Another thread about sexism in video games.

[Dwarvenhobble]

Jesus, you'll really make me have to quote go back through your garbage to quote you?
Fine.

OK lets play then:

What I said

That features a character who totally co-incidentally looks like the main game director.
Said character has sex with the muscular woman.
Said muscular woman character beats the shit out of the previous games male lead
Said game directors previous game featured a strong black woman who beats the crap out of the two male leads at once.
May or may not have been a fetish thing inserted right there for people to play through in a game like how Tarantino has a foot fetish which turns up often in his films.

What you said

He'll remember to pull out the "Druckman mo-capped sex with muscle-woman fetish" thing again despite being corrected for something like the third or fourth time, that's guaranteed.

So lets play that game you hate and break down the points.

Druckman mo-capped sex - Nope I didn't say he did the mo cap
Druckman has a muscle woman fetish - yes I did say that and stand by the claim.

If you're going to accuse me of saying a specific thing to try and pull some kind of own get it fucking right what I said instead of having to make up bullshit to try and find some-one to take out whatever it is causing you to be like this out on because when you bother you actually can come up with some decent arguments but it seem recently you've just been like an irritated animal lashing out in threads and it's not nice to watch happen to you.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Awhile back I came to the conclusion that he honestly has no idea what he's written out in previous posts. Each post he makes is a self-contained individual one-off argument made to "counter" what is currently being said; there's no actual attempt at coherence or continuity between posts because they're based on his feelings at the time of posting instead of evidence or a consistent philosophy. It's also why these threads inevitably become 40 total pages of goalpost moving with the exact same debunked arguments getting repeated every 5 pages or so.

Says the person who pops up every few threads makes some insane claim about what I've said gets called out and proved wrong then repeats it hoping some-one will believe his bullshit.

See you in another 3-4 threads time when you'll just do the same.

Remember when you decided to just go back to whatever shadowy corner you keep popping up from and stay there because you claimed I annoyed you so much? What happened to that? You just couldn't leave alone could you?

You've been shown again and again to have no argument and I'm starting to doubt you have the capacity to form cogent arguments anymore and not just resort to your usual strawman and ad hominem that get disproven then you do it all over again cause you get pissy over something I said.

You're not arguing against what I've said here. You're not raising points for discussion you're just here to sling mud because that seemingly is all you can do anymore.

 

[Hawki]

But that is how it's applied. The past and past characters must die one way or another

Not really.

I know works are open to interpretation, but bear in mind that Kylo Ren is the one who says it. And the idea of letting the past die is one that applies to him, in that by this point in time, he's still in the shadow of Vader (wearing a Vader-esque mask), and torn up over killing his father. This fits in with the wider theme of Luke and failure. It's telling that at the end, Luke is the one who overcomes Ren, in part by coming to terms with his past/failure, while Kylo is still bound in hate by Luke, and loses because of it. It's not that Kylo Ren fails to discard the past completely (see when he smashes his helmet), but he doesn't go the full way. It also fits in with Rey's journey, because she's so certain that she can redeem Kylo Ren like Luke redeemed Vader. Except there, she fails as well, but does come to terms with her past, finally accepting that her parents were nobodies.

Now Rise of Skywalker does its best to undermine all of that, but to boil that line down to the idea of "past characters have to die?" Um...well, like I said, works can be interpreted differently, but I can't share that interpretation. It comes off as surface-reading.

Ah but that's part of it The Doctor's past and origins have been been iffy sometimes and conflicting tales have been given:
William Hartnell's Doctor was just an eccentric from the future who made the Tardis initially
Tom Baker's incarnation saying he graduated Time Lord academy with passing grades but then went became a rogue Time Lord after
The TV movie version of The Doctor being said to be half human
David Tennant's Doctor saying he ran before finishing Time Lord academy training shortly after staring into the time vortex as part of some academy process thing.

You're not really helping your case by pointing out that the Doctor's past has constantly been rewritten well prior to the Timeless Child.

