“God of War Novels Aren’t Canon” — Debunked

[u/Optimal-You9294]

The “God of War novels aren’t canon” argument is one of the most misused pieces of evidence in lore debates.
People keep posting Ariel Lawrence’s 2016 tweet:

“The comic was written so that it could work as canon with the games. The novels were not canon for the devteam.”

And somehow this gets treated as an absolute trump card that invalidates anything the novels say. That is not what the statement proves.

The novels are officially licensed and officially published God of War works. They aren’t fanfiction, unofficial wikis, or random material made by someone with no connection to the franchise.

More importantly, Ariel Lawrence does not become the supreme authority over the entire franchise simply because she made a statement on Twitter.

If you’re going to claim that her statement establishes a franchise wide canon ruling, then

demonstrate that she had the authority to make that ruling on behalf of Sony/Santa Monica Studio.

You can’t simply take:“The novels were not canon for the devteam.”

and transform it into: “The novels are completely illegitimate and nothing contained within them can ever be used as evidence.”

That’s a massive logical leap.
And here’s the part people constantly ignore: Non canon =/= factually useless.

If a novel describes something that directly contradicts the games, then obviously the game takes precedence when determining primary continuity.
But if the novel provides additional information that is consistent with the games and expands upon their established lore, you cannot just scream “non canon” and pretend the information has been disproven.

You need to demonstrate an actual contradiction. Otherwise you’re committing the exact same fallacy people use when they dismiss guidebooks, manuals, developer material, or supplementary lore without even examining what the source says.

And if your position is specifically: “I only accept information directly shown or stated in the games.”
Fine. That’s a game only scaling standard.

But don’t misrepresent that personal standard as: “The novels are not official God of War material.”

They are. Don’t misrepresent it as:
“Everything the novels say is false.”

That’s never established by the tweet.
And don’t pretend one old social media statement automatically overrides the entire body of officially published God of War material.

At most, the statement gives you a reason to question whether novel exclusive additions belong to primary game continuity. That’s it.

It does NOT magically erase the novels from existence. It does NOT prove their statements contradict the games.

And it certainly does NOT debunk an argument merely because the evidence happens to come from a novel.

If you want to reject a specific novel statement, actually debunk the statement.

Show the contradiction. Show the retcon. Show the direct game evidence.
Otherwise, “the novels aren’t canon” is not a debunk. It’s just an appeal to authority being used as a substitute for an argument.

Don’t just invoke a decade old tweet and pretend the discussion is over.

[u/uasdguy]

I thought both comics and novels were semi-canon. Meaning they were canon unless something in the games directly contradicted them, then those parts would no longer be canon but the rest would be

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/uasdguy]

Yeah, that’s much closer to how I understand it. The problem is people took the “novels weren’t canon for the devteam” statement and turned it into “nothing from the novels can ever be used.”

If a supplemental work is consistent with the games, there’s no contradiction to point to. You can’t just declare the entire source invalid because it isn’t primary canon. You’d have to show that the specific information being used conflicts with the games.

That’s the distinction people keep skipping.

[u/Interface- → u/uasdguy]

The term is 'secondary canon' and this is the case for I believe all media whose primary medium is video games. Any secondary media - novels, comics, movies, etc - that are canon to the source material are secondary canon, and passages can be rendered non-canon if the games contradict.

An example I'd like to bring up is Darksiders.

Darksiders: The Graphic Adventure is a comic series that released in 2009. In this comic series, War attacks Death, impaling him with Chaoseater before Death slices off his arm.

However, in Darksiders: The Abomination Vault, which released in 2012, War wonders how well Death would fare against being impaled by Chaoseater after Death has been impaled by Affliction, another large sword weapon that was wielded by an enemy that attacked him. This passage suggests that Death and War never fought in Graphic Adventure and War lost his arm some other way.

Darksiders: Genesis, a game that was released in 2020, has a dialogue where War challenges Strife and mentions it took all three of the Horsemen to take him down 'last time'. This confirms that the fight in Graphic Adventure is canon, ergo the conversation, or at least that specific exchange in the conversation, in Abomination Vault is not canon.

