2 hours ago, Verlaine said:

I'm puzzled by the repeated critique that 1) Disney wiped out the EU and at the same time 2) presented a story that is the same as the EU and uses EU characters. These two cannot be both correct.

The story is not the same. They're just cherry picking what they want and twisting it.

For people calling another canon reset after 30 years: it's not going to happen, the franchise will be dead by then. I love star wars, i love new star wars movies, eu and new canon. But times had changed and star wars isn't the only "big" thing, its not as magical as it used to be, we got accustomed to astounding visual effects. When star wars came out, the world was a lot more bland and boring (at least in poland, during the time of comunistic government), star wars showed the alternative to everyday life and expanded universe was builded on those strong feelings, it allowed people to come back to this unique world they loved. Today, even though its extremely popular, the franchise doesn't invoke such strong feelings anymore. People will change, expectations will change and star wars will die and remain "80s classic with **** ton of spinnofs, sequels and prequels". That's how i see it. Imagine someone watching ANH in 2050. Its going to be entirely different world and watching ANH will probably be as strange to them as watching old karate movies for us or sth like that.

Answering the question - i'm afraid we wont see any eu ships, but we will see pilots and upgrades from eu (because new canon sinply isnt big enough)

Or like watching the original Godzilla now. Which is still a kind of powerful experience. Star Wars is a classic. And will still be around and revered for quite sometime. It has already lasted 40 years.

16 hours ago, TheRabidAardvark said:

Disney did the right thing. And cherrypicking isn't "disrespectful". Calling it disrespectful only shows that you're a simplistic grognard who cannot adapt to change and has a severe case of nostalgia glasses.

Wow. Just because someone has a different opinion then you doesn't mean they're a "simplistic grognard". In fact, all you're doing is proving you are very childish and can't stand the fact that someone might have a different opinion then you. Grow up.

17 hours ago, TheRabidAardvark said:

some hackjob author could self-insert their mary-sue/gary-stu.

Yea the worst time the EU ever did that was Episode 7. Oh wait that's not EU.....

15 hours ago, JJFDVORAK said:

Well as one of the many "simplistic grognards", I disagree that 75-80% of the old EU was crap. Maybe it's my "severe case of nostalgia glasses" but I rather like lots of the old EU. Was it all great? Of course not, but neither is the new canon. Some of the new canon is just this generations "hackjob author" self-inserting their Mary Sue. How about you just keep your opinion - and make no mistake- that is all it is- to yourself and try not to be so disrespectful of the opposite opinion.

I didn't read the EU until after getting into X-wing. I can tell you that you are looking at it through rose colored glasses. There is more crap then there is good stuff. Also, the good stuff is just....OK. It's not great.

Next, they didn't just wipe the EU into the trash bin. They said it's still there....but not necessarily accurate. They are basically going to go through it all and redo everything that they feel is good enough to be kept. Also, they will do it in a way that has at least a certain quality level and it works with the consistent story line they are building. So, step back from the whole "they threw it all in the trash heap" reaction.

Personally, I'm very pleased with what they are doing. I think there were some good ideas in the EU, but most of it was crap. Even the good stuff was not as good as it could have been. So, I'm more than happy to see them redo all the EU into something better and something that fits.

Those that look at the EU fondly are looking through rose tinted glasses in my opinion.

I think the comic book analogy is good. How many times have Superman or Spiderman or Xmen or Batman reset their lore? Somethings get left behind, some don't.

Clearly these story lines haven't died on the vine.

50 minutes ago, heychadwick said:

I didn't read the EU until after getting into X-wing. I can tell you that you are looking at it through rose colored glasses. There is more crap then there is good stuff. Also, the good stuff is just....OK. It's not great.

Next, they didn't just wipe the EU into the trash bin. They said it's still there....but not necessarily accurate. They are basically going to go through it all and redo everything that they feel is good enough to be kept. Also, they will do it in a way that has at least a certain quality level and it works with the consistent story line they are building. So, step back from the whole "they threw it all in the trash heap" reaction.

Personally, I'm very pleased with what they are doing. I think there were some good ideas in the EU, but most of it was crap. Even the good stuff was not as good as it could have been. So, I'm more than happy to see them redo all the EU into something better and something that fits.

Those that look at the EU fondly are looking through rose tinted glasses in my opinion.

I'm curious as to what kinds of material you've gotten into with the EU. Are you reading the books alone? Or are you also playing the numerous video games that also came from the EU?