However:

 

[Hawki]

The Doctor not even being a Time Lord and having infinite regenerations? That was Chibnall and over-wrote all the past about The Doctor being some actual rogue Time Lord pretty much. Hell the idea of The Doctor being basically Time Lord police is pretty laughable, I mean what did he spend all that time in the Time Lord special ops then they just wiped him and he had to go through the academy again because um........you know Chibnall never explain why they chose to wipe The Doctors memories I don't think.

So, I think we've both ended up disliking the Timeless Child, but for different reasons.

To address your point, I don't know where you're getting the claim that the Doctor has infinite regenerations. He had a reset from Eleven to Twelve, and it's implied that the pre-Hartnell Doctors got a reset as well, so Hartnell is the start of a new regeneration cycle.

As for the Doctor, so, I checked the wiki, apparently, the Doctor is retired from Division (see the Brendan symbolism), and is regressed into a child's body, so the Timeless Child thing isn't actually retconning much. As for why they wiped the Doctor's memories...um, the Doctor is an abducted child who was experimented on to give Time Lords regeneration, and took part in black ops, for a species that presents itself as benevolent, whereas in reality, is governed by assholes. There's every reason to wipe the Doctor's memories. In terms of continuity, it's not perfect, but you can segway the Doctor as the Timeless Child into his First Doctor childhood without much issue.

However, to make myself clear, I still detest the Timeless Child, or at least, the Doctor being the Timeless Child. I think the TC being its own character would be brilliant on its own, because the idea of the Time Lords being morally grey has been explored many times, and this would add to the motif of 'shiny exterior, rotten interior.' However, here are my problems with it:

-It takes away from the First Doctor's agency. One ran away from Galifrey in a TARDIS and became something of a maverick. How's and why's have varied over time, but see One's monologue about good and evil in the Christmas special to Bill for instance. However, if the Doctor has already been away from Galifrey countless times with Division, even with the memory reset, it takes away from this agency and 'specialness.' "Oh, the Doctor is going rogue? What else is new?"

-It's an extreme leap of faith that the Timeless Child is the Doctor, and ergo the source of their regeneration powers, and no-one, in the show's entire in-universe or out-universe history, mentioned this until the Master discovered it? No-one? At all?

-I don't entirely agree, but a point that's been raised with NuWho is that it's really leant on the mythology of the Doctor. In OldWho, the Doctor was just some guy bumbling around who ended up in the right place at the right time (or wrong, depending on your POV), whereas in NuWho, there's a sense of mythology built around him. I don't think that's a problem per se, but making the Doctor the Timeless Child, and therefore pretty much the progenitor of the entire Time Lord race? I.e., Space Jesus? No. Just no. It's a subjective line, I admit, but for me, it crossed into pure tripe. And there's a further distinction in that the NuWho mythology was baesd around what the Doctor did (in part due to the Time War), whereas the Timeless Child is based on what the Doctor IS. It's 'doing' vs. 'being,' and a character doing miraculous things will generally be more interesting than one who's special because they were born that way.

-It can't even make the most of the premise. If the TC was a real bastard in Division, then you'd have a contrast of sorts between pre-Hartnell Doctors, and post-Hartnell Doctors. However, we've seen Ruth/Fugitive Doctor and...she's really no different. At all. She even calls herself the Doctor, despite the name being a title that the Doctor chose. It undermines the weight of his name/title, in that pre-TC, we understood the Doctor chose the name because it best suited his temprament. "The man who makes people better," as the Master pointed out. That, and it fits his 'violence at last resort' approach. Here, however, we have a black ops Doctor who still calls herself the Doctor. I...what?

