Talk:Movie continuity family

Events in this continuity come from two sources. Agent X leaked much of what is known in the Sector Seven alternate reality game. The prequel novel, Ghosts of Yesterday is also set in this continuity. So, what exactly says "Ghosts of Yesterday" is part of this "real" continuity? Wouldn't it just be part of the same disinformation campaign as the movie itself? --KilMichaelMcC 18:17, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

That is a good question, and I don't know the answer. That is just what Derik told me. - Starfield 19:01, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

Aside the various conflicts that prevent Ghosts from betting with the movie-- the ARG itself made a reference to the the book.

It was a bit of a half-hearted reference, IMO- it felt like an afterthought rather than a serious attempt to draw the two together, but it was there.

Also, the very update the ARG had (the 1982 video) while not referencing the book per-se, at least addressed one of the big guestions of Ghost's ending; if Starscream knew Earth's location in 1969, why did he take 50 years to show up? Answer: He didn't. -Derik 19:17, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

If you're following the logic of the ARG, then only the ARG itself is "real" and the movie and all its tie-ins are part of Hungry Dragon 2. So unless "Ghosts of Yesterday" was published by Agent X, it would also have to be part of the disinformation campaign. --KilMichaelMcC 19:28, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

What is the very update and the 1982 video? Is that one of those MP4s I don't know how to play? - Starfield 21:56, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

I propose "Real continuity" be renamed "ARG continuity", or something to that effect. And that it is listed secondarily to the actual, proper "disinformation" continuity, which as I imagine anyone who's interested thinks of as the "real" continuity for the movieverse. - Chris McFeely 18:30, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

Sounds reasonable. - Starfield 19:01, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

And it says "two continuities" - but surely the "Twilight's Last Gleaming" continuity from the Titan comics, which very deliberately diverges from the movie's events rather than being an "accidental" micro-continuity, should get more than a footnote? - SanityOrMadness 19:34, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

I guess I was thinking there were two "families" of sorts. The ARG continuity which self-identified itself as the "real" one and a family of stories invented by Sector Seven which are all disinformation. This isn't necessarily the best way to present it, but that's what I was thinking. If you can improve it, go ahead. - Starfield 19:54, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

Okay, I've restructured it, but it needs heavy expansion in pretty much all departments. - SanityOrMadness 20:09, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

Well done. - Starfield 20:15, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

Twilight's Last Gleaming, Universal Stream Designation

Has the "Twilight's Last Gleaming" continuity received a universal stream designation? Is it a negative number? JW 13:38, 18 August 2010 (EDT)

I don't think splinter timelines turn negative. They're just positive splinter timelines. --ItsWalky 14:45, 18 August 2010 (EDT)

It doesn't have one officially, but it'd presumably be Tyran 208.10 Gamma. - Chris McFeely 17:37, 18 August 2010 (EDT)

Thanks for the info. (I thought that, as a "reversed" timeline where Megatron won, it might be negative.) JW 15:14, 19 August 2010 (EDT)

Live-action film series

The contents of this article appear to be mostly redundant to that mentioned above. Perhaps a merge is in order?KrytenKoro 16:14, 27 June 2013 (EDT)

No, that page is for the movies themselves. This page is for the movies and all related comics, games, toys, and stuff. Escargon 16:27, 27 June 2013 (EDT)

I get what the pages are for, I'm saying that the actual content, the words in the article, are mostly the same, even though that other article has a link to this one saying "See here for more info". What I mean is, I'm not seeing enough "more info" to justify that.KrytenKoro 17:24, 27 June 2013 (EDT)

Interesting point. The other page is the continuity family page. This page is the continuity page. If they are exactly the same, then the "live-action film series" continuity family is a family of just one continuity—the "movie continuity." If that is true, maybe this is one instance where there doesn't need to be a designated continuity family, since you can't really have a family of one. Are we sure it is true? Is there anything in the "live-action film continuity family" that isn't in continuity with the movies? Cyber Missions maybe? - Starfield 18:52, 27 June 2013 (EDT)

I wouldn't say that live-action film series is a continuity family page. It's a page for the film series. If it were TV rather theatrical, the films would be the episode pages and that'd be the overall series article. And whilst most everything is in continuity with the films, that doesn't mean they're all in continuity with each other. For instance, both movie timeline and Titan Magazines movie timeline exist. Jalaguy 19:01, 27 June 2013 (EDT)

The live-action film series page says in a couple of places that it is a continuity family, and it is listed as a continuity family on the continuity family page. Maybe that should change and have it be a page for just the films. Animated is similar in that it has various secondary fictions that are in continuity with the cartoon but not necessary with each other. It doesn't have a continuity family page, but it has a continuity page where it explains how the splinter timelines relate to each other. I like how that is organized. - Starfield 20:22, 27 June 2013 (EDT)

I think another reason why it exists is to put it in the Things that don't exist category, cause of the Sector Seven ARG. Escargon 20:34, 27 June 2013 (EDT)

Is that why? Here I assumed "movie continuity" was in the "things that don't exist" category as some unsubtle commentary on the bayverse. - Starfield 20:58, 27 June 2013 (EDT)