Command and Conquer Wiki talk:Canon/Archive 1


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of matters pertaining to C&C Canon. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the new Canon talk page or in a new topic on the Forums).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

Continuity
From the perspective of this Wiki being inside the Command and Conquer Universe, obviously only one set of events takes place, and everything else would be speculation. Therefore, I have tried to write my articles so that as much as possible of both campaigns is written into the 'actual history,' even if I have to change certain things to make things consistent. Obviously, I can't do this with the Second Tiberium War, or the Red alert storylines, but I've tried to do this with the Firestorm Crisis, as well as The First Tiberium War. Obviously the Generals plotline needs no help.
 * But we're not doing Generals in Cnc Wiki, right? --Snow93 09:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Tiberium Dawn / Sun
Please look over my First Tiberium War, and Firestorm Crisis pages that I've cooked up. I'm willing to change them if you think there's a continuity issue, especially with First Tiberium War - I was looking for a way to fit in both campaigns, because due to the in-universe nature of this Wiki, whatever doesn't occur, we never talk about.
 * I think having as much as possible of both campaigns is fine, but if Renegade's storyline conflicts with the Nod campaign, we go with Renegade (I think)Snow93 08:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

How might renegade's campaign conflict with the Nod campaign? I dunno, just in case it did. Snow93 13:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment from Agaiz
About that RA2 issue: There are pictures of RA2 Apocalypse Tanks in Kane's temple in Renegade. Whether this is just an easter egg or actually a relevant link between the stories I don't know. On the other hand, what happened to Kane. Do we just not see him around in the Kremlin or is it because it's a parallel universe? And there is more... is Lt. Eva just another easter egg or a reference to GDI's AI? I mean she might have become the voice for all EVA units during the developement process because commanders liked her voice? But that's just speculation.

Oh yeah, and what about C&C3? I just saw the Black Hand page you wrote. Previews of C&C3 indicate that the Black Hand is involved in attacking GDI during the Third Tiberium War. So should this already be included or not? I think it should, it makes this wiki more interesting because there is 'fresh' information, not just from old games.

Exactly, I was just about to mention the wealth of information from places such as, especially the pictures which are actually "fact files" (i.e. with information on them) --Snow93 17:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

More Dthaiger
As stated by APOC, anything at this stage is still early development. Until we actually have the game, I figure C&C 3 doesn't exist (Besides, we need a consistent timescheme, we can't be writing some articles from 2032, and others from 2047.) As for RA2, I think the best way to deal with it is:

1. RA1

2. Ant Missions Black Ops 9 formed

3. Do not include RA2

4. TWI

5. TWII

6. Firestorm.

Comments?

I changed it because I realized that it's very hard to exclude a lot of articles. For example, let's say that we allow RA2 in, and then it is revealed in TWIII that RA2 had absolutely nothing to do with it. In that case, we would be obliged to take out the RA2 articles, or to at least tag them as a 'Historical Simulation,' or something like that, which could be very inconvenient.

DarkMastero's Reposnse
I feel that they are planning to make RA2 in continuality. The introduction of the Time Machine is a clear hint of this because the major plot hole was the years getting off. I imagen that at some point they will travel back in time and somehow help the events of Tiberian Dawn get into place. Likely whenever they get around to making another game in the Red Alert universe (which won't be soon seeing as how they've chosen to do a Tiberian game next...). --DarkMastero 18:41, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

--Dthaiger 19:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Make a different namespace for alternative universes? --Snow93 19:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Like adding 'Red Alert 2 Universe' (or possibly 'Generals Universe') to every article? We could do that, I'd love to see some RA2 articles in here - seperated from the original universe database. Main page should notice users about this e.g. 'This wiki is mainly about the original C&C universe (including RA1, TD, Ren, TS) - for articles on the parallel universes (RA2, Gen) please refer to their respective pages --Agaiz 07:52, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I believe they are all related, but not linearly. To me it seems as if this occurred: Einstein nerfs Hitler, RA1 begins

- If Soviets win RA1, the USSR may soon collapse with internal conflict & a provisional govt joins the G8 along with the reestablished Allies, then proceed to TD (possibly include the Ant missions to cause a military establishment between the countries)

