StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I know I'm probably begging for a bruising here, but as a sfj reg I've become EXTREMELY disillusioned by the reaction there to the idea that both TCW and TFU have been claimed to be canon. (Please don't ask for proof on that, I have none.) The general consensus there is that TCW being canon is a fantastic thing because it's thought that that hurts the warsie side of the debate as far as weapon strengths and strategy and whatnot. (Again, please, I have no proof, I don't even watch the show.) But even though apparently TFU was declared to be a legitimate part of Star Wars in the same interview with GL (Sorry, again, no links) there is a complete denial of TFU because it shows Force-user power levels in the freaking stratosphere.
So as a fan of both trek and wars, but at least for the time being SICK TO DEATH of that dumb shit, what is the feeling here? Is TFU considered canon? Is TCW considered canon? Is TCW considered detrimental to the warsie side of the debate? I think maybe I would be a better fit over here, honestly. At least, that's what they tell me.
If anyone lurks there, I'm mojo. My buddy Airlocke has been considering jumping ship, as well.

For those at home, TCW is "The Clone Wars" and "TFU" is "The Force Unleashed". I've also clarified the thread title.

There is really no reason to make such a big fuzz about the "is it canon"-question. LucasArts has quite a simple policy, and there is no reason to follow anything but their policy.

Everything directly produced by George Lucas is G-canon - the movies and the novelizations of those movies. This level of canon can not possibly be overwritten by other levels of canon.
The cartoon-shows have their own special level of canon, called T-canon (for television). This level of canon is between G-canon and C-canon.
Then there is C-canon, which stands for Continuity: Books, comics, games etc. This is fully canonic, the seperate levels simply means that George Lucas can ignore them whenever he wants while working on a SW-project (however, he has included a lot of stuff, such as Coruscant, into his own works).

Again, all of this is canon. When talking about the Star Wars universe, all of this counts as the reality we are discussing, just like the movies and TV-shows count as reality when discussing Star Trek.



However, you have to keep in mind the following:
The story of every work in one of the categories above is always canon, but the way it is represented is not necessarily canon. For example, you could not take a Star Wars videogame and conclude that everyone in Star Wars can carry 10 different weapons including rocket launchers just because the player character does.

Imagine taking a certain historical event, say from WW II. You'll base your work on it - say you're trying to tell the tale of the D-day landings in Normandy.
You could make a live-action movie or television show, in which case you'll try to represent it accurately. Or you could represent it via some form of animation, in which case you'll probably employ more artistic license. And if you're making a video game, you'll obviously have to detach yourself from reality a lot.
The movies are similar to documentaries representing a historical event. The books are similar to books written about such events. The cartoons and games are based on such events, but just like in real-life they pay less heed to accurate representation.

So we can say "yes, what happened in TCW Episode XY actually happened, Anakin really captured that fortress.". We won't say "oh it's canon, therefore the visuals must be a 100% accurate representation of SW-reality".
The same goes for TFU. Yes, that would mean that that Star Destroyer was actually brought down (because that's a story element), but it doesn't mean that all those depictions of force powers are 100% accurate (because that's a game mechanic).



So yes, both TFU and TCW are canon. Whether they "hurt the warsie side of the debate" doesn't matter for that.

Serafina wrote:

However, you have to keep in mind the following:
The story of every work in one of the categories above is always canon, but the way it is represented is not necessarily canon. For example, you could not take a Star Wars videogame and conclude that everyone in Star Wars can carry 10 different weapons including rocket launchers just because the player character does.

Imagine taking a certain historical event, say from WW II. You'll base your work on it - say you're trying to tell the tale of the D-day landings in Normandy.
You could make a live-action movie or television show, in which case you'll try to represent it accurately. Or you could represent it via some form of animation, in which case you'll probably employ more artistic license. And if you're making a video game, you'll obviously have to detach yourself from reality a lot.
The movies are similar to documentaries representing a historical event. The books are similar to books written about such events. The cartoons and games are based on such events, but just like in real-life they pay less heed to accurate representation.