And as far as quality is concerned, again, the vast majority of EU content held up to decent standards of quality. The EU might have been messy, there are scattered articles across the wiki that show discrepancies regarding certain topics of the lore, but the vast majority of what was made was consistent with the lore. There are numerous books that are fantastic, such as the Republic Commando series (the game is also amazing), X-Wing Rogue Squadron, The Thrawn Trilogy, The Old Republic series (another great game). And then there are the countless games like the X-Wing and TIE-Fighter series, Dark Forces, Battlefront, Rogue Squadron, Bounty Hunter, and Shadows of the Empire, which are also of great quality and stand up today.

The problem is that while Disney might be twisting the EU to conform to their own standards, they are leaving out an incredible amount of detail in the process. They are doing all of this when they simply could have been far more creative and gone to The Old Republic era, or focus on stories of other characters that are around during the Galactic Civil War or Clone Wars eras. It's a big galaxy, with trillions of inhabitants at least. Why shove in the original cast if not for the pure sake of maximum profit? To me, wanting to re-write history for maximum monetary gain isn't a good method to promote story-telling. Above all else, I don't see what the point was to unnecessarily remaking content that already existed. Disney would have made plenty from just holding onto the license of Star Wars alone.

38 minutes ago, Lobokai said:

I think the comic book analogy is good. How many times have Superman or Spiderman or Xmen or Batman reset their lore? Somethings get left behind, some don't.

Clearly these story lines haven't died on the vine.

The comic book analogy doesn't apply here in the same way though. Yes, Marvel and DC have consistently created new stories around their characters, but with comic books, the one appealing aspect are those specific characters. The vast majority of comics place their heroes and villains in modern times, there isn't a deep, rich universe of limitless potential that can easily be jumped to in the same way that exists with Star Wars. Their story lines certainly haven't died on a vine, but reinterpreting comic book characters is a different environment compared to something like Star Wars. Comic book characters like Superman have plenty of different interpretations for their history and future, and the general public would be able to identify that the different movies are different interpretations of the character, and that one movie doesn't necessarily override the other. The atmosphere of writing a new take on Superman is much more open because Superman is the aspect of that medium which holds the center stage. That's not true of Star Wars, where the universe was open to all kinds of interesting characters with unique backstories.

Think of it this way, superhero comics are defined by their characters, Star Wars is defined by its universe. They are two different aspects of entertainment, and the rules that work out for one don't exactly work for the other.

Yeah, you mentioned like, a dozen things out of hundreds of entries in the old EU. Now, many are good, and quite a few more are okayish, but the EU is not a golden child. Novel-wise they've been on rocky ground since 1999 and Vector Prime (Personally, while I liked some of the NJO books, the series was way too long), Dark Nest, Legacy of the Force and Fate of the Jedi may have strong concepts but were not always strongly executed. Traviss later republic commando books are marred by her increasing preachiness on her beliefs about how wrongbad Jedi are about everything. Before that you've got some classic clunkers. Crystal Star? Children of the Jedi? Dark Saber? Not to mention quite a few of the EU stories may not be bad to experience but critically are incredibly cheesy and not to be taken seriously.

While a number of video games are good game, they haven't always been very strongly additive to the Lore. Battlefront II and its community has a special place in my heart - but that game was TERRIBLE with vehicles for "competitive balance", completely ballsed up all the lore. KOTOR II is a very polarizing title about if it's on tone, and many people are critical of the fustercluck of TOR the MMO's lore and story direction. People complain about Zann in EaW. Just because you have a positive subjective experience does not mean that critically the product is good.

But, most importantly for Disney - their target audience hasn't read all that. TFA didn't nearly become the best selling movie of all time (and I think highest selling in the US) by Disney holding on to a bunch of old lore from decades ago that other people have been forced to follow because continuity. That IS like comic books, and if you're taking over a brand to move forward it's real, real bad to shoehorn your "new" audience to try and follow a bunch of old stuff they don't know about and you either have to explain or try and get them to buy into something that even people who really like it have said a lot of it isn't that great. You said it, Star Wars is defined by it's universe. Well, in order to bring that universe back to everyone - not just the same serious fans who'd been following all along, then needed to go back to basic and do it again.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Power-gem_attack_ship

How can anyone forget this phallic looking beauty. And we can introduce the greatest jerk-ass pilot in the galaxy, Vrad Dodonna! Who else has stranded Luke Skywalker on an airless asteroid? And just think what a 'power gem' modification upgrade could do...

49 minutes ago, CosmicCastawayA90 said:

I'm curious as to what kinds of material you've gotten into with the EU. Are you reading the books alone? Or are you also playing the numerous video games that also came from the EU?

And as far as quality is concerned, again, the vast majority of EU content held up to decent standards of quality. The EU might have been messy, there are scattered articles across the wiki that show discrepancies regarding certain topics of the lore, but the vast majority of what was made was consistent with the lore. There are numerous books that are fantastic, such as the Republic Commando series (the game is also amazing), X-Wing Rogue Squadron, The Thrawn Trilogy, The Old Republic series (another great game). And then there are the countless games like the X-Wing and TIE-Fighter series, Dark Forces, Battlefront, Rogue Squadron, Bounty Hunter, and Shadows of the Empire, which are also of great quality and stand up today.

