# Story canon, what does it mean to you?



## Reploid (Jan 7, 2018)

Nothing really


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Jan 7, 2018)

If your game is trying to tell a story?  It's pretty important.  It's so fundamental to story telling that most people will immediately be able to instinctively notice you messed with it, even if they can't tell you why. Full stop.   There is no argument.  This applies to any media in a series where narrative consistency is important.

For games like Zelda and Mario?  Keep it consistent within the game.  The chronology never mattered, and anyone who tries to say that it did from the outset is literally insane.  So many different people have worked on the series, that it would have been impossible to keep it consistent.  Not to mention, I highly doubt Nintendo was thinking of creating a multimedia franchise when they were making Mario, Zelda, Metroid.  They made games and kept what stuck.  There was probably no mention in board rooms or planning on how to create a story.  Again, this is true in nearly any media series where singular episodes are the feature, not the overarching world.

Trying to impose a timeline on their franchises was a stupid thing for Nintend'oh to do.  There is a reason why it's so controversial: it makes literally no sense.


----------



## hobbledehoy899 (Jan 7, 2018)

If you can piece together a series' story, even if the games aren't linear, I'd say that's good enough.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jan 7, 2018)

I should also say canon within a work can play here. If a character has been established as one thing throughout the game and then does something very out of character it can annoy some.



Reploid said:


> Nothing really


When films get dubbed in other regions it has been seen that some which come from the original regions expect either the original actor, or at least the same actor between films. The latter really bothering some people natives however seem to have less of a problem.
Is this something like that? Or maybe "I don't play games for the story" and thus story conflicts don't bother people.

Related to this is Sanderson's first law, and possible future entry (it narrowly avoided being mentioned in the opening post)


> An author's ability to solve conflict with magic is DIRECTLY PROPORTIONAL to how well the reader understands said magic. If characters (especially viewpoint characters) solve a problem by use of magic, the reader should be made to understand how that magic works.


If something gets handwaved by magic maguffin or I have no clue what is going on (an example I like is I saw the harry potter sequel/prequel thing and it was a fun light show but I had no idea which character was winning or in mortal peril at a given point in time). While canon is not essential I would say if you are going to use it then use it. When it is troubled then from what I can see in others it is similar to when the quoted thing above is troubled for me.


----------



## Meteor7 (Jan 7, 2018)

Consistency in video game narratives, either across multiple games in a franchise or within just a single telling of a game's story, can definitely tickle my fancy when done right. That being said, I think that the manner in which games develop canon which I enjoy the most is when future games don't just springboard off of the story and setting of a previous game with direct callbacks to events that the player has already seen, but when future games start introducing lore that begins to redefine and re-contextualize canon. It always gives me the biggest sense of wonder and incites the most amount of eager questioning when a narrative introduces lore or information pertaining to what happened/was established in previous games which paints those events in brand new lights. I can even enjoy when future games end up retconning past events, so long as those retcons are believable withing the physics of the world and don't directly contradict past events. Off of the top of my head, a game franchise which I find does both of these well is (perhaps controversially) Kingdom Hearts.

While establishing, maintaining, and flexing canon in a game can definitely prick the imagination, I'd certainly put it behind gameplay in terms of importance. It may seem like an odd thing to mention by way of comparison, but I've often found little micro-incidences where the choice needs to be made between providing a convenient gameplay mechanic to the player and strictly adhering to maintaining the canon of the world in which they live. As a fabricated example, imagine a game taking place in a medieval setting where no form of magic or other "ex-machina" exists, wherein the gameplay loop involves wandering around a world map of some kind and entering areas which function as pseudo-dungeons in which the player presses further into enemy territory to face a boss character at the end. Now, once the boss has been beaten, there's nothing left to do in the "dungeon", so what options do you now have for the player? You wouldn't want to make them trek all the way back through an empty dungeon just so that they can reset the gameplay loop and continue the game. 

Maybe you could design the dungeon to reveal new areas of itself once the boss has been defeated, giving players an inherent reason to want to re-traverse the dungeon? That solution might end up making players weary and worn out being made to go through each dungeon twice to recover all items, but it would also be a little difficult to justify in-canon why the player somehow couldn't find these areas the first time through. With a cave system, a cave-in could be an easy excuse to rearrange the dungeon, but even that seems contrived from a writing perspective. Straight teleportation from the boss room to the entrance would break the "no magic" canon as well, and having a horse-drawn carriage appear to ferry you back to the entrance would not only feel contrived as well, but break believably. How did they get here? Why would they dive so far into a dangerous area? How did they know I would be here? These questions could have time devoted to them to explain them away, but now you're sacrificing players' time and the pacing of the game to explain a mechanic you want them to make use of. 

It's in these instances that I very strongly believe that it serves the overall gaming experience to forego strictly maintaining a canon of the game, suspend belief, and just allow the player to utilize these mechanics without making a point of explaining every one of them in-universe. If you can justify a mechanic while preserving game pacing and making it interesting for the player, then so much the better, but I think the inclusion of a mechanic in a game should supersede its justifiably in almost every instance. That's why I'd say that, while a fluent and coherent canon in video game narratives can be titillating, it should never be held so high as to obstruct gameplay mechanics, or at least that's how I see things.


----------



## WhiteMaze (Jan 7, 2018)

It all depends on what you're doing and what you're building.

Imagine if Shenmue 2 had nothing to do with the Shenmue 1? Would it still have made the series as popular? Breaking the story like that?

I doubt it. 

On the other hand, if you're not necessarily focusing on narrative and story, especially if you've *already completed it , *then I don't see a problem. 

The fans complain when they are waiting for a closure. A sequel. A continuation of what you promised to continue with the games. And when you *don't give them that* and give them an "*Alternate Universe*" or "*Non Canon*" crap, they get angry. Of course they do. 

That's not why they joined the boat in the first place.


