Why is BO2 considered not canon?

[Unseen]

I've heard and read on a few forums that some fans don't consider BO2 canon, I was just curious as to why this is? Seemed like it was canon to me, as far as a prequel goes anything could of happened before soul reaver, and it seems like it built up to what would happen in SR nicely enough.

[Dumah]

Originally posted by wrace:

Yep. Existing of such strange stone that can save from Soul Reaver (from the soul of Raziel inside it). Another non canon.

- are you sure that you understand what word canon means? If you dont like certain parts of official narrative it doesnt make it non-canon.

Originally posted by wrace:

BO2 is not canon just because this game was created without Crystal Dynamics.

- BO2 is canon because it is canon. You hold no authority to be able to decide what is canon or not in LoK.

Originally posted by wrace:

One more note: if one will look at credits of BO1, this one will see the name of Amy in them.

- in Uncharted too. Here for Uncharted is part of LoK. Hear! Hear!

[Unseen]

Well it seems that if there's even one connection in BO2 to the other games, such as the hylden, then it must be canon.

I understand all your points in the last post, and the blocking system was terrible. Its even more annoying due to the unblockable red attacks. Which I felt were cheap shots. I also hated Turok3, and felt like it ruined the series. And I said that on the turok 2 forums on steam and got trolled brutally. So I mean sometimes people take their games very seriously and latch onto something just cause its a brand. I guess that's collector mentality.

Altho, i did not think BO2 was as terrible as Turok3 was which imo completely changed what turok was, changed a game about dinosaurs, giant spiders, and primal beasts into tentacle fish demons. Hated that game, hated everything about it, the lame cod checkpoint system, the lame bosses, dumb AI, it was terrible and I loved the first 2 turoks.

So I get how you feel, I was just wondering if BO2 is connected, and I guess it is thanks to the Hylden. As much as I hate to admit, Turok3 is canon with those games since it follows up the story in turok2. Its kinda sad sometimes, a bad sequel can ruin a franchise, and degrade it greatly. That said, BO2 still fit into a lot of the themes of the old one, granted you have brought up some great points as to why its not the quality of the other games.

I for one think stealth in general in BO is dumb, he never used stealth in BO1. Besides changing into a peasant who didn't fight at all just talked to I think one crazy guy. Why would he use stealth? He's clad in armor and carries a sword and moves pretty slowly unless in wolf form.
So the idea of him using stealth imo is pretty damn dumb, and the finishing moves were less than brutal, well the double bladed sword ones probably the most violent one in the game to me, since he rips it upwards which would spill all your guts.

Just the idea of an uber vampire using stealth, instead of an exciting head on fight like in defiance, just seems odd to me. But still, I did like some levels and the hylden I did think were interesting additions to the legacy series. Its def not the best in the franchise. But if even one thing is connected to other games its still canon, even if its crap like turok3 was, its sadly canon.
Because its a copyrighted franchise, its kinda like how george lucas isn't directing starwars anymore, but abrams starwars, is still starwars canon its been etched into the mythos and whether its bad or not people gotta work with it I guess.

I can strongly agree with you that BO2 has some really stiff gameplay, weird graphics, wasn't made with any kind of style or anything... Uma for example, in the end credits her art looked nice, 3d wise, by the time of the gamecube resident evil remake with sexy as all hell jill, there's not much reason to make her look like an animated blow up doll.

It was a lazy product, and whats funny is it still netted in some money. I guess cause it was blood omen, even my old friend who loved horror games got it. He never played it past the first level, cause well, the reasons you've pointed out.

Altho i do kinda like playing bad games sometimes just to see how bad they are.. And BO2 was pretty bad, but I did feel like it got better later with more creepy enemies and better levels than what started out. As far as canon go, if it connects the other games even a little it much be canon.

But anyway, I like that you guys can have a friendly debate and put out your points and not insult or flame each other. Its cool to see that on steam for a change instead of petty insults or attacks. I think you've both been very mature with your points and i see both.

[Unseen]

Its a great series and the only real reason I'd struggle through a game like BO2, I really don't like stealth games much. I found the first MGS had a good story and cutscenes but the replay is terrible and the gameplay is more annoying to me than fun. Only really cool parts were hind d boss fight and metal gear. MGS2 was a lot better cause they streamlined it with more action and less stealth.

