SOTO writing is great and is on right direction. [spoilers] [Merged]

[Kalavier.1097]

18 hours ago, Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

A big part of the issue with Balthazar is not only that he acts the complete opposite of how he was depicted in GW1, to the point of acting just like Menzies (and to the point that many GW1 fans agree that PoF would have been better if they just used Menzies instead), but A) Nowhere does GW2 or ANet outside of GW2 say that Balthazar ever acted differently, giving the heavy handed impression that human belief about him was simply wrong, and B) the vision of Balthazar shown by Kormir of before Balthazar's fall from grace shows him acting the same way.

The way it came across to me, from the ingame materials shown is that the gods met to decide what to do. Balthazar announced he was wanting to fight, the rest wanted to leave. Balthazar announced that he was going to stay and fight anyway. The gods then seperately decided to deal with Balthazar before he could do something, and as there is no mention of conflict, I believe they backstabbed him and stripped him of power, title/divinity before he had a chance to fight back, betraying him and leaving him imprisoned in the mists to sit forever alone while they left. So Balthazar came back pissed off because he was betrayed by his fellows, left to rot in isolation, and they left the battlefield "Like cowards" to him, so thus he goes into S3 and PoF not the Balthazar of old, but one hellbent on regaining all his lost power to get revenge for the harsh betrayal of the six.

18 hours ago, Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

 

In all fairness, the game is rather negative about the gods.
In Kormir's case, her "excuses" (as they're often falsely called) about the gods "fleeing" (again, as it's often falsely called) from the Elder Dragons is very much a negative statement. Though most people misunderstand "we realized that in fighting the Elder Dragons, either they kill us or we kill them, and even if we killed them, killing the Elder Dragons would lead to Tyria's destruction via magical imbalance, so we decided the non-aggression route" as "we were scared of dying so we fled". This little retcon (as per Jeff Grubb back in 2014, the reason the gods left was because they were prepping to leave for a long time but stuck around due to Abaddon, and with mortals handling Abaddon on their own they believed they can handle any other threat that comes their way so they left before the Elder Dragons even woke up) is very easily seen as casting the gods in a negative light.

The way the game depicts it and the way people who want something to hate is not the same. As you point out "Falsely called". It's fair to dislike the direction of the story, but it's another thing to purposefully twist what happened.

18 hours ago, Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

Add on that both core GW2 and SotO diminishes the Six Gods' accomplishments by attributing many of the accomplishments they did specifically and solely to the Seers (Bloodstone, Scepter of Orr/Staff of the Mists) and other elder races.
 

I don't see this as a diminishing, but instead another layer of the multi-faceted history of Tyria that so many settings ignore in that history can be viewed through many lenses. The humans didn't see the gods recover the bloodstone or the Scepter/staff from the Seers, they saw the gods present those items. So the humans wrote "The gods made this". It makes the world feel like one that has gone through eras rather then having all these relics purely appear from a single time of the gods, with the gods using what came before, much like how we have done in GW1 and GW2.  It's not "The gods are less powerful" to me, but "The gods are smart enough to recognize items of power and use them."

18 hours ago, Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

So yeah... it's not very hard to interpret GW2 as being very anti-Six Gods, which in turn is easy to interpret as GW2 being very anti-GW1 lore.

The gods aren't the only lore of GW1, and while one can interpret GW2 as being "Anti-six gods" which is fair, that doesn't mean GW2 is anti-GW1, and as said here "Is purposefully treating Gw1 lore in a mean-spirited or petty manner".

 

18 hours ago, Imba.9451 said:

GW1 Content: My point was, that everything GW1 related got gutted quite unsatisfactory, while everything new got pushed. It`s simple: open storybeatsh do not feel good. And again, stop putting words in my mouth.

It's amusing you say that last part, but then shove words into my mouth. While your opinion on how the Gw1 stuff is valid, that is your opinion. GW1 itself laid the groundwork for what GW2 presented, and the other guys examples were all established in the Movement of the World, a document created by the GW1 team before GW2 released.

18 hours ago, Imba.9451 said:

Braham: You can put that hater stamp on haters. But don't engage into a discussion with the pre-conceived notion that everyone speaking badly of this character is a hater, this discrediting them. Thats intellectually dishonest. Also, you argument is weird: Is it not allowed to talk about character, if they are not part of the story anymore? Also, he lost the bow because he got drunk. Despite the commander telling him to be carefl and stop drinking. All in all, he is not a likeable character. Therapy or not. Because having problems is not an excuse to be a jerk.

 

There is a distinction between "I dislike the character" and the "haters". I have no issue if you dislike Braham, but don't twist what happens to support your dislike.

The statement I made was that some people *the haters* will continue to rant about Braham as if he's awful and has to die, even though he's not part of the story currently. They will also purposefully twist events and situations to support their hatred of the character, even if it's not what happened. I've seen this with Trahearne, Braham, to a lesser extent Taimi. 

 

Also, I'm going to assume you aren't doing this intentionally but the scene you describe here literally never happened ingame. At all. The Commander never told Braham to stop drinking or be careful at the Legion Rally, Rytlock told him to remember that Braham is a representative of Dragon's Watch before Braham left with Ryland to see the Festival.

And Ryland was never viewed as a threat/bad guy until after Braham lost the bow, and if you actually examine the events with knowledge of what Ryland and Bangar had planned you can literally see how the situation was manipulated with the goal of gaining the bow, by Ryland, who was viewed as an ally and not an enemy. So to hold the loss of the bow as "A terrible thing Braham did" without actually considering the context of the situation and even how the characters involved acted, is very one-sided. Until they discover Bangar has the bow, not even the Commander held it against Braham, and they assumed it got misplaced or somebody had it from the brawl. Braham leaves to find Marjory to search for it while the Commander deals with the growing tensions.

