Like Legend of Zelda, do you think they should relase an offical timeline?

[Alpha71689]

Unlike Zelda, knowing where each Pokemon game places on a timeline does nothing to improve or enhance the experience of the series as a whole, because each Pokemon game - or at least Gen - is so self-contained. It'd be nice, but I don't see a real need for a timeline.

To be fair, you can play the Zelda series out of order, and not be confused. Despite there being a timeline, I believe each game is its own entity, with its own legend to tell.

 

[Phoenixon]

Unlike Zelda, knowing where each Pokemon game places on a timeline does nothing to improve or enhance the experience of the series as a whole, because each Pokemon game - or at least Gen - is so self-contained. It'd be nice, but I don't see a real need for a timeline.

To be fair, you can play the Zelda series out of order, and not be confused. Despite there being a timeline, I believe each game is its own entity, with its own legend to tell.

You could, but the overall story won't flow. I mean, there's some obvious sequels, that we didn't need a timeline to explain. Like (OoT to) WW to PH to ST. Or OoT to MM. Or, more recently, ALttP to ALBW.
In, Pokemon the only sequels we've had were BW to B2W2, and we know the time between them was two years. Sure, you could play them in either order really, but the story flows from BW to B2W2.
Like Beausoleil said, each generation is self contained. But, some consider GSC to be sequels to RBY, in which case, we still know there were three years between them. The rest of the generations are unrelated, unlike Zelda, where most of the games ARE related.
That's why a timeline is unnecessary. (Although, I admit, I want to see one in the future.)

 

[Deadman]

I say it might be interesting but not really necessary. That bit of story each game presents is more or less concluded in itself. From what I can say all games must play somewhere in the lifespan of Oak since he gets mentioning often enough and in present term if I remember correctly meaning he's still alive (don't nail me on all of that though, can't remember every detail) which narrows the time span of when the games play a bit (isn't he like 50 or so, maybe a bit older). The time line BG released seems to be a good hit though. But really, I don't feel the desperate need of a time line in Pokèmon games though (but I wish time would pass in the Anime and they move to a new generation after concluding Ash's journey when he's older). Also I like the Zelda time line especially since it's including the multiple universe theory after messing around with time but that's enough off-topic.

 

[Hex Maniac]

I'm not even sure if there is an actual timeline. I suspect that they probably come up with the story for each game more or less independently. It's likely that you could somehow establish a general chronological order between games but they probably weren't made with a precise timeline in mind.

 

[Bolt Strike]

I say it might be interesting but not really necessary. That bit of story each game presents is more or less concluded in itself. From what I can say all games must play somewhere in the lifespan of Oak since he gets mentioning often enough and in present term if I remember correctly meaning he's still alive (don't nail me on all of that though, can't remember every detail) which narrows the time span of when the games play a bit (isn't he like 50 or so, maybe a bit older). The time line BG released seems to be a good hit though. But really, I don't feel the desperate need of a time line in Pokèmon games though (but I wish time would pass in the Anime and they move to a new generation after concluding Ash's journey when he's older). Also I like the Zelda time line especially since it's including the multiple universe theory after messing around with time but that's enough off-topic.

I don't think Professor Oak has appeared at all after the time skip actually, so it's possible he could've died in between GSCHGSS/DPPt and BW1.

 

[LavenderTownGhost]

I think that would be beyond cool. I love reading series' timelines, such as the .hack timeline. I could read that one over and over again, so fascinating. I feel that we should petition this haha!

 

[Deadman]

I say it might be interesting but not really necessary. That bit of story each game presents is more or less concluded in itself. From what I can say all games must play somewhere in the lifespan of Oak since he gets mentioning often enough and in present term if I remember correctly meaning he's still alive (don't nail me on all of that though, can't remember every detail) which narrows the time span of when the games play a bit (isn't he like 50 or so, maybe a bit older). The time line BG released seems to be a good hit though. But really, I don't feel the desperate need of a time line in Pokèmon games though (but I wish time would pass in the Anime and they move to a new generation after concluding Ash's journey when he's older). Also I like the Zelda time line especially since it's including the multiple universe theory after messing around with time but that's enough off-topic.

