Very well spoken sir, and I couldn't agree more. If the Fallen "Timeline" is possible, then so are the "timelines" that spawn every time any player ever sees a "Game Over" screen in a game. Clearly Nintendo is referring to some sort of alternate reality as the Fallen Timeline, which is a different concept that doesn't mesh well with the other two timelines because it originated from different rules entirely. I think you're probably spot on with your speculation as to why they slapped the Fallen Timeline in the canon lore of the series.
I've always seen the Fallen Timeline as less of a "splinter" which formed during the final battle with Ganon in Ocarina of Time and more of a "twin timeline" to the original one that exists *parallel* to it's counterpart serving as a "mirror" of sorts with events that are intentionally meant to be opposite to the ones seen in the Adult and Child timelines. Basically speaking when the Golden Goddesses created the Zelda universe they created 2 twin timelines that perfectly mirrored eachother in every way until the pivotal point where Ganon's defeat would usher Zelda to split the timelines. As part of their "divine plan" the Golden Goddesses literally created 2 opposite mirror timelines so that in one events would lead into a timesplit while the other remained unaffected. Of course going with this interpretation implies the Goddesses's willingness to let Link die in order to do it so i can understand hesitation to reach this conclusion but given the fact that this is by far the only *logical* explanation i could ever imagine for such a specific set of events to take place it is the only real solution to justify the existence of the Fallen Timeline.
@@dennisdesormier6886 ...because the mirror timelines where created at the *beginning* of Time itself and not at a specific point during the already established timelines. When we're playing Skyward Sword, The Minish Cap and Four Sword we're looking at the events of 2 seperate timelines happening *simultaneously* all the way to the final battle with Ganon where the outcome would differ leading to both Zelda's splitting of that timeline and Ganon's defeat of Link. This is the only way we can rationally justify all 3 timelines as been real without the "what if" problem that comes along with the exact point of origin for the Downfall Timeline.
@@javiervasquez625 That still doesn't make any sense. You've done a whole bunch of mental gymnastics to come up with a headcanon, that, as far as I know, has no actual basis in the games, and the only thing you've accomplished is shifting the explanation for the Fallen Hero timeline from "The multiverse is canon is the Zelda universe" to "the goddesses did some weird timeline nonsense for no apparent reason". Honestly, the way I see it, coming up with an in-universe explanation is far more trouble than it's worth. Ratatoskr's reasoning for why Nintendo did it is good enough for me.
@@Draconich ...until you realize Ratatoskr didn't solve anything given he too also shares NO BASIS within the games to come up with a Multiverse scenario that Nintendo has never even suggested explains Link's sudden death at Ganon's hands. All you're telling me with this comment is that you prefer to *blindly* swallow the words of the popular guy with the hundred thousand subscriber count than a random nobody who's willing to consider all possibilities provided by Nintendo instead of just saying "Multiverse there ya go problem solved" and calling it a day. Next time why not admit you don't like thinking deeply and just go with the flow like a good TH-camr fanboy?
I heard this theory one time: The triforce grants a wish to its holder, and in OOT, it is split in 3 and held by Zelda Link and Ganondorf. At the climax of the battle, all three of them felt so strongly and were of such determination that they subconsciously tried to wish with the triforce. Since the seperate pieces were all wished upon at once with this strength, they activated despite not being complete, and the triforce split the universe in three in order to satisfy each wish. Link wanted nothing more than to defeat Ganon, so he did, and the adult timeline is created in which he is sent back in time, disappearing from the world. Zelda wanted to protect Hyrule and its people, so the child timeline was created to which Link returns and Ganondorf was never able to conquer Hyrule. Ganon wanted to defeat Link, so he does, and the fallen hero timeline is created. Perhaps doesn't make the most logical sense with all of the events and info in the games, but I think it's the nicest explanation for the fallen hero timeline's existence.
That’s actually one of the better explanations I’ve read to justify the fallen timeline. I’d take it a step further and say that Zelda’s wish was to defeat Ganon but Link’s wish was to have a childhood that was taken from him, so that’s what planted the idea in Zelda‘s head to send him back in time.
i really like this idea! rather than just chalking the timeline up to the failure of link, it gives the power to ganon, which is what makes the timeline interesting. in a way, with this interpretation, Zelda, Link, and Ganon become separated across time in their own respective victories. it makes more sense as a struggle for power, with the final battle being the critical moment. the triforce is unable to grant any one of the three wishes as the primary one, so instead - it grants all three, separately.
@DinoDM and then you have the adult and child timeliness for Zelda and Link's wishes. The adult timeline leads us into WW and the child timeline takes us into MM. The aspect of the fallen timeline kicks off with LttP which explains how Ganon was able to have his wish granted. He was able to enter the Sacred Realm and upon touching the triforce, he turned the Sacred into the Dark World.
There's also one where I accidentally reflected Koume's fire beam into the ground I was standing on.... yeah, let go of that shield button QUICK if you do that. XD
I always interpreted the fallen hero timeline as this: Link falls specifically in the final battle with Ganon, not earlier. By this point, he has already set free all of the sages, and even if he falls, the sages are capable of sealing ganon as seen in the Alttp intro cutscene. The reason why there aren't more splits like this could be because Oot is the only game on which if Link falls, Hyrule continues to exist. On every other game there is not another force capable of stopping Ganon, resulting in the "end" of the timeline.
LttP is a sequel to Four Sword Adventures. It fits beautifully together when placed there on the timeline. There must have been an earlier timeline split, either in Skyward Sword, or following the events of Minish Cap.
While I still side with the video and don't really want to see a third timeline at all, this is probably the most reasonable explanation for why the timeline exists, so props to you for that interpretation
@@Draezeth Well a split in Skyward Sword makes sense as you go back in time to kill Demise after killing the Imprisoned as you did not think about using the Triforce to destroy the Gate of Time that way you did not have to create a split
An idea I like is one I actually read in a fan fiction, that being the idea that Link wasn't originally sealed for seven years and instead attempted to face Ganon as a child and failed. Then time was rewound through magical means all the way back to the beginning, and the decision was made to seal Link until he was an adult more capable of facing such a dangerous enemy. As such, the fallen timeline already exists by the time the game starts, we're just not made aware of it.
@@farazhasan7811 Clearing the Air by Sinnatious on AO3. That said, it's one, a Linked Universe fic (LU is a somewhat popular fan comic where-in all of the various Links are brought together for a shared quest), and two, it discusses the fallen timeline but doesn't actually follow its story, more-so it's ramifications.
@@CristataArt oh i think i read that one. Time (OoT link) and Legend (alttp and quite a few others games Link) got stuck somewhere and they had that conversation about it. man now i want to re-read it. it was good.
I can imagine Rauru sending Link to fight Ganon only to be fucking eviscerated and everyone in the Sacred Realm is like "You Dumb Fucking Bird how are you gonna fix this"
I remember that being a theory people discussed on places like the Zelda Universe and Legends Alliance forums when Hyrule Historia came out. Such a timeline would at least fit better with the in-game story, as it would give more of a reason for why the Master Sword determined that Link couldn't defeat Ganon upon first drawing the blade from the Pedestal of Time.
I think child timeline would be courage, because that's the one link ends up in. In adult timeline, link is sent to the past, and Ganondorf is sealed away, with zelda presumably ruling over hyrule, meaning it would make sense if that was the wisdom timeline.
@@christopherealy8025 in addition, the child timeline was basically seen as the "main" timeline for a while by fans, so it makes most sense to be the one that represents Link
However, in the Downfall Timeline, we have to collect and reassemble the pieces of the Triforce of Wisdom, in the Adult Timeline, we ahve to collect and reassemble the pieces of the Triforce of Courage. There must, for balance and symetry, be a game in the Child Timeline in which the pieces of a broken and scattered Triforce of Power must be collected and reassembled.
@@christopherealy8025 I assigned based on how the main conflict was resolved. Adult, Link faces Ganondorf and wins. Which took courage. Child, Link tells Zelda and she tells the king. Ganondorf is imprisoned before he takes power. This took wisdom. Fallen, Ganondorf through sheer force over powers Link.
They exist because Nintendo has literally never held the timeline in all that high of a priority. They said as much several times. In 03 I think it was Miyamoto said they had a document that had the timeline but it wasn’t that important to them to stick to it. The fact of the matter is that a lot of things Nintendo made up as they went along.
I still think a better idea would’ve been to make the “downfall” timeline to be one where Link lifts the Master Sword and disappears into the adult timeline, and the child timeline that he returns to is a completely different timeline. There’s a few ways you could create a time travel issue where Link just isn’t present.
yeah! I saw a thing on that, a youtube video, it called that the 'abandoned timeline' sense in the game you go between three times, and one is a time where there is no link, add that to the theory that the reason this timeline can exist is because the sages were freed and could stop ganon with out link, and you have a much better reason then just 'the hero was defeated' he wasn't defeated, he was removed from the timeline, but the sages prevented total ruin
But he doesn't disappear. That is the past of the Adult timeline. He just remains in the Spirit Realm for 7 years, and then is released back out into the world. This is why changes in the past will affect the future. If the timeline split started when Link pulled the Master Sword, then the stuff you do in the past WOULD NOT affect the future. The Child timeline does not exist until Zelda sends Link back into the past to BEFORE he pulled the Master Sword.
@@DaNintendude except the bit where you learn the song of storms only to go back and teach it to the windmill guy to then learn it, you know the future actually affecting the past as Link did not drain the well yet when you learned the song
You're right. There is nothing stopping them from making a branch for every game if Link dies, but the difference here is that we have actual games released that can be slotted there. There definitely COULD be a branch from Skyward Sword if Link loses against Demise and he takes over or something but there's no game to go with it. We have infinite timelines but very finite glimpses of it through the games basically. I don't see that as an issue.
Yes, I'd like to second this. Personally, the existence of the fallen timeline makes no difference to me because I am already a believer in the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum physics. It is my base assumption especially for any time travel fiction with a multiverse. So it doesn't matter that the existence of a fallen timeline implies the existence of infinite unspoken zelda timelines because that's how I view it by default. The timelines we have are special simply because they are the stories we're told.
Who cares they can branch it a million times 😀 As long as each game is good. It really should have no bearing on the games. This timeline idea only emerged after OoT, but us kids playing it just thought of each game universe as a different retelling of the same basic story. It’s just fine that way & I think Nintendo had unnecessarily trapped themselves into this timeline bs.
@@inthefadea lot of fans kept trying to make a timeliness for it(apparently especially among Japanese fans, you know, the ones Nintendo cares about), which is why they made one up. Then it got retconned/forgotten about.
I always felt it made more sense for the 3 timelines to exist as a function of the Triforce being held by multiple unique entities, and as a result reality being pulled into different directions (child = link, adult = zelda, hero loses = ganon). Idk if that even makes sense or is any better. Just random shit from my head canon.
I think we can take that further to the pieces of the Triforce itself. Wisdom, Zelda sends Link back. Courage, Link wins. Power, Ganon wins. It would be nice if they recreated the final battle of OoT in Tears or another game and we see the Power (Ganon wins) timeline/universe. They should connect the dots
I prefer to think the Downfall Timeline is simply is a "twin" brother to the og timeline that splitted as it makes sense with how the the Golden Goddesses operate by constantly "scheming" so that specific events would happen regardless of all parties's involvement as seen with the Hero of Winds appearing only AFTER the Goddesses flooded Hyrule. By going for a "mirror timelines" scenario we avoid the inconsistent plothole mentioned by @Ratatoskr regarding a Multiverse of timelines which are created based on every possible event that could ever take place at any point during Link's adventure.
The first time someone explained it to me they said something like this: The triforce grants a wish to its holder, and in OOT, it is split in 3 and held by Zelda Link and Ganondorf. At the climax of the battle, all three of them felt so strongly and were of such determination that they subconsciously tried to wish with the triforce. Since the seperate pieces were all wished upon at once with this strength, they activated despite not being complete, and the triforce split the universe in three in order to satisfy each wish. Link wanted nothing more than to defeat Ganon, so he did, and the adult timeline is created in which he is sent back in time, disappearing from the world. Zelda wanted to protect Hyrule and its people, so the child timeline was created to which Link returns and Ganondorf was never able to conquer Hyrule. Ganon wanted to defeat Link, so he does, and the fallen hero timeline is created.
I’ve had similar thoughts about the timelines. The Child and Adult timelines basically become embodiments for the Triforce of Courage and Wisdom respectively. To create some sort of balance, there needed to be a timeline for the Triforce of Power. Therefore, the Downfall timeline was created.
All of the games on the fallen timeline are directed by Miyamoto (or direct sequels to them). I think the reason this timeline exists is more meta; creative differences between Anouma and Miyamoto. I remember Miyamoto not being fan of split timeline which was confusing for fans trying to make a timeline. This is probably why out of respect his games were given their own continuity.
@@squidyouknow The "Oracle" duology is also in the Fallen Timeline, and those weren't even made by Nintendo (albeit one of their developers was Fujibayashi, who is the current director of the series, and most likely will become the third main manager of the franchise after Miyamoto and Aonuma).
@@16ktsgamma The CDi games were made when there was only one Link, right? Before OoT introduced the multiple Link/split timeline concepts. They came after 4 games that are on the Fallen Hero, so that's their timeline and they should, logically, either star Zelda 1/2's Link or LttP/LA's Link.
Disclaimer: I haven’t read Hyrule Historia. I played OoT as an adult and was already aware of the timeline when I did so. When I played through, I noticed that most people focus on the child/adult timeline split that happens after Ganondorf is defeated. But, I interpreted the initial freezing of link in time as a timeline split as well. This made sense to me because we actually see Ganondorf defeat Link at the castle moat and take the triforce of power from the sacred realm. That sounds distinctly like a timeline split to me. You can also see that on the timeline you showed from the book, the Fallen timeline is split BEFORE the other two timelines break off from each other. This of course may be for graphical convenience but I would interpret than in a more intentional way by Nintendo. But, this is just my feeling.
No because link still slept to the future SLEEP 😴 BEEING THE KEY 🔑 WORD he didn’t travel to the future like most back in the day thought?!! 🤨 he slept to it I never thought like ya did back then because of this detail and glad I didn’t back then thing is the first child to adult is still the original Time flow THERE WAS NO BREAK WIND WAKER STORY INTRO PROVES THIS by talking about the event past of ganondorf then future event ganondorf The break only happens when link went back to see child Zelda the second time and her meeting him technically the first time and the split there happened aka diverging from the original timeline past and future of ocarina of time So yeah in a sense Zelda actually in truth removed link from his original future timeline flow. With that said the only reason we have a what if Downfall timeline was because this is what was originally planned for OOT before Nintendo during development was like F it lets change the ending ADULT 🌊 and make anew alternate past CHILD 🌳 because our original ending is to dark for players.
If the split was because Link was defeated by Gannondorf in the final battle, that would, in fact, be BEFORE Zelda sends him back in time with the Ocarina...
@@thatjrpganimefanplayerjusi8003 Exactly. being in stasis doesnt break the timeline. It just allows Gannondorf free reign for 7 years. However there should probably be a break where Link can put the Master Sword back and becomes a kid again...
@@williamwolfe962 true but at the same time that would still flow from original past and future aka there really was no disruptions which again all flowed into the wind waker even when link was semi time traveling back and forth into a child of the actual canon aka the learner road of the time still not being closed only way that could fit would be that break in child would have to be a absolute what IF outcome which I think thats what your talking about? So yeah the timeline travel is pretty much leaner up to the wind waker Well aside from the WTF OOT wind mall rain guy and the inconstancy of that nonsense paradox of a plot that makes no sense which tells me Nintendo really didn’t think that one through LMAO 🤣 I would love to know what went through Nintendo over sight when creating that little part of the game?
My brother and I have always interpreted the hero fails timeline as the timeline that goes on without Link when you go back in time to go to say the well or spirit temple. It's just a timeline where Link existed, but vanished without ever becoming a hero. Gone, presumed fallen.
That would make _more_ sense, yes. Like if Zelda canon was that Link only made one trip back to the past, to get the Lens of Truth and Silver Gauntlets in one go. Then next to the Any% and 100% categories, there'd probably be a canon% speedrun category where you get everything you can with only one trip back as a kid. That would be neat.
Nah, it's where link fails in the final battle to Ganondorf. Ganondorf takes the trforce of courage from link and the triforce of wisdom from zelda after defeating them. He becomes ganon, The demon king. Link freed the 7 sages before his battle with Ganondorf, so they were able to seal ganon along with the full triforce into the sacred realm. After that, the events of the imprisoning war and then a link to the past take place.
@@osirisblaster You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of OP's point. They clearly know what Aonuma _said_ happened, it just doesn't make sense/opens a can of worms, as explained in this video. They are introducing a hypothetical "fix" to the existing timeline "as she is written."
Fallen timeline makes WAY MORE SENSE when you view it from the lense of not wanting to undo the narrative they built with the old games, and those games being *first* in the plot of zelda. It exists because the plot of lttp is literally detailing the situation in which ganon gets away with it. It existed as a plot point well before oot was even a thing. Zelda has a dream about this plotline in OOT, and we can infer a couple things- 1. This whole fallen plotline is a dream of zeldas or 2. That theres something in the fallen timeline that puts this premonition into zeldas head as a warning so that it can be undone or 3. Theres a timeline where she doesnt pay attention to it or that its impossible to stop without divine time traveling intervention. Either way, the devs make it a timeline because its canon, its literally a fully fleshed out timeline all on its own. Its the foundation by which these other games exists and oot Zelda’s ENTIRE character motivation for her actions in oot. She needed a hailmary to undo the one possible and horrific future. My understanding of the timelines is also that each detail a scenario in which one of the three shapes the world with a key action from oot- ganon in one, zelda in one, link in one. In the fallen one, ganon just does it and nobody is able to stop it. In the child timeline, Zelda’s wacky plan works out. In the adult timeline, link saves the day and stops ganon. I also think the games have ALWAYS included “link fails” as a plot possibility, the game over screens in the old games are literally about it. I dont think it has to be complicated multiverse theory, it is as simple as link being stopped by ganon when he’s unprepared, so in other words, ganon wins by playing dark and dirty. He probably defeats link as a CHILD in the dark timeline, because link is a dummy who would do anything to stop him, and zelda probably saw (either through dream or experience) what would happen, so she cooked up locking link away and going into hiding.
This makes way more sense than most of the other comments. I think the issue people have is not seeing the actual event take place, so they can't accept that it happened
@@paulchapman8023 I'm not sure what video you just watched, because the one I saw very explicitly stated that WW and TP wrote ALttP out of existence initially, and that the Fallen Timeline was the "inelegant solution" to bring it back into the fold (7:30).
The downfall timeline only makes sense if it's the original timeline. Somewhere down that timeline, the royal family might have used the triforce to try and change the past (since they had the triforce for a good period of time). Their wish results in a multiverse, leading to the adult and child timeliness in addition to the original downfall timeline.
@@Tokomihonestly tho, I believe botw and totk are downfall because they make no sense in the adult or childhood time.. or any timeline for that matter. Up until they mentioned the imprisoning war and basically contradicted the entire adult and child timeline
@@m_ron2742 some theories I've seen have said that Botw and TOTK take place in a timeline where all of the previous three had come back together, explaining why there's references to every timeline
@@lukasprogamin6044 My personal headcanon is that Hyrule Warriors, the original, serves as an official part of the Canon which conveniently gathers several parallel worlds including Wind Waker and Twilight Princess into one abomination of a period and that the gates (which happen to be floating in the sky,) are never seperated from the present making it so many world suddenly mix together. I can't even conceptually imagine how TotK works at this point though.
The three timelines made sense to me, 1. Child Timeline - Zelda sends Link further back before they met at the end of the game using the Ocarina of Time to live his lost years as a kid. 2. Adult Timeline - Continuation after Ganondorf was beaten in the future. Link is now in the Child Timeline 3. Fallen Hero Timeline - This is the timeline where Kid Link did not travel back by returning the Master Sword since Zelda sent him back further using the Ocarina. There is no Link in this timeline and the last confrontation he had with Ganondorf was outside the castle where he lost and with the Temple of Time open and no Hero in that timeline Ganondorf just took the Triforce.
@@havewissmart9602 I think he's saying that Link picks up the Master Sword, travels forward 7 years, and dies to Ganondorf. So it's basically OoT without Link.
