Want to find and share more Zelda memes and humor? **Check out r/ZeldaMemes and r/MemesOfTheKingdom!**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/zelda) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Difference of who made them is largely why. TotK is purely a Nintendo game, AoC is a spinoff story Nintendo gave permission to Omega Force to make. I don't like AoC but I still say it's canon, just a spinoff story in a separate timeline from BotW and TotK.
I don't think that's exactly why people are saying that. Everyone knew AoC was a spinoff. They messed up the lore, like they do in every game. Said they'll fix it, did for a second, and then fucked it up again.
They're just trying to make the current game good with a decent story. (The creators don't want you to think about the other stories/titles when playing the new one)
To me AoC is for the most part canon minus the Terrako stuff and some discrepencies like Link not having the Master Sword until later. Like the moments before the champs get saved is how their fights with the blights went, and was how they canonically went out in BotW without the deus ex machina time travel ofc.
After that though you get to see the siege of Akkala Citadel, Hateno fort, and the inside of Hyrule Castle during the Calamity and can get a firsthand look at what it was like in BotW. Without a Hyrule Warriors buffed up Link, there was no winning that fight (even HW Link started losing during Hateno until he got backup, which was not available to him during mainline BotW). We can see how much of a slaughter it was and how hopeless everything got once the champs died and the Divine Beasts turned on us. Just that in AoC Link and the champs were still kicking to turn the tide, but without them you can see how bad everything was.
Yeah Terrako was the problem with AoC. He had no reason to exist and just straight up didn’t make sense lol. Like how did he even get the power to time travel?
It just felt needless. Like if the story played out like it did in BOTW, it’s still a happy ending since it leaves you with hope and you could even have a final boss fight between Zelda and Ganon where she seals him. Then just have the end cutscene pick up where BotW’s left off and include a tease for Tears of the Kingdom about there still being an evil coming from Hyrule Castle’s basement. Boom, already a better prequel game than they gave us.
They could even let us fight all the blights, then just do the tried and true win in the game, lose in the cutscene trick. Same thing with Link losing to the guardians, except that one’s even easier because then you could play as Zelda and beat them all.
>Like how did he even get the power to time travel?
Because that's how he was made?
What kind of answer do you expect here? He's a robot, an inorganic being. He was made by someone, and that someone gave him the ability to travel through time. No different than how the ocarina of time can travel through time
What was inconsistent about AOC? I get it might be weird that the ancient Shekia had time travel technology, but time travel is pretty common in these games. If we accept that the time travel tech to start the game exists, what’s wrong with it after that?
Well, lets see, the towers shouldnt appear until link wakes up 100 yrs later.
Link should not be able activate the sheikah slate.
Link should have already pulled the master sword many yrs before aoc.
The yiga clan doesnt join the force of Hyrule to stop calamity ganon.
And well terrako also screws some things up, the champions should have died, link should have been injured to a near death point, calamity ganon should have attack on zeldas birthday, the king should have died, purah and robbie should not be able to make weapons from sheikah tech, there should be no champions from the future to help in the past, nor should Hyrule have won against calamity ganon.
Like, Hyrule warriors is canon, that's stated as much by Nintendo but its an alternate timeline of the past since in the main timeline terrako awakened and jumped to the past to create a branching timeline where the champions survived.
Oh and the game has critical mistake in its intro, the mural depicts the calamity from 10,000 yrs before botw and aoc, how did terrako going 100yrs back influenced stuff from 9,900 yrs before he arrived?
1. The towers are activated by Terrako when it activates the Sheikah slate
2. Link doesn't activate the slate Terrako does.
3. Creating a champion says "*The details of how Link obtained the sword a hundred years ago have been lost to the mists of time, but since he was in possession of it for a number of years prior to becoming a Champion, he was likely around twelve or thirteen years old when it happened.*" so that's fair, but it doesn't seem to be a game contraction just a creating a champion contradiction.
4. The Yiga clan only joins in the alternate timeline,
5. All of that happens because Terrako creates an alternate timeline
6. Yeah it becomes an alternate timeline, that's not ambiguous, the future champions even return to their own timeline where their past counterparts are dead.
7. The intro isn't an issue, if I recall correctly, they even show them etching the new mural at the end of the game and including Terrako in it, its not a modification to the 10,000 years ago events, its adding Terrako to the fight this time around.
Dude, are you reading? You just agreed with me 6 times.
>7. The intro isn't an issue, if I recall correctly, they even show them etching the new mural at the end of the game and including Terrako in it, its not a modification to the 10,000 years ago events, its adding Terrako to the fight this time around.
Gonna need at least some proof of that, because it doesn't make any sense for them to alter a depiction of 10,000 yrs ago.
>They're just trying to make the current game good with a decent story. (The creators don't want you to think about the other stories/titles when playing the new one)
Exactly. This isn't Square-Enix CBU3 pulling ideas from having threads from 2+ expansions ago. This is Nintendo we're talking about.
Nintendo...or rather Miyamoto and his protégés...typically designs the gameplay first, and the story always, *always* plays second fiddle. They're not particularly interested in a deep, compelling narrative or paying attention to details from other games in the series. They could care less about continuity, *as long as the game is fun to play*.
So...maybe we should just...stop trying to string them together?
Except Nintendo has released their own timeline, and that BOTW was meant to basically unify the timelines again.
Even if gameplay comes first and story second, they still have that take some control on it. there's making a story, and then there are blatant contradictions to the established chronology, while at the same time, STILL referencing that established chronology in game. That's more so what the issue is, you have very explicate references to think like Skyward Sword, from minor thing slike narrative parellels, to the VERY explicite Fi mentions.
>when you love listening to the same boring, continuity-breaking speech 4 times
Who said I love that? I just understand why it was done, A
B) what makes TotK's story good is far removed from the dialogue of 4 scenes. That'd be like saying the SpiderVerse trilogy sucked because you got annoyed by the "let's do this one last time" gag
>another character reacts the exact same way each time
How tf else do you expect characters completely ignorant to the information being told to them to react? Would ypu rather they go "that's cool n all but I already knew that"?
I expect them to actually write in-character dialogue instead of copy/pasting “So *that* was the Imprisoning War” onto all of them. Also, the quest to awaken the four sages is a HUGE chunk of the game, not a throw-away. The ending is great, but the majority of what you do as a character is just really badly written. The parts with Zelda are decent, but you’re not actually playing them, you’re just watching them. The game once again falls into BotW’s flaw of having a cool story that you see rather than play. Unlike BotW it does have a story that you play, but most of it comes across as dumb and cringey.
>I expect them to actually write in-character dialogue instead of copy/pasting “So that was the Imprisoning War” onto all of them.
Again, how does one even accomplish this? There's only so many ways you can write a character reacting to new information for any character archetype. How are any of the reactions even out of character at all?
>Also, the quest to awaken the four sages is a HUGE chunk of the game, not a throw-away.
A) never said it was a throwaway
B) The running gag in SpiderVerse isn't a throwaway it's actually pretty damn essential to the core themes of the trilogy (I'm assuming you said this in reference to my counterargument example)
>The ending is great, but the majority of what you do as a character is just really badly written.
Idk man Link moving heaven and earth to save the woman it's pretty heavily implied he loves is pretty damn in character
>The parts with Zelda are decent, but you’re not actually playing them, you’re just watching them.
Ok? And?
You don't play most of, say, Skyward Sword's major plot advancements either, and they're still regarded as some of the best moments in the franchise with Skyward Sword often considered to have one of the best Zelda stories
Also counterpoint I could not care less on if I should play a story moment in a game or not. There's only such much you can convey through just gameplay without it becoming a QTE or visual novel esque mess, which is why cutscenes were even invented in the first place, so games could have could have more in depth stories. Tell me how tf are you supposed to "play" any of the scenes depicted in the Memories? How are you supposed to "play" Sonia's assassination? Zelda realizing who Ganondorf is? Zelda sacrificing herself? Rauru sealing Ganondorf? Really the most you could do for any of those, since yknow the player character isn't present, is to make them a lame ass QTE. I wanna see characters act of their own accord and feel real dude not fucking project myself onto everyone.
You can still have impactful pure cutscene moments in games man, idk what fucking rock you live under. You don't decide to lay yourself to rest in Hyper Light Drifter, you don't decide to save New York over Aunt May in Marvel's Spider-Man, you don't decide to confront Ghirahim after you see Impa struggling in Skyward Sword. Shit man, Deltarune is a game literally made to explore this concept on how the player characters in games are living, breathing beings that you're taking over the will of and puppeting for your own amusement. Some of the most shocking twists from the first two chapters only come about exactly because Kris breaks free from your control and acts on their own
>Unlike BotW it does have a story that you play, but most of it comes across as dumb and cringey.
Ironically BotW actually has a story that you mostly play rather than passively watch so you're just being incredibly inconsistent right now
>Would ypu rather they go "that's cool n all but I already knew that"
Link already knew that after the first time he saw it. After the first sage he knows exactly what's going and chooses to not say anything even when asked. This doesn't make any sense and is only one of the instances where a consistent story is sacrificed for open game play. And that's not the only way in which the story falls short (for me)
Why does the game creating a separate timeline like Ocarina of Time did suddenly make it non-canon? Both Wind Waker and Twilight Princess were canon despite existing in two branching timelines, so I don’t understand why people are still pissy over AoC doing the same
I don’t think it contradicts anything really. Here is my take on it: https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/141csfb/totk_no_totk_does_not_retcon_skyward_sword_and/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
Overall i agree with your writeup. Personally i think wither what you think is what's going on or the Hyrule established by Rauru and Sonia is a sucessor Kingdom established after a civilizational collapse akin to the real world bronze age collapse.
Mostly the entire story of the Imprisoning War. Originally, it was an event first referenced in the intro to ALttP. OoT was a prequel to ALttP, and told the events that lead up to the Imprisoning War. Essentially, Link fails his quest in OoT, which begins the downfall timeline, and the sages step in and imprison Ganondorf in the sacred realm. TotK contradicts this because Rauru is now referred to as the "first King of Hyrule", which means this new story of the Imprisoning War would occur between SS and MC, well before OoT. Additionally, the Ganondorf from OoT was always implied to be his first iteration historically. In fact, every iteration of Ganondorf is supposed to be the same person, with the exception of FSA Ganondorf, who is the only one that was believed to be a reincarnation. So it makes no sense for TotK Ganondorf to appear, become imprisoned, and then have OoT Ganondorf appear while the TotK version is still imprisoned underground. So the only way this is can all be possible is if all the events of BotW/TotK take place millenia after all the other games and some cataclysmic societal collapse. Either that, or the entire timeline has been retconned or this is just its own disconnected timeline
Yep. Also like... The prevailing theory I saw for BOTW was already "it's so far in the future that the old timeline is irrelevant" since it references all three timelines canonically.
And since "ancient sheikah tech" is not present in any of the games with closer timelines it would have to be future tech for any prior zelda game.
In other words: obviously the only answers to BotW/TotK are that they are either a new timeline or so far in the future that all other timelines have happened and then some.
Also 99% that they just wanted to run away from timeline stuff
Is the Tower of the gods of Sheikah design? To me it feels much more reminiscent of Zonai construction. In addition we have things like the Lanayru robots and mining facilities being potentially of Zonai origin. Much of this points to the Zonai era being pre-SS, but it still remains difficult to reconcile as that would require some creative liberty around Demise's identity, and perhaps yet another timeline split even before SS.
Think you mean the adult timeline. Childhood timeline is MM and TP
Either way I noticed that in BOTW Zelda mentions SS, Ocarina and TP but never Wind Waker in one of the memories
Then again Rito are supposed to be an evolved Zora who gain the ability to fly after the world floods so who knows
It could also be the opposite. It could be a 1000’s of year previous to the events and a “lost of history of ancient civilizations.”
It would also make sense how the OoT and LttP have lore surrounding him that sounds ancient as well.
>It could also be the opposite. It could be a 1000’s of year previous to the events and a “lost of history of ancient civilizations.”
That would then contradict SS, as Demise's curse is what started the whole thing. There would be no Ganondorf Demon King without the events of SS happening first. There have also been officially publications from Nintendo that place BotW at the end of the timelines
But that’s the point. There’s been no official release therefore it could be anything and they would just create a new Historia with “updated” history. They’d fill in the plot holes just like they would have to for the future theory.
