Guild Wars 2

NewTrain.7549:

Magister Sieran: The dragon’s servants will never let our ships sail. If they surround the docks, they’ll slaughter us— and Zhaitan’s forces will grow.
<Character name>: Our soldiers are too injured to fight. They can barely walk. We can’t form a defense and still get them all aboard.
Magister Sieran: Someone needs to hold them off and give everyone else time to escape. No, not someone. Me.
<Character name>: You can’t win against those monsters, Sieran! There are too many of them!
Magister Sieran: If I can keep them busy, it’s enough of a win for me. Gixx always said I was an exceptional troublemaker.
Magister Sieran: When you and I met, I didn’t think about anything but myself. I wanted fun, excitement, risks… I didn’t really care about others.
Magister Sieran: In my short life, you’ve taught me the most important lesson. Friends will go through anything for each other. That’s why I have to do this.
Magister Sieran: I’ve always wondered what it would be like to go to the mists. It’ll be an adventure…

I mean seriously, you think this dialogue is mature? It reads like a poorly written after-school special with the first two lines delivered expertly by Captain Exposition and his friend Mr. Obvious.

I felt like Tybalt’s was because I knew exactly what he was implying. Sieran I never really connected with, so I can’t say.

I’m kind of jumping into the discussion here, but I feel like the example you’re giving is less a matter of “mature vs. juvenile” and more a matter of “robotic vs. realistic.”

It pains me to criticize a writer bluntly because I know it’s not an easy craft and it’s not exactly one full of objectivity either. But I think the flaw with dialogue like Sieran’s there is that 1) she’s basically confessing to being an adult child and 2) her change of heart seems like it came out of nowhere. (In other words, it doesn’t fit her character at all.)

I had moments with both Tybalt and Forgal where I felt companionship long before Claw Island, so when they “opened up to me,” it felt more real. When Sieran did it, I felt like her sacrificial speech was coming out of nowhere – like it didn’t even fit her personality.

And therein (being fair) lies part of the struggle of writing dialogue for a video game. You have to shoehorn bs in sometimes because that’s just how the story goes. Maybe Sieran doesn’t even fit as a self-sacrificing character – at least not in that context – but the overarching design said “this is what she has to do for it to fit the gameplay.”

Labjax.2465:

NewTrain.7549:

Magister Sieran: The dragon’s servants will never let our ships sail. If they surround the docks, they’ll slaughter us— and Zhaitan’s forces will grow.
<Character name>: Our soldiers are too injured to fight. They can barely walk. We can’t form a defense and still get them all aboard.
Magister Sieran: Someone needs to hold them off and give everyone else time to escape. No, not someone. Me.
<Character name>: You can’t win against those monsters, Sieran! There are too many of them!
Magister Sieran: If I can keep them busy, it’s enough of a win for me. Gixx always said I was an exceptional troublemaker.
Magister Sieran: When you and I met, I didn’t think about anything but myself. I wanted fun, excitement, risks… I didn’t really care about others.
Magister Sieran: In my short life, you’ve taught me the most important lesson. Friends will go through anything for each other. That’s why I have to do this.
Magister Sieran: I’ve always wondered what it would be like to go to the mists. It’ll be an adventure…

I mean seriously, you think this dialogue is mature? It reads like a poorly written after-school special with the first two lines delivered expertly by Captain Exposition and his friend Mr. Obvious.

I felt like Tybalt’s was because I knew exactly what he was implying. Sieran I never really connected with, so I can’t say.

I’m kind of jumping into the discussion here, but I feel like the example you’re giving is less a matter of “mature vs. juvenile” and more a matter of “robotic vs. realistic.”

It pains me to criticize a writer bluntly because I know it’s not an easy craft and it’s not exactly one full of objectivity either. But I think the flaw with dialogue like Sieran’s there is that 1) she’s basically confessing to being an adult child and 2) her change of heart seems like it came out of nowhere. (In other words, it doesn’t fit her character at all.)

I had moments with both Tybalt and Forgal where I felt companionship long before Claw Island, so when they “opened up to me,” it felt more real. When Sieran did it, I felt like her sacrificial speech was coming out of nowhere – like it didn’t even fit her personality.

And therein (being fair) lies part of the struggle of writing dialogue for a video game. You have to shoehorn bs in sometimes because that’s just how the story goes. Maybe Sieran doesn’t even fit as a self-sacrificing character – at least not in that context – but the overarching design said “this is what she has to do for it to fit the gameplay.”

I honestly didn’t think Tybalt was much better. It was just so…expected (and Tybalt was the first character I experienced this scene with). Simply based on his characterization I had guessed what would happen to him far before this scene simply because of the generic tropes that permeate the GW2 writing.

But perhaps you’re correct. Perhaps juvenile isn’t the correct word. I simply meant it in the sense of “this is what a juvenile would read/write”, akin to my previous statement of the GW2 writing reading like a young adult novel. And with that meaning in mind, I stand by my opinion of GW2’s writing. No poster who has volunteered “good” writing from this game has shown me anything that has made me think otherwise.

I mean, there’s a huge problem when someone who can recite the entire Tudor dynasty from memory (and the Stuart dynasty as well) had to look up the names of characters from this game. It means that the writing is less interesting than Edward VI, which is saying a lot.

I can sum up the answer to this whole thread [T] rating Anet is tiptoeing around many of the risqué and adult themes in the story in a juvenile manner. For example in the living story “let’t throw lesbians in” okay “lets make them say kittened unrealistic things to each other because thats what real gays do” probably was not the conversation but rather “lets put lesbians in because that will show players we are progressive” okay "but we have to water down all the dialogue because all the 8 year olds that play won’t laugh if we don’t.

This is also why we lack blood, dismemberment, and some of the darker more sinister themes some games have. In order for GW2 to be as intense as we want it would have to be [M] which I wouldn’t mind honestly how many 8 year olds were prohibited from buying Call of Duty because it was rated [M]?
Unfortunately the game is [T] is is so horrifically childish that Disney would be proud, I half expect to see mickey mouse jump out with the pirates in the Gendaran Fields, but the game is fun and we will still play it, or go buy Skyrim and enjoy watching heads roll

Kamikae.9536:

I can sum up the answer to this whole thread [T] rating Anet is tiptoeing around many of the risqué and adult themes in the story in a juvenile manner. For example in the living story “let’t throw lesbians in” okay “lets make them say kittened unrealistic things to each other because thats what real gays do” probably was not the conversation but rather “lets put lesbians in because that will show players we are progressive” okay "but we have to water down all the dialogue because all the 8 year olds that play won’t laugh if we don’t.

I’m thinking the conversation went rather differently entirely than “let’s throw in lesbians” . . . probably because there was already some in there (arguably Caithe/Faolain) as well as “male” couples (again, arguably two ‘male’ sylvari).

No, I get the feeling they realized they had two characters which could have an interesting dynamic in Marjory/Kasmeer and someone ran a bit far with them being playful . . . so they doubled-down on it rather than shy away.

And I doubt it’s “watered down for the sake of children” so much as “watered down so we don’t get GLBT hatemail for portraying them cartoonishly”. Even though I have seen actual couples (of any orientation and combination) . . . be a whole lot worse than Jory/Kas are. A lot worse.

This is also why we lack blood, dismemberment, and some of the darker more sinister themes some games have. In order for GW2 to be as intense as we want it would have to be [M] which I wouldn’t mind honestly how many 8 year olds were prohibited from buying Call of Duty because it was rated [M]?

I . . . think it would be as off-putting as a Disney feature being moved to PG-13 so it could explore darker themes. Which is weird because they did it with a PG rating at least twice.

And Pokemon successfully gets some rather . . . fridge-horrory stuff through its games.

Ratings aren’t anything. It’s how you work at them.

Unfortunately the game is [T] is is so horrifically childish that Disney would be proud, I half expect to see mickey mouse jump out with the pirates in the Gendaran Fields, but the game is fun and we will still play it, or go buy Skyrim and enjoy watching heads roll

I’d rather expect it to be a different mouse . . . and it would still fit in the T rating to have him accurately transferred over. Food for thought.

NewTrain.7549:

I disagree, it’s far easier to deal with mature themes in a juvenile way than it is in a mature way. Which have you heard more of in your life; Holocaust survivor stories or holocaust jokes? You see, people often choose juvenile because it’s far easier, far less thought provoking, and takes far less effort.

if you want specific GW2 examples, I’ll provide you with the events at Claw Island. A thinly developed character, painted in certain arcs as a goofball, needlessly sacrifices them self for no conceivable gain. Sacrificing your life for someone else’s is a powerful mature theme, yet the way GW2 handled it was essentially just doing it because it was expected, which is quite juvenile.

