A really blurry image pops up looking vaguely like backscallibur, that was it.
A really blurry image pops up looking vaguely like backscallibur, that was it.
It doesn't just "look vaguely like" Black Excalibur, it is Black Excalibur. And it's clear that the intent is for him to trace that, and it's heavily implied (by what happens) that that is indeed what he did trace.
But of course, its impossible, by either his narration or by the use, to prove that's what he did trace. "implied" is the best its possible to say.
Well, I kinda see both sides of the argument. I think if the author wants to retcon something in some Side Material books, then it should be considered canon. It's his story and his world, so he has the final say. However, if that thing that he says actively contradicts something in the main material (here, F/SN) itself and he provides no explanation for how it could have happened, then I'm moreso inclined to agree that fans have a right to ignore that and consider the retcon non-canon. Personally, I'd rather try to find a way that both what the author said in the side material and what is shown in the game works together. But in this case I have to agree with Mike that I just don't see a logical way for those two things to work alongside of each other, as I don't think Shirou can "confuse" what weapon he is producing. Especially when he is making one powerful enough to destroy the Grail.
This is pretty much what I'm thinking. The first step in tracing is "the concept of creation", so right from the beginning Shirou's being asked to recreate the hopes and dreams of all mankind. I'm pretty sure he would either lock up or blow out his brain trying to comprehend that.
It's worth noting that depending on how UBW works, he might have been able to store Excalibur in it despite it being untraceable (since all the materials originated from Earth, unlike Ea.)
Yes but, as Tobias and several others pointed out, what was shown was what he was intending to trace, and since the version he's seen most recently is the black version, that's what he had in his mind's eye when he started the tracing. However, since Black Excalibur and Excalibur are the same weapon but in different hands, there is no contradiction there. And, indeed, it's clearly shown when he destroys the Grail that the version he actually uses is the light one, because the blast that comes out is a white light.
Well, I mostly agree with this sentiment, although I'm a bit more inclined to just ignore the retcon if finding a way to fit it to the game clearly involves making huge logical jumps which don't really make much sense and quite clearly go against the original intent of the scene.
Actually, thinking back, I don't know if you can say he was trying to trace blackscallibur, the line, iirc, is something like, I have to think of the most powerful sword I can imagine and use it, then the hazy image. Going off the idea that he couldn't trace excallibur in all its glory, a sword that was like it would be what he was talking about
Personally, I really just don't see the point in this retcon. Why make Excalibur non-traceable? Unless there was some other conflict or contradiction I wasn't aware of he was trying to fix with this. For the most part (yes, I'm aware of the major problems (edit:meaning, the ones people bring up most often)), F/SN was pretty solid and fine as it is. Extra information and adding background mythos and facts is awesome, but I think stuff like this is getting a bit out of hand. Especially if we are on the 4th side-materials book now and it's getting to create retcons and contradictions. I'd have rather him just leave F/SN be.
It came as a surprise because of the drastically different treatment Ea and Excalibur received.
In Ea's case:
"Holy shit what's that I don't understand and I can't trace it! ZOMG!"
In Excalibur's case:
"Nice sword."
"I will trace that" - Shirou
"I can trace that" - Archer
It was sort of hard to stomach when Nasu sprung the "can't trace this" clause on you.
Possibly buff saber, or show the fandom excallibur and EA were closer in power then was usually thought, depending on interpretation, I suppose?
I still stand by my skepticism of Archer's ability to trace it.
"I could trace Excalibur but then I would die"
Then how could you know you could trace it
But isn't Ea like made of like spaceshit or whatever? Excalibur was a grand sword so it's powerful, but it was still an Earthly magic sword. We all knew Ea was ridiculous hax and Gilgamesh just didn't use it seriously, so if the only reason he made Excalibur non-traceable is to make Ea seem less special, I think that's kinda silly.
Exactly. Which is why, in the absense of any actual explanation, I'm not willing to accept Nasu's blatent retcon. It just does not make sense, and to justify it you're having to contort yourself in ridiculous ways. The simplest solution is to just chalk it down to a stupid oversight on Nasu's part and ignore it due to the fact that the game is clearly more "canon" than any side-material book is.
Really?
Because he seems to be doing a pretty damn good job on back-peddling from "Shirou can trace Excalibur"....
I'm sure that, if he suddenly decided that, actually, Ea is the same strength as Excalibur after all, and all that stuff in HA and Zero wasn't real, you'd find some way to justify it and reconcile the blatent retcon with existing canon.
Well, spaceshit is not special anymore, because spaceshit is a recognized element by the association according to CM3 (thus it is a basic terrestrial element, Rin could wield it. That's right, the Average One can wield spaceshit).
If Ea is actually made of spaceshit, Shirou would be able to trace it.
Maybe Archer understands his abilities really well?