Whilst I know most people these days agree on the split timeline theory, I've never seen any major agreement on this particular arrangement of games, and I think it should either be removed or listed with other timeline theories on the Timeline Theory page. Happyjoe5 20:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree. Although the main part of the article describing what the Split Timeline is should stay, the stuff about the order that the other games happen in should go.--ShutUpNavi 20:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Working Split Timeline Theory
Submitted by Philip Dorlin on 09/08/10
I would like to submit my version of the Split Timeline Theory. If anyone can find fault with it please just add it as a question in the Problems & Solutions section.
Skyward Sword (SS) - Ocarina of Time (OoT) - Majoras Mask (MM) - Twilight Princess (TP)
Minish Cap (MC) - Four Swords (FS) - Four Swords Adventures (FSA)
Legend of Zelda (LoZ) - Adventure of Link (AoL)
Oracle of Seasons (OS) - Oracle of Ages (OA)
A Link to the Past (ALttP) - Links Awakening (LA)
Skyward Sword (SS) - Ocarina of Time (OoT) - Wind Waker (WW) - Phantom Hourglas (PH) - Spirit Tracks (ST)
Linking Child Timeline Games
1) Minish Cap must be followed by Four Swords, then Four Swords Adventures as Vaati makes his debut with origin story in Minish Cap, he is the villain of Four Swords and then killed in Four Swords Adventures.
2) In Four Swords Adventure Ganondorf becomes Ganon permanently with the Trident. He posesses the Trident in A Link to the Past which is officially stated as being followed by Links Awakening. He wields it in Legend of Zelda which is also officially stated as being followed by Adventure of Link. He also uses it in the Oracle games which can happen in either order. This places the Minish Cap series before LoZ, the Oracle Series, and ALttP.
3) Since Twinrova are alive in the Oracle Series it must occur in the Child Timeline as they are killed in the Adult Timeline. With Ganon also wielding the Trident as stated above that places the Minish Cap Series, LoZ, and ALttP in the Child Timeline.
4) With reason 1 stating that the Minish Cap Series starts before the games LoZ, ALttP, and the Oracle Series. And reason 2 states that with Twinrova alive these games must also take place in the Child Timeline. That puts the Minish Cap Series after Twilight Princess. As every appearence of Ganondorf afterwards is as Ganon, who appears chronologically at the end of the Minish Cap series.
5) ALttP must be at the end of the Child Timeline because the Sacred Realm is restored to its former glory and Link is the new master of all the Triforce. And as a side note the Master Sword is said to never be used again.
6) In the Oracle Series Twinrova attempt to revive Ganon. Since reason 4 places ALttP second to last and is only one of two games in the Child Timeline to mention Ganon as killed. It must come after Adventure of Link since it is the direct sequel to Legend of Zelda the only other game to state Ganon as killed.
7) Skyward Sword has been stated as a prequel to Ocarina of Time placing it before any other game in both timelines. Ocarina of Time then follows, with the Twilight Princess (Backstory) of Ganondorfs fate possibly happening either before, after or at the same time as Majora's Mask which still stars the same Link from Ocarina of Time. Twilight Princess is then stated as following Majora's Mask many hundreds of years later in the Child Timeline. This is also the last appearence of Ganondorf before he becomes Ganon with the Trident.
Linking the Adult Timeline
1) As stated Skyword Sword is a prequel to Ocarina of Time placing it at the start.
2) Wind Waker is to follow as there is no Hero of Time as he was sent back to his childhood creating the Adult Timeline were he would not exist to save Hyrule.
3) Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks follow after, as officially stated.
Problems & Solutions
Q. How does Ganon go from his imprisonment in the Four Sword in FSA to leading an army in LoZ.
A. It may be explained in a future installment as Ganon is known to escape his prisons and even cheat death.
Q. In ALttP Ganon is sealed in the Dark World but in the Child Timeline he is never sealed in the Sacred Realm.
A. As it is at the end of the Child Timeline ALttP may by this point have a muddled history. There is mention of an Imprisoning War and Ganon being sealed away in the sacred realm. No such imprisonment exists except in the Adult Timeline which he escapes from. There is a similar story in Twilight Princess were he leads an army, is captured and sealed away in another realm by the Ancient Sages.
Q. If Ganon is killed in LoZ why is he alive by ALttP.
A. Despite his death in LoZ he is nearly revived in AoL a direct sequel. And in my timeline version once more by Twinrova albeit partially sucessfully. So he may in a future game or later time be completely revived.
Ganondorf in Twilight Princess upon death has his spirit sealed in the Trident. He is then either released into a new body by another Gerudo male called Ganondorf, the body then corrupted by the spirit of the original Ganondorf becomes Ganon. Or that same Gerudo claims Ganondorfs powers and as a result his Ganon form. This explains the death in Twilight Princess as enough time would then pass for a new Gerudo male to be born, and explain why the spirit within the trident corrupts the Gerudo into Ganon.
