The Elephant in the Split Timeline's Living Room

This is a post I've been meaning to make for quite some time. I need to make it clear before I begin that I am not a fan of the old "UWM" faction, nor did I agree with their theories in regards to the timeline. In fact, I remember a good deal of the split-fandom having a jolly good revenge against them, due to the Aonuma interview, and I couldn't help but join in, despite having been a lone-believer in what I considered to be a much simpler solution to the single timeline.

That frankly makes this post a very hard one to make, but I think it needs to be brought out into the open. I have mentioned this multiple times before, but I believe the previous circumstances (i.e. victory celebrations) resulted in it getting swept under the rug.

In a nutshell, I've been waiting for the "scandal" to quiet down before mentioning this.

There really is info out there that should be considered in debate, and there's an especially big one that seems to go over Aonuma's head.

Myamoto's interview, E3 2005

The first page

The second page

These links will bring up 2 pages concerning a "Round Table" discussion with Myamoto. You'll hear questions and answers in Japanese, and a translation following each. The important information is found at the end of #4 and the beginning of #5.

First it is confirmed that this Link is different from the one in the Wind Waker.

Second, it is confirmed that the game takes place after Ocarina of Time.

Third, one of the interviewers asks for clarification as to whether the game takes place between Ocarina and Wind Waker, which recieves a simple confirmation.

Now before anyone goes "But he didn't understand the question!" or "Aonuma's really in charge!" or anything like that, answer me why? After all, we're talking about the guy who "upended the tea table", as Aonuma himself has admitted many times. If you know Japanese and can give me a better translation that distinctly says otherwise, than please do! But from all outward appearances, this interview seems as damning as the Aonuma one.

I'd also like to point out Aonuma's rather nasty fanservice habit. The same guy is guilty of dragging the Link/Zelda shippers along for Twilight Princess, in which there was clearly no Link/Zelda romance. (As evidenced by all the Zelinkers jumping on the Link/Midna bandwagon.) His quotes are often surrounded by such flourishes as "wouldn't it be cool if...?" or "don't you think...?" The latter was found quite a bit in the initial translations of the Aonuma interview that started the whole timeline mess.

A new can of worms

What can be concluded from this?

This is something that I had to learn the hard way about Myamoto, I suppose people need to learn it about Aonuma. The guy is not infallible, and at times, seems to even be disconnected to the game development. It also needs to be remembered that despite his executive status, he's one dev among many, and a group is going to have different ideas than a single individual. That said, I do consider Myamoto's word above Aonuma's.

The game series as a whole makes quite a few continuity errors and mistakes, and Aonuma himself considers timeline an afterthought, merely dumping the new Zelda of the day wherever he thinks he can make it fit. If split timeline is taken as the norm, that leaves a lot of rather nasty conclusions to be had about other time travel scenarios within Ocarina of Time, not to mention Majora's Mask, and now possibly Phantom Hourglass.

It also needs to be mentioned that due to the content and context, it was immediately assumed that Twilight Princess was a bridge between the two games, and I think people would do well to remember that. There are many things in Wind Waker that simply do not make sense unless there were more heroes after the Hero of Time. Now I can accept "mistakes" as an answer, but can anyone else?

If one dev disagrees, there's a good possibility that many do.

Finally, if there is an official timeline set in stone, why keep it a secret? There is no reason to. I'm starting to find myself thinking that Aonuma might not have the *authority* to finalize the timeline. After all, Myamoto has "un-finalized" timelines before...

Now, with that covered, if anyone would like to engage with me on what I believe a potential timeline would be, I'd be happy to do so, even though that's not really my goal here. Fair warning, my beliefs on the timeline aren't exactly fashionable... But in the meantime, I just kinda feel like this tidbit has been ignored way too long. Personally, I kinda feel that you can't make any sort of "neat and clean" timeline of the entire series, especially since the capcom games appear to be their own monster entirely. And I'd also like to see discussion begin anew, without the drag of cliques getting in the way.

This isn't a case of Miyamoto and Aonuma disagreeing. During Twilight Princess's development it jumped around from one place in the timeline to another. This is just one of the random places it was before finalization, no big deal really. Most of us we actually aware of the interview, and knew that.

In-game evidence is what really matters anyway, and it points to the two games being unrelated. There is no hero after the adult portion of OoT, resulting in the necessity of the Great Flood.

But that's just what I'm saying. The in-game evidence *is* key, and twilight Princess is a huge player. And while I do agree that it appeared the devs would give differing amounts of time on Twilight Princess's distance from Ocarina of Time over the years, something that needs to be kept in mind is that the story apparently changed little from that 2005 interview until later on. The changes from that point on were all final touches and the addition of the Wii control scheme.

Please don't assume that I'm not aware of what goes on...

Personally, I don't think there's anything unusual about Wind Waker, other than the hero was "late" being born. It's not so much that he didn't appear... He just appeared "late". Something that's always grabbed me about the whole "Link" thing is they're seemingly viewed as a singular entity.

I don't really want to get into the specifics of it all just yet, though... I'll make my case for connecting the games later. Right now, my "battle" is with the interview.

The Timeline was confirmed a split. Before it was around the UWM would have been correct ( I was one of them).

Originally Posted by Polychrome

And while I do agree that it appeared the devs would give differing amounts of time on Twilight Princess's distance from Ocarina of Time over the years, something that needs to be kept in mind is that the story apparently changed little from that 2005 interview until later on.

That's highly contestable. IIRC, they've been making last-minute tweaks to everything in Zelda games since Ocarina of Time.

That said, statements made before games are finished are not necessarily considered as correct if they contradict with the final product.

First off, I'm new to ZU (no doubt about it), but I've now been inclined to come here. I don't consider myself a theorist of any sort but I've actually kept up on the discussions and theories here because I find them interesting. ZU seems to the booming place for theorist discussion and whatnot, and it has a remarkable history of whats transpired here in the past two years. This may come off odd, but I've watched this forum over from Desert Colosess. Anyway, I just have a few comments to make in regards to what I've witnessed in the progression of the timeline debates in this community.

Originally Posted by Polychrome

This is a post I've been meaning to make for quite some time. I need to make it clear before I begin that I am not a fan of the old "UWM" faction, nor did I agree with their theories in regards to the timeline. In fact, I remember a good deal of the split-fandom having a jolly good revenge against them, due to the Aonuma interview, and I couldn't help but join in, despite having been a lone-believer in what I considered to be a much simpler solution to the single timeline.

The UWM was certainly something else, and I can see why people hated them. I think the person that created it had some pretty good intentions. LoZ Historian wanted to crack down on canon and find reasonable answers without Splittists getting in the way and pressing their beliefs on everyone. I can respect his stern stances because the split timeline belief was so popular, but his obsessions made him unbecoming and he started to take things to far. He ultimately did what he accused the split timeline believers of doing. But in his defense and for split timeline believers defence, one thing I've noticed throughout the communities is that whenever and whatever timeline theory has ever been presented, those that believed in the single timeline and those that believed in the split timeline butted heads practically all the time. Regardless, this has made it hard for BOTH sides then to find reasonable conclusions of possible timeline orders. Its been that struggle of imposing beliefs since the development of OoT that has caused such passionate extremist to attack each other like the UWM and the ASE did here at ZU. I suppose using fire against fire never solves anything, just causes more of a mess in the long run. So I say both sides have been ethically wrong in their rivalries.

Originally Posted by Polychrome

This is something that I had to learn the hard way about Myamoto, I suppose people need to learn it about Aonuma. The guy is not infallible, and at times, seems to even be disconnected to the game development. It also needs to be remembered that despite his executive status, he's one dev among many, and a group is going to have different ideas than a single individual. That said, I do consider Myamoto's word above Aonuma's.

I don't believe its a matter of who has the say over someone else. The timeline has always been a sensitive subject and I believe Aonuma and Miyamoto just have different opinions on the matter altogether. This essentially is probably why the timeline never gets resolved. They simply have a different outlook on how to deal with this and thats that.

Originally Posted by Polychrome

The game series as a whole makes quite a few continuity errors and mistakes, and Aonuma himself considers timeline an afterthought, merely dumping the new Zelda of the day wherever he thinks he can make it fit. If split timeline is taken as the norm, that leaves a lot of rather nasty conclusions to be had about other time travel scenarios within Ocarina of Time, not to mention Majora's Mask, and now possibly Phantom Hourglass.

I know you're not a fan of the UWM, or it's creator, but I'm going to recommend people to read this article anyway.

I came across this just recently, and it seems the guy is a lot more sensible. Still true to his normal disgust, but he addresses pretty well on how to take an approach to the timeline now that its officially a split. I agree on his point that we should not merit canon with too many complexities that the producers are not willing to abide by themselves.

He's simply saying what you questioned, "How are we going to know where game's go if they keep changing their minds." And I do believe the split timeline does provide more avenues than the single timeline. I agree that their are now more avenues for theorists to take with which order the games will go. Yet this very fact makes it hard to conclude what alternatives could be the canonically correct timeline. Hell, it makes me upset to know this because I always thought the split would make the timeline easier to see.

Originally Posted by Polychrome

Finally, if there is an official timeline set in stone, why keep it a secret? There is no reason to. I'm starting to find myself thinking that Aonuma might not have the *authority* to finalize the timeline. After all, Myamoto has "un-finalized" timelines before...

