The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild has now been given an official placement on the Legend of Zelda series timeline, but things aren't quite as simple as we might have hoped.
The Zelda series' timeline had been heavily speculated by fans for years until finally, saving any additional future torment, Nintendo released an official version inside a book called the Hyrule Historia. Naturally, with Breath of the Wild being released after this book, its position on this timeline wasn't immediately confirmed. The game has now been added to the Zelda 'History' portal on Nintendo's Japanese site, however, as seen below.
Breath of the Wild is sitting right at the very bottom, all on its own in a box without any connections. Essentially, the game has been confirmed to take place after all entries before it, sitting right at the very end of the timeline, but doesn't seem to have any connection to any of the three previously revealed timeline arcs.
Speaking to Famitsu (and translated by Siliconera), series producer Eiji Aonuma and director Hidemaro Fujibayashi discussed what this means in a little more detail:
Eiji Aonuma: “Well of course it’s at the very end. But, I get what you’re asking, it’s which timeline is it the end of?”
Hidemaro Fujibayashi: “That’s… up to the player’s imagination, isn’t it?”
Aonuma: “Hyrule’s history changes with time. When we think of the next game and what we want to do with it, we might think, “Oh, this’ll fit well”, and place it neatly into the timeline, but sometimes we... have to change the placement. Actually, the decided history has been tweaked many times.” (laughs)
Fujibayashi: “Lately within the company, a term called ‘New Translation’ has cropped up. (laughs) Strictly speaking, we don’t change it, but rather new information and truths come to light."
So it definitely sits at the end of the timeline, but its final placement isn't properly decided... We'll leave this one up to you lovely readers to figure out in the comments.
[source siliconera.com]
Comments 73
This Discussion continues, is clear Zelda has absolutely no Story, that timeline was just something done for the sake of it.
Yes some games had some connections, but seem more like just references, easter eggs, except maybe for the whole Windwake phantom hourglass thing, to me each game its is own entity.
Unless Nintendo puts a game out to really tie this all Zelda games are just their own thing no matter what that timeline nintendo made up
The Zelda timeline will continue to baffle me. I translated it as -shrugs "we don't actually know, so, just make it up yourself and just enjoy that damn games we spend years making".
I always disregarded the Zelda timeline unless it was explicitly mentioned as sequels eg: Ocarina/Majora/Waker/Hourglass/Tracks.
It's just far too convoluted to think about.
I think if they stuck to a rigid canon and adhered religiously to the timeline they'd be limiting themselves in ways that could only damage the series.
It doesn't matter if it makes sense, it's about the adventure you have in each game and not some epic drawn-out affair with Tolkien-esque consistency.
The timeline is BS to begin with.
It's a Legend for a reason; contradictions and incoherencies abound. Although for my personal headcanon, I rather like the timeline collapse theory.
I always assumed BotW happened after the CD-i games.
This is just what I thought. After all, the games are just legends (as the name suggests) so they most likely all happened in the same timeline in one way or another (creating three different possible timelines). That's why BoTW has references to all timelines, because it doesn't belong to one, it belongs to all.
Of course it's at the end, it has Koroks but also has Zoras and Rito (therefore you just don't see the Zoras in Windwaker, as there is too much water and they are spreadout)
But, I have never really liked the different timelines (the Hero wins/losses off shoots) I just like the games as they are, great games only connected by names, characters and the Master Sword.
Man, they need to abandon this timeline nonsense. Never been a fan.
Considering botw mentions all timelines maybe at some point they all merge back into one line and that leads to botw
Hehe, this was always the case. Hyrule Historia and the encyclopedia positions the timeline as something that changes based on who's writing it. And that makes sense in a series where time is constantly displaced.
The Legend of a hero saving a princess from a powerful demon against the backdrop of a bleak world doesn't need a timeline. It stops each generation re-telling that Legend in a way that means something to them. I always thought that was magical.
In spite of some obvious connections among the games, I consider the timeline to be shoehorned into The Legend of Zelda franchise.
@GrailUK Yes, that's how I see it.
