Forum:We need a policy on videogames: Difference between revisions

Forum:We need a policy on videogames (edit)

Revision as of 11:28, 13 June 2010

1,127 bytes added , 13 June 2010

no edit summary

Falcotron

885

edits

@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 ::::::I'm going to repeat what I said above. Treat the ''City of the Daleks'' as a secondary source as we do the novelisations. --[[User:Tangerineduel|Tangerineduel]] 13:58, June 11, 2010 (UTC)
 :::::::Yes like the novels, books, comics, annuals etc. And just to say Attack of the Graske is an interactive episode, not a video like City of the Daleks. Big difference. --[[User:Vitas|Vitas]] 08:47, June 13, 2010 (UTC)
+::::::::No, the novels, etc. are ''primary'' sources for this wiki. It's only ''novelisations'' that are secondary sources. And, unlike, say, Star Wars, there are no "levels of canon" within the primary sources; there's just primary and secondary. So, if something in an EDA contradicts something on TV, you have to weasel around it and say there are conflicting accounts or the like; you can't just say the EDA is wrong. But if an EDA contradicts a Target, or a video game, the Target, or the game, is wrong. See [[Tardis:Canon policy]] for details. (I can't say this is the same decision I would have made, but the reality is that we needed a decision, and I'm happy he's made one.)
+::::::::Also, the distinction between "interactive episode" and "video game" doesn't seem particularly important for a discussion of canon. ''Graske'' has multiple endings and involves the viewer/player as a character, while ''City'' has a single ending and has the viewer/player controlling the Doctor, so ''Graske'' is actually much, much harder to fit into continuity, not easier. --[[User:Falcotron|Falcotron]] 11:28, June 13, 2010 (UTC)