Eiji Aonuma's Zelda Timeline Disclaimer

[sputnix]

As reported by Kotaku, the most recent translation reveals Zelda producer Eiji Aonuma's disclaimer of sorts on the much-discussed timeline. In it Aonuma issues a gentle reminder that, "from the very beginning, Zelda games have been developed with the top priority of focusing on the game mechanics rather than the story."... "While reading over "The Full History of Hyrule," it's possible that some parts may look contradictory," he said. "For instance, the Mogma race or the beetle item that appear on the very first story do not appear on any other game that takes place in the future. I'd like to ask everyone just to enjoy the book and to be broad-minded, and to think that those parts are the way they are because of the way Zelda games are developed."

source : IGN

so will future games be made with a story that fixes errors [I doubt it] or will zelda fanatics have to live with it

 

[AceWarhead]

I just hope they will not begin to focus on the story too much, because that will sorta ruin the series.

 

[KingVamp]

I already said it wasn't perfect. It a fictional timeline, not everything has to be clean.
Just whole idea behind it make relatively sense. If they want to they can make a Zelda
to show completely how the so-far timeline is meant to be.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

I already said it wasn't perfect. It a fictional timeline, not everything has to be clean.
Just whole idea behind it make relatively sense. If they want to they can make a Zelda
to show completely how the so far timeline is meant to be.

Being "fictional" isn't an excuse for being filled with plot holes. A huge amount of films and games are completely fictional but they (often) strive to be airtight when it comes to plot and are torn apart if they're riddled with holes. I just find it mind blowing that when Zelda comes into question people can just say "Well it's fictional" or "Well it's their right" when they completely screw up. Literally if a game like God of War, which is entirely fictional (just like Zelda) and relatively plot light (just like Zelda) pulled the same shit it'd get torn apart left and right by the same people who give a pass to this. I'm fine with the games being plot light and I was fine with the whole "games are not related at all outside of a few" theory that I had before but this timeline is just really shitty. I honestly think they were just about finished with the Hyrule Historia and then realized they needed one more page, so in a few minutes they tied together all the games loosely in this "timeline" and fit it in a few pages (or however much it takes up). It would not surprise me.

 

[Master Mo]

What he means by this is that the gameplay mechanics, like the beetle, seem to be more technological advanced then some that appear in the future games like the original LoZ or OoT, which does make no sense. That is why he said that "Zelda games have been developed with the top priority of focusing on the game mechanics rather than the story" simply because they would never let the gameplay suffer over something trivial like this.

But essentially it doesn`t make sense to have more advanced technology in the past if nothing happened to take it away from the civilization but imo that I give them credit for not taking that into account, simply because we would have missed out on something amazing like the Beetle!

What the plothole-haters like Guild are referring to is not what Aonuma was meaning here. He was talking about nitpicking...

...when they completely screw up...

Good God, please make him stop. Dude, this is your opinion but I haven`t seen you saying where you see all those plotholes! If you keep up this discussion you should really try to elaborate on why you have this opinion rather then sticking it into our face all the time. Please, tell us why Nintendo completely screwed up the timeline you apparently don`t care about and with which you are angry about simply because Nintendo-Fanboy (that`s what we are, though among other fanboyisms - Yes, I do love God of War ) enjoy it.

 

[Gahars]

So basically, the whole timeline is contrived and not even all that important to the developers themselves; exactly what the detractors have been arguing all along.

Honestly, that's fine, though it does make the timeline pretty pointless. I don't really see the point; no timeline at all is far better than a bad retcon.

 

[Taik]

I already said it wasn't perfect. It a fictional timeline, not everything has to be clean.
Just whole idea behind it make relatively sense. If they want to they can make a Zelda
to show completely how the so far timeline is meant to be.

words

Sure it might suck but it's probably their best attempt or something.
I'll take another example : Kingdom Hearts
Now this is my favourite series ever for various reasons, one being that the plot is over-complicated as fuck and it's awesome.

However I don't think a "serious timeline'd plot" would work for Zelda as it would imply a thousand games filling up the plot holes (just like BBS, 358/2 Days, Chain of Memories, Coded as well as 3D from the KH series) and I think the timeline is fine as it is, sure there are plot holes but who cares, it's just a basic structure that shows what happens when.

 

[KingVamp]

I already said it wasn't perfect. It a fictional timeline, not everything has to be clean.
Just whole idea behind it make relatively sense. If they want to they can make a Zelda
to show completely how the so far timeline is meant to be.

Being "fictional" isn't an excuse for being filled with plot holes. A huge amount of films and games are completely fictional but they (often) strive to be airtight when it comes to plot and are torn apart if they're riddled with holes. I just find it mind blowing that when Zelda comes into question people can just say "Well it's fictional" or "Well it's their right" when they completely screw up. Literally if a game like God of War, which is entirely fictional (just like Zelda) and relatively plot light (just like Zelda) pulled the same shit it'd get torn apart left and right by the same people who give a pass to this. I'm fine with the games being plot light and I was fine with the whole "games are not related at all outside of a few" theory that I had before but this timeline is just really shitty. I honestly think they were just about finished with the Hyrule Historia and then realized they needed one more page, so in a few minutes they tied together all the games loosely in this "timeline" and fit it in a few pages (or however much it takes up). It would not surprise me.

