I'm gonna preface every discussion I have about this game by asking the other person if they think Chronicle is canon, and if they say no and/or invoke that one BlizzCon, the conversation ends there.
-
They’re canon until retconned. But— Devil’s Advocate: They were advertised as definitive lore. Lore Blizzard implied they were going to take seriously and stand by. Yet about a year later they were already experiencing retcons. It raises questions and doubts as to their validity.
The retcons are hardly retcons though. They're more so adding lore atop of the existing Chronicles. Which is bound to happen in a game that is ongoing.
-
-
I think that's more generous than deserved, but my point is: Blizzard set out, saying they were writing a LORE book. Something they hadn't done since the RPG. ~3 years later, they rescind that. It kind of sends the message that they're incapable of writing a definitive lore book.
-
In some ways, I think it would have been better for their credibility had they not written the books, and instead told the information through other means like archaeology. "What's the point of a lore book if it gets retconned once things become story relevant?"
- Pokaż odpowiedzi
Nowa rozmowa -
Wydaje się, że ładowanie zajmuje dużo czasu.
Twitter jest przeciążony lub wystąpił chwilowy problem. Spróbuj ponownie lub sprawdź status Twittera, aby uzyskać więcej informacji.