@BlueOcean Aye. It's the Legend of Zelda...not the Story of.
The way I see it, someone is telling a story, and the story teller changes with each game. That is how you can account for different designs and art styles. Also, Links Awakening showed a dream world where there were a lot of Mario influences, and even Kirby. A theory I love is that Nintendo has a dream world, called Subcon, which is where games like Super Mario Bros 2, Link's Awakening and Super Smash Bros take place (which is why nobody gets hurt in Smash Bros). Through this dream world, they have learned stories and places from other lands, including alternative versions of Link. It also explains things like the Bowser broach Malon wears in Ocarina of Time.
On the one hand I think all the attention paid to the timeline is silly and on the other I don't get why people get so upset about the timeline... I kind of like it! I also like BOTW being at the end and I sort of think of it as all the timelines have melded into the one BOTW, since you have the flying guys AND the zoras.
this timeline is a complete joke. it seems like the developers are making fun of the fans of the series. zelda never had an interesting story to begin with and it is always roughly the same.
It’s all a legend
The timeline collapse idea would've been by far the most sane one to go with. Before launch Nintendo would always refer to "The Calamity Ganon", and what better fitting thing than to have "the calamity" refer to a crashing together of the timelines while also creating that strange disembodied version of Ganon with it. It's the only way to cover having Skyward-era `robotic` tech everywhere, the Koroks, the flood having receded (uncovering what is definitely a town layout based on Ocarina's Castle Town), Lon Lon Ranch further down, the Skyward era statues... Not to mention the fact that the outfits themselves all refer to the events of Wind Waker, Skyward, Ocarina etc as things from the past.
I like to think the timeline is a really cool idea that gets us thinking but in reality it is a mess and it doesn't always make sense.
I think the Game Theorists had a neat explanation how BotW fits best into the "Hero fails" Timeline (only timeline where the villain is always Ganon, not Ganondorf, only timeline where the hero outfit has a yellow stripe, etc.)
Clearly I’m in the minority, but I kinda like the idea of a working timeline that unifies the games. Done right it can even help inspire new game ideas (like what happened to create Calamity Ganon). But I also prefer it to be a puzzle for the hardcore fans to work out for themselves and not be something that constricts the designers.
The official one kinda works, though I’m not keen on the third Downfall splinter being a separate thing as there’s nothing really in-game to support the existence of this.
10,000 years ago, the blue tunic'd hero sealed away the Calamity Ganon after the crisis on infinite Hyrules where all 3 dimensions became one.
😋
The only Nintendo series I really worry about the timeline in is Metroid. I like a little more consistency there because Metroid has always had a more clearly structured timeline than Nintendo's other franchises. Zelda has never really had that consistency in the first place.
It's hard for me to place it in any of the timelines thanks to Zelda referencing Twilight Princess but also having the Tutorial floating around.
My 7 year old daughter thinks Hyruke Warriors is canon and BOTW is set long after it and is what fuses the seperate timelines to one.
@wonderclassic @Alikan @abe_hikura
This, this, and this.
To me, the original Calamity of 10,000 years ago was something akin (though in no way identical) to the non-canon events of Hyrule Warriors – a crisis crossover of the three timelines that ended with not only the 3 timelines but also the past, present, and future collapsing in on themselves.
In fact, if they want to make Hyrule Warriors 2, I'd suggest that they do this very thing, and make it canon this time.
Trying to fit a timeline around games that are mostly reboots is simply insanity.
It has Koroks in it, which only existed because they evolved from Kokiri during the Great Flood, so it has to be at the end of the Wind Waker Timeline.
@ALinkttPresent The Koroks could’ve evolved and developed in any of the timelines, assuming the Kokiri left the forest. Hyrule was completely destroyed at the end of the Wind Waker and the Master Sword was left in Ganon’s stone head in the bottom of the ocean. The Wind Waker timeline is the least feasible of all of them. In fact, it’s impossible for this game to be set after the Wind Waker. They’re being lazy and noncommittal. I don’t know why they even established a timeline if they don’t want to stick with it.