Magister Sieran: The dragon’s servants will never let our ships sail. If they surround the docks, they’ll slaughter us— and Zhaitan’s forces will grow.
<Character name>: Our soldiers are too injured to fight. They can barely walk. We can’t form a defense and still get them all aboard.
Magister Sieran: Someone needs to hold them off and give everyone else time to escape. No, not someone. Me.
<Character name>: You can’t win against those monsters, Sieran! There are too many of them!
Magister Sieran: If I can keep them busy, it’s enough of a win for me. Gixx always said I was an exceptional troublemaker.
Magister Sieran: When you and I met, I didn’t think about anything but myself. I wanted fun, excitement, risks… I didn’t really care about others.
Magister Sieran: In my short life, you’ve taught me the most important lesson. Friends will go through anything for each other. That’s why I have to do this.
Magister Sieran: I’ve always wondered what it would be like to go to the mists. It’ll be an adventure…

I mean seriously, you think this dialogue is mature? It reads like a poorly written after-school special with the first two lines delivered expertly by Captain Exposition and his friend Mr. Obvious.

Well and dont you think that holocaust jokes light up a nova level this feels wrong sign on them? Now contrast that with the example you gave. There is humor in there sure but humor != juvenile. In fact considering the character of Sieran thats exactly how it should have been conveyed as Sieran is a character thats alway been unsure of herself, always had that funny streak to her and now she’s about to face the ultimate threat and knows she’s not going to walk away from it. Wouldnt you except such a character to use humor as a defense mechanism? And before you argue against that humor has been used by people about to die in real life as well. Quick search found an outlaw called Tom Ketchum. His last word before being executed were good-bye please dig my grave very very deep.

Firefly if you watched the series is also an excellent example, each line said in that series is full of humor yet far from juvenile. It is not the humor that makes something mature or juvenile but rather the message it conveys. Holocost jokes arent juvenile because they have humor but rather because instead of recognizing the horror of the holocost and use stories to teach humanity why such things should never ever be repeated they push stories that belittle the whole dark human episode and make it seem like nothing.

also the example you gave has no exposition in it, not sure why you mentioned it here.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

It’s pretty terrible, but then I don’t think Tybalt did it any better. Forgal . . . I haven’t brought myself to the point of wanting to do that yet.

More mature is the conversation around the medic camp in Dry Top. “We need to do something with the bodies…” comes to mind, though the majority of the feel comes from how the voice acting lent it the hesitant air of “I really don’t want to be talking about this, but we need to discuss it”.

Of course, in the same zone there was Prosperity which felt like a cheap imitation of Deadwood (the HBO series) which itself was somewhat of a immature sort of look at things on the surface. (Underneath the veneer of immaturity, it was better than it looked but…)

Anyway.

Yeah, it could be better off but you know what? I’m more annoyed at other things in the story to start ripping it apart over every “not mature” place. I survived GW1 and it’s terribleness with Prophecies. (Also can be called “Guild Wars: Sacrificial Lambs and Transparently Evil People”)

I mean seriously people do expect every character to behave the same way? serious and professional at all times? Thats not how it happens in real life. People have different characters, some are colorful while other are serious. There is also a whole million shades in between the two extremes. The game would be much worst of if every NPC was an Agent Smith.

Dialog is a tool meant not just to convey the story but to tell you about the character who speaking. It teaches you a lot about them.

are they confident or insecure.
are they the serious type or the colorful type.
Are they trust worthy or irresponsible
etc..

this isnt bad writing, quite the opposite, it brings life and makes things interesting.

Galen Grey.4709:

NewTrain.7549:

I disagree, it’s far easier to deal with mature themes in a juvenile way than it is in a mature way. Which have you heard more of in your life; Holocaust survivor stories or holocaust jokes? You see, people often choose juvenile because it’s far easier, far less thought provoking, and takes far less effort.

if you want specific GW2 examples, I’ll provide you with the events at Claw Island. A thinly developed character, painted in certain arcs as a goofball, needlessly sacrifices them self for no conceivable gain. Sacrificing your life for someone else’s is a powerful mature theme, yet the way GW2 handled it was essentially just doing it because it was expected, which is quite juvenile.

Magister Sieran: The dragon’s servants will never let our ships sail. If they surround the docks, they’ll slaughter us— and Zhaitan’s forces will grow.
<Character name>: Our soldiers are too injured to fight. They can barely walk. We can’t form a defense and still get them all aboard.
Magister Sieran: Someone needs to hold them off and give everyone else time to escape. No, not someone. Me.
<Character name>: You can’t win against those monsters, Sieran! There are too many of them!
Magister Sieran: If I can keep them busy, it’s enough of a win for me. Gixx always said I was an exceptional troublemaker.
Magister Sieran: When you and I met, I didn’t think about anything but myself. I wanted fun, excitement, risks… I didn’t really care about others.
Magister Sieran: In my short life, you’ve taught me the most important lesson. Friends will go through anything for each other. That’s why I have to do this.
Magister Sieran: I’ve always wondered what it would be like to go to the mists. It’ll be an adventure…

I mean seriously, you think this dialogue is mature? It reads like a poorly written after-school special with the first two lines delivered expertly by Captain Exposition and his friend Mr. Obvious.

Well and dont you think that holocaust jokes light up a nova level this feels wrong sign on them? Now contrast that with the example you gave. There is humor in there sure but humor != juvenile. In fact considering the character of Sieran thats exactly how it should have been conveyed as Sieran is a character thats alway been unsure of herself, always had that funny streak to her and now she’s about to face the ultimate threat and knows she’s not going to walk away from it. Wouldnt you except such a character to use humor as a defense mechanism? And before you argue against that humor has been used by people about to die in real life as well. Quick search found an outlaw called Tom Ketchum. His last word before being executed were good-bye please dig my grave very very deep.

Firefly if you watched the series is also an excellent example, each line said in that series is full of humor yet far from juvenile. It is not the humor that makes something mature or juvenile but rather the message it conveys. Holocost jokes arent juvenile because they have humor but rather because instead of recognizing the horror of the holocost and use stories to teach humanity why such things should never ever be repeated they push stories that belittle the whole dark human episode and make it seem like nothing.

also the example you gave has no exposition in it, not sure why you mentioned it here.

Perhaps read my follow-up post on juvenile writing.

Secondly, you don’t seem to understand what exposition is.

Exposition – Exposition is the portion of a story that introduces important background information to the audience; for example, information about the setting, back story, context, etc. It contains examples such as “information dump” or “idiot lecture”.

In this case, both of the first two lines explicitly state the context of the situation (what is actually being shown on screen). This makes them exposition, specifically of the “idiot lecture” variety. If you’re unable to recognize that, I’m not sure it’s worth it to even continue talking about writing.

Galen Grey.4709:

…

Galen i think the point your missing, is that while what you say is true, its not really the point, yes having npcs which walk around and say stuff relevant is more background information, yes different charchters react differently, etc.

but none of that makes for good story telling. Its not what you do, its how well its done.

NewTrain.7549:

Perhaps read my follow-up post on juvenile writing.

Secondly, you don’t seem to understand what exposition is.

Exposition – Exposition is the portion of a story that introduces important background information to the audience; for example, information about the setting, back story, context, etc. It contains examples such as “information dump” or “idiot lecture”.

In this case, both of the first two lines explicitly state the context of the situation (what is actually being shown on screen). This makes them exposition, specifically of the “idiot lecture” variety. If you’re unable to recognize that, I’m not sure it’s worth it to even continue talking about writing.

I disagree.

“The dragon’s servants will never let our ships sail. If they surround the docks, they’ll slaughter us— and Zhaitan’s forces will grow. "
“Our soldiers are too injured to fight. They can barely walk. We can’t form a defense and still get them all aboard. "

Thats not stating the context of the situation. Everyone realizes they need to retreat and they have one possibility of retreat open to them by ship. Thats discussing why the obvious plan of action will fail and what can be done about it. If they make a run for it, they will not be able to set sail before zhaitan’s forces are upon them. If the ones that are able to hold zaithan’s forces at bay there will be not enough people to carry the wounded to the ships.

Thats not describing the situation thats discussing the plan of action. Remove those first two lines and the whole thing crumbles. why would Sieran just go back towards zaithan’s forces and what is everyone supposed to do ? back her up? hold the line? run as the wind? Like I said thats not an example of exposition, it is not describing what is happening around them, its them formulating a plan of action.

phys.7689:

Galen Grey.4709:

…

Galen i think the point your missing, is that while what you say is true, its not really the point, yes having npcs which walk around and say stuff relevant is more background information, yes different charchters react differently, etc.

but none of that makes for good story telling. Its not what you do, its how well its done.

thing is how can be done better? so far the only thing suggested seemed to be remove color from dialog which I personally think would detract rather then add to the experience.

Galen Grey.4709:

phys.7689:

Galen Grey.4709:

…

Galen i think the point your missing, is that while what you say is true, its not really the point, yes having npcs which walk around and say stuff relevant is more background information, yes different charchters react differently, etc.

but none of that makes for good story telling. Its not what you do, its how well its done.

thing is how can be done better? so far the only thing suggested seemed to be remove color from dialog which I personally think would detract rather then add to the experience.