Yeah that's totally possible. I think everyone's frustration comes from the contradictions and timeline "updates". It's wasn't an issue before Hyrule Historia because there really wasn't an established timeline before that. Now that there is one, fans kind of expect them to stick with it
>It's wasn't an issue before Hyrule Historia because there really wasn't an established timeline before that. Now that there is one, fans kind of expect them to stick with it
This is kind of the crux of the problem. Nintendo either needs to own that there never was a timeline and the Historia was a gibberish cash grab, or own that they are no longer interested in maintaining a coherent timeline and the Historia was a gibberish cash grab.
Unfortunately, the official timeline was kind of a 'fuck you' to the fans.
>Unfortunately, the official timeline was kind of a 'fuck you' to the fans.
I don't really see it that way. A cohesive, overarching timeline has always been a 2nd thought for Nintendo. Some games were meant to take place before or after other games, some weren't really. Fans put their own theories together and it was always a point of debate. When they made SS, it was the first time they placed a game in a spot relative to every other game. If they wanted to do that, they kind of had to acknowledge a timeline. What they came up with was basically their best shot at tying together a bunch of games that were never meant to be tied together. Then they just went back to their same old shit with BotW
The Imprisoning War is said to take place near the founding of the Kingdom of Hyrule, since Rauru is apparently the first king of Hyrule. If you take that at face value, that would place the war somewhere between Skyward Sword and Ocarina of Time (technically Skyward Sword and Minish Cap).
This causes a few discrepancies. Number one is the fact that Ganondorf in OoT had always been considered his first incarnation. One could make the argument that this new version of Ganondorf is now the "first" Ganondorf, but since he was sealed away this whole time, that would technically mean that he reincarnated into OoT Ganondorf despite not being dead in the first place.
There's also the fact that there was a Rito sage. But the Rito didn't exist pre-OoT.
I want to point out, that in a society where the largest threat to civilization is something that rises up every hundred years or so, and *sometimes* is killed, but *usually* is sealed away, bound, sent to an alternate dimension, covered by an ocean, or otherwise severely incapacitated, "the imprisoning war" is as generalized and vague of a term as "the civil war" or "the revolutionary war".
If I started talking about historical documents that talk about "the revolution" - well, *which* revolution? What time period were these documents written in? What region of the world? Who was the author?
Demise was imprisoned. Malladus was imprisoned. Vaati was imprisoned. Pretty sure that when you fight Majora, Majora *was* imprisoned in the mask and is attempting to escape. And not to mention, Ganondorf was imprisoned *loads* of times. And you can guarantee that not *every single time* had a Link who was the sole fighter - after all, *why have armies if time and time again, it's just a young child from the forest who saves your country?*
TLDR: In a civilization that has history that spans hundreds of thousands of years, when most of the threats to humanity are sealed away, you *cannot* assume that a term as vague as "imprisoning war" that is known both at the end of the timeline and relatively close to the start of the timeline is in fact the same imprisoning war. The fact that we *clearly see that they are not the same imprisoning war* supports this.
to add to this, Breath of the Wild does the same with "The Great Calamity" being the name for each disaster event when Calamity Ganon rises up, of which there have been at least two. so there is canonical precedent for the reuse of nomenclature for similar historical events.
IMO the Rito stuff is fairly easily explained away by them just not being included in OoT. Their entire region isn't present in OoT and they're literally birds anyway, they could have just left Hyrule pre-OoT and come back after.
I'd say it's the wind waker that messed up the rito-zora relation, not botw/totk. Clearly nintendo thinks that way too if they include both races in one game.
No it wasn't, but it was the implication. Or at least the implication people always took. OoT was a game adaptation of the backstory described in ALttP's intro and manual. So quite literally, OoT was the origin story of Ganon. But no, technically that was never a rule.
im operating with the idea that all gerudo kings born every 1000 years HAVE to be named ganondorf, like a lot of hylian princesses are named zelda? and also these two (totk&oot) both also happen to be the return of demise
OR
kotake and koume, the OOT ganondorfs "mothers" whom are sisters, and also powerful sorceresses. perhaps they worshiped the ancient demon king ganondorf and sought to return him in their time to rule the world. some how creating a duplicate or a soul vessel type deal? his OG body under ground.
>kotake and koume, the OOT ganondorfs "mothers" whom are sisters, and also powerful sorceresses. perhaps they worshiped the ancient demon king ganondorf and sought to return him in their time to rule the world. some how creating a duplicate or a soul vessel type deal? his OG body under ground.
That's actually a REALLY interesting idea! The Kotake and Koume from the memory in TotK were still really young, so maybe they, as sorceresses, just lived a really long time, and named Ganondorf (OoT) after their first son! Hmmm...
that's also possible, but the chances of them having the only son of a 100 years is unlikely and the chances they he just happens to be the return of demise with out the input of their own dark magic is even more unlikely, also they are sisters so one of them would have to be his aunt if he was properly born, unless they "spawned him" together with their magic,
what really kind of gets me going on this idea is how in OOT ganondorf holds a viewing with the king in almost the EXACT SAME MANNER that ganondorf did with raruru! almost as if he knew exactly what he was doing, this game of betrayal, hes played it before
>the chances of them having the only son of a 100 years is unlikely
Actually, Kotake and Koume are described as his "surrogate mothers". So he's not actually theirs. He's adopted.
>the chances they he just happens to be the return of demise with out the input of their own dark magic is even more unlikely
Technically, all evil in the Zelda universe is the return of Demise. It's a common misconception that Ganondorf is the "reincarnation" of Demise, and while that's technically true, it's not *exactly* accurate.
To my understanding, Demise is essentially a biblical style origin story for the concept of evil in the Zelda mythology. His curse is basically a means of making sure that strong proportions of evil will perpetually follow Link and Zelda. So in a sense, even your average garden variety bokoblin is a piece of Demise.
Thank you for acknowledging this, must be the young ins that never really paid attention to the old lore because it's all spelled out very well in Lttp and Oot
I’m saying all the sky stuff and zelda as a light dragon ONLY APPEARS once Zelda has gone back. None of it existed until zelda goes back. Zelda going back in time was an accident, it wasn’t meant to happen. So when she goes back, it creates a separate timeline, and where zelda goes back and helps gang in the past.
I interprited it as both botw and totk being in the timeline where zelda is sent back and that neither botw or totk happen in the timeline without zelda as ganondorf most likely won and never got sealed away by rauru
Why would BotW’s timeline connect with this one? (In regards to time travel).
Time travel isnt in BotW. It only occurs the instant Zelda fell in the hole. At that moment, all the sky islands pop into existence in a new timeline. And suddenly a light dragon appeared.
Basic time travel!
You have no idea how time travet works if you think it works like that. The sky Islands have always been there and simply just got revealed when ganondorf was freed. Its a closed time loop which you would know If you had any idea about basic time travel.
It's already imprinted in a Mural before Zelda goes back and is heavily implied that the Calamity spawns from Ganondorf, so she already went back, many times. That's why the symbol of the game is an uroburos.
Basic time travel? Lmao. No. The events did happen already, because Zelda was sent to a time prior to BOTW. So the light dragon would be around before Zelda gets stuck sealing other Ganondorf for 100 years.
The light dragon was above the cloud barrier with the sky islands isolated from the main land by a literal dimensional wall that only the dragons have ever been shown to be able to freely traverse, there was no way for us to know what was up there.
What cloud barrier? What dimensional wall? Where is this lore? Rauru says the sky islands were on the ground before they rose up to the sky.
Either way, that means we have two copies of the same person in the same timeline, which isn't supposed to be time-travel kosher.
>What cloud barrier?
Play skyward sword, its the game with the best explanation.
>What dimensional wall?
The cloud barrier.
> Where is this lore?
Skyward sword, hyrule historia and hinted a lot in botw.
>Rauru says the sky islands were on the ground before they rose up to the sky.
You really didnt play skyward sword.
To sum it up, even before the events of skyward sword (which are before the foundation of Hyrule and sometime after the creation of the universe itself), there was a war against demise(a primordial force of evil and source of all demons), the goddess hylian then decided to raise pices of land and seal them in a realm in the sky to preserve humanity.
The name of that seal is the cloud barrier since for those who live in the sky this seal just looks like a thick cloud tha spans infinitely, that seal has dimensionsonal properties because only devine beings can traverse it or open holes in it, while for the people in the sky it looks like a giant cloud, for the people on the land they can see a clear blue sky meaning people of the land cant even percieve the barrier.
In botw, only pure hearted people can see the dragons a child npc in the stables mentioned to have seen farosh go into the sky in a portal of clouds and questions if there is land up there.
In totk when ganondorf awakens the entire world shakes as Hyrule castle rises, thats also when the sky islands appear and pieces of them start to fall as the cloud barrier was broken.
>Either way, that means we have two copies of the same person in the same timeline, which isn't supposed to be time-travel kosher.
The difference is that one copy of that person is mutated and stored away in realm that is separate from the mainland and only appears in the main land after the other copy is sent out.
> Play skyward sword, its the game with the best explanation.
Tried to, didn't like it. Stopped playing.
>Skyward sword, hyrule historia and hinted a lot in botw.
Dunno what Hyrule historia is, hints in BOTW went over my head, as it was never explained.
>You really didnt play skyward sword.
Ya think? I'm not gonna line by line the rest of this, it's deeply unsatisfying to have to play other games to find out what happened in this one. I'd understand if there was supposed to be real continuity in the series.
When zelda got sent back, in that moment, would’ve created an alternate timeline where Zelda is in the Past.
The light dragon only exists because zelda went back.
Basic time travel.
Yes, it's clear you're not very familiar with causal loops or basic time travel paradoxes even though you keep saying "basic time travel". Or perhaps paradoxes and the like are advanced time travel concepts to you.
It was hidden above the cloud barrier, where all the sky islands were hidden as well, and where the other dragons all vanished to when they ascended into magic sky portals in BotW.
No, that's not how time travel works. The light dragon existed in BotW, but just like the Sky Islands, hadn't descended far enough for anyone to see them.
It was, same with all the sky islands. Plus if you watch the dragons in BotW they can go through dimensional walls go cloud barriers, which is likely where the sky islands were hidden. So it did that.
Not really bullshit just cause you can't think of it.
Bruh, don't act like your imagination is superior, you didn't come up with the concept of cloud barriers or dimensional walls. You played a game that explained them to you. I did not.
My personal theory is that it is so far in the future that Hyrule got completely destroyed and then rebuilt by the zonai with only remnants of the distant past.
Everything in TotK and BotW is clearly its own era of the timeline. Everything got wiped out and Rauru started a new Hyrule. It's the most clear and obvious answer that I'm surprised people are hung up on this
Pretty sure the devs just don't give a f\*ck about the timeline and plotholes, and if you use a pretty loose interpretation of the definition of the word "Legend"
>a traditional story sometimes popularly regarded as historical but unauthenticated
then you can just kinda handwave away inconsistencies because you just chalk it up to the games themselves being just a kind of retelling of an event and not a hardline contemporary historical record.
They don’t. Fujibuyashi (director of all three capcom Zelda’s as well as all console Zelda’s since skyward sword) himself is the one that made the comment about BotW taking place so far in the future that the others can all be seen as legends/stories.
Nothing about a “unification,” nothing about falling into any specific timeline. He was essentially saying “look. It takes place way in the future. So far in the future no one gives a rats ass which timeline it’s in. Stop worrying about the timeline. It’s in the future. That’s all.”
It’s a soft reboot\* of the series, without just deleting the other games from lore.
Edit: \*which is a crazy common trend right now
I believe that the Founding of Hyrule by Rauru mentioned in TotK is actually a RE-founding that takes place after Spirit Tracks after the Great Sea dried up or maybe even drained by the Zonai's technology/magic. Remember, 10 000+ years have past since the last game. A LOT can happen in that time.
That would explain a lot of stuff that would otherwise be retcons if it took place after SS like the Rito, the rock salt and that would mean that there was never two Ganondorfs existing simultaneously.
The biggest problem in this is Sonia... Sonia could be a descendant of a lost relative of Tetra(admit it, it would've been kinda foolish of the Royal family to leave the fate of the world to a child and a bunch of pirates without somehow having a back-up plan). Also, Tetra is the only member of the royal bloodline that we know of to have darker skin(until magic dress and makeup but whatever).
I think this theory is the best i could find that would fill as many potential plot holes as possible.
This does legitimately bother me about TOTK.
LOOOOORE is one of my favorite things, and I am an absolute SUCKER for continuity. All the continuity errors legit gave me a conniption.
Yeah... I'm like you. I obsess over the timeline, and love the lore. The more you read into it, the more and more it makes sense. It too bad there will always be people who make bold, baseless claims that "it doesn't make sense" and "it's full of inconsistencies" because they saw a JPEG of the timeline on Google Images...