A dark game i could think of that's similar to BO2 is manhunt, which is a terribly boring game imo. I couldn't finish it, cause it was dull and annoying. So I'm not really big into stealth at all, but the fact its a legacy game pushed me through it. One reason I love the franchise so much, cause its actually like dracula, and not all the new stuff but the old dracula, the brutal, medievil, bloody and just all around monstrous vampire. Which I don't see as much now, its just pretty boy vampires like twilight. Kain series was a legit dark vampire story.

BO1 when I first played it, had so much atmosphere, creepy music, cutscenes, voice acting. For the time i think it was 96, I don't remember anything before that game that had that much. This was about one year before mario 64 and right near the launch of PSX. I didn't have no interest in wing commander or jumping flash, blood omen sold psx to me. Its really no wonder BO1 and soul reaver both are still talked about this long after they were released. I think their horror classics, and all these games, even BO2, deserve better versions than this.

[Baziel Moon]

BO2 the weakest of the franchise? Sure. Mildly Contradicting the titles around it? Quite possibly. Non-Canon? Absolutely not.
I would tend to agree that far too many people these days use the term "non-canon" when they mean "I personally disliked", "I didn't think this fit", "I'm not a fan of this genre" etc.
For better or worse BO2 is canon. You can have the debate about the comics as being a different media, you can have the debate about Nosgoth as not having a full release, but not with BO2 as a full game.

[Baziel Moon]

Sorry Wrace but that's not how it works - and you appear to be saying that you personally think it doesn't fit. You're more than welcome to debate what you consider fitting or what your 'headcanon' or opinion is but that's not what actual canon is. It definitely has things I'd rather it hadn't done but they spoke long ago about it - BO2 is canon. You can make cases for the comics being a different media or Nosgoth for being unreleased but not on the grounds that you personally have decided they don't fit. Sorry man, 'Word of God' is king and word of god said it's canon.

[Unseen]

I do see some of wrace points and I do agree that sometimes, even an official product isn't actually canon, or even multiverse.

Example would be, starwars legends, the old comics and novels. Even reading them back then, as a kid, I knew that they were no more than professional fan fics. Because as soon as a real sequel to return of the jedi came out, none of the books or comic books would matter. Even tho they were professional licensed products from the franchise, as soon as a real theatrical film was released, all of it was gonna be thrown away. I knew that before even the prequels were released because it made sense.

The same could be said for classic movie monsters like frankenstein or dracula. The real canon for those was the novels, not bride of frankenstein or curse of dracula they had nothing to do with the original creation. So what wrace is saying can happen. Pretty often actually, and that's because companies want money without being tied to a master storyline.

But where I'd agree with everyone else, is one simple connection. If any work of fiction, bad or good, connects even one bit of the original storyline, its canon. Example would be return to oz, from the wizard of oz series. Even tho it was weird as hell, and a lot more depressing than wizard of oz. It still connected the canon and had dorothy as the main character yet again and the old plotlines still existed within the film.

BO2, connects many themes in other BO's. I would say the canon in nosgoth might be loosely connected because its an online game with no real storyline, but then again I'm not sure about that cause I sadly never got a chance to play nosgoth (wish they'd bring it back would love to try it out). But the evidence has been given, dumah has said that there has been loose mention of the hylden in defiance, the closing entry to the series. To me that is the smoking gun that BO2 is canon. If one series, connects even a little bit of the main storyline, and is an official product of the franchise, it must be canon.

And I really can't buy its not canon cause of a few story inconsistencies, the same things can happen within an original storyline. Example would be the movie xmen2, pyro blasting a bunch of police officers with a blast of fire, then runs away with the evil mutants. Then right after that, the same fire that blew up a cop car, strangely doesn't even kill the cops, they get up with not even bad burns.. Then later on in the film, wolverine stabs one of his old rivals, a human, an old man at that... And the guy stays alive for about another half hour while a dam blows up and floods the place. A dude getting stabbed by 3 long blades, and he's old, and he doesn't even pass out from blood loss? Even things within one movie don't add up sometimes.

