Guild Wars 2

Karizee.8076:

Relics of Orr interview with Chris Whiteside posted yesterday ~~

http://www.relicsoforr.com/p=3256

Having looked over this interview I noticed that at least one dev here acknowledges one of the major problems I had with the LS:S1 (Living Story Season One, how I will be referring to it from now on), and though he calls it problems with “exposition,” what he describes is the problem with character development.

I and others have harped on the character of Scarlet, how it was poorly written and executed in a general story sense, but the fact that poor character development has been acknowledged has given me a glimmer of hope.

I love GW2; let me get that out of the way, but the ultimate execution of LS:S1 was one of the reasons I quit for a while, and I hope, hope, hope LS:S2 learns from its mistakes. In any case, I decided to break down the major problems I had with LS:S1 and list solutions to counteract them.

Who knows if anyone looks at these things, but here goes.

1. Player agency

Did you vote for Kiel or Gnashblade? Do you even remember? There was a great deal of pomp and fanfare surrounding the election side-story, which ran alongside the spine of the Zephr Sanctum release, but aside from some minor cameos later in the LS, the consequence of the only instance where players were allowed to steer the story was largely unfelt. Kiel at any point during the later LS could have been replaced by “LIONGUARD PERSON” and nothing would have been lost. And Gnashblade with “MERCHANT WHO’S BITTER AT LIONGUARD PERSON FOR MAKING HIM WORK FOR FREE.”

This was a major case of a ball being dropped, and where I think the solution is most obvious: seriously involve the community choice in the outcome of the LS. Obviously a story arc is written and once the ending is decided, it’s decided, but the joy is in the journey, and even if Villain A must accomplish Task B by Time C in the larger puzzle developed by the writers, at least make the players feel that either Kiel or Gnashblade is heavily involved in the attempt to keep Villain A from doing B. Why wasn’t Kiel the constant partner instead of whatserface and whatserface (also fairly shallow characters)? Why not have a major element of the story be following the way the person we elected elects to deal with this catastrophic problem? Maybe the reason we elected them ends up being their downfall, leading to mistakes? Maybe the qualities we liked are allowed to shine through and validate our choice as they are put to constructive use in a tangible way? It seems a fairly easy thing to impliment, at least to me.

2. Organic Storytelling

There is a simple concept called setup and payoff. It’s used not uncommonly in storytelling: you can look it up, I won’t explain it here.

Okay, fine, I’ll give an example
[spoiler]One of my favorite open world events is in Bloodtide Coast. In this particular event, a certain pair of characters try to find a certain thing for a certain purpose (enjoyable stories don’t have to be super complex. this is as basic as it gets). They accomplish this, but one character discovers that the other character is doing something they don’t approve of and force them to correct themselves by shedding a certain item. Event over. Now if you follow the characters afterwards you’re treated to a great sequence. But if you go back to the site of the event, another event begins… someone is also on a similar quest for a similar thing.

I don’t want to spoil it, but one seemingly independent event which fires off seemingly at random, and irrelevantly, as any event does, leads to a chain of things that become increasingly entertaining, especially because you the player are aware of connections (in a truly “meta fashion”) that the characters are completely oblivious to. This relates back to player agency (the player, the reader, the audience) is permitted to get involved directly by making logical story connections themselves before or as the characters do merely by being witnesses, rather than needing to have things explained to them. The personalities of the characters involved are also revealed perfectly through the way they react to the events shown (mostly “drunkard” in the latter part of the chain, which is fine for the perfect, simple little event that it is).[/spoiler]

You might say, "Hey, Scarlet was “setup” with Aetherblades and Molten, and then “paid off” by explaining it all in the end" and I’d say “sort of, but not really.” Not organically. The early LS elements were, by their nature, introduced to us as contrivances: THIS IS THE LIVING STORY. They were released as “MAJOR STUFF IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN,” and players were invited to speculate on events which revealed little to nothing of the future, to the point where pure conjecture was encouraged. This creates contrived expectations. “What is the purpose of this? How does it fit into that? How will it fit into this?”