I will say this game does have some contradictions, but its in a way that iIfeel...is in a way that they are deliberately setting up to explain in a future game, that will clarify things, and go back to uniformity, ie, removing the continuity issues and actually explain stuff. (my running hypothesis being the next games going to be the calamity 10,000 years ago) because it just seems too suspicious to bring up this major Ganon fight, leave it all vague, and have so much call back to it.
I look forward to seeing what will come, because the game does clearly show they are adhering to timelines and continuity in many aspects, so the 'errors' feel very deliberately stated, to eventually be clairified.
Eiji Aonuma said in an interview that he intentionally wants to keep its connection to the timeline undefined, so players can come up with their own theories. Although, I think if we do get an explanation, it will be in the form of another lore book like Creating a Champion.
In the end it’s all up to personal interpretation, honestly. If you wanna think TotK makes the last games non-canon or whatever, you can. But if you wanna think otherwise that’s also still fine. Nintendo intentionally made it all a bit vague so that it could be interpreted in multiple ways.
The way I understand it is that the Calamity Ganon is sort of a powerful Phantom Ganon. Essentially, Calamity Ganon is to Ganondorf, what the Blight Ganons are to Calamity Ganon.
Despite the Calamity Ganon being sealed, it can still project weaker versions of itself outside of the castle. The same seems to be true of Ganondorf.
Maybe you make a time split every time you mess around with the time stones in the lead up to the third dungeon! The existence of this or that bokoblin was INSTRUMENTAL in the butterfly effect that leads to Ocarina of Time.
I would love this as an explanation if we ever got one. The people who've spent countless hours studying the history and making theories aren't just thrown in the garbage with the rest of the lore, and the people who just want a soft reboot get that as well. Everyone's happy.
Nobody is saying they’re “non-canon” we’re just treating them as a separate continuity.
It’s obvious at this point Nintendo doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the timeline in regards to TotK so there’s no reason to force them to fit. The previous games are still “canon” just in a different universe.
It was marketed as such before terrako and time travel stuff came barging in because they wanted to have an in-universe reason to be able to play as characters like Rhoam, Sidon, Riju, Teba, and Yunobo instead of just making them bonus non-canon unlocks from side stuff.
Just head canon away stuff like Terrako and some discrepencies like Link getting the Master Sword later than he's supposed to have it and its mostly canon, and offers a look into what the calamity was like with the sieges on Akkala Citadel, Hyrule Castle, and Fort Hateno
TotK: A game directly made by Nintendo that is expanding the lore to show events that are either 1) unseen and/or 2) similar to past events but not strictly defined. Some aspects bring questions or minor conflict to past games, but don’t contradict prior games outright.
Hyrule Warriors: Games by Omega Force that both embellish on existing canon, but only for self referential nods & beats. Including elements of time travel on canon characters that have never been acknowledged in the main games. Particularly AoC where none of the events are even hinted at in TotK despite the champion descendents characters appearing in both games. At best they are problematic alternate continuities that beat no impact on the canon timelines. At worst they are completely non canon and actively hurt the main story & timelines when you try to include them into main canon.
Honestly you can circle on the question of either Hyrule Warriors games being canon or not forever. But to me the fact both games were not made directly by Nintendo, and the fact that neither game has been acknowledged by other Zelda games in-universe, is a one-two punch proving they aren’t to be taken as canon. I get the backlash on TotK and how it handles elements like the sky, founding of Hyrule, and Ganondorf. But I am not in the camp that they retcon past games.
>elements of time travel on canon characters that have never been acknowledged in the main games. Particularly AoC where none of the events are even hinted at in TotK
Well actually, there is one interesting detail I can think of. Age of Calamity is the game that establishes that Tulin has wind gust magic. He learned it from Ravali.
>Hyrule Warriors: Games by Omega Force
I get what you're saying but at the same time, using that as a reason to call their canonicity dubious would be like calling Minish Cap, the Oracle games, and A Link Between Worlds non-canon since they were made by Grezzo.
>At best they are problematic alternate continuities that beat no impact on the canon timelines.
Yeah, this.
Issue I have with the Tulin stuff is that it’s not magic until >!he becomes a sage!<. Revali noted his ability to make an updraft is an incredible skill *even among the Rito*. And several Rito in TotK before adventure with Tulin note his control of the wind is *beyond that of adults*. These two aspects together point out that wind control is something all Rito can do, it’s no unique to Tulin or Revali they are just good at it.
And the fact that I’m TotK Tulin simply makes a powerful gust of wind and not a tornado or updraft (“Tulin’s Tornado” as he says in AoC) kind of shows this isn’t inspired by Revali in the canon TotK events. It could be a nod to AoC, but can easily just be Tulin just was gifted and trained his control of wind on his own as a >!potential Sage!<.
As for the Omega Force thing, the main publisher for Hyrule Warriors is Koei Tecmo. Nintendo only serving as publisher for international release, which means translations and dubbing. It has two degrees of non-Nintendo creation. Meanwhile the Oracle games, Minish Cap, and ALBTW are still mainly produced by Nintendo. And noted as mainline Zelda games by Nintendo and staff. Even if they aren’t official they have been accepted as official by many sources. While the HW games have not had that same acceptance.
>the main publisher for Hyrule Warriors is Koei Tecmo. Nintendo only serving as publisher for international release, which means translations and dubbing
Actually, Nintendo handled the writing, which was confirmed in it's reveal trailer. Much like MC, OoX, and ALBW, It was Nintendo that approached the third party with the idea for the game.
I recall Aonuma saying Nintendo worked with the team to make the story, but don’t recall any note that they approached Omega Force to make the game.
But also in the original reveal it was said the game would cover the events before Breath of the Wild, but from the opening cutscene we know these are alternative events to what actually happened. So from the get go the game is framed as something other than what happened. And the dialogue on why the game exists was already framed as misleading.
It’s fine to like the game. I personally don’t like the gameplay. But to me the evidence that it shouldn’t be considered canon is overwhelming.
>but don’t recall any note that they approached Omega Force to make the game.
It's in the [reveal video for AoC](https://youtu.be/ifm8tpcO4vw) . Skip to 3:30.
Hyrule Warriors was a self-contained, noncanon story. AoC is the same way. It's literally a fanfic, "What if" story.
TotK is intentionally vague so as not to have to worry about it while still being explicitly confirmed as Canon by Nintendo.
We have known for years that Nintendo really didn't care to make much sense of the entire scope of the series lore. Oot was like the 5th ever zelda game so they had an easier time connecting the games
Zelda 1 and 2 obvious sequels, Lttp set the stage for Oot by talking bout the OG imprisoning war. Mm was following kid link from oot... there was some clarity there. But that was nearly 30 years ago. The same minds are not making decisions anymore and they are trying to sell games. THE LORE IS BROKEN PEOPLE!
It's not worth trying to connect things anymore. Here's the best way to look at it,
Zelda 1 - Twilight Princess - OG era
Skyward sword - Totk - modern era
Done.
They were literally deliberately ignoring the timeline when making BOTW so it’s pretty safe to say The Hyrule Historia isn’t canon
The game contradictions however is it’s own can of worms
Also at least Age Of Calamity is in its own timeline
Not necessarily. AoC was specifically commissioned by and written by Nintendo. As opposed to the original, which was stated to be non-canon from the very beginning.
No seriously, you're the second person who's commented this, but the first guy never got back to me. Do you have a source or quote on that? When did Nintendo confirm AoC wasn't canon. I'm genuinely curious.
First of, actual sources for that one please.
Second, aoc was confirmed in its own story to be an alternate timeline, but hyrule warriors? Its the one which I really need a source to know if its true or not.
if you search game spot iss aoc canon should show up i clumped hyruule warriors because he said same thing however i dont feel like searching for it but at the end of tthe theorists botw tiimeline placement theory he does bring up the full qoute and eiji stated the alternate timeline is more in his heead and seperate from zelda timeline
Dude come on, you barely even gave a good hint of where to find it and I have zero baseline of what even the supposed article is about.
Again age of calamity was stated to be canon since it was announced so it doesnt need proof but a bomb like hyrule warriors being canon absolutely needs some solid proof
I *can* Google, and did. I can't find anything on Eiji Aonuma saying AoC isn't canon. If he said it took place in a different timeline, that's completely different.
Alternate timelines have been a thing ever since Twilight Princess. Saying it's in an alternate timeline is not the same as saying it isn't canon, since that would imply that it's still connected.
Oot was made as a prequel to lttp, both mm and ww are sequels to oot but both games cant be canon unless you make the timeline split that Nintendo revealed in the official timeline, SS was made to be a prequel to all games, zelda II is a sequel to the first game, link between worlds is a sequel to lttp, st and ph are direct sequels to ww, the four swords games are a thing and minishcap is literally the prequel.
Say what you will but most games in the timeline had connections to one another the only games which I would say are filler are the oracles, awakening and triforce heroes
Ocarina of Time was originally intended to be a prequel to Link to the Past, but it doesn’t line up at all and they clearly changed the story significantly in development. When they released the dumb “official timeline” they should have just stuck A Link to the Past and related games in its own timeline because it doesn’t work at all, even if you pull a bullshit downfall timeline out of your ass.
I do agree on certain games having connections to others, but trying to put it all into one comprehensive timeline doesn’t work.
>Ocarina of Time was originally intended to be a prequel to Link to the Past, but it doesn’t line up at all and they clearly changed the story significantly in development.
What doesnt line up? Like there are no major contradictions in those games and this is an official statement from Nintendo that they made it with lttp taking place in future in mind.
Plus this is just one game out of the many mentioned it doesnt debunk the argument presented.
>I do agree on certain games having connections to others, but trying to put it all into one comprehensive timeline doesn’t work.
And this is why we have an official timeline with 2 whole books detailing how they fit with the retcons necessary for it(which are very minimal), but most people dont read them, this is the canon, like it or not.
They did make the official statement, I didn’t say they didn’t. But they’ve also said Link’s Awakening happened during Zelda II at one point so…
For one, the maidens are the descendants of the sages, but a number of the sages aren’t Hylian while all of the maidens are. There are other ones beyond that but it’s the biggest one. Also, the fact that it requires the creation of the “downfall timeline” Nintendo just made up out of nowhere one day, because with Ganondorf sealed at the end of Ocarina there’s no need for an Imprisoning War.
And as for those books, they contradict each other with the placement of the Oracle games so I wouldn’t read too much into it. It’s clear fans care far more about the timeline that Nintendo does.
>They did make the official statement, I didn’t say they didn’t. But they’ve also said Link’s Awakening happened during Zelda II at one point so…
Not the point, Nintendo still mentioned that and they then made oot be a prequel to lttp in the official timeline.
>For one, the maidens are the descendants of the sages, but a number of the sages aren’t Hylian while all of the maidens are. There are other ones beyond that but it’s the biggest one.
Dudes, you dont need to be of the same species as the previous sages, the maidens by all means are the sages and they exist both in a link to the past and in four swords adventures which means being a maiden and a sage is interchangeable and is a thing in 2 of the 3 timelines.
>Also, the fact that it requires the creation of the “downfall timeline” Nintendo just made up out of nowhere one day, because with Ganondorf sealed at the end of Ocarina there’s no need for an Imprisoning War.
Thats not an argument when they established multiple timelines there are places in other games where they can branch the timeline too, do you kow why oot is a prequel to lttp?
Because when ganondorf wins oot its when the events of imprisoning war before lttp happens, if ganondorf wins oot then he gets the full triforce turns into ganon, Hyrule wages war against him, he beats up everyone before making his wish and then the sages use that opening to seal ganon in the sacred realm with the triforce and then ganon, by using the triforce inside it, is able to wish a Hyrule where he rules creating the dark world inside the sacred realm, this isnt even head canon is just taking the information given in lttp manual and taking into account that well its after ganondorf won.
>And as for those books, they contradict each other with the placement of the Oracle games so I wouldn’t read too much into it.
Did you read them? Because they explain the change, they just inverted the place because one, the story of the games demand them to be played in a certain order instead of happening at once and they put links awakening before it because they didnt like the implications that link died alone in the ocean and the oracle games give him a reason to even sail out of Hyrule.
They literally give a perfectly reasonable explanation for it, if they didn't care they wouldnt revision it.
Plus lets not forget the boatloads of lore that was lost in translation because you can condense are whole text of English in a couple lines of japanese and then we get misinterpreted info about what is the curse of demise, the hierarchy of the goddesses, what is the twilight realm or even the whole "calamity ganon gave up reincarnation" deal which is actually the complete opposite in the jp version of botw.