The Ancient Sages are the power for the Adult Timeline Seven Sages and the Child Timeline Wise Men and Maidens. The Ancient Sages grant their power to seven people who need it. From there it is passed down to their descendants. This theory works on the basis that either the Ancient Sages granted their power to seven Hylians who would become the Seven Wise Men, either after Twilight Princess which has a similar kind of Imprisoning War as mentioned in ALttP. Or the Seven Wise Men were granted their power in a future Imprisoning War in which Ganon, not Ganondorf is stated in ALttP as being sealed into the Sacred Realm. This would work as the Wise Men and Maidens in ALttP are all Hylians, and the the Imprisoning War mentioned in ALttP is fought between Ganon's Army and the Knight's of Hyrule aka the (Hylian Knights). The other thing to mention is that besides the number seven for all the groups and with the exception of the Maidens, Ganon and/or Ganondorf has been sealed away somewhere by the Seven Sages, the Ancient Sages and the Seven Wise Men. It should be noted that even though the Maidens do not seal Ganon away they can be used by Agahnim to break the seal holding him.
As for the Sages of Earth and Wind in Wind Waker they are Sages of the Master Sword and possess only the ability to keep the Master Sword in working order. All other sages in the Zelda series are either powerless or possess an explanation for their powers.
I unfortunately and regretably cannot explain the forever changing geography of Hyrule. Despite my best attempts the only solution I can provide is that all Zelda games take place in similar yet alternate realities unless the land corellates to the previous game either in geography or story i.e. LoZ to AoL, or WW to ST.
End of Theory
This message was left via problem report by 126.96.36.199 on 10-Dec-07 14:26 UTC
There is a discrepancy on this page. Ganon would not have had the power of the Triforce of Power in the Child Timeline because he didn't get it until Link pulled the Master Sword from the Temple of Time.
At the end of Ocarina of Time, Young Link's hand glows with the Triforce of Courage, showing that he has the triforce without pulling the Master Sword. The events in OoT were meant to happen (Ganondorf was destined to steal the triforce), so when Link didn't pull the Master Sword, the gods gave Ganon, Link, and Zelda their Triforces. This is the "divine prank" the sages refer to in Twilight Princess.
This doesn't make any sense to me. For one things people's hands have been known to glow with the Triforce emblem when they don't actually have a piece. I just looked at the ending and Zelda's hand is NOT glowing with a Triforce emblem. What happened at the timeline split is unclear, and hard to reconcile with the rest of the timeline. I go into it at length on my [Talk Page] --Fierce Deku (talk) 04:10, November 15, 2010 (UTC)
Speaking of which...
Wouldn't it be kinda like Minority Report? Link experienced the one timeline, in which Ganondorf ruled for seven years and then was defeated, then Link was sent back. So, when he told Hyrule about what Ganon would do, kinda like Minority Report, he saw that that would happen in the future unless stopped, but they stopped it so it never happened. Sure, now that is has been stopped, it won't happen, but it still would have happened. One timeline, because the other branch was stopped from happening. so, instead of a split, with the two timelines happening simultaneously, wouldn't there just be the one? Switch-track kinda thing? Aeronflux 20:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
A Link to the Past
Isn't A Link to the Past here as well, after Twilight Princess? I'm not sure but i remember it was with the seven maidens. 188.8.131.52 22:25, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Why is there still speculation about Spirit Tracks place in the timeline on the article when we now know it'll be a sequal to Phantom Hourglass? Yowuza yadderhouse | meh 19:04, November 29, 2009 (UTC)
- I didn't know that personally, it's just recent information I had from quite a reliable source that it was unconfirmed, I just used it to fill the gap until someone had decent information.--LunaLink December 6, 2009
The Timeline Theory is canon. Okay. And we can possibly rule out the same effect happening in Oracle of Ages, because we are using the power of the Oracle of Ages - conceivably, she can actually reroute time, and not just herself.
But there is absolutely no reason why the mechanics of split timeline wouldn't apply to Majora's Mask. Even if we use the possibility of beating Majora in only two 3-day sets, there is still at least two timelines (we can ignore any effects from Ocarina, because this is already a different dimension) - one in which Link does nothing but stop Majora, and one in which everyone dies, while Link teleports out.
- Or, it could be due to Zelda and Zelda alone. While Link could easily have lived his seven years as a child, and safely changed the future as he had done before and continued to do in Majora's Mask or Oracle of Ages, the semi-divine Triforce had been the thing that kept him in the Temple of Light for seven years. As a gesture of compassion, Zelda went against the Triforce itself, and that could be what broke time. It certainly fits with the tendency of this Zelda's plans to do more harm than good - she makes an emotional decision without thinking it fully through, and so instead of letting Link fully save Hyrule as we know he should be able to do, she damns one version of Hyrule for the sake of his comfort.184.108.40.206 21:54, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
~Wind Waker makes a huge reference to the Ocarina of Time, and Majora's Mask storyline. I can see Ocarina of Time's storyline being referenced, but if Majora's mask occurred during the "Young Link Timeline" rather than the Adult one, like Wind Waker, then why would Majora's Mask be mentioned? The piece of text in question is spoken by the King of Red Lions I think after the events at the Tower of the Gods and in Hyrule. He states that the Hero of Time had the Triforce of Courage, but when he left Hyrule to go on a separate journey, he was separated from the elements that made him the hero. Unless I'm thinking of some other game, this is a reference to Majora's Mask, isn't it?Jagtarro (talk) 10:04, January 19, 2010 (UTC) Masterlink03: I agree with Jagtarro there... that it's pretty big of a reference as well as how Tingle was introduced in Majora's Mask..