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Jan 7, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> I should also say canon within a work can play here. If a character has been established as one thing throughout the game and then does something very out of character it can annoy some.
> 
> Related to this is Sanderson's first law, and possible future entry (it narrowly avoided being mentioned in the opening post)
> 
> If something gets handwaved by magic maguffin or I have no clue what is going on (an example I like is I saw the harry potter sequel/prequel thing and it was a fun light show but I had no idea which character was winning or in mortal peril at a given point in time). While canon is not essential I would say if you are going to use it then use it. When it is troubled then from what I can see in others it is similar to when the quoted thing above is troubled for me.



I would say that both of these points are understood instinctively by most people.  The first one is tied to motivations; every well written character has a line of thinking that they employ, even if it isn't known to either the reader or actors.  The second is with canon, or the foundations of world building in a consistent fashion. Most often these induce the most classic of ironies: dramatic irony.  Where the disparity between information can cause the actor or player to appreciate the complexities of situations from a different angle.  When the media fails to eventually portray these properly, the audience will feel justifiably cheated out of their experience of an understandable result, for culturally we understand the world to be rational, whatever that may be for that culture.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 7, 2018)

I'm a huge fan of the Zelda canon because it spawns a lot of awesome fan fiction to join it all together


----------



## Taleweaver (Jan 7, 2018)

Okay... Where's that controversial opinion thread? I feel like I'm going to make some enemies here...

The problem with successful authors is that both they and their audience wants to keep the story going, despite the fact that the scope of the story is almost by definition limited. Some scores are larger than others*, but at one point authors should give things a rest.

This whole canon thing is one of those problems. Nintendo just wants to keep similar elements in zelda to keep things recognizable to their audience, but they are not related. This whole attempting of fitting zelda games on a timeline is, frankly said, busywork for Fanboys. They expect that every next iteration nearly did in the universe without them realising they put ever more restrictions on the developers to just create the best sorry within the game.

Final fantasy at least puts each game in their own universe, this ensuring that their creative team at least doesn't have that stuff going for them.


*Series like song of fire and ice (aka: game of thrones) are exceptional in that they do enough foreshadowing and predictions to make sure that the story itself is incredibly long, rather than a bunch of extra added new stories or tacked on season (s)


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Jan 7, 2018)

Meteor7 said:


> While establishing, maintaining, and flexing canon in a game can definitely prick the imagination, I'd certainly put it behind gameplay in terms of importance. It may seem like an odd thing to mention by way of comparison, but I've often found little micro-incidences where the choice needs to be made between providing a convenient gameplay mechanic to the player and strictly adhering to maintaining the canon of the world in which they live. As a fabricated example, imagine a game taking place in a medieval setting where no form of magic or other "ex-machina" exists, wherein the gameplay loop involves wandering around a world map of some kind and entering areas which function as pseudo-dungeons in which the player presses further into enemy territory to face a boss character at the end. Now, once the boss has been beaten, there's nothing left to do in the "dungeon", so what options do you now have for the player? You wouldn't want to make them trek all the way back through an empty dungeon just so that they can reset the gameplay loop and continue the game.
> 
> Maybe you could design the dungeon to reveal new areas of itself once the boss has been defeated, giving players an inherent reason to want to re-traverse the dungeon? That solution might end up making players weary and worn out being made to go through each dungeon twice to recover all items, but it would also be a little difficult to justify in-canon why the player somehow couldn't find these areas the first time through. With a cave system, a cave-in could be an easy excuse to rearrange the dungeon, but even that seems contrived from a writing perspective. Straight teleportation from the boss room to the entrance would break the "no magic" canon as well, and having a horse-drawn carriage appear to ferry you back to the entrance would not only feel contrived as well, but break believably. How did they get here? Why would they dive so far into a dangerous area? How did they know I would be here? These questions could have time devoted to them to explain them away, but now you're sacrificing players' time and the pacing of the game to explain a mechanic you want them to make use of.
> 
> It's in these instances that I very strongly believe that it serves the overall gaming experience to forego strictly maintaining a canon of the game, suspend belief, and just allow the player to utilize these mechanics without making a point of explaining every one of them in-universe. If you can justify a mechanic while preserving game pacing and making it interesting for the player, then so much the better, but I think the inclusion of a mechanic in a game should supersede its justifiably in almost every instance. That's why I'd say that, while a fluent and coherent canon in video game narratives can be titillating, it should never be held so high as to obstruct gameplay mechanics, or at least that's how I see things.


While I can agree with the overall statement of the post, where if needed, canon can break for gameplay enjoyment, I feel like your example is particularly lacking.  A simple trick that has probably been used since the first oral epic was told is the time skip.  An easy example for a dungeon in a game, for where the player needs to exit is to fade the screen to black, and then fade in with them exiting the entrance of said dungeon from where they entered.  This and other quick travel explanations are simple and easy implementations when thought of from a game design perspective.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 7, 2018)

Taleweaver said:


> Okay... Where's that controversial opinion thread? I feel like I'm going to make some enemies here...
> 
> The problem with successful authors is that both they and their audience wants to keep the story going, despite the fact that the scope of the story is almost by definition limited. Some scores are larger than others*, but at one point authors should give things a rest.
> 
> ...


I disagree, everything up until the Wind Waker was clearly written with a single storyline in mind, and it's entirely possible that Nintendo was writing with a split timeline in mind with Twilight Princess

That said, I do appreciate that Aonuma told the dev team for BotW to ignore the timeline, that way the fans can, as you said, so the busywork


----------



## Navonod (Jan 7, 2018)

It bothered me when they changed Poseidon's design in God of War 2 from old man looking to middle age. But that's only a small issue since I liked the new design more than the original.


----------



## Meteor7 (Jan 7, 2018)

DrGreed said:


> It bothered me when they changed Poseidon's design in God of War 2 from old man looking to middle age. But that's only a small issue since I liked the new design more than the original.


That reminds me a bit of how I felt about Frank West's personality and VA being changed for DR4. I'd have been alright with it, had they not made him look and sound like a snark-spewing, memeing, whiny knock-off of every other grizzled male protagonist in western gaming. It's a fine line you walk changing or retconning something from a franchise; the backlash can be amplified if the new is found to be of lesser quality than the old, just by way of how there used to be something good there that they foolishly threw away. You can get a harsher reaction than if the bad was there from the beginning.


