[Mobius]

Guys, let's get straight to the point. Many brilliant plot creators had to retcon their stuff. It happened to JRR Tolkien, it happened to the creators of BSG. May I know why you keep thinking that was so perfect even if there are enough sources proving that they applied the rules of retcon?

For God's sake, may I know why the FS community is the only place in which the word "inconsistency" is misused? No one talks about retcons and the behavior towards those inconsistencies is ambiguous and inconclusive.

What exactly do you want to do again?

It sounds like you came upon the term 'retcon' and decided that 'whoa, we really need this for Freespace.' But it's a familiar term, and while it's accurate, I don't think we need to go slapping it up on the Wiki...

Familiar term? I'm afraid you're wrong.

What I want to do? Edits, edits and edits as soon as this problem is solved.

Why are the beams the Goliath fired the whole point of your argument?  The GTVA got beams in the 30 years between wars.  The Shivans were more advanced to begin with.  Why is it such a stretch that Allied command would not be surprised.  Besides, in a breifing, the CO has to appear calm and collected or morale goes to hell.  Admitting surprise to the people you are sending to their deaths is bad form.  Add to that the fact that the real surprise would be finding the Shivans out there at all.  The beams are superfluous.

The SC Goliath jumped from the nebula and fired beams. Nothing about the "amazing news" on the matter. Typical in a retcon.

So therefore just because the mood of the briefing is unsurprised, it's a retcon.  Flimsy logic there.

Why are you so rooted to having a 'retcon page?'  More people disagree with you here than agree with you.  People can come up with their own ideas about why this or that happened.  made the game, what you think are your opinions.  Let us keep ours.

Your psychological analysis is truly debatable and...

...guess who's imposing his opinion? Surely not me. I'm introducing a change and I have proofs to backup it. If your fingers are stuck in your ears, well, this is not my problem.

If we need to retcon, we're doing it wrong. The original Freespace storyline holds together well enough, even with these possible loose ends, but if you want the whole storyline revamped and the game remade so that there are absolutely no plotholes whatsoever, that's your baby. We won't complain if you do it, but we'll not lose sleep wondering about the answers to questions nobody asked.

Thanks for the suggestion but I don't think creating a "What If...?" campaign is the right thing. It'd get the opposite result.

Mobius was right, a lot of people have no idea what retconning means.

There is overwhelming evidence to support the idea that the excess nodes to Sol/beam weapon continuity was retconned in Fs2. But it seems like the majority would prefer to fill the gap with interesting theories...and that's just fine. In fact, it's better that way! Retconning closes the door on speculation and is ultimately unneccessary as the same job can be done through fan theorizing, which is always more fun and a lot healthier for the community.

I don't see any problem with Mobius making a list of retcons, or whatever. I'm sure it would be very accurate. But despite the obviousness of the retconning taking place, lacking any official word from :V: it's better that these gaps be filled with theorycrafting. I mean, you can make a structurally sound sandwich with mud, but who wants to eat it?

The problem is about the hierarchy. What made is canon, so why would canon retcons be put to an inferior level, replaced by fan made theories?

Everyone is free to create his/her theory but unless you put it to a very good use (i.e. a campaign) there's no point in spreading it and expecting people to accept it while retcon is the most credible solution.

I'd prefer if they were kept to one page and were named 'inconsistencies', not retcons. Since they're not retcons.

Snail, your brain is a mystery.

Node Inconsistencies (FreeSpace Wiki page)

There are a number of jump node connections that are used in FreeSpace but are not illustrated on the Official Volition Node Map. They are listed below, along with their references and how valid you should consider them. Volition says that the node map should overrule other references.

had a lot of confusion even when FS1 got released and then decided to clear everything by claiming that the official nodemap is the only one that counts. Let me say something about the matter:

1) In the official nodemap ( dixit) there's only one jump node from Sol, and it leads to Delta Serpentis;

2) That statement by it is clearly proved that they retconned the map...at this point I don't understand why the same principle shouldn't be applied to FS2;

What I see here is a retcon. And I also see accepting it. What's the point in refusing such an obvious thing? What's the point in limiting the subject to the starmap, alone?

And be polite - feel free to say that not everyone agrees with me but as long as the individuals who don't agree are close minded and refuse to accept the obvious please forgive me for not considering their opinions unless they cite proofs that totally nullify what I've been saying.

[General Battuta]

...what's the point in making a big deal out of it?