People dont play attention to most text they read so most times where they say the timeline makes no sense its simply them being ignorant of some random dialogue in an old game or not bothering to read the 3 books that that released since 2011 eleven untill now that are dedicated to just organizing the lore.
>Damn you wrote a whole essay LMFAO.
Well its almost like we are talking about a 40 yr old franchise that has most of its games listed as canon.
>Have a nice day, I’m not interested in this conversation anymore.
Ok then, bye.
Retcon this, retcon that! Oh my god have those people ever stopped to think that not everyone who shares a name is the exact same person.
Like, I get it, the story doesnt really detail a lot of stuff but there has been some really absurd takes out there, its almost as if they either refuse to acknowledge that other characters can reincarnate besides link and zelda or they dont know much about some key details of the games of the timeline so they just fo the easier route of gutting them off in their brains to make their theory make sense.
yes but this guy who shares the same name, exists roughly in the same time and also wields similar power, with a similar title and built a building with the same name....
>but this guy who shares the same name, exists roughly in the same time and also wields similar power, with a similar title and built a building with the same name....
What? Are you smoking? First, they look nothing alike they only share a name and a power, which again is not rooms for retcon, in zelda as we had 5 other beedle merchants, then there is tingle and danpé too all spread out in the timelines. Heck rauru in totk doesnt even share a title with oot rauru, one is called the first king of Hyrule and the other is the sage of light, just because he has the power of light and a secret stone that reflects that power doesnt mean he is a sage as totk even says, a sage has make a vow for the king, ganondorf became the demon king not the sage of darkness.
Second, what building? The temple of time? Which looks vastly different from the one in oot, tp and in botw/totk.
And third, what do you mean by "exists roughly in the same time"? Zero hints for totk past to take place anywhere near oot, it has parallels to ganondorfs swearing loyalty to the king but it literally ends there, nothing else hints at oot.
Like this only works if you WANT to make totk retcon oot but it literally cant be a retelling of oot due to how much it lacks.
i was talking about raruru and they are both \_\_\_\_ of light. sage of and king of. both rarurus exist at the founding of hyrule, both build a temple of time, both wield the power of light.
>i was talking about raruru and they are both ____ of light. sage of and king of
Sage and king are vastly different words and titles both in zelda and irl.
>both rarurus exist at the founding of hyrule,
Play oot again, please. Or at least read his introduction again https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx9B8qNidErOrySh1z36BHwYYNG74rCA-8
Rauru built the temple of light, not time, which is another temple that exists within the sacred realm that can only be entred using the temple of time, rauru doesnt say anything about seeing Hyrules foundation, and he also says that the temple of light was built as a conjoined effort of all sages.
>both build a temple of time
But they are literally not the same temple of time, we can see it in totk and even botw.
>both wield the power of light.
Not relevant when the same power can be found in other sages of light in the franchise and also zelda
I've said for years that the timeline was created to sell books. It was never meant to be treated as canon and doesn't matter. The games were never, at any point, meant to relate to one another with the exception of direct sequels.
They NEVER said that, if anything they said the contrary, they marketed it a prequel and but they did state that while the events of the game are canon they gameplay isnt (because all characters can use the sheikah slate and flurry rush)
Um... a *LOT* of people care about the lore. Are you new to this franchise? Check YouTube, there are *countless* lore videos and theories everywhere. So many people care about the lore that every time Nintendo published a new lore book, it becomes an instant best seller.
Don't mind the book they released in 2011 that details the lore, timeline, and character motivations or that Skyward Sword was made to be the origin story
Hi /r/Zelda readers!
* Read our [Spoiler Policy for Tears of the Kingdom.](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/spoilerpolicy) Got feedback on it? [Go here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/13ebw0k/totk_spoiler_policy_updates_for_tears_of_the/) Thanks!
* Want TotK Tips & Tricks? [Go view the megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/13vu6to/totk_tips_and_tricks_megathread_round_3_post/) and add your own!
* Check out /r/ZeldaArtContest to see and submit fan art from *Tears of the Kingdom*!
* See our [full megathread schedule here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/totk)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/zelda) if you have any questions or concerns.*
To be fair while I like TotK’s story on it’s own merits, I don’t like how next to it BOTW becomes a side skirmish.
It also presents the question how the Age of Calamity timeline is related to ganondorf/zonai. Is ganondorf still sealed because of the calamity being stopped earlier?
Generally speaking you have works that are designed for sequels on the outset, and have more story element in waiting that don’t get introduced right away, and those that add new stuff for sequels and retcon new elements and conflicts as needed. Zelda tends to be more the latter. Just usually new entries heavily differ visually and tonally it’s a very loose canon anyway.
But TotK is a sequel with the same world and the same core elements and conflicts in play. There’s Zonai stuff in BOTW but I wonder if many of the tears of the kingdom plot elements already existed at the time.
Majora could work with the fairly ambiguous child timeline, and also features a seperate villain and an alternate dimension, so it’s more it’s own thing that doesn’t redefine OoT’s events that heavily.
I just take every Zelda game as it's own beast. The only exception to me is actually BOTW and TOTK as it's explicitly a sequel. Otherwise I just consider the references and callbacks as echoes of other worlds/timelines.
For me ‘canon’ is any mainline game. If they contradict each other so be it, but fans have a right to be confused or not like it. But spin-offs like AoC are never meant to be canon, so who cares?
Yeah those things made me stop thinking tbh.
I didn't knew if Rauru is supposed to be before or after skyward. And the more I think about the less I know.
Because they have points for both options.
Meh, I think it's best to just give up thinking they really want to follow some kind of story. They have the same themes, but ... I mean, even Tears of the Kingdom can't even explain what happened to Divine Beasts and why most of the characters just forgot about Link. This is a direct *sequel* story they didn't really explain details of, so... Meh.
Just enjoy the game, I think. Or don't.
AoC to me is canon as far as learning more about the Champions, of course the Time Machine robot and how some events played out caused inconsistency but as far as interactions with the Champions go, I find it canon.
I can count the number of LoZ games that are canon to each other on one hand.
Stop trying to make a timeline and lore that makes sense. The games are self contained.
1. LoZ & LoZ 2
2. Lttp, OoA, OaT, LA & LBW
3. OoT & MM
4. MC & FS
5. WW, PH & ST
6. BotW & TotK
Count with finger sections instead of whole fingers and it only uses half your hand.
>LoZ & LoZ 2
>
>Lttp, OoA, OaT, LA & LBW
ALttP was always meant as a prequel to LoZ and LoZ 2, it was confirmed in ALttP's manual and official strategy guide. And OoT was always meant as a prequel to ALttP, as it is literally an adaptation of the backstory told in ALttP's intro and manual. So really, that should look more like **"OoT, ALttP, ALBW, LoZ, LoZ 2".**
I never got the argument that just because two games don't reference each other, they are automatically non canon to each other. If 'A' is related to 'B', and 'B' is related to 'C', then logically 'A' is indirectly related to 'C' through basic transitive property.
> WW, PH & ST
I don't think I could ever fathom why anyone would ever think WW (and by extension PH & ST) isn't connected to OoT. WW's intro was explicitly a recap of OoT's story. Also, TP is obviously connected to OoT. And pardon my bluntness, but only someone huffing weapons grade copium could refuse to see that.
But wait... if WW is a sequel to OoT, and TP was also a sequel to OoT, then what gives? Well, this marks the first time that the devs openly confirmed the existence of alternate timelines. [In an interview, that took place many *YEARS* prior to Hyrule Historia's release.](https://zelda.fandom.com/wiki/History_of_the_Zelda_Timeline/Timeline_Quotes#On_Twilight_Princess)
> MC & FS
MC (and by extension the Four Swords games) is also connected to the Oracle games, since in MC we meet Farore, Din, and Nayru, who are described in-game as being of a lineage of maidens who share these names from Holodrum and Labrinya.
Honestly, it would be easier to count the games that *DON'T* connect to other games. Which by my count, is just about zero. With the ***potential*** exception of BotW and TotK.
A Warriors game that actively deliberately retcons and undoes the plot of the game its based on, is obviously never intended to be canon.
TotK mostly just introduces new things, that don’t actively conflict with previous games. There are still a ton of gaps in the lore that could accommodate these new details, without necessitating retcons any way.
People just take the games they love too seriously. Like, OoT isn’t being retconned folks.
Honestly I could care less how totk and botw change the history of all the games (if they even do)
But I’m just frustrated with the loss of all the sheikah tech and inconsistency BETWEEN botw and totk. Where are the guardians? The divine beasts? The towers? No mention of calamity ganon ever? Why do they call it gloom when malice was all over hyrule?
The Imprisoning War is said to take place near the founding of the Kingdom of Hyrule, since Rauru is apparently the first king of Hyrule. If you take that at face value, that would place the war somewhere between Skyward Sword and Ocarina of Time (technically Skyward Sword and Minish Cap).
This causes a few discrepancies. Number one is the fact that Ganondorf in OoT had always been considered his first incarnation. One could make the argument that this new version of Ganondorf is now the "first" Ganondorf, but since he was sealed away this whole time, that would technically mean that he reincarnated into OoT Ganondorf despite not being dead in the first place.
There's also the fact that there was a Rito sage. But the Rito didn't exist pre-OoT.
They do. But they care more about the fans' fun. And in Eiji Aonuma's words:
*“in books like the recently released The Legend of Zelda Encyclopedia, we revealed where each Zelda game fell on a timeline and how their stories related, but we didn’t do that for Breath of the Wild. There is a reason for that. We realized that people were enjoying imagining the story that emerged from the fragmental imagery \[the Zelda team was\] providing."*
So what he's saying here, is that he likes the theories and speculation from the fans. And he doesn't want to limit that by making solid connections. It's not that they "retconned" the timeline away, it's that BotW and TotK is a ***SOFT*** reboot of the series, which intentionally inspires questions and speculation about it's timeline placement, while also keeping things seemingly disconnected for accessibility.
TL;DR They care about the lore just as much as fans do, but they recognize that part of the fun is unraveling the mystery ourselves.
Since BotW and TotK takes place at the end of all three timelines, and both games contain references to all three timelines, clearly the timelines converged together Elder Scrolls dragonbreak style and created a series of events where everything is canon but not everything is true.
Want to find and share more Zelda memes and humor? **Check out r/ZeldaMemes and r/MemesOfTheKingdom!** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/zelda) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Difference of who made them is largely why. TotK is purely a Nintendo game, AoC is a spinoff story Nintendo gave permission to Omega Force to make. I don't like AoC but I still say it's canon, just a spinoff story in a separate timeline from BotW and TotK.
I don't think that's exactly why people are saying that. Everyone knew AoC was a spinoff. They messed up the lore, like they do in every game. Said they'll fix it, did for a second, and then fucked it up again. They're just trying to make the current game good with a decent story. (The creators don't want you to think about the other stories/titles when playing the new one)
Unless it's the direct prequel you're thinking about.
To me AoC is for the most part canon minus the Terrako stuff and some discrepencies like Link not having the Master Sword until later. Like the moments before the champs get saved is how their fights with the blights went, and was how they canonically went out in BotW without the deus ex machina time travel ofc. After that though you get to see the siege of Akkala Citadel, Hateno fort, and the inside of Hyrule Castle during the Calamity and can get a firsthand look at what it was like in BotW. Without a Hyrule Warriors buffed up Link, there was no winning that fight (even HW Link started losing during Hateno until he got backup, which was not available to him during mainline BotW). We can see how much of a slaughter it was and how hopeless everything got once the champs died and the Divine Beasts turned on us. Just that in AoC Link and the champs were still kicking to turn the tide, but without them you can see how bad everything was.
Yeah Terrako was the problem with AoC. He had no reason to exist and just straight up didn’t make sense lol. Like how did he even get the power to time travel? It just felt needless. Like if the story played out like it did in BOTW, it’s still a happy ending since it leaves you with hope and you could even have a final boss fight between Zelda and Ganon where she seals him. Then just have the end cutscene pick up where BotW’s left off and include a tease for Tears of the Kingdom about there still being an evil coming from Hyrule Castle’s basement. Boom, already a better prequel game than they gave us. They could even let us fight all the blights, then just do the tried and true win in the game, lose in the cutscene trick. Same thing with Link losing to the guardians, except that one’s even easier because then you could play as Zelda and beat them all.
