#and then later during her jaunt to the past it was revealed that she basically made them a Thing in the present

[vivacia-18]

This was getting to long for the tags, hope you don't mind me commenting directly!

asdlkjaada The freaking Dondon quest - I totally did that one by accident, and all of the reveal was totally overshadowed by the fact that I felt equal parts bad and annoyed finding out that they were unkillable NPCs when I just spent the last 10 minutes trying to murder the herd for meat X'D

But yeah, overall while I don't look for much depth in a video game (if I want it I'm cool to come with a shovel myself later) totk really lacked cohesion overall. Certain parts of the story and characters were enjoyable, but it definitely didn't pull itself together very well.

One thing I wanted to see way back in botw, and that I think could have tied in well to this game - and maybe even the Dondon quest! - was having the monsters actually be part of Hyrule. As in like, people that are meant to be there. Its stated multiple times that the blood moon summons lost spirits who are cursed to wander the land and fight and die in eternal cycles of damnation. We also know that dead/undead and transformation into other species is a thing in Zelda (the Stals in OOT anyone?) completely unrelated to Ganondorfs whole deal. What I wanted SO BAD was for post game after getting rid of the blood moon, the curse would be lifted and the monsters would be normal again. So you could barter for stuff (bokoblins, etc), or battle for prestige but not to the death (Lynels), or like sneakily harvest things (Hynox, Talus) but you wouldn't be killing them anymore - because they're among the people you were trying to save, they're a part of Hyrule too. And now the warrior dead can rest in peace once more.

Until we accidentally bring the blood back in totk and they're summoned/cursed again, whoops! But anyways, I felt like that would have been both good gameplay and good depth, and now I kinda like the tie in of the Dondons only being known as they were cursed under the blood moon, and it's only recently that they've shown to be naturally pretty docile, or something along those lines.

I also think that could have tied in well with explaining Gan too, and how the fuck he was still around when the Calamity was supposed to be banished and they made an explicit point of saying he had chosen to forgo the chance of reincarnation, so shouldn't he have been gone forever? Finally broken free of the cycle and allowed to rest?

I haven't thought this part through quite as much, so bear with me. The blood moon reads as a curse to me, but not so much one cast BY Ganondorf, so much as it is the manifestation of the curse UPON him. It truly seems like in this game duo especially Gan is destined to fall to madness, and one headcanon I've gotten rather fond of that ties into the Light and Darkness thing is that its because the power of Light is incompatible with him long term, just as the power of Dark is incompatible to Zelda (if we really want to reach we can link it back to the schism between Hylia and Demise in SS, but that's optional).

Any long term exposure to their opposite will have detrimental mental effects - basically a magical autoimmune reaction. I think he can interact with certain aspects - note that both he and Zelda seem compatible with Sheikah tech/magic, which is fun conceptually as they are a people/Sages of Shadow - but not pure Light. I think Zelda would go equally mad should she ever try to use Dark magics long term.

Fortunately for her and unfortunately for Gan, Light being the magic of the main ruling family makes it much more prominent and easy to find for someone who is naturally driven to seek Power. And when he does his magic becomes... sick, for a lack of better terms. This culminated into terminal illness upon bonding with the soul stone - cruel in the way of tuberculosis, granting a flush of power and vibrancy before death, this created the blood moon - a warped representation of death and rebirth, light and dark, twisted into something foul. And contaminated magic is what we see manifested as the blight/gloom in later years. The Calamity was his spirit, broken free of Rauru's seal, yearning to be reunited with its body. And in totk we see his flesh revived, though his spirit was thought slain and the curse of the blood moon broken. It wasn't though, just briefly contained once more, because the source of the blight - the soul stone - was still bonded to him, and he couldn't rest until it was removed.

...Wow, this got far longer than I was intending, guess I really brought that shovel afterall X'D

tldr; I agree with OP that totk had the potential to be much deeper and more narratively satisfying than it was, even within the realm of what one would generally expect from a mainstream video game (which is not too much). And a big part of that for me would be a tweak to the monster mechanics post-game, and a little more actual backstory to Ganondorfs backstory to they actually make narrative sense.

The Dondon Post (or: the bizarre TotK's side content counterpoints to its main quest's immuable binary morality)

Speaking of strange TotK Choices, I think I have one singe post left in me about this game; and it's about the Dondon quest, "The Beast and the Princess".

(and about other stuff too, you'll see, we'll get to them)

More specifically: about how... strange of a thematic point it feebly attemps to make in the larger context of the storyline, and how it seems to be yet another mark of a world that, perhaps, once tried to be more morally complex that it ended up becoming.

Buckle up: it's a long one, and it gets pretty conceptual.

(good gem boys notwhistanding)

The Princess and the Beast

So, a couple of things about the setup. We are investigating potential Princess sightings; but at this point, either because we have already completed a bunch and know the general gib, because we have met a couple of wild Fake Zelda shenanigans, or through the simple fact that we are completing a side quest, we know there's a good chance it won't lead to an actual Zelda information. So when we ask Penn about what is going on and he replies with the ominous "we saw the Princess riding some kind of beast --a frightening one with huge, brutal tusks-- that the princess seemed to control", we get Ideas. Then the sidequest is registered: "The Princess and the Beast".

So. You know me. And if you don't know me, here's what you should know: my brain immediately flared up with the thought there was no way in hell this wasn't some kind of wink towards Ganondorf's renowned boarish beast form, especially given tusks were given so much focus.

My first assumption was: that's a miniboss right? I will get to fight some small boar-like thing that Fake Zelda rides sometimes. Cool! I didn't hold too hard onto my hope that the relationship of Zelda and/or Ganondorf to the natural world, or to each other would be expanded upon, since I had already been burned before, but my interest was piqued.

You have to understand how starved I was for any hint of complexity or mystery or ambiguity at this point. I was extremely eager for the game to throw anything at me that would surprise me, enlighten something pre-established, make the exploration lead to a meaningful discovery or deepening of characters, world or themes (and not just slightly cooler loot, or a bossfight, or a puzzle devoid of emotional context --cohesion and depth is what motivates my play sessions, especially in an open world game that I want to believe is worth losing oneself into). This was about the most intriguing task on my to do list at the moment, and so I plunged in immediately.

After really REALLY misunderstanding what I was supposed to do (I stalked every corner of every forest surrounding the tropical area at night or during blood moons in hope to see something --which was very much the wrong call), I arrived to the other stable, then was guided to the other side of the river where Cima awaits and explains that these creatures are actually a new species discovered by Zelda; that they are gentle and kind and not at all scary ("Dondons aren't beastly, they're adorable!"), and even somehow digest luminous stones into gemstones. They like the company of people and liked Zelda in particular.

I was... I felt two different ways about this conclusion, and I think it's worth to explore both: disappointment and some sort of... "huh!" Hard to describe this emotion otherwise.

I'll get the disappointment out of the way first, because it's the least interesting of the two. While I think the little emotional arc I was taken on was not devoid of interest --I was indeed taken on by the rumor and intrigued by its implications-- I wanted, well. A little bit more. And if the creatures were to be Zelda's pet project, I would have loved for them to be actually terrifying and feisty, and for her to develop an interest for these creatures in particular regardless. It could have been very interesting characterization that veered out of the perfect princess loving the perfect world floundering around her, always bringing her clear, practical benefits from the interaction.

