Εγκατάσταση Steam
Σύνδεση
|
Γλώσσα
简体中文 (Απλοποιημένα κινεζικά)
繁體中文 (Παραδοσιακά κινεζικά)
日本語 (Ιαπωνικά)
한국어 (Κορεατικά)
ไทย (Ταϊλανδικά)
Български (Βουλγαρικά)
Čeština (Τσεχικά)
Dansk (Δανικά)
Deutsch (Γερμανικά)
English (Αγγλικά)
Español – España (Ισπανικά – Ισπανία)
Español – Latinoamérica (Ισπανικά – Λατινική Αμερική)
Français (Γαλλικά)
Italiano (Ιταλικά)
Bahasa Indonesia (Ινδονησιακά)
Magyar (Ουγγρικά)
Nederlands (Ολλανδικά)
Norsk (Νορβηγικά)
Polski (Πολωνικά)
Português (Πορτογαλικά – Πορτογαλία)
Português – Brasil (Πορτογαλικά – Βραζιλία)
Română (Ρουμανικά)
Русский (Ρωσικά)
Suomi (Φινλανδικά)
Svenska (Σουηδικά)
Türkçe (Τουρκικά)
Tiếng Việt (Βιετναμικά)
Українська (Ουκρανικά)
Αναφορά προβλήματος μετάφρασης
Κανόνες συζητήσεων και οδηγίες
Αναφορά ανάρτησης
"Now with UCN I'm finally satisfied with the lore"
-Scott
Also, UCN wasn't meant to be canon. It was a fun little last game to give us some joy and tie up the last tiny bits of lore left. William's now trapped in Hell forever with Cassidy and 50+ horrifying animatronics to kill him over and over, the FFPS location burned down killing Henry, Michael, and the last remaining spirits, and the series is over.
just because something breaks the fourth wall doesn't mean it's not cannon
What do you mean by "Canon" exactly? How do you define it?
I'm understanding that when someone says Canon, they mean "Primary Resource". But there is a bit of an equivocation fallacy here, as the definition seems to shift to suit the purposes of the person talking about it... Which then leads to an Ad Populis, as various people support or reject something being canon or not to suit their purposes.
Canon, by dicta, is not very useful here. For example, the New Testament is Canon, and went through a massive council of debates to figure out what is and isn't 'Canon'. What came out was a series of stories that wildly contradict one another and don't clarify the life of one of the world's most influential spiritual leaders. Hell, recent analysis of the bible revealed that there was a "Book Of Jesus" but it somehow became lost between being written and this canonization process. [1, side bar on the process of proving that.]
So, lets start with the basics here; How do you define 'Canon' and what are the traits that a canon piece of the work, entail? Does UCN have these traits, or does it not have enough to suitably pass as Canon to you? If it does, or does not, what does that mean going forward?
---
[1] The discovery of "the Book of Q", or "The Book of Jesus".
The New Testament is a bibliography of the writings of the followers of Jesus, and no one mentions Jesus having written a book before. This is unusual, because Jesus would be the most successful religious figure to have never written a book to his own name. Usually we would chalk that up to Jesus either not having the money to have a book written (He is remarkably pressed for cash in numerous stories, like pulling coins from a fish, pay onto Cesar, throwing down in church market, etc.) and Publishing is notoriously expensive, OR he may have been a collection of various people in a process we call pageantry. IE, the disciples all took stories from poor Jewish wandering mystics and compiled him into a singular character, and this is the story of a sub-sect of Judaism forming and rising. To keep it digestible for the common people, they just amalgamated these mystics as a singular character. These were the two most common explanations for some of Jesus's curious qualities as a Religious figure.
But, there is a wrinkle. "Jesus Said" and "Jesus Wrote" in the native language of Aramaic, uses the same words. Think of it as though you had just gotten a text from your mom, what's more natural for you to say? "My Mom says XYZ" or "My Mom Wrote XYZ"? Same principle, but literacy wasn't wide spread enough to warrant the language to even acknowledge this in common usage.
So, how do we prove if something was Written and recited as the words of Jesus, or if it was Spoken and then recorded as the words of Jesus?
An Israeli institute (The name eludes me off the top of my head), did an analysis of the writings of the Apostles in it's native language and found numerous places where they quote Jesus verbatim. They all agree with long passages of texts, to the punctuation, exactly what Jesus had 'Said'. Do you remember when MatPat claimed that his script's '4th Paragraph' was about the puppet, and he used that as evidence that FNAF6 is going to be about the puppet? Well, Scott can't hear paragraphs, nor can any of us. Mark, Luke and John, blessed disciples they may be, can NOT hear the exact same punctuation (Including errors in the punctions, *Shakes fist* Curse you Commas!). And considering that these books were written decades apart from one another, we can conclude that they were citing a book written by Jesus, rather then recalling what he had said.
Now, what exactly happened to the Book of Jesus?.. no one knows for sure. But, at least we know that he did write something. And we have a pretty good lay out of what is in it, even if we don't have the full texts.