So we can say "yes, what happened in TCW Episode XY actually happened, Anakin really captured that fortress.". We won't say "oh it's canon, therefore the visuals must be a 100% accurate representation of SW-reality".
The same goes for TFU. Yes, that would mean that that Star Destroyer was actually brought down (because that's a story element), but it doesn't mean that all those depictions of force powers are 100% accurate (because that's a game mechanic).



So yes, both TFU and TCW are canon. Whether they "hurt the warsie side of the debate" doesn't matter for that.

According to the main area doing it your way seems to be breaking the suspension of disbelief:

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Ess ... lysis.html

Basic approach:

Pretends that the fictional universe is real, which means that the films and TV shows are considered documentary footage and books are treated as if they were real stories, historical records, official spec sheets, etc.

Maybe i am getting it wrong but the TCW being a TV show means it is to be treated like documentary footage according to the rules.

I'm moving this to the Star Wars only forum.

As for documentary; well, that's actually the framing story of both sets of Clone Wars stories, the introductions are meant to imply that they're in-universe Republic propaganda.

TCW is heavily stylized, so to say that it indicates lower firepower would be like grabbing, say, a 40k videogame cutscene like this and saying it disproves all high yields within it.

NecronLord wrote:I'm moving this to the Star Wars only forum.

As for documentary; well, that's actually the framing story of both sets of Clone Wars stories, the introductions are meant to imply that they're in-universe Republic propaganda.

Moreover, they're cartoons

By that, I simply mean if we take live-action film as genuine documentary footage, clearly, the Tartovsky stuff, or even something as sophisticated as the CW film and TV show, is, just like a cartoon about a WWII battle, an interpretation of what actually happened. It might be faithful to Wars history (by and large, at least), but it shouldn't be regarded on a par with actual glimpses into the Warsverse, like the films afford us.

Same said for the videogames, albeit the fact I utterly HATE those TFU stories. I enjoyed the hell out of playing the first game, somewhat repetitive though it was, but the plot was fucking retarded. I hope it, TFU2 and the [groan] likely third installment are all dismissed as Infinities stories sometime down the line.

Ha ha fat chance Sean. Lucasfilm seems dead set on including every stupid damn thing ever written under the Star Wars moniker.

It's like how little league has trophies for 15th place now. No one is allowed to suck and be a loser anymore.

I don't know, they've happily ignored little things for TCW.

Srelex wrote:TCW is heavily stylized, so to say that it indicates lower firepower would be like grabbing, say, a 40k videogame cutscene like this and saying it disproves all high yields within it.

Ah but TCW is T-Canon and the gigaton figures are C-Canon, thus TCW, as sfj residents are so fond of saying "shits all over the ICS"

What they are forgetting of course is that even IF we accept Kiloton or sub kiloton yields for medium and heavy Turbolasers in TCW, that in no way invaldiates the gigaton figures in C-Canon.

Why?

Because we have Megaton scale light turbolasers in G-Canon, (though they always claim those were A) kiloton scale B) smaller asteroids than 40m and C) not the light turbolasers but mediums or something, while the main site explains that they are 7 megatons because they do the job of 479.1 kilotons in 1/15 of a second... which puts them perfectly in line with the ICS figures)

As a result the TCW figures are invalidated not just because of the heavily stylized nature of the cartoon, but also because of conflicting G-Canon sources. Thus the C-Canon ICS figures stay.

and honestly, I don't recall any instances of TCW conflicting with the ICS regarding starship weapons. What is this big conflict the whiners are talking about? The fact that the blasts don't product gigaton level shockwaves when striking warships with shields and armor specifically designed to withstand such force? They tried that with the broadside scene in RoTS. It didn't work.

Darksider wrote:and honestly, I don't recall any instances of TCW conflicting with the ICS regarding starship weapons. What is this big conflict the whiners are talking about? The fact that the blasts don't product gigaton level shockwaves when striking warships with shields and armor specifically designed to withstand such force? They tried that with the broadside scene in RoTS. It didn't work.

