Zelda Wiki
    Nintendo doesn't care about the timeline, and didn't consider it when writing BoTW
    • Nintendo might not care... And?

      Honestly, I, myself, no longer care about the timeline. I see everything regarding continuity from an out of universe standpoint instead of an in-universe one.

      But as long as games reference each other and there is some semblance of a timeline, people won't stop theorizing about it. And that's perfectly fine. Nintendo not caring won't change that, potential disappointment won't change that.

      It's the people who tell others not to theorize because Nintendo doesn't care who are the problem, don't pay attention to them :B

      The post was edited 1 time, last by FroyoDragon: 10/10 wording ().

    • Nintendo has nobody to blame but themselves for the timeline. When Miyamoto was asked in 1998, he could have said that there's no timeline, but instead he gave the Miyamoto Order. When Aonuma was asked in 2004, he could have said that there's no timeline, but instead he said that there's a secret timeline. When Aonuma was asked in 2011, he could have said that there's no timeline, instead he again said that there's a secret timeline. That's three chances Nintendo had to put an end to timeline speculation, and each time, they fanned the flames of timeline speculation.
      "The (Star Wars) EU is a bloated, wretched mess."
      - Jedi Master Sagan
    • Yeah I don't think theorizing needs Nintendo's approval, it will inevitably happen anyway. They have already approved it by going along with the split timeline and HH anyway.

      I also really doubt it means that the timelines don't exist or that HH is suddenly not canon. Aonuma said it isn't a high priority for them, that's different from saying it doesn't matter. With that said, yes, it being of a lower priority still shows that they haven't fully embraced the timelines.

      Nintendo's video game design philosophy is gameplay first when it comes to Zelda if not most of their IPs, and they don't want that to be held back by other factors. Take that as you will, it's how they reason.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by ich Will ().

    • Cajbaj wrote:

      I HEEEAAAAVILY disagree with this statement here. I think telling us stifles the discussion (and arguments) people like this community for.

      In principle, maybe; in practice, the discussion seems to have largely bottlenecked, with most people inclined to look into the matter having long since done so and drawn their respective conclusions. If the timeline prediction thread in the Theorizing section is any indication, every scrap of BotW has been pored over dozens of times in increasingly minute scope (to an absurd level, in my opinion), and yet all this has accomplished is creating multiple feuding camps who have each, again, come to their own conclusions.

      Now, true, we do still have the Champion's Ballad, but unless that offers tangible evidence pointing in a concrete direction, it ultimately won't change anything.

      Discussion and debate in and of themselves are wonderful things that should be facilitated and encouraged wherever possible, but only if they continue to be discussions and debates. When everything's been picked clean to the point of bleaching and the only result is several deeply-rooted opposing camps, it doesn't benefit anyone.
    • Kaylin wrote:

      Feranel wrote:

      ^But... there is no challenge..
      Y'all are trying to convince eachother of something that does not exist. There is no true timeline to figure out. :B
      I know a number of people who would find this incredibly offensive...
      It's not his fault though. It's Nintendo's fault for throwing the timeline out the window, the fans should be offended at that. :x
      You may disagree with me on this thread, but I can guarantee you'll agree with me on another :3nod

      "That knight was none other than you, Link."
    • But there's the rub- Nintendo hasn't "thrown the timeline out." They merely said they A) don't consider it a high priority at any time, B) thusly did not really take it into account when putting BotW together, and C) still have yet to decide where it actually is. Nowhere in any of that is there anything indicating that the timeline has been retconned out, and if that was their intention, then they need to come right out and say it in explicit terms for all to hear. Until then, the timeline's as much a factor now as it was when they unveiled it in 2012, so everyone should be proceeding accordingly.

      And that, again, is why Nintendo needs to make and execute a definitive decision here. Is BotW on the DT? Great. CT? Great. AT? Less great, but fine. New timeline? Cool. Merged timeline? Regrettable and creatively bankrupt, but fine. Separate from the timeline, a la Hyrule Warriors? Confusing, but fine. Nowhere, because the timeline is no longer a factor going forward? Again, regrettable, but so be it. That leaves us with, appropriately enough, seven options- it can't be that hard to pick and announce one, and sitting on the matter benefits no one.
      Black Velvet Inferno

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Setras ().

    • That's what I mean, they haven't made a definitive decision: because the timeline isn't important enough to them. They didn't consider the timeline when writing/developing Breath of the Wild: because the timeline isn't important enough to them. It's abundantly clear that they don't really care.

