Jump to content
  • Sign Up

I don't want to be rude, but the writing...


Greencactaur.4396

Recommended Posts

I feel like a part of the problem also stems from the fact that this game cannot decide on what time setting it wants to be in. This can be seen with the heavy armor where on one end, you have gladiatorial roman armor while on the other, there's full plate on par with the late 1300s-1600s . There's bronze-age swords, to 1500's nodachi katanas, to even 1600s rapiers, and even Aztecan macuahuitls. I could go on for another set of paragraphs about the guns,  tech, siege, municipals, and architecture.

Edited by cyberzombie.7348
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, cyberzombie.7348 said:

I feel like a part of the problem also stems from the fact that this game cannot decide on what time setting it wants to be in. This can be seen with the heavy armor where on one end, you have gladiatorial roman armor while on the other, there's full plate on par with the late 1300s-1600s . There's bronze-age swords, to 1500's nodachi katanas, to even 1600s rapiers, and even Aztecan macuahuitls. I could go on for another set of paragraphs about the guns,  tech, siege, municipals, and architecture.

This is because different areas have different styles. edit: remember this old thing? https://i.redd.it/0xvq3rl7cbaz.jpg Even IRL we've had this kinda thing. Things people don't really link together happening in a similar period of time.

You do have quite literal gladiator combat rings, makeshift pirate gear from scavenged materials, to full, master crafted plate armor. One region has one style of sword, while another region has a different one. Unlike real world however, most of these weapons and blades are made from similar materials. The Gladius you can find is made of the same stuff as the katana, which is made of the same stuff as the Krytan Military sword.

 

Guns they literally went into back at launch lol. Kryta, Norn, and Charr all had firearms, which had different styles/origin. As time has advanced, the firearm tech as advanced with it.

Edited by Kalavier.1097
  • Like 9
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 2 months later...

The writing is a real problem indeed. I love the game and I also don't wan't to disrespect the work of anyone, but the honest truth is that sometimes I have to stop playing because of the writing. The dialogue is light-hearted and quasi-witty at bestm and cringy at it's worst.

The tone is always the same (sarcastic / cynical / edgy) and that is true for all the characters almost all the time. The abondant use of common expressions, play on words and one-liner attempts proves to be a very poor choice for a fantasy setting. Hearing the people of Tyria use things like "good-cop, bad-cop" in their vocabulary happens all the time; at this point I almost expect the characters to mention "having a burger at McDonalds" or "I'll just take a cab don't worry about me!".

The Guild Wars lore and setting has everything it needs to take itself seriously, at the very least a little bit more. 

Also, about the voice acting. You can feel that the actors just read the words without really being invested in the situation. It's hard for a voice actor to make a good performance if the dialogue doesn't carry you, and if you don't have the key references for the scenes and characters you are voicing, the result will lack coherence. Just doing your best with a few directions and the dialogues on a sheet isn't gonna cut it. Actors need to be involved a little more deeply in the process.

That is when you know you have good dialogue. You have to feel it when you read, that the voice actors will need to immerse themselves, read between the lines and demonstrate subtlety, otherwise the quality of the writing will go to waste. That is when you know you got something.

That of course requires more budget. But that is not why they won't do it.

It is because it is probably quite hard to find an actual good writer.

 

And someone out there think it is too risky.

Or the writer is close to management.

Or everyone likes it and we are the only ones complaining XD

Anyways, please hire new heads in the narrative department!

Isn't it time for a revolution?

Anyways, awesome game still.

Peace.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with the notion that GW2 is poorly written - it's not a masterpiece of writing like say Disco Elysium, but it's fine and fit for purpose imo.  It's difficult to debate around it considering it is in large part subjective. 

But I will contest the idea that GW2's dialogue is not appropriate for "fantasy."  Let's assume that GW2 is a fantasy game (heavily debatable but let's not get into that) - there is a misconception that fantasy means medieval or ancient times, but the truth of the matter is that GW2 is clearly not medieval at all and not all fantasy has to be medieval.  If we really had to pinpoint a time period that GW2 is set in that's equivalent with periods of our own history, it would be the early-modern to modern period, what with the Charr's industrial revolution.  Heck, some elements namely Cantha and the Asura are almost sci-fi (transferring a consciousness onto a golem anyone?). 