Again, we know there are retcons. That's no reason not to come up with cool theories about them. Sure, the Sol jump node thing was retconned, but ST:R also came up with a great theory to explain it.

Calm down!

[Mobius]

I am calm.

I didn't expect such a high level of attrition towards me, especially by a random guy like Snail who refuses to accept the obvious.

About the theories - tey should be left as theories. First place in the hierarchy: retcon. Second place, fillable by the community: theories. It's not the contrary.

[General Battuta]

I still don't even understand what you're on about. Who wants to make theories into some kind of canon?

You are tilting at windmills, my quixotic friend.

[Mobius]

I have a problem that prevents me from creating new Wiki pages and edit them. That's why I'm not taking the initiative.

On a side note, from what I heard, those Shivan task force theories according to which the FS1's Shivans didn't have beams because of the need to make intersystem jumps appear to be widely accepted.

Also, take look at this:

I would say that the question of the nature and composition of the Shivan fleet in FS1 is resolved because of FS2's new information, not in spite of it.  In other words, we're given the answer in no uncertain terms based on what we learn in FS2.

Think of the Knossos in Gamma Draconis.  It was seemingly deactivated by the Ancients in a (vain) attempt to stop the Shivan advance, and it wasn't activated again until the Trinity did so on Bosch's orders.  That's a good 8000-year span without any contact between the GTVA's current area of space and the systems beyond Gamma Draconis.  From what we see in Into the Lion's Den, either the Shivans' core space itself or at least some large concentration of them lies beyond that series of Knossos portals; one can even surmise that creating them and stabilizing those nodes is what brought the Ancients into contact with the Shivans in the first place.  Since we know all of that, is it any real stretch to assume that the Lucifer fleet is the same fleet which destroyed the core remnants of the Ancients' empire 8000 years ago? 

The Vasudan scientists stranded on Altair recognized the planet as having been attacked by Shivan weapons; since the Lucifer fleet's weapons were the only ones they had any knowledge of, it's no stretch to assume that the Lucifer itself caused the destruction.  Let's say that, after wiping out the Ancients, the Shivan fleet returns to Gamma Draconis, only to find the node sealed behind them.  Cut off from whatever command structures the Shivans possess, the Lucifer and her accompanying ships have no other choice but to find someplace to sit around and wait.  Fast-forward 8000 years, and they begin to pick up signals from two other subspace-capable species that are currently going at each other...and you know the rest.

So there you go.  That's all based on information that we learn in both games, and it easily explains why the Shivan cruisers and destroyers in FS1 don't possess any sort of beam weaponry.  No retcons required.

Had the GTVA been surprised of the beams then Petrarch would have mentioned them. The fact that Petrarch didn't is a clear evidence of retconning because retconning, as I said, means changing stuff and pretend that it has always been that way. There was no need to mention the presence of beams just as sure as there was no need to mention the fact that most Shivan ships are red.

Petrarch didn't even need to specifically mention the fact, since anyone with a pair of eyes could see the sensor video clip in that command briefing showing a Shivan ship firing beam cannons.  It was an established fact at that point.  Just because he didn't express surprise in that one briefing doesn't mean that the GTVA as a whole didn't express surprise when the information was first discovered.  Just because the game didn't explicitly state a certain reaction or stance doesn't make that stance any less feasible.

Or maybe it was all some nebulous retcon to work around the fact that had managed to put spiffy new weapons into the sequel.  But if that's the case...who cares?

I'm afraid the part about FS1's Shivans is not true. The Ancient Empire was immense so the Shivans did not sortie only the small task force we see in FS1. Even if they sortied a much larger task force, it'd be hard to believe that the Ancients nearly decimated it, leaving only the fleet we see in FS1. That's not what the Ancient monologues suggest because leaving such a small remnant of the main Shivan task force would sound more as an Ancient victory, giving the original dimensions of the fleets which engaged each other in combat.


Just to point how widely accepted theories are, if analysed, not that reliable.

[Mongoose]

I'm afraid the part about FS1's Shivans is not true. The Ancient Empire was immense so the Shivans did not sortie only the small task force we see in FS1. Even if they sortied a much larger task force, it'd be hard to believe that the Ancients nearly decimated it, leaving only the fleet we see in FS1. That's not what the Ancient monologues suggest because leaving such a small remnant of the main Shivan task force would sound more as an Ancient victory, giving the original dimensions of the fleets which engaged each other in combat.


Just to point how widely accepted theories are, if analysed, not that reliable.

