Guild Wars 2

Obsidian.1328:

Ugh…are players really that obtuse?

Some of them are, especially a portion of those that don’t really keep track of the lore at all. They have a habit of fixating on a single piece of information, blowing it out of proportions, and then crafting a theory around it. I’m sure we all remember one of the more “popular” theories about Scarlet last year. The one where she was obviously a time traveling Sylvari from an alternate reality.

Writers can give an inch on something, and you can bet money on a portion of the player base running a mile with it with either a tin foil hat, a doomsday banner, or their fingers in their ears going “LALALALALA!”.

So let them. =D

Obsidian.1328:

Ugh…are players really that obtuse?

dev says: “well, when the lore is out of game, especially one that is a small detail on a pre-release interview that isn’t even documented on our wiki, we might consider it malleable.”

entire lore forum say: “DEVS OUT TO RETCON EVERYTHING FROM GUILD WARS 1 BECAUSE OF SCARLET”

BrunoBRS.5178:

Obsidian.1328:

Ugh…are players really that obtuse?

dev says: “well, when the lore is out of game, especially one that is a small detail on a pre-release interview that isn’t even documented on our wiki, we might consider it malleable.”

entire lore forum say: “DEVS OUT TO RETCON EVERYTHING FROM GUILD WARS 1 BECAUSE OF SCARLET”

Well, the nuke retcon of the 6 gods, magic and bloodstones post release was a bit more than a “small detail” IMO. And, an offsite interview at that. Nobody saw it coming.

People keep throwing the word “retcon” around and using superficial comments to justify its use. I don’t think people know what that word even means, rather they throw it around willy-nilly at anything and everything the moment a problem comes up. The only instance I’ve seen a retcon take place for GW1 was when in Factions they made a comment regarding Ascalon and its current affairs only to lead people wondering why the hell Eye of The North was telling it as though the war was still going on.

Otherwise, people are jumping to conclusions because ambiguous lore is ambiguous.

Ronin.7381:

People keep throwing the word “retcon” around and using superficial comments to justify its use. I don’t think people know what that word even means, rather they throw it around willy-nilly at anything and everything the moment a problem comes up. The only instance I’ve seen a retcon take place for GW1 was when in Factions they made a comment regarding Ascalon and its current affairs only to lead people wondering why the hell Eye of The North was telling it as though the war was still going on.

Otherwise, people are jumping to conclusions because ambiguous lore is ambiguous.

Really. The game launched with this lore largely intact. http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Magic

In August of 2013 this greatly changed lore was introduced. http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Magic

The lore change is assumed to effect the entirety of GW2. Retroactively. It also inserts the lore as common knowledge prior to it being introduced. Retroactively. We spent a year in game not knowing the lore, and after the change, we all magically knew all along. Everyone did.

I think it fits the definition of Retroactive Continuity pretty well.

oh kitten . Now I see, from the latest gw2 revision, that Snaff knew enough about ley lines to name them as such. No source listed, but its another brand new scrap of paper dumped into the prosperity instance.

for crying out loud. No Retcons?

A retcon is what they did mistakenly to the Sylvari timeline when they showed Scarlet’s birth year. An abrupt change of facts. While some people might view the changes to magic, Bloodstones, and the gods are retcons, the changes to the lore are explained when they expanded their backstory and added additional information and perspective on the subject.

Writers can change facts all the time in there works. What makes the difference between a retcon or not is usually just storytelling. Good writers can explain the changes in such a way that they are believable. Amateur writers sometimes have to use the ham handed retcon appoarch though.

Erukk.1408:

A retcon is what they did mistakenly to the Sylvari timeline when they showed Scarlet’s birth year. An abrupt change of facts. While some people might view the changes to magic, Bloodstones, and the gods are retcons, the changes to the lore are explained when they expanded their backstory and added additional information and perspective on the subject.

Writers can change facts all the time in their works. What makes the difference between a retcon or not is usually just storytelling. Good writers can explain the changes in such a way that they are believable. Amateur writers sometimes have to use the ham handed retcon appoarch though.