      The timeline, is however, important to certain fans and theorists. Which is why I'm confused why theorists aren't pissed that their favorite aspect of the series (lore/timeline) is being grossly neglected.

      Especially since they're leading fans on with lore books like the Art and Artifacts and the new Zelda Encyclopedia that's coming out, then showing disinterest by not even knowing where Breath of the Wild takes place. It's kinda like someone asking you out on a date (leading you on), then getting cold feet afterwards and ignores you. It's kinda hilarious, that even the chief of the development department, Mr. Aonuma himself, doesn't even know where Breath of the Wild takes place!

      I'm not even a hardcore timeline theorist, so personally, I don't mind that Nintendo doesn't care about the timeline. But if I was one, I'd be extremely pissed off at Nintendo for neglecting it after hyping it up, and rightly so.
      You may disagree with me on this thread, but I can guarantee you'll agree with me on another :3nod

      "That knight was none other than you, Link."

      The post was edited 4 times, last by HylianKnight ().

    • Mr. Aonuma not knowing where Breath of the Wild fits in the timeline, is like a chef not knowing what ingredients he used to cook his food.

      It's embarrassing!

      They would have been better off coming out and saying something like:

      "Okay guys, so we're not invested in the timeline anymore. BUT we do know the direction we're going with the overall lore. Breath of The Wild is the start of a new chapter".

      At least that's better than what we got with Mr. Aonuma basically saying:

      "Beats the shit outta me, I dunno where it fits, we'll fit it in somewhere later... maybe... dunno lol".
      You may disagree with me on this thread, but I can guarantee you'll agree with me on another :3nod

      "That knight was none other than you, Link."

      The post was edited 2 times, last by HylianKnight ().

    • The timeline isn't "the ingredients to a chef's masterpiece". The timeline is like that one spice that nobody can pronounce that gets dashed atop the masterpiece for the few who really want it.

      For the most part, I don't like Nintendo saying where all the games are, because it leads to issues of them being... wrong about their own games. Which is like... they made them so technically they can't be wrong, but it also just hurts fans wno apparently know the lore as presented in-game better than the devs.

      But with BoW specifically, with the way its story is designed, it doesn't need to be connected definitively into any one timeline to work, unlike some games like the WW trilogy or direct sequels. But, because "the real timeline" already exists, Nintendo might as well place BoW in it.
    • It's not so much that the technicality timeline itself is neglected, it's more so that the chief developer doesn't know the direction the lore is going in. They're kinda just making things up as they go along. One moment they're hyping up lore books like Art and Artifacts and the Hyrule Encylopedia, the next moment they have no idea when Breath of the Wild takes place. It just seems really sloppy, wishy washy, and gives the impression that they don't really care about the lore.

      It seems disrespectful to fans who are really invested in the lore.
      You may disagree with me on this thread, but I can guarantee you'll agree with me on another :3nod

      "That knight was none other than you, Link."

      The post was edited 2 times, last by HylianKnight ().

    • MORPHRELINK wrote:

      Feranel wrote:

      ^But... there is no challenge..
      Y'all are trying to convince eachother of something that does not exist. There is no true timeline to figure out.
      So? It's a game (Games are by definition meant to be challenging, and engaging) the story itself isn't real. However, for me, to enjoy the game more authentically and immerse myself into the world that Miyamoto has created, If I want to peace together it's history through each game, Then I'll do that. Especially for a game that encourages its players to think outside the box.

      Gamers themselves exploit the mechanics to better suit their liking all the time. Finding glitches and work-arounds to play the game in a way that the devs never intended.

      Respectfully, by the end of the day, Theorizing the timelines are just as much a part of the game play as the mechanics of the game itself in my eyes. Regardless of devs intent or lack thereof.
      Im not stopping you. Go for it. Have fun. Like HylianKnight said, more power to you!

      Just saying the heavy discussion of the timeline placement just lost the canon goal of every theorist out there. There is none as Aonuma stated for Botw. So all the theorizing may continue, but its now not that serious anymore because instead of figuring out the secret canon placement, its now convincing others of your own fan placement.

      I think this will make theorizing much more peaceful than some of the discussions I have seen because some people can get really frustrated when they think the figured out everything and back it up with "prove" from the game or words the developers once said.
      Right now all this "prove" is gone, because the team didnt make any decisions specifically to keep the timeline placement intact. Aonuma just created the game without thinking much about it at all.

