KQ Canon?

[TheReturnofDMD]

However, because TSL isn't published by the official company that has the rights to King's Quest IP, its a work of Fanfiction, and is therefore unofficial, just like the King's Quest VGA remake, KQ2 Remake and the King's Quest 3 remake.

Baggins, yes,.TSL is unofficial...technically.
     But...Let's say VG ever made their own King's Quest, and it starred some character named Lord Bygar from a land called Axyia who was was going on a troll killing spree and had nothing to do with Daventry and was a FPS action/fantasy game. Now, ''officially'' that would be part of the King's Quest series, and would legally be canon.   
     But...ethically, and as far as plot, would something such as that be a real King's Quest game, and real King's Quest canon simply because it was marketed under the Sierra brand name? Let's face it, the company that created King's Quest no longer exists except in name, so to be technical about it, any game by Vivendi would also be unofficial except from a legal standpoint.
     Also, I've seen you mention how TSL's timeline changes some things of the official King's Quest timeline. Well...Like for example Graham being 19 in KQ1...In the game itself (and neither in it's manual; I have the original King's Quest game with it's original box and manual and also the King's Quest collection). From what I've seen, Graham's age is never referenced in King's Quest I. Maybe it was referrenced in a later version of KQ1's game box, but...the  packaging isn't official cannon, because it can divurge at times from what is seen in game. In King's Quest IV he's referred to as "Old King Graham" and yet in KQ5, he doesn't appear all that old. And his appearence from KQ4, KQ5, and KQ6 changes much. The only things similar about his appearence in those three games is his gray hair, and his outfit. His facial appearnece looks quite different in each game.
The King's Quest companion and novels are really on the same level of canon as TSL; basically fan-fiction that is pretty much accepted as canon by fans and was licened by Sierra (or Vivendi in TSL's case.)

[Baggins]

The manual for KQ4 actually call graham old, it does call "king Edward", old. It doesn't actually make any comments towards Graham's age.

Graham is called "old" in KQ5 during a few narrative spots IIRC, if you use eye icon on him, or something around him. So leave that to interpretation of the character that apparently some people consider a 44+ character old.

TSL isn't licensed by Vivendi, at least not the "official license", but rather a provisional "fan license". It just has a limited permission to make the game. Infact Vivendi made sure they couldn't actually use the name "King's Quest".

Like it or not, manuals are official secondary sources of information to the game and therefore more official than TSL's timeline or game. Especially considering that Roberta was behind them. (TSL will always remain unofficial even if Vivendi Sierra decided to go the route of creating a King's Quest Sidestory covering another king in another land in the world of King's Quest).

The King's Quest companion and the novels on the other had is official sierra authorized work, and has Roberta, Jane Jenson, Ken Williams, John Williams and other King's Quest Designers and sierra staff behind it.

Peter Spear was directly involved with getting plot details from them years before later games were released (He also apparently was able to influence some of the story writers and designers, and was the reason why Derek Karlavaegen exists in Jane Jenson's KQ6 Guidebook Manual).

Portions of the book were released with King's Quest series as pack-ins, or in files on the disks. It was heavily advertised with portions reprinted by the official sierra Interaction magazine back in the day as well. If you know where to look, there are even more refrences to the books to be found within later official sierra material as well.

Even Roberta considered it a must have for anyone hoping to explore the series in greater depth and detail.

Additionally it was designer/story writer of KQ7 Lorelei Shannon  established King Graham's age during hte King's Quest series in both the official King's Quest 6 hintbook(which had Roberta and Jane Jenson behind it as well), and later in her KQ7 Hintbook as well.

What people don't seem to know is that Roberta usually never did the writing of the stories herself(or at least not all of it). She usually just came up with a base concept and outline and had other authors helped do the writing for her to flesh things out a bit.

Even TSL considers the companion a part of their game. Where do you suppose they got the name Hassan? Its not mentioned in the game itself. Their timeline issues are mainly research snafus, and could easily be fixed in time. If not, well Peter Spear's unofficial adaptation of game will probably have discrepencies with the official companion, and the original timeline.

[Yonkey]

TSL isn't licenced by Vivendi. It just has a limited permission to make the game. Infact Vivendi made sure they couldn't actually use the name "King's Quest".

Just to clarify this, we have been licensed in the sense that we are permitted use of all necessary Sierra IP, but our game is not to be marketted as an official sequel to the series.

[Baggins]

I'm referring to the difference between the "official license" and "fan license". They are two different ballparks.

Peter Spear, the manual/strategy guide authors and "trilogy novelists" had the official license for example, and direct support from Roberta herself in some fashion (giving them story information behind the scenes or what not), or were the story writers of the games themselves expanding on their story in the paper form.

[Yonkey]

Ahh I see.  However, one could also say "video game storyline" and "KQ companion storyline" are two different ballparks as well, considering more people have played the games than read the books.

