The Zelda character Nintendo forgot about 

First to like 👍

First

​@@djalexander7723CRIMINAL BOT

Happy Thanksgiving

​@@djalexander7723 NOT U U NOT AMERICAN

Yes, just like Colonel CaTaffy and Commander North in the NES Metal Gear manual.

Link kneeling and praying in front of a crucifix comes to mind

​@@sk00kthat was in a japanese strategy guide for a link to past

Hey, I was gonna make the same point!

Thank you because this was confusing me 😭

That, plus technically Princess Zelda I is technically still the first Princess Zelda, even if she isn't the first Zelda ever, because SS Zelda isn't a princess. Hyrule wasn't founded yet, and neither was the Hyrulean royal family.

now im getting a headache@@richardkirkland6805

Oh, hey, another person making the point I was about to regarding Zelda from Skyward Sword.

So here's the question to ask: If Rauru and Sonya were the founding monarchs, did they happen to have a daughter already, named Zelda, when she arrived to regenerate the Master Sword, or did they adopt her as her own? Was her brother even her brother by birth? That could suggest all kinds of timeline shenanigans, with another timeline split where she doesn't become the dragon, meaning the "Fallen Hero Timeline" doesn't necessarily follow after OOT at all. Otherwise, if there were 2 Zeldas at the beginning, it would seem one "slept" as a dragon, while the other slept under a curse for countless thousands of years... and has only been awakened in the Fallen Hero Timeline, which had OG LOZ Zelda AND the sleeping OG Princess Zelda... Which would mean all the other timelines still have a sleeping OG Princess Zelda outside of Hyrule in the North Castle. Ow, too much to think about. My head hurts now.

Zelda's mom is never implied to be called zelda so it'd make sense, not everyone in the royal family has sacred power, the ones that do are the ones called zelda as that power is power from the first zelda, aka hylia, who they descend from

Bowser brother, and Zelda brother

...Which isn't a lot, but it's weird that it's happened twice.

​@@TheRealRidley12 if i had a nickel for every time someone referenced this unfunny phineas and ferb joke, I'd DROWN.

It’s not unfunny, it’s just overused and only occasionally done right.

@@Roomba10It's usually used well when it's referencing something very specific

TBF, if you treat the first Hyrule Warriors as cannon, the timeline of BoTW/ToTK makes a lot more sense. HW1 merges the timelines, and BoTW takes place in that merged timeline.

I don't think Nintendo/Miyamoto ever really cared about some Zelda timeline. It seems to be something that only fans are obsessed with.

@@fattiger6957I agree! I always thought Hyrule Histroria was exactly for the fans. But then they had to make a revision which I thought was funny. I just enjoy the games and I love theorizing.

​@@BrainStormzFTCno, hyrule warriors is only the twilight princess timeline, it isn't until the epilogue in legends where, temporarily, wind waker characters appear from, as the game states, "another dimension", since hyrule warriors is between twilight princess and four swords adventures, directly saying characters from ss, tp, mm, and oot are "from the past" and not from other dimensions/timelines

Skyward sword doesn't change anything about the timeline

My pet theory is thinking of Hyrule itself as a sort of cosmic organism, that sort of "molts" and regenerates once in a while, losing some "memories" while keeping others. It's the only way I can explain the paradoxes and out-of-context references.

If you treat the first Hyrule Warriors as cannon, the timeline of BoTW/ToTK makes a lot more sense. HW1 merges the timelines, and BoTW takes place in that merged timeline.

Personally I would argue that SS Zelda IS NOT A PRINCESS. This is because while Zelda and Link go on the found Hyrule Skylift itself doesn't seem to be a monarchy as Zeldas father is seen as a headmaster or principal of the knights academy of Skyloft. In fact I would argue the guy in the white robe with white hair is actually the ruler of Skyloft as the Headmaster refers to him multiple times as someone who makes the decisions such as delaying the race so Link can find his loftwing red (not sure if that's the loftwings official name or if Im just getting that from Erickson's gaming if Link could talk series). Imo what I think happened is Link and Zelda from SS married and became the rulers of Hyrule making them king and queen BUT the tradition of naming the female heirs Zelda didn't start till the unnamed prince degreed it in Zelda 2. Ie SS Zelda had a daughter but her name was Marin (Link and Marin fans go nuts sorry about spelling) not Zelda and it didnt become trad till Zelda 2.

@@BrainStormzFTC that is one of my headcanons, yeah some people stayed before after the merge was undone and brought stories from their world with them and all the relics we see are clones of their originals

There's only one technically, the second one, which is the Zelda from the first game is not even mentioned. And we know where both of them came from, one is the current ruler and the other was from ages ago.