----------



## orcid (Jan 7, 2018)

For me the Zelda games are independent. In every game there is a normal young boy and at the end of game he is a hero. Obviously the Link of the one game is not identical with the link of another game. So writing a timeline or a canon doesn't make sense at all.
In other games the canon is important. Examples are movie-like games like Uncharted.


----------



## anhminh (Jan 7, 2018)

Well, it hard to ignore that sometime cameo just happen and it just so out of place people have to come up with something to justify their appearance. It true that it could just there for no reason but it kinda kill the immensive so fan have to make up timeline to fit it in.

Like let take Pokemon on 3DS for exam. People had been going around connecting XY, ORAS and Sun/Moon together and to older game because Looker is in those game.


----------



## dogmarch (Jan 7, 2018)

Kingdom Hearts. I think the story writers have a hard time trying to come up a cohesive story due to the multiple worlds Sora visits. being canon or not as long as it feels like the story is moving, it's fine by me.


----------



## wormdood (Jan 7, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I disagree, everything up until the Wind Waker was clearly written with a single storyline in mind,


but . . . _*The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening*_ . . . tell me that fits in . . . its just silly to look for connections when zelda games are concerned


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 7, 2018)

wormdood said:


> but . . . _*The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening*_ . . . tell me that fits in . . . its just silly to look for connections when zelda games are concerned


It's a sequel to Link's Awakening. It's the same Link


----------



## wormdood (Jan 7, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> It's a sequel to Link's Awakening. It's the same Link


what is a squeal to links awakening. . .?


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 7, 2018)

wormdood said:


> what is a squeal to links awakening. . .?


And by Links Awakening I meant Link to the Past. Whoops! XD


----------



## RustInPeace (Jan 7, 2018)

The only topic of story canon I care about is Dragon Ball, namely that GT isn't canon.


----------



## RedBlueGreen (Jan 7, 2018)

Canon isn't really all that important to me since most games I play are JRPGs and a lot of them take place in different worlds or stories even if they are in the same series. I prefer stuff like Resident Evil keep a consistent canon. I don't care if the Elder Scrolls games break canon because I really don't care about the lore that much. The only story and lore I really give a shit about takes place in ESO.


dogmarch said:


> Kingdom Hearts. I think the story writers have a hard time trying to come up a cohesive story due to the multiple worlds Sora visits. being canon or not as long as it feels like the story is moving, it's fine by me.


I still have no idea what was going on in Dream Drop Distance. 358/2 Days was kind of similar. Like the whole game takes place after Sora is sleeping to have his memories restored after Chain of Memories, but for some reason the members of Organization XIII that were killed in Chain of Memories are still alive for a while? Roxas is shown not to be a member of the Organization until after Sora's sleeping as well, so he shouldn't be in The World That Never Was until after the members of Organization XIII from CoM were defeated (save for Axel). IIRC the game specifically mentions that those people were defeated in Castle Oblivion as well, meaning that the early part of 358/2 Days takes place during CoM. But it can't chronologically, because Roxas isn't around at that time. You could argue that Roxas was created when Sora released his heart in the first game (but I think he was actually created after CoM since Sora was still alive later in KH1 and CoM) but that still doesn't make any sense.


----------



## wormdood (Jan 7, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> And by Links Awakening I meant Link to the Past. Whoops! XD


oh ok . . . although its not
The plot of _A Link to the Past_ focuses on link as he travels on a journey to save Hyrule, defeat Ganon and rescue maidens related to the Sages.
. . . while the supposed squeal is one of the few _Zelda_ games not to take place in the land of Hyrule, and does not feature Princess Zelda or the Triforce relic. Instead, protagonist Link begins the game stranded on Koholint Island, a place guarded by a creature called the Wind Fish.

sure it was slated to be a squeal but a squeal it simply is not


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 7, 2018)

wormdood said:


> oh ok . . . although its not
> The plot of _A Link to the Past_ focuses on link as he travels on a journey to save Hyrule, defeat Ganon and rescue maidens related to the Sages.
> . . . while the supposed squeal is one of the few _Zelda_ games not to take place in the land of Hyrule, and does not feature Princess Zelda or the Triforce relic. Instead, protagonist Link begins the game stranded on Koholint Island, a place guarded by a creature called the Wind Fish.
> 
> sure it was slated to be a squeal but a squeal it simply is not


That doesn't change the fact that storyline wise it fits. That'd be like saying Majora's Mask couldn't be a sequel to Ocarina of Time because it takes place in Termina


----------



## RedBlueGreen (Jan 7, 2018)

anhminh said:


> ike let take Pokemon on 3DS for exam. People had been going around connecting XY, ORAS and Sun/Moon together and to older game because Looker is in those game.


It could very well be true, or it could be Looker from another world. The only thing we can say for sure is that Red, Blue, Green and Gold, Siver, and Crystal are directly connected as are Black and White with Black 2 and White 2.

I think that Sun and Moon could take place in the same canon as the other games because in the Rainbow Rocket episode of US/UM the evil team leaders from other worlds all say that there was never a similar trainer to your character who tried to stop them and someone (was it Wicke?) references the Team Rocket from Red and Blue/Green that was stopped.


----------



## Deleted User (Jan 7, 2018)

Story canon means something to me when it breaks the illusion of what I want from the story. Let's take half life for example. I believe the half life series follows a linear path of events. Expansions like Blue shift or opposing force or not canon, but that doesn't mean they are not fun games. Nobody in their right mind would call something like the
*Half Life 2 Cinematic Ultra Graphics Mod *as canon because it's such shit. It turns half life 2 into a joke of a game and breaks canon.


----------



## SLiV3R (Jan 7, 2018)

It means nothing to me! I dont care about stories. I just want to have fun and play some games!