The problem is that while Disney might be twisting the EU to conform to their own standards, they are leaving out an incredible amount of detail in the process. They are doing all of this when they simply could have been far more creative and gone to The Old Republic era, or focus on stories of other characters that are around during the Galactic Civil War or Clone Wars eras. It's a big galaxy, with trillions of inhabitants at least. Why shove in the original cast if not for the pure sake of maximum profit? To me, wanting to re-write history for maximum monetary gain isn't a good method to promote story-telling. Above all else, I don't see what the point was to unnecessarily remaking content that already existed. Disney would have made plenty from just holding onto the license of Star Wars alone.

The comic book analogy doesn't apply here in the same way though. Yes, Marvel and DC have consistently created new stories around their characters, but with comic books, the one appealing aspect are those specific characters. The vast majority of comics place their heroes and villains in modern times, there isn't a deep, rich universe of limitless potential that can easily be jumped to in the same way that exists with Star Wars. Their story lines certainly haven't died on a vine, but reinterpreting comic book characters is a different environment compared to something like Star Wars. Comic book characters like Superman have plenty of different interpretations for their history and future, and the general public would be able to identify that the different movies are different interpretations of the character, and that one movie doesn't necessarily override the other. The atmosphere of writing a new take on Superman is much more open because Superman is the aspect of that medium which holds the center stage. That's not true of Star Wars, where the universe was open to all kinds of interesting characters with unique backstories.

Think of it this way, superhero comics are defined by their characters, Star Wars is defined by its universe. They are two different aspects of entertainment, and the rules that work out for one don't exactly work for the other.

I'm pretty sure SW is very character driven. People weren't buying empty boxes with a promise to fill it with figures later back in 1977 just because of the 'limitless universe', they wanted the characters!

Also, the problem with comics is that no one seems to be able to actually write the characters 'correctly', with the last 2 or 3 decades showcasing costumes and powers with really bad attitude and angst. I'm all for keeping things lively and not being tied to old continuity but please don't forget what made these characters interesting in the first place.

52 minutes ago, UnitOmega said:

Yeah, you mentioned like, a dozen things out of hundreds of entries in the old EU. Now, many are good, and quite a few more are okayish, but the EU is not a golden child. Novel-wise they've been on rocky ground since 1999 and Vector Prime (Personally, while I liked some of the NJO books, the series was way too long), Dark Nest, Legacy of the Force and Fate of the Jedi may have strong concepts but were not always strongly executed. Traviss later republic commando books are marred by her increasing preachiness on her beliefs about how wrongbad Jedi are about everything. Before that you've got some classic clunkers. Crystal Star? Children of the Jedi? Dark Saber? Not to mention quite a few of the EU stories may not be bad to experience but critically are incredibly cheesy and not to be taken seriously.

While a number of video games are good game, they haven't always been very strongly additive to the Lore. Battlefront II and its community has a special place in my heart - but that game was TERRIBLE with vehicles for "competitive balance", completely ballsed up all the lore. KOTOR II is a very polarizing title about if it's on tone, and many people are critical of the fustercluck of TOR the MMO's lore and story direction. People complain about Zann in EaW. Just because you have a positive subjective experience does not mean that critically the product is good.

But, most importantly for Disney - their target audience hasn't read all that. TFA didn't nearly become the best selling movie of all time (and I think highest selling in the US) by Disney holding on to a bunch of old lore from decades ago that other people have been forced to follow because continuity. That IS like comic books, and if you're taking over a brand to move forward it's real, real bad to shoehorn your "new" audience to try and follow a bunch of old stuff they don't know about and you either have to explain or try and get them to buy into something that even people who really like it have said a lot of it isn't that great. You said it, Star Wars is defined by it's universe. Well, in order to bring that universe back to everyone - not just the same serious fans who'd been following all along, then needed to go back to basic and do it again.

To your first point, the EU was not perfect, I've said as much in my previous comments. I mentioned only a dozen things because if I was to list every bit of good lore that came from the EU, then we'd be here for weeks. You say that you don't like how the Jedi are shown to be wrong, or that they may be bad in their own light with regards to Republic Commando, and you also cite later on that KOTOR II was polarizing because of its tone, which I'm assuming is for similar reasons of the Jedi being shown to be flawed. To this, I would say that moments showing the Jedi were in the wrong are fantastic throughout the EU. KOTOR II and books like Republic Commando showed that the Jedi were far from perfect, as they should be. The Jedi Council held onto its strict beliefs for thousands of years, and the Galaxy has suffered for that throughout history. The Jedi are not perfect, and adding in a moral grey area into the Star Wars universe builds up the universe that much more. Life isn't about clear instances of right or wrong, so what's the problem with highlighting this through certain sections of Star Wars lore?