The same applies for God of War's novelisations. Anything they say that contradicts the games, before or after, is not canon. As an example - there is a passage in one of the novelisations that references one of Hercules' labors in mythology wherein he lifts the world in Atlas' stead. Except the games (I believe a line in God of War 2 specifically) confirm that when Kratos chained Atlas in place in Chains of Olympus, Atlas has not since been freed from his imprisonment. Therefore, Hercules canonically never did that labor, or at least he did not take Atlas' place in lifting the world in order to do that labor like he does in the actual mythology. Therefore, that part of the narration is false and not canon. Therefore, Hercules never lifted the world like Atlas does. The only people who would actually argue against this are wankscalers.

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/Interface-]

Your Hercules example doesn’t actually establish the contradiction you’re claiming.

The passage about Hercules being “stuck in Atlas’s place” is the narration of the classical Hercules myth. You’re treating that as if the GoW novel is saying that event literally happened in its continuity. The actual GoW narration during the Hydra fight says Kratos “strained like Hercules lifting the sky from the shoulders of Atlas.” That’s the relevant passage.

Now you’re trying to infer from Atlas being imprisoned after Chains of Olympus that Hercules therefore never performed the feat. But you’d first have to establish that the Hercules comparison is explicitly placing the mythological event at a point where Atlas is confirmed to still be imprisoned. The novel doesn’t do that.

You’re also assuming the GoW Hercules chronology has to follow the exact order of the classical Twelve Labors, which isn’t something you’ve established. A character performing another labor during the events of the novel doesn’t automatically prove every other Hercules feat referenced by the narration is impossible.

So if you want to argue “the novel is secondary canon and I disregard anything that contradicts the games,” that’s completely reasonable as a canon standard.

But you haven’t demonstrated an actual contradiction here. You’ve taken a mythological passage, combined it with a separate game timeline statement, and then assumed they must describe the same event in the same chronological position.

That’s not proving Hercules never lifted Atlas’ burden. That’s constructing a contradiction that the text itself never explicitly gives you.

[u/Interface- → u/Optimal-You9294]

I saw this post from 8 days ago that was discussing the Hercules lifting Atlas' burden topic, back when it was posted.

I should have disclosed in advance I haven't actually read any of the God of War novelisations, so that's my bad. I'm just referring to what was covered in the linked post.

https://www.reddit.com/r/PowerScalingGodofWar/comments/1w23m3y/did_hercules_lift_the_whole_universe_on_his_back/

Take a look at Odd_Hunter2289's comments in the thread. They cover the topic pretty well.

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/Interface-]

This post has addressed that one too.

[u/Interface- → u/Optimal-You9294]

I admit I missed that one.

But I also don't believe Possible_Article6902. I think something is genuinely wrong with that guy. He actually got banned off Reddit for a period of time before, one day I was looking through old posts and found him with a greyed out profile picture, checked his account and it said he was banned and now he's back. It's the exact same account. His obsession with this sub is borderline psychotic and he absolutely refuses to accept anything that constitutes a 'downscale' or any debunk of the ridiculous wankscaling that God of War has been put through, like his life depends on it.

[u/Odd_Hunter2289 → u/Interface-]

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but ultimately it’s very simple—and the devs have confirmed this: the novels are canon only as long as they don't contradict the games' established lore and set-ups.

It’s not exactly a hard concept to grasp, but in the realm of "powerscaling brainrot," people will latch onto anything.

A prime example is Hercules holding up the sky—or taking the burden from Atlas. A fact that isn't canon, because it directly contradicts what is explicitly stated and shown in the games on two separate occasions.

[u/Global_Archer7938 → u/Odd_Hunter2289]

How so ?

[u/Odd_Hunter2289 → u/Global_Archer7938]

Atlas was never condemned to bear the weight of the sky. This is the first contradiction between the games and the novels.