So my questions pretty much been answered I think, altho i would agree with wrace its not the best one, and has a lot I didn't like as well. I still kinda want it to be canon because of the hylden cause I kinda liked the hylden levels a lot. They actually made the game better and more unique. And added an aura of creepyness, and not really traditional monster/vampire creepyness but a kind of ancient, lost time creepyness. And that kinda thing to me adds a lot to the imagination. So to me the big connection is the hylden, and probably the selling point of the whole game. Even if alien/demons might seem odd for BO, they really are not aliens per say. Nosgoth isn't the same as our world but it is similar, even in BO1, the plague, kings and kingdoms, cities, crypts, religious minorities, a lot of it mirrored our real world. And the theory that we may of came from the stars, a different plain, or creations of the gods is something that I would expect would be mirrored in nosgoth as well.

So I really think its the hylden that connect the canon more than anything. And one major factor in my mind, and its not clear cut evidence but does support something that I find funny. In SR, raziel trys to justify the seraphen at the end, before his battle with kain. Kain laughs and mocks him for thinking the seraphen were kind or benevolent. Kain did this for a reason, for some knowledge he found out, and it wasn't well explained even then why the seraphan were corrupted. I wondered about it myself, cause given the first 2 games, it would appear that the seraphan are good guys. The vampires seem like nothing more than fleas, feeding on the unsuspecting natural human beings who just want to live their lives. In the first 2 games, I assumed that the vampires were natural villains and the appeal of the series is that you are not playing a good guy but a nightmare.

Well the hylden change all that, they connect the fact of what kain was laughing and mocking raziel for, that the seraphan were really being used, by an ancient malevolent species that saw vampires and humans both as nothing more than pawns. And had contempt for the very things they were using. So to me, I want BO2 to be canon because it answered a lot of questions from the first 2.

Sorry for the long rant but that's why I love the series, there's a lot of mythos and lore that I just love in this game and it was a great ongoing series. I really wish they would revive it in some form.

[Baziel Moon]

Fun fact: BO2 actually began development before SR1 had been released, but SR1 was such a colossal success that they accelerated the development of SR2 and left BO2 with less resources.

That's part of the reason for its problems but it also led to another interesting twist - they knew well in advance what was coming and planned for it. The whole of SR2 and Defiance was written expressly with the goal of solving or explaining BO2's inconsistencies - and it led to some of the best parts of the series: The Soul Reaver paradox, Raziel's role in it, the mind bendingly beautiful climax of SR2 and the end of Defiance : All were written that way specifically because of BO2.

You cut that off you cut off the reason behind most of the rest of the series. Sure it's not the greatest game and it somewhat brought the franchise down in its time but so much rests on it and is built from it that the series as a whole doesn't function as well without it.

[Baziel Moon]

Originally posted by wrace:

.
Why is BO2 canon? I think that I do not see yet the simple answer on this question.
I explained already why it is not canon from my opinion (many distinctions with the games that are really canonic in LOK - BO1 and SR1). Is it canon just because it has prefix "Legacy of Kain" or the same heroes (Kain, Vorador and Janos) that looks veeeery strange? Strange argument.

I think the key thing here seems to be the words "in my opinion". I appreciate your opinion on things but at the end of the day those are your beliefs. Doing what I do I have be quite careful with what's fact and what's opinion. So I try to avoid opinion where possible or clearly mark it as such. In this case canon by its very definition is a body of works approved by an author or publisher. They have made several statements in the past to the effect that BO2 is canon (notably by Amy Hennig and the team that ran the Soul Reavers not BO2)- especially during the early days when it was in dispute because people didn't know how it was supposed to fit. We know a lot more now - and yes a lot of it may have been retroactive, but they've never once said it's not canon. They've stuck by those guns. Whether you personally accept it or not is beside the point - your beliefs aren't on debate. If you believe it doesn't fit or is an alternative universe of whatever is not for me to say and you can debate that with whoever. But by definition that is not what canon is. Word of god has spoken on what the canon is and BO2 is canon.