And how do you know that the Shivans would have needed a force any larger than we saw in FS1 to destroy the Ancients?  themselves said that the Ancients weren't that far ahead of the Great-War-era Terrans and Vasudans technology-wise, with the obvious exception of subspace technology.  And one of the Anicent monologues has a very telling quote: "But these were not like the others.  They did not die."  I'd say it's fairly likely that the Ancients were physically unable to impose any sort of substantial damage on the Shivan fleet...think trying to down even something as weak as a Scorpion using only ML-16s.  We certainly know that they weren't able to do anything against the Lucifer, since they only discovered the secret to getting through its shields after they were still able to put that knowledge into practice.  Even a single Lucifer-class vessel by itself could presumably have rampaged through entire fleets of Ancient ships, all without suffering so much as a scratch.  Maybe the Ancients managed to pick off some cruisers and a destroyer or two, but even what was left by the time of FS1 could have easily walked right over them.

So there you go.  A position well-supported by multiple canon sources that doesn't require any retconning at all.

[FoxtrotTango]

Seems like Mobius really wants an excuse to make his own continuity. No offense, Mob, but it just seems to be that we're not going to get any true process on this retcon issue unless these hazy issues are settled by a solid, continuous belief across the entire community. And, as you can see, that's not going to be likely until the theory is proposed in a campaign or something.

[Snail]

I didn't expect such a high level of attrition towards me, especially by a random guy like Snail who refuses to accept the obvious.

It's not obvious it's your opinion

[Narwhal]

It is obvious that the nodemap has been retconned. No trouble with this.

Then, I have some troubles going much further :

- What is retcon, and what is "inconsistancies", "mistake" ? I think even the developpers of FS were not half as fan of their game as we are of their ; and things they didn't care too much about became canon for us.
- What is "mystery that is going to unravel in FS3".

Though, I DO agree that Command not noticing the beam weapon in the briefing is weird. That doesn't mean anything more. There is no one saying "their AA beams are still as dangerous as during the Great War". It might as well have been an overlook from the developper of the mission, who forget to mention this. Remember that if memory serves, by that level, the player has already been facing tough beam weapons, so they might have overlooked the fact that Shivan beam weapons were actually new.

So theories t explain this are speculative. Exactly like saying it was retconned is just as speculative. The only thing we can say for sure is that command didn't say anything about the use of beam weapons.

Still, the most puzzling mystery for me is to understand how you can swear at one another for this. MY GF who read above my shoulder just said :

"Donc il y a des gens pour s'engueuler sur des points mineurs de la chronologie d'un jeu d'action de plus de 10 ans ! Talk about neeeeeerrddds !" (you'll translate )

[Snail]

It is obvious that the nodemap has been retconned. No trouble with this.

As someone has said there are explanations, not only retcons. So there is TRUBBLE.

[Droid803]

"Talk about Nerds! These guys argue over minor chronological points in a 10-year old action-game!"
Bleh. My french sucks.

[Mobius]

And how do you know that the Shivans would have needed a force any larger than we saw in FS1 to destroy the Ancients?  themselves said that the Ancients weren't that far ahead of the Great-War-era Terrans and Vasudans technology-wise, with the obvious exception of subspace technology.  And one of the Anicent monologues has a very telling quote: "But these were not like the others.  They did not die."  I'd say it's fairly likely that the Ancients were physically unable to impose any sort of substantial damage on the Shivan fleet...think trying to down even something as weak as a Scorpion using only ML-16s.  We certainly know that they weren't able to do anything against the Lucifer, since they only discovered the secret to getting through its shields after they were still able to put that knowledge into practice.  Even a single Lucifer-class vessel by itself could presumably have rampaged through entire fleets of Ancient ships, all without suffering so much as a scratch.  Maybe the Ancients managed to pick off some cruisers and a destroyer or two, but even what was left by the time of FS1 could have easily walked right over them.

So there you go.  A position well-supported by multiple canon sources that doesn't require any retconning at all.

Too bad that canon also proved. It's not the quality here, it's the quantity. Terrans and Vasudans have been conquering space for centuries. The Ancients had been conquered space for thousands of years and pardon me if Mrs. Logic suggests that their fleet was much bigger and their Empire much larger

And the reference to shields? It's likely to be a reference to the advantage the Shivans had in dogfights and bombing runs, which really makes the difference in a war. That was a long term tactical advantage, not a random reference to a single superdestroyer.

And my source is canon...