      Also I know for some this is bad news, but for a lot of people this is good news and others really dont care actually..
      ~ Founder of the 2017 S.S. Spoilerfree Zelda Ship ~
    • Point is:
      Yes, they can pick an arbitrary timeline and plonk it in there.
      But it's just semantics. They chose 10.000+ years to basically make the entire narrative separate from anything else in the series and not let it be bogged down by questions like "wait where was all this Sheikah tech in OoT". Whatever they do, no timeline placement will have any significant impact.

      For all intents and purposes, BOTW is separate from the timeline.

      We can't even speak of "timeline theorizing for the sake of itself" because normally that's fueled by the desire to find a hidden message left by the devs, a cryptic clue, a fat wink.

      We've been told in no uncertain terms that there's no such message, so honestly, why care.

      Partial signature credit to Eternalegend

      The post was edited 1 time, last by gamtos ().

    • I suppose this really is a big example of "you can't please everyone". I never liked the timeline anyway, so I guess I'm biased there and think that there shouldn't be one. I feel like every game should be judged individually. For instance, Wind Waker is more poignant if you know what Hyrule is, but since each game is separate there was never a feeling like we wouldn't go back to Hyrule. I'm positive that's why BotW is so far in the future: it wants to use Zelda lore and themes, but it doesn't want to feel constricted in how its events have to effect the timeline as a whole, because that was never a priority.
    • insert timeline tirade here
      A timeline of sorts was a factor as far back as TAoL- the latter was, obviously, a direct sequel to TLoZ. ALttP was then a prequel to that, while LA was stated to be connected to it, and OoT was then intended as a prequel to ALttP. Now, granted, the latter connections were confirmed purely through developer statements, so you could strictly speaking regard each game as its own entity and lose nothing, but still, they could also be put together without much issue in the same way. They weren't really "hiding" anything.

      It was around the time of MM where explicit connections started coming to the forefront, as the latter was quite obviously a sequel to OoT by design. Granted, this was due in large part to them reusing OoT's assets to save time and money, but it still stands.

      The OoX games had no firm placement themselves, but clearly connected to each other to tell a coherent (if flexible) story, and the ending with Link sailing away leads seamlessly into LA and makes them its logical prequels.

      The Four Sword Saga was the same way- no firm placement in and of themselves (with the closest being a statement that FS was the earliest game at the time), but obvious ties between each other with TMC coming first, then FS, then FSA.

      WW was loudly proclaiming its status as an OoT sequel right out of the gates with direct allusions to the Hero of Time and the events of OoT, and PH and ST were quite obviously its direct sequels.

      TP was a bit of an oddball loner, but again, it had clear allusions sprinkled throughout to both OoT and MM, strongly suggesting connections to them.

      SS was very clearly stated to be an OoT prequel prior to release and ended up being the tale of the forging of the Master Sword and the founding of Hyrule.

      ALBW was made from the ground up to tie back to ALttP and come after it.

      Even TFH squeaked by with a statement the day before it was released that it was a sequel to ALBW.

      To prefer to view the games as their own entities with no connections to each other is fine- to each their own. But to try and assert that there were never any kind of connections between any of the games and that Nintendo never put in those connections is objectively untrue.

      And that's precisely why, at this point, this wishy-washy attitude they're taking with BotW is pretty grating. They've had ample opportunity across the series' history to squash any notion of a timeline; they have not done so, ergo they have to at least acknowledge that it's a factor. They've had ample opportunity to take "side games" like the Four Sword Saga and TFH and put them in a separate continuity; they chose not to do so, so suddenly deciding that this newest main series entry doesn't get a slot would just boggle the mind. And if they were going to decide that BotW isn't on the timeline or even that the timeline is no longer a thing, fine- but they've had ample opportunity to do that as well, and haven't.

      Bottom line- whatever their decision ends up being, they have to make a decision and inform everyone what it is. It's just not practical or sensible to sit on the matter.
    • Nintendo has little interest in placing BotW anywhere, but they've had fans convince them before. When fans theorize, they actually come to at least fairly accurate conclusions that Nintendo's obviously went along with before, to a certain degree at least.

      So again, it's not like Nintendo disapproves of the timelines because they prioritize gameplay first when developing. And even if they did, as I said, it's not like they haven't been convinced before. The point being, theorizing isn't pointless. But I'm repeating myself for like the second time now.

      I guess you can interpret the statement how you like, it can be fuel for those that don't approve of the timelines or it can be seen as the same old Nintendo doing what they do. Last time I checked, BotW wasn't impossibly difficult to place in a timeline anyway

      The post was edited 2 times, last by ich Will: Typo ().