Impa can be seen with Zelda’s bracelet from the beginning of the game, which hints at a self-fulfilling timeline, yet Ghirahim is still very much present throughout its course. Then, in the very same instance of time travel, we see Zelda hand over her bracelet to Impa as a parting gift. We witness Ghirahim’s defeat during the final sequences of SS, followed by his complete destruction in the moment Demise’s sword shatters. To put it simply, it would be impossible for most of the events in the game to occur within this self-fulfilling, “fixed” form of time progression. If SS were to be set in a self-fulfilling timeline, events such as the battle with Demise and the quest surrounding the Life Tree shouldn’t have had to be completed, as the effect of such events would have already been visible from the beginning of the game. This is because, if Link was to go back in time and defeat Demise before the events of SS, it would make his entire journey, and by extent the entire premise of the game, completely unnecessary to that version of the timeline. However its existence suggests that SS, in its entirety, is a self-fulfilling game. I have no problem with the event by itself. I don’t particularly swear by the “3 Theories of Time Travel” (pictured below), but this specific event can be nicely summed up as a “Fixed Timeline” by its definition. This event is seemingly self-fulfilling, meaning that it was always going to happen, and that the effect of it was, and is, always able to be witnessed even in times when it is technically still yet to occur. The fact that Impa can be seen with Zelda’s bracelet upon first meeting her throws a huge spanner in the works in regards to the timeline’s functionality. SS then brings forth a problem in that there is an event that suggests a flow of time functioning separately to this original “cause and effect” principle. In other words, whilst the manipulation of time is slightly different in each case, the functionality of the overall timeline remains the same. That being said, both means of time travel revolve around the fact that actions committed in the past are able to have repercussions in the future. This would suggest that the Ocarina of Time and the Master Sword possess different time altering abilities to one another, as one allows free travel between specific points in time, while the other does not. As we know, this event is what causes the CT/AT split to occur, after which Link is unable to return to his original timeline. OoT ends with one last time travel sequence in which Link is sent back in time by Princess Zelda, however this time it happens via the Ocarina of Time. In both cases, Link is able to travel back in time, alter the past, and then return to his original timeline, where the effects of his actions can be witnessed. And although there is the obvious difference that OoT Link is transformed with each instance of time travel, the way in which time is able to be affected by each is more or less the same. This form of time travel is fundamentally the same as the type utilised by the Hero of Time to travel between two points via the pulling of the Master Sword. This would explain how Link is able to travel back and forth along his original timeline even after altering the past, (as seen in quest to plant the Life Tree seedling). It appears to be that the gateway is a portal between two points in time, each existing on the same timeline. However, as I dug into the evidence further, I discovered that there was more to it than I thought.Īs we don’t know the nature of time travel via the Gate of Time, it’s difficult to know exactly what occurred during the time travel sequences of SS. I’ll be honest with you, when I first began writing this theory, all I wanted to prove was the possibility of a new timeline branching from the game’s final boss. WARNING: INCLUDES SPOILERS FOR MULTIPLE GAMES: SS, OoT & FSAĪh yes, the infamous Skyward Sword timeline split. But I couldn’t see any recent threads about it, so I thought I’d go ahead and make one) (I apologise in advance if this has already been discussed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |