From what I've been able to gather, the console editions of Hexen (PSX and N64) have some extras that weren't in the PC version. Since I don't have either of those systems, I'd be interested if someone can fill in what the differences are. Ettingrinder 08:01, June 6, 2010 (UTC)
Adding intro quotes.
I'm going through the level pages and adding the storyline text blurbs that you see at the beginning of each level. If there's any issues with that, let me know. Xcalibur201 06:05, October 29, 2010 (UTC)
- Obviously there are potential copyright issues whenever someone copies in chunks of text like that. At the bare minimum, a source should be given. Ryan W 15:33, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
- I have similar concerns. It's an old game, but original content should always be sourced. It's just that I haven't found the author yet. I do want to include that stuff, because it makes a nice addition to the articles, and it provides an easy reference. Xcalibur 12:41, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
Which enemies, weapons and items only appear in full version?
Perhaps it could be nice to add notes about which enemies, weapons and items only appears in the full version, like the Heretic page does?
Swamp Demo and other beta oddities
The "Swamp Demo" map was not likely to be an early version of Darkmere, but instead the mysterious unaccounted-for swamp level pictured in Raven's original beta press release screenshots of the game, which can be seen here. The swamp map pictured there is significantly different from Darkmere. It MAY have been the "Black Crypt Swamp" level which Kevin Schilder mentioned in his email to me as being the map the "cryptr" music track was originally written for, though I have no direct evidence for that.
Other notable differences/oddities in this set of screenshots:
- Dark Bishops in Winnowing Hall?!
- Display of players' fourth weapons on the status bar hasn't been completed yet (shots show players using them, but status bar doesn't show them).
- Wrong sky on the Forsaken Outpost (red angry clouds; commercial release has dark blue w/thunder and lightning).
--Quasar 19:22, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
While I respect your contributions so far User:Xcalibur, you will need to defend addition of speculative details to this article. We treat the game manuals as secondary canon (with the games themselves being primary), so I need you to explain why you have the opinions you have on the transformation of individuals in the various parts of the Cronos Triumvirate. Otherwise I cannot approve the current revision as is. --Quasar (talk) 10:23, 25 July 2016 (CDT)
- That's perfectly understandable. I realize this is going out on a limb compared to my usual contributions, and that I must defend my ideas with argument. I generally agree with interpreting canon and its authority that way. However, Hexen is a unique case. It's my opinion that this game was rushed in development, leading to ambiguities and last minute changes. For example, the world is called Cronos, but the flavor texts refer to it as Hexen. And the Wastelands (which I'm currently writing) has very few pitfalls, when every indication is that it was originally intended to have many more (possibly through a scripted quake which wasn't put in). Brown chaos serpents were intended to be poisonous, according to the manual, and they have green shots, and more of them appear for the Cleric (who does poison damage with serpent staff and flechettes).
- But I digress. The point is that due to this game's development, there is more room for interpretation of canon than there otherwise would be. Getting back to the subject, the manual states that clerics became dark bishops. So if transformations happened, and clerics became dark bishops, what happened to the legionnaires and mages that went over to Korax?
- The manual states that legionnaires became ettins, but they are weak, common grunts, so this doesn't fit. All in-game evidence supports my hypothesis. There are more centaurs/slaughters in a fighter playthrough, and they occupy Zedek's Tomb. Traductus' Tomb is full of dark bishops, and there are wall panels depicting a robed figure that looks similar. This leaves reivers, which are strangely absent from Menelkir's Tomb, but there are more examples. In hub 5: vivarium, monsters vary greatly depending on your class. For the fighter: slaughtaurs, centaurs and green chaos serpents. cleric: dark bishops, brown chaos serpents, more ettins. mage: reivers, afrit, wendigo. These distributions match the various weapons/abilities of the classes, and is completely consistent with my hypothesis. There is an even better example in Deathkings of the Dark Citadel. at the end of Deathkings, you fight Zedek/Traductus/Menelkir again, and each are accompanied by a wave of monsters. Zedek: slaughtaurs, Traductus: dark bishops, Menelkir: reivers. This, combined with the other consistent points, confirms in my mind that my theory is the intention of the developers, and that ettins=legionnaires was justifiably retconned. After all, it makes sense for them to be somewhat evenly matched in power, as slaughtaurs/dark bishops/reivers are (and ettins aren't). As an aside, that's one reason why I think legionnaires are slaughtaurs and not centaurs, the other being the Zedek battle in Deathkings.
