Talk:Baldur’s Gate (game)

Is it really non-canonical? Because there exist some hints in Lost Empires of Faerun with elements of the game story, like the Bhaalspawn created by Bhaal, which battle for the power of their father, the death of bhaal is described in a small article (p.41/42). Then there are the novels, which I thought tell the Story of the game and so in would be canonical, because it exist in written form too?(62.117.29.105 09:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC))
 * The novelization of the game is canon. The story is told in a linear fashion and there is only one outcome. The game is slightly different because the player can create his or her own character, and each player might play through the game in a slightly different order. This alone would make millions of "alternate outcomes", no one of which would be the "canon" version. There are certainly canon elements in this game and other games too. These types of games always have lots of canon lore (just take a look at the many books in the library area at the very start of Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn) and even some familiar faces (Drizzt has been known to show up in some of the games). The primary focus when creating a game is making it fun, not making it canon, so some liberties have been taken. Fw190a8 17:42, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The novelizations are almost universally despised by fans of the game (to the extent that many refuse to aknowledge their existance), largely for paying little heed to the game's story, being terrible in their own right, having an almost totally unsympathetic lead-character, poorly presenting the characters of the game and killing off the few it did well. The first game is fairly linear compared to the second and the begining of the second game openly states that the player takes a fairly specific party (Charname, Imoen, Khalid, Jahira, Minsc and Dynaheir). There is only one outcome to the game itself as well, unlike the sequels. Generally I don't see why this article has a "IS NOT CANON" sign while other games from the same series have a much less angry "Might not be canon if contradicted" sign.
 * As Fw190a8 said, the novels are fully canon, whereas the games are not. It doesn't matter whether they're good or not, because by that reasoning entire sections of canon in several franchises would be rendered mute (such as say... the Star Wars Holiday Special). For continuity's sake, all published novels, unless specifically said otherwise, are canon.
 * It can be said the games are not completely non-canon, however. In fact, it was Phil Athans (oddly, since he's the one who wrote the novels) who confirmed that WOTC's official policy is to consider the games canon. However, because, as Fw190a8 pointed out, roleplaying games often have several endings and, even barring that, several possible options (for instance, even though Baldur's Gate has a fairly linear story one can choose what race and class to be and which quests to pursue) games are considered only semi-canon on this wiki. This is because that otherwise, as Fw190a8 says, there would be too many possibilities to keep track of. For book keeping it's simply easier to consider the lore of games canon but not necessarily the events within.
 * It can be expected however, that the backstories of most characters, unless different than the ones presented in print sources, are pretty much canon.Niirfa-sa 20:59, 5 January 2009 (UTC)