Edited September 17, 2023 by Kalavier.1097

[GeraldBC.4927]

On 9/16/2023 at 2:01 AM, Kalavier.1097 said:

You are describing a lot of things that were established in "The Movement of the World" Which what do you know... was written by the GW1 writing team! You know, before GW2 even released! As if GW2 is building off the foundation literally set by the GW1 team from the very start!

All I'm seeing here is "Ugh, don't you know that they wrote up some excuses for the drivel that would follow later?" And all I can say is that this doesn't justify what was done afterwards. It doesn't even justify the article itself. If bad outcome B was caused by prior decision A, that doesn't automatically mean that B is good, that just means that both are bad and A shouldn't have happened the way that it did to begin with.

 

On 9/16/2023 at 2:01 AM, Kalavier.1097 said:

I'd love to know when Kormir is so negative and nasty about the gods. Balthazar's history wasn't changed at all, so that is no retcon. Nothing negative is really said about Dwayna, Kormir, Melandru, Grenth, or even Lyssa. 

When the Commander meets Kormir in her library, she explicitly states that the gods have determined that everything they do only worsens the situation in Tyria and that they cite this as their reasoning for the exodus. So in tandem with apparently everyone on the planet, the gods in GW2 also agree that the gods are useless and do more harm than good. It's like I described in the more abstract version: In the second instalment of the franchise, everyone is in sudden agreement that the gods are universally bad, including the gods themselves. It's almost as if someone involved in the narrative design of the second game has an axe to grind, either with the gods as a set of characters or with GW1 as a whole. 

 

On 9/16/2023 at 2:01 AM, Kalavier.1097 said:

Adelbern, who was totally a mentally stable individual in GW1

Adelbern was a hero of the people who overthrew the tyrants that preceded him and then successfully fended off the Orrians and the Charr alike. Did he potentially make a mistake at one point? Sure, but there is a vast difference in a character's portrayal between "We should stand and fight for our land" and "I would rather doom my own people to forever haunt this land than to let someone else take it." Every line relating to Adelbern in the second game - much like with Balthasar - whether it is by Charr or humans or even third-hand documents found in the world - only belittles and denigrates him and omits anything positive about him. Again with this common theme of "everything in GW1 bad!" in the second game's narrative design. 

The Vabbians had a prosperous country with lots of beautiful monuments and a thriving populace both in the sense of farmers as well as nobility. There is no reason for this to change even under Joko's rule. Not just that but it was completely and utterly destroyed by the dragonbrand and subsequently the forged. Everything about the new Vabbi is so dry and dull. It is an absolute atrocity and a disservice to what Vabbi could be - and has been in the first game.

Joko conquering most of Elona didn't even have to be framed as a negative, the Mordant Crescent didn't have to exist. They could have just had the Sunspears assist Joko with his campaign against Vabbi, Kourna and Istan as a quid pro quo for helping them during Nightfall, when all the nations of Elona had either betrayed or turned their backs on them. The Commander suddenly dropping the goody-two-shoes shtick specifically to not free Joko was out-of-character and unnecessary. You get railroaded into rescuing Livia when she's stuck in a White Mantle fortress, despite her talking down to the Commander. Arguably it would make more sense for the Commander to leave Livia rotting in her ward and release Joko from his cage instead.

Joko had already been established as a benevolent ruler in Vabbi, so the foundation for something better was already there. They just refused to use it.

On 9/16/2023 at 4:01 PM, Kalavier.1097 said:

as if the GW2 devs came in cackling and going "How can we RUIN THIS CHARACTER HEHEHEHEEHEHEHE"

Considering that during development, there were sitting GW2 devs bragging on twitter about how they never played GW1 and wearing that like a badge of honor rather than a testament to their lacking professionalism, that impression is far from unreasonable. 

"But in 'Muh movement of the world'...." I hear you say, but you forget an important detail here: Nothing stopped them from either changing the article, ignoring its contents or simply not including those blunders in it in the first place. 

Edited September 17, 2023 by GeraldBC.4927

[Randulf.7614]

On 8/29/2023 at 9:25 PM, Randulf.7614 said:

I’ve skipped the comments to avoid spoilers, but I at least wanted to chime in that so far it’s been excellent. A return to classic guild wars storytelling and a vast chasm in difference to Gyala which was a mess in plot, structure and storytelling via gameplay. This corrects those problems and elevates itself in the process, with decent dialogue as well. I think it helped ditching the legacy characters and their baggage for a bit. I find this crew more interesting to learn about right now.

I do think it’s a shame the dragon story was rushed through to its premature conclusion, but I have no complaints up to the Wizards Tower so far. The only feedback I have is the amount of lore journals there are. In themselves not an issue, but reading off a monitor is incredibly difficult. I’d like to see improvements to the text font and spacing to rectify this going forward. They are effective, but almost unreadable for people like me

Having now finished the story, my opinion remains unchanged. Reinforced in fact.