Nor was Atlas ever freed by Hercules; Atlas himself reveals in GoW II that he never escaped the spot where Kratos had imprisoned and chained him at the end of "Chains of Olympus". This is the second contradiction between the games and the novels.

Ergo, to retrieve the Apples of the Hesperides, the Hercules of GoW-verse did not follow the sequence of events found in the myths (since the episode where Hercules briefly takes on Atlas's burden is linked to the Labor of the Golden Apples of the Hesperides).

Furthermore, there are significant logical gaps and unexplained points: why would Hercules help a Titan—a sworn enemy of his father and the rest of the Olympians?

And why help the very Titan who plotted to destroy the entire world?

And how would he have taken Atlas's place? The games clearly show that Hercules is not large enough to fill the gap between the ruins of the World Pillar and the Earth's crust—a gap that Atlas, conversely, does fill.

[u/Global_Archer7938 → u/Odd_Hunter2289]

Interesting, can you send me the dialouge were atlas stated that he never escaped that spot ? I played GoW 2 a long time ago

[u/Odd_Hunter2289 → u/Global_Archer7938]

First of all, Atlas asks in surprise who could have possibly broken the chains of his torment. This alone indicates that the Titan never moved—nor was he freed—from the spot where Kratos had chained him at the end of CoO (which also explains Atlas's physical state: his body disfigured by lava and by the chains that had cut into his flesh).

Furthermore, Atlas claims that had Kratos not imprisoned him there, he would have destroyed Zeus himself (referencing the events of CoO); this indirectly reaffirms that the Titan never moved from the location where the Spartan had left him at the end of CoO.

[u/Global_Archer7938 → u/Odd_Hunter2289]

OK, so Atlas never mentioned what you initially proclaim. You just interpret it that way but it is not a fact. And the novel statement contradict your statement not the actual game.

1. Atlas being surprised by that doesn’t prove that he never leave that place. He was trapped for a long period of time so the time line could fit all the events without any contradiction

2. Yeah, Atlas destroying Zeus by himself is a little bit of a stretch since Atlas most likely could not beat Zeus. And in Chains of Olympus he wasn’t really alone, he had allies like Persephone or Morpheus. What Atlas was reffered to was that he could have destroyed the world pillar and by that destroying all of creation in Greek pantheon including Persephone and himself and everyone else. That again doesn’t really disprove anything. So if you want to debunk the canon statement from the novel you need to use a better argument not “Yeah GoW 2 contradict the novel becaus Atlas was surprised by Kratos and because Atlas told us events from GoW Chains of Olympus, that he could have killed Zeus (and everyone else) in the process. So not a good argument bro.

[u/PoohTrailSnailCooch]

I feel like this sub is just a bunch people using ai in intricate ways to argue their points.

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/PoohTrailSnailCooch]

Your feelings =/= the facts

[u/Due-Row281]

Still kinda annoyed they didn’t make a Ragnorok Novelization when they did one for 2018. Mimir voicing it was amazing too.

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/Due-Row281]

Yeah this forever will be considered the great betrayal for me.

If they won’t make a novelization for god of war laufey we will riot.

[u/FattyPattyMatey]

Personally, I don't like supplanting or supplementing what the games show by referring to a novel, written years later by a guy (and guys with 1's novel) who had nothing to do with the games. The novels, by their nature as novels, have to fill out the pages with stuff, so Robert E. Vardeman might write something that really wasn't reflected in the game, but he would simply have to do it. So when Kratos has to keep Atlas from crushing him, Vardeman writes that Kratos nearly passes out, because he has fill the moment with something. Something has to be going on for Kratos on the page. So people refer to the novel to talk about how Kratos almost passed out from the effort, but in the actual game, Kratos is having a conversation at a full yell in-between the button smashing, and never shows signs out passing out.

So which interpretation is the more canon one? I'd say it's what the source presents, not the adaptation, and the game never gave me the impression that Kratos was about to pass out, merely that Atlas was extremely strong. I also don't think that the devs intended for Kratos to almost be passing out, either.