- If Allies win RA1, then RA2 & YR happen

TD: GDI wins, defeats main threats of Nod

TS: Nod power resurges using world uncertainty and utilization of tiberium, etc. etc. --143.88.130.167 15:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Continuity issue:

How is it that GDI can use the ion cannon at the end of the Firestorm Crisis, but they can't contact any orbital communications stations because of ion interference. --Dthaiger 00:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Well at the end of FS they reestablish the link to GDI orbital command... but you're right, before they do they should not be able to contact any satellite. Maybe it's just something where the game designers didn't pay attention. Like with the timeline issues we've discussed on the history talk page. Speaking of which: I've talked to some people in a forum about this. The consensus was that the first war began with a terrorist attack in 1995 and escalated into a global scale conflict which lasted for three years. Renegade was really supposed to be after that and the fact that Kane is in there can be explained in two ways: the first option is that we only see him on screen or as a hologram so he might very well be connected to CABAL like in FS or in some secret hiding place where he went to after the destruction of his temple. The other explanation would be that the developers didn't care about continuity and just wanted to put as much C&C in there as possible. In order to fit Renegade into our timeline I believe we have to stick with the first option - that's also what PlanetCnC did for their Encyclopedia. They left out a lot but the chapter about the Black Hand is clearly set after the first war. Timeline will look like this then:

1946 (they mention GDI here in some RA1 video by the way) 1995 Meteor, terrorist attack, beginning of the conflict 1998 First War ends 2020 Black Hand, first Kane sightings, ReGenesis 2030 official return of Kane, Second War

I mean Hassan has to have gained power somewhere between 2020 and 2030 - and his temple is in Egypt, just like the one you destroy at the end of Renegade. Slavik also suceeds Raveshaw as the leader of the Black Hand if I'm not mistaken. --Agaiz 08:16, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

According to the TS manual, sightings of Kane became relatively commonplace during the period between the first and second Tiberium Wars. --Dthaiger 14:04, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I know the Ion Cannon discussion is likely dead but I'd like to suggest that maybe the Ion Cannon is lower in orbit then GDI's space station. I recall CABAL mentioning that the interference was in the upper atmosphere so if the Ion Cannon was lower then the interference they still may be able to contact it. --63.65.45.98 05:08, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Heres my Idea the war starts 1994 because the fighting was going on before in Africa GDI was formed because of Nod power in the Balkans Tiberium appears transforing Nod from a third rate Al Quadea'sh group to a world power Renegade and end of GDI and Nod campains take place in 2010 because a) it say's decades have taken place between TD and TS and b) because that contradicts EA's 2019 idea Jamhaw 18:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)jamhaw
 * Oh yeah Kucan says in an interview that Renegade takes place the same time as TD. Jamhaw 18:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)jamhaw

Continuity
Now that we have an article about it, we have a choice. I can either create a 'Non-Canon' template, or we can figure out a way to include it.

The other thing I think would be utterly awesome is to get some more people to look over our 'continuity / history pages' (Once we have them all together), and then see if APOC will look over them.

Sincerely, Dthaiger 20:38, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

No, Renegade is clearly the last few missions of C&C. --Snow93 14:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

No the temple in TD is in Sarajevo, Bosnia the one that Havoc destroys however is in Egypt. So they can't be the same --Agaiz 14:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Where does it say that the Renegade one is in Egypt? --Snow93 08:12, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

In one of the missions I think - also you see that the temple in Sarajevo is a different setting. The one in Egypt is surrounded by desert/canyon, Kane's temple has trees in the background. --Agaiz 09:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

That's unlucky, they can't do it perfectly. I think that everyone in the community would agree that the end of Renegade is the end of Tiberian Dawn, just from a different person's viewpoint. --Snow93 09:45, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Most of us agree on that. I'd like to ask: what about the differences in the uniforms and weaponry between TD and Renegade? Should this be treated as an evolution in arms technology or all this great art in Renegade should be ignored as non-canon?- This is an important question to me as I plan to edit some screenshots from Renegade and inplement them into the articles on characters/units from TD (as I tried in the [|minigunner article]). I don't want to work in vain- do I have the blessing of the community? --Johnny 10:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Include what does not contradict Tiberian Dawn (eg. black Hand details, bios of characters, weapon evolution (the Cobretti AR-70 as an evolution of the GAU-3 Eliminator and predecessor of the M16 Mk. II). Check existing articles to see how it was implemented (eg. Light Tank). Mikael Grizzly 10:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Kane Runs World
If the soviet ending were canoncical Kane would rule the world and nod would be uneccsarry to form Jamhaw 20:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)jamhaw

