PDA

View Full Version : [SPOILER] Q&A With Jen Fernández, Richard Lemarchand, and Kyle Mannerberg



blincoln
28th Jan 2004, 07:10
Thanks Jen, Richard, and Kyle!

(Spoilers ahoy!)

http://www.thelostworlds.net/Defiance-JenRichardKyle.HTML

Vampiric Fool
28th Jan 2004, 11:36
Oh oh oh! I love your Q&A sessions with people, Blincy!

Thanking you, this lays to rest many theories floating about. Namely the Devolution.

Edit: Although...
I'm surprised that the question of "Where both Raziels, Pre-Sword and Post-Sword absorbed into the blade?" was not asked. Oh well, Mahaps next time.

Embla
28th Jan 2004, 12:28
Thanks blinc.
Looking forwards to reading it, in about a couple of weeks time. :)

Reaper007
28th Jan 2004, 13:42
Dang, I read the first few questions only and I think I spoiled half of Defiance :eek:

Reaper007

Kain's Ancient Blade
28th Jan 2004, 16:28
very cool. thanks a lot blinc.

u da man.

Shrykull_the1st
28th Jan 2004, 17:10
WOW!!! I got to say, although I am desperatly waiting to play Defiance, that information just makes BO2 much more interesting and it fits it better in the story (however this was never a problem to me).

van_HellSing PL
28th Jan 2004, 17:22
blinc, you would truly deserve the name Raziel, Lord of Secrets, as you provide hidden knowledge to us all!

btw, I told ya all the Seer was a Hylden :p. But then again, there goes my devolution theory :(...

Umah Bloodomen
28th Jan 2004, 17:34
I also believed that The Seer was a Hylden. :p to all you skeptics. :D

EDIT:

Also, it's good to have some confirmation on both Moebius' little game (with regard to his spirit incarnation in SR2) and to know that the Demons are not Hylden. I had a notion that the Hylden struck an alliance with the Demon race that would assist them in their return to Nosgoth).

Shrykull_the1st
28th Jan 2004, 17:56
But why did Janos say to Kain that the Hylden were the arquitects of the demons, if they are the natives of the demon dimension? Did he mean about they're appearence in the world?

DJpick
28th Jan 2004, 20:47
Jen, Richard, and Kyle mention the film 12 Monkeys at this point as an example of this concept
Interesting analogy :)

But that makes sense. Although wouldn't 12 monkeys be a different time idea? Maybe you can explain this better B. Cause I have seen the movie, and I just don't see the connection.

those who travel through it can't change history, because they didn't.
Doesn't the idea of the paradox contradict this though? Or is it something like SR2 won't change until Kain and Raziel leave SR1, therefore during BO1 happened as it did?

Raziel is doomed to play out his circular destiny over and over again
I saw it as an example of tie forcing what was meant be. Only this time it happened as it should, and not prematurely due to Moebius.

The Seer is "an extremely powerful and mysterious Hylden
Most of the history of the Hylden has not been revealed yet, but it will be eventually.
Good, because there is SO much possibilty with their race, especially the Seer, now that it has been confirmed :)

The Circle was taken by surprise, and could not face Vorador without Malek to protect them
He WAS older than the current regime :)

Kain had understood enough of the Vampire prophecy to see the roles that he and Raziel would play, including the necessity of casting him into the Abyss.
I'm curious how Kain knew, since I haven't seen any mention of a wraith. In all the murals we have seen, it looks like an Ancient. Not a wraith.

Yes, it was because of the corruption of Kain's soul. The amount of devolution was directly related to how much of his soul they received.
Good :) Now that one is settled too :) So, it had to do with corruption AND smaller amounts.

Thanks B. Now some age old debates have been settled :)

But why did Janos say to Kain that the Hylden were the arquitects of the demons, if they are the natives of the demon dimension? Did he mean about they're appearence in the world?
Yes. The Hylden created the event that let the Demons into Nosgoth.

blincoln
28th Jan 2004, 21:24
Although wouldn't 12 monkeys be a different time idea? Maybe you can explain this better B. Cause I have seen the movie, and I just don't see the connection.

Spoilers if you haven't seen 12 Monkeys:


In 12 Monkeys, the scientists of the future have Bruce Willis try and assassinate the man who will kill off most of humanity, but he fails, because that's how the timeline always played out. His failure is what allows the future era he is from to exist at all.

Dogfight
28th Jan 2004, 21:38
In 12 Monkeys nothing in time was changed.

In the LOK series time is pretty much up for grabs, as long as two Soul Reavers meet and create a paradox, certain events in history can be changed.

blincoln
28th Jan 2004, 23:29
Yes, but taking the larger view, nothing has changed in Legacy of Kain, either - the outcome of Defiance is what allowed BO2 to happen, for example.


Raziel ends up going into the blade because he always has. Etc.


Like Jen, Richard, and Kyle (and Kain) have said, time is like a river that flows around the rocks thrown into it, and arrives at the same destination in the end.

The one exception I might see to this is the Nemesis/William the Just thing in Blood Omen, but I'm sure we'll see an explanation of it eventually.

Bobman32x
29th Jan 2004, 02:34
a nice example of the 12 monkeys/LOK thing would be the 2 final destination movies (more 1st than 2nd) It just involves visions of the future instead of timetravel

You might have seen a way to escape "death" a little longer, but it will ALWAYS come back for you. though FD2's ending sucked and made the entire concept of the 2 movies go to ruin.

Final Destination 2 spoliers- vvvvvvvv

How does running out of air underwater and then being brought back by a Heart AED (you know the "Clear!" things) Kill you and revive you, but still making you dead in the eyes of all the balance of nature of existence as we know it?

The Amazing Rando
3rd Feb 2004, 06:11
Originally posted by Dogfight
Thanks for the Q. and A. blincoln.
I just have a few gripes.



This appears to contradict the game itself, comparing pictures of Defiance at the timestreamer site of the murals with the in game cutscenes, a connection is seen. I discovered that the scene of the Hylden striking down the Ancient, looks just about identical to the scene at the end when Kain has the Blood Reaver in Raziel's chest. Seriously, it looks the same. Besides this the scene of the Ancient fighting against the Hylden, looks strangely similar to the duel between Kain and Raziel at Avernus Cathedral.

Looks can be decieving



See the links below. As Amy said a while back in another F.A.Q.:"And a final note -- we do in fact make mistakes sometimes."

http://www.timestreamer.co.uk/screenshots/Defiance/Hylden%20ProphecyImage.jpg

http://www.timestreamer.co.uk/screenshots/Defiance/Moebius%20Possessed10Image.jpg

http://www.timestreamer.co.uk/screenshots/Defiance/AncientHeroImage.jpg

http://www.timestreamer.co.uk/screenshots/Defiance/Raziel%20vs%20Kain25Image.jpg

Not meaning to put down what the staff said, but I need a second opinion. Either the team that designed the murals didn't collaborate enough with the staff that wrote the story or they made some unintentional mistakes along the way that completely changes what they came up with in terms of story in the first place. Raziel even comments on how Kain looks like the figure in one of the murals and his comment doesn't seem off.


His comment doesn't seem off. Well, that's reason enough for me to go against an official statement.



http://www.timestreamer.co.uk/screenshots/Defiance/ProphecyImage.jpg

Somethings unmistakingly wrong.

I've seen the film the 12 Monkeys, but that doesn't really relate up to this point with the LOK series, in that movie time couldn't be changed everything happened as it was supposed to, in the LOK series time has been changed again and again. Now I don't want to be the guy that thrashes the staff of Crystal D and you, but unless the Legacy of Kain series has been taking place in parallel dimensions with Kain and Raziel going from one dimension to another newly created parallel dimension each time they rewrite history and then make history, this has to be wrong. Kain clearly changed time in Blood Omen 1 and in Soul Reaver 2. Amy even said that Blood Omen 2 was something newly created by the paradox at the end of Soul Reaver 2 and that it wasn't around before. Well I guess the parallel dimension idea could be true, but I sure as hell hope it isn't, that would make everything Kain and Raziel did kind of pointless.

No comment right now




Ariel being at the Spirit Forge could still be validated in one of two ways. It is her future self brought to the past by the Spirit Forge, or the other Ariel that has been around was and has been merely an illusion of the Elder's. Either one is far more valid than what the staff said.

Wow, I'm glad someone has spend years and years coming up with the only 2 possibilities that could even remotely be plausable to explain something. Nothing else even stands a remote chance of being close to almost being something that could happen. :rolleyes:



Again, as Amy said: "And a final note -- we do in fact make mistakes sometimes." I hope this is one of those times, this makes me somewhat distrustful of this whole F.A.Q., not that I am not thankful for it.

Thank you, O perfect one, for saying htat again. Since, you know, only Amy and the team make mistakes, never the fans. :rolleyes:




Taking that this is not an unqualified "yes" the popular deduction going around was that Raziel became a part of Kain's soul, therefore there is no longer a continous cycle.

Somethings that didn't resolve anything.

They didn't really explain how Kain knew about Raziel being the prohesied messiah and why it was necessary to cast Raziel into the Abyss.

The Circle couldn't use their powers against Vorador for an unknown reason, but what exactly it is is hasn't been explained. This would go with what Amy said that even they don't know everything.

Just because they haven't told us everything they know, doesn't mean they don't know. I'm pretty sure Amy might have some inside information that we aren't aware of. An unexplaigned reason is different than an unnown reason. Why do you think some things are left for other games to cover if they so choose.



The problem with this is that it is isn't explicit enough, there were two different insect looking demons in Blood Omen 2. The ones with green glowing hellfire that resemble the Hylden called the Lesser Demons at the Canyons, and the demons in cages called the Hylden Pets which Kain encountered later on. The staff could have been referring to either one of them. Even if it is obvious for me, some will always have doubts.

Seriously, I don't want to be a nuisance, thanks for the F.A.Q., I know beggars can't be choosers but I would have preferred better answers to some of the questions. Perhaps there will be some addendums in the future or corrections. I'll end this with Amy's introduction to the old Soul Reaver 2 F.A.Q.

So: Who are you to call the team at CD wrong? Out and out saying they are wrong is completely disrespectful to both blinc and the team. There's a reason that these are official answers, even if that means that all your theories aren't right. Fess up that you're wrong, instead of being disrespectful. There's a reason that Amy is writing the story and that her theories and facts are correct above all others. This is most plausible statement of all, sadly some will not believe it until it is official confirmed (which was about 8 years ago)

BAH!!!