- The "leaving Hyrule to go on a separate journey" part is a reference to the fact that Link was sent back in time to fulfill a different task, which was attempting to keep the Sacred Realm closed and exposing Ganondorf's treacheries to prevent the demise of Hyrule which happens in the Adult timeline. The "separation of elements that made him a hero" could be a reference to the Master Sword, which Link had to keep in the pedestal once he was sent back in time to avoid triggering what he did in the Adult timeline. Alternatively, all of this could simply be (and probably is) an error on the parts of the game developers. It happens, and we know from personal experience that it's happened to Miyamoto multiple amounts of times as he continuously switches up his chronology order in different interviews. --220.127.116.11 01:24, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
- I don't see the developer error your talking about. The Adult Timeline Hero of Time was sent back in time after defeating Ganon. This is what the King in WW was talking about, him leaving and being separated. At that point the Triforce of courage stayed in the Adult Timeline, as we see from that fact that WW Link finds it. Where's the error? That's actually way more attention to the timeline that they pay in other games *cough*twilightprincess*cough*. And for the record, Miyamoto has been sort of out of the loop for a while now as far as the Zelda Timeline, which I think makes a lot of people mistakenly believe Nintendo isn't paying much attention: they are, it's just someone other than Miyamoto nowadays.--FierceDeku 22:42, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
I consider calling it the "Split Timeline Theory" to be using the word like in scientific theory. A scientific theory is not a guess (that would be a hypothesis), but a larger idea supported by a large body of scientific evidence that has come to be accepted. It's like the Theory of Evolution or the Theory of Gravity. With that meaning of the word you call it a theory even though it's known to be true.--Fierce Deku (talk) 04:59, November 12, 2010 (UTC)
Spirit Tracks Get's rid of frustration.
Since Spirit Tracks realease, I think that a new timeline can be made. Here it is:
Minish Cap to Ocarina Of Time, then the timeline splits.
Adult Timeline: Wind Waker to Phantom Hourglass to Spirit Tracks to Link to the Past to Four Swords to Four Swords Adventure to Link's Awakening.
Child Timeline: Majora's Mask to Twilight Princess to Legend of Zelda to Zelda 2: The Adventure of Link to Oracle of Ages/Oracle of Seasons.
If you have any questions, ask on this page.
Masterink03: TINGLE They put Majora's Mask not with Twilight Princess!!! Tingle wouldn't have been introduced to link unless he went to Termina! if you say no... explain how Link could have met tingle in the split timeline theory?
Majora's with Wind Waker:
How could have tingle not been introduced to Link then later put in Wind Waker if Majora's Mask did not occur
- How is Tingle alive for over 100 years, and in a whole different dimension? - McGillivray227 22:19, May 2, 2010 (UTC)
Masterlink03:The over 100 years... I don't know for sure... but in a different dimension highly unlikely... in the theory's Majora's mask is on the Twilight Princess side...maybe he had sons? but still if Link didn't bump into him in Majora's Mask, he probably wouldn't have recognized him Wind Waker... Masterlink03: I agree with the other notes up as well... I want to edit the whole thing completely as well
- Tingle now lives over 100 years, moves to another dimension, and can recognize a different person? - McGillivray227 22:39, May 2, 2010 (UTC)
Masterlink03: thats what the split timeline theorists' are pointing out to me...
- Then the split timeline theorists are pointing a few incorrect things to you. - McGillivray227 23:00, May 2, 2010 (UTC)
Masterlink03: more of showing the reason they should remove that arrangement of theory...
This is an old thread of discussion and probably already got resolved elsewhere, but I'm responding to it anyway:
What? If I'm reading this, people are assuming that the Tingle from Wind Waker is the same one from Majora's Mask. You guy's, there are many different "copies" of many Zelda Characters. There are alternate versions of Hylians that exist in Termina, and also many people have descendants or perhaps reincarnations of themselves who look just like them and have the same name and characteristics. There are multiple Zeldas, Links, Malons, Anjus, and TINGLES. The Tingle in Wind Waker is either the descendant or some kind of reincarnation of the Majora's Mask Tingle or his potential Hylian counterpart. If he recognizes Link in Wind Waker, it's because he's been to Outset Island, saw a drawing of the Hero of Time who Link looks like, or maybe Tingle is just crazy (there's plenty of evidence for that already). The Tingle from Majora's Mask did not go to Hyrule then live hundreds of years and meet Wind Waker Link. Maybe I'm misinterpreting this but it seems like people were thinking that he did.--Fierce Deku (talk) 05:14, November 12, 2010 (UTC)
--Terraricraft (talk) 22:13, August 3, 2011 (UTC) Let's remember what tingle was trying to find force shards and try magic, so he could have accidentally transported 100 years in another dimension(It's a crazy theory but somewhat possible).