That's what you might think, but in actual fact, if the Soviets won RA, they would only rule all of mainland Europe. Anyway, welcome to CnCWiki, Jamhaw, enjoy your time here. --Snow|93(talk) (Edward Lilley) 12:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually just because Kain killed Stalin and whats-her-name (Nadia) --Dthaiger 01:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC) it doesn't mean all of the Soviet Union will suddenly follow him, if anything he (Kane) would be a traitor. With them gone several other generals and leaders would likely fight for control of the Soviet Union which could cause it to collapse. --63.65.45.98 18:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I suppose so. The Brotherhood would most probably rise out of the ashes of the defeated Soviet Union. --Snow93 10:24, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Kane rise up from Tiberium. Also the Rich-Poor grade took big bite too. --Kasugurami 09:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Err, no. Kane was present as far back as the Great World War II and used his influence to control the Soviet Union. The Brotherhood of Nod existed far longer than most think. Move Fiend 09:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Separate Universes
Now, I may have misunderstood, but I was lead to believe that there is now, officially, no connection between the Tiberium and RA timelines, and that they are now separate universes. If that's the case, shouldn't there be separate entries for similar buildings in each universe? DWolf2k2 06:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

There are. Such as Construction Yard and Mammoth Tank for the Tiberium universe and RA2:Construction Yard and RA2:Mammoth Tank for the RA2 universe. --24.172.193.251 17:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Westwood intended them to be sequel in timeline. RA was definitely. Yet not sure about RA2. Personally I want to include.
 * RA has most of the unit Dawn has - RA2 has similar one, not completely same. --Kasugurami 09:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The general stance is that RA2 is uncanonical in the Tiberium universe. Most editors hee share this stance, so RA2 will remain in a separate namespace. Move Fiend 09:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Hate for Generals
Also, why do so many users here seem to dislike Generals so much? I understand it's a grand departure from the rest of C&C, but it's still a pretty good game.DWolf2k2 23:02, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
 * As you might have guessed, I agree with you. The trouble with it for the 'old-skool' fans was that it was such a departure from many of the series' traditional themes and ideas. Not only did it not feature Tiberium or the Soviets/Allies, it also changed fundamental gameplay aspects. For example, many players resented the shift of the toolbar to the bottom, the addition of 'worker' or 'peon' units to construct buildings, the lack of FMV, etc. Personally, while I can understand their annoyance at the time (they were looking forward to another Tiberium game), now that C&C 3 has been released I hope that people can see Generals as a game that, while lacking links to the other titles in the series, is still very fun to play. In particular, I think Generals (with ZH and patches) is one of the most finely balanced games for multiplayer, with all those different sides perfectly in tune with one another. Oh, and the 'modern warfare' theme, er, rocks my boat. Makron1n 14:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I don't know about anyone else, but I make a point of saying that while thw storyline is utter rubbish, it is a good game. I play it lots and lots (yes, really, I do). So I agree with Makron1n. The only ting I don't like about it is the storyline, so as this wiki is quite a lot about storyline/universe, it might seem as though I don't like it. If we were solely talking about technical gameplay issues it would seem as though I loved it. I generally feel the same about RA2, but the storyline is at least funny in it. --Snow93(talk)(contrib) 13:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Here's one for ya
lookie

A screenshot from Red Alert (1): Retaliation from psx...

I know the argument has been going on for very long, though presence of general Carville in RA1 should be seen as a connection between the two games large enough to yet again think over either treating RA2 as a part of tib universe or RA1 as a separate universe...--Johnny 15:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Nope. Just because a character has been re-used doesn't mean the games are connected, especially since he wasn't in the games released for PC. However, if you could point out Kane in RA2 or Yuri in RA, that would be a connection. Mikael Grizzly 15:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC)