Jump to content
IGNORED

POLL: Is Zelda Tears of the Kingdom a sequel or a prequel?


phart010

Tears of the Kingdom is:  

14 members have voted

  1. 1. Tears of the Kingdom is:

    • The sequel to Breath of the Wild
      13
    • The prequel to Breath of the Wild
      1


Recommended Posts

I just had this thought come to mind watching the new trailer for Zelda TOTK. Could this game be the prequel to Breath of the Wild? It seems that Ganondorf is summoning an army to destroy the Kingdom in the trailer..  Maybe this is the lead up to the epic battle that happened 100 years prior to Breath of the Wild.

 

Edited by phart010
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Link said:

As a prequel, it would make sense. They basically already told that story, though. It would feel like a cheap cop-out to me. 

How so? Do you mean with the flashbacks and storytelling in BOTW? Or do you mean Hyrule Warriors Age of Calamity?

Age of Calamity actually doesn’t count. They made it pretty clear that when the robot thingy went back in time, it became a parallel reality. So any of the events in that game should be excluded from the “natural” BOTW timeline. 
 

Edited by phart010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Link said:

I didn't play Hyrule Warriors. I spent about ten minutes with it and thought it was kinda dumb tbh 🤷‍♀️ 

It's not for me either.  It's definitely more of a mindless button masher compared to BOTW.  My younger kids really enjoyed it since it was easier for them to get into without my help.  They also love BOTW, but I have to help them with a bunch of stuff in that game.

It's rare I buy brand new games on day 1, but Tears of the Kingdom is definitely a day 1 buy for me.

Edited by TDIRunner
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The title was changed to POLL: Is Zelda Tears of the Kingdom a sequel or a prequel?

That doesn’t matter. If the intention was for us to discover that it is secretly a prequel then they would not tell us. That would spoil the element of discovery.

Gannon (or whoever is speaking in the video) says: Rise, Rise my servants. Sweep over Hyrule. Eliminate this kingdom and her allies. Leave no survivors!

In BOTW, Hyrule Kingdom is already pretty much eliminated. There’s no military forces remaining and the castle is in ruins. The only survivors are a small number of villagers scattered throughout little towns across the land.

And who are Hyrule’s allie’s?  I was thinking this is referring to the sky people. If sky people and Hyrule Kingdom are in tact in this game, maybe they all get destroyed by Gannon after he emerges from his dormant state. And this explains why we don’t see any floating islands or the “kingdom” of Hyrule in BOTW. 

Just my thoughts 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, RegularGuyGamer said:

The explanation story of BOTW is 56 min so there is a lot of development of the characters outside of the memories alone

https://youtu.be/SUvaxhN9who

I watched it just earlier. Even after watching it, I still think there’s a lot of blanks. I am convinced even after watching it that TOTK could be a prequel

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, fox said:

The secret is Link dies in the opening hours and we secretly play as Zelda the rest of the game.  That is why the kingdom has so many tears and gameplay footage has been so limited.

On a more serious note, if you play Age of Calamity, you see that prior to the rise of Calamity Gannon, Hyrule was a pretty thriving Kingdom. All of that was destroyed after Gannon rose up. 
 

If this game comes after BOTW, the guy (Ganondorf/Gannon) speaking in that latest trailer about destroying “Hyrule Kingdom” is essentially talking about destroying some sparsely populated villages in remote areas, and the Gerudo, Zora, Gorons and bird people. In total, maybe there’s like 100-200 people in these places

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Administrator · Posted
23 minutes ago, phart010 said:

In BOTW, Hyrule Kingdom is already pretty much eliminated. There’s no military forces remaining and the castle is in ruins. The only survivors are a small number of villagers scattered throughout little towns across the land.

And in the trailers they've released, Hyrule Kingdom has been pretty much eliminated. They show things which simply did not exist in the state shown and in some cases (e.g. the Horse Stables) did not exist at all prior to the Calamity/the events of BotW.