If only they would release it. lol. It'll be awhile before they ever release the timeline in my opinion. I agree with TSA. The timeline is a mystery that the series is meant to keep secret because of how many people want to know what it is. So long as we keep theorizing and yearning for the timeline, the longer Nintendo will keep it a secret to sustain people's interest in the series.

Originally Posted by Mage of Byrnia

I don't believe its a matter of who has the say over someone else. The timeline has always been a sensitive subject and I believe Aonuma and Miyamoto just have different opinions on the matter altogether. This essentially is probably why the timeline never gets resolved. They simply have a different outlook on how to deal with this and thats that.

Actually, that's kinda what I was trying to get across, and I greatly thank you for your reply. In the long run, it just comes down to who you believe and what conclusions you make on what information you've been given. I give Myamoto more credit because it's his series, though I'll admit that's pretty much it. I find it somewhat hypocritical that people aren't allowed to dismiss Aonuma's quote, but somehow it's okay to blow off Myamoto? That's one of the things that's been bugging me about the whole thing for quite some time, more than the implications of the timeline itself.

I guess I have other reasons... I think the splittists are getting nastily close to becoming the next UWMs, and as fun as fandom explosions are to watch (yeah, I admit it, I'm evil), there's a lot of hurt feelings that are exchanged in the process for seemingly no reason at all. We're not discussing our religions or political beliefs here, after all.

I'd be glad to "sportingly" butt heads with anyone later on, but I got a Weird Al concert to attend tonight.

There are few people who actually consider themselves as "splittists" anymore, we just accept what the developers have told us to be true. You can't just ignore what Aonuma says because he isn't Miyamoto, it's ridiculous.

Originally Posted by MercuryMule

There are few people who actually consider themselves as "splittists" anymore, we just accept what the developers have told us to be true. You can't just ignore what Aonuma says because he isn't Miyamoto, it's ridiculous.

You can't ignore Myamoto because he isn't Aonuma either. That's the point.

Originally Posted by Polychrome

You can't ignore Myamoto because he isn't Aonuma either. That's the point.

I'm not ranking these by who said them, but by when they were said. Something later in development is better then something earlier in development.

Originally Posted by MercuryMule

I'm not ranking these by who said them, but by when they were said. Something later in development is better then something earlier in development.

Why isn't the concern with me. The concern is that you're doing it at all. You're allowed to take one guy's voice over the other's, but at the same time, no person on the opposite side of the argument is allowed this luxury?

The fact is, timeline may not be the only thing that Myamoto and Aonuma may not see eye to eye on. Why the heck *did* Myamoto "upend the tea table"? I wouldn't argue that it was about timeline, but we need to consider that as far as this series goes, his word is pretty much law. And, as said before, there may be reasons that there has been no "official" timeline as of yet.

To top it off, the article Mage suggested seems to indicate that Myamoto himself has changed his mind over the years. I hate agreeing with LOZH, but he finally seems to be talking sense when he says that the timeline cannot be defined completely, something I came to believe long before the fandom explosion last spring.

People can make up their own mind about the timeline, because Nintendo can't make up theirs.

How is his word law when he doesn't make the games anymore? Does the actual game developers intentions matter so little that any random remark made by Miyamoto automatically renders them pointless? What happens if Miyamoto contradicts himself? What if what he says contradicts a game?

and "upending the teatable" has nothing to do with the timeline. It is strictly about keeping up game quality, nothing more.

Originally Posted by MercuryMule

How is his word law when he doesn't make the games anymore?

For example, Craig McCracken's word was still Law when he moved on to Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends. Bungie's word is still Law when it comes to Halo, even after the split. It's common when you're dealing with a popular IP to leave the final word up to the guy in charge. You may think Myamoto is disconnected, but why doesn't anyone assume the same for Aonuma? (And I brought up my "shipping" argument earlier which seems to show this more clearly.)

I already stated that "upending the tea table" had nothing to do with the timeline. I *did* say that it is proof that Myamoto's still large and in charge. He's still involved in the long run.

Luckily nobody seems to support this ridiculous notion, so continued argument is pointless, as convincing you that Miyamoto isn't god in regards to Zelda is going nowhere.
The fans as a whole respect Aonuma, and thats what is important (Miyamoto seems to trust him too, keep that in mind). When he said the timeline split, even the most hardcore linearists had to accept it, as it is his series now. Every serious timeline theorist, through a use of in-game facts and quotes, has come to the idea of OoT>WW and OoT>MM>TP.
The integrity of a creator quote depends upon a lot of things, and in the end this one doesn't hold up, and I seriously doubt Miyamoto