When you lead a player/reader/audience along like that what you “set up” is an expectation which will almost certainly be wrong. When the next “clue” is dropped and it turns out the earlier “hints” were not nearly enough to bring them to the ‘right" conclusions, the player is lost. They must submit to the will of the writers and be lead along by the nose. You don’t make the player/reader/audience feel like a part of the action anymore, more like they’re just along for the ride.

Rather than creating entirely new stories from entirely new threads created more or less from scratch, why not develop stories out of the oodles and oodles of open world (and dungeon?) content already available? There is such dense, unexplored potential for development to be found in the game that it’s staggering, especially regarding the villains already there.

The centaurs, the Inquest, the dredge, Caudacus!, people have made cool suggestions already: these enemies are just ripe for the picking. The best LS content in my opinion was Southsun, because it took a “throwaway” consideration (what happens to those refugees? are these consortium guys kittens or what?) and puts you in the thick of the consequences. You had to pacify(fight!) innocent, justifyably angry refugees while at the same time acknowledging you were helping a corporation that was taking total advantage of them. Overcoming an injustice also provides a strong emotional mode of identification, and I suspect it’s why a majority voted for Kiel, because players personally experienced that mode of identification with her.

3. Character and Conflict

This can be very hard, especially with all of the mechanics that GW2 has to deal with. So again, I say, don’t create new major characters (especially villains). Don’t contrive new Person for us to care about and assume we will care about them simply because they are written as the threat or because they were the companion. Take someone we’ve ignored and reveal how we’ve underestimated them. Take someone we already love and force us to watch their tragic unraveling. If there must be an epic threat, make it endanger something we care about from the get-go, and not something you need to explain so we understand why we care (waypoints, asura gates, The Mists; popular metabosses and farm events; even the races themselves, and feel free to look into Real Life for inspiration). Entangle it with real-life social issues (like the refugees) so that simply by being humans who have lived we already have an emotional investment in its course.

4. Make it Worth It

Moreso than souvenirs or achievement points, LS content should leave veteran players with the satisfaction of a unique shared experience. Game mechanics aside, players should be left feeling fulfilled by the story, should feel as if their participation mattered and that their participation really left them with a memory that will stay with them tot he end of their game-playing days. I think if the above points are considered, it can be more greatly assured that this effect is achieved.

And please add some zones already..

Lets see how much they improve with the upcoming Bazaar of the 4 winds.
It’ll probably give us a clue as to how Season 2 is gonna be like.

Bazaar of the rehashed content isn’t what alot of people are looking for.
Expect the same cheesy storylines and zerg style gameplay with the checklist achievements for LS S2.
Expect gemstore to reflect whatever wrapping the content currently is or filled with nostalgia GW1.

Stormcrow.7513:

Bazaar of the rehashed content isn’t what alot of people are looking for.
Expect the same cheesy storylines and zerg style gameplay with the checklist achievements for LS S2.
Expect gemstore to reflect whatever wrapping the content currently is or filled with nostalgia GW1.

Sadly, im gonna have to agree with you there.
I don’t even think there will be any story, probably more of the same achievement grinds and a little bit of re-skin. Oh well, i guess its better then no events at all.

Give us answers to questions and don’t just leave us guessing for half a year. Its all about pacing and they had no idea how to do it.

Also when there is information to give, give it to us IN-GAME, not spread out over a multitude of social media sites.

Finally I want a high fantasy story.

Tops Ways to Make S2 better than S1:

1. Never ever introduce a character like Scarlett, or any non-orginal character concept cannibalized from another copyrighted media.

2. Understand and acknowledge the server population deficits inherent to over a year of lackluster content when creating boss events, such as Tequatl.

3. If any of your Living Story content involves zerging, scrap it automatically and fire any developer involved in its creation.