For one, Hyrule castle is shown to be dilapidated, as well as Hyrule Town being in ruins. Secondly, again, the horse stables did not exist prior to Calamity Ganon's attacks, yet are visible in the trailers. The Master Sword is shown to have taken significant damage; there was nothing in BotW to indicate that this was ever the case prior to the game:

image.png

 

Not to mention Link's arm/hand:

image.png

He's actively been altered since the events of BotW.

He's also clearly learned from his actions in BotW:

image.png

Note that machine is pieced together - it's not ancient Sheikah technology in it's original form, it's a bunch of wood the man's put together to make a new contraption. And again - ruins in the background. Plenty of ruins in the trailers; this is a Hyrule which is attempting to recover post-Calamity Ganon, not one which is confident it will defeat Calamity Ganon on account of having the Divine Beasts.

It's marketed as a sequel, and everything points to it being a sequel. Ganondorf's existence and determination to destroy Hyrule kingdom and it's allies is more likely to imply that rebuilding has happened since BotW than to imply that this is a prequel rather than what they've told us it is. There's zero evidence of this being a prequel and the simplest answer is more often than not the right one.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Administrator · Posted
6 minutes ago, phart010 said:

If this game comes after BOTW, the guy (Ganondorf/Gannon) speaking in that latest trailer about destroying “Hyrule Kingdom” is essentially talking about destroying some sparsely populated villages in remote areas, and the Gerudo, Zora, Gorons and bird people. In total, maybe there’s like 100-200 people in these places

To this specifically - there's nothing at all to imply that they can't have rebuilt. Hyrule isn't the whole world and as a Canadian I can tell you with confidence that immigration is a legitimate form of rebuilding population in a region.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, phart010 said:

“Hyrule Kingdom”

Nope.  He says “This kingdom” which given there are both sky and underground areas may not even be Hyrule.

But more importantly “and HER allies”

playable Zelda confirmed 😎

Edited by fox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gloves said:

And in the trailers they've released, Hyrule Kingdom has been pretty much eliminated. They show things which simply did not exist in the state shown and in some cases (e.g. the Horse Stables) did not exist at all prior to the Calamity/the events of BotW.

For one, Hyrule castle is shown to be dilapidated, as well as Hyrule Town being in ruins. Secondly, again, the horse stables did not exist prior to Calamity Ganon's attacks, yet are visible in the trailers. The Master Sword is shown to have taken significant damage; there was nothing in BotW to indicate that this was ever the case prior to the game:

image.png

 

Not to mention Link's arm/hand:

image.png

He's actively been altered since the events of BotW.

He's also clearly learned from his actions in BotW:

image.png

Note that machine is pieced together - it's not ancient Sheikah technology in it's original form, it's a bunch of wood the man's put together to make a new contraption. And again - ruins in the background. Plenty of ruins in the trailers; this is a Hyrule which is attempting to recover post-Calamity Ganon, not one which is confident it will defeat Calamity Ganon on account of having the Divine Beasts.

It's marketed as a sequel, and everything points to it being a sequel. Ganondorf's existence and determination to destroy Hyrule kingdom and it's allies is more likely to imply that rebuilding has happened since BotW than to imply that this is a prequel rather than what they've told us it is. There's zero evidence of this being a prequel and the simplest answer is more often than not the right one.

How do you know what existed before Calamity Gannons initial attacks? They didnt show us much in BOTW.. Maybe the horse stables did exist, but were just destroyed? And what we are seeing now is how they were before Calamity Gannon initially emerged.

Hyrule Castle appeared to be in tact. It did not appear to be in ruins to me. It did seem to be in the process of getting destroyed though. 

Maybe this is the damage that was done to the Master Sword prior to it being placed back into the Lost Woods to rest for 100 years.

That thing on Links arm seems to have happened when he and Zelda went underground and confronted that zombie looking things. I’m gonna guess and say that was the cursed mummy of Ganondorf and somehow his arm was cursed by it.

The ruins you are seeing in Hyrule field could be part of ancient Hyrule. Just as today we see ancient Roman pillars scattered here and there throughout Europe and the Middle East, we don’t confuse those with modern infrastructure.


