fact of the matter is something changed.

And as for the SoS, it's a Temporaly Anomaly which remains constant on a loop. Its origin is unknown, but it doesn't mean anything else.

I understand your reasoning with the plants, but I have to argue it is a gameplay mechanic. The plants, to continue with that example, are all optional and brings no necessary elements to the game. The SoS on the other hand, is integral to the story and leads to one of the only two necessary time travel to complete the story.

I don't think it can be dismissed that easily. Link didn't go back to the past yet, he didn't get the Lens of Truth; yet the futur is depicted as though he already did it. That makes no sense; unless the futur we see is already the definitive futur from the start, a futur that takes into account time travel that have yet to happen.

I always assumed the same to be true for the Temple of Spirit (the only other necessary travel to the past, in order to complete the game). There's no proof here though, but the other "updates" appear more or less as gameplay. I can't remember anything else aside from those two that were necessary to finish the game.

Even still, it's far different. Terminator has people coming to the future to stop the past, which only created the future in the first place. It's a paradox from the getgo.

Zelda has a starting point which comes in on no temporal paradoxes, creates and then corrects said paradoxes So the only one left is still the SoS.

I was using Terminator as an example simply to show that, travel in time doesn't necessarily leads to change in time. The time travel is already written, hence its effect exist before the time travel itself happens.

So when Link is in the futur, he didn't travel to the past yet, but the actions of his futur self travelling to the past are already taken into account; it happened, basically.

They're there on his person when you look in the menu. The reason he was sent to the future was so that he could use the MS. It stands to reason that he couldn't use some of his adult items because he was too inexperienced or unable due to age.

They're there, but cannot be used. I'm short in time right now so I can't write as much as I'd like, but there is a number of items that Link can get as a child, and uses still as an adult (the Lens of Truth).

There's so many cameo to the game; I'd except Nintendo to at lest program the Gerudo guard to be surprised at seeing Link's card if he still had it.

Originally Posted by Cayenne Pepper

But it is what happens. If Link walks by a patch of dirt to grow a plant in the Future, once he goes back to the past and plants it, the future is changed. It becomes a Future Revised. So that literally happens in game.

So what happens if you plant all of the Magic Beans before you ever go to the future, thus eliminating all need for the future to be revised? Could it not be that this gameplay element is formatted the way it is because of gameplay and not story? The way you're suggesting it makes it sound like the story differs from player to player. Those who plant all of their beans before going to the future never experience a revised future, whereas those who miss some of the beans and then go back in time to plant them do experience a revised future, implying that the future only revises when you time this gameplay element incorrectly.

Originally Posted by Cayenne Pepper

Were that the case, then there'd be more than two branches.

Why would there have to be 2+ branches without the revision? Time in OoT is much like rewinding and fast-forwarding a video tape. We don't get multiple tapes every time we hit the rewind or fast-forward buttons, so Link shouldn't be creating any branches here. The plant idea is the only thing you currently seem to have that supports a future that would have to be revised, but as already said, the future doesn't have to be revised if all of the beans are planted before the Master Sword is pulled. That leaves us with just the one metaphorical video tape.

Originally Posted by Cayenne Pepper

For that to happen, there'd have to be previously [to OoT] existing other timelines [universes] for him to be sent to, which Aonuma just confirmed is false not too long ago.

You are correct. This is another reason I don't believe option 2 is accurate.

Originally Posted by Cayenne Pepper

Which is the one that she's in. You don't get it?

It sounds like you don't get it. Why are you focusing solely in in option 2? Neither option works, and option 2 is the more ridiculous of the two, IMO. However, these are the only two options that would prevent there from being two Links in the past simultaneously.

Originally Posted by Cayenne Pepper

As I said, it would result in the destruction of all Links in every tense.

I have no idea where you're getting this. What results in the destruction of all Links? You just said "it" and never explained what "it" is. And since we see one Link at the end and we know logically that there has to be another one in the past at the same time, whatever "it" is obviously didn't destroy every single Link ever.

Originally Posted by Cayenne Pepper

Link got the Triforce because he was destined to. And the only logical explanation of Ganondorf and Link having the pieces on the CT is because they had them on the AT.

Who said anything about Ganondorf having a piece of the Triforce?

Originally Posted by Cayenne Pepper

Things work out less than fine. With time rewinding, there still leaves a Hypothetical Future which could take on another direction and change the course of events to become FSA for all we know.

