Story direction is a little...political/ideological (spoilers) - returning player

[Labjax.2465]

7 hours ago, TheLadyOfTheRings.9148 said:

I think it's impossible to dissociate "politics" and "ideology" from storytelling since politics and ideology are so present in pretty much all areas of our lives. To me personally, a story that doesn't touch on political/ideological things would be like a story not using any sort of language or words. 

Yes, well said. What people are implying when they say a story got political (like it's a new thing) is "I didn't notice politics in the storytelling before because it so closely aligned with what I already believe or had coded enough language and presentation that I didn't make the connection."

[Zebulous.2934]

1 hour ago, Labjax.2465 said:

Yes, well said. What people are implying when they say a story got political (like it's a new thing) is "I didn't notice politics in the storytelling before because it so closely aligned with what I already believe or had coded enough language and presentation that I didn't make the connection."

Does that mean that the writing has gotten sloppy?  Master story tellers teaching children a lesson without the child realizing vs an amature who stops the flow of the story and blatantly explains the important points. 

[Labjax.2465]

1 hour ago, Zebulous.2934 said:

Does that mean that the writing has gotten sloppy?  Master story tellers teaching children a lesson without the child realizing vs an amature who stops the flow of the story and blatantly explains the important points. 

It can mean that I guess if the issue is presentation, but I don't believe that better coded messaging in a story is inherently better writing. More effective as propaganda maybe (in the sense of persuasion, not as an inherently dirty word) but that leads to a fascinating question to me because in this situation and others, I get this impression some people are not so much offended by propaganda as they are offended by noticing propaganda. So the question becomes like, do they want to be persuaded/influenced (whatever you want to call it) to change their beliefs, just without realizing it? It's kind of strange when I think about it that way and I don't quite understand what people want (if they even know themselves).

Edited to add: Personally, at the level of ideological clarity I'm at and the way it puts me at odds with some of the environments I'm in, I find myself disliking the better coded propaganda more than the obvious stuff because it takes more effort to dissect it and understand how it's trying to influence me. I also have a special dislike for propaganda that is, to my knowledge, clearly misrepresenting something in reality, whether intentionally or accidentally due to the writer's understanding. To put it in terms that have a very low chance of offending anyone here, if a writer implies that the earth is flat in their storytelling, it wouldn't matter how eloquently or metaphorically it's presented, if I caught onto it (and there's a decent chance I would with how keyed up I am about noticing propaganda these days), I would take issue with them for misleading people. The thing is though, that's a pretty non-offensive example, but many others could provoke an argument over what is real and what is not, and I want people to understand that those struggles of influence and belief are nothing new under the sun. I would like to think the most important parts of what I believe are mostly true, but it's highly likely some of it is not and it's important to investigate further on an ongoing basis to combat the natural likelihood of some ignorance and misunderstanding. In this sense, especially coded messaging may teach people to turn their brains off and let the messaging sink in uncritically, which I don't believe is healthy for understanding.

Edited October 8, 2022 by Labjax.2465

[Mykhel.6532]

2 hours ago, Labjax.2465 said:

Yes, well said. What people are implying when they say a story got political (like it's a new thing) is "I didn't notice politics in the storytelling before because it so closely aligned with what I already believe or had coded enough language and presentation that I didn't make the connection."

This is incorrect. Seeing politics in a game vs. seeing real-world politics being injected into a game at the cost of its lore are two very different things. Making assumptions like this is degrading and insulting to chalk it up to something so simple.

[Labjax.2465]

8 minutes ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

This is incorrect. Seeing politics in a game vs. seeing real-world politics being injected into a game at the cost of its lore are two very different things. Making assumptions like this is degrading and insulting to chalk it up to something so simple.

I'm a little taken aback at the idea it's degrading or insulting to think that's the implication. Maybe it is too implying of someone not understanding themself and that is seen as an insult, but I honestly don't know how else to interpret that rhetoric that I see in so many places in entertainment now. A pivotal fact here, as far as I can tell, is that entertainment has always been political in the sense of carrying political beliefs/ideology/messaging. And if that is true, then some explanation is needed for why people are more often coming out of the woodwork talking as if entertainment is newly political.

If you don't believe the game has gotten newly political and you just believe the game's lore is being poorly handled, then that's not really what I'm speaking against, so it wouldn't fit for you.

Edited October 8, 2022 by Labjax.2465

[Mykhel.6532]

26 minutes ago, Labjax.2465 said:

I get this impression some people are not so much offended by propaganda as they are offended by noticing propaganda.