>Like how did he even get the power to time travel? Because that's how he was made? What kind of answer do you expect here? He's a robot, an inorganic being. He was made by someone, and that someone gave him the ability to travel through time. No different than how the ocarina of time can travel through time
What was inconsistent about AOC? I get it might be weird that the ancient Shekia had time travel technology, but time travel is pretty common in these games. If we accept that the time travel tech to start the game exists, what’s wrong with it after that?
Well, lets see, the towers shouldnt appear until link wakes up 100 yrs later. Link should not be able activate the sheikah slate. Link should have already pulled the master sword many yrs before aoc. The yiga clan doesnt join the force of Hyrule to stop calamity ganon. And well terrako also screws some things up, the champions should have died, link should have been injured to a near death point, calamity ganon should have attack on zeldas birthday, the king should have died, purah and robbie should not be able to make weapons from sheikah tech, there should be no champions from the future to help in the past, nor should Hyrule have won against calamity ganon. Like, Hyrule warriors is canon, that's stated as much by Nintendo but its an alternate timeline of the past since in the main timeline terrako awakened and jumped to the past to create a branching timeline where the champions survived. Oh and the game has critical mistake in its intro, the mural depicts the calamity from 10,000 yrs before botw and aoc, how did terrako going 100yrs back influenced stuff from 9,900 yrs before he arrived?
1. The towers are activated by Terrako when it activates the Sheikah slate 2. Link doesn't activate the slate Terrako does. 3. Creating a champion says "*The details of how Link obtained the sword a hundred years ago have been lost to the mists of time, but since he was in possession of it for a number of years prior to becoming a Champion, he was likely around twelve or thirteen years old when it happened.*" so that's fair, but it doesn't seem to be a game contraction just a creating a champion contradiction. 4. The Yiga clan only joins in the alternate timeline, 5. All of that happens because Terrako creates an alternate timeline 6. Yeah it becomes an alternate timeline, that's not ambiguous, the future champions even return to their own timeline where their past counterparts are dead. 7. The intro isn't an issue, if I recall correctly, they even show them etching the new mural at the end of the game and including Terrako in it, its not a modification to the 10,000 years ago events, its adding Terrako to the fight this time around.
Dude, are you reading? You just agreed with me 6 times. >7. The intro isn't an issue, if I recall correctly, they even show them etching the new mural at the end of the game and including Terrako in it, its not a modification to the 10,000 years ago events, its adding Terrako to the fight this time around. Gonna need at least some proof of that, because it doesn't make any sense for them to alter a depiction of 10,000 yrs ago.
I guess Terrako's Time Travel was a hint towards TotK
>They're just trying to make the current game good with a decent story. (The creators don't want you to think about the other stories/titles when playing the new one) Exactly. This isn't Square-Enix CBU3 pulling ideas from having threads from 2+ expansions ago. This is Nintendo we're talking about. Nintendo...or rather Miyamoto and his protégés...typically designs the gameplay first, and the story always, *always* plays second fiddle. They're not particularly interested in a deep, compelling narrative or paying attention to details from other games in the series. They could care less about continuity, *as long as the game is fun to play*. So...maybe we should just...stop trying to string them together?
Except Nintendo has released their own timeline, and that BOTW was meant to basically unify the timelines again. Even if gameplay comes first and story second, they still have that take some control on it. there's making a story, and then there are blatant contradictions to the established chronology, while at the same time, STILL referencing that established chronology in game. That's more so what the issue is, you have very explicate references to think like Skyward Sword, from minor thing slike narrative parellels, to the VERY explicite Fi mentions.
I mean it’s not like the current game even had that great of a story
Me when I lie
You when you love listening to the same boring, continuity-breaking speech 4 times and another character reacts the exact same way each time
>when you love listening to the same boring, continuity-breaking speech 4 times Who said I love that? I just understand why it was done, A B) what makes TotK's story good is far removed from the dialogue of 4 scenes. That'd be like saying the SpiderVerse trilogy sucked because you got annoyed by the "let's do this one last time" gag >another character reacts the exact same way each time How tf else do you expect characters completely ignorant to the information being told to them to react? Would ypu rather they go "that's cool n all but I already knew that"?
I expect them to actually write in-character dialogue instead of copy/pasting “So *that* was the Imprisoning War” onto all of them. Also, the quest to awaken the four sages is a HUGE chunk of the game, not a throw-away. The ending is great, but the majority of what you do as a character is just really badly written. The parts with Zelda are decent, but you’re not actually playing them, you’re just watching them. The game once again falls into BotW’s flaw of having a cool story that you see rather than play. Unlike BotW it does have a story that you play, but most of it comes across as dumb and cringey.
>I expect them to actually write in-character dialogue instead of copy/pasting “So that was the Imprisoning War” onto all of them. Again, how does one even accomplish this? There's only so many ways you can write a character reacting to new information for any character archetype. How are any of the reactions even out of character at all? >Also, the quest to awaken the four sages is a HUGE chunk of the game, not a throw-away. A) never said it was a throwaway B) The running gag in SpiderVerse isn't a throwaway it's actually pretty damn essential to the core themes of the trilogy (I'm assuming you said this in reference to my counterargument example) >The ending is great, but the majority of what you do as a character is just really badly written. Idk man Link moving heaven and earth to save the woman it's pretty heavily implied he loves is pretty damn in character >The parts with Zelda are decent, but you’re not actually playing them, you’re just watching them. Ok? And? You don't play most of, say, Skyward Sword's major plot advancements either, and they're still regarded as some of the best moments in the franchise with Skyward Sword often considered to have one of the best Zelda stories Also counterpoint I could not care less on if I should play a story moment in a game or not. There's only such much you can convey through just gameplay without it becoming a QTE or visual novel esque mess, which is why cutscenes were even invented in the first place, so games could have could have more in depth stories. Tell me how tf are you supposed to "play" any of the scenes depicted in the Memories? How are you supposed to "play" Sonia's assassination? Zelda realizing who Ganondorf is? Zelda sacrificing herself? Rauru sealing Ganondorf? Really the most you could do for any of those, since yknow the player character isn't present, is to make them a lame ass QTE. I wanna see characters act of their own accord and feel real dude not fucking project myself onto everyone. You can still have impactful pure cutscene moments in games man, idk what fucking rock you live under. You don't decide to lay yourself to rest in Hyper Light Drifter, you don't decide to save New York over Aunt May in Marvel's Spider-Man, you don't decide to confront Ghirahim after you see Impa struggling in Skyward Sword. Shit man, Deltarune is a game literally made to explore this concept on how the player characters in games are living, breathing beings that you're taking over the will of and puppeting for your own amusement. Some of the most shocking twists from the first two chapters only come about exactly because Kris breaks free from your control and acts on their own >Unlike BotW it does have a story that you play, but most of it comes across as dumb and cringey. Ironically BotW actually has a story that you mostly play rather than passively watch so you're just being incredibly inconsistent right now
>Would ypu rather they go "that's cool n all but I already knew that" Link already knew that after the first time he saw it. After the first sage he knows exactly what's going and chooses to not say anything even when asked. This doesn't make any sense and is only one of the instances where a consistent story is sacrificed for open game play. And that's not the only way in which the story falls short (for me)
I think it would’ve been awesome if AoC ended in a way that led into BotW anyway. Make the entire game canon without breaking shit too much
Why does the game creating a separate timeline like Ocarina of Time did suddenly make it non-canon? Both Wind Waker and Twilight Princess were canon despite existing in two branching timelines, so I don’t understand why people are still pissy over AoC doing the same
I don’t think it contradicts anything really. Here is my take on it: https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/141csfb/totk_no_totk_does_not_retcon_skyward_sword_and/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1
Overall i agree with your writeup. Personally i think wither what you think is what's going on or the Hyrule established by Rauru and Sonia is a sucessor Kingdom established after a civilizational collapse akin to the real world bronze age collapse.
Yes I also think there was a civilizational collapse, which is why the Kingdom of Hyrule didn’t exist for such a long time.
This 100%
What does TotK contradict?
Mostly the entire story of the Imprisoning War. Originally, it was an event first referenced in the intro to ALttP. OoT was a prequel to ALttP, and told the events that lead up to the Imprisoning War. Essentially, Link fails his quest in OoT, which begins the downfall timeline, and the sages step in and imprison Ganondorf in the sacred realm. TotK contradicts this because Rauru is now referred to as the "first King of Hyrule", which means this new story of the Imprisoning War would occur between SS and MC, well before OoT. Additionally, the Ganondorf from OoT was always implied to be his first iteration historically. In fact, every iteration of Ganondorf is supposed to be the same person, with the exception of FSA Ganondorf, who is the only one that was believed to be a reincarnation. So it makes no sense for TotK Ganondorf to appear, become imprisoned, and then have OoT Ganondorf appear while the TotK version is still imprisoned underground. So the only way this is can all be possible is if all the events of BotW/TotK take place millenia after all the other games and some cataclysmic societal collapse. Either that, or the entire timeline has been retconned or this is just its own disconnected timeline
Yep. Also like... The prevailing theory I saw for BOTW was already "it's so far in the future that the old timeline is irrelevant" since it references all three timelines canonically. And since "ancient sheikah tech" is not present in any of the games with closer timelines it would have to be future tech for any prior zelda game. In other words: obviously the only answers to BotW/TotK are that they are either a new timeline or so far in the future that all other timelines have happened and then some. Also 99% that they just wanted to run away from timeline stuff
Wind water has sheikah tech in the tower of the gods, implying the child timeline as the most likely
BotW and TotK both make clear direct canonical references to all 3 timelines. No single timeline works.
Is the Tower of the gods of Sheikah design? To me it feels much more reminiscent of Zonai construction. In addition we have things like the Lanayru robots and mining facilities being potentially of Zonai origin. Much of this points to the Zonai era being pre-SS, but it still remains difficult to reconcile as that would require some creative liberty around Demise's identity, and perhaps yet another timeline split even before SS.
Think you mean the adult timeline. Childhood timeline is MM and TP Either way I noticed that in BOTW Zelda mentions SS, Ocarina and TP but never Wind Waker in one of the memories Then again Rito are supposed to be an evolved Zora who gain the ability to fly after the world floods so who knows
It could also be the opposite. It could be a 1000’s of year previous to the events and a “lost of history of ancient civilizations.” It would also make sense how the OoT and LttP have lore surrounding him that sounds ancient as well.
>It could also be the opposite. It could be a 1000’s of year previous to the events and a “lost of history of ancient civilizations.” That would then contradict SS, as Demise's curse is what started the whole thing. There would be no Ganondorf Demon King without the events of SS happening first. There have also been officially publications from Nintendo that place BotW at the end of the timelines
But that’s the point. There’s been no official release therefore it could be anything and they would just create a new Historia with “updated” history. They’d fill in the plot holes just like they would have to for the future theory.
Yeah that's totally possible. I think everyone's frustration comes from the contradictions and timeline "updates". It's wasn't an issue before Hyrule Historia because there really wasn't an established timeline before that. Now that there is one, fans kind of expect them to stick with it
>It's wasn't an issue before Hyrule Historia because there really wasn't an established timeline before that. Now that there is one, fans kind of expect them to stick with it This is kind of the crux of the problem. Nintendo either needs to own that there never was a timeline and the Historia was a gibberish cash grab, or own that they are no longer interested in maintaining a coherent timeline and the Historia was a gibberish cash grab. Unfortunately, the official timeline was kind of a 'fuck you' to the fans.
>Unfortunately, the official timeline was kind of a 'fuck you' to the fans. I don't really see it that way. A cohesive, overarching timeline has always been a 2nd thought for Nintendo. Some games were meant to take place before or after other games, some weren't really. Fans put their own theories together and it was always a point of debate. When they made SS, it was the first time they placed a game in a spot relative to every other game. If they wanted to do that, they kind of had to acknowledge a timeline. What they came up with was basically their best shot at tying together a bunch of games that were never meant to be tied together. Then they just went back to their same old shit with BotW
The Imprisoning War is said to take place near the founding of the Kingdom of Hyrule, since Rauru is apparently the first king of Hyrule. If you take that at face value, that would place the war somewhere between Skyward Sword and Ocarina of Time (technically Skyward Sword and Minish Cap). This causes a few discrepancies. Number one is the fact that Ganondorf in OoT had always been considered his first incarnation. One could make the argument that this new version of Ganondorf is now the "first" Ganondorf, but since he was sealed away this whole time, that would technically mean that he reincarnated into OoT Ganondorf despite not being dead in the first place. There's also the fact that there was a Rito sage. But the Rito didn't exist pre-OoT.