Dogfight
3rd Feb 2004, 07:34
No. Time in the world of Legacy of Kain is basically immutable - those who travel through it can't change history, because they didn't. Jen, Richard, and Kyle mention the film 12 Monkeys at this point as an example of this concept [ If you haven't seen it, it's definitely worth checking out - blinc ]. While some things (like Ariel's role at the Spirit Forge) might seem out of place, it will all make sense in the end.

This is what I was saying the team was wrong about and its not being disrespectul, its being reasonable. Time has been changed in the LOK series, in the very first game Kain changed time by killing William the Just in the past and preventing his genocide of the people of Stalberg and the army of Willendorf in the future. Moebius himself even manipulates time.

Vampiric Fool
3rd Feb 2004, 12:21
Dogfight, I ussually find it funny when you have your little debates trying to prove yourself right, but you're trying to argue with the Official Ruling here.

Protector_Malek
3rd Feb 2004, 12:38
Dogfight, what I see here, is that you want the story to be like YOU want it to be. Why can't you just simply aknlowedge that you were wrong? These guys are the ones that CREATED the story. It doesn't matter what you THINK some mural meant, these guys KNOW what they meant, because they CREATED them!
You are saying that Defiance doesn't validate what they are answering... but dude, it doesn't validate it because you created a whole alternative story in your head that you are sure is the right one. You keep saying "these mural looks a lot to what happened here..." etc. But these are yout impressions, they guys at CD created the story, you cannot ignore that. Your are taking their story, and turning it against them! WTF! They wrote it!
Like I said before, you always try to prove your point at all cost. You are a super cool, nice person. But it does get annoying at times that you always try to prove that you are right. Haven't you think that you might be... wrong?

PS: I'm glad to see this answer:


Q: If Ariel enters the Reaver in the BO era, does this alter the events of Soul Reaver?
A: No. Time in the world of Legacy of Kain is basically immutable - those who travel through it can't change history, because they didn't. Jen, Richard, and Kyle mention the film 12 Monkeys at this point as an example of this concept [ If you haven't seen it, it's definitely worth checking out - blinc ]. While some things (like Ariel's role at the Spirit Forge) might seem out of place, it will all make sense in the end.
It makes the story much easier to understand, since I've always said that History in Nosgoth can't be changed, that guys travelling in time, and makining "changes", are actually settings things in motion, exactly like in "12 monkeys". EXCELLENT EXAMPLE!

Vampmaster
3rd Feb 2004, 16:00
I think Raziels life is more like a coil. No matter how many times you loop around there's always a beginning and an end. So there could be an *almost* infinate number of Raziels in the Soul Reaver and he'd still be able to be absorbed by Kain.

Example of the coil:


Raz finds Soul Reaver here:
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////..............................
Raz enters Blood Reaver here:
.........................//////////////////////////////////////..............................
And again here once he's the WB:
.........................//////////////////////////////////////..............................
WB enters the Blood Reaver again here:
.........................//////////////////////////////////////..............................
WB enters the Blood Reaver again here:
.........................//////////////////////////////////////..............................
WB enters the Blood Reaver again here:
.........................//////////////////////////////////////..............................
WB enters the Blood Reaver again here:
.........................//////////////////////////////////////..............................
WB enters the Blood Reaver again here:
.........................//////////////////////////////////////..............................
WB enters the Blood Reaver again here:
.........................//////////////////////////////////////..............................
And finally leaves here:
.........................//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////



This is the main thing that doesn't make sense to me:

razInReaver = false;

while (razInReaver == true) {
razInReaver = true;
//Output that he's in the Reaver
}

This will do nothing.

Dogfight
3rd Feb 2004, 18:49
Dogfight, I ussually find it funny when you have your little debates trying to prove yourself right, but you're trying to argue with the Official Ruling here.

I'm not arguing with the official ruling, I am merely stating what the series says is true. The problem is the official staff's statements, especially the one about time being immutable appear to contradict the games themselves without any real evidence to support what they say. In the next game perhaps somethings will happen to validate their statement, but this isn't the case so far. Blood Omen 1, and Soul Reaver 2 involved changing time, to say time is basiclaly immutable even if it is the staff that says it, is going too far, especially when Kain and Raziel have changed time on more than one occassion.


Dogfight, what I see here, is that you want the story to be like YOU want it to be. Why can't you just simply aknlowedge that you were wrong? These guys are the ones that CREATED the story. It doesn't matter what you THINK some mural meant, these guys KNOW what they meant, because they CREATED them!

Yeah, except the guys that created the murals made them totally misleading and didn't offer anything in the games to validate what the staff would later say is fact.

I'd have no problem if Kain said in the game: "I'm not any of the figures in the mural, and Raziel said: "I got confused, Kain isn't any of the two figures in the murals I'm both."

The problem arises because both Raziel and Kain admit that they are one of the figures in the murals, they never mention what the staff says or even hints at it. Of course the murals were all a big misdirection purposely done by Crystal Dynamics but they never really stated them as such and their meaning was not fully explained in the game. Perhaps in the next game, Kain may have a recap about this. It is difficult to know what is true when much of the material presented in the games may be called into question at a later time by Crystal Dynamics.


It makes the story much easier to understand, since I've always said that History in Nosgoth can't be changed, that guys travelling in time, and makining "changes", are actually settings things in motion, exactly like in "12 monkeys". EXCELLENT EXAMPLE!

Except in 12 Monkeys nothing of history could be changed, everything happened as it was supposed to, it was totally immutable. Whereas in the LOK series time has been altered three times, events have been deleted from history, and some new things have been added. Unless there are parallel dimensions involved, or Kain is going to put history back to how it was before Moebius started meddling in it, what the staff says can only be wrong. Time isn't immutable in the LOK series, it has been changed again and again. I'm only being reasonable here.

blincoln
3rd Feb 2004, 19:35
I think you are misunderstanding the 12 Monkeys comparison.

Bruce Willis *does* alter history - from a certain point of view. It's just that his actions are the ones which always lead to the future that he came from.

Similarly, when characters in the Legacy of Kain series "alter history," they are just setting things up to make history turn out the way it always has. William the Just was never "supposed" to be the Nemesis, because Kain was always destined to travel back in time and assassinate him, etc.

Dogfight
3rd Feb 2004, 19:56
I think you are misunderstanding the 12 Monkeys comparison. Bruce Willis *does* alter history - from a certain point of view. It's just that his actions are the ones which always lead to the future that he came from.

Similarly, when characters in the Legacy of Kain series "alter history," they are just setting things up to make history turn out the way it always has. William the Just was never "supposed" to be the Nemesis, because Kain was always destined to travel back in time and assassinate him, etc.

No, I am not misunderstanding the 12 Monkeys comparison, it is simply not valid.

These are big spoilers for the movie. In 12 Monkeys, James Cole, (Bruce Willis) as a young boy witnesses certain events that lead to a horrible future, but he has trouble recalling them as an adult. He is picked to go back in time in the future and change the past. When he goes back in time, he starts remembering what he saw as a kid. It turns out the older James Cole always went back in time, his being in the past was part of history, so much so that his young self sees the final moments of his older self's life. The older James Cole doesn't change history, he has always been only a part of the same set events of time that always happened.

In Blood Omen 1 the Nemesis and his legions ravaged Nosgoth, murdered his own people at Stalhberg, and defeated the army of Willendorf. All of this happened, but if time is immutable how could this be changed. Simple, when two Soul Reavers meet in the past a paradox is created, powerful enough to derrail history. Kain went back in time and fought William the Just, with each holding an incarnation of the Soul Reaver. Kain killed William the Just before he became the Nemesis creating a new slightly altered future. Totally different from 12 Monkeys where the future stayed the same.

blincoln
3rd Feb 2004, 21:10
More spoilers for 12 Monkeys:

Bruce Willis *does* change history though - his actions at the airport are what let his younger self see Madeleine Stowe. If he hadn't seen her as a child, he wouldn't have recognized her when he went back in time, meaning that he wouldn't have ended up kidnapping her and running from the police. Maybe none of the "army of the twelve monkeys" things would have even happened, which would have resulted in a completely different future.

So even though he changed history, he just changed it to the way it had been recorded as fact from his era all along.

Just like in the Soul Reaver era (which is as far into the future as we've seen in LoK), history records that William the Just was killed, and the Nemesis never existed.

Those events are what allow Kain to rule Nosgoth, and travel back into the past to "influence" history in SR2 and Defiance. I put "influence" in quotes, because even though he's making changes, they are the changes that allow the events of Blood Omen to proceed the way they're supposed to - this includes things like putting the Reaver where either Moebius can find it for William, or his younger self can find it for use in Blood Omen which hasn't been covered in any game yet.

It's a closed loop - just like Raziel's fate. Things that seem to be changes to it are really just furthering the closing of the loop.

Protector_Malek
3rd Feb 2004, 21:42
Blincoln, I think it will be impossible to change dogfight's mind (much like in LOK's history :D ). You understand the story (the closed loop), I understand it, most people understand it. So let's just call it a night.
The last thing, to DOGFIGHT: when you say that raziel/kain recognize himself in the murals...... don't you see that they were wrong? The whole point of those murals and what kain and raziel says, is to mislead you... and then surprise you at the end.

Dogfight
3rd Feb 2004, 22:00
More spoilers for 12 Monkeys: Bruce Willis *does* change history though - his actions at the airport are what let his younger self see Madeleine Stowe. If he hadn't seen her as a child, he wouldn't have recognized her when he went back in time, meaning that he wouldn't have ended up kidnapping her and running from the police. Maybe none of the "army of the twelve monkeys" things would have even happened, which would have resulted in a completely different future.

So even though he changed history, he just changed it to the way it had been recorded as fact from his era all along.

Just like in the Soul Reaver era (which is as far into the future as we've seen in LoK), history records that William the Just was killed, and the Nemesis never existed.

Those events are what allow Kain to rule Nosgoth, and travel back into the past to "influence" history in SR2 and Defiance. I put "influence" in quotes, because even though he's making changes, they are the changes that allow the events of Blood Omen to proceed the way they're supposed to - this includes things like putting the Reaver where either Moebius can find it for William, or his younger self can find it for use in Blood Omen which hasn't been covered in any game yet.

It's a closed loop - just like Raziel's fate. Things that seem to be changes to it are really just furthering the closing of the loop.

I see where you are going, but the older James Cole didn't change history by going into the past, he just did what he always did in the first place. No change of history, his going back into the past was fated to happen to cause the very future he sought to avoid.

Now with Kain in Blood Omen 1 it is a different story. Hypothetically, if Kain had gone back in time killed William the Just, and thereby this caused someone else to become the Nemesis causing the very future he sought to avoid in the first place, then you could make the argument that the LOK series is like 12 Monkeys, but this didn't happen.

