You know, when I look something up in a video game wiki, I don't even want correct interpretations and theories. Why are they captioning screenshots with any dramatic literary quote?
When I asked why they were adding Bible quotes, they said it was fine because they also added Quran quotes to other pictures. The Quran quote they added completely changes the meaning of the scene - it's one where a group of people in the desert find a hidden treasure trove of gold, and start happily talking about how this means they don't have to be subsistence farmers anymore, they could travel or learn new things, or buy new equipment to make farming easier, and the scene ends on that upbeat note. The wiki says that they got greedy and lazy because they thought the gold was their reward, and added a Quran quote from a section where a guy gets killed in an earthquake for not being grateful to God. And then when pressed on why have this interpretation at all, they went 'well, do you want us to just be like Gamepress, only having the game information?' Unfortunately I was blocked before I could say 'yes, absolutely, this is a WIKI.'
Also, Gamepress doesn't only have game information, and the wiki frequently plagiarizes from them... which is the source of some of their flagrantly wrong information. That time I mentioned in the first post where they mentioned (correctly) that a character theme titled "Ständchen" was quoting a piece by Franz Schubert also titled "Ständchen" and then linked to a completely different song because "Ständchen" just means "Serenade" and he wrote so many pieces with that title that Wikipedia has a disambiguation page? (The correct one, which is INCREDIBLY obvious if you listen to the relevant music... or, uh, read the character's story, at all... is D957, from "Swan Song.") The Youtube video they linked was the exact same one Gamepress linked. It takes some real work to be so bad at providing good information that fucking Gamepress ekes in ahead of you by crediting the username of the random Twitter user whose thread they copy-pasted.
just saw someone describe the Temeraire series as having "almost no plot in each novel." I'm not even mad, I'm just baffled.
I wonder if they're talking about overarching plot for the series. Each book is very eventful, but the structure of the series is simpler. Mostly it's "what continent do we have to get across this time?"
they said something like "each book has almost no plot but somehow by the end it adds up to the napoleonic wars." I guess the very broad strokes of each book are pretty similar, but "we try to get from point A to point B while various national governments put us in situations" is a very respectable formula with a lot of flexibility, I feel
Oh, I see the confusion. They think the Napoleonic Wars are the plot of the series. They are not, which is why the war was finally resolved off screen by minor characters. The Napoleonic Wars are the setting. The plot is Temeraire coming of age.
I think modern/coffeeshop AUs would be more fun if most of the character backstories are appropriately adjusted to the less intense setting, except one guy should be identical to canon so you'd end up with a cast of two baristas, a grad student, the guy who owns the hardware store, and a werewolf assassin.