“Color” in dialogue is a staple of movies, books and television. Sometimes it’s even somewhat realistic. I have no problem with color in GW2 story dialogue. Quips, one liners and especially digs at other characters happen in tense situations. People talk about things that matter all the time, but they also say things that might be considered inappropriate to the mood. This is a means of coping with stress.

However, there’s also the separate issue of having things make sense. One person does not form the rear guard against an army. Imo, that is the weakness in the Battle of Claw Island chapter, not the dialogue — which is no worse than most movies and TV shows offer.

IndigoSundown.5419:

However, there’s also the separate issue of having things make sense. One person does not form the rear guard against an army. Imo, that is the weakness in the Battle of Claw Island chapter, not the dialogue — which is no worse than most movies and TV shows offer.

Here’s a way one person could have formed a rear guard. I’ll paraphrase my post from a few weeks ago.

There were already risen on both sides of the gate. There were risen between the survivors and the ship. Shutting the gate and making a dramatic last stand there would have accomplished absolutely nothing. Worse, it didn’t even make sense. It also made no sense that the risen forces attacking the island didn’t make attacking the docks and sinking every ship there a priority.

If that had been the case, the survivors would have had to seek an alternative means of escape. A couple of possibilities come to mind: maybe somebody had a boat stashed somewhere for some off duty fishing, or maybe a lifeboat had survived the sinking of the big ships and drifted away, unnoticed. The survivors could have been boarding this small vessel when suddenly – oh noes, a Risen patrol!

And then…

NPC Hero: Dagnabbit! I’ll hold ’em off! You guys get outta here! Aaaaah! /e attacks

Commander: NPC hero, no-o-o-o-o!

Whatshername: There’s too many of them, NPC hero won’t last long, we gotta go! Like, yesterday! Or something.

Commander: Shucky darn! By Droknar’s hammer, NPC hero, you shall be avenged!

Followed by a series of narrow escapes until the lifeboat is picked up by some other friendly vessel (or quaggans or largos or whatever – heck, who in Tyria doesn’t have some kind of breathing apparatus these days?)

IndigoSundown.5419:

Galen Grey.4709:

phys.7689:

Galen Grey.4709:

…

Galen i think the point your missing, is that while what you say is true, its not really the point, yes having npcs which walk around and say stuff relevant is more background information, yes different charchters react differently, etc.

but none of that makes for good story telling. Its not what you do, its how well its done.

thing is how can be done better? so far the only thing suggested seemed to be remove color from dialog which I personally think would detract rather then add to the experience.

“Color” in dialogue is a staple of movies, books and television. Sometimes it’s even somewhat realistic. I have no problem with color in GW2 story dialogue. Quips, one liners and especially digs at other characters happen in tense situations. People talk about things that matter all the time, but they also say things that might be considered inappropriate to the mood. This is a means of coping with stress.

However, there’s also the separate issue of having things make sense. One person does not form the rear guard against an army. Imo, that is the weakness in the Battle of Claw Island chapter, not the dialogue — which is no worse than most movies and TV shows offer.

Color is fine, when done correctly, good color keeps in mind what type of color comment that specific charachter would do. It also gives you insight into their charachter. But honestly color is not the issue, its how well the storytelling is executed. As far as telling them how to improve, I mean one can point out flaws, and how it felt flat, and how the way they chose to present certain scenes didnt work, but there is no simple answer to better storytelling.
I would suggest they hire a storyboarding artist to bridge the gap between writers and event scripters/CS guys. And hire an editor who is used to dealing with serialized fiction. Comic book editor, TV series editors, etc.

also, the music is adds nothing to this game in the way they added it. get someone to actually score the game.

Askherion.4935:

I agree with you OP. There should be more story to keep busy while levelling… While the game ils a prime example to attention to small detail given how many NPCs have dialogs, actions and whatnot, it lacks silver lining. The small thank you letters you gain from finishing a heart or completing a zone could be revamped to rectify that and make the levelling more enjoyable, I think… Maybe by changing the hearts into a regional story. Each region would still have hearts, but each would give you a part of a bigger story limited to their zone. That would make hearts more interesting the first time and subsequent times while keeping the freedom of doing whatever you want. A silver lining that makes you want to stay in the zone doing hearts to learn more instead of going somewhere else out now boredom.

^^^ This right here ^^^

Ignoring all the arguments about whether the writing is good or bad or juvenile or not (all of which has nothing to do with my original posts regarding this), the issue is one of how enticing it is (or rather isn’t) to participate in the story that exists. As I said before, yes, there is a lot of story there, but there is zero motivation to participate in it. By modifying the regional stories to be more coherent, and more directly interacted with and rewarded, it would make participating in things like heart regions a lot more enjoyable, and a lot less of a grind feeling.

And to those who have said that I sound like I’m looking for a single-player RPG… no, I’m not. I have a large number of such games, and I enjoy them, but that is not what I’m talking about here. I’ve played MMOs since before they had graphics (MUDs), and starting with Everquest and Asheron’s Call as my first graphical MMOs (I missed UO and other precursors) I’ve played well over 50 different MMORPG titles. Most of them are terrible, but some have had some very good story elements that were mired by too little exp for achievements. GW2 was supposed to be different. It was supposed to be better. And at first it was, to a degree. But now it’s worse than before.

And when I suggested before about the idea of branching stories, I mean that Personal Story content that is custom to your character anyway (to an extent), could have branching story arcs and elements that last for longer than 1-3 quests, but instead have an impact on the PS to a much larger degree (this would add replay value for anyone starting a new alt). As it is, you make a choice, you do a couple of quests based on that choice, then you return to the main story line, which is entirely linear. The only choice that makes a relatively lasting difference is your choice of Order that you join, and even that ends up joining up with the others after a relatively short time.

What I’m saying is that there should be a reason to participate, and reward for doing so, and right now there is neither. If they set up chained story arcs as part of the heart regions, and made dialog and story element presence a little more apparent, that would help. If they added some new side stories that include cut scenes and instanced playing fields, that would help too. If they added in some additional side stories to Living World content for lower level characters, so that they feel like they’re making more of a difference to the LS changes anyway, then that would also be fantastic.

I’m not asking for a game where I can walk through it and have it perfectly catered to me all the time. I’m saying that the game feels like more of a grind than it has to, simply because there is no meaningful participation with the lore all along the way. You get chunks here and there, and LS content from time to time that you may or may not be able to fully participate in depending on your character level. But it doesn’t flow. And the time spent between those choppy chunks of (debatably) meaningful story is mostly static and not particularly rewarding. And I’m not talking about loot rewards and exp, although improvements there would be welcome to me. I’m talking about feeling good about having participated rather than simply moving on and never giving it a second thought. I’m talking about feeling like I’m doing something worthwhile while I’m doing it, because I feel like there is purpose behind it (other than gaining more levels).

Those sorts of changes would eliminate the feeling of grindiness that now exists. Plus I think that the personal story arc should begin at level 2 or 3, relatively immediately after the tutorial, like it used to, so that there is more of a story hook for new players to get into the story and lore in the first place.

Galen Grey.4709:

NewTrain.7549:

Perhaps read my follow-up post on juvenile writing.

Secondly, you don’t seem to understand what exposition is.

Exposition – Exposition is the portion of a story that introduces important background information to the audience; for example, information about the setting, back story, context, etc. It contains examples such as “information dump” or “idiot lecture”.

In this case, both of the first two lines explicitly state the context of the situation (what is actually being shown on screen). This makes them exposition, specifically of the “idiot lecture” variety. If you’re unable to recognize that, I’m not sure it’s worth it to even continue talking about writing.

I disagree.

“The dragon’s servants will never let our ships sail. If they surround the docks, they’ll slaughter us— and Zhaitan’s forces will grow. "
“Our soldiers are too injured to fight. They can barely walk. We can’t form a defense and still get them all aboard. "

Thats not stating the context of the situation. Everyone realizes they need to retreat and they have one possibility of retreat open to them by ship. Thats discussing why the obvious plan of action will fail and what can be done about it. If they make a run for it, they will not be able to set sail before zhaitan’s forces are upon them. If the ones that are able to hold zaithan’s forces at bay there will be not enough people to carry the wounded to the ships.

Thats not describing the situation thats discussing the plan of action. Remove those first two lines and the whole thing crumbles. why would Sieran just go back towards zaithan’s forces and what is everyone supposed to do ? back her up? hold the line? run as the wind? Like I said thats not an example of exposition, it is not describing what is happening around them, its them formulating a plan of action.

You can disagree all you want, but it’s still exposition. Read those lines again, neither of them is “formulating a plan of action”. This first line even contains material that should be GLARINGLY OBVIOUS to both characters involved, yet Sieran still feels the need to say it. Poor poor writing and a classic example of “idiot lecture”. It’s also redundant with what’s happening visually. But like I said earlier, if you’re unclear about what is and what isn’t exposition then we’re very clearly talking at two different levels here and it would be a waste to continue.