I think that makes it better, legends and history change over generations and generations, they become a story of legend. Legends are hardly ever true to their origin, so it's fitting for this series to have a messy timeline.

I think the explanation of "they're all so far apart in time (and sometimes in different timelines)" works pretty well to allow them to have some connection to previous games, so those events don't feel like they were for nothing, while also not forcing the writers to restrict themselves to the story and lore of previous games

When Nintendo finally made a timeline, I wanted to bash my head against a concrete pillar.

I don‘t think the „timeline“ should be looked at like the timelines we are used to from other games. The clue is in the title, really - the „legend“ of zelda. Every game is a legend and how many legends do you know for sure transpired the way we know them as today? Santa Clause with his sled and raindeers for example used to be a kind old man, giving to the poor. King Arthur‘s story is genuinely a lot like Zelda with the amounts of contradictions every version holds - simply because every century people imagined him new, so much so that it‘s become hard to discern which one was the „real“ version of the story almost two thousand years later. And in Zeldas case, much more time has passed than just a couple thousand years, so it makes perfect sense that the stories might carry some sense of what happened, but the details, no matter how important they may seem, have been obscured and lost to time. Just how legends tend to do. I think it‘s oddly perfect for the timeline to be so imperfect. Not to mention the amount of intruiging theories we can make out of it, you can assume what you like and you‘ll never be right, nor wrong. Anybody can have their own version of how things and history transpired in Hyrule without harm and I think that‘s part of what makes Zelda so magical.

​@@majora5651 The timeline is perfect to be honest (aside from the Four Swords games which can theoretically take place anywhere without a direct sequel in between) so i don't understand why the fandom has such a hard time piece the games together considering how obviously clear it is regarding which game takes place after which game and how it all piles up together perfectly. There's nothing to say aside from the fact Nintendo has a set idea of how to make this games without thinking much about how it all makes sense within an extended timeline.

ganondorf is her brother?? that would make some fan comics really weird...

@@MegaMegajennifer Any weirder than Link being Zelda's b*stard brother in Zelda 1's manga? XD (I could've used the theory of LttP or OoT being siblings, but my initial comment was about the Mangas, so I'm keeping it to those. XD)

what????! ide think there would probably be some ocasions where a link and a zelda are siblings from older generations being together, but the originals??@@eonnexus

@MegaMegajennifer ya, it was certainly something to find out about, but Link's father in the 1989 manga was an Elf named Rune who had an affair with the previous (Blue haired) Zelda, making Link and the first games Zelda half siblings. The manga isn't cannon obviously, same with Zelda 2's brother being a prototype Ganondorf/Agahnim, but it's certainly something to think about, as I'm pretty sure the theory of Link & Zelda being siblings in LttP & OoT come FROM fans who read the original manga.

ugh, i hate when comics are compared to canon fiction...@@eonnexus

My cousin said something similar expect with Ganondorf being the main character of his own game, I laughed at the title he came up with called The Legend of Ganondorf: The quest for the 3 triforces. One of the 2 can work well either way, especially with Ganondorf!

i think there is a zelda spinoff game, tho, it might be a fan game...

There's the Philips CDi game Zelda's Adventure, someone remade it for pc I think in the style of links awakening

What would you call it then? „The Legend of Zelda?“ Now thats wild 😂😂

the legend of link?@@alexalbrecht1988

That's... Not a name.

@@CassiusStelar because Bentham has all theses problem,s before Jesus came and the king was evil and unfit to rule until Jesus came and. Things change for the good

I'll call him Nikolas

@@CorbinLeonard-rp4et Um... English, please?

@@CassiusStelar unnecessary change

May luck be with you. That game can be brutal. Fun, but brutal.

Fun fact: He almost had a sister again in botw, but they scrapped her. There is concept art of her in the Japanese version of the "Creating a Champion" book.

Where does it state that Tetra dislikes her Zelda name? The idea pleases me but is it canon?