But that assumes that the past and future are events that are occurring simultaneously. That's not what the game shows us. The game shows us that the past really is the past. They are events that have already happened. The future are events that are going to happen. The people of future Kakariko Village aren't running around while you're a child looking for the Lens of Truth. The people of future Kakariko Village don't exist yet (or at least their 7-year-older forms don't exist yet). We just know thanks to time travel what the future will look like when it finally does exist.

Originally Posted by Cayenne Pepper

Because if they weren't as I explained them, once Link left the fuure, a new timeline would be created stemming from the point he left. One where he did awaken a sage and one where he came back to the future to do it again because rewinding undid it.

You still haven't satisfactorily explained why Link leaving the future would create a new future. The future is still going to be there when Link comes back to it, just as he left it (ignoring the plants thing, of course, for already stated reasons).

And what about the thing I mentioned in my last post, about all of the sages needing to be awakened again if the old future was destroyed every time Link returns to the past? How did those sages end up being awakened if Link showed up in a new future that he's never been to before (despite having awakened, let's say three, sages before he went back in time)?

Originally Posted by Cayenne Pepper

War of Bound Chest

Ah. I figured BC might be Bound Chest, but I had no idea what the W was supposed to be since the events of TMC's back story weren't really a war, and the Bound Chest itself didn't even show up until the very end of the invasion.

Originally Posted by Volvagia_slayer

So what happens if you plant all of the Magic Beans before you ever go to the future, thus eliminating all need for the future to be revised? Could it not be that this gameplay element is formatted the way it is because of gameplay and not story? The way you're suggesting it makes it sound like the story differs from player to player. Those who plant all of their beans before going to the future never experience a revised future, whereas those who miss some of the beans and then go back in time to plant them do experience a revised future, implying that the future only revises when you time this gameplay element incorrectly.

Is it possible to plant all the magic beans before becoming an adult? From memory, the bean near the Spirit Temple can only be planted after Link learns the Requiem of Spirit (how else can Child Link get to the temple?). I might be wrong about that.

The question about the sages needing to be reawakened is a good one, and one that I asked in another thread. Having re-read this update, though, the future revised idea makes sense, but the phrasing about the future being destroyed adds confusion. I infer from Cayenne Pepper's post that the future amendments are, in a sense, cumulative: Link does stuff in the future, then goes back to the past, does stuff in the past, and what he does in the past has effects in the future that build on or add on to the future that Link had already visited, e.g.:

Link goes to future = The Future
Link returns to past and plants a bean
Link goes to future again = The Future + Bean Planted
Link returns to past and completes child portion of Spirit Temple
Link goes to future again = The Future + Bean Planted + Child portion of Spirit Temple completed

Actions that Link perform in the past are supplementary to the future that he has already visited, which ties in with the OP's "Future Revised". For this to work, though, the future cannot be destroyed every time Link goes back. In fact, it must remain in situ on the timeline so that Link's actions can add to it. This ties in with Volvagia's idea about the video tape: when we rewind a tape to the beginning, the stuff that's recorded about sixty minutes into the tape doesn't get erased; it remains there, but we just can't view it unless we either i) watch sixty minutes of the tape or ii) fast-forward through sixty minutes.

Originally Posted by Mr Wilhelm

I know it's not the topic, but how do you think it would have been ALttP? Mere curiosity really. As it is, even if Ganondorf had found a portal to the Sacred Realm, I doubt he would have gotten the Triforce.

Because if Link had never pulled the sword, Ganondorf would have been captured and killed. Thus No OoT, TP OR WW. HOWEVER, due to some of the SS spoilers I read, Ganon[dorf] would come back. He's tied to the TF, just as Zelda and Link.

I don't remember Ganondorf ever getting the entire Triforce in any Zelda game to be true, so ALTTP remains an entire mystery to me.

You do realize that ALttP WAS the only time he got the entire Triforce? Well, there's WW, but it doesn't count because he didn't use it.

Time doesn't continue, it merely is suspended until Link's return.

Time is constant. Which means, if left unchecked, it could turn in any direction.

If someone was to watch Link as he traveled to the past, less than a second would pass for them before he returns, even if Link had remained days in the past. Odds is that they wouldn't even realize he actually traveled to the past.

They also wouldn't know that their timeline was destroyed.

I understand your reasoning with the plants, but I have to argue it is a gameplay mechanic. The plants, to continue with that example, are all optional and brings no necessary elements to the game. The SoS on the other hand, is integral to the story and leads to one of the only two necessary time travel to complete the story.

Even if it is just two, by altering the past, he changes the future. Which does Revise the Future. Because it's not the exact same future. The only way it doesn't revise is if Link goes to the past and then immediately goes to the future.

