Opinion on Chronicle now that we see it in a different light

[Goldielocks]

Alot of it is still correct, in fact, its more interesting know because you have to read between the lines and think critically now

You don’t know what is and what isn’t correct. Blizzard isn’t beholden to anything now that they’ve confirmed it’s no longer the word of god.

Nothing about this is any more interesting than getting lore from within the game. This isn’t the purpose for Chronicle’s existence.

[Sneaksies]

Nothing has changed for me as I still see it as canon. The Titan perspective is easily explained with Aman'Thul's mastery of space and time. He could had easily time travel through different timelines and witness many what if events. And also to the ancient past before even the Titan's existence and documented the events there. Since they didn't specifically mention Aman'Thul going alone then that could only mean Aman bought the other Pantheon Titans with him to all these events and timelines. I'm guessing he wasn't the only Titan that was curious about the universe.

Not all of it is right though, in ANY piece of writing there will ALWAYS be bias. There are also some things that contradict itself in reconcile, and stuff they leave out

[Fallen of Lordaeron]

That’s not true. The word of god is a real thing in fiction. Statements from the author directly count as objective truth. They made the fictional universe. They can do that. Chronicle was sold based on this principle. You can’t use definitive and biased in the same sentence.

Your arguments don’t counter what I’m saying either. You’re just strengthening the fact that Chronicle should have never been made or at most, been marketed wildly differently to support the idea that objective truth is impossible. It should have had “from the titan’s perspective” as the subtitle since V1.

But we know why this didn’t happen. Wouldn’t have sold as much. Blizzard has no excuse here.

I think you may be misunderstanding what I'm saying here.

You feel Chronicles were sold as being objectively true. I understand that. I'm explaining that myself, along with others in this thread, were not under that impression at any point in time. Furthermore, nothing in the marketing gave me the impression is claimed to be the objectively true account.

All of that aside though. Did you honestly expect they would never change the lore after Chronicles? They've made it clear on a multitude of occasions that nothing is sacred in Warcraft lore. How is the addition of Shadowlands any different? Because they used the word "definitive"? When it was released, it was definitive. That didn't mean they would never add new lore.

[Sneaksies]

They were a money making scam. Blizz refuses to hold to any lore so when they said and I quote "Chronicles will be the end all for lore" I knew it was only a matter of time before they shat all over them cause they are too lazy to stay within the lore.

? If you thought about chronicle critically you would know it was always from a pov with things that dont make sense and are left out. The fact that chronicle never mentions Argus or Shadowlands should tell you it was NEVER from an omnipotent being

[huth]

You realize they write the lore as they go, right? Every bit of actual history in all of existence has been written by a biased source. Objective truth is an impossibility.

It's a video game; they changed their story over their 25+ year run. It happens.

Especially since it wasn't until at least 10 years in that continuity even became in any way relevant. Changing stuff was basically inevitable.

I took the statement about the Chronicles to be more about scope, though. Basically, it can only contain stuff that would be possible for a Titan to know about.

[Fallen of Lordaeron]

I agree, except its not a retcon imo

I'm just saying that regardless of if you view it as a retcon or consistent with the lore, it doesn't matter. Retcons are something Blizzard has done with every new game they've released. WC2 retconned/streamlined WC1, WC3 retconned some of WC2, WoW retconned all of the previous a bit, etc. It's nothing new. It's how they've developed their lore.

[Omedon]

This was a mistake.

I can’t buy chronicle on audible, because it’s not a story book in the context of being placed next to the novels. It’s a reference book, it should be told in the voice of Metzen or Danuser, not Odyn or Ra.

I’m not going all “magic xylophone” here, it’s their story to own, not ours, but I’m less comfortable with pitching chronicle as “a certain point of view,” as that, more than any lore point, feels like an after the fact retcon.

My opinion, such as it is.

[Villager720]

Pretty disappointed.
They weren’t sold to us that way.
I remember Metzen doing a video claiming they were the be all, end all source of lore truth.
To then say the Titans were their origin (forgetting that there’s no way they could have observed most of the events of the second and third books when they were dead/imprisoned/locked in keepers) completely undermines their accuracy, as the Titans have been consistently shown to be less than omnipotent, bordering on bumbling.

[Minikin]

You realize they write the lore as they go, right? Every bit of actual history in all of existence has been written by a biased source. Objective truth is an impossibility.

It's a video game; they changed their story over their 25+ year run. It happens.

yea thatll fall on deaf ears around here.

[Fallen of Lordaeron]

Especially since it wasn't until at least 10 years in that continuity even became in any way relevant. Changing stuff was basically inevitable.

I took the statement about the Chronicles to be more about scope, though. Basically, it can only contain stuff that would be possible for a Titan to know about.

Yeah. I basically viewed it as a Constellar or Keeper sitting on a rock somewhere in space observing and recording the events. They'd be limited to what they know, but still expansive.