There are numerous short EU stories that haven't aged well, and those could do with some retconning. I'm not opposed to fixing the instances where the lore doesn't line up. George Lucas himself has shown a disregard for established lore with some episodes of The Clone Wars series. However, there were far more instances of incorporating the excellent worlds and aspects from the EU in a proper manner than there were cases where the series went in a far different direction from what was previously established.

I'm also not sure what about Battlefront II you're referring to. I don't recall that game ever being centered on competition more so than entertainment, and I don't understand what you mean when you say it "ballsed up all the lore." I would also like to point at that because you have a negative experience doesn't mean that the product is worth being re-written and remade. Referring back to your previous statements about numerous EU stories being cheesy and not to be taken seriously, there have already been statements from officials of the lore that clarify what is and what isn't canon regarding stories like that. A prime example are the Star Wars Tales comic, which was an excuse for many authors to create a mixture of stories that more closely adhered to established canon, and stories which were purely for entertainment. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wars_Tales#Tales_stories_with_elements_of_continuity I would love for these stories to be cleared up further in other works, and for work to go into defining what is and isn't actual "canon." But there's nothing wrong with some cheesy stories being told here and there. If a story is really good, then other writers will find it beneficial to continue those stories in later works. If it is another cheesy story that's really for entertainment value above all else, then it falls by the wayside and doesn't become a focus of the EU. This system worked just fine for the EU, but I wouldn't be opposed to certain stories that were written purely with entertainment in mind to be declared non-canon like many of the Star Wars Tales were, and I'd like them to be replaced by something arguably better.

The EU was a collaborative story that was continuously built upon the works of a wide range of talented authors. There were certainly authors that didn't make the cut compared to others, but Star Wars had an open universe that was welcoming to anyone who had a story to tell. Because of this, I strongly disagree with your final point. As I said before, Disney could have brought the community of the EU together with fans of the movies. Disney did in fact hold onto old lore from decades ago, they just simply gave it a little bit of a twist so that they could pass it on as a sequel. When A New Hope released for the first time ever, did anyone know anything about that universe? No, they didn't. If Disney created new stories within the Star Wars Universe, with new characters, or in the Old Republic era, it'd be the same thing. There are ways to create stories that have rich history that don't alienate people who have never experienced that history before. There are numerous examples of works of all kinds that do it in a way that's open to everyone and discriminates no one. The new Star Trek series of movies used time travel and alternate reality, Terminator Genisis did the same, and Mad Max simply used ambiguity. These methods are just a few in which to create stories that don't discount or completely retell the past, and instead let audiences focus on the new story that is unfolding.

Disney did not have to go back to the basics and retell the same story. Disney did not have to wipe out the entirety of the EU, only to pick out certain bits of the lore to redo the same stories. And Disney certainly did not have to constrict the ability for other creators to work within the Legends continuity.

55 minutes ago, GrimmyV said:

I'm pretty sure SW is very character driven. People weren't buying empty boxes with a promise to fill it with figures later back in 1977 just because of the 'limitless universe', they wanted the characters!

Also, the problem with comics is that no one seems to be able to actually write the characters 'correctly', with the last 2 or 3 decades showcasing costumes and powers with really bad attitude and angst. I'm all for keeping things lively and not being tied to old continuity but please don't forget what made these characters interesting in the first place.

Star Wars is character driven, but the universe itself is what made the franchise iconic. The characters are incredibly important as well, but they support that universe more so than they hold the center stage. Your concern for keeping what made characters interesting is similar to what I and others feel for the Star Wars universe as a whole. The massive cast of characters from the movies are certainly factors that draw people to Star Wars, and there were already numerous really excellent stories that people could experience if they wanted to see more of those characters. More often than not, the EU was able to capture the qualities of those characters, and fleshed out their pasts and futures in really creative ways. And that's why people like me believe Disney should have gone to other parts of the Star Wars galaxy to make new, and more original stories, rather than remaking what was already done before. We want interesting characters to cheer for and to fear, in the case of iconic villains like Vader, but we want those characters to be new and breaking out of the already established world of the original cast. By and large, the EU accomplished this with characters like Admiral Thrawn, Kyle Katarn, Mara Jade, and countless others.