Certainly the best story arc to my mind. If I was to nitpick, the Tower itself could have been more utilised and the end instance a bit meatier with a bit more in Act 3. I would perhaps cool off on too much dialogue during a fight. Whilst the fights are not too intense, it's very difficult to be immersed in both battle and keep track of the talking. I'd rather dialogiue was kept to phases between combat. It helps enhance the danger of the fight by being focused on that and not all the lore and chatting going on around. The death of <spoiler> also needed a bit more impact within the instance itslef. The build up and after was well handled, but it needed something a bit more visual there. Maybe a cutscene to add impact rather than falling over with a cry

But, they are minor points. Everything worked. The pacing was particularly good, the dialogue mature and the lore reveals finally made it feel connected to the GW universe in a way that's been missing for so long. 

After Champions, the rushed second half of EoD and the appauling Gyala Delves stuff, I'd almost thrown in the towel with the writing and the story. I now feel a lot happier and positive about the direction. I do hope it continues. I am wary of splitting the next bit into 3 parts, but if SoTo so far is any indication, then as long as it doesn't fall back into predictability and tropism then I think SoTo will be remembered as one of - if not the best - expansion for story and lore at least

Good stuff

Edited September 17, 2023 by Randulf.7614

[Kalavier.1097]

14 hours ago, GeraldBC.4927 said:

All I'm seeing here is "Ugh, don't you know that they wrote up some excuses for the drivel that would follow later?" And all I can say is that this doesn't justify what was done afterwards. It doesn't even justify the article itself. If bad outcome B was caused by prior decision A, that doesn't automatically mean that B is good, that just means that both are bad and A shouldn't have happened the way that it did to begin with.

So where does GW1 end then, EOTN? Beyond? Nightfall? You complain about GW1 lore being destroyed yet ignore that GW1 itself set this stuff up. Just because you don't like what happened doesn't automatically mean that it is bad.

14 hours ago, GeraldBC.4927 said:

When the Commander meets Kormir in her library, she explicitly states that the gods have determined that everything they do only worsens the situation in Tyria and that they cite this as their reasoning for the exodus. So in tandem with apparently everyone on the planet, the gods in GW2 also agree that the gods are useless and do more harm than good. It's like I described in the more abstract version: In the second instalment of the franchise, everyone is in sudden agreement that the gods are universally bad, including the gods themselves. It's almost as if someone involved in the narrative design of the second game has an axe to grind, either with the gods as a set of characters or with GW1 as a whole. 

There is a very distinct difference between "Totally useless" and "Understand they could win, but it'd destroy everything." Cause you know, for all the hype about the gods, they did very little in GW1 as well.

14 hours ago, GeraldBC.4927 said:

Adelbern was a hero of the people who overthrew the tyrants that preceded him and then successfully fended off the Orrians and the Charr alike. Did he potentially make a mistake at one point? Sure, but there is a vast difference in a character's portrayal between "We should stand and fight for our land" and "I would rather doom my own people to forever haunt this land than to let someone else take it." Every line relating to Adelbern in the second game - much like with Balthasar - whether it is by Charr or humans or even third-hand documents found in the world - only belittles and denigrates him and omits anything positive about him. Again with this common theme of "everything in GW1 bad!" in the second game's narrative design. 

Ah yes, because in Prophecies Adelbern didn't try to outright kill somebody offering aid simply because he was Krytan.
Because he didn't banish his son and revoke his royal title of Prince because Rurik dared to speak up about the situation of Ascalon.

Adelbern, who even the GW1 prophecies manuscripts has the people wondering if Adelbern has lost what it takes to restore Ascalon, as he has circled the wagons and simply is content to stand and fight. Who is losing the trust of his people.

Adelbern, within GW1 itself, was being depicted as somebody who was focused on holding his ground to the point that speaking out against that idea, that trying to survive elsewhere and return later with strength was treason. Every line about Adelbern in GW2 is relating to his final days, not his early years. Adelbern after the Searing was never the same man who fought in the guild wars and took the throne due to popular vote.

14 hours ago, GeraldBC.4927 said:

The Vabbians had a prosperous country with lots of beautiful monuments and a thriving populace both in the sense of farmers as well as nobility. There is no reason for this to change even under Joko's rule. Not just that but it was completely and utterly destroyed by the dragonbrand and subsequently the forged. Everything about the new Vabbi is so dry and dull. It is an absolute atrocity and a disservice to what Vabbi could be - and has been in the first game.

Vabbi when we reach it is a land under assult from two directions by two hostile to each other forces. And the thing is the game pretty much makes it outright clear that before these two invasions at nearly the same time, Vabbi WAS PROSPEROUS. They make it clear that Vabbi was thriving, as it was, and enjoyed high quality of life and stability. They pretty much make it beyond clear that Joko didn't change up much about Vabbi besides worship of him and the heavy inclusion of Awoken in all levels of life from nobility to physical labor. And often far more the latter, allowing the Vabbians to live spoiled lives. edit to add on: They were so spoiled to the point of the Order of Shadows having to purposefully stop the commander and tell them "They are so reliant on the Awoken if you kill the Awoken off here, they'll starve out and die"

14 hours ago, GeraldBC.4927 said:

Joko conquering most of Elona didn't even have to be framed as a negative, the Mordant Crescent didn't have to exist. They could have just had the Sunspears assist Joko with his campaign against Vabbi, Kourna and Istan as a quid pro quo for helping them during Nightfall, when all the nations of Elona had either betrayed or turned their backs on them. The Commander suddenly dropping the goody-two-shoes shtick specifically to not free Joko was out-of-character and unnecessary. You get railroaded into rescuing Livia when she's stuck in a White Mantle fortress, despite her talking down to the Commander. Arguably it would make more sense for the Commander to leave Livia rotting in her ward and release Joko from his cage instead.

Joko had already been established as a benevolent ruler in Vabbi, so the foundation for something better was already there. They just refused to use it.