I think you're confusing ideology and propaganda. Propaganda is used to persuade people of a particular view/stance/vote in a variety of ways that can easily appear manipulative if it's anything other than a presentation of facts; and even that is now contested today. The ideology I'm referring to in this instance is when artists deliberately alter their own stories to fit their ideological views. A game/story can naturally flow into issues that occur in the real world if done with care and respect for the existing lore... but that is not the case here in my opinion. I think the quality of writing from LWS4 to now has drastically dropped as a result.

[Mykhel.6532]

3 minutes ago, Labjax.2465 said:

I'm a little taken aback at the idea it's degrading or insulting to think that's the implication.

You're literally implying that I was too dumb to see politics previously because they "aligned with my views" and only see it now is because I don't agree.

[Mykhel.6532]

7 minutes ago, Labjax.2465 said:

If you don't believe the game has gotten newly political and you just believe the game's lore is being poorly handled, then that's not really what I'm speaking against, so it wouldn't fit for you.

Even then, you're making a serious generalization of players who have critiques similar to my own. Instead of making broad assumptions, I would recommend you ask or even challenge them with examples and/or comparisons (e.g., "If you don't like the situation presented during X, did you have a problem when X situation was presented before?") to better understand their point of view.

[Labjax.2465]

33 minutes ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

You're literally implying that I was too dumb to see politics previously because they "aligned with my views" and only see it now is because I don't agree.

The way I see it is more or less how I view my own (what I see as) ignorance on matters like these in the past... that I simply didn't know better and had no frame of reference with which to consider an alternative. I don't think people who view it that way are "dumb." I think they are unused to viewing politics as more than voting campaigns. I have some frame of reference on that from my own experience, is the thing*. If I sound caustic at all in these situations, it is probably born of frustration from dealing with bad faith engagement with these topics.

While we are giving recommendations to each other, if you do not believe the game is newly political, I would recommend not titling your thread "story direction is a little political/ideological." Many people respond to threads on forums based on the title alone and don't read the OP, much less pages of discussion that follow.

*I mean, if you had asked me about this topic just a few years ago, my position might very well have been "yeah things are more political now" because I saw politics as mostly to do with vocal campaigning. Since then, some people more educated on politics helped me see how pervasively politics and political power is intertwined with so much of what we can take for granted as normal or universal; how traits of a society/beliefs are often a lot newer and more fleeting than it might be designed to appear and are there to support the dominant political power framework and surrounding material conditions, whether as a conscious plot or as an organic result of.

Edited October 8, 2022 by Labjax.2465

[Teratus.2859]

8 hours ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

That isn't even the main focus of point. Did these dragons claim untold lives on Tyria? Did she create them as mindless tools? Did she create them knowing this? All answers are YES.

She created them knowing their fate yes.

But you're also arguing that she knew Tyria would become a place populated with countless lifeforms.
As far as I'm aware she did not know this would be the case.

She created a world for her and her children, the appearance of other beings isn't specifically commented on.
She may have created the first mortals or they could have come into existence on their own.. or like Humans were brought to Tyria by other beings of power.

All we do know from Soo-Won's dialogue is that she never wanted or intended to hurt anyone.

8 hours ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

Oh, well shoot! I mean, at least SHE was happy for a time and things were blissful! I guess that makes up for all the lives that were lost as a result.

Again I have to ask you to put yourself in her position.
Given the choice you and pretty much every living intelligent being would have done the same thing to escape an eternity of solitude and nothingness.

She can't be blamed for wanting to escape such an existence, we would all likely make that choice if it was ours to make, no matter the consequences and no matter how hard we try to resist believing it's the morally right thing to do.. eventually the solitude would be too much and it would break anyone.

Ever seen the movie Passengers? a similar scenario is presented in that film and it's a big part of the story.
Good movie too, i'd recommend it if you haven't seen it.

8 hours ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

This comparison is ridiculous. You do not KNOW the fate of your children when you have them... She KNEW before and after she created them.

There are certainly signs, well documented cases of troubled children who grow up and do horrible things.
And usually accompanied by family etc who claim they never saw it coming when at times it was obvious to others.

Love is blind is a saying for good reason, because it's true.

And even if a mother knew her child would grow up to be a monster, chances are she would still love them and try to put them on another path, even if she knew it was futile.

Soo Won didn't even have that option, her children were integrated into the very world she created, to destroy them would have undone literally everything.. and she would be back where she started.. alone in endless nothingness.

8 hours ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

Humans aren't all consuming, element-based dragons with the capacity of consuming life on a massive scale. Humans might be capable of taking large-scale life (and I mean thousands-millions)... but not alone.

