Stone Ocean
Member
A timeline is fine, but we could have done without without the timeline split bullshit
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
are we obsessed with canon?
- Thread starter RadioHammer500
- Start date
Yep, the mainline superhero stuff does.
The (admittedly insufficient) solution is to internalize your own canon and hope stories are written vaguely enough to not inferfere. And if they aren't, you adjust or ignore.
I'd personally argue that a narrative which breaks what already exists is by definition neither a good nor great narrative.
That1BlackGuy
Member
I'm" not but I can see why a lot of people are depending on how invested someone is into a game's lore.
Jeevesmeister
Banned
Seconding this. Sadly canon has been reduced to a dirty word thanks to the rampant corporate overtaking of "nerd" fiction, from Disney declaring the Star Wars EU is "not canon" to make room for what's bound to be a lifeless, soulless, entertaining but pointless trilogy of blockbusters developed to push the corporate brand.
Don't even get me started on the Marvel "Cinematic Universe," where the Avengers 2 trailer has RDJ with a completely straight face declaring "this is the end of the road" or whatever in the same week they've announced Avengers film well into my 30s. And I'm 24.
Abandon this bullshit ideal of "canon" and you can have a far more enjoyable time with fiction than obsessing over minute details of "worldbuilding," as fun as they can be to appreciate in a proper context of they simply don't matter in the long run.
I don't give a damn what Disney does with Star Wars. My "canon" is Admiral fucking Thrawn. If you really want to wrap your head around what I'm saying, go watch Prometheus and realize that film is a longform intellectual body horror comedy making fun of nerds obsessing over "canon." You could put the Benny Hill theme to that film and it's the funniest shit ever.
Finale Fireworker
Member
People love the Zelda timeline.
Canon is important because it is a really big part of world building. Self contained stories are great and are not necessarily improved by fitting into a larger tapestry of narrative. But if it's part of the story and important to the experience, yeah, mind being paid to canon is really crucial.
I think a good example of this is how BioShock 1 doesn't benefit at all and isn't made a better game by being part of the "BioShock" universe. But BioShock Infinite and Burial at Sea rely on that connection to the universe for the story they're telling. Infinite and BaS are strengthened by the canon in a way where they would drastically suffer or not even exist in the same way if canon was thrown out. But BioShock is self contained and the greater canon is irrelevant.
Sheriff_Battlesnake
Banned
Idk. Lore building and canon is what gets me enthralled in a games universe. I wouldn't care about Metal Gear if it wasn't telling some big, grand narrative.
For shame, Marcus.
For shame, Marcus.
It depends on the game. If it's narrative I prefer a game to be canon within itself but there are also ways games can "break" canon while still maintaining believably from the player. For example, games can set up a world building base that the player learns through talking to people, codexes, the narrative, etc. but then later on in the series of games or even in a singular game be told that everything that they thought they knew was wrong because of historical bias or lying, etc. This can either go really well or really badly depending on the game. You think up until that point everything is canon and then the game challenges you to think twice and not believe everything it tells you. That becomes the new canon I guess you could say. It also starts to get difficult when you have games with choices. Sometimes the devs of the game don't want to establish a canon except for very specific story points in order to allow players to maintain that semblance of choice when most of it is just an illusion anyways. In general though you always want to have some story beats that are concrete enough that you continue to care for what's going on. If things are always changing in an extreme way very quickly it's like whiplash and eventually people might start to feel disconnected.
Owlowiscious
Member
It's not that hard. I play games by the rules of the game. If the games is a series, cool. If Mario is a series that doesn't follow canon, then cool, that's the rules of the game set by the game. If a game wants to go by canon, like Kingdom hearts, then cool.
If a game breaks its own rules, then it gets confusing and lowers the quality of the game. You can use Zelda as an example, but actually all of that linking timeline stuff are things from outside the games. So, for me, I don't see any issue with the Zelda series, the games themselves aren't breaking any rules the games themselves are setting (we're kind loosely based on each other, and change things around all the time and are probably different realities anyways).
If a game breaks its own rules, then it gets confusing and lowers the quality of the game. You can use Zelda as an example, but actually all of that linking timeline stuff are things from outside the games. So, for me, I don't see any issue with the Zelda series, the games themselves aren't breaking any rules the games themselves are setting (we're kind loosely based on each other, and change things around all the time and are probably different realities anyways).
MisterHero
Super Member
Canon is important because the story being told is worth caring about.
There are chances to bend and even retcon prior games but you can't treat the audience like kids where anything goes.
There are chances to bend and even retcon prior games but you can't treat the audience like kids where anything goes.
