So this "what if" scenario has been confirmed?

Regarding the mutually exclusive or "subjective" interpretation, if Nintendo indeed views the chronology that way, it's like they didn't release a timeline at all.. I sincerely hope they don't! What's the point in releasing a timeline if you leave it up to the fans to decide what happened? I'd like to see Aonuma elaborating on that at some point.

It was exactly the prequel they said it was. It features Ganondorf's rise to power and the seal of the seven sages (Ganon and the seven sages being the two things they said connect it to the Imprisoning War), and based on the series' pattern with connections to other games, there's no precedent for it needing to be more than that.

OoT also shows a Link defeating Ganon, whereas the ALttP BS mentions no hero. You can't look only in the similarities when you are making comparisons. The fact that they had the IW in mind doesn't mean that they made a good job portraying it.

What's the point in releasing a timeline if you leave it up to the fans to decide what happened?

That's called being creative and giving the fan a choice. I know not many people are used to that since they're more accustomed to being told what to like and what to do, but there is such a thing.

I think that you misunderstood me. It's ok if you prefer one branch over the other. But the problem is that a subjective timeline equals to no timeline, if indeed that is their intention.

Originally Posted by Lex

It was exactly the prequel they said it was. It features Ganondorf's rise to power and the seal of the seven sages (Ganon and the seven sages being the two things they said connect it to the Imprisoning War), and based on the series' pattern with connections to other games, there's no precedent for it needing to be more than that.

Also, they didn't say it was going to be the Imprisoning War, they said it is the Imprisoning War after the game was released. It's sufficient to serve as a retelling of the story in the writers' eyes, as well as the vast majority of the fanbase prior to people getting confused by the introduction of TWW.

Except no it isn't. Ganon was sealed in the SR with only the ToP. That alone makes it not the SW. We've already been over why OOT cannot be the SW. I'm not doing it again. Even Nintendo sees that it can't be the SW. They made too many contradictions. So the changed it and made it be before the SW.

Originally Posted by zeldafan1982

I think that you misunderstood me. It's ok if you prefer one branch over the other. But the problem is that a subjective timeline equals to no timeline, if indeed that is their intention.

It happens in art and in other media all the time. The artist / writer lets the viewer interpret the work.

In this case, Aonuma created 3 separate scenarios with the stories and let the viewer interpret how it will end. Its not an all or nothing scenario, where it has to be 3 alternate, co-existing universes or its just a gabble of games. Zelda is far from a mere logical story. It is pure fantasy and imagination.

In this case, Aonuma created 3 separate scenarios with the stories and let the viewer interpret how it will end.

Well, I don't mind when the ending is not explicitly stated or even when the games don't connect in an obvious way. My concern here is that if I'd chose the AT/CT I would have to disregard 6 games and vice - versa. It's one thing to let the viewer/reader interpret things and another to essentially force him to deem a bunch of stories as non-canon.

Originally Posted by The Baton of the Wind

That's called being creative and giving the fan a choice. I know not many people are used to that since they're more accustomed to being told what to like and what to do, but there is such a thing.

There's being creative and then there's poor writing. Metaphysics or no, at least two of the branches as they've been described don't work without glaring stupidity on the part of people who are practically required by their circumstances to be competent. That's the basis of my objections, not that I'm too simple-minded to appreciate open-ended story-telling.

Originally Posted by silver arrow

Except no it isn't. Ganon was sealed in the SR with only the ToP. That alone makes it not the SW.

Except the official timeline is confirmed to have contradictions and the connections persist despite this (just like OoT=IW was confirmed in 1998 despite the contradictions), so the precedent is that contradictions are not sufficient to diminish authorial intent.

Originally Posted by Lex

Except the official timeline is confirmed to have contradictions and the connections persist despite this (just like OoT=IW was confirmed in 1998 despite the contradictions), so the precedent is that contradictions are not sufficient to diminish authorial intent.

Doesn't matter what authorial intent there was. It is flat out impossible for OOT to be the SW. It's a far cry from the relatively small contradictions in HH.

Ok I hate to sound like a dip♥♥♥♥ but what does SW stand for? All these abbreviations are making it hard for me to decipher anything

Originally Posted by silver arrow

Doesn't matter what authorial intent there was. It is flat out impossible for OOT to be the SW.

