Darth Windu Posted November 22, 2002 Author Share Posted November 22, 2002 Originally posted by CorranSec (1)Windu- what feeling? The feeling that you're wrong, or that insanity is a good thing? (2)Oh, and I sense a little contradiction. First it was "if they're going to BOMB a city they drop BOMBS," and now it's "Just cos it's a BOMBER doesn't mean it drops BOMBS." ????? Luke's dad- Whoooho! Go the stupid people. Go the insane people even more. Sith- Argh, you stole my rubber chickens line. But, yeah, you're right. Oh, and here's another reason for using my 'more air units' idea- it will totally discount Windu's idea. 1 - what is this 'feeling' you are going on about? 2 - There is no contradiction. The act of 'bombing' a targets refers to attacking it with bomb's. However the term 'Bomber' refers to a large strike aircraft, which has many weapons options including, but not limited to, bomb's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 23, 2002 Share Posted November 23, 2002 Originally posted by Darth Windu 2 - There is no contradiction. The act of 'bombing' a targets refers to attacking it with bomb's. However the term 'Bomber' refers to a large strike aircraft, which has many weapons options including, but not limited to, bomb's. -The STAR WARS bombers are BOMBING targets in STAR WARS GALACTIC BATTLEGROUNDS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted November 23, 2002 Share Posted November 23, 2002 it will totally discount Windu's idea. Or we could do neither idea... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 24, 2002 Author Share Posted November 24, 2002 Corran - As bad as some of my idea's have been, your idea concerning air is, IMHO, worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 24, 2002 Share Posted November 24, 2002 Originally posted by Darth Windu Corran - As bad as some of my idea's have been, you're idea concerning idea is, IMHO, worse. ''you're'' means you are pfff! idiot! Oh and you realize your ideas are bad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 25, 2002 Author Share Posted November 25, 2002 Yep, i freely admit that SOME of my idea's have been bad. But then the whole point of the forum is to bring idea's to the attention of the community and see what the majority think of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 25, 2002 Share Posted November 25, 2002 Originally posted by Darth Windu Yep, i freely admit that SOME of my idea's have been bad. But then the whole point of the forum is to bring idea's to the attention of the community and see what the majority think of them. I think you know what the majority of the community thinks of your ideas! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 Windu, for the majority of the forum to like your idea, you would have to be the only member;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 26, 2002 Author Share Posted November 26, 2002 Sith - Well at least i actually come up with idea's. To date, i have yet to see ANY idea from you, and most of the time you seem to be bagging everyone else's idea's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 Ok Windu, I don't never flamed you, I've never called you names and on the whole I respect your opinions. However, this is highly likely to change if you consider EU to be canon. Canon by definition is the movies and only the movies. I suggest YOU read up on the matter. Have a look about what canon means here: http://theforce.net/swtc/continuity.html Then I'll accept your full apology. To even suggest the movies and the EU are one and the same is blasphemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 Actually from how I understand it says that some of EU could be considered canon, although the rest is not such as post BoE novels. Although I would consider that some of post RoTJ novels could be considered canon becuase at the end of the film u see Coruscant celebrating, yet the planet itself is never shown to be taken over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 I think that the Shadows of the Empire and the Thrawn trilogy are the only two that should be considered canon. LA owns the rights to both, and they stay quite close to Star Wars format, characters, and storyline. Both Mara Jade and Thrawn himself originate in these books, and they have almost merged with the canon characters by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 26, 2002 Share Posted November 26, 2002 I agree with Sith. SoE and the Thrawn Trilogy should be looked at as canon. Even if it isn't in the movies, those stuff are from my point of view, the best EU stuff anyone ever come up with(especially Thrawn). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted November 27, 2002 Share Posted November 27, 2002 No, no, no, people. I agree that the pieces of EU you've mentioned are generally considered to be "Star Wars fact". However, that does still not make them canon. Canon is ONLY material created by George Lucas, that is the movies. I said CREATED, not approved, so EU is not canon. To show this, I use an example. If there was a conflict between the Thrawn Trilogy and the Star Wars movies (and I'm not saying there is, although the cloning ideas are open for debate) which would be considered "correct"? Obviously the movies. No-one would say "the way cloning is presented in Attack of the Clones isn't correct as it contradicts what we've seen in the Thrawn Trilogy." (which it doesn't, but I'm making it up for argument's sake). This is because the movies are the only truly gospel material, they are CANON. There is no maybe about it. The definition of canon is the movies. But that doesn't mean EU can't be considered "fact". I think the Thrawn Trilogy is an interesting one because it created Coruscant as a planet. This is the only planet in the movies George Lucas didn't create. However, until it appeared at the end of Return of the Jedi, it was still not canon. George had the power to totally change the name of the capital planet, and it wouldn't contradict his existing trilogy. And just because Coruscant is now canon, that doesn't make ysalamiri and Chiss and clones with double U's in their name canon too. I'm quite happy to continue this debate if anyone disagrees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorranSec Posted November 27, 2002 Share Posted November 27, 2002 Windu- you said "corran - the felling's mutual." What were you referring to? (And thank me for not commenting on your spelling) Let us please, please please please move away from the discussion of whether BOMBERS drop BOMBS or whether BOMBING involves ROCKETS or whatever the hell. Fact is, we've already pointed out several reasons why rockets etc. would not fit in with the bomber unit. I don't care what bombers use in real life or even in SW; we're thinking about a game. A damned lot of people come up with ideas (myself included). So what if the majority of discussion is debate about these ideas? We're allowed to do whatever we like. I think. Vostok- No offense, but why are you here? You just kinda came barging in and mentioned something about people considering EU to be canon. What's this got to do with unique units, or bombers, or what? But about the whole EU/canon debate. Frankly, it's quite clear we will be forced to incorporate large amounts of EU units into any GB 2, for plain old gameplay reasons. Debate about what's canon and what's not all you like, but can't you see that a movie-only standpoint will destroy any game? Anyway. About the whole canon/EU thing: Pieces of EU are and should be considered to be just as true as the movies. I'm not just talking about Zahn's books, but about every EU book/comic/whatever ever created. They are legitimate sources and should be considered by everyone as such, purist or not. Such conflicts that Vostok speaks of have never occured, at least in my memory, and I've read nearly every SW book. Give a few examples, and I might be inclined to believe you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 27, 2002 Author Share Posted November 27, 2002 corran - i was refering to our respective idea's about aircraft, you don't like my idea, i don't like your's. As for the 'Bomber's firing rocket's idea' - i now consider this discussion closed. Vostok - unfortunately, EU is canon. Personally, i think many of the book's are rubbish and seem to have been written by 12-year old's, but what can ya do about it? I am not a fan of EU, i have never read a Star Wars book and i don't intend to in the near future. I think that there is no prerequisite to being a 'true star wars fan' - that is some more rubbish by closed-minded immature EU freak's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted November 27, 2002 Share Posted November 27, 2002 No Windu, EU is NOT canon. Where are you getting that from? I think you mean they are taken as "fact". That does not mean canon. Corran, the reason I'm discussing EU is because in one of Windu's few posts where he made a reference to Star Wars instead of the US Air Force he claimed the Databank said that TIE Bombers carry rockets. I told him that is only EU as we never see a TIE Bomber with rockets in the movies. As for contradicting EU, at least two things spring to mind that no-one can deny the contradictions involved: C-3PO's age Boba Fett's youth There are many more, but they mostly only go against the Star Wars themes and mythology and don't actually clash. Dark Jedis, for example. They go against what we see in the movies, but there is nothing to say they don't exist. I, like Windu, am not a fan of EU at all. However, I have read most of the books, so I am a little knowledgable in the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 27, 2002 Author Share Posted November 27, 2002 I'm pretty sure it has it on starwars.com that EU is canon, might be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryllith Posted November 27, 2002 Share Posted November 27, 2002 Originally posted by CorranSec Anyway. About the whole canon/EU thing: Pieces of EU are and should be considered to be just as true as the movies. I'm not just talking about Zahn's books, but about every EU book/comic/whatever ever created. They are legitimate sources and should be considered by everyone as such, purist or not. Such conflicts that Vostok speaks of have never occured, at least in my memory, and I've read nearly every SW book. Give a few examples, and I might be inclined to believe you. Taking this view, what happens when something in the movies contradicts something that happened/said/whatever in one of the books/comics/whatever? If we consider