@Daxel
I agree. Although it's nice to think you're transcending someone else's work by adding an expanded universe, if it's not sanctioned or part of the artist's original vision, it's non-canon.

@Jonathan Holmes

I love the Mega Man timeline. There are definitely some alternate universes though. As pathetic as it is I love thinking about the overarching Mega Man storyline.

My theory is that Nintendo itself is too confused on how a timeline would work for the series and they don't want to admit to a fanmade timeline so they are refusing to comment on the matter.

I always thought Zelda was a seperate Story, similar to that of Final Fantasy, only being brought together with common things that ever game has. Like Cid, Chocobo, and so forth. I do not believe they are all linked as one long single driven story line. That would mean there is a possibility for an ending ans I much prefer that to not be a possibility.

ZOMG ANTI-TIMELINE BIAS NINTENDO IS SO BIASED OMG!

also, Ocarinahero10 sounds like a douche.

There is no overarching timeline, I've been saying this for years.

Apparently he wasn't a gamer when Link's Awakening came out, because Link's Awakening occurs in the middle of Zelda II, back when Nintendo actually WERE trying to make one coherent story with one single Link. This is made evident in the Link's Awakening Official Player's Guide in the section which tells what has happened in the story so far.

This is probably just a mayor case of "overthinking" to which I can only reply STFUAJPG!

I could swear a few months back Nintendo (I think it was Miyamoto himself) said there IS a timeline of sorts, one that the staff spent a while to put together themselves, but they never released it for whatever reason. And that Ocarina was the "very first" of the Zelda stories.

Then again, they might've just meant the "tales told" thing, where "The Legend of Zelda" is a story told in Hyrule that seems to change with each retelling (much like some of the legends we hear about today).

And I agree the petition thing is pretty dumb.

that guy is kinda a dick

ok this guy is well an ass for thinking he is right about everything but i liked his ideas about the master sword a picori blade, but i also like game trailers idea of the oracles games each taking place at the same time in each split timeline. But damn it i know there is no Santa Clause, and no real hyrule but i can believe in a Zelda timeline all i want no matter how much you all say there isn't one. I also like to belive that the events of each game are the true stories of the ledgends told of the hero of time, go ahead tell me i am wrong, i dont care.

also, there is no god

I had always sort of assumed the different characters are ancestors/descendants of one another. I mean they have the exact same name, appear to live in the same geographical area, wear the exact same clothes, and are all terrible at carrying out a regular conversation.

But I suppose the notion of creating an entirely new adventure with the exact same premise as a way of generating a continued long-term income for the business makes just as much sense.

when you start to use concepts like "split timeline" it means you've already written yourself into a corner.

For years, Zelda fans have clung to Miyamoto's reference to some secret "document" at Nintendo, which apparently clarifies the timeline and has everything make sense and be all official-like. Seeing as Nintendo has not seen fit to release this document of theirs, it make much more sense to just ignore any pretense of continuity in such a long, on-going series and just accept them as they are.

And yet, just to play devil's advocate, the fact that this statement is coming from a nameless Nintendo of America rep places this "official statement" on the same level as American NES manual stories, which were often elaborated on and changed from the actual Japanese story. That is, this can't be regarded as a statement to rely on.

There's also the fact that certain games in the series are officially linked together in places. The Wind Waker is clearly linked to the Ocarina of Time (which created the split timeline series), and later Phantom Hourglass. Majora's Mask is a sequel to Ocarina of Time, and Twilight Princess was billed as "100 years after Ocarina of Time" as well. One timeline sequence that's practically confirmed is The Minish Cap, followed by Four Swords, followed by Four Swords Adventures. And finally, there were the pre-Ocarina games: The Adventure of Link is a direct sequel to Zelda 1, A Link to the Past was made as a prequel to Zelda 1 (and introduced the "Imprisoning War," which was "created" in Ocarina of Time), and Link's Awakening was originally meant to be a sequel to LttP (but is now ambiguously in the timeline). So the links (no pun intended) are there, they just don't fit together perfectly due to the lengthy history of the series.

Personally, I'm fine with just accepting those vague links and chalking up certain differences to "varying storytellers," the same way that timeline "disbelievers" can accept the differing Zelda games as different takes on the same fairy tale. It's just annoying to hear people put so much effort into deciphering that which cannot be deciphered - and is as inconsequential as other convoluted video game timelines (like Mega Man).