 

[Hawki]

-There's an element of cynicism to the entire thing. It gives the writers free reign to use as many pre-Hartnell incarnations as they want. Now, you can point to Hurt's War Doctor, but a) that was driven because of Eccelston's refusal to return to the show, and b) it actually puts in the time and effort to explain why the War Doctor is different enough from the other incarnations, and even gives him a redemption arc of sorts. Ruth, however, is just thrown in there. And in what I might actually call a case of being 'woke,' it's telling that the Timeless Child is a girl, and Ruth is a woman, and...I dunno, it feels like they're saying "see! The Doctor was always a girl from the start! How dare you complain about a gender flip when the gender flips happened a long time ago!" Well nice try Chibnall, but you're not fooling anyone.

-Even despite all that, I might have been more willing to forgive it if it was handled well in the present, but no, it isn't. The TC revelations mainly come from the end of series 12, which is the Master monologuing. Yes, we get visual flashbacks, but there's so many more interesting ways to do it. Consider the War Doctor again - Eleven didn't just monologue to Clara about what he did in the Time War, it SHOWED us. We see the War Doctor go from this figure of dread in Night of the Doctor, to the Day of the Doctor special where he's redeemed in-universe and out-universe. And recently, in Flux, when Thirteen meets Techteun, her 'mother,' it can't even get that right, because she's killed off in minutes, and we're back to the Ravagers/Flux nonsense.

So, yeah. Not a fan.

Ah but going forward the idea was for the company and continuity to pretend to a greater or lesser extent that past didn't exist anymore.

First, retcons/reboots are common, especially in movies and games, and absurdedly common in comics. This isn't new, and while you didn't say so directly, there's nothing "woke" about this.

But as to those specific examples:

John Connor isn't the saviour of Humanity anymore

Are you referring to Dark Fate?

John being popped off like that doesn't bother me, though I can understand why it would for some. If Dark Fate was the only piece of T2 media in existence, I might be more upset, but even then, John's death isn't "let the past die." Dark Fate presents it as a tragedy, as Sarah explains "John was killed by a Terminator from a future that no longer existed." Furthermore, his death hangs over the entire film, from Sarah's grief, to Carl's "for John," to the idea that if there's always going to be an AI that goes rogue, there'll always be someone to rise up against it. John's death is thematically different from anything in Last Jedi.

Also, again, this isn't the first time it happened. Sarah Connor Chronicles hinted at something similar in its finale (though to much less effect - I despise the show, but that's another matter), and other Terminator media has done similar things, to "Jane Connor" in one of the comics, to Genisys. There's multiple Terminator timelines, so what happens in Dark Fate doesn't affect others. It doesn't change the franchise because by its nature, the franchise allows for multiple timelines and outcomes.

Luke didn't restore any kind of balance to the force nor was some great hero as the Extended Universe novels were made non cannon

The old EU was non-canon well before Last Jedi. I understand why Disney did it. I think they could have been more careful with it (e.g. there's no reason to retcon pre-Ep. 1 stuff IMO), but if Disney was going to make sequel films, there's no way they could expect moviegoers to brush up on decades worth of EU material.

As for Luke not restoring balance to the Force (whatever that's even supposed to mean now), I understand the complaint, but it's a complaint that I put at the feet of Rise of Skywalker, not Last Jedi. Last Jedi actually explored the ideas of legacy, failure, and growth, Rise of Skywalker just brings Palpy back, and can't even be bothered to explain how.

Captain America wasn't the one who punched Hitler
The Emperor of Mankind didn't make the Primarchs he just claimed credit for some-one else's work

I'm sure there is more I could bring up.

Not sure about those two, those are new to me.

But yes, lore shifts and changes, and old lore can be recontextualized, for better or worse. This isn't a new practice in fiction, and there's nothing inherently "woke" about it. 40K for instance has always been recontextualized - take the necrons and tyranids for example. Their incarnations now are very different from how they started out.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

So, I think we've both ended up disliking the Timeless Child, but for different reasons.

To address your point, I don't know where you're getting the claim that the Doctor has infinite regenerations. He had a reset from Eleven to Twelve, and it's implied that the pre-Hartnell Doctors got a reset as well, so Hartnell is the start of a new regeneration cycle.