The Linked Timeline Theory
---Phantom Ganon Still Alive---
I'm speaking of the Phantom Ganon which was sealed in between dimensions in Ocarina of Time. Seeing as he was banished there before Link had a chance to alter history in the Split Timeline theory, wouldn't he still exist in both the "Child" and "Adult" timelines? I've always thought that the space between dimensions, or realms of existence if you would, was simply an endless void where nothing existed, including time. Hence it could not be changed to where he was never created. What do you guys think?
(18.104.22.168 05:09, July 30, 2010 (UTC))
At the end of Ocarina of Time, Link returns to the past having knowledge of future events and explains them to child princess Zelda, thereby thwarting Ganondorf's plans, preventing the "future" (as Link witnessed it) from ever occurring. For all intensive purposes, the entire adult segment of the game could easily have been spelled out as an introduction with the game essentially ending when Link first meets Zelda. There is no "timeline split". What future that would have been simply disappears (or merges with) and the only timeline that follows thereafter goes straight into Majora's Mask. I hope someone with an understanding of X Y Z W coordination can realize that "time" and "location" are completely different things. In fact, to completely entertain the idea of an alternate timeline, Link would have to originally travel to the past, from the future (as exists in most stories involving Time Travel) rather than to the future, from the past.
I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, but I simply can't believe anyone who has played the game all the way through to the final end screen would think that there are two distinctly different "locations" separated from a single length of time where either Link or anyone/anything else could exist exactly as the player witnessed it following Ganandorf's reign.
The second most logical explanation that could occur is during the events of the ending of OoT, when Link returns as a child to 'meet' princess Zelda for the first time. It would require only that despite what Link says (Link does speak in Ocarina of Time, he just doesn't have a word bubble or written dialogue for the player to read. This is easily proven during this exact scene when Zelda ask's for Link's name, then learns of his name after a short pause. Link could essentially say anything with the player's only hint's being the response of another character), the future still continues. Perhaps in the sense that even though Zelda is told of Ganondorf's plans, she may not have been quick enough to act so that Ganondorf end's up escaping, chasing Zelda and Impa on horse. Regardless of how it happens, but simply entertaining the idea that the end of OoT simply loops right back into Link's first meeting with Zelda, then NO timeline is developed. At all. It just becomes an infinite loop, enclosed and entirely separate from any other Zelda.
I hope a moderator or admin could clear this up from the official page. (22.214.171.124 12:02, May 12, 2011 (UTC))
- First of all, BTW, the term is "intents and purposes". Secondly, if there was no timeline split, then how can one explain the differences between what took place in The Wind Waker (Hyrule being flooded and replaced by the Great Sea, Ganondorf being let loose from his imprisonment at the end of Ocarina Of Time) and what took place in Twilight Princess (Hyrule remains unflooded, Ganondorf sent to the Twilight world by the Ancient Sages)? Thirdly, if there was an infinite loop, then how is child Link able to live on to the events that took place in Majora's Mask? (VicGeorge2K9 (talk) 12:04, May 12, 2011 (UTC))
- Thanks for clearing up that 'second logical explanation' of mine, VicGeorge2K9. Also on my poor use of grammar. I'm more of a numbers guy if I do say so myself.
- To address your second concern, I simply can't give you an explanation other than you believe what you believe strictly because you acknowledge this split timeline theory. My post was to simply disprove any reasoning that would even let an idea such as a "split timeline" even exist. The only Link (the player's eyes and ears) that existed in Ocarina of Time traveled to the future, then returned to the past with knowledge of that particular future. Explaining this to Zelda would prevent Ganondorf from ever taking over (at least in the timeframe of OoT/MM) and prevent the future from occurring as Link had witnessed it. After the explanation, Link presumably leaves in search of Navi and the story of Majora's Mask unfolds.
- The whole point is, the future that was Adult Link's disappeared when he permanently returned to a child.
- It is my personal opinion that should a "split timeline" theory exist, each timeline must make room for each game.
- It's not so much of "Adult Timeline" and "Child Timeline, it's more of "Adult Timeline" or "Child Timeline"
- For either to be feasible, they must both entirely support the remainder of the Zelda titles on their own. This is the point i'm trying to make... The timeline theory "splits" and makes room for waaaay too much speculation. Even if they did both fully support the rest of the titles, it still would not explain why an "Adult Link" timeline exists, when there is no 'Adult Link'.