(I have made another post that speaks of my discomfort that Zelda does everything everywhere and everyone loves her for it --I get what they were trying to go for, but it either lacks conflict for me to buy into that dynamic at the scale of several regions, or they went on too hard for my taste, as she is, at once and in the span of a couple of years at most: a schoolteacher, a gardener, an animal researcher, a scholar, a traveler, a military expert, a knower of landscape, a painter, a horse rider, an infrastructure planner, a [...] princess --at some point it begins to sound made up, "Little Father of the people"-esque to rattle the hornet's nest a little bit, especially if it's not shown as either a clearly godly characteristic or, even more necessary imo, a negative trait; another expression of her killing herself at work to compensate for a perceived flaw she's trying to earn forgiveness for, like she did in BotW. But that's another topic, and the clumsiness of her character arc has been well threaded by basically everybody disappointed in the story already.)

But, if I decide to be a little graceful, I'd like to explore my "huh!" emotion, and take it apart a little bit.

I think there's something interesting to have such strong parallels to setting up a story about the relationship between Zelda and Ganondorf ("The Princess and the Beast", like come on guys that's the conflict of over half the series), or at least Zelda and the concept of Evil since Ganondorf pretty much represents it in this game, and then have it go: actually, there was a horrible monster that everyone was afraid of, but Zelda was wise and patient enough to approach it and realize its potential beyond the tusks, what beauty can be brought upon the world if one makes the effort to look for what exists underneath. It says something a bit deeper about the world and about Zelda in particular. It intrigues, at the very least.

Is it a reach? Probably! Is my first interpretation that the quest is actually about "eww you thought Zelda would be interested in *disgusting vile monsters* and not sweet and gentle and human-loving animals that literally shit jewlery when cared for? jokes on you, she never would feel any ounce of sympathy for anything that isn't Good and Deserving" uhhh definitively truer? Probably! But I also don't want to dismiss that the quest made me think about it. If I had completed it earlier, I might have even felt like it was (very clumsy, not gonna lie) setup about the main conflict.

But that's also a good segway into my next section: the arbitrary limitations between the animal and the creature, the monstrous and the human.

And the fact that TotK points directly at it.

A Monstrous Collection

(these two guys are just. doing So Much and being So Valid despite being massive weirdos the game wants us to be slightly repelled by. I, for one, respect the Monster kinning grind and their general Twilight Princess energy.)

So. These two guys. There is so much to say about these two guys. I don't think I have seen the Trans Perspective on Kolton on tumblr, and I would love to get it because. I feel like it's a worthwhile discussion (just, how gender and identity is handled in TotK overall, I feel like it's a very complicated conversation and I have not seen super deep dives and I'd be very interested in hearing more).

Beyond the throughline of voluntary consumption of magical objects to turn into less human creatures being a weirdly prevalent plot point in TotK (Zelda, Kolton and Ganondorf casually transing their entire species for funsies --Ganondorf being particularly relentless with Fake Zelda, mummy/phantom shenanigans, Demon King and then literal dragon), I want to focus on Kilton a little bit.

Kilton is genuinely the only NPC in the game willing to acknowledge the inherent personhood that monsters have (the game does showcase them picking up fruits, mourning their boss if you kill them, being cutesy and happy to identify you as one of their own if you wear the appropriate mask --and that's not even getting into creatures like the Lynels, who seem to really edge on the limit of being a conscious creature with a system of honor and property and many other things). He does encourage us to think of monsters as more than a species whose only worth lie in how fun it is to eradicate them; even more, gameplay-wise, he does give us a reason to interact with them in other ways than just our sword with his museum. He does encourage us to see that beauty for ourselves and then select what we think is coolest/most intimidating/cutest/eight billion ganondorfs in every pose imaginable

The fact that Ganondorf is considered a monster was a great win for this feature in particular, and is very funny, but it's also... A lot, if we dig at it a little more than warranted. Beyond all of the Implications and all of the things of representation and political conflict and values already discussed ad nauseum: when did he stop being considered a human? What does that mean about the flimsiness of what is a monster and what is a creature and what is an animal and what is a person and what is even a hylian, as sheikahs got absorbed into the definition in this game? Especially with the stones taken into account, how profound changes in nature are a huge part of the plot (even when reversed and ultimately pretty meaningless): how easy it is, to make that slip? Who decides when that slip has been made? What is acceptable to hurt without remorse? What is beautiful and worth preserving? What is both at once? What is neither?

And again, in a classic Zelda conundrum (appreciative(?)): who the fuck gets to decide that, when, and why?

The Bargainers and the Horned God

(major shoutout to these big guys for being the sole and only providers of actual depth to the Depths, and for looking cool as heck)

So. Let's move the conversation to the Depths.

Conceptually: what an interesting idea!! And so well executed (initially)!! A mirror world to the surface, dark and hushed and full of unknown creatures; haunted by gloom and sickness and the unknown. Not a first in the series, far from it: from ALTTP to ALBW, and even taking the Twilight world of TP into account, this idea of a Dark World acting as a deforming mirror to Hyrule and revealing many interesting aspects as we get to explore both is always a very interesting take on corruption and envy and fear/weakness and/or some sense of darkness looming under the perfect exterior. I'd argue even the Lens of Truth of both OoT and MM's serve a similar function, both gameplay-wise, but also in terms of theme: not everything is as it seems. In the world of Light, darkness must hide itself; but darkness also possess its own beauty, its own hardships, and will stare back at you without blinking if you go seek for it. It's, in my opinion, one of the series' most compelling conversation about the cyclical nature of fate, the coldness of godhood, and how small one feels in the face of a universe that is more complicated than it initially appears --which is why Courage must be invoked to push forward regardless.

The Depth's otherworldly ambiance is truy wonderful, whether in the plays of light and shadows, the creatures native to the environment we meet there (wish we met more!), the soundtrack, the strange aquatic/primordial plants, the fact that the dragons visit this place and connect them to the outside --invoking ideas of balance and interconnectivity, that the tree branches look like veins. The coliseums, the mines, the zonai facilities and the prisons do seem to poke at many things about what the relationship to the past was to this place; was it ever truly a place? Did it look like this back then? Why was it buried? Why did it come back? But in spite of it all, I think the Depths struggle overall to question or reveal anything about the surface that we couldn't already assume going in (that the only thing congealing there is Ganondorf's gloom, his lonely domain of Wrongness, only shared by Kohga and the yiga --the only naysayers of Goodness and Light, contemptful and blinded by self-importance and rage). The zonite is mined by gloomy monsters --why, what for?-- so any notion of greed and over-expansion that could have been associated to the zonai is now reabsorbed into Ganondorf's general evilness, since it needs to be reminded he is everything and anything bad with the world: darkness and conquest and greed and capitalism and pollution and bad weather and sickness and darkness and violence and war and death and betrayal and fakeness and lies and patriarchy and exploitation. No matter that he never does a single thing with zonite in the game; rather set up elements of conflict that never go anywhere than, for a second, let the foundations of absolute goodness and absolute evil risk becoming shaky --and you coming to this unwelcoming dark place that hates you, killing the miners and taking their resources for yourself is, on the other holy, royal fur-covered hand, utterly legitimate. The resources were once Rauru's after all, were they not?

