User:SOTO/Forum Archive/Inclusion debates/@comment-4028641-20170222073756/@comment-1789834-20170223032825: Difference between revisions
(Bot: Automated import of articles) |
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-'''User:(SOTO/Forum Archive)/(.*?)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)/\@comment-([\d\.]+)-(\d+)'''\n([\s\S]*)\[\[Category:SOTO archive posts\]\] +\7\2/\4-\3/\6-\5)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
In which case, that further backs up my "Edit". The point in my edit was that you have Faction Paradox (and before I start, I'm not a fan of FP nor do I disapprove of its inclusion, so there's no peddling or bias of anything on my part). FP put a lot of work into its range of books and audios that were meant for the DWU, despite them having no true licence to use certain terminologies. There's a complete oeuvre of work that spans years and the authors actually intertwine their own stories with those with licences. | In which case, that further backs up my "Edit". The point in my edit was that you have Faction Paradox (and before I start, I'm not a fan of FP nor do I disapprove of its inclusion, so there's no peddling or bias of anything on my part). FP put a lot of work into its range of books and audios that were meant for the DWU, despite them having no true licence to use certain terminologies. There's a complete oeuvre of work that spans years and the authors actually intertwine their own stories with those with licences. | ||
| Line 5: | Line 4: | ||
Just to make sure, you and I agree right? I'm all ''against'' making this a valid form of narrative. Same goes with anything from the Lego Dimensions range. There are too many crossovers and the characters are dealt with too flippantly. It's more bragging that "we have the Doctor/Daleks" rather than "we're making a Doctor Who game/story". | Just to make sure, you and I agree right? I'm all ''against'' making this a valid form of narrative. Same goes with anything from the Lego Dimensions range. There are too many crossovers and the characters are dealt with too flippantly. It's more bragging that "we have the Doctor/Daleks" rather than "we're making a Doctor Who game/story". | ||
<noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts]]</noinclude> | <noinclude>[[Category:SOTO archive posts|Inclusion debates/20170222073756-4028641/20170223032825-1789834]]</noinclude> | ||
Latest revision as of 14:43, 27 April 2023
In which case, that further backs up my "Edit". The point in my edit was that you have Faction Paradox (and before I start, I'm not a fan of FP nor do I disapprove of its inclusion, so there's no peddling or bias of anything on my part). FP put a lot of work into its range of books and audios that were meant for the DWU, despite them having no true licence to use certain terminologies. There's a complete oeuvre of work that spans years and the authors actually intertwine their own stories with those with licences.
In this case, we have a movie who uses the Daleks as a light-hearted approach on a "British villain". I get your point but you've kind of said it yourself. If they wanted this movie to take place in the DWU, they'd have least hired Briggs to do a few more lines. The Daleks were evidently not supposed to be taken seriously.
Just to make sure, you and I agree right? I'm all against making this a valid form of narrative. Same goes with anything from the Lego Dimensions range. There are too many crossovers and the characters are dealt with too flippantly. It's more bragging that "we have the Doctor/Daleks" rather than "we're making a Doctor Who game/story".