Neospartan
Neo Member
IMO, the freedom that comes with the possibility of everything in a fiction world makes it naturally uninteresting and lacking impact. Why should I be amazed at what is happening if in the realm of fiction it's as possible and casual as whatever we're used to in the real world.
Setting and sticking with a canon limits the writer's capability but also encourages creativity as then the writer must take workarounds to deal with these self-imposed limits. It's fron where the impact comes. And since it's easier to set the limits of the real world instead of creating new ones it becomes more relatable and improves immersion.
If there is a canon and you as a writer decide to ignore it I'm most likely to consider your work cheap, as it allows you to capitalise on what is not possible on real life. And really, anyone can do that.
Setting and sticking with a canon limits the writer's capability but also encourages creativity as then the writer must take workarounds to deal with these self-imposed limits. It's fron where the impact comes. And since it's easier to set the limits of the real world instead of creating new ones it becomes more relatable and improves immersion.
If there is a canon and you as a writer decide to ignore it I'm most likely to consider your work cheap, as it allows you to capitalise on what is not possible on real life. And really, anyone can do that.
Very much agreed. I still prefer to think the Miyamoto Order separate from the Split Timeline and the Capcom games, merely connected through Ocarina of Time in the more general narrative.
To answer the thread's question, it depends on the game. Some games (like Mario) are better off without a hardwired canon and require as much creative freedom as possible. Other games (like Zelda) can benefit from an open-ended narrative that can still be part of a bigger picture. And finally, there are cases (like Mass Effect), where lack of narrative cohesiveness equals bad game design. And there are all the in-betweens.
Infinite falls apart under the weight of its own canon, namely that it's lazily convenient and non-sensical all at the same time. Once you poke a hole in the flimsy Bioshock Infinite the narrative flies away like a balloon.
Junahu
Member
Some of the best Zelda games use canon to terrific effect, without limiting themselves to taking place in the same world. Majora's Mask and Wind Waker are both sequels to Ocarina of Time, and they both look at the aftermath of OoT from different perspectives.
If you're going to maintain a canon, then you should use it in a way that strengthens the games you're producing. And don't be a afraid to cut away from canon if the game and the narrative would benefit from doing so.
Just don't be Mario Galaxy 2, where you ignore canon, but proceed to recycle the entire plot from the first game anyway (except for the parts that were remotely engaging or world building). At that point the game would have been better served with no plot whatsoever.
If you're going to maintain a canon, then you should use it in a way that strengthens the games you're producing. And don't be a afraid to cut away from canon if the game and the narrative would benefit from doing so.
Just don't be Mario Galaxy 2, where you ignore canon, but proceed to recycle the entire plot from the first game anyway (except for the parts that were remotely engaging or world building). At that point the game would have been better served with no plot whatsoever.
Ein Bear
Member
MGS4 was fucking fantastic. It wasn't perfect (
, but it resolved everything much better than you'd expect from a series that made everything up as it went along. It had to resolve the plots of two games from the 80s, a game that were never intended to have sequels, and a random prequel set in the sixties that was counted as a mainline title whilst seemingly having nothing to do with anything else.
If the worst you can say about it is "They said Nanomachines alot, and the poop man shouldn't have got married", then I think it did a really great job all things considered.
Vamp not being an actual vampire was lame as hell)
If the worst you can say about it is "They said Nanomachines alot, and the poop man shouldn't have got married", then I think it did a really great job all things considered.
Ivan Amiibo
Banned
Some people are obsessed. it's funny to watch. Devs just let it happen for publicity reasons. Nintendo can't ever say "there's no nintendo timeline, you're all idiots." They'd rather have the name out there.
You can easily criticize the way they went about wrapping things up. There's less gymnastics in the olympics.
You can easily criticize the way they went about wrapping things up. There's less gymnastics in the olympics.
Finale Fireworker
Member
I would be interested to hear you explain that.
akachan ningen
Member
Not at all. Just make it good, that's all I care about.
Ein Bear
Member
Like I say, it sure isn't perfect. But the series was already ridiculously nonsensical before that, that they tied things up as well as they did was a minor miracle. MGS is best when you just go with the flow and embrace the crazy.
Sheriff_Battlesnake
Banned
TC McQueen
Member
Everybody hated the reset button at the end, but the whole temporal weapon ship thing and the consequences shown in the episodes were great because they were a break from the norm and the timeship was a clever twist on time travel.
Anyway, games in a series benefit from a canon, because that allows them to build up characters and worlds better, but they suffer whenever that canon becomes incomprehensible if you don't follow non-game material (Halo is a good example of this). That said, game franchises with loose canons/non-canon games are fine too, as long as people know about that upfront.
