Damn Loaf, Im sure we would get on just fine in another context and you seem cool on Wingnut, but why do you have to be so damn difficult on purpose with things like this?
Sheesh... anyway to the post... *deep breath*
Bandit LOAF said:
I believe I claimed the former, not the latter (accurate to timeline v. matches the game).
Alright then lets take a close look at what you did say:
"Heart of the Tiger is Wing Commander through and through -- and it *sets* the continuity. It's because of the Heart of the Tiger novel that future stories can refer to exactly what happened on the Victory in 2669. "
So the novel is WC "
through and through", and it "
*sets* the continuity". And you say this is why "
future stories" can refer to exactly what happened on the Victory, but how can anyone refer to "
exactly what happened on the Victory" when the book and the game contradict each other in several major ways?
It is impossible to match a novelization to an *interactive* video game. When we refer to the events of mid-2669, we'll generally refer to the way they happened in the novel rather than in any one of fifteen different ways to play through a video game.
(There are exceptions -- Flash, for instance, talks about his test pilot experience in the novel... though we don't see it in the prose.)
Firstly, That wasnt my criticism, of course. Despite what you seem to imply by your responces Im not a complete idiot. There *are* different ways to play the game, but none of these different ways would result on the events EVER playing out the way it is written in the novel.
THATS MY POINT
Secondly, Flashes story is almost completely different in the novel. To summerise: In the game the Victory is assisting with the Excalibur test flights, and thats why Flash came aboard, *flying* an Excaliber. He either stays with you on the Victory if you win in the sim challenge, or he leaves, he can also die later on. But in the novel he is there mealy as a replacement pilot, who flies in on a Thunderbolt. There is no challenge to Flash at all, and he dies sometime later.
And that is just the insident with Flash, the other examples I gave are equally valid. The game and the novel contradict each other in several ways. Not even mental gymnastics cannot make them fit properly.
So... this is wrong because... people... can't call Blair skipper? Is there some Playstation exclusive scene where Eisen orders no one to give Blair a nickname? I'm lost.
The novel also calls him 'Maverick'. Reconcile that fact in the same manner.
I had no problem with the callsign "Mavrick", because they had to call him something. But my problem with the novel was not only that I felt the dialogue was poorly written, and the constant use of the same phrases over and over that started to make the characters start to sound like one dimensional caricatures IMO. But not only that, but NO ONE in the script calls Blair that anyway, so it makes even less sence. Its made up, its not in the game.
The HoTT novel to me seems badly written in so many ways. I enjoyed End Run, which I read afterwards, and I have started Action Stations. So when you told me Forstchen didnt actually write HoTT this actually makes complete sence. Even if those major events were different, I STILL found HoTT was written badly.
The novel and the script aren't verbatim. As I told you at the very beginning of this debate, the novel is based on an earlier version and is corrected to be more prosaic.
You just wasted a lot of time proving me right to spite *LeHah*.
If you look, I was actually replying to LeHah.
I was also talking a bit about the events that were different, because you asserted somewhere else that the novel "sets" the continuity, and so therefore you would think that Wing3, the actual damn game itself would match. But no it doesnt, in so many ways. The novel doesnt just fill in the gaps.
... wait, no you didn't, his claim was that "a great deal" of the dialogue in the book came from the script. You're just spitting in the wind.
Now you are just playing the semantics game!
LeHah said it was "
a strange thing to say" that in the game the dialogue was a lot better, because "
a great deal of the dialogue is also in the game, verbatim". But thats not true. Verbatim doesn't mean "sort of like". The truth is only a
very small portion of the dialogue ingame is actually "
verbatim". I only gave a few examples, I could open the book anywhere and find more without even trying.
Paladin did speak that way in the game, though - as he was voiced with a Scottish accent.
He didnt have a
bad Scottish accent which is how it read in several places.
But not everywhere. Its the over the top useage that I was complaining about, like I had said before.
(I think you'd have trouble finding a single movie script with a character's dialogue written in brogue. It would be fully counter to the purpose of a script. You will, however, find that it is very common in literature... and the original two Wing Commander games. Why this concept continues to elude you is beyond me
Of course I understand that but that again was directed at LeHah, not you.
And any piece literature that tries so hard to make sure people understand that the character/s have an accent that is very hard to read is sloppy IMO, because clearly they cant find a better and more articulate way to tell the story. I will be interested in how The Price of Freedom novel deals with this. That novel is on its way, but Im sure if it does do something like this Im pretty sure its not nearly as bad at all that I would complain about it like this.
---
Once I again I am telling you that I dont care if you personally, or anyone else likes the book. My original position was that *I* didnt like it, and you challenged me on those reasons. You deny there is any significant discrepancy between the game and book, even though certian key sequences, scenes and characters that ARE very different including the entire Flash storyline. You say that it fills in the gaps, well, yes it does. And the "gaps" is probably what future games pulled from which is fine, but thats NOT my problem with it. In fact I read it expecting that! I didnt however expect so many things do be so
different to the game. WC3 dialogue may not have been Shakespeare but it was a hellava lot better than the (imo) dredful changes in the book, like making so many people call Blair "skipper" when it wasnt even in the script. So while it does show what else happened in WC3 I simply cant take it seriously when such major changes to the actual game storyline were made.
Now why this is now relevant to SAGA? Well, you defend the novel despite these rather large contradictions between the game and the book, and then furiously rat on SAGA calling them liars for simply giving incorrect ship classes. I dont know enough about WC to comment on how true that is, but I dont really care, but you do seem to have one rule for stuff like the novel and one rule for SAGA, even though the changes the novel made where much more noticeable and huge. You say SAGAs "incorrect" ship classes will cause confusion. Well, maybe it will, if anyone cares. But what if no one played WC3, and only read the novel? Is it not fair to say they would have a incorrect perception of what to expect with the WC3 game storyline? Would you not have to "correct" them as well?
Ed
No it isnt. And I didnt think you would question this of all things 
