A Challenge to Pinecove

TK makes a good point, but there people who theorise for the competition. Which is fine in some aspects, and not fine in others.
It's not a bad thing to get really into theorising, as it can be a passion for some people, but to take it too far will exacerbate disagreements and cause conflict.

What we really need are guidelines, a common agenda. Something to follow, something that we can all agree on without inhibiting people's ideas. I am by no means someone who can provide these guidelines; no one is. We need to work them out together.

@ Impossible: I really don't like being harsh, but please understand I only do it when I feel it is just. The bias I spoke of is that when the flood is mentioned. The refusal to accept nothing but Hyrule's destruction. The arrogance I spoke of is your attitude towards both Lex and ZU. I know it must be frustrating to come to a community where everyone thinks/acts differently, but that is just another example of how we need to establish a common agenda in theorising.

I apologise for putting down LA, that was not my place, and I apologise for seeming harsh or even ignorant. However, I stand by my views that the approach you are taking to this "crisis" is far too extreme and self-centred. I only take back my extreme remarks, not my beliefs.

This topic reminds me why i dont join many theorist discussions. Its a shame too, because i have some ideas but hey, this is war!

This is exactly the point I'm trying to make. It shouldn't be like this, and people haven't progressed since the single timeline days. Pinecove seemed to completely miss the point I made about this. His response had nothing to do with it, he misunderstood and somehow thought I was saying something else, while ignoring the actual issue I was talking about. I made another big post on that subject, so please go over that.

The very fact that your "methods" resulted in years of denial over the entire timeline suggests that no, they aren't the best way to look at the timeline. They've already failed before. Moving on from this supposedly arbitrary belief, from one "lost battle", is all many people here did. They didn't move on from the methods and principles that led there, because they didn't understand the reasons behind the divide in the first place. Pinecove doesn't seem to understand what the methods of other posters are, as his recent posts are turning what I've actually said into a completely different idea. Please think back to what I've actually been posting, instead of making these baseless ad hominem attacks. What you've been posting is personal, what I've been posting is not.

And really, LoZ Historian, that was a bit pathetic. You know almost nothing about most of the people you were attacking, which you happened to do in a rather biased way. You couldn't be more wrong about pretty much all the people you were listing, and you're just doing what Viral is with no real reason.

I already brought this up several posts ago, but again, I'm actually trying to address the fact that Pinecove has made this overly personal - I'm not making it personal myself. In fact, it's quite the opposite, as I only posted it due to its widespread relevance to posters here and their attitudes. I'm trying to resolve the problem by bringing it back to the debate itself, which I'd like to have. Without being attacked and insulted, which seems to have become your fallback now that you have nothing else to say. Your crap isn't discrediting me. I've seen some of the comments you've made elsewhere, and they're exactly how I know that you still have this war mentality. You made this personal, to the point where all people who share any of my views on anything become my responsibility and my representatives, and all I can do now is defend myself.

I have no real problem with someone theorizing that OoT is the Seal War. But to use that as evidence in a debate about, say, whether to place games on the AT versus the CT, is stupid as now OoT being the SW is nothing more than theory. Which is basically using a theory as proof for another theory, something that should be left out of Zelda theorizing, imo.

This, again, is something I've posted about many times that Pinecove now seems to be ignoring in favour of some weirdass interpretation of my style. Basically, people can get away with this on ZU, but almost nowhere else, due to these various problems of bias and extremism. One theory becomes a fact that proves another theory that becomes a fact that proves another theory. Soon the evidence used becomes so distant from the actual truth that people are posting on an entirely different paradigm, which leads to the frustration and idiotic rage posts I've seen made when this was actually challenged. I thought Pinecove had learnt something when he admitted to fault there, but now he's slipped back into the same old habits.

No response to my post I see.

His post dealt with the way people theorize, so he probably thought that it covered your post as well.

I wrote 2 paragraphs directly to him explaining my actions in the hope that the fire will settle a little bit, but nothing. =/

Originally Posted by LOZ Historian

I wounder if THESE people find/found Theorizing FUN?