It's impossible if the games' stories are totally dependent on/must adhere to all the details from previous entries.

It's possible if games' connections can involve diverting from the established details of one entry and replacing them with new details in another.

Guess which of these limitations is true of HH - most notably in LttP's connection to OoT.

Originally Posted by Big McIntosh

Ok I hate to sound like a dip♥♥♥♥ but what does SW stand for? All these abbreviations are making it hard for me to decipher anything

Sealing War

Originally Posted by Lex

It's impossible if the games' stories are totally dependent on/must adhere to all the details from previous entries.

It's possible if games' connections can involve diverting from the established details of one entry and replacing them with new details in another.

Guess which of these limitations is true of HH - most notably in LttP's connection to OoT.

ALTTP's connection with an alternate OOT actually.

If everything seen everywhere in all Zelda games is completely inaccurate then everything can work as anything.

Originally Posted by silver arrow

ALTTP's connection with an alternate OOT actually.

But isn't that what I'm saying, that connections can be forged through the creation of alternate versions of previously-told stories?

Originally Posted by Lex

But isn't that what I'm saying, that connections can be forged through the creation of alternate versions of previously-told stories?

Indeed, but that's just it. It has to be an alternate version. Different in that major plot lines have completely different ends. It's different than ignoring a plot hole here and there.

Originally Posted by silver arrow

Indeed, but that's just it. It has to be an alternate version. Different in that major plot lines have completely different ends.

Why? Why can't it just be "another story about the Imprisoning War of the Seven Sages" that's meant to be set before LttP by virtue of that fact? Why does it have to be "a story that follows the precise plot of the original", particularly when the creators have stated that this isn't how they develop the games?

Originally Posted by Lex

Why? Why can't it just be "another story about the Imprisoning War of the Seven Sages" that's meant to be set before LttP by virtue of that fact? Why does it have to be "a story that follows the precise plot of the original", particularly when the creators have stated that this isn't how they develop the games?

Because the imprisoning War is a defined event in Hyrulian history. They could easily make another story about it that doesn't follow the plot exactly, but there are key moments in the historical event that make the imprisoning war the imprisoning war.

OOT as a story clearly has inspiration from the SW in ALTTP's manual. That doesn't make it the SW itself though. It has many elements from the SW story but enough differences to clearly distinguish it as a separate event.

I think the creators are changing the way they make their games, I'd say the release of a timeline, as well as the release of Skyward Sword is evidence. I think they are starting to put stories behind everything.

Originally Posted by shadow of Majora

Link didnt die in oot. deal with it.

He CAN die.
And for the DT to transpire, he has to.
And since ALttP has been out for like, ever, we see that it happens.

He was alive at the end. deal with it. it is not a possible ending to oot. deal with it.

Are you ♥♥♥♥ting me?
If you die in the game, you're taken to the Game Over screen where you go to the main menu and then where you saved. The same thing happens when you win. Which makes them both gameplay mechanics.

The objective of the game IS to win. That doesn't mean that Link's death doesn't count, because Nintendo has told you your opinion is wrong.

Im sorry if you don't believe nintendo has intellectual rights to its own property and stories. deal with it.

They do and HH is proof of that.
Nintendo says that Link's death in OoT leads to ALttP.

Which makes it true. Deal with it.

Originally Posted by shadow of Majora

not and if he does die situation. if her were to die situation.

Semantics.
Nintendo says Link can die during the final battle.
And the game corroberates this as well.

And if Link dies, ALttP happens.

Originally Posted by silver arrow

One can simply play OOT and see that it totally isn't the prequel they said it was going to be though. This is why they had to make a what if ending for it to even work.

Not even. They could have put ALttP on the CT after FSA and it would have worked.

Originally Posted by silver arrow

Indeed, but that's just it. It has to be an alternate version. Different in that major plot lines have completely different ends. It's different than ignoring a plot hole here and there.

The only difference is Link's eath which leads to a different set of events.
Everything that happened before Link dies is exactly the same.

Originally Posted by Cayenne Pepper

Not even. They could have put ALttP on the CT after FSA and it would have worked.

I don't understand how this relates to what I said.

The only difference is Link's eath which leads to a different set of events.
Everything that happened before Link dies is exactly the same.

That major event had to be changed in order for it to be possible though, is what I'm getting at. There is an opposite outcome in the main plot line.