New Zelda set after Wind Waker

[Batman's Biggest Fan]

It will be a Wind Waker sequel after all. So this should tie up some plot holes caused by the above said game.

http://cube.ign.com/articles/588/588913p1.html

And also a DS Zelda game is in the works. I'll be keeping an eye on this one. Should be good

[G1Ravage]

It will be a sequal (as in taking place in the same timeline), but not necessarily within the same generation.

Part of me doesn't want to believe that the "mature" Link we've been seeing is the grown up version of the cute lil' Link from Wind Waker.

[Shnay]

Well, all they said about it was that it "follows chronologically after the Wind Waker." That doesn't really make it a sequel, neccessarily. Wind Waker took place after Ocarina of Time, but it wasn't a true "sequel" to the game. Personally, I don't like to think of the games in terms of the Legend of Zelda timeline (http://www.zeldalegends.net/index.php?n=timeline-p), but rather each game as a variation on a single legend or myth. A new way of telling an age old story, rather than a similar story actually occurring ever hundred years or so.

[WolfieKiwi]

I'll be waiting for that day, when older link is now part of the action...

[Tanooki]

if it is a true sequel to wind waker, i'll be highly disappointed it isn't going to be in the cel shaded format. i'll still buy it though being the fanatic that i am

Falcon

[PaQ]

I guess this means I should definitely finish Wind Waker before playing the next one. :p

[Dogbert]

Personally, I don't like to think of the games in terms of the Legend of Zelda timeline (http://www.zeldalegends.net/index.php?n=timeline-p), but rather each game as a variation on a single legend or myth. A new way of telling an age old story, rather than a similar story actually occurring ever hundred years or so.I can see how you could make that arguement, but even if you do there are still several games that would have to take place in the same timeline.

OoT -> MM -> WW -> ALTTP -> OoA/OoS (Maybe) -> LA

ALTTP includes various references to OoT, which is why it is part of that timeline. LA is likely a sequel to ALTTP based on Nightmare Agahnim. OoA/OoS is unclear in the timeline right now, but the ending (see spoiler box below) would indicate a prequel to LA.Link leaves on a boat at the end of OoA/OoS.

TLoZ -> AoL (clearly a direct sequel)

TMC -> FS -> FSA (Clearly a timline invloving the four sword)

So there you have the most broken timeline possible. There are other clues that would link TMC (and FS/FSA by extention) to the ALTTP & OoT timeline (see spoiler box), but that could just be random.Ganon gets his Trident that he has in ALTTP in TMC. The sacred realm that was corrupted in OoT, but changed back in ALTTP, appears as the dark realm in FSA.


That's just arguements for how there could be three timeline (four if OoA/OoS is separate) at maximum even if you subscribe to the "different tellings of the same legend" perspective. I believe they are all connected somehow (except the CDI games). I admit, it is hard to connect LoZ & AoL to the rest, but that might just be because they happens so much later than the rest. There are many different timelines out there, but I like the N-Sider (http://www.n-sider.com/articleview.php?articleid=248) one. Too bad The Chimp hasn't managed to update it...

[Tanooki]

I can see how you could make that arguement, but even if you do there are still several games that would have to take place in the same timeline.

OoT -> MM -> WW -> ALTTP -> OoA/OoS (Maybe) -> LA

ALTTP includes various references to OoT, which is why it is part of that timeline. LA is likely a sequel to ALTTP based on Nightmare Agahnim. OoA/OoS is unclear in the timeline right now, but the ending (see spoiler box below) would indicate a prequel to LA.Link leaves on a boat at the end of OoA/OoS.

TLoZ -> AoL (clearly a direct sequel)

TMC -> FS -> FSA (Clearly a timline invloving the four sword)

So there you have the most broken timeline possible. There are other clues that would link TMC (and FS/FSA by extention) to the ALTTP & OoT timeline (see spoiler box), but that could just be random.Ganon gets his Trident that he has in ALTTP in TMC. The sacred realm that was corrupted in OoT, but changed back in ALTTP, appears as the dark realm in FSA.


That's just arguements for how there could be three timeline (four if OoA/OoS is separate) at maximum even if you subscribe to the "different tellings of the same legend" perspective. I believe they are all connected somehow (except the CDI games). I admit, it is hard to connect LoZ & AoL to the rest, but that might just be because they happens so much later than the rest. There are many different timelines out there, but I like the N-Sider (http://www.n-sider.com/articleview.php?articleid=248) one. Too bad The Chimp hasn't managed to update it...i think you mean ganon gets his trident in four swords adventures and not minish cap. ganon wasn't even in minish cap

Falcon

[SSJPabs]

My personal pet theory involves Link's descendant from LA being found by Impa in LoZ which explains why to him, Hyrule was a foreign land. (I.E. Link drifted to somewhere else and settled down but told stories of his heroic adventures and a descendant tried to find Hyrule).