Whatever you believe about Dead Sun is fine - it wasn't released. Whatever you believe about Nosgoth - grey area but ultimately wasn't released so you're welcome to discount it. Whatever you believe about the comics - they're a different media genre, so technically there's grey area for you to play with,. But not really on the officially released games.

Ultimately this brings us back to the beginning. People asserting their own views as 'canon' to try to denigrate things they see as less fit to be part of a franchise. That's what it comes down to: fanon, headcanon, personal belief. You're welcome to debate those, but those don't constitute canon.

Originally posted by wrace:

Originally posted by Baziel Moon:

Fun fact: BO2 actually began development before SR1 had been released, but SR1 was such a colossal success that they accelerated the development of SR2 and left BO2 with less resources.

Is there official proof of this fact? It looks very logical, though sooner it looks like tale of fans.

Given what I do I have a mountain of official sources, which people are free to look through. For some reason few people do. Tbh it always surprises me that people wade into debates without reading through official sources, but I digress. Feel free to look through.
https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1rn3HwkyzgxDH6n1UtZJoHS5RdAMW5UHr
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1JIzEZlM7Ssc78MevAiGmf5N3lQs1g0m4
https://legacyofkain.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Archive

Here's the particular source you're looking for:
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/legacy-of-kain-defiance-designer-diary-1/1100-6077249/

As I say BO2 was in the works first and suffered for the accelerated development of SR2 - and SR2 was planned in part to explain the events of BO2.

Originally posted by wrace:

Originally posted by Baziel Moon:

That's part of the reason for its problems but it also led to another interesting twist - they knew well in advance what was coming and planned for it.

It became evident after release of Defiance, which revealed the sence of some things in SR2.

Originally posted by wrace:

Originally posted by Baziel Moon:

The whole of SR2 and Defiance was written expressly with the goal of solving or explaining BO2's inconsistencies

I don't think so

Yeah, again. Mountain of sources and creators word trumps your opinion I'm afraid. Defiance is obvious but they also explicitly attribute the time travel and history altering stuff in SR2 as being written to accommodate the upcoming BO2. Here's one that comes to hand quickly:
http://www.dcabdesign.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=237#p237
https://web.archive.org/web/20160304102813/http://www.dcabdesign.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=336
It also says about how BO2 didn't really plan for things and threw things over the fence for others to handle and says how some on the SR team felt that hurt both of them, so there's also that.

Originally posted by wrace:

Originally posted by Baziel Moon:

The Soul Reaver paradox, Raziel's role in it, the mind bendingly beautiful climax of SR2 and the end of Defiance

The role of two paradoxes in SR2 is:
a) to save the life of Kain instead of to kill him as it was in the original timeline (first paradox);
b) provide to him the weapon for the last battle with the main enemy (second paradox).
No common with BO2 at all, because BO2 is about the younger Kain, not about the older one.
As I said above, they can use just the last moment in SR2 with the words of Kain about hyldens and the desire of Raziel to resurrect the Janos, that's all. Janos said nothing useful in Defiance, it was just used as the container for Unspoken to use it in BO2. Two small moments in SR2 and Defiance for that to give the life for BO2. They do not change these games cardinally.

Again I can't help but feel you've missed something here. They've been woven into the story, but the reason they were written in the first place is so Amy could justify the changes BO2 had made. Ultimately we have a plot where Raziel changes history to spare Kain and then Kain changes history to spare Raziel which causes a massive issue with history - this issue is the events of BO2. SR2 initiates the change, Defiance explains the finer details of what changed and BO2 is the end result of them. But IRL BO2 was happening so SR2 was written to introduce timeline changes to accommodate for it and Defiance was written to tie up the loose ends and tie them back together. How they tie together was touched upon in interviews: http://www.thelostworlds.net/Defiance/Question_and_Answer_with_Amy_Hennig.html
Note also in that interview, Amy backs up BO2 and says her games explin it rather than declares it 'non-canon'

Feel free to 'disagree' and everything ,but this is stuff explained by the creators. IMO if you play against the word of god, you lose. If they ever change tact and say it isn't canon I'll join you in reiterating that fact but until then 'god' has spoken and I see little reason to challenge what they have said.