So with that considered, it's no surprise at all that people in GW2 "sound more modern" - they are not people from the middle-ages quite simply.  It would in fact be very jarring if they spoke in a Tolkien-esque way while on airships, boarding helicopters, driving tanks, calibrating golems, etc. 

Edited by KnightofPhoenix.3679
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, KnightofPhoenix.3679 said:

I disagree with the notion that GW2 is poorly written - it's not a masterpiece of writing like say Disco Elysium, but it's fine and fit for purpose imo.  It's difficult to debate around it considering it is in large part subjective. 

But I will contest the idea that GW2's dialogue is not appropriate for "fantasy."  Let's assume that GW2 is a fantasy game (heavily debatable but let's not get into that) - there is a misconception that fantasy means medieval or ancient times, but the truth of the matter is that GW2 is clearly not medieval at all and not all fantasy has to be medieval.  If we really had to pinpoint a time period that GW2 is set in that's equivalent with periods of our own history, it would be the early-modern to modern period, what with the Charr's industrial revolution.  Heck, some elements namely Cantha and the Asura are almost sci-fi (transferring a consciousness onto a golem anyone?). 

So with that considered, it's no surprise at all that people in GW2 "sound more modern" - they are not people from the middle-ages quite simply.  It would in fact be very jarring if they spoke in a Tolkien-esque way while on airships, boarding helicopters, driving tanks, calibrating golems, etc. 

I think the issue is more that the writers seem to struggle with matching the tone of the dialogue to the seriousness of the situation.  Often our characters are cracking jokes and displaying flippant snark in the face of life-and-death struggles.  Perhaps in the case of some characters it could be played off as a defense mechanism, and sometimes its even charming, but when it's practically all characters all the time it's hard not to arrive at the conclusion that the writers simply don't know how to handle this type of writing.

Not that I think it's an easy thing to do.  It's hard to keep the tone appropriately serious when your character is constantly in these over-the-top world-ending struggles.  But that's another issue with the writing that makes it hard to relate to.  Why are we always up against immortals, dragons, and Gods?  It's so ridiculous who can blame the writers for making the dialogue match how silly the story itself is?

  • Like 5
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

I think the issue is more that the writers seem to struggle with matching the tone of the dialogue to the seriousness of the situation.  Often our characters are cracking jokes and displaying flippant snark in the face of life-and-death struggles.  Perhaps in the case of some characters it could be played off as a defense mechanism, and sometimes its even charming, but when it's practically all characters all the time it's hard not to arrive at the conclusion that the writers simply don't know how to handle this type of writing.

Not that I think it's an easy thing to do.  It's hard to keep the tone appropriately serious when your character is constantly in these over-the-top world-ending struggles.  But that's another issue with the writing that makes it hard to relate to.  Why are we always up against immortals, dragons, and Gods?  It's so ridiculous who can blame the writers for making the dialogue match how silly the story itself is?

That's a fair criticism and is unfortunately quite prevalent in most of entertainment even outside of video games - I'd hate to scapegoat, but my impression is that this is very much "Marvel-like." 

In any case as you point out, MMOs need (or feel they need) to escalate the story to keep players engaged - when you start with a cataclysmic dragon as your very first enemy (Zhaitan), then things could only get more and more cataclysmic.  And while you can up the gravitas of the writing (and they had in Heart of Thorns vs vanilla), eventually trying to keep the gravitas keep pace with the storyline risks becoming melodramatic.  The alternative is to start taking things a bit less seriously at some points. 

So I get that criticism and yes some of it did get grating especially in Dragon's End.  But at the same time, the writers did leave space for important discussions and dialogue and it wasn't all sacrificed for cheap jokes - one scene in particular that was brief, but touching, is when you give Aurene a fish and she says she's too old and your character responds that she is never too old for that.  I'm a father and that simple line resonates far more than one would think. 