And this is what I would say, except... except for the dead. The fallen warriors, the poes, and, most important of all: the Bargainer statues.

The Bargainers are, in-universe, godly creatures guiding the fallen to a place of final respite, regardless of moral alignment. The poes are all, fundamentally, cleansed of judgement: they are lost souls whose past reality does not matter anymore, and all deserve that peace regardless. In spite of the heavy paradise/hell parallels drawn in that game, with Rauru/Zelda/Sonia as the guardians of Light where Ganondorf gets to become a Devil-like figure, it is confirmed here that no such thing exists when you actually die in this universe.

It almost feels as if the fabric of Hyrule itself, in a brief moment that refuses to elaborate on its own point, goes: "yeah, whatever is happening here between Light and Darkness, it doesn't actually matter. This conflict is futile and doesn't understand the real nature of being alive, dead, a god, a person, a monster, an animal. The truth lies elsewhere --but you will never be told what it is."

It's: wild.

One of the game's most striking traits of narrative brilliance in my opinion --to the point where I'm wondering whether it's there on purpose or was effectively an oversight since every other aspect of reality breaks its own back trying to reassure us that everything is at its correct place, receiving the appropriate treatment by the universe in a way that is never to be questioned.

Another case of that ambiguity being allowed to exist without being immediately crushed and repressed is the case of the Horned God (interesting parallel to Ganon's actual horns that he develops in this game in case the hellish parallels weren't clear enough already): a demon Hylia sealed into stone and pushed far from humans in a clear case of questionable behavior since, while the Horned God isn't exactly nice, does propose a different philosophy you are not punished for exploring; and yet, a proposal that has seen itself persecuted in a very real sense by the goddess of absolute goodness, patron of hylians, Zelda, and many more. Pushed away from view.

Interesting.

And Yet, Light Must Prevail

Okay, so, after all of this, we're left to ask... What the fuck is up with morality in Tears of the Kingdom?!

What do we trust? These half-breaths in the occasional sidequests that Light and Darkness is just the wrong frame of reference, that nature cannot be this simple, is ever-shifting and can be recalled or reaffirmed by arbitrary forces, and might even not matter at all in the universe's fabric, despite having so much of its lore soaking in the dychotomy? Or... everything else about the game, this insistence that Good must not only be assumed as whatever tradition the kingdom has passed down for thousands upon thousands of years, but remain utterly unquestioned the entire time? That Bad is without cause, graceless and unworthy of investment?

Are the Bargainer's statues the only thing worth listening to, that morality is a fable the living tells themselves --or should we be moved when Darkness destroys Light, when Light suffers to preserve itself and the world --but not when the Other is rightfully slain?

Was Kilton correct to see beauty in the monstrous? Was Kolton onto something when he let go of his previous form because there is no clear distinction between what should receive an arrow to the face and what shouldn't? Or should we rather focus on Zelda losing her human form as a beautiful and tragic sacrifice --but something that never actually altered her nature as a hylian, the descendant of a lineage of Good Kings meant to rule forever?

Is the Dondon good because it always was, or was it worth Zelda's love in spite of the fear it initially provoked?

Either way, at the end of the game, evil is slain. Ganondorf is, not killed, but --like his angry BotW boar counterpart-- destroyed, as monsters tend to be. He explodes over the lands of Hyrule, freed from Darkness; freed from everything wrong, since the foreign menace that embodied it all was wiped out in one fateful sweep of a holy blade cradled in sacrificial love. Nothing wrong remains. The Sages reaffirm their vows to protect the kingdom forward, and a very human --hylian-- Zelda smiles: Hyrule now forever and ever basked in eternal Light.

[mneiai]

Thoughts on Jon’s parentage in light of GoT

In light of the really, really awful ending of Game of Thrones, a lot of people are wondering if GRRM might not change some of the thought to be absolutes of his canon that have not yet been revealed, to distance himself from the show.

Now, GRRM has said in the past that he does not believe in changing his reveals just because people have guessed them. But this situation is, admittedly, a little different. And, talking to someone last night about it, I decided to walk through a major theory that appeared in the show but not yet in the books. R+L=J (that Jon is the son of Rhaegar and Lyanna) is one of the most popular theories of ASOIAF, and possibly the longest existence of any theory not yet proven. It's canon in GoT, but technically it might not be too late to change it in the books, depending on what GRRM has planned.

(CW rape, as you’d expect considering, and incest)

The basic breakdown of Jon's parentage is that it has to be something either so horrible/shocking and/or dangerous that Ned could never tell anyone else about it and that he would send Jon off to potentially die in the cold surrounded by rapists and traitors and still think he didn't yet deserve to know the truth.

We also know that Jon had to have been conceived after Lyanna disappeared, as he was realistically younger than Robb when Cat first saw him and babies age very, very quickly, so a many months difference in age ends up being huge (Robb was born nine months after Ned “road to war”).

N+A=J is probably the other major theory that people go to after R+L=J, but not only would that make no sense to not reveal it (people already suspect Ashara is Jon's mother, it’s a probable redherring in the books), the timing doesn't work. People have to get super, ridiculously creative to explain how Ned and Ashara could have met up during the war, like Ashara sneaking around under disguise during a war and shit. And Ashara was known to have been pregnant too early for Jon’s age. The above requirements (of the secret being one Ned can't risk getting out and the timing of the conception) also makes it difficult to accept B+A=J, where people say Ashara might have visited Brandon in the Black Cells and had sex with him. Firstly, sex in the Black Cells? That seems unlikely in a lot of ways. Secondly, the ages would still not really work out. Ned would arguably keep it secret to avoid succession issues for Robb, but if that was the case there would be no reason to keep this from Cat. In fact, she might be way more forgiving knowing that Ned was putting their children's futures first. So, the "shocking"/dangerous part basically leaves us with three possibilities as far as present theories go:

Lyanna is Jon’s mother and either Rhaegar or one of his Kingsguard or companions is the father (and therefore everyone would think him possibly Rhaegar's son regardless)

Starkcest, with Lyanna as his mother and most likely Brandon as the father

Otherbaby, which is that a Stark man is actually his father, but his mother is an Other

Going backwards: Otherbaby seems unlikely not because of the timing (who the hell knows how long Others take to gestate, maybe their newborns age slower, etc) but because no one doubts that Ned entered the North with a baby. An Other wouldn't just jaunt down to Dorne to have a kid and Ned just coming North with a random baby he then abandons and never thinks about is pretty ridiculous. Also, if Ned knew the Others existed, surely he would have spent the last 14 years of his life caring way more about the Night’s Watch and may have been way hesitant to let a half-Other go to the Wall. So it basically hinges on some unfounded theories like with the other unlikely parentages, where the Other would have had to, say, cast a spell to make Ned forget or something. Starkcest is unlikely because of timing. Lyanna was with Brandon before she ran off/was kidnapped/whatever, but, again, that was very obviously before the war started. And the timing is a big issue not just because of Jon’s age, but also because of how Lyanna died--it's heavily implied she died soon after giving birth.