@@havewissmart9602 Sort of, because it's not necesaarily dependent on Link dying. For e.g.: (1) Link is born >---(2) Picks Sword 7yrs pass---> (3) Adult defeats Ganondorf >----> (4) Zelda sends Link back to [1]. 1&4. Link never picks up the sword, leading to Twilight Princess. 2. There is no Link, leading to Zelda 1&2, LttP, etc. 3&4. Link is gone, but he defeated Ganondorf before leaving, leading to The Wind Waker.
Something that you said about why doesn't every final boss have a branching timeline had a thought occur to me. The timeline splits are special to Ocarina of Time because time had already been made unstable. With Ganondorf entering the Sacred realm and Link being put to sleep or stasis or whatever, Link was able to go back and forth through time throughout the game. That ability must have put enormous strain on the fabric of reality, making branching timelines and alternative realities possible and maybe the only way to stabilize reality itself.
My interpretation of it is that the downfall timeline is things as they were supposed to play out without any time travel intervention. I think the is the most likely explanation since it is the original timeline. Since OoT was always meant to be a prequel of aLTTP, I follow it in that order. While OoT is a prequel it still told an evolving story because in that game we change the course of history.
The Fallen Hero timeline being the original timeline, and the OoT that we play being the result of the Sage of Time sending visions of the future back in time to her younger self and to Link in order to stop Ganondorf's rise to power before it happens only for their actions to directly cause it fits mechanically and thematically. It would certainly explain why OoT Link was supposed to be older when he pulled out the Master Sword despite no other Link facing that restriction.
Still does not really explain any age restriction on pulling the master sword. Well, there are more mundane reasons like not having the strength to pull the sword but then there is the question of why it trapped link the sacred realm which seemingly evades all explanation. Also, why can't adult link use child items like boomarang and sticks? I am really confused by that both in terms of lore and mechanically... There just does not seem to be any need for that restriction.
I think the fallen timeline is better treated as a "what if..." branch, not necessarily a set in stone timeline that definitely happens when link dies in another universe, but a telling of the events that might occur if he lost
Exactly! The only way the Fallen timeline could happen is if a universal in-game event were to happen like the cutscenes after beating Ganondorf. If a player goes through the entire game without dying a single time, the Fallen timeline can't happen
@@nigeladams8321 it is though. The way Nintendo explains the Fallen Hero timeline is that you play OoT as normal, get all the way up to Ganondorf, but lose that battle. Ignoring the plotholes that that creates, what if the player never loses to Ganondorf? The Adult and Child timelines all happen and are set up in cutscenes that everyone sees. There's nothing like that showing Ganondorf beating Link, and if a player never dies during their battle with Ganondorf, the Fallen Hero timeline can't happen It would've been so much better if there was an actual in-game event that shows what happens if Ganondorf wins, or if Nintendo never shoehorned in this 3rd timeline to begin with
Actually, there is an "in universe" explanation for the "hero falls" timeline. In the game, there are actually two separate instances of timeline splits. Link first travels back in time when he punts the master sword back into the pedestal. It's reasonable to assume that, when this happens, there is a split in the timeline. For adult link, whenever young link accomplishes something in the past, it doesn't change the current timeline, but creates two alternative timelines. One where the past was changed, and one where it wasn't. This would mean there is a timeline where Link has literal insurmountable obstacles in the form of tasks only young link can complete, but hasn't. Therefore, adult link fails. This means that there are dozens if not hundreds of timelines specific to branching off of ocarina of time, but we can consolidate them assuming that there are only three major outcomes of the timeline. Two that branch off from the end of the game, and one that consists of the any possible branch where link ran into a problem he could only solve by going back in time. This means that there are not just one, but many "hero falls" timelines, but they are all basically identical. Enough at least, that there is no reason for nintendo to make multiple versions of a link to the past.
@@AeonTH Yup. No other game, not even the adult timeline, has Link go about his adventure as early as he did in OOT and MM. At that age no amount of darkness sealing steel could defeat someone that still makes you piss the bed.
My understanding of the "defeated timeline" is that it is the original intended timeline (ALTTP->LA->TLoZ->TAoL), which flowed quite smoothly. That is, until OoT decided to change a critical moment in Hyrule's history, Ganon ends up being sealed in the Dark World by the combined powers of the Seven Sages WITHOUT the full Triforce, as opposed to the ALTTP manual and in-game information telling you he possesses the full relic. This would retroactively mean that the other two timelines (the adult and child timelines) are the REAL what-if timelines based on whether or not Ganondorf enters the Sacred Realm (WW) and obtains the full Triforce (ALTTP) or not (TP). I don't know why Nintendo decided to make OoT so open-ended when they could have easily made Ganondorf pull a fast one on Link and Zelda during their battle and take the courage and wisdom pieces without them knowing. Ganon would be sealed by the Seven Sages leading directly to ALTTP with almost no lore discrepancies. Tldr: The "defeated timeline" is the original timeline; the "adult and child timelines" are the what-ifs. Nintendo screwed up when writing Ocarina of Time's ending.
I think it's because, canonically, he can't take Triforce pieces like that. The owner has to be defeated. Of course, that leaves the question as to why Link didn't claim the Triforce of Power at the end of OoT. Maybe because Zelda sent him back in time before he could?
@@Swiftbow With Ganon defeated, Zelda sends Link back (which _does not_ send his Triforce piece back, because there are not 2 Triforces of courage in the child timeline), effectively leaving Princess Zelda alone with all three pieces of the Triforce in the adult timeline. She, and her bloodline, keeps them and when later Ganon escapes and no hero rises against him, her grandson(?) Daphnes Nohansen Hyrule wishes that all of Hyrule be flooded... so no one can be hurt.
But yeah, if Link was defeated at the end of OoT, then Ganondorf would have the full Triforce. Hyrule then mounts the Sealing War to stop him and we have the backstory from the ALttP manual. I wouldn't necessarily calling it "messing up" the ending, in that... would you want to PLAY/buy Ocarina of Time if Link lost at the end? Probably not.
It was fun being able to clown on the old IGN timeline, that inexplicably put Oracle of Ages and Seasons on opposite branches of the timeline because whoever did the timeline had never played either game and forgot to google the plot. Shouts out to nintendo for making an even worse timeline than that.
Simple solution, "timelines" were always fanwank and Nintendo never really gave a shit about any sort of coherent shared world between these games until they saw people arguing about it. They realized they could make a quick buck and made their own retroactive fanwank timeline, but since *they* wrote it, it's the "official" one this time. There is no timeline other than direct sequels and the vague implication that the events of other titles also happened at some point.
Yeah it doesn’t really make sense. But I like that each of the triforce welders have their own timeline where they win. Link in adult, Zelda in child, and Ganon in downfall
Ganon "wins" by spending most of his time either imprisoned inside the Sacred Realm or dead and waiting for his underlings or "someone else" (Yuga) to come along and revive him so that he may have his few minutes in the spotlight before going back to sleep that. That said i do admit i like the idea of the 3 timelines been representative of each character's "traits" more than their victories as they all seem to favor aspects which seem connected to each Triforce bearers's personality and background. Adult Timeline is all about responsibility and leadership leading to Zelda been focal to that timeline's story. Child is about overcoming scary and creepy monsters (Majora's Mask and the Twili) making sense to focus on Link. Finally the Downfall has Ganon at his strongest by possessing the full Triforce and been able to attack Hyrule with an army of monsters as shown in the original The Legend of Zelda on the NES. All 3 timelines fit the "themes" of their respective games making sense that each one would "belong" to one of the 3 respective Triforce wielders.
Interestinv perspective but i think it would be fairly easy to make an argument for any game being themed after any one you want, there is no explicit signs of timelines being themed after each of the three triforce wielders.
Zelda wisdom timeline because she sends link back in time and they stop Ganon before he can do anything Power in the downfall timeline for obvious reasons. Ganon wins Courage in the adult timeline since it’s basically a normal link adventure I’m only talking about how the timelines start, not each timeline as a whole
I like the idea that the three timelines should be as follows; the timeline where adult link beats Gannon and gets sent back from; the timeline where link gets sent to after defeating Gannon; and the original timeline that link left when he took that 7 year jump. That timeline doesn't have a hero in it to beat or get defeated by Gannon, so he's free to take over, find all the pieces of the triforce and become Gannon in peace.
VortexxyGaming had a theory that the Fallen Timeline was THE original timeline. She proposed that Zelda in OoT never had visions to alert her to the danger of Gandondorf, so Link never had an audience with her, which ultimately led to his failure. She reasoned that a future Zelda used the TriForce to wish that the Zelda in OoT had her visions, thus making a new timeline. And then the eventual Adult Timeline.
Not a fan of this theory as it proposes ALL Zeldas sharing the ability of foresight due to future timeline shenanigans making it impossible for a villain to do ANYTHING that cannot be countered by a future Zelda mingling with her past selves. I prefer to think the Downfall Timeline is a "mirror" timeline to the timesplit one that exists independent of the one where Zelda splits the timeline leading to Ganon's defeat over Link and the events of the Sealing War and A Link to the Past.
@@MagillanicaLouM I so wish she managed to play Breath of the Wild before that stupid car accident... (sigh). I'm sure she would have loved the game and would have made tons of theories surrounding it's Lore both before and after the reveal of Tears of the Kingdom. May she never be forgotten by the Zelda community.
i think it'd be safe to say that all the jumping back and forth made Ocarina of time a sort of nexus point where reality was unstable enough for the 3 pieces of the triforce to peel away a timeline that's favorable to their holders. explains why theres no issue with skyward sword, since the triforce had already been assembled and used. plus the loop there was closed pretty tight anyways.
I'd really appreciate a video from you with a summary of the fan-made timelines. I think it would jive well with your audience who is here for video game lore and I personally just really like your analysis. I could see you doing a great job looking at these fan theories and seeing which ones you think hold up the best.
The only way to fix the whole multiverse thing is if Nintendo says that the Downfall Timeline happens because Link fails AT ANY TIME during Ocarina of Time. -He died in the final battle? DF Timeline -He drowned in the Water Temple? DF Timeline -He died at the Deku Tree? DF Timeline -Ruto decided to keep Link and not allow him to fullfill his destiny? DF TIMELINE They should make it the default Game Over Timeline, so no matter how link fail, it eventually becomes the Downfall Timeline. That way, it also, TECHNICALLY, you can see it ingame, as you get a Game Over.
Personally, I like the _idea_ of a timeline in which the hero is defeated. I can understand not just the practical necessity of it from a lore perspective, but there's also a certain morbid mystique to the concept of the chosen hero being defeated by the villain and seeing what kind of terrible world is created from that defeat, where evil reigns over the land. To then get a story of redemption, wherein the hero reappears some time later and eventually defeats the evil again to bring some measure of peace and prosperity to the ravaged world feels triumphant and dramatic. It makes for a good _story._ ...But it doesn't expressly make for a good _timeline._ I can't really add much to what you already said because I'm pretty much in agreement with all of it. The best I can do to play devil's advocate is that the only way you could rationalize the Fallen Hero Timeline is that, by a slight stretch of the imagination, there kinda-sorta _is_ some amount of magic involved, with that being: the Triforce. More specifically, the hero chosen by the gods (Link) is a counterpart to another being chosen by the gods: Ganondorf. He is in possession of the Triforce of Power and, as such, his victory is the only victory that could feasibly occur within the canon because, since Link is chosen, he is absolutely _assured_ to win, always. That is, unless Ganondorf is able to beat him, since he too is chosen. In that instance, the only defining factor between them is which one can defeat the other, through raw skill and determination in a clash of good vs. evil. In this manner, there can't be any other timeline splits for any reason. Link _will_ always win, right up until he's faced with a Triforce-infused Ganondorf, in which they're both evenly matched and must rely on their own abilities to win. They're both _elevated_ by the gods and _capable_ of winning, but neither is _assured_ to win because they're both chosen. That's the best explanation I've got. And it's not even air-tight because that then begs the question why there aren't other splits still with similar outcomes in any instance in which Ganondorf is still in possession of the Triforce, such as in Wind Waker and Twilight Princess, so there's still major problems with this concept. Again, I like the _idea_ of it. It's a fun story. But it's not good for the health of a timeline.
I mean it honestly does make for a good timeline, just a alternative one. Eh nah you do not really need that stuff to rationalize it. I mean those splits still probably exist, we just have not seen games based on them. It is when done well.
This is genius. I would give you an award if this was Reddit haha. You ask why couldn't this happen in other games where Ganon has the Triforce. Well, what if it has to do with him being a kid? In OoT, Link wasn't able to wield the sword until he was an adult, by ruling of the sages or goddesses. The only other game where Link wields the master sword as a child is Wind Waker--the game that takes place in the timeline where evil ruled for 7 years. Maybe the only reason WW Link was granted access to the Master Sword is because the sages/goddesses wanted to prevent another apocalypse, and WW Link, still a child, was the only option. My point is that the Master Sword's age limitation is what caused Ganon to be successful, somehow..
Well... isn't OoT the only time Ganondorf is defeated BUT he keeps the Triforce of Power? Every other time he's defeated (to the best of my knowledge), Link takes it from Ganon's body. That could explain why that particular battle was inconclusive, as far as the timestream is concerned.
All this could've avoided if OoT had a version of Zelda II's game over screen. Instead of "RETURN OF GANNON", it could have been, *The hero has fallen, and soon so does the princess. Ganondorf takes the completed Triforce, and is sealed away in the Sacred Realm. His evil corrupts the land into the Dark World. All is lost.* *GAME OVER*
this is how we felt back in 2011 when Hyrule Historia came out. But now, I really think there could be some canonical ways to make a 3erd split in Ocarina. A lot of people have theorized how Link going back and forward in time could have created a 3erd timeline wich he later abandon. That could be it, since the books state "the hero is defeated" yet they don't explain how. The defeat of the hero could have been that he just disappeared in that timeline, therefore people thought he was defeated.
The Fallen Hero timeline being the original timeline, and the OoT that we play being the result of the Sage of Time (Zelda) sending visions of the future back in time to her younger self and to Link in order to stop Ganondorf's rise to power before it happens only for their actions to directly cause it fits mechanically and thematically. It would certainly explain why OoT Link was supposed to be older when he pulled out the Master Sword despite no other Link facing that restriction.
It comes from Nintendo's misunderstanding of what we wanted as fans. We don't care if some of the older games are side stories or noncanon. We always just wanted to know what games were intended to be connected. It's clear that there is a "modern" timeline, and a "classic" timeline, and that for anything in the classic timeline wasn't ever meant to be connected to the newer games in a significant way. At the time when the classic games were being made, they didn't know how big the series would become or how they would eventually make a blueprint for connecting the stories. The modern timeline includes the biggest games in the series that actually had thought put in as to where they belong on the timeline. The classic games belong together, in their own disconnected branch with ALBW. They attempted to shoehorn the classic games in anyways and that gave us the DT.
My idea regarding the zelda timeline is that the 3 timelines are basically the zelda equivilent of a dragon break from elder scrolls, where what happens in the 3 doesnt matter because the final result will be breath of the wild. The game which the timelines merge.
Which to me is stupid as F you know why because I love the adult timeline more then the others and I would love to see it go towards a new direction future it’s why I hope your a 100% absolutely wrong on that other wise DEATH TO CREATIVITY of what has been build up since OOT and then iam done permanently and then i will truly say yeah this world is out F ideas ugh 😑
The merge thing is entirely made up by fans. The developers only ever said: “It’s up to your imagination where it falls on the timeline” and refused to reveal its placement. That’s it. No merge.
@@Belks1453 Fair point, I mainly replied after reading the last sentence since lots of people seem to say that like Nintendo confirmed it, but if it’s all your own theory, then yeah, never mind.
The Entire premise of “Fallen Hero” timeline was to set up the game: Link to the Past (1991) in the offical timeline. Before the events of said game and after link dies in OoT, the Seven Sages in a last act of desperation move to seal Ganondorf (who at this point has obtained all three pieces of the Triforce) into the Spirit Realm in order to save Hyrule. Because Ganon has what he wants, the events of the Child and Adult timelines do not happen as a result, thus creating said “Fallen” timeline.
My theory is that the OoT Ganondorf battle, and Link’s possible loss, was just so important in the uni/multiverse that it was strong enough to cause such a timeline to exist. It’s far more of an impactful event than other boss battles. And definitely a more “important” Ganon fight than others. I guess
I had always considered Four Swords Adventures to be a link (heh) between the older and newer games, explaining that Ganondorf was reincarnated as a different male Gerudo and regained the power of Ganon when he acquired the trident. The game ends with him being sealed away, and this is a perfect setup for A Link to the Past, where Ganon is unsealed and wields the same trident against Link. I still think this is a better way of integrating the pre-Ocarina games into the newer timeline than what Nintendo actually did.
Its funny. Four Swords Adventure was actually conceived originally to be the game that would contain Ganondorf acquiring the Triforce and the Imprisoning war, which would lead to it becoming the true link between the 3D games and the SNES/NES games. But Miyamoto the slayer of complex storytelling struck and had those elements stricken from the record in favor of a more gameplay focus. Thus Four Swords Adventures has its ALttP connections heavily reduced and you just had a game where Ganondorf doesn't get the Triforce, doesn't start the Imprisoning War, and ends up sealed in the Four Sword. This is likely why Nintendo never considered just making Four Swords the connecting game since there would be a lot of inconsistencies. Thus were left with their old story of OoT being the direct prequel to ALttP. And that lead to the current solution of keeping the old games in the timeline.
I saw the Downfall Timeline split happening because you need to travel back to the past once in Ocarina of Time to complete the game, in order to get the Silver Gauntlets as a child. You go back to the past, changing history, and then travel back to the future, having removed the Silver Gauntlets from that timeline. This means the Downfall Timeline happens first, when Link goes back in time and changes the past. Now there is the Downfall Timeline where the hero didn't have the tools needed to defeat Ganondorf, and thus is defeated, forcing the Sages to seal the entire Sacred Realm There is the Child Timeline, where Zelda sends Link back to the past before removing the Master Sword and changing history, and Ganondorf is stopped. And Finally there is the Adult Timeline where Ganondorf was sealed, but Link doesn't exist.
@@71Derme It would seem Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom explore the Downfall Timeline. The Imprisoning war is mentioned in Tears of the Kingdom... and Rauru...
You’re selling the community incredibly short here. I watched a well produced fan theory on the Zelda timeline at my first apartment in college. I believe it was from a prominent gaming site since the transitions and production was much higher quality than basement TH-camrs of the time. That was winter or spring of 2007, not 2011. I had moved apartments repeatedly and graduated well well after by 2011. That was my first deep introduction to Zelda timeline theory. They explained Aonuma said there were two endings to OoT when talking before WW. The split timeline fan theory had been argued by fans since wind waker and TP was a direct conflict that all but confirmed the split timeline to the fans. In both cases Aonuma said two endings. The community pretty much cemented their opinion of 2 timelines back in 06. Seems clear to me Nintendo had a rough idea of 2 timelines but never fully realized it. Several years after fans made sense of it, Nintendo decided they wanted to debunk what was already reasoned out so they argued a third timeline and then claimed this was planned decades ago. If that were true Aonuma would have mentioned 3 endings not 2 in either interview. Again, the fans did the math before Nintendo did based on Nintendo’s own words, so Nintendo changed the rules several years after the fact.
This is why Brian David Gilbert's "Perfect Zelda Timeline" is canon, in my eyes. He's able to recontextualize the events of the fallen hero timeline in a way that only allows it to occur in one set event pertaining to Ocarina of Time.