Edited by KnightofPhoenix.3679
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KnightofPhoenix.3679 said:

In any case as you point out, MMOs need (or feel they need) to escalate the story to keep players engaged - when you start with a cataclysmic dragon as your very first enemy (Zhaitan), then things could only get more and more cataclysmic.  And while you can up the gravitas of the writing (and they had in Heart of Thorns vs vanilla), eventually trying to keep the gravitas keep pace with the storyline risks becoming melodramatic.  The alternative is to start taking things a bit less seriously at some points. 

Yeah, the action fatigue becomes very apparent post PoF. Since it's hard to go up after single-handedly killing a god of war, on top of being the main muscle for everyone problems. I just hope the next main plot is something more grounded and focued on worldbuilding to help reset the momentum. 

Edited by cyberzombie.7348
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, cyberzombie.7348 said:

Yeah, the action fatigue becomes very apparent post PoF. Since it's hard to go up after single-handedly killing a god of war. I just hope the next main plot is something more grounded and focued on worldbuilding to help reset the momentum. 

The detective angle with Rama seems promising.  I hope they take it in that direction instead of pitting us against yet another stupid immortal God-thing.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KnightofPhoenix.3679 said:

That's a fair criticism and is unfortunately quite prevalent in most of entertainment even outside of video games - I'd hate to scapegoat, but my impression is that this is very much "Marvel-like." 

In any case as you point out, MMOs need (or feel they need) to escalate the story to keep players engaged - when you start with a cataclysmic dragon as your very first enemy (Zhaitan), then things could only get more and more cataclysmic.  And while you can up the gravitas of the writing (and they had in Heart of Thorns vs vanilla), eventually trying to keep the gravitas keep pace with the storyline risks becoming melodramatic.  The alternative is to start taking things a bit less seriously at some points. 

So I get that criticism and yes some of it did get grating especially in Dragon's End.  But at the same time, the writers did leave space for important discussions and dialogue and it wasn't all sacrificed for cheap jokes - one scene in particular that was brief, but touching, is when you give Aurene a fish and she says she's too old and your character responds that she is never too old for that.  I'm a father and that simple line resonates far more than one would think. 

Marvel writing goes back much farther, it was just the normal way of writing in the 80s and 90s. People only think that writing is "marvel-like" now because of the super dark and edgy bottomless pit that all media sunk into in the early to mid 2000s, starting around the time of the reimagined Battletsar Galactica, which defined the genre.

 

The newer generations don't understand because its all they've been exposed to, so they think its just a meme. I'm sorry, but entertainment was alot better when everything wasn't an overdramatic soap opera.

 

The story of this game has always been fun and charming, and terrible, but that's the point.

Edited by Mariyuuna.6508
  • Like 5
  • Confused 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, KnightofPhoenix.3679 said:

But I will contest the idea that GW2's dialogue is not appropriate for "fantasy."  Let's assume that GW2 is a fantasy game (heavily debatable but let's not get into that) - there is a misconception that fantasy means medieval or ancient times, but the truth of the matter is that GW2 is clearly not medieval at all and not all fantasy has to be medieval.  If we really had to pinpoint a time period that GW2 is set in that's equivalent with periods of our own history, it would be the early-modern to modern period, what with the Charr's industrial revolution.  Heck, some elements namely Cantha and the Asura are almost sci-fi (transferring a consciousness onto a golem anyone?). 

 


Well, I agree with you there. It is alright for me that it is not medieval. That misconception about fantasy is one that I am quite happy that you corrected. See, I personnally love fantasy and to me fantasy does not implicates "medieval" at all. As you pointed it out well, the fantasy we get in GW2, if it weere to be compared with a period of our own world, would probably be closer to modern times and not medieval times. That is great, I have no problems with that. 

When I used "good cop bad cop" as an exemple of poorly writen, I ment that by using those expressions you ncessarily invoque "cops" whcih do not exist in GW2. There are many mistakes like this (I'd call them mistakes, without a doubt.) I don't mind a modern tone. But as it was also well pointed out...

 

7 hours ago, AliamRationem.5172 said:

Often our characters are cracking jokes and displaying flippant snark in the face of life-and-death struggles.  Perhaps in the case of some characters it could be played off as a defense mechanism, and sometimes its even charming, but when it's practically all characters all the time it's hard not to arrive at the conclusion that the writers simply don't know how to handle this type of writing.