Well to be fair we're not far off either XD
And that depends entirely on the human, a smart enough human with malevolent intent in the right position with the right abilities could certainly bring about a world shattering catastrophe.

Unlikely as it may be.. it's not impossible.

8 hours ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

No. It isn't. Maybe when writing a new story, sure. But this is a decade of lore. Writing over your lore to create an ex-machina dragon that never existed is lore-altering. It conflicts with a ton of lore. The very fact that the so-called balance of the elements was some "shield" from the void means we would've seen void creatures after the fall of Zhaitan. But we didn't we saw a rush to consume both by Balthazar and Kralkatorrik.  Not to prevent the void from coming (which is weird how a literal God, Balthazar didn't know about the Void and the protection of the balance)... which counters the entire premise of Path of Fire. Meaning Balthazar, if successful would have been destroyed by the Void as a result of his own stupidity. I was even fine with Soo-Won just being a lost Elder Dragon... but then they made her into this Mother Dragon, creationist... which is also stupid because what is the void? Why didn't the Void kill her to begin with? Why did the Void allow her to make children who were going to help her stave off the void? The balance didn't exist before her children. What changed? Do you see how stupid of a decision this was? There is no logic in this Villain. She is the dumbest character in all of Guild Wars.

Oh she existed, we just didn't know anything about her.
That has been consistent through the entire Gw2 game, all we know for sure was that the name started with an S.

The way the void was written in isn't terrible at all, it has been a part of the story all along.. we only knew it as Dragon Corruption and torment.
We just didn't identify it's true form until End of Dragons.

As far as Kralkatorrik goes he was trying to end his own suffering, his torment the void magic controlling him drove him to consume endlessly.
Kralk was going to consume all of existence and destroy himself in the process, finally ending his suffering.

Balthazar on the other hand you're mistaken about, Balthazar is not of this world.. he like the other gods are beings from the mists, very likely to be significantly younger than the Elder Dragons.
There is no guarantee at all that they knew about the void, nor how Tyria and the mists even came into existence.
The dragon cycle we experience in Gw2 isn't just the first one we players get to experience, it's the first one the Human Gods themselves were present on Tyria for.

There were many cycles before this final one and what the Gods knew about the Elder Dragons they likely learned from ruins and older races such as The Forgotten, and they were only around for 2 cycles at best.
Much of the history about the dragons gets wiped out during each cycle, that's precisely why we knew so little about them throughout Gw2.

Also Balthazar's agenda was entirely selfish, he didn't care about Tyria he sort power.
He wanted to take the Elder Dragons Power and use it to wage war on the other gods that he believes betrayed him.
He was completely consumed by revenge.

8 hours ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

I would skip it. She was the worst "god" in any writing I've ever seen. She created 5 children she couldn't control. Wasn't strong enough to take in the VERY POWER she gave to her children and ended up being consumed by the void before being killed by her own "creations." What about what I said here is untrue? What about what I said defines any God you've ever heard? And don't say the Human gods. They weren't really gods either.

She quite literally tells you that she created her children in part because she couldn't handle the power alone.
This is even evident in the game itself, that is exactly why she choose to be contained in a machine that siphons off her magic, delaying her corruption and why she eventually fell to corruption after the machine was sabotaged and all that magic exploded through her like a tsunami.

All of these things happened because of us, because we upset the balance and started killing her children in the first place.
Every Dragon death dumped more power, and more void corruption onto the other dragons until Aurene ascended and started learning how to filter it.
By that point the Dragonvoid had already become a sentient entity as we saw with Kralkatorrik's Torment which had been empowered by the magic of Zhaitan, Mordremoth and Balthzar and it was actively working to erase the world and return everything to the Void.. the natural state of existence.

9 hours ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

No. We've had a development process. Taimi discovered the Ley-line connection between Dragons, she discovered the machine that would lead to the vision of The Eternal Alchemy--which shows the balance of the Dragons--which is the only time I've ever seen Water noted. In that very vision it shows Mordremoth consuming everything. Kralkatorrik nearly consumed the entirety of the mists. I guess these mindless tools are broken because by this logic, they want the void to come destroy everything. Hell, not even Jormag talks about preserving some balance against the void. She wanted Primordus DEAD!

We've had plenty of development's and plenty of "we were wrong" moments as well.
If I recall that vision of the Eternal alchemy depicted Zhaitan (Dark Green Orb, Dark Green usually associated with Death and Necromancy in Guildwars) being broken from the balance and it's power being dumped onto Tyria the central orb, a representation of Zhaitans death having some kind of consequence we didn't expect.

