Zelda retrospective: The end, my only friend, the end ...
Game Trailers posted their sixth and final Legend of Zelda video retrospective exploring the much disputed series timeline. We have no idea what the difference between Hyrule A and Hyrule B is, but we like what we see.
From the beginning: Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5
[Thanks to all who sent this in]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
midwat @ Nov 21st 2006 12:24PM
The horror!...The horror!
KBeat @ Nov 21st 2006 12:26PM
I thoroughly enjoyed the entire retrospective even though I have only played a couple of the games in the series. Here's hoping they give some other game franchises the same high quality treatment.
Dathos @ Nov 21st 2006 12:28PM
What I think the time line is:
1.MinishCap -I'll agree with
2.Ocarina of Time
Split:
3.Majora's Mask
4.Oracle of Seasons/Ages
3.Windwaker
4.Phantom Hourglass
5.Links Awakening (The WindFish's dream not Links)
6.Legend of Zelda
7.Adventures of Link
Not sure about twilight princess since it doesn't come out in England till december.
However I quite like their timeline, but with oracle of seasons/ages joining the split timeline together again. That would kinda make sense.
BklynKid @ Nov 21st 2006 12:34PM
I have never played a Zelda game and still cared to continue 2 hours later.
BIGGEN @ Nov 21st 2006 12:34PM
but where does the horribly dispicable Zelda: Wand of Gamelon fit in?
Dxtrinc @ Nov 21st 2006 12:36PM
Simply awesome....they did a great job on these videos....and i cant wait for them to hopefully bring out more after Phantom Hour Glass and Twilight Princess
in the words of Teen Girl Squad
"SOOOOO GOOD!"
Russell @ Nov 21st 2006 12:37PM
I'm so confused. All I know is that I can't wait for Christmas so that I can get a Wii (for to play The Twilight Princess with).
strider_mt2k @ Nov 21st 2006 12:45PM
The retrospective was great. I enjoyed every installment.
The last one was very interesting.
I don't even care if it's accurate or not. The very fact that they attempted to thread everything together at all is worth the kudos!
Honestly I haven't played most of the games, (Big fan of "Link'S Awakening") but I'm jumping back into Minish Cap on my DS because of this installment.
socrates @ Nov 21st 2006 12:50PM
In my timeline, the original Zelda happens after Excitebike and Mighty Bomb Jack, and Zelda II immediately precedes Dragon Warrior III.
I've liked these retrospectives...especially since I haven't really played any of the 3d Zelda games (I tried Ocarina for like 6 hours and decided that I was done with the series), so it was a good chance to learn what has happened (now there's a slingshot! I think). I find myself excited about Phantom Hourglass, though - because it looks more like LttP, and also because I wouldn't have to buy a system JUST for that game.
bryan @ Nov 21st 2006 12:54PM
Maybe this is a minor quibble, but how is it that A Link to the PAST is supposed to be the second to last in the series?
Seemoneh @ Nov 21st 2006 1:01PM
If it was first, what PAST would it link to?
JFink @ Nov 21st 2006 1:08PM
Hmmm... very interesting ideas. I think for the most part they got it right. The only flaw in their logic is that "A Link to the Past" came before the original 8-bit one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda_series#Chronology
So i think it goes:
1. The Minish Cap
2. Ocarina of Time
Splits
Hyrule A
3. Majora's Mask
4. Four Swords
5. A Link to the Past
6. Link's Awakening
7. The Legend of Zelda
8. The Adventures of Link
Hyrule B
3. Twilight Princess
4. The Wind Waker
5. Phantom Hourglass
Then the Oracles Series tries to rejoin the timeline.
The Intangible Fact @ Nov 21st 2006 1:14PM
@jfink
Your timeline looks very accurate.
SteveT @ Nov 21st 2006 1:15PM
No way. This is the One True Timeline:
http://www.zeldablog.com/2006/04/01/the-triforce-of-time-theory/
StrangeInterlude @ Nov 21st 2006 1:22PM
I'll assume that Wand of Gamelan and the other CDi games probably take place in a Bizarro Hyrule, a la the "Bizarro Earth" from DC Comics.
