Talk:CnC Timeline

RE: Unification of FS-Endings

I vote for either reverting the page to the last revision before that change, or an edit of that revision only adding the note about endings.

Reason: The explanation for the unification in itself admits there are two different endings - very similar, but still different. And, even if one might argue the question of who "hit the button" is irrelevant for FS - history has shown us that it was always assumed that the GDI one. And in the wake of another Quest for Dollars by EA, that's something we cannot ignore.

So, not only does the author admit there are two, albeit similar, different endings, but we also have to assume we'll be forced to fork Tiberium Wars' storyline in the future.

Therefore, this page should be fixed/reverted to include the correct number of two (2) endings for FS again.
If there is no answer to this within three days, I assume no one else is interested in this topic and will do the fixing. I would, however, prefer to discuss this with the revision's author first.

Renegade 12:48, 12 July 2006 (CEST)

P.S.: After all, saving four revisions of this wasted way more database space than an additional ending in the list would :P

Well, the videos during the campaigns show enough evidence of the fact Firestorm has one single storyline. GDI and Nod end up having an alliance to defeat CABAL together, and that's what they do.

Even the "who hit the button" thing is debatable, since we see in the Nod ending that CABAL has escaped anyway. They might be destroying two possible sites of the "final, real CABAL core", both taking on the one they believe is the real one, only to end up both getting tricked.

Though I think it's really not important who hit the button. When making Firestorm they could hardly say "Sorry folks, no final mission for you, the other side beat CABAL". That is the only reason for the minor split at the end.

Nyerguds 13:12, 12 July 2006 (CEST)

Nevertheless, due to that decision, there are two different ending sequences, and the fact that we'll one day have to fork from one stays. If C+C3 states there is just one ending, fine, we'll edit the page according to new information. But for now, we have two different ending sequences, which is a clear indicator of two different endings, no matter how minor the difference may be.

Having listed two endings, only to mark them as being the same, is just confusing - either there's one ending, or two. But nothing in between.

Renegade 13:20, 12 July 2006 (CEST)

Fair enough.. but PLEASE don't call it "C+C3" >_<

--Nyerguds 13:58, 12 July 2006 (CEST)