I don't think Professor Oak has appeared at all after the time skip actually, so it's possible he could've died in between GSCHGSS/DPPt and BW1.

Not appeared physically but mention in present term, meaning he's still dwelling somewhere in the world just not where the player currently is. But as I said, I can't remember every detail and might miss something.

 

[Bolt Strike]

I say it might be interesting but not really necessary. That bit of story each game presents is more or less concluded in itself. From what I can say all games must play somewhere in the lifespan of Oak since he gets mentioning often enough and in present term if I remember correctly meaning he's still alive (don't nail me on all of that though, can't remember every detail) which narrows the time span of when the games play a bit (isn't he like 50 or so, maybe a bit older). The time line BG released seems to be a good hit though. But really, I don't feel the desperate need of a time line in Pokèmon games though (but I wish time would pass in the Anime and they move to a new generation after concluding Ash's journey when he's older). Also I like the Zelda time line especially since it's including the multiple universe theory after messing around with time but that's enough off-topic.

I don't think Professor Oak has appeared at all after the time skip actually, so it's possible he could've died in between GSCHGSS/DPPt and BW1.

Not appeared physically but mention in present term, meaning he's still dwelling somewhere in the world just not where the player currently is. But as I said, I can't remember every detail and might miss something.

I don't recall Oak ever even being referenced in 5th gen at all either.

 

[Alpha71689]

Unlike Zelda, knowing where each Pokemon game places on a timeline does nothing to improve or enhance the experience of the series as a whole, because each Pokemon game - or at least Gen - is so self-contained. It'd be nice, but I don't see a real need for a timeline.

To be fair, you can play the Zelda series out of order, and not be confused. Despite there being a timeline, I believe each game is its own entity, with its own legend to tell.

You could, but the overall story won't flow. I mean, there's some obvious sequels, that we didn't need a timeline to explain. Like (OoT to) WW to PH to ST. Or OoT to MM. Or, more recently, ALttP to ALBW.
In, Pokemon the only sequels we've had were BW to B2W2, and we know the time between them was two years. Sure, you could play them in either order really, but the story flows from BW to B2W2.
Like Beausoleil said, each generation is self contained. But, some consider GSC to be sequels to RBY, in which case, we still know there were three years between them. The rest of the generations are unrelated, unlike Zelda, where most of the games ARE related.
That's why a timeline is unnecessary. (Although, I admit, I want to see one in the future.)

Well, at least it would be easy to create a Pokémon timeline, unlike the Zelda games.

 

[Fig]

Unlike Zelda, knowing where each Pokemon game places on a timeline does nothing to improve or enhance the experience of the series as a whole, because each Pokemon game - or at least Gen - is so self-contained. It'd be nice, but I don't see a real need for a timeline.

Not that the Zelda timeline really "enhance" or "improve" my experience.

Really it more makes me want to tear my hair off in despair.

 

[Dorothy]

Unlike Zelda, knowing where each Pokemon game places on a timeline does nothing to improve or enhance the experience of the series as a whole, because each Pokemon game - or at least Gen - is so self-contained. It'd be nice, but I don't see a real need for a timeline.

Not that the Zelda timeline really "enhance" or "improve" my experience.

Really it more makes me want to tear my hair off in despair.

Okay, so it enhances your experience negatively

It also has to do with genre, I suppose. Zelda is fantasy, and like most fantasy makes clear and distinct references to events in the universe's distant past - often to other games in the series - in ways which affect, or in some cases are imperative to, the plot. Depending on your point of view the timeline makes the chronology confusing and frustrating, but without it the chronology is damn near impossible to work out. That said, Zelda needs a clear timeline due to the nature of the series and its genre.

Beyond the existence of the Pokemon themselves (especially legendaries), the world of Pokemon is.. pretty ordinary. References to past games rarely affect the plot in any way, except in Gen II and BW2. It's not anywhere close to as necessary for Pokemon to have a timeline as it is for Zelda to have one.