Judging from the schizoid art style (seriously, I know a guy with actual schizophrenia who draws pictures that look something like the CDi Zelda's animation!) and pathetic voice acting, I'd wouldn't be a bit surprised if the Link, Zelda, and Ganon from this Hyrule were actually the imperfect Bizarro duplicates of the "real" ones.
Ugliness am beauty!
FlamingMoe @ Nov 21st 2006 1:27PM
Seriously, this has to stop. There are currently 13 Zelda titles (16 if you count the CD-i games. Which you don't.), and a 14th on the way, released during a period of over 20 years. There is no way Nintendo has been able too keep a continuing timeline that corresponds with all the games. It's like saying there's a plotline connection between all the Final Fantasy games.
The Zelda series is simply a series of games that share a number of elements, including bits and pieces of the plot. Personally, I think that's even cooler than one big continuing story.
FSK405K @ Nov 21st 2006 1:36PM
Retrospective #6 is insane!
It began simply enough, but as soon as they started discussing Timeline B, my head started to explode. That fans and pundits are creating theories and different contingencies, arguing over points of fact and interpretation to this extent bodes well for Zelda and video games in general.
Really, it's quite as silly as listening to two walking Star Wars encyclopedias come to shouting matches over whether Tattooine was invented as an argument against Capitalism or that the Rebel Alliance is George Lucas' representation of the Vietcong. You know it's people reading WAY too much into things, and that they hold those truths to be self-evident.
On the other hand, I was delighted to see the commenter discuss the potential implications that Twilight Princess would make on their timeline tree. For that brief moment, Zelda-ology aspired to be a true coherent body of facts, seeming to follow some scientific, logical study. And for that, I rejoice! May the endless debates about video game chronology help teach us and our children deductive reasoning and how to effectively communicate our premises, inferences, and conclusions!
matt @ Nov 21st 2006 1:36PM
so, for a person who has only played a couple of these, what order do i play them in?
do i play them in the order they were released, gradually gaining gameplay features and technology advances from newer consoles as i go?
or, do i play them in the order the timeline says and enjoy a 16 game long continuous story?
Chris @ Nov 21st 2006 1:39PM
Zelda II as the ending of the entire series is still awesome, how that version of Link ends up with two Princess Zelda's. I just wish the more modern games would make referance to the sleeping Zelda, that would be great.
Though I'm only 6 hours into TP so there is hope!
FSK405K @ Nov 21st 2006 1:44PM
matt, Play them as close as you can to the order they were released. Always do that with game series. Only skip games that are especially egregious (FF 11).
007craft @ Nov 21st 2006 1:47PM
play them in the order they are releeased. Zelda has a very confusing story. It also is hard to take in due to missing some text from certain character and secrets in games. There is no voice acting ever (Which I hope they cnage with the next next zelda).
If you play them in order of timeline then it will be difficult because of the weapons and everything link has. Just play them as they where released... its alot more fun that way. Then just follow the story from each game at a time
Jonathan @ Nov 21st 2006 1:57PM
All I know is that this video makes me want to go back home, fire up my Wii and play more Zelda!!
Cronotrigger913 @ Nov 21st 2006 2:08PM
Oh, nice Doors lyric in the title there. Took me a few seconds to get it.
FSK405K @ Nov 21st 2006 2:33PM
On the other hand, if you've played all of them before, it would be quite an experience to go back and play them in chronological order.
Lucas @ Nov 21st 2006 2:40PM
Wouldn't the Oracle series have to take place before Wind Waker in timeline B, since Hyrule is flooded at the begining of Wind Waker? If this was the case the Oracles would still take place at the same time (in the alternate timelines) but both would happen before the begining of Wind Waker.
Stuart @ Nov 21st 2006 3:00PM
I've never considered the split timeline theory. Normally things start getting a little fuzzy around A Link to the Past whenever I try timeline work.
But I do have 2 cents to chip in, and I ask that this be strongly considered.
