User talk:Mmmmm PIE@legacy41957525

Possible Timeline
Just a tip. The backstory of Adventure of Link mentions that the prince decrees that all princesses from then forth shall be known as 'Zelda'. This is pretty strong evidence then that this Princess Zelda was the first Zelda to appear although the game itself is not the first. --Knil 20:41, 29 August 2007 (EDT)

Many agree with you, while many others believe that Nintendo has long since stopped considering AoL when planning their games, and, in no longer accounting for the Sleeping Zelda Legend, have overwritten it. Its a divided issue, which is why the wiki itself takes no particular stance on it, but personally I lean away from your interpretation.

To be completely sound, a theory which places the Sleeping Zelda at the begining of the timelie requires what is known as a "Two Kings interpretation" of the AOL backstory. One must assume that the King who fathered the sleeping Zelda is a different person from the King who hid the Triforce of Courage in the great palace... though there is much in the AOL instruction booklet to suggest they are the same (suugest, but not prove).

Without this assumption, an early sleeper timeline just won't work... and it simply not an assumption I'm a fan of.

Sorry but I do not follow. Why must it be assumed that the Triforce of Courage was put there by a different King? Also, it was in the Island Palace, not the North(ern) Palace. --Knil 06:06, 31 August 2007 (EDT)

Oops. Palace thing fixed thanks (Its the Great Palace, Island palace is level 3). Anywho;


 * The AoL instruction booklet; for reference

Consider three points on the timeline; point A being the Sleeping Zelda incident point B being the hiding of the Triforce of Courage and point C being the events AOL. By your reasoning, point A should predate any in-game Zelda event so we placed it near the very begining of the line. Based on Impa's explantion in the AoL manual we conclude that the Triforce of Courage could not have been removed from the palace between points B and C and that, therefore, could not make an appearace in Hyrule proper during that time.

As AlttP (D) and OOT (E) both contain the ToC (and indeed the whole Triforce) we can simply reason they do not occur between points B and C but rather sometime before B or after C. Showing were never possibly intended to be set after the events of AoL is rather easy (Ocarina has been re-affirmed first chronologically by the series producers numerous times since its release and the back cover of AlttP names it a prequel to AoL/LoZ right out).

That creates a timeline A - E - D - B - C which forces a gap of hundreds of years between the sleeping Zelda incident and the ToC being hidden (longer if we account also for tWW or TP); thus there must be a different King for each event, which is strongly suggested against is the manual.--PIE

IM?
Hey, pie, got an IM address? :P --Jase 20:07, 29 August 2007 (EDT)


 * Yarp; I'm 'mmmmmm PIE eh' on AIM and use mmmmm__PIE@hotmail.com for MSN, though I only ever log on when using my home PC, which is only usually for ~15 minutes a day. That my change when I head up to Edmonton on Friday, towards more MSN use and less AIM. --PIE