Kain rewrote history, introducing a new timeline where the Nemesis and his army never existed with new consequences.

This then caused the introduction of two new fated events that didn't happen in the previous timeline, Kain getting killed off at William's Chapel 30 years before Blood Omen 1 by Raziel (Before Blood Omen 1 there was no William's Chapel, thus everything associated with this is new.) and Raziel being imprisoned in the Soul Reaver 500 years in the past (Kain says that when Moebius rewrote his destiny, he also rewrote Raziel's destiny.)

Again these fated events were altered, never happening in the first place and creating another new timeline introducing Blood Omen 2.

I understand what you are saying, simply that for things to stay as they are, somethings in history have to occur. Choices leading to actions, which lead to the reactions of others, bringing about a continous chain of cause and effect. This causing events throughout history, past, present, and future to happen in the first place. I know Kain can't change everything that happened, especially much of the history of the series in particular, but that doesn't mean he can't alter time to a degree. The series is about fate, but also about free will. The loop or Ouroboros does exist, but that doesn't mean that the pebbles can't affect the river's current before it meets itself again.

The last thing, for DOGFIGHT: when you say that raziel/kain recognize himself in the murals...... don't you see that they were wrong? The whole point of those murals and what kain and raziel says, is to mislead you... and then surprise you at the end.

Yes, except the surprise never really came and was never really validated in the game. I see that is the case, but I would've liked for the true meaning of the murals to have been more explained in Defiance

DJpick
4th Feb 2004, 05:31
Seriously, it looks the same. Besides this the scene of the Ancient fighting against the Hylden, looks strangely similar to the duel between Kain and Raziel at Avernus Cathedral.
That's because they are. The two of The two heros are the same ones pretty much all through the game.

in that movie time couldn't be changed everything happened as it was supposed to
If I remember correctly, it was because most of the events were partly caused by the fact that Bruce's character went back. Not to mention he was cloudy from the drugs and constant shifting. He had no idea what was real anymore.

And of course, there was the insurance at the end.

They didn't really explain how Kain knew about Raziel being the prohesied messiah and why it was necessary to cast Raziel into the Abyss.
They shouldn't have to. Kain made a choice. He saw Raziel's wings as a sign, when in fact, Raziel may have gotten the wings by chance and had nothign to do with the blade. It was just a choice of Kain, he saw something in some murals, then saw Raziel, so he thought he was doing the right thing. There shouldn't need to be a dissertation of every event.

They should know that the forums are a "direct line" to us, and we consider everyone's questions, concerns, frustrations, etc. as we develop the SR games.
That's more than I have seen from a few other companies :) Let alone the actual writer :)

So many things were left vague and open to interpretation in BO:LoK, that generally these "inconsistencies" are simply a matter of my interpretation of the material not matching a fan's interpretation.
The whole concept of making a sequel is an example of this. Kain had two choices. Amy chose to take the refusal one to continue the story.

It's also why I let the game shape my ideas, as oppsed to my ideas influencing my views of the games. Every game to me has been a great story, and the deeper it gets, the more entertained and intrigued I get. I think Amy has done a fantastic job writing these games. SO there are inconsistencies, so what. She has done a great job explainging them, even if just a little bit.

In the LOK series time is pretty much up for grabs, as long as two Soul Reavers meet and create a paradox, certain events in history can be changed.
But with Raziel gone, and the WB gone as well, there ARE no oither Reavers to meet. Cause as long as Kain keeps the blade and doesn't let WTJ get it, there will be no way to change time, because I doubt Kain would let it happen. Not to mention the story is now unknown, the false destiny has been erased, so Kain is writing his own past now.

The one exception I might see to this is the Nemesis/William the Just thing in Blood Omen, but I'm sure we'll see an explanation of it eventually.
I just saw Kain becoming "The Nemesis" in WTJ's place.

but the picture the staff paints is pretty grim.
LoK hasn't even hinted at being a "Happily ever after" kind of game. So grim may be how they intend to go anyways.

How does running out of air underwater and then being brought back by a Heart AED (you know the "Clear!" things) Kill you and revive you, but still making you dead in the eyes of all the balance of nature of existence as we know it?
Double Jeopardy?

Just because they haven't told us everything they know, doesn't mean they don't know.
Rule number 1 in poker, never show your hand.

Why would Amy give us EVERY answer, when she has another game in the works. She's dropping bits and crumbs, to lead us to the bigger part of the story. She'sa not going to tell us EVERYTHING. That's what the games are for.

Who are you to call the team at CD wrong? Out and out saying they are wrong is completely disrespectful to both blinc and the team. There's a reason that these are official answers, even if that means that all your theories aren't right. Fess up that you're wrong, instead of being disrespectful. There's a reason that Amy is writing the story and that her theories and facts are correct above all others. This is most plausible statement of all, sadly some will not believe it until it is official confirmed (which was about 8 years ago)
Not to mention, it's HER story, not the fans. Yes she may steal our ideas sometimes and tweak them, but when it's all said and done, these games are done FOR the fans, not by them.

I have had a lot of ideas that were blown out of the water. But instead of holding to them hoping someone will flip a bigger coin, I prefer to come up with newer and better ideas. It's the whole point of her making a game that makes us think :)

only that the game isn't entirely clear and supportive of their statements.
1. The murals were created races, bent on manipulating events to better suit the future for them.
2. The murals were critiqued by an egotistical Squid bent oin dellusions of grandeur.
3. The murals were read by people who never saw the context in which they were written.
4. The murals were painted by people who had their own views in their heads. They may not have seen things the way the other race, or members of their own race, saw things.
5. All 4 of these groups have different experiences in their lives, leading to a different view of the murals themselves.

So to say the murals paint a different picture is kind of redundant, since murals ALWAYS paint a specific story that may not be 100 rooted in reality.

And Dogfight, weren't you the one who was preaching "That goes against the official FAQ" a few weeks ago? How are they the gospel truth then, and now heresy all the sudden?

what I see here, is that you want the story to be like YOU want it to be.
I wouldn't mind having the story how I want it to be either. But unfortunately then I would know how this game unfolds, and that's broing. Amy is surprising me at every turn, which entertains me MUCH more than having the game I already know played out in front of me.


It makes the story much easier to understand, since I've always said that History in Nosgoth can't be changed, that guys travelling in time, and makining "changes", are actually settings things in motion, exactly like in "12 monkeys". EXCELLENT EXAMPLE!
Unfortunately, that negates the idea of free will, because then that means their choices are still dictated by fate :) Although it makes a great story element :)

Also, that would change my view about how Defiance sets time on a "tabula rasa". After Defiance, I thought Kain would be in a free will smorgasbord, now it seems like his free will may be at fate's discretion once again :)

WB enters the Blood Reaver again here:
When did the WB enter the Reaver though? It embraced it, but never entered it. Because the fact is, if the WB is in the BR, then Raziel never gets put into it, and then the WB is never made.

I'm not arguing with the official ruling, I am merely stating what the series says is true
The series is written by the people who gave us the the FAQ. So either they are wrong, or right. But it sounds more like you're saying they're insane, and choosing story aspects by the highly logical and scientific method of throwing darts at ideas on a wall.

And, I have to agree with everyone. The FAQ is right, but the series is COMPLETELY open to interpretation. I mean just about EVERY character in these games has misread something, so how can they be right, if in fact, they were wrong to begin with?

Blood Omen 1, and Soul Reaver 2 involved changing time, to say time is immutable even if it is the staff that says it, is going too far, especially when Kain and Raziel have changed time on more than one occassion
Time IS immutable. Kain became a nemesis, when WTJ died. Raziel was put in the blade still. SR1 occurs, etc, etc.

A mirror is a mirror. It always reflects what's in front of it. Break the mirror, it still reflects an image, just in smaller parts. Put water on it, it shows it distorted by the water, but it still shows the picture.

Light is light. Take a picture of something partly underwater, and the light is still bent, but the image is still shown.

Things can be immutable, while still being modified. Take a ball of silly putty roll it into one long string, or a ball, and it's STILL the same chunk you started with. Tear a piece of paper into fourths, and it's still the same piece of paper, just in smaller pieces.

Or I can go with the river analogy. I could place a small rock in the stream, and it doesn't really do anything. Or, I could place a REALLY BFB (Big freakin Boulder) in the middle, and the stream stops, but eventually the water builds up, and just goes around it and on like it was doing to begin with. I altered it's flow, but it still is flowing how it was, unless of course, I take a bull dozer and change it's path completely. Although after time, the flow could be reestablished, but now it's larger due to the extra path I added. Many rivers do this with their meanders that they create, and then merge with yet again.

No, I only want the story to be what it is.
That's a flawed desire then. Because what the story is, is what Amy writes. Saying Amy is wrong is like saying the sun is wrong because it follows the moon. You have no control over it. It does what it does, whether you think it's wrong or not.

And if you TRULY wanted to the story to be "what it is" then there would be no wrong or right, there would just be "what it is".

It's like someone telling me I'm wrong for being so arrogant. Unfortunately, that's what I am.

Math equations can be wrong, ideas and creations can't.

Yeah, except the guys that created the murals made them totally misleading and didn't offer anything in the games to validate what the staff would later say is fact
Like I said, the murals are/were biased to begin with. You can't paint an objective picture with only one perspective. Art, and pictures may be worth a 100 words, but that doesn't mean they are the same words you see.

If I show you a picture of a beach at sunset, you may see a relaxing vacation, I just see a postcard. But if I show you a picture of a mountain, you may see cold snow, where as I see untracked powder, killer jumps, wicked runs and a GREAT idea for a vacation on skis or snowboards. Pictures are open to interpretation. The creators of the graphical murals had a specific idea they were going for, a hybrid destiny. But the creators of the literal murals (Ancients, Hylden) saw potential signs, that were misinterpreted from the beginning. So in essence, some of the murals were in fact wrong. Or the resulting decisions based on what they portend were wrong.

The murals and prophecies were based on what COULD have been, not what actually was. AND in the end, it was the murals that made "what could have been" into what actually was.

The problem arises because both Raziel and Kain admit that they are one of the figures in the murals, they never mention what the staff says or even hints at it.
Yes. And in the end, they were both wrong. Kain and Raziel don't have to have a side monologue mentioning how they were wrong. It is something that is left to the reader/player to discover themselves. Every answer doesn't have to be outright given to us.

Kain also thought he could prevent Raziel from being put into the blade, but we saw how well THAT plan worked out. That eventuallity didn't even need fate's help.