Oracle of Ages and Oracle of Seasons could only be truly completed IF the player took the password from the previous game, and continued his adventure in the next realm to stop Ganon's resurrection. The 2 seperate quests became one in their total scope of plot: Ie to stop the ressurection.
So then why can't the Oracle games be considered a re-unification of the timeline split?
b igmiz @ Nov 21st 2006 3:03PM
i enjoyed thsese, but this one is on some nerd shit. very comic-book guy
Paul P. @ Nov 21st 2006 3:22PM
When does Soul Calibur II take place? Is it before or after Super Smash Brothers Melee?
JodyAnthony @ Nov 21st 2006 3:47PM
watching this retrospective has made me hungry enough to eat an octorok
FSK405K @ Nov 21st 2006 4:18PM
lmao Paul!
playclever @ Nov 21st 2006 5:56PM
Woah... now there's a headf**k. I've only ever played "A Link to the Past" and I had no idea the whole debacle was so complicated!
I really want to see more of these retrospectives. The history of gaming is so cruelly overlooked.. I really hope GameTrailers pick this up and run with it.
Zo K. @ Nov 21st 2006 5:59PM
Aside from being full of errors (the Zelda theme was not in OoT, heart containers were in use well before LA or LttP, the PS2 was already out before WW was announced, the Oracle games for GBC were set to be three games but the NES games had nothing to do with it, stealth was used in the series well before WW, etc.) and spoilers (Jesus, man... I feel bad for anyone getting ready to dive into Wind Waker), this was still a fun watch.
Zo K. @ Nov 21st 2006 6:15PM
Oh, and these guys seem to forget that Ganon is officially killed in the first NES adventure, and his followers try to resurrect him in Zelda II. So how can A Link to the Past come after that?
I figured the SNES adventure's title was pretty self explanatory in where it sat among the three games.
Turo @ Nov 21st 2006 6:31PM
And here i was, thinking that each game was an entirely new story lol. i love them all but wow i had no idea there was some grand scheme and tie in to it all. i guess something i love is that even if u dont understand it all together, u can still enjoy each title as its own awesome adventure :D time for more Twilight Princess FTW!! yayyyy to The Legend of Zelda, a true gem in gaming history and what a pleasure to be around for it! =)
Newmiracle @ Nov 21st 2006 6:36PM
lol, Paul P. ftw
striderhayasa @ Nov 21st 2006 7:31PM
Awesome, just awesome...off to play more Wii and TP
Kikumann @ Nov 21st 2006 9:46PM
butt were do Faces of Evil and Wand of Gamelon fit in i thot thos wer great and beter then al the other ones!!!!!!!1
soul4sale @ Nov 21st 2006 10:02PM
Throwing rocks in the pond:
- ALTTP was described, at its release, as a prequel to the original game. The Link and Zelda in ALTTP were ancestors of the original Link and Zelda. Putting ALTTP after the orginal LOZ doesn't make sense.
- The oracle series was originally concieved as a trilogy (3 sides of the Triforce, etc.) so it really doesn't work as a timeline unifier.
- Anybody consider that the series might have gotten a reboot with OOT? If you restart the timeline with games from OOT onward, the A/B split theory works better.
Powerlord @ Nov 21st 2006 11:07PM
There seems to be some confusion as to whether Hyrule is a country or a planet.
Either way, the Oracle games go out of their way to point out that they take place in two different countries that exist in the same world.
If you play a linked game (beat one game, then use the password from one in the other), you have people who move from one country to the other, right up to finding out who Queen Ambi's lover is.
hollerback @ Nov 21st 2006 11:09PM
Heh. Too bad Twilight Princess makes no sense in that timeline whatsoever.
And never mind that the idea that there are two "timelines" is incredibly dumb. Sending Link back to the past to "tell the King and thwart Ganon" (which I don't remember from the game at all) would stop "Hyrule B" from ever having existed in the first place. "Adult Zelda" would have never existed as we knew her, and Ganon would still be on the loose and free.
That's why I always thought the OoT plot of "kill Ganon IN THE FUTURE and save Hyrule's PAST" never made sense at all.
