17
edits
User talk:The Inexistent: Difference between revisions
→V-Cast game and canonicity...
Johnboy3434 (talk | contribs) (→V-Cast game and canonicity...: new section) |
Johnboy3434 (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 191: | Line 191: | ||
== V-Cast game and canonicity... == | == V-Cast game and canonicity... == | ||
May I inquire as to why you reverted my edits to the V-Cast game? To my knowledge, no official source has stated that a KH game must be made by Square in order to be canonical. Disney has at least partial ownership over the franchise (possibly moreso than Square, since they own the original characters), and they endorsed it, so it's still an official game. It sucks, but that doesn't matter. The events are never referenced again, but they don't need to be in order to have occurred. And most importantly, the events of the game do not contradict anything because the whole story is a dream sequence. I have yet to see a argument against its inclusion that doesn't invoke a fan-made rule concerning canon or deride the quality of the game. If there's a source that I missed stating that it was not canon, could you please link the article to it so the statement is sourced? Otherwise, would you at least rethink my argument. | May I inquire as to why you reverted my edits to the V-Cast game? To my knowledge, no official source has stated that a KH game must be made by Square in order to be canonical. Disney has at least partial ownership over the franchise (possibly moreso than Square, since they own the original characters), and they endorsed it, so it's still an official game. It sucks, but that doesn't matter. The events are never referenced again, but they don't need to be in order to have occurred. And most importantly, the events of the game do not contradict anything because the whole story is a dream sequence. I have yet to see a argument against its inclusion that doesn't invoke a fan-made rule concerning canon or deride the quality of the game. If there's a source that I missed stating that it was not canon, could you please link the article to it so the statement is sourced? Otherwise, would you at least rethink my argument. Alternatively, it might be better if the article doesn't address the issue at all. Just summarize the plot and let the reader decide. | ||
If it was my chronology statements that prompted the reversion, I understand. My brief analysis was unsourced, even if it could be deduced.----[[User:Johnboy3434|Johnboy3434]] 19:44, 25 July 2011 (EDT) | If it was my chronology statements that prompted the reversion, then I understand. My brief analysis was unsourced, even if it could be deduced.----[[User:Johnboy3434|Johnboy3434]] 19:44, 25 July 2011 (EDT) | ||