Just because the characters say something, doesn't mean THEY are right. Amy had a reason Kain and Raziel made the wrong interpretations, it was a dramtic choice, that added suspicion and curiosity. What would be the point of saying from the first mural, that Raziel was both? Nothing. It gives away the HIDDEN meaning she is trying to portray. It also contradicts the realization Raziel finally had at the end, that led to his sacrifice. If Raziel knew he was both, then it wouldn't have been a sacrifice at the end, it would have been weird.

Also, the murals are ironic. The figurative meaning of Kain and Raziel being one of them, is different than the literal one, where Raziel is both (or which ever one it is, it's hard to decide which is literal and which is figurative in this case, it's like saying peanut butter is the opposite of jelly).

and some new things have been added
And corrected.


events have been deleted from history
And reintroduced.

or Kain is going to put history back to how it was before Moebius started meddling in it
And as you can see, despite his meddling, time moves on. It can't be changed. Unless of course, only someone with true free will can do it.

And you're changing the context. Time hasn't been changing, it has been altered. tweaked. Modified. It's the same time, but with slight changes.

it has been changed again and again. I'm only being reasonable here.
And yet, the events of BO1 as seen in Defiance, aoccured as they did in BO1. So just HOW much has it been changed? It hasn't really. The pillars fall, Moebius dies, Kain refuses the sacrifice, Vorador dies (strange one that one is), Raziel goes into the blade. Time hasn't really changed as much as you say.

Yes the events behind BO2, and BO2 were added, but they were corrected as well. You're taking the phrase "time flows on, and corrects any change" WAY too literally. Kain may have been the instrument of time, when he ended BO2. Time doesn't put on a trenchcoat and fedora and double six shooters and fix what went wrong. It sways characters already invoilved to right what has been set wrong on their own.

Atleast that's how I see it.

No, I am not misunderstanding the 12 Monkeys comparison, it is simply not valid.
According to B's explanation, it is 100% valid. WHat the characters do, leads to the events that lead them to what they do in the first place.

Totally different from 12 Monkeys where the future stayed the same.
You forgot about the insurance part of the end of 12 Monkeys.

Also, in 12 Monkeys, they had "murals" in the phone calls and tapes they had recorded, that were confusing. Cole finally remembers them and makes ANOTHER call, which is what lead to the "insurance" being sent back. Cole went back, set the future in motion, and then later went back again, with his original past (the phone call and tapes he remembered) as hints to what he needed to do. Quite apropo to LoK.

As for BO1, time is immutable for sure. Kain HAS to see the Nemesis in order to persuade him to go back and kill WTJ. If the Nemesis never existed, WTJ would never be a target. And then the NEmesis would always live. But if Kains life is that he ALWAYS sees the NEmesis, and then goes back, then time allows it. Think of that event as augmenting the current time line. Although, we do know Kain remembers the altered past, as well as the new one. So it's possible that the first part of BO1 before WTJ was just a memory, and not actually part of the time line. It's was an interactive flashback.

because even though he's making changes, they are the changes that allow the events of Blood Omen to proceed the way they're supposed to - this includes things like putting the Reaver where either Moebius can find it for William, or his younger self can find it for use in Blood Omen which hasn't been covered in any game yet.
Not to mention making the SR to begin with :) And killing Janos, and creating the massacre of the circle.

But, not to argue with you B, cause I know you could probably kill me in an LoK debate :) But you're talking about Moebius' cycle. How would this concept change with the fact that SR2 has been, stretched out a bit? We know that SR2 originally was supposed to end with Kain dying, and Raziel being absorbed. But would SR2 still lead to BO1, now that the blade has been removed from time and Kain being alive?

It's because the murals are ironic. The figurative meaning of Kain and Raziel being one of them, is different than the literal one, where Raziel is both (or which ever one it is, it's hard to decide which is literal and which is figurative in this case, it's like saying peanut butter is the opposite of jelly).

Hypothetically, if Kain had gone back in time killed William the Just, and thereby this caused someone else to become the Nemesis causing the very future he sought to avoid in the first place, then you could make the argument that the LOK series is like 12 Monkeys, but this didn't happen.
You must have missed SR1 then.

This then caused the introduction of two new fated events that didn't happen in the previous timeline, Kain getting killed off at William's Chapel 30 years before Blood Omen 1 by Raziel (Before Blood Omen 1 there was no William's Chapel, thus everything associated with this is new.)
Here's a riddle for you. If WTJ was never fated to die, and The chapel and the timeline were new events, then why did Raziel, go back and heal the blade that was broken, and eventually would fall into Kains hands in BO1? If this was a new event, then how could Raziel heal the blade that broke from the fight, and would be found by Kain BEFORE he killed WTJ?

Because SR2 leads to BO1, like B said. Raziel heals the blade, that Kain finds and uses to kill WTJ, which allows the broken blade to be found by Raziel and healed.

Also, if SR2 is a result of the new BO1 timeline, then how did Raziel go back to get Janos killed, and cauyse the massacre that allowed Ariel to be born, and killed, and then bear Kain into the world? These are events that happen BEFORE WTJ is killed, yet the Raziel that caused them is a RESULT of the death of WTJ.

Because, all these events are inextricably bound. They all lead to the next, which in turn leads to the one before it. A perpetual loop. Or a Moebius strip, if you pardon the pun.

then it would be another piece of evidence to support the deduction that Kain and Raziel in the games have only been fixing the changes to the timeline Moebius introduced back in Blood Omen 1, and returning history to how it was before the original alteration to the original timeline.
That kind of makes the whole story aspect of the Ancients and Hylden trivial and useless, and negates Amy's comment about explaining the Hylden motives in a later game. If it was WTJ's death that caused everything, then why worry so much about murals drawn by the Hylden and Ancients? Also, Moebius isn't the true villian, he is a pawn, so correcting his alteration is pointless, since what he did is NOTHING compared to the ideas of the one leading him.

Yes, except the surprise never really came and was never really validated in the game.
Actually it was. Through the whole game, Raziel feared the Reaver and what it symbolized to him. Eternal prison. In the end when he saw the FINAL piece of the mural, the Scion, he realized what his destiny was. Once again, just because it wasn't explicitly stated, doesn't mean it wasn't mentioned through hidden meanings and thought. Sometimes deeds speak louder than words. And Raziel finally realized it, and decided to go against BOTH the destinies of the murals, and make a new one, hence, his sacrifice.

PS. In closing, I apologize about the length of this post. I haven't been able to access the forum for about 5 days, and was having debate withdrawls. I just hope I was able to keep the melodrama out of it.

TempySmurf
4th Feb 2004, 06:01
After seeing the Butterfly Effect, I started wondering about the Legacy of Kain timeline. I always assumed that there were two different ways that time was altered in LOK, but I'm not sure if I've thought it through complete to post on it. I'll throw out my thoughts to see if someone else can get what I'm thinking.


Spoilers for Butterfly Effect (awesome movie by the way)


In the buttefly effect when he blacked out as a kid it was his future self going back in time and occupying that space. There were times he would go back in time and he wouldn't do anything to change the past, but would just do what he always does and so he would change nothing but would visit the past. His mind would stay the same because time stayed the same. Then there were times he would go back in time and change events that would cause his mind to get new memories. He would keep his old memories of previous timelines though.

In Blood Omen, Kain went back in time and changed the events in the past, but at least to our knowledge, his mind didn't change. He didn't seem to get information from the new world he created. Which is how most timestreaming stories usually go. I also wonder, but not really as much, does this mean that there are two Kains? When he took the sword out of Raziel in Soul Reaver 2 he changed the timeline, but he got new memories and seemed to keep his old memories.

That's why I say that there are two different types of ways to alter time and they have different effects.

I'm wondering how the different ways of altering time effect time, Kain, and everything else. Is it just always suppose to be or what? I can't put my finger on it, but this makes me wonder.

Dogfight
4th Feb 2004, 07:01
Here's a riddle for you. If WTJ was never fated to die, and The chapel and the timeline were new events, then why did Raziel, go back and heal the blade that was broken, and eventually would fall into Kains hands in BO1? If this was a new event, then how could Raziel heal the blade that broke from the fight, and would be found by Kain BEFORE he killed WTJ?

In the original timeline William's Soul Reaver was not shattered in two because Kain didn't go back in time and shatter it with his Soul Reaver.

The two events I have already mentioned were newly introduced fates of Kain and Raziel. William's Chapel wasn't around in the original timeline, it is something that was newly introduced as was Kain's fate there, which was predestined all the way back when the young Kain altered history by killing William in Blood Omen 1 and thereby created this new timeline, at that moment Kain and Raziel's final fates were rewritten as presented in Soul Reaver 2.

I never said that Raziel didn't go back in time and travel through history in the original timeline only that in the original timeline he wasn't supposed to become the Soul Reaver 500 years before Blood Omen 1, there is a difference.

At the end of Soul Reaver 2 a new timeline is created, Kain and Raziel still go back in time, they have to for the timeline to stay consistent, but the events of Kain's supposed death and Raziel's supposed imprisonment have been thrown out. This doesn't mean that Kain won't die and Raziel won't become the Soul Reaver, only that when it was supposed to happen was altered.

The deduction I said of older Kain stopping his younger self from killing William the Just in the past, was an example of how time may be immutable and could also end on a positive note. In simpler terms the older Kain brings back the original timeline, making a sort of loop. By changing time in the first place, this eventually leads to Kain correcting the time alterations bringing back the original timeline, thereby making time in a way immutable. It is but one possibility to support what the staff said about time being immutable, don't quote me on this.


I just saw Kain becoming "The Nemesis" in WTJ's place.

This is debatable and purely interpretative.


There shouldn't need to be a dissertation of every event.

Yes, but a slight comment here and there wouldn't hurt.


So it's possible that the first part of BO1 before WTJ was just a memory, and not actually part of the time line. It's was an interactive flashback.

Some rewrites have happened time and again, even if all of history cannot be changed, some events can be.

Kainster
4th Feb 2004, 08:01
Well, this debate seems to have gotten out of hand, especially the 12 Monkeys analogy. So to avoid creating another string of references to the movie, I think the point the CD team was trying to make with the movie as an example is the concept of INEVITABILITY. No matter what you do to prevent fate (good or bad) is futile because no matter what measures you take to avoid Fate, those actions only bring about that Fate. If i were making an analogy for this though, I wouldve made a reference to Greek Mythology which is MUCH better suited than that crummy movie. Maybe everything that happens between Raz Kain and Moebius and re-writing history are the ACTUAL events that take place in each of their destinies. It only seems that they are fighting the power of Fate. But only the next game will tell. To heck with assumptions.

