I just thought of something. Since there aren't Rupees and Hearts hidden in Grass anymore...
that means the Minish are extinct
;_;
damnit Link, you had ONE JOB!
;__;
Please remind me, how does the lack of rupees and hearts tell us this? 😞
I just thought of something. Since there aren't Rupees and Hearts hidden in Grass anymore...
that means the Minish are extinct
;_;
damnit Link, you had ONE JOB!
I don't think this deserve its own thread so I will post this video here:
https://youtu.be/jYiRDXwXgJ0
![]()
7 : 02 > "those areas have not been yet unlocked"
Did he just pointed out the black areas ?!!
Zelda doesn't have a timeline, guys. They threw something together but it's BS. It's like a reimagining every single game. No continuity whatsoever.
;__;
Please remind me, how does the lack of rupees and hearts tell us this? 😞
Zelda doesn't have a timeline, guys. They threw something together but it's BS. It's like a reimagining every single game. No continuity whatsoever.
Zelda doesn't have a timeline, guys. They threw something together but it's BS. It's like a reimagining every single game. No continuity whatsoever.
There is a timeline but generally they make it loosely tie together after the fact. How much after the fact depends on the game and producer.Zelda doesn't have a timeline, guys. They threw something together but it's BS. It's like a reimagining every single game. No continuity whatsoever.
Sorry but I'm holding an official book here that says otherwise.
Long ago, there existed a kingdom where a golden power lay hidden. It was a prosperous land blessed with green forests, tall mountains, and peace.
But one day, a man of great evil found the golden power and took it for himself. With its strength at his command, he spread darkness across the kingdom. But then, when all hope had died, and the hour of doom seemed at hand...
...a young boy clothed in green appeared as if from nowhere. Wielding the blade of evil's bane, he sealed the dark one away and gave the land light.
This boy, who traveled through time to save the land, was known as the Hero of Time.
Zelda doesn't have a timeline, guys. They threw something together but it's BS. It's like a reimagining every single game. No continuity whatsoever.
No, he speaks about the blue areas.I don't think this deserve its own thread so I will post this video here:
https://youtu.be/jYiRDXwXgJ0
![]()
7 : 02 > "those areas have not been yet unlocked"
Did he just pointed out the black areas ?!!
Zelda doesn't have a timeline, guys. They threw something together but it's BS. It's like a reimagining every single game. No continuity whatsoever.
No, he speaks about the blue areas.
The Great Plateau fits roughly 10 times into the map both horizontally and vertically, so it is 1% of the total.
Well, the threw something together. But i agree. Every game is actually just reimagining the game. I don't understand why people even bother with it.
The Minish were the ones who did that
What about this then ? (I know someone already checked on previous page but multiple check won"t hurt)
https://youtu.be/dar1t_L2wBk?t=2m26s
2:27 > Chico is saying something about the dot on map but I don't understand it (english isn't my first language).
Often wondered about this too. Some people seem desperate to have some semblance of continuity of a much loved series. Personally I can't see it or see any point to it.
I like when they do things like the introduction to Wind Waker but on the whole, having multiple time lines etc does seem like a stretch just to tie things together for some of the fans.
Zelda games have a wonderful atmosphere this isn't helped or hindered by having some pseudo continuity shoe-horned in as an afterthought.
It's probably true that Nintendo didn't gaf about continuity when they were making the games, and only created the timeline in response to fans. That doesn't mean that no timeline can be interpreted. Whether or not the creators intended it, people can have fun speculating and interpreting things in the lore. Really there is no definitive answer because it's a work of fiction, completely open to interpretation.
I have a friend who prefers to think of it as the exact same story, told by a different person each time. Each person missing or including details which makes their version unique. That's an interpretation of the series, and he's entitled to that interpretation. Doesn't make his interpretation any more or less valid than my preferred timeline interpretation.
Sorry but I'm holding an official book here that says otherwise.
Even if you're a death of the author kinda guy and disregard extra-textual commentary from the creators of the games, there's still a fairly obvious continuity for a lot of the games. Every mainline EAD game since OOT has an obvious spot. The problem is shoehorning the pre OOT games into the new set up. But denying it outright is blatantly wrong.
Whether they give much of shit about it is a totally different question.
windwaker is all about being connected to ocarina, Majoras mask is a direct sequel, skyward sword is written as an origin story. TP is is clearly after ocarina. Those things aren't really thrown together but the basis of the settings of those games.
