The Timeline: Now envolving MQ for once...

[Melchizedek]

Okay, to begin with I just want to state, that the below, timeline, and the one in my sig is my timeline, that honestly, can't be disputed from the games that are in it, which are all the games I've played. Here is the timeline:

(OoT) \
-------(MM) - - - - - - - - - - - - - -(WW)
(MQ) /

Okay, so nothing special there, but just letting you know where I'm at. Now obviously, most people agree with the split timeline theory, when they've played enough games that a split is needed to explain it. So they go basically by a basic plan like this that they build on for themselves:

......Child- MM -TP..........
OoT
.....Adult - WW/PH......

So you can see what I mean. Now my proposal. Since the release of MQ, does the timeline need to split at OoT to child and adult, or could there have always been two parallel Zelda Worlds. It is world wide agreed that if you go back in time and change something little, something big will be different in the future. So is it possible that there isn't a direct split, but there is two parrallel worlds from the beginning, So in other words, here's what I'm proposing...

OoT...MM.....WW.. PH...
MQ.....TP.....

You can work in the other games where you want, but I think you people can see my point. There's probably some flaws when it's considered in more depth, but I see splitting the timeline as a resort, especially when there's two games, identical, but slightly different, and those small differences make the future big differences. So when I finally get TP, and more games and a linear timeline is too hard, I'd go to my MQ/ OoT parallel before the splitting at OoT double timeline. Just my thoughts, that I wanted to share. And please don't turn this thread into a discussion that Aonuma, or Miyamoto confirmed the split, but discuss you thoughts on the proposed timeline.

Happy posting.

[Erimgard]

I don't buy it. The only changes are to make the dungeons harder...no timeline relevance was meant.
And how can MM come between OoT and WW? If, like you're proposing, the final timeline travel in OoT didn't cause a split, then the adult side OoT stuff would be erased, and thus Ganon wouldn't be sealed away as he is in the WW backstory.

[Hugh]

I'm not reallly sure why you've included MQ as it has no timeline significance whatsoever. It's just a remake, and nothing more. If you include MQ you have to include all other remakes as seperate games in the timeline.

You don't need to have played all of the Zelda games to include them in a timeline, I haven't but I still include them all.

How can TWW come after MM? Ganon wasn't sealed in the child section of OOT, so why would he be sealed in TWW's backstory?

[JC Farrell]

I see where your going with this but one question. Whats MQ stand for?

[Sage of Earth]

Originally Posted by Erimgard

I don't buy it. The only changes are to make the dungeons harder...no timeline relevance was meant.
And how can MM come between OoT and WW? If, like you're proposing, the final timeline travel in OoT didn't cause a split, then the adult side OoT stuff would be erased, and thus Ganon wouldn't be sealed away as he is in the WW backstory.

It would have been this way had TP not existed.

[Hombre de Mundo]

Originally Posted by JC Farrell

I see where your going with this but one question. Whats MQ stand for?

Master Quest.


I don't buy this. Why would the same story (OoT and MQ) result in two completely different things (flooding and... non-flooding:XD)?

[JC Farrell]

thanks........

yeah I don't see why they should add Master Quest in there...its like having the original OoT with difficulty but saying if you choose easy or hard the story is told differently.

[Melchizedek]

Well, I can see that the theory isn't gaining any acceptance. Firstly, I've been misunderstood, and questioned how MM can fit between OoT and WW. I am not proposing this as part of the MQ timeline. It was just an example of how some people do put the games. Really, all there is to this timeline theory is this...

OoT................
MQ...............

Insert the games where you like. Most of you would put the 3D games like this...

OoT.....MM....TP
MQ.....WW

Like so, though it doesn't matter which of the two games MQ, or OoT go first.

Now to explain why I placed the games in a order on my sample timeline, that everyone deems weird. That order being....

OoT...MM...WW..PH
MQ.....TP

As I clearly have stated I havn't played TP. My sig tells you that. And with the games I've played, there's no need to split the timeline to fit them in. Therefore the triforce of courage isn't split in time travel at OoT's conclusion, but rather in Link going to Termina in MM, and leaving Hyrule. Therefore WW must follow to gather the split pieces. That's to answer some reoccuring points I've noticed, now to answer some more personal ones...

Originally Posted by Erimgard

I don't buy it. The only changes are to make the dungeons harder...no timeline relevance was meant.
And how can MM come between OoT and WW? If, like you're proposing, the final timeline travel in OoT didn't cause a split, then the adult side OoT stuff would be erased, and thus Ganon wouldn't be sealed away as he is in the WW backstory.

Well, it's not for sale. It's my opinion, you either agree or not... Regarding Ganon not being sealed away, I view the seal placed upon Ganon in the Sacred Realm at the conclusion of OoT a seal that is greater than time. Simple time travel won't break it...

Originally Posted by Hugh

I'm not reallly sure why you've included MQ as it has no timeline significance whatsoever. It's just a remake, and nothing more. If you include MQ you have to include all other remakes as seperate games in the timeline.

You don't need to have played all of the Zelda games to include them in a timeline, I haven't but I still include them all.