DrZaius1
Average Gamer
Raian
MikePeterSucks
Mohammedali
OmegaDevastator
TrippleExpresso9
DarkenZero24
Impossible


We cant even get to the ****ing basis for why we even continue on doing what we are doing sometimes. Theorizing becomes SERIOUS BUSINESS, and I cant help but go bat-fu(k crazy mad inside when it does [restrains rants]. I'm getting pretty damn tired of trying to understand the above people and their god damn overly analytic approaches. It's impossible to find mutual grounds because the "rules" - rather guidelines to theorizing never have been established properly to mediate between different calibers of theorists' thought processes. And why should anyone care that much about such a matter? Why does it have to be that complicated? Have we really lost our minds? I know I have. Haven't any of you?

Maybe some of us are just overly concerned and/or too passionately involved in what we do here. And because of this, we have a hard time just sitting down and talking about the problems and resolving them; rather than making accusations we so really want to slam on others that have made us sore in the past. Thus when we have threads like these, theorizing becomes political. And I hate that very much. It makes me not want to participate in this hobby every time, because I think of the Timeline Wars.

Theorizing is suppose to be enlightening, NOT a stressful matter. IMO, people have always theorized for Discovery/Enlightenment, Truth, and or Fame. ZU in general has always been stuck on the Truth and Fame aspect. And that is why we have rants from Impossible.

I sincerely loath what theorizing had to become... This is all the Split Timeline's fault (not the people whom supported it). The "easy way out" solution isn't always the easiest long-term... I will always stand by that.

~LOZ H~

Edit:

Also:

You know what people? EVERYONE is a hypocrite when you're a theorist. Being a theorist of any study is a chaotic hobby: It's a gamble, practically. People change in motives along with how they conduct themselves in debate. That's how we develop better ethics and so on.

cool story bro

And yes, I did find theorizing fun. That's why I quit once it turned into the dramafest it is now.

You can't comprehend the difference between an explicit fact of the plot… compared to an event which was implied once 18 years ago, is NOT implied in the current version of the game, and is in no way… of material value to the debate.

If you decide what is important and not important then you can decide what your timeline is from that placement.

Whether or not the IW is close to the creation is utterly irrelevant.

This is you deciding what is important and not important, and in that you’re no better than Lex.

However, the seal and Ganon are both crucial to ALttP's occurrence, as is clearly explained by the full manual story and by the maidens in the game.

Soo… if those are so important then what is the Seal War and what is the Imprisoning war? Are they different wars or different accounts of the same war? Does one of them happen before Ganon, is one of them caused by Ganon, does one of them happen because of the triforce and when exactly does the triforce leave the sacred realm? You see, by deeming these questions as irrelevant you have no problem with stating your timeline as:

Again, almost any interpretation of what was being implied leads to the CT placement, not AT. And even your twisted, biased idea of a condition that you have no basis to set favoured a CT placement in 2002.

Originally posted by Lex: The IW, on the other hand, was implicitly closely tied to the creation in both the original and GBA rerelease of ALttP, and then the game adaption of the IW, OoT, was framed in that context as well. Problem being that if the IW features ALttP's Ganon and the creation of ALttP's Dark World, it can't be OoT, and it can't be so closely tied to the creation.

Therefore you are ignoring questions, that sin for which you now crucify Lex.

The fact is, the Triforce returned to the SR before ALttP and after the previous Triforce game, whatever that may be. We know this is the case because all timelines must assume it.

Cool, so when was the triforce touched or removed from the sacred realm? Was it during, before or after the SW? Without the answer to that question you don't have a theory, period.

All that's necessary is for the Triforce to be in the SR, and for Ganondorf to take it. Not for this to be the first time it was ever taken, which is never stated. This was obviously the case in 1991, and it was obviously the case in 2002, and it was only TP that introduced any problem with it –

I agree with you here, the Seal War is what happened before Ganondorf was a major player of anything. We know from OoT that there was a seal on the sacred realm BECAUSE someone this one time ever tried to enter the sacred realm and take the triforce, without cause and effect there is no explanation for a Temple of Time.

l

Long after TWW guaranteed that ALttP could not be on the AT. The CT was the only place where "ALttP is the first time the Triforce is taken from the SR" was still true.