It was mostly the Clone Wars vehicles, because the OT had everything in set lore, but in Space every faction needed four ships - the transport, fighter, bomber and interceptor. The ARC-170 was used as the fighter analog armed with torpedoes and lasers. The V-Wing which was supposed to be a high-speed interceptor was shoehorned into being a bomber with proton bombs and a weird flak cannon primary, as well as having terrible speed and maneuverability. CIS had a similar problem, where the Belbullab-22 was picked for the bomber type (despite never having bombs). The Empire used Theta-class shuttles for their space transport... for some odd reason, probably scale? And everything needed ordnance (similar to EA's battlefront) so you had a lot of ships which didn't normally carry missiles having missiles without additional hardpoints.

Realistically, Disney was never going to preserve the EU as canon. I get that it's a sensitive issue for people who are invested in that body of work, but be realistic. They're making movies that are going to pull down billions, they are going to do everything possible to make them commercially successful, end of story. Pulling out the good bits from the EU, like we've already seen them do a number of times in Rebels, is as much as you can ask for, and honestly I think they're doing a good job of putting in call-outs to things and pulling in interesting bits of the EU without restricting the creatives who are working with Star Wars now.

When the EU was a going concern, Star Wars was otherwise dead and buried, and nobody was paying attention to continuity or quality. What you ended up with was a mess, and most of it wasn't very good. What does it do for Disney to keep it in place? You don't tell someone who makes multi-million dollar movies that he has to be restricted by decisions made by a comic book writer nobody has ever heard of 20 years ago. You tell that guy to make the best and most successful movie he can, and you put the supervision in place to make sure that the 'new EU' has that consistency and quality going forward.

FWIW, I am on board with seeing more EU stuff pulled into X-Wing, because I think there are still interesting things in there to be used. I'd like to see the E-Wing sorted out, just for one example.

On 2/25/2017 at 11:12 AM, Dosiere said:

As long as there are current/near future Star Wars canon material it seems like a slim chance.

That said, what else can really be added aside from the gunboat or vong? They already hit all the major ones. The very last Star Wars novel made in legends is full of x wings and e wings still.

On 2/25/2017 at 11:22 AM, Punning Pundit said:

Part of the problem is that there are very few Legends ships left from the appropriate part of the timeline, that are the correct size. For Rebels, there's... The T-Wing? And sure: various X-Wing variants.

Imperials have several TIE variants to choose from. But... Eh. Honestly I don't think they offer much that we don't already have.

And for Scum we have more YT freighters than I can shake a stick at.

So: what is it that you're itching for? What ships from Legends are you impatient to see? What glaring omissions are there? Are you the lone fan of the T-Wing?

There's plenty of EU ships still. Chiss claw craft, Hapan miy'til, scurrg, chir'daki, predator fighter, skipray blast boat, stealth x-wing, and more.

On 2/25/2017 at 11:26 AM, Punning Pundit said:

LIKE THE DEFENDER!!

I think the Vong might be too far into the galactic future for this game, but I confess to not having read those books.

Having said that: I think there's a solid 45% chance the sequel trilogy will be about the Vong. Some of the recent canon novels have pointed in that direction.

The new Jedi order was rough the same timeframe as TFA IIRC

On 2/25/2017 at 0:29 PM, Lobokai said:

Well, I disagree with the sentiment of some.

The EU was saturated in crappy, over the top, established lore violating, Mary Sue, junk. If I'm Disney, I'd have done the same.

Cancel it all. Then cherry pick what you like. Otherwise you spend thousands of hours sifting through so much, garbage, paralyzing your creative process, and everyone's going to get angry everytime something old is retconned.

The EU didn't violate any more of the established lore than the prequel trilogy...

2 hours ago, VanderLegion said:

The EU didn't violate any more of the established lore than the prequel trilogy...

Seriously? It's like a 10,000:1 ratio. As a GM of SW RPGs, on and off for the last 20 years, I've basically read it all. Video games, comics, audio dramas, cartoons, stupidly long novel series that aren't even internally consistent.

The prequels had some serious groan/facepalm moments. But Jedi Academy, Rogue Squadron-esq, Voyager-Vong swill, alternate non-force force paths, etc. Tons of junk there.

2 hours ago, VanderLegion said:

The EU didn't violate any more of the established lore than the prequel trilogy...

And look how well that body of work is looked upon...

I miss Splinter of the Mind's Eye, the Brian Daly Han Solo stories, the sense of crazy anything goes adventure of the OT time period, before the dark times. The EU didn't start with Thrawn you know. But I sure wouldn't have faulted Empire or Jedi because they didn't include Kybur crystals or the survival of Tagge.

oh and GUNBOAT!

2 hours ago, Lobokai said:

Seriously? It's like a 10,000:1 ratio. As a GM of SW RPGs, on and off for the last 20 years, I've basically read it all. Video games, comics, audio dramas, cartoons, stupidly long novel series that aren't even internally consistent.