[Baggins]

I'm just pointing out that the companion, manuals and novels had the "official license". That just puts them a league higher than "fan license".

But I would agree that they can be considered secondary material to the game, with the game's being primary sources, but still are official sources of information.

[Yonkey]

I'm just pointing out that the companion, manuals and novels had the "official license". That just puts them a league higher than "fan license".

Oh definitely.  But I think what tends to happen (along with a lot of things in life) is whatever is more widely known and most recent gets the most "airplay".  While it is factually true that something said 30+ years ago in KQ1 is true, how many people today would actually know this, without having played previous games and/or reading the KQ novels?

[Baggins]

As for game storylines often there were more than one way of doing things heh heh, so essentially each player would have their own unique take on the storyline(they "directed the action").

The companion's version tended to be a variation on the full points version of the games. Many manuals, and other guides tended to follow the companion's versions of events.

Timeline dating was pretty consistent in all manuals/guidebooks/hintbooks, etc in the series, and were in line with companion's dating as well.

Its actually quite suprising for a series that seemed to not have any "tolkien level" of  consistency from one game to the next.

[Yonkey]

As for game storylines often there were more than one way of doing things heh heh, so essentially each player would have their own unique take on the storyline(they "directed the action").

Usually, people assume the storyline to be the most ideal path that completes the game (i.e. the long path in KQ6 & the good ending in KQ7), however I do consider manuals and guidebooks part of video game storyline, since they are packaged with the product.

And while I'm glad the companions respected the aformentioned game design, having not been an actual collaboration with the game designers, one could see Peter Spear's storyline as "endorsed fan-fiction", rather than KQ canon.

[Baggins]

Usually, people assume the storyline to be the most ideal path that completes the game (i.e. the long path in KQ6 & the good ending in KQ7), however I do consider manuals and guidebooks part of video game storyline, since they are packaged with the product.

That's the thing, there was more than one way of solving the "ideal" path. Infact KQ7 had more than one version of "ideal" path. KQ6 had more than one version of the Idea path. example; you could get cassima's hair, or you could get beauty's hair and still get the same points Or you could talk to Ali before you talked to the Hakim, or talk to the guards before you talked to either, to find out to find out where you were, and depending on who you chose, you would alter the conversations of those other characters if you talked to them later. Thus there was dialogue you could miss depending on which character you chose to speak to first, and yet you could still get full points.

So basically the player directs the story, and the story isn't going to be the same for each player.

And while I'm glad the companions respected the aformentioned game design, having not been an actual collaboration with the game designers, one could see Peter Spear's storyline as "endorsed fan-fiction", rather than KQ canon

Actually, Peter Spear was in collaboration with the game designers even from the first edition, as he mentions in the forward and acknowledgements to the book, as well as designers using his material in later manuals, and guides(its also mentioned in the "about the author" section as well). This is probably why portions of his book are actually on king's quest collections, or were packed in with some versions of the game, or why designers like Lorelei Shannon actually refrenced his books in their King's Quest material. There was actually a special King's Quest floppy version collection that came with the first or second edition of the guidebook for example.

KQ5 manual for example refrences a plot element from companion, and KQ6 manual was created with major collaboration between Jane Jensen. eluki bes shahar, and Peter Spear.

Also people tend to consider officially licensed material using the term "profic' rather than "fanfic", even though I'm sure as a writer he was also a fan. But since he was chosen by Sierra to write the book, he's more official, than the average web fanfic writer.

If you didn't know the terms, Shield of Achille, Chest of Gold, and Merlin's Mirror were coined by Peter Spear.

Those terms did not exist in any previous game, but were refrenced in later game manuals.

In the original game it was just the Magical Chest, Magic Shield, and the Magic Mirror.

It was Peter Spear that gave them more detailed names.

[Yonkey]

Actually, Peter Spear was in collaboration with the game designers even from the first edition, as he mentions in the forward and acknowledgements to the book, as well as designers using his material in later manuals, and guides(its also mentioned in the "about the author" section as well). This is probably why portions of his book are actually on king's quest collections, or were packed in with some versions of the game, or why designers like Lorelei Shannon actually refrenced his books in their King's Quest material.

Ahh, I didn't know he worked with them during the creation of the novels.  Ok, in that sense I consder his novels to be part of KQ canon then.

[Cez]

As far as having an "official" or "fan license" I will say, personally, that I don't think Vivendi has the power to say what's canon or not just because they own the license. It would be unfair to say that if we were to acquire the KQ rights, then we could dismantle Roberta William's world and call ourselves the "true" King's Quest, without her approval.

However, we do have her approval. Even if she hasn't read the plot and doesn't want to get involved whatsoever, she did give us her approval. In a way, she gave us the permission to tell our story about the KQ universe in whatever way we wanted. One of the reasons she did not want to get involved (legality aside) was because she didn't want to have any imput or change our way of telling this story.

so, being the author, and by giving us her approval and her support, she also gave us a sort of "official" stamp. 