To contradict you, all games went on the adult timeline until MM had the misfortune of being placed on an 'alternate' timeline. We also know of the very next and only other game to go on an 'alternate' timeline: TP. Before that there were no games that were 'black sheep' because there was no 'alternate' timeline that existed. So YOU'RE the one putting games on a timeline that in the early nineties DIDN'T EVEN EXIST. Your mumbo jumbo about tWW and AlttP not being culpable, with that argument doesn't even compute.

So which intent do we dismiss: the intent that the Dark World of ALttP was created in the IW, or the intent that the IW was as closely tied to the creation as depicted originally and in OoT?

I would say the intent demonstrated by OoT is more important than the intent ignored by OoT. To say the opposite seems patently ridiculous to me, and goes against the spirit of OoT. Of course, those who do say the opposite think my views just as patently ridiculous, and just as much against the spirit of ALttP.

Either way, it's not cut-and-dry, since either way, you have to dismiss the integral intent of the original story.

Soooo... SW = wars before OoT that involved interlopers and led to the sealing of the sacred realm.
IW = war that led to the imprisonment of Ganondorf.

If we couldn't say that before TP then we can say that now:
__________________________________________________
in AlttP:
SW: when sages sealed the sacred realm when evil began issuing forth from it (i.e. it was seen that the triforce had the potential to bring evil upon the land)

While it was originally stated that Ganondorf was involved in this war, that was changed with the GBA release that no longer mentions Ganondorf

IW: The war that ends in Ganondorf's capture, only spoken of in AlttP as 'hey, Ganon is sealed in the sacred realm and now it's the dark world.'
____________________________________

in OoT:
SW: spoken of as a time of upheaval in the near past of OoT's newly founded kingdom, a series of wars that involved the Sheikah becoming nearly extinct, the creation of the temple of time and sealing of the sacred realm. While these many wars ended merely 10 years before OoT, these many wars date back to antiquity and are sourced from the first time 'somebody not Hylian' heard about rumors of the magical triforce. By AlttP these 'prolonged wars' are merely called 'the Seal War.'

IW: The Imprisoning War is OoT, and ends with Ganondorf entering and being imprisoned in the Sacred Realm, which makes TP-Alttp completely impossible as in TP there is no evidence that Ganon broke the seal that he was in by AlttP at any time except as FSA provides, which would make the only possibility:

MM-FSA-TP-AlttP,

and FSA and TP can't coincide on the same timeline.
___________________________________
In TP:
SW: We understand that after the seal was placed, interlopers tried to use shadow magic to enter the sacred realm, and spirits of light banished them to the 'twilight realm.' Very specifically by what Lanayru, the spirit of light infers in TP we know this to be a 'Seal War' that predates both Ganon and the war that ultimately unifies Hyrule. Once again, by AlttP the 'prolonged wars' are simply called 'the Seal War.'

IW: The end of this war is in a video that plays about halfway through this game, where Ganon is executed for his crimes, and bring on the famous hiccup in that the execution doesn't take. The thing that happens on the AT side of things is shown at the end of OoT, where Ganondorf is sealed in the sacred realm and the sacred realm sealed by the sages, which is the perfect setup for AlttP. Once again, being that this is an ALTERNATE timeline that shares the same history as the classic timeline, this makes it impossible for AlttP and TP to be on the same timeline as Ganon is obviously banished to the twilight realm, not the Sacred Realm/Dark World.
__________________________________

Four pages ago, Impossible you had me for a moment thinking it stupid to think that a classic AT timeline were possible, probably why a lot of people who either weren't smart enough or had had enough refused to refute you. As I thought about your arguments, counter arguments for your undeniable logic came into my head. Now I believe the world is once again set aright.

So it was logic that ultimately refuted Impossible's strong case, his edicts and his laws and his irrevocable decrees are as naught if you use logic, not complaining.

So for everyone, complaining about Impossible makes Impossible stronger, and LOGIC makes Impossible go away for a while. Please, let's restart the discussion that Impossible wanted so badly, and stop flaming, spamming and generally complaining. We're here for a discussion, not for a group hug and a glass of milk.

Originally Posted by Average Gamer

Lex, it says that nothing bad happened between the IW and ALttP's beginning. It was an era of peace between the two games according to the GBA Manual.