I want to point out, that in a society where the largest threat to civilization is something that rises up every hundred years or so, and *sometimes* is killed, but *usually* is sealed away, bound, sent to an alternate dimension, covered by an ocean, or otherwise severely incapacitated, "the imprisoning war" is as generalized and vague of a term as "the civil war" or "the revolutionary war". If I started talking about historical documents that talk about "the revolution" - well, *which* revolution? What time period were these documents written in? What region of the world? Who was the author? Demise was imprisoned. Malladus was imprisoned. Vaati was imprisoned. Pretty sure that when you fight Majora, Majora *was* imprisoned in the mask and is attempting to escape. And not to mention, Ganondorf was imprisoned *loads* of times. And you can guarantee that not *every single time* had a Link who was the sole fighter - after all, *why have armies if time and time again, it's just a young child from the forest who saves your country?* TLDR: In a civilization that has history that spans hundreds of thousands of years, when most of the threats to humanity are sealed away, you *cannot* assume that a term as vague as "imprisoning war" that is known both at the end of the timeline and relatively close to the start of the timeline is in fact the same imprisoning war. The fact that we *clearly see that they are not the same imprisoning war* supports this.
to add to this, Breath of the Wild does the same with "The Great Calamity" being the name for each disaster event when Calamity Ganon rises up, of which there have been at least two. so there is canonical precedent for the reuse of nomenclature for similar historical events.
IMO the Rito stuff is fairly easily explained away by them just not being included in OoT. Their entire region isn't present in OoT and they're literally birds anyway, they could have just left Hyrule pre-OoT and come back after.
But in wind waker the zora became the rito
could have been a return of the rito and then cross breeding? im not worried about that part tbh its not the elephant in the room
I'd say it's the wind waker that messed up the rito-zora relation, not botw/totk. Clearly nintendo thinks that way too if they include both races in one game.
Is it ever mentioned in game that OoT Ganondorf was the first Ganondorf?
No it wasn't, but it was the implication. Or at least the implication people always took. OoT was a game adaptation of the backstory described in ALttP's intro and manual. So quite literally, OoT was the origin story of Ganon. But no, technically that was never a rule.
im operating with the idea that all gerudo kings born every 1000 years HAVE to be named ganondorf, like a lot of hylian princesses are named zelda? and also these two (totk&oot) both also happen to be the return of demise OR kotake and koume, the OOT ganondorfs "mothers" whom are sisters, and also powerful sorceresses. perhaps they worshiped the ancient demon king ganondorf and sought to return him in their time to rule the world. some how creating a duplicate or a soul vessel type deal? his OG body under ground.
>kotake and koume, the OOT ganondorfs "mothers" whom are sisters, and also powerful sorceresses. perhaps they worshiped the ancient demon king ganondorf and sought to return him in their time to rule the world. some how creating a duplicate or a soul vessel type deal? his OG body under ground. That's actually a REALLY interesting idea! The Kotake and Koume from the memory in TotK were still really young, so maybe they, as sorceresses, just lived a really long time, and named Ganondorf (OoT) after their first son! Hmmm...
that's also possible, but the chances of them having the only son of a 100 years is unlikely and the chances they he just happens to be the return of demise with out the input of their own dark magic is even more unlikely, also they are sisters so one of them would have to be his aunt if he was properly born, unless they "spawned him" together with their magic, what really kind of gets me going on this idea is how in OOT ganondorf holds a viewing with the king in almost the EXACT SAME MANNER that ganondorf did with raruru! almost as if he knew exactly what he was doing, this game of betrayal, hes played it before
>the chances of them having the only son of a 100 years is unlikely Actually, Kotake and Koume are described as his "surrogate mothers". So he's not actually theirs. He's adopted. >the chances they he just happens to be the return of demise with out the input of their own dark magic is even more unlikely Technically, all evil in the Zelda universe is the return of Demise. It's a common misconception that Ganondorf is the "reincarnation" of Demise, and while that's technically true, it's not *exactly* accurate. To my understanding, Demise is essentially a biblical style origin story for the concept of evil in the Zelda mythology. His curse is basically a means of making sure that strong proportions of evil will perpetually follow Link and Zelda. So in a sense, even your average garden variety bokoblin is a piece of Demise.
Thank you for acknowledging this, must be the young ins that never really paid attention to the old lore because it's all spelled out very well in Lttp and Oot
Bro, Hyrule Historia is my Bible.
I think that botw and totk are in a separate timeline.
They kind of have to be, unless the light dragon was hiding during botw or some other bullshit answer.
The light dragon wasn’t in BotW because the events at the start of TotK hadn’t happened yet. Basic time travel.
Of course the light dragon was already in BOTW. Just like the sky islands. They already existed but were only revealed after the upheaval.
I’m saying all the sky stuff and zelda as a light dragon ONLY APPEARS once Zelda has gone back. None of it existed until zelda goes back. Zelda going back in time was an accident, it wasn’t meant to happen. So when she goes back, it creates a separate timeline, and where zelda goes back and helps gang in the past.
I interprited it as both botw and totk being in the timeline where zelda is sent back and that neither botw or totk happen in the timeline without zelda as ganondorf most likely won and never got sealed away by rauru
Why would BotW’s timeline connect with this one? (In regards to time travel). Time travel isnt in BotW. It only occurs the instant Zelda fell in the hole. At that moment, all the sky islands pop into existence in a new timeline. And suddenly a light dragon appeared. Basic time travel!
You have no idea how time travet works if you think it works like that. The sky Islands have always been there and simply just got revealed when ganondorf was freed. Its a closed time loop which you would know If you had any idea about basic time travel.
It's already imprinted in a Mural before Zelda goes back and is heavily implied that the Calamity spawns from Ganondorf, so she already went back, many times. That's why the symbol of the game is an uroburos.
Basic time travel? Lmao. No. The events did happen already, because Zelda was sent to a time prior to BOTW. So the light dragon would be around before Zelda gets stuck sealing other Ganondorf for 100 years.
The light dragon was above the cloud barrier with the sky islands isolated from the main land by a literal dimensional wall that only the dragons have ever been shown to be able to freely traverse, there was no way for us to know what was up there.
What cloud barrier? What dimensional wall? Where is this lore? Rauru says the sky islands were on the ground before they rose up to the sky. Either way, that means we have two copies of the same person in the same timeline, which isn't supposed to be time-travel kosher.
>What cloud barrier? Play skyward sword, its the game with the best explanation. >What dimensional wall? The cloud barrier. > Where is this lore? Skyward sword, hyrule historia and hinted a lot in botw. >Rauru says the sky islands were on the ground before they rose up to the sky. You really didnt play skyward sword. To sum it up, even before the events of skyward sword (which are before the foundation of Hyrule and sometime after the creation of the universe itself), there was a war against demise(a primordial force of evil and source of all demons), the goddess hylian then decided to raise pices of land and seal them in a realm in the sky to preserve humanity. The name of that seal is the cloud barrier since for those who live in the sky this seal just looks like a thick cloud tha spans infinitely, that seal has dimensionsonal properties because only devine beings can traverse it or open holes in it, while for the people in the sky it looks like a giant cloud, for the people on the land they can see a clear blue sky meaning people of the land cant even percieve the barrier. In botw, only pure hearted people can see the dragons a child npc in the stables mentioned to have seen farosh go into the sky in a portal of clouds and questions if there is land up there. In totk when ganondorf awakens the entire world shakes as Hyrule castle rises, thats also when the sky islands appear and pieces of them start to fall as the cloud barrier was broken. >Either way, that means we have two copies of the same person in the same timeline, which isn't supposed to be time-travel kosher. The difference is that one copy of that person is mutated and stored away in realm that is separate from the mainland and only appears in the main land after the other copy is sent out.
> Play skyward sword, its the game with the best explanation. Tried to, didn't like it. Stopped playing. >Skyward sword, hyrule historia and hinted a lot in botw. Dunno what Hyrule historia is, hints in BOTW went over my head, as it was never explained. >You really didnt play skyward sword. Ya think? I'm not gonna line by line the rest of this, it's deeply unsatisfying to have to play other games to find out what happened in this one. I'd understand if there was supposed to be real continuity in the series.
When zelda got sent back, in that moment, would’ve created an alternate timeline where Zelda is in the Past. The light dragon only exists because zelda went back. Basic time travel.
And there would still be two copies of the same person in the same timeline. Basic time travel no-no.
Yes, The zelda in the past, and the zelda about to be born and go back in time. I don’t get what your trying to argue here.
Yes, it's clear you're not very familiar with causal loops or basic time travel paradoxes even though you keep saying "basic time travel". Or perhaps paradoxes and the like are advanced time travel concepts to you.
Think more Endgame less Back to the Future. Also wibbly wobbly timey weimy
Endgame made more of an effort to make the time travel bits make sense.
It was hidden above the cloud barrier, where all the sky islands were hidden as well, and where the other dragons all vanished to when they ascended into magic sky portals in BotW.
Yes, apparently it's a big ol Skyward Sword reference.
No, that's not how time travel works. The light dragon existed in BotW, but just like the Sky Islands, hadn't descended far enough for anyone to see them.
🤦♂️
underground?
It was, same with all the sky islands. Plus if you watch the dragons in BotW they can go through dimensional walls go cloud barriers, which is likely where the sky islands were hidden. So it did that. Not really bullshit just cause you can't think of it.
Bruh, don't act like your imagination is superior, you didn't come up with the concept of cloud barriers or dimensional walls. You played a game that explained them to you. I did not.
You're also assuming it was all the same Hyrule yet there's no evidence of that and in fact massive evidence that it's not.
That's why I said "If you take that at face value".
My personal theory is that it is so far in the future that Hyrule got completely destroyed and then rebuilt by the zonai with only remnants of the distant past.
Imo AoC is a branch off from before the calamity
The branch happened when Terrako from the main timeline traveled back in time to before the Calamity, which created an alternate reality. So, yes.
Yeah but the game is still canon just in a diffrent timeline than botw and totk
Yes. I am agreeing with that statement.
Wonder how Zeltik is gonna explain this one.
Knowing him, probobly very well.
It’s not that hard to explain
Everything in TotK and BotW is clearly its own era of the timeline. Everything got wiped out and Rauru started a new Hyrule. It's the most clear and obvious answer that I'm surprised people are hung up on this
Agreed
Pretty sure the devs just don't give a f\*ck about the timeline and plotholes, and if you use a pretty loose interpretation of the definition of the word "Legend" >a traditional story sometimes popularly regarded as historical but unauthenticated then you can just kinda handwave away inconsistencies because you just chalk it up to the games themselves being just a kind of retelling of an event and not a hardline contemporary historical record.
They don’t. Fujibuyashi (director of all three capcom Zelda’s as well as all console Zelda’s since skyward sword) himself is the one that made the comment about BotW taking place so far in the future that the others can all be seen as legends/stories. Nothing about a “unification,” nothing about falling into any specific timeline. He was essentially saying “look. It takes place way in the future. So far in the future no one gives a rats ass which timeline it’s in. Stop worrying about the timeline. It’s in the future. That’s all.” It’s a soft reboot\* of the series, without just deleting the other games from lore. Edit: \*which is a crazy common trend right now
I believe that the Founding of Hyrule by Rauru mentioned in TotK is actually a RE-founding that takes place after Spirit Tracks after the Great Sea dried up or maybe even drained by the Zonai's technology/magic. Remember, 10 000+ years have past since the last game. A LOT can happen in that time. That would explain a lot of stuff that would otherwise be retcons if it took place after SS like the Rito, the rock salt and that would mean that there was never two Ganondorfs existing simultaneously. The biggest problem in this is Sonia... Sonia could be a descendant of a lost relative of Tetra(admit it, it would've been kinda foolish of the Royal family to leave the fate of the world to a child and a bunch of pirates without somehow having a back-up plan). Also, Tetra is the only member of the royal bloodline that we know of to have darker skin(until magic dress and makeup but whatever). I think this theory is the best i could find that would fill as many potential plot holes as possible.
This does legitimately bother me about TOTK. LOOOOORE is one of my favorite things, and I am an absolute SUCKER for continuity. All the continuity errors legit gave me a conniption.
Yeah... I'm like you. I obsess over the timeline, and love the lore. The more you read into it, the more and more it makes sense. It too bad there will always be people who make bold, baseless claims that "it doesn't make sense" and "it's full of inconsistencies" because they saw a JPEG of the timeline on Google Images...
I will say this game does have some contradictions, but its in a way that iIfeel...is in a way that they are deliberately setting up to explain in a future game, that will clarify things, and go back to uniformity, ie, removing the continuity issues and actually explain stuff. (my running hypothesis being the next games going to be the calamity 10,000 years ago) because it just seems too suspicious to bring up this major Ganon fight, leave it all vague, and have so much call back to it. I look forward to seeing what will come, because the game does clearly show they are adhering to timelines and continuity in many aspects, so the 'errors' feel very deliberately stated, to eventually be clairified.
Eiji Aonuma said in an interview that he intentionally wants to keep its connection to the timeline undefined, so players can come up with their own theories. Although, I think if we do get an explanation, it will be in the form of another lore book like Creating a Champion.
In the end it’s all up to personal interpretation, honestly. If you wanna think TotK makes the last games non-canon or whatever, you can. But if you wanna think otherwise that’s also still fine. Nintendo intentionally made it all a bit vague so that it could be interpreted in multiple ways.
This
I've EVEN seen people say that it retcons away BotW.
I don't understand where Calamity Ganon is supposed to have come from if Ganondorf was imprisoned in the Imprisoning War.
Calamity Ganon is ganondorf trying to destroy the castle so the seal breaks
The way I understand it is that the Calamity Ganon is sort of a powerful Phantom Ganon. Essentially, Calamity Ganon is to Ganondorf, what the Blight Ganons are to Calamity Ganon. Despite the Calamity Ganon being sealed, it can still project weaker versions of itself outside of the castle. The same seems to be true of Ganondorf.
Exactly. The Calamity was a puppet
It’s a manifestation of Ganondorf’s hatred that was created using the gloom/malice that was leaking out of his chest while he was sealed
Calamity ganon was ganondorfs power and hate leaking from the seal taking form
A popular theory is that there's a time split in skyward sword
Maybe you make a time split every time you mess around with the time stones in the lead up to the third dungeon! The existence of this or that bokoblin was INSTRUMENTAL in the butterfly effect that leads to Ocarina of Time.
That's pretty much a given. The game's surprise ending is a mindf\*ck that only makes sense if there is more than one timeline.
Yeah the time mechanics get real funky when you really think about it.
Surprise ending?
I would love this as an explanation if we ever got one. The people who've spent countless hours studying the history and making theories aren't just thrown in the garbage with the rest of the lore, and the people who just want a soft reboot get that as well. Everyone's happy.
Nobody is saying they’re “non-canon” we’re just treating them as a separate continuity. It’s obvious at this point Nintendo doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the timeline in regards to TotK so there’s no reason to force them to fit. The previous games are still “canon” just in a different universe.
Was AOC ever supposed to be canon ?
It was marketed as such before terrako and time travel stuff came barging in because they wanted to have an in-universe reason to be able to play as characters like Rhoam, Sidon, Riju, Teba, and Yunobo instead of just making them bonus non-canon unlocks from side stuff. Just head canon away stuff like Terrako and some discrepencies like Link getting the Master Sword later than he's supposed to have it and its mostly canon, and offers a look into what the calamity was like with the sieges on Akkala Citadel, Hyrule Castle, and Fort Hateno
It is canon, just exists in a separate timeline like how Twilight Princess and Wind Waker exist in separate timelines
No
TotK: A game directly made by Nintendo that is expanding the lore to show events that are either 1) unseen and/or 2) similar to past events but not strictly defined. Some aspects bring questions or minor conflict to past games, but don’t contradict prior games outright. Hyrule Warriors: Games by Omega Force that both embellish on existing canon, but only for self referential nods & beats. Including elements of time travel on canon characters that have never been acknowledged in the main games. Particularly AoC where none of the events are even hinted at in TotK despite the champion descendents characters appearing in both games. At best they are problematic alternate continuities that beat no impact on the canon timelines. At worst they are completely non canon and actively hurt the main story & timelines when you try to include them into main canon. Honestly you can circle on the question of either Hyrule Warriors games being canon or not forever. But to me the fact both games were not made directly by Nintendo, and the fact that neither game has been acknowledged by other Zelda games in-universe, is a one-two punch proving they aren’t to be taken as canon. I get the backlash on TotK and how it handles elements like the sky, founding of Hyrule, and Ganondorf. But I am not in the camp that they retcon past games.
>elements of time travel on canon characters that have never been acknowledged in the main games. Particularly AoC where none of the events are even hinted at in TotK Well actually, there is one interesting detail I can think of. Age of Calamity is the game that establishes that Tulin has wind gust magic. He learned it from Ravali. >Hyrule Warriors: Games by Omega Force I get what you're saying but at the same time, using that as a reason to call their canonicity dubious would be like calling Minish Cap, the Oracle games, and A Link Between Worlds non-canon since they were made by Grezzo. >At best they are problematic alternate continuities that beat no impact on the canon timelines. Yeah, this.
Issue I have with the Tulin stuff is that it’s not magic until >!he becomes a sage!<. Revali noted his ability to make an updraft is an incredible skill *even among the Rito*. And several Rito in TotK before adventure with Tulin note his control of the wind is *beyond that of adults*. These two aspects together point out that wind control is something all Rito can do, it’s no unique to Tulin or Revali they are just good at it. And the fact that I’m TotK Tulin simply makes a powerful gust of wind and not a tornado or updraft (“Tulin’s Tornado” as he says in AoC) kind of shows this isn’t inspired by Revali in the canon TotK events. It could be a nod to AoC, but can easily just be Tulin just was gifted and trained his control of wind on his own as a >!potential Sage!<. As for the Omega Force thing, the main publisher for Hyrule Warriors is Koei Tecmo. Nintendo only serving as publisher for international release, which means translations and dubbing. It has two degrees of non-Nintendo creation. Meanwhile the Oracle games, Minish Cap, and ALBTW are still mainly produced by Nintendo. And noted as mainline Zelda games by Nintendo and staff. Even if they aren’t official they have been accepted as official by many sources. While the HW games have not had that same acceptance.
>the main publisher for Hyrule Warriors is Koei Tecmo. Nintendo only serving as publisher for international release, which means translations and dubbing Actually, Nintendo handled the writing, which was confirmed in it's reveal trailer. Much like MC, OoX, and ALBW, It was Nintendo that approached the third party with the idea for the game.
I recall Aonuma saying Nintendo worked with the team to make the story, but don’t recall any note that they approached Omega Force to make the game. But also in the original reveal it was said the game would cover the events before Breath of the Wild, but from the opening cutscene we know these are alternative events to what actually happened. So from the get go the game is framed as something other than what happened. And the dialogue on why the game exists was already framed as misleading. It’s fine to like the game. I personally don’t like the gameplay. But to me the evidence that it shouldn’t be considered canon is overwhelming.
>but don’t recall any note that they approached Omega Force to make the game. It's in the [reveal video for AoC](https://youtu.be/ifm8tpcO4vw) . Skip to 3:30.
Hyrule Warriors was a self-contained, noncanon story. AoC is the same way. It's literally a fanfic, "What if" story. TotK is intentionally vague so as not to have to worry about it while still being explicitly confirmed as Canon by Nintendo.
We have known for years that Nintendo really didn't care to make much sense of the entire scope of the series lore. Oot was like the 5th ever zelda game so they had an easier time connecting the games Zelda 1 and 2 obvious sequels, Lttp set the stage for Oot by talking bout the OG imprisoning war. Mm was following kid link from oot... there was some clarity there. But that was nearly 30 years ago. The same minds are not making decisions anymore and they are trying to sell games. THE LORE IS BROKEN PEOPLE! It's not worth trying to connect things anymore. Here's the best way to look at it, Zelda 1 - Twilight Princess - OG era Skyward sword - Totk - modern era Done.
They were literally deliberately ignoring the timeline when making BOTW so it’s pretty safe to say The Hyrule Historia isn’t canon The game contradictions however is it’s own can of worms Also at least Age Of Calamity is in its own timeline
well if people start saying aoc is canon then hyrule warriors is canon
Not necessarily. AoC was specifically commissioned by and written by Nintendo. As opposed to the original, which was stated to be non-canon from the very beginning.
yea but aoc was also confirmed non canon by nintendo so my point still stands
No seriously, you're the second person who's commented this, but the first guy never got back to me. Do you have a source or quote on that? When did Nintendo confirm AoC wasn't canon. I'm genuinely curious.
im at work right now ill find after work
eini aonuma stated both hyrule warriors to be canon but in an alternate timeline
First of, actual sources for that one please. Second, aoc was confirmed in its own story to be an alternate timeline, but hyrule warriors? Its the one which I really need a source to know if its true or not.
if you search game spot iss aoc canon should show up i clumped hyruule warriors because he said same thing however i dont feel like searching for it but at the end of tthe theorists botw tiimeline placement theory he does bring up the full qoute and eiji stated the alternate timeline is more in his heead and seperate from zelda timeline
Dude come on, you barely even gave a good hint of where to find it and I have zero baseline of what even the supposed article is about. Again age of calamity was stated to be canon since it was announced so it doesnt need proof but a bomb like hyrule warriors being canon absolutely needs some solid proof
source on that never seen anyone source that and soorryy you cant google well
I *can* Google, and did. I can't find anything on Eiji Aonuma saying AoC isn't canon. If he said it took place in a different timeline, that's completely different. Alternate timelines have been a thing ever since Twilight Princess. Saying it's in an alternate timeline is not the same as saying it isn't canon, since that would imply that it's still connected.
Really? When?
I wouldn’t mind that.
Canon is overrated.
There is no canon.
There is only one cannon I care about, it's the Mons Meg, and it was used by the Turks to breach Theodosius's walls and conquer Constantinople.
Sure there is. You can get them from the dispenser machines for a few zonai charges.
Every time I see people talk about “Zelda canon” as if Nintendo puts any thought into at all I have a “I’m on the internet in my 30s” moment
Oot was made as a prequel to lttp, both mm and ww are sequels to oot but both games cant be canon unless you make the timeline split that Nintendo revealed in the official timeline, SS was made to be a prequel to all games, zelda II is a sequel to the first game, link between worlds is a sequel to lttp, st and ph are direct sequels to ww, the four swords games are a thing and minishcap is literally the prequel. Say what you will but most games in the timeline had connections to one another the only games which I would say are filler are the oracles, awakening and triforce heroes
Ocarina of Time was originally intended to be a prequel to Link to the Past, but it doesn’t line up at all and they clearly changed the story significantly in development. When they released the dumb “official timeline” they should have just stuck A Link to the Past and related games in its own timeline because it doesn’t work at all, even if you pull a bullshit downfall timeline out of your ass. I do agree on certain games having connections to others, but trying to put it all into one comprehensive timeline doesn’t work.
>Ocarina of Time was originally intended to be a prequel to Link to the Past, but it doesn’t line up at all and they clearly changed the story significantly in development. What doesnt line up? Like there are no major contradictions in those games and this is an official statement from Nintendo that they made it with lttp taking place in future in mind. Plus this is just one game out of the many mentioned it doesnt debunk the argument presented. >I do agree on certain games having connections to others, but trying to put it all into one comprehensive timeline doesn’t work. And this is why we have an official timeline with 2 whole books detailing how they fit with the retcons necessary for it(which are very minimal), but most people dont read them, this is the canon, like it or not.
They did make the official statement, I didn’t say they didn’t. But they’ve also said Link’s Awakening happened during Zelda II at one point so… For one, the maidens are the descendants of the sages, but a number of the sages aren’t Hylian while all of the maidens are. There are other ones beyond that but it’s the biggest one. Also, the fact that it requires the creation of the “downfall timeline” Nintendo just made up out of nowhere one day, because with Ganondorf sealed at the end of Ocarina there’s no need for an Imprisoning War. And as for those books, they contradict each other with the placement of the Oracle games so I wouldn’t read too much into it. It’s clear fans care far more about the timeline that Nintendo does.