Things I never expected to see from a "Gw2 exists to destroy gw1 lore" person. "The heroic sunspears should all turn into villains willingly, with heroes like Koss, Talhkora, and others willingly helping Joko conquer all of Elona simply because he did them a singular favor of getting across the sulfur" Ah yes, Talhkora should betray her father and family.

Sunspears were part of the army that threw down Joko. He only aligned with the heroes because he was weakened and had no control over his army. You are saying the people who fought to defend all three nations, despite 2 (Vabbi less then kourna) turning against them, would willingly just flip and agree to become enforcers for Joko in conquering all of the land? And you think GW2 is destroying GW1 lore if this is what you think would work better?

The commander, after regaining their memories, know the Awoken are a hostile force. Livia on the other hand, is literally a shining blade, who is an ally. Rescue the Tyrant who has caused suffering seen in the border towns, vs rescuing an agent of Anise/Kryta. I think you got the wires mixed up on "Hero vs Villain"

14 hours ago, GeraldBC.4927 said:

"But in 'Muh movement of the world'...." I hear you say, but you forget an important detail here: Nothing stopped them from either changing the article, ignoring its contents or simply not including those blunders in it in the first place. 

Ah yes, but then the "GW1 is better" crowd would be complaining about how GW2 ignored the document made by the GW1 team and expanding on the very details laid out in GW1 itself, from Prophecies to Nightfall.

Edited September 18, 2023 by Kalavier.1097

[Konig Des Todes.2086]

15 hours ago, Kalavier.1097 said:

The way it came across to me, from the ingame materials shown is that the gods met to decide what to do. Balthazar announced he was wanting to fight, the rest wanted to leave. Balthazar announced that he was going to stay and fight anyway. The gods then seperately decided to deal with Balthazar before he could do something, and as there is no mention of conflict, I believe they backstabbed him and stripped him of power, title/divinity before he had a chance to fight back, betraying him and leaving him imprisoned in the mists to sit forever alone while they left. So Balthazar came back pissed off because he was betrayed by his fellows, left to rot in isolation, and they left the battlefield "Like cowards" to him, so thus he goes into S3 and PoF not the Balthazar of old, but one hellbent on regaining all his lost power to get revenge for the harsh betrayal of the six.

I disagree with the bold. Based on the order that Kormir presents (particularly the underlined):

Kormir: Waging war with them could only lead to the destruction of Tyria—and we, the Six, would be the match that would start the blaze.

Kormir: And so, we chose to withdraw from Tyria altogether, and spare this world further calamity... Or rather, most of us chose to.

Balthazar: Cowards. You may flee, but I will not. I do not avoid conflict... I am conflict.

Balthazar: The Elder Dragons will die by my hands...and their power will become my power.

Kormir: Balthazar was blinded by his pride. The dragons are beyond even the gods—a raw, primal force without equal.

Kormir: Whether he won or lost—by his death or theirs—Balthazar's ambitions would bring about the end of Tyria.

Kormir: The rest of the Six—Dwayna, Grenth, Melandru, even Lyssa—reached an agreement. Balthazar had to be dealt with.

Balthazar: If you won't join the fight against the dragons, I'll see you all burn with them!

Balthazar: Cowards! ALL OF YOU!

Kormir: We stripped him of his power, and chained him in the Mists. There he would remain, forever—powerless to carry out his plans.

Balthazar: Mark these words: when I'm free, I will strike you down, and claim your power for my own!

Balthazar: I will NOT be dismissed! I am Balthazar, mightiest of the Six!

Balthazar: And I swear to you, you will scream your allegiance before the end!

It would appear that Balthazar threatened to kill the other gods before they stripped him of power. Basically the way it seems to be is:

1. Some of the Elder Dragons wake up (depending on how retconned Movement of the World is, it ranges between "just Primordus" to "after Zhaitan" as in early lore, Balthazar appeared in LA to create a portal to the Mists shortly after its reconstruction, though this portal to the Mists never showed itself and instead became asura gates just before launch, but late enough into development that Mists Warriors in every capital city reference the Balthazar made portal)
2. The Six Gods convene to discuss what to do.
3. During meeting, most gods do not wish to fight, but Balthazar does. So he declares that he'll kill the Elder Dragons and take their magic for his own. Balthazar then calls the others cowards and threatens to kill the other gods as well.
4. Balthazar is beaten down before he could prepare an actual fight (depending on if the ruined Hall of Heroes map is canon even if not visited, it could be the conflict happened there and destroyed the place), Balthazar loses, is stripped of divinity and imprisoned (seemingly in the Fissure of Woe given the cinematic's background). Balthazar hurls more insults and this time promises to steal the other gods' power.
5. Some time later, Rytlock happens.

There's really no indication other than Balthazar's bias claim in S3E5 that he was backstabbed or betrayed. And per commentary from devs on reddit, Balthazar wanted to fight because... he was bored. He hadn't had "a proper fight" since Abaddon (rip Menzies I guess).

15 hours ago, Kalavier.1097 said:

The way the game depicts it and the way people who want something to hate is not the same. As you point out "Falsely called". It's fair to dislike the direction of the story, but it's another thing to purposefully twist what happened.

I should clarify.

The ones falsely calling are not just players, but certain developers too. Which might seem a super bias and false thing to say - if the writers are the ones calling it surely it must be true because they make the canon right? Well, even the writers can misremember (especially for large projects like GW2) and non-curated comments on reddit tend to include such. Despite writing in that the gods left to avoid conflict, there have been devs who said they fled, don't care about humans, etc. The same devs who say they don't like the Six because they abandoned humanity, when they're the ones who wrote in that the gods "abandoned" humanity.

