Editing Board Thread:Series general discussion/@comment-2112031-20170322125406/@comment-18014300-20170403184316

<div class="quote">
Master Sima Yi wrote:
I'd already asked Aymar about this myself personally and discussed it over two months ago and he gave me the same answer. I see no point in 'trying' to reconcile the events when it just ends up being a highly convoluted mess just for the sake of it. It's pretty clear there was no regard for ''Discovery''<nowiki>'s</nowiki> events when the movie script was being written and that's just how it is. I myself much prefer the story of ''Discovery'' to that of the film, but it's not like it's something that didn't cross his mind before I or anyone else asked about this and I highly doubt it's an ill-informed decision on his part.

Also, just to be clear, I don't see adjusting the wiki to accurately represent this change should be a reason to change Aymar's mind.
</div>

I think that even if we shouldn't be trying to convince Aymar to change his mind, it's still better to at least voice our perspective on the matter. Sure, we can have faith that they thought over it, but we can't be absolutely sure really how informed their decision was, and it doesn't hurt to present our analysis.

Aside from this, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth that they adveetised the film as being so true and faithful to lore ''many'' times, yet in the end, they don't even make a show of effort to be true to these words. I think if I said that this point I'm making is about ethical reasons, that would be too extreme, but I do think that if they marketed their product in such a way, they have an obligation, a responsibility to be honest. It shocked me that more than just having forgotten ''Discovery'' or overlooked how they contradict, they outright declared it non-canon, then claimed before the issue was ever brought up that they worked hard to ensure it stayed true to pre-existing lore. I didn't bring this point up in my message to Aymar, but I did mention that I think that it's poor for the integrity of the series. Many franchises have grappled with inconsistencies; ''Star Wars'' dealt with hundreds of them far worse than the ones between ''Discovery'' and the film and always persevered to weave it all together in the end, ultimately creating a very vibrant world of diverse concepts (until Disney came along and finally axed everything). 

The issue at hand is that aside from the fact I think it's wrong of Ubisoft to been so blatantly dishonest in advertising their film as faithful to pre-existing lore (heck, it even contradicts ''Unity'' and ''The Essential Guide'' on the structure of the Templars), the integrity of this series, as abstract of a concept as that is, matters. The point that we have here is that not only does integrity matters, but declaring ''Discovery'' non-canon wasn't necessary in the first place.

And here I must point out that if I remember correctly, Master Sima Yi, you weren't exactly present in our discussions about the conflict between ''Discovery'' and the film and had spoken with Aymar before you got a chance to look over our analyses on the matter, so forgive me if I say that I'm also unsure if you had the most informed view of this when you were speaking with him. Thus far, it seems to me that ''Discovery'' was declared non-canon in fear of the "convoluted mess" that would result from "trying" to reconcile it with the film, which, if this really was Ubisoft's perspective as well, seems to me preemptive even if they thought and talked over it. Preemptive because when we ourselves checked over how to reconcile the two, it was not hard at all, nor has it created a mess of a plot.