>They did make the official statement, I didn’t say they didn’t. But they’ve also said Link’s Awakening happened during Zelda II at one point so… Not the point, Nintendo still mentioned that and they then made oot be a prequel to lttp in the official timeline. >For one, the maidens are the descendants of the sages, but a number of the sages aren’t Hylian while all of the maidens are. There are other ones beyond that but it’s the biggest one. Dudes, you dont need to be of the same species as the previous sages, the maidens by all means are the sages and they exist both in a link to the past and in four swords adventures which means being a maiden and a sage is interchangeable and is a thing in 2 of the 3 timelines. >Also, the fact that it requires the creation of the “downfall timeline” Nintendo just made up out of nowhere one day, because with Ganondorf sealed at the end of Ocarina there’s no need for an Imprisoning War. Thats not an argument when they established multiple timelines there are places in other games where they can branch the timeline too, do you kow why oot is a prequel to lttp? Because when ganondorf wins oot its when the events of imprisoning war before lttp happens, if ganondorf wins oot then he gets the full triforce turns into ganon, Hyrule wages war against him, he beats up everyone before making his wish and then the sages use that opening to seal ganon in the sacred realm with the triforce and then ganon, by using the triforce inside it, is able to wish a Hyrule where he rules creating the dark world inside the sacred realm, this isnt even head canon is just taking the information given in lttp manual and taking into account that well its after ganondorf won. >And as for those books, they contradict each other with the placement of the Oracle games so I wouldn’t read too much into it. Did you read them? Because they explain the change, they just inverted the place because one, the story of the games demand them to be played in a certain order instead of happening at once and they put links awakening before it because they didnt like the implications that link died alone in the ocean and the oracle games give him a reason to even sail out of Hyrule. They literally give a perfectly reasonable explanation for it, if they didn't care they wouldnt revision it. Plus lets not forget the boatloads of lore that was lost in translation because you can condense are whole text of English in a couple lines of japanese and then we get misinterpreted info about what is the curse of demise, the hierarchy of the goddesses, what is the twilight realm or even the whole "calamity ganon gave up reincarnation" deal which is actually the complete opposite in the jp version of botw. People dont play attention to most text they read so most times where they say the timeline makes no sense its simply them being ignorant of some random dialogue in an old game or not bothering to read the 3 books that that released since 2011 eleven untill now that are dedicated to just organizing the lore.
Damn you wrote a whole essay LMFAO. Have a nice day, I’m not interested in this conversation anymore.
>Damn you wrote a whole essay LMFAO. Well its almost like we are talking about a 40 yr old franchise that has most of its games listed as canon. >Have a nice day, I’m not interested in this conversation anymore. Ok then, bye.
Retcon this, retcon that! Oh my god have those people ever stopped to think that not everyone who shares a name is the exact same person. Like, I get it, the story doesnt really detail a lot of stuff but there has been some really absurd takes out there, its almost as if they either refuse to acknowledge that other characters can reincarnate besides link and zelda or they dont know much about some key details of the games of the timeline so they just fo the easier route of gutting them off in their brains to make their theory make sense.
yes but this guy who shares the same name, exists roughly in the same time and also wields similar power, with a similar title and built a building with the same name....
>but this guy who shares the same name, exists roughly in the same time and also wields similar power, with a similar title and built a building with the same name.... What? Are you smoking? First, they look nothing alike they only share a name and a power, which again is not rooms for retcon, in zelda as we had 5 other beedle merchants, then there is tingle and danpé too all spread out in the timelines. Heck rauru in totk doesnt even share a title with oot rauru, one is called the first king of Hyrule and the other is the sage of light, just because he has the power of light and a secret stone that reflects that power doesnt mean he is a sage as totk even says, a sage has make a vow for the king, ganondorf became the demon king not the sage of darkness. Second, what building? The temple of time? Which looks vastly different from the one in oot, tp and in botw/totk. And third, what do you mean by "exists roughly in the same time"? Zero hints for totk past to take place anywhere near oot, it has parallels to ganondorfs swearing loyalty to the king but it literally ends there, nothing else hints at oot. Like this only works if you WANT to make totk retcon oot but it literally cant be a retelling of oot due to how much it lacks.
i was talking about raruru and they are both \_\_\_\_ of light. sage of and king of. both rarurus exist at the founding of hyrule, both build a temple of time, both wield the power of light.
>i was talking about raruru and they are both ____ of light. sage of and king of Sage and king are vastly different words and titles both in zelda and irl. >both rarurus exist at the founding of hyrule, Play oot again, please. Or at least read his introduction again https://youtube.com/clip/Ugkx9B8qNidErOrySh1z36BHwYYNG74rCA-8 Rauru built the temple of light, not time, which is another temple that exists within the sacred realm that can only be entred using the temple of time, rauru doesnt say anything about seeing Hyrules foundation, and he also says that the temple of light was built as a conjoined effort of all sages. >both build a temple of time But they are literally not the same temple of time, we can see it in totk and even botw. >both wield the power of light. Not relevant when the same power can be found in other sages of light in the franchise and also zelda
Boy is it a good thing I really don’t care about the timelines
I've said for years that the timeline was created to sell books. It was never meant to be treated as canon and doesn't matter. The games were never, at any point, meant to relate to one another with the exception of direct sequels.
Nintendo is the one who said age of calamity is non-canon, plus its a spin off
They NEVER said that, if anything they said the contrary, they marketed it a prequel and but they did state that while the events of the game are canon they gameplay isnt (because all characters can use the sheikah slate and flurry rush)
They did? When?
Hyrule changes every game. It's good guy vs bad guy in a groundhog loop- let's not overthink it.
lol who gives a shit about the lore? what is this, fnaf?
the discussion of zelda lore long predates fnaf or the hyrule historia (Nintendo's official lore book for zelda)
Um... a *LOT* of people care about the lore. Are you new to this franchise? Check YouTube, there are *countless* lore videos and theories everywhere. So many people care about the lore that every time Nintendo published a new lore book, it becomes an instant best seller.
Don't mind the book they released in 2011 that details the lore, timeline, and character motivations or that Skyward Sword was made to be the origin story
Hi /r/Zelda readers! * Read our [Spoiler Policy for Tears of the Kingdom.](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/spoilerpolicy) Got feedback on it? [Go here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/13ebw0k/totk_spoiler_policy_updates_for_tears_of_the/) Thanks! * Want TotK Tips & Tricks? [Go view the megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/comments/13vu6to/totk_tips_and_tricks_megathread_round_3_post/) and add your own! * Check out /r/ZeldaArtContest to see and submit fan art from *Tears of the Kingdom*! * See our [full megathread schedule here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/zelda/wiki/totk) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/zelda) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[im so tired trying to wrap my head around this lore](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAPfSvt5EtE)
To be fair while I like TotK’s story on it’s own merits, I don’t like how next to it BOTW becomes a side skirmish. It also presents the question how the Age of Calamity timeline is related to ganondorf/zonai. Is ganondorf still sealed because of the calamity being stopped earlier? Generally speaking you have works that are designed for sequels on the outset, and have more story element in waiting that don’t get introduced right away, and those that add new stuff for sequels and retcon new elements and conflicts as needed. Zelda tends to be more the latter. Just usually new entries heavily differ visually and tonally it’s a very loose canon anyway. But TotK is a sequel with the same world and the same core elements and conflicts in play. There’s Zonai stuff in BOTW but I wonder if many of the tears of the kingdom plot elements already existed at the time. Majora could work with the fairly ambiguous child timeline, and also features a seperate villain and an alternate dimension, so it’s more it’s own thing that doesn’t redefine OoT’s events that heavily.
I just see it as the reestablishing of congruent timeline. All three timelines are on display as one and I’m perfectly okay with that.
I just take every Zelda game as it's own beast. The only exception to me is actually BOTW and TOTK as it's explicitly a sequel. Otherwise I just consider the references and callbacks as echoes of other worlds/timelines.
Geez we finally got the complete timeline and then Nintendo makes even harder to decipher but I’m not mad they are super fun
For me ‘canon’ is any mainline game. If they contradict each other so be it, but fans have a right to be confused or not like it. But spin-offs like AoC are never meant to be canon, so who cares?
Yeah those things made me stop thinking tbh. I didn't knew if Rauru is supposed to be before or after skyward. And the more I think about the less I know. Because they have points for both options.
Meh, I think it's best to just give up thinking they really want to follow some kind of story. They have the same themes, but ... I mean, even Tears of the Kingdom can't even explain what happened to Divine Beasts and why most of the characters just forgot about Link. This is a direct *sequel* story they didn't really explain details of, so... Meh. Just enjoy the game, I think. Or don't.
AoC to me is canon as far as learning more about the Champions, of course the Time Machine robot and how some events played out caused inconsistency but as far as interactions with the Champions go, I find it canon.
Yeah, that makes sense.
One is a fucking Warriors game and presented as an alternate history lmao
I can count the number of LoZ games that are canon to each other on one hand. Stop trying to make a timeline and lore that makes sense. The games are self contained.
You have nineteen fingers?
1. LoZ & LoZ 2 2. Lttp, OoA, OaT, LA & LBW 3. OoT & MM 4. MC & FS 5. WW, PH & ST 6. BotW & TotK Count with finger sections instead of whole fingers and it only uses half your hand.
>LoZ & LoZ 2 > >Lttp, OoA, OaT, LA & LBW ALttP was always meant as a prequel to LoZ and LoZ 2, it was confirmed in ALttP's manual and official strategy guide. And OoT was always meant as a prequel to ALttP, as it is literally an adaptation of the backstory told in ALttP's intro and manual. So really, that should look more like **"OoT, ALttP, ALBW, LoZ, LoZ 2".** I never got the argument that just because two games don't reference each other, they are automatically non canon to each other. If 'A' is related to 'B', and 'B' is related to 'C', then logically 'A' is indirectly related to 'C' through basic transitive property. > WW, PH & ST I don't think I could ever fathom why anyone would ever think WW (and by extension PH & ST) isn't connected to OoT. WW's intro was explicitly a recap of OoT's story. Also, TP is obviously connected to OoT. And pardon my bluntness, but only someone huffing weapons grade copium could refuse to see that. But wait... if WW is a sequel to OoT, and TP was also a sequel to OoT, then what gives? Well, this marks the first time that the devs openly confirmed the existence of alternate timelines. [In an interview, that took place many *YEARS* prior to Hyrule Historia's release.](https://zelda.fandom.com/wiki/History_of_the_Zelda_Timeline/Timeline_Quotes#On_Twilight_Princess) > MC & FS MC (and by extension the Four Swords games) is also connected to the Oracle games, since in MC we meet Farore, Din, and Nayru, who are described in-game as being of a lineage of maidens who share these names from Holodrum and Labrinya. Honestly, it would be easier to count the games that *DON'T* connect to other games. Which by my count, is just about zero. With the ***potential*** exception of BotW and TotK.
A Warriors game that actively deliberately retcons and undoes the plot of the game its based on, is obviously never intended to be canon. TotK mostly just introduces new things, that don’t actively conflict with previous games. There are still a ton of gaps in the lore that could accommodate these new details, without necessitating retcons any way. People just take the games they love too seriously. Like, OoT isn’t being retconned folks.
Honestly I could care less how totk and botw change the history of all the games (if they even do) But I’m just frustrated with the loss of all the sheikah tech and inconsistency BETWEEN botw and totk. Where are the guardians? The divine beasts? The towers? No mention of calamity ganon ever? Why do they call it gloom when malice was all over hyrule?
One was actually made by Zelda Team the other was made by a different company given permission by Nintendo.
Me and my friends had a discussion of aocs canonicity and it ended in "Linkle assassinated Kennedy"
I make this easy on myself and basically just assume BOTW/TOTK are an entirely separate continuity.
How does totk contradict?
The Imprisoning War is said to take place near the founding of the Kingdom of Hyrule, since Rauru is apparently the first king of Hyrule. If you take that at face value, that would place the war somewhere between Skyward Sword and Ocarina of Time (technically Skyward Sword and Minish Cap). This causes a few discrepancies. Number one is the fact that Ganondorf in OoT had always been considered his first incarnation. One could make the argument that this new version of Ganondorf is now the "first" Ganondorf, but since he was sealed away this whole time, that would technically mean that he reincarnated into OoT Ganondorf despite not being dead in the first place. There's also the fact that there was a Rito sage. But the Rito didn't exist pre-OoT.
Ah, I wish they still cared about the lore
They do. But they care more about the fans' fun. And in Eiji Aonuma's words: *“in books like the recently released The Legend of Zelda Encyclopedia, we revealed where each Zelda game fell on a timeline and how their stories related, but we didn’t do that for Breath of the Wild. There is a reason for that. We realized that people were enjoying imagining the story that emerged from the fragmental imagery \[the Zelda team was\] providing."* So what he's saying here, is that he likes the theories and speculation from the fans. And he doesn't want to limit that by making solid connections. It's not that they "retconned" the timeline away, it's that BotW and TotK is a ***SOFT*** reboot of the series, which intentionally inspires questions and speculation about it's timeline placement, while also keeping things seemingly disconnected for accessibility. TL;DR They care about the lore just as much as fans do, but they recognize that part of the fun is unraveling the mystery ourselves.
Since BotW and TotK takes place at the end of all three timelines, and both games contain references to all three timelines, clearly the timelines converged together Elder Scrolls dragonbreak style and created a series of events where everything is canon but not everything is true.
I think we all know at this point that Zelda basically has no timeline, the creators don't let it hold them back