The crux point of the game's narrative, the baptism, doesn't even matter as a 'deciding point' of anything using Bioshock Infinite's own interpretation of many worlds theory and time travel. It makes rules, sets up grand ideas and then doesn't adhere to them later because the story is a mess.
PanicFreak
Member
I'm a Nikon guy myself.
OT: not really. It doesn't bother me that certain stories aren't canon and other are.
OT: not really. It doesn't bother me that certain stories aren't canon and other are.
Version 3.0
Member
I think breaking canon is a symptom of a larger problem, which is the industry's crippling fear of new IPs and/or customers' apathy towards new IPs (two sides of the same thing, really).
If a developer is making a new game and can't shoehorn it into the canon of a franchise, it should be a new game. But new games are risky.
If a developer is making a new game and can't shoehorn it into the canon of a franchise, it should be a new game. But new games are risky.
Hyperzephyrian
Banned
All these camera-themed dad jokes.
Sunnington
Banned
It depends on the type of game and the severity of inconsistency. Like Resident Evil or Sonic the Hedgehog I don't care about at all.
But games like Mass Effect where the story is the draw to the game and you have things like
Writing a story that's interesting and makes sense is what's hard about writing. Anyone can be creative and put a bunch of crazy crap in a story. The tough part is having all that crazy crap make sense.
But games like Mass Effect where the story is the draw to the game and you have things like
Tali taking her mask off on her homeworld even though it's well established doing so would fucking kill her.
Writing a story that's interesting and makes sense is what's hard about writing. Anyone can be creative and put a bunch of crazy crap in a story. The tough part is having all that crazy crap make sense.
Internal consistency of a work and which works are canon are not the same inquiry. You can have plot holes in totally canocical works when the writing is shit.
I don't care about whether a work is canon. I do care, however, about whether a work is shit or not.
Separate works within a franchise that contrast with each other don't really bother me and I prefer not to analyze which of them are "canon". None of it is real so that type of analysis is a total waste of time in my opinion.
I don't care about whether a work is canon. I do care, however, about whether a work is shit or not.
Separate works within a franchise that contrast with each other don't really bother me and I prefer not to analyze which of them are "canon". None of it is real so that type of analysis is a total waste of time in my opinion.
The only instance I can think of where I was bothered by whether something was canon was when Atlus decided to mess up the ending of Persona 3 with The Answer. Eventually I decided to just pretend like it didn't exist.
I'm crossing my fingers that Naughty Dog doesn't fuck up the ending of TLOU with a sequel. Maybe I will be proactive and just not buy any future games in that series.
I'm crossing my fingers that Naughty Dog doesn't fuck up the ending of TLOU with a sequel. Maybe I will be proactive and just not buy any future games in that series.
It was so convoluted and useless. It didn't even make any sense. It had to be split into 3 scenarios. The games are fine and they stand on their own, they don't need to tie into the other games.
I kinda agree. The Zelda games weren't designed with a timeline in mind until post-Ocarina of Time. Zelda doesn't really have any interesting lore, because the games don't connect up that well, other than direct sequels and maybe OoT to WW, the games don't really tie in, in any meaningful way.
If the Zelda games were designed with a timeline in mind from the begning then it could have been cool, but it's just a bit of a mess as it is, imo.
To answer the question, though. If a game want to build a consistent and interesting world it should have a canon. If a story breaks the rules it created itself, that's bad.
I don't really care about canon. In all honesty I thought the story of MGS4 was interesting and kind of clever. Other people however, just wait for SF5 and the outrage surrounding how old Chun Li is supposed to be and why Sakura (if she's in the game) is still wearing a school uniform.
lmao, I was thinking the same thing
Beelzebufo
Banned
I think whenever you see people complaining about canon, it's because the story is made worse when it's ignored, not better. Like Other M. Compare that to Prime which I guess has Metroids that can be killed in ways they shouldn't be, but nobody actually cares about that because it doesn't ruin the story.
They explained that last one already.
Canon is only talked about so often because of Weekly Jump manga having anime filler. Manga fans then spilled that sort of talk into video game discussion.
I also think canon discussion is only because people want to one-up others on pure, official knowledge. It isn't really that helpful or constructive most of the time imo.
This is generally my view on canon discussion most of the time, basically.
I also think canon discussion is only because people want to one-up others on pure, official knowledge. It isn't really that helpful or constructive most of the time imo.
This is generally my view on canon discussion most of the time, basically.
people telling you tales from their ass isn't constructive or helpful either where lore is concerned. being a pedant is problematic sure but the opposite isn't good either.