Very good analysis! Yeah the split in the timeline always existed. Ocarina of Time was supposed to be the Imprisoning War, at the time we all recognised it as the Imprisoning War, despite a few differences. We all recognised it as the story of how a thief named Ganondorf stole the Triforce and became Ganon, only to be sealed away by seven sages. When Majora's Mask came out it was apparent that it was about an alternate future, the one Link had gone back to. So the split already happened in 2000. At the time I thought it was interesting. It's really The Wind Waker that made things complicated. Like A Link to the Past it was set after Ganon was sealed. It was basically occupying the same space. At the time it made me think they had rebooted the series starting from the same point in time. And when you really think about it, that's actually what happened. Then with Hyrule Historia they tried to rescue the older games, that were effectively, as you put it, written out of existence. The thing is, Hyrule Historia didn't really solve anything. Before it, we had two 'storylines', based on evidence from the games and developer interviews: 1) OOT - ALTTP - OOA - OOS - LA - TLOZ - TAOL, with MM in an alternate timeline. 2) TMC - FS - OOT - TWW - PH - ST, with MM and TP in an alternate timeline. We just had no idea of how to reconcile these two storylines and where the heck to put Four Swords Adventures. A lot of people said before A Link to the Past, but that didn't really make sense because Ganondorf doesn't die at the end of Ocarina of Time, he is just sealed away. Hyrule Historia provided a nice place to insert Four Swords Adventures, but it's just that, a nice place, it's not really where it's supposed to be. We don't actually know where it's really supposed to be. Most likely before A Link to the Past, but the game story was poorly written and it clashes with prior information. As for the two storylines, as I said Hyrule Historia didn't really solve it. It just said: "It's a different story, that begins with the hero being defeated". Because that's what it is, not an alternate timeline, a side-story; which is funny because it came before The Wind Waker, so actually the newer games should be the side-story. The two storylines were already divided, so Hyrule Historia didn't really provide anything. It just artificially created a connection with a line on a page. 🤷🏻♂
I had a chat with a friend of mine who is a fellow LoZ enthusiast and we came up with a potential 3rd timeline that just about fits rather than “Link dies”. At the end of OoT, kid Link talks to Zelda and warns her about Ganondorf, she gives him the Ocarina of Time and tells him to get out of town, and she warns her father about his evil intent, leading to Majora’s Mask… Our thought was, what if her father didn’t take his daughter seriously about how evil Ganondorf is…and with Link not around, there’s no one to stop him from finding some other way to obtain the Triforce. This leads to the Hyrule in Downfall timeline.
I have a theory where-in a the "hero is defeated" timeline is actually just a dream type set of events that happens through those 7 years that Link is trapped in the sacred realm during OoT. That those games are essentially a set of trials to strengthen him for when he returns. But also surmise that a new timeline in reality can spawn from that.
I always thought that the reason that the fallen hero timeline worked after link died is because if link dies anywhere else, in any other games, the world is just kind of doomed. there is nothing cause ganon will always take over if link dies. the only exception is link's death in ocarina of time, because the world doesn't actually get taken over by ganon when he dies, since he is sealed in the sacred realm. The reason the fallen hero timeline works is because its the only time where link's death doesn't basically end the world.
This. One million percent. If Link dies anywhere else in the game to any other enemy, it's game over. But with the sages free, even link dying is not enough for Ganondorf to win at that point. He is still sealed away, and Hyrule isn't taken over. This is only possible at the final battle in hyrule castle, and explains nicely why this game and this death in particular created a spin off timeline.
Except, the Adult Timeline exists, and there was a situation where there was no Link to defeat Ganondorf, and the world effectively ended. Yes, Ganondorf was defeated, but it still was the End of the World. Wind Waker is Post Apocalyptic, it takes place after the End of the World. If the present of another fight between Ganondorf and Link being possible many years after the end of the world allows for the timeline to continue, then Link loosing to any other enemy in any other situation would not end the timeline, it would just merely continue on Post Apocalyptic to allow a new Link to rise up at a later time...and the Downfall Timeline is pretty much Post Apocalyptic throughout most of its games (that take place in Hyrule...The Oracle games and LA don't count). Only the Child Timeline is not Post Apocalyptic, Hyrule is not reduced to ruin but instead prospers alongside all the neighbouring realms (except for Gerudo...for them it was the end of the world, same as with the other two timelines).
@@StarlasAiko While it's true in adult timeline there is no Link to stop Ganondorf, the goddesses step in and flood the world, stopping Ganondorf. The thing the two timelines have in common is no hero to stop Ganon, but intervention from elsewhere (The Sages/Goddesses). Downfall is post-apocalyptic because Ganondorf wasn't defeated; where as wind waker is post-apocalyptic because the world was forced to be filled with water to stop Ganondorf. I wouldn't say there's any contradiction there. There's no hero, apocalypse happens, but for different reasons and from different interventions. At least, that's how I understand it.
@@StarlasAiko Well I think its sort of like, if link dies in wind waker, the only other thing a hypothetical new link from the future would do is the exact same thing that would normally happen in wind waker. none of the other games in that timeline could happen if wind waker doesn't happen
@@StarlasAiko also there is the thing of in the battle between OoT and wind waker, there was literally divine intervention, and it was only because the people of hyrule started praying and asking them to save them. There were no people to pray and beg the gods to save them immediately after link dies in ocarina. Unless maybe you want to count like the hyruleans in kakariko, but a small minority of people in castle town actually survived the 7 year period where ganondorf took over, not nearly enough to have any divine intervention
The way I like to think of the fallen hero timeline is that when you travel in time in ocarina of time you are actually abandoning timelines in which ganon is not being defeated, for example when you do the spirit temple stuff, you create that timeline and become adult in that timeline, leaving behind that first timeline in which you became adult, this timeline becoming a timeline without a hero (this is of course following the time travel theory that if you travel to the past you don't change the future but create another timeline instead) prove that this is what happens? none, I just like to think of it this way cause it makes more sense for a timeline split xP
The official time line always seemed so silly to me. The games always appeared to me to be retellings of old stories from different perspectives, the way myths change and shift throughout time. One might even think of these tales of old as, let's say, legends.
There's like 0 real-world evidence to suggest that there are infinite diverging timelines, one of the least provable things out there, I always cringe when people push that
I always liked the theory that the 'fallen hero' Timeline was split by a link to the past, not Ocarina of time. If Im recalling the theory right, The timeline split is caused by Links wish on the triforce being to undo Ganon's evil entirely, which in turn split the timeline by retroactively undoing Ganon winning against link, which inadvertantly caused Ocarina of time to occur with ITS split timeline.
Magic can still explain the third timeline, presumably sending Link back isn’t instantaneous and there is a moment where he is neither in the present or the past, that moment creates the third timeline with no link and Ganon wins.
This. This is what made me love the way the split works. The idea being LttP Link wished to undo everything Ganon did, which includes killing his previous incarnation, which results in the other timelines.
@@Lucrei. so if you google a bit, the general consesus is that the wish was explicitly, "Is that the effect of Ganon's evil actions are reversed, thus restoring Hyrule (and the Sacred Land) to its former glory." The wording on that can also be interrpreted as being able to save past link, however that happened.
@@justfriendly7676 ¿Why undoe such a *specific* event caused by a past Ganon (Link's death) instead of say... Vaati's escape from the Four Sword or Vaati's transformation into a villain, Demise's attack on the Surface World and so on and so forth? Undoing the death of a past Link doesn't make sense if Link can also undoe all other negative outcomes caused by Ganon's predecessor (Demise) not to mention the many other negative events which have taken place in the timeline prior. This theory makes ALttP Link come as a hypocrite for choosing to specifically save his past incarnation but not anyone else who suffered in previous storylines.
@@justfriendly7676 So he saves his past self from death but not all the people Ganondorf killed while he ruled Hyrule with an iron fist for 7 long years? Kind of hypocritical.
I think you’re looking at it wrong, Ratatoskr. Yes, the timeline implicitly splits with every play-through and every action, and every defeat and every victory… but that doesn’t mean they’re making games for all of those branches, that’s all. You just have to imagine where those splits go. The reason for the timeline being a split where Link lost to Ganondorf is because of two factors: 1) Ganondorf has the entire triforce 2) An imprisoning war occurs to have Ganon in the Dark World to begin with, which could only occur if Link had freed the 7 Sages from their respective dungeons in OoT. That’s it. Every other “Link dies” ending is left to the imagination, and the most likely result of those imaginations are that it’s just game over, ganon wins, everyone loses-but it could be more and that story is just never told. This one is. There infinite instances of each copy of the branching timelines in accordance to the branching of the players. There’s nothing wrong with it, we will never have a complete history, encompassing all things that are possible in the branching and winding chains of chase and effect. That’s fine, it’s like any other story, with a history before and after the events focused on, with branching universes due to quantum mechanics with every little probability. It may be frustrating, but it’s not bad. It’s just how it is-it’s more than likely how the *real world* is. We will never glimpse into other timelines, we can never look even into everything in our own world, past present of future-we can only live our lives and see what is before us. To endeavor, to succeed, and to fail, with the consequences and results of each extending into infinity, and branching in ways we will never know. --------- That being said, Ocarina of Time is *still* the game where even without quantum branching and purely with known in-universe logic you would expect the timeline to split in other ways because Link jumps back and forth between time-think about it. He has to jump back and forth for the Well and the Spirit Temple at absolute minimum, and **the things as a child influence things in the future that were not already true**. WHICH MEANS, every time Link pulled out and put in the Master Sword he was **splitting the timeline**. This should be intuitive, since Link clearly split the timeline every time he jumped back to the dawn of the first day in Majora’s Mask-Link would carry masks and times with him for events that had not occurred when he jumped backwards-this means the Timeline necessarily split. So basically, when you say there’s no magic involved to cause this… there is and you are, as far as I can tell, factually incorrect. There is likely a trail of doomed timelines Link left behind attempting to reach the one(s) that he could save by crossing over. It’s a sobering thought, but it really highlights the idea of battling against all odds and forcing forcing a righteous victory when doomed to failure. I think it’s worth remembering whenever a hero achieves an unlikely victory that there are those timelines where they failed. That they weren’t divinely ordained to victory just because they’re the good guy. They’re the one beating the odds, not the one bullying the villain who never had a chance. ☺️ The acknowledgment of those failures, the idea that failure has a cost beyond just trying again, I think is a perspective worth putting forward. That success is meaningful because we can fail. That good is meaningful because it *can* lose and evil can win. That life is precious *because* we are mortal. That all of our experiences are truly unique, that they are not defined, that they are what they are because of our action and not because it’s merely destined to be so. That everything we do happens against all probable odds, that we *exist* against all probable odds. That, even if we do fail, even if evil wins, even if we die, even if we squander our unique slice of probability that we can perceive, it’s not the end. Merely a new beginning… I think it’s beautiful, profound, and true. That this timeline where Link died resulted in Link’s greatest triumph in claiming the entire Triforce, in another life. (There may be some Buddhist undertones in the Worldview , I’m not sure, haha) I don’t think it’s stupid at all, my friend, and I hope you consider it again from another perspective.
Wow. This is actually a pretty profound way of looking at the Zelda timelines. I especially like the point you made about how Link's greatest failure paved the way for his greatest success; I was never cognizant of that irony before. Bravo.
@@majine.2606 Thank you! Link’s victories are only proportional to Ganon’s I think, and so the two are like the swinging of a pendulum. It reminds me as well of Breath of the Wild, in that Link failed 100 years ago, and so now the odds that Link is up against are even greater than they were before, but still he must triumph-and so he does, by the perspective of the story. Doubtlessly though, there are many timelines where the revived Link fails (game over), and there are even a few timelines where Link defeats Calamity Ganon without even bothering to free the Divine Beasts or obtain the Master Sword, lol. There is a *cinematic* and functional difference in fighting Ganon without having done so, after all. It is unlikely that any continuing product (like Tears of the Kingdom) or timeline will directly address those worlds as opposed to a more broadly representative “normal” one, but I think it’s safe to say they exist. The unique freedom and viability of individual experience is part of the whole joy of open world games (or really even games as a medium as opposed to books or movies in general), and I don’t think it’s in Nintendo’s mindset to take away the legitimacy of the individual player’s path and experience if it can be avoided-ditto everything Miyazaki makes and their open-ended conclusions.
The Downfall Timeline could easily have happened because of the magic in OoT. Consider this: if Link died as a child, it never would have happened because Ganondorf wouldn't have access to the Sacred Realm from the Master Sword's removal. It can ONLY happen if Link dies after Ganondorf takes the tri-force. Therefore, the same magic that created the Adult Timeline forced another split where Link dies or simply never beat Ganondorf.
You know, the whole point to a "legend" is that it is a story retold time and time again, changing per the storyteller to convey the same themes and ideas to that particular time period. The Legend of Zelda can just be a that; the same single story retold time and time again. It being a part of a cohesive canon really undermines that, and, let's face it, it's really unnecessary. Can we just not apply continuity to everything, please? I know living is hard, uncertain, and seemingly meaningless, but forcing it into art that doesn't need it as some ploy for comfort is a sadder reflection of society than not having it.
The fallen hero time line didn't previously bother me. Now you made me think about it. The other thought I have for where they could fork the timeline is whether link did or didn't return to hyrule after the end of MM. Since that game is a weird analogy for the afterlife it could be a fallen hero story.
I prefer to think of the Downfall Timeline as a "twin" timeline which mirrors the one that splitted in 2 until the very moment where Link defeated Ganon and Zelda sent him back to a newly created Child Timeline. This way we safely avoid the "what if" problem altogether and we don't have to deal with the fact that the Downfall Timeline could have happened at ANY other point during Link's adventure in Ocarina of Time. According to Twilight Princess Link did return to Hyrule where he married a woman and birthed a bloodline which lead to the birth of the Hero of Twilight. This was all confirmed in the Hyrule Historia which made it very clear that the Link of Twilight Princess is indeed the descendant of the Hero of Time after he returned from Termina and the events of Majora's Mask.
@@javiervasquez625 I see your point, but MM doesnt tell us what happens next so we could have concluded that either happened. So there could have been an alternate timeline to TP. It isn't perfect. But I like it better than "link somehow didn't win maybe"
@@MrJeldie TP Link is said in game to be a blood descendant of OoT Link, who also appears as the Hero's Shade, which contrasts with WW Link who has the spirit of the hero, but isn't blood related since Link left the timeline.
An issue I have with your stance is that Zelda games prove the multiverse exists... The Sacred Realm, Twilight realm, Lorule, Termina... The games also shows that there are events that play out even if Link loses and while we don't get the biggest picture of what happens we still get a glimpse, Link falling in Zelda 2 allows for Ganon to return, The Moon crashing shows Link becoming a casualty of the event, Not stopping Vaati before the 3rd bell shows him killing Zelda so there are infinite of timelines that's we don't see and to be frank you can literally stick any game in any spot, Hyrule can be flooded as many times as the goddesses want or twilight can spill to any version of Hyrule we know and it can keep going from there with no stop. Link losing to Ganon in Ocarina is a valid set of events that can happen even if you don't like the idea. The only theory I've heard lately that I dislike is the Unified Theory because it combines the 3 timelines we know and that doesn't make sense considering all the possibilities for timelines that there are...
When the timeline first came out, some reddit comment theorized that one time when adult link went back with the song of storms, they created the downfall timeline, since they couldn't have completed that quest without taking information from the future into the past. The timeline he left was the downfall timeline, while the timeline he seeded with the song of storms became the adult timeline. Seems to me like any time link went back with information or tools that couldn't have been obtained without time travel, a new timeline is created.
That would lead to at least four timelines, since Link has to go back at least twice in-game (once for the Eye of Truth, once for the Silver Gauntlets).
I guess the "fallen timeline" is just abandonware. In a way, both TP and wind waker are remakes of link to the past. They come after Aonuma takes over Zelda production and wanted to institute more creative freedom than was possible under Miyamoto, who is a devout antistory creator. His antistory stance is also the big reason his Zelda games don't connect as well as Aonuma's Zeldas.
Way back in the day I read a theory that I’ve made my own head canon: the fallen hero timeline is the first to happen but at the end of it Zelda takes the timeline back to Skyward Sword, then when OoT happens again Link defeats Ganon and we get the Child and Adult Timelines
I think one way to fix this is for Nintendo to remake Ocarina of Time and add a new story element where Link does actually officially die but before that, he was able to set up a time reversal thing with his ocarina creating the victorious timelines. Or maybe Zelda herself went back in time after Link dies to tell her younger self to do something different which leads to what officially happens in the game.
Well, there actuall IS a 3rd timeline in OoT. The first time you travel to the future the Windmill Musician already knows the song of storms. You learn it from him, go back and then teach it to him. You could say this is some paradox, but also maybe someone else thought it to him first and you replaced that person. The moment you go back in time and then to the future again, you'll pretty much be in a different future. Also with the Spirit Temple. The first time when you are in the future the Silver Gauntlets are there. But then you go back in time to pick them up in the past, effectively creating another timeline. The future where the gauntlets were stored was real, but you never return to it. The hero was active in this timeline but then vanished. Maybe people thought he lost and thus was defeated. It's kind of a stretch to call it that, but OoT does have a bunch of timelines. To top it off, there is one that is easier to find: the ending. Originally, Link and Zelda meet. After which Zelda has to run away, Link meets Ganondorf and gets the Ocarina of Time. But in the end, Link is send back to the moment he meets Zelda. Essentially creating 2 young link timelines: 1 where he travels to the future and 1 where he doesn't because Ganondorf is captured. This one is most obvious. It gives 2 Young Link Timeslines and 1 Adult Link Timeline.
I liked the timeline when I thought it was supposed to be the timeline where there is no Link in the world. The Hero of Time traveled to the future, but it spawned a timeline where there was never a Hero of Time existing.
I’m glad you mentioned Aonuma’s quote for Twilight Princess. I had never heard it. I just assumed the timeline is made from fan theories, and afterward Nintendo has fun playing with these theories, but never feels beholden to them. When every Zelda game comes out, it’s the fans that decide (debate) where it goes in the timeline. It’s a cool dynamic between developer and consumer.
Link lost. That is best idea Nintendo had when it comes to the Zelda timeline. It takes the standard of “the hero beats the villain” trope, which I think is great. Yes, it could have been done differently, but I disagree in it being bad.
I think a multiverse split is good if it happens from a very significant event. We're not following other timelines that might have occurred after, say, Link fails to sneeze, because it is indeed dumb. But "what if the hero failed" is something many people have always enjoyed exploring. I don't think that's "stupid" at all, it's something many would consider intriguing and worth crafting.
It's a pivotal moment that holds massive consequence. It makes total sense to put the timeline split there. Like you said I doubt link sneezing has a huge effect on events
I’d agree with both arguments here if link failing is something we could actually see play out, besides a game over screen. Even something short like majoras mask’s game over when you fail to stop the moon in time (which IS a significant event that could warrant a timeline split) would have sufficed here. But no, it’s something you would just have to assume happens to have Ganondorf become Ganon and start the dark timeline because Ocarina of Time is just important like that.
@@Julian-um2om I don't know if terminas Moon crashing would be timeline split levels of significant. We don't know how much if at all Hyrule would be affected by terminas destruction
@@nigeladams8321 well if we go by real life physics, an asteroid the size of termina's moon hitting the planet would have serious consequences for the global climate considering all of the debris sent into the atmosphere.
In my mind I always imagined that it was one of the timelines created when Link hopped back and forth between adult and child Link. He didn't go back to his old timeline, he just created a new timeline and left it without a hero
That's exactly my assumpion too. Imagine the case where Link collects 9 skulltulas as an adult (every cursed person is still cursed) and then returns to the past to collect the 10th. In the past, the first skulltula guy is not cursed anymore. That's the creation of a new timeline.
@@Enat1510 I think it happens when he goes back in time during the Gerudo Temple stuff, only because it's canon required. You can even get through the Spirit Temple without going back as a kid. Super hard though haha
My current headcanon for why there's a downfall timeline is because of the ultimate magic in the franchise: The full triforce. It allows so much to happen. It allows Ganondorf to be protected by any intervention from the gods, it allows Ganondorf's will to be natural law. And with his ability to draw power from the Triforce of Power, it stands to reason that he can do so from the full Triforce without actually making a wish upon it. In any other game where Link can be defeated, there are still several steps preventing anyone from assembling the full Triforce, whether it's collect all the pieces of a triforce, or showing you have a balanced heart or whatever. In Ocarina of Time, Ganondorf already had Zelda and all he needed to do was beat Link to get his piece and... yeah.
Been saying this exact thing for years. It makes NO sense. I hate that the downfall timeline has all the games I grew up playing to that point. Also it's weird that the fallen hero timeline is the only one where the Triforce ends up back in the hands of the royal family and Hyrule survived.
I do agree that the hero is defeated thing never really made much sense. However, I was hoping you could present some alternative ways to fit a link to the past and all the games that follow into the timeline in a way that would make more sense. I'm curious how you or anyone else would make it work.
Couldn´t the third timeline be the "correct" "unaltered" Ocarina of time events? With the other two being the magical alterations from Zelda which weren´t supposed to happen in the first place. That would atleast fix the multiverse thing.