@AlexOlney But Alex, you know you want to play The Legend of Zelda: The Beginning Meets the End, a 5D game where our now beautiful Link is teleported back in time to the very beginning of the very first adventure... And in order to right the wrongs in each timeline, he has to beat every game with their original graphics... Only... Link doesn't transform along with them.
Embark on a new epic adventure through pixels and pixelles, with increasing resolution throughout, and discovering water is wet, until at the very end you reach Breath of the Wild and discover the one true final endgame boss: The Credits- Just kidding, it's of course Crediganon, Ganon reincarnated as walls of text that slam into your face with supersonic speed. Faced with an insurmountable challenge, our hero discovers to his horror that the actual creator of the game is Ganon...
But the rest is for you to find out.
Makes sense to me. I'm just struggling to see where Kratos fits into it.
I personally think the timeline is a bunch of nonsense. It's obvious that they don't really think about it in that way (which is a good thing). It's just a thing to keep fans talking, nothing more.
Nintendo just needs to stop this timeline nonsense.
Some people like tying them together with the timeline and I thought they made some clever choices in making it work. It's fun to imagine and think about, but to me, it's always a legend in each game and everything else is just a different side to a similar repeating set of events and there is a feeling of history and promise in them because of how they relate. It works on many levels, and I don't think anyone should be bothered how others enjoy it all. It is sad if someone gets upset when it doesn't tie together in some perfect continuity, though.
@boatie I'm in the same boat. I think the laser beam focus on it can be a bit silly on face value. But at the same time, there is some fun in the theorizing. So I don't know why some get so heated or upset about the idea or discussion of a timeline (fan created or not). It doesn't necessarily take away from the enjoyment of the games or series in general (unless you let it).
@thesilverbrick Well, they (meaning Nintendo) opened the door to the idea of "New Translation". So they can easily retcon or explain away what may or may not have happened to Hyrule in WW. And again, we are talking about a 10,000 year gap. Anything could have feasibly happened in that time. But like you said, I do think Nintendo should either just not even bother or make a commitment to making the timeline make some measure of sense if they're just gonna go through all the trouble of keeping the idea alive.
I like to think that BOTW is the only real Hyrule and Timeline. All of the other games are “Legends” or myths that take place in the world of Hyrule. That’s what all of the names of locations are related to names and places in prior games. Even if they don’t take place in the same timeline or even if it’s a dream. The old games are just stories that were told for millennia and has been ingrained in their civilization. It makes sense to me at least. No convoluted timelines. Only one. The rest are stories.
I always considered it in the Adult Link timeline, because Zelda briefly mentions the hero in twlight in a flashback. All the same, it's fun to speculate.
I don't think there needs to be a timeline by default, to enjoy or play the games, but saying that it is to the detriment of the series, is going a bit far in my opinion, and actual, real-life myths and legends clearly also have a timeline, and they aren't any less magical or wonderful because of it.
And even before this whole "Nintendo put a timeline in, because people demanded it" nonsense, there were already dozens of references in the Legend of Zelda series to previous installments, so that really is nothing new and it does mean that at least in some way, they are tied together.
Just a few examples: Majora's Mask referenced Ocarina of Time, The Wind Waker referenced Ocarina of Time, and so on and so on.
Nothing to get so stressed out about. If you don't like the timeline, just ignore it, but there actually are people that DO enjoy all of the Zelda an Link lore coming together like some vast, all-encompassing saga, so I guess it should just be what it is to each individual, and the rest can be ignored.
Basically there is no timeline or continuity. It's like Final Fantasy.
Except for MM of course. And TP I guess.
@TheWorkingDead problem is the "legend" always changes. The story of ALTTP has no bearing on OoT.
BOTW mentions no other legend or sages.
@6ch6ris6 I think MM had an interesting story. And Links Awakening was neat.
@Trajan Yes, but there are conflicting stories in real life myths too.
now to make a sequel or a prequel to the game The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. that should help with creating a proper place for the game in the timeline.
The Zelds timeline was a mistake.