The Timeless child has infinite regenerations as it's said the Doctor has died many many times it was just when Timelords adapted regeneration and took that ability for themselves too they limited it to 12. Which yeh also undermines the fact it was mentioned the Doctor (and The Master by that implication) where given a whole new set of regenerations during the time war.

Unless something happened in the Flux series of Doctor Who to say the Doctor was given a whole new set of regenerations just from the Timeless Child the Doctor was shown / implied to have infinite regenerations unlike Timelords

As for the Doctor, so, I checked the wiki, apparently, the Doctor is retired from Division (see the Brendan symbolism), and is regressed into a child's body, so the Timeless Child thing isn't actually retconning much. As for why they wiped the Doctor's memories...um, the Doctor is an abducted child who was experimented on to give Time Lords regeneration, and took part in black ops, for a species that presents itself as benevolent, whereas in reality, is governed by assholes. There's every reason to wipe the Doctor's memories. In terms of continuity, it's not perfect, but you can segway the Doctor as the Timeless Child into his First Doctor childhood without much issue.

I does but also really doesn't explain how or why he ran away as such like surely literally one of the most important beings the Timelord have ever met responsible for a major part of their civilisation thanks to regenerations wouldn't just be allowed to run off and not actually be monitored very closely. Also the Doctor had parents so did they just dump him with some random couple, sure they weren't explicitly shown in the show but the Doctor did once go back and ended up basically visiting his younger self on a version of Galifrey to become the monster under his own bed as a child. Like it works far better as the Doctor as his rogue Time Lord with the Time Lord council just sort of going "Bah whatever let him do his thing it's not like we need him really, let his jump round the universe and timeline doing stuff as long as he doesn't do anything major it's fine". Also it would be iffy as to why the Matrix works for The Doctor as it's attune to Timelord DNA. plus any other Timelord specific stuff T-Davies decided to give to the Doctor like Radiation absorption and ability to cure cyanide poisoning before it's lethal to him.

However, to make myself clear, I still detest the Timeless Child, or at least, the Doctor being the Timeless Child. I think the TC being its own character would be brilliant on its own, because the idea of the Time Lords being morally grey has been explored many times, and this would add to the motif of 'shiny exterior, rotten interior.' However, here are my problems with it:

-It takes away from the First Doctor's agency. One ran away from Galifrey in a TARDIS and became something of a maverick. How's and why's have varied over time, but see One's monologue about good and evil in the Christmas special to Bill for instance. However, if the Doctor has already been away from Galifrey countless times with Division, even with the memory reset, it takes away from this agency and 'specialness.' "Oh, the Doctor is going rogue? What else is new?"

-It's an extreme leap of faith that the Timeless Child is the Doctor, and ergo the source of their regeneration powers, and no-one, in the show's entire in-universe or out-universe history, mentioned this until the Master discovered it? No-one? At all?

I kind of hope T-Davies comes in and retcons that as all some trick by The Master.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

-I don't entirely agree, but a point that's been raised with NuWho is that it's really leant on the mythology of the Doctor. In OldWho, the Doctor was just some guy bumbling around who ended up in the right place at the right time (or wrong, depending on your POV), whereas in NuWho, there's a sense of mythology built around him. I don't think that's a problem per se, but making the Doctor the Timeless Child, and therefore pretty much the progenitor of the entire Time Lord race? I.e., Space Jesus? No. Just no. It's a subjective line, I admit, but for me, it crossed into pure tripe. And there's a further distinction in that the NuWho mythology was baesd around what the Doctor did (in part due to the Time War), whereas the Timeless Child is based on what the Doctor IS. It's 'doing' vs. 'being,' and a character doing miraculous things will generally be more interesting than one who's special because they were born that way.