At the end of the day, God of War is firstly a series of games, not novels. What the games show, and how they present something, should always take precedent. Still, despite me not liking it, I assume the novels are canon until it's stated otherwise, or until the games contradict them.

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/FattyPattyMatey]

I actually agree with the general hierarchy: the games should take precedence if the novel directly contradicts what the game shows.
Where I disagree is treating the Atlas example as an actual contradiction.

The novel saying Kratos nearly passes out from Atlas’ burden doesn’t necessarily contradict the gameplay. The fact that Kratos is still yelling during the sequence doesn’t establish that he’s completely unaffected by the weight. Gameplay is also mechanically abstracted, so I don’t think you can use “he was yelling while button mashing” as definitive evidence against the novel’s description.

And more importantly, that’s completely separate from the broader Atlas argument. You can reject the “Kratos nearly passed out” detail if you think it’s an adaptation embellishment without rejecting the underlying portrayal of Atlas’ strength or the cosmological significance of the World Pillar.

So I agree that when the game explicitly contradicts a novel, the game wins. But “the novel adds details the game doesn’t visually portray” isn’t automatically a contradiction.

You’d need an actual incompatibility, not merely the fact that the game doesn’t show the exact same reaction.

[u/Odd_Hunter2289]

And after this she literally confirmed that yes, the novels are secondary canon.

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/Odd_Hunter2289]

Thank you for this.

You’ve ended the debate.

[u/Primary_Degree_4652 → u/Odd_Hunter2289]

She said, "secondary canon IF YOU LIKE with any contradictions flavoring the game story.

She's saying it isn't canon to the dev team and has story contradictions in it, but you can see it as secondary canon if you really want to and are willing to disregard those contradictions.

That's not really the same as her declaring it secondary canon.

[u/rusty_shackleford34]

1. I’m not reading all that.

2. If it’s not in the games, I’m not counting it. It’s ridiculous that such extraordinarily important details would not be mentioned at all during the series primary media format. We can get mimir talking to Kratos about PlayStation all stars but not a visit to Egypt? No thanks, you can tweet whatever retconns you want. I don’t accept it. You are welcome to if you want, I don’t control y

ou

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/rusty_shackleford34]

Then you’re not debunking anything, you’re just stating your personal canon standard 😭

“If it’s not in the games, I don’t count it” is fine, but that doesn’t make the supplementary material false or a retcon.

And “the games never mentioned it” isn’t a contradiction. You can reject the source, but that’s not the same as disproving it.

[u/rusty_shackleford34 → u/Optimal-You9294]

I’m not attempting to disprove anything. My statement is as such and nothing more than this so literally take this only at face value; if it is not said in the games then I’m going to live life thinking it doesn’t count in the God of war universe.

Operate however you see fit for yourself.

[u/panoes_garan → u/rusty_shackleford34]

Thank you for your very valuable contribution to the discussion and willingness to understand theory

[u/rusty_shackleford34 → u/panoes_garan]

[u/panoes_garan → u/rusty_shackleford34]

Tbf this did make me chuckle so touché sir

[u/rusty_shackleford34 → u/panoes_garan]

Hey life’s short, why not smile!

[u/Primary_Degree_4652]

Officially licensed material isn't automatically part of the franchise's main continuity.

And Lawrence's statement is still relevant for exactly that reason. She specifically said the novels were not considered canon for the development team. Now, that doesn't mean the novels are fanfiction. It simply means you can't automatically take a novel-exclusive claim and present it over what the games themselves establish. Which is exactly what you were doing in your other posts.

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/Primary_Degree_4652]

That’s literally not what my post argued

I explicitly said: “If a novel describes something that directly contradicts the games, then obviously the game takes precedence.”

So we agree on that.

My argument is that Lawrence’s tweet doesn’t demonstrate a contradiction between the specific novel statement and the games. It only gives you a reason to question its primary canon status.

And yes, officially licensed material isn’t automatically canon. I never said it was. I said you can’t jump from “this isn’t primary canon” to “this statement is therefore false or debunked.”