The SNES manual said that "peace was restored to Hyrule" after Ganon was defeated, and that "Hyrule was in a time of peace" at the time of ALttP (centuries after). While without any knowledge of the intermittent events we could assume there is perpetual peace in-between, there is really no need for this to be the case. A dozen games have come out since ALttP; that's plenty of room to expand on the time between the sages' seal and ALttP.

It's a corrupted Sacred Realm in the end. Whether Ganon did it with a wish or his own actions, it's a corrupted Sacred Realm. It isn't really important beyond that.

ALttP says one thing, and the story of the sages' seal (in OoT) says another.
The difference is important because in ALttP Link getting the Triforce is one of the central events and goals of the story.

No they don't. Only one guy and three fishmen talk about it, and they only call it the Triumph Forks. The Triforce seems to be screwed.

I've brought up this quote before:

I heard that beneath the big-head boulder
on top of the hill here on Outset...

...is where the greatest treasures of all,
the golden Triumph Forks, are buried.

But actually, fry, I must have misheard
or something...

'Cause this one guy told me that what was
actually buried beneath that weird rock
was a chart to this shard of something
called Triforce. Whoever heard of that?

That's crazy! There's a big difference
between "Triumph Forks" and "Triforce."
I mean, I think someone intentionally
buried something misleading there.

The fishmen, at least, think it's called "Triumph Forks," but someone clearly knows its true name.

Not in any real detail.

Evidence?

Besides, the Legend of the Hero is apparently the only old tale they know.

It's the only old tale we hear, perhaps. But that's not evidence of lack, it's lack of evidence.

Hyrule (and possibly even the Triforce) are only hanging on by the skin of their teeth in the Great Sea because of that tale. Hyrule and the Triforce basically have no important individual surviving tales of their own. They're just accessories to the Legend of the Hero.

"This is but one of the legends of which the people speak"?

You've never really responded to this when I've brought it up.

Only because of the Legend of the Hero, and the people of the Great Sea don't give the blade any importance at all. As far as they're concerned, Hyrule was a myth. They don't even know its name. Furthermore, the Legend of the Hero may have only been exclusive to Outset Island in the first place.

Which is why Tetra, who seems to have never been to Outset prior to the beginning of the game, knows about it?

Only three people do that. Tetra goes back to the pirate life in the ending and even loses her ToW-granted appearance. Medli and Makar's only role was to play an instrument in a cave for the Master Sword's sake, and since they're sailing with the pirates in the ending it looks like there isn't even a reason to maintain their Sage duties after Daphnes erases Hyrule. The people of the Great Sea really don't remember a thing about the old world and at that point they've already created a new culture.

Their "sage duties" also evolved along with the culture of the Great Sea; Medli is an attendant, and Makar plays in the forest ceremony.

No we don't. We just see windows. Link from TWW has no idea who the people depicted on those windows people are.

Debatable.

Only one in TWW, and that's because it was portable, not to mention that it was really just a walkie-talkie and not an actual Gossip Stone. Besides, even if the people somehow learned to communicate with the rocks in the first place, Gossip Stones wouldn't be helping people rebuild Hyrule either.

There are Gossip Stones in PH as well.

Yes, the Gossip Stones would presumably function in Old Hylian. If you're referring to Phantom Hourglass, those Gossip Stones were for mini-games and they were in the Ocean King's realm, a place that people from the Great Sea apparently aren't supposed to belong in.

Wasn't the idea that the "realm" Link and Tetra had to return from was a kekkai related to the Ghost Ship?

They basically remember nothing, and what they do know is practically a myth to them. On top of that, even if they found/created a new land, it's far more likely that they'd base its culture off of their current culture, not a dead culture that nobody remembers to begin with.

Which is why we see an entirely new pantheon of temples, rather than the elementally-aligned ones from OoT and TP.

Hyrule was utterly erased

All we know is that water filled that bubble.

Daphnes shot down the possibility of rebuilding it

He just wished for hope in the wake of Ganondorf saying there was no hope in rebuilding it.

not to mention that the entire point of TWW was moving on from the past, with Hyrule representing the past.

Which is why Hyrule (at the bottom of the ocean) isn't brought back.

All that's necessary is for the Triforce to be in the SR, and for Ganondorf to take it.

I would reduce it even further:

All that is necessary is for the Sacred Realm to be sealed and for Ganon to have wished on the Triforce while he was present there.