Marketing the game as a sequel would be wise if you wanted to surprise everyone with a plot twist in which you discover the game is actually a prequel . 

I think there’s plenty of evidence. I could turn out to be wrong, but I don’t think this idea is out of the realm of possibilities. 

In real life, the simplest answer is usually the right one. But this is not real life. This is a pretty highly developed fictional fantasy world with legends, monsters, and magic
 

Edited by phart010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Administrator · Posted
3 minutes ago, phart010 said:

That thing on Links arm seems to have happened when he and Zelda went underground and confronted that zombie looking things. I’m gonna guess and say that it was Ganondorf and somehow his arm was cursed.

Your arguments all follow a similar "logic" to this one which I don't get - you're saying this is a prequel, but that Link's arm situation happened when he and Zelda went underground...

Sure, logical, makes sense.

But it clearly wasn't like that in BotW. This is a new development. How does that support your argument?

 

9 minutes ago, phart010 said:

Marketing the game as a sequel would be wise if you wanted to surprise everyone with a plot twist in which you discover the game is actually a sequel. 

Nintendo really has no reason to tell us it's one thing and get us hyped up about the continuation of the story of these characters, only to bait-and-switch and it be the complete opposite. That's bad marketing. Like, phenomenally bad marketing. They've to my knowledge never done that nor had any reason to with any product. There have been twists in the series before (Link Between Worlds had a few great ones), but to sell something as one thing when it's the opposite of that... No. That's not a twist. Heck, it'd not even be a good surprise; it'd be an incredible let-down. The story of what happens all the way back to 10,000 years prior to BotW is well established; there's no point at all in re-treading that ground. Even with Age of Calamity being a parallel history, the ground has been tread in terms of games we've played, stories we've seen. 

 

14 minutes ago, phart010 said:

I think there’s plenty of evidence.

You've yet to provide any.

It's a sequel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Gloves said:

Your arguments all follow a similar "logic" to this one which I don't get - you're saying this is a prequel, but that Link's arm situation happened when he and Zelda went underground...

Sure, logical, makes sense.

But it clearly wasn't like that in BotW. This is a new development. How does that support your argument?

 

Nintendo really has no reason to tell us it's one thing and get us hyped up about the continuation of the story of these characters, only to bait-and-switch and it be the complete opposite. That's bad marketing. Like, phenomenally bad marketing. They've to my knowledge never done that nor had any reason to with any product. There have been twists in the series before (Link Between Worlds had a few great ones), but to sell something as one thing when it's the opposite of that... No. That's not a twist. Heck, it'd not even be a good surprise; it'd be an incredible let-down. The story of what happens all the way back to 10,000 years prior to BotW is well established; there's no point at all in re-treading that ground. Even with Age of Calamity being a parallel history, the ground has been tread in terms of games we've played, stories we've seen. 

 

You've yet to provide any.

It's a sequel.

I’m not saying it’s a prequel. I am entertaining the possibility that it could be a prequel.

If the arm thing isn’t part of his natural body and is in fact a “curse” of some sorts, then him essentially being killed and his body being left to heal for 100 years in the shrine of resurrection would have probably removed any unnatural things from his body. 

I would totally respect Nintendos decision if they wanted to call the game a sequel and then plot twists revealed it to be a prequel. I mean you only have two choices if you want to surprise people. You either stealth drop a game or you can announce the game in advance but be vague about the plot. Saying that it’s a sequel isn’t necessary lying. It’s like saying Better Call Saul is the sequel to Breaking Bad. It’s not necessarily a lie, it’s just imprecise. 

There’s no “actual evidence” when we are hypothesizing about what the storyline of a fantasy video game might be. It’s all speculation. So my “evidence” is the arguments that I have made to support this concept. Maybe call it supporting arguments 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if it's a sequel or prequel, but I do know that my hype has faded pretty hard on this one. All the poor performing, low-resolution Switch games that keep dropping have really made me want to wait for a Switch 2. BotW may be one of my favorite games, but it's not like it was particularly impressive from a technical standpoint. If the scope of this game is even bigger, I can't imagine it will fair particularly well on aging (aged?) hardware.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...