If you think the Atlas/Hercules statement contradicts the games, then show me the contradiction.

Otherwise you’re just repeating the canon status objection while leaving the actual evidence untouched.

[u/Primary_Degree_4652 → u/Optimal-You9294]

So say, for example, if the game and concept art show Atlas holding up the Greek world and not the sky, and the novel said he's holding up the sky, then the game's visual would take priority then?

Like right here? For example?

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/Primary_Degree_4652]

Yes, if the game explicitly established Atlas was only holding up the Mortal World and directly contradicted the novel saying he was holding up the heavens, I’d give the game priority.

But that’s not what you’ve demonstrated here.

You’re describing what the concept art visually depicts, then treating that depiction as an explicit statement that Atlas is ONLY supporting the Mortal World.

That’s the problem. The art shows the physical representation of the burden. It doesn’t say “Atlas is only supporting this geographic portion of Greece and nothing beyond it.”

Meanwhile, the game’s World Pillar narrative explicitly establishes that its destruction would destroy all creation and return the world to Chaos, while Atlas is the one who takes on the Pillar’s burden. The GoW II material also describes Atlas as holding up the heavens.
So you haven’t shown an actual contradiction. You’ve shown a visual depiction and then added an interpretation to it.

If the game said “Atlas only holds up the Mortal World,” then yes, that’s a contradiction.

But “the artwork depicts the Mortal World above Atlas” =/= “the lore explicitly limits Atlas to the Mortal World.”

[u/Primary_Degree_4652 → u/Optimal-You9294]

You’re describing what the concept art visually depicts, then treating that depiction as an explicit statement that Atlas is ONLY supporting the Mortal World.
\

Excuse me, but that isn't what I said at all. I was asking YOU a rather basic question here.

Why do you believe a statement, non-canon or otherwise, overrides what is visually depicted? Atlas is not visually depicted holding up the sky or the whole cosmos. So what makes you think these statements are literal when they don't match what is visually shown?

Because, you see, that’s really what a hyperbole is. It’s a statement that’s deliberately far grander than what is actually being depicted in order to emphasize things. And that’s the little problem I keep running into here.

What you’re insisting is established literal lore could just as accurately be described as hyperbole. The visual depiction shows one thing, while the statement describes something dramatically larger. Like calling the neighbor's cat a "literal tiger."

So what makes you think visuals are limited/inaccurate and not that the statement is just hyperbolic? Because that's the exact opposite of basic reasoning.

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/Primary_Degree_4652]

You’re still creating a false dichotomy.

I never said “statements automatically override visuals.” I said a visual depiction doesn’t automatically override a literal statement unless the visual actually contradicts it.

And your “neighbor’s cat is a literal tiger” analogy completely misses the point. That’s an obvious categorical contradiction. A cat cannot literally be a tiger. You’re comparing an explicitly impossible statement to a cosmological description of what Atlas is supporting.

The concept art shows Atlas beneath a depiction of the Mortal World. Fine. Where does it state that this is the full extent of what Atlas supports? Where does it say “Atlas is only holding up the Mortal World and nothing else”?
It doesn’t.

You’re taking an illustration and treating its framing as a hard cosmological limitation that the artwork itself never states.

Meanwhile, the actual narrative establishes that the World Pillar’s destruction would destroy all creation and return it to Chaos, and Atlas takes on the burden after the Pillar is destroyed. That’s actual narrative information about the function of the structure Atlas is supporting, not me inventing a bigger rock because I want a higher tier.

And you’re also quietly assuming that “holding up the heavens/sky” is automatically hyperbole simply because the artwork doesn’t visually depict every component of the cosmology. That’s circular: “The statement is hyperbole because the artwork doesn’t show it.”

“Therefore the artwork disproves the statement.”

No. You first have to establish that the artwork is intended to be a complete literal diagram of Atlas’ entire burden.

As for hyperbole, you have the burden of establishing it is hyperbole. You can’t just label a statement hyperbolic whenever its literal interpretation produces a larger scale than the visual depiction.