I agree with most of this. Zelda games rarely directly connect back to a previous game. Rather the past events are seen more as legends than direct connections. I believe this game will be no different.
windwaker is all about being connected to ocarina, Majoras mask is a direct sequel, skyward sword is written as an origin story. TP is is clearly after ocarina. Those things aren't really thrown together but the basis of the settings of those games.
What about this then ? (I know someone already checked on previous page but multiple check won"t hurt)
https://youtu.be/dar1t_L2wBk?t=2m26s
2:27 > Chico is saying something about the dot on map but I don't understand it (english isn't my first language).
Often wondered about this too. Some people seem desperate to have some semblance of continuity of a much loved series. Personally I can't see it or see any point to it.
I like when they do things like the introduction to Wind Waker but on the whole, having multiple time lines etc does seem like a stretch just to tie things together for some of the fans.
Zelda games have a wonderful atmosphere this isn't helped or hindered by having some pseudo continuity shoe-horned in as an afterthought.
to me they are saying that its more stuff to do behind the red pin, now how far down behind it is the question.
But seein how the map area is going outside into the Black areas it makes it look like there is even more stuff into the black area of the map.
Zelda doesn't have a timeline, guys. They threw something together but it's BS. It's like a reimagining every single game. No continuity whatsoever.
It's probably true that Nintendo didn't gaf about continuity when they were making the games, and only created the timeline in response to fans. That doesn't mean that no timeline can be interpreted. Whether or not the creators intended it, people can have fun speculating and interpreting things in the lore. Really there is no definitive answer because it's a work of fiction, completely open to interpretation.
I have a friend who prefers to think of it as the exact same story, told by a different person each time. Each person missing or including details which makes their version unique. That's an interpretation of the series, and he's entitled to that interpretation. Doesn't make his interpretation any more or less valid than my preferred timeline interpretation.
The other day I said arguing with people who say Nintendo doesn't have new IPs is like arguing with flat earthers. The same applies to timeline deniers.Zelda doesn't have a timeline, guys. They threw something together but it's BS. It's like a reimagining every single game. No continuity whatsoever.
I look at that map once more and discovered that those blue lines (boundaries of each region?) extend into the black areas. I think this indicates that the black areas could be actually hidden parts of the map instead of being map boundary. Of course, this speculation can be wrong, but if those black areas are really unexplored areas, this could mean the map of BotW can be similar / bigger than the map of XCX provided that the blue areas are already a tad small than the map of XCX.
The other day I said arguing with people who say Nintendo doesn't have new IPs is like arguing with flat earthers. The same applies to timeline deniers.
The very first Zelda sequel was connected chronologically with Zelda. Just like ALTTP, OoT, MM, WW, TP, SS and ALBW were connected to each other. Even Link's Awakening and the Oracles are connected to other Zelda games as are the DS Zeldas obviously. This isn't something that Nintendo reps had to tell us, this was in the actual games and manuals.I don't deny there is a timeline because Nintendo said there is one. What I will state is that the timeline is shoehorned in as an after thought for fans. It is pointless, but if people enjoy it, that's fair enough.
I think we're all missing an important point. The game is called The Legend of Zelda for a reason. We aren't playing the actual events, we are playing legends based on events. Think about the legends about the Greek gods. They rarely matched up with each other, and were purposefully vague. Zelda is no different. I think we all get hung up on "this place lines up with this place or that place on such and such map", or "this event happened 100 years after this other event", but in reality, these games are myth and legend. They aren't going to match up (except for the obvious ones that are direct sequels).
Can't quite tell if you're being serious or just mocking the people who champion this line of thought. If you really believe this, you're wrong. There's explicit and officially canon continuity between the games (even if there wasn't originally), and they are now being deliberately written with this in mind even if that wasn't the case originally. I think OoT is when they started thinking about this for real, as it was written as a prequel to ALttP. Then it got even more explicit with WW (the flood being used as a last resort due to adult timeline OoT Link disappearing and Hyrule being left without a hero), TP (OoT Link is there in spirit form, etc) and SS (it's a VERY explicit origin story for everything else). This isn't stuff just thrown into the timeline after the fact, it's actually in the games.
Now, that doesn't mean they necessarily care very much about Hyrule's geography being consistent, etc, but that's different.
Nintendo didn't originally think about it that way, clearly. But they do now, and they explicitly write the stories to fit that now. Then, yeah, they've retroactively tried to make all the old games make sense in the bigger picture (before that existed) by coming up with this three-way-split timeline, but your friend's interpretation (of what the series is doing these days, at least) is in fact officially invalid. This isn't speculation and theorizing, it's official word right from Nintendo's mouth.