@@shira_yone What i mean is that Zelda not doing anything is the 3rd timeline that leads into link to the past. The other two timelines are altered by Zeldas actions. That doesn´t mean there are multiverses. It just means Zelda made 2 different timelines with magic that aren´t the original one in which link lost. Her sending him back made +2 timelines not +1. That way it all still works. Problem is in the game we win. So we are already not playing the original link looses timeline from my stupid little theory! xD
Yea that's how I think about it too, originally Link loses in OoT but because of aLttP Link's Wish he manages to win which then leads to the split. I have zero basis for this but this is just my personal cope lmao
I just run on a Dragon-Break (Elder Scrolls) rule. In any case of the Downfall Timeline's genesis in OOT, the amount of time that passes between it and the next title is big enough to where the differences in how Link dies in OOT don't matter much by the time A Link To The Past happens. So "The Downfall Timeline" is a series of timelines that are indistinguishable from each other outside of the "How Link Died in OOT". I apply this case to BOTW as well. BOTW (And TOTK), take place SO long after the final title on each timeline that every permutation of events from the Fallen, Child, and Adult timeline happens in each reality. So in the Child Timeline, a series of events results in a version of Gannondorf getting the triforce and the goddesses flooding hyrule.etc And I feel this is supported by the "Era of Myth" in the Champion Lore book and also the references to every timeline in BOTW. BOTW can take place on any timeline becuase all Zelda Timelines become indistinguishable from each other by the time BOTW takes place.
Maybe the event triggering the Fallen Hero Timeline isn’t necessarily Link’s defeat, but the fact that Ganon successfully obtains all three triforce pieces, which would always lead to the Imprisoning War in any timeline? IDK, just a thought.
My head canon at this point is that somehow the timelines reconverge into a unified timeline before Breath of the Wild happens, which is why multiple timelines' events are referenced at the Master Sword ceremony in BotW. There are three timelines, a Triforce that is three-as-one, you get the thematic math. It's a nice way to put all that mucking with the multiverse behind us. That'll be my head canon until something else comes along to change it.
8:30 Hyrule Warriors Age of Calamity may have split the timeline already. It says in one of the loading screen tips that when Terrako went back in time a whole new timeline is formed. After a little research it seems that there are some aspects to Age of Calamity's story that don't line up with Breath of the Wild's at all, so it may not be canon at all. I do wonder what this means for Tears of the Kingdom. Will it acknowledge the potential split timelines in a way that significantly impacts the game or will it not be brought up at all?
Back in highschool I ran a Zelda campaign that took place in the fallen timeline, between OOT and ALTTP. In it the players had to try and rally a broken Hyrule against Ganon, and finish the fight that Link started, eventually pushing Ganon into the Golden Realm and sealing him there, leading right into the start of Link to the Past. I look back fondly on that campaign, it had some legitimately awesome moments, and a lot of player driven growth and RP. I still have some in jokes with the only player from that game that I'm still in contact with ("We do NOT talk about the Shadow Temple") I like the third timeline, and I think it works. But it is harder to explain than the first 2. If 1 and 2 exist, 3 should not, if 3 exists 1 and 2 should not, unless multiverse theory is canonically true, or there is more time travel at play than originally thought.
Actually, this video made me consider a different angle that may not have been considered yet- the triforce is responsible for the timeline fracture. Think about it- each timeline represents a different outcome that was desired by the holders of the triforce, and since Zelda opened the sacred realm and sent Link back to the past at roughly the same time, time itself was already fractured in that moment allowing the last Ganon one desperate chance to succeed. It’s a bit of a stretch, but it kind of fits with the overall vibe. That’s part of why the downfall timeline is so… well, dark and distorted compared to the other two; it’s Ganon’s will being made partially true and manifesting in that world.
When I was a kid I thought every game was just a parallel universe or retelling, and there was no timeline. Twilight princess and wind waker being connected kinda makes sense. But the fact that every single game is somehow connected to oot makes no sense to me at all. They should've just left it with twilight princess and wind waker being connected, and the other games just be a parallel universe or something.
i dont think it has to connect. i like the idea that everything is a retelling of the same sort of story it makes it feel more like a fairy tail and i like that feeling
Opposite. I hate the idea that nothing is connected. I want events to have consequences in games that take place after those events. I want the story to develop over the course of history, not just be stomped by each subsequent release.
I think the Downfall Timeline works with some slight tweaking. Instead of Link being killed in the final fight, it would go like this: Boy Link uses the Spiritual Stones to enter the Temple of Time. He lays hand on the Master Sword, but before he can pull it out, Ganondorf (who followed him in) jumps him and kills him. Panicked, the Sages trap him in the Golden Realm where he remains imprisoned till ALTTP. After ALTTP, Zelda and Link wish on the Triforce to undo the evil Ganon caused. This reverses all the way back to when he killed Link, spawning a new timeline. In this alternate timeline, the Sages create a protective cocoon around Link so Ganondorf can't murder him. The rest of the game continues normally from there.
Zelda and link wish yeah Zelda wasn’t there with link when he made that wish you must be referencing games post a link to the past on that one right? just as a correction
Kind of convoluted to justify Nintendo's bad attempts at consistency. Personally i feel the best solution to the Downfall Timeline debacle is arguing for a "mirror timeline" theory where the events of the Downfall Timeline are revealed to take place in a *SEPERATE* timeline to the one where the timesplit ocurred all as part of a "Divine Plan" set by the Goddesses so that one timeline would lead to the timesplit while the other remained unaffected and unchanged. By using this logic we can safely do away with the Multiverse problem thanks to the Goddesses's own meddling.
@@javiervasquez625 again obviously this was the original plan and out of OOT when it was being developed until retconned so in actuality the down fall timeline truly is the original idea developed outcome so because of the retcon they shoved it as a what if and after this this whole change during development kept going even on after OOT with other Zelda games unfortunately Anyway to be honest though it would have just made more sense to put the whole downfall after twilight princess and FSA just to have the ganon of the downfall being the new ganondorf but hey that’s just me just to only have two timelines original outcome timeline adult and alternate outcome child Problem solved and would have developed the child more and with BOTW and tears at the end of it
@@javiervasquez625 like seriously it would have been more natural this way Originally reality outcome 🌊 Ganondorf dies for good and a new villain takes over Meanwhile The split of the new past Alternate reality outcome 🌳 Ganondorf dies but is then reincarnated as anew individual Ganondorf the second who becomes ganon for the rest Why didn’t Nintendo just do that huh it would have streamed line why better and less messy with the split branching instead of a what if after there retcon changed with OOT ending
I still don’t get the problem here. This seems more like a “Well I would have rather done it this way” complaint than actually pointing out flaws with Nintendo’s explanation. So what if it’s a “multiverse” explanation? Yeah if Link fails then it’d split off into different events. What is there not to understand? They probably chose to split the event at OOT because having a story where Link fails in the final battle with Gannon is much more interesting than if he lost to a Moblin.
The fallen timeline doesn’t happen because link lost the battle with Ganon. It happens because he used the master sword to travel back in time to get the lens of truth and silver gauntlets, creating a timeline where link just Disappeared and wasn’t around to fight Ganon in the first place.
Is it possible to interpret it as Ganon specifically killing Link during a time warp, knowing it would create problems that neither of the other timelines could cope with? I'm really trying to force the timeline into the continuity by saying that, but I mean if you think about it that way, the 3rd timeline exists functionally as the 3 parts of the triforce as a whole all being determined equal in a game that time travel exists being the only fair way to allow the solution to the heroes problems, otherwise you could almost say "why wouldn't they keep this power for the future when Ganon might win again?" or "why didn't they use this power earlier?" or even, "did they hesitate to use it before or after during the timelines that were created unintentionally?" It kind of wraps it up nicely viewing it that way because it provides a solution to everyone's problems, including Ganon, and that is why they never use it again or never did before, it had unintended side effects of creating a timeline where you could argue they created more suffering rather than simply solved their own. How about Hyrule and Lorule? Multiverses exist even without time travel, but there needs to be a "Link" to connect them all, magic of some kind, otherwise the speculative timelines could be possible during any other life or death situation the heroes encounter, but functionally the magic being used doesn't create those possibilities by existing, only creating those possibilities when used, it isn't itself creating the possibility, unless it's made to specifically open those possibilities or "Links" up. I'd love to hear feedback on this interpretation and if it can hold up to scrutiny as speculative as it is.
I've seen some theories floating around that there's some timeline fuckery that happens off-screen to create the fallen hero timeline, e.g. Link loses in an alternate version of OoT, and then Zelda does some magic shit to send visions to her past self and to kid Link, creating both the Downfall Timeline and kicking off the events of OoT as we experience them. That would be much better than the official explanation IMO.
That would cause a new problem with the implication that ALL Zeldas have the power to send visions to their past selves. If they all have the power to prevent negative events from happening then it's theoretically possible there are in fact an *endless* amount of timelines which are are all constantly been created as a new Zelda is born to warn her past self from a new negative event during her present time. This never ending cycle of "vision, timesplit, vision, timesplit, ad infinitum" tears this whole theory appart from the get go.
@@javiervasquez625 In OoT, Zelda uses the Ocarina of Time to send Link back to the past, so the ability to send visions could also be tied to the Ocarina. Or maybe the ability to send visions was discovered by the Zelda in OoT, and by the next Zelda game the knowledge had been lost. Lots of ways to do it without creating new problems.
@@Enraric Still it would come off as way too convenient to have A Zelda get the chance to split the timelines in 3 different ways due to simple item placement near her vicinity (aka the Ocarina of Time) while all her incarnations both before and after are devoid of such an opportunity to save their Links (not to mention their own people) from another similar conflict with a future Ganondorf. The Golden Goddesses would look like the biggest trolls in the Zelda universe for allowing a *single* Zelda to split the timelines in 3 while her predecessors and successors are forced to suffer a single outcome with no chance to change them in any way.
From what I gathered with how a timeline split occurs in Zelda is if there is time travel involved in the game. Ocarina of time has you going back and forth as child and adult Link which is why a third timeline occured. Same with age of calamity where terako time traveled and helped end the calamity 100 years earlier creating a new branch (and should just stay as a small singular branch imo). However, there is time travel in majora's mask which indicates a new timeline can occur there (one that I hope Nintendo DOESN'T expand to).
My extradiegetic interpretation is that fans actually figured out the correct timeline and Nintendo didn´t expect that. Thus, they BS their way out with a new timeline that no one saw coming (because it doesn´t make sense). Yes, Miyamoto and Aunoma are talented, but they are also prideful, vanidous and petty in some measure.
It's hard for me to understand why many in the Zelda community are so obsessed with the timeline and lore when so much of its structure is subject to change. Ie: the Minish Cap and SS. Minish Cap was supposed to be the origin story of Link's cap which Nintendo completely forgot about or retconned in Skyward Sword. Nintendo retconning the Minish Cap is totally fine; but it proves the point that they invest little interest in the consistency of the timeline(s) and universe. Zelda's overarching story will always take a backseat to its gameplay and contained, isolated plots on a per-game/sequel basis. We all know this. Thus I personally think taking a critical look at the intricacies of the timelines with the same critical eye as a more narrative driven franchise (Dark Souls, the Witcher, GoW) will only conclude with more inconsistencies and incoherent, poorly realised plot threads.
Are 🤨you dense attention spin ADHD or something? I’ll tell you way the Zelda community are obsessed with it because they actually THINK? USE THERE BRAIN 🧠 you know something this woke timeline has lost to dead boredom the Zelda community actually think because it’s actually there do you even intro and world building bro?! In the intro of wind waker it the original continuation of OOT straight up majora mask intro is literally the alternate timeline continuation of OOT second ending Twilight princess middle of the game reference of the timeline of the CHILD even it’s ending with Ganondorf talk to link shows this straight up Skyward Sword intro reference it being the origin bud it’s ending showing it’s the beginning BOTW even through showing thing from other timelines it’s the child for many main reason for me and TOTK really showing this Yeah there’s a timeline dude clear as F day Judging by your comment you don’t like to think and seem to want everything simple?! Nah your probably one those old ass Zelda fans who just again 🤪let’s not think about anything BUT GAMEPLAY 🤪AM I RIGHT!? Hmm 🤨 But hey be blue pilled in deny as hell of the clear as day Zelda mythology connection lore as many are unfortunately blind no brains 🧠 to 😒 Yes there has been retcon but they still fit with continuity for the most part. Ps for people saying Zelda is like final fantasy NO stop it Zelda is nothing like final fantasy in terms of universes continuity what I said above and what’s in game story proofs that.
I just don’t believe in the Zelda timeline at all. The only sequence of games that makes sense to me is: 1. Skyward Sword 2. Ocarina of Time 3. Majora’s Mask 4. Twilight Princess I’m glad that Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom are stepping away from the Zelda timeline to create their own self contained story.
So, pretty much in complete agreement on this one. Summed up my feelings on the timelines pretty well. The only things a don’t agree with are as follows: I’ve always felt that the entire concept of separate time lines was made so they could have more freedom with what kind of story they want, and while I do agree it was mostly planned, it’s still just an elaborate hand wave. Secondly, actually think BotW’s “unified timeline” leaves for a very complex question… how the hell did that happen??? Maybe TotK will explain it, but if it never gets explained it basically comes off like a retcon. Which I get. Really, I do. The Zelda timelines are a mess, but I really just don’t like wide sweeping retcons, especially since this one seems to be occurring the very next game after they FINALLY described how this stuff all fits together in the first place.
I feel that the ending with BOTW merging everything could work as that monkey with a typewriter eventually writing a Shakespeare novel. So many years go by, that every possible cycle of things happens. It's that far in the future. Something like that.
The “unified timeline” is entirely the fanbase misinterpreting what was actually said. The devs were asked which branch BotW goes on and they replied: “That can be up to your imagination. We want the player to explore and make sense of it themselves”. The internet then magically got “It’s unified then! Confirmed!” and spread it like wildfire.
@@incognitoman3656 I agree. The Child Timeline is where I think it goes. I’ve gone up against nay-sayers before with all their arguments and none of their arguments have managed to beat out the child timeline, whereas, I’ve made them bend backwards and jump hoops trying to justify the other two. For example, people arguing downfall have to explain how all these races that have gone basically extinct in that line have been brought back to life and how Hyrule somehow formed back to how it looks… in the child timeline lol. Everything in TP and FSA perfectly sets up a Hyrule for BotW to occur… whereas, the other two are radically different. But in regards to what you said… Boar Ganon is already in that timeline in TP and he’s a pig in FSA. Zora & Rito co-exist, which needs explanation regardless of timeline, but likely a split evolution perhaps. The Zora are entirely gone and replaced by Rito (so it seems) in Wind Waker, yet they coexist here, which makes the child line more likely. And Kokiri probably evolved into Koroks overtime regardless.
@@WindMageMaster when did the ocean zora turn into rito, and when did the landmass change so much that koroks appeared instead of the wierd monkeys from tp?? It just doesn’t make sense for wind waker, imo. And also, four swords adventures could definitely take place in a separate timeline. We’re just missing a pig-sized piece of the puzzle: why ganon decided to stop re-incarnating in BoTW
The results of the ending of OoT are kind of like the Schrödinger's cat experiment. Link is alive, dead, and is completely missing from the box at the same time until you play a sequel.
Explained it perfectly. What kills me the most about the third timeline is that Four Swords Adventures was already intended as a prequel to Link to the Past, so the classic games could just be at the end of the child timeline, instead we got this whole multiversal mess. It used to be fun speculating about the timeline, but I remember when Historia came out discussion kind of just died. With multiverses nothing mattered anymore. Any point in the game could make another timeline.
Which is why it's better to dismiss the whole "what if" nonsense altogether and instead argue for a 2 timelines scenario where the Downfall Timeline is independent from the one where the timesplit takes place so as to avoid the the plothole regarding it's creation without much of a problem. The events of the Downfall Timeline happen in a "twin" timeline that is "adjacent" to the timesplit one allowing both to exist as their own individual timelines with no problem whatsoever.
Excellent video! It lays out exactly what my issues have been with this 'timeline split' since Historia was released. As a substitute for the official timeline, I love the theory from NintendoBlackCrisis (which I accept as part of my headcanon) that basically puts the downfall timeline into a bad ending of Minish Cap where Vaati is sealed instead of destroyed. It's much more satisfying and makes Four Swords Adventures much more interesting that in its original placement, where in this new timeline it becomes a prequel to ALttP and the start of the downfall timeline games. It does this while also explaining how Vaati could be alive in the Four Swords games if he was outright destroyed in Minish Cap and is a super elegant solution. I am perfectly fine with accepting it since apparently the timeline could change at any point according to Nintendo themselves.
@@godspeedhero3671 not really, he says in the video that he's fine with the adult and child timeline split because it's a multiverse made via magic while the hero defeated timeline isn't magic it's just a different outcome. It's a small personal gripe and is only really an issue to him alone (there are probably others who have some sort of autistic reaction when things aren't a way they think it should be too. Also autistic isn't an insult even though I know people will take it as one)
Very well spoken sir, and I couldn't agree more. If the Fallen "Timeline" is possible, then so are the "timelines" that spawn every time any player ever sees a "Game Over" screen in a game. Clearly Nintendo is referring to some sort of alternate reality as the Fallen Timeline, which is a different concept that doesn't mesh well with the other two timelines because it originated from different rules entirely. I think you're probably spot on with your speculation as to why they slapped the Fallen Timeline in the canon lore of the series.
I've always seen the Fallen Timeline as less of a "splinter" which formed during the final battle with Ganon in Ocarina of Time and more of a "twin timeline" to the original one that exists *parallel* to it's counterpart serving as a "mirror" of sorts with events that are intentionally meant to be opposite to the ones seen in the Adult and Child timelines. Basically speaking when the Golden Goddesses created the Zelda universe they created 2 twin timelines that perfectly mirrored eachother in every way until the pivotal point where Ganon's defeat would usher Zelda to split the timelines.
As part of their "divine plan" the Golden Goddesses literally created 2 opposite mirror timelines so that in one events would lead into a timesplit while the other remained unaffected. Of course going with this interpretation implies the Goddesses's willingness to let Link die in order to do it so i can understand hesitation to reach this conclusion but given the fact that this is by far the only *logical* explanation i could ever imagine for such a specific set of events to take place it is the only real solution to justify the existence of the Fallen Timeline.
@@javiervasquez625 But doesn't that just transfer the question to "Why did they create 2 opposite mirror timelines here but not in every other game?"
@@dennisdesormier6886 ...because the mirror timelines where created at the *beginning* of Time itself and not at a specific point during the already established timelines. When we're playing Skyward Sword, The Minish Cap and Four Sword we're looking at the events of 2 seperate timelines happening *simultaneously* all the way to the final battle with Ganon where the outcome would differ leading to both Zelda's splitting of that timeline and Ganon's defeat of Link. This is the only way we can rationally justify all 3 timelines as been real without the "what if" problem that comes along with the exact point of origin for the Downfall Timeline.
@@javiervasquez625 That still doesn't make any sense. You've done a whole bunch of mental gymnastics to come up with a headcanon, that, as far as I know, has no actual basis in the games, and the only thing you've accomplished is shifting the explanation for the Fallen Hero timeline from "The multiverse is canon is the Zelda universe" to "the goddesses did some weird timeline nonsense for no apparent reason".
Honestly, the way I see it, coming up with an in-universe explanation is far more trouble than it's worth. Ratatoskr's reasoning for why Nintendo did it is good enough for me.
@@Draconich ...until you realize Ratatoskr didn't solve anything given he too also shares NO BASIS within the games to come up with a Multiverse scenario that Nintendo has never even suggested explains Link's sudden death at Ganon's hands. All you're telling me with this comment is that you prefer to *blindly* swallow the words of the popular guy with the hundred thousand subscriber count than a random nobody who's willing to consider all possibilities provided by Nintendo instead of just saying "Multiverse there ya go problem solved" and calling it a day.
Next time why not admit you don't like thinking deeply and just go with the flow like a good TH-camr fanboy?
Bro won’t let Ganon get his one W
Lol
His frame data is holding him back
for real
#Justice4Ganon
Ganon had his W in Wind Waker. Sort of, at least...
I heard this theory one time: The triforce grants a wish to its holder, and in OOT, it is split in 3 and held by Zelda Link and Ganondorf. At the climax of the battle, all three of them felt so strongly and were of such determination that they subconsciously tried to wish with the triforce. Since the seperate pieces were all wished upon at once with this strength, they activated despite not being complete, and the triforce split the universe in three in order to satisfy each wish. Link wanted nothing more than to defeat Ganon, so he did, and the adult timeline is created in which he is sent back in time, disappearing from the world. Zelda wanted to protect Hyrule and its people, so the child timeline was created to which Link returns and Ganondorf was never able to conquer Hyrule. Ganon wanted to defeat Link, so he does, and the fallen hero timeline is created.
Perhaps doesn't make the most logical sense with all of the events and info in the games, but I think it's the nicest explanation for the fallen hero timeline's existence.