[Unseen]

Well I was just wondering initially since I saw quite a few threads and fan sites saying it wasn't canon online and was really curious as to why or why not. But I think I see why now, I'm kinda sold on the idea its canon since even if the game was somewhat awkward in gameplay, and some of the models looked funny. They still used kains old voice actor, and they still connected BO1, and apparently the other ones in a few details.

I really am more on the side its canon since, well, it is sold with all the other legacy games on steam. I would think the franchise would consider it canon at least.

I would say wrace could just throw it out in his mind as canon if he really doesn't like it, but there still comes the issue with the hylden, and wasn't BO2 the first appearance and mention of the hylden? So if any game connects the hylden that to me is kind of the smoking gun.

So yea I really was just curious as to why people have these different viewpoints. Also I'm new to the expanded franchise, never got a chance to play SR till now and was always more familiar with BO1, I'm glad they were released on steam. Altho I would like to see a good version of BO1 on steam with resolution support etc. Would play it all over again if they did.

[Baziel Moon]

Ok sorry Wrace, I know the English language can be complex and isn't necessarily your forte. Let me spell it out:


https://www.gamespot.com/articles/legacy-of-kain-defiance-designer-diary-1/1100-6077249/
"While Soul Reaver was still in development, and seeing as-yet untapped potential in the character of Kain, another Crystal Dynamics team began work on Blood Omen 2."

*So BO2 began development before SR1 was released, hence it started before SR2.SR2 was released first. Therefore their places were swapped. Steve Ross's complaints about BO2 also gel with this:
http://sxross.com/?cat=14
"Not my fondest memories. This project took three years while we built our engine from scratch. Trying to art direct this while also doing all the concept work and being a full time environment artist, designer, and UI artist nearly killed me."
*Thus he was working from 99-01 and did a hell of a lot himself. Amy meanwhile says this:
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/soul-reaver-2-qanda/1100-2820960/
"it's basically been two years since we finished up Soul Reaver (including the PC and Dreamcast ports, and all the foreign versions that had to be completed following the US release of Soul Reaver on the PlayStation). A two-year development cycle is pretty normal or even aggressive by today's standards...."
"To make a long story short(er), we created Soul Reaver 2, from the ground up, in just 17 months. This required a heroic effort, remarkable dedication, and sickening hours from the team. I am so proud of my teammates, and I'm blown away by what they've been able to accomplish in this short amount of time."
*So she has a big team working long hours who've completed their game in less than 18 months.

Thus: BO2 started first, SR2 released first - places were swapped. One of them was accelerated.

Again. Amy resolved things beginning with SR2:
http://www.dcabdesign.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=237#p237
As you quote:
""BO2's contradictions were thrown 'over the fence' for the SR team to figure out. It made a lot of our storyline stuff hard to reconcile. Personally I resented it, but damn if Amy didn't come through and tie it all together. The ending of SR2 with Kain's new memories, the Hylden, etc.. she just did an amazing job considering the huge amount of crap she had to resolve."
You seem to have missed the other one there.
https://web.archive.org/web/20160304102813/http://www.dcabdesign.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=336
"3) Now this is about BO1, so I will understand if you don't have an anwser for that, but... in BO1, when Kain traveled back through time, the only weapon that could kill William the Just was the Soul Reaver. Was it already planned by Sillicon Knights that 2 incarnations of the Reaver could create a paradox (and the idea was carried on in SR2) ?
No the Paradox was created to help explain some of the inconsistencies of BO2, and to create the ability to change fate. It was entirely Amy's creation: she found a way to use coincidences in BO as a way to explain the ability to change time. I thought it was a brilliant solution!"

*Thus as previously stated BO2 did do thing the other team didn';t like and left inconsistencies they didn't like. But they didn't declare it non-canon. They worked to resolve it. As above Amy wrote the time paradox parts of SR2 specifically to help explain BO2's issues.

