|
|
Post by MRSKELETON on Feb 1, 2007 21:32:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by michiyoyoshiku on Feb 1, 2007 22:22:07 GMT -5
1. that's not g4 it's Gametrailers
2. it's inaccurate
|
|
|
|
Post by ReyVGM on Feb 1, 2007 22:49:18 GMT -5
They call it a timeline theory for something.
So no, it's not inacurate.
|
|
|
|
Post by michiyoyoshiku on Feb 1, 2007 22:53:32 GMT -5
Pretty off theory or rather.......it makes sense until they split the 2 Gameboy color games
|
|
|
|
Post by vysethebold on Feb 2, 2007 1:05:33 GMT -5
I thought it was very inaccurate. First of all, A Link to the Past happened 100 years before the original Legend of Zelda not after. It says to in the instruction booklet. Furthermore, Link's Awakening is a direct sequel to A Link to the Past. They both feature the same Link as stated in the instruction booklet and the official strategy guide. Then, they forgot to include a game: Four Swords that was included with A Link to the Past on the GBA. They included the Four Swords Adventures on the Gamecube but not the original GBA game. They both have their own stories that are not the same so the GBA one deserves its own place on the time line. These guys really need to do their homework...
|
|
|
|
Post by ninjarygar on Feb 2, 2007 1:29:26 GMT -5
It's not innacurate because, as they said, it's ALL theory. Nintendo has never released a timeline and the timeline issue is something that gets talked about alot. Jeez guys... there's a really obvious disclaimer in the begining saying that it's just their idea. They never presented it as fact... and blatently said that it isn't. Get a grip.
It's a theory I haven't heard before. I believe Link's awakening is definately after Link to the past. I also believe that there are way more multiple links/hyrules... but I like the theory. It's different. Truth is there probably isn't a timeline... and the video suggested that too. So... yeah.....
By the way....there is no greater stupid than the people who post youtube comments.
|
|
|
|
Post by michiyoyoshiku on Feb 2, 2007 1:37:45 GMT -5
Zelda is like Bond films........There IS NO TIME LINE!
|
|
|
|
Post by MRSKELETON on Feb 2, 2007 1:46:47 GMT -5
There are some parts I agree with. The way I theorize the timeline is Minish - Oot - Lttp - LA - S & A - TP - FSores - WW - PH - Z - AoL
|
|
|
|
Post by ReyVGM on Feb 2, 2007 2:29:37 GMT -5
Vyse: I wouldn't go by the American instruction booklets if I were you.
If the Japanese ones say the same thing then ok, but I'm willing to bet the American story in the instruction booklet has everything told differently.
Notice how in the games itself they never actually say how many years have passed since the last one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malroth on Feb 2, 2007 4:30:07 GMT -5
...Discussions concerning the "timelines" of the Zelda series should be banned from the internet.
|
|
|
|
Post by vnisanian2001 on Feb 2, 2007 13:34:43 GMT -5
The one thing that really pissed me off about GT's Zelda retrospective (and this is coming from someone who isn't a Nintendo fanboy) was in Part 3 of the retrospective, the part where they mentioned that the graphics in OOT paled in comparison to the Playstation's graphics.
|
|
|
|
Post by bioniccommando83 on Feb 2, 2007 17:15:30 GMT -5
Haven't seen the video yet, but I've always stumbled over how with Zelda II for the NES, it was implied in the manual there were two Princess Zeldas- the one rescued from the first game, and then the second one, bound in sleep, sealed in the North Palace where after it was decreed that all future princesses of Hyrule would henceforth be named Zelda after her. Does anyone know how this translates out in the Famicom version?
|
|
|
|
Post by ninjarygar on Feb 2, 2007 23:55:46 GMT -5
The one thing that really pissed me off about GT's Zelda retrospective (and this is coming from someone who isn't a Nintendo fanboy) was in Part 3 of the retrospective, the part where they mentioned that the graphics in OOT paled in comparison to the Playstation's graphics. That pissed me off too... because it was definately better than PSX's graphics. There was something else too.... I can't remember now. Oh well... it was still enjoyable to watch anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by vnisanian2001 on Feb 3, 2007 10:18:07 GMT -5
The one thing that really pissed me off about GT's Zelda retrospective (and this is coming from someone who isn't a Nintendo fanboy) was in Part 3 of the retrospective, the part where they mentioned that the graphics in OOT paled in comparison to the Playstation's graphics. There was something else too.... I can't remember now. It probably was the part where they said that the Water Temple was absolute torture (and it sure was, BTW). |
|