-It can't even make the most of the premise. If the TC was a real bastard in Division, then you'd have a contrast of sorts between pre-Hartnell Doctors, and post-Hartnell Doctors. However, we've seen Ruth/Fugitive Doctor and...she's really no different. At all. She even calls herself the Doctor, despite the name being a title that the Doctor chose. It undermines the weight of his name/title, in that pre-TC, we understood the Doctor chose the name because it best suited his temprament. "The man who makes people better," as the Master pointed out. That, and it fits his 'violence at last resort' approach. Here, however, we have a black ops Doctor who still calls herself the Doctor. I...what?

See I think the mythology makes sense in so much as he's crossed paths with species a lot some of them wit their own primitive or advanced time travel technology so him being this sort of mythical character who may appear in the hour of need seems kind of fitting given how many adventures he's had and how many people have met him.

As for The Doctor being a real bastard I'm somewhat shocked Chibnall didn't have Ruth / fugitive doctor going by "The Valeyard".

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

-There's an element of cynicism to the entire thing. It gives the writers free reign to use as many pre-Hartnell incarnations as they want. Now, you can point to Hurt's War Doctor, but a) that was driven because of Eccelston's refusal to return to the show, and b) it actually puts in the time and effort to explain why the War Doctor is different enough from the other incarnations, and even gives him a redemption arc of sorts. Ruth, however, is just thrown in there. And in what I might actually call a case of being 'woke,' it's telling that the Timeless Child is a girl, and Ruth is a woman, and...I dunno, it feels like they're saying "see! The Doctor was always a girl from the start! How dare you complain about a gender flip when the gender flips happened a long time ago!" Well nice try Chibnall, but you're not fooling anyone.

Yeh that's kind of what I'm thinking to. The past was The Doctor always being a man now he was always a girl until suddenly he wasn't that one regeneration in the past then many others going forward

-Even despite all that, I might have been more willing to forgive it if it was handled well in the present, but no, it isn't. The TC revelations mainly come from the end of series 12, which is the Master monologuing. Yes, we get visual flashbacks, but there's so many more interesting ways to do it. Consider the War Doctor again - Eleven didn't just monologue to Clara about what he did in the Time War, it SHOWED us. We see the War Doctor go from this figure of dread in Night of the Doctor, to the Day of the Doctor special where he's redeemed in-universe and out-universe. And recently, in Flux, when Thirteen meets Techteun, her 'mother,' it can't even get that right, because she's killed off in minutes, and we're back to the Ravagers/Flux nonsense.

So, yeah. Not a fan.

Yeh I heard abou the Flux stuff, I checked out and remain out until T-Davies takes charge again and even then I'm only coming back in once I hear he's conclusively wipe the TC stain clean and off the series entirely.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

-First, retcons/reboots are common, especially in movies and games, and absurdedly common in comics. This isn't new, and while you didn't say so directly, there's nothing "woke" about this.

But as to those specific examples:

True but a lot of the time it's a case of "Well those other version still exist and existed and weren't a lie". Comic reboot wise / retcon wise it's often generally done to keep the stuff the audience likes and remove stuff they hate or stuff the writers do and don't want which won't piss off the audience too much

Are you referring to Dark Fate?

John being popped off like that doesn't bother me, though I can understand why it would for some. If Dark Fate was the only piece of T2 media in existence, I might be more upset, but even then, John's death isn't "let the past die." Dark Fate presents it as a tragedy, as Sarah explains "John was killed by a Terminator from a future that no longer existed." Furthermore, his death hangs over the entire film, from Sarah's grief, to Carl's "for John," to the idea that if there's always going to be an AI that goes rogue, there'll always be someone to rise up against it. John's death is thematically different from anything in Last Jedi.

Also, again, this isn't the first time it happened. Sarah Connor Chronicles hinted at something similar in its finale (though to much less effect - I despise the show, but that's another matter), and other Terminator media has done similar things, to "Jane Connor" in one of the comics, to Genisys. There's multiple Terminator timelines, so what happens in Dark Fate doesn't affect others. It doesn't change the franchise because by its nature, the franchise allows for multiple timelines and outcomes.

The issue I have with Dark Fate is The Sarah Connor Chronicles showed a far better way they could have done "Oh John Connor is no longer the resistance leader" storyline.