NewTrain.7549:

You can disagree all you want, but it’s still exposition. Read those lines again, neither of them is “formulating a plan of action”. This first line even contains material that should be GLARINGLY OBVIOUS to both characters involved, yet Sieran still feels the need to say it. Poor poor writing and a classic example of “idiot lecture”. It’s also redundant with what’s happening visually. But like I said earlier, if you’re unclear about what is and what isn’t exposition then we’re very clearly talking at two different levels here and it would be a waste to continue.

Ehhh . . . no. Good writing can get away with that first line as the opening to a conversation. I’ve seen it done. It’s been done where the glaringly obvious (to the characters in scene) is spoken so the reader/observer can tell more about it.

Heck, Timothy Zahn gets good mileage out of it in his books. So did Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.

I’ll not go so far as to say it’s “unnecessary exposition”. It’s one of those times when a character says something like that, and the player gets the realization exactly what’s coming.

“If we try to get across, we’ll never make it.”

That’s said so the audience can have that piece sink in, through the rush of watching a scene. The sudden realization one of them is going to pull a sacrifice (or address it differently, in a subversion). Sure, it bends Alfred H’s (I’m not writing his name due to censor issues) definition of drama, but it still works.

All this is moot, more or less, because I still think that sacrifice was a poor way for them to go out – there were other options which hadn’t been exhausted, and might have worked. And even if they failed, they could have made it fail in such a way the sacrificial mentor died anyway.

It didn’t need to be hamfistedly shoved there. That is the bad writing here. A problem of concept, rather than a problem with dialogue.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Ehhh . . . no. Good writing can get away with that first line as the opening to a conversation. I’ve seen it done. It’s been done where the glaringly obvious (to the characters in scene) is spoken so the reader/observer can tell more about it.

Sure, good writing can, but this ain’t good writing. Your assertion also doesn’t mean it isn’t exposition, it very clearly is. It also certainly doesn’t mean it’s not an “idiot lecture”, which you actually describe it as in your post without using the term (just the definition).

NewTrain.7549:

Sure, good writing can, but this ain’t good writing. Your assertion also doesn’t mean it isn’t exposition, it very clearly is. It also certainly doesn’t mean it’s not an “idiot lecture”, which you actually describe it as in your post without using the term (just the definition).

1. I already said it wasn’t good writing, but that’s also not the fault of “idiot lecture”.

2. I never said it wasn’t exposition. If you want to be completely technical, it’d count as exposition. It’s not what most laypeople think of as “exposition”.

3. I wouldn’t call it an ‘idiot lecture’, since I have a less derogatory term. Which, as it stands, better encapsulates the “why” writers do this. And, notably, doesn’t preclude “good writing” from doing it either. Start looking on the list for how many things thought of as masterpieces use it.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

NewTrain.7549:

Sure, good writing can, but this ain’t good writing. Your assertion also doesn’t mean it isn’t exposition, it very clearly is. It also certainly doesn’t mean it’s not an “idiot lecture”, which you actually describe it as in your post without using the term (just the definition).

1. I already said it wasn’t good writing, but that’s also not the fault of “idiot lecture”.

2. I never said it wasn’t exposition. If you want to be completely technical, it’d count as exposition. It’s not what most laypeople think of as “exposition”.

3. I wouldn’t call it an ‘idiot lecture’, since I have a less derogatory term. Which, as it stands, better encapsulates the “why” writers do this. And, notably, doesn’t preclude “good writing” from doing it either. Start looking on the list for how many things thought of as masterpieces use it.

yeah i dont think much is served by the title idot lecture, but i think the difference is that the idiot lecture represents things the audience is supposed to know. But i agree its not always bad writing to do so. In fact its often considered bad story telling not to do it sometimes.

If I was writing this story…

Trahearne: They’ve surrounded the island. This won’t end well.

Deputy Mira: Oh, we’re in some pretty kitty litter now. Game over, man! Game over!

Sieran: What? Over? Did you say over? Nothing is over ’til we decide it is! Was it over when the Quaggans seared Ascalon? Heck, no!

Trahearne: Quaggans?

Commander: Forget it, she’s rolling.

Sieran: And it ain’t over now! This rose has thorns! Blightghast? It’s a dead dragon! Tequatl? Dead! Zhaitan?

Commander: Dead! Sieran’s right. Psychotic, but absolutely right. First things first, though. We gotta get off this island.

Trahearne: But the island is surrounded. The docks – and all the ships – are in flames. We’re not going anywhere.

Deputy Brakk: I’ve got a little fishing boat tucked away in a secluded cove.

Trahearne: Deputy Brakk? I thought you were dead.

Deputy Brakk: It was a close call. I jumped into the garbage disposal just as the risen breached the wall and overran the fortress.

Sieran: What a lovely smell you’ve discovered.

Commander: You said you have a boat.

Deputy Brakk: Yes, indeed. There’s a little cove over on the west side of the island, well out of sight of, well, anyone who doesn’t know where to look! I keep a little boat there, for off-duty fishing trips. Talon would have had a cow if he knew!

Trahearne: Alas, poor Talon. I knew him, Sieran.

Sieran: Uh, yeah. He, ah, seemed like a great Watch Commander.

Commander: And now his watch has ended…

Deputy Mira: Are you all out of your minds? End of watch? It’s the end of everything! What are you, golems? Wind-up marionettes? Don’t you know when you’re dying? Watch and regulations and orders. What do they all mean?

Commander: Fool of a Deputy! Be quiet! All right. Brakk, you lead the way. Trahearne, bring up the rear. Stay frosty, people.

/e sneak to the secluded cove

Deputy Brakk: Oh, thank the Eternal Alchemy! It’s still here! And nobody found the bottle of Tequatl’s Tail Tequila I stashed under the seat.

Commander: Sun’s almost down. Trahearne, you seem to know a lot about the risen. How well can they see in the dark?

Trahearne: Well, given that the magic which reanimates the risen also somewhat hampers tissue decay, the rods and cones in the eyes of risen…

(Five hours later)

Trahearne: …about as well as when they were alive.

Commander: Right. Well. Everyone wake up. We’re moving out.

Risen Thrall: Death, good!

Deputy Brakk: Oh, no!

Deputy Mira: Those things are gonna come in here and they’re gonna get us!

Sieran: I got this!

Commander: Sieran, what — ?

Sieran (attacking the risen thrall): You shall not pass!

Commander: Get back here and get in the boat! That’s an order!

Trahearne: I think we’re going to need a bigger boat.

Commander: What?

Trahearne: There’s not enough room for all of us.

Deputy Mira (taking a slug from the bottle of Tequatl’s Tail Tequila and pushing Sieran out of the way): Hey, you, cabbage patch kid! Get in the (hic) boat! This is my turf and I’m gonna defend it.

Sieran: But – thorns!

Deputy Mira: Shuddup, ya loose leaf lettuce! Get in the boat!

Commander: Come on, Sieran. We’re going.

Risen Brute: This one, kill.

Deputy Mira (attacks risen brute and other risen approaching): Come on! Come on! Come and get it, baby! Come on! I don’t got all day! Come on! Come on! Come on you kitten! Come on, you too! Oh, you want some of this? Well, double dumb kitten on you!

Sieran: Not bad for a human.

/e Deputy Mira holds off the approaching risen while everyone else gets away.

Tachenon.5270:

If I was writing this story…

Except for Sieran surviving, it works for me and is funny enough to get a giggle and a +1.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

NewTrain.7549:

Sure, good writing can, but this ain’t good writing. Your assertion also doesn’t mean it isn’t exposition, it very clearly is. It also certainly doesn’t mean it’s not an “idiot lecture”, which you actually describe it as in your post without using the term (just the definition).

1. I already said it wasn’t good writing, but that’s also not the fault of “idiot lecture”.

2. I never said it wasn’t exposition. If you want to be completely technical, it’d count as exposition. It’s not what most laypeople think of as “exposition”.

3. I wouldn’t call it an ‘idiot lecture’, since I have a less derogatory term. Which, as it stands, better encapsulates the “why” writers do this. And, notably, doesn’t preclude “good writing” from doing it either. Start looking on the list for how many things thought of as masterpieces use it.

1. I agree with this point in full. I never said this was the sole reason for the bad writing, just one of the pieces that make it feel so forced and artificial.

2. You responded to my post, which was a response to someone claiming it wasn’t exposition. I’m not sure what you were trying to achieve but jumping into an argument and taking neither side.

3. Idiot lecture isn’t a derogatory term, it’s an actual literary device where things that should be blatantly obvious to the characters are being stated solely for the audience, usually due to a perception that the audience isn’t sharp enough to pick up on these pieces of the story. Kind of like a character referring to his wife as “wife” and not by her name, just so the audience knows the relationship, although it’s highly unrealistic dialog (this being one of the classic examples).