Interesting
That’s actually one of the better explanations I’ve read to justify the fallen timeline. I’d take it a step further and say that Zelda’s wish was to defeat Ganon but Link’s wish was to have a childhood that was taken from him, so that’s what planted the idea in Zelda‘s head to send him back in time.
This is really good
i really like this idea! rather than just chalking the timeline up to the failure of link, it gives the power to ganon, which is what makes the timeline interesting.
in a way, with this interpretation, Zelda, Link, and Ganon become separated across time in their own respective victories.
it makes more sense as a struggle for power, with the final battle being the critical moment. the triforce is unable to grant any one of the three wishes as the primary one, so instead - it grants all three, separately.
@DinoDM and then you have the adult and child timeliness for Zelda and Link's wishes. The adult timeline leads us into WW and the child timeline takes us into MM. The aspect of the fallen timeline kicks off with LttP which explains how Ganon was able to have his wish granted. He was able to enter the Sacred Realm and upon touching the triforce, he turned the Sacred into the Dark World.
Well there's definitely a universe where Link drowned or gave up at the water temple.
An infinite number of them, in fact.
There's also one where I accidentally reflected Koume's fire beam into the ground I was standing on.... yeah, let go of that shield button QUICK if you do that. XD
It was that one f*cking key under the floating block in the middle tower.
I’m more interested in the timelines where Link just wrong warps to the final cutscene.
@@VirixPhilia Only timelines in PUs that are QPU-aligned can have that happen.
I always interpreted the fallen hero timeline as this: Link falls specifically in the final battle with Ganon, not earlier. By this point, he has already set free all of the sages, and even if he falls, the sages are capable of sealing ganon as seen in the Alttp intro cutscene. The reason why there aren't more splits like this could be because Oot is the only game on which if Link falls, Hyrule continues to exist. On every other game there is not another force capable of stopping Ganon, resulting in the "end" of the timeline.
LttP is a sequel to Four Sword Adventures. It fits beautifully together when placed there on the timeline. There must have been an earlier timeline split, either in Skyward Sword, or following the events of Minish Cap.
It makes sense to me that Ganondorf one of the holders of the triforce and a warlock defeats the hero splitting the timeline at that moment.
While I still side with the video and don't really want to see a third timeline at all, this is probably the most reasonable explanation for why the timeline exists, so props to you for that interpretation
@@Draezeth Well a split in Skyward Sword makes sense as you go back in time to kill Demise after killing the Imprisoned as you did not think about using the Triforce to destroy the Gate of Time that way you did not have to create a split
Yes that makes alot of sense and I was going to comment this but I saw this comment and decided that I don’t have to comment again.
An idea I like is one I actually read in a fan fiction, that being the idea that Link wasn't originally sealed for seven years and instead attempted to face Ganon as a child and failed. Then time was rewound through magical means all the way back to the beginning, and the decision was made to seal Link until he was an adult more capable of facing such a dangerous enemy. As such, the fallen timeline already exists by the time the game starts, we're just not made aware of it.
What's the fanfic called?
@@farazhasan7811 Clearing the Air by Sinnatious on AO3. That said, it's one, a Linked Universe fic (LU is a somewhat popular fan comic where-in all of the various Links are brought together for a shared quest), and two, it discusses the fallen timeline but doesn't actually follow its story, more-so it's ramifications.
@@CristataArt oh i think i read that one. Time (OoT link) and Legend (alttp and quite a few others games Link) got stuck somewhere and they had that conversation about it. man now i want to re-read it. it was good.
I can imagine Rauru sending Link to fight Ganon only to be fucking eviscerated and everyone in the Sacred Realm is like "You Dumb Fucking Bird how are you gonna fix this"
I remember that being a theory people discussed on places like the Zelda Universe and Legends Alliance forums when Hyrule Historia came out. Such a timeline would at least fit better with the in-game story, as it would give more of a reason for why the Master Sword determined that Link couldn't defeat Ganon upon first drawing the blade from the Pedestal of Time.
I'm fond of the 3 together. They operate in balance like the triforce.
Child = wisdom
Adult = courage
Fallen = power
It exists because it must exist.
I think child timeline would be courage, because that's the one link ends up in. In adult timeline, link is sent to the past, and Ganondorf is sealed away, with zelda presumably ruling over hyrule, meaning it would make sense if that was the wisdom timeline.
@@christopherealy8025 in addition, the child timeline was basically seen as the "main" timeline for a while by fans, so it makes most sense to be the one that represents Link
However, in the Downfall Timeline, we have to collect and reassemble the pieces of the Triforce of Wisdom, in the Adult Timeline, we ahve to collect and reassemble the pieces of the Triforce of Courage. There must, for balance and symetry, be a game in the Child Timeline in which the pieces of a broken and scattered Triforce of Power must be collected and reassembled.
@@christopherealy8025 I assigned based on how the main conflict was resolved.
Adult, Link faces Ganondorf and wins. Which took courage.
Child, Link tells Zelda and she tells the king. Ganondorf is imprisoned before he takes power. This took wisdom.
Fallen, Ganondorf through sheer force over powers Link.
They exist because Nintendo has literally never held the timeline in all that high of a priority. They said as much several times. In 03 I think it was Miyamoto said they had a document that had the timeline but it wasn’t that important to them to stick to it. The fact of the matter is that a lot of things Nintendo made up as they went along.
I still think a better idea would’ve been to make the “downfall” timeline to be one where Link lifts the Master Sword and disappears into the adult timeline, and the child timeline that he returns to is a completely different timeline. There’s a few ways you could create a time travel issue where Link just isn’t present.
yeah! I saw a thing on that, a youtube video, it called that the 'abandoned timeline' sense in the game you go between three times, and one is a time where there is no link, add that to the theory that the reason this timeline can exist is because the sages were freed and could stop ganon with out link, and you have a much better reason then just 'the hero was defeated' he wasn't defeated, he was removed from the timeline, but the sages prevented total ruin
But he doesn't disappear. That is the past of the Adult timeline.
He just remains in the Spirit Realm for 7 years, and then is released back out into the world.
This is why changes in the past will affect the future. If the timeline split started when Link pulled the Master Sword, then the stuff you do in the past WOULD NOT affect the future.
The Child timeline does not exist until Zelda sends Link back into the past to BEFORE he pulled the Master Sword.
@@DaNintendude except the bit where you learn the song of storms only to go back and teach it to the windmill guy to then learn it, you know the future actually affecting the past as Link did not drain the well yet when you learned the song
@@jamiek8123 You mean this one?
th-cam.com/video/pkF0GKIvd0k/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=NintendoWorldReportTV
This was solid imo.
@@chesrieldreemon824 oh that ones cool, but I think I meant this one th-cam.com/video/0Y63KaFkBf8/w-d-xo.html
Don't let his deceptively calm tone of voice fool you, he hates everything he has to say
Every God damn time
lmao
🤦🏽♂️
Ragegaming, here, where else will I stumble upon you ? XD
@@professeurmythologeek7695 Rurikhans comment section as well as NCH productions lol
You're right. There is nothing stopping them from making a branch for every game if Link dies, but the difference here is that we have actual games released that can be slotted there. There definitely COULD be a branch from Skyward Sword if Link loses against Demise and he takes over or something but there's no game to go with it.
We have infinite timelines but very finite glimpses of it through the games basically. I don't see that as an issue.
Yes, I'd like to second this. Personally, the existence of the fallen timeline makes no difference to me because I am already a believer in the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum physics. It is my base assumption especially for any time travel fiction with a multiverse. So it doesn't matter that the existence of a fallen timeline implies the existence of infinite unspoken zelda timelines because that's how I view it by default. The timelines we have are special simply because they are the stories we're told.
No, if demise had won there would be no future for hyrule.
Who cares they can branch it a million times 😀 As long as each game is good. It really should have no bearing on the games. This timeline idea only emerged after OoT, but us kids playing it just thought of each game universe as a different retelling of the same basic story. It’s just fine that way & I think Nintendo had unnecessarily trapped themselves into this timeline bs.
@@inthefadea lot of fans kept trying to make a timeliness for it(apparently especially among Japanese fans, you know, the ones Nintendo cares about), which is why they made one up. Then it got retconned/forgotten about.
@@TheLastRaven6 because we've never gotten a game that isn't in hyrule right? You know, besides all those ones
I always felt it made more sense for the 3 timelines to exist as a function of the Triforce being held by multiple unique entities, and as a result reality being pulled into different directions (child = link, adult = zelda, hero loses = ganon). Idk if that even makes sense or is any better. Just random shit from my head canon.
I think we can take that further to the pieces of the Triforce itself. Wisdom, Zelda sends Link back. Courage, Link wins. Power, Ganon wins. It would be nice if they recreated the final battle of OoT in Tears or another game and we see the Power (Ganon wins) timeline/universe. They should connect the dots
Yeah I really like this idea
I prefer to think the Downfall Timeline is simply is a "twin" brother to the og timeline that splitted as it makes sense with how the the Golden Goddesses operate by constantly "scheming" so that specific events would happen regardless of all parties's involvement as seen with the Hero of Winds appearing only AFTER the Goddesses flooded Hyrule. By going for a "mirror timelines" scenario we avoid the inconsistent plothole mentioned by @Ratatoskr regarding a Multiverse of timelines which are created based on every possible event that could ever take place at any point during Link's adventure.
The first time someone explained it to me they said something like this: The triforce grants a wish to its holder, and in OOT, it is split in 3 and held by Zelda Link and Ganondorf. At the climax of the battle, all three of them felt so strongly and were of such determination that they subconsciously tried to wish with the triforce. Since the seperate pieces were all wished upon at once with this strength, they activated despite not being complete, and the triforce split the universe in three in order to satisfy each wish. Link wanted nothing more than to defeat Ganon, so he did, and the adult timeline is created in which he is sent back in time, disappearing from the world. Zelda wanted to protect Hyrule and its people, so the child timeline was created to which Link returns and Ganondorf was never able to conquer Hyrule. Ganon wanted to defeat Link, so he does, and the fallen hero timeline is created.
I’ve had similar thoughts about the timelines. The Child and Adult timelines basically become embodiments for the Triforce of Courage and Wisdom respectively. To create some sort of balance, there needed to be a timeline for the Triforce of Power. Therefore, the Downfall timeline was created.
All of the games on the fallen timeline are directed by Miyamoto (or direct sequels to them). I think the reason this timeline exists is more meta; creative differences between Anouma and Miyamoto. I remember Miyamoto not being fan of split timeline which was confusing for fans trying to make a timeline.
This is probably why out of respect his games were given their own continuity.
A link between worlds and Triforce heroes are not directed by Miyamoto and are on the Fallen timeline...
@@mattiaboscherini4001 Yeah, because one is a sequel to A Link To The Past and the other is a spinoff that got sent there because it's a meme timeline
@@squidyouknow Nah if it's the Meme Timeline then where are the CDi Zelda games.
@@squidyouknow The "Oracle" duology is also in the Fallen Timeline, and those weren't even made by Nintendo (albeit one of their developers was Fujibayashi, who is the current director of the series, and most likely will become the third main manager of the franchise after Miyamoto and Aonuma).
@@16ktsgamma The CDi games were made when there was only one Link, right? Before OoT introduced the multiple Link/split timeline concepts. They came after 4 games that are on the Fallen Hero, so that's their timeline and they should, logically, either star Zelda 1/2's Link or LttP/LA's Link.
Disclaimer: I haven’t read Hyrule Historia. I played OoT as an adult and was already aware of the timeline when I did so. When I played through, I noticed that most people focus on the child/adult timeline split that happens after Ganondorf is defeated. But, I interpreted the initial freezing of link in time as a timeline split as well. This made sense to me because we actually see Ganondorf defeat Link at the castle moat and take the triforce of power from the sacred realm. That sounds distinctly like a timeline split to me. You can also see that on the timeline you showed from the book, the Fallen timeline is split BEFORE the other two timelines break off from each other. This of course may be for graphical convenience but I would interpret than in a more intentional way by Nintendo. But, this is just my feeling.
Thank you, I was thinking this through the entire video and was about to write this myself.
No because link still slept to the future SLEEP 😴 BEEING THE KEY 🔑 WORD he didn’t travel to the future like most back in the day thought?!! 🤨 he slept to it I never thought like ya did back then because of this detail and glad I didn’t back then
thing is the first child to adult is still the original Time flow THERE WAS NO BREAK WIND WAKER STORY INTRO PROVES THIS by talking about the event past of ganondorf then future event ganondorf
The break only happens when link went back to see child Zelda the second time and her meeting him technically the first time and the split there happened aka diverging from the original timeline past and future of ocarina of time
So yeah in a sense Zelda actually in truth removed link from his original future timeline flow.
With that said the only reason we have a what if Downfall timeline was because this is what was originally planned for OOT before Nintendo during development was like F it lets change the ending ADULT 🌊 and make anew alternate past CHILD 🌳 because our original ending is to dark for players.
If the split was because Link was defeated by Gannondorf in the final battle, that would, in fact, be BEFORE Zelda sends him back in time with the Ocarina...
@@thatjrpganimefanplayerjusi8003 Exactly. being in stasis doesnt break the timeline. It just allows Gannondorf free reign for 7 years. However there should probably be a break where Link can put the Master Sword back and becomes a kid again...
@@williamwolfe962 true but at the same time that would still flow from original past and future aka there really was no disruptions which again all flowed into the wind waker even when link was semi time traveling back and forth into a child of the actual canon aka the learner road of the time still not being closed only way that could fit would be that break in child would have to be a absolute what IF outcome which I think thats what your talking about?
So yeah the timeline travel is pretty much leaner up to the wind waker Well aside from the WTF OOT wind mall rain guy and the inconstancy of that nonsense paradox of a plot that makes no sense which tells me Nintendo really didn’t think that one through LMAO 🤣
I would love to know what went through Nintendo over sight when creating that little part of the game?
My brother and I have always interpreted the hero fails timeline as the timeline that goes on without Link when you go back in time to go to say the well or spirit temple. It's just a timeline where Link existed, but vanished without ever becoming a hero. Gone, presumed fallen.
th-cam.com/video/pkF0GKIvd0k/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=NintendoWorldReportTV
You actually reminded me of this video.
That would make _more_ sense, yes. Like if Zelda canon was that Link only made one trip back to the past, to get the Lens of Truth and Silver Gauntlets in one go. Then next to the Any% and 100% categories, there'd probably be a canon% speedrun category where you get everything you can with only one trip back as a kid. That would be neat.
Nah, it's where link fails in the final battle to Ganondorf.
Ganondorf takes the trforce of courage from link and the triforce of wisdom from zelda after defeating them.
He becomes ganon, The demon king.
Link freed the 7 sages before his battle with Ganondorf, so they were able to seal ganon along with the full triforce into the sacred realm.
After that, the events of the imprisoning war and then a link to the past take place.
@@osirisblaster You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of OP's point. They clearly know what Aonuma _said_ happened, it just doesn't make sense/opens a can of worms, as explained in this video. They are introducing a hypothetical "fix" to the existing timeline "as she is written."
@@Wendy_O._Koopa the timeline wouldn't exist if the sages werent able to seal ganon.
It would be the ganon total victory timeline with no games.
Fallen timeline makes WAY MORE SENSE when you view it from the lense of not wanting to undo the narrative they built with the old games, and those games being *first* in the plot of zelda. It exists because the plot of lttp is literally detailing the situation in which ganon gets away with it. It existed as a plot point well before oot was even a thing. Zelda has a dream about this plotline in OOT, and we can infer a couple things- 1. This whole fallen plotline is a dream of zeldas or 2. That theres something in the fallen timeline that puts this premonition into zeldas head as a warning so that it can be undone or 3. Theres a timeline where she doesnt pay attention to it or that its impossible to stop without divine time traveling intervention. Either way, the devs make it a timeline because its canon, its literally a fully fleshed out timeline all on its own. Its the foundation by which these other games exists and oot Zelda’s ENTIRE character motivation for her actions in oot. She needed a hailmary to undo the one possible and horrific future.
My understanding of the timelines is also that each detail a scenario in which one of the three shapes the world with a key action from oot- ganon in one, zelda in one, link in one. In the fallen one, ganon just does it and nobody is able to stop it. In the child timeline, Zelda’s wacky plan works out. In the adult timeline, link saves the day and stops ganon.
I also think the games have ALWAYS included “link fails” as a plot possibility, the game over screens in the old games are literally about it. I dont think it has to be complicated multiverse theory, it is as simple as link being stopped by ganon when he’s unprepared, so in other words, ganon wins by playing dark and dirty. He probably defeats link as a CHILD in the dark timeline, because link is a dummy who would do anything to stop him, and zelda probably saw (either through dream or experience) what would happen, so she cooked up locking link away and going into hiding.
This makes way more sense than most of the other comments. I think the issue people have is not seeing the actual event take place, so they can't accept that it happened
Agreed. The video doesn’t seem to acknowledge that Zelda 1, Adventure of Link, and A Link to the Past came out before Ocarina of Time did.
Oh, so Zelda's premonition splits the timeline??
@@paulchapman8023 I'm not sure what video you just watched, because the one I saw very explicitly stated that WW and TP wrote ALttP out of existence initially, and that the Fallen Timeline was the "inelegant solution" to bring it back into the fold (7:30).
You real asf for this
The downfall timeline only makes sense if it's the original timeline. Somewhere down that timeline, the royal family might have used the triforce to try and change the past (since they had the triforce for a good period of time). Their wish results in a multiverse, leading to the adult and child timeliness in addition to the original downfall timeline.
Congrats you spoiled yourself tears of the kingdom
@@Tokomihonestly tho, I believe botw and totk are downfall because they make no sense in the adult or childhood time.. or any timeline for that matter. Up until they mentioned the imprisoning war and basically contradicted the entire adult and child timeline
@@m_ron2742 some theories I've seen have said that Botw and TOTK take place in a timeline where all of the previous three had come back together, explaining why there's references to every timeline
@@lukasprogamin6044 My personal headcanon is that Hyrule Warriors, the original, serves as an official part of the Canon which conveniently gathers several parallel worlds including Wind Waker and Twilight Princess into one abomination of a period and that the gates (which happen to be floating in the sky,) are never seperated from the present making it so many world suddenly mix together. I can't even conceptually imagine how TotK works at this point though.
@@TheAndrain Your headcanon is wrong, Aounuma has said himself this didn't happen
The three timelines made sense to me,
1. Child Timeline - Zelda sends Link further back before they met at the end of the game using the Ocarina of Time to live his lost years as a kid.
2. Adult Timeline - Continuation after Ganondorf was beaten in the future. Link is now in the Child Timeline
3. Fallen Hero Timeline - This is the timeline where Kid Link did not travel back by returning the Master Sword since Zelda sent him back further using the Ocarina. There is no Link in this timeline and the last confrontation he had with Ganondorf was outside the castle where he lost and with the Temple of Time open and no Hero in that timeline Ganondorf just took the Triforce.
This is my favorite version but I don't think it's what they actually had in mind considering the Fallen Hero name
Can you explain the third one again?
@@havewissmart9602 I think he's saying that Link picks up the Master Sword, travels forward 7 years, and dies to Ganondorf. So it's basically OoT without Link.
@@Icemario87 does that fix the problem discussed in the video?
@@havewissmart9602 Sort of, because it's not necesaarily dependent on Link dying. For e.g.:
(1) Link is born >---(2) Picks Sword 7yrs pass---> (3) Adult defeats Ganondorf >----> (4) Zelda sends Link back to [1].
1&4. Link never picks up the sword, leading to Twilight Princess.
2. There is no Link, leading to Zelda 1&2, LttP, etc.
3&4. Link is gone, but he defeated Ganondorf before leaving, leading to The Wind Waker.
Something that you said about why doesn't every final boss have a branching timeline had a thought occur to me. The timeline splits are special to Ocarina of Time because time had already been made unstable. With Ganondorf entering the Sacred realm and Link being put to sleep or stasis or whatever, Link was able to go back and forth through time throughout the game. That ability must have put enormous strain on the fabric of reality, making branching timelines and alternative realities possible and maybe the only way to stabilize reality itself.
Not only that but there could very well be infinite timelines splits, but Nintendo only makes games about this one timeline split
A timeline that link dies to a chicken
This is canon and I refuse to believe otherwise
And in that timeline, a chicken *BECOMES A LINK*!
My interpretation of it is that the downfall timeline is things as they were supposed to play out without any time travel intervention. I think the is the most likely explanation since it is the original timeline. Since OoT was always meant to be a prequel of aLTTP, I follow it in that order. While OoT is a prequel it still told an evolving story because in that game we change the course of history.
Exactly what I think!