- (126.96.36.199 12:35, May 12, 2011 (UTC))
- Nintendo created the games, and the stories that would explain the existences of either timeline. Had they chose to pursue only one possible future for what followed Ocarina Of Time and Majora's Mask, then either The Wind Waker and its related Nintendo DS sequels Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks would not have been created, or Twilight Princess would not have been created. But they ended up creating what they did, and as such, it has led to the belief that these timelines somehow coexist. (VicGeorge2K9 (talk) 13:14, May 12, 2011 (UTC))
- First of all, the Split Timeline "Theory", as I'm tired of having to reiterate, is officially confirmed by Nintendo and also fits with in-game information. It is no more a guess than the theory of gravity. The name continues to persist on this page because it started out as a theory that is now confirmed, but we should probably move it to just "Split Timeline". I don't understand any of your temporal mechanics explanations. First of all, Link does not travel to the future when he first pulls the Master Sword, he is put to sleep for 7 years (time is still passing completely normally for everyone. Link is simply comatose and wakes up after having grown for 7 years). When he is an adult and puts the Master Sword back in the pedestal, what apparently happens is that his "spirit" alone (not his body) which includes all his memories and whatnot, is transported back in time and put into his child body. Items apparently travel back with him as well. Subsequent times that he pulls the Master Sword as a kid he may actually be going to sleep again (remember he brought all his items back so he can therefore wake up with all the adult equipment he left the future with), or maybe he's actually being sent forward in time to his adult body. At the end of the game, Zelda does this exact same process, sending him back to his child body in the past. This time though he is sent further back, prior to his accidentally letting Ganondorf into the Sacred Realm. He is able to prevent Ganondorf from getting the Triforce (he could easily do this by simply not opening the Door of Time/pulling the Master Sword). The future that follows is now one in which Link is never sent back in time from a point where he remembers that he should leave the door of time closed, and Link therefore has no origin within the current line. It's the classic time traveler's "kill your grandpa in the past" paradox, and the only solution I'm aware of is that the "Adult Timeline" still exists and that Link came form that line; were that timeline destroyed Link would not exists (not one who knew how to stop Ganondorf anyway). There is no reason to believe that the other timeline ceases to be. The child timeline split off from it. Again, this is confirmed by the game's creators and in game evidence. When Link goes back in time, he changes the timeline, splitting a new one off, and the original one keeps existing too. Since time travel mechanics are a purely theoretical field, there is no reason to try to contrive some other contradictory mechanics when the ones used in the Zelda universe have already been defined for us.--FierceDeku 21:57, May 12, 2011 (UTC)
Of course, the one thing I am wondering is how the Wind Waker future-generation Link in the Adult Timeline is able to get the Triforce Shards from the Ocarina Of Time generation Link if that Link ended up going back to the past to create the Child Timeline and somehow nullifying any possibility that he may end up leaving Triforce Shards for any future-generation Link in the Adult Timeline to go and find buried in the Great Sea. Of course, this also makes me wonder how the future-generation Link of Wind Waker even came to be if the Ocarina Of Time generation Link went back in time to create the Child Timeline. Admittedly the whole thing is very confusing. (VicGeorge2K9 (talk) 03:17, July 7, 2011 (UTC))
- The King of Red Lions/Daphnes Nohansen Hyrule explains the fate of the Triforce of courage after Ocarina of Time in this quote: "When the Hero of Time was called to embark on another journey and left the land of Hyrule (his "spirit" was sent back into his child body in the past, where he starts the Child Timeline), he was separated from the elements that made him a hero. It is said that at that time, the Triforce of Courage was split into eight shards and hidden throughout the land." The Triforce remained in the Adult Timeline and was split/hidden. It did not go back in time, just like how Link's adult body didn't go back.
- As for how the WW Link came about even though the Hero of Time presumably did not have any descendants in the Adult Timeline, I think it's just a matter of the classic Zelda reincarnation cycle. We obviously know that almost identical people reoccur throughout time: there's multiple Anjus, Links, Zeldas, Tingles, all kinds of people. It would take ridiculous, probably impossible genetics to produce this effect. We sort of have to assume that there's some sort of magic/fate at work in the Zelda universe that causes this. Therefore a duplicate person doesn't have to be a blood descendant of the previous one. One important thing to note is that in WW, Ganondorf says that Link is surely "the Hero of Time, reborn". This lends evidence to the idea that some force is making there be repetitions of people, as opposed to them all being freak identical great-great-great-grandchildren purely through genetics.--FierceDeku 22:31, July 7, 2011 (UTC)
This is a revival of a discussion above which kind of just died. I think its time we remove the "theory" from this article title. Fierce Deku made a good point that it is more like a scientific theory, but at the same time, it has been confirmed by Nintendo. I don't see how much more evidence we could get. Thoughts? --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 21:24, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
Today (not before) I heard of a web-site called "Zelda Universe" so I Googled it. It's not as cool as Zeldapedia, but it gets news updates, or someone is posting news updates. Anyway, It (Z.U.) said that Aonuma "almost" disproved HIS (himself) Split-Timeline Theory. He said he "knows how all the Zelda games 'fit' into The Timeline, but I can't tell you." now, this does not disprove the split timeline, but it does compromise/complicate it a bit.