As I said above Kralkatorrik was being driven by torment, he was trying to consume all of existence because in doing so he would be destroying himself, thus ending his torment and suffering.
The void was controlling him, his torment was the Dragonvoid.. we just didn't know it at the time.

Jormag did talk about preservation actually, her world of ice where everyone would be safe and protected.
But yes ultimately she did just want to destroy Primordus because she as a powerful and very intelligent being couldn't stand being linked to a mindless monster anymore... especially one who wanted her dead as well.
For Jormag it was all about breaking free from Primordus by any means necessary and that ultimately drove Jormag to yeet both herself and Primordus out of existence in a catastrophically disappointing finale.

What we don't know is how much influence the void had on Primordus and Jormag's behaviour since we never had any content in Ice Brood Saga based on Dragon Torment like we did with Kralkatorrik.
I would most certainly think that the rivalry and hate both dragons had for one another was at the very least amplified by their own Torment in some way.
Jormag most of all did not seem the type to be okay with destroying itself and seemingly got more unhinged as the IBS progressed.. I believe that was the effect of Jormag's Torment, the Dragonvoid working to destroy them both in another player foiled plot to destroy the world.

9 hours ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

This is a ludicrous statement. You make it sound like we were actively trying to decimate Tyria. And it's crazy to believe it was just your hero. All 5 races and their respective armies/factions participated in the defeats of every elder dragon. It was kill or be killed. Then it became 'how do we stop the Elder Dragons without hurting the world.' That's called a well-written story. Everything was ok and made sense with the lore up until IBS.

No we were trying to kill Elder Dragons, we didn't know what the consequences were at first.
And once we did we saved one despite wanting to destroy it and fed it a supercharged fallen god in the process, then let it go off on a rampage that nearly destroyed all of existence.

We never intended for so much destruction to occur from our actions but it did and we continued onwards because at the end of the day, we had to do it.

This same behaviour repeats even in Cantha with our characters constantly causing problems doing "the right thing" and even when our actions get us in hot water with essentially the Canthan police we just run off and continue doing whatever we want to.
To hell with the laws we break and the rules we violate.. we're "doing the right thing" right?
It is no surprise at all that some characters on our journey have branded us as troublemakers or threats..
We've quite literally spent the last decade in Tyria going where we want and doing what we want.
And we've nearly helped destroy the world several times over because of it.

Yes it is good writing, I agree gw2 is largely a well written game but that in no way means we're not guilty of a lot nor responsible for a lot that has happened and one reason why I think Gw2 is largely a well written game is exactly because of that.
We're not perfect and we make mistakes.. that's what makes the journey interesting.. nobody likes a mary sue.

9 hours ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

Never once said he was a good guy.

True, but you did say he had somewhat good intentions with the eternal life thing.

While I stand by that he was right to call us out for our actions, I don't believe he had any good intentions at all, as you said he was a Narcissist and I believe that at the end of the day his agenda was all about Joko.

9 hours ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

This isn't true at all. Our character put Primordus to sleep instead of killing it. They SAVED Kralkatorrik from Balthazar. They have tried to reason with nearly every villain in the game. Please provide an example of this statement because I don't see this.

We put Primordus in the crosshairs in the first place, but that was before we knew about the world go boom if more dragons die problem.

And Kralk again put in the crosshairs was our fault, Rytlock may have been the one to originally release Balthazar but it was us who decided to trap him and attack him instead of talking to him.
Balthazar may have been hiding who he was but he wanted to work with us up until that point.
It's no guarantee but it's possible things could have gone a different way had we not chosen violence over diplomacy.

And yes we do try to reason with many enemies through the story but when that doesn't go as planned we just say.. oh well we tried, lets kill em.

Sometimes we do capture some and turn them to our side but that's usually after we beat the snot out of them instead of coming up with an alternative plan that better proves we should be working together.

Much of this is likely due to the need for playable content and all that but it's no less relevant.

The commander and their allies very much do whatever they want, wherever they want to with little to no regard for native laws/rules. 

[Teratus.2859]

4 hours ago, Labjax.2465 said:

I'm a little taken aback at the idea it's degrading or insulting to think that's the implication. Maybe it is too implying of someone not understanding themself and that is seen as an insult, but I honestly don't know how else to interpret that rhetoric that I see in so many places in entertainment now. A pivotal fact here, as far as I can tell, is that entertainment has always been political in the sense of carrying political beliefs/ideology/messaging. And if that is true, then some explanation is needed for why people are more often coming out of the woodwork talking as if entertainment is newly political.