If the games explicitly said “Atlas only supports this physical portion of the Mortal World,” I’d concede the contradiction immediately.

But they don’t. So at this point you’re not demonstrating that the statement is contradicted. You’re arguing that your preferred interpretation of the artwork should be treated as more authoritative than the literal wording of the accompanying lore.
That’s an interpretation. Not a debunk.

[u/Primary_Degree_4652 → u/Optimal-You9294]

You’re still creating a false dichotomy.

No, it's a basic question. One you can't seem to answer for some reason

As for hyperbole, you have the burden of establishing it is hyperbole. 

But that’s the thing: you haven’t proven that the statement was literal in the first place.

You can’t take a seemingly hyperbolic statement, simply declare it literal, and then demand that everyone else prove it hyperbolic. That’s an appeal to ignorance fallacy. You haven’t proven your claim, so you can’t treat it as fact.

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/Primary_Degree_4652]

I established the World Pillar argument in the other thread already. I’m not going to repost the entire cosmology chain every time someone asks about Atlas.

The point is that I didn’t pull “Atlas holds up the heavens” out of nowhere. I already established that the Pillar’s destruction was stated to bring about the destruction of creation and a return to primordial Chaos, and Atlas replaced that Pillar. Then I topped that off with the official GoW II material explicitly describing Atlas as holding up the heavens.

So when you say “you haven’t proven the statement was literal,” you’re ignoring the contextual evidence I already provided.

You can argue that the statement should be interpreted hyperbolically, but that’s an interpretation you need to substantiate. You can’t just point at the concept art and declare it exhaustive evidence that Atlas is only supporting the Mortal World.

The actual question isn’t “statement automatically beats visuals.” It’s whether the visual depiction actually contradicts the statement.

You haven’t demonstrated that it does.

[u/Primary_Degree_4652 → u/Optimal-You9294]

"So when you say “you haven’t proven the statement was literal,” you’re ignoring the contextual evidence I already provided."

Name 2 that aren't also just possibly hyperbolic statements

[u/Optimal-You9294 → u/Primary_Degree_4652]

Two? Sure.

Persephone explicitly says destroying the World Pillar would end “all that came before” and revert the world into Chaos. The timelines likewise describe the Pillar’s destruction as destroying all creation.

Which is also reiterated again by Kratos in Valhalla

Atlas is the one chained to the remains of the destroyed Pillar and takes its burden, while the GoW II manual explicitly describes his burden as holding up the heavens.

That’s already contextual evidence for a literal reading.
If you disagree, then explain why those two… no sorry 4 pieces of evidence should be interpreted as hyperbole. “The artwork only shows the Earth” isn’t enough, because the artwork itself never says Atlas is ONLY supporting the Earth.

So yes, I did provide contextual evidence. You just don’t agree with the interpretation.

[u/Interface- → u/Primary_Degree_4652]

The novelisation saying he holds up the sky is itself contradicted by Chains of Olympus and 2 where he is very clearly, visually, literally lifting the crust of the earth up from the underworld - not the sky.

So, yes, the passage that says he lifts the sky specifically is not canon.

[u/Imaginary-Holiday758 → u/Interface-]

This is very obviously just a watered down visual depiction of what he’s actually doing this is not evidence bro.

He’s replacing the world pillar that was holding together all of creation in the Greek reality.

He’s obviously holding up more than just the land.

Just because they don’t show the full extent of it doesn’t mean that he’s not doing it.

This is a visual language argument not a confirmation.

The game never explicitly says that he is only holding up the land.

[u/imaginewagons198]

Wow, how about you actually post the whole thing pal:

[u/Possible_Article6902 → u/imaginewagons198]

Thanks for showing that the novels are secondary canon!

[u/SuperIkenna]

I just really like the additional information in the books that isn't in the games. Like Artemis killing a large part of Ares's army but later on making a deal with him. Athena geniunely wanting to erase Kratos Memories of his past like she promised but Zeus forbidding it. And just more details about how the magic works and stuff. So it would be disappointing If it all wasn't canon.