›

Jurassic Park: The Game-movie canon or not?

JPTGfanJPTGfan
edited December 2011 in Jurassic Park
I have been wondering... Is Jurassic Park: The Game part of the movie canon or is it in it's own universe?

Comments

  • waroftheworlds01waroftheworlds01
    edited December 2011
    I personally consider it canon even though there are somethings that don't fit. But over all, it's close enough for me to consider canon. But officially.... don't know. Probably not.
  • bloodkiller630bloodkiller630
    edited December 2011
    isnt there like comics about this incident, with the troodons and the embryo can?
  • VainamoinenVainamoinen Moderator
    edited December 2011
    That was also a huge issue when Back to the Future came out. There was of course no consensus. :D

    TTG at least clarified that even though their stories might not be "canon" from the viewpoint of the original creators, they work hard to deliver a story that is so much in the spirit of the franchise that it could be considered canon. Apart from that, I suspect that Telltale will always refrain from suggesting that this could be "official" canon, as the original creators must not feel pressured to make a (positive or negative) statement on the matter.

    Still, "canon" is always sketchy when it comes to interactive media. Jurassic Park might not be the game where you have many choices to make, but still events may play out slightly differently, and you'd have to determine which version of events is the canon version and which is not.
    Did Nima survive? Was she able to talk her way into the park or was it necessary for her to slap the guard unconscious?
    And so on.

    All this makes things very complicated. Maybe it's best to fall back to that "expanded universe" idea TTG was talking about in the very early days of the BTTF announcement. ;)
  • Dr.DinoDr.Dino
    edited December 2011
    The game is canonical to the universe created by the movies since it's an officially product that expands to that universe. "Canon" is by itself a meaningless concept unless it's officially stated. Jurassic Park in its entirety was only once officially divided in two universes - novel and movie - by Michael Crichton.

    All tie-ins that come after, as far as I know, are based on the movie universe - expansions, merchandise, rides, spin-offs, video-games, etc. - thus those tie-ins that expand on the movies are officially canonical. Inconsistencies and retcons don't negate whether or not something is canon.
  • JPTGfanJPTGfan
    edited December 2011
    Dr.Dino wrote: »
    The game is canonical to the universe created by the movies since it's an officially product that expands to that universe. "Canon" is by itself a meaningless concept unless it's officially stated. Jurassic Park in its entirety was only once officially divided in two universes - novel and movie - by Michael Crichton.

    All tie-ins that come after, as far as I know, are based on the movie universe - expansions, merchandise, rides, spin-offs, video-games, etc. - thus those tie-ins that expand on the movies are officially canonical. Inconsistencies and retcons don't negate whether or not something is canon.

    If the game is movie canon... then why does Gerry Harding look different? Why are there more Velociraptors on the Island? Why is the restaurant called Les Gigantes instead of Cretaceous Cafe? I'm starting to think that the game takes place in it's own universe.
  • Asian InfernoAsian Inferno
    edited December 2011
    JPTGfan wrote: »
    If the game is movie canon... then why does Gerry Harding look different?
    They can recast in movies and still have it canon.
    JPTGfan wrote: »
    Why are there more Velociraptors on the Island?
    They explained this in a way that it doesn't conflict with the movie.
    JPTGfan wrote: »
    Why is the restaurant called Les Gigantes instead of Cretaceous Cafe?
    No answer to this, but it might have been an unintentional mistake. A possible oversight as well. But movies have mistakes too...
    JPTGfan wrote: »
    I'm starting to think that the game takes place in it's own universe.
    One possible mistake out of three does not make this game not canon.
  • sebastiaan.raatssebastiaan.raats
    edited December 2011
    Dr.Dino wrote: »
    The game is canonical to the universe created by the movies since it's an officially product that expands to that universe. "Canon" is by itself a meaningless concept unless it's officially stated. Jurassic Park in its entirety was only once officially divided in two universes - novel and movie - by Michael Crichton.

    All tie-ins that come after, as far as I know, are based on the movie universe - expansions, merchandise, rides, spin-offs, video-games, etc. - thus those tie-ins that expand on the movies are officially canonical. Inconsistencies and retcons don't negate whether or not something is canon.

    Yeah, the problem with that is that canon doesn't work that way.
    If you consider every tie-in and video game to be canon, there is so much conflicting information that nothing will make sense anymore.

    Every spin-off (series) is part of its own canon. The comics conflict with JP:The Game, the toy lines conflict with both, the other video games (OG comes to mind) once again conflicts with everything else, etc. up to the point where even retconning doesn't allow any of it to make sense.
  • IrishmileIrishmile
    edited December 2011
    Much like anything else I think its whatever the consumer wants to be canon.. I for one am OK with this story being canon..
  • Maniac536Maniac536
    edited December 2011
    You can't make a statement that you cant create canonical rules, all kinds of franchises do it. All halo content must fit canon, be it game, book or graphic novel. For star trek only the movies and tv shows are canon, books and comics aren't. Star wars there are levels of canon, like the movies first then the original Lucas papers, then the expanded universe. For example, If anything in EU is different than what was in a movie, movie trumps book.

    Heck, I think Tresspasser is still in canon actually, well, nothing in jp3 negated it at least.
  • NeelisNeelis
    edited December 2011
    I'd call it part of the expanded universe, not movie-canon.

    Then again, fans can't even agree if a scene scripted and shot but cut from the film is canon or not, so a debate about the games, toys, comics, etc. could go on forever.
  • sniperwar10sniperwar10
    edited December 2011
    Neelis wrote: »
    I'd call it part of the expanded universe, not movie-canon.

    Then again, fans can't even agree if a scene scripted and shot but cut from the film is canon or not, so a debate about the games, toys, comics, etc. could go on forever.

    yep
  • ScnewScnew
    edited December 2011
    What's people's obsession with knowing whether or not things are considered "canon" or not? When it comes to popular franchises, "canon" only lasts so long as someone doesn't think they can make money changing it. Look at Star Wars or mainstream comic books, they throw previously established canon out the window every five minutes or so. Maybe this game's canon, but you can bet if Spielburg decided he wants to make a new Jurassic Park and has some great idea that directly contradicts something in the game, he's still going to do it.
  • scallengerscallenger
    edited December 2011
    +1 to the above post. It drives me crazy this whole "canon, not canon" debate. If you don't like a particular entry in a franchise, of any form, you can personally count it out, or vice versa. For example, many fans like to pretend JP3 doesn't exist. I personally like the film, so I consider it part of the story. Some people hate Trespasser for mixing both film and novel concepts. I love it for that! It's all in the same universe, just different dimensions of it. All can be enjoyed. Anyone who tries to canonize it is just trying to play "god" to the fans.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.