If Jon had been born months before Ned reached Lyanna (the war had gone on for about a year before the Sack, which was before Ned reached Lyanna)...then what the hell was up with her death? Ned doesn't smell the rot of very old blood and infection (Rhaegar had left way before that, remember, to go to KL and then go die in battle). Are we supposed to believe the KG were raping her? Or that she'd conveniently slit her wrists just before Ned got there? So, we get to Lyanna and someone she was with after her disappearance. Which would have been Rhaegar, Whent, and Dayne, and maybe some other men here or there. We don't know why Lyanna was with Rhaegar, the assumption is that it was so he could have his third head of the dragon (by this point Aegon was months old and they knew that Elia couldn't risk another pregnancy without dying). Maybe they were in love, maybe they had some deal where she'd give him a kid and he'd set her up with a comfortable life somewhere, maybe he kidnapped her to rape her, maybe he saved her from his father's assassins and went on the run with her, we don't know. The last two are where it's more likely maybe one of the other men are Jon's father. We know that the KG won't stop rape, but they could feel bad about letting it happen. Maybe one is sympathetic to Lyanna and they form some sort of bond. Maybe she asks for sex so Rhaegar isn't her only experience or maybe they even fall into a fucked up sort of love. On the run from Aerys means she's wide open to fall for a dashing KG or even maybe to seduce one of these men who couldn't marry her so she'd be "ruined" for marriage. But, again, it brings up the fact that Ned hadn't, couldn't, tell Jon, even though he considered Jon mature enough for the Night's Watch. And the very suspicious fact that Ned wanted Jon to have taken his vows--forsaking any claims he might have--before he'd be told. If his parents were, say, Lyanna and Arthur Dayne, telling Jon might hurt because Ned would need to admit he was Jon's adopted father, but it would also give Jon so much closure that anyone who actually cared that much about Jon would surely tell him. He'd have to impress on Jon that it was a secret he'd have to keep, because of Lyanna, but even then Jon claiming some Dayne heritage wouldn't surprise anyone, people would just assume Ned told him Ashara really was his mother. If it was Lyanna and Oswell Whent, that would have given Ned way more reason to tell Cat the truth--her mother was a Whent, Jon would have been her family to protect, too.

As for others that were known to travel with Rhaegar, well, JonCon is obviously out of the question. And most of the rest could have probably found ways to get Lyanna to their own lands/keeps, married her and gotten word back to their families, or any other number of possibilities that make it seem unlikely. (We don’t really know everyone with them and all of their marriage statuses, of course, but we do know what the culture is like as far as unmarried women, bastard children, etc).

But if Lyanna and Rhaegar were Jon's parents, it fills in all the gaps in his parentage.

The timing is perfect to pass Jon off as younger than Robb because he could have actually been conceived after Robb with no weird excuses. Lyanna could have died from childbirth as her death points to because that timing works. Ned would have come North with a baby, confirming how everyone believes Jon was born in the South. Ned could not risk telling ANYONE. One slip and Jon would be killed and Ned and his children would surely suffer somehow for his treason. He couldn't reach out to loyalists, because he was in fact still Robert's friend and didn't want to go to war against him. He couldn't tell Cat because he didn't know how she'd react at first and then because she clearly hated Jon so much that she might use it to get rid of him. He couldn't tell Jon because he didn't know how Jon would react, surely he'd be shocked and resentful and that can make a teenage boy say and do all sorts of foolish shit. And so he decided only after Jon took a vow that would mean he could not seek to claim the throne, when they'd be somewhere fairly isolated from the world, unlikely to be overheard, would Ned tell him. So, how can the books give us anything but R+L=J when it fits the best and was already in the show? Wouldn’t it mean a bunch of retconning? Consider: this would not be the first time GRRM retconned something. Perhaps the easiest to point out, in regards to Jon, is that he goes to the Watch believing it's his only viable choice, but then in a later book we find out about Ned's "dream of spring," which should have surely given Jon the impression he could become a lord. But there are lots more: Originally Lannisters were an Andal family, now they were First Men. The Blackfyre Rebellions didn't exist when the Hedge Knight was written. Arianne didn't exist at first and Doran had more than two sons. Jinglebell's personality. "Nuncle." Aerys I's wife was completely changed. The Estermont family tree. Renly's eye color.... Yeah, GRRM has no problem retconning. We also know he had to abandon plans before--his five year gap that ended up never happening almost definitely would have set Edric Dayne up as the Sword of the Morning, for example. It's entirely possible he could trash, like, half of Jon's upcoming storyline and just replace it with something else. Especially since it's likely almost all the succession issues are between Dany and fAegon and Jon's heritage most likely has more to do with the fight against the Others. There will probably be little signs of such, especially after the series ends and people go back and reread (RLJ is really, really heavily foreshadowed), but in the end it’s whatever GRRM makes it.

And that doesn’t really bode well for any other predictions/theories that came true in the later seasons of Game of Thrones, either.

[adelaideattractions]

11 days that destroyed Miley and Liam

Less than two weeks after a carefully-worded statement hit the press declaring that Hollywood sweethearts Liam Hemsworth and Miley Cyrus were separating, their attempt at keeping things amicable has been hit with a wrecking ball. It all started so respectfully. Our hearts were breaking from news that our favourite couple was on the rocks, but their press release offered plenty of hope that theyd one day reunite (again). Liam and Miley have agreed to separate at this time, a spokesman for Cyrus told People magazine on August 10. RELATED: Miley Cyrus and Liam Hemsworths pets post breakup RELATED: Miley Cyrus fired for buying Liam Hemsworth a penis cake RELATED: Miley Cyrus blasts cheating claims in a series of tweets Ever-evolving, changing as partners and individuals, they have decided this is whats best while they both focus on themselves and careers. They still remain dedicated parents to all of their animals they share while lovingly taking this time apart. Sometime between then and now, something snapped between the two, and Hemsworth suddenly filed for divorce citing irreconcilable differences. So whats the real story behind this increasingly messy split?

media_cameraPlenty of people hoped the pair would work things out. Picture: Jesse Grant/Getty Images for Disney REUNION HOPES The original statement was a shock, but it didnt take a relationship expert to work out that theyd intentionally used soft language like separate at this time and lovingly taking this time apart. These are not the words of two people certain that they want to be apart forever and history told us they were prone to a bit of on/off action. Cyrus and Hemsworth met as young lovebirds on the set of The Last Song in 2009 and got engaged in 2012 before breaking up two years later.

media_cameraThey met as teenagers on the set of The Last Song. Then in 2016, they reunited with another engagement and secretly wed in December at Cyrus house in Franklin, Tennessee.

media_cameraThe couple tied the knot in an intimate ceremony at home. Picture: Instagram According to most reports, things quickly soured and Hemsworth and Cyrus separated in June, but had decided to keep their time apart low-key and respectful until it hit the press. Once it did everything changed. THOSE ITALIAN PHOTOS First, there were the photos of Cyrus, 26, kissing reality TV star Kaitlynn Carter, 30, during a PDA-heavy Italian jaunt.

media_cameraPhotos were released of Carter (left) and Cyrus kissing.

media_cameraHemsworth was said to be blindsided by news of the fling. The photos were released just hours after news broke of the separation, providing a jarring double-blow of a shock to fans and by many accounts, to Hemsworth himself, who was holed up with his brothers family in Byron Bay at the time. As the days rolled on and amid growing feverish speculation and whispers of infidelity, Hemsworth took the bold step of releasing a statement via Instagram. But from there, things took a nasty turn. THE BLAME GAME Suddenly, after weeks of staying quiet, sources from both camps were weaponised, hurtling barbs and thinly-veiled accusations at each other. Far from keeping us in the dark with their amicable and loving time apart, Cyrus and Hemsworth were via their sources increasingly trying to one-up each other in the blame game.