As for the murals, I can understand how they would be misleading. We all know the official answer is that Raziel is both figures depicted with the Reaver which keeps in tune with Redeemer and Destroyer. But the murals do look like they depict a sequence of events (Raziel defeating Kain, then Raziels absorption into the Reaver which was my idea of Redeemer and Destroyer at the time). Now Im not arguing the official answers. Whatever the CD team says is true, they wrote the story, and now that I've read both characters in the murals are Raziel I can understand why that is. But still Dogfight does have a point as to why they are misleading. However, to the point he brings that the CD team could be making a mistake, I would have to say thats improbable, mostly because they probably already have the story for the next game pretty much written. If they didnt, I dont think they wouldve answered those questions at this point.

By the way, MAD PROPS to blinc cause i saw like 3 questions in that Q&A which i asked him in an email a while back

DJpick
4th Feb 2004, 15:23
The Ancients, the Hylden or someone else? Both sides don't seem to have the full picture, as if neither was clued in on it
Or it COULD just be that they were drawn one sided for a reason. To show the bias of each group, and what they thought truly happened back then.

DJpick
4th Feb 2004, 20:23
I'm more of a researcher, gathering up the clues the staff has left for us in the games to solve the many questions of the series. Many times I get the right deductions, sometimes I get a wrong deduction, but more often than not I arrive at the true conclusions.
But these are games to be enjoyed, not cases to be solved. You can't tell Amy she's wrong, when she is creating this from scratch. This is something made from scratch, not something already was to begin with. If Amy hadn't created the story herself, and was making her interpretation of someone else's work, then you could say she's wrong or right. But saying the creator is wrong is like saying the cook is wrong because he cooked the food.

Peter Jackson can be accused of being right or wrong because he remade someone else's wrok. Tolkien can't be wrong, because it was HIS work.

Doesn't it make you question what really happened back before the war between the two races, so far we've only heard from word of mouth, you could make the analogy that it is like a rumor, the reality is likely different and not as cut as dry as we have been led to believe.
Duh. That's what I said. Each side is painting the picture as THEY saw it. The Ancients feel like they were right and just in their decision, while the Hylden feel victimized by the zealous Ancients. That's exactly what the murals portrayed, the view from the painters perspective. Of course they don't paint the true picture, because they aren't painte2d by an outside viewer who is uninvolved and/or unbiased. The murals show two different stories because they ARE two different stories. Two sides to the same coin. I'm sure if you asked a Nazi about the WWII massacres he would have a different view than a survivor of the camps (this comment is not meant to spark any political, religious, or otherwise type of debates, it was used to make a specific point, how views are different from person to person, depending on the perspective they are seeing it from).

It's the "He said she said" dichotomy.

Dogfight
4th Feb 2004, 23:37
But these are games to be enjoyed, not cases to be solved. You can't tell Amy she's wrong, when she is creating this from scratch. This is something made from scratch, not something already was to begin with. If Amy hadn't created the story herself, and was making her interpretation of someone else's work, then you could say she's wrong or right. But saying the creator is wrong is like saying the cook is wrong because he cooked the food.

I never said the games were cases. Sure the games are made to be enjoyed, but they are also made to stir the curiosity.

Well, the current games aren't really something made from scratch, the original one Blood Omen 1 was. The games following this built on the foundation of the first game, using it as an outline. Soul Reaver 2 borrowed heavily from the background of the original game, Blood Omen 2 took many concepts from the cancelled game Chakan, and Defiance is in many ways a culmination of all the other games. The most original of all the games, next to the original I'd say would be Soul Reaver 1.

I never said that Amy was wrong, only that what the staff said about time being immutable and unchangable was wrong up to Defiance. In the next game they could validate what they said, but up to now it hasn't been proven entirely right. Yes, some things in time do stay the same, but time is still altered.

DJpick
5th Feb 2004, 00:16
I never said the games were cases. Sure the games are made to be enjoyed, but they are also made to stir the curiosity.
So how can they be wrong? You never answered my question. If they aren't cases, how are they wrong?

Well, the current games aren't really something made from scratch, the original one Blood Omen 1 was. The games following this built on the foundation of the first game, using it as an outline. Soul Reaver 2 borrowed heavily from the background of the original game, Blood Omen 2 took many concepts from the cancelled game Chakan, and Defiance is in many ways a culmination of all the other games. The most original of all the games, next to the original I'd say would be Soul Reaver 1.
Well, SR2, SR1 borrowed from BO1 because, well, they were sequels. That's like saying Return of the King borrowed from Two Towers, which borrowed from Fellowship to begin with. OF COURSE they borrowed from the prequels.

Blood Omen 2 took many concepts from the cancelled game Chakan
That's because the guy who drew/created Chakkan, also drew the concept art for BO2. So it's not surprising there were similarities. But BO2 drew visual inspiration, not story inspiration.

Are you saying BO2 is wrong because the visuals are from a different game?

I never said that Amy was wrong, only that what the staff said about time being immutable and unchangable was wrong up to Defiance. In the next game they could validate what they said, but up to know it hasn't been proven entirely right. Yes, some things in time do stay the same, but time is still altered.
You just aren't even reading what we say are you. Time IS immutable, but you can still have changes. A truck barreling down the road hits a bird. The truck keeps moving, with an all too noticable dent in the bumper now.

The moon comes closer to Earth, and tidal forces are changed, but the tides still wash and break on the sand.

Gravity is lesser on smaller planetary objects (the moon) yet there is still a pull. And even though you float in space, there is still an astronomical gravitational pull being exerted on you, you just have no landmark to referrence it with, ergo you feel like you are floating and not moving.

The sun will always rise. Put on sunglasses, the light is "altered" but the sun still rised/rose or whatever the word is.

There are some inevitabilities in life. And despite what anyone says, the official answer is time is immutable. Now this may not jive with the games, but that may be because the writer is trying to show that Kain and Raziel who think they have free will, in fact, truly are bound by fate. You can't compare the perspective of Kain and Raziel, to what the writer is actually trying to say.

Yes, it may be validated in the next game, but their answer of "time is immutable" has already given that away. They are practically telling us that even though the theme of these stories is "fate vs free will" that in the end, fate always wins. No matter how much free will you have, you are still obligated to the rules of time. So even though there are changes, time forces them to be corrected. Time forced the events, that led to the changes.

Time forced Raziel to be put into the blade, which led to the alteration of time. As Kain said, History abhors a paradox, and just because one was introduced, doesn't mean things have TRULY changed. Moebius is still Moebius, Kain is still Kain, and Raziel still has no pants, no matter what "changes" appear to be made.

If time was TRULY changed, then certain events would never occur. As we saw in Defiance, despite the paradox in SR2...

Mortanius still led Kain to the pillars, to kill himself and Anacrothe, the pillars still fell, Kain still refused the sacrifice and became the ruler. Ariel still had died. Vorador still died (which in turn leads us to believe WTJ still died, which means time forced this event, despite the SR2 paradox, because it HAD to happen in order for SR2 to happen as it did). Moebius still died. The SR was still made.

What you fail to realize is that Kain and Raziel are outside of time the minute they entered the Cplast chamber in SR1. Kain and Raziel's futures were to go back, but according to their history 3500 years ago, they had already gone back.

You can look at it from their perspective, and see that they think they have free will because they are making changes. But at the same time, their choices are no longer important, because 3500 years before, they had already made these decisions. See, time IS immutable, because it doesn' tmatter what they think they are doing, because they already did it 3500 years ago (from SR1 referrence). Raziel was able to get the WB in SR1, because 3500 years ago, he was put into the blade.

And during Defiance, the WB changed, because Raziel STILL wnet intot the blade, but willingly. The fact that Raziel STILL had the WB after SR2 is proof that he would go into the blade again. Despite the alteration, time forced this occurance to happen, by allowing it to exist when it shouldn't. Which pretty much proves that Kain will still somehow receive the SR in BO1 and then break it over Raziel. The cycle still runs full circle despite any changes.

No matter what Kain has done, time has forced him to do what he had always done.

The ONLY real difference is that Kain is no longer dead.
Although judgiing from the event in Defiance, he still has a purpose, therefore he can't die. Kain is the Scion, he has a reason he is not dead yet. You can either Take Amy's answer as is, or look at it as "because he is the Scion, he has something to fulfill before he can truly die, and time will force this event to happen". Either way, we have to go with the official answer, because it can lead in man y directions.

I never said that Amy was wrong, only that what the staff said about time being immutable and unchangable was wrong up to Defiance
You actually did say they were wrong based on what the games showed us. And they weren't wrong, Amy, like I said, is a supperb writer who knows what she's doing, she's trying to make us think time isn't immutable and there is some free will in our protagonists. But I have a feeling the rug will be pulled from underneath us and eventually the "time immutable" chapter of the story will come into play. And then it will be a new story completely.

DJpick
5th Feb 2004, 00:20
Your take is not exactly the same as mine, I'm putting forth the possibility that the prophecy was brought about by someone other than the Ancients and the Hylden, this including the murals of the prophecy at the Vampire Citadel, then each side just came up with what they thought was the truth of the prophecy
Defiance pretty much painted the picture that EG is the one pulling the strings. Kain mentions this himself. SO the artist of the prophecies is not an unknown anymore. And a thtis point, introducing a new pivotal character would be overkill. We already have the Seer to deal with, as well as the Hylden, and more on the History behind the pillars and Ancients and Guardians as well as Hash/HL/SL. Adding too many all important characters would make the game confusing and hard to watch. It would also clutter things. It would be like a 3 man boxing match.

DJpick
5th Feb 2004, 02:57
I think that may be the message that Amy is portraying, so far. The despite all his decisions, and all he knows, Kain is creating the future that is trying to avoid, by trying to prevent it. In the end, it may have been his death taht would truly end everything.

Umah Bloodomen
5th Feb 2004, 03:28
Should this thread continue to degenerate into a spamfest regarding inappropriate pet-related discussion AND/OR continue to degenerate into melodrama involving attacks and retaliation (or the encouragement of such behavior by unmentioned third-parties), then this thread will be closed and those participating in that nonsense will subject themselves to the enforcement of the Terms of Use of Our Community (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18226).

Blincoln has provided some great information here and he deserves his thread's integrity. My suggestion to you is that if you wish to go off topic, then utilize Private Channels (PM's and/or Email) or create an appropriate off-topic thread in the LOK CC (http://forums.eidosgames.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=24).

Thanks. :)

SpliffTastic
5th Feb 2004, 03:42
watch the ending of 12 Monkeys again. pay attention to the scene on the plane. Cole did change history.

Umah Bloodomen
5th Feb 2004, 03:47
SpliffTastic ~ Please do not further antagonize the situation. It has been and will continue to be dealt with accordingly.

