You can say anything you want and take anything you want as canon. It's a fair game. WE'RE the customers. We can choose to believe whatever we'd like about fiction in general because the customer is always right. It's made for OUR entertainment so we can take it however we'd like. If you have a problem with that then, well, you go ahead and have a tantrum about it but it's not going to change anybody's mind.
Personally, I don't think anybody at Nintendo (even Miyamoto) has one freaking clue about the timeline themselves and just wishes the issue would go away. Miyamoto himself has stated numerous times his "facts" on the timeline and every time he talks about them it's one contradiction after the other. He has no clue how he wants them all to map out.
arguing that something is not true or official because you don't like it is daft.
Arguing that a persons participation in development of something automatically makes them an undeniable expert in every single aspect of it or its relationship to/effect on similar things, is ludicrously naive and gullible.
What if Christopher Tolkien released another companion book to The Lord of the Rings, in which he claimed Sauron originally had hair the color and appearance of pink cotton candy? His family owns the rights to the story, so why deny his explanation even if he clearly doesn't know what the hell he's talking about nor has significant evidence to prove it, right?
I stopped careing about Zelda timeline, years ago... I just play the games because they are fun, and they each tell an interesting story...
You can go insane if you think about the timeline too hard...
You can say anything you want and take anything you want as canon. It's a fair game. WE'RE the customers. We can choose to believe whatever we'd like about fiction in general because the customer is always right. It's made for OUR entertainment so we can take it however we'd like. If you have a problem with that then, well, you go ahead and have a tantrum about it but it's not going to change anybody's mind.
Technically only the companies (i.e. in place of the Church, from which the term canon is derived) can define what is and isn't canon... But in general most companies aren't pedantic enough to get that specific... The ones who do get pedantic, start adding and tossing out material at whim, as they feel like it...
Star Trek comes to mind... They are very specific as to what is 'canon'... While they have a huge list of 'licensed' spinoff material, in the past they had been very specific that 'only the movies, and the the TV shows are canon'. They have waffled a bit on the Animated Series (in the past stating it isn't canon, at times stating that parts of it canon, or even saying that all of it may be canon, this is constantly in flux). Roddenberry himself personally 'tossed out' the animated series, and Star Trek V in his view. But after he passed, the company eased up on that... Star Trek V has almost consistently be considered canon by Paramount in modern times...
What if Christopher Tolkien released another companion book to The Lord of the Rings, in which he claimed Sauron originally had hair the color and appearance of pink cotton candy? His family owns the rights to the story, so why deny his explanation even if he clearly doesn't know what the hell he's talking about nor has significant evidence to prove it, right?
Did you know that J.R.R. Tolkien actually had said in his writings, that he wanted people to expand his world? That others may know things about his world, that even he didn't know? He thought that other writers in his world would be inevitable... There is even one letter, IIRC, that says that he wanted to give permission for others to write stories in his universe when he passed.
However, Christopher Tolkien decided to go against his father's wishes (for the most part), and keep all the rights within the family.
Of course, Chris never had full rights over LOTR and the Hobbit, as his father had sold those to the Paul Zaentz Company/Tolkien Enterprises. That company has been able to make all sorts of spinoff material, long after JRR's death... To Chris's chagrin, or so I've read...
Some people think so, other 'purists' are glad he kept it that way...
There are some middle of the roaders, that wish he would ease up a bit, in so much to allow more editors to release more of the 'nearly finished' core 'great tales' storylines, or stories that could be completed with limited editorial additions...
Actually there is something like that already (The Tale of Gondolin by Alex Lewis, illus by Ruth Lacon), that got limited publication by permission from another one of the Tolkiens (Chris sister I think), that people think should get a good final edit by Chris, and then an official rerelease...
Originally there were only like 50 copies printed...
As for JRR Tolkien endorsing budding writers to add to his world... IIRC, there are also some rather rare fan fiction published in Tolkien society newsletter (or whatever the letter Tolkien had quite a bit of involvement with) while he was alive back in the 70s... Which he JRR may have even left some of his opinions of... (but I don't know all the details) One of the more noteable of these was apparently two-three short stories about Arwen, or some other famous female elf from the legendarium (I can't remember exactly).
JRR's view, was not much different (other than there being much more people involved) than Roberta also saying something similar;
As to a King's Quest IX: Since I will never design a King's Quest 9, it would be unfair of me to comment on any one else's endeavors in that area. However, if there were ever to be a King's Quest 9, I wish it luck and hope that it could revive interest in adventure gaming as a whole and in the original King's Quest games in general.