Alex @ Nov 21st 2006 11:19PM
Not usre if anyone will actually read this, but after playing twilight princess a bit and checking out this retrospective, TP feels more like you are controlling Navi. So in theory you arent playing link at all, just helping him progress through the world all the while listening to Navi. I mean it makes sense since the Wiimote is explicitly controlling Navi. Makes ya wonder.
Jonn @ Nov 21st 2006 11:35PM
OW.
Epsilon @ Nov 22nd 2006 1:08AM
@40: Actually, time can be very confusing, but by Link warning the king, although that timeline is saved, the world destroyed by Ganon continues to move on.
As for Twilight Princess, I believe that the Twilight realm could be likened to the dark world from ALTTP and may even be the first signs of the dark world opening up, meaning that Twilight Princess is actually before Four Swords. It would also explain why Link turns into a wolf, as in ALTTP it was revealed that without the moon pearl you would be transformed. If the moon pearl appears at all in TP, that would prove my point that TP's twilight realm is essentially the dark world. Another theory I have is that the dark world is actually the second, near apocaliptic timestream, meaning that supposedly Zelda created a rift in time by sending Link back that is now trying to come back together, hence the slipping between the "light" and "dark" worlds. However, one detail was overlooked, at the end of the Oracle games, Ganon was revived by the Twinrova sisters, explaining Ganon's escape from either the sacred realm or from beneath the water submerging Hyrule. However, upon closer thought, unless Link [left behind decendants] the split timeline theory is impossible and the games follow a linear pattern. So here's my theory:
1.Minish Cap
2.Ocarina Of Time
A:
3.Majora's Mask
4.Link's Awakening
5.Zelda
6.Zelda 2
7.Twilight Princess (opening of twilight realm/dark world/time portals)
8.A Link to the Past
9.Four Swords (note that if TP is before ALTTP, Zelda and Link would not be kids and not know each other and Link would not know about the moon pearl)
B:
3.Oracle of Seasons/Ages
4.Wind Waker
5.Phantom Hourglass
Also note that this theory for timline B depends on a previous game where Hyrule is submerged that likely would occur between Oracle of Seasons/Ages, allowing Ganon to avoid being trapped when the flood happens.
Epsilon @ Nov 22nd 2006 1:12AM
*(note that if TP is before ALTTP and the twilight realm is the dark world, then only if FS is after ALTTP would Zelda and Link would be kids and know each other and Link would know about the moon pearl)
Petey @ Nov 22nd 2006 7:15AM
so in timeline B, after adult link is sent back in time to be a child again (starting timeline A), there should be no link...but if TP is to follow, then where does this adult link come from??
Josh @ Nov 24th 2006 11:26PM
That was a very entertaining take on the series, but where is Four Swords? I'm talking about the original multiplayer game included on the GBA port of A Link to the Past...
Nintendo has an official timeline somewhere, but they're just reluctant to release it...
Mystic Warrior MJ @ Nov 30th 2006 8:24AM
In the video Oracle of time (the blue one) should be under the N64 Ocarina of time as that one would fit that time line best of all. Also in both games link is a child so unless link is a child in timeline B at some point how would you explain the reoccurance of link.
Evan @ Dec 3rd 2006 5:13PM
Concerning the split timeline theory. if adult zelda sent adult link back in time to have a childhood, wouldnt the mastersword be sent back with him? And because of that, how does the windwaker and TP have the mastersword when the world is now linkless and masterswordless?
And concerning the Oracle games. The games dont both have to take place at the same point in the timeline. If you remember there is 100 years difference between TP/OOT and WW. The triforce might be set in place between those periods so one of the Oracles can be at the end of one timeline, and somewhere else in another.
Twilight Freedom @ Jan 2nd 2007 1:33PM
I agree with alot of it but one thing i do not agree with is the positioning of twilight princess. Although link is older in this game, he has grown from a boy naturally, this may be the same time but not warping from different time periods so hyrule B would probrably have changed. This should be near the end of Hyrule A