- To summarize: in-game content of both Hexen and Deathkings is consistent with my hypothesis, the only contradiction is one of the manual descriptions (the other is consistent), and there is proven ambiguity in canon elsewhere. if there were ANY in-game contradictions to this, I wouldn't post it, but there are none.
- So, that is my line of argument. As you see, I didn't add that speculation lightly - I thought about it rigorously before I added it to the wiki. Even so, I made sure to state that this is theorized, rather than passing off my speculation (however rigorous) as fact. I can debate the finer points of this if you'd like. Xcalibur (talk) 23:56, 25 July 2016 (CDT)
- There's also this* that suggests there may be some grounds for regarding the "manual canon" as suspect. The centaur connection makes ample sense to me, though I'm not entirely convinced regarding the reivers. Your best case is the Deathkings example, but did Raven have that much input into the finer points of Deathkings (which, IIRC, was contracted out to outside mappers, like Final Doom / Master Levels were?) Likewise, how much input did Raven have in the cutscenes for the console versions (which, AFAIK, are the only ones that call the world itself "Hexen")? I'm afraid that, with the Raven folks offering us a lot less in the way of behind-the-scenes tidbits than the old id team does, we might never know for sure. At any rate, something like this, even if included, should be clearly stated as something that seems likely, rather than a known fact, unless we can get any "Word of God" on it.
- * (Which, as an aside, I consider valuable and could really stand to be preserved somewhere safer if it's still true that all that's needed to block access to something on the Wayback Machine is for some domain squatter to put up a robots.txt...) -- ETTiNGRiNDER (talk) 06:59, 26 July 2016 (CDT)
- I'm not sure how much input Raven had on Deathkings, or how closely it followed the original creative vision. I'll admit that reiver/mage is the most tenuous connection, especially since they seem to be undead, but the Deathkings battle convinced me of this. Of course, my theory is predicated on the idea that individuals were transformed into monsters, if this did NOT happen, then everything else is swept aside. However, it is something that makes sense to me personally and fits the overall canon. Assuming the fundamental idea is correct, the link you provided is another argument against the ettin/legionnaire connection in the manual, which is something I disagree with. Xcalibur (talk) 18:34, 26 July 2016 (CDT)
- Parts of this do make sense to me, but allow me to offer some points on how contention can be raised and why it'll be necessary to tread on the subject with utmost neutrality (ie., it is fine to note these interesting points but not to state them as if they are fact, and why differences in interpretation would have to be noted with equal weight):
- I personally have always associated the clerics with reivers because of their appearance. They have horned helmets and chainmail armor which match the cleric very closely, though they look somewhat more archaic. Given they seem to be spirits of the dead, they could easily date from earlier in history when the armor style of the Church was different. To add to the correlation, reivers are also capable of sapping health from you as a melee attack, something shared in common with the cleric's serpent rod.
- That mages face reivers and clerics face dark bishops could be interpreted just as reasonably that there was a particularly intense rivalry between the Church and the Arcanum and that this carried over even after Korax took control. It might make sense, if the Arcanum is considered heretical by the Church due to its less regulated use of magic (stated to be a "big deal" on Cronos) and lack of dedication to whatever deities the Church held in regard.
- The element about the world being called "Hexen" in the console ports is not relevant to this discussion because those ports were done by outside developers who didn't have a good grasp on the existing canon. The PC version has no such thing to say outside of its manual, which does use the name Cronos. --Quasar (talk) 10:19, 27 July 2016 (CDT)
- Let me start off by saying that I'm not one of those people who cling to headcanon, and fly into a butthurt rage when its argued or disproven. I'm neutral and open-minded on this, which is why I emphasized that "it is theorized".
- That is an interesting point about the similarities between reivers and clerics. The rivalry hypothesis would also be a viable explanation. However, Traductus' Tomb is full of Dark Bishops, which seems to contradict these points. and yes, magic is a very big deal on Cronos, even the legion uses magical artifacts and weapons (as do the fighter and slaughtaurs).
- the n64 port is my favorite version, but I guess those oddities aren't relevant due to the point you raised. However, on Shadow Wood, the areas "leading up" to the levels are designed to reflect the levels. You have to get past a precipice to enter the Wastelands, then the level itself has only one deathdrop iirc (by the porkelator). And the brown chaos serpents not being poisonous is still a viable point, as they clearly were intended to be. It comes down to being rushed in development imo.