Note: On a sidenote, the strangest though noteable, of Tolkien universe related publication history, is the existence of about four books by two different authors, that are technically unauthorized 'profic' (professional fiction)... Published in countries that do not follow international copyright laws, such as Russia. So fan-fiction that was written to make money...
One is a retelling of LOTR trilogy from the Morder's perspective, portraying the so-called 'dark' forces, are actually a benevolent technologically superior enlightened democratic culture, while it shines the light on the "Peoples" (humans, elves, dwarves, etc) and 'Fellowship" as superstitious, backwards, and racist people, under monarchal dictatorships. LOTR represents the 'history written by the victors'.
Everyone knows only three Zelda games count - The Legend of Zelda, Zelda II and A Link To The Past and even those.... who knows how the fuck they fit together in a timeline! All that matters is they were fun to play!
Everyone knows only three Zelda games count - The Legend of Zelda, Zelda II and A Link To The Past and even those.... who knows how the fuck they fit together in a timeline! All that matters is they were fun to play!
Bt
Kinda like KQ, where to most 'fans' only KQ6 counts.
You can say anything you want and take anything you want as canon. It's a fair game. WE'RE the customers. We can choose to believe whatever we'd like about fiction in general because the customer is always right. It's made for OUR entertainment so we can take it however we'd like. If you have a problem with that then, well, you go ahead and have a tantrum about it but it's not going to change anybody's mind.
Personally, I don't think anybody at Nintendo (even Miyamoto) has one freaking clue about the timeline themselves and just wishes the issue would go away. Miyamoto himself has stated numerous times his "facts" on the timeline and every time he talks about them it's one contradiction after the other. He has no clue how he wants them all to map out.
Yeah. Nintendo started out making games, and then built stories around them. The story was always second, so it's expected that there's inconsistencies. I think Nintendo realizes that but has just tried to make fans happy by creating a timeline that would satisfy a group of them. BUt I don't think any of the developers personally care too much. I think if it were up to Miyamoto there'd be a lot less story in the Zelda games than there is now, meager though it may be.
Kinda like KQ, where to most 'fans' only KQ6 counts.
Yeah, man, those other games, they just NEVER happened. I mean, duh. :P
Some game universes have sloppy timelines with a lot of inconsistency. It happens. In most cases, I don't see much point in nitpicking them, personally. Hell, even purely contained inside KQ7 there's never a satisfactory answer for why Rosella & Valanice don't finally find one another in Chapter 4 or 5.
Yeah, man, those other games, they just NEVER happened. I mean, duh. :P
Some game universes have sloppy timelines with a lot of inconsistency. It happens. In most cases, I don't see much point in nitpicking them, personally. Hell, even purely contained inside KQ7 there's never a satisfactory answer for why Rosella & Valanice don't finally find one another in Chapter 4 or 5.
Even in the best and most tightly constructed universes--Like Tolkien's--there are inconsistencies. Also Roberta didn't seem to be a stickler for making an ordered universe. This is the same universe where Dracula, Little Red Riding Hood, King Neptune and Pegasus all exist in the same game; Where the Three Bears and Medusa exist in the same country; Where a 19th Century style Manor sits next to an Ancient Egyptian-esque tomb.
Comments
http://zelda.wikia.com/wiki/Miyamoto_Order
either way - the point is, arguing that something is not true or official because you don't like it is daft.
You can't call something Nintendo publishes "fan fiction" just because you disagree.
You can always disagree and come up with your own theory, but that doesn't automatically invalidate sourced information.
What is so hard to grasp about this concept?
Personally, I don't think anybody at Nintendo (even Miyamoto) has one freaking clue about the timeline themselves and just wishes the issue would go away. Miyamoto himself has stated numerous times his "facts" on the timeline and every time he talks about them it's one contradiction after the other. He has no clue how he wants them all to map out.
Arguing that a persons participation in development of something automatically makes them an undeniable expert in every single aspect of it or its relationship to/effect on similar things, is ludicrously naive and gullible.
What if Christopher Tolkien released another companion book to The Lord of the Rings, in which he claimed Sauron originally had hair the color and appearance of pink cotton candy? His family owns the rights to the story, so why deny his explanation even if he clearly doesn't know what the hell he's talking about nor has significant evidence to prove it, right?
You can go insane if you think about the timeline too hard...