IndigoSundown.5419:

Galen Grey.4709:

phys.7689:

Galen Grey.4709:

…

Galen i think the point your missing, is that while what you say is true, its not really the point, yes having npcs which walk around and say stuff relevant is more background information, yes different charchters react differently, etc.

but none of that makes for good story telling. Its not what you do, its how well its done.

thing is how can be done better? so far the only thing suggested seemed to be remove color from dialog which I personally think would detract rather then add to the experience.

“Color” in dialogue is a staple of movies, books and television. Sometimes it’s even somewhat realistic. I have no problem with color in GW2 story dialogue. Quips, one liners and especially digs at other characters happen in tense situations. People talk about things that matter all the time, but they also say things that might be considered inappropriate to the mood. This is a means of coping with stress.

However, there’s also the separate issue of having things make sense. One person does not form the rear guard against an army. Imo, that is the weakness in the Battle of Claw Island chapter, not the dialogue — which is no worse than most movies and TV shows offer.

That I completely agree with. Not sure how much time her self sacrifice really managed to buy us, probably micro seconds or seconds at best but hey its the thought that counts

NewTrain.7549:

You can disagree all you want, but it’s still exposition. Read those lines again, neither of them is “formulating a plan of action”. This first line even contains material that should be GLARINGLY OBVIOUS to both characters involved, yet Sieran still feels the need to say it. Poor poor writing and a classic example of “idiot lecture”. It’s also redundant with what’s happening visually. But like I said earlier, if you’re unclear about what is and what isn’t exposition then we’re very clearly talking at two different levels here and it would be a waste to continue.

It may be obvious but like I said in my previous version it was still necessary for co-ordination sake. Imagine if Sieran just fell back without saying anything, even you as a player what would you have done? backed her up?, kept going without a care? ask everyone to join you in the line of defense? without Sieran explaining what she planned to do and just doing it, it would have caused complete mayhem. It was a plan.

In anycase both lines were detailing events in the future (what would happen once they boarded the ships) Exposition doesnt deal with future events so no it is definitely not exposition.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

I’ll not go so far as to say it’s “unnecessary exposition”. It’s one of those times when a character says something like that, and the player gets the realization exactly what’s coming.

“If we try to get across, we’ll never make it.”

It is not just this though, things like these happen in real life. people arent robots who kitten situation and make decisions based on whether a risk is larger than 50% or not. Some people in some situation may choose to take a risk even if there is an infinitesimal chance of success. This is especially true if say not crossing could prove to be equally lethal as crossing. One party might decide its better to face the current risk then the future risk trying to cross whatever would present and thus communicates that to the other party in the hope of changing their mind not to state something that’s glaringly obvious even though it most likely is glaringly obvious.

The obvious wouldn’t figure out into it, its just a matter of communicating plans / strategy. The situation might be painfully obvious but that doesnt mean the course of action is and no matter how obvious the situation is the multiple people involved need to somehow synchronize.

NewTrain.7549:

2. You responded to my post, which was a response to someone claiming it wasn’t exposition. I’m not sure what you were trying to achieve but jumping into an argument and taking neither side.

This is a forum. I’m allowed to do that, especially when I have a point to make.

3. Idiot lecture isn’t a derogatory term, it’s an actual literary device where things that should be blatantly obvious to the characters are being stated solely for the audience, usually due to a perception that the audience isn’t sharp enough to pick up on these pieces of the story. Kind of like a character referring to his wife as “wife” and not by her name, just so the audience knows the relationship, although it’s highly unrealistic dialog (this being one of the classic examples).

Yeah, right about here I’m going to call you out. You need to try writing dialogue which sounds natural and not artificial, or forced. I had to do it as part of a creative writing class, and you know what came out all around the room from the exercise? Things which were really, really hard to use in a scene.

Dialogue is a tricky beast to write well. I see otherwise good writers fail at it, or alternatively writers which make dialogue sound good fail to have the rest of the writing work as well. It’s the #1 thing I hate to do when writing, and rough drafts have . . . by necessity . . . had the dialogue reworked to be more artificial so a scene could be understood by someone other than the person who wrote it.

Tachenon.5270:

If I was writing this story…

<snip>

Oh so many allusions! I love it. Very well done.

Galen Grey.4709:

NewTrain.7549:

You can disagree all you want, but it’s still exposition. Read those lines again, neither of them is “formulating a plan of action”. This first line even contains material that should be GLARINGLY OBVIOUS to both characters involved, yet Sieran still feels the need to say it. Poor poor writing and a classic example of “idiot lecture”. It’s also redundant with what’s happening visually. But like I said earlier, if you’re unclear about what is and what isn’t exposition then we’re very clearly talking at two different levels here and it would be a waste to continue.

It may be obvious but like I said in my previous version it was still necessary for co-ordination sake. Imagine if Sieran just fell back without saying anything, even you as a player what would you have done? backed her up?, kept going without a care? ask everyone to join you in the line of defense? without Sieran explaining what she planned to do and just doing it, it would have caused complete mayhem. It was a plan.

In anycase both lines were detailing events in the future (what would happen once they boarded the ships) Exposition doesnt deal with future events so no it is definitely not exposition.

Like I said earlier, we’re clearly talking at two different levels and continuing this discussion is a waste if you can’t recognize what is and is not exposition.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

NewTrain.7549:

2. You responded to my post, which was a response to someone claiming it wasn’t exposition. I’m not sure what you were trying to achieve but jumping into an argument and taking neither side.

This is a forum. I’m allowed to do that, especially when I have a point to make.

3. Idiot lecture isn’t a derogatory term, it’s an actual literary device where things that should be blatantly obvious to the characters are being stated solely for the audience, usually due to a perception that the audience isn’t sharp enough to pick up on these pieces of the story. Kind of like a character referring to his wife as “wife” and not by her name, just so the audience knows the relationship, although it’s highly unrealistic dialog (this being one of the classic examples).

Yeah, right about here I’m going to call you out. You need to try writing dialogue which sounds natural and not artificial, or forced. I had to do it as part of a creative writing class, and you know what came out all around the room from the exercise? Things which were really, really hard to use in a scene.

Dialogue is a tricky beast to write well. I see otherwise good writers fail at it, or alternatively writers which make dialogue sound good fail to have the rest of the writing work as well. It’s the #1 thing I hate to do when writing, and rough drafts have . . . by necessity . . . had the dialogue reworked to be more artificial so a scene could be understood by someone other than the person who wrote it.

But see, here’s the thing…I don’t claim to be a professional writer. Just as someone doesn’t need to be a professional quarterback to recognize a bad pass, you don’t need to be a professional writer to recognize bad writing. Are you trying to claim someone must be an excellent writer in order to recognize bad writing? That would be a logical fallacy sir.

NewTrain.7549:

But see, here’s the thing…I don’t claim to be a professional writer. Just as someone doesn’t need to be a professional quarterback to recognize a bad pass, you don’t need to be a professional writer to recognize bad writing. Are you trying to claim someone must be an excellent writer in order to recognize bad writing? That would be a logical fallacy sir.

And I’m not a professional writer either, I’m an amateur who occasionally gets a minor story published and has exactly one published other work under his belt. (Good luck finding it though.) I can still sit back and call you out on this, because. . . and try to stay with me here . . .

You may not need to be a pro quarterback to recognize a bad pass, or a pro outfielder to realize the ball was thrown to the wrong person, or a pro golfer to recognize someone’s using a sand wedge on the fairway. But then, turning around when someone calls you out for the heckling, it’s a poor defense to go “I’m not a professional, they should know better”. It looks sketchy, neighbor, and invites no respect.

I find it telling you took nothing from my post other than an attempt to double back and try to pin me for a logical fallacy. I explained, patiently and politely, why bad dialogue happens even in otherwise good writing. It’s not a telltale sign of bad writing. It is, however, a warning sign to look more closely.

And before you try to twist that around, no, I’m not saying GW2 has a masterpiece story. It’s serviceable and average when you look at the whole thing, with some parts which are quite good, and some parts which make you want to kill a quaggan.

(And those parts differ from person to person – I do not understand, for instance, why anyone wants to tell me how great Zojja is when I just want to punt her back to Rata Sum whenever I see her.)

If you want an example of what I mean about dialogue, and just a general “these are actual people” feel of characters? Find yourself a Spider Robinson story. I recommend Callahan’s Crosstime Saloon.

Well, I’m am a profession writer and there’s such a thing as writing to purpose and there’s another thing called writing style. Both of those are being ignored in this conversation.

In the LA guard dialogue, there really isn’t anything wrong. The writing is being intentionally exaggerated as it often is in games. What the writers got is what the writers were going for.

But it’s not just being a good writer or being a bad writer. Its’ being a writer under deadline with a specific set of instructions.

No matter how good an actor is, bad direction can sink him. Until you’re written anything under time constraints with someone else calling the shots, you have no idea what it’s like.