Giving her more family members in general, really. (Siblings, cousins, aunts, uncles, grandparents, etc.) The way they've done things so far, incarnations of a king and a princess are the only "royal family" (or any kind of Hylian nobility in general) we the players ever really hear about. AoL's manual had a prince and there might have been brief mentions of a queen once or twice somewhere else (OoT mentioned Zelda's mother briefly, I think?) but aside from that it's pretty much just the king and princess every time. That's the entire royal family in nearly every generation, apparently. (Which can lead to some bad questions if you try to rationalize the apparent unbroken line of succession for who knows how many generations. Because that makes one wonder if there's some sort of super-incestuous chain going on where father+daughter birth a son who will be the next king and then mother+son birth a daughter who will be the next princess, repeating that sequence infinitely.) And we tend to barely know too much about any staff serving in the castle either, with the biggest exception of a portrait in TWW showing flood-era Zelda with a bunch of people that could be ancestors of Tetra's pirate crew. Whole bunch of life in the castle being hinted at there. Aside from that portrait, we get a few one-offs such as Aghanim or Cole (shady advisors who deceive the king that they're supposed to be serving). I think a large part of it is just Nintendo being fans of using simplistic fairytale level storytelling style and structure for the core of the series. Everything operates on providing as little detail as possible that's not immediately and directly relevant to the current tale being told. If it doesn't help move the story along, it either belongs in the background or it belongs off-screen. They're not likely to throw things in just for the worldbuilding (although to be fair BotW and TotK have been much better about that than most previous games).

Yeah

For context, it's a CTF.

If I recall correctly, that idea comes from a line which the English localization team chose to write as "Zelda is your..." (cutting off the line and leaving the rest to the imagination, which many players then chose to assume would end with the word sister) while a literal translation from the Japanese text for that same line actually comes out as "Zelda is your destiny". Saw that a while back on a page that had gone through the manual and in-game text for LttP comparing the original Japanese text and how the translators altered it for the US release. Don't have a link saved to check it again now though.

CRIMINAL BOT

@@Cliffordlonghead what

​@@Cliffordlonghead A bot is a user with a questionable name and profile picture, that person isen't

Given the amount of those times part of his scheme is marrying her to legitimise his rule, that would give the series a weird Alabama twist.

​@@CuriousKeybro what? When did he plan to do such thing

ew@@CuriousKey

bleh

"solid" as in some nonsense headcanon. Considering the manga people really shouldn't go down that route. Or ever, considering they kissed in the second ever game

hence the star wars comparison@@kit76149

I started with the original NES game as a kid as well, but there's always been some sort of loose sequence for them in the marketing from what I was aware of growing up. (Although the word loose here can be emphasized. They left the connections between games quite vague. Nintendo likes simplistic "fairy tale" styled storytelling with this series, which means that they haven't done much worldbuilding. We don't usually see any details that aren't immediately and directly relevant to the current adventure.) They presented AoL as the direct sequel to LoZ and then they presented LttP as a prequel to them both and then they presented LA as the direct sequel to LttP and then they presented OoT as another prequel to the series and then they presented MM as the direct sequel to OoT. So by that point it was fairly simple to say OoT -> MM -> LttP -> LA -> LoZ -> AoL. (Many things were left up to imagination on a closer inspection. But it's what they had given us so far at that time.) Where things got weird for a bit was with the releases of TWW and TP and fans fighting over whether or not Nintendo actually intended certain things to be on different branches of a split in the timeline. We also got some oddball releases around this time that felt more disconnected than usual. Harder to slip into a placement. There were the Capcom produced Oracles games. And there was the Four Swords side game within the GBA rerelease of LttP, followed by the releases of TMC and FSA. Hyrule Historia cleared up the "is there a split?" question but also threw split timeline fans off balance with the introduction of a third branch. Almost nobody expected that one. We thought the intention was for LttP onwards to follow after TP and FSA. And... things are kinda weird again now since BotW's release. Nintendo played it vague with what they could intend for BotW's placement but the idea they want us to take away from it is that in the extremely long term all three branches of the timeline go through variations of similar events as each other and the differences in the timing and details become so irrelevant thousands upon thousands of years into the future that it all blends together in the legends / myths and all three branches ultimately lead to some version of an inevitable future. They all have BotW, or something indistinguishably similar to it, tacked on at the end. Soft reboot. The previous games "happened" but their relevance to anything is effectively zero and they might not even be accurate accounts of whatever may actually be buried in the history. I guess with TotK the intention even goes so far as to propose that the kingdom of Hyrule known to us from previous games (both the original Hyrule and the post-flood New Hyrule) fell and had their names forgotten in the myths so that Rauru and Sonia establishing a new kingdom with that name believed their kingdom to be the first and only kingdom with that name. People like yourself who disliked having timelines and don't want to think about it get to have their "told you so" moment. Because within the Hyrule currently being depicted the older games are at best just stories that people within this Hyrule might be telling each other about mythical figures known only through oral tradition storytelling.

...