minish cap before ocarina of time in the timeline

Originally Posted by Butt Fist

Stopped reading here. You shouldn't be able to rotate any map for it to match up. North is North.

It even sort of matches up with the Eastern part of SS' map, with Lake Hylia being Lake Floria. The part of the map where it shows the sky blocks what I assume to be more of the Minish Woods (since there's a bunch of trees going North). This would make up most of the woods in SS.

Acually, given that this is another planet, the magnetic north may change (either through flipping as it does here or through significantly faster continental drift), and it is possible that even the axis north could change for bizarre reasons.

Originally Posted by Darth Yoshi

As for a post-ST placement, in MC the Oracles of Labrynna and Holodrum appear, and buy houses in Castle Town. Labrynna and Holodrum are lands that exist in a pre-Flood Hyrule, as evidenced by the fact that OoS takes place after LttP, which has no Flood in its history. Therefore, MC cannot take place after WW, artwork notwithstanding.

good point but if I remember correctly the ones who appaer are their descendants

Originally Posted by tlozbj

well explain how the descendants of the oracles appaer if the oracles do not appaer till later in the timeline or how is their knowledge about holodrum and labryna if that happens before OOT and MC could easyli be placed after LA in the timeline for the oracle descendants

Cameo appearance. Its been established that Holodrum and Labryna are lands that exist separate from Hyrule in the Legend of Zelda. Its not hard to imagine that they probably came to Hyrule from some reason or another.

Originally Posted by keyaki

Cameo appearance. Its been established that Holodrum and Labryna are lands that exist separate from Hyrule in the Legend of Zelda. Its not hard to imagine that they probably came to Hyrule from some reason or another.

But if the game really occurs before OOT explain it from that point of view

Originally Posted by tlozbj

But if the game really occurs before OOT explain it from that point of view

Evidently, time in this case isn't an issue. But at the same time they can just be a simple easter egg. Its not often a cameo appearance has any impact on a story, not in the Legend of Zelda anyway. It wouldn't make a difference if they appeared in WW or ST or TP or FSA.

Originally Posted by keyaki

Evidently, time in this case isn't an issue. But at the same time they can just be a simple easter egg. Its not often a cameo appearance has any impact on a story, not in the Legend of Zelda anyway. It wouldn't make a difference if they appeared in WW or ST or TP or FSA.

Actually cameos are important take for example the end of OOA the boat cameo.That cameo linked it directly to LA clearing the position of the oracle series in the timeline that would be after ALTTP but before LA but that does not come to the case right now so that why caneo are importants

Originally Posted by tlozbj

Actually cameos are important take for example the end of OOA the boat cameo.That cameo linked it directly to LA clearing the position of the oracle series in the timeline that would be after ALTTP but before LA but that does not come to the case right now so that why caneo are importants

That's not a cameo, that just shows what happened to Link at the end of journey in Holodrum and Labryna.

Originally Posted by tlozbj

good point but if I remember correctly the ones who appaer are their descendants

The MC Oracles are said to be descended from a "long line" of Oracles, but nothing in that says that the unnamed ancestors of the MC Oracles are in fact the OoS Oracles. It's just as likely that the OoS Oracles are descended from the MC Oracles, who themselves are members of a line that predates MC. Which is the interpretation that the Historia went with.

Originally Posted by Darth Yoshi

The MC Oracles are said to be descended from a "long line" of Oracles, but nothing in that says that the unnamed ancestors of the MC Oracles are in fact the OoS Oracles. It's just as likely that the OoS Oracles are descended from the MC Oracles, who themselves are members of a line that predates MC. Which is the interpretation that the Historia went with.

That being said, its possible that MC Oracles lived in Hyrule during that time but the Oracles of OoX just happened to live in Holodrum/Labryna.

Originally Posted by tlozbj

where i have not see it

Originally Posted by Masky

Sorry but where? Didn't know that

In the Sky Temple. There are tablets on the wall that have TP Hylian text.

They're somewhere else, too, but I don't remember where.

Originally Posted by tlozbj

And how can we be sure that hyrule historia timeline is canon

Yo.

Originally Posted by tlozbj

but can we be sure that is the real timeline this is not the first time Nintendo lies about the timeline see what happen with OOT they say ot was the first in the timeline and they release SS

Yes, because when this was said, then OoT WAS the first game in the series, but then TMC and SS came out. And that changed.

Originally Posted by tlozbj

Actually yes because Aonuma and Miyamoto both have said that Aonuma have the complete timeline in his computer with games that have been release and probably games that will be release

He never said he had FUTURE games in his timeline. So we can assume that he updates his own timeline after the release of every new Zelda game.