If you don't believe the game has gotten newly political and you just believe the game's lore is being poorly handled, then that's not really what I'm speaking against, so it wouldn't fit for you.

Entertainment has always been influenced by the times and yes the politics of the time.

But there is a big difference between something being influenced by politics and something that is blatantly shoving a political agenda in your face.

The word we use to describe the latter is propaganda, and a lot of people tend to strongly dislike that kind of thing.
That becomes especially true when people are smeared and branded as bad people when they dislike/disagree with the agenda being pushed on them.

[The Greyhawk.9107]

3 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

Entertainment has always been influenced by the times and yes the politics of the time.

But there is a big difference between something being influenced by politics and something that is blatantly shoving a political agenda in your face.

The word we use to describe the latter is propaganda, and a lot of people tend to strongly dislike that kind of thing.
That becomes especially true when people are smeared and branded as bad people when they dislike/disagree with the agenda being pushed on them.

THIS.

[Mykhel.6532]

7 hours ago, Labjax.2465 said:

Many people respond to threads on forums based on the title alone and don't read the OP, much less pages of discussion that follow.

This is the epitome of ignorance. I won't capitulate to laziness.

 

7 hours ago, Labjax.2465 said:

*I mean, if you had asked me about this topic just a few years ago, my position might very well have been "yeah things are more political now" because I saw politics as mostly to do with vocal campaigning.

That's fine. However, you cannot ignore that media influences culture and needless to say... politics is in kitten near everything these days. When people play games, it's often to escape the real world for a little bit; enjoy a visual story. You can't escape when you're seeing characters change completely from who they were before to fit a stereotype (the biggest example being Smodur).

 

7 hours ago, Labjax.2465 said:

Since then, some people more educated on politics helped me see how pervasively politics and political power is intertwined with so much of what we can take for granted as normal or universal;

If you're implying GW2 has always emulated modern day political issues/parties, please provide a concrete example of this prior to PoF. Please be specific.

[Mykhel.6532]

3 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

She created them knowing their fate yes.

But you're also arguing that she knew Tyria would become a place populated with countless lifeforms.
As far as I'm aware she did not know this would be the case.

Is she a god or not? The "new" lore is that she created everything on Tyria. She foresaw her children's deaths. She didn't see that it would be by the hands of the life that resulted? This concept makes no sense whatsoever.

 

3 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

She created a world for her and her children, the appearance of other beings isn't specifically commented on.
She may have created the first mortals or they could have come into existence on their own.. or like Humans were brought to Tyria by other beings of power.

But WHY!? We literally have gone from not knowing (and frankly, not needing to know) the true story of the creation of Tyria, to its creation being a result of loneliness...with the "god" that created it all, knowing the incredible suffering that her children would cause. We get no explanation on how a water dragon was able to produce offspring of other elements, how she was able to "draw" from the void, why the void didn't crush her or her children at the start since there was no balance to "push it back," or why she and void exist in the first place...

 

3 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

Again I have to ask you to put yourself in her position.
Given the choice you and pretty much every living intelligent being would have done the same thing to escape an eternity of solitude and nothingness.

No. That is the concept of a god... you CANNOT put yourself into their shoes. It's exactly why trying to humanize a god is a ridiculous venture and why the human gods story line made sense. They were quite IMPERFECT because they weren't real gods. In fact, now that I think of it... I would be pretty disheartened knowing that the being that created everything is now dead. Pretty pathetic gods on Tyria. Ugh. It's seriously so disappointing.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

We just didn't identify it's true form until End of Dragons.

This can just as easily be described as "We didn't have anywhere else to go so we wrote it this way." I do not believe this was the original direction of what the void was... The corruption was originally the conflicting of dragon power. Kralkatorrik even talked about how the energy warred within him, causing untold pain in the final scenes of his story in LWS4. He mentioned nothing of the void... and again I bring up how he was able to speak and show affection to Aurene when he was literally created as a "mindless tool." In addition, why did Soo-Won make them able to reproduce? What did they reproduce with? does that mean Soo-Won mated with an unseen dragon? It's bad writing.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

She can't be blamed for wanting to escape such an existence, we would all likely make that choice if it was ours to make, no matter the consequences and no matter how hard we try to resist believing it's the morally right thing to do..

It's ridiculous what you're asking here. You're asking a naturally mortal being, playing a mortal character (conceptually), to understand plights from an immortal being. Don't you understand how stupid this is from a writing standpoint? Not only can we not understand or even relate to what this is, but you are asking me to sympathize and/or justify the mass murder of billions of Tyrians because "she was lonely, bro." Insane.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

And that depends entirely on the human, a smart enough human with malevolent intent in the right position with the right abilities could certainly bring about a world shattering catastrophe.

Unlikely as it may be.. it's not impossible.

I agree. Not impossible. But not probable. Again, they still couldn't do it alone.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

She quite literally tells you that she created her children in part because she couldn't handle the power alone.

This makes NO sense. She existed with the void before her children existed. How did she combat the void then? How was she able to create and grow 5 children in the midst of the void before they had the ability to do so? you have no answer for this, because there isn't one. It's bad writing.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

All of these things happened because of us, because we upset the balance and started killing her children in the first place.

Dude... stop acting like our characters are the bad guys for fighting for their friends and family's lives.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

By that point the Dragonvoid had already become a sentient entity as we saw with Kralkatorrik's Torment which had been empowered by the magic of Zhaitan, Mordremoth and Balthzar and it was actively working to erase the world and return everything to the Void.. the natural state of existence.

There's no evidence of this statement prior to EoD.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

If I recall that vision of the Eternal alchemy depicted Zhaitan (Dark Green Orb, Dark Green usually associated with Death and Necromancy in Guildwars) being broken from the balance and it's power being dumped onto Tyria the central orb, a representation of Zhaitans death having some kind of consequence we didn't expect.

Incorrect. Zhaitain is depicted as a blemished white/black orb. The vision is in a cutscene with "The Machine" Living world question. The vision shows Mordremoth (Green orb) consuming the other dragons as a result of him becoming too strong.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

The void was controlling him, his torment was the Dragonvoid.. we just didn't know it at the time.

Convenient.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

And once we did we saved one despite wanting to destroy it and fed it a supercharged fallen god in the process, then let it go off on a rampage that nearly destroyed all of existence.

This is wrong. Taimi created her machine to subdue Primordus. Balthazar repurposed it to drain the dragon's power. I literally just redid the quest line the other day.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

But yes ultimately she did just want to destroy Primordus because she as a powerful and very intelligent being couldn't stand being linked to a mindless monster anymore... especially one who wanted her dead as well.

This contradicts what Soo-Won said her children were.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

For Jormag it was all about breaking free from Primordus by any means necessary and that ultimately drove Jormag to yeet both herself and Primordus out of existence in a catastrophically disappointing finale.

Again, this makes no sense. What made Primordus different from the other Dragons? Why did Jormag need to be free? What "bound" them? These are huge events with little to no explanation...

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

This same behaviour repeats even in Cantha with our characters constantly causing problems doing "the right thing" and even when our actions get us in hot water with essentially the Canthan police we just run off and continue doing whatever we want to.

NO! How are you viewing it this way? We RESPOND to the problems being caused! Name 1 thing we CAUSED in Cantha. Meaning, our character's actions had a direct consequence on Cantha that was not caused by the actions of another character.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

To hell with the laws we break and the rules we violate.. we're "doing the right thing" right?

This is incorrect as well. We literally go through their legal system multiple times to go about it the right way. The Canthans that assist us in the story are literally the ones who either go lawless themselves (Minister Yi and Joon), or assist us in breaking the laws (Detective Hama). I'm sorry, please provide an example if you think I'm wrong.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

True, but you did say he had somewhat good intentions with the eternal life thing

Is giving someone eternal life not a good intention? Can you be evil but still do something good?

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

And Kralk again put in the crosshairs was our fault, Rytlock may have been the one to originally release Balthazar but it was us who decided to trap him and attack him instead of talking to him

You have a warped view of reality, my friend. We "decided to trap him and attack him instead of talk to him?" You mean the god who was using Lyssa's mirror to disguise himself as Lazarus, of which we didn't know until we trapped him and broke the mirror? Which then proceeded to destroy the lab, steal the machine, and threaten us with death if we pursued him. Yeah, I can really see where we had the time to sit down and talk to Balthazar. It was probably because we didn't offer him tea.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

It's no guarantee but it's possible things could have gone a different way had we not chosen violence over diplomacy

Dude... almost every story event in PoF leading up to Kralk had our character or others trying to reason with Balthazar and tell him about the destruction of the dragons. Did you even play Path of Fire?

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

And yes we do try to reason with many enemies through the story but when that doesn't go as planned we just say.. oh well we tried, lets kill em.

You mean we had no effing choice but to kill them. You either stop them by all means necessary or you and millions of others die. In no way is that the same thing.