Thanks. :)

DJpick
5th Feb 2004, 04:04
I'm not sure it was Cole who changed it. He still died and the guy got on the plane. But because Cole went back, with the knowledge that his future self had allowed him to have, he was able to allow a chnage, but he didn't change it himself. He created the event, that allowed others to change it. Although, it's also HIGHLY possible that the lady on the plane was there to ensure here future DID happen, for completely unknown reasons. The ending was a little vague on that aspect. Was she Cole's insurance? Or the virus guys?

DJpick
5th Feb 2004, 05:01
Currently they are wrong, mistakes are made from time to time. Having old story elements be dropped and new ones introduced you can’t always be certain even if it is the official word
I can, because the writer/creators gave us the official word. Just because it hasn't been explained now, doesn't mean it's wrong. Basically what you're saying is she's wrong, until she makes it right? Which implies that she is going to change her ideas. When everyone else says it just hasn't been explained yet.

It would be the same as me saying you're wrong, because none of your ideas have been validated. And until they are, they're not right. You're using the ambivalent approach, where it's just wrong, until it's right. Where just because it hasn't been said yet, it's not a fact. And once it's stated, THEN you'll say it's right, instead of just taking Amy at her word. You have to be willing to take that leap of faith and just trust Amy in that she knows what she's doing. You shouldn't doubt her, she has done an amazing job.

And to FINALLY get to use my favorite quote...

Absence of proof, is not proof of absence

It isn’t quite the same in the sequels of LOTR they don’t go back in time to the first movie.
It doesn't matter. Time travel is just the story element Amy chose. Just like Tolkien made a ring that ruled all others.

Soul Reaver 2 borrowed heavily from the background of the original game
Of course it did. If they made a sequel that had NOTHING to do with the prequel, then Amy would have just written the vampiric Final Fantasy (pre FFX2 of course).

Blood Omen 2 took many concepts from the cancelled game Chakan including some story elements
I know. You already said that before.

But it took many of them, because the creator of Chakkan was heavily involved in BO2. This is common knowledge. Not because it just looked cool, and they wanted to be unoriginal and cheat.

What is more Amy is not the only writer of the series, there are others and there is also much background sources used from all the games including from Blood Omen 1 in the newest games.
That's called inspiration. She didn't copy the story and change the names to protect the innocent. She used other ideas, to come up with something of her own. It's like adding sugar and water to make koolaid. Seperately they were water and sugar, but together they made something COMPLETELY different.

but then again afterwards they could make a new game going back to there being free will
I doubt Amy will do that. Because then it just gets annoying when the reader thinks to himself "wait a minute, that's not what was going on last time!!!" Amy won't keep turning 180's because she will make us dizzy, as well as herself. Amy has had a direction, and from 1 to 5, she has stuck with it. But what her idea or underlying theme is, may not be the same as the thoughts Kain and Raziel has. Like I said, it's a dramatic choice. It's a contrasting view, make the characters see one thing that may be the opposite of what you're trying to say, to emphasize what it is you finally end up saying.

Just because Kain and Raziel say one thing that doesn't match what Amy says, doesn't make what she says wrong. Kain and Raziel aren't writing these games. They are representations of it. Kain and Raziel are working under the pretense that they have free will. If Amy wanted us to know from the beginning that they were bound by fate, she would have done it.

But then that would be boring, and here's why...

"Excerpt from LoK: There is no free will"

Kain: "Raziel, you must change fate and reclaim your destiny"
Raziel: "What's the point? Time won't allow it because there is no free will. I'll just be put in the blade again, it 'll never end. It's pointless because our choices will be erased."
Kain: "I guess you have a point. Where are my pants?"

See, when you have a two sided aspect you're trying to portray, you have to actually have two sides. Free will is nothing without the idea of fate to contradict it. Light wouldn't be light without dark. Peanut butter would be boring without jelly. "Tastes great "would be kind of like a "so what" without "less filling". There would be no good, without evil to contrast it. Up wouldn't be up without a down. left would be just one big circle without a right to counteract it.

Time is immutable would be a pathetic story, without the concept of free will to give it some intrigue. No one wants to believe that they have no impact on the choices they make. WHich is why "time is immutable" even if Kain and Raziel seem to be Defying it (hence the title, Defiance). If people didn't think they had free will, there would be no Defiance. If there was no such thing as fate, then there would be nothing to defy.

There is a reason that they say time is immutable, and then don't actually show it in the games. They want you to think Kain and Raziel have a chance at defying the stars. They want you to believe they have hope, when in the end, fate may prevent that hope from ever truly being fulfilled.

but then again afterwards they could make a new game going back to there being free will. You never know, it could even go in a totally different direction
There is only one way to go after free will, and it's not south west. It's no free will. Fate. Destiny.

There is of course one main story, but many ways to tell it and many ways to keep us all guessing, which is what give the LOK series an edge over others.
If there are many ways to tell it, then how is Amy's way wrong? This is just one of many ways she could have chosen. How can CD be wrong, if they could have chosen any number of possibilies? If only one choice was right, then it could be wrong. But if there are many, then this one isn't wrong.

“time is basically immutable,” still leaving room enough for free will and some big alterations.
No. "Basically" means that "basically" what they do may seem to have an effect, but doesn't mean diddly in the scheme of things. Just like sports. The losing team may have put up a valiant fight, but the victor is still the only one remembered, no matter how great the losers played. Unless of course the two teams played SO spectacularly that the game goes down as one of those games where both teams are immortalized because of the phrase "Where XXX FINALLY beat YYY" (Like Hogan vs Andre).

"Basically" doesn't allow for big changes. It allows for the characters to think they have changed something, only to see it negated in the long run. Just like BO2 was. First they're free, then they're defeated.

Saying that those who travel through time can’t change history, because they didn’t is up to this point a contradiction of the series, of course some added future material could as you say paint a different picture but for now it is still wrong
But that's not what they said. What they're saying is that they didn't change time, because they ALWAYS went back to change time. Like Kain said "We are destined to meet here because we have always met here."

Kain's "edge of the coin" idea may have merit, but even if the coin lands on its edge, it can EASILY be knocked back onto it's other edges.

but there have been and are other writers
But they didn't come up with the ideas we see now. BO1 didn't deal with free will vs fate like the other games have. When Amy wrote SR1, she created a standard the rest of the games have to follow. No matter who writes them.

You are giving Amy too much credit
I'm giving credit where credit is due.

Besides this many story elements change from game to game, some are dropped, some are added, even with what the staff said, I am doubtful
Fair enough. But don't sit here and say the writers are wrong because of how YOU see things happening. And don't tell us we're wrong, just because we don't agree with. Tell us we're wrong because we're wrong, not because we disagree.

some are dropped
What elements were dropped?

Dogfight
5th Feb 2004, 08:00
It doesn't matter. Time travel is just the story element Amy chose. Just like Tolkien made a ring that ruled all others. Of course it did. If they made a sequel that had NOTHING to do with the prequel, then Amy would have just written the vampiric Final Fantasy (pre FFX2 of course).

The difference is that by time traveling in the LOK series you end up repeating a lot of the same material from the other games, not that there is anything wrong with this, but it doesn't make Soul Reaver 2 and Defiance made from scratch.


I know. You already said that before. But it took many of them, because the creator of Chakkan was heavily involved in BO2. This is common knowledge. Not because it just looked cool, and they wanted to be unoriginal and cheat.

When did I say they took the concept designs of Chakan because it looked cool, was unoriginal and the staff of LOK wanted to cheat.

Chakan's story and the concept designs by Steve Ross of the game were transplanted when the game was cancelled into Blood Omen 2. The game designs of Sirens and its story was also transplanted into Blood Omen 2. Saying that this was merely an inspiration is being too kind, it was transplantion of material from two games into one and then others customizing it.


I'm giving credit where credit is due.

Well then why not also mention the other writers of the series Denis Dyack, Ken McCullock, Richard Lemarchand, Jim Curry, Bret Robbins, Steve Ross, and Carol Wolf.

Great thanks to all these people and to all the others of the team for bringing us this wonderful series.


What elements were dropped?

Check out blincoln's website.

DJpick
5th Feb 2004, 15:41
The difference is that by time traveling in the LOK series you end up repeating a lot of the same material from the other games, not that there is anything wrong with this, but it doesn't make Soul Reaver 2 and Defiance made from scratch.
It does if the latter games don't exactly go to the same periods we saw before. SR2 was 20 years after WTJ died, and 500 before BO1. So although they are built on an old story, it's not the SAME story told again. It's the same story, but from a new angle. We see the world 20 years after WTJ dies. We see it when Janos was alive and the old Guardians were alive.

Besides, LotR did a lot of flashbacks to the prequels. Or made a lot of mention of them. SO how is that any different than what Amy did. TT and RotK still had to do with a ring and the fellowship and Sauron, so are they any more original than FotR? No, they just build of a story.

When did I say they took the concept designs of Chakan because it looked cool, was unoriginal and the staff of LOK wanted to cheat
When you said it was a Chakkan: Reddeux.

Saying that this was merely an inspiration is being too kind, it was transplantion of material from two games into one and then others customizing it.
Well, Chakkan 2 (which is what it resembled actually if I remember correctly) is what it was based off of. And Chakkan 2 was never made.

Well then why not also mention Denis Dyack, Ken McCullock, Richard Lemarchand, Jim Curry, Bret Robbins, Steve Ross, and Carol Wolf.
Because Amy has taken the BO1 story, and drawn it to a beautiful Epic. Dennis, although a great writer as well, didn't write BO1 to be drawn out.

Amy is the writer, and director of the majority of these games. CD/Eidos went to her 5 years after BO1 and said we want a sequel. SR1 was made. SR1 wasn't exactly original either, since it's story elements had been established in BO1 as well.

When I look up the credits for most of these games, I see Amy listed as Writer AND director.

As for the BO2, well, it was an interesting game, but poorly written in my view. If this is what you meant by strory elements added and dropped, well that's what happens when Amy doesn't write it.

As for the other people, I'm sure they did an amazing job as well. But the fact is in either her or the other interviews, it's always mentioned that "AMY has done tons of research into this or this or this". SO even the other people mention her. But I'm not talking about CD and a video game. I'm talking about the story. Amy is the one behind the majority of the story. If we were just talking about a video game I would have said CD.

warpsavant
6th Feb 2004, 01:13
Amy? Amy who? WTF does 12 monkeys have to do with LOK? Must have something to do with the Hydlen. hehe

This answer is unacceptable!

Q: Why was the Circle defenseless back in Blood Omen 1?
A: The Circle was taken by surprise, and could not face Vorador without Malek to protect them.

WHATEVER!!!!!!!!!!