The prequels had some serious groan/facepalm moments. But Jedi Academy, Rogue Squadron-esq, Voyager-Vong swill, alternate non-force force paths, etc. Tons of junk there.

What in any of the stuff you mentioned is violating the lore? Not liking something doesn't make it inconsistent. The books did a pretty good job staying consistent with each other.

thr prequels outright contradict stuff from the OT

Weird.

It's like Disney said that the EU are Legends.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/legend

"a story coming down from the past; especially : one popularly regarded as historical although not verifiable"

Disney has very specifically gone out of their way to paint the EU in a light that allows the positive material to flow back into the canon in a way that fits their storylines, and I believe they've done a masterful job of reinvigorating the fan base and creating a cohesive product moving forward. Minor inconsistencies will happen - the EU was downright terrible at the minor things, and had plenty that didn't jive in the big picture. We all still loved it.

I loved the stories from the EU as much as the next guy but it had run its course. Nobody would care about the Old Republic except for a bunch of nerds. How Han, Leia, and Luke did all grown up? Your average fan is very curious about that. It would make no sense fiscally for Disney to try to make their product fit the EU while trying to worm their way through what's already written, even if they went back to the Old Republic.

Keep bringing back good ships from the EU that can have an impact in the new timeline, and hopefully we can see them in action in X-Wing. I'd love to get a Skipray Blastboat.

Another good thing for Disney in wiping the EU is that they get to sell the same old product again (bringing the good EU stuff back) and the fans are grateful for it.

7 hours ago, UnitOmega said:

It was mostly the Clone Wars vehicles, because the OT had everything in set lore, but in Space every faction needed four ships - the transport, fighter, bomber and interceptor. The ARC-170 was used as the fighter analog armed with torpedoes and lasers. The V-Wing which was supposed to be a high-speed interceptor was shoehorned into being a bomber with proton bombs and a weird flak cannon primary, as well as having terrible speed and maneuverability. CIS had a similar problem, where the Belbullab-22 was picked for the bomber type (despite never having bombs). The Empire used Theta-class shuttles for their space transport... for some odd reason, probably scale? And everything needed ordnance (similar to EA's battlefront) so you had a lot of ships which didn't normally carry missiles having missiles without additional hardpoints.

Gameplay mechanics and balancing do not equate to lore. Even the wiki outline these uses of ships as being made for gameplay purposes.

3 hours ago, Lobokai said:

Seriously? It's like a 10,000:1 ratio. As a GM of SW RPGs, on and off for the last 20 years, I've basically read it all. Video games, comics, audio dramas, cartoons, stupidly long novel series that aren't even internally consistent.

The prequels had some serious groan/facepalm moments. But Jedi Academy, Rogue Squadron-esq, Voyager-Vong swill, alternate non-force force paths, etc. Tons of junk there.

56 minutes ago, VanderLegion said:

What in any of the stuff you mentioned is violating the lore? Not liking something doesn't make it inconsistent. The books did a pretty good job staying consistent with each other.

thr prequels outright contradict stuff from the OT

I agree with VanderLegion. I have no idea where you are getting your numbers from Lobokai, but your view that the EU is comprised of "junk" is little more than an unfounded opinion.

41 minutes ago, dsul413 said:

Weird.

It's like Disney said that the EU are Legends.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/legend

"a story coming down from the past; especially : one popularly regarded as historical although not verifiable"

Disney has very specifically gone out of their way to paint the EU in a light that allows the positive material to flow back into the canon in a way that fits their storylines, and I believe they've done a masterful job of reinvigorating the fan base and creating a cohesive product moving forward. Minor inconsistencies will happen - the EU was downright terrible at the minor things, and had plenty that didn't jive in the big picture. We all still loved it.

I loved the stories from the EU as much as the next guy but it had run its course. Nobody would care about the Old Republic except for a bunch of nerds. How Han, Leia, and Luke did all grown up? Your average fan is very curious about that. It would make no sense fiscally for Disney to try to make their product fit the EU while trying to worm their way through what's already written, even if they went back to the Old Republic.

Keep bringing back good ships from the EU that can have an impact in the new timeline, and hopefully we can see them in action in X-Wing. I'd love to get a Skipray Blastboat.