Originally Posted by keyaki

That being said, its possible that MC Oracles lived in Hyrule during that time but the Oracles of OoX just happened to live in Holodrum/Labryna.

Well, Din's figurine explicitly calls her a dancer from Holodrum, and Nayru's says that she's descended from "a line of priestesses in the land of Labrynna."

Originally Posted by Darth Yoshi

Well, Din's figurine explicitly calls her a dancer from Holodrum, and Nayru's says that she's descended from "a line of priestesses in the land of Labrynna."

So...either descendants or just decided to travel to Hyrule. It can go either way.

Originally Posted by tlozbj

but can we be sure that is the real timeline this is not the first time Nintendo lies about the timeline see what happen with OOT they say ot was the first in the timeline and they release SS

Because it's made by the real developers, not fans. Many of the recent Zelda games have been conceived with this timeline in mind. We know this because they told us all the games of the time had been placed and that all following ones would be made to fit. I am seeing some very ridiculous logic here... Prior to them finally showing the "master document" as one of the anniversary presents to the fans, people had no problem accepting that whatever it said, it was canonical. Then as soon as they see it, it's suddenly not canonical just because some people feel the need to nitpick at little details from the older games. They went out of their way to explain how and why the games fall where they do and titbits of what happens between.

They have never lied about a placement. If one bothers to look up the placements they gave games before in many interviews, all of them are exactly the same as they are placed in Hyrule Historia. Likewise, Ocarina of Time was the first. But then The Minish Cap was created as taking place before it and nothing contradicted that. However, particularly strange theorists refuse to accept that anything ever goes before Ocarina of Time even though Hyrule was already old and full of history during that game. Then Skyward Sword comes out Hyrule hasn't even been founded, there is no Master Sword yet, ect. After that, people became more open-minded to more pre-Ocarina of Time placements.

But then The Minish Cap was created as taking place before it and nothing contradicted that. However, particularly strange theorists refuse to accept that anything ever goes before Ocarina of Time even though Hyrule was already old and full of history during that game.

Hey give us a break! lol

Its not like some of us never accepted, its just it didn't seem like Aonuma gave a straight answer. Admittedly, even i though I accept it, I'm still confused as to how it happens before.

yeah because we see new hylian the new hyrulean crest and the descendants of the oracles fo the oracles series things that cannot be there if it actually happens before OOT

Originally Posted by tlozbj

yeah because we see new hylian the new hyrulean crest and the descendants of the oracles fo the oracles series things that cannot be there if it actually happens before OOT

The existence of the Oracles doesn't necessarily have to be tailored to time. The Oracles could've existed over long periods of time, they just didn't become a major character until OoX. Again, its just a cameo appearance. Nothing important.

Originally Posted by keyaki

Hey give us a break! lol

Its not like some of us never accepted, its just it didn't seem like Aonuma gave a straight answer. Admittedly, even i though I accept it, I'm still confused as to how it happens before.

Well, some of you actually did refuse to accept it. It was actually quite cute... if that makes any sense at all!

It happens before because it features many landmarks names that don't appear in any other game and lacks locations seen in most of the other games, implying that its version of Hyrule from long ago. Because Four Swords after it suddenly has the locations not in The Minish Cap but are in Ocarina of Time, that speaks for itself. The Minish Cap's pre-Ocarina of Time placment was at least evidenced by its vastly different Hyrule. Plus, it's a standalone story, and a standalone can fall easily anywhere. Likewise, Hyrule is small and not unified, a state it existed in prior to Ocarina of Time. The Gorons are few in number and have not settled, another connection with Skyward Sword.

With the release of Skyward Sword, it itself does imply that The Minish Cap follows it due to the status of the Gorons, the absence of Hyrule's iconic names, ect.

Originally Posted by Her Grace

Well, some of you actually did refuse to accept it. It was actually quite cute... if that makes any sense at all!

It happens before because it features many landmarks names that don't appear in any other game and lacks locations seen in most of the other games, implying that its version of Hyrule from long ago. Because Four Swords after it suddenly has the locations not in The Minish Cap but are in Ocarina of Time, that speaks for itself. The Minish Cap's pre-Ocarina of Time placment was at least evidenced by its vastly different Hyrule. Plus, it's a standalone story, and a standalone can fall easily anywhere. Likewise, Hyrule is small and not unified, a state it existed in prior to Ocarina of Time. The Gorons are few in number and have not settled, another connection with Skyward Sword.

With the release of Skyward Sword, it itself does imply that The Minish Cap follows it due to the status of the Gorons, the absence of Hyrule's iconic names, ect.

I can't argue against it anymore for obvious reasons. Though at the same time, I haven't even gotten half way through Minish Cap yet...