A new Oracle theory

[Fairy penguin]

Well, splits been confirmed, even if there are those who don't believe in it out of stubborness.

Really? When did they disclaim it?

[JonathanSpenc]

New Timeline:

     TMC
        |
      OoT
   /         \
(Child)(Adult)
  |            |---Spin-off FS
  MM      FSA
  |            |
 OoS     ALttP
  |            |
 OoA      LA
  |            |   
  TP        LoZ
               |
             AoL
               |
           TWW
              |
             PH

I think I did better on this one!

[Ezlo's Apprentice]

I think you should start a separate thread for your timeline theories to save derailing other topics. I have plenty of holes to pick in that one too...

[JonathanSpenc]

Okay, where should I put said thread?

Also I can't figure out where the hell LoZ and AoL should go! 

[Ezlo's Apprentice]

Okay, where should I put said thread?

In this subforum- Book of Mudora- home of all timeline related nonsense.

Also I can't figure out where the hell LoZ and AoL should go! 

It takes a little imagination.

On topic (kind of): Working up to the sixth dungeon with the Gorons today seemed to open up so many paradoxes my brain hurts.

[JonathanSpenc]

So the Book of Mudora?

Also where would YOU put LoZ and AoL?

[hello_echoes]

@fairy penguin: They disclaimed the part about TP.  They said they hadn't gotten the chance to play through it all yet and that details of that game could totally change this, and "other timeline theories." At least, I think they worded it like that to some degree.

@JohnathanSpenc: You do know how to create new topics in forums correct? Just selected the New Topic option in the Book of Mudora forum. And btw, I would personally place LoZ and AoL sometime after AlttP, making those games the last ones in the child line. But that's just me.

[Fluesopp]

I think it's stated LttP and LA Link are a descendent of LoZ and AoL Link.
I think someone stated this in a thread some days ago. EA?

[Ezlo's Apprentice]

I think it's stated LttP and LA Link are a descendent of LoZ and AoL Link.
I think someone stated this in a thread some days ago. EA?

*goes to see*

- ALttP doesn't come after LoZ/AoL. The box for ALttP describes Link and Zelda as predecessors to those in the first games.

So ALttP/LA > LoZ/AoL is right. Oracles > TP however makes me want to punch a puppy.

[TZM]

The oracles games felt like they were trying to do their own thing, not keap a timeline... as if it were OoT young link after majora's mask or somthing really, or before, i dunno. I dont think thats what it is after everything is said and done but that could have been the original plan.

[Fluesopp]

I don't think the original LoZ and AoL, and perhaps even ALttP and AL were trying to establish or support a timeline either...

[hello_echoes]

Neither did TMC, FSA, or FS.

Hell, if that train of thought keeps going none of the zelda games had a timeline in mind, which is the reason why we are all here correct? 

[JonathanSpenc]

Neither did TMC, FSA, or FS.

Hell, if that train of thought keeps going none of the zelda games had a timeline in mind, which is the reason why we are all here correct? 

TMC is first in the time line, FSA is the first after the adult ending of OoT. FS is just  a spin off!

That's blasphomy! There IS a time line, even if not all of them are on it!

[Ezlo's Apprentice]

That's blasphomy! There IS a time line, even if not all of them are on it!

That kind of thinking will doom us all!

Seriously, with a couple of obvious exceptions, you could just give up on most of the games to form your ideal timeline. Huge cop out. People need to stretch their imaginations more (but just to a healthy level... ).

[Fluesopp]

Neither did TMC, FSA, or FS.

Hell, if that train of thought keeps going none of the zelda games had a timeline in mind, which is the reason why we are all here correct? 

TMC is first in the time line, FSA is the first after the adult ending of OoT. FS is just  a spin off!

That's blasphomy! There IS a time line, even if not all of them are on it!

After OoT you have TP on one side, and TWW on the other. That's one of the least debateable games.
And TMC is widely accepted as the first game, but that was not the point. It were not designed with continuity in mind.
And you cannot be sure that it's a timeline.. Myiamoto said once they had a big document which describes how the games are related to each other. Personally, I have given up that. I don't even hope they ever release it, if it's a real document, as that would ruin most of the Zelda discussion.. You can only discuss what's unclear.

[hello_echoes]

First of all, I was being sarcastic when I said that none of the zelda games featured any type of timeline. I was simply stating that all of this was ment to be confusing, otherwise there would be no point to debating.  Furthermore, I hate it when people say that certain games don't count when they construct timelines. I think all of them should be incorperated in one way or another. I mean, if there is a timeline, then all of the games should fit. Besides, it's fun to see people's creativity, especially when they attempt to explain the more "difficult to place" games. 

[JonathanSpenc]

First of all, I was being sarcastic when I said that none of the zelda games featured any type of timeline. I was simply stating that all of this was ment to be confusing, otherwise there would be no point to debating.  Furthermore, I hate it when people say that certain games don't count when they construct timelines. I think all of them should be incorperated in one way or another. I mean, if there is a timeline, then all of the games should fit. Besides, it's fun to see people's creativity, especially when they attempt to explain the more "difficult to place" games. 

That's what I tried doing, but b/c of Fluesopp and Count von EA debating, my ideas keep changing thus my time line does too.

[bastian]

I really don't get people wanting to put each Oracle game in a seperate timeline. I mean, they happen one right after the other. If you've played them as linked games, how do you explain the characters and enemies referencing the first game you played when you're playing the second game if they happen at the same time in different timelines? That's just moronic.

I thing the Oracles games feel like they fit directly after ALttP (or LA) stylewise and graphicly (and the fact that the Triforce is all together at that point). Or after MM.

But, frankly, I don't give them (or any game made by Capcom) a whole lot of thought. If Team Zelda didn't take the time to personally create the game, I don't worry to much about where it fits in the timeline.

Hell, maybe some day Miyamoto or Aounama will get around to saying what Ishii (the Mana games producer) said: they ALL take place in different realities with the same charma being reincarnated for the characters.

[Caseman]

I'm going to take a step back for a minute to address the thread topic.

Does it really matter which order these games take place in?  We know both games take place instantaneously after one another.  In my personal opinion, these two cartridges are pretty much the same game split up into two episodes, and it leaves it up to the player which one to play first.

As for the game introductions, I think this is another case of overanalyzing the material and making guesses.  I believe there is no definite answer to the question, because if there is then half the people that played apparently played the game wrong.

[Link Reborn]

New Timeline:

     TMC
        |
      OoT
   /         \
(Child)(Adult)
  |            |---Spin-off FS
  MM      FSA
  |            |
 OoS     ALttP
  |            |
 OoA      LA
  |            |   
  TP        LoZ
               |
             AoL
               |
           TWW
              |
             PH

I think I did better on this one!

Thats probably the most logical timeline(to me) anyways.