Also one of I think it's a deleted scene or an ending extra scene in T2 show Sarah grown up looking after grankids.

Also while there's multiple timelines at this point each time they seem to be trying to create a new timeline to stick with going forward then bailing on it. Like I actually enjoyed Genisys and the Jane Connor thing and was like "Oh they're really trying to switch out John Connor because he's a male hero character. Though I guess I should be Thankful they didn't just do what the UK version of Being Human did with it's post apocalypse hero chaacter who was meant to save humanity

Spoiler: Being Human UK spoiler

She didn't, the vampire prophecy was that Humanity was meant to see her as a saviour against the vampires an by the time they finally got all the parts of the prophecy together and read it to find out how she was meant to save them humanity would be doomed already because she was just a regular human with no powers or destiny in reality

The old EU was non-canon well before Last Jedi. I understand why Disney did it. I think they could have been more careful with it (e.g. there's no reason to retcon pre-Ep. 1 stuff IMO), but if Disney was going to make sequel films, there's no way they could expect moviegoers to brush up on decades worth of EU material.

As for Luke not restoring balance to the Force (whatever that's even supposed to mean now), I understand the complaint, but it's a complaint that I put at the feet of Rise of Skywalker, not Last Jedi. Last Jedi actually explored the ideas of legacy, failure, and growth, Rise of Skywalker just brings Palpy back, and can't even be bothered to explain how.

True on that, it's funny really because I swear some executive was like "Oh it's so hard continuing Star Wars and figuring out a future direction because there's nothing written for it and we're having to create this new future. It's then like everyone pointing to the EU and going, just make that, make that cannon again and do film versions of that. Which it may or may not end up happening depending on if Disney pulls the whole Star Wars Multiverse thing or not

Not sure about those two, those are new to me.

But yes, lore shifts and changes, and old lore can be recontextualized, for better or worse. This isn't a new practice in fiction, and there's nothing inherently "woke" about it. 40K for instance has always been recontextualized - take the necrons and tyranids for example. Their incarnations now are very different from how they started out.

It has been but lets say it's more deliberate and comes off more as political statements as to the retcon.

Captain America didn't punch Hitler but history remembers it that way because racism
The Emperor didn't create the Primarchs it was his wife who did, oh yeh he has a wife now and she's an immortal being just like he is supposed to be and she's responsible for most of the imperium tech and science that was credited as being created by the emperor now.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

True on that, it's funny really because I swear some executive was like "Oh it's so hard continuing Star Wars and figuring out a future direction because there's nothing written for it and we're having to create this new future. It's then like everyone pointing to the EU and going, just make that, make that cannon again and do film versions of that. Which it may or may not end up happening depending on if Disney pulls the whole Star Wars Multiverse thing or not

Nothing would've made Star Wars nerds madder than sticking to the old EU continuity. I know, because I was paying attention to the fandom when the EU was being written

It has been but lets say it's more deliberate and comes off more as political statements as to the retcon.

The Emperor didn't create the Primarchs it was his wife who did, oh yeh he has a wife now and she's an immortal being just like he is supposed to be and she's responsible for most of the imperium tech and science that was credited as being created by the emperor now.

Honestly, one of the better lore retcons 40k has ever had, assuming it's accurate

Also, the Captain America thing has precedent: we were racist enough at the time to prevent Charles De Gaulle from retaking Paris with African troops because Black people would've been cool on camera

 

[Hawki]

The Timeless child has infinite regenerations as it's said the Doctor has died many many times it was just when Timelords adapted regeneration and took that ability for themselves too they limited it to 12. Which yeh also undermines the fact it was mentioned the Doctor (and The Master by that implication) where given a whole new set of regenerations during the time war.

The Timeless Child had infinite regenerations, the Doctor doesn't. He was given a new regeneration cycle, allowing Eleven to regenerate into Twelve.