That bolded part is the issue for me though. We know it was a different writer or even group of writers between the two games(at least until Nightfall, but the basic lore had been set by then). Some may argue that it was the same company, and therefore perfectly acceptable. But to me that’s just silly. Legally that’s legit, logically it isn’t. I suppose it depends on which you think is more important. :/

I have to add that I think they generally did a good job meshing the two together(albeit lately it’s less so). Jeff and Ree, for instance, are very good fantasy writers. One needs only to look at their past works to validate that. Personally I think GW2 ANet did a good job linking up the basic facts of the lore. However, the style and spirit of writing between the two games are vastly different. Perhaps it was that shift in stylistic approach that was a major factor with the incompatibilities many see here. /shrug

Honestly, be glad the writing is as focused as it is. We’ve got Jeff and Ree in a position to filter everything into a cohesive whole. It’s not like in comics where previous writers’ contributions are implied (or flat out said) to have never actually happened.

The impression I get in the case of, say, magic, is that of scientific progress revealing greater intricacy of things we already knew worked. Like, the GW1-era understanding of magic is that it was given to Tyria by the gods, but even then there is acknowledgement of the Mursaat and Seers using magic before the gods arrived. 250 years later, magic is understood better, more records have been found and analyzed, and the whole of understanding has grown. The why, and the exact details, have changed, but the actions are still the same. The gods still gave magic to Tyria, Doric still approached them to beg for it to lessen, and the Bloodstone was still shattered and separated.

It’s much like the treatment of medicinal plants over our own history. Cayenne was used as an antibacterial for many hundreds of years before we understood it was the vitamin C that did it. The action is the same, the why and how has changed.

And it’s a darn bit more elegant than it could be.

Dak

That’s not sound reasoning though. You’re saying that since 250 years have past and Tyria is more modern and knowledgeable, that magic is only now better understood.

Dot dot dot…

They made it in the future for at least two related reasons: 1) for a broader artistic approach to the game visuals and themes; i.e. steampunk and magitech. 2) and for redefining sketchy but generally accepted lore concepts to mirror that new artistic, stylistic, and philosophical theme.

In other words, they purposely set the game in the future so that they could point to scientific progress dispelling aspects of the old lore as something akin to “mythic.”

I mean…it’s not like they said:
“Oh look…it’s 250 years later. Let’s explore how this scientific revolution can unveil the ‘truth’ behind Tyrian magic!”

But rather it went something like this:
“It’s going to hard to introduce all these new ideas we have into the current setting of Tyria. Why don’t we just make it in the future and use ‘scientific progress’ to better legitimize what we want to do with the narrative? It fits so well with what we want to do with GW2’s artistic style anyway, why not?”

Do you see the difference there?

I understand your point, and to an extent, I agree. The story is always going to service the game, not the other way around.

I just think the execution was a fair bit more elegant than a lot of these things end up being. Where the old stuff clashes with the new aim, it’s expanded upon instead of thrown out.

I guess I’m just used to Star Wars, where if an incoming writer wants to take their story in a different direction but there’s overlap, what came before is just completely ignored.

Obsidian.1328:

Exactly. Players need to make intelligent judgements on which things in-game should be taken literally, and which should be taken as limitations on the game engine. The game company can’t be expected, with existing technology, to present a world that is 100% accurate and viable.

Indeed, players can think about finding explanations for plotholes and things the game designers did not think about when creating the game. Such possible explanations themselves do not serve as an explanation for theories that go against logic ingame though. Neither does accepting the existence of plotholes and missing explanations “invalidate” someone’s argumentation. “Brushing something off” and accepting that there is no logical explanation are way, way different things. The only thing that discredits someone imo is personal attacks.

DraconicDak.9340:

This is logical. It does not write off a plothole that is inescapable otherwise, but incorporates it in believable fashion. And in fact, if you look at the GW1 entry for Gwen:

In 1080 AE, King Adelbern recalls Gwen Thackeray and the Ebon Vanguard to fortify Ebonhawke, a town alongside the Blazeridge Mountains, in order to solidify supply lines to Ascalon City.

Which supports my theory.

As the literal purpose of fortifying Ebonhawke was to solidify the supply lines you are claiming can’t exist (which, neatly, also defies your claim that the developers didn’t think about the supply problem), and as Gwen did, in fact, survive, I contend that there were supplies flowing into Ascalon City from the south, in safety, up until the final siege and the Foefire.

The Founding: “At a mountain clearing, we discovered an old, abandoned mining town. Its masters were long gone, but their possessions would aid us in our struggle against the charr.”

