Let me get this straight...


Originally posted by Marcml30:
I don't understand your use of canon. I interpret canon to be rules or perceptions that are largely inviolate. By saying "psuedo" aren't you contradicting the word's meaning?
I was using “pseudo canon” as only a shorthand description for your claim that WC canon “doesn't exist . . . because it can be anything the developers want”, and my general point was that “canon” can range from a general (and thus fairly flexible) principle to a specific (and thus fairly rigid) rule, hence my comparison between the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Tax Code. But I probably should have elaborated.

In the case of WC, I suppose you can argue that we’ve been guilty in the Zone of confusing the common notion of “canon” as standards or norms–let’s call them “meta-facts”–with simple facts or trivia. For example–the norm or meta-fact that interstellar travel occurs via jump points versus the simple or trivial fact that jump drives are a monopoly market in Gemini Sector in 2669. Nonetheless, I think the distinction has little practical value for WC because WC is still essentially a work-in-progress. By contrast, something like Star Trek has “settled down” into a certain predictability about “who, what, and where we are”. In short, we as gamers and fans are exploring aspects of WC that Trekkers, in their respective universe, can already reminisce over.

As for your main point, which seems to be, that the canon or meta-facts of WC strike you as just too liberal or too subject to change, I think part of the answer is what I said above regarding WC’s infancy compared to other popular sci-fi “conceptions”. But more generally, even the most dogmatic canon (literary, legal, religious, etc.) has a source, and history suggests that the question is not how inviolate the particular canon is, but how many human beings have the power to change it. For example, it is nine people who decide in the U.S. exactly what “free speech” is, though those nine can be overruled by millions more but only by a tedious process of amendment.

Here in the Zone, we follow what many legal historians and political philosophers have come to generally term the “Catholic-model”. It seems to me that our nearly absolute deference to Origin and what it says about the WC universe is about as strict a canon as you could ever hope to have.

Originally posted by Quarto:
It seems obvious that when those licenses refer to the Confederation, they actually mean Tri-System.
In my view, the most telling references occur in the planets database. For example, the planet Terrel is described as “one of the first planets to be declared a pro-habitable zone by the confederation” and as “one of two planets which supplies the vast majority of the Confederations [sic] food requirements”.


Umm... wow... that was such bullshit it wasn't even funny...

No offense to you or anything but are you overusing such terms as 'pseudo' and 'meta' to make yourself feel smarter? They don't help at all to advance your point, whatever the hell it may be. You said absolutely nothing in that entire post other that what everyone knows, canon is what we are told in Wing Commander merchandise. What a fricken' suprise!



No offense taken, TC. (In fact, I like your strong sense of self.:))

I was honestly responding to criticisms about P2 on the same terms as those criticisms. You say that “everyone knows . . . canon is what we are told in Wing Commander merchandise”. But you’re obviously wrong because that “definition” clearly isn’t cutting it with those who are reluctant to take Origin at its word about P2. Since I was being pressed to defend the way we use the word “canon” (not exactly a superficial challenge), I saw an opportunity to plow some common ground and perhaps break the stalemate on the issue. (I mean, why disagree with people when you don’t have to, right?)

While some dislike P2 simply because of the story and/or game, others have argued the problem is solely with how P2 “fits” with the WC universe as they perceive it, saying that P2 doesn’t “feel right” and so forth. Essentially, they question the value of our beloved “WC canon” if it won’t allow us to recognize the WC universe when we see it.

It’s a fair point. Moreover, many of us have at times made the same point, one way or another, in other discussions in the Zone.

For example, it has not been enough for us to know that the Confederation-class is a dreadnought; we have debated why it is one and what generally counts as a Confed or Kilrathi dreadnought. It has not been enough to know the stats for specific ships and fighters; we have debated which is the “most powerful” cap ship or the “best” fighter. It has not been enough to know that Blair is missing or dead at the end of “Prophecy”; we have debated what his true fate is (and when we heard “the story” about Blair possibly joining with the Nephilim, more than a few of us questioned if this plot development was “right”).

In each case (and many more), whether we thought about it in this precise way or not, we were appealing to or otherwise hoping to find (or at least propose) “higher” principles, rules, or facts that resolved the issue. But whatever you call them, the desire or goal was to develop a certain lore and to bring some degree of “settlement” or standardization to WC beyond the cut-and-dried listing of unrelated, or at best loosely-related, facts. (What else was the point of “marrying” the Ranger-class and the Victory, to take another example?)