media_cameraCyrus posted a series of Instagram shots from Italy as news broke of the split. Given Cyrus occasionally wild past and the telling interview she gave with Elle in July, plenty of people assumed that a major factor in the split was her desire to revert back to her partying ways. I mean, do people really think that Im at home in a f***ing apron cooking dinner? I definitely dont fit into a stereotypical wife role. I dont even like that word, she told the magazine. PARTYING LIFESTYLE But as that narrative quickly began to form, TMZ published quotes attributed to a source on Cyrus side, insisting that it was actually the opposite. According to the outlet, the Malibu singer battled valiantly to save her and Hemsworths seven-month marriage but struggled to accept his heavy drinking and use of certain drugs a claim which he has since denied. People magazine also published a scathing story claiming that Cyrus had tried to kerb his partying and that he would lash out at her. Everyone always thinks Miley is problematic and immature and a hardcore partyer while hes this chill surfer dude, but thats actually (not accurate), People quoted a source as saying. That particular accusation may have eventually been drowned out amid all the other noise had it not been for the fact that just days later, Cyrus released a jaw-droppingly blunt song clearly aimed at Hemsworth.

media_cameraCyrus was back in the studio within days. Heres a snippet of Slide Away: I want my house in the hills Dont want the whiskey and pills I dont give up easily But I dont think Im down So wont you slide away Back to the ocean, Ill go back to the city lights Move on, were not 17 Im not who I used to be You say that everything changed Youre right, were grown now The message was clear: Cyrus wanted people to know it was Hemsworth, not she, who needed to grow up. [embedded content] IMMATURE STUNT But Team Hemsworth wasnt taking any of that lying down. It wasnt long before a friend of the Hunger Games star told Page Six that hed been blindsided and left heartbroken by the photos of his estranged wife and Carter. They are still married and they really did love each other. Shes really immature and always has been, a source said. One of Carters The Hills castmates, Brandon Thomas Lee, even weighed in on the drama, accusing the women of trying to mess with their exes (Carter also recently split from The Hills alum Brody Jenner). This whole is just so I dont know, I didnt want to even get involved with it, but it just seems so fake to me, Lee told E! News of Cyrus and Carters romance. Its just like, why? Theyre just obviously messing with their two ex-husbands. And theyre all friends! It just seems so ridiculous to me.

media_cameraJust a stunt? Picture: Instagram Page Six also claimed that people close to Hemsworth had revealed that Cyrus sources had been working overtime to paint (him) as the problem and that he was hurt by the coverage. Liam is one of the kindest, gentlest people out there. Him being wild or drunk or deadbeat is absolutely ridiculous, the source said, adding that the booze claims are 100 per cent a distraction from Cyrus alleged infidelity. MAKING IT PERMANENT Exactly eleven days after announcing their tentative separation, Hemsworth hired famed lawyer Laura Wasser and abruptly filed for divorce from Cyrus. Liam is just done with it. There is no turning back and he knows he wants to move on, E! News quoted an insider as saying. They have not had a lot of communication. There is nothing to say. So what made him break things off for good? Slide Away cant have helped, nor would reports of Cyrus basically having sex with Carter at an LA club last week. Either way, the events of the past couple of weeks flipped the relationship from separated at this time- to dead in the water. MILEY HITS OUT Perhaps it was the shock at his sudden filing that made Cyrus finally flip or maybe she was just desperate to finally defend herself publicly but after that, the words came tumbling out via a lengthy Twitter thread. I can accept that the life Ive chosen means I must live completely open and transparent with my fans who I love, and the public, 100% of the time, she began. What I cannot accept is being told Im lying to cover up a crime I havent committed. I have nothing to hide.

media_cameraThe singer denied the cheating claims. Picture: Instagram I f**ked up and cheated in relationships when I was young, she wrote. But the truth is, once Liam & I reconciled, I meant it, & I was committed. There are NO secrets to uncover here. Ive learned from every experience in my life. Im not perfect, I dont want to be, its boring. Ive grown up in front of you, but the bottom line is, I HAVE GROWN UP. I can admit to a lot of things but I refuse to admit that my marriage ended because of cheating. Liam and I have been together for a decade. Ive said it before & it remains true, I love Liam and always will. WHAT NOW? The only good news out of the situation is that the couple had a prenup, and with no requests for spousal support, the divorce should be finalised quickly a rarity in Hollywood. The agreement reportedly outlines a clear separation of their profits during the marriage, with both Cyrus and Hemsworth retaining the homes they individually purchased. Unfortunately for all the hopeless romantics following the Hemsworth/Cyrus love story over the past decade unlike other times, this breakup is likely to stick. Think about it: Cyrus and Hemsworth called off their engagement and split up back in 2013, but managed to maintain mutual respect and affection publicly in the years that followed prior to their eventual reunion. This time? Not so much and divorce has a finality to it that rarely offers a point of return. Originally published as 11 days that destroyed Miley and Liam https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/entertainment/celebrity/how-miley-cyrus-and-liam-hemsworths-amicable-split-turned-so-ugly/news-story/e0d2c9eefb3e60afa4deb532609a2bea?from=htc_rss

[adelaidecity]

11 days that destroyed Miley and Liam

Less than two weeks after a carefully-worded statement hit the press declaring that Hollywood sweethearts Liam Hemsworth and Miley Cyrus were separating, their attempt at keeping things amicable has been hit with a wrecking ball. It all started so respectfully. Our hearts were breaking from news that our favourite couple was on the rocks, but their press release offered plenty of hope that theyd one day reunite (again). Liam and Miley have agreed to separate at this time, a spokesman for Cyrus told People magazine on August 10. RELATED: Miley Cyrus and Liam Hemsworths pets post breakup RELATED: Miley Cyrus fired for buying Liam Hemsworth a penis cake RELATED: Miley Cyrus blasts cheating claims in a series of tweets Ever-evolving, changing as partners and individuals, they have decided this is whats best while they both focus on themselves and careers. They still remain dedicated parents to all of their animals they share while lovingly taking this time apart. Sometime between then and now, something snapped between the two, and Hemsworth suddenly filed for divorce citing irreconcilable differences. So whats the real story behind this increasingly messy split?

media_cameraPlenty of people hoped the pair would work things out. Picture: Jesse Grant/Getty Images for Disney REUNION HOPES The original statement was a shock, but it didnt take a relationship expert to work out that theyd intentionally used soft language like separate at this time and lovingly taking this time apart. These are not the words of two people certain that they want to be apart forever and history told us they were prone to a bit of on/off action. Cyrus and Hemsworth met as young lovebirds on the set of The Last Song in 2009 and got engaged in 2012 before breaking up two years later.

media_cameraThey met as teenagers on the set of The Last Song. Then in 2016, they reunited with another engagement and secretly wed in December at Cyrus house in Franklin, Tennessee.

media_cameraThe couple tied the knot in an intimate ceremony at home. Picture: Instagram According to most reports, things quickly soured and Hemsworth and Cyrus separated in June, but had decided to keep their time apart low-key and respectful until it hit the press. Once it did everything changed. THOSE ITALIAN PHOTOS First, there were the photos of Cyrus, 26, kissing reality TV star Kaitlynn Carter, 30, during a PDA-heavy Italian jaunt.