She goes on to further explain how it all fits together:
http://www.thelostworlds.net/Defiance/Question_and_Answer_with_Amy_Hennig.html
"How does Defiance relate to the events of Blood Omen 2?
The events of Defiance cause Blood Omen 2 to be possible. During the rift when the Pillars collapse, the Hylden Lord/Hash is able to escape his imprisonment and possess Janos. This means that not only does he have an indestructible vessel for himself, but once he gets another body in BO2, he has Janos prison to use to power The Device. Vorador's appearance in that game was going to be explained a little bit in the original Defiance design, but this part was trimmed down."
And for the people at the back who can't read very well we'll say it louder
"THE EVENTS OF DEFIANCE CAUSE BLOOD OMEN 2 TO BE POSSIBLE"

That is a straight up question where she could have responded declaring it non-canon. She didn't, she explained it and said how it fits in - it's canon

So again ultimately you're welcome to your opinions if your headcanon is it didn't happen. It did create problems for the franchise certainly but they've never wrote it off for that, quite the opposite. Burden of proof is on you to prove with things beyond you opinion that it isn't canon. Find the smoking gun where they say it isn't canon and I'll join you. Until that point - In official terms, for better or worse - it's a canon entry to the franchise.

[Baziel Moon]

Hey if you can't be bothered to read the sources and try to understand the words it's not my problem. I've not given you opinion - I've given you official sources (where the director explains how the series fits into the canon no less) and you've ignored them and given me your opinion and tried to shine it up for more than it's worth. The burden of proof is on you. Unless you can find an official source with the words "BO2 is not canon" then your opinion is invalidated. Sad but true. It's canon. Deal with it. Build a bridge and get over it.

[Baziel Moon]

So to summarise;
Using words that make sense =bad
Your opinion = so good you need to keep typing it
Dev comments = bad
Reading them =terribad
Official position = 'nothing'
"The events of Defiance cause Blood Omen 2 to be possible" = ignoring this
BO2 =canon
Building bridges = oh hell no
Dealing with the actual position = no way
Dealing with burden of proof being on you = tears or is it water (see1)
Revealing cut content = great
Dancing with Tambourines =bad unless it involves sorting your patches or Morris dancing for some reason
Cheat enabled puzzled puzzle solved = so great it's a vince mcmahon face

You don't like it, but thats not what canon is - burden of proof is on you. Get over it already.
don't worry man I can forgive your mistakes just others are notably less impressed and tbh I can see why. You can get better though wrace I believe in you. You can make it, you can pull through. Best wishes

[Baziel Moon]

In all seriousness though. Laughs and trolling aside, we both know the actual status of BO2 don't we? Op has got their answer, there's probably no need to 'play the game' (of pretending you don't know) anymore.

It's come down to a rather amusing stalemate of your low opinion of it (which BTW I'm not really disagreeing with) vs the official stance, continuity connections and developer comments. If you really feel that the series work best without BO2 then you are free to have that as a personal opinion.

But ultimately that isn't what the canon of the series is - as a fully fledged game released, published, officially supported (in its time) and never cast out by its devs or publishers it is by the very definition a canon Lok title.

For all it flaws and imperfections it is canon and that's really all there can be to it. You may well have been trying to play devil's advocate by pointing out why people generally dislike it and don't want to treat it as canon and have just gotten a little carried away - but we both know where it really stands don't we? For better or worse BO2 is a true part of the series and we've gotta live with that.

[Baziel Moon]

Wrace. Why would I want to ignore the facts to suit your opinion?

I think you need to have a look into this a bit more. Play the games. Read through some of those sources - and I mean actually read them - especially the part where the director says " The events of Defiance cause Blood Omen 2". Don't cherry pick what supports your opinion and dismiss whatever you don't like: and that's good advice generally - Don't try to make the facts suit your opinion let your opinion suit the facts. It's all laid out for you here if you have the will to overcome that ego. As before, your headcanon doesn't constitute what the actual canon of the series is. If you want to be active in the Lok community you need to get over that and know where your opinion ends and where objective reality begins and deal with it.

I learnt long long ago when I started to be active in the community that you have to know the difference between fact and opinion if you want to debate, and you have to learn to get along with people. Those are skills that - in the nicest possible way - you could really brush up on.

[Baziel Moon]

Originally posted by wrace:

Water. Tears. But my opinion is fact cos I said is proof. Something about Tambourines

Facts. Official Word. Canon. Deal. With. It.