them both canon and both "true" then we end up with a paradox. The reason the movies are canon is be they are the ultimate source for what happens. Lucas has the right to mark anything written by other authors as "untrue", but the other's cannot, that's what makes his work the canon. As for games drawing only from the movies... well I'm willing to accept EU additions when they're needed to make something work. The most immediately thing which comes to mind is all the units created in GB that never appeared in the movies (especially wookies). That being said though, I'd prefer them to use something from the movies and build on it, rather incorporating something completely new (like the Vong discussion...) Kryllith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted November 27, 2002 Share Posted November 27, 2002 Corran, very little outside of SoE and the Thrawn trilogy is considered "fact" as Vostok calls it. But much in those books are considered fact. As for games drawing only from the movies... well I'm willing to accept EU additions when they're needed to make something work. The most immediately thing which comes to mind is all the units created in GB that never appeared in the movies (especially wookies). That being said though, I'd prefer them to use something from the movies and build on it, rather incorporating something completely new (like the Vong discussion...) Agreed. BTW, i like your little title under your name. I cant wait until i have 1000 posts so i can make my own:) unfortunately, EU is canon Unforunately EU isnt canon. And this statement, like the one about starwars.com, contradicts your argument that EU is bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 27, 2002 Share Posted November 27, 2002 Taking this view, what happens when something in the movies contradicts something that happened/said/whatever in one of the books/comics/whatever? If we consider them both canon and both "true" then we end up with a paradox. The reason the movies are canon is be they are the ultimate source for what happens. Lucas has the right to mark anything written by other authors as "untrue", but the other's cannot, that's what makes his work the canon. Yes Lucas can do whatever he want. Lucas only agrees on stuff and gives his stamp of approval on stuff. However, Lucas is not gonna make a sequel to the old Trilogy(99.99% sure) so if you want to know what happens next, you need EU!!! I mean we can't stay forever with the same stuff, we need new stuff! What if in who knows how many years, we get a SWGB3(if SWGB2 is made of canon only stuff except for EU stuff to complete a civ) and ep3 is over and everyone did everything with SWGB2 and it gets kinda lame to replay the same damn old civs over an over again, they have to take some stuff out of EU! Or it will simply be the same civs again and again and again........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted November 28, 2002 Share Posted November 28, 2002 Thanks Kryllith, I'm glad someone understands me. As for NEEDING EU... well I don't know about you but the Star Wars Galaxy as it exists on film is beyond compare. Anything that someone else adds to it just isn't worthy of the Star Wars name. I would be more than happy to play the same civilisations over and over, because of how good the Star Wars mythology is. If the EU didn't exist, would you think we needed it? My prime example for this argument would be Lord of the Rings. It doesn't need any "EU" to be fantastic. A whole range of computer games have just come out for the Two Towers, and I'm pretty sure they don't feature new civs and units from outside Tolkien's work to keep them "interesting". Why is Star Wars different? I firmly believe Star Wars is strong enough to stand on it's own merits. And quite frankly I can't believe other Star Wars fans don't feel the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 28, 2002 Author Share Posted November 28, 2002 Vostok - actually 'Lord of the Rings' is a bad example. This is because the 'Rings' trilogy is just a small part in the entire saga created by Tolkien. In many of his other books, a great deal of fact, myths and history concerning 'middle earth' was revealed, which obviously gives the game designers much more material to draw on. Sith - how does saying that 'unfortunately, EU is canon' mean that i like it???????? I have just been reading over at starwars.com, and technically EU IS canon. However they seem to have different definitions, such as the movies are classed as 'absolute canon'. So really, as to the question of 'is EU canon', it depends greatly on your own point of view... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted November 28, 2002 Share Posted November 28, 2002 EU is "canon" as long as it isn't rediculous (Star Wars vs. Star Treck) or contradicts the movies ( Droids, all those Boba Fett books) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 28, 2002 Share Posted November 28, 2002 I agree with crazy dog, but however I don't think we should consider EU as canon but at longs as it doesn't contradict anything or simply sucks, it's great. Windu- you are one of these persons that want canon only things so when you said that it kinda contradicted everything else you said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.