Comments 6

Re: Zelda Timeline Is Only Considered "To An Extent" During Development, Says TOTK Director

TheDownfallHero7

The timeline has always been considered since Zelda II by Nintendo (the timeline doesn't exists crap needs to stop).

The Historia timeline is literally based off every confirmation Aonuma gave for each title prior to BotW (Miyamoto for the entries before ALttP). As well as in game lore.

We have the downfall timeline because they screwed up the fact that OoT was prequel to ALttP but they messed up when making Wind Waker and Twilight Princess as it's sequels as well. Every other game in the timeline pretty much fits. Like how Minish Cap was stated to be the earliest version of Hyrule we see while acting as the origins for the Four Swords too. The downfall timeline keeps the lore point of the sages in OoT being remembered hence the name of some of the towns in Zelda II and it keeps OoT as the origins of Ganondorf that's mentioned in ALttP.

FSA is a weird spot but it's also vague about being a direct sequel to FS so it being after TP isn't really a problem. If anything it continues the battle between light and shadow like Ganondorf foreshadowed in Twilight Princess.

Re: Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom: Where Does It Fit In The Zelda Timeline?

TheDownfallHero7

@Ryu_Niiyama Makes more sense if BotW and TotK branched off a fourth split from OoT. OoT was confirmed to have happened in the history of BotW. This basically means that everything before did happen as without SS, OoT wouldn't even happen.

I don't think Rauru and Sonia founded the original Hyrule but one that was founded long after OoT. Creating a Champion even confirms that Ganondorf was defeated at the end of OoT and sealed, he would proceed to resurrect, get killed or sealed and (most likely reincarnate) until he became the Calamity.