The Fallen Hero timeline being the original timeline, and the OoT that we play being the result of the Sage of Time sending visions of the future back in time to her younger self and to Link in order to stop Ganondorf's rise to power before it happens only for their actions to directly cause it fits mechanically and thematically.
It would certainly explain why OoT Link was supposed to be older when he pulled out the Master Sword despite no other Link facing that restriction.
Still does not really explain any age restriction on pulling the master sword. Well, there are more mundane reasons like not having the strength to pull the sword but then there is the question of why it trapped link the sacred realm which seemingly evades all explanation. Also, why can't adult link use child items like boomarang and sticks? I am really confused by that both in terms of lore and mechanically... There just does not seem to be any need for that restriction.
I think the fallen timeline is better treated as a "what if..." branch, not necessarily a set in stone timeline that definitely happens when link dies in another universe, but a telling of the events that might occur if he lost
This is exactly what my headcanon is.
Exactly! The only way the Fallen timeline could happen is if a universal in-game event were to happen like the cutscenes after beating Ganondorf. If a player goes through the entire game without dying a single time, the Fallen timeline can't happen
@@milestone380 yeah but your playthrough isn't necessarily the Canon story. Link never actually failing isn't really a problem
@@nigeladams8321 it is though. The way Nintendo explains the Fallen Hero timeline is that you play OoT as normal, get all the way up to Ganondorf, but lose that battle. Ignoring the plotholes that that creates, what if the player never loses to Ganondorf? The Adult and Child timelines all happen and are set up in cutscenes that everyone sees. There's nothing like that showing Ganondorf beating Link, and if a player never dies during their battle with Ganondorf, the Fallen Hero timeline can't happen
It would've been so much better if there was an actual in-game event that shows what happens if Ganondorf wins, or if Nintendo never shoehorned in this 3rd timeline to begin with
@@milestone380 the player doesn't have to literally lose, why would that be a requirement. That's super arbitrary
Actually, there is an "in universe" explanation for the "hero falls" timeline. In the game, there are actually two separate instances of timeline splits. Link first travels back in time when he punts the master sword back into the pedestal. It's reasonable to assume that, when this happens, there is a split in the timeline. For adult link, whenever young link accomplishes something in the past, it doesn't change the current timeline, but creates two alternative timelines. One where the past was changed, and one where it wasn't. This would mean there is a timeline where Link has literal insurmountable obstacles in the form of tasks only young link can complete, but hasn't. Therefore, adult link fails. This means that there are dozens if not hundreds of timelines specific to branching off of ocarina of time, but we can consolidate them assuming that there are only three major outcomes of the timeline. Two that branch off from the end of the game, and one that consists of the any possible branch where link ran into a problem he could only solve by going back in time. This means that there are not just one, but many "hero falls" timelines, but they are all basically identical. Enough at least, that there is no reason for nintendo to make multiple versions of a link to the past.
What
This is the one. The magical influence is LITERALLY Ganondorf, as the wielder of the Triforce of Power.
@@AeonTH Yup. No other game, not even the adult timeline, has Link go about his adventure as early as he did in OOT and MM. At that age no amount of darkness sealing steel could defeat someone that still makes you piss the bed.
hey, this ain’t half bad
Nice
My understanding of the "defeated timeline" is that it is the original intended timeline (ALTTP->LA->TLoZ->TAoL), which flowed quite smoothly. That is, until OoT decided to change a critical moment in Hyrule's history, Ganon ends up being sealed in the Dark World by the combined powers of the Seven Sages WITHOUT the full Triforce, as opposed to the ALTTP manual and in-game information telling you he possesses the full relic.
This would retroactively mean that the other two timelines (the adult and child timelines) are the REAL what-if timelines based on whether or not Ganondorf enters the Sacred Realm (WW) and obtains the full Triforce (ALTTP) or not (TP). I don't know why Nintendo decided to make OoT so open-ended when they could have easily made Ganondorf pull a fast one on Link and Zelda during their battle and take the courage and wisdom pieces without them knowing. Ganon would be sealed by the Seven Sages leading directly to ALTTP with almost no lore discrepancies.
Tldr: The "defeated timeline" is the original timeline; the "adult and child timelines" are the what-ifs. Nintendo screwed up when writing Ocarina of Time's ending.
Good explanation. I never re ally thought of it that way.
I think it's because, canonically, he can't take Triforce pieces like that. The owner has to be defeated.
Of course, that leaves the question as to why Link didn't claim the Triforce of Power at the end of OoT. Maybe because Zelda sent him back in time before he could?
@@Swiftbow With Ganon defeated, Zelda sends Link back (which _does not_ send his Triforce piece back, because there are not 2 Triforces of courage in the child timeline), effectively leaving Princess Zelda alone with all three pieces of the Triforce in the adult timeline. She, and her bloodline, keeps them and when later Ganon escapes and no hero rises against him, her grandson(?) Daphnes Nohansen Hyrule wishes that all of Hyrule be flooded... so no one can be hurt.
But yeah, if Link was defeated at the end of OoT, then Ganondorf would have the full Triforce. Hyrule then mounts the Sealing War to stop him and we have the backstory from the ALttP manual.
I wouldn't necessarily calling it "messing up" the ending, in that... would you want to PLAY/buy Ocarina of Time if Link lost at the end? Probably not.
I miss the days before the official timeline when we fans debated different timeline theories. Fun times.
It was fun being able to clown on the old IGN timeline, that inexplicably put Oracle of Ages and Seasons on opposite branches of the timeline because whoever did the timeline had never played either game and forgot to google the plot.
Shouts out to nintendo for making an even worse timeline than that.
Simple solution, "timelines" were always fanwank and Nintendo never really gave a shit about any sort of coherent shared world between these games until they saw people arguing about it. They realized they could make a quick buck and made their own retroactive fanwank timeline, but since *they* wrote it, it's the "official" one this time.
There is no timeline other than direct sequels and the vague implication that the events of other titles also happened at some point.
@@colbyboucher6391 quick buck how?
@@svennevs5740 Hyrule Historia? The book that canonized the idea of "timelines" in the first place?
@@colbyboucher6391 That is anything but "quick buck"
I do remember first learning about the "hero is defeated" timeline and thinking "but the hero WASN’T defeated. I was there, i won that fight"
Yeah? That's why it's a split in the timeline
It's a pivotal point that has massive consequences whether or not you specifically lost.
@@nigeladams8321 idk why timelines are so hard for some people
@@cajunking5987 idk why jokes are so hard for some people
And i thought the opposite, “i’ve lost at least once against EVERY boss” 😂
Yeah it doesn’t really make sense. But I like that each of the triforce welders have their own timeline where they win. Link in adult, Zelda in child, and Ganon in downfall
Ganon "wins" by spending most of his time either imprisoned inside the Sacred Realm or dead and waiting for his underlings or "someone else" (Yuga) to come along and revive him so that he may have his few minutes in the spotlight before going back to sleep that. That said i do admit i like the idea of the 3 timelines been representative of each character's "traits" more than their victories as they all seem to favor aspects which seem connected to each Triforce bearers's personality and background. Adult Timeline is all about responsibility and leadership leading to Zelda been focal to that timeline's story. Child is about overcoming scary and creepy monsters (Majora's Mask and the Twili) making sense to focus on Link. Finally the Downfall has Ganon at his strongest by possessing the full Triforce and been able to attack Hyrule with an army of monsters as shown in the original The Legend of Zelda on the NES. All 3 timelines fit the "themes" of their respective games making sense that each one would "belong" to one of the 3 respective Triforce wielders.
Interestinv perspective but i think it would be fairly easy to make an argument for any game being themed after any one you want, there is no explicit signs of timelines being themed after each of the three triforce wielders.
@@elio7610
Adult = 3 Zeldas lead Hyrule = Wisdom
Child = Link faces scary stuff = Courage
Downfall = Ganondorf gets full Triforce = Power
Zelda wisdom timeline because she sends link back in time and they stop Ganon before he can do anything
Power in the downfall timeline for obvious reasons. Ganon wins
Courage in the adult timeline since it’s basically a normal link adventure
I’m only talking about how the timelines start, not each timeline as a whole
Makes sense to me.
I like the idea that the three timelines should be as follows; the timeline where adult link beats Gannon and gets sent back from; the timeline where link gets sent to after defeating Gannon; and the original timeline that link left when he took that 7 year jump. That timeline doesn't have a hero in it to beat or get defeated by Gannon, so he's free to take over, find all the pieces of the triforce and become Gannon in peace.
Link just sleeps for 7 years. So I think that's still the same timeline.
VortexxyGaming had a theory that the Fallen Timeline was THE original timeline. She proposed that Zelda in OoT never had visions to alert her to the danger of Gandondorf, so Link never had an audience with her, which ultimately led to his failure. She reasoned that a future Zelda used the TriForce to wish that the Zelda in OoT had her visions, thus making a new timeline. And then the eventual Adult Timeline.
Not a fan of this theory as it proposes ALL Zeldas sharing the ability of foresight due to future timeline shenanigans making it impossible for a villain to do ANYTHING that cannot be countered by a future Zelda mingling with her past selves. I prefer to think the Downfall Timeline is a "mirror" timeline to the timesplit one that exists independent of the one where Zelda splits the timeline leading to Ganon's defeat over Link and the events of the Sealing War and A Link to the Past.
Miss Vortexxy so much...
@@MagillanicaLouM I so wish she managed to play Breath of the Wild before that stupid car accident... (sigh). I'm sure she would have loved the game and would have made tons of theories surrounding it's Lore both before and after the reveal of Tears of the Kingdom. May she never be forgotten by the Zelda community.
i think it'd be safe to say that all the jumping back and forth made Ocarina of time a sort of nexus point where reality was unstable enough for the 3 pieces of the triforce to peel away a timeline that's favorable to their holders.
explains why theres no issue with skyward sword, since the triforce had already been assembled and used. plus the loop there was closed pretty tight anyways.
Nice
I'd really appreciate a video from you with a summary of the fan-made timelines. I think it would jive well with your audience who is here for video game lore and I personally just really like your analysis. I could see you doing a great job looking at these fan theories and seeing which ones you think hold up the best.
There would be a lot of different theories...
The only way to fix the whole multiverse thing is if Nintendo says that the Downfall Timeline happens because Link fails AT ANY TIME during Ocarina of Time.
-He died in the final battle? DF Timeline
-He drowned in the Water Temple? DF Timeline
-He died at the Deku Tree? DF Timeline
-Ruto decided to keep Link and not allow him to fullfill his destiny? DF TIMELINE
They should make it the default Game Over Timeline, so no matter how link fail, it eventually becomes the Downfall Timeline. That way, it also, TECHNICALLY, you can see it ingame, as you get a Game Over.
Personally, I like the _idea_ of a timeline in which the hero is defeated. I can understand not just the practical necessity of it from a lore perspective, but there's also a certain morbid mystique to the concept of the chosen hero being defeated by the villain and seeing what kind of terrible world is created from that defeat, where evil reigns over the land. To then get a story of redemption, wherein the hero reappears some time later and eventually defeats the evil again to bring some measure of peace and prosperity to the ravaged world feels triumphant and dramatic. It makes for a good _story._
...But it doesn't expressly make for a good _timeline._ I can't really add much to what you already said because I'm pretty much in agreement with all of it. The best I can do to play devil's advocate is that the only way you could rationalize the Fallen Hero Timeline is that, by a slight stretch of the imagination, there kinda-sorta _is_ some amount of magic involved, with that being: the Triforce. More specifically, the hero chosen by the gods (Link) is a counterpart to another being chosen by the gods: Ganondorf. He is in possession of the Triforce of Power and, as such, his victory is the only victory that could feasibly occur within the canon because, since Link is chosen, he is absolutely _assured_ to win, always. That is, unless Ganondorf is able to beat him, since he too is chosen. In that instance, the only defining factor between them is which one can defeat the other, through raw skill and determination in a clash of good vs. evil.
In this manner, there can't be any other timeline splits for any reason. Link _will_ always win, right up until he's faced with a Triforce-infused Ganondorf, in which they're both evenly matched and must rely on their own abilities to win. They're both _elevated_ by the gods and _capable_ of winning, but neither is _assured_ to win because they're both chosen.
That's the best explanation I've got. And it's not even air-tight because that then begs the question why there aren't other splits still with similar outcomes in any instance in which Ganondorf is still in possession of the Triforce, such as in Wind Waker and Twilight Princess, so there's still major problems with this concept.
Again, I like the _idea_ of it. It's a fun story. But it's not good for the health of a timeline.
I mean it honestly does make for a good timeline, just a alternative one. Eh nah you do not really need that stuff to rationalize it.
I mean those splits still probably exist, we just have not seen games based on them.
It is when done well.
This is genius. I would give you an award if this was Reddit haha.
You ask why couldn't this happen in other games where Ganon has the Triforce. Well, what if it has to do with him being a kid? In OoT, Link wasn't able to wield the sword until he was an adult, by ruling of the sages or goddesses. The only other game where Link wields the master sword as a child is Wind Waker--the game that takes place in the timeline where evil ruled for 7 years. Maybe the only reason WW Link was granted access to the Master Sword is because the sages/goddesses wanted to prevent another apocalypse, and WW Link, still a child, was the only option.
My point is that the Master Sword's age limitation is what caused Ganon to be successful, somehow..
Good idea!
@@Jdudec367 yeah i don’t know why that’s so confusing for people
Well... isn't OoT the only time Ganondorf is defeated BUT he keeps the Triforce of Power? Every other time he's defeated (to the best of my knowledge), Link takes it from Ganon's body.
That could explain why that particular battle was inconclusive, as far as the timestream is concerned.
All this could've avoided if OoT had a version of Zelda II's game over screen. Instead of "RETURN OF GANNON", it could have been,
*The hero has fallen, and soon so does the princess. Ganondorf takes the completed Triforce, and is sealed away in the Sacred Realm. His evil corrupts the land into the Dark World. All is lost.*
*GAME OVER*
this is how we felt back in 2011 when Hyrule Historia came out. But now, I really think there could be some canonical ways to make a 3erd split in Ocarina.
A lot of people have theorized how Link going back and forward in time could have created a 3erd timeline wich he later abandon. That could be it, since the books state "the hero is defeated" yet they don't explain how. The defeat of the hero could have been that he just disappeared in that timeline, therefore people thought he was defeated.
this is a lot better than what we got
The Fallen Hero timeline being the original timeline, and the OoT that we play being the result of the Sage of Time (Zelda) sending visions of the future back in time to her younger self and to Link in order to stop Ganondorf's rise to power before it happens only for their actions to directly cause it fits mechanically and thematically.
It would certainly explain why OoT Link was supposed to be older when he pulled out the Master Sword despite no other Link facing that restriction.
We didnt feel like that, we all knew it was a what if and still a THEORY
@@ElliotKeaton I like your theory better
@@ElliotKeaton thinking about it a little more, how does that explains the age restriction of the master sword?
It comes from Nintendo's misunderstanding of what we wanted as fans. We don't care if some of the older games are side stories or noncanon. We always just wanted to know what games were intended to be connected. It's clear that there is a "modern" timeline, and a "classic" timeline, and that for anything in the classic timeline wasn't ever meant to be connected to the newer games in a significant way. At the time when the classic games were being made, they didn't know how big the series would become or how they would eventually make a blueprint for connecting the stories. The modern timeline includes the biggest games in the series that actually had thought put in as to where they belong on the timeline. The classic games belong together, in their own disconnected branch with ALBW. They attempted to shoehorn the classic games in anyways and that gave us the DT.
My idea regarding the zelda timeline is that the 3 timelines are basically the zelda equivilent of a dragon break from elder scrolls, where what happens in the 3 doesnt matter because the final result will be breath of the wild.
The game which the timelines merge.
Which to me is stupid as F you know why because I love the adult timeline more then the others and I would love to see it go towards a new direction future it’s why I hope your a 100% absolutely wrong on that other wise DEATH TO CREATIVITY of what has been build up since OOT and then iam done permanently and then i will truly say yeah this world is out F ideas ugh 😑
The merge thing is entirely made up by fans. The developers only ever said: “It’s up to your imagination where it falls on the timeline” and refused to reveal its placement. That’s it. No merge.
@@WindMageMaster Read the first 2 words of what i said.
@@Belks1453 Fair point, I mainly replied after reading the last sentence since lots of people seem to say that like Nintendo confirmed it, but if it’s all your own theory, then yeah, never mind.
The Entire premise of “Fallen Hero” timeline was to set up the game: Link to the Past (1991) in the offical timeline. Before the events of said game and after link dies in OoT, the Seven Sages in a last act of desperation move to seal Ganondorf (who at this point has obtained all three pieces of the Triforce) into the Spirit Realm in order to save Hyrule. Because Ganon has what he wants, the events of the Child and Adult timelines do not happen as a result, thus creating said “Fallen” timeline.
My theory is that the OoT Ganondorf battle, and Link’s possible loss, was just so important in the uni/multiverse that it was strong enough to cause such a timeline to exist. It’s far more of an impactful event than other boss battles. And definitely a more “important” Ganon fight than others.
I guess
I had always considered Four Swords Adventures to be a link (heh) between the older and newer games, explaining that Ganondorf was reincarnated as a different male Gerudo and regained the power of Ganon when he acquired the trident. The game ends with him being sealed away, and this is a perfect setup for A Link to the Past, where Ganon is unsealed and wields the same trident against Link. I still think this is a better way of integrating the pre-Ocarina games into the newer timeline than what Nintendo actually did.
Its funny. Four Swords Adventure was actually conceived originally to be the game that would contain Ganondorf acquiring the Triforce and the Imprisoning war, which would lead to it becoming the true link between the 3D games and the SNES/NES games. But Miyamoto the slayer of complex storytelling struck and had those elements stricken from the record in favor of a more gameplay focus. Thus Four Swords Adventures has its ALttP connections heavily reduced and you just had a game where Ganondorf doesn't get the Triforce, doesn't start the Imprisoning War, and ends up sealed in the Four Sword. This is likely why Nintendo never considered just making Four Swords the connecting game since there would be a lot of inconsistencies.
Thus were left with their old story of OoT being the direct prequel to ALttP. And that lead to the current solution of keeping the old games in the timeline.
I saw the Downfall Timeline split happening because you need to travel back to the past once in Ocarina of Time to complete the game, in order to get the Silver Gauntlets as a child.
You go back to the past, changing history, and then travel back to the future, having removed the Silver Gauntlets from that timeline.
This means the Downfall Timeline happens first, when Link goes back in time and changes the past.
Now there is the Downfall Timeline where the hero didn't have the tools needed to defeat Ganondorf, and thus is defeated, forcing the Sages to seal the entire Sacred Realm
There is the Child Timeline, where Zelda sends Link back to the past before removing the Master Sword and changing history, and Ganondorf is stopped.
And Finally there is the Adult Timeline where Ganondorf was sealed, but Link doesn't exist.
...Tears of the Kingdom...
@@beezusHrist wdym
@@71Derme Haha you'll see on May 12
@@beezusHrist but the theory of the guy who post the main comment has sense?
@@71Derme It would seem Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom explore the Downfall Timeline. The Imprisoning war is mentioned in Tears of the Kingdom... and Rauru...
You’re selling the community incredibly short here. I watched a well produced fan theory on the Zelda timeline at my first apartment in college. I believe it was from a prominent gaming site since the transitions and production was much higher quality than basement TH-camrs of the time. That was winter or spring of 2007, not 2011. I had moved apartments repeatedly and graduated well well after by 2011. That was my first deep introduction to Zelda timeline theory. They explained Aonuma said there were two endings to OoT when talking before WW. The split timeline fan theory had been argued by fans since wind waker and TP was a direct conflict that all but confirmed the split timeline to the fans. In both cases Aonuma said two endings. The community pretty much cemented their opinion of 2 timelines back in 06.
Seems clear to me Nintendo had a rough idea of 2 timelines but never fully realized it. Several years after fans made sense of it, Nintendo decided they wanted to debunk what was already reasoned out so they argued a third timeline and then claimed this was planned decades ago. If that were true Aonuma would have mentioned 3 endings not 2 in either interview.
Again, the fans did the math before Nintendo did based on Nintendo’s own words, so Nintendo changed the rules several years after the fact.
This is why Brian David Gilbert's "Perfect Zelda Timeline" is canon, in my eyes. He's able to recontextualize the events of the fallen hero timeline in a way that only allows it to occur in one set event pertaining to Ocarina of Time.
Do you have a link?