The Founding is ingame information, meaning Ebonhawke was abandoned before the arrival of Gwen and her people. The Charr laid siege to it immediately, how big is the chance for supply caravans to reach Ascalon City from there? Even assuming that such arrived from the south, through the Crystal Desert.

There were no supplies flowing into Ascalon City from the south.

Taking the logical approach then supply lines from Ebonhawke to Ascalon City most likely did not exist. Meaning the supply of the population of Ascalon City and the remaining human outposts is really hard to explain. It does not make the existence of arable land any more plausible, or a human presence outside of Ascalon City, and therefore does not lessen the Charr’s guilt in any way. They still killed every human outside of outposts they could find.

If there is a logical, in-game explanation for Ascalon City surviving for 18 years with no food, please, elucidate me.

I’m not saying Ebonhawke was for farming.

I’m saying it was on a supply route. Only a short trip south lies the water near Marhan’s Grotto, where supplies could come from Elona by way of Amnoon’s oasis, from Lion’s Arch along the coast around the Southern Shiverpeaks, or even from Cantha if they were inclined to make the trip.

And Adelbern’s purpose in reinforcing it was to strengthen that supply line. Unless you’re saying he was strengthening supply lines that didn’t exist?

Also, you say that the Charr mercilessly killed every single human that they could find (while being invisible, south of the Wall, it seems), but the game and literature continually refer to human slaves.

As in, humans kept, alive, for doing work.

Not just instantly killed.

So, uh… yeah, I feel you’re still making assumptions.

DraconicDak.9340:

I understand your point, and to an extent, I agree. The story is always going to service the game, not the other way around.

I just think the execution was a fair bit more elegant than a lot of these things end up being. Where the old stuff clashes with the new aim, it’s expanded upon instead of thrown out.

I guess I’m just used to Star Wars, where if an incoming writer wants to take their story in a different direction but there’s overlap, what came before is just completely ignored.

Oh I agree that the execution was more elegant than it might have been. It’s clear they showed real effort in trying to fuse the two. I just don’t understand why the change was even needed. I mean…it had a great foundation to start with, why mess with that?

Never played the Star Wars stuff, how bad was it?

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

for crying out loud. No Retcons?

Who said anything about, “No retcons?” I clearly pointed one such retcon that took place for continuity reasons in order for GW:EN to follow up on. There are others but what do the bloodstones have to do with the Foefire in arguing Adelbern was retconed? Answer is simple, none. Perhaps you didn’t get the memo, in trying to keep the topic of discussion regarding Ascalon, I’m saying there are times to throw the retcon-card around and times that should be discouraged to do so.

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

Boba Fett crawling out of the Sarlacc pit bad.

But- but that just serves to show how amazing Fett was. He was the Mandalorian with an impressive reputation. Heck, he had his chance to kill Vader…

…Or perhaps Boba Fett is actually a Hutt by disguise, clearly since no Sarlacc could possibly digest a Hutt.

Obsidian.1328:

Never played the Star Wars stuff, how bad was it?

Of particular note is probably Karen Traviss, who wrote a whole series of novels ignoring previous canon to make the Mandalorians into a perfect Mary Sue race. She was disliked by other SW authors at the time, and eventually the TV series The Clone Wars introduced a radically different version, essentially overwriting hers, and she threw a fit and quit SW writing entirely. I believe she’s doing Halo stories now.

She’s the most extreme example, but the entire SW Expanded Universe is constantly shifting like that.

Perhaps the phrase “How can I make this mine?” should be a fitting brand for writers like her in any ’verse that deals with continuity…

DraconicDak.9340:

Obsidian.1328:

Never played the Star Wars stuff, how bad was it?

Of particular note is probably Karen Traviss, who wrote a whole series of novels ignoring previous canon to make the Mandalorians into a perfect Mary Sue race. She was disliked by other SW authors at the time, and eventually the TV series The Clone Wars introduced a radically different version, essentially overwriting hers, and she threw a fit and quit SW writing entirely. I believe she’s doing Halo stories now.

She’s the most extreme example, but the entire SW Expanded Universe is constantly shifting like that.

They should totally bring back Tarkin as a clone, inject him with Midichlorians(cuz that Lucas idea was so awesome right?), give him a super duper SSD, and unleash him on Coruscant.

Lovestory with Jar Jar included cuz same-species relationships are sooooo last millennium.