But if the sleeping Zelda from AoL predated Zelda:TooT, and if LoZ and AoL are the "end" so far, wouldn't there be TWO Zeldas in the AoL timeline? The pre-Toot, and LoZ one?

[Dogbert]

i think you mean ganon gets his trident in four swords adventures and not minish cap. ganon wasn't even in minish capYes, it was just an oversight. You are right, it was FSA, not TMC.


But if the sleeping Zelda from AoL predated Zelda:TooT, and if LoZ and AoL are the "end" so far, wouldn't there be TWO Zeldas in the AoL timeline? The pre-Toot, and LoZ one?Yes, there are two Zeldas in the LoZ/AoL part of the legend. In the manual for AoL, it says that when the Zelda was cursed to sleep forever, the King said that all future princesses must be named Zelda in her honor. That would imply an explaination for why the AoL Zelda and the LoZ Zelda both have the same name. I believe the Zelda name is a symbol and not just a previous King's order (thus meaning the sleeping Zelda wouldn't have to be the first). But in any case, since the manual contains an explanation for why all princesses are named Zelda, that means there are two Zeldas to save in LoZ/AoL.

Exactly when the sleeping Zelda was cursed is still debatable. Some say it was pre-OoT (thus explaining all the Zelda names), but others argue that that must mean the WW flood will end and new Hyrule will be built on top of old Hyrule. We'll have to wait and see...

[Superperson]

Well, all they said about it was that it "follows chronologically after the Wind Waker." That doesn't really make it a sequel, neccessarily. Wind Waker took place after Ocarina of Time, but it wasn't a true "sequel" to the game. Personally, I don't like to think of the games in terms of the Legend of Zelda timeline (http://www.zeldalegends.net/index.php?n=timeline-p), but rather each game as a variation on a single legend or myth. A new way of telling an age old story, rather than a similar story actually occurring ever hundred years or so.
I agree with you with that, it seems more like a new hero is born in a different age and takes the role as Link or something along those lines. But never really have anything to do with eachother. Gannon has more concistency through the timeline then Link actually.

[Dogbert]

Well, all they said about it was that it "follows chronologically after the Wind Waker." That doesn't really make it a sequel, neccessarily. Wind Waker took place after Ocarina of Time, but it wasn't a true "sequel" to the game. Personally, I don't like to think of the games in terms of the Legend of Zelda timeline (http://www.zeldalegends.net/index.php?n=timeline-p), but rather each game as a variation on a single legend or myth. A new way of telling an age old story, rather than a similar story actually occurring ever hundred years or so.I agree with you with that, it seems more like a new hero is born in a different age and takes the role as Link or something along those lines. But never really have anything to do with eachother. Gannon has more concistency through the timeline then Link actually.I think Shnay was saying that he doesn't believe there are multiple Links - that each game is the same story, just being told by a different person. But yes, you are correct; there are many Links. Ganon is the only character that could be a single being. There is a certain storytelling element about Zelda games. My opinion is that the games are supposed to be legends about different fights against evil. In each of these legends, the true identities of those involved have been forgotten over the years, so they have been replaced with generic characters. Link is the courageous young warrior, Zelda is wisdom and innocence, and Ganon is evil. In the timeline, Ganon is an evil that waits in the shadows and tries to rule the world. Each time he is challenged by someone courageous and defeated.

By the way, it's Ganon (not Gannon). ;) I don't mind the occational typo, but some people on other boards will go nuts if you use too many n's in Ganon because it was spelled wrong in LoZ.

[Fresh V]

I've never played Zelda before, but I wanna start now 'cuz everyone says it's so good. So I'm probably gonna get the new Zelda, and the DS one if I ever get a DS.

BTW, will the new Zelda seem confusing if I haven't played Wind Waker?

[Tanooki]

I've never played Zelda before, but I wanna start now 'cuz everyone says it's so good. So I'm probably gonna get the new Zelda, and the DS one if I ever get a DS.

BTW, will the new Zelda seem confusing if I haven't played Wind Waker?i don't think it will be confusing. one zelda game has never really led into another unless you play the master quest with the oracle games

Falcon

[Shnay]

I think Shnay was saying that he doesn't believe there are multiple Links - that each game is the same story, just being told by a different person. This is how I like to view the games when I play them, but I don't think that this is the way Miyamoto and crew intended them to be viewed. I think that the games are supposed to be part of a single timeline (or possibly a couple of timelines), but I just enjoy my interpretation more. :)

[Superperson]

I think Shnay was saying that he doesn't believe there are multiple Links - that each game is the same story, just being told by a different person. But yes, you are correct; there are many Links. Ganon is the only character that could be a single being. There is a certain storytelling element about Zelda games. My opinion is that the games are supposed to be legends about different fights against evil. In each of these legends, the true identities of those involved have been forgotten over the years, so they have been replaced with generic characters. Link is the courageous young warrior, Zelda is wisdom and innocence, and Ganon is evil. In the timeline, Ganon is an evil that waits in the shadows and tries to rule the world. Each time he is challenged by someone courageous and defeated.