I don't think it can be dismissed that easily. Link didn't go back to the past yet, he didn't get the Lens of Truth; yet the futur is depicted as though he already did it. That makes no sense; unless the futur we see is already the definitive futur from the start, a futur that takes into account time travel that have yet to happen.

OoT happens as a result of Link removing the sword. Had he done nothing, Ganon would not have entered the SR.

I always assumed the same to be true for the Temple of Spirit (the only other necessary travel to the past, in order to complete the game). There's no proof here though, but the other "updates" appear more or less as gameplay. I can't remember anything else aside from those two that were necessary to finish the game.

Nothing would appear out of place. That's the beauty of it. And the seeds were an example.

So I'll start again:
Link walks past a patch of dirt. +7 years, nothing happens.
Link returns to the past.
Link plants a seed. +7 years, a plant grows.

The future has changed. Nothing major, but it's still a change. When I say the future updates, you're expecting somethig like a wave of time changing everything right then? Just something big, correct?

I was using Terminator as an example simply to show that, travel in time doesn't necessarily leads to change in time. The time travel is already written, hence its effect exist before the time travel itself happens.

The future changed once Link removed the MS. Zelda set things in motion, but the deciding factor that allowed OoT to happen was the actual removing of the sword. Zelda saw a future of things to come, but her premonition only allowed these things to happen, not stop it like she intended. And the future set in stone is false. TP is proof of that.

Literally, if Link did nothing, neither TP nor WW would happen.

So when Link is in the futur, he didn't travel to the past yet, but the actions of his futur self travelling to the past are already taken into account; it happened, basically.

No. The SoS is a temporal anomaly. There is no logic behind it. It is simply gameplay. Because its in the game as:

guy: You look like that kid who taught me this song you're learning from me now.
past:
guy: hey kid. Teach me a song.

There is no origin in the game. It's an infinite loop, trapped in a paradox, solely existing due to its constant. [STORMCEPTION]

The SoS existed previously to OoT. And is only kept going by the fact that time is constant. If time wasn't constant, the SoS would fade into history. Never to be known by anyone.

They're there, but cannot be used. I'm short in time right now so I can't write as much as I'd like, but there is a number of items that Link can get as a child, and uses still as an adult (the Lens of Truth).

Clearly he's qualified to use it. But I think that's more gameplay than anything.

So what happens if you plant all of the Magic Beans before you ever go to the future, thus eliminating all need for the future to be revised? Could it not be that this gameplay element is formatted the way it is because of gameplay and not story? The way you're suggesting it makes it sound like the story differs from player to player. Those who plant all of their beans before going to the future never experience a revised future, whereas those who miss some of the beans and then go back in time to plant them do experience a revised future, implying that the future only revises when you time this gameplay element incorrectly.

Even if Link does not go to the past for the beans/seeds/whatever, he still has canon travels to the past. And when he changes something in the past, it changes something in the future. Which makes the Future Revise once Link gets there, whether you see it or not.

Why would there have to be 2+ branches without the revision? Time in OoT is much like rewinding and fast-forwarding a video tape. We don't get multiple tapes every time we hit the rewind or fast-forward buttons, so Link shouldn't be creating any branches here. The plant idea is the only thing you currently seem to have that supports a future that would have to be revised, but as already said, the future doesn't have to be revised if all of the beans are planted before the Master Sword is pulled. That leaves us with just the one metaphorical video tape.

Okay, I can see that logic there. But that still doesn't account for canon travels. The Future does revise for canon travels. No matter how many tapes there are.

It sounds like you don't get it. Why are you focusing solely in in option 2? Neither option works, and option 2 is the more ridiculous of the two, IMO. However, these are the only two options that would prevent there from being two Links in the past simultaneously.

Because 1 is a gruesome version of the truth. The Link that goes to see Zelda at the end is Perfect Future Adult Link who became Perfect Past [Present] Link.

2 is a more illustrated verson of the truth. Long story short, they're both correct to some degree. Zelda did send Link back to regain his childhood.

Zelda sends Link back and the Link that was sent back becomes the Link previously existing there.

I have no idea where you're getting this. What results in the destruction of all Links? You just said "it" and never explained what "it" is. And since we see one Link at the end and we know logically that there has to be another one in the past at the same time, whatever "it" is obviously didn't destroy every single Link ever.

'It' is the Past. The point Link left. I never said it was destroyed. Only the future was detroyed. Someone else pointed out time is like a video tape rewinding. Either way doesn't matter as much.

Who said anything about Ganondorf having a piece of the Triforce?

