@G-Man: I think it's important to note that one of the reasons we the readers care so much about continuity is because it influences a character's motivation. That's the thing I hate most about Batman Inc. in the new52. When Jason was revealed as being in the Wingman outfit, that would've been a big shocking reveal in the old DCU given the way Battle for the Cowl and the Batman and Robin: Red Hood & Scarlet arc went. With the new52, it seems pointless. Plus the book obviously can't have continuity with parts of its own very short back catalogue especially the stuff with Bruce sending Stephanie Brown to that boarding school in England. Past history affects current stories. That's all there is to it, despite how much DC editorial wishes it were otherwise.
the point of the reboot is that you can start from issue one. the books will inform you of any backstory. if it doesn't, it isn't relevant.
The characters are in a new universe. its the same thing as a separate movie/tv/game continuity, etc.
I don't think they fully ran a reboot on all the character's besides probably Harley Quinn and Phantom Stranger, but ran a relaunch going into the future, around 1-8 years after the Blackest Night with most continuities still in existence for almost all the DC characters. Some of the characters origins are changed, some are redesigned, some set a new direction, others just stayed the same, but they all have some part of continuity carried over to The New 52.
As for the Green Lantern titles, I believe, most of the continuity do exist and are carried over to "The New 52" series reason being "The Rise of the Third Army" was not brought up by coincidence and was created from stories of the previous Green Lantern series. Such examples are how Hal reacts to Sinestro being a Green Lantern again and how the Guardians explain why Hal Jordan was one of the most dangerous Lantern of them all. These hints within the first couple issues of Green Lantern leads to think that the main story arcs of the title do exist and are carried over to The New 52. Other series relating to the title such as New Guardians and Red Lanterns also throws it out there for us with the other lantern corps being from the Blackest Night and Brightest Day crossovers and by creating a short prologue of the aftermath on Oa in the first issue of New Guardians. (the panels in which Tony previewed in this episode).
And yeah continuity does matter for us Tony, you of all people know that! For people who really enjoy and take notice in such characters it's mandatory. Although they do make it reader-friendly within this new relaunch by telling the story in present/future time and not looking down at the past, all emotions, feelings and memories between each character are still in existence. If they do look down at the past, which the Guardians of the Universe have been known to do, they give out good explanations and pictures to give you a further understanding, if you haven't read Green Lantern's past references. They really didn't want to do a full reboot due to the fact that big characters like Superman, Batman, Green Lantern, and others that have a set origin didn't need to be changed, directly and already have a particular direction and path that people already take notice of.
@G-Man I made a blog some time ago regarding Green Arrow and his connection to Green Lantern with specifics on how he was involved in Green Lantern:Rebirth and how he gave the ring to Hal and Guy Gardner as well as Zero Hour (you can see him when you pause the video to 4:03) and many of the events before this. Apparently I heard from @SmashBrawler from a response that he told me a while ago.
Parallax still happened to my knowledge, but Zero Hour isn't essential for it to exist. Plus, Zero Hour needs COIE, which clearly didn't happen.
So is he correct in that sense, as well as all of Green Arrow's involvement being wiped away in the New 52?
As a fairly new reader to comics, I just enjoy comics for what they are. I understand the concern and all and i love reading up on old story lines but I'm not concerned with "has this happened or not". I feel like @G-Man does about this. I think a writer will mention a certain thing happened if it helps with his story, If not then they will leave it out there for us to wonder.
@Figueiredo: The thing is, they were adamant not to call it a reboot. But, in a way, some characters have been. That's the confusion. Some continuity has remained but others haven't. Then you slowly see what we thought was still intact slowly coming apart.
DC messed this up. They started New 52 so they could get out of the muddled history but all they did was make it worse by having some of the heroes history still be the same and others changed. It's almost worst now than it was before.
@G-Man: I know, I know... and that is the difference to Crisis on Infinite Earths, at that time. The Post-Crisis affair was, in my modest opinion, handled much better. And I think that the "5 years life span" of the New 52, is for the most characters, way to short...