All posts by MDGeistMD02

I am locking this thread.

Let's be clear here, @DishonoredGod : spreading false info and potentially ruining Harvey's reputation is treading on some thin ice.

And doubling down on it would not be advisable... if it is false.

Do you really want one of us to go the extra step and contact Harvey directly to see if he posted this? I have already taken screen shots. Do you really want to go THAT FAR with this?

I'm going to admit that I have serious doubts as to the legitimacy of that "post".

I've read numerous other posts, interviews, and watched videos with Harvey Smith - both in a professional and relaxed manner, and I have to say that post sounds nothing like him. And him remembering a quote like that so directly? Usually he's had to check his notes and often said "it was something along the lines of..."

I also question the legitimacy of this somehow being 'canon' just because 'Harvey Smith' thinks it should have been so.

Your previous fixations on Delilah also have me calling into question all of this.

I'm assuming that the Daud DLC was supposed to be that way, as nothing in your post dictates otherwise.

So, we're somehow defending the fact that she wanted to eradicate Emily in the Daud DLC, an innocent child, just so she could have power... and that Delilah deserves the throne and would make the "best and wisest ruler"?

Yeah, no.

Honestly, I'd been waiting for Billie Lurk DLC since her introduction in Knife of Dunwall. Unfortunately, the Death of the Outsider was a terrible story (imo) and kinda wasted her.

As for Delilah, while I like her personally, we already knew most of her story - I mean she made sure to drone on and on... er, I mean explain it to us in detail in D2. Plus, having her in place of Jessamine for the Heart was already enough for me.

It was already kinda explained how she formed the coven, and unlike the assassins who were both disciplined and admired Daud, Delilah's coven seemed like a bunch of petty whiners who were always bickering. Plus, she made too many tactical mistakes.

Luca and her meeting doesn't really sound that interesting, imo, but I do agree that DOTO wasn't great, as I said above.

• There is also this, games like Redfall or Deathloop are way easier to make then Dishonored, because Dishonored requires full capacity of the entire team for several years to get made.

Yeah, and both their reception and overall sales kind of shows that. :(

• That is 14 years gap between releases! At that point no one will care anymore.

Pssh, all anybody does anymore is remaster, reboot, and rehash old IPs.

Agreed.

And there's nigh constant activity here - and from a multitude of users.

The same holds true on Reddit.

As one of the most prominent contributors to and major proponents of the Minor Characters and their corresponding category, I would advise against it.

There are (currently) 210 Minor Characters we have already tagged on this wiki. For someone to be added to this category, they either have to appear in-game and be named, or they have to appear in multiple notes.

Aside from that amount, there are numerous characters mentioned in notes, audiographs, books, articles, conversations, etc that we haven't added, simply because there isn't really enough reason to add them.

And this is coming from someone who really likes minor side characters.

If you make a personal sandbox page or a blog, I feel that would probably be more suited to what you are wanting to do with your personal project as opposed to creating an actual article on the wiki.

That aside, I'm curious what this personal project is that you're collecting the names for.

- Geist

Good to see you and hope you enjoy your visit. If you need any help just ask one of the active moderators here for assistance.

I'd like to keep the next "Dishonored" game in a Victorian-esque era (as that's one of my favorites), but I don't see that happening.

As to what types of enemies, it would depend on where the game was located. It'd be neat to explore either Tyvia or the Pandyssian continent. As both of those are opposite extremes on a climatory basis, enemies could vary from political factions to rival exploratory groups.

If we do jump in the timeline, I hope it isn't too far past the 1910s, 1920s, or 1930s (or at least those corresponding times in the real world). Light mechanical enemies could still be a thing as well as new animals (both areas lend themselves to great ideas there - including the OP's idea).

In terms of human enemies, for Tyvia I could see a rising governmental or scientific power becoming the focus, whereas Pandyssia lends itself more to a native threat, a rival expedition (as mentioned above) and a sinister corporation behind it.

Of course both could also have cults of some type - the Tyvian one being some weird "modern" Void worshippers lending aid to government/scientists mentioned. The Pandyssian one could a cult akin to some Lovecraftian worshippers dedicated to ancient powers and yet somehow draw energy from them similar to how Lurk was able to use the Eye from the Dead God.

Anyway, TL/DR. Interesting to see what others would think.

Welcome, it's good to have you here. :)

After further review, I feel the integrity of what this post was originally supposed to convey has been lost.

Therefore, I am closing this thread.

Lol - that's a lot of words for someone "just want[ing] to play video games."

It's interesting that you bring up Star Trek as an example, and judging by the fact you used Geordi LaForge it stems to reason you are talking about the primary Timeline of OST and STNG. Within the Timeline of those series, the Earth of the 1990s experienced a Eugenics War which very nearly brought about a new Dark Ages for the world.