Frosch.7809:

I am absolutely freaking out over this. How can they do this?

More than a year ago, in a lore discussion thread about Sohothin, i mentioned that Rytlock may be a candidate for Khan-Ur, if he is a descendant. And now it looks as if i may be right. Frankly, i am shocked.

ArenaNet, how can you once more trample onto GW1 lore in this way? How can you?

Sohothin does not belong into the hands of a Charr. I was waiting for a chance to take it away, by force if need be. But no, you turn that Charr into the one to lift the curse of Ascalon. Rytlock may be a candidate for Khan-Ur, but he is NOT the rightful heir to the kingdom of Ascalon. If anyone, that is Samuelsson. The human kingdom is gone, alright. But what you do here is justifying genocide and ecocide.

I was thinking that making the Charr into a playable race was for the sake of game balance, but now i see that it is obviously favouritism. You are going too far, ArenaNet. Enough is enough. You are favouring a race that caused a genocide of innocents and destroyed Ascalon completely. Many old GW1 players have not forgotten, and really do not like the Charr. I see now how much you care about those players, even less than i thought.

The ghosts deserve to be put to rest. The Charr do not deserve to be freed from a curse they caused by their actions. But that is just my opinion.

Treat your GW1 lore with more respect. Do not let a Charr casually lift the curse during a living story update like this. You could have made a great story out of it, one that stands on its own. You just casually throw it into an update whose focus is something completely different from the whole Ascalon story.

Recently you said that you do respect the lore of GW1, but now i see that you really don’t. And that you really do not care one bit about GW1 players. And yes, if what the trailer shows is really going to happen then i am done with this game.

You do know the humans conquered the charr first… right? The charr just wanted what was rightfully theirs…. Not their fault Aderlburn went crazy and killed everyone. He should have just died like everyone else was supposed to

ryan.6217:

Frosch.7809:

I am absolutely freaking out over this. How can they do this?

More than a year ago, in a lore discussion thread about Sohothin, i mentioned that Rytlock may be a candidate for Khan-Ur, if he is a descendant. And now it looks as if i may be right. Frankly, i am shocked.

ArenaNet, how can you once more trample onto GW1 lore in this way? How can you?

Sohothin does not belong into the hands of a Charr. I was waiting for a chance to take it away, by force if need be. But no, you turn that Charr into the one to lift the curse of Ascalon. Rytlock may be a candidate for Khan-Ur, but he is NOT the rightful heir to the kingdom of Ascalon. If anyone, that is Samuelsson. The human kingdom is gone, alright. But what you do here is justifying genocide and ecocide.

I was thinking that making the Charr into a playable race was for the sake of game balance, but now i see that it is obviously favouritism. You are going too far, ArenaNet. Enough is enough. You are favouring a race that caused a genocide of innocents and destroyed Ascalon completely. Many old GW1 players have not forgotten, and really do not like the Charr. I see now how much you care about those players, even less than i thought.

The ghosts deserve to be put to rest. The Charr do not deserve to be freed from a curse they caused by their actions. But that is just my opinion.

Treat your GW1 lore with more respect. Do not let a Charr casually lift the curse during a living story update like this. You could have made a great story out of it, one that stands on its own. You just casually throw it into an update whose focus is something completely different from the whole Ascalon story.

Recently you said that you do respect the lore of GW1, but now i see that you really don’t. And that you really do not care one bit about GW1 players. And yes, if what the trailer shows is really going to happen then i am done with this game.

You do know the humans conquered the charr first… right? The charr just wanted what was rightfully theirs…. Not their fault Aderlburn went crazy and killed everyone. He should have just died like everyone else was supposed to

Well to be fair, the Charr weren’t innocent. They did take the land from the Forgotten/Grawl. They’re just a territorial and war-like species who grows by conquering. Think Genghis Khan.

ryan.6217:

You do know the humans conquered the charr first… right? The charr just wanted what was rightfully theirs…. Not their fault Aderlburn went crazy and killed everyone. He should have just died like everyone else was supposed to

And how long does a group need to hold a piece of land before it could be considered “rightfully theirs”? Because humans held Ascalon for about a thousand years.

Be mindful of your answer though, because if it comes down to a “first come first serve” type of policy, the old races and the Elder Dragons would have the right to kill us all to take back their lands.

The ability to fight for and hold land is the only real “rightful claim” anybody can have.