And if Link had never been in this universe before, would the Triforce of that time have recognized him as being destined to carry it since in that universe Link was never previously destined to exist? (And if the answer is "no", since that's what makes sense, then what's up with the Triforce of Courage mark on his hand at the end of the game?)

But that assumes that the past and future are events that are occurring simultaneously.

Under normal circumstances, they would be. The SoS shows us that time does stay constant. It exists in the future to create itself in the past. Only to continue doing so.

That's not what the game shows us. The game shows us that the past really is the past. They are events that have already happened. The future are events that are going to happen. The people of future Kakariko Village aren't running around while you're a child looking for the Lens of Truth. The people of future Kakariko Village don't exist yet (or at least their 7-year-older forms don't exist yet). We just know thanks to time travel what the future will look like when it finally does exist.

That sounds like an Imperfect Past viewpoint. My viewpoint is Perfect Present. You're looking at it as if Link hadn't drawn the sword yet. I'm looking at it from Link returning to the Past the final time.

You still haven't satisfactorily explained why Link leaving the future would create a new future. The future is still going to be there when Link comes back to it, just as he left it (ignoring the plants thing, of course, for already stated reasons).

Because the future in OoT happens solely due to the fact thatLink pulls the Master Sword. If Link never pulled it, it doesn't happen. So when Link returns to the past, he undoes the original pulling of the sword. Because returns to the exact second he leaves. Which makes the future in OoT irrelevant because Ganondorf can't get in the SR is the MS is still in the pedestal. Without the ToP, Ganondorf can't take over Hyrule or survive his fatal impaling in the TPBS.

Which makes the future Link created, Hypothetical. Because at the point of return, he makes Hyrule safe. By placing the MS back, he reapplies the key to the seal which means Ganondorf can't get it, which means he doesn't get the ToP, which means he doesn't take over Hyrule, which means the future that Link traveled to previously, doesn't exist.

Link going back in time doesn't do anything until the sword rests safely in the pedestal. When he doesm, it destroys the future because Link is preventing the the direct causes or the future he left.

And what about the thing I mentioned in my last post, about all of the sages needing to be awakened again if the old future was destroyed every time Link returns to the past? How did those sages end up being awakened if Link showed up in a new future that he's never been to before (despite having awakened, let's say three, sages before he went back in time)?

Aside from gameplay, that's what I mean about the future being revised. It automatically updates itself to keep these things as if they had previously come to pass. Even though technically, they should not have, due to Link.

The World Ends With Link.

It's a somewhat confusing read, but I enjoyed it. It more or less matches with what my view already was (when Link replaces the MS, time is rewound to right before he pulled it and the AT hasn't happened yet; Zelda removes Link from the timeline and places in an unaffected past right before he either pulls the MS or right after he leaves Kokiri forest), so I agree and like it quite a bit. It's definitely more in depth than anything I've written on the subject.

Whether time rewinds or not is irrelevant. It can be one tape, or a series of tapes. Once Link puts the sword down, the future is destroyed because it prevents the events of the future.

So Volvagia Slayer, that it why time isn't a tape. And if it was, Link rewinding to the seven years prior cuts the tape at the point her touched the sword. If you fast forward, yeah it's gonna be the same future. But to be able to fast forward, you need some scotch tape to patch it, which would revise said future.

First and foremost, This is a great day.

My original timeline:
.........................MM-TP-(FSA)
......................./
SS-tMC-FS-OoT
.......................\
.........................(TP)-(FSA)-AlttP-(OoX)-LA-tWW-PH-ST-LoZ-AoL-(OoX)

HH Timeline:
CT....................MM-TP-FSA
....................../
SS-tMC-FS-OoT
..................\...\
AT................\....tWW-PH-ST
DT.................AlttP-OoX-LA-LoZ-AoL


The areas where I was dead wrong mostly had to do with placing AlttP and its successors in an alternate timeline; a timeline where Link failed.

Nobody could have guessed the dev's plans for a third timeline because there was no source for it before HH.

Meanwhile, AlttP's early placement in my original timeline was about as true as could be expected to the intent created by the third timeline; AlttP never worked later in the timeline after the Great Ocean Era and the classic games needed AlttP to connect them to the timeline.

In most every other area I was pretty much dead on. It is sort of life affirming that my fourswords placement in conjunction with TP as well as my early tMC placement ideas are finally validated.

For those who misunderstood Aonuma's recent "OoT is earliest story" statements he mostly made those statements in conjunction with Ganon's initiation into the story as it related to the triforce, and his statements on OoT being the earliest were never as specific or implicit as his statements regarding TMC and FS's early placement.