15 hours ago, Kalavier.1097 said:

I don't see this as a diminishing, but instead another layer of the multi-faceted history of Tyria that so many settings ignore in that history can be viewed through many lenses. The humans didn't see the gods recover the bloodstone or the Scepter/staff from the Seers, they saw the gods present those items. So the humans wrote "The gods made this". It makes the world feel like one that has gone through eras rather then having all these relics purely appear from a single time of the gods, with the gods using what came before, much like how we have done in GW1 and GW2.  It's not "The gods are less powerful" to me, but "The gods are smart enough to recognize items of power and use them."

The gods aren't the only lore of GW1, and while one can interpret GW2 as being "Anti-six gods" which is fair, that doesn't mean GW2 is anti-GW1, and as said here "Is purposefully treating Gw1 lore in a mean-spirited or petty manner".

How is going from "the gods created magic and these magical artifacts to benefit mortal rulers who abused the powerful gifts given to them" and changing it to "the gods used some other group's magic containers to spread magic that anyone could do (as shown in S3 with White Mantle doing it) and were cautious of said group's magical artifacts so they 'gifted' them to mortal rulers, treating them as guinea pigs to see if the magical artifacts are safe to use" not diminishing the value and actions of the Six Gods? Not only does it take the credit of the creation of the Bloodstone, Scepter of Orr, and Staff of the Mists away from the Six and give it to the Seers, but it turns the motivations of the Six Gods from being benevolent rulers seeking to make life easier for their subjects into indifferent or outright malevolent rulers who treat their faithful as disposable test subjects. It makes the Six Gods barely better than the morally grayer Inquest.

Sure it also adds a layer of multi-faceted history of Tyria, but you can do that without diminishing the contributions of humans and their gods. To turn GW1 lore into multi-racial lore, you don't say "nah, the humans actually weren't the cause" but say "and this is how the humans' actions affected these other groups".

And yes, the gods aren't the only lore of GW1, but I wasn't saying they were - I was specifying that the treatment of the Six Gods is very negative in GW2, to an unfair amount, and running blatantly contradictory to their depiction and treatment in GW1. Which in turn does means that, in this facet at the very least, GW2's treatment of GW1 lore is not faithful. It makes the argument that "GW2 is anti-GW1 lore" to hold merit because, to some degree, that is a true statement. The majority of that degree is anything involving human-centric views and their gods, which is quite a lot of GW1 lore even if not all of it.

4 hours ago, GeraldBC.4927 said:

Adelbern was a hero of the people who overthrew the tyrants that preceded him and then successfully fended off the Orrians and the Charr alike. Did he potentially make a mistake at one point? Sure, but there is a vast difference in a character's portrayal between "We should stand and fight for our land" and "I would rather doom my own people to forever haunt this land than to let someone else take it." Every line relating to Adelbern in the second game - much like with Balthasar - whether it is by Charr or humans or even third-hand documents found in the world - only belittles and denigrates him and omits anything positive about him. Again with this common theme of "everything in GW1 bad!" in the second game's narrative design.

Adelbern was very much mentally unstable as of post-Searing Prophecies. This is even a plot point that Rurik and Adelbern are constantly butting heads because Adelbern lets his old racism against Kryta and his growing mental instability caused by failing to properly lead Ascalon and "allowing" the Searing to happen, which all culminates in Adelbern exiling Rurik.

It's all right there in GW1, in Prophecies no less, and is only furthered in Eye of the North and Beyond. In this regard, GW2 was faithful to GW1.

Adelbern is a classic story of a hero turned villain due to folly of his flaws and the pressure of increasing failures. A true Greek Tragedy, if you will.

And history tends to focus more on the failures of individuals than their successes (though you'll note that Ghosts of Ascalon, at the very least, does treat Adelbern as a failed hero more than a madman who doomed his nation - at the start of it, from human perspective, that is).

4 hours ago, GeraldBC.4927 said:

"But in 'Muh movement of the world'...." I hear you say, but you forget an important detail here: Nothing stopped them from either changing the article, ignoring its contents or simply not including those blunders in it in the first place. 

That would have made writing that an entirely moot point, however, to then completely disregard it. Especially since it was - as mentioned - GW1 writers who wrote up Movement of the World and core GW2.

[Konig Des Todes.2086]

4 hours ago, Randulf.7614 said:

I would perhaps cool off on too much dialogue during a fight. Whilst the fights are not too intense, it's very difficult to be immersed in both battle and keep track of the talking. I'd rather dialogiue was kept to phases between combat. It helps enhance the danger of the fight by being focused on that and not all the lore and chatting going on around.

I definitely agree here. Especially as a necromancer main, where death shroud always massively muffles out dialogue, music, etc. An effect I hate and would praise the day they remove it. Same happens if you get downed, too. And it's even worse when there is dialogue that doesn't go into the chat log (which there is a higher than average amount of in SotO).

[Eekasqueak.7850]

I played the story as Necro too but I was my occultist themed scourge because they're my most "wizardy" character I feel so I didn't even know about shroud doing that. 

[Kalavier.1097]

6 hours ago, Eekasqueak.7850 said:

I played the story as Necro too but I was my occultist themed scourge because they're my most "wizardy" character I feel so I didn't even know about shroud doing that. 

Yeah. As a necro main currently setup as Harbringer who is almost always going into shroud and staying in as long as possible, it's kinda annoying to have EVERYTHING muffled.