This goes beyond getting the tone wrong.

The setting is good, the world-building elements and the frame of the story is alright, and has lots of potential. But when it comes to dialogues, it all goes very wrong. It seems like it's one edgy personnality expressing itself through all the NPCs, almost all the time. I mean, I can watch Rick and Morty, or Futurama or such things and actually enjoy continuous sarcasm and sillyness, but please spare me those unidimentional constant blabbering-tier dialogues when I play a Fantasy Heroic MMORPG !

I reall don't like to rant so I'j sorry for doing it, but I really wish this game had a better writing.

Also, I don't know if this is the case for every races, I almost only play humans.

It did seem a bit better on the sylvari side if I remember correctly.

But obvious someone with a lot of influence on the dialogu end has a very intense penchant for sarcasm, cynicism and narrative shortcuts.

Actually I found a dialogue bwteen two NPCs in End of Dragons, and it was clearly an argument between two writers being made into an interaction in the game. In the NPC'S dialogue, seemingly an exchange between an artist and an editor, the guy in the power position (the editor) was explaining to the artist that character devoloppement is a "no" while quickly getting to the point of the next event in the plot was the "way to go".

The writer was being made fun of, he was calling himself a lover of litterature but in a very pathetic way.

That caught my attention and if it is what it looks like it is, it seems sooooo wrong.

Because of this, I have very little hope for the narrative future of this franchise.

Someone up there thinks he's right and that he's doing GW2 a favor by streering the writing in this way.

Amd while writing for a game is VERY different than writing in a novel, HE IS STILL SO WRONG.

Hypothtically.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a complement to the many contributions in here, always take note when thinking of the writing from Heart of Thorns and beyond that the first writer of the game's setting (Ree Soesbee) had a preference for worldbuilding and "fidelity" of the setting and that this should be more important than character focus/development. As in, make the world feel like an actual place and the characters can then live inside said world - this was their philosophy. The current batch of writers that took over after Vanilla and up to this point were much more focused on character development over worldbuilding to the point where the latter could be sidestepped at times. See "Champions" in Icebrood Saga for the extreme example of this - it's a story about the Commander/Aurene, Braham/Primordus and Ryland/Jormag, not about Tyria, in fact doing nothing with regards to worldbuilding. So in short, I think most people feel the writing is bad because there's some worldbuilding lacking rather than the writing in itself being insufficient.

 

Neither style is bad but they are in odds with each other, so that trying to write a character driven narrative into the previously well established worldbuilding of GW2 can and will appear awkward at times. However I think this is improving a bit and while the main batch of dialogues still leave much to be desired, you can strike gold in achievements and scattered writings across the maps in EoD - there's some good short stories there in my opinion such as all the notes you can find in New Kaineng. Finally, we now have Bobby Stein acting as narrative director going forward and he knows the ins and outs of the previously established worldbuilding very well so we can hope for further improvements in matching the writing to the setting.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, maxwelgm.4315 said:

Just a complement to the many contributions in here, always take note when thinking of the writing from Heart of Thorns and beyond that the first writer of the game's setting (Ree Soesbee) had a preference for worldbuilding and "fidelity" of the setting and that this should be more important than character focus/development. As in, make the world feel like an actual place and the characters can then live inside said world - this was their philosophy. The current batch of writers that took over after Vanilla and up to this point were much more focused on character development over worldbuilding to the point where the latter could be sidestepped at times. See "Champions" in Icebrood Saga for the extreme example of this - it's a story about the Commander/Aurene, Braham/Primordus and Ryland/Jormag, not about Tyria, in fact doing nothing with regards to worldbuilding. So in short, I think most people feel the writing is bad because there's some worldbuilding lacking rather than the writing in itself being insufficient.

 

Neither style is bad but they are in odds with each other, so that trying to write a character driven narrative into the previously well established worldbuilding of GW2 can and will appear awkward at times. However I think this is improving a bit and while the main batch of dialogues still leave much to be desired, you can strike gold in achievements and scattered writings across the maps in EoD - there's some good short stories there in my opinion such as all the notes you can find in New Kaineng. Finally, we now have Bobby Stein acting as narrative director going forward and he knows the ins and outs of the previously established worldbuilding very well so we can hope for further improvements in matching the writing to the setting.

This ideal is nice and all but world building also requires character development too. Character and world are tied together and one cannot exist without the other. Just like the crop of people that try to defend Trahearne as some nuanced, deep character when he's not (a commander that is awkward, unsure, and pretty much unwilling to lead basically lead the armed forces to defeat so the only thing that saved him was plot armor).

 

In all, GW2's core story in the core world is bad. Even when you play the points that "might" answer questions (like who the hell is Trahearne) you still don't get answers. They are vague and cryptic, a lot of things just happen out of the blue. The strongest points of writing were the first two acts of of maybe a 3rd of the core stories. The Norn and Sylvari have the worst of it all. And the fact that unless you can stomache playing the game multiple times over and over you will never get the full story or full picture (and even when doing that you still don't.)

 

Examples include of course Trahearne, the Human/Charr peace, the lack of actually answering the whole Dream thing for the Sylvari (even in HoT when it's proven the Dream is from Mordremoth) and so on and so forth. Plot points are just completely dropped entirely (if you are Charr you spend your first twenty levels building a warband only to be dismissed as a legionnaire by your second arc conveniently) to entire characters just popping in and out and being forgotten (outside of Rytlock and Thackery, all of Destiny's Edge pretty much being non-existent).

 

There's this thing in visual media that gets repeated a lot and it's called show don't tell. The game does a lot of telling, but sometimes not even answering but we don't get to see anything in the core game. This slightly improves in HoT but massively improves in PoF. And going to just be blunt about it, but the entire plot of EoD where we are chasing after a woman who wants to destroy the world because she couldn't get laid by one guy is just edgey taken to a new extreme and honestly a bad way to get started on the whole needing to end the current dragon plot thread. There could have been something else that tied in with the Jade Wind event from GW1 instead they went with this non-sensical woman scorned angle that wants to be edgey.

 

Good world building requires the characters that populate said world to be good too to help give it flesh. Thankfully GW2 has survived a bit and the post Anka part of EoD was much improved.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gw2 is suffering of "the flinstones" syndrome, where we basically have ppl in another era/time behaving and have social/mindset like modern north-americans. This is fine for child TV cartoons(where is not to be take serious), but is a ruin for a fantasy plot. 

 

 

Edited by ugrakarma.9416
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can definitely see the main dialogues being a bit too "quippy" at times. During a lot of the eventful moments, I can agree that having snarky one-liners can be cut down. I'd appreciate it a lot more if they kept those types of lines among particular characters who we can expect those things from (like Chanach, or sometimes even Braham, simply based off of his personality).

I think these types of dialogue never bothered me to the point of calling the writing "terrible", however, mainly because they balance it out with a lot of serious communication as well. Yeah, there's a ton of banter especially during heated moments, but there's also an ample amount of heartfelt or informational dialogue and the jokey parts never felt like they took anything away from those serious moments.

I definitely won't say GW2's writing is a shining masterpiece. I think it's good at its base, and there's plenty of times when it falters. But I wouldn't say that the writers aren't taking themselves seriously simply because the dialogue is written with a modern tone and it inserts a lot of quips and jokes. I think there's a purpose for why it's written this way. Whether or not it's successful in that purpose is another story (something which I feel is more subjective), but I can still see the care being put in it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/5/2023 at 1:10 PM, ugrakarma.9416 said:

Gw2 is suffering of "the flinstones" syndrome, where we basically have ppl in another era/time behaving and have social/mindset like modern north-americans. This is fine for child TV cartoons(where is not to be take serious), but is a ruin for a fantasy plot.

The problem with this mindset is, what is "The GW2 era"

because there isn't one. And I don't mean "haha fantasy" but in a real sense. There are groups that fit into different times of history and all function together. Not to mention as I put above, https://i.redd.it/0xvq3rl7cbaz.jpg You can have a pirate, a victorian man, a gunslinger, and a Samurai all alive at the same time yet all four are treated as "Different times" by most.

