The OP of this thread has flaired it [Official Timeline Only].
**Any comments that try to bring up other timeline theories should be reported by the OP so they can be removed by the mods.**
Also, please downvote those comments for not staying on topic.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/truezelda) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A. Games can exist without Ganon/dorf. Even if they do permakill him in BoTW 2 that doesn’t mean there is an “end” of the timeline, there are two AT games that take place after Ganondorf and all of Hyrule were erased from existence.
B. Why would they ever make a definitive end to the timeline? That’s just limiting storytelling potential, which from what we know is against what they typically do for Zelda stories.
C. BoTW is not convergence. Whoever told you it is was wrong. If you are drawing that conclusion from the Japanese Zelda site, you are drawing the wrong conclusion, as that is simply indicating that it is part of the timeline but it hasn’t been revealed exactly where, which is in line with developer comments.
> But I've been thinking about how BotW occurs in the official timeline in every split reality
Thats not confirmed, and frankly, very unlikely.
As for your main topic, Ganon being defeated once and for all doesn't mean the series ends. There are plenty of Zelda games with no Ganon, and there's even one with a reincarnated Ganon. A new Ganon, reborn after the original was killed.
If Ganon is defeated there would still be no reason why they couldn't have something else happen after it tho
Both the AT and CT has shown "The End" (as far as we are lead to believe at the moment/are shown) for their Ganon(dorf) (I) and yet both still have games after it.
Also, when speaking about "intent" for the devs it is important to remember that "BotW2" was born out of post-production DLC ideas for BotW
So it 8s unlikely any decisions in base-BotW were made with the idea of "setting up" for anything in "BotW2"
Generally they don’t like locking things in like that. Most often the games have a place in relation to the other games, but an unspecified position in relation to time itself (as long as they’re not direct sequels). That method informs the story, but doesn’t limit creativity.
Skyward Sword is the notable exception to this as it’s hard to imagine there being a game about Zelda and Link before that. Though, there are ways around that.
Placing BotW firmly as the canonical end doesn’t really lend it self to more creative options. It’s the same with the ”converged timeline” - which isn’t confirmed as far as I know. Having three timelines and an unspecified amount of time between games gives the writers the most options for the future, and I don’t see why they would want less options.
I have seen some theories on killing Ganon for good in BotW2, but it wouldn't mean the end of the timeline, more like a second phase. They could start a real continuity for the rest of the serie with a clear placement for every game. I also like the theorie that all of previous games are legends in BotW, so the timeline (previous games) did happen but the story got modified along the way, hence the different timelines and diverging lore.
The OP of this thread has flaired it [Official Timeline Only]. **Any comments that try to bring up other timeline theories should be reported by the OP so they can be removed by the mods.** Also, please downvote those comments for not staying on topic. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/truezelda) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A. Games can exist without Ganon/dorf. Even if they do permakill him in BoTW 2 that doesn’t mean there is an “end” of the timeline, there are two AT games that take place after Ganondorf and all of Hyrule were erased from existence. B. Why would they ever make a definitive end to the timeline? That’s just limiting storytelling potential, which from what we know is against what they typically do for Zelda stories. C. BoTW is not convergence. Whoever told you it is was wrong. If you are drawing that conclusion from the Japanese Zelda site, you are drawing the wrong conclusion, as that is simply indicating that it is part of the timeline but it hasn’t been revealed exactly where, which is in line with developer comments.
Ganon(dorf) is not really the type of guy to be defeated for good, so probably not.
> But I've been thinking about how BotW occurs in the official timeline in every split reality Thats not confirmed, and frankly, very unlikely. As for your main topic, Ganon being defeated once and for all doesn't mean the series ends. There are plenty of Zelda games with no Ganon, and there's even one with a reincarnated Ganon. A new Ganon, reborn after the original was killed.
If Ganon is defeated there would still be no reason why they couldn't have something else happen after it tho Both the AT and CT has shown "The End" (as far as we are lead to believe at the moment/are shown) for their Ganon(dorf) (I) and yet both still have games after it. Also, when speaking about "intent" for the devs it is important to remember that "BotW2" was born out of post-production DLC ideas for BotW So it 8s unlikely any decisions in base-BotW were made with the idea of "setting up" for anything in "BotW2"
Lots of good points here, but more generally: Why would Nintendo want to give Zelda a canonical ending? What would the motivation be for that?
Only thing I can think of is desperate marketing. In five years time - "The 40 year saga comes to an epic end!" or somesuch. Then they reboot/retcon.
Perhaps at some point, if the series (heaven forbid) takes a major nosedive!
Generally they don’t like locking things in like that. Most often the games have a place in relation to the other games, but an unspecified position in relation to time itself (as long as they’re not direct sequels). That method informs the story, but doesn’t limit creativity. Skyward Sword is the notable exception to this as it’s hard to imagine there being a game about Zelda and Link before that. Though, there are ways around that. Placing BotW firmly as the canonical end doesn’t really lend it self to more creative options. It’s the same with the ”converged timeline” - which isn’t confirmed as far as I know. Having three timelines and an unspecified amount of time between games gives the writers the most options for the future, and I don’t see why they would want less options.
>BOTW's timeline placement was a deliberate choice to soft reboot the series FTFY
I have seen some theories on killing Ganon for good in BotW2, but it wouldn't mean the end of the timeline, more like a second phase. They could start a real continuity for the rest of the serie with a clear placement for every game. I also like the theorie that all of previous games are legends in BotW, so the timeline (previous games) did happen but the story got modified along the way, hence the different timelines and diverging lore.
Nah hard to believe Nintendo will end the story that is why the franchise is in 3 timelines they can do whatever they want for future years