media_cameraPhotos were released of Carter (left) and Cyrus kissing.

media_cameraHemsworth was said to be blindsided by news of the fling. The photos were released just hours after news broke of the separation, providing a jarring double-blow of a shock to fans and by many accounts, to Hemsworth himself, who was holed up with his brothers family in Byron Bay at the time. As the days rolled on and amid growing feverish speculation and whispers of infidelity, Hemsworth took the bold step of releasing a statement via Instagram. But from there, things took a nasty turn. THE BLAME GAME Suddenly, after weeks of staying quiet, sources from both camps were weaponised, hurtling barbs and thinly-veiled accusations at each other. Far from keeping us in the dark with their amicable and loving time apart, Cyrus and Hemsworth were via their sources increasingly trying to one-up each other in the blame game.

media_cameraCyrus posted a series of Instagram shots from Italy as news broke of the split. Given Cyrus occasionally wild past and the telling interview she gave with Elle in July, plenty of people assumed that a major factor in the split was her desire to revert back to her partying ways. I mean, do people really think that Im at home in a f***ing apron cooking dinner? I definitely dont fit into a stereotypical wife role. I dont even like that word, she told the magazine. PARTYING LIFESTYLE But as that narrative quickly began to form, TMZ published quotes attributed to a source on Cyrus side, insisting that it was actually the opposite. According to the outlet, the Malibu singer battled valiantly to save her and Hemsworths seven-month marriage but struggled to accept his heavy drinking and use of certain drugs a claim which he has since denied. People magazine also published a scathing story claiming that Cyrus had tried to kerb his partying and that he would lash out at her. Everyone always thinks Miley is problematic and immature and a hardcore partyer while hes this chill surfer dude, but thats actually (not accurate), People quoted a source as saying. That particular accusation may have eventually been drowned out amid all the other noise had it not been for the fact that just days later, Cyrus released a jaw-droppingly blunt song clearly aimed at Hemsworth.

media_cameraCyrus was back in the studio within days. Heres a snippet of Slide Away: I want my house in the hills Dont want the whiskey and pills I dont give up easily But I dont think Im down So wont you slide away Back to the ocean, Ill go back to the city lights Move on, were not 17 Im not who I used to be You say that everything changed Youre right, were grown now The message was clear: Cyrus wanted people to know it was Hemsworth, not she, who needed to grow up. [embedded content] IMMATURE STUNT But Team Hemsworth wasnt taking any of that lying down. It wasnt long before a friend of the Hunger Games star told Page Six that hed been blindsided and left heartbroken by the photos of his estranged wife and Carter. They are still married and they really did love each other. Shes really immature and always has been, a source said. One of Carters The Hills castmates, Brandon Thomas Lee, even weighed in on the drama, accusing the women of trying to mess with their exes (Carter also recently split from The Hills alum Brody Jenner). This whole is just so I dont know, I didnt want to even get involved with it, but it just seems so fake to me, Lee told E! News of Cyrus and Carters romance. Its just like, why? Theyre just obviously messing with their two ex-husbands. And theyre all friends! It just seems so ridiculous to me.

media_cameraJust a stunt? Picture: Instagram Page Six also claimed that people close to Hemsworth had revealed that Cyrus sources had been working overtime to paint (him) as the problem and that he was hurt by the coverage. Liam is one of the kindest, gentlest people out there. Him being wild or drunk or deadbeat is absolutely ridiculous, the source said, adding that the booze claims are 100 per cent a distraction from Cyrus alleged infidelity. MAKING IT PERMANENT Exactly eleven days after announcing their tentative separation, Hemsworth hired famed lawyer Laura Wasser and abruptly filed for divorce from Cyrus. Liam is just done with it. There is no turning back and he knows he wants to move on, E! News quoted an insider as saying. They have not had a lot of communication. There is nothing to say. So what made him break things off for good? Slide Away cant have helped, nor would reports of Cyrus basically having sex with Carter at an LA club last week. Either way, the events of the past couple of weeks flipped the relationship from separated at this time- to dead in the water. MILEY HITS OUT Perhaps it was the shock at his sudden filing that made Cyrus finally flip or maybe she was just desperate to finally defend herself publicly but after that, the words came tumbling out via a lengthy Twitter thread. I can accept that the life Ive chosen means I must live completely open and transparent with my fans who I love, and the public, 100% of the time, she began. What I cannot accept is being told Im lying to cover up a crime I havent committed. I have nothing to hide.

media_cameraThe singer denied the cheating claims. Picture: Instagram I f**ked up and cheated in relationships when I was young, she wrote. But the truth is, once Liam & I reconciled, I meant it, & I was committed. There are NO secrets to uncover here. Ive learned from every experience in my life. Im not perfect, I dont want to be, its boring. Ive grown up in front of you, but the bottom line is, I HAVE GROWN UP. I can admit to a lot of things but I refuse to admit that my marriage ended because of cheating. Liam and I have been together for a decade. Ive said it before & it remains true, I love Liam and always will. WHAT NOW? The only good news out of the situation is that the couple had a prenup, and with no requests for spousal support, the divorce should be finalised quickly a rarity in Hollywood. The agreement reportedly outlines a clear separation of their profits during the marriage, with both Cyrus and Hemsworth retaining the homes they individually purchased. Unfortunately for all the hopeless romantics following the Hemsworth/Cyrus love story over the past decade unlike other times, this breakup is likely to stick. Think about it: Cyrus and Hemsworth called off their engagement and split up back in 2013, but managed to maintain mutual respect and affection publicly in the years that followed prior to their eventual reunion. This time? Not so much and divorce has a finality to it that rarely offers a point of return. Originally published as 11 days that destroyed Miley and Liam https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/entertainment/celebrity/how-miley-cyrus-and-liam-hemsworths-amicable-split-turned-so-ugly/news-story/e0d2c9eefb3e60afa4deb532609a2bea?from=htc_rss

[paharvey99]

Day 19

We went to view a house this morning. It was a good house, and really interesting too. Turned out that the guy selling it had actually been born in the house and it had been in the same family for more than 80 years. He’d written out a bit of a history of the house for potential buyers, which was nice – it made me want to buy it. Then halfway through the woman showing us round said “He’s not considering offers below X amount*, he won’t take less than that”. And the amount she said was more than we can afford, so I was all ready to say “Ok, we can’t afford that, see you”, but then decided I wanted to see the rest of the house anyway, so we saw the rest of the house.

Then, further conversations with the estate agent revealed that the seller might actually accept a lower offer. This really annoyed me, like, why do you have to go through this whole nonsense where you have to guess what the price is? Just tell me what the price is and I’ll decide if I want to pay it. Like in a supermarket.

Speaking of which, we didn’t go in any supermarkets at all today, that was unusual. I had enough food in for all our meals and enough milk for bedtime, so we were covered.

After we left the house viewing we went down to the park for a bit, then back home for lunch, which was stuff from the fridge and freezer. Then we watched a bit of Brexit on the telly and saw Boris Johnson lose again. I didn’t understand why he then cancelled the vote on his deal - he had the numbers for it. Seemed a bit like something a Remainer might do. Boris Johnson is a Remainer, pass it on.

