X5 as a game
Keyword: Game. Produced and released by Capcom. It can be retconned, but cannot be taken back. An out-of-game source which was released and then pulled is valuable by every sense of the word, but is not on its own an absolute. Not without knowing why it was pulled, and we can only guess. It may be a conceptual link they're not willing to commit to. Or it may be final and they just wanted to save it for their next book. We don't know either way.
Thing is, the Zero collection timeline is not a small thing, it is several entries which tell a complete story from start to finish. Within that story, a lot of matters are recited, and many points which are cross-referenced in the character profiles simply depend on the whole. The cross-referenced points such as Zero sealing himself as a result of the Nightmare Incident, X's perfect virus countermeasures, Zero turning good and Project Elpis simply cannot entirely stand alone.
I disagree. X having a perfect virus countermeasure is in no way related to the Nightmare or to Project Elpizo. Neither are the latter two related to each other. They each relate to those points which are previously established, which is fine and dandy, except that those previously established points DID stand alone. Filling in more material is always welcome, but that they can be filled in one way does not mean that they can be filled in only that way.
In fact that virus countermeasure speaks against it. In linking the whole thing to the "virus from space", presumably Roboenza, it says that these points are being newly expanded. Whether that connection was given the final stamp of approval or is still subject to change is unclear.
Zero Collection timeline being "small" or not is irrelevant. Concept is not "small". The whole of concept is not completely invalidated based on one or two points changing. That's why we call it insight.
We know Mother Elf is NOT created to be Cyber-elf with the ability to control Reploids (though Dark Elf) is; Mother elf was creation as an anti-virus.
As I said in my last post: "...it is no small stretch for one who by each and every account was born to alter Reploid behavior, regardless of to what end."
An anti-virus may kill the virus but that doesn't mean it'll undo what damage was done. See where I'm going with that? The ability to alter Reploid programming on such a deep level surely carries the potential of more than one application; there is nothing that says the transformation of Mother Elf to Dark Elf is not simply a matter of intent rather than ability. Aizu is discussing ability, not purpose, there is a difference. Furthermore, Project Elpizo as an official backing of a "controller" leaves the implication that Weil wasn't the only one to see that potential use in Mother Elf.
Furthermore, though not necessarily, the text seemingly implicates the corruption to Dark Elf as upon birth, which we also know is not true.
Speculation. By saying "not necessarily", you render your own point moot. You cannot discredit information simply because your own optional interpretation doesn't fit.
Neither of these untrue details are mentioned in Tree Keys.
One may well be true in canon, as I've outlined above. The other is not "mentioned", it is your own personal interpretation of context. Invalid. Aizu did not state that Dark Elf was created at birth, he simply did not specify that she wasn't. And nothing, save you, says that she was. That is not a valid argument. I can tell you that "early concept" strongly correlates to "originally" (which it does), but that alone proves nothing.
We're going off on a tangent, though. Because regardless of Aizu's words, that the Three Keys disclaimer exists cannot be denied, and as such, information from the Three Keys cannot stand as fact without support from another source.
"The information that follows comes from the early concept phases for the Zero series' scenario, and therefore may not be canonical."
When was that statement ever retracted? It wasn't. You argue against that, you argue against fact.