----------



## wormdood (Jan 7, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> That doesn't change the fact that storyline wise it fits. That'd be like saying Majora's Mask couldn't be a sequel to Ocarina of Time because it takes place in Termina


new world / lore / characters / new goal / and zero backstory given in the tloz la to connect it to the tloz alttp

and btw the opening in mm directly connecting oot and mm is what made that a sequel (not to mention the unique key item the oot being the center of the game in both games story's)

if anything albw could be considered a squeal to alttp


----------



## SANIC (Jan 7, 2018)

dogmarch said:


> Kingdom Hearts. I think the story writers have a hard time trying to come up a cohesive story due to the multiple worlds Sora visits. being canon or not as long as it feels like the story is moving, it's fine by me.


KH does have a cohesive story
Unchained X
Birth By Sleep
KH1
Chain of Memories
<1 Year Gap>
358/2 Days (This game takes place of the course of one year.)
KH2
Re: Coded
Dream Drop Distance
KH3
0.2 (it's mickey telling a story of Aqua and how he found the Kingdom Key D, so technically right before KH 1,  but takes place in the present. It has been 10 years since the events of Birth By Sleep.)



wormdood said:


> what is a squeal to links awakening. . .?


The story of that Link goes from
LttP
Link's Awakening
Oracle of Ages and Oracle of Seasons
Link Between Worlds is more of a reimagining of LttP. Also the sequel to Link Between Worlds is Triforce Heroes


----------



## THEELEMENTKH (Jan 7, 2018)

dogmarch said:


> Kingdom Hearts. I think the story writers have a hard time trying to come up a cohesive story due to the multiple worlds Sora visits. being canon or not as long as it feels like the story is moving, it's fine by me.


But Kingdom Hearts' lore is easy: Everyone's Ansem


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 7, 2018)

wormdood said:


> new world / lore / characters / new goal / and zero backstory given in the tloz la to connect it to the tloz alttp
> 
> and btw the opening in mm directly connecting oot and mm is what made that a sequel (not to mention the unique key item the oot being the center of the game in both games story's)
> 
> if anything albw could be considered a squeal to alttp


If I remember correctly the manual for Link's Awakening directly states that he went sailing looking for new adventures after the events of LttP


----------



## wormdood (Jan 7, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> If I remember correctly the manual for Link's Awakening directly states that he went sailing looking for new adventures after the events of LttP


now i gotta do some googling and reading (i personally got the game used when i was a kid . . . never had/seen a box or manual)


----------



## Spectral Blizzard (Jan 7, 2018)

Two words.
It depends.
BOOM!


----------



## FAST6191 (Jan 7, 2018)

This GB Zelda lark had me curious so I went and found a manual, does indeed appear to follow on in the English one at least. Knowing Zelda manuals though I am going to have to find the Japanese one.


----------



## Veho (Jan 7, 2018)

Talking about game settings and stories here, right? 

I guess canon is important when a game is a direct sequel to its predecessor's storyline, but "canon" is flexible and any established plot point or detail of lore can just be retconned away if it's in the way (although you can go way overboard with retcons too *cough*Blizzardgames*cough* ). 

On the other hand games like Zelda are too varied and too far apart from each other in style and story to be crammed into a single world or divide them into "canon" and "non-canon" stories. I always viewed it as an archetypal "hero's journey" story repeating many times in many universes, with some similarities but no hard connections between them. They all really happened, they are all "canon" to their own universe. With the exception of direct sequels, they are all separate worlds and different Links. I've always considered the need to cram them all into a single universe and a single timeline at any cost very silly and pointless. Like trying to establish an official Super Mario timeline.


----------



## XDel (Jan 7, 2018)

This is extremely important to me, which is why I find it impossible to remain of fan of Halo past part 2, and why as a life long Star Wars fanatic, I have been hard pressed to enjoy anything beyond the old books and Dark Horse comics, from the advent of the "Special Edition" re-releases , all the way up to the Last Jedi, which for me, was indeed the final nail in the coffin, though most people today seem to be conditioned to have an intolerance for detail, and so it is that  market trends follow the same pattern...
...the very one they themselves manufactured.


----------



## osaka35 (Jan 7, 2018)

If the game tells me to care about it, i will. If it tells me not to, I won't. otherwise i'll just consider it interesting but not necessary.

Metroid: Other M, for example, told us to care a looooot about the story and backstory. It goes against much of the canon established from the previous games, of which that canon was important for the story. So it deserves the shit it catches. 

Megaman has a surprisingly detailed back story, though the confusing bits of the story don't break the fun of the games. Kind of like with zelda. Fun to think about, and it can add a dimension of depth and reward for completion, but not necessary since the designers didn't think it terribly important.


----------



## ars25 (Jan 7, 2018)

RedBlueGreen said:


> I still have no idea what was going on in Dream Drop Distance. 358/2 Days was kind of similar. Like the whole game takes place after Sora is sleeping to have his memories restored after Chain of Memories, but for some reason the members of Organization XIII that were killed in Chain of Memories are still alive for a while? Roxas is shown not to be a member of the Organization until after Sora's sleeping as well, so he shouldn't be in The World That Never Was until after the members of Organization XIII from CoM were defeated (save for Axel). IIRC the game specifically mentions that those people were defeated in Castle Oblivion as well, meaning that the early part of 358/2 Days takes place during CoM. But it can't chronologically, because Roxas isn't around at that time. You could argue that Roxas was created when Sora released his heart in the first game (but I think he was actually created after CoM since Sora was still alive later in KH1 and CoM) but that still doesn't make any sense.


358/2 starts during the end of Kingdom Hearts and the whole beginning tutorial happens inbetween the end of KH1 and the beginning of COM. thats why you see the Orginazation members that were killed in the beginning. as for your Roxas Confusion he (and Namine) were made when sora released his heart, and the reason why Sora got his body back was because of kairi giving his heart a "Physical Form" in the same vein as Ansem SOD was in the first KH. While roxas had his real body(So technicly SOra up untill the end of KH2 was a walking sentient Heartless). So thats why Roxas and Sora could exist at the same time.