At about 3pm we decided to nip into town – I wanted to buy some CDs, the person I live with wanted to buy some trousers and the three year-old we live with wanted to buy some dresses. We jumped on a bus and I went to get the CDs I wanted while the person I live with and the three year-old I live with went to the library. Both of the albums I wanted (Kim Gordon and Caroline Polachek) were out of stock, so I bought the Girl Band album instead. I haven’t listened to it yet, I will report back forthwith.

Then I went to the library and the person I live with went to buy trousers and I went with the three year-old we live with to find some tea for the three year-old we live with. It turned out to be later than we had realised, well past normal tea time. We hurried to the café in town we always go to, in search of a jacket potato, but it turned out that it had just stopped serving hot food. We were just across the road from the big shopping centre, Churchill Square, which has a Debenhams in it with a café and the person I live with had had a successful meal there with the three year-old we live with quite recently, so I decided to give it a go. We rushed over there and it turned out to have stopped serving hot food two hours earlier.

By this time, things were getting a bit desperate. There is little more panic-inducing for a parent than a child that hasn’t eaten. You have a window of opportunity every mealtime and if you miss it, then you will surely pay for it in some way later. There are always consequences. Therefore I needed to find a jacket potato as quickly as possible.

Churchill Square is home to a food court on the top level, so we charged out of Debenhams and up the escalator on our quest for carbs. There was a Spud-u-like at the top of the escalator, which would have been perfect if the entire chain hadn’t gone bust earlier in the year. That was particularly galling, being taunted by an abandoned jacket potato shop. The other options were: McDonalds – no potato; Chop Stix – no potato; Ed’s Easy Diner – no potato; and Italian Kitchen – surely no pota… HANG ON THEY DO POTATOES. It seemed like Italian Kitchen might not be as Italian as the name suggests.

We ordered, and a jacket potato with cheese and beans arrived and was duly eaten and all was right with the world again. I love to see it.

After that we went home and I cooked some chicken thighs as part of my tea plans and then we played until it was bath time. During the bath I started to put on a song I had had in my head all day, but when the three year-old I live with saw me get my phone out she decided she wanted the Nick Cave song she is now obsessed with at bathtime on. “MICK CAVE, PUT MICK CAVE ON YOUR PHONE.” I relented and put Nick and his CGI rabbits on. Halfway through, the other person I live with came in and pointed out that on the song we were listening to, Nick Cave sounds like Vic Reeves doing his club singer bit on Shooting Stars, which is one of those things that is impossible to unhear once you’ve heard it. We laughed and the three year-old we live with got annoyed with us for not taking Mick seriously enough.

I made a creamy chicken and mushroom pasta thing for tea. I put quite a bit of marjoram in it, I’ve just got into marjoram. I think it’s my new German cookbook that is to blame. Snipped some chives over the top as well. I’m always surprised at how much buying something you don’t usually buy, like a pot of herbs or something, can change what you cook. I don’t know why I’m surprised by it, it happens often enough.

Didn’t go to Waitrose.

*actual amount not disclosed because I’m embarrassed about how much we’re looking at spending on a house

Day 20

A dull sort of a nothing Sunday, but a very pleasant day. Lovely and boring, like a song by Crowded House.

I was the last one up, which was odd. Usually I’m the one that is up first, fetching milk and tea and toast for the people that I live with. Not today though. We didn’t have any plans, other than tidy up a bit, as the flat viewing that was meant to happen on Friday is happening tomorrow. The person I live with wanted to get some washing done before the viewing and we needed some washing liquid for delicates, so the three year-old I live with and I went down to Tesco to get some. I bribed the three year-old I live with out of the house with the promise of a magazine, I could tell she wasn’t in the mood for going out and the magazine was by far the easiest and quickest way of changing that.

We got to Tesco and she chose a magazine, a Frozen one inevitably, and then I tried to find the delicate washing liquid, but they didn’t have any. Bugger. I picked up some other things, including some frozen salmon that was on offer that I thought we could have for tea, paid for them, and went across the road to Sainsburys. Thankfully they had the delicate washing liquid, so we bought it and came home.

By that time it was lunchtime, so I heated up a load of pasta that was in the fridge, a couple of different kinds. The three year-old I live with and I had cauliflower cheese pasta from the previous day. I stirred chipotle paste through mine and made it smokily spicy, it seemed like something worth doing in its own right. The other person I live with had chicken and mushroom and marjoram pasta from the previous evening.

After lunch we went for a quick jaunt out. We tried to go up to Devil’s Dyke, but it’s the kind of place you haven’t got a hope of finding a parking spot on a sunny Sunday afternoon, and so it proved. We therefore headed down the hill to Saddlescombe Farm, where I found a parking spot but properly scraped the underside of the car in the process of getting to the parking spot. There’s not very much to do at Saddlescombe Farm, it’s just a nice spot on the valley bottom on the South Downs Way, so we went for a walk along a bridleway in the afternoon light and then turned around and came back. The farm does have a pretty good café though, basically two nice women serving homemade cakes and cups of tea out of a caravan. It was chilly but sunny, and probably the last time this year we’ll sit outside to eat. The three year-old I live with had an ice cream, which was frozen solid and I had to warm it up in my hands to make it soft enough for her to get her spoon in.

Back at home, I made some noodles for the three year-old I live with’s tea, with enough left over to feed her and the other person I live with tomorrow as well. While she ate I chopped up the butternut squash I got in Sainsburys the other day. It’s always a pain, hacking up a butternut squash, and not quite worth the effort in the end, I reckon. I chucked the squash in a roasting tin with some potatoes cut up in similar sized chunks, an onion, a couple of yellow peppers, garlic and a load of marjoram. It roasted up nicely, and then I put a couple of bits of frozen salmon in for the last bit of cooking. They ended up overcooked, but I think that’s frozen fish for you more than anything.

Didn’t go to Waitrose.

[yatterzuk]

TinyCo Facebook Live Q&A – Recap

Hey there Clammers!

TinyCo announced recently that they wanted to try out a Live Q&A on their Facebook Page, and a bit like their previous Reddit AMA  there were mixed feelings about them doing this, but I think it was long overdue that they reach out to the community again and as much as this didn’t go quite as I’d hoped, (more on that later), hopefully it’s a start.

For those of you who missed the Q&A, it was live on Monday 20th March, and you can still watch it in full via TinyCo’s official Family Guy Quest For Stuff Facebook page, but incase you don’t want to go there, I’m going share my thoughts on what was a rather unusual Live Q&A for me.

THE TINYCO TEAM

Left to Right we have: Jason (Lead Artist); Jay (Lead Producer); Kimberley (Narrative Designer); Damon (Animator) and Kate (Lead Community Support).

THE LIVE Q&A – MY THOUGHTS

Now this was a 30 minute forum, and I’m not going to sit and do a word by word transcript as I’m not sure who would lose the will to live first, me writing it or you reading it. Instead I’m going pull out and highlight any interesting info and just give my general thoughts on what worked in this format, and of course what didn’t.

I’m going to be straight up honest before we go much further and say I was disappointed by the way the Live Q&A went, and I don’t mean due to the comments and questions being hijacked by trolls. No, it was the fact that from the outset this whole Live Q&A came over as very scripted, like when politicians give a Live Q&A briefing but the questions have actually been wrote by their own team and the answers rehearsed earlier, this just lacked the spontaneity i associate with a Live Q&A. I’m sorry TinyCo but this was the way it came across, the questions were too much about the Team and not the game. And that’s not the type of questions we see day in day out from players.