[Imba.9451]

8 hours ago, Konig Des Todes.2086 said:

I definitely agree here. Especially as a necromancer main, where death shroud always massively muffles out dialogue, music, etc. An effect I hate and would praise the day they remove it. Same happens if you get downed, too. And it's even worse when there is dialogue that doesn't go into the chat log (which there is a higher than average amount of in SotO).

And here I am, thinking that this problem was on me for not being a native english speaker. It's nice to see that others feel the same way, too. It kinda equals out in Metas and general events, when doing them repeatedly, but the first one or two times doing them always stresses me out, because on the one hand, I want to understand what to do and react to whats happening on my screen, and on the other, I want to understand the dialogue.

It's a lot of cognitive load sometimes and not the best player experience, especially when I am invested in whats happening.

[Randulf.7614]

Cognitive overload. I like that description

[Eekasqueak.7850]

I usually call it overstimulation, maybe that's more of a thing that happens to autistic people though. 

[mandala.8507]

On 9/17/2023 at 9:53 PM, Kalavier.1097 said:

Ah yes, but then the "GW1 is better" crowd would be complaining about how GW2 ignored the document made by the GW1 team and expanding on the very details laid out in GW1 itself, from Prophecies to Nightfall.

You're never going to win an argument with the GW1 supremacists on this forum. GW1 lore is a hollow vessel that they were allowed to fill with endless head canon because the actual world building, while well done, is quite thin on the ground.

Guild Wars 2 will make a literal masterpiece of gaming out of 20 sentences worth of lore from GW1, but there's nothing it can do to live up to the perfection that is whatever these players imagined the story could have been.

[Kalavier.1097]

4 hours ago, mandala.8507 said:

You're never going to win an argument with the GW1 supremacists on this forum. GW1 lore is a hollow vessel that they were allowed to fill with endless head canon because the actual world building, while well done, is quite thin on the ground.

Guild Wars 2 will make a literal masterpiece of gaming out of 20 sentences worth of lore from GW1, but there's nothing it can do to live up to the perfection that is whatever these players imagined the story could have been.

Honestly that line was from what I've learned online over the many years.
Certain groups (across all fandoms and locations) will hate the newer thing. They'll have a reason for the hate. But the reason doesn't matter, because if another piece of lore comes out confirming what they wished was true actually, they'll still hate it. Use Movement of the World? Terrible. Ignore it? How dare you ignore GW1 legacy! Kinda why i poke the question "What is the end point of GW1? Nightfall? EOTN? Beyond? because it always seems to shift and flow 😄

personally, I've liked the fact that Guild wars embraces how history can be biased. Even in Core with the Charr talking about Stormbringer which is completely off track with what happened, and then another Charr in the ruins going "I'm pretty sure all that stuff is wrong." How we did good things as heroes in GW1, but that enabled some evils to surge up. And that's why we go from such a large world map to a more restricted one at core.

It's not the way everybody may have wanted it to go, but it is the way the story evolved. 

[Imba.9451]

2 hours ago, Kalavier.1097 said:

Honestly that line was from what I've learned online over the many years.
Certain groups (across all fandoms and locations) will hate the newer thing. They'll have a reason for the hate. But the reason doesn't matter, because if another piece of lore comes out confirming what they wished was true actually, they'll still hate it. Use Movement of the World? Terrible. Ignore it? How dare you ignore GW1 legacy! Kinda why i poke the question "What is the end point of GW1? Nightfall? EOTN? Beyond? because it always seems to shift and flow 😄

This is the crux of the debate. Your comment heavily implies a fixation on the binary differentiation between haters and non-haters. You create strawman-arguments noone even brought up in this thread, but defend them by implying that haters think like that and putting people attacking the story-developments in GW2 next to those haters.

You are fighting windmills. And the irony is, you do so in a thread on wich people aknowledge SotO's writing, wich clearly is not GW1.

I can understand that senseless hate as you describe it is annoying. But you should attack it where it appears, not where you assume it.

Edited September 19, 2023 by Imba.9451

[Kalavier.1097]

24 minutes ago, Imba.9451 said:

This is the crux of the debate. Your comment heavily implies a fixation on the binary differentiation between haters and non-haters. You create strawman-arguments noone even brought up in this thread, but defend them by implying that haters think like that and putting people attacking the story-developments in GW2 next to those haters.

You are fighting windmills. And the irony is, you do so in a thread on wich people aknowledge SotO's writing, wich clearly is not GW1.

I can understand that senseless hate as you describe it is annoying. But you should attack it where it appears, not where you assume it.

Meanwhile I have actually and explicitly acknowledged that there are people who dislike stuff without being haters, in GW2 and otherwise.

I have never said there is a binary or one or the other. In your own words, "stop putting words in my mouth"

 

[Imba.9451]

2 minutes ago, Kalavier.1097 said:

Meanwhile I have actually and explicitly acknowledged that there are people who dislike stuff without being haters, in GW2 and otherwise.

I have never said there is a binary or one or the other. In your own words, "stop putting words in my mouth"

 

Correct, you never said that. Thats why I used the word "implied", and went on to put on display how this comes off. Nice try at a comeback, but not fitting here.

Also, just because you aknowledged the difference does not mean you aren't showing sign of heavily fixating on pushing back against "haters" in this thread.

Edited September 19, 2023 by Imba.9451

[Kalavier.1097]

3 minutes ago, Imba.9451 said:

Correct, you never said that. Thats why I used the word "implied", and went on to put on display how this comes off. Nice try at a comeback, but not fitting here.