Unless something happened in the Flux series of Doctor Who to say the Doctor was given a whole new set of regenerations just from the Timeless Child the Doctor was shown / implied to have infinite regenerations unlike Timelords

Not Flux, in Time of the Doctor.

I kind of hope T-Davies comes in and retcons that as all some trick by The Master.

It won't happen. It's one thing for the Master to lie, it's another for Tecteun to. When she confronts Thirteen, she has little reason to lie.

I don't want TC retconned because we're then in the business of wasting time going back and forth on plot revelations. That said, I'd rather it just be ignored. Chibnall hasn't done anything interesting with it, so why should Davies?

The Emperor didn't create the Primarchs it was his wife who did, oh yeh he has a wife now and she's an immortal being just like he is supposed to be and she's responsible for most of the imperium tech and science that was credited as being created by the emperor now.

Okay, I need a source on that, because I looked on his wiki page, and couldn't find any mention of a wife.

Nothing would've made Star Wars nerds madder than sticking to the old EU continuity. I know, because I was paying attention to the fandom when the EU was being written

That's news to me, because I haven't seen a single Star Wars fan celebrate the new canon over the old EU.

Frankly, I can't blame them. I've never been that interested in the Star Wars EU, and certainly not post-Return stuff, but what we got was a sub-par sequel trilogy, so how is Disney's stuff better?

Again, I can understand why they did the retcon, but the lacklustre material is another story.

Honestly, one of the better lore retcons 40k has ever had, assuming it's accurate

Why? How?

Also, the Captain America thing has precedent: we were racist enough at the time to prevent Charles De Gaulle from retaking Paris with African troops because Black people would've been cool on camera

What does that have to do with Cap punching Hitler?

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

That's news to me, because I haven't seen a single Star Wars fan celebrate the new canon over the old EU.

Frankly, I can't blame them. I've never been that interested in the Star Wars EU, and certainly not post-Return stuff, but what we got was a sub-par sequel trilogy, so how is Disney's stuff better?

Again, I can understand why they did the retcon, but the lacklustre material is another story.

If they did a 100% accurate Thrawn trilogy with darkside Luke, clone Luuke, clone Palpatine, force invulnerable tree lizards, and Grand Admiral "I know your race likes opera so I know what battle tactics you will use" Thrawn?

There's not enough nostalgia in the world

Why? How?

Considering I'm 99% certain that Dwarven is missing huge amounts of context? Anything to shake off the setting stagnation. Compared to "Grey Knights did a blood ritual to Khorme by using Sisters of Battle as paint", it's at least a Scalzi

What does that have to do with Cap punching Hitler?

Why *else* would allied propaganda center blond haired, blue-eyed Steve Rogers doing something he plainly didn't do?

 

[Avnger]

Okay, I need a source on that, because I looked on his wiki page, and couldn't find any mention of a wife.

Dwarven is, like usual, speaking with his unique combination of hyperbole, ignorance, misunderstanding, and bigotry.

Spoiler: Seige of Terra spoilers

Erda - Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum

wh40k.lexicanum.com

She was introduced as an attempt to provide more lore about the Emperor and birth of the primarchs by proxy. Since the big man was obviously too busy to sit and lore dump in the middle of the stories, Erda was conveniently available to do so. My personal take is that she allowed the introduction of a unique perspective on events we only had passing knowledge of previously, but there were probably other (perhaps even better) ways to do that. She came kind of out of nowhere, but this is 40k; she's far from the most egregious example of weird lore insertions.

 

[Chimpzy]

Something relevant to this thread. And now lemme go drag in my divan, cuz I think I'll need to watch while sitting fancy.

 

[BrawlMan]

Something relevant to this thread. And now lemme go drag in my divan, cuz I think I'll need to watch while sitting fancy.

When did Girard start working for G4/X-Play?

 

[Chimpzy]

When did Girard start working for G4/X-Play?

Don't really know, I only occasionally watch their stuff. But iirc, I think he first started showing up as host around late summer last year.