In responding to the P2 criticisms, I borrowed from what is common fare in the philosophies that study how a given “community” (religious, scientific, or legal) enforces its beliefs or “canon” and how such beliefs get overthrown by “better” ones. (Paradigms and paradigm-shifts . . . you gotta love ’em!) The Zone and its “exploration” of the WC universe operate no differently.


Well all I have to say about that is, that Confederation as defined in the Booth probably refers to the Tri System Confederation and not The Terran Confederation per se.

Remember, a confederation is just a name for a system of government. There have been many confederations in history, the Confederacy in the south of the US, the German Confederation, etc.

Also, I'd guess as to say that CIS stands for Condeferate Intelligence Service or Internal Service or some other military organisation. Anyone wish to guess?


Nemesis: I will agree that the WCU is in its early stages and that P2 expanded the WCU beyond the borders set by WC3 & 4. Regardless of how little it had that could be linked to the known WCU, P2 IS part of the WCU (whether we feel it belongs there or not). My concern is that P2 made the WCU too open-ended, too generic with little to distinguish it from other game universes such as I-War or Freespace.

BanditLOAF: Thank you, Thank you, Thank you for closing the ridiculous Kittens vs Bunny Rabbits thread - it was looonnng overdue.


I don't see how showing the future in a remote area opened up WC any more than anything else. Perhaps introducing the bugs opened up wc for some people, or maybe people just like to argue on a side they know is wrong!


Maybe they wanted to leave it open like they did. Perhaps they did that so when the next WC game comes out, be it WC or Privateer, it would be a combination of the two with massive multiplay capabilities. Id like to see it have the ability where you can choose who you want to be. A privateer, a fighter pilot for Confed, a merchant, a pirate, even bring back the ol Retros! It would also be neat since the war with the Kilrathi is over, to even fly for them! Make it so versitle as to who you want your character to be, and be able to perform manual landings on bases and planets, actually get out of the cockpit, walk around like in 3d shooters, interact with other characters in the game, etc. That would be a great game.


Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
Origin once planned a 'crossover' game which would better connect Privateer 2 and the rest of the WC universe -- it's mentioned in a 1996 PC Gamer (Richard Garriot cover).


Originally posted by Napoleon
I don't see how showing the future in a remote area opened up WC any more than anything else.
When you first played P2 did you feel like you were playing in the WCU as you had come to know it from WC1-4/P1/RF? Be honest. And if you have to point out single lines in dialog and the manuals then you are having to look way too hard! The problem w/ P2 was that there was no transition - nothing looked familiar (characters, organizations, et al). And if it doesn't look like the WCU why call it that? In almost every spinoff there is some kind of connection between the original and the spinoff - at least at first. That's why there is so much controversy about this game.
Perhaps introducing the bugs opened up wc for some people, or maybe people just like to argue on a side they know is wrong!
Not quite sure what you are saying - I'm arguing on the side that is wrong? WCP started a new storyline with new characters and a new enemy. What did WCP have in connection to the WCU (as we were accustomed to) that P2 didn't? I'll bet you won't have to think very hard to figure it out.


The first time i played P2 it sucked, because i thinked that is the continue of P1.Now i´m playing again (and not accepting in the WCU) and it is a good game


Hm, the first time I played P2, I already knew it wasn't a sequel to Priv, and I enjoyed it a lot more than Priv. And I enjoyed the story even more than I did that of Prophecy.


Yeah, but that doesn't have to make the Prophecy story bad... I enjoyed it quite a bit, plus Prophecy will always have a speciall place it my heart since it was my first WC game.:)


You know what would make me feel more into the game, would be if during the mission breifings or maybe if there was a star map you could go check, they would show you what system your in, what the nearby systems are, the jump points between them and what the mission goals are for getting the carrier to them. INstead of always just telling us, "we jumped into this system", then later "we jumped into the next system". If they actually showed us our path I would feel a greater sense of accomplishment if i could see on a map the carrier getting closer to the enemy home system or where there are enemy bases.


I know what you mean EW. This 'special place inside the heart'.For me it is the same...I know the P story was not the best one, but it was the P atmosphere, the WC atmosphere which lead you to buy the other games. Some other things at P weren't so bad...like the actors for example or the concept of the Midway...if they would have spent more money on it, it would have been a very good game...so it is for me just 'a good one'.