Talk:Gavla

From BIONICLEsector01
Revision as of 13:40, 14 May 2014 by Maxim21 (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

While browsing in fishers64 OGD archive, I found that one:

I noticed in OGD that you said Gavla’s mutation and transformation into a Shadow Matoran occurred at the same time due to artistic license. Because it would be a bit hard to fit that onto BS01, I thought of an explanation and I’d like to know what you think of it:
Chirox, being the scientist he is, decided to put both the Mutation virus and the Shadow Leeches into his Tridax pod to see if he could more speedily mutate the Matoran and turn them to his side, just as a way to save time. He did this several times in the initial attack, starting with Gavla, but later gave up on the idea because it took too long to load both the virus and the Shadow Leeches, rendering the process inefficient.
Would you say that it could be an explanation?
You can certainly say he tried that as an experiment, if you wish.
That's in the Greg Dialogue file, posted by Wrinkledlion X on Mar 29 2008, 09:18 PM
Given it's directly staten to be for BS01 but that's not here, I'm kinda confused: was that not accepted given how Greg word it? Or should it be here?
Maxim21 (talk) 18:19, 10 May 2014 (CEST)
Sounds to me like he accepted it... i think it should be added, although i must admit, this wasn't really an issue i had thought about. could i have a link to the source please? i'm sure there's lots more interesting stuff there. :) Intelligence4 (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2014 (CEST)
Well, that's from the archive of the three previous OGD downloadable on BZP. It can be a bit hard to find something, but you can quick search for the timestamp to find this specific one. maxim21 08:54, 11 May 2014 (CEST)

I feel like that was rescinded eventually, but I've got nothing to back that up, necessarily. I know it was discussed at one point or another, though.

That said, it's pretty dumb; I mean, the transformation is more or less acknowledged to be non-canon anyway, so what's the point of shoehorning it in? -- I AM THE DOREK do not truffle with me 03:22, 13 May 2014 (CEST)

What I find amusing about this whole thing is this: The OGD poster says the artistic license explanation would be a "a bit hard to fit... onto BS01". He then proposes an alternate explanation that's nearly five times as long as the one he wants to replace. XD --Angel Bob (talk) 04:07, 13 May 2014 (CEST)