This writing is being produced for the purpose of furthering game elements, not telling it’s own story. It would be much better if the writers were given complete freedom, which is, in this circumstance impossible.

However stilted dialogue isn’t juvenile and writing a scene that shows prejudice and job corruption isn’t juvenile.

People are writing to purpose. The writing serves the purpose for which it was created.

It’s not a novel it’s a game.

Vayne.8563:

Well, I’m am a profession writer and there’s such a thing as writing to purpose and there’s another thing called writing style. Both of those are being ignored in this conversation.

You’re correct. Because we can’t begin to approach the style or purpose in this topic – that’s a can of worms which gets rather complex fast.

In the LA guard dialogue, there really isn’t anything wrong. The writing is being intentionally exaggerated as it often is in games. What the writers got is what the writers were going for.

I could probably find something wrong, but I’m not up for picking everything apart. Especially if I’m not being paid to do so.

But it’s not just being a good writer or being a bad writer. Its’ being a writer under deadline with a specific set of instructions. No matter how good an actor is, bad direction can sink him. Until you’re written anything under time constraints with someone else calling the shots, you have no idea what it’s like.

This writing is being produced for the purpose of furthering game elements, not telling it’s own story. It would be much better if the writers were given complete freedom, which is, in this circumstance impossible.

And there lies a lot of the issue with the GW franchise story as a whole. It’s slaved to the game, much like any other game in the genre of “fantasy games” . . . there’s a lot of places where drama and mechanics meet and everything falls apart. (Not unlike “why not use a Phoenix Down on Aeris?”)

However stilted dialogue isn’t juvenile and writing a scene that shows prejudice and job corruption isn’t juvenile.

I prefer to call it “amateur” unless it really is juvenile. Not that juvenile writing is a bad thing, it paid J.K Rowling pretty nicely.

It’s not a novel it’s a game.

While you are correct, there is still a modicum of effort which needs to be met in polishing and working dialogue. Unfortunately, it’s especially difficult in the instance of the painterly “cutscenes” since they’re lacking one of the key elements of a video game – the video potential.

I’m ever so glad they cut that crap out for LS2.

Sure. In a game, writing can almost always be improved. That’s because deadlines. You get a short time to write something because we need it yesterday, maybe you have other thing you’re writing that were due the day before, this is a priority. Gotta get it out and done. You write something fast that serves the purpose of the scene, because you’re writing other stuff at the same time. It’s not your story.

That’s why almost all MMOs have mediocre writing. But mediocre doesn’t mean amateur. It doesn’t mean juvenile.

Games that are written around story, like some single player games, are going to have better writing. Games where the writing is only there to further the gameplay elements are going to have worse writing.

In neither case is it amateur or juvenile. That’s why I use the “writing to purpose” line. One of the first things I wrote I wrote for a very specific audience. It’s terrible if you don’t take that audience into account. It’s fine if you think about who you’re writing for.

Because a lot of MMO people really don’t pay much attention to what you’re stating you have to overstate it, in the same way actors on stage have to overact for people to see their reactions without close ups.

Vayne.8563:

That’s why almost all MMOs have mediocre writing. But mediocre doesn’t mean amateur. It doesn’t mean juvenile.

The one I’ve played with the best so far has to be A Realm Reborn, but that’s because it’s basically a Final Fantasy game with MMO aspects grafted into it. And that’s usually where a lot of focus goes in FF games.

In neither case is it amateur or juvenile. That’s why I use the “writing to purpose” line. One of the first things I wrote I wrote for a very specific audience. It’s terrible if you don’t take that audience into account. It’s fine if you think about who you’re writing for.

Pretty much this. Most of my work is actually in tabletop gaming, and writing for that purpose. It makes pretty poor literature.

And my short story / novellas are an entirely different animal which I won’t begin to talk about but they are also not masterpieces by any stretch.

Because a lot of MMO people really don’t pay much attention to what you’re stating you have to overstate it, in the same way actors on stage have to overact for people to see their reactions without close ups.

Is that why “The Producers” most recently looked so fake and overblown? Oh, wait, I saw the stage play and the recentish release was basically the stage show on a smaller stage :P

But it should be said – all of this is irrelevant to people who like to see solid, good writing are going to be disappointed. There’s just too much which has flaws, and problems. GW2’s writing is not much worse (or better) than what we got the first time around in Tyria. An opinion I’ll continue to repeat on the topic of story/writing quality . . .

Along with my opinion the reason the writing is “bad” is partly because of the medium and partly because of how it was put together – in parts rather than as a whole.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Vayne.8563:

That’s why almost all MMOs have mediocre writing. But mediocre doesn’t mean amateur. It doesn’t mean juvenile.

The one I’ve played with the best so far has to be A Realm Reborn, but that’s because it’s basically a Final Fantasy game with MMO aspects grafted into it. And that’s usually where a lot of focus goes in FF games.

In neither case is it amateur or juvenile. That’s why I use the “writing to purpose” line. One of the first things I wrote I wrote for a very specific audience. It’s terrible if you don’t take that audience into account. It’s fine if you think about who you’re writing for.

Pretty much this. Most of my work is actually in tabletop gaming, and writing for that purpose. It makes pretty poor literature.

And my short story / novellas are an entirely different animal which I won’t begin to talk about but they are also not masterpieces by any stretch.

Because a lot of MMO people really don’t pay much attention to what you’re stating you have to overstate it, in the same way actors on stage have to overact for people to see their reactions without close ups.

Is that why “The Producers” most recently looked so fake and overblown? Oh, wait, I saw the stage play and the recentish release was basically the stage show on a smaller stage :P

But it should be said – all of this is irrelevant to people who like to see solid, good writing are going to be disappointed. There’s just too much which has flaws, and problems. GW2’s writing is not much worse (or better) than what we got the first time around in Tyria. An opinion I’ll continue to repeat on the topic of story/writing quality . . .

Along with my opinion the reason the writing is “bad” is partly because of the medium and partly because of how it was put together – in parts rather than as a whole.

People who judge writing without looking at the audience are going to be disappointed. It’s not the writing’s fault, it’s their expectations of what they want writing to be.

A lot of people who play MMOs are readers and a lot aren’t. But I’m willing to wager more aren’t than are. So if the company writes for those who aren’t (people who don’t understand subtlety and have to be hit over the head with repeated information for example, then that’s what they’re writing for.

You being disappointed won’t change the need to write that way. The point is it’s not amateur and people should stop blaming writers. Because the writing is doing exactly what it’s supposed to.

If you’re going to make a product for everyone you have to cater to the lowest common denominator, or you’re going to lose a big part of your audience. If your expectations are set higher than the LCD than you’re going to be disappointed, which is okay.

But I don’t particularly see that as being reasonable.

Vayne.8563:

But I don’t particularly see that as being reasonable.

Maybe, but I’ll say this last thing on this before I duck out of the topic:

If they say they want their stories to be remembered, and chatted about, then they have to do better.

Well, they did say such towards the end of LS1. The problem is, there’s . . . a not insignificant amount of uneven-ness to the writing which stands out like a sore thumb to me. And to others, which they pick up on quickly as different issues entirely (see: Kas/Jory).

It’s my greatest wish for the writing team to actually get someone . . . singularly . . . to get the final product and make sure it’s consistent with previous and later parts. Tonally, thematically, and factually. Why insist on it being a single person? More writers having the final rubber-stamp means more chances they’re not on the same page.

Then you get the mess of a Personal Story where the feel seems dramatically different from piece to piece.

The stories aren’t going to be remembered. Not in the sense of a great book or a great movie. That’s just wishful thing. Fights will be remembered. People will likely remember the fight at the end of the current arc, for example, in the same way people remember the Marionette fight. They’re remembering the fun game, not the story.

Some people, like me, will remember the story, but it’s a focus for me.

As badly as this thread has been derailed I still feel the need to address a couple of things related to my original posts and responses to them…

First, to Vayne, Tobias, Galen, and New Train: You’ve deviated so completely far from the original purpose of this thread that I’m tempted to report all of you for posts that do not add to the original discussion. If you want to continue your arguments, please post a separate thread and argue there. Your arguments about how good or bad the writing is in GW2 and your side arguments about good writing vs. bad writing in general or in relation to gaming in general has absolutely nothing to do with what I’ve been trying to talk about. Please take those arguments elsewhere, they never belonged in this thread in the first place.

To Vayne: you posted here on page 1 about how you feel like you’re totally involved in the story and the changes to the world. I didn’t properly respond to that and I would like to do so.

You obviously fully participated in the DEs related to the Living World story, and that’s great for you, but what about every new player who was too low level to participate? What about all the other content that is totally unchanged and doesn’t seem to even acknowledge that anything happened? What about the Personal Story that is now so disconnected from the “current” state of the world so as to present serious continuity problems? Furthermore, those changes would have taken place with or without you, so your participation is meaningless in relation to the changes, but more than that, what about those who didn’t get that opportunity, and what about every other piece of the game that continues on exactly as it has since pre-launch (no matter how many characters have participated in it)?