P.S. I stongly belive in the Split Timeline theory, AND that all the Zelda "worlds" are conected on/by a Globe/Earth/Planet-Thingy, like the way Link crossed over from Hyrule to Termina in MM. Does anyone have anything else to say on the matter at hand? DekuSpenstar (talk) 14:05, November 4, 2011 (UTC) DekuSpenstar (talk) 14:05, November 4, 2011 (UTC) DekuSpenstar.
- I am confused. How does that complicate it at all? Are you saying because he used timeline in a singular fashion? That's how I use it too but i still believe the split Nintendo confirmed. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 14:19, November 4, 2011 (UTC)
Here is the now infamous quote. Zelda Dungeon is the only place that I've been able to find the quote with the actual question it is responding to also included:
"Amanda Mackay: Now a lot of the music within the Zelda series carries over within different games. Does that mean that they're within the same timeline?
Eiji Aonuma: Yes, all of the games are within one timeline for the entire series, but that timeline is a secret that I cannot reveal."
I don't know who Amanda Mackay is and intend no offense toward her, but it seems extremely obvious to me that this is just a case of someone who doesn't know much about the Zelda timeline posing the frequently asked "Are all the games in the same continuity" question, to which Aonuma of course responds with a simple yes, they're all canonical and in one continuity, but I can't reveal the secret master document. The wording (which I believe would be a translation anyway) does not seem at all intended to contradict the split timeline theory, he's using timeline as a word for universe/continuity, and not going into the nitty gritty explanation of the split timeline as that would be tangential to the question. It has been very clearly stated by Aonuma himself that the split timeline "theory" is true and that WW exists in the adult line and TP in the child. Anyone who wishes to see the quote please direct your attention to this page's references section. The only games that have come out since this statement are known direct sequels to WW, and SS is a known prequel to OoT. None of this generates any need to remove the split timeline anyway, so why would it suddenly be different? Besides, if Aonuma was going to announce that the split timeline had been retconed, it is unlikely he would do it in a vague ambiguous way like this. I see no new information in this statement and no cause for any doubt of old information.
I realize that was kind of long and whatnot but I'm sure we'll be hearing about this quote again, so I wanted to lay in out very clearly in advance. More on topic, I support changing this page's name/language to just "Split Timeline" (with "Split Timeline Thoery" as a redirect). It's officially confirmed, and I'm tired of people misinterpreting the use of the word "theory" or attempting to use it as reasoning against it being confirmed.--FierceDeku 18:54, November 4, 2011 (UTC)
- The way I read that quote, it looks like Amanda is asking whether games that share music are necessarily connected to each other, and that Aonuma reaffirmed that there is a timeline but that he isn't allowed to give any hints about it. I don't know how this would even have anything to do with the spit timeline theory, specifically. Jedimasterlink (talk) 00:29, November 5, 2011 (UTC)
Hey! Zelda Universe said it not me! Like I said I strongly belive in the Split Timeline. And, yes, I think "Split Time" sould be a page in-and-of-its'-self. 188.8.131.52 11:42, November 7, 2011 (UTC) 184.108.40.206 11:42, November 7, 2011 (UTC) DekuSpenstar.
I honestly think that this is a little too in-depth for something that's sorta obvious. I mean, I love speculation and theorizing as much as the next dude, but it makes perfect sense that each story is its own "legend," so to speak. There are a few games that do have a linked continuity, like Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, and Wind Waker do, but this doesn't necessarily mean that every other one is connected somehow. Sometimes a reference is just a reference, a nod is just a nod, and an homage is just an homage.
It explains pretty much everything, doesn't it? Guy named Link who at some point wears some green clothes and a pointy hat, who saves a girl (usually named Zelda and usually a Princess) from evil, finding some sort of powerful, evil-banishing sword, traveling a world that has a lot of similar places and names, meeting people who happen to resemble other people from past games. That's what I've always seen the series as. There is a little bit of connectivity, but not every thing, every game, is connected. If anything each game either starts its own timeline/continuity, or adheres to follow or precede another.Derekoe (talk) 00:43, November 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Look, it's been officially confirmed multiple times (including in the quote I just posted above) that ALL the Zelda games exist in one single canonical continuity. If you don't want to look at them that way or worry about the timeline that's completely fine. I would personally appreciate it though if you would refrain from claiming that it isn't true. Zelda is confirmed to have a single-continuity all-games timeline, and while it's totally cool if you don't like that fact or don't want to worry about it, would you please not talk to people as if it isn't a real fact? I've spent a lot of time on this site trying to help spread accurate and detailed info about Zelda so I'm a little sensitive I guess... Oh, and I know you didn't believe the rumor DekuSpenstar, I was just making it clear what the deal is for future reference, since we'll probably be hearing about this again from other people.--FierceDeku 02:12, November 8, 2011 (UTC)
- But that's the thing, different people from within the development studios have said a lot of things conflicting things, even Miyamoto himself says something different. To say that the game's themselves are the most official source is one thing, but then to also say that developers confirm it doesn't make sense, considering that the staff can and has changed dependent on the title. There's also the fact that when I read this page, I'm seeing A LOT of things that are left dangling in the wind as loose ends. Phrases like "it's possible," "subject to speculation," and "it is likely" have no place in an article that is supposed to be formed as fact - that's why it's still a theory. For a theory to become fact, it needs to be conclusive and have no loose ends, everything, and I mean everything, needs to tie together, with nothing left to question, or speculate. Only two of the three references provided for this page actually state fact given by Aonuma as a developer, and the only thing it does is state that only Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Wind Waker, and Twilight Princess are connected (with the possibility of Skyward Sword, but we'll have to wait and see). The third reference itself is an in-game reference, but then again it still only ties together those four games.