 

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

The commander and their allies very much do whatever they want, wherever they want to with little to no regard for native laws/rules.

The entire EoD storyline disagrees with you. Please provide me an example where our character or someone from our group BLATANTLY disregarded the laws/rules of an established country.

[Mykhel.6532]

4 hours ago, Teratus.2859 said:

Entertainment has always been influenced by the times and yes the politics of the time.

Explain where modern politics existed within original GW2. Please be specific.

[TheLadyOfTheRings.9148]

15 hours ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

Then please explain how they did it for the first 5-6 years of the game.

They didn't. 

[Mykhel.6532]

Just now, TheLadyOfTheRings.9148 said:

They didn't.

Example please.

[TheLadyOfTheRings.9148]

Just now, Mykhel.6532 said:

Example please.

Examples: Charr storyline, there's the Flame Legion, a faction against the other 3 High Legions. They want to dominate the other Legions by using magic. There's war and battles and conflicts. The charr politics dictate how their society is organized and how for example they deal with the Flame Legion, or what is or isn't a crime. They have a prison. There's also the Renegades, another faction with a different ideology. They want war instead of peace.

There, examples - plural.

[Mykhel.6532]

Just now, TheLadyOfTheRings.9148 said:

Examples: Charr storyline, there's the Flame Legion, a faction against the other 3 High Legions. They want to dominate the other Legions by using magic. There's war and battles and conflicts. The charr politics dictate how their society is organized and how for example they deal with the Flame Legion, or what is or isn't a crime. They have a prison. There's also the Renegades, another faction with a different ideology. They want war instead of peace.

There, examples - plural.

You're not giving examples. At all. How does that relate to modern politics/ideology? You're just listing story details and general concepts about stuff. How did they reflect current society in 2012 when it was released. Be specific.

[TheLadyOfTheRings.9148]

Just now, Mykhel.6532 said:

You're not giving examples. At all. How does that relate to modern politics/ideology? You're just listing story details and general concepts about stuff. How did they reflect current society in 2012 when it was released. Be specific.

Uh yes I did give examples. If you still don't understand that's not my problem. And what exactly do you call "modern" politics/ideology? Be specific.

[Mykhel.6532]

1 minute ago, TheLadyOfTheRings.9148 said:

Uh yes I did give examples. If you still don't understand that's not my problem. And what exactly do you call "modern" politics/ideology? Be specific.

Easy. 2014-2015, during the time HoT was in development there were multiple victories in the realm of gay marriage throughout the united states. At the exact same time, we find out that Marjory, a character originally intended to die at the end of Scarlet's saga... was rewritten to stay alive and become the lover of Kasmeer Meade, representing the LGBT community's victory. This is literally a rewrite to fit modern politics.

Now that I've made it clear: Your turn.

[Labjax.2465]

1 hour ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

Easy. 2014-2015, during the time HoT was in development there were multiple victories in the realm of gay marriage throughout the united states. At the exact same time, we find out that Marjory, a character originally intended to die at the end of Scarlet's saga... was rewritten to stay alive and become the lover of Kasmeer Meade, representing the LGBT community's victory. This is literally a rewrite to fit modern politics.

Now that I've made it clear: Your turn.

In the human personal story, the poor person path is essentially helping the law enforcement take down a violent gang who want to do terrorism for no apparent reason. This is within a class stratified city ruled by a queen (with some analog to a president, apparently she has some kind of ministers system too) and a secret police force (shining blade), as well as a not-secret police force (the seraph). The most representation the poor get, in other words, is doing senseless violence and helping law enforcement stop senseless violence. I doubt the writers saw it this way consciously (it's a lot like the plot of Batman Begins in broad strokes, so it's possible it was just inspired by other US media) but ultimately, what it comes out to is political messaging that says: "class stratified society is perfectly fine, and poor people are only good people if they work with cops to take down other poor people and otherwise are violent people who want to cause chaos." And you can draw a direct line there to the framework of a society like the US or UK.

And whether everyone will agree with that read of that particular plot thread in GW2 or not, the analog to modern society is undeniable. There is nothing substantively defined enough in its writing to distinguish it from modern society as something with vastly different conditions and structure.

Edited October 8, 2022 by Labjax.2465

[Tyson.5160]

1 hour ago, Mykhel.6532 said:

 

Incorrect. Zhaitain is depicted as a blemished white/black orb. The vision is in a cutscene with "The Machine" Living world question. The vision shows Mordremoth (Green orb) consuming the other dragons as a result of him becoming too strong.