If none of them knew about the Shadowlands, they would only theorize about the Shadowlands.

Plus, how bad is it really that they've made an infinite afterlife from which they can pull any concept they want out of something which originally was a much blander concept?

[derpkitteh]

it just goes to show they don't respect their own story.

it makes it really hard to further care about wow at all.

[Sneaksies]

First, people are hanging way too much onto the words "from titan's perspective".

Second, what exactly has been retconned that is causing this new hysteria?



Can you please elaborate?

It is from the titans pov

[Nathreim]

? If you thought about chronicle critically you would know it was always from a pov with things that dont make sense and are left out. The fact that chronicle never mentions Argus or Shadowlands should tell you it was NEVER from an omnipotent being

The Shadowlands are mentioned as is Argus. But as we had never been they were not covered in detail. Thats not the issue though its all the other retcons that are the problem.

Expanding on what was not covered in detail doesn't bother me. The lack of respect for anything already canon does many other things in chronicle have been retconed since some not even months after a book is published.

[Fallen of Lordaeron]

yea thatll fall on deaf ears around here.

It's weird to me. For people on a fansite, there seems to be a lot more loathing of the game than being fans of it.

Some people voice genuine frustrations with an ever-evolving, ever retconned lore. It's understandable. Other people act like Blizzard broke down their front door and robbed them at gunpoint for having the audacity to change something.

[Sneaksies]

The Shadowlands are mentioned as is Argus. But as we had never been they were not covered in detail. Thats not the issue though its all the other retcons that are the problem.

Expanding on what was not covered in detail doesn't bother me. The lack of respect for anything already canon does.

My mistake, i meant it never tells you where the shadowlands came from, and where does it mention argus?

- - - Updated - - -

it just goes to show they don't respect their own story.

it makes it really hard to further care about wow at all.

It was always like this. It was always from the titans pov

- - - Updated - - -

This was a mistake.

I can’t buy chronicle on audible, because it’s not a story book in the context of being placed next to the novels. It’s a reference book, it should be told in the voice of Metzen or Danuser, not Odyn or Ra.

I’m not going all “magic xylophone” here, it’s their story to own, not ours, but I’m less comfortable with pitching chronicle as “a certain point of view,” as that, more than any lore point, feels like an after the fact retcon.

My opinion, such as it is.

ill say it again, it was always from their pov its not a retcon

[Goldielocks]

I think you may be misunderstanding what I'm saying here.

You feel Chronicles were sold as being objectively true. I understand that. I'm explaining that myself, along with others in this thread, were not under that impression at any point in time. Furthermore, nothing in the marketing gave me the impression is claimed to be the objectively true account.

https://www.amazon.com/World-Warcraf.../dp/1616558458

Go read the product description. If you still don’t think that’s trying to be sold as a non biased look into the history of Warcraft then I don’t know what to tell you.

All of that aside though. Did you honestly expect they would never change the lore after Chronicles? They've made it clear on a multitude of occasions that nothing is sacred in Warcraft lore. How is the addition of Shadowlands any different? Because they used the word "definitive"? When it was released, it was definitive. That didn't mean they would never add new lore.

Changing the lore is fine. It’s about shady business practices that’s the problem. Chronicle should have never been sold this way.

[Sneaksies]

https://www.amazon.com/World-Warcraf.../dp/1616558458

Go read the product description. If you still don’t think that’s trying to be sold as a non biased look into the history of Warcraft then I don’t know what to tell you.

Changing the lore is fine. It’s about shady business practices that’s the problem. Chronicle should have never been sold this way.

I agree, but whats more important to me is whats in the book. Sure they screwed some people over, but the main idea is whats in the book

[Minikin]

It's weird to me. For people on a fansite, there seems to be a lot more loathing of the game than being fans of it.

Some people voice genuine frustrations with an ever-evolving, ever retconned lore. It's understandable. Other people act like Blizzard broke down their front door and robbed them at gunpoint for having the audacity to change something.

eh those whining ever constantly are just nuts. yea blizz has fed up before but in the end its their game. someone aptly pointed it out in another thread that all these goobers keep complaining and then go resub or rebuy, like wtf is all the complaining for then. Even for this aspect of titans and all, no one wept this much when the void lords and all were added, or titan forged vs old ods rather than titans themselves. Ive just notched it down that some of these folks just suffer from excessive depression. Blizzard could pop out a golden egg from their ass and hand deliver it to them and theyll prolly complain why it wasnt shaped like frostmourne.

Infracted.

[Nathreim]

My mistake, i meant it never tells you where the shadowlands came from, and where does it mention argus?

- - - Updated - - -



It was always like this. It was always from the titans pov

- - - Updated - - -

It mentions argus when talking about the Draenei but its only a mention.

[Feanoro]

They sold something under one premise, then completely changed to another premise that completely negated the original. That's at least questionable as false advertising.