About the "first Rebel victory" thing, the crawl really just talks about Rebel fighters from one specific base, not necessarily the first Rebel victory in total. There were alot of bases, not to mention alot of worlds rebelling as well. VT-16 14:54, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Let's make the X-Wing game's Battle of Yavin and all paradoxical missions non-canon Edit

In repeated circumstances, the X-Wing game has snubbed the Star Wars canon. The existance of TIE Interceptors PRIOR TO YAVIN(!!!) is wrong and plain ridiculous. The prelude to Yavin involving a Nebulon-B Frigate named the Divad and Rebel X-Wings is never mentioned in canon and other, and other far more legitimate sources than X-Wing. The X-Wing version Death Star trench is filled with obstacles deliberately against the canon trench in A New Hope. Let's scrap the page on the Divad, references refering to the use of TIE Interceptors before Yavin, discuss whether the Star Destroyer Immortal is actually the Devastator (as it pursues the Tantive IV just prior to its capture and has Vader aboard at the time), etc.

• Not our call. If Lucasfilm and Lucasfilm licensing say it's canon, we have to make sense of it somehow. Otherwise, I'd go around declaring Lando Calrissian and the Flamewind of Oseon non-canon because I didn't like it very much and can't remember what happened in it. At best, we can note contradictions in "Behind the scenes" sections, go to the official site message boards to ask VIPs for clarifications, or wait for more material to clarify matters. —Silly Dan _(talk) 01:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
• Most Lucasarts games like X-Wing have no endorsement of Lucasfilm anyway. I like most of the X-Wing game even though it is inaccurate. I'm not trying to stamp my feet on Lucasarts, but I denounce their "edition" of the Battle of Yavin which does violate George Lucas' original film. To compromise with you, I say that there should be a warning banner on the X-Wing game article and all related contradictory articles that it conflicts with the films.

they didn't make the trenchrun that way specifically to make it diferent from the movie. They did that to make it more of a challenge than flying in a straight line and waiting for Han to blast Vader's buddies. And the "first victory" from the crawl could always mean the first MAJOR victory, the first one that actually mattered as opposed to guerilla tactics that were essengially just annoying to the Empire.--Commander Mike 02:30, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

The special edition has a more canonical trench run. MoffRebus 08:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, a lot of little things do contradict. We have to remember that the game was released pretty early, 13 years ago. It's possible that the designers didn't know that much about the canon, such as the name of Vader's destroyer, or the name of the Twi'lek homeworld.

• I like the X-Wing games, but X-Wing itself is the most paradoxical of all of them, that's why I made a point of it. I'm sure that the "straight-line, no obstacles" trench idea would have been implemented, if the lasers in the X-Wing game weren't so slow! By the time X-Wing Alliance came out, a bloody Corvette's fast turrets could rip a TIE Defender to pieces. It is true that the game, which came out in 1993, had less to run on, other than the movies and some other sources. So I don't blame the game makers, I am just dissappointed that we have pages that mention TIE Interceptors in BBY years as well as the A-Wing. Fortunately there is a solution to the A-Wing issue in that they can be replaced with their predacessor, the R-22 Spearhead, which allows X-Wing to remain closer to cannon. As for the Interceptor, does anyone know of any non-shielded curved wing Imperial fighters in the BBY years?

Don't spoil other's fun Edit

I really can't understand. The X-wing game states that those craft are A-wings and Tie-Interceptors. Why is it a problem that it contradicts other non-canon materiel? I mean if I want to play a "Star Wars" game, I want to play a game with A-wings, not with craft that I never heard of. It's ridiculous that some other people's retcon is accepted as relevant instead of what the makers states in the game itself. It would be much easier to accept that thos _are_ A-wings and Interceptors.

If each and every contradictions have to be explained, then let's start with this: How is it possible that in Star Wars IV: A New Hope at the Battle of Yavin each time you see a rebel pilot, the background moves exactly the same. (That's the same footage in the background.) How is it possible that they fly their planes exactly the same way at exactly the same place above the Death Star? And how's it possible that in Return of the Jedi the Death Star, Endor and the stars in the background move inconsistently? Well, if you can overlook these inconsistencies, why is it a problem that there are A-wings in the game X-wing? You know, this is not a consistent setting, this is _fiction_! So, please, accept the truth, because this wookiepedia may depict a consistent world of Star Wars, but the cost of it is to lie to people who don't know the game.

81.182.236.139 11:57, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• The wiki documents canon; we don't influence it or pick-and-choose it. The A-wings and TIE Interceptors in the game have been canonically retconned to being different ships, to fit with previously established canon. If this bothers you, please speak to Leland Chee or someone else at LFL. Also, the site's name is "Wookieepedia." -- AdmirableAckbar ^(Talk) 12:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to add that it'd be impossible to hear X Wing/Tie fighters' engines, blasts, explotions, pilots' screams, laser cannons, debris, crashes etc in space. Because you know.... it's space... no oxygen... vacuum... etc etc etc. So the chap has a point, it is after all, a game.