Actually it is Zhaitan’s Orb that is crashing into Tyria, not Mordremoth. The vision is showing that Zhaitan’s orb has entered into Tyria pool of magic sort of speak.

 

If you look at the placement of the orbs in The All diagram and compare it to the vision, the dark green orb is Zhaitan when compared to this diagram.

 

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/The_All

 

Also when you watch the cinematic the orbs activate which correlates to the order of each dragons awakening with Primordus being first and Mordremoth being last.

[Mykhel.6532]

4 minutes ago, Labjax.2465 said:

In the human personal story, the poor person path is essentially helping the law enforcement take down a violent gang who want to do terrorism for no apparent reason. This is within a class stratified city ruled by a queen (with some analog to a president, apparently she has some kind of ministers system too) and a secret police force (shining blade), as well as a not-secret police force (the seraph). The most representation the poor get, in other words, is doing senseless violence and helping law enforcement stop senseless violence. I doubt the writers saw it this way consciously (it's a lot like the plot of Batman Begins in broad strokes, so it's possible it was just inspired by other US media) but ultimately, what it comes out to is political messaging that says: "class stratified society is perfectly fine, and poor people are only good if they work with cops to take down other poor people and are violent people who want to cause chaos otherwise." And you can draw a direct line there to the framework of a society like the US or UK.

While yes, this can also be compared to several structures of order throughout history. Senseless violence has never ceased. Class stratification has also existed throughout history. These are general concepts, of which GW2 does well.

 

6 minutes ago, Labjax.2465 said:

And whether everyone will agree with that read of that particular plot thread in GW2 or not, the analog to modern society is undeniable. There is nothing substantively defined enough in its writing to distinguish it from modern society as something with vastly different conditions and structure.

No. This is wrong. General concepts are those seen throughout all of history. When thinking of what I'm describing, ask yourself is this unique to modern day? Or can I point to this happening before because it's a concept that has happened throughout all of history.

 

The plot of original GW2 cannot be compared to modern society. 5 different species/races come together, the crux of their plight being your character's focal point, to destroy an Elder Dragon which threatens all life on Tyria by the use of a sunken island once lost to time to create countless undead. They use their different cultures, tech, tactics, and groups to unite and defeat it. There's nothing in the plot comparable to modern day politics. A wide variety of diverse, unique leaders, with defined personalities and depths join you along your way full of sacrifice, struggle, loss. The primary theme is the unity of races.

 

Let's compare that to IBS. A faction within the Charr separates itself with the ridiculous goal to "get an Elder Dragon" and become the dominant race led by a charismatic figure (Bangar) at the top, which has never demonstrated himself to be a capable leader. This group is LITERALLY described in the "Prologue: Bound by Blood to be "expanding the reach of their xenophobic extremism." The factions of Charr that remained good now have to exterminate the bad ones. Imbecile leaders within the good part of the faction don't attempt diplomacy at all, killing needlessly and even when brought to the table, ruin any chances of a peaceful ending whatsoever. Every female in the story is extremely capable, competent, faultless, and experienced (Crecia, Malice, Almorra, Jora, Galina Edgecrusher, Cinder). Every male leader is an unforgiving, mindless brute (Smodur, Snarl), demonstrated to be weak-willed (Rytlock, Cloudspeaker), or a pushover (Gorrik, Efram).

 

The entire IBS was an allegory of modern politics. The Charr represented the Republican party. The offshoot of Bangar and the eventual frost legion were those who supported Trump. Those Charr who were war hungry, mindless brutes represented the Neo-con parts of the R. party, while the "smarter" never-trumpers/democrats (the rest of the "good" Charr) wanted continued unity. This leads to Logan stating the line I put into the OP where he says "We will be on the right side of history." This was a complete immersion breaking experience for many people and it was potently obvious. They ruined years of lore and character development for the Charr to put this garbage into their story.

[Mykhel.6532]

19 minutes ago, Tyson.5160 said:

Also when you watch the cinematic the orbs activate which correlates to the order of each dragons awakening with Primordus being first and Mordremoth being last

No. This is wrong. Zhaitans orb does NOT enter the center in that vision. It is Mordremoths.

 

Top Left: Soo-Won (Water)

Top Right: Kralkatorrik (Lightning)

Left Center: Mordremoth (Life)

Right Center: Zhaitan (Death)

Bottom Left: Primordus (Fire)

Bottom Right: Jormag (Ice)

 

They are literally on the opposing sides to their opposite element. Mordremoths goes around the fixture and then comes center screen before jumping into the middle. Watch it. This is the original video from 2014.