Zelda U takes place at the end of the "Hero is defeated" timeline. To be more specific, it takes place sometime after Zelda II. Not that it's a direct sequel; it is just the next cronological game in that timeline.

"Well Spemanig, you're using a lot of absolutes. What makes you so sure?" I'll tell you.

1. We've never seen Hyrule look like this before.

Now I'm not talking about graphics, but layout. With all the main series 3D Zelda games, Hyrule Castle Town is smack in the center of everything. Not here. I'm not saying that it isn't geographically the middle most part of this map, we don't know that much yet, but it's obviously not the central focus, with which the entire rest of the map is built around. This was sort of the case with Wind Waker, as the Tower of the Gods was geographically above OoT's Hyrule Castle Town. This changed later in that timeline with New Hyrule in Spirit Tracks. There is also an uncharacteristic feature of cottages in the open field. Perhaps it's even a small village. We've never seen anthing quite like it in a 3D Zelda game, though they have been in 2D Zelda's on occasion.

Now this could all mean nothing. There could be a plot reason why Hyrule is so different geographically. But I think it's because the maps from Zelda NES and Zelda II are the maps left most open for interpretation. Their layout was not dependant on timeline fluff or anything. They were just vast open worlds for the sake of being open. If new game took place after Zelda II, that game would have the most freedom with what it could do to it's map. But why is that?

2. No 3D Zelda Game has ever taken place on the Hero is Defeated timeline.

"...Holy shit, he's right." Yep. In fact, the last home console game to ever take place in that timeline was A Link to the Past. Yeah. This means they could do virtually anything with it. Zelda II was the last game cronologically in that timeline, and this is what it's map looks like.

It's an 8-bit mess. But most importantly, Aonuma could take the most creative liberies with this Hyrule because it's just an 8-bit mess. They are dealing with an open world now. The hyrule-centric design of yesteryear served a gameplay purpose that it doesn't need to serve anymore. Starting from here basically gives them a blank slate both story wise and map wise.

3. Can You See What They All Have in Common?

Every Link in the Hero is Defeated timeline have a common look not shared with literally any Link from any other game in the series. Most notably, the extremely long sideburns. Not one Link appearing in any other game in any of the timelines has ever had these signature sideburns and likewise, not one Link in the Hero is Defeated timeline has ever been without them. Not once.

Not once.

Now in any other case, I'd just call it a coincidence, but with 16 Zelda games to date, and an unwavering track record, something like that can't be a coincidence.

4. Aonuma's Fixation on Zelda NES.

This one's kind of a no brainer, but just the fact that Aonuma keeps referencing how he wishes to make Zelda Wii U feel like Zelda NES makes more sense when you consider that the way he plans to accomplish that is by actually setting Zelda U in that world.

5. Setting Zelda U After Zelda 2 is the Perfect, and Kind of the Only, Place to "Rethink the Conventions of Zelda."

Why? Because setting a Zelda game at the end of anytimeline gives the designer the most freedom to create something new. Setting Zelda after Zelda II, Spirit Tracks, or Four Swords Adventure gives Aonuma the most freedom to change core elements of Zelda because they are cronologically the farthest away from the series. Any game set after it would only really be restricted by what came before it. Any other place in the timeline would have be restricted by what came before, but what would come after. That's why I have a hard time believing that it will take place anywhere near the begining of the timeline. That just wouldn't be an ideal place to rethink the conventions of Zelda because they'd be so restricted by the conventions of just about every Zelda.

Setting Zelda U after Zelda 1+2 in particular would offer the most freedom because those games are the farthest removed from any of the conventions of any Zelda game. They came before they even knew that there would be conventions to set, so any game after that would only be restricted by having a Hyrule and having a Princess Zelda.

The plot could be anything. The world could be anything. The game could be anything.

Nice, I hope you're right. Wind Waker was such a different game from Twilight Princess/Majora's Mask/Ocarina of Time. If they made a 3D Zelda on the Hero is defeated timeline, they could make the game any way they want. Would be nice and different.

i think it is after he went to thailand to have a sex change

Nope. Still a dude.

biologically :P

And me the nerd siting here thinking, "Who cares?" :P

Of course it will. It's coming out in 2015, and Zelda II came out back in the '80s. You needed a map to figure that out?

ALttP came out after Zelda II. It takes place before Zelda II.

You know what? It makes sense.

Very good observations. I've felt the same thing. His goal to return to the roots could see him return the setting of the originals. I mostly like your observation on the sideburns thing though... I noticed them and liked the look - it felt classic to me, but until now I didn't realize why. I used to draw Link with those sideburns all the time in elementary school. This brings me back.