By the way, it's Ganon (not Gannon). ;) I don't mind the occational typo, but some people on other boards will go nuts if you use too many n's in Ganon because it was spelled wrong in LoZ.
Not sure if I agree with you 100% on that, but I do comply with some points...I don't think its a name they put onto the character because they forgot but that new heroe named Link is born every few hundred years or so to undo evil. I view it as sort of a Link reincarnation type thing, not in the literal sense but as becoming the same hero through time. Atleast thats my take on it.

I knew I spelled Ganon a little funny.:p

[SSJPabs]

Not sure if I agree with you 100% on that, but I do comply with some points...I don't think its a name they put onto the character because they forgot but that new heroe named Link is born every few hundred years or so to undo evil. I view it as sort of a Link reincarnation type thing, not in the literal sense but as becoming the same hero through time. Atleast thats my take on it.

I knew I spelled Ganon a little funny.:pWhat, like the eternal hero (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0691017840/002-5798591-8830407)?

[guinaevere]

BTW, will the new Zelda seem confusing if I haven't played Wind Waker?Not in the least. Though, for $20 you can pick up Wind Waker in the meantime. It's a good game. You might get a bit sick of sailing all over the place, but it's a nice game to step into the Zelda franchise with. Stylish with very simple controls.

Shnay, I like your take on the whole Hero stories bit. It reminds me of the way Romans and Greeks had similar tales about similar gods. A saga, repeated to different people from different cultures, communities, interests would adapt and retell that same story to fir their audience. Interesting.

Pabs, don't you mess with Joseph Campbell. :p

[Mynd Hed]

I've never played Zelda before, but I wanna start now 'cuz everyone says it's so good. So I'm probably gonna get the new Zelda, and the DS one if I ever get a DS.

BTW, will the new Zelda seem confusing if I haven't played Wind Waker?

All the Zelda plotlines are essentially self-contained. Any plot elements that the creators want to bring in from a previous game are always given in the pregame cinematic. So you can pick up any Zelda game and play it without fear of confusion. Connecting different Zelda games into a continuous plot line is just a silly game for continuity freaks. (-: It can be done with enough imagination, but by no means is it necessary to enjoy the games.

As long as this thread is going the continuity discussion route, I wonder if anyone's tried to fit Four Swords Adventures or Minish Cap into any of the existing continuity theories yet. That would be a project and a half....

[Superperson]

What, like the eternal hero (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0691017840/002-5798591-8830407)?
Yeah I guess sorta. I'm not even know all the details about my own theory but its just a veague idea I had that seemed to make sense. But he wears the same clothes, thwarts the same evil (well not everytime) I just think of him as a reaccuring hero through time, I guess, yes, a eternal hero like you said above.

[Dogbert]

As long as this thread is going the continuity discussion route, I wonder if anyone's tried to fit Four Swords Adventures or Minish Cap into any of the existing continuity theories yet. That would be a project and a half....My Trident and Dark Realm clues in post #7 help to do just that. My theory goes like this:

OoT - MM - WW - TMC - FS - FSA - ALTTP - OoA/OoS - LA - LoZ - AoL

You could argue that OoA/OoS can't be between ALTTP & LA because Link meets Zelda, but I think the ending is more persuasive evidence that it belongs there.

TMC could go anywhere before FS, but I think OoT was designed to be the first Legend of Zelda. Plus, I don't think it could go between MM and WW because WW implies that there has been no heroes since the hero of time.

You could also argue that TMC/FS/FSA is a separate timeline, but I don't believe so. It was stated in an interview (which shouldn't be used as timeline evidence because they conflict with each other - I'll supply evidence to back this up in the FSA spoilers below) that the FS series was made to smooth out the timeline.

Everytime Ganon dies, he needs to be revived. When he died in ALTTP, he was revived in OoA/OoS. When he died in LoZ, baddies tried to use Link's blood to revive him. So, when he died in WW (or if he's not dead, in LoZ '05), he needed to be revived for ALTTP. This was accomplished by getting Vaati to find a new Ganondorf for Ganon's spirt to take over by means of the trident, which he then used as a weapon until he was fully defeated in ALTTP. In fact, the "he only used a trident for two games in a row" argument is a good reason why LoZ/AoL should go after ALTTP.