----------



## SANIC (Jan 7, 2018)

ars25 said:


> 358/2 starts during the end of Kingdom Hearts and the whole beginning tutorial happens inbetween the end of KH1 and the beginning of COM. thats why you see the Orginazation members that were killed in the beginning. as for your Roxas Confusion he (and Namine) were made when sora released his heart, and the reason why Sora got his body back was because of kairi giving his heart a "Physical Form" in the same vein as Ansem SOD was in the first KH. While roxas had his real body(So technicly SOra up untill the end of KH2 was a walking sentient Heartless). So thats why Roxas and Sora could exist at the same time.


Walking sentient Heart not heartless. Kairi restored his heart


----------



## ars25 (Jan 7, 2018)

SANIC said:


> Walking sentient Heart not heartless. Kairi restored his heart


Yeah that's why I put technically since by definition a heartless is a heart that lost it's body


----------



## wormdood (Jan 7, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> This GB Zelda lark had me curious so I went and found a manual, does indeed appear to follow on in the English one at least. Knowing Zelda manuals though I am going to have to find the Japanese one.
> View attachment 110644


im not really sustained by that . . . it reads like it could have happened after 99% of all zelda games . . . let me know if you find a Japanese one


----------



## SANIC (Jan 7, 2018)

wormdood said:


> im not really satisfyid by that . . . it reads like it could have happened after 99% of all zelda games . . . let me know if you find a Japanese one


On the official time line it comes right after



ars25 said:


> Yeah that's why I put technically since by definition a heartless is a heart that lost it's body


Isn't the definition of heartless a body with out a heart. Because Sora had a heart when it was restored meaning he isn't a heartless. Nobodies don't have hearts.


----------



## ars25 (Jan 7, 2018)

SANIC said:


> On the official time line it comes right after
> 
> 
> Isn't the definition of heartless a body with out a heart. Because Sora had a heart when it was restored meaning he isn't a heartless. Nobodies don't have hearts.


Nope very confusingly a heartless has a heart but can't reobtain it's body. While a nobody doesn't initially have a heart but does have a body


----------



## The Real Jdbye (Jan 7, 2018)

I don't really care, but then again most games I play aren't direct sequels, so they're not connected much to the previous entries. That gives devs a lot more freedom to do whatever they want, so it's not really an issue.


FAST6191 said:


> View attachment 110622​
> A canonical story is a story which follows on from established events and worlds in previous works. If a story does something which contradicts previous works held to be in the same universe then it is said to break with canon. Canon can be useful as it allows you to establish a story and explore it over many works, and it can be troubling in that it then restricts you as you have to make new characters, technology/magic and events work within the established logic lest you be accused of violating canon. In games you have the further problem that you are either prevented from doing multiple endings, having to establish a "canonical ending" in any sequel or find yourself having to do a lot of extra story writing and level design that may never get seen.
> It is possible to retroactively make works non canon, in games one such thing being the Castlevania handheld games when later entries in the franchise hit.
> 
> ...


I have to correct you there, there is an official Zelda timeline seen in the Hyrule Historia book.


----------



## th3joker (Jan 7, 2018)

i would hate to see a pink darth vader in a video game where darth maul can fight aginst rey


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 7, 2018)

th3joker said:


> i would hate to see a pink darth vader in a video game where darth maul can fight aginst rey


I'd like to remind you that in the Extended Universe there was canonically an alternate reality version of Darth Vader that turned back to the light side and wore all white


----------



## chrisrlink (Jan 7, 2018)

also in fanfictions let me give you an example (it's half cannon) I'm currently writing one based on DBZ/DBS (working on DBZ first) it follows the arcs in the manga/anime Frieza---->Android/Cell---->Majin---->SSG etc difference is i added one key per....creature (Sonic) into the mix I also write Pokemon ones more based on the game plots (Anime sucks imo) but all events happen in the Mega Timeline I'm Talking HGSS FRLG and BW/2 also in that timeline oh and I'm a lead character speaking of the Pokemon Anime it's not cannon in a major way it blurred the Non/Mega Timeline for one (XY/XYZ) I understand rewriting BW's plot cause of Fukushima Nuclear plant incident (and the subsequent cancellation of the Team Rocket V. Team Plasma 2 episode special but blurring the non/Mega timelines in the anime was a big nono in my book (I feel I contradicted myself)


----------



## Zense (Jan 7, 2018)

Meteor7 said:


> Consistency in video game narratives, either across multiple games in a franchise or within just a single telling of a game's story, can definitely tickle my fancy when done right. That being said, I think that the manner in which games develop canon which I enjoy the most is when future games don't just springboard off of the story and setting of a previous game with direct callbacks to events that the player has already seen, but when future games start introducing lore that begins to redefine and re-contextualize canon. It always gives me the biggest sense of wonder and incites the most amount of eager questioning when a narrative introduces lore or information pertaining to what happened/was established in previous games which paints those events in brand new lights. I can even enjoy when future games end up retconning past events, so long as those retcons are believable withing the physics of the world and don't directly contradict past events. Off of the top of my head, a game franchise which I find does both of these well is (perhaps controversially) Kingdom Hearts.


I completely agreed with your point until you mentioned kingdom hearts as an example... I find the way the Star Wars games are included in the universe a great way to develop a franchise. Knights of the Old Republic 1 and 2 are excellent examples on how to carry the story from one game to the next. Kingdom Hearts, having played all except 3D which I've come half way through, seems to me to be trying to patch holes that arise from new elements added to what seems to have been planned to be a single game story. I gotta say, though, that I enjoyed every KH game until I played 3D...

It seems like OP isn't aware that Nintendo made their own timeline? I believe they've said that it is only as a fun experiment, and I can see how this is fun for fans.

Dragon Quest needs to be mentioned too. 1-3 had a nice way of carrying on a story, but the later games were also fantastic even though they were separate stories. Can't wait for DQ11!


----------



## chrisrlink (Jan 8, 2018)

don't forget SM/USUM being parallel worlds in the same timeline (Mega)


----------



## Nekomaru (Jan 8, 2018)

Wow, I am astonished by the level of this discussion (maybe I spent too much time on the Switch hacking forum lol). I think that video games have to fulfill at least one of the two criteria:

1. Give the player fun.
2. Provide an immersive, cathartic experience.

As long one of the conditions is fulfilled, staying in canon is secondary. It feels solid when a franchise with a few games keeps coherence but as time goes by, new generations of consoles and players come around and the long-running series just cry for a reboot. Otherwise you can try to painstakingly follow the canon and fall behind (in The Bold and the Beautiful manner).