The few plot holes in it comes down to small things in gameplay like Mogma race or the beetle. I mean if they was going focus
on that much, it could possible damage the gameplay 'cause they couldn't add things in the gameplay that contradict the storyline. Other words, while yes they are thinking about the timeline (story and placement wise)they wouldn't let it go as far as to let the timeline hinder gameplay. Why are you so mind fix to think they haven't been thinking about the timeline and it something they just made up.Multiple people on this forum show why which Zelda goes where.

While have look into it much the connected story themselves has like 0 to maybe like 1 bump into it.

 

[Deleted-236924]

Honestly, that's fine, though it does make the timeline pretty pointless. I don't really see the point; no timeline at all is far better than a bad retcon.

But the fanboys have been dying for a timeline.

 

[sputnix]

well a timeline was bound to happen really if it was done any other way people would still have a but-load of problems with it, really I don't care so much if an item doesn't fit that well in a timeline because it's an item, besides there is no indecation of when they took place so a lot of time can pass b/t games. I think the most important issue is that now that there is an offical timeline we know that zleda and link are apart of a long line of inbreeders as they look the same in almost every game o.0

 

[Guild McCommunist]

However I don't think a "serious timeline'd plot" would work for Zelda as it would imply a thousand games filling up the plot holes (just like BBS, 358/2 Days, Chain of Memories, Coded as well as 3D from the KH series) and I think the timeline is fine as it is, sure there are plot holes but who cares, it's just a basic structure that shows what happens when.

That's exactly what anyone any greedy game company wants. A plot thread that's so full of holes that they can constantly fill it with sequels and spin offs without fanboys complaining.

 

[Valwin]

Don't Misinterpret Aonuma's Words: Hyrule Historia's Timeline is Fully Canon

 

[Janthran]

I just hope they will not begin to focus on the story too much, because that will sorta ruin the series.

Screw you, I like the story.

 

[Foxi4]

So basically, the whole timeline is contrived and not even all that important to the developers themselves; exactly what the detractors have been arguing all along.

Anybody with half-a-brain knew that the moment he/she saw the table.

*looks at your avatar*

I'm so sorry. I... didn't mean it that way. Forgive me.

 

[Deleted-236924]

However I don't think a "serious timeline'd plot" would work for Zelda as it would imply a thousand games filling up the plot holes (just like BBS, 358/2 Days, Chain of Memories, Coded as well as 3D from the KH series) and I think the timeline is fine as it is, sure there are plot holes but who cares, it's just a basic structure that shows what happens when.

That's exactly what anyone any greedy game company wants. A plot thread that's so full of holes that they can constantly fill it with sequels and spin offs without fanboys complaining.

Like you said multiple times in the past, the plot in Legend of Zelda isn't the main point of the games.
Why complain about it being "filled with plotholes" then?

If it lets them make more games "that are moar consistent", why not?

 

[Gahars]

Honestly, that's fine, though it does make the timeline pretty pointless. I don't really see the point; no timeline at all is far better than a bad retcon.

But the fanboys have been dying for a timeline.

You can't let the whims of a few fans dictate the direction a series takes. A good creator (in any medium) has to have the courage to do what's best for his work instead of just pandering to the fanbase.

 

[Master Mo]

You can't let the whims of a few fans dictate the direction a series takes. A good creator (in any medium) has to have the courage to do what's best for his work instead of just pandering to the fanbase.

TBH, if they just wanted to please the "fanboys" they would have just gone with what was widely accepted: two splits. Releasing it to the public, now that I can accept as an feeding of fanboys!

 

[Foxi4]

Honestly, that's fine, though it does make the timeline pretty pointless. I don't really see the point; no timeline at all is far better than a bad retcon.

But the fanboys have been dying for a timeline.

You can't let the whims of a few fans dictate the direction a series takes. A good creator (in any medium) has to have the courage to do what's best for his work instead of just pandering to the fanbase.

I have to agree. If we were to do what the fanboys want, Sonic Team would already reveal that Sonic's not interested in Amy's advances because he's gay for Shadow. No. Just... No. Fanboys/Fangirls are usually weird. Games are for the general public.

 

[Deleted-236924]

Honestly, that's fine, though it does make the timeline pretty pointless. I don't really see the point; no timeline at all is far better than a bad retcon.

But the fanboys have been dying for a timeline.

You can't let the whims of a few fans dictate the direction a series takes. A good creator (in any medium) has to have the courage to do what's best for his work instead of just pandering to the fanbase.

Fanboys were dying for a timeline, they got one.
They can't just complain about it.

 

[Bladexdsl]

there you go told you they made the timeline up in the last year theres the proof