- I'm sorry, but I don't care how sensitive you are to this subject, it might not go as far as you think, and that sensitivity to the subject could be causing people to receive some false information. So far I don't see anything that would make this anything more than a theory.
- Barring that however, since they have pretty much explicitly stated that Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Wind Waker, and Twilight Princess ARE linked by one continuity, it still works to explain a timeline expressly between those games, but not any link they may have to others outside of the thematic elements that pretty much any game in the series has. Derekoe (talk) 03:30, November 8, 2011 (UTC)
- One of the biggest myths messing with people's ability to understand Zelda is the idea that Miyamoto is still the final word on things. He is no longer particularly involved in the story of Zelda, so whatever he has said about the timeline can more or less be considered retconed when contradicted by higher sources. Eiji Aonuma is the highest official source I'm aware of; he is highly involved with the recent games, and he has stated multiple times that not only are all the Zeldas officially considered to be in one continuity, but that a master timeline document detailing this continuity physically exists. It doesn't matter what misinformed Nintendo employee who is less involved with Zelda anyway said something to the contrary in the past, nor does it matter if Miyamoto himself wakes up one day and chooses to adopt a no-timeline point of view; Aonuma did not lie, the all-games one-continuity timeline is real, whether or not every person is aware of/chooses to believe it. He is not the only one to bring up the master document either (Nintendo of America for example tried to have it publicly released once). No one is required to apply the single-continuity concept to their interpretation of Zelda, but it is undeniable that the concept both exists and is the interpretation adopted by the people who are most involved in actually creating the stories in question.--FierceDeku 04:45, November 8, 2011 (UTC)
- Considering that the developers have confirmed the split timeline numerous times, I think we should remove "theory" from the title of this page. Jedimasterlink (talk) 02:58, November 8, 2011 (UTC)
I second that, I say we putt it to a vote, all in favor of "Split Timeline" (minus 'Theory') say, Yay. All against (keep 'Theory') say, Nay. DekuSpenstar (talk) 15:53, November 12, 2011 (UTC) DekuSpenstar.
I think everyone is out playing the new Zelda:Skyward Sword, because I've seen no change the past 5 days. I know this because my Mom won't stop playing it long for me to get a chance to play.(yes, I have a COOL Mom!). DekuSpenstar (talk) 14:35, November 23, 2011 (UTC) DekuSpenstar.
Skyward Sword would suggest another split near the VERY beginning. What with the fact Ghirahim goes back in time to revive Demise, and despite this the "Present" time is utterly uneffected if you go back through the Gate of Time. This would suggest that when Ghirahim revived Demise it created a split and the final battle takes place in it. Kinda downplays the whole "End of the world" thing if you think about it. Evnyofdeath 04:48, November 28, 2011 (UTC)
- The game goes you of it's way to precisely show the ending does not cause a split. It takes the approach that what happens in the past already happened and won't change the future. Zelda's bangle or bracelet...wristband or what ever it's called is shown on Impa from the very start implying that everything in the ending had already happened. Further more through the gap in the sealed temple you can see the crystal Zelda is sleeping also from the start, long before she goes back in time. Even for the final nail in the coffin to make absolutely sure they didn't want people to think this way Phi's dialogue about Demise says he has conquered time which given the realm the final battle occurs in enough justification to prevent a paradox. Oni Dark Link 19:31, November 28, 2011 (UTC)
- I understand that, however if that is true, that means Demise was killed in the past and couldn't have been resealed as the Imprisioned again. Additionally before Demise's defeat the Master Sword is not in the pedestal Zelda's crystal was on. Evnyofdeath 01:57, November 29, 2011 (UTC)
This debate is piontless, even if that were so, wich it is not, you would also be saying that Twilight Princess makes a split timeline wen Link goes back in time to the Temple of Time. I mean, in game, there is a chest just to the left in the secret grove, it is open already, and broken over time. Now, Link can open it in the Past, but wether he does or not the brokin/open chest will still be there in the 'Future' and remain so to the end of the game. It is just part of game-plot and does not make a second split in the timeline, wich is the LAST thing we need right now. I mean, this is so off subject, we are debating/voeting for Split Timeline, Theory, or not Theory! DekuSpenstar (talk) 10:18, November 29, 2011 (UTC)
Except there is a difference. The one in Twilight Princess is what is known as a "Stable Time Loop". The one in Skyward Sword can't be explained away as such, due to again, the fact in the present the Imprisioned was still, well, imprisioned which it couldn't be if Link killed Demise in the past, and the Master Sword still isn't in the pedestal until after the defeat of Demise. Evnyofdeath 13:29, November 29, 2011 (UTC)
- Did you read my comment? All the evidence in the game points to Skyward Sword supporting stable time travel. What happened in the past happened and has no bearing on the future. Zelda is visibly asleep from the start and Impa has the bracelet she got at the end of the game. And Link did not kill Demise either, at the end of the game he seals him away within the Master Sword, and what form does demise take during the events of the game? As a sealed being with a giant spike in his head. Oni Dark Link 19:39, November 29, 2011 (UTC)
Yes, Stable Timeline, thank you, but what your trying to say would empliy that Link has a choice in the mater, when he does not, and clearly needs to too finish the game. Now, we raely need to get back to the mater at hand, Split Timeline, theory, or not.