Firstly, what other remakes are there? because I'm aware of none!
Secondly, you have to of played all Zelda games to include them in a timeline because only through playing them can you know all the intrigate parts of it...

Originally Posted by JV Farell

I see where your going with this but one question. Whats MQ stand for?

Master Quest. Why do you ask?

Originally Posted by Sage of Earth

It would have been this way had TP not existed.

Ahh, thank you for supporting me on that. It would be that way if TP didn't exist. Having not played it, TP doesn't exist in my theorising, and that's how I come to my view...

Originally Posted by Hombre de Mundo

I don't buy this. Why would the same story (OoT and MQ) result in two completely different things (flooding and... non-flooding)?

I think we've covered that...as much as we can without a full on argument..

Originally Posted by JC Farell

yeah I don't see why they should add Master Quest in there...its like having the original OoT with difficulty but saying if you choose easy or hard the story is told differently.

Well. My views aren't lost. I guess that everyone just disagree's. Honestly, I see splitting the timeline as a resort.

Well they are my thoughts, as the Garo's say, "belief or disbelief rests with you"...

[Hombre de Mundo]

^ How can you make a timeline ignoring the existance of a game just because you haven't played it? I haven't played ALttP, yet my own theory is much depending on that very game.

If I had only played, oh let's say FS and TP, I'd make my timeline as so:

FS---TP and then list a few points as to why, that nobody would ever believe since they've played the other games and know for a fact that FSA must follow FS.

You're basically proposing OoT-MM---WW, except for some reason you have thrown in MQ and a parallell Hyrule that according to your graphic timeline merges without reason, making it quite hard to take seriously.

Originally Posted by melxhizedek

Firstly, what other remakes are there? because I'm aware of none!

There's the GBA remake of ALttP and LA DX... then there's Zelda AST, which is basically a remake of the orginal. I don't know how much you'd count the LoZ and AoL remakes, they'rea basically just ports though did had some changes in the manual.

And let me just say that the GBA remake of ALttP has storyline changes, something which MQ does not in any way.

Master Quest. Why do you ask?

He asked because he didn't know.

Honestly, I see splitting the timeline as a resort.

Can you elaborate? because splitting the timeline is very logical and is by no means a resort for people who can't fit it into a linear timeline.

[Melchizedek]

Originally Posted by Humbre de Mundo

^ How can you make a timeline ignoring the existance of a game just because you haven't played it? I haven't played ALttP, yet my own theory is much depending on that very game.

If I had only played, oh let's say FS and TP, I'd make my timeline as so:

FS---TP and then list a few points as to why, that nobody would ever believe since they've played the other games and know for a fact that FSA must follow FS.

Well, yes, you could take it that way, or you could take it this way.... Okay from now onwards this is my timeline....

Child Line: TMC - OoT-MM -ALttP - TP -LA - LoZ-AoL - OoS-OoA
Adult Line: TMC - OoT - WW/PH - FS-FSA

Now to explain my reasoning. Ohh wait. I've only played three of the games, so I can't explain why I placed the other games like that. How silly of me. I think you can see my point. You can't fully understand a game until you've played it, whether you think you can from reading Wiki's or not...

Originally Posted by Humbre de Mundo

You're basically proposing OoT-MM---WW, except for some reason you have thrown in MQ and a parallell Hyrule that according to your graphic timeline merges without reason, making it quite hard to take seriously.

No. No. No. Honestly, have you people been reading the thread? How many times do I have to explain? OoT-MM---WW has nothing to do with this theory. I said that in my last post... If you want to flame that, do it somewhere else, because all there is to this theory is...

OoT........ (Place the games where you want.)
MQ.........

I am not proposing the OoT-MM-WW thing as part of the theory, it is just what I know as correct from the games I've played, so I used it for an example. I also said that you people who have more knowledge of the games, and believe the split, would if you agree with the MQ timeline Theory take it to be something like this...

OoT.....MM....TP
MQ.....WW

Now, how many more time do you want me to explain that?

Originally Posted by Humbre de Mundo

There's the GBA remake of ALttP and LA DX... then there's Zelda AST, which is basically a remake of the orginal. I don't know how much you'd count the LoZ and AoL remakes, they'rea basically just ports though did had some changes in the manual.

And let me just say that the GBA remake of ALttP has storyline changes, something which MQ does not in any way.

Ohh. Just putting games on new consoles isn't a remake. Such as MM on gamecube, or LoZ on gamecube, or OoT on gamecube. They're not remakes, just different consoles that's why you don't include them in the timeline. Master Quest is actually a different game, with large differences, not just a console change, that's why it should be in a timeline..

Originally Posted by Humbre de mundo

Can you elaborate? because splitting the timeline is very logical and is by no means a resort for people who can't fit it into a linear timeline.

It is quite obviously a resort, because this is how it came about. People were theorising and trying to fit them into a linear timeline, but they couldn't do it, so they looked at OoT and discovered they could work a split to make a timeline work...

As I said before, many times, all there is to this theory is..

OoT......
MQ.......

Belief or disbelief rests with you, but frankly the way people have just shut this theory down, and brought in irrelavant material, I don't care whether you believe...