Seems like Mobius really wants an excuse to make his own continuity. No offense, Mob, but it just seems to be that we're not going to get any true process on this retcon issue unless these hazy issues are settled by a solid, continuous belief across the entire community. And, as you can see, that's not going to be likely until the theory is proposed in a campaign or something.

That's exactly what should never happen: apply this to a campaign and leave it as a fan made theory.

Also, I never said that an eventual Retconning theory wouldn't have any references to the fact that not everyone agrees with it (even if, as fan made theory, it'd be obvious).

It is obvious that the nodemap has been retconned. No trouble with this.

Then talk about this subject with Snail because he's stubborn (in the bad way).

As someone has said there are explanations, not only retcons. So there is TRUBBLE.

Are you aware of the fact that those "explanations" are fan made and each one is different from the others?

I thought common sense calls for a total rejection of elitism, especially here. What do I see instead? People placing certain fan made stuff to a debatable high level...

[Snail]

Are you aware of the fact that those "explanations" are fan made and each one is different from the others?

I thought common sense calls for a total rejection of elitism, especially here. What do I see instead? People placing certain fan made stuff to a debatable high level...

So elevating YOUR OPINION on retcon to a higher position is somehow not elitism?

[Mobius]

My opinion is neutral because retconning is not like inventing stuff from scratch and pretend it to be valuable and believable. Retconning means having a different approach on fan made theories. Yet again, you're missing the point here...

[General Battuta]

I have no idea what your point is, or what it has ever been.

I don't even understand what the issue is in the first place.

Can't we go back to happily disagreeing and fanwanking about everything? It's more fun.

[Snail]

My opinion is neutral because retconning is not like inventing stuff from scratch and pretend it to be valuable and believable. Retconning means having a different approach on fan made theories. Yet again, you're missing the point here...

Where did I say that explanations are canon?

Yet again, you are missing the point that just ending all speculation and discussion on unexplained mysteries by introducing retcon (with little to no canon base may I add) is just not the right thing to do IMO.


Can I just get this straight here? What I'm saying is that this entire thread is just your opinion. Everything you say which isn't definitely fact is nothing more than opinion. And just FYI, what you're saying here isn't ''fact''. It's inference, guesswork if you will, taken from the absence of certain statements in FS2 and other very vague comments.

Look, the problem I have with this being included in the Wiki is the fact that it's just some people's opinion. It's not even established material agreed upon by people. This entire retcon idea is plainly your idea, your opinion, your theory. It's not fact. Perhaps if you presented it as your opinion I wouldn't be so miffed.

[General Battuta]

Yes, well put.

[Commander Zane]

"Talk about Nerds! These guys argue over minor chronological points in a 10-year old action-game!"
Bleh. My french sucks.

So not only does she know the concept of what everyone's talking about but she knows the game's that old.
Sounds hypocritical to me.

[Narwhal]

She knows what "retconning" means + she has already pulled my leg about how old is this game (cause I enthusiastically told her about "that game some fans improved so much I am going to play it instead of kissing you").

[Mongoose]

Too bad that canon also proved. It's not the quality here, it's the quantity. Terrans and Vasudans have been conquering space for centuries. The Ancients had been conquered space for thousands of years and pardon me if Mrs. Logic suggests that their fleet was much bigger and their Empire much larger

And the reference to shields? It's likely to be a reference to the advantage the Shivans had in dogfights and bombing runs, which really makes the difference in a war. That was a long term tactical advantage, not a random reference to a single superdestroyer.

And my source is canon...

As you yourself said, quantity does not equal quality.  The Ancients may have had massive fleets spread out over thousands (maybe even millions) of star systems, but we know for a fact that they weren't all that far ahead of the Terrans and Vasudans in terms of their technological developments.  Do yourself a favor and try lining up a thousand FS1-armed Orions in front of a FS1-armed Lucifer.  Notice what happens?  That's right...the Lucifer cheerfully plows its way through the lot of them without suffering a scratch, even if the entire bomber complement of each Orion were launched against it.  Outside of subspace, it's literally an invincible ship in the FS1 era, and based on what the Ancients themselves say, it was equally invincible to them; even if the "shields" reference may have extended to fighters and bombers, it most certainly described the Lucifer.  You don't even need to bother with the rest of the Shivan fleet; that single ship could have done the job all by itself.

(And I fail to see how your opinion is better backed by canon, when I'm the one using multiple direct quotes and gameplay references from the game itself. )