I will concede that they are connected, I never doubted that. I just don't think the games are intentionally following any kind of predetermined story or path.The very first Zelda sequel was connected chronologically with Zelda. Just like ALTTP, OoT, MM, WW, TP, SS and ALBW were connected to each other. Even Link's Awakening and the Oracles are connected to other Zelda games as are the DS Zeldas obviously. This isn't something that Nintendo reps had to tell us, this was in the actual games and manuals.
.
WW very directly and explicitly connects back to the time travel shenanigans in OoT as being the entire reason for the Great Sea even existing.
And all that, yes. Direct sequels are one thing, but yeah, SS was explicitly written as the origin story for pretty much everything that happens in all the other games. This "it's just different retellings of the same legend" thing might have been the case once, but it absolutely isn't anymore. The official stance now is that all the games are separate events that really happened, placed along a timeline (splitting into three after OoT).
I look at that map once more and discovered that those blue lines (boundaries of each region?) extend into the black areas. I think this indicates that the black areas could be actually hidden parts of the map instead of being map boundary. Of course, this speculation can be wrong, but if those black areas are really unexplored areas, this could mean the map of BotW can be similar / bigger than the map of XCX provided that the blue areas are already a tad small than the map of XCX.
Edit: The map which is a tad smaller than XCX is the one in VGA footage. The black areas can be included in that map, so it may not affect the original analysis.
Often wondered about this too. Some people seem desperate to have some semblance of continuity of a much loved series. Personally I can't see it or see any point to it.
I like when they do things like the introduction to Wind Waker but on the whole, having multiple time lines etc does seem like a stretch just to tie things together for some of the fans.
Zelda games have a wonderful atmosphere this isn't helped or hindered by having some pseudo continuity shoe-horned in as an afterthought.
Yes because direct references to the Hero of Time in Wind Waker are just bullshit, right? Or the fact that Link ended Oot with the ocarina of time and Epona and started Majora's Mask with the ocarina of time and Epona, right? Or how Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks have named references and in game photos of previous characters. You guys can not like the timeline, but saying it's just nonsense either shows you've never played the games or covering your ears and eyes because you don't like it.
Now I admit they probably weren't thinking of it waay back with the first 3 (although Zelda 2 is literally an older Zelda 1 Link), but since Oot, only the fourth game, they were
Actually the VGA map had clearly defined oceans on the eastern border, and since the world looks largely the same in the new map I would imagine that what we've seen at E3 is not the complete map. Unless of course some of those "province" border lines extend into open water in the ocean, which is surely a possibility.
I think so. Holy shit. I thought those black areas are map boundary, not areas hasn't been shown yet. Now I understand why they said Great Plateau is only 1%.
Its more of an inferred thing. Dont need it but cool that its there if you do.Hm, I'd forgotten that. Thank you. That's the case throughout all the games?
Where'd you hear that? That would mean this game is huge!
Often wondered about this too. Some people seem desperate to have some semblance of continuity of a much loved series. Personally I can't see it or see any point to it.
I like when they do things like the introduction to Wind Waker but on the whole, having multiple time lines etc does seem like a stretch just to tie things together for some of the fans.
Zelda games have a wonderful atmosphere this isn't helped or hindered by having some pseudo continuity shoe-horned in as an afterthought.
humans are just garbage at multiplication
Nintendo chose the 1-2% number, plateau is about a percent of the area, and has 4 shrines (which would be slightly less than 2% if there's "over a hundred")
the game is gonna be big enough, no one should make up fake expectations for it that it clearly won't deliver on
I think it's in the off-plateau video, when Bill is placing markers he's pointing the tablet northwest, and the visible mountains that were furthest away could not be marked (as indicated by the little red dot vanishing) which would mean that they are not playable area.
Game is already huge. No need to pretend it's going to be way bigger.
Super-giant-Gohma? Yeah, possible. It can also be that big-ass guardian at the end of the trailer.
Plateau regions fits into the overall map ~90 time which equals about 1.11%.
It might not be obvious, but it's there all the same.I will concede that they are connected, I never doubted that. I just don't think the games are intentionally following any kind of predetermined story or path.
My point is that it isn't obvious, at least to me. I have't played every single game but I have played most of them. I don't have a problem with a timeline as such, I don't think it is important.