Also, just because you aknowledged the difference does not mean you aren't showing sign of heavily fixating on pushing back against "haters" in this thread.

Meaning the people who started off their posts implying anet is purposefully and intentionally attacking GW1 lore. Not "I don't really like how it's been going".

It's one thing to not be a fan of the current story. It's another to imply or outright state that because you don't like the current story beats, that the company is actively attacking or erasing previous story chapters.

To use another setting example, It's the difference between "I don't like the star wars sequel trilogy/current shows." vs "Disney has purposefully ruined star wars and is trying to destroy everything about the characters we loved."

[Imba.9451]

21 minutes ago, Kalavier.1097 said:

Meaning the people who started off their posts implying anet is purposefully and intentionally attacking GW1 lore. Not "I don't really like how it's been going".

It's one thing to not be a fan of the current story. It's another to imply or outright state that because you don't like the current story beats, that the company is actively attacking or erasing previous story chapters.

To use another setting example, It's the difference between "I don't like the star wars sequel trilogy/current shows." vs "Disney has purposefully ruined star wars and is trying to destroy everything about the characters we loved."

But noone said "Anet has purposefully ruined Guild Wars" (Not in terms of "Nyahaha, we take away everything you like because we feed of your tears!" at least.) Regarding the characters though, it sometimes comes off that way to me, i'll admit that. However, I also argued this to be the case because of new writers wanting to make a name for themselves, instead of relying on the usage of old material. Because after all, it's more impressive having created something new than continuing the work of someone else. And regarding the gods and Balthazar, this pretty much is a confirmation of this.

It's also normal for writers to get invested in their characters. However, if the characters that are a players vehicle to experience the game (i.e. the commander) reacts in a totally different way than many players do towards certain characters and their actions, then this creates a dissonance and a "we writers vs pleb player who just don't get it" vibe, intentional or not. And no matter what you think of Braham and Aurene, calling these characters "divisive" is hard to argue against.

I do not even argue for GW1 to be the holy grail of storytelling. Heck, it surely is not. It is very often clunky, partly based on being an old game, partly "questionable VA" and partly because of being a "generic" fantasy setting with not much in terms of underlying themes, that hasn't been done a thousand times already. But it was a fun world, based on a few interesing concepts and created the foundation for what came after. Nothing more, nothing less. Everyone who praises GW1 storytelling should replay it. It's not "bad", but it's just "okay", hence I can kinda get behind your seeming sentiment regarding this.

 

What I think makes the difference is the "Dark Souls" effect, GW1 had in some areas. Some things were not explained, left open pieces of information. The world was presented as bigger as the game itself explored it, thus creating a "whats over there" mentality for many people. (Atleast in my case and from what I interpreted many comments I've read of the years). Now, obviously, resolving opens ends will ALWAYS let some people disappointed, because everyone had a differing headcanon (even devs). Deconstructing things people liked in he first game for a "but akshually"-moment, does understandably not feel good for those people.

Also, an internal culture war, if I may call it that, does not help. You mentioned the Star Wars sequels, this examplifies what I mean perfectly by how different directors Undid what came in the previous film to take the movies "their way". This is disrespectful to the source material. It feels like the story is about their ego, rather than internal consistency and ultimately, the fans. And, agree or not, this is what I felt over huge portions of PoF, LS4 and IBS.

 

Edited September 19, 2023 by Imba.9451

[Kalavier.1097]

46 minutes ago, Imba.9451 said:

But noone said "Anet has purposefully ruined Guild Wars" (Not in terms of "Nyahaha, we take away everything you like because we feed of your tears!" at least.)

 

On 9/13/2023 at 8:10 PM, GeraldBC.4927 said:

I'm in the same boat. For obvious reasons I hated how the new story additions throughout GW2 violated the lore of Guild Wars in ways that were petty and mean-spirited. Even in the new texts found in the world, some of that resentment against the first game's lore on the part of whoever wrote it still shines through.

 

[Imba.9451]

1 hour ago, Kalavier.1097 said:

 

 

You and I seem to read that comment differently it seems. Personally, I see the sentiment of undermining whats there in order to have what the new writers put atop of it seem bigger being called out, based on the debate that give this comment you quoted context, as did the debate about how the narrative around the gods and Balthazar shifted.

You seem to read this as: "I think the developer are mean gremlins that create flipcharts in order to determine how to kitten off players most" (exagerrated ofc)

[mandala.8507]

I'd love to know how you managed to interpret calling the GW2 writers "petty and mean-spirited" as constructive criticism.

In what fantasy land does GW2 in any way demonstrate a "resentment against the first game's lore on the part of whoever wrote it".

This is the GW2 forum, right? I feel like I'm on the GW1 subreddit reading through this thread right now.

[Laken.9018]

Personally speaking I wouldn't say the writers are "mean spirited" but I have always felt there is a sub section of the GW2 creation team who seem to actively dislike/want nothing to do with GW1 lore.
It was super notable in Cantha when they did everything they could to avoid going anywhere near anything from the old Cantha and made massive retcons/"fixed" the more problematic elements as they saw it. IBS also avoided a lot of old GW1 areas.

There have been occasions throughout my time playing the franchise where I felt like the writers forget they were meant to be writing for a vast array of people and not themselves. My two main stand outs are Mid Living World Season 1 around Tower of Nightmares and EOD.
I just got the impression in recent years they want to be unburdened from the past but in a weird kind of way I also feel SoTO felt like them going back and trying to fix some of the more egregious attacks and fix them (such as bringing Livia, Mursaat and Dwarves all back into the fold after they were kinda rapidly brushed off screen). I've been super impressed by SoTO it feels like a more mature story and less soap opera.