Let's have a look at a few examples:

- When the fans decided what becomes canon: Mass Effect 3 original ending controversy and "Retake Mass Effect" fan action which forced the Extended Cut on the devs. Less obvious example - how Sonic "furry" fan creatures insitgated the character creation mechanics in Sonic Forces.
- When there are several co-existing more and less canon paths: Drakengard series. Each game splits beautifully in a couple of endings, which  became starting points for multiple novels or manga (technically spin-offs but hard to rank in importance or fun). Drakengard 3 was purposefully tying all branching endings into a single multiverse - deep metash**t!
- When the canon gets supplemented or enriched by non-canon: Bayonetta and Bayonetta: Bloody Fate Movie. I love both but found it really cool how non-canon anime captured the spirit of the game and provided additional psychological depth to the main cast.

Examples outside of the video games: iconic characters from both DC and Marvel Comics have been rebooted, killed, resurrected, replaced, retroconned both in multiple media. Can you tell me the canon story of Superman or Batman in an A4 page?

Take-home message: in the end every single player decides what is canon to him/her. It follows the concept of "concretization" of a work of art, developed by the Polish philosopher Roman Ingarden. To each his own canon then. Enjoy!


----------



## kuwanger (Jan 8, 2018)

I'd say there's four types of games/series in relationship to canon:

1) Games that try to tell an involved story through a collection of works exploring a lot of different ideas that are often in conflict with each other.  Done well, this invariably has include things like unreliable narrator and mythos/rumor.  Few games actually try this and most that do fall short, but most people tend to gloss over it because of the difficulty of writing such a work.

2) Games that try to tell an involved story, but it's clear that it was not what was originally intended.  Hence, after a while, the story tends to go bad because of the inclusion of too many cooks/writers, which tends to devolve into people rage quitting the series at some point.  This can also be an example of (1) done badly, also.

3) Games that either start as an original game and use it as a mythos to make more or otherwise are ally drawn from a shared mythos.  To that end, there still has to be some cross-game consistency or people will be irked at how unrelated the games are where it's clear the labels are merely window dressing.

4) Games that really don't have a canon except whatever happens to be made up to continue the pretext for what can only jokingly be called a plot.  Usually gamers can enjoy these games even when they wildly in contradiction with previous games precisely because they've not emotionally invested themselves in the story.

Most games in a series fall into (2) and/or (4).  I'd say Final Fantasy is (3).  I'm not sure if I could point out an example of (1), but then I'm not really into epic stories (usually).  In general, though, people become more emotional invested the higher up the list and more concerned about canon precisely because it feels like the game developers are telling a story within a story through the interconnected stories.  It's that depth that makes one become emotionally attached and hence hostile when the "relationship" turns sour.

So, that's what canon means to me:  that which is unsaid by being said and hence has more value than it would have for being told.


----------



## gameboy (Jan 8, 2018)

is final fantasy 7 canon after all the extra stuff?


----------



## Taleweaver (Jan 8, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I disagree, everything up until the Wind Waker was clearly written with a single storyline in mind, and it's entirely possible that Nintendo was writing with a split timeline in mind with Twilight Princess
> 
> That said, I do appreciate that Aonuma told the dev team for BotW to ignore the timeline, that way the fans can, as you said, so the busywork


So...with whom do you disagree, exactly? 

I haven't followed the Zelda timeline...I just used it as an example of people bickering about where BotW fits on the timeline. My opinion on it was (and still is) that previous works shouldn't get in the way of the storywriting. If the timeline itself was good up and until wind waker...all the better.


----------



## SG854 (Jan 8, 2018)

What does it mean to me?
Absolutely nothing. I usually skip story in games. They usually suck anyways.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Jan 8, 2018)

Taleweaver said:


> So...with whom do you disagree, exactly?
> 
> I haven't followed the Zelda timeline...I just used it as an example of people bickering about where BotW fits on the timeline. My opinion on it was (and still is) that previous works shouldn't get in the way of the storywriting. If the timeline itself was good up and until wind waker...all the better.


I was disagreeing with you saying that fitting stuff into a timeline shouldn't be Nintendo's job


----------



## Beerus (Jan 8, 2018)

i only care about cannon in anime *cough* *cough* naruto fillers 
but i am really salty that they changed p5 protagonist name exactly when i beat it i never saw it coming


----------



## Jayro (Jan 8, 2018)

I love when a game just thrusts you into battle or whatever, and the story slowly reveals itself to you subtly, without much hand-holding and at a good pace, keeping you interested. I also love exploring the lore of games, like Splatoon. Lore gives you more places to branch out into, should they ever make prequel games.


----------



## Taleweaver (Jan 8, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I was disagreeing with you saying that fitting stuff into a timeline shouldn't be Nintendo's job


Ah, I see. Thanks for the clarification. I understand how that got interpreted, but I meant it more in the sense of "it shouldn't be their main priority". Of course, if the first games were set up like that or there weren't any conflicts...then there's obviously just benefits to be had.


----------



## thewarhammer (Jan 8, 2018)

I really think that the canon is important, but not something to be deemed as the most important thing in a game.

Taking Zelda as an example, the fanbase worries more with the series' timeline than the creators themselves (as Aonuma stated himself, the timeline was created with all of the fan commotion behind it in mind). Almost all the games from the series can be played in any order, with literally any of them being needed to understand the other games. I really do think it's nice to have an official timeline as it really improves the experience IMO, but it's not ultimately necessary in this case, as the games aren't made with the necessity of knowing what happened at the prior games in mind.

Kingdom Hearts on the other hand is the opposite. It directly follows the past games, being related to every past event. The main problem is that Nomura heavily relies on plotholes to release more material and "buy more time" to think on something instead of develop the story further in a better way. Luckily the final result is good enough, and the gameplay remains solid as ever.