Did they watch the BO intro? Because that old dood only looked surprised when his powers failed him.

DJpick
6th Feb 2004, 05:26
Did they watch the BO intro? Because that old dood only looked surprised when his powers failed him.
Vorador's raid surprised them, and once they realized they were being attacked, they cleared their heads and focused on fighting back. Next thing you know their powers failed. WHich would be an even bigger unsettling surprise.

Amy? Amy who? WTF does 12 monkeys have to do with LOK? Must have something to do with the Hydlen. hehe
In regards to the timeline they meant :)

What's a Hydlen? :D

Protector_Malek
6th Feb 2004, 11:12
This has been discussed before. Most probably, the guardians were not that powerfull, NOT AT ALL. They never said they were. And vorador was powerfull indeed.
PS: My cat's alright. I took him to the vet! ;)

Dogfight
6th Feb 2004, 14:33
Even Vorador was surprised at himself losing his own magical abilities, just as he was going to take down Malek, it wasn't just the Guardians.

Protector_Malek
6th Feb 2004, 15:15
mmm I don't remember that part.... I'm going to install BO1 again... and play it again :)

Dogfight
6th Feb 2004, 16:47
It happens after Vorador takes out the Circle. Malek shows up and they duel, Malek loses the fight, and then just as Vorador is about to kill Malek his powers begin to fail him too. Vorador then teleports away leaving the the disgraced Malek behind.

I know some have said that the Circle wasn't that powerful but this is giving Vorador a bit too much credit. Now Vorador is a powerful being I'm not disputing this, but him taking out six of the Circle would not be a small feat, even for him.

The illusion given was how easy it was for Vorador to take out the six, counted we never saw how he took out the other two of the six, Blood Omen 1 only shows Vorador taking out four of them, but even so it should have been more difficult for Vorador, the four didn't even put up any resistance.

What is more, this old F.A.Q. gives some clues that there was much more to this affair than we know.

http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?threadid=169

Thanks to Warpsavant and Amy Hennig. Here are some excerpts.


Q: Why was the Circle defenseless? Their magic fails in the cut scene; Moebius even says they are defenseless in Sr2. Is it because Malek was not their, or their magic failed? What were they doing in there? And where was Mortanius all this time? Off getting possessed??
A: This has not yet been revealed. At the time (as represented in BO:LoK's FMA), certain members of the Circle were watching and guiding the movements of the Sarafan via the "viewing basin" in the chamber. Mortanius' whereabouts have not been revealed.

Q: Did Vorador follow raziel to the Stronghold, or the Sarafan, or is just a giant coincidence that V shows up, when the Circles magic fails, and Moebius and Raziel are distracting Malek?
A: This is intentionally unexplained. It's not exactly a giant coincidence, when you consider the event, which precipitated both Raziel's and Vorador's infiltration of the Stronghold...

HolyMoses
6th Feb 2004, 16:52
Also remember that Moby was in the area. He could have easily followed Malek to the area where his battle with Vorador was going on. You see Malek running to the scene, where Moby isn't the running type. Onces Mobius got with in a certain area, Vorador's powers could have started to fade due to the staff.

Mortanus might have also had a part to play with it, possibly killing members of the circle for their aid in the vampire purge. This is doubtful, but not impossible.

DJpick
6th Feb 2004, 19:22
I don't think Mortanius killed them though, since didn't Amy say Vorador killed the 6?

Also, there is no proof the Staff affects Vorador.

Seeing as how once the HoD was gone, it didn't affect Kain

And the limits of magic was established in BO1. Kain had a limited amount of Mana, so it's safe to assume the Guardians spent a LOT just trying to defend themselves. And Vorador, in his berserker fury, would use either his weaker spells at the most emotionally charged full force (kind of like an overdrive) or he would use his most visciously powerful spells, without any regards to the limits of them.

DJpick
7th Feb 2004, 06:26
Now that I think about it, it seems like the time theory in The Terminator Series would be pretty appropriate for this series too. Changes are made, but they only dely the inevitable.

Dogfight
7th Feb 2004, 10:23
The Terminator series, of course, that has to be the best comparison example for the LOK series. They have the whole free will versus fate theme going, and the motif of a horrible future being inevitable.

Each time in those movies, someone from either side tries to change the past, they merely postpone the inevitable future. No matter how many times you change the past, you can't escape the future destiny. Coincidently neither side can destroy the main adversary in the past.

Kind of reminds me of Kain and the Elder. The Elder couldn't destroy Kain in the past, and Kain apparently isn't going to kill the Elder in the past either. Both will likely have to duke it out in the future, and this could mean the eventual end of both of them.

The staff at Crstal Dynamics should've used the Terminator series to compare the LOK series with instead of 12 Monkeys, it is far more appropriate.

Protector_Malek
7th Feb 2004, 11:15
I still think that those guardians weren't powerfull. There's no indication that they were. Then, I do not understand why you keep thinking they had such great powers. They were pillar guardians, not warriors. They knew magic, but ther's no telling that it was offensive magic.
Even with the new guardians (with more power after Nuprator's curse), they were not that powerfull, if kain took them down, vorador certainly could have done the same easily.

DJpick
7th Feb 2004, 18:45
Each time in those movies, someone from either side tries to change the past, they merely postpone the inevitable future. No matter how many times you change the past, you can't escape the future destiny. Coincidently neither side can destroy the main adversary in the past.
I think it's because like Raziel said, it would cause a fatal paradox. If Raziel had truly never been put into the Reaver, WTJ wouldn't have lost. The problem is (like Terminator) the acting agent is from the future, and their existence is based on the past that they are trying to change.

It would be like me going back to kill my dad before I was born. If my dad didn't exist to create me, I would never have existed to go back and kill him, therefore my dad would never have been killed and I would still exist.

So it's quite possible Kain may have to convince a person from the past (janos in the past, fledgling Kain, Vorador, etc) to do something because he can't really do anything to alter it because for all we know, Kain making a change had always happened before)

Blincoln should've used the Terminator series to compare the LOK series with instead of 12 Monkeys, it is far more appropriate.
He didn't make that refrence, they did.

As for the blade, the WB stopped existing when Raziel used it to heal Kain. So I doubt it will truly be free. And as much as I liked Raziel as a character, I don't think he will be back because it would just be wierd to contradict what happened in Defiance, consdiering how dramatic it was, and how important it was

I still think that those guardians weren't powerfull
I agree. The humans weren't meant to be Guardians to begin with, so there's no telling if they could fully tap into the power they were given.

EpicDefender
7th Feb 2004, 22:27
I'm going to have to say that Raziel was NOT both of the beings depicted in the defiance murals. Kain was one, Raziel was the other. I'm also going to have to say that the murals of the two beings fighting with reavers were not between an anciet and a hylden. the mural depicts one defeating the other and vice versa. Now, either the mural were prophetical because Raziel did defeat Kain and Kain did defeat Raziel and impaled him with the reaver or we have the latter: Moebius the time streamer went back in time set up false murals, like he said in the game, so that raziel would kill kain.

Didn't Ariel explain why she was able to leave the pillars? Did she not say something about being able to leave because all the guardians came together to purify the wraith blade.

Vampiric Fool
8th Feb 2004, 07:05
Originally posted by EpicDefender
I'm going to have to say that Raziel was NOT both of the beings depicted in the defiance murals. Kain was one, Raziel was the other. Please read all the Facts before you just start yelling false things.

In other, unrealated news. I prefer the Terminator analogy over the 12 Monkeys one. Also, Querie:The FAQ makes it seem like Both versions of Raziel(Wraith-Blade and Wraith) are now trapped in the blade. Do you guys agree with this, or would someone like to shed some light on this for me?

DJpick
8th Feb 2004, 08:30
Epic, the official answer proves that idea wrong.

VF, I don't think both blades are trapped in the reaver because based on the cutscene in Defiance...

The WB appeared to disappear after healing Kain. And if it WAS in the blad,e then there would be no roiom for Raziel, since the WB couldn't enter the blade in SR2. And even idf it wanted to, it would/should have done it then, yet it didn't. Based on what has been shown now so far, I don't think it would even pbe possible for two WB's to be in the Reaver. Not to mention 2 WB's would cause a perpetual paradox.

Dogfight
8th Feb 2004, 08:46
:I'm going to have to say that Raziel was NOT both of the beings depicted in the defiance murals. Kain was one, Raziel was the other. I'm also going to have to say that the murals of the two beings fighting with reavers were not between an anciet and a hylden. the mural depicts one defeating the other and vice versa. Now, either the mural were prophetical because Raziel did defeat Kain and Kain did defeat Raziel and impaled him with the reaver or we have the latter: Moebius the time streamer went back in time set up false murals, like he said in the game, so that raziel would kill kain.

Didn't Ariel explain why she was able to leave the pillars? Did she not say something about being able to leave because all the guardians came together to purify the wraith blade.

The murals were all a big misdirection purposely done by Crystal Dynamics but they never really stated them as such and their meaning was not fully explained in the game. Perhaps in the next game, Kain may have a recap about this. It is difficult to know what is true when much of the material presented in the games may be called into question at a later time by Crystal Dynamics.

The true representation of the murals they have already stated on the two F.A.Q.'s about Defiance.


The WB appeared to disappear after healing Kain. And if it WAS in the blad,e then there would be no roiom for Raziel, since the WB couldn't enter the blade in SR2. And even idf it wanted to, it would/should have done it then, yet it didn't. Based on what has been shown now so far, I don't think it would even pbe possible for two WB's to be in the Reaver. Not to mention 2 WB's would cause a perpetual paradox.

I agree with these arguments, but it is still a difficult issue to pinpoint exactly, with Crystal Dynamics you never know for sure.

DJpick
8th Feb 2004, 09:08
Call me quick to judge on this one, which I try to avoid, but 2 souls in the SR would just be too easy of an idea. A way to explain the WB AFTER Raziel is imprisoned. I don't see Amy as the type to takle the easy way out. If she wants to explain the WB AFTER Raziel, she will do something interesting, not something like "Oh look, it's twofer"

PS. "Twofer" is short for 2 for 1.

Vampiric Fool
8th Feb 2004, 12:12
Ahh, Good to have the question laid to rest in my mind, even if the answer is not official. It was just that the fact that the FAQ said that Raziel was going through an Endless loop that threw me off.

Woetothecongoured
8th Feb 2004, 17:49
i agree with what your saying, the wraith blade cant be in the reaver(when kain shattered the blade on Raziel, we didnt see two wraith blades:)

DJpick
8th Feb 2004, 18:25
What awas meant by endless loop was, Raziel gets the WB, goes to SR2, kills Kain, gets put in the SR, then BO1 and then SR1 and so on and so forth. Remember, in SR2 when the Reaver impaled Raziel, the WB had detached from Raziel, so it wouldn't have been absorbed with him. No one really knows what would happen to the WB after Raziel was imprisoned.