Firstly, I really fail to understand why you claim that the only people who care about the Old Republic era would be a bunch of "nerds." Really? Aren't we all nerds if we enjoy something like Star Wars in the first place? I'd also like to point out that Disney has already ripped from that era in making the Hammerhead-like ship in Rogue One. And if the average fan is curious about following more of the original cast, then they already could have jumped into any number of EU sources and learned more about them. Each of the characters childhoods could have been expanded upon in legends, sure, but the average fan still doesn't care enough to look further into the universe of Star Wars unless it's on a movie screen. As to your last point about money that Disney would make, I'm going to answer that along with this earlier post:

7 hours ago, You Look Like A Nail said:

Realistically, Disney was never going to preserve the EU as canon. I get that it's a sensitive issue for people who are invested in that body of work, but be realistic. They're making movies that are going to pull down billions, they are going to do everything possible to make them commercially successful, end of story. Pulling out the good bits from the EU, like we've already seen them do a number of times in Rebels, is as much as you can ask for, and honestly I think they're doing a good job of putting in call-outs to things and pulling in interesting bits of the EU without restricting the creatives who are working with Star Wars now.

When the EU was a going concern, Star Wars was otherwise dead and buried, and nobody was paying attention to continuity or quality. What you ended up with was a mess, and most of it wasn't very good. What does it do for Disney to keep it in place? You don't tell someone who makes multi-million dollar movies that he has to be restricted by decisions made by a comic book writer nobody has ever heard of 20 years ago. You tell that guy to make the best and most successful movie he can, and you put the supervision in place to make sure that the 'new EU' has that consistency and quality going forward.

FWIW, I am on board with seeing more EU stuff pulled into X-Wing, because I think there are still interesting things in there to be used. I'd like to see the E-Wing sorted out, just for one example.

I find it fascinating how there are instances of corporate greed that people are quick to point out has having a negative overall impact on a product or piece of work, and then there are other instances which manage to make the same methods and goals more acceptable for those same people. I've said as much in my last posts that not only do I understand that Disney is making decisions for purely maximum profit, but I've also brought forth an argument to show that it is wrong for them to do so. For example, Electronic Arts is considered a terrible company, and was awarded the "Worst Company in America Award" two years in a row (2013-2014). What is the goal of that company? To maximize profits. How do they accomplish this? By putting profit ahead of a good product, often times leaving that product is a lesser state than the standard that came before it. Disney is doing the same thing here with the EU. I have yet to see a use of EU material that has outdone its original story or character. Disney is selling the same product at a lower level of quality. That isn't right.

To your next point, Star Wars was not dead and buried, it was thriving in other art forms. Just because a Star Wars movie wasn't on a theater screen doesn't mean that it was dead. There was still a fanbase that was plenty large enough for the legacy of the franchise to be carried through fantastic games, comics, and books. As for the "mess," I've also already stated that there are some aspects here and there that could have done with some cleaning up. However, the vast majority of content has already been sorted out, and you only need to go to the wiki to see that. I again return to my previous explanation that Disney wiping the EU only to pick out what they personally like to expand on doesn't make any sense. They are looking up stories, characters, and ships that already existed in the EU to use for their "new" stories, which are little more than copies from what was already done in the EU. Tell me why exactly they couldn't have kept the EU intact? They certainly aren't doing anything creative with the EU, as others have been quick to state. So if Disney could spend that much time searching for EU material to copy and paste, why was there a need to remake everything?

Disney's profit should not be the focus of discussion about stories within the Star Wars universe. Disney makes more than enough profit as it stands. What should be important about the discussion regarding the EU is whether or not it should be respected by fans and Disney alike, and I wholeheartedly believe that it should be. Whether an individual sees pieces of the EU being good, bad, or mediocre is meaningless. I say that good or bad, the many stories of the EU that fit into the established timeline have a right to have an opportunity to be expanded upon further and still be kept alive by whoever holds the Star Wars license. Every story told through the EU has a right to exist in some form or another, be it through the title of an "Infinity," in which the story is told in an alternate reality or made with no regard for the rest of the established lore, or be it through a story that is closely tied and checked for accuracy with the established lore. I have had plenty of great experiences with the EU, I've also had ones that were not as great. It is not my place to judge what has a right to exist based on how "good" it is. Everything should be placed in a proper category that fits that work, and then fans can experience what they want to, as they have already done in the past. Disney's actions are not promoting such an avenue for Star Wars.

I see no issues with anything that happened with the old EU. Maybe its just the years of reading through everything that Tolkien has ever produced, but I don't get the desire for one set canonicity. Also don't get the problem with reimplementing stories or aspects of them, thats something humanity has done since the dawn of civilization.

19 hours ago, CosmicCastawayA90 said:

I'm curious as to what kinds of material you've gotten into with the EU. Are you reading the books alone? Or are you also playing the numerous video games that also came from the EU?

And as far as quality is concerned, again, the vast majority of EU content held up to decent standards of quality. The EU might have been messy, there are scattered articles across the wiki that show discrepancies regarding certain topics of the lore, but the vast majority of what was made was consistent with the lore. There are numerous books that are fantastic, such as the Republic Commando series (the game is also amazing), X-Wing Rogue Squadron, The Thrawn Trilogy, The Old Republic series (another great game). And then there are the countless games like the X-Wing and TIE-Fighter series, Dark Forces, Battlefront, Rogue Squadron, Bounty Hunter, and Shadows of the Empire, which are also of great quality and stand up today.