In which case as long as we have a sages' seal (the timing doesn't matter) and as long as Ganon is there with the Triforce (timing and circumstance don't matter), ALttP can pretty easily take place. That's why I don't see the idea of distance between ALttP and the IW as a problem; you have to introduce some distance that wasn't there originally, or you have to dramatically reduce the plot.

Since the latter is more difficult to work out, all of us tend to opt for the former- we either space the IW from creation, or the IW from ALttP. There's really no point in demonizing either decision since doing so would be entirely hypocritical. I only really do so to demonstrate the hypocrisy at work.

Originally Posted by Average Gamer

I do find theorizing to be somewhat enjoyable at times, mostly when dealing with smaller theories that aren't caught up in the internet drama that Impossible mentioned in his first post.

Also, congrats on being biased by only listing people you mainly dislike in your "incriminating" list.

I believe earlier I said I didn't have a problem with Raian's theorizing abilities. I just get lost in-between his points he debates from time to time.

Anyway, you answered the question. That is all that matters.

Originally Posted by Average Gamer

You do realize that you and your UWM group are largely responsible for that in the first place, right?

Yes. It's my fault isn't it. We could go round and round on that subject, but I think it's fairly evident to this community where certain people stand on the matter. And what would I have to do to make up for past sins? Why should I have to prove myself? Honestly, I don't know why, but there is still a glimmer of concern.

Originally Posted by Average Gamer

Historian, by trying to pin the blame on the split timeline you have just made yourself look like one of the "obsessed" that you attempted to criticize in your previous paragraphs.

Truly my dear Average Gamer. You are wittingly correct.

Originally Posted by Impossible

And really, LoZ Historian, that was a bit pathetic. You know almost nothing about most of the people you were attacking, which you happened to do in a rather biased way. You couldn't be more wrong about pretty much all the people you were listing, and you're just doing what Viral is with no real reason.

You and the rest of them share a theme of what theorizing should be about. The purpose of that post was to edge those people on to answer the question; which worked on two people surprisingly.

And Average Gamer couldn't be more right. I do have a problem with the majority of those people in that list. I truly do. Really. Sincerely... But, because I am determined, I shall try to understand and find professional respect in the end. No matter how many times I have to read those peoples debates and break down their train of thought.

Originally Posted by quick silver

So for everyone, complaining about Impossible makes Impossible stronger, and LOGIC makes Impossible go away for a while. Please, let's restart the discussion that Impossible wanted so badly, and stop flaming, spamming and generally complaining. We're here for a discussion, not for a group hug and a glass of milk.

I'm sorry. I haven't acknowledge I'm one of the weak people too, that never could adhere to the proper way to theorize.

--------------

Do what you all will.

I wish you luck in succeeding here, Impossible.

[returns to books and studies in the shadows]

~LOZ H~

Viral:
The nature of theorising is not to be bound by a list of rules. People think in different ways and interpret information and evidence differently, and THAT is why it is so interesting. A schism continues because some people attempt to control how other people view evidence by stating it is "the most factual approach".

In this instance the most effective thing to do would be – not to complain about one person proving thirty people wrong- but to do something about it. Impossible can offend nobody bringing a more factual approach to the table, anyone who chooses to be offended or feel they are ‘controlled by facts’ is a moron, and this instantly proves that you are not in the end seeking facts and should move to fanfic.

Viral:
Obviously people should not think of theorising as a "battle", but this is sometimes the case, and this is where the community should be trying to make changes

Impossible came to the solution of making this thread as a way to end the battle and to promote a discussion. You all are the ones who are battling him. In fact refusing to refute him and instead attacking his qualities as a theorist is something I would expect from lesser theorists; that’s what one does when they have no way of refuting.

Erimgard:
AMEN BROTHER.
I about hung myself when there was nothing at ZU except Ollathir and Pinecove *****ing about LoZ/AoL's placement for months, becuase they wanted to "take me down". Theorizing should be about finding the facts, not proving that you have the biggest E-penis

.

This is what I am talking about. This thread hasn’t really gotten to a discussion yet because theorists are busy pissing on the ground to mark their territory and sizing one another up and discussing the lines that shouldn’t be crossed rather than bringing up counter arguments or once again succeeding that they might not be in possession of all the facts. I would be just as frustrated as Impossible seems to be.

Lex:
You're right, the game makes little note of any in-between. But this is true for both of these, which still leaves us with the question of "where do all the other games go?"

@Impossible
In reference to there being no record of any happenings between OoT and AlttP, tWW would sum up why there is little history about the Seal War way better than would TP. Your elaborate argument doesn’t account for a classic CT placement nearly as well as you insist, and so at the end of your argument there is still the question of “where do all the other games go?”

Lex:
None of this is as far beyond TWW's Great Sea as you seem to believe.

But this is one of the symptoms of a larger problem; there is, despite observations on both sides, no theory that has gained serious foothold in this community that has "no evidence" or that is "killed" by evidence from the other side. There are problems with almost all theories, and those problems usually have to be overlooked in favor of positive evidence. But I think we should look at the philosophy behind the timeline: it has at times been stated that games are often left open-ended.

I just can’t state it better than that, and I don’t even entirely agree with Lex’s case.

Pinecove:
I have a right to theorize the way I want to. And alright, maybe I'm a bit close minded on the matter sometimes, but you talk to Erim, or Viral and you'll learn I'm anything but that.

I do not see everything as a war. I don't see where you got that from, and in terms of your timeline, I'm going to be honest. It was poorly written. You said in the opening page (or something like that) that your opinions were no biased. I went through your timeline and saw biasness about 15 times, and that was only after your section on TMC.

You're a disgusting no good theorist who is biased and who creates his own laws for the sake of making himself look important. You need to look like a professional ******* in front of everyone don't you?

K, so it’s out there Pinecove, in one of the most professional, pragmatic and progressive statements you’ve ever made on ZU, now the thing to do would be not to shut down but to actually debate…

@LoZH: Same goes for you. I'd really like to hear a counter argument for Lex, Impossilbe OR me at this time rather than a self depreciating remark. The only reason I send the invitation is because I know that unlike many here, an awesome rebuttal is right behind that cloak waiting to be released, and that you hold back where any moron could spout the top of his head is no weakness.

Ok so after everything has been said and done the correct approach should be this...

"What would you like to debate about Impossible?"

Oni... this thread is about the classic AT versus the classic CT timelines.

Meaning we are discussing specifically where the 'classic games' (all games before OoT and the Capcom games) should go;

on the adult timeline; after Adult Link leaves the timeline,

or on the child timeline; where OoT's events lead to an alternate timeline where young Link gets to live out his childhood.

Continuing the conversation from my previous thread:

MM made an alternate timeline, before MM, there was only one timeline that was only definable as alternative when Link didn't go back like he was supposed to. To suggest that the classic games would suddenly jump from their intended timeline to this alternate child timeline seems to ignore original intent and 'telling the future in gaming' just as much as the 'after the events of OoT' quote seems to suggest that a future flood will connect the classic games to the modern games.

No matter how many times you say we ignore evidence and connect things and predict floods with outdated information, Impossible, you ignore as much and connect things in a very similar way.

And saying that ALttP's backstory has nothing to do with ALttP, and isn't in the same Hyrule, isn't ignoring the original intent?

I never said that, so I'm ignoring nothing. Again, please don't confuse me with a Lex/Erimgard clone.

Saying that OoT and ALttP aren't in the same Hyrule isn't ignoring the original intent

Saying FSA and TP are in the same timeline is ignoring intent. Saying that FSA's removed timeline information would magically place it on the child timeline is heresay because it never happened, so stop living on the coulda-shoulda and basing your entire theory upon it.

Saying that Hyrule can just come back and be the same it was isn't ignoring NEWER intent that supersedes old intent? Saying that TP clearly links to ALttP via the Master Sword isn't the newest intent of all?

As near as I can tell you're using artwork to make a base for your theory. Where is artwork on your hierarchy and why does it supersede Ganondorf's seal?

I'm sorry, but there IS NO TIMELINE that can change the fact that the originally intended OoT-ALttP connection is false. Miyamoto's statement, which would supposedly make OoT the IW, specifically said that OoT showed the Ganon from the SNES game. This is no longer true. The connection is broken, the intent has changed.

Which I assume would mean that AlttP can go wherever by what you are saying. Which does not a classic child timeline make.

