If SM 2 is canon, does that make SM 1 canon too?

[GameBoi]

Apparently the first game wasn't considered canon according to online chatter. Fans claimed one of the devs said as such in an faq, while others said that answer was a jokeful non-answer to avoid talking about the first game's place in the timeline. There's also the issue that Titus hadn't been mentioned at all in the wider 40k universe until Boltgun.

But if they're saying SM 2 is canon according to the pinned comment, does that retroactively canonize SM 1 too?

[~*|Reborn|*~]

Escrito originalmente por GameBoi2099:

Apparently the first game wasn't considered canon according to online chatter. Fans claimed one of the devs said as such in an faq, while others said that answer was a jokeful non-answer to avoid talking about the first game's place in the timeline. There's also the issue that Titus hadn't been mentioned at all in the wider 40k universe until Boltgun.

But if they're saying SM 2 is canon according to the pinned comment, does that retroactively canonize SM 1 too?

I think it's a bit like the Fire warrior Game/book and the Blood ravens from the Dawn of war series. Think they made the games first and then the books were made alongside/after. Occasionally their characters/chapters pop up in passing mention or have a short cameo in other 40k books.

[Tyvolus]

Escrito originalmente por WastingSanity:

Technically speaking, the 40k games and 40k novels are not cannon. The only thing that is really considered cannon is the table top material. So rule books and codex.

Especially given recent novelists actions coming to light.

exactly