The problem is that while Disney might be twisting the EU to conform to their own standards, they are leaving out an incredible amount of detail in the process. They are doing all of this when they simply could have been far more creative and gone to The Old Republic era, or focus on stories of other characters that are around during the Galactic Civil War or Clone Wars eras. It's a big galaxy, with trillions of inhabitants at least. Why shove in the original cast if not for the pure sake of maximum profit? To me, wanting to re-write history for maximum monetary gain isn't a good method to promote story-telling. Above all else, I don't see what the point was to unnecessarily remaking content that already existed. Disney would have made plenty from just holding onto the license of Star Wars alone.

I was reading the books alone. Yes. I think that's completely acceptable. Why do I have to go find some game with ancient technology to play to read the books? If the success of a book requires the playing of a video game to succeed, then it's failed. The books should stand on their own merit.

What have I read? The Thrawn Trilogy, Bounty Hunter Wars, tried to read the Rogue Squadron series, but couldn't get 1/2 way through the first book. I read the one with Xizor. I know there are a few more, but they escape me at the moment. The best of all of them was the Thrawn Trilogy. You stated it was "fantastic". I won't give it that much credit. It was enjoyable, but could be better written. These books were just OK. They weren't that great. I didn't read them in my youth and am reading them as an adult. I think you are looking back too fondly and tying in all your love of Star Wars as a kid into making it better than it was.

You talk about wanting to "shove" in the original cast for maximum profit and I think you are wrong. I think it's for maximum success of the Star Wars effort. I think it was in danger after Ep 1-3. Yes, Ep 7 was a repeat of the original, but they stated they were trying to make it as close to the original as possible many times before released. Their goal was to have a movie that didn't suck and they were going to try to recapture as much of the original as possible. They needed to save the franchise or it would whither with another bad movie. They made an OK new movie. That was their goal. It worked. To then want to build on what people want is considered a money grab? You don't see Disney branching beyond that? What about the other major project they have, Rebels tv show? That's totally new people, with a few cameos from the movies and a couple of pull ins from Clone Wars. I don't think you are giving them enough credit.

You say Disney is "twisting" the EU when I say it is massaging it to make it fit better and make more sense with a coherent story. I'm OK with that. You say that they are trimming details. Well....how long has the EU been out and how many books have there been? How long has Disney had to put out new stuff? I think they are making great progress with new books and movies. Give them some time to get stuff out! You want them to jump to Old Republic and stuff? You think they won't eventually get there? Disney is going to crank out new Star Wars stuff for a generation, at least.

On 26/02/2017 at 11:26 AM, Verlaine said:

I'm puzzled by the repeated critique that 1) Disney wiped out the EU and at the same time 2) presented a story that is the same as the EU and uses EU characters. These two cannot be both correct.

That's exactly my sales pitch for those undergraduate essays I used to write for other people.

Important disclaimer: the only EU material I have first hand experience with is the Thrawn books, which I read because they were held up as the gold standard of EU content. To be charitable, they are mediocre. If the Thrawn books are significantly lower quality than the rest of the EU then my view is incorrect, but that doesn't fit with anything I've been told by EU fans or critics alike, so there you go.

There are three ways Disney could handle the EU:

1. The EU is forbidden and never to be mentioned again because Disney hates you. Yes, you.

2. Creators can take what they like but aren't restricted by the EU.

3. Creators are restricted by the EU.

How does (3) help their business?

And I'm sorry, but the restrictions imposed by maintaining consistency with all of the EU is incredibly relevant. The EU is a massive pile of content, much of which is (by everyone's admission) not very good. Just maintaining consistency with it at all is a job of work, and if you don't put in that effort, then you're in case (2) anyway. If I'm a Hollywood film-maker, and I have the option of either making the best Star Wars movie I can, or the best Star Wars movie I can within the restrictions of everything defined in the EU canon, good and bad and god-awfully not-thought-out, why would I choose the latter? If I'm a novelist, why am I going to be constrained by decisions made by a third-rate comic book writer a long time ago when much less money and interest was on the line?

Anyway, I think I'm done piling on here. People who are still defending the EU are emotionally invested in it and are responding on that basis. Which is fine, nothing wrong with that. There are lots of things that I'm emotionally invested in because of who I was at the time or what was going on in my life, which if I were to come upon fresh today, wouldn't engage me the same way. But being emotionally invested in something doesn't mean that keeping it is an objectively good decision, either from a creative or a financial perspective. On both counts, the EU had to go, and go it did, and that's really all there is to it.