Supposedly because in one episode they also did something like that in atmosphere it somehow makes a difference, even though we saw that it doesn't in AoTC with the SPHA/t vs the Core Ship.

I actually had my own question about the canonicity of the Force Unleashed story. While I know that it is generally labelled "C-canon," does anyone know if one particular version trumps the others? The PS3/360 version of the game has some pretty notable differences from the Wii/PS2/PSP version of the game (the most obvious is probably battling Darth Desolous and Darth Phobos at the Jedi Temple, and going to Cloud City to rescue Garm Bel-Iblis). Then the comic has some differences as well, and from what I've heard, the novel is different again, particularly in that it apparently portrays Starkiller as being quite weak in melee combat, and downplaying his abilities to a large extent.

So basically, there are at least 4 versions of the Force Unleashed story that are all different, and are all the same level of canon. So if someone hates Starkiller and insists that he's a crap fighter, and insists that you have to read the book if you argue with him and show youtube clips, are they right, or do we basically get to pick and choose which feats of Starkiller are "real?"

I'm also curious about Quick Time Events, particularly mandatory ones. On the one hand, they are gameplay mechanics, which I can generally understand not being canon, but on the other, they are basically button prompted mini-cutscenes themselves, and mandatory QTEs means that there is no other possible way the game could progress except by what is shown in the QTE, so why wouldn't those count?

On a slight aside, I do find it funny when people have a big problem with Starkiller being too powerful a force user, since most of the people who make the biggest deal about it are also the ones who are fully aware of EU Palpatine being able to mind-control whole planets and blow up entire fleets of Stardestroyers, or all the crazy stuff EU Luke has done. Seems kind of hypocritical.

Freefall wrote:On a slight aside, I do find it funny when people have a big problem with Starkiller being too powerful a force user, since most of the people who make the biggest deal about it are also the ones who are fully aware of EU Palpatine being able to mind-control whole planets and blow up entire fleets of Stardestroyers, or all the crazy stuff EU Luke has done. Seems kind of hypocritical.

Not necessarily; some who object to Starkiller's Force power tend to do so on the grounds that he's basically a Gary Stu. It doesn't help that Starkiller is apparently also responsible for the creation of the Rebellion.

But doesn't the game have Starkiller beat both Vader and Palpatine?

Bellosh101 wrote:Not necessarily; some who object to Starkiller's Force power tend to do so on the grounds that he's basically a Gary Stu. It doesn't help that Starkiller is apparently also responsible for the creation of the Rebellion.

IIRC movie-canon overrides that, since the Rebellion was created at the end of Episode III, although I haven't watched it in some time.

in force unleashed it's implied that palpy deliberatlely threw the fight. in the novel of unleashed 2 the clone wins due largely to luck (juno creates a small breach in vader's armor he channels electricity through the breach in order to incapacitate vader.) Vader still manages to rattle him so vader may be far stronger.

Bellosh101 wrote: Not necessarily; some who object to Starkiller's Force power tend to do so on the grounds that he's basically a Gary Stu. It doesn't help that Starkiller is apparently also responsible for the creation of the Rebellion.

Yeah, but keep in mind Starkiller creating the rebellion was because of Palpatine's stupidly convoluted Bond-villain plan, which is perfectly consistent with his convoluted plans in the PT.

I'm not defending the plot, BTW, which I agree ended up being rather stupid (which is really too bad, because the basic premise was great), I'm just saying that given what Palpatine did in the PT, it is not abnormally stupid or out of character for him.

Anyway, as mentioned, it seems pretty clear Palpatine threw the fight in FU1. As for Vader, well, how powerful is cyborg Vader really? He beat Luke, who was a complete rookie at the time. He blocked a couple of blaster shots with his hand. He strangled a couple of Imperial Officers. He beat an old decrepit Obi-Wan. He broke some random rebel soldier's neck.

