| mZuzek said: The way you put it it's almost like they didn't deliberately make Zelda 2 after Zelda 1, A Link to the Past before both and the GB/GBC games right after it, Ocarina of Time before all of them and Majora's Mask, Twilight Princess and The Wind Waker as OoT sequels, and Skyward Sword as the prequel to everything and Phantom Hourglass as the sequel to The Wind Waker with Spirit Tracks coming after it and A Link Between Worlds after the Link to the Past saga games. There was always a timeline. Sure, there are plotholes here and there, but most of it was intentional going all the way back to the 80's titles. And no matter how much you hate the official timeline, it's still there, it's still official, and nothing you say will change that. Edit: and I'm directing this to all of you timeline haters. |
Wait, so you're saying they had this timeline planned from the very beginning of the series?
I'm sorry, but that's a huge, HUUUUUUUUUGE stretch. It's absurd to suggest such a thing. There a few direct sequels here and there (Zelda 2/1, Majora/Ocarina), but trying to put everything into the same universe and timeline is kinda stupid, yes. There's no reason to get defensive here. You take something like Ocarina of Time and A Link to the Past, for example, and they have the EXACT same plot, with just the details changed. You could say "it's alternate universes" or "it's the same legend beign retold" and it works fine.
I never understood why this is one of the oldest and most discussed debates on gaming communities. Is plot even Zelda's strength? Unless the plots of more recent games have gotten MUCH better (and I'm talking something as old as Wind Waker here), it's definitely not.