@@Northraider123 Fair warning, my initial comment was (mostly) a joke
th-cam.com/video/Q-25c8Rsobw/w-d-xo.html
There are infinite timelines. We just don’t have games for all of them.
Very good analysis!
Yeah the split in the timeline always existed. Ocarina of Time was supposed to be the Imprisoning War, at the time we all recognised it as the Imprisoning War, despite a few differences. We all recognised it as the story of how a thief named Ganondorf stole the Triforce and became Ganon, only to be sealed away by seven sages. When Majora's Mask came out it was apparent that it was about an alternate future, the one Link had gone back to. So the split already happened in 2000. At the time I thought it was interesting.
It's really The Wind Waker that made things complicated. Like A Link to the Past it was set after Ganon was sealed. It was basically occupying the same space. At the time it made me think they had rebooted the series starting from the same point in time. And when you really think about it, that's actually what happened.
Then with Hyrule Historia they tried to rescue the older games, that were effectively, as you put it, written out of existence.
The thing is, Hyrule Historia didn't really solve anything.
Before it, we had two 'storylines', based on evidence from the games and developer interviews:
1) OOT - ALTTP - OOA - OOS - LA - TLOZ - TAOL, with MM in an alternate timeline.
2) TMC - FS - OOT - TWW - PH - ST, with MM and TP in an alternate timeline.
We just had no idea of how to reconcile these two storylines and where the heck to put Four Swords Adventures. A lot of people said before A Link to the Past, but that didn't really make sense because Ganondorf doesn't die at the end of Ocarina of Time, he is just sealed away.
Hyrule Historia provided a nice place to insert Four Swords Adventures, but it's just that, a nice place, it's not really where it's supposed to be. We don't actually know where it's really supposed to be. Most likely before A Link to the Past, but the game story was poorly written and it clashes with prior information.
As for the two storylines, as I said Hyrule Historia didn't really solve it. It just said: "It's a different story, that begins with the hero being defeated". Because that's what it is, not an alternate timeline, a side-story; which is funny because it came before The Wind Waker, so actually the newer games should be the side-story.
The two storylines were already divided, so Hyrule Historia didn't really provide anything. It just artificially created a connection with a line on a page.
🤷🏻♂
I had a chat with a friend of mine who is a fellow LoZ enthusiast and we came up with a potential 3rd timeline that just about fits rather than “Link dies”.
At the end of OoT, kid Link talks to Zelda and warns her about Ganondorf, she gives him the Ocarina of Time and tells him to get out of town, and she warns her father about his evil intent, leading to Majora’s Mask…
Our thought was, what if her father didn’t take his daughter seriously about how evil Ganondorf is…and with Link not around, there’s no one to stop him from finding some other way to obtain the Triforce. This leads to the Hyrule in Downfall timeline.
I have a theory where-in a the "hero is defeated" timeline is actually just a dream type set of events that happens through those 7 years that Link is trapped in the sacred realm during OoT. That those games are essentially a set of trials to strengthen him for when he returns. But also surmise that a new timeline in reality can spawn from that.
The downfall timeline exists because oot is a prequel to a link to the past, which was published a few years earlier
I always thought that the reason that the fallen hero timeline worked after link died is because if link dies anywhere else, in any other games, the world is just kind of doomed. there is nothing cause ganon will always take over if link dies. the only exception is link's death in ocarina of time, because the world doesn't actually get taken over by ganon when he dies, since he is sealed in the sacred realm. The reason the fallen hero timeline works is because its the only time where link's death doesn't basically end the world.
This. One million percent.
If Link dies anywhere else in the game to any other enemy, it's game over.
But with the sages free, even link dying is not enough for Ganondorf to win at that point. He is still sealed away, and Hyrule isn't taken over. This is only possible at the final battle in hyrule castle, and explains nicely why this game and this death in particular created a spin off timeline.
Except, the Adult Timeline exists, and there was a situation where there was no Link to defeat Ganondorf, and the world effectively ended. Yes, Ganondorf was defeated, but it still was the End of the World.
Wind Waker is Post Apocalyptic, it takes place after the End of the World. If the present of another fight between Ganondorf and Link being possible many years after the end of the world allows for the timeline to continue, then Link loosing to any other enemy in any other situation would not end the timeline, it would just merely continue on Post Apocalyptic to allow a new Link to rise up at a later time...and the Downfall Timeline is pretty much Post Apocalyptic throughout most of its games (that take place in Hyrule...The Oracle games and LA don't count). Only the Child Timeline is not Post Apocalyptic, Hyrule is not reduced to ruin but instead prospers alongside all the neighbouring realms (except for Gerudo...for them it was the end of the world, same as with the other two timelines).
@@StarlasAiko While it's true in adult timeline there is no Link to stop Ganondorf, the goddesses step in and flood the world, stopping Ganondorf. The thing the two timelines have in common is no hero to stop Ganon, but intervention from elsewhere (The Sages/Goddesses). Downfall is post-apocalyptic because Ganondorf wasn't defeated; where as wind waker is post-apocalyptic because the world was forced to be filled with water to stop Ganondorf.
I wouldn't say there's any contradiction there. There's no hero, apocalypse happens, but for different reasons and from different interventions.
At least, that's how I understand it.
@@StarlasAiko Well I think its sort of like, if link dies in wind waker, the only other thing a hypothetical new link from the future would do is the exact same thing that would normally happen in wind waker. none of the other games in that timeline could happen if wind waker doesn't happen
@@StarlasAiko also there is the thing of in the battle between OoT and wind waker, there was literally divine intervention, and it was only because the people of hyrule started praying and asking them to save them. There were no people to pray and beg the gods to save them immediately after link dies in ocarina. Unless maybe you want to count like the hyruleans in kakariko, but a small minority of people in castle town actually survived the 7 year period where ganondorf took over, not nearly enough to have any divine intervention
The whole "timeline" idea in the Zelda chronology only serves to put Ocarina on a pedestal
The way I like to think of the fallen hero timeline is that when you travel in time in ocarina of time you are actually abandoning timelines in which ganon is not being defeated, for example when you do the spirit temple stuff, you create that timeline and become adult in that timeline, leaving behind that first timeline in which you became adult, this timeline becoming a timeline without a hero (this is of course following the time travel theory that if you travel to the past you don't change the future but create another timeline instead) prove that this is what happens? none, I just like to think of it this way cause it makes more sense for a timeline split xP
Time travel just doesn't seem to make sense any way you look at it.
"Please unsubscribe and unclick the bell notification"
Jesus christ that caught me offgaurd 💀💀💀
Lmao same, not sure if its a bit or genuine mistake
The official time line always seemed so silly to me. The games always appeared to me to be retellings of old stories from different perspectives, the way myths change and shift throughout time. One might even think of these tales of old as, let's say, legends.
There's like 0 real-world evidence to suggest that there are infinite diverging timelines, one of the least provable things out there, I always cringe when people push that
I always liked the theory that the 'fallen hero' Timeline was split by a link to the past, not Ocarina of time. If Im recalling the theory right, The timeline split is caused by Links wish on the triforce being to undo Ganon's evil entirely, which in turn split the timeline by retroactively undoing Ganon winning against link, which inadvertantly caused Ocarina of time to occur with ITS split timeline.
Magic can still explain the third timeline, presumably sending Link back isn’t instantaneous and there is a moment where he is neither in the present or the past, that moment creates the third timeline with no link and Ganon wins.
My personal cope for the "fallen"-line is that the wish LttP Link did at the end gave OoT Link the power to defeat Ganon.
This. This is what made me love the way the split works. The idea being LttP Link wished to undo everything Ganon did, which includes killing his previous incarnation, which results in the other timelines.
It can't be though. His wish was to bring everyone killed during the events of the game back to life
@@Lucrei. so if you google a bit, the general consesus is that the wish was explicitly, "Is that the effect of Ganon's evil actions are reversed, thus restoring Hyrule (and the Sacred Land) to its former glory." The wording on that can also be interrpreted as being able to save past link, however that happened.
@@justfriendly7676 ¿Why undoe such a *specific* event caused by a past Ganon (Link's death) instead of say... Vaati's escape from the Four Sword or Vaati's transformation into a villain, Demise's attack on the Surface World and so on and so forth? Undoing the death of a past Link doesn't make sense if Link can also undoe all other negative outcomes caused by Ganon's predecessor (Demise) not to mention the many other negative events which have taken place in the timeline prior. This theory makes ALttP Link come as a hypocrite for choosing to specifically save his past incarnation but not anyone else who suffered in previous storylines.
@@justfriendly7676 So he saves his past self from death but not all the people Ganondorf killed while he ruled Hyrule with an iron fist for 7 long years? Kind of hypocritical.
I think you’re looking at it wrong, Ratatoskr. Yes, the timeline implicitly splits with every play-through and every action, and every defeat and every victory… but that doesn’t mean they’re making games for all of those branches, that’s all. You just have to imagine where those splits go.
The reason for the timeline being a split where Link lost to Ganondorf is because of two factors:
1) Ganondorf has the entire triforce
2) An imprisoning war occurs to have Ganon in the Dark World to begin with, which could only occur if Link had freed the 7 Sages from their respective dungeons in OoT.
That’s it. Every other “Link dies” ending is left to the imagination, and the most likely result of those imaginations are that it’s just game over, ganon wins, everyone loses-but it could be more and that story is just never told. This one is.
There infinite instances of each copy of the branching timelines in accordance to the branching of the players. There’s nothing wrong with it, we will never have a complete history, encompassing all things that are possible in the branching and winding chains of chase and effect. That’s fine, it’s like any other story, with a history before and after the events focused on, with branching universes due to quantum mechanics with every little probability.
It may be frustrating, but it’s not bad. It’s just how it is-it’s more than likely how the *real world* is. We will never glimpse into other timelines, we can never look even into everything in our own world, past present of future-we can only live our lives and see what is before us. To endeavor, to succeed, and to fail, with the consequences and results of each extending into infinity, and branching in ways we will never know.
---------
That being said, Ocarina of Time is *still* the game where even without quantum branching and purely with known in-universe logic you would expect the timeline to split in other ways because Link jumps back and forth between time-think about it. He has to jump back and forth for the Well and the Spirit Temple at absolute minimum, and **the things as a child influence things in the future that were not already true**. WHICH MEANS, every time Link pulled out and put in the Master Sword he was **splitting the timeline**.
This should be intuitive, since Link clearly split the timeline every time he jumped back to the dawn of the first day in Majora’s Mask-Link would carry masks and times with him for events that had not occurred when he jumped backwards-this means the Timeline necessarily split.
So basically, when you say there’s no magic involved to cause this… there is and you are, as far as I can tell, factually incorrect. There is likely a trail of doomed timelines Link left behind attempting to reach the one(s) that he could save by crossing over.
It’s a sobering thought, but it really highlights the idea of battling against all odds and forcing forcing a righteous victory when doomed to failure.
I think it’s worth remembering whenever a hero achieves an unlikely victory that there are those timelines where they failed. That they weren’t divinely ordained to victory just because they’re the good guy. They’re the one beating the odds, not the one bullying the villain who never had a chance. ☺️
The acknowledgment of those failures, the idea that failure has a cost beyond just trying again, I think is a perspective worth putting forward. That success is meaningful because we can fail. That good is meaningful because it *can* lose and evil can win. That life is precious *because* we are mortal. That all of our experiences are truly unique, that they are not defined, that they are what they are because of our action and not because it’s merely destined to be so. That everything we do happens against all probable odds, that we *exist* against all probable odds.
That, even if we do fail, even if evil wins, even if we die, even if we squander our unique slice of probability that we can perceive, it’s not the end. Merely a new beginning… I think it’s beautiful, profound, and true. That this timeline where Link died resulted in Link’s greatest triumph in claiming the entire Triforce, in another life. (There may be some Buddhist undertones in the Worldview , I’m not sure, haha)
I don’t think it’s stupid at all, my friend, and I hope you consider it again from another perspective.
PS - I liked the video even though I completely disagree and think you’re wrong, just because I love how you present yourself.
Wow. This is actually a pretty profound way of looking at the Zelda timelines. I especially like the point you made about how Link's greatest failure paved the way for his greatest success; I was never cognizant of that irony before. Bravo.
@@majine.2606 Thank you! Link’s victories are only proportional to Ganon’s I think, and so the two are like the swinging of a pendulum.
It reminds me as well of Breath of the Wild, in that Link failed 100 years ago, and so now the odds that Link is up against are even greater than they were before, but still he must triumph-and so he does, by the perspective of the story.
Doubtlessly though, there are many timelines where the revived Link fails (game over), and there are even a few timelines where Link defeats Calamity Ganon without even bothering to free the Divine Beasts or obtain the Master Sword, lol. There is a *cinematic* and functional difference in fighting Ganon without having done so, after all.
It is unlikely that any continuing product (like Tears of the Kingdom) or timeline will directly address those worlds as opposed to a more broadly representative “normal” one, but I think it’s safe to say they exist. The unique freedom and viability of individual experience is part of the whole joy of open world games (or really even games as a medium as opposed to books or movies in general), and I don’t think it’s in Nintendo’s mindset to take away the legitimacy of the individual player’s path and experience if it can be avoided-ditto everything Miyazaki makes and their open-ended conclusions.
The Downfall Timeline could easily have happened because of the magic in OoT. Consider this: if Link died as a child, it never would have happened because Ganondorf wouldn't have access to the Sacred Realm from the Master Sword's removal. It can ONLY happen if Link dies after Ganondorf takes the tri-force. Therefore, the same magic that created the Adult Timeline forced another split where Link dies or simply never beat Ganondorf.
You know, the whole point to a "legend" is that it is a story retold time and time again, changing per the storyteller to convey the same themes and ideas to that particular time period. The Legend of Zelda can just be a that; the same single story retold time and time again. It being a part of a cohesive canon really undermines that, and, let's face it, it's really unnecessary.
Can we just not apply continuity to everything, please? I know living is hard, uncertain, and seemingly meaningless, but forcing it into art that doesn't need it as some ploy for comfort is a sadder reflection of society than not having it.
The fallen hero time line didn't previously bother me. Now you made me think about it.
The other thought I have for where they could fork the timeline is whether link did or didn't return to hyrule after the end of MM. Since that game is a weird analogy for the afterlife it could be a fallen hero story.
I prefer to think of the Downfall Timeline as a "twin" timeline which mirrors the one that splitted in 2 until the very moment where Link defeated Ganon and Zelda sent him back to a newly created Child Timeline. This way we safely avoid the "what if" problem altogether and we don't have to deal with the fact that the Downfall Timeline could have happened at ANY other point during Link's adventure in Ocarina of Time.
According to Twilight Princess Link did return to Hyrule where he married a woman and birthed a bloodline which lead to the birth of the Hero of Twilight. This was all confirmed in the Hyrule Historia which made it very clear that the Link of Twilight Princess is indeed the descendant of the Hero of Time after he returned from Termina and the events of Majora's Mask.
@@javiervasquez625 I see your point, but MM doesnt tell us what happens next so we could have concluded that either happened. So there could have been an alternate timeline to TP. It isn't perfect. But I like it better than "link somehow didn't win maybe"
@@MrJeldie TP Link is said in game to be a blood descendant of OoT Link, who also appears as the Hero's Shade, which contrasts with WW Link who has the spirit of the hero, but isn't blood related since Link left the timeline.
An issue I have with your stance is that Zelda games prove the multiverse exists... The Sacred Realm, Twilight realm, Lorule, Termina... The games also shows that there are events that play out even if Link loses and while we don't get the biggest picture of what happens we still get a glimpse, Link falling in Zelda 2 allows for Ganon to return, The Moon crashing shows Link becoming a casualty of the event, Not stopping Vaati before the 3rd bell shows him killing Zelda so there are infinite of timelines that's we don't see and to be frank you can literally stick any game in any spot, Hyrule can be flooded as many times as the goddesses want or twilight can spill to any version of Hyrule we know and it can keep going from there with no stop. Link losing to Ganon in Ocarina is a valid set of events that can happen even if you don't like the idea. The only theory I've heard lately that I dislike is the Unified Theory because it combines the 3 timelines we know and that doesn't make sense considering all the possibilities for timelines that there are...
When the timeline first came out, some reddit comment theorized that one time when adult link went back with the song of storms, they created the downfall timeline, since they couldn't have completed that quest without taking information from the future into the past. The timeline he left was the downfall timeline, while the timeline he seeded with the song of storms became the adult timeline.
Seems to me like any time link went back with information or tools that couldn't have been obtained without time travel, a new timeline is created.
That would lead to at least four timelines, since Link has to go back at least twice in-game (once for the Eye of Truth, once for the Silver Gauntlets).
I guess the "fallen timeline" is just abandonware. In a way, both TP and wind waker are remakes of link to the past. They come after Aonuma takes over Zelda production and wanted to institute more creative freedom than was possible under Miyamoto, who is a devout antistory creator. His antistory stance is also the big reason his Zelda games don't connect as well as Aonuma's Zeldas.
Way back in the day I read a theory that I’ve made my own head canon: the fallen hero timeline is the first to happen but at the end of it Zelda takes the timeline back to Skyward Sword, then when OoT happens again Link defeats Ganon and we get the Child and Adult Timelines
I think one way to fix this is for Nintendo to remake Ocarina of Time and add a new story element where Link does actually officially die but before that, he was able to set up a time reversal thing with his ocarina creating the victorious timelines. Or maybe Zelda herself went back in time after Link dies to tell her younger self to do something different which leads to what officially happens in the game.
Well, there actuall IS a 3rd timeline in OoT.
The first time you travel to the future the Windmill Musician already knows the song of storms. You learn it from him, go back and then teach it to him. You could say this is some paradox, but also maybe someone else thought it to him first and you replaced that person. The moment you go back in time and then to the future again, you'll pretty much be in a different future.
Also with the Spirit Temple. The first time when you are in the future the Silver Gauntlets are there. But then you go back in time to pick them up in the past, effectively creating another timeline.
The future where the gauntlets were stored was real, but you never return to it. The hero was active in this timeline but then vanished. Maybe people thought he lost and thus was defeated.
It's kind of a stretch to call it that, but OoT does have a bunch of timelines.
To top it off, there is one that is easier to find: the ending.
Originally, Link and Zelda meet. After which Zelda has to run away, Link meets Ganondorf and gets the Ocarina of Time. But in the end, Link is send back to the moment he meets Zelda. Essentially creating 2 young link timelines: 1 where he travels to the future and 1 where he doesn't because Ganondorf is captured.
This one is most obvious. It gives 2 Young Link Timeslines and 1 Adult Link Timeline.
I liked the timeline when I thought it was supposed to be the timeline where there is no Link in the world. The Hero of Time traveled to the future, but it spawned a timeline where there was never a Hero of Time existing.
I’m glad you mentioned Aonuma’s quote for Twilight Princess. I had never heard it. I just assumed the timeline is made from fan theories, and afterward Nintendo has fun playing with these theories, but never feels beholden to them. When every Zelda game comes out, it’s the fans that decide (debate) where it goes in the timeline. It’s a cool dynamic between developer and consumer.
Link lost. That is best idea Nintendo had when it comes to the Zelda timeline. It takes the standard of “the hero beats the villain” trope, which I think is great. Yes, it could have been done differently, but I disagree in it being bad.
I think a multiverse split is good if it happens from a very significant event. We're not following other timelines that might have occurred after, say, Link fails to sneeze, because it is indeed dumb. But "what if the hero failed" is something many people have always enjoyed exploring. I don't think that's "stupid" at all, it's something many would consider intriguing and worth crafting.
It's a pivotal moment that holds massive consequence. It makes total sense to put the timeline split there. Like you said I doubt link sneezing has a huge effect on events
I’d agree with both arguments here if link failing is something we could actually see play out, besides a game over screen. Even something short like majoras mask’s game over when you fail to stop the moon in time (which IS a significant event that could warrant a timeline split) would have sufficed here. But no, it’s something you would just have to assume happens to have Ganondorf become Ganon and start the dark timeline because Ocarina of Time is just important like that.
@@Julian-um2om it wasn't planned, why would there be more than a game over?
@@Julian-um2om I don't know if terminas Moon crashing would be timeline split levels of significant. We don't know how much if at all Hyrule would be affected by terminas destruction
@@nigeladams8321 well if we go by real life physics, an asteroid the size of termina's moon hitting the planet would have serious consequences for the global climate considering all of the debris sent into the atmosphere.
In my mind I always imagined that it was one of the timelines created when Link hopped back and forth between adult and child Link. He didn't go back to his old timeline, he just created a new timeline and left it without a hero
That's exactly my assumpion too.
