Now don't go postal with this

mpanty

Keen Commander
Originally posted by Dougie

(...) The author *would* have been given some guidelines, and it is likely that one of them would be how to design things relative to the games. Hence his response, implying that he was told not to adhere to the games; which thus implies that Roberts' intention was to ignore the games completely. (...)
Besides, not adhering to the games would have made it easier for him to shoot the movie... he would not have had to worry about consistency problems, since he chose not to deal with them from the start...

This assuming Dougie's point is correct... (and I think it is) :)
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
I can tell you from first hand experience that the authors did *not* recieve such guidelines -- at least in the case of Peter Telep, who's book was part of the same contract and published at the same time by the same company. He recieved a copy of the shooting script and (much later) a copy of the style book.

The Iason is mentioned in the book *not* because they decided to screw around with the games continuity, but because it was in the shooting script of the movie -- there's a scene (filmed, even) in which Blair recognizes a POW tattoo on Paladin and Paladin explains that he was on the Iason.

Telep recieved access to further materials courtesy of dedicated fans (credited in the books forward:)) not because DA provided them.
 

$tormin

Spaceman
i was amazed when i finally read the book and saw that LOAF had helped with the writing. though they should have included this site in there.
 

LeHah

212 Squadron - "The Old Man's Eyes And Ears"
A friend of mine is going to University of Florida, where Telep teaches. I commanded my friend to harass Telep into making more WC novels! :p (This is a joke, BTW, though he is going to the college)
 

$tormin

Spaceman
Originally posted by LeHah
A friend of mine is going to University of Florida, where Telep teaches. I commanded my friend to harass Telep into making more WC novels! :p (This is a joke, BTW, though he is going to the college)
good for him. everybody needs an edumacation :)
 

LeHah

212 Squadron - "The Old Man's Eyes And Ears"
He's also going down there since the stadium scenes in "Unbreakable" were shot there. :)
 

LeHah

212 Squadron - "The Old Man's Eyes And Ears"
How about someone making the memory manager work for Armada?! After that, maybe someone can tweak the Armada engine to look more crisp like WC3 or something. :)
 

TC

SubCrid
Wow... what'd that have to do with the conversation :(

and you're forgetting that someone has to magically make WC2 a 3D game with FSAA, lens-flare, bump-mapping, tri-linear textures autoreduplicated to aflumate, plexitron stereomatica and steep fate streaming video-rendering output monitors!

TC
 

Bob McDob

Better Health Through Less Flavor
I hope nobody minds if I use this lull to bring up the Tiger's Claw again. :)

How can the movie Claw and the game Claw be the same? After all, wasn't the movie about the Tiger Claw and the game the Tiger's Claw. And while I've heard that it was a typo (which seems reasonable), I've also heard it wasn't, and I don't believe either of those were from reliable sources.

On other notes, the Tiger Claw looks different, she's armed with broadside torpedo tubes, and wasn't she commisioned earlier than in the game? Granted, I'm not sure about the last point, and it could be argued that the WC1 Claw does have torps, she just never fires them.

Still, it's not the sort of answer that satisfies me. I have to admit that I do agree with Dougie on several points, and I won't completely accept that the WC movie is canon unless I see a letter signed by all the writers and designers for it. Or something to that effect. I still think that, originally at least, the movie was meant to be seperate (even if it was changed to canon later in production), and as I said, until someone proves beyond reasonable doubt one way or another, I'm not sure I can accept either answer.
 

Wolfman

Rear Admiral
Good to see we're getting our ideas on continuency out in the open.

Dougie, its good to have someone else backing up these concerns but as the way of things are, just ignore any insults, don't stoop to that level.

I noticed in the first day of this thread that there was never going to be a way of both sides (not a good word to use) to agree on what is what etc. With LOAFs insights I have accepted much of what was in the movie, I can kinda accept the whole old Rapier (movie) and new Rapier (game) deal now, though the WC1 Rapier is (supposed)to be the F-44 and the WC2 one is the F-44 mark (type) 2.

Frosty don't go antagonising Dougie ok?

I don't want anyone kicked of a thread I started (let anlone on the whole CZ!).

The two Iason thing doesn't meld but having the captain of the second being the first ones son certainly makes more sense.
 

$tormin

Spaceman
Originally posted by Bob McDob
I hope nobody minds if I use this lull to bring up the Tiger's Claw again. :)

How can the movie Claw and the game Claw be the same? After all, wasn't the movie about the Tiger Claw and the game the Tiger's Claw. And while I've heard that it was a typo (which seems reasonable), I've also heard it wasn't, and I don't believe either of those were from reliable sources.

On other notes, the Tiger Claw looks different, she's armed with broadside torpedo tubes, and wasn't she commisioned earlier than in the game? Granted, I'm not sure about the last point, and it could be argued that the WC1 Claw does have torps, she just never fires them.

Still, it's not the sort of answer that satisfies me. I have to admit that I do agree with Dougie on several points, and I won't completely accept that the WC movie is canon unless I see a letter signed by all the writers and designers for it. Or something to that effect. I still think that, originally at least, the movie was meant to be seperate (even if it was changed to canon later in production), and as I said, until someone proves beyond reasonable doubt one way or another, I'm not sure I can accept either answer.
in the novel they sorta quote loaf on the specifics of the tiger claw/tigers claw. they are the same ship. i was part of the "different name, different ship" group too before i found the book at the liberary
 

Bob McDob

Better Health Through Less Flavor
Hmm. Thanks. I'll go check it out.

Hey, maybe in Pilgrim Truth they give an answer for every question in this thread! :D
 

$tormin

Spaceman
Originally posted by Bob McDob
Hmm. Thanks. I'll go check it out.

Hey, maybe in Pilgrim Truth they give an answer for every question in this thread! :D
not every question. for instance, why is that mushroom growing out of your nose?
 

Bandit LOAF

Long Live the Confederation!
Both Tiger's Claws have the same history behind them -- they're both Bengal class strike carriers that exist at the same time, they're both Maniac's first assignment/Blair's second assignment, they both were the ship that served at Custer's Carnival... and so forth and so on.

The *look* is fairly immaterial -- since it's not the first re-imagining of the Tiger's Claw... it looks different on WCA (no forward bay) in SM1 SNES (weird platform launchers) and in SWC (whole new ship).

And no, no difference in commisioning dates... in fact, the novel give's the Tiger's Claws history straight out of Claw Marks.

And it's pretty clear that it *is* a typo -- the first script (draft 1) calls the ship both Tiger Claw and Tiger's Claw... the second changes almost all the Tiger's Claws into Tiger Claws (there are a few left -- check the script posted to the CIC a few days back)... and the third is entirely (save one) Tiger Claw. SOmebody made a mistake on the first draft and it snowballed from there...
 

Dralthi5

Spaceman
The Handbook does give the commissioning date as 2619, though. That would actually kind of make more sense, considering how beat up the Claw is (remember the leak in the barracks?). Whatever.
 
Top