 

[BrawlMan]

Don't really know, I only occasionally watch their stuff. But iirc, I think he first started showing up as host around late summer last year.

Good on him! I know he's happy!

 

[Hawki]

If they did a 100% accurate Thrawn trilogy with darkside Luke, clone Luuke, clone Palpatine, force invulnerable tree lizards, and Grand Admiral "I know your race likes opera so I know what battle tactics you will use" Thrawn?

There's not enough nostalgia in the world

I wouldn't be surprised if there was.

Thrawn, as far as I understand, was insanely popular. So popular that he was brought back for the new canon regardless, and as far as I can tell, most people welcomed that.

Also, darkside Luke, clone Luuke, and clone Palpatine...well, we kind of got clone Palpatine regardless, so I'm not seeing too much of a difference.

Can't comment on the yuzhan-vong - I'm aware of their reputation, but that's it.

But that said, is it better, or worse, than what the sequel trilogy produced? Because reading all that, it certainly seems more creative at least.

Why *else* would allied propaganda center blond haired, blue-eyed Steve Rogers doing something he plainly didn't do?

Same reason anyone uses propaganda? Not sure how it's related to African-American soldiers, unless he's stealing their thunder.

I actually checked Hitler's Marvel page (Earth-616, don't have the time to check all the rest), and the only 'thunder' I can see Cap stealing from is Jim Hammond, if at all, since he's the one that killed the guy apparently.

(Also, your regular reminder that the Marvel world is insane, and isn't ours, because holy shit...)

Dwarven is, like usual, speaking with his unique combination of hyperbole, ignorance, misunderstanding, and bigotry.

Spoiler: Seige of Terra spoilers

Erda - Warhammer 40k - Lexicanum

wh40k.lexicanum.com

She was introduced as an attempt to provide more lore about the Emperor and birth of the primarchs by proxy. Since the big man was obviously too busy to sit and lore dump in the middle of the stories, Erda was conveniently available to do so. My personal take is that she allowed the introduction of a unique perspective on events we only had passing knowledge of previously, but there were probably other (perhaps even better) ways to do that. She came kind of out of nowhere, but this is 40k; she's far from the most egregious example of weird lore insertions.

Reads post...

Okay, the warp storm thing is stupid IMO. It's been stated time and time again that Chaos was responsible for scattering the Primarchs, but now it's her?

That said, you're right, there's plenty of weird lore insertions, but if Erda's getting credit for anything, it seems to be taking the thunder from Chaos, rather than the Emperor, here.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

I wouldn't be surprised if there was.

Thrawn, as far as I understand, was insanely popular. So popular that he was brought back for the new canon regardless, and as far as I can tell, most people welcomed that.

Also, darkside Luke, clone Luuke, and clone Palpatine...well, we kind of got clone Palpatine regardless, so I'm not seeing too much of a difference.

Can't comment on the yuzhan-vong - I'm aware of their reputation, but that's it.

No, no Vong yet, that's decades later. Around the same time they killed Chewbacca with a moon and turned Han Solo into an incurable alcoholic (also, like, six light-side/dark-side Luke flip flops, a half dozen kids trivializing grown adults, and a dozen planet/star destroying super weapons later)

And yeah, we eventually got a clone Palpatine. And it was stupid as shit and mocked relentlessly

Everything I mentioned was a single trilogy. The Thrawn they eventually brought into Rebels jettisoned or toned down most of his bullshit to tolerable levels. No anti-Force bubble tree lizards, no entire race of assassins, no predicting military tactics via Broadway plays

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

Since the thread pretty much started with this as a focal point -

Horizon Forbidden West leak confirms Aloy is 'more rugged and masculine'

A leak of the early build of Guerrilla Games' PlayStation exclusive Horizon Forbidden West reveals a more 'rugged and masculine' Aloy.

poptopic.com.au

Game leak shortly before launch: *check*

Muscly female lead: *check*

Fanbase divided and getting pissy about it: *check*

Gee this sounds familiar.