There was possibly too much talk about who the guyswere, where they came from and the Family Guy show rather than the game itself, after half an hour of listening I feel I learned very little about the game I didn’t already know but I sure as hell felt like I’d known the TinyCo guys all my life. I felt by the time things ended I wanted get them all friendship bracelets as a token of my affection, lol. And hey, maybe that was the point of it, so we’d get to know them as people and not just TinyCo employees, and hey they all seemed awfully nice but by doing this the Live Q&A lacked spontaneity, fun, the unexpected and the down right bizarre that anything linked to Family Guy usually demands.

It also seemed to lack a lot of player questions, the whole point of going live is to answer questions that aren’t only asked before but actually asked live on the timeline, encouraging quick fire and fun responses. Check out this Addicts LIVE stream to see what I mean. Instead I sensed some nerves from the guys, although not the gals, and pre-rehearsed responses to pre-set questions. I’m sorry if that wasn’t the case but it’s certainly how it came across listening to it live.

So that’s my main criticism, and as this was a first outing I can forgive that, I guess some performance nerves combined with not knowing what to expect from what can at times be a very hostile Facebook audience, probably made this a who drew the short straw jaunt for the guys we got to meet. But on my 2nd, and 3rd listen of the Live Q&A  I started to look past this and pull out little bits of info I thought players might want to hear about, and yes I’m going share them with you soon.

I’m also hoping if you watched the Live Stream you’d give us your thoughts in the comments. But please no hating, this isn’t what this post is about, it’s about saying a little Thanks to the TinyCo guys for making the effort but also telling them what worked and what didn’t in order when the next Live Q&A happens we might see more of our questions and less strategically planned answers. Also we might see a bit more interaction with what’s going on on Facebook as they chat, I’d have loved for one the guys to have joked about sending them some love and likes as that sea of little angry faces ran across the bottom of my Facebook screen. You know an instant reaction but in a joking way, jesting with us, playing with us, truly interacting with us. Even a “hey you guys, stop mocking us” in their best Stewie voice. Sometimes it’s ok to show us you’re only human after all…..

THE LIVE Q&A – WHAT THE TINYCO TEAM TOLD US

Well they told us a lot about themselves, which I’m guessing most of you don’t want to know so I’ll try to be brief. But suffice to say, although they weren’t jumping up and down Tiny Tom style they all appeared to love working on FGQFS as much as some of us love playing it. Even Kate, who surely has the toughest job of any at times.

Here’s a few of the things they said about working on FGQFS: It’s a dream; It’s wonderful; It’s great; Every day is different; Can’t wait to go to work everyday; Paid to do what we love; Get to spend the day making stuff up and playing; Team is like a family; Gives you an adrenalin rush and that’s despite the long hours, stress, the brutal nature of the mobile gaming industry and even at times being so busy you end up sleeping in the office.

They are also all big Family Guy fans, they said this about the show: Love the humour; The random nature of the show; How it always comes back to family & friendship; It’s got heart at the centre of it.

And Brian & Stewie seem to be their favourite characters from the show, so it must frustrate them as much as us they can’t use Stewie more. But it’s great to know they all have a passion for the game, and want to be there devising content and events for us for a long time.

Now the second overall thing I took from this is the way they all talked about the game going forward, as let’s face it there’s been a lot of speculation that with the Futurama game looming the end was nigh for FGQFS. But the TinyCo’s teams general chat and body language did not seem to signal the end is imminent in any shape or form so it could be the game everyone loves to hate it going to endure for a while yet.

What made me think this, well talk of bringing in more land once we see more of the older devices disappear from our lives, so they talk in terms of the game outliving these devices. They also talked about the issue with The Blimp, in fact they referred to the ongoing problems as a horror story as every fix causes a new issue, so they are planning to remove it and redo that part of the game, now that’s not something they’d consider if the game were on its way out surely? There’s also still a team of 40 or so working on the game, so it’s not down to one guy and his computer just yet.  And the artists continue to create 3 new characters a week. So this all says to me FGQFS isn’t going anywhere just yet, so don’t unbuckle your safety belts guys as this crazy ride continues.

Ok now onto more specific bits and pieces, as I mentioned above there’s a team of about 40 that work on FGQFS, so next time we moan about having to buy a premium item I guess we should think that those folk need paid, they ain’t doing voluntary work. And Kimberley revealed for every 4 week event they need to come up with at least 200-250 new jokes. I take my hat off to that as like Kate, I struggle to come up with one joke, never mind being able to roll off a production line of them. I’d be laughing all the way to the Bunny Asylum if that were my job.

They told us how they plan an event, sometimes they pick an episode and build the event around it, and I must say this is the events I like to see, ones where I recognise characters and costumes from the show. But they also confirmed sometimes they do the opposite and they get the rights to an Intellectual Property, say for example, Power Rangers, then they look to see if it has links to the show and if it doesn’t they devise a way to merge the two together in a funny Quahog kind of way.  They also revealed they still working very closely with the writers at the Family Guy TV show who continue to share ideas with them.

They also talked about something we see in our comments a lot, a desire for new gameplay and features during events, many of you have recently felt that too many events are the same format onl with different content to unlock. And they talked about this revealing that even when they reuse a format they do endeavour to make it better, for example they said the Quahog Heat gameplay features were based on those of The Hauntening, only with some tweaks to improve it.

But they also added not only did they understand our cries for new features in future events, they were actually going to be delivering some in the next event, Mighty Morphin Power Griffins.  So as much as many of us say they don’t listen, they obviously do!

Likewise they touched on the ongoing demand for old event characters to return, the most popular requests being for American Dad characters; Superheros characters and of course Star Trek characters. This is a question that they’ve now answered many times, but did so again. Basically they only get a limited time contract to give them the rights to use these characters during an event. If they want to bring them back they need to agree a new contract, so they can’t just drop these characters into the game at any time to please new players. But Damon stressed he’d love see some return himself as he hasn’t got them in his game either.

They chatted about their favourite Family Guy characters that they get to work on in the game and for everyone who’s fed up with Peter having so many skins, please be kind to Jason as they’re one his favourite things to work on. And Jay, well Joe’s his go to guy, and as for Damon, he’s got a soft spot for Bruce. And Kimberley well it’s all about Brian & Stewie. And Kate well she kept that her little secret, lol.

They also found time to chat about all us multi-millionaires and tried to explain why some of us have more coins than we’ll ever be able to spend. They said they will try introduce items to buy but in order to try keep events balanced and fair they will always use an event currency or else us multi- millionaires would just burn through events too quickly. And they are right, we would and then we would probably complain we’re bored, cause hey we’re entitled multi-millionaires aren’t we. Lol.

There you have it, hopefully the start of a new relationship with the Staff at TinyCo currently working on Family Guy: The Quest For Stuff.

Did you see some things you were curious about answered? Have some helpful suggestions/replies to some of the questions you saw or the LiveQ&A setup adopted? Thoughts on the Current Staff? Let us know.

~ Russian Tigger

TinyCo Facebook Live Q&A – Recap was originally published on Yatterz