Board Thread:Wiki discussion/@comment-18014300-20200504004330/@comment-4801149-20200509000041: Difference between revisions
imported>RShepard227 No edit summary |
imported>RShepard227 No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Cris's closing question summarizes my own thoughts on the matter: How well have the true arbiters of canon thought this through? Have they considered this as carefully as we have, or are they simply repeating what they've read here on the wiki as "canon," mistakenly-written or otherwise, which leaves us simply self-fulfilling our own interpretations of the lore? Sol intimated that the latter has already happened in his opening post. If Ubisoft wants to be lazy and "outsource" the lore-keeping to this wiki, that's on them, but at the same time, we shouldn't be giving them that option. If it's at all possible, the writers are welcome to and should weigh in on this topic. Though I understand the issues with actually getting them to come down and talk to us. Seems like they're able to have it their way on all fronts—use our speculation to fill in their own blanks, provide no guidance in return, and then point fingers at us if other | Cris's closing question summarizes my own thoughts on the matter: How well have the true arbiters of canon thought this through? Have they considered this as carefully as we have, or are they simply repeating what they've read here on the wiki as "canon," mistakenly-written or otherwise, which leaves us simply self-fulfilling our own interpretations of the lore? Sol intimated that the latter has already happened in his opening post. If Ubisoft wants to be lazy and "outsource" the lore-keeping to this wiki, that's on them, but at the same time, we shouldn't be giving them that option. If it's at all possible, the writers are welcome to and should weigh in on this topic. Though I understand the issues with actually getting them to come down and talk to us. Seems like they're able to have it their way on all fronts—use our speculation to fill in their own blanks, provide no guidance in return, and then point fingers at us if other fan groups have problems with it. | ||
Revision as of 02:06, 9 May 2020
Cris's closing question summarizes my own thoughts on the matter: How well have the true arbiters of canon thought this through? Have they considered this as carefully as we have, or are they simply repeating what they've read here on the wiki as "canon," mistakenly-written or otherwise, which leaves us simply self-fulfilling our own interpretations of the lore? Sol intimated that the latter has already happened in his opening post. If Ubisoft wants to be lazy and "outsource" the lore-keeping to this wiki, that's on them, but at the same time, we shouldn't be giving them that option. If it's at all possible, the writers are welcome to and should weigh in on this topic. Though I understand the issues with actually getting them to come down and talk to us. Seems like they're able to have it their way on all fronts—use our speculation to fill in their own blanks, provide no guidance in return, and then point fingers at us if other fan groups have problems with it.