I understand that most content must, by necessity of technical issue and time constraints, be static. But that also means that that static content needs to be more compelling, otherwise it’s just tedious and meaningless.

And now, I have a couple of suggestions that could help people like me feel like there is more direct and purposeful participation in the lesser lore content…

1. There are a number of NPCs in GW2 whose purpose is to run around telling any PC that comes within proximity about an active and ongoing DE. The relevance of their information is often questionable as it never changes even when the state of the event changes. I propose that ArenaNet add additional dialog content to such NPCs that properly reflects certain states of the DEs based on event progression. Such that, if such an NPC talks to a character when the event is just starting, they may desperately ask for help, whereas if they talk to a PC when the event is 75% over, they may say something like “You could still join up and help out. Maybe you could make the difference in the final moments!” (please excuse my terrible writing, I just came up with something off the cuff as an example).

2. ArenaNet could add in similar content from heart NPCs, so that if a PC comes into proximity with them, hasn’t already spoken to them, and is less than 50% complete in the heart region, then the NPC would call out to them and ask for help. That way there would be a natural and organic reason to actually talk to that NPC and learn the story and lore of that particular region and thus learn the purpose and reason behind the activities you do. This would probably require some re-coding to add in a character flagging system, but I think character flagging for story elements would be a good thing anyway.

Continued below…

(Continued from above)…

3. Finally, I think that there should be an option for if a character is “always aware of events” or not. If the option is checked, then the system works just like now, with heart region and DE objectives laid out in the tracker without ever having to talk to anyone. But if it is unchecked (personal choice of the player): heart regions would not display objectives until after speaking with the heart NPC for the region (requiring a character flag); DEs will not be flagged on the map unless you speak with one of the NPCs that try to enlist your help, or come across the DE active area itself on your own; and DE objectives will not automatically be present and obvious as soon as you get within range of the DE active area, but will only be present and updated after a change and update takes place (NPCs that inform you of a DE should give some indication of the progress of the event and allow you to immediately get the current active objectives as soon as you enter the DE active area). In the case of the DEs, many DEs have no such NPC, in which cases either the objective should point out an NPC to talk to (such as a collection NPC for example), or should have NPCs similar to the others added in. Which solution is best would depend on each individual event, and adding this sort of thing in would take a good deal of time and effort for all DEs, so many DEs might have to remain treated as “always aware” regardless of the option setting, until they can be updated.

All of those changes/additions would, in my opinion, make the world and the story feel more natural, and would give greater story- and lore-based purpose to participation for those of us who want it. It would also make DEs feel more natural and organic, as you won’t know what’s going on or what you’re supposed to be doing until someone tells you or a change in the event makes it more obvious. Until that point you would just follow the crowd or otherwise try to find out what’s going on.

Such interactions from the relevant NPCs could be made more obvious by turning up their volume when they try to get your attention (preferably including an option to adjust it separate from other volume settings), and possibly adding speech bubbles (also with an option to turn them on or off separate from other game options).

This would give players the power to either continue as is if that is what they prefer, or to have more direct and active participation with the lore elements (not the tiny bits of lore like random NPC conversations with other NPCs, but at least the ones players will typically participate in… they can still go looking for the rest if they want to).

Adding a flag system for characters to determine if they have participated in something or not (particularly major PS or LS segments and events) so that NPC dialog and responses can change based on such participation or lack of participation would go a long way to making the world feel more organic and natural as well. And it would give more of a sense of branching stories without requiring fully branching stories.

I think such changes would go an awfully long way toward making the game feel less like a grind to players like myself and my girlfriend, as well as for new players who haven’t participated in every piece of PS and LS since game release day.

That’s all for now,
Drake

You could go ahead and report me, but really I jumped in when the conversation had derailed early. If they wanted to do anything about it, they would have locked the thread with Xtreme Prejudice. Apologies for derailing it so callously, though.

Now as to your topic . . . just what is the topic anyway? Is it how it now requires leveling, as your original post suggests? (It always did, and GW1 handled it by artifically inflating the later two campaigns so you’d be 20 almost definitely at a given point. Especially Factions.)

Is it about how there’s no story to drag you along? I think that’s part of the charm, because there’s at least some freedom there in not having it pushed into your face constantly how the lore works . . . not to mention it’s less likely to make no sense if they change things later. (Oh god did EverQuest get pretty bad for this…)

Is it about the mechanics of DEs, like your last posts seem to derail into? Because some of that just isn’t likely to work on a technical level, some of it should probably not be done, and maybe some interesting concepts which need to go back in the over to be fully ready to present as robust ideas.

They would only have locked the thread if they felt the thread on the whole was a problem, not for individuals taking the thread off topic. And then only if they actually saw it and were aware of it. Your discussion regarding the writing isn’t a bad discussion on its own, it just doesn’t belong in this thread. And your own jumping into it late doesn’t gain you anything as far as I’m concerned, as you significantly contributed to the off-topic discussion, and thereby exacerbated the derailment.

As for the point, I’ll admit that I tend to talk a lot (or type or whatever), and will likely do so here again. As a result, points can get a little lost in the jumble, but the point has never changed, and if you want to know what it is, then go back to my very first post and read the TL;DR at the very top. My point has nothing to do with having to level (and I fail to see how anyone could interpret it that way), it has to do with how much of a grind it is to level, and how the game now feels like even more of a grind because you have to do it for longer durations with little to nothing purposeful to break it up, specifically more meaningful story content (or at least that would be my preference). And I don’t see how having some additional story content added, and/or options to make existing story content more noticeable for those who want it to be (but still as unnoticeable as you like depending on how you set them), would in any way push story into your face, or anyone else’s. If all you want is a game with no story and pure hack-and-slash, then there are plenty to choose from, but my suggestions wouldn’t make GW2 any less casual about the story if you wanted it to be.

In any case, my point was, and is, that the game lacks decent story content and now feels like nothing but a pointless grind, and isn’t fun anymore, and that ArenaNet should do something about it. I initially addressed this perhaps inaccurately, as there is story content (as I’ve admitted). But the way such story content is presented makes the game feel lacking in such content because of the lack of meaning from participation.

As to changing story content so it makes sense… EQ certainly made many mistakes in that regard. Most importantly that when they made major and sweeping changes to the story of the game world, they failed to change other content along with it. So you ended up with a lot of content that worked from older story perspectives, and then other content that worked from newer story perspectives, and the two can’t jive together. But GW2 is doing much the same thing at this point. LS content has drastically changed and evolved the overall story and the lore-based state of the game world. But most of the story content still present in the game (obvious and otherwise) is still largely based off of the old story from before LS season 1 even began.

And I mentioned nothing about the mechanics of DEs. I merely addressed the manner in which participation in them has no purpose, and that options could be added to make DE participation fall in as part of the story content more clearly for those who want. And as I said, these would be options no one, including you, would be required to make it work this way (if it was implemented in any way remotely similar to what I’ve suggested). If you like things the way they are, you can keep them the way they are. And I fail to see how that is any way a “derailment” from my original point either, as the suggestions for DEs and heart regions relates directly back to trying to address the feel of the game.

So other than you trying to confuse the issue (hopefully not deliberately, though I question that), and the solid derailment resulting from the unrelated arguments, where was the point lost? All of my posts (with one exception) have been about the same thing: the grind feel of the game due to (I believe) lack of worthwhile story content, and possible ways that might help alleviate that.

As for my ideas being less than fully formed. I’m not paid to come up with fully formed design ideas and spoon-feed them to ArenaNet staff. I have quite enough to deal with in my own life without trying to do ArenaNet’s job for them. What I’ve given is rough brainstorming as mere possibilities. I would hope that they would inspire those that are in a position to do something about it to at least realize that there is a problem (or at least that some players feel there is), and to start thinking about creative possibilities for ways to address that problem. If you don’t like my ideas, then feel free to suggest some of your own, or to modify the ones I’ve given to make them something that you like better, and we and others can engage in a progressive brainstorm for other possible ways to address this issue. But then, since you obviously feel there is no problem, I doubt you could contribute very much; after all, you can’t solve a problem if you believe there is no problem.

Drake Phoenix.6158:

And your own jumping into it late doesn’t gain you anything as far as I’m concerned, as you significantly contributed to the off-topic discussion, and thereby exacerbated the derailment.

Well, usually the OPs of topics like these drop the topic and never return so . . . good on you for coming back. Again, I apologized for that. But this reply is going to also ramble a bit in places.

Hope you don’t mind.

As for the point, I’ll admit that I tend to talk a lot (or type or whatever), and will likely do so here again. As a result, points can get a little lost in the jumble, but the point has never changed, and if you want to know what it is, then go back to my very first post and read the TL;DR at the very top.