But canon have it's issues. Depending on the game, the publisher can "change it's canon" for the sake of marketing and sales. For an example, we have Street Fighter 2010, which was a very bad move from Capcom US trying to sell the game relying on another IP.

The main problem with the canon IMO is the inability of some people to differ canon from easter eggs/fanservice. You can shot down a Rathalos in MGS Peace Walker, but it doesn't mean they're part of the same world. Overwatch is literally packed with stuff from several Blizzard games, but it doesn't mean they share the same universe. It really pains me everytime a new fan theory is brought to light just because the game creators wanted to please the fans with a little easter egg.




ars25 said:


> 358/2 starts during the end of Kingdom Hearts and the whole beginning tutorial happens inbetween the end of KH1 and the beginning of COM. thats why you see the Organization members that were killed in the beginning. as for your Roxas Confusion he (and Namine) were made when sora released his heart, and the reason why Sora got his body back was because of kairi giving his heart a "Physical Form" in the same vein as Ansem SOD was in the first KH. While roxas had his real body(So technicaly Sora up untill the end of KH2 was a walking sentient Heartless). So thats why Roxas and Sora could exist at the same time.





ars25 said:


> Yeah that's why I put technically since by definition a heartless is a heart that lost it's body



Actually, no. A heartless is born when someone loses his/her heart, the heart being taken by the darkness within it and turning into a Heartless itself. What happens with the Nobodies is that, if they are strong willed enough, their body and soul "remains together" after losing his/her heart.

Sora isn't exactly a good example for this as he had (at one point at least) three hearts (two and a half, to be more specific) within him, this being the reason behind Roxas appearance when Sora became a heartless. As Kairi is one of the Princesses of Hearts, she could erase all the darkness in Sora's heart, making him return to his normal self again (and being a Princess of Hearts, her heart can't turn into a Heartless).

But as Sora's Nobody (which is Ven's Nobody technically speaking) continued without his heart, he kept existing. With Naminé is a little bit more complicated, as she's a Nobody of both Kairi's heart and Sora's body and soul.


----------



## ars25 (Jan 8, 2018)

thewarhammer said:


> I really think that the canon is important, but not something to be deemed as the most important thing in a game.
> 
> Taking Zelda as an example, the fanbase worries more with the series' timeline than the creators themselves (as Aonuma stated himself, the timeline was created with all of the fan commotion behind it in mind). Almost all the games from the series can be played in any order, with literally any of them being needed to understand the other games. I really do think it's nice to have an official timeline as it really improves the experience IMO, but it's not ultimately necessary in this case, as the games aren't made with the necessity of knowing what happened at the prior games in mind.
> 
> ...


To quote you on Nomura relieing on plot holes for the KH series thing seem to come from the first game being written with no real sequels in mind since they weren't probably sure if Disney would've green lit another one.Thats probably one of the many reasons for the "plotholes' or retcons in later instalments.  As for the heartless thing i complete agree with you, and regarding the roxas point you made Roxas is sora nobody and the only reason why he looks like ven is due to the influience his heart had which is referenced here by nomura https://forums.khinsider.com/birth-sleep/147019-20-kh-mysteries-solved-sort.html .


----------



## thewarhammer (Jan 8, 2018)

ars25 said:


> To quote you on Nomura relieing on plot holes for the KH series thing seem to come from the first game being written with no real sequels in mind since they weren't probably sure if Disney would've green lit another one.Thats probably one of the many reasons for the "plotholes' or retcons in later instalments.  As for the heartless thing i complete agree with you, and regarding the roxas point you made Roxas is sora nobody and the only reason why he looks like ven is due to the influience his heart had which is referenced here by nomura https://forums.khinsider.com/birth-sleep/147019-20-kh-mysteries-solved-sort.html .




The problem is that the plotholes were only increasing in number as the games were being released, without . I can be wrong, but it seemed to me that he did with KH3D the same Tite Kubo did with Bleach's final arc.

Well, Roxas IS Sora's Nobody, but both Ven's and Sora's hearts are merged with each other. So, technically speaking, Roxas can also be considered Ven's Nobody.

This is even said in the interview you've posted above. In fact, the interview answers a few questions regarding this fact:


_"*Q2: Why did Roxas faint in Castle Oblivion on Day 297?*
A: Because he had gotten to close to both Sora and Ventus, his "real self".

Before Day 297 in Days Sora had been to Castle Oblivion, as well as the fact that Ventus is asleep somewhere in the Room of Awakening. Both Sora and Ventus can be called Roxas' "real selves", and when he felt their presence it made him faint._

_When Roxas went to Castle Oblivion the memories of his "real selves" made him confused.

Ventus asleep in a room in the castle.

*
Q3: Is it possible that Roxas has a heart?*
A: It is thought that it could be Ventus' heart.

In KHII FM there were clues to him having a heart, and in Days we saw Roxas crying--proof that he could have a heart. As was said in Q1, he has taken a lot of himself from Ventus. But perhaps when Sora and Roxas were separated, Ventus' heart stayed in Roxas?

On Day 357, Roxas cries after losing his friend Xion.

Sora links with Ventus to help heal him.


*Q4: Why can Roxas dual-wield?*
A: Because he can use both Sora's and Ventus' keyblades.

Sora can wield two keyblades at once because he has Ventus' as well as his own. As Roxas is a part of Sora, he also can use two. In Days Roxas awakened his ability to dual wield after fighting Xion. In KHII once Sora absorbs him, he can also dual-wield.

Roxas awakens his ability to dual-wield with his will to not forget Xion who also wielded a keyblade."

_


----------



## ars25 (Jan 8, 2018)

thewarhammer said:


> The problem is that the plotholes were only increasing in number as the games were being released, without . I can be wrong, but it seemed to me that he did with KH3D the same Tite Kubo did with Bleach's final arc.
> 
> Well, Roxas IS Sora's Nobody, but both Ven's and Sora's hearts are merged with each other. So, technically speaking, Roxas can also be considered Ven's Nobody.
> 
> ...