[Kalavier.1097]

36 minutes ago, Laken.9018 said:

It was super notable in Cantha when they did everything they could to avoid going anywhere near anything from the old Cantha and made massive retcons/"fixed" the more problematic elements as they saw it. IBS also avoided a lot of old GW1 areas.


I just got the impression in recent years they want to be unburdened from the past but in a weird kind of way I also feel SoTO felt like them going back and trying to fix some of the more egregious attacks and fix them (such as bringing Livia, Mursaat and Dwarves all back into the fold after they were kinda rapidly brushed off screen). I've been super impressed by SoTO it feels like a more mature story and less soap opera.

The thing is those elements are from the Movement of the World/Gw beyond.

Dwarves being living and not stone goes back to pre-EOTN, and Beyond/movement of the world established that Cantha would be changed drastically if we ever returned.

[Imba.9451]

1 hour ago, mandala.8507 said:

This is the GW2 forum, right? I feel like I'm on the GW1 subreddit reading through this thread right now.

Thats on you then. You want to see the writing on the wall when there is not even a wall to begin with. Windmills. Don't try to antagonize people this way.

 

40 minutes ago, Laken.9018 said:

I just got the impression in recent years they want to be unburdened from the past but in a weird kind of way I also feel SoTO felt like them going back and trying to fix some of the more egregious attacks and fix them (such as bringing Livia, Mursaat and Dwarves all back into the fold after they were kinda rapidly brushed off screen). I've been super impressed by SoTO it feels like a more mature story and less soap opera.

Feeling the same. Truth be told, bringing back Mursaat and Livia is blatant fanservice for people like me, so I have to admit that I am very biased here.

Edited September 19, 2023 by Imba.9451

[mandala.8507]

2 minutes ago, Laken.9018 said:

Personally speaking I wouldn't say the writers are "mean spirited" but I have always felt there is a sub section of the GW2 creation team who seem to actively dislike/want nothing to do with GW1 lore.
It was super notable in Cantha when they did everything they could to avoid going anywhere near anything from the old Cantha and made massive retcons/"fixed" the more problematic elements as they saw it. IBS also avoided a lot of old GW1 areas.

Can you substantiate this with evidence/examples? What problematic things from GW1 Cantha did they change or "fix" that you think they shouldn't have?

The reason they mostly avoided the ancient Cantha stuff was because (in my opinion): 1) Budget. They have limited room to tell a story, and if they spent half that time rehashing old Canthan history, it means they have less room to work with for the GW2 story they want to tell. and 2) Winds of Change set up a cultural revolution in Cantha that would inevitably lead to several erasure events, as these things tend to do in real world settings as well.

The final relevant dialogue from Winds of Change:

Quote

Ashu: "Deep down inside...some part of me always knew that I was being used. As much as it pains me to admit it. I never wanted to be powerless again, not after the Afflicted. And yet, that was the life I found myself trapped in."

Miku: "It's over now, Ashu. She can't control you anymore. You can come with me. I know it won't be easy, but we can learn to be a family again. We can make things better."

Ashu: "Don't misunderstand me, sister. I am thankful for what you've done, but I am not going with you. With Reiko gone, the Ministry of Purity will follow me. I'll never be powerless again. I'll never be afraid again."

Ashu: "The people here need me, and they love me. They'll look to me to show them the way. Our lands are in chaos, and only I have been blessed to show them the correct path to walk. I can make things better. I can make Cantha whole again, and I can make it stronger."

Ashu: "This is my life now. The people that we were died that day, along with our family. You are just a ghost. But now I am free to move on, free to make things better."

Ashu: "I no longer have to walk in Reiko's shadow. I have seen where she has failed, and I have learned. I will not falter, and I must look forward. Go, and don't appear before me again. There is no place here for a shade of a past long since dead."

Miku: "I... understand. You've made your choice. If this is how you wish to live, so be it. Let's go, friend - there is nothing more for us here. You know where to meet up with me."

...

Miku: "It's funny, isn't it? That we can fight so hard, that we can do so much. We've saved countless lives, and yet somehow...it's the hardest thing to save someone from themselves."

Miku: "I want to believe that some of the person that I knew still exists within Ashu. I hope that he can find that again, and grow into a better man, and be a better leader. But I know that I no longer have any part to play in his life."

Miku: "The people do not need to follow him, what happens next is in their hands. Cantha has the freedom to choose its path now, and I have the freedom to walk my own. Through all of this, I've come to understand that the world is a larger place than I'd ever imagined. I want to go forward and embrace it, and see where life takes me. There is nothing more exciting than the possibilities that the future can offer!"

What strikes me from this exchange is Miku's naivety in thinking her younger brother is free. It is made apparent this couldn't be further from the truth by the way in which he speaks to us about his plans for Cantha's future. Despite recognizing how he was used by Reiko to further her schemes, the ideological shackles he was placed in remain very much intact. He's internalized the lie that he is somehow Cantha's chosen savior, and likely many other distorted ideals fed to him by the Ministry of Purity over the years.

His freedom of choice is an illusion.

...And so much of old Cantha was lost to the fear that organization weaponized against all parts of Cantha they deemed "other".

39 minutes ago, Laken.9018 said:

There have been occasions throughout my time playing the franchise where I felt like the writers forget they were meant to be writing for a vast array of people and not themselves. My two main stand outs are Mid Living World Season 1 around Tower of Nightmares and EOD.

Again, can you be more specific?