Ganzlinger
Member
I am
I don't know, I don't see a lot of canon obsession as far as video games go. It's comic book fandom that seems the most obsessed with that. It's horrible there, the superhero readers specifically. I pretty much don't even bother trying to discuss that stuff online anywhere, it got to a point where I just wanted to shot myself in the fucking head.
For me, personally, I'm okay with canon in stuff. It's good to have that consistency in storytelling, but I have no issues with flopping small details for story sakes or rectons/reveals about the past as long as they make sense and aren't obvious bullshit nonsense.
For me, personally, I'm okay with canon in stuff. It's good to have that consistency in storytelling, but I have no issues with flopping small details for story sakes or rectons/reveals about the past as long as they make sense and aren't obvious bullshit nonsense.
I care a lot for canon and it is one of the reasons why I think MCU is so damn amazing as a whole. However, if things are not planned well in advance or are just randomly forced stories for the sake of having sequels/spin offs/prequels to closed stories, then sometimes a reboot or alternate universe is better.
For example, I hope that the MGS games without Kojima are a reboot or alternate universe so the canon of Kojima remains untouched from MGSV on. And some comics absolutely suffer from remaining canon, for example. Spiderman storyline after Civil War comes to mind (not an avid comic book reader, but picked that one up, such bullcrap).
For example, I hope that the MGS games without Kojima are a reboot or alternate universe so the canon of Kojima remains untouched from MGSV on. And some comics absolutely suffer from remaining canon, for example. Spiderman storyline after Civil War comes to mind (not an avid comic book reader, but picked that one up, such bullcrap).
Finale Fireworker
Member
I've heard this before, obviously you're not the only one who feels that way. However, I don't think this is true.
I'll tag for spoilers just in case, but:
The game establishes that every decision creates additional universes based on the decision. This is the foundation of the real world multiverse theory as well. When you make a choice, multiple universes are instantly created for every infinitely possible outcome of that choice.
The baptism is a choice-based incident that creates an infinite number of alternate universes as a result of that choice. Therefore it is impossible to hunt down and kill every Booker or every Comstock in every multiverse scenario. The only way to eliminate ALL of them is to go to the origin of each branching multiverse, which is the baptism. By killing Booker at the baptism, which is a seed for an infinite number of worlds, none of those worlds exist.
The killing of Booker at the creek is not a choice, so it does not create alternate universes where the Elizabeths don't drown Booker. There is only the single outcome.
Any logistic conflicts with this theory are remedied by the fact Elizabeth is a quantum dimensional superpower with complete and absolute control over every universe that exists, will exist, or can exist. It stands to reason that Elizabeth could be "closing all the doors" herself. Whether that is enough for everyone would vary from person to person.
The baptism is a choice-based incident that creates an infinite number of alternate universes as a result of that choice. Therefore it is impossible to hunt down and kill every Booker or every Comstock in every multiverse scenario. The only way to eliminate ALL of them is to go to the origin of each branching multiverse, which is the baptism. By killing Booker at the baptism, which is a seed for an infinite number of worlds, none of those worlds exist.
The killing of Booker at the creek is not a choice, so it does not create alternate universes where the Elizabeths don't drown Booker. There is only the single outcome.
Any logistic conflicts with this theory are remedied by the fact Elizabeth is a quantum dimensional superpower with complete and absolute control over every universe that exists, will exist, or can exist. It stands to reason that Elizabeth could be "closing all the doors" herself. Whether that is enough for everyone would vary from person to person.
Silent Chief
Member
I don't agree.
How about a Mario game with his sister Luigi and his pal Wario. They both carry an arsenal of guns and there's blood everywhere. I can go on, but it stops being Mario eventually...
Canon is not just the story, it's everything that's already established.
You'd still get it anyway. The community was fitting all the pieces together and creating a timeline and by the end of it, they actually came incredibly close to what Nintendo's book has.
It is not exclusive to anime/manga stuff and games. In fact, I'd say for a lot of manga/anime stuff it is quite easy to separate, as the original story is often by a long running manga from a main mangaka (at least, this was the case for most I have seen).
Some of the comic book or science fiction stuff can be terribly convoluted in terms of canon, as there are countless of people contributing to the overall story. Star Wars canon is a big example (with Disney discarding nearly all of the previous canon recently, lol). A lot of comic books series are also huge in this, with all those different universes/timelines and writers forcing the plot in all kinds of weird ways to fit into crossovers/other storylines.
More Fun To Compute
Member
People in general have an obsession with authenticity and what is "real." This is to the point where the obsession becomes more extreme the more it deals with something that has no relation to the real world like fiction. This is a pretty standard theme of post modernism I think. Deliberately not respecting canon might be a sign that they are aware of this and want to rub your nose in how you have been programmed to think by media.