4. Immediately implement player housing, Guild Halls, player mounts, and begin working on both Cantha and Elona.

5. Call up Blizzard and have them explain to you what Loot 2.0 is, then offer to buy them all pizza. Take detailed notes and listen to everything they say, because they know more than you.

6. For every gemstore item you create, there should be a corresponding piece of actual in-game content that is both meaningful and relevant. If any developer suggests a gemstore item without a corresponding piece of actual in-game content, fire them immediately for gross incompetence and negligence.

7. Immediately incorporate new races and classes into the game. Your primary focus should be developing new permanent content for the game.

8. Fire your writing team and hire a full writing team of established fantasy authors. Call up R.A. Salvatore and offer him a full-time consulting position at your home office. All story content will need to be personally signed and approved by Mr. Salvatore.

9. All living story content must have the requirement of not punishing casual players, and at the same time, not boring hardcore players. If multiple tracks or play areas need to be made, so be it.

10. Assemble a committee of the players who have spent the most time with GW2 and create a consulting committee. At regular and frequent intervals, you will ask questions and glean information from people who understand what needs to be done to fix this game. Humble yourselves if you have to. Do whatever it takes to do what needs to be done and get the advice that you need to solve real and relevant problems with the game. Simply ignoring problems with your game does not make them go away. ASK THE PLAYERS.

I’d like to stress that this thread is singularly addressing the story element of the “Living story.” Discussions about new mechanics and content have been belabored and repeated quite enough in this subforum.

I was hoping more for specific suggestions for improving LS:S1 (like… why didn’t they make Mai Trin a companion character who you interact with in the beginning and later joins you for a bit, seeming kind of cool and helpful, and then reveal she’s a baddie who horribly betrays you?), lessons from which can be applied to S2, or specific suggestions for S2 gleaned from disappointments or problems with S1.

That said,

darkdomino.9578:

Tops Ways to Make S2 better than S1:

1. Never ever introduce a character like Scarlett, or any non-orginal character concept cannibalized from another copyrighted media.

8(2). Fire your writing team and hire a full writing team of established fantasy authors. Call up R.A. Salvatore and offer him a full-time consulting position at your home office. All story content will need to be personally signed and approved by Mr. Salvatore.

10(3). Assemble a committee of the players who have spent the most time with GW2 and create a consulting committee. At regular and frequent intervals, you will ask questions and glean information from people who understand what needs to be done to fix this game. Humble yourselves if you have to. Do whatever it takes to do what needs to be done and get the advice that you need to solve real and relevant problems with the game. Simply ignoring problems with your game does not make them go away. ASK THE PLAYERS.

I’ve isolated the ones that more or less deal directly with the story element.

1. Can you define what “character like Scarlet” means, specifically? She seemed to me a pretty bland, generic villain, in the vein of other bland, generic villains; I don’t see it so much as a “rip-off” as an “also-ran.” Or are you referring to another character as being cannibalized?

2. R. A. Salvatore isn’t going to care about Guild Wars’ lore. He’s going to want to create his own. Your suggestion is pretty radical, but assuming it can even come true, it’s unlikely to solve the problem. Wanting to make his mark, Salvatore will want to make new characters, new stories, completely from scratch, to show the Established Fantasy Writers’ Mark on his work, signed and dated. It’s not likely to feel much less contrived than LS:S1. It seems entirely unnecessary to me. The writers Anet has are already learning. GW2 isn’t “Mass Effect” or “Balder’s Gate” level of story, and it’s not really meant to be. There is much more emphasis on game mechanics than story, which is fine; the story should still be competent, even if it’s minimal and simple.

3. How do you know which players to trust? Just because a few players are confident they know certain solutions doesn’t mean they’ll be right (myself included). I would hope Anet’s developers have enough faith in their own judgement to know how to filter community feedback and ultimately decide which way to go. They’ve more or less been doing that so far, and hiring an exclusive subset of metrics to funnel their feedback from seems like it might yield even less desirable results for the community at large.