Honestly, it's rather foolish to sit down into a fantasy realm and then try to tie it explicitly to any sort of historical era in all regards. You always have things that break the mold and affect how things run/how cultures emerge. Sometimes you have magic affecting government with magitech. Sometimes you have a more industrial styled culture that emerges. Sometimes you have those that don't dive into either as much.

In general, there is also the fact a lot of people only know stylized versions of history from games/shows/movies, and that is often tweaked for the storytelling/visuals vs being accurate.

  • Thanks 3
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is a lot of weakness in the writing quality, stemming all the way back to the whole plot of dragons and what became of them.
The dragon story was a mess, I would be surprised if they ever intended for all the dragons to die. It really caused a lot of issues from both abruptly obliterating any semblance of mystery from the world as it writes you into a zero sum conclusion of Aurene having to survive as no one else can deal with the fallout of the trajectory throughout the seasons. Sure this wouldn't destroy the story as a whole  but any story beats threatening Aurenes' life are completely void of emotional impact (pun intended) and that happens multiple times.

 

(work in progress post, will expand)

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 1/3/2023 at 8:29 AM, Guilan.5760 said:

The writing is a real problem indeed. I love the game and I also don't wan't to disrespect the work of anyone, but the honest truth is that sometimes I have to stop playing because of the writing. The dialogue is light-hearted and quasi-witty at bestm and cringy at it's worst.

The tone is always the same (sarcastic / cynical / edgy) and that is true for all the characters almost all the time. The abondant use of common expressions, play on words and one-liner attempts proves to be a very poor choice for a fantasy setting. Hearing the people of Tyria use things like "good-cop, bad-cop" in their vocabulary happens all the time; at this point I almost expect the characters to mention "having a burger at McDonalds" or "I'll just take a cab don't worry about me!".

The Guild Wars lore and setting has everything it needs to take itself seriously, at the very least a little bit more. 

Also, about the voice acting. You can feel that the actors just read the words without really being invested in the situation. It's hard for a voice actor to make a good performance if the dialogue doesn't carry you, and if you don't have the key references for the scenes and characters you are voicing, the result will lack coherence. Just doing your best with a few directions and the dialogues on a sheet isn't gonna cut it. Actors need to be involved a little more deeply in the process.

That is when you know you have good dialogue. You have to feel it when you read, that the voice actors will need to immerse themselves, read between the lines and demonstrate subtlety, otherwise the quality of the writing will go to waste. That is when you know you got something.

That of course requires more budget. But that is not why they won't do it.

It is because it is probably quite hard to find an actual good writer.

 

And someone out there think it is too risky.

Or the writer is close to management.

Or everyone likes it and we are the only ones complaining XD

Anyways, please hire new heads in the narrative department!

Isn't it time for a revolution?

Anyways, awesome game still.

Peace.

 

I agree. In general it seems like nowadays every conext (fantasy, historical and so on) must reproduce somehow our society in some way, I personally don't like it, everything seems misplaced somehow to me. It's not that people needs these kind of things to plunge into a world.

About gw2 specifically, I will be honest I don't like that much the way dialogues are written too. Maybe gw1 was written not that epic ok, but at least it has sense to me, gw2 started quite ok but over time dialogues became more and more...idk, sometimes reminds me of some kind of sitcom/modern teen drama, sometimes I struggle a bit going on with the story.

These are my personal feelings about this matter, there is not right and wrong, it's just a point of view, I think discussin things can be useful.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 1/3/2023 at 7:00 PM, SoftFootpaws.9134 said:

Marvel writing goes back much farther, it was just the normal way of writing in the 80s and 90s. People only think that writing is "marvel-like" now because of the super dark and edgy bottomless pit that all media sunk into in the early to mid 2000s, starting around the time of the reimagined Battletsar Galactica, which defined the genre.

 

The newer generations don't understand because its all they've been exposed to, so they think its just a meme. I'm sorry, but entertainment was alot better when everything wasn't an overdramatic soap opera.

 

The story of this game has always been fun and charming, and terrible, but that's the point.