P.S. to sign your name on a talk-page just type 4 of thoes little sgwigle thingys ~ , should be below your Esc. key. DekuSpenstar.
What Should We Do...
Hmm, non-canon, I like it! It alows everyones own opinion, and it will finnish this debate once and for all about this...wibbliy, wobbliy,time-ey, wime-ey... stuff... (Doctor Who) anyone elts for the non-canon-ing of Split Timeline? DekuSpenstar (talk) 23:05, January 31, 2012 (UTC)
- Um, no, that won't work. There is no remotely canonical source which specifically says it's not true, and numerous developer quotes which say it is true. It is canon. I recommend we remove the "theory" from the title, which we had more or less already agreed upon, and rewrite the page accordingly.--FierceDeku 02:48, February 1, 2012 (UTC)
YES, YES, YES! Non-Theory, not non-canon! I only said non-canon to help stop the debate. As I have said before, I am in favor of non-theory-ing the Split Timeline. DekuSpenstar.
- ......There's so much wrong with what you just said, I don't know where to start. What debate are you even talking about? Why would we do non-canon instead of non-theory just to stop a supposed debate, anyway? Why are you claiming to have said this before when you clearly did not? Why are you so emphatic about this for no readily apparent reason? ...Well, that being said, I agree this page needs to be un-theoried. Xykeb Yvolix Zraliv 14:07, February 1, 2012 (UTC)
- He actually did say he supported removing the word "theory" from the page title in a past discussion (a couple sections above this one) that went dead for some reason. The fact that this discussion has been open for some time (albeit on hiatus for a while) is likely why he called this a "debate", even though nobody has opposed changing the title. Jedimasterlink (talk) 16:35, February 1, 2012 (UTC)
I wanted to add this picture to this page, do you people like it? Greeting from Bulgaria!
And this makes sense..?
How could there possibly be a "Link Fails" timeline? I'm not saying they can't make a story where he fails. It's there story, it'll go the way they want it. But, does it make sense? Anyone who's beaten the game has seen how Link won. The Adult/Child Timeline differences happen when Zelda sends him back and Ganon never gets the Triforce to begin with. Okay, makes sense. But, how did Link suddenly fail? Did he forget that he had to deflect the shot with the Master Sword, like he did while fighting Phantom Ganon? Did he not realize that stunning the real deal also required the Light Arrows? Between the two parts of the fight, did the building collapse in a different way, causing Link to be killed by falling debris? During the second part, did Link fail to knock Ganon over, thus not getting the Master Sword back, thus being unable to win? Did he get the sword, only for Ganon to get up too quickly and strike Link's back before he could deliver the final blow? Something would've had to go differently for Link ot fail, but for that to happen, at least one of them would've had to thought differently, moved differently, something. They only would've done so in response to a different circumstance, but one of them would've had to have created that different circumstance. Not to be one of those guys who throws ridiculous stuff out there, but I don't see when that would've happened. Does anyone else? WestleyCole (talk) 22:20, January 26, 2013 (UTC) *Apparently I'm having problems. I can't seem to set this up to match the rest of the page layout. If someone else can, feel free to do so.
- It doesn't make sense. That's why Hyrule Historia is a piece of dolled-up, expensive, grade-a fanon nonsense that someone should feel really guilty making people pay for. It's like if someone put a vandalized article from here in book form; arguably it's worse. Just don't give that... book... any credence; Zeldapedia sure doesn't! (Feel free to replace all those adjectives with their expletive counterparts.) --AuronKaizer! 23:01, January 26, 2013 (UTC)