Imagine the case where Link collects 9 skulltulas as an adult (every cursed person is still cursed) and then returns to the past to collect the 10th. In the past, the first skulltula guy is not cursed anymore. That's the creation of a new timeline.
@@Enat1510 I think it happens when he goes back in time during the Gerudo Temple stuff, only because it's canon required. You can even get through the Spirit Temple without going back as a kid. Super hard though haha
@@buxzw1945 I think that too, but on top that every single time Link goes back, he creates a fallen timeline
My current headcanon for why there's a downfall timeline is because of the ultimate magic in the franchise: The full triforce. It allows so much to happen. It allows Ganondorf to be protected by any intervention from the gods, it allows Ganondorf's will to be natural law. And with his ability to draw power from the Triforce of Power, it stands to reason that he can do so from the full Triforce without actually making a wish upon it. In any other game where Link can be defeated, there are still several steps preventing anyone from assembling the full Triforce, whether it's collect all the pieces of a triforce, or showing you have a balanced heart or whatever. In Ocarina of Time, Ganondorf already had Zelda and all he needed to do was beat Link to get his piece and... yeah.
Been saying this exact thing for years. It makes NO sense. I hate that the downfall timeline has all the games I grew up playing to that point. Also it's weird that the fallen hero timeline is the only one where the Triforce ends up back in the hands of the royal family and Hyrule survived.
I do agree that the hero is defeated thing never really made much sense. However, I was hoping you could present some alternative ways to fit a link to the past and all the games that follow into the timeline in a way that would make more sense. I'm curious how you or anyone else would make it work.
Nintendo needs to release an Updated Version of the Hyrule Historia with a CORRECT Version including Tears of the Kingdom.
Couldn´t the third timeline be the "correct" "unaltered" Ocarina of time events?
With the other two being the magical alterations from Zelda which weren´t supposed to happen in the first place. That would atleast fix the multiverse thing.
In other words timeline where he doesn't go back in time after winning?
@@shira_yone What i mean is that Zelda not doing anything is the 3rd timeline that leads into link to the past.
The other two timelines are altered by Zeldas actions. That doesn´t mean there are multiverses. It just means Zelda made 2 different timelines with magic that aren´t the original one in which link lost.
Her sending him back made +2 timelines not +1. That way it all still works.
Problem is in the game we win. So we are already not playing the original link looses timeline from my stupid little theory! xD
Yea that's how I think about it too, originally Link loses in OoT but because of aLttP Link's Wish he manages to win which then leads to the split. I have zero basis for this but this is just my personal cope lmao
@@Spinexus I said what you said, but simpler.
If Zelda didn't do anything, that means Link doesn't go back in time.
I just run on a Dragon-Break (Elder Scrolls) rule.
In any case of the Downfall Timeline's genesis in OOT, the amount of time that passes between it and the next title is big enough to where the differences in how Link dies in OOT don't matter much by the time A Link To The Past happens.
So "The Downfall Timeline" is a series of timelines that are indistinguishable from each other outside of the "How Link Died in OOT".
I apply this case to BOTW as well.
BOTW (And TOTK), take place SO long after the final title on each timeline that every permutation of events from the Fallen, Child, and Adult timeline happens in each reality. So in the Child Timeline, a series of events results in a version of Gannondorf getting the triforce and the goddesses flooding hyrule.etc
And I feel this is supported by the "Era of Myth" in the Champion Lore book and also the references to every timeline in BOTW.
BOTW can take place on any timeline becuase all Zelda Timelines become indistinguishable from each other by the time BOTW takes place.
Maybe the event triggering the Fallen Hero Timeline isn’t necessarily Link’s defeat, but the fact that Ganon successfully obtains all three triforce pieces, which would always lead to the Imprisoning War in any timeline? IDK, just a thought.
How would Ganon obtain the Triforce pieces without defeating Link and Zelda?
My head canon at this point is that somehow the timelines reconverge into a unified timeline before Breath of the Wild happens, which is why multiple timelines' events are referenced at the Master Sword ceremony in BotW. There are three timelines, a Triforce that is three-as-one, you get the thematic math. It's a nice way to put all that mucking with the multiverse behind us. That'll be my head canon until something else comes along to change it.
8:30
Hyrule Warriors Age of Calamity may have split the timeline already. It says in one of the loading screen tips that when Terrako went back in time a whole new timeline is formed. After a little research it seems that there are some aspects to Age of Calamity's story that don't line up with Breath of the Wild's at all, so it may not be canon at all. I do wonder what this means for Tears of the Kingdom. Will it acknowledge the potential split timelines in a way that significantly impacts the game or will it not be brought up at all?
Back in highschool I ran a Zelda campaign that took place in the fallen timeline, between OOT and ALTTP. In it the players had to try and rally a broken Hyrule against Ganon, and finish the fight that Link started, eventually pushing Ganon into the Golden Realm and sealing him there, leading right into the start of Link to the Past.
I look back fondly on that campaign, it had some legitimately awesome moments, and a lot of player driven growth and RP. I still have some in jokes with the only player from that game that I'm still in contact with ("We do NOT talk about the Shadow Temple")
I like the third timeline, and I think it works. But it is harder to explain than the first 2. If 1 and 2 exist, 3 should not, if 3 exists 1 and 2 should not, unless multiverse theory is canonically true, or there is more time travel at play than originally thought.
Actually, this video made me consider a different angle that may not have been considered yet- the triforce is responsible for the timeline fracture. Think about it- each timeline represents a different outcome that was desired by the holders of the triforce, and since Zelda opened the sacred realm and sent Link back to the past at roughly the same time, time itself was already fractured in that moment allowing the last Ganon one desperate chance to succeed. It’s a bit of a stretch, but it kind of fits with the overall vibe. That’s part of why the downfall timeline is so… well, dark and distorted compared to the other two; it’s Ganon’s will being made partially true and manifesting in that world.
... Tears of the Kingdom :)
When I was a kid I thought every game was just a parallel universe or retelling, and there was no timeline. Twilight princess and wind waker being connected kinda makes sense.
But the fact that every single game is somehow connected to oot makes no sense to me at all. They should've just left it with twilight princess and wind waker being connected, and the other games just be a parallel universe or something.
i dont think it has to connect. i like the idea that everything is a retelling of the same sort of story it makes it feel more like a fairy tail and i like that feeling
Same. I always saw the Fallen Hero timeline just as the writers having some fun with a what-if scenario and turning it into its own set of stories
Opposite. I hate the idea that nothing is connected. I want events to have consequences in games that take place after those events. I want the story to develop over the course of history, not just be stomped by each subsequent release.
I always end up referring to this timeline as basketball because of that one Brian David Gilbert video 😅
I think the Downfall Timeline works with some slight tweaking. Instead of Link being killed in the final fight, it would go like this:
Boy Link uses the Spiritual Stones to enter the Temple of Time. He lays hand on the Master Sword, but before he can pull it out, Ganondorf (who followed him in) jumps him and kills him. Panicked, the Sages trap him in the Golden Realm where he remains imprisoned till ALTTP.
After ALTTP, Zelda and Link wish on the Triforce to undo the evil Ganon caused. This reverses all the way back to when he killed Link, spawning a new timeline. In this alternate timeline, the Sages create a protective cocoon around Link so Ganondorf can't murder him. The rest of the game continues normally from there.
Zelda and link wish yeah Zelda wasn’t there with link when he made that wish you must be referencing games post a link to the past on that one right? just as a correction
Kind of convoluted to justify Nintendo's bad attempts at consistency. Personally i feel the best solution to the Downfall Timeline debacle is arguing for a "mirror timeline" theory where the events of the Downfall Timeline are revealed to take place in a *SEPERATE* timeline to the one where the timesplit ocurred all as part of a "Divine Plan" set by the Goddesses so that one timeline would lead to the timesplit while the other remained unaffected and unchanged. By using this logic we can safely do away with the Multiverse problem thanks to the Goddesses's own meddling.
@@javiervasquez625 again obviously this was the original plan and out of OOT when it was being developed until retconned so in actuality the down fall timeline truly is the original idea developed outcome so because of the retcon they shoved it as a what if and after this this whole change during development kept going even on after OOT with other Zelda games unfortunately
Anyway to be honest though it would have just made more sense to put the whole downfall after twilight princess and FSA just to have the ganon of the downfall being the new ganondorf but hey that’s just me just to only have two timelines original outcome timeline adult and alternate outcome child
Problem solved and would have developed the child more and with BOTW and tears at the end of it
@@javiervasquez625 like seriously it would have been more natural this way
Originally reality outcome 🌊 Ganondorf dies
for good and a new villain takes over
Meanwhile
The split of the new past
Alternate reality outcome 🌳 Ganondorf dies but is then reincarnated as anew individual Ganondorf the second who becomes ganon for the rest
Why didn’t Nintendo just do that huh it would have streamed line why better and less messy with the split branching instead of a what if after there retcon changed with OOT ending
If he killed link before he pulled out the master sword he wouldn't have got the triforce of power and none of the fallen timeline events would happen
I still don’t get the problem here. This seems more like a “Well I would have rather done it this way” complaint than actually pointing out flaws with Nintendo’s explanation. So what if it’s a “multiverse” explanation? Yeah if Link fails then it’d split off into different events. What is there not to understand? They probably chose to split the event at OOT because having a story where Link fails in the final battle with Gannon is much more interesting than if he lost to a Moblin.
The fallen timeline doesn’t happen because link lost the battle with Ganon. It happens because he used the master sword to travel back in time to get the lens of truth and silver gauntlets, creating a timeline where link just Disappeared and wasn’t around to fight Ganon in the first place.
When headcanon sounds more plausible than the official canon.
Is it possible to interpret it as Ganon specifically killing Link during a time warp, knowing it would create problems that neither of the other timelines could cope with?
I'm really trying to force the timeline into the continuity by saying that, but I mean if you think about it that way, the 3rd timeline exists functionally as the 3 parts of the triforce as a whole all being determined equal in a game that time travel exists being the only fair way to allow the solution to the heroes problems, otherwise you could almost say "why wouldn't they keep this power for the future when Ganon might win again?" or "why didn't they use this power earlier?" or even, "did they hesitate to use it before or after during the timelines that were created unintentionally?"
It kind of wraps it up nicely viewing it that way because it provides a solution to everyone's problems, including Ganon, and that is why they never use it again or never did before, it had unintended side effects of creating a timeline where you could argue they created more suffering rather than simply solved their own.
How about Hyrule and Lorule? Multiverses exist even without time travel, but there needs to be a "Link" to connect them all, magic of some kind, otherwise the speculative timelines could be possible during any other life or death situation the heroes encounter, but functionally the magic being used doesn't create those possibilities by existing, only creating those possibilities when used, it isn't itself creating the possibility, unless it's made to specifically open those possibilities or "Links" up.
I'd love to hear feedback on this interpretation and if it can hold up to scrutiny as speculative as it is.
I've seen some theories floating around that there's some timeline fuckery that happens off-screen to create the fallen hero timeline, e.g. Link loses in an alternate version of OoT, and then Zelda does some magic shit to send visions to her past self and to kid Link, creating both the Downfall Timeline and kicking off the events of OoT as we experience them. That would be much better than the official explanation IMO.
That would cause a new problem with the implication that ALL Zeldas have the power to send visions to their past selves. If they all have the power to prevent negative events from happening then it's theoretically possible there are in fact an *endless* amount of timelines which are are all constantly been created as a new Zelda is born to warn her past self from a new negative event during her present time. This never ending cycle of "vision, timesplit, vision, timesplit, ad infinitum" tears this whole theory appart from the get go.
@@javiervasquez625 In OoT, Zelda uses the Ocarina of Time to send Link back to the past, so the ability to send visions could also be tied to the Ocarina. Or maybe the ability to send visions was discovered by the Zelda in OoT, and by the next Zelda game the knowledge had been lost. Lots of ways to do it without creating new problems.
@@Enraric Still it would come off as way too convenient to have A Zelda get the chance to split the timelines in 3 different ways due to simple item placement near her vicinity (aka the Ocarina of Time) while all her incarnations both before and after are devoid of such an opportunity to save their Links (not to mention their own people) from another similar conflict with a future Ganondorf. The Golden Goddesses would look like the biggest trolls in the Zelda universe for allowing a *single* Zelda to split the timelines in 3 while her predecessors and successors are forced to suffer a single outcome with no chance to change them in any way.
From what I gathered with how a timeline split occurs in Zelda is if there is time travel involved in the game. Ocarina of time has you going back and forth as child and adult Link which is why a third timeline occured. Same with age of calamity where terako time traveled and helped end the calamity 100 years earlier creating a new branch (and should just stay as a small singular branch imo). However, there is time travel in majora's mask which indicates a new timeline can occur there (one that I hope Nintendo DOESN'T expand to).
My extradiegetic interpretation is that fans actually figured out the correct timeline and Nintendo didn´t expect that. Thus, they BS their way out with a new timeline that no one saw coming (because it doesn´t make sense). Yes, Miyamoto and Aunoma are talented, but they are also prideful, vanidous and petty in some measure.
How doesn’t it make sense?
Lol correct timeline yall have to much time, just play the games and move on
@@santinogoring8860 *too
@@santinogoring8860 some people enjoy things by analyzing them.
@@cajunking5987 There just games they ain't that deep
It's hard for me to understand why many in the Zelda community are so obsessed with the timeline and lore when so much of its structure is subject to change. Ie: the Minish Cap and SS. Minish Cap was supposed to be the origin story of Link's cap which Nintendo completely forgot about or retconned in Skyward Sword.
Nintendo retconning the Minish Cap is totally fine; but it proves the point that they invest little interest in the consistency of the timeline(s) and universe.
Zelda's overarching story will always take a backseat to its gameplay and contained, isolated plots on a per-game/sequel basis. We all know this. Thus I personally think taking a critical look at the intricacies of the timelines with the same critical eye as a more narrative driven franchise (Dark Souls, the Witcher, GoW) will only conclude with more inconsistencies and incoherent, poorly realised plot threads.
Are 🤨you dense attention spin ADHD or something? I’ll tell you way the Zelda community are obsessed with it because they actually THINK? USE THERE BRAIN 🧠 you know something this woke timeline has lost to dead boredom the Zelda community actually think because it’s actually there do you even intro and world building bro?!
In the intro of wind waker it the original continuation of OOT straight up
majora mask intro is literally the alternate timeline continuation of OOT second ending
Twilight princess middle of the game reference of the timeline of the
CHILD even it’s ending with Ganondorf talk to link shows this straight up
Skyward Sword intro reference it being the origin bud it’s ending showing it’s the beginning
BOTW even through showing thing from other timelines it’s the child for many main reason for me and TOTK really showing this
Yeah there’s a timeline dude clear as F day
Judging by your comment you don’t like to think and seem to want everything simple?! Nah your probably one those old ass Zelda fans who just again 🤪let’s not think about anything BUT GAMEPLAY 🤪AM I RIGHT!? Hmm 🤨
But hey be blue pilled in deny as hell of the clear as day Zelda mythology connection lore as many are unfortunately blind no brains 🧠 to 😒
Yes there has been retcon but they still fit with continuity for the most part.
Ps for people saying Zelda is like final fantasy NO stop it Zelda is nothing like final fantasy in terms of universes continuity what I said above and what’s in game story proofs that.
@@thatjrpganimefanplayerjusi8003 lol this comment is pure gold. Thanks for making me laugh
@@JoMaisBure10 no problem glad you love 😁👍it you Simpton no brain ADHD blue pill denial of continuity that’s right there in front of your face
honestly dude, there is such thing as being overly critical
I just don’t believe in the Zelda timeline at all. The only sequence of games that makes sense to me is:
1. Skyward Sword
2. Ocarina of Time
3. Majora’s Mask
4. Twilight Princess
I’m glad that Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom are stepping away from the Zelda timeline to create their own self contained story.
So, pretty much in complete agreement on this one. Summed up my feelings on the timelines pretty well.
The only things a don’t agree with are as follows: I’ve always felt that the entire concept of separate time lines was made so they could have more freedom with what kind of story they want, and while I do agree it was mostly planned, it’s still just an elaborate hand wave.
Secondly, actually think BotW’s “unified timeline” leaves for a very complex question… how the hell did that happen??? Maybe TotK will explain it, but if it never gets explained it basically comes off like a retcon. Which I get. Really, I do. The Zelda timelines are a mess, but I really just don’t like wide sweeping retcons, especially since this one seems to be occurring the very next game after they FINALLY described how this stuff all fits together in the first place.
I feel that the ending with BOTW merging everything could work as that monkey with a typewriter eventually writing a Shakespeare novel.
So many years go by, that every possible cycle of things happens. It's that far in the future. Something like that.
The “unified timeline” is entirely the fanbase misinterpreting what was actually said. The devs were asked which branch BotW goes on and they replied: “That can be up to your imagination. We want the player to explore and make sense of it themselves”. The internet then magically got “It’s unified then! Confirmed!” and spread it like wildfire.
@@WindMageMaster it’s probably in Child Link’s timeline, but then, where did Boar Ganon, Rito, and Korok come from?
@@incognitoman3656 I agree. The Child Timeline is where I think it goes. I’ve gone up against nay-sayers before with all their arguments and none of their arguments have managed to beat out the child timeline, whereas, I’ve made them bend backwards and jump hoops trying to justify the other two. For example, people arguing downfall have to explain how all these races that have gone basically extinct in that line have been brought back to life and how Hyrule somehow formed back to how it looks… in the child timeline lol. Everything in TP and FSA perfectly sets up a Hyrule for BotW to occur… whereas, the other two are radically different. But in regards to what you said… Boar Ganon is already in that timeline in TP and he’s a pig in FSA. Zora & Rito co-exist, which needs explanation regardless of timeline, but likely a split evolution perhaps. The Zora are entirely gone and replaced by Rito (so it seems) in Wind Waker, yet they coexist here, which makes the child line more likely. And Kokiri probably evolved into Koroks overtime regardless.
@@WindMageMaster when did the ocean zora turn into rito, and when did the landmass change so much that koroks appeared instead of the wierd monkeys from tp?? It just doesn’t make sense for wind waker, imo. And also, four swords adventures could definitely take place in a separate timeline. We’re just missing a pig-sized piece of the puzzle: why ganon decided to stop re-incarnating in BoTW
The results of the ending of OoT are kind of like the Schrödinger's cat experiment. Link is alive, dead, and is completely missing from the box at the same time until you play a sequel.
Explained it perfectly. What kills me the most about the third timeline is that Four Swords Adventures was already intended as a prequel to Link to the Past, so the classic games could just be at the end of the child timeline, instead we got this whole multiversal mess.
It used to be fun speculating about the timeline, but I remember when Historia came out discussion kind of just died. With multiverses nothing mattered anymore. Any point in the game could make another timeline.
Which is why it's better to dismiss the whole "what if" nonsense altogether and instead argue for a 2 timelines scenario where the Downfall Timeline is independent from the one where the timesplit takes place so as to avoid the the plothole regarding it's creation without much of a problem. The events of the Downfall Timeline happen in a "twin" timeline that is "adjacent" to the timesplit one allowing both to exist as their own individual timelines with no problem whatsoever.
@@javiervasquez625 This is my preferred version as well. It makes way more sense than trying to split up the four sword trilogy.
Excellent video! It lays out exactly what my issues have been with this 'timeline split' since Historia was released.
As a substitute for the official timeline, I love the theory from NintendoBlackCrisis (which I accept as part of my headcanon) that basically puts the downfall timeline into a bad ending of Minish Cap where Vaati is sealed instead of destroyed. It's much more satisfying and makes Four Swords Adventures much more interesting that in its original placement, where in this new timeline it becomes a prequel to ALttP and the start of the downfall timeline games. It does this while also explaining how Vaati could be alive in the Four Swords games if he was outright destroyed in Minish Cap and is a super elegant solution. I am perfectly fine with accepting it since apparently the timeline could change at any point according to Nintendo themselves.
Is it really that elegant though? Its another "what if" split based on the life/death of a character.
Doesn't timelines splitting already confirm multiverses? If it didnt then the timeline shouldn't have split it should have fused back together.
Exactly. Dude is just making up something to complain about.
@@godspeedhero3671 not really, he says in the video that he's fine with the adult and child timeline split because it's a multiverse made via magic while the hero defeated timeline isn't magic it's just a different outcome. It's a small personal gripe and is only really an issue to him alone (there are probably others who have some sort of autistic reaction when things aren't a way they think it should be too. Also autistic isn't an insult even though I know people will take it as one)
He's right and you are low IQ for not getting it.