As a matter of principle I never read nor use TL:DR. I think it’s an insult to good communication. But yes, your rambling manner (something which is also a problem of mine) left me following it around and wondering where the point was going sometimes. Especially as follows:

My point has nothing to do with having to level (and I fail to see how anyone could interpret it that way), it has to do with how much of a grind it is to level, and how the game now feels like even more of a grind because you have to do it for longer durations with little to nothing purposeful to break it up, specifically more meaningful story content (or at least that would be my preference).

You’re not making a point about having to level (and were confused about me taking it that way) as your point is about how much of a grind it is to level . . . can you stop and re-read what you wrote there? You pretty much just ran that into a circle.

The rest of the thought also confirms what I thought was the point – you have a problem with the new pacing of the personal story at every ten levels. Yeah, that’s something I have a problem with too in theory. In practice, well . . . I think it solves a lot of other issues by making sure you’re ready to take the whole chapter at once and not have to “stop, come back later after some leveling for skills”.

But you said that wasn’t the point, so now I am slightly more confused.

And I don’t see how having some additional story content added, and/or options to make existing story content more noticeable for those who want it to be (but still as unnoticeable as you like depending on how you set them), would in any way push story into your face, or anyone else’s.

That’s not my complaint. Well, not my complaint about this game, but another one I am still trying to play.

If all you want is a game with no story and pure hack-and-slash, then there are plenty to choose from, but my suggestions wouldn’t make GW2 any less casual about the story if you wanted it to be.

And that’s not what I want at all. Did you read the off-topic ramble? I want a game with a coherent story which doesn’t feel like a bunch of scenes stitched together with visible seams. (All the more visible currently, with the removal of one piece.)

It’s my biggest problem with GW2’s story content – until lately, it feels like . . . like a writing exercise where a typewriter was left at a desk and everyone involved in the writing could sit down and type up ten pages before handing it off to someone else. And the next person wasn’t obligated to keep track of what the other person wrote.

(Actual writing group exercise, great fun, results in wonderfully insane stories. But I digress.)

[1/2]

In any case, my point was, and is, that the game lacks decent story content and now feels like nothing but a pointless grind, and isn’t fun anymore, and that ArenaNet should do something about it. I initially addressed this perhaps inaccurately, as there is story content (as I’ve admitted). But the way such story content is presented makes the game feel lacking in such content because of the lack of meaning from participation.

Almost every game is a pointless grind, in some sense of the term. RPGs generally fall into that category easily if you don’t like the story or the system, and MMOs fall into it all too easily since their aim is to keep you playing rather than play once and walk away. Story isn’t going to cut it for the most part, so . . . again, while I’d like to see some better story work (at least LS2 is better that way) I’d much rather prefer any content and not be picky about it.

Especially since I have very little faith in seeing “truly amazing and breathtaking story” coming through this game. I mostly expect rather pleasant and simple, because that’s how the stories of GW1 also were. I don’t expect them to execute brilliantly, I expect them to execute passably and entertainingly.

As to changing story content so it makes sense…

Yeah, that’s a dropped ball. But I think it’s a result of the development team not giving themselves enough planning ahead with the LS1 arc. I mean, it’s clear the second half (after Scarlet’s Invasions) had an arc and an ending . . . and then they failed to really follow up on the ending. If I had done it – Lion’s Arch would have had an off-season arc of being rebuilt steadily and had it overlap into early LS2 until the Mad King’s time came around so he could wreck the fountain again.

Probably while some poor metalworker was staring at the mess and turning to Captain Magnus, throwing down his hammer, and going “I quit, you fix this mess”.

And I fail to see how that is any way a “derailment” from my original point either, as the suggestions for DEs and heart regions relates directly back to trying to address the feel of the game.

I misspoke, not “derailment” but “tangent”. Do forgive me for that.

And on that tangent, you’re right in that DEs probably should have a greater sort of impact. But then, the one place where it does – Orr, it’s interesting but not very well-thought out. Especially in terms of Straits of Devastation, or the “marching routes” which require several linked events.

And some of the technical things you ask for are more likely to break and not work than they are to function as intended. Sorry, I’m going to be blunt with that.

All of my posts (with one exception) have been about the same thing: the grind feel of the game due to (I believe) lack of worthwhile story content, and possible ways that might help alleviate that.

The grind feel of the game is because you ran out of things to do which feel satisfying. That’s when the feeling of “grind” sets in, and when people start to feel disgruntled. I don’t know how else to put this but – maybe Halloween will give you a break enough to stop feeling it as grindy? Or when LS2 starts back up afterwards and you have more story content to work through? Yes, basically I am suggesting you take a break.

The hiatus has felt like it dragged on a bit. On the plus side, it means I got to catch up through my Story Journal.

As for my ideas being less than fully formed. I’m not paid to come up with fully formed design ideas and spoon-feed them to ArenaNet staff. I have quite enough to deal with in my own life without trying to do ArenaNet’s job for them.

That’s a poor cop-out and excuse for not trying. If you’re going to raise concerns, follow up with things you think will fix it, or say you don’t have any ideas but still think it’s an issue. Don’t just go “it’s not my job to fix it” because then . . . no matter how eloquent you may write . . . you come off badly.

But then, since you obviously feel there is no problem, I doubt you could contribute very much; after all, you can’t solve a problem if you believe there is no problem.

Oh, I could take stabs at it. But I don’t believe they’d be any better than what we have now. At best I think I’d satisfy one group of players while kittening off two other ones. I’ve, once or twice, bothered to present what I think would be a Good Idea in detail . . . it’s never gone rather well. The devil is in the details, they say, and that’s usually where it falls apart.

And so I mostly make vague ideas and frameworks rather than plotting it out. I have enough of that to do for my tabletop games.

[2/2]

Sorry Drake but I feel you’re way off the mark here. If any company making any game wanted to make the game completely 100% immersive, and make the story count, it would have to be designed that way from moment one. Band aid patches two years later might improve the game slightly, but I’m still going to kill a deer and get a breastplate from it. I’m still going to be out of combat and all my wounds will magically disappear. I’m still going to see NPCs in the story die and not end up getting rezzed, when I can rezz many other NPCs. For dramatic purposes those NPCs have to be dead and stay dead.

All MMOs ever really are are games people play to do stuff. Story is an excuse to do the stuff. Story can almost always be improved. I’ve never seen an MMORPG where this wasn’t true.

The problem is, most people really don’t play these games for the story and those of us who like the story agree to suspend our disbelief. That’s how pretty much all games (and many movies and books work). If you enjoy it enough, you put your disbelief to the side and you go with it. If you’re not enjoying it, obviously you won’t do that.

I’m not saying your suggestions don’t make some kind of sense, but reprogramming every NPCs that calls out an event to track the event is an awful lot of work for a very small issue. An issue so small, I doubt many people have ever even thought about it.

Would it improve this game. Absolutely. Is it worth the time and manpower to do what you’re asking? I doubt that very much.

I’m not saying you’re wrong in what you’re saying. I’m saying your expectations for an MMORPG are probably too high.

I’ll add . . . even if ArenaNet listens very carefully and devotes a lot of time and resoruces, I expect they will miss the mark for two very solid reasons.

First, they don’t have the time to conceive, code, and fully test such an evolution. That last part, is where I expect it would fall apart if ANet tried it. I like the company, and I don’t think they’re idiots . . . but testing under pressure is not something I expect would yield a project which runs smooth like butter.

Secondly, and this one is rather our own fault – the target moves. All the time.

excuse me OP?
Your very first line states :“Preemptive TL;DR: The current state of the game is seriously lacking in decent story content” how exactly is discussing writing going off topic from decent story content? Maybe we didnt go in the direction you wished the thread to go fair enough but we definitely didnt derail it.

Now to your other points
1. You’re wrong. NPCs most definitely change dialog based on Event status. No NPC near shaemoor is going to complain they feel sick unless the aquadaut is poisoned. Like wise scout sandra isnt going to tell you captain marshall is trapped in the cave unless you’re in the chain where he is trapped in the cave. As for your suggestion of actually indicating progress lets take scout sandra, all she knows is captain marshall is in the cave and hasnt come out yet. How should she know how close he is to being saved or not? when you get in range the event indicator will give you that info but for the npc to tell you it just wouldnt make logical sense. The way I see it, the NPC is acting in character while the indicator is OOC representation of the event and I personally wouldnt change that.

2. Dont think this is necessary really. The heart NPC is marked, if you want the story you will go talk to him if you dont care about the story you do the task and you’re done. Just them calling out to you will not change what the player is interested in.

3. This is a good idea. provided by default they;re flagged to show it would add to the exploration turning hear display off. I Like it.

Well npcs giving you information they dont have such as telling you the status of events they’re not that close too would actually be counter to what you want. For the rest I dont think it will make much difference. If a play values talking to NPCs (and they should as thats where all the story lies) they’re going to do that regardless if they’re engaged by said NPC him/herself. Not marking hearts is nice as discovering them will feel like a reward for exploration but again if you like that chances are you’re going to talk to them anyway and people who dont value such things are never going to disable it.