The great tie-in fiction debate

[Albertosaurus Rex]

However, I've recently started looking at the tie-ins again. After all, things shouldn't be judged by their worst examples. So I recently read Keith Baker's Eberron tie-in The City of Towers, which was... well, mediocre to be fair. However, I've recently heard good things about Dan Abnett's Warhammer 40k novels, and because what I've seen of the setting is awesome, I will be giving his books a go in the near future.

You know, I missed an opportunity there. I could have typed: " However, I've recently heard good things about Dan Abnett's Warhammer 40k novels, and because what I've seen of the setting is awesome, I will be giving his books a go in the near future (As opposed to THE GRIM DARK FUTURE IN WHICH THERE IS ONLY WAR!)."

...Anyway. I have to admit one thing: the thought of reading books based on films or tv series weirds me out. Apart from the fact that they are often non-canon, the idea of reading about characters that started out as being portrayed by actors is strange to me. When you're reading a book based on a card game/miniatures game/RPG, it fills in the background material of that game, while in the case of a tv tie-in, the background is already filled in... if that statement makes any sense to you.

I must also admit that, despite what I have stated above, the sight of authors who write only tie-ins tends to sadden me sometimes. I check their bibliography and it sometimes turns out that they hop from RPG tie-in to tv tie-in to videogame tie-in and it gives me this feeling of "You're just in it for the money, right?"