To me, that's really what matters.

[Petra Rocks]

 Insofar as the world of Kings Quest only *exists* in the minds of its fans, I suspect the ulitmate answer lies in what each fan will accept as canon rather than what some of sort of Kq Ecumenical council says.    Not to say that some sort of logically consistant storyline isn't a good thing, but I'm not sure that one can say what *canon* is.   

[Yonkey]

I think if there was one person who wrote all the games, then you could (i.e. JRR Tolkien with LOTR) but since the KQ series is not like that, and since it spans 3 decades, used different designers, sports many fangames & fanfics, and has novels based off it, it's a little too difficult to define what is considered "KQ canon" and what isn't.

[Baggins]

Which is why I personally don't like the term "canon" entirely... It sounds way to religious.

I prefer using official vs. nonofficial...

TSL is nonofficial by all technical definitions of the word. But that doesn't mean that it can't tell a good story and can't have its own version of continuity.


I also would like it if things were as consistent as possible having few contradictions (some things aren't actually contradictions but evolution of characters over the time between the last time they were seen).

But as we have seen over the course of several fan remakes, that each team has their own takes on the stories they don't even remain consistent between each team's stories or with the original story.

Thus why in omnipedia we try to keep a neutral stance. We simply mention the differences. We don't negatievely berate the differences, it must remain unbiased. However all historical synopses to a characters remain true to the original released games, than the remakes (remakes historical notes are mentioned in a seperate heading to seperate their altered continuity).

I refer to the differences as "alternate histories".  This applies to all other forms of fanfiction including written short stories and novels that take place after MoE. Since the contradictions can't all exist on the same timeline, and not all the short stories can exist in the same universe as well.

BTW IGN article makes the destinction between your game's "Fan license" and the "official license" so apparently it does mean something to some people.

[Yonkey]

BTW IGN article makes the destinction between your game's "Fan license" and the "official license" so apparently it does mean something to some people.

Yep, to copyright holders and lawyers.   To the rest of us, it doesn't make that much of a difference.  As long as you're legally given permission to use intellectual property by the owners of that IP, I'd say you're considered "official".

Canon on the other hand is subjective, because as I said before, there wasn't one sole designer with one strict vision.  To use another example, the KQ series had no George Lucas.  Roberta Williams is considered close, but due to the different designers involved there is quite a distinction between her and Lucas.

[Petra Rocks]

"Official" counts for legal purposes, not canon.  I'm pretty sure there is no law regarding what 'canon' is or is not. 

[Baggins]

"Canon Law"

Which is again a stupid religious term anyways...

Most companies that use the term "canon" tend to use it to refer to things that the IP owners consider canon. Star Trek only views the live action tv shows and movies as canon for example.

Lucas Film considers pretty much every single source of Expanded Universe as part of "canon". Movies being "primary canon". Fanfic is considered "non-canon".

Fanon, or "personal canon" is the term used by fans who define their own "canon", and may include "fanfic" in their personal views.

Usually the terms Canon and Official, and some cases "continuity" are interchanged when used by the companies, and mean the same thing. Sometimes the terms get combined, for example, "official continuity", "official canon", "canon", "canon continuity", etc, get tossed around.

I've seen King's Quest fans go by either Sierra produced games as being canon only, they don't even accept the manuals.

I've seen other King's Quest fans choose to follow original games and manuals, and guides only.

Another viewpoint I've seen is people consider Games canon, and manuals and guides "secondary" source of canon.


Still others that will only accept something if Roberta is directly involved.

Still others I've seen, ignore the original versions of games and choose to follow the fan remakes in their personal continuity.

Plus many other permutations of how people view things. Thus why in the omnipedia I tend to use the term "Alternate Histories" as it allows for many different personal histories to exist.

[Yonkey]

Still others I've seen, ignore the original made games and choose to follow the fan remakes in their person continuity.

If you mean me, it's more because I don't have the original games (nor the time to play even the KQ3+ remake).   But in general, the only people would do that is due to technology limiting them.  If the KQ Compilations ever come out, people will value the official storyline over fan remake.

[Baggins]

No I didn't mean you specifically, since you have said that POS is using the original history, not the remake's alternate history(there is no way the two histories can exist on the same timeline, just way too many differences).

However many of the things you posted to me you thought KQ2 original was missing was actually in the game's manual's short story and introduction movie(just past the credits), in all its AGI graphics glory. Such as "why graham was looking for a wife". Many of the other things you brought up are actually explained if you "look" or talk "npcs" or look at inventory items and screens in the game.

Here's hoping the compilations ever come out... I'm tired of having to tweak my system just to play the originals through dosbox and VDMsound...