Your misinterpreting those statements what they are saying.
Q2 stated that due to Roxas being Sora's nobody while also harboring vens heart being in such close proximity to them made him faint. As Ventus' heart was reacting to his comatose body and Roxas being reacting to Sora's heart.
Q3 was just saying Roxas has ven's heart
Q4 Was explaining how Roxas and sora can dual wield keyblades 
Also Sora is harboring Ventus' Heart it's not merged with his at this current moment. The only time they merged hearts was at the beginning of bbs and that was because Ventus' heart was fractured by xehanort.


----------



## thewarhammer (Jan 8, 2018)

ars25 said:


> Your misinterpreting those statements what they are saying.
> Q2 stated that due to Roxas being Sora's nobody while also harboring vens heart being in such close proximity to them made him faint. As Ventus' heart was reacting to his comatose body and Roxas being reacting to Sora's heart.
> Q3 was just saying Roxas has ven's heart
> Q4 Was explaining how Roxas and sora can dual wield keyblades
> Also Sora is harboring Ventus' Heart it's not merged with his at this current moment. The only time they merged hearts was at the beginning of bbs and that was because Ventus' heart was fractured by xehanort.



There isn't any risk of misinterpretation when it says "_Both Sora and Ventus can be called Roxas' "real selves", and when he felt their presence it made him faint._

_When Roxas went to Castle Oblivion the memories of his "real selves" made him confused."_

It CLEARLY says both of them can be considered his real self. There's nothing more to say about it.


----------



## Deleted User (Jan 8, 2018)

Jayro said:


> I love when a game just thrusts you into battle or whatever, and the story slowly reveals itself to you subtly, without much hand-holding and at a good pace, keeping you interested. I also love exploring the lore of games, like Splatoon. Lore gives you more places to branch out into, should they ever make prequel games.


I can see that.  A good story (in a video game) should hook you, then have you work to uncover more about the plot.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jan 8, 2018)

Jayro said:


> I love when a game just thrusts you into battle or whatever, and the story slowly reveals itself to you subtly, without much hand-holding and at a good pace, keeping you interested. I also love exploring the lore of games, like Splatoon. Lore gives you more places to branch out into, should they ever make prequel games.



I am not sure that is canon per se.
Thrusting you into a story (possibly with an equivalent to a high level character so you get a taste of what is to come) is a nice way to start some games. If you mean just dropping you into a story and going from there then if you want a term to have for it then "in medias res".



kuwanger said:


> I'd say there's four types of games/series in relationship to canon:
> 
> 1) Games that try to tell an involved story through a collection of works exploring a lot of different ideas that are often in conflict with each other.  Done well, this invariably has include things like unreliable narrator and mythos/rumor.  Few games actually try this and most that do fall short, but most people tend to gloss over it because of the difficulty of writing such a work.


Trying to think of games that do this. Plenty of books do this*, indeed such things usually end up being among my favourite, but other than games based on those books (and it is rarely reflected mechanically) I'm at a loss.

*for all else that might be said about him Brandon Sanderson is a master at this.


----------



## Deleted User (Jan 8, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> I am not sure that is canon per se.
> Thrusting you into a story (possibly with an equivalent to a high level character so you get a taste of what is to come) is a nice way to start some games. If you mean just dropping you into a story and going from there then if you want a term to have for it then "in medias res".


There is a trope for the former.  What I think they're trying to get at, though, is that the game should hook you with a bit of gameplay first, then slowly introduce you to the story as time goes on.  While hardly an example of a deep and intricate story,_ Sonic Colors _does this by just dropping you into the first level without any explanation so you can get a feel for the gameplay first, _then_ introduce you to the story as the game goes on.

Another example that comes to mind is _Kingdom Hearts_, at least, from a certain perspective.  As a kid, I had trouble following the game's objectives, so I would often spend my time wandering around, wondering what to do next.  Because of these prolonged periods of wandering aimlessly and/or trying to beat a certain boss, it made story progression and cutscenes all the more rewarding.  That being said, something along these lines can't really be replicated with success these days, due to the prevalence of the internet and walkthroughs/guides, as well as the aging demographic of the video game industry; many of these people don't have as much as time as they used to, and probably aren't willing to spend it wandering around a game aimlessly when they could be doing other things.


----------



## kuwanger (Jan 9, 2018)

FAST6191 said:


> Trying to think of games that do this. Plenty of books do this*, indeed such things usually end up being among my favourite, but other than games based on those books (and it is rarely reflected mechanically) I'm at a loss.



Xenosaga would come to mind, maybe?  Boktai could be considered too.  I'd tend to argue the Tales of games tend to follow somewhere between (2) and (3).  Yea, it's really hard to find examples of (1) because it's mostly a given that games are supposed to be fully self-contained.  Or that even those that have the scope to try such things (Mega Man X/Zero comes to mind) quickly devolve into (2) or (4) because the people in charge of the story are rarely allowed to carry over from game to game (look at X6's story).  ZX might qualify as (1) merely because it's effectively been cancelled as a series.  I'm not quite sure where the Metal Gear Solid or Resident Evil series fits.

tl;dr (1) is generally only doable if there's one person in charge, so it's little wonder it almost only happens well with books.


----------



## KlasseyKreations (Jan 9, 2018)

i only clicked on this thread, cuz i saw the old Tempy mascot art LOL  @FAST6191


----------



## Hells Malice (Jan 9, 2018)

I'm very invested in canon in regards to story and lore heavy games. I'll be going through Valkyria Chronicles 4 with a fine toothed comb, having read all of the design archives and adoring the lore. Hell it didn't even have to tell me any details in the trailer, I already spotted them just by looking.

But in most games, canon means nothing. I don't care about Zelda canon. The timeline is cute and it kinda works if you squint a bit and let go of any harsh judgements, but at the end of the day it really doesn't matter because none of the games actually try to connect to eachother. Only OOT/MM and the DS abominations were intentionally tied afair off the top of my head.

Games like Dead Rising and stuff are so devoid of any lore or real story, that they can do whatever they want. The best way to play Dead Rising 2 was with Frank West.


----------