People who claim that ALttP's manual describes OoT's events but remove OoT's Ganon make no sense, because the maidens talk about the same damn events and explain that Ganon was behind them, and it's clear that the way this leads to ALttP, if it's OoT, would blatantly contradict everything ALttP says. I choose to maintain the intent that ALttP's story actually makes sense. I'm still focusing on the old connections, I'm just focusing on the connections that STILL WORK (like the Master Sword and even geography), instead of ones that are now flawed and broken no matter what. And if they aren't talking about those events, then the manual has nothing to do with the game and is simply there for fitting with perversions of the timeline. The fact is, it's ALttP's backstory.

Which does not necessarily a classic child timeline make.

Well, aside from the still-present aspects of ALttP Ganon's origins (which we know were the IW), the maidens not knowing who he is (yet somehow knowing all about the IW events in the very next game, ALttP, indicating exactly when the IW occurs), and the Knights of Hyrule (died out in the IW, in FSA but not in ALttP)? We have removed text from the game that basically confirms that every single element of the IW was intended to be in FSA. In a world that's just like ALttP's. Explaining the origins of Ganon transforming into the King of Darkness, as well as getting the trident he uses in ALttP. Erimgard's topic on this explained it pretty well. And those things still in FSA that I pointed out show that the IW can't have happened before FSA. Considering we're talking about the origin story of ALttP's Ganon, obviously it was going to be during FSA, and now we're forced to move it to afterwards instead. Much of ALttP's backstory hasn't occurred yet in FSA's time.

Which to me means:

TMC-FS-OoT
..................\
....................FSA/AlttP/LA-tWW

Saying that FSA's removed timeline information would magically place it on the child timeline is heresay because it never happened, so stop living on the coulda-shoulda and basing your entire theory upon it.

It kinda does. The beta is only mentioned now to prove that FSA being an island means nothing. The beta quotes heavily, heavily imply a CT placement where there was no flood. FSA was still an island in the beta. Therefore FSA still being an island means nothing.

While what you're saying, quick silver, does make a lot of sense, and I'm tempted to actually do that, I don't think that they ever intended or intend for there to be games between OoT and TWW. Even though it's possible, I think that the creators were clear enough in the TWW opening and such to say that they don't intend for there to be any games between OoT and TWW.

I understand what you're saying Som. In making that claim, I would suggest that the root of meaning for the text of any version of AlttP was that no game come between it and its prequel and that this was implied as strongly or stronger than tWW's 'summing up' version of events, and yet you say that TP must come between it and OoT. You must therefore accept one contradiction or the other.

This is what I believed when I first heard of the split a LOOONG time ago, that Majora's Mask was an alternate reality separated from Hyrule. That Zelda messing with space and time also puts MM on a seperate and distinct timeline from classic games is the next logical conclusion.

And TP was the natural next step, Aonuma wouldn't be able to quell all doubt about the split timeline until he put another game on this alternate timeline, whatever he said about tWW, or about OoT's two endings, two games on the original timeline proves nothing, and one must really say

.......TP
....../
OOT-tWW

before one can really say there is a split in the timeline.

A classic CT placement therefore causes the entire franchise (at the time) to suddenly jump onto this in game made up alternate timeline, and that goes against the very grains of developer intent.

I don't even what we're debating anymore but I see one way out of this: Impossible, I challenge your timeline.

Give me any proof you can for your timeline except TMC first as I can't give away my secret argument for the podcast debate.

Go.

Pinecove... I love you to death as a theorist but you are most definitely a serial thread killer.

You mean I just killed the thread then?

And awesome I didn't know you liked my style of theorizing!

So the thread is dead now?

*celebrates*

Originally Posted by quick silver

Pinecove... I love you to death as a theorist but you are most definitely a serial thread killer.

Does this mean the thread is dead now? Looking at the OP and the current debate.... yeah we might as well kill this one right now and then have you debate whatever you want in another thread created for that topic.

y/n?

Originally Posted by Hombre de Mundo

Does this mean the thread is dead now? Looking at the OP and the current debate.... yeah we might as well kill this one right now and then have you debate whatever you want in another thread created for that topic.

y/n?

Is this a vote?
If so i am for "yay"!