@Trajan yeah those were the games where they actually tried something new
...why they even bother??
Barely anyone ever talks about the Mario timeline.
BOTW is its own branch.
There. Problem solved.
It comes at the end of all three timelines and games that follow will follow a linear path until it doesn't.
@MasterGraveheart I was thinking the same thing about BOTW but maybe since it starts in the resurrection maybe its on the OoT timeline where the hero lost and that would place it with link to the past but I cant Explain the tech though...
@TheWorkingDead I think you may have a point there regarding myths in a story.
It was clear from the very beginning that BoTW was going to reunite all of theses branches non sense. BoTW have references on basically all the game in the franchise, from all different branches.
To be honest if they were to make a new Zelda, that's one relating the event 10000 year prior BoTW that I would love to hear about.
How the beast was created, how the kingdom was etc...
Or a Zelda game that is not happening in the Hyrule kingdom, but as we clearly see in BoTW, there are land around Hyrule. Who live there? What are they doing? Why they are not helping or being attacked by Ganon? Why they are not attacking Hyrule for processing the Triforce?
BoTW leave so many interesting question open, and I'm sure they will never be answered!
Y'know what? What if there is no timeline?
It's not the Chronicle of Zelda. It's the Legend of Zelda.
Legends are stories passed down from generation to generation, usually with changes over time, much like how a lot of Zelda games have similar elements, but major setting changes.
@AlexOlney Some of us want a bigger picture from the series though, which is what the timeline gave us. So for us folks, its nice that Nintendo sticks to the timeline still
@uximal The dead hero timeline theory would go in line with Game Theory's thoughts on it, but that basically came down to Lynels existing in that timeline, whereas they don't in the two living hero timelines.
I'm satisfied with it's placement I guess, due to all of the timeline-effery all throughout the game with Easter Eggs, DLC, and such.
@thesilverbrick I agree, Nintendo would've been better off just not doing fan service if they aren't going to continue the fan service, lol.
I'm not hellbent on the Zelda timeline personally, but I am a history/myth/legend/folklore lover in general about our own world and these things fascinate me. There's the factual and legendary histories about Stonehenge, the Pyramids of Giza, Easter Island, Greek mythology, Norse mythology, the Mayans, the Incan Empire, Angkor Wat... on and on. I just love lore and I find it fun that Zelda actually has a timeline that "works". It's only a waste to those that just play the games for the gameplay sure, and I fully understand that point of view. But Zelda doesn't JUST have gameplay, it happens to have a story, WITH continuity-- Maybe Nintendo should have taken a direct nod from Final Fantasy and made each game clearly self contained, i.e. each "Legend of Zelda" was an unconnected reboot of each previous game, save for recurring tropes (Link, Zelda, Ganon, Master Sword, Triforce, etc.).
PS To my timeline lovers, my 2 cents after looking at that image is BotW is at the bottom because it consolidates all timelines into one and there's a horizontal line showing that there's so many more Zelda's that have yet to occur that lead to it that it can't be disclosed exactly how at this point. Or, that horizontal line means BotW is a retcon of the Zelda timeline as we know it and is literally it's OWN timeline independent of all other known Zelda's, but in the "game sense" means that it has every well known trope known to the Zelda within it up to this point, like a "Best of Zelda" edition and timeline.
Phew! That was fun
I find the timeline an interesting point of discussion, but I don't hold it as gospel. Unless some games blatantly reference or are related to another, I treat each as their own game.
If you had a choice between the Zelda series as it currently stands, and the exact same thing but with developed lore, why would you choose not to have lore?
The real reason the Zelda series doesn't have chronological lore is simply because it takes time to come up with how things fit together. Nintendo would rather not spend the time and money, and obviously a lot of fans couldn't care less.
They didn't have a plan for a timeline in the 80's, they just rolled with whatever story they could come up with. Having said that, their explanation is still miles better than anything Kojima has ever come up with to explain characters in his games
I thought the whole idea was that each version of the game is Link and Zelda reincarnated with no further connections.