And on that note, I'd like to point out that one of the few long-running, NES-created series out there, Castlevania, did manage to unify it's timeline under Igarashi's leadership from Symphony of the Night onwards, with Igarashi even releasing an official timeline (that struck three games from the continuity due to blatant conflicts, as well as a fourth game that he just really hated). However, Igarashi has pointed out that this has come to bite him in the ass, as due to certain plot elements, he is now severely limited by where he can place a story in the timeline. So having a concrete timeline could actually do the Zelda series more harm than good.

@ Holmes

All the Mega Man main-series games are in the same continuity (Original, X, Zero, ZX, Legends, in that order), while Battle Network and Star Force are in an alternate reality where computers were highly developed instead of robots. Pretty simple, no muss, no fuss. Then again, I may just not notice people arguing about those timelines.

The "hidden document" reference was made by Eiji Aonuma, IIRC, not Miyamoto. It seems to me that Miyamoto just wants to focus on the games and doesn't give a damn about the timeline or even the individual game stories. Aonuma started working on the LoZ franchise with Ocarina of Time, and he generally sounds more interested in the overarching timeline (or the pretense thereof) than Miyamoto ever has.

There's that famous comment from Miyamoto where he said the timeline was Ocarina, then the NES games, and Link to the Past at the end, which basically contradicted everything everybody ever thought they knew about Link to the Past (including stuff on the box and in the manual). Link was supposed to be the same guy in all the games, then things got too repetitive in too many games, and they made up the "different generations of Links" stuff. Then the split timeline thing. They're just trying to keep things plausibly within the same canon while still doing whatever the hell they want.

So Twilight Princess takes place a century after Ocarina, in the same world. Big deal. It's still the same story, told with new elements (somehow everybody conveniently forgot to mention the existence of a "twilight world" and all related artifacts in OoT). The point is, some of these games are real direct sequels (like OoT and Majora, or Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass). But there's really no point in pretending there's a big masterplan and it's gonna lead us somewhere. It's the same story over and over again, for crying out loud. It's nice to get new elements like the Goddesses legends in Link to the Past and Ocarina, but that's where it stops.

Furthermore, the fact that there always are new games coming out nullifies the validity of whatever hypothetical timeline you could make up. Everything is possible, because there could always be a big twist that's about to be told in an upcoming game. Any inconsistency may be explained in a game that's yet to come out. And still, the tendency so far has been to introduce new stories, not solve the idiosyncrasies between game A and B.

Building a Zelda timeline is a fun exercise in geekdom, and one Nintendo are interested in fueling among their fans, because it keeps the interest in the series alive. It's a fantastic way to cop your way out of writing an original story. Just throw in the ol' "save the princess, kill the bad guy, retrieve the triforce" with little variations here and there - and pretend it's part of a bigger timeline, and people are automatically interested. In a way, it's also a good thing for the series since most of the time the plot stays out of the way and is never a burden on the gameplay - which I believe is Miyamoto's intention. But face it, people...there is no such thing as a Zelda timeline, and Miyamoto doesn't care.

MEATMOUTH ROARS FOR THE TRUTH IS HARDCORE AND HE DOES NOT LIKE HARD CORE!

ROAR MEATMOUTH AND USE YOUR MEAT BEAM TO DISTROY THE TRUTH.

There isn't one Zelda timeline.

There's several, Not each game is part of a concurrent timeline.

I would like to point out that people only look into this crap because there is no variety in the gameplay between games?

If you give people 50 deserts and a degree in desertology, of course they are going to look into differences. They are still deserts though :P

I always laugh when I see someone try to put Zelda into a timeline.

It doesn't matter how much sense this timeline makes. If the creators say "there is no timeline" then there is no timeline. Period. No matter how many fans you get to sign a petition. Ugh.

It's like disliking a video game that came out "way too soon" and you make a petition that claims you will not buy and play it. Pointless and will not get you anywhere or change anything.

Nintendo should just put out a ridiculous, incorrect time line to piss all the fans off.

People though thought there was a timeline? How? It's never been the same link? Just nods to each other.. You know like FF? Thought it was obvious..

There is no timeline.

Deal with it.

oh my gosh...
are you seriously worrying about a fucking time line?
my suggestion for you is...

forget about it, and
go play the game.

the creator created this master piece for you to enjoy it for what it is,... not for what you want it to be.


...and simply signing petitions isnt going to change a fucking thing!
~miranda