 

[Fig]

The whole split timelien nonsense made me throw my hands up in disgust and walk away as far as Zelda goes.

 

[Dorothy]

The whole split timelien nonsense made me throw my hands up in disgust and walk away as far as Zelda goes.

It's the only way it could have happened, IMO. I've long been a proponent of the split timeline theory (although I favored 2 timelines rather than 3). Especially when Twilight Princess detailed how the Sages failed to seal Ganondorf right after Wind Waker mentioned Ganondorf freeing himself from the Sages' successful seal (both events being said to have taken place after the Hero of Time defeated Ganondorf), there really couldn't be only one timeline; the internal contradictions in background information wouldn't allow for it. Splitting the series into Child and Adult timelines via Zelda's sending Link back to the past at the end of OoT was not only the logical choice, but a neat bit of storytelling to boot.

I will agree that the idea of the Fallen timeline was stupid and shouldn't have been included, though.

 

[Alpha71689]

The whole split timelien nonsense made me throw my hands up in disgust and walk away as far as Zelda goes.

Honestly, Nintendo backed themselves in a corner when they tried to mess with time travel. They opened that door, and are now trying to string the games together, to make them fit in one universe.

 

[Robo-Floatzel]

A timeline like the Zelda one would be nice, but I don't think it would be necessary since all the main-series games are set in a contemporary period (around 10-15 or so years) and nothing needs to be intertwined at all. I'd rather have a full map of the Pokemon world with all the regions in it as opposed to a timeline for the franchise, since so much of the Pokemon world is still unknown, and a timeline wouldn't do much other than cover the games like the Zelda timeline did.

 

[squidsticks]

I think a timeline would be neat for curiosity's sake. As people here have said, Pokemon games are pretty stand alone, with no constant plot running through them. But! I did find myself wondering if Prof Oak was still alive while playing through Y. I mean, having significant periods of time pass between events in the games would be a logical way to explain the advancements in the tech available to you in each gen. Ultimately, it's not necessary, but I'd certainly find it interesting!

 

[Warrior of Fire]

I mean, having significant periods of time pass between events in the games would be a logical way to explain the advancements in the tech available to you in each gen.

An important thing to remember about technology in any world is that the more it advances, the quicker it can advance. I know that there's a name for it, but I can't remember it at the moment.

 

[Phoenixon]

I mean, having significant periods of time pass between events in the games would be a logical way to explain the advancements in the tech available to you in each gen.

An important thing to remember about technology in any world is that the more it advances, the quicker it can advance. I know that there's a name for it, but I can't remember it at the moment.

Moore's law: technology advances at an exponential rate. I think that might have been what you meant.

Although, I'm not sure if advancements in tech are definitely the cause of time in the Pokemon World. What if some regions are just more developed than others, hence having better tech?
Although, I'm getting kind of off topic, and I doubt this really matters anyway.

 

[squidsticks]

I mean, having significant periods of time pass between events in the games would be a logical way to explain the advancements in the tech available to you in each gen.

An important thing to remember about technology in any world is that the more it advances, the quicker it can advance. I know that there's a name for it, but I can't remember it at the moment.

Moore's law: technology advances at an exponential rate. I think that might have been what you meant.

Although, I'm not sure if advancements in tech are definitely the cause of time in the Pokemon World. What if some regions are just more developed than others, hence having better tech?
Although, I'm getting kind of off topic, and I doubt this really matters anyway.

Oh, for sure! It's probably very likely that different regions have developed at different rates to each other. I was just thinking of how sort of "basic" the game was in the first gen compared to the most recent instalment. I mean, actual time elapsed in the real world explains that, so I just thought that logically, you could say that your adventure in Kanto takes place 10-15 years before the adventure in Kalos (your Pokedex is much more basic, all the road signs are physical signs, whereas in X and Y they look like computer screens, etc). I think this is why more in-depth descriptions of the each region would be more interesting! Maybe Kalos is actually a far more developed region than a "modern day" Kanto? I think it's a really neat topic to discuss.

 

[tortuga gigante]

they alredy have one one line google it and you can most likly find it online in pdf format it was rather long too