I think there are references in each game that connect them, but people shouldnt take it that seriously.
Its just something to keep the fanbase going and keep it fun outside the games.
But in no way something to be upset about if you see contradicting things. They never really promoted the Timeline and they shouldnt. I dont mind direct sequels like Majoras Mask(still on my 1st playthrough on 3ds) but even that one doesnt refer to OoC that much.
Whats also funny is now that they have kinda ditched the green tunic the have a lot more liberty conceptually amd visually. They can have a legend of zelda with more futuristic or sci fi elements.
Him wearing the green always had a medieval kinda look that i cant imagine to translate well in a more scifi setting not counting it as a DLC add on for funs
@Alber-san My personal theory is that BotW is the one game in the series that's completely factual of the world of Hyrule, and that all previous games are old legends about past heroes, which may either be based loosely on history or purely fabricated. This would explain why Link in BotW has a more realistic experience with such things as breakable equipment, stamina, weather effects, and realistic physics, while the heroes of old are seen with more exaggerated abilities such as smashing rocks by picking them up and throwing them, or effortlessly scaling tall cliffsides.
To put it another way, all past Zelda titles are Disney-esque adaptations of Hyrule's history and lore, and BotW is a current-events documentary.
@Seanmyster6
That makes a lot of sense. I like that theory.
@Sanangelo89 I've always imagined that, were a Zelda game to feature a futuristic sci-fi setting, the green tunic would be translated into a jacket or vest a la Han Solo, or perhaps a space-knight's suit of high-tech armor.
@Alber-san Thanks, I'm glad you like it.
(also, I hope people don't misunderstand my theory and think that I only like BotW and want all the other games to "not count" or something)
I believe it is all one timeline. Just as the legend implies, a new hero is born every so often to rise and fight the evil plaguing the land.
BotW is a point in Hyrules' time where lots of major and minor etc lores of the legend combined over the centuries, millennia, etc, to form the names of places and also the shapes of certain terrain and structures such as Spectacle Rock.
BotW is an excellent tribute to the series in those regards, they just missed the dungeon and item aspect. But so, so beautiful of a tribute I say.
I just want to know where it fits into the Star Trek timeline.
most game stories are self contained. Rarely they are connected. It is clear that OOT and MM are directly related for example. Similarly Windwaker and Phantom Hourglass are the exact same people. However when you go outside of this, its really more about making a new story. Take each story as self-contained, and accept that fact. The official timeline is a joke anyhow.
Honestly I've really never cared much about the supposed timeline of the Zelda series or how it's all interconnected or not. I'm also a huge fan of the Final Fantasy series and I guess I've always looked at Zelda kinda the same way (other than the FFXIII trilogy or FFX & X-2) that each game is in it's own bubble/timeline but just with a lot of the same people, places, things as the only real connecting elements.
@jswhitfield8 Interestingly, I distinctly remember reading an interview in a Nintendo Power mag (can't remember which issue, I'll have to find it again) where they pressured them about the timelines after WW came out and they adamantly stated that none of the games to that point had any connections. They even stated that MM was NOT a sequel to OoT and that they had no intention of ever connecting the games. You are the first person I've found to say exactly what I've been trying to tell people. The Historia was purely a marketing gimmick by management to sell whiny fans another "thing" because they whined loud enough and demanded their "fanfics" be cannon. Meanwhile the director just slammed his head down on the desk. I don't care that it exists, I care that they had no spine and caved in to a lame marketing ploy that would forever bind them to some broken and lame back world story plot. XP
Honestly, this type of catering to all the whiny fans out there is precisely why Nintendo is tanking financially in the first place. Like, why the heck do we need a dozen versions of the DS? Half a dozen versions of the 3DS? "It's too big; it's too small; I want a camera; why isn't it more like my phone?" Meanwhile all of those hundreds of millions of dollars in redesign/reengineering/development/marketing thrown down the drain when it could've manufactured 5x more amiibos or funded 4+ WHOLE games' development. I'm sorry Nintendo but you're doing it wrong. ;P
Tap here to load 73 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...