All in all, I think he is actually less impressive than, say, Darth Maul or Padawan Obi-Wan. Certainly Dooku, RotS Anakin, or Mace Windu would destroy him. So really, Starkiller being able to beat him shouldn't be that big a deal, especially to serious Star Wars geeks who should know better. If anything, the game was probably being generous to Vader.

Anyway, anyone have an idea what the deal with the various different versions is?

Imperial528 wrote:

Bellosh101 wrote:Not necessarily; some who object to Starkiller's Force power tend to do so on the grounds that he's basically a Gary Stu. It doesn't help that Starkiller is apparently also responsible for the creation of the Rebellion.

IIRC movie-canon overrides that, since the Rebellion was created at the end of Episode III, although I haven't watched it in some time.

That wasn't necessarily the Rebellion in the form and shape we saw in the original trilogy. It might have just been a political alliance rather than a guerrilla/military one, or those elements could have had no connection with the political side (e.g. Mon Mothma) until Starkillers intervention.


Also, keep in mind that Starkillers power, as presented in the video games is NOT canon. Gameplay elements are NOT canon. You'd have to go by the novelization.
In the games, his most impressive feat is knocking down the Star Destroyer, which can actually be explained by him influencing the engines rather than pulling the whole weight on his own.

Actually the novel of TFU overrides the ISD crash incident. In the book, the ISD was already crashing due to damage sustained in the Raxus shipyard's destruction. He just shifts it's course slightly so it crashes into the mass driver. Then when he tries to slow it down because he realizes that he's still standing on the mass driver, he fails miserably.

Darksider wrote:Actually the novel of TFU overrides the ISD crash incident. In the book, the ISD was already crashing due to damage sustained in the Raxus shipyard's destruction. He just shifts it's course slightly so it crashes into the mass driver. Then when he tries to slow it down because he realizes that he's still standing on the mass driver, he fails miserably.

There, biggest problem solved. The whole rest can easily be chalked up to game-mechanics, and Starkiller just being a powerful, well-trained dark-side force-user. Heck, we saw Vader throwing stuff around without effort in TESB, and Yoda also showed some good telekinetic feats in AotC - not to mention Palpatines feats in ROTS. Starkillers feats are hardly out of the ordinary if the Star Destroyer-incident is not canon.

Serafina wrote:There, biggest problem solved. The whole rest can easily be chalked up to game-mechanics, and Starkiller just being a powerful, well-trained dark-side force-user. Heck, we saw Vader throwing stuff around without effort in TESB, and Yoda also showed some good telekinetic feats in AotC - not to mention Palpatines feats in ROTS. Starkillers feats are hardly out of the ordinary if the Star Destroyer-incident is not canon.

Granted, even shifting the trajectory of a multimegaton spaceship hurtling from orbit is still a far more impressive showing than anyone who isn't named 'Luke Skywalker' or who didn't use a pyramid the Sith built as a giant force focusing device.

Serafina wrote: Also, keep in mind that Starkillers power, as presented in the video games is NOT canon. Gameplay elements are NOT canon. You'd have to go by the novelization.
In the games, his most impressive feat is knocking down the Star Destroyer, which can actually be explained by him influencing the engines rather than pulling the whole weight on his own.

Aren't cutscenes still considered canon? I thought it was just straight gameplay mechanics that were non-canon. This is why I had the question about mandatory QTEs, since they are basically just button-prompted cutscenes, but the buttons still means they are technically gameplay.

In the PS3/360 version, there isn't much indication he's having much effect on the SD until it is already pretty close to the ground, at which point, he causes it to have a fairly drastic nose dive. Definitely not on the level of pulling it out of orbit, as some people seem to think he did, but still pretty impressive. The Wii/PS2/PSP version is a bit different, with him causing massive explosions and crushing portions of the bridge, from what I recall.

He also TKs a couple of smallish ships in a few cutscenes, probably about the size of the clone transports seen at the end of Episode II without it seeming too difficult for him.

Freefall wrote:Aren't cutscenes still considered canon?

They are, but the game and the novel depict two different scenarios. The novel is considered to supercede the games.

What if the comics and novel clashed?