Vampmaster
9th Feb 2004, 10:04
If you look at the Reaver during and after the "vengence & sacrifice" scene, you'll notice that the blade has two auras. The blue indicating the newly imprisoned Raziel and the yellow indicating the Spirit Reaver wraith blade coiled around it. Essentially, Kain has the intertwined Soul Reavers that Raziel used to create the SR2 paradoxes abeit purified by Spirit.

Protector_Malek
12th Feb 2004, 02:31
Originally posted by Dogfight
In that introduction even Vorador was surprised at himself losing his own magical abilities, just as he was going to take down Malek, it wasn't just the Guardians.
Dogfight, I'm playing Blood Omen 1 again, and there's no way you can tell vorador is surprised when he looses his powers. In fact, the scene is SO short and quick, that you can hardly see vorador's face. Even the lightning coming from his hands does not let you see his face clearly, and like I said, it is extremely quick, it is even hard to see if he suddendly lost his powers, or if he just felt pity and left. There is NO WAY you can tell he is surprised.
So, I'm not so sure about him loosing his powers, and the guardians lossing them as well. Like I said, I just think the guardians are weak.

Dogfight
12th Feb 2004, 03:30
Dogfight, I'm playing Blood Omen 1 again, and there's no way you can tell vorador is surprised when he looses his powers. In fact, the scene is SO short and quick, that you can hardly see vorador's face. Even the lightning coming from his hands does not let you see his face clearly, and like I said, it is extremely quick, it is even hard to see if he suddendly lost his powers, or if he just felt pity and left. There is NO WAY you can tell he is surprised.

It is difficult to notice depending on various factors, including brightness and contrast, but looking very carefully Vorador is just about to use a magical spell from his right hand to finish off Malek, when his expression changes to surprise and he quickly teleports away. There was much more going on in that scene, than has currently been revealed.

Below is a quote about that scene from when Warpsavant asked Amy some questions.


Q: Why was the Circle defenseless? Their magic fails in the cut scene; Moebius even says they are defenseless in Sr2. Is it because Malek was not their, or their magic failed? What were they doing in there? And where was Mortanius all this time? Off getting possessed??
A: This has not yet been revealed. At the time (as represented in BO:LoK's FMA), certain members of the Circle were watching and guiding the movements of the Sarafan via the "viewing basin" in the chamber. Mortanius' whereabouts have not been revealed.

Q: Did Vorador follow raziel to the Stronghold, or the Sarafan, or is just a giant coincidence that V shows up, when the Circles magic fails, and Moebius and Raziel are distracting Malek?
A: This is intentionally unexplained. It's not exactly a giant coincidence, when you consider the event, which precipitated both Raziel's and Vorador's infiltration of the Stronghold...

For the full Soul Reaver 2 F.A.Q. click the link below.

http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?threadid=169

DJpick
12th Feb 2004, 05:12
And NO where in those answers did she says Vorador lost his powers. If it's something as visible as you say, then I doubt it would be part of the "much more going on" you describe.

Dogfight
12th Feb 2004, 05:57
And NO where in those answers did she says Vorador lost his powers. If it's something as visible as you say, then I doubt it would be part of the "much more going on" you describe.

Moebius could have been nearing with his staff when Vorador began to lose his powers and decided to leave the place.

It is too convenient an explanation for such powerful beings to be losing their powers in that battle simply because they were weak and for Vorador to leave his greatest prey behind for no reason, there had to be more going on. We will have to wait for what has written on this to be exposed.

DJpick
12th Feb 2004, 06:45
Moebius could have been nearing with his staff when Vorador began to lose his powers and decided to leave the place
Call me overanalytical. But we've never seen Moebius' staff have an effect on NORMAL vampires. So far it's been Janos and Kain before he lost his you-know-what.

And based on SR2 and Defiance, it had to be close proximity, so nearing isn't close enough for me to believe that it would have an effect, because when it DID effect them, it left them in excruciating pain.

and for Vorador to leave his greatest prey behind for no reason
What about poetic justice? Proving that he could beat him, yet leaving him alive as a Spirit because death would be a release form his punishment?

Dogfight
12th Feb 2004, 06:49
Call me overanalytical. But we've never seen Moebius' staff have an effect on NORMAL vampires. So far it's been Janos and Kain before he lost his you-know-what. And based on SR2 and Defiance, it had to be close proximity, so nearing isn't close enough for me to believe that it would have an effect, because when it DID effect them, it left them in excruciating pain.

Yes, I agree with all of this, I was merely posing a possibility.


What about poetic justice? Proving that he could beat him, yet leaving him alive as a Spirit because death would be a release form his punishment?

This would be true if Vorador knew what was going to happen to Malek for failing to protect the Circle, but I doubt he did. Its more likely Vorador was going to kill Malek, but something then happened that caused him to prematurely leave. Much later in Blood Omen 1 at Dark Eden their battle continues where it left off.

Protector_Malek
12th Feb 2004, 13:15
I just watched the video again, and NO, you cannot see Vorador's Face. It is dark, and it all happens VERY quickly. Yes, the lightning in his hand diminishes, BUT YOU CANNOT SEE HIS FACE AT ANY TIME in that escene. So you cannot tell whether he is surprised or any other expresion. And there's not at all indication that he sudendly lost his powers. It is a extremely short sequence. Try to explain it only with BO1 as reference: they never said that he lost his powers. And if he did, why didn't he just wield his sword and killed malek?
No, no, no. I believe he left malek live.

DJpick
12th Feb 2004, 19:31
This would be true if Vorador knew what was going to happen to Malek for failing to protect the Circle, but I doubt he did. Its more likely Vorador was going to kill Malek, but something then happened that caused him to prematurely leave. Much later in Blood Omen 1 at Dark Eden their battle continues where it left off.
I was under the impression the Malek and Vorador fight wasn't in the same time as the massacre. Like it came later?As if Malke went hunting for Vorador?

Just watched the scene, Vorador killed the one guy, drank his blood, then Malek arrived, and Vorador bonked him on the head. I saw no scene where his magic failed actually.

And the scene from when you meet Vorador seems like it's HIS retelling. So it's possible this story is just an embelishment. Not to mention from what I saw, Vorador CHOSE not to kill Malek, his magic didn't fail. Especially considering Vorador got the one bolt off that brought Malek to his knees.

moose562
12th Feb 2004, 21:22
if kain drank the seers blood in BO2 to get telekenisis (or whatever it washe gained) wouldn't this hylden essence be within Kain now? And perhaps this was passed to raziel being his first-born (the potency of the hylden 'energy' being stronger at the time of raziels 'conception'

whatever! ;) :P

van_HellSing PL
12th Feb 2004, 21:26
if kain drank the seers blood in BO2 to get telekenisis (or whatever it washe gained) wouldn't this hylden essence be within Kain now? And perhaps this was passed to raziel being his first-born (the potency of the hylden 'energy' being stronger at the time of raziels 'conception' YES! At last someone who supports my theory! :D

moose562
12th Feb 2004, 21:32
Originally posted by van_HellSing PL
YES! At last someone who supports my theory! :D

i think it makes some sense


i mean i couldnt get the whole "raziel is hylden" stuff in defiance!


what was with that?

warpsavant
13th Feb 2004, 00:56
Well, some of you have some good things to say. Some of you have some ridicuous things to say. But saying they were defeated because Vorador surprises them is still unacceptable to me.

Protector_Malek
13th Feb 2004, 01:56
can you accept that Vorador was more powerful than the guardians? They were humans guardians after all. And Vorador could defeat them easily.

DJpick
13th Feb 2004, 03:56
if kain drank the seers blood in BO2 to get telekenisis (or whatever it washe gained) wouldn't this hylden essence be within Kain now? And perhaps this was passed to raziel being his first-born (the potency of the hylden 'energy' being stronger at the time of raziels 'conception'
See, it's stuff like this that makes Amy and CD's answers a little odd. Because we are to believe that when we played SR1, BO2 hadn't happened yet, but if BO2 came to be written in the annals of time then as soon as Kain pulled the blade in SR2 Raziel would receive that energy like Kain received the new memories.

Interesting idea though. If BO2 always happened because time is immutable so even though they created a paradox, it would imply they had ALWAYS created one, and BO2 always happened, and that's how they got TK to begin with.

Moose

They weren't saying that Raziel was a Hylden, anymore than they were saying he was an Ancient (which everyone seems to readily belive). What they're saying is that he is an instrument of each race. Based on the prophecies in the murals...

If Kain had won, then supposedly according to what Raziel and Kain believe, the Ancients would have won and the Hylden would be defeated.
BUT
If Raziel had won, the last Guardian would be defeated and the pillars would TOTALLY be destroyed (even further than they had) and the Hylden would be free.

But based on Amy's answer...
Raziel was actually both, so it was up to Raziel, he could either sacrifice himself, or defeat Kain, and the respective races that claimed THAT victory/defeat would win.

But in the end Raziel chose to make his OWN decision, sacrificed himself into the blade and gave a big "Up yours" to BOTH races claiming him. So the ancients won technically, because their last Guardian was alive, and the SR was made. But the Hylden ALSO won because the binding wasn't secured, and the Pillars still fell.

But when it comes down to it, I don't think any erasure of the Hylden or Ancients decisions would matter. I think history would repeat itself in that event. I think the real change lies in the defeat of the EG somehow. The Hylden and Ancients ar eboth pawns.

I wonder if the SR was a last ditch effort by the Ancients to finally allow themselves to return back to their wheel, at the cost of their reincarnation though. I have always seen the the Ancients as the Zealous blind faith religious beings who would do anything to return to their Wheel, even at the cost of their mortality and reincarnation from it.

But that's just all my view. This whole post isn't meant to be factual, just my take on what I have seen so far. Feel free to point out flaws.

As for Vorador and the Guardians. I think it was just a matter them still being in "Protector Guardian" mode. And they never were able to really use their magic for offense, maybe just defense. It wasn't until Nupraptors madness that they were able to attack. Kind of like when you're good, you're nice. But when you're corrupted, you're down right evilly violent. So to me it wasn't that they were surprised or weak, they just couldn't defend themselves as well because they wer epure, or something like that. WHereas even though Vorador wasn't evil, he was in the middle of a berserker fury.

moose562
13th Feb 2004, 21:51
thanks for that reply, it has cleared it up a bit

DJpick
14th Feb 2004, 09:28
I hope so, cause I think I confused myself typing it :)