- like I said before, the mage/reiver connection is tenuous, but that was my best speculation. if I add this point to trivia, I'll be sure to phrase it more like: It is theorized that some individuals of the Cronos Triumvirate were transformed into monsters. the manual states that legionnaires became ettins and clerics became dark bishops. Fan speculation identifies legionnaires as slaughtaurs, clerics as dark bishops, and mages as reivers. or something like that. Xcalibur (talk) 20:14, 27 July 2016 (CDT)
- Yeah that's a good start. I'd probably go a bit further, by explaining with the reasoning you used above (the manual writers potentially not being Raven themselves, for one, and confusion/repurposing of things during development) as to why this speculation is an avenue of fan discussion on this topic. --Quasar (talk) 09:29, 28 July 2016 (CDT)
HeXen II's intro names HeXens world as Cronos. That said, the HeXen II intro also portrays D'sparil as his serpent mount, something that was 'rectified' in the murals on the walls of the last area of HeXen II's expansion POP that show D'sparil riding the serpent.
As for the speculation of HeXen's original story, the MAPINFO lump lists an unused map slot called Mage's citadel. I think the player character was originally meant to attack each of the masters in their fortresses (Fighter; hub4, Mage; hub3 and Cleric; hub5. While hub1 was meant to be Korax's fortress) and that Ettins, Dark Bishops and Reivers were likely originally planned to represent the twisted remains of each masters people. Obviously this is pure speculation of course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 13:54, 27 July 2016 (CDT)
"the manual may not have been written by Raven and its authors may not have had a proper understanding of canon"
The manual is canon. The manual is canon regardless of who wrote it. The canon of the game is the text in-game and the manual that comes with it. The canon is not us trying to guess what the developers were thinking.
When debating the canon facts of Doom's story, have you ever seen someone qualify the evidence of the manual's intro text by saying "but of course, we don't know who wrote the manual"? No, because it doesn't matter.
"The manual states that legionnaires became ettins, but they are weak, common grunts, so this doesn't fit"
This is a huge stretch. There's no reason to think corrupted legion members would have to be strong, or equal in strength to clerics and mages. Much like with your other arguments, you are just looking at the game and trying to see it organized the way you would organize it. Hexen isn't a game with neat, completely realized thematic patterns. Hexen is a game that reuses the Wolf Chapel mural in Winnowing Hall for no reason, and has maps shaped like weapons that were removed from the game.
The rest of your comments seem to be based on more centaurs/slaughtaurs appearing when playing as fighter, and appearing on levels with Zedek. Firstly, it's overwhelmingly more likely more centaurs are used when playing as fighter for gameplay reasons -- IE, because they are more fun to fight as fighter. Secondly, if appearing before Zedek identifies them as legion members, why doesn't this apply consistently to the other human bosses?
The canonical facts about monsters-as-corrupted-humans are:
- Ettins were legionnaires
- Dark bishops were "more powerful leaders of the church"
- Nothing is identified as a corrupted member of the arcanum
It's untidy, and it would be nice if they'd finished drawing this pattern, but they didn't.
Grain of Salt (talk) 05:42, 4 August 2022 (CDT)
- Raven already said that some of the material that accompanied Heretic was expressly not canon and contradicted the ideas they had in mind and was later overturned by material in the Chronicle of Deeds. Have you verified that nothing similar happened with Hexen? Manuals are respected less here than whatever the game itself has to say. For example, Doom II's manual claims you took a vacation between Doom 1 and Doom II and flew in on a space ship, but this is widely considered to have been retconned definitively by the Ultimate Doom, where you instead arrive on Earth through a portal from Hell, consistent with the first game's in-game narrative. We treat in-game as tier 0 and it takes priority. Hexen though has nothing to really say about this matter at all outside the manual and so that's all that applies with regard to this particular point.
- Your continued reversion of these particular bits might be justified on that point, but it does somewhat run afoul of consensus established above where it was decided by multiple parties to explain that community speculation over the correspondence has been long-running and sustained. --Quasar (talk) 06:23, 4 August 2022 (CDT)
- Another known example where it absolutely does matter who wrote the manual is with the Super NES version of Doom, where the manual gives a date for the events of Doom. A date which has been explicitly repudiated as canon by John Romero who said it was a detail invented by Williams Entertainment, not id Software. --Quasar (talk) 06:28, 4 August 2022 (CDT)