I don't deny it, I am humbled and stand corrected in many areas, but the dev's word has always been final and of this single fact I have always been the utmost paragon.

And now to the point of this thread

My single beef with this third timeline is that Link failing in and of itself does not alter time.

The other two timelines are created by Zelda wielding the ocarina, a time altering device, and no such happenstance occurs in the instance of OoT's game over screen.

My single hope from this juncture is that there is more explanation uncovered about exactly why the timeline would split a third time.

My theory is that it is in fact young Zelda who first alters time with the Ocarina, altering time by causing the awakened sages to put Link to sleep once he enters the sacred realm, rather than fight Ganon as a child and fail.

If he was fated to fail and Zelda's interference created both the Adult and the Child timelines, then AlttP's eventuality is in fact the original course of the timeline, with the Adult and Child timelines breaking off from the origninal timeline.

That timeline would look like this:

........................MM-TP-FSA
....................../
SS-tMC-FS-OoT-AlttP-OoX-LA-LoZ-AoL
......................\
........................tWW-PH-ST

Your thoughts?

Post Script: This thread should not be merged with the 'denial and complaints thread' as I fully intend to spark a discussion that has nothing to do with complaining about or denying the current timeline.

Post Post Script: I fully intend on owning the English translation of this book.

I have the same problem you do with it, and haven't yet decided how to explain it in my own mind, but I do very much like your idea of ocarina interference, and link failing was the original course after all. I need to think about that... maybe in a day or two I'll have something more to say about it.
And yes I want an english translation more than anything. as well as four or five people I know who DON'T frequent places like zelda universe dungeon or informer like sites.

I have a feeling you're right about the DT just being the original timeline, until Link used the Ocarina to open the Door of Time, and awakened on the AT as the Hero of Time.
After all, the DT was definitely the only timeline until OoT came around. So the only reason the other two timelines exist, is because of OoT.
The key is the ocarina of time, it is most likely what created the other timelines when Link first used it, and when Zelda first used it.
So if it had never been used, you would just have the DT.. but using the Ocarina caused the shift to the AT, and later the CT.

This is the better version of an idea I already had! I fully support this! Also, remember in MM when Owl Dude (Gaepora Something) says it is the destiny of Termina to be crushed? That's because the DT is the original timeline and link wouldn't be able to save termina there!

The HH implies that Link was killed in the showdown at Ganon's Castle. Otherwise, I'm with you. It would be more convenient to have him killed when Ganondorf enters the Sacred Realm, but if the dev's word is final, we'll have to choose a different route.
If he was killed in that battle, something would have to be different and I suggest a lack of light arrows. I believe that Zelda, out of feelings of guilt and regret, sent Link's spirit back to be reborn into the same life, along with a prayer to the gods, begging them to save Link from his horrible fate. To answer her plea, they granted her the power of light, to give Link a fighting chance.

EDIT: ...or she simply just appealed to the gods. After all, the people of Hyrule have been known to do only that before, with impressive results.

Interesting theory. I actually like the DT being the original course; it adds more reason and weight to it's existence. That would suggest that a lot more goes on in the middle (or is it the beginning/ending?) of OoT. I smell a potential game actually focusing on Zelda...

Originally Posted by quick silver

My theory is that it is in fact young Zelda who first alters time with the Ocarina, altering time by causing the awakened sages to put Link to sleep once he enters the sacred realm, rather than fight Ganon as a child and fail.

If he was fated to fail and Zelda's interference created both the Adult and the Child timelines, then AlttP's eventuality is in fact the original course of the timeline, with the Adult and Child timelines breaking off from the origninal timeline.

What do you think of the fact that the DT-split happens when Link is adult and fights Ganondorf with all the Sages awakened and having the Triforce of Courage?
It seems quite hard for the divergence to have nay natural explanation when it happens depending on the outcome of a certain battle, without any circumstance chaged between the two different battles (the successful and unsuccesssful).

/Blue Window

Originally Posted by quick silver

My single beef with this third timeline is that Link failing in and of itself does not alter time.

You are correct - it does not. The DT is a split not based on "Time" but based on "Probability". The DT is a 5th dimensional split rather than a 4th dimensional one.

By introducing the DT, Aonuma has basically revealed to us that there are infinite probabilities in Zelda, and that the actual games in the series show a small collection of these "Probabilites".

By extension, I suppose you could say that officially approved elements such as the manga show "Probabilities" as well, albeit differing in at least a small way from the games. In the end, it's all "Zelda" canon as long as its officially Nintendo approved.