Eh, I actually found 80s and 90s storytelling in general to have better tonal consistencies and not always rely on a heavily cynical/sarcastic dialog even in the face of life-or-death situations that seems to prevail in any post mid-00s American media. 80s/90s media storytelling could often go campy but when it was time to get srs, kitten got srs. It could be formulaic and predictable especially with the feel-good stories but a lot of content coming out was diverse and experimental.

GW2 is hit or miss, but the lack of gravity that characters' dialog have in serious situations interrupts my immersion and grates on my nerves. Like, it's too afraid of taking itself too seriously and it shows me many of the writers probably never touched a book in their life before going by how awkward they are about writing characters with actual emotional impact around the setting. It reminds me of other juvenile, surface level writing that I don't like.

 

 

Edited by ContessaMinxa.2461
  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/5/2023 at 8:29 PM, meerfunkuhtron.9725 said:

I can definitely see the main dialogues being a bit too "quippy" at times. During a lot of the eventful moments, I can agree that having snarky one-liners can be cut down. I'd appreciate it a lot more if they kept those types of lines among particular characters who we can expect those things from (like Chanach, or sometimes even Braham, simply based off of his personality).

I think these types of dialogue never bothered me to the point of calling the writing "terrible", however, mainly because they balance it out with a lot of serious communication as well. Yeah, there's a ton of banter especially during heated moments, but there's also an ample amount of heartfelt or informational dialogue and the jokey parts never felt like they took anything away from those serious moments.

I definitely won't say GW2's writing is a shining masterpiece. I think it's good at its base, and there's plenty of times when it falters. But I wouldn't say that the writers aren't taking themselves seriously simply because the dialogue is written with a modern tone and it inserts a lot of quips and jokes. I think there's a purpose for why it's written this way. Whether or not it's successful in that purpose is another story (something which I feel is more subjective), but I can still see the care being put in it.

"Modern tone" in the sense of making every character irreverent and refusing to seriously commit to heavy emotional impact, beyond some light touches of moralizing to remind the player this or that character is a good guy.

 

I agree that Canach and Braham being like that isn't a problem as it works for them, but for example in the HoT story I found Taimi really annoying with how she kept blabbering over her tech obsession after Braham's mother died and a whole host of dramatic events happened. Bad writers' like to constantly play up a character's trait to emphasize that X trait is their personality instead of blending them to change their reaction according to the environment and situation around them like how actual people act. These types of writers think if a character isn't constantly showing that they are X trope then they're being watered down in a sense which really isn't accurate.

That in my opinion, is an example of bad pacing and inappropriate character reflex in writing since it cheapens the impact of the story. There was also the initial surprise of Balthazar being unveiled as the pretender of Lazarus in LWS3 that I found intriguing, but my engagement was quickly shut down with the characters' wet noodle blasé attitude about it. It doesn't need to be a melodrama fest but it just needs to make.. sense. Although, drama and heavy writing shouldn't be avoided either.

But American writing heavily centers itself on the tropes of characters' not having their stride broken and always keeping a tough face which is why hero/heroines cracking jokes during serious battles is a common trope to point out one writing trope manifestation of this internal philosophy. Also, many characters just feel kind of stupid... XD. But GW2 is nowhere unique in this regard and is just a product of its culture and time. I wouldn't call the writing exceptionally bad by any means, just mediocre with some great highlights.

 

 

Edited by ContessaMinxa.2461
  • Like 3
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, ContessaMinxa.2461 said:

Eh, I actually found 80s and 90s storytelling in general to have better tonal consistencies and not always rely on a heavily cynical/sarcastic dialog even in the face of life-or-death situations that seems to prevail in any post mid-00s American media. 80s/90s media storytelling could often go campy but when it was time to get srs, kitten got srs. 

 

I think this has a lot to do with people imitating a style. Whedon, for example in Buffy, was great at writing the quick sarcastic repartee, then pivoting smoothly to heavy emotional content. His characters cracked wise all over the place, but never at the expense of undermining the story’s emotional climaxes.

Early Marvel movies, guided by him, were really good at this, too.

But decades later, writers are emulating that style, and often trip over themselves because they don’t have the mastery of it that he did.

Edited by Gibson.4036
  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...