Technically only the companies (i.e. in place of the Church, from which the term canon is derived) can define what is and isn't canon... But in general most companies aren't pedantic enough to get that specific... The ones who do get pedantic, start adding and tossing out material at whim, as they feel like it...
Star Trek comes to mind... They are very specific as to what is 'canon'... While they have a huge list of 'licensed' spinoff material, in the past they had been very specific that 'only the movies, and the the TV shows are canon'. They have waffled a bit on the Animated Series (in the past stating it isn't canon, at times stating that parts of it canon, or even saying that all of it may be canon, this is constantly in flux). Roddenberry himself personally 'tossed out' the animated series, and Star Trek V in his view. But after he passed, the company eased up on that... Star Trek V has almost consistently be considered canon by Paramount in modern times...
Did you know that J.R.R. Tolkien actually had said in his writings, that he wanted people to expand his world? That others may know things about his world, that even he didn't know? He thought that other writers in his world would be inevitable... There is even one letter, IIRC, that says that he wanted to give permission for others to write stories in his universe when he passed.
However, Christopher Tolkien decided to go against his father's wishes (for the most part), and keep all the rights within the family.
Of course, Chris never had full rights over LOTR and the Hobbit, as his father had sold those to the Paul Zaentz Company/Tolkien Enterprises. That company has been able to make all sorts of spinoff material, long after JRR's death... To Chris's chagrin, or so I've read...
There are some middle of the roaders, that wish he would ease up a bit, in so much to allow more editors to release more of the 'nearly finished' core 'great tales' storylines, or stories that could be completed with limited editorial additions...
Actually there is something like that already (The Tale of Gondolin by Alex Lewis, illus by Ruth Lacon), that got limited publication by permission from another one of the Tolkiens (Chris sister I think), that people think should get a good final edit by Chris, and then an official rerelease...
Originally there were only like 50 copies printed...
http://www.tolkienlibrary.com/reviews/taleofgondolin.htm
As for JRR Tolkien endorsing budding writers to add to his world... IIRC, there are also some rather rare fan fiction published in Tolkien society newsletter (or whatever the letter Tolkien had quite a bit of involvement with) while he was alive back in the 70s... Which he JRR may have even left some of his opinions of... (but I don't know all the details) One of the more noteable of these was apparently two-three short stories about Arwen, or some other famous female elf from the legendarium (I can't remember exactly).
JRR's view, was not much different (other than there being much more people involved) than Roberta also saying something similar;
Note: On a sidenote, the strangest though noteable, of Tolkien universe related publication history, is the existence of about four books by two different authors, that are technically unauthorized 'profic' (professional fiction)... Published in countries that do not follow international copyright laws, such as Russia. So fan-fiction that was written to make money...
One is a retelling of LOTR trilogy from the Morder's perspective, portraying the so-called 'dark' forces, are actually a benevolent technologically superior enlightened democratic culture, while it shines the light on the "Peoples" (humans, elves, dwarves, etc) and 'Fellowship" as superstitious, backwards, and racist people, under monarchal dictatorships. LOTR represents the 'history written by the victors'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Ringbearer
The other is the Ring of Darkness" trilogy set some 300 years after LOTR trilogy, following the decendents of the original.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Perumov
http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Ring_of_Darkness
Strange indeed...
Bt
Kinda like KQ, where to most 'fans' only KQ6 counts.
Yeah. Nintendo started out making games, and then built stories around them. The story was always second, so it's expected that there's inconsistencies. I think Nintendo realizes that but has just tried to make fans happy by creating a timeline that would satisfy a group of them. BUt I don't think any of the developers personally care too much. I think if it were up to Miyamoto there'd be a lot less story in the Zelda games than there is now, meager though it may be.
Yeah, man, those other games, they just NEVER happened. I mean, duh. :P
Some game universes have sloppy timelines with a lot of inconsistency. It happens. In most cases, I don't see much point in nitpicking them, personally. Hell, even purely contained inside KQ7 there's never a satisfactory answer for why Rosella & Valanice don't finally find one another in Chapter 4 or 5.
Even in the best and most tightly constructed universes--Like Tolkien's--there are inconsistencies. Also Roberta didn't seem to be a stickler for making an ordered universe. This is the same universe where Dracula, Little Red Riding Hood, King Neptune and Pegasus all exist in the same game; Where the Three Bears and Medusa exist in the same country; Where a 19th Century style Manor sits next to an Ancient Egyptian-esque tomb.