The world that had "gotten past all that dreary slog, & now moved onwards" experienced a loss of some 30 million people during the exact time you said you were growing up in. The only way these new frontiers were gained was by going backwards in the first place. Rather than us going through such a monumental loss of life, perhaps simply acknowledging and celebrating some of these milestones as is the point of the roundtable discussions will get us to these New Frontiers...

Unless you're saying you prefer the outcome of Star Trek's timeline involving the original version of Khan.

Also, is there some reason you have to keep calling others you disagree with "losers" or claiming they have "moral failings"? Not sure why you have to resort to othering people just to make your own points of view seem correct in your own mind. The original post was shared by someone who didn't find it necessary to address you as such, and I would ask you to maintain the same decorum.

(btw - Lincoln, who was in that OST clip you linked was a known Progressive, a group you seem to have disdain for; he also got fanmail from Karl Marx, but that's beside the point)

As for saying the specific word "wrong", no you did not say that word. However, you have alluded over and over and over and over that people you don't agree with are incorrect. The aforementioned terminology I mentioned above is evidence of that.

As for saying you use your "freedom of conscience & make up [your] own mind" while linking to a clip of Starship Troopers is very telling. The original novel promotes militarism, fascism, and military rule, while the film satirizes these concepts by featuring bombastic displays of nationalism as well as news reports that are intensely xenophobic and propagandistic.

I'm not sure the point you were making by admitting that you live your life that way, even though you say you don't "pal around with racists, sexists, & other such losers".

Finally, your opening remark suggests you were "done with" the "stale internet-drama" in 2016. Why then did you engage with this thread at all? I'm not saying you don't have the right to do so, but you are the one who opened up the conversation. The same with every other time you felt it necessary to reply. Again, engagement within the community is fine... but then complaining that such engagement exists when you initiated it seems odd.

Anyway, thank you for your reply.

I do agree that IRL politics inserted within a game, movie, comic, what-have-you does detract from the enjoyment of that media (unless of course that's the main focus of the story obviously). Forcing customers to endure a particular agenda in a ham-fisted way is something I would gladly see removed from current media projects.

Luckily within the game world of DotO itself, there are no real world politics; in-game politics for certain, but nothing directly relating to anything in the real world as you pointed out.

I feel the expansion is noteworthy for not having the "typical white male protagonist" that many other games suffer from. In point of fact, if one knew nothing of the Dishonored game-universe and saw only the cover, it's easy to forgive someone in thinking of Billie as a "black female protagonist", at least to me.

Again, my goal would be to get more eyes on the expansion and I believe any positive press is good for the game. Having the game mentioned on some roundtable discussion isn't forcing real world politics or agendas into the game itself. And if nothing else, Rosario Dawson would make a good candidate for recognition in BHM as the VA of the main protagonist.

Continuing this line of thought, canonically Billie Lurk is both bisexual and suffers from physical disabilities (after Daud's DLC in D1). I could even see the game getting recognition during Pride Month or in March (National Disabilities Awareness Month) for the lead protagonist.

Within the context of the game, there are hints that Gristol has a somewhat xenophobic attitude towards people of other isles in the Empire - there are spoken lines in the House of Pleasure mission, as well as a special mention noting that Corvo Attano was the first Royal Protector not native to Gristol who also just happens to be the first one accused of murdering his charge.

This isn't new.

There is also ample evidence that certain leanings of sexuality and religion are looked down/frowned upon.

Again, this is nothing new.

Racial, political, and religious conflicts (many of which mimic those of our own world) are present within the "fantasy world" of Dishonored.

Personally, as long as agendas aren't forced upon the average community member (which the above roundtable discussion isn't doing as far as I know), any positive attention that can be shined upon the great characters and writing of the Dishonored series is welcome.

Maybe if enough renewed interest is focused on the series, Arkane will finally get around to making us a new game. ;)

I believe he is either Arnold Timsh or Pratchett.

In the early build of Dishonored, it was Corvo who was supposed to go after Arnold Timsh rather than Daud, but the level was cut from the main game.

However, it's never stated who he is.

@Lethal blade00 I noticed your reply of "You are welcome", but I have to ask:

I've been on this wiki since October 2013 and save for a few posts in the Discussions threads here, I've never seen any posts (or edits for that matter) made by you on the main wiki. Do you go by a different username there? Or am I somehow missing the edits you've actually contributed to the wiki?

I'm just kinda curious by your reply on this thread.

@Tranquilmage Glad to hear your efforts were made easier by a perusal of the site. We've been lucky over the years to have many valuable contributors and insightful editors add to the wiki. I always hold the Dishonored wiki as the standard by which I compare new wikis whenever I go to them. I may be a little biased, but I do believe a great caring community helped mold our wiki into something to be proud of. :)

"It's an official trailer, made by Arkane. It's probably the worst one done by them."

Aw, I kinda liked it. :(

I will admit, the Emily character constantly looking at the camera (I guess to be haunting or some such nonsense) was annoying. The rest I enjoyed though, for what it was at least. :)

Lol - I love it. :D