Actually, this is still about Zelda.

There was a decent timeline thingy done a while here
http://youtube.com/watch?v=SF8Ve2Dk6-0

It seems plausible enough, especially the splitting timeline theory. (What is nonsense is the bit about moving the kingdom explaining why the original Zelda didn’t have any castles or towns, and how it followed Link’s Awakening which is why you had to collect stuff again. Bullcrap, it’s a game… it’s the same with Metroid, always having to collect your stuff again. Metroid Prime was amusing in that in a single elevator ride at the start your suit malfunctions and you lose alllllll your powerups, to be found on some damn random planet again later… pretty convenient)

I really have to disagree though, with them putting Link to the Past on the Timeline A, where Young Link and Young Zelda get rid of Gannondorf early (after Link goes back in time). Link to the Past was all about Ganon getting out of the Sacred Realm (Dark World) and messing about. You helped put him there in Ocarina of Time as an adult, so it’s doubtful that he was trapped by the non-awake sages (in the past anyway) in the Sacred Realm. They say it could just be a legend passed down from what young Link remembered happening as an adult, but that still doesn’t put Ganon where he needs to be. So I think LTTP goes in the Timeline B, before Windwaker… which is a bit of a downer really, since it all gets flooded. And I can only assume the Link in Link to the Past isn’t the real Hero of Time either, because it’s assumed that he was “erased” from this timeline by having gone back to being a kid in Ocarina of Time. So in LTTP you’re just some schmuck who ends up finding the triforce… wow, must be some bad crap going on between the time Your Uncle Recovers, and the gods utterly destroying your home and forcing everyone to live on the tops of mountains with a total population of like 30 NPCs.

Angry Video Game nerd did one as well,
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/29488.html?type=flv

What I don’t understand is why he’s so confused that Link To the Past isn’t first. He seems to think because it contains the term Past that it should be first. But actually, it’s linking current events to past events… but as he says, it’s like pulling a George Lucas. But the thing is, the past events being referred to are in the intro to the game itself if you don’t press start. It’s just back story and then the game play is “years later”.

And then of course, it makes perfect sense…. to me… that the Ocarina of Time is basically the game that represents that back story. The split timeline makes sense as well, with the flood on one side, and … non-flood on the other… I haven’t finished Twilight Princess yet so I have no idea how it plays out. Everything I’ve seen so far is that it answers nothing at all. Oh well.

But these immortal Link and Zelda characters, probably easier to just say they are descendants. Who take the name. Or even better, consider them as Final Fantasy characters.. name em Cid, but that’s it, don’t expect anyone to be anyone game to game. Unless you add sub-numbering to your sequels (Final Fantasy 10 and 10-2.. what the hell is that?)

As for Zelda and Zelda II (for NES).. I think those are on their own. I mean, the first game was just the first one, no concept of a huge timeline, then immediately the sequel (the sidescroller, arg). But then, Link To the Past is sort of a reboot with similar characters. I bet no one likes this idea, but I do, since it removes nonsense. And I still don’t count those gameboy adventures on their own, I mean, they are all over the place. The first timeline explanation suggests Oracle Of Ages is on one timeline, and Oracle of Seasons on the other… but originally there were supposed to be 3 games (one for each bit of the triforce). So I think those are standalone themed adventures. And the four-sword crap is just nuts.

I consider them as personally canon as Star Trek: The Animated Series or Threshold…

yeah, that was geeky, sorry.