Guild Wars 2

Shriketalon.1937:

Ms. McCoy, there is something in your posts which I feel needs to be addressed.

Angel McCoy.1832:

The whole “Commander” topic is another discussion entirely.

Bottom line is that, at the beginning of the Pact (almost 2 years ago in-game time), you were “The Commander.” After Zhaitan was killed, the Pact continued on and you went off into the world to do stuff. At that point, other commanders were brought on, and you become “A Commander.”

This never happened.

You never told that story. You did not write those scenes. Nowhere in the entire game of Guild Wars 2 does this ever take place, and therefore it is not the story you told.

This has happened repeatedly throughout Season 1, you refer to events and information that never actually transpire in the game. There are forum posts that detail how the Flame Legion were just using Scarlet to get their way, but there is no evidence for this in the game. Other posts describe how the dredge were inspired by multiple victories and motivated to keep serving as shock troops, but there isn’t a single NPC who says anything remotely justifying this. The krait were described as bitter and resentful after the Tower fell and struck LA in pursuit of vengeance, but there isn’t a single scene where that idea is conveyed.

If it isn’t in the game, it doesn’t exist. If it never makes it from your head to the page, it is never written.

The storyteller is responsible for conveying the entire narrative, and any holes in the tapestry are theirs to mend. It does not matter if you have the answers. It does not matter if you have it all properly arranged in your mind. It does not matter that you are a smart and clever thinker. All that matters is what you actually create in your medium. Art is judged by its results, not its intentions.

We never left the Pact. Anyone can claim we left to do our own thing, but there isn’t a single scene in the story that actually demonstrates this. It’s like leaving a gap between Chapter 8 and Chapter 10 and giving a brief synopsis of what was supposed to happen. That’s not storytelling, that’s telling that there should have been a story. And it’s all well and good to claim that there were priorities and time constraints, but maybe we didn’t need one or two of the hundred of lines of Scarlet’s “Mwahahahaha, I’m evil” rants or a scene or two of Marjory and Kasmeer making kissy faces, or a random interlude of Braham being a stereotypical moron. Maybe one of those scenes could have been spent actually moving the plot for the Player Characters.

You cannot ask us to pretend that you wrote the missing chapter of your novel. If it isn’t in the game, it does not exist. If it never happened in game, it did not happen.

I can only agree on that.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

You’re missing the point again. If the “birthright” is about us, then it would have changed us. For instance, when my charr found the item, it should be a unique weapon skin or something that aesthetically changed my character. Or the item can be exchanged for a land, house, or my own legion, or something. With the human unknown parents it can be as simple as something written on the gravestone of my father like;

“A father who will always play the Seraph for his son playing as the Thief.”

.. and if you’re a warrior for example;

“A father who will always play the Thief for his son playing as the Seraph.”

With something simple thing like that takes the story to a personal level.

Instead we get a generic address “…our beloved <Character Name>.”

Addressed later, largely as “polish” which just wasn’t there.

Also, my character’s “birthright” doesn’t change him because that would get in the way of how modular the PS material is – it can’t change them significantly or else it might not make sense when it mad-libs the rest into it.

Again, an issue of polish and finesse. But it doesn’t mean the story wasn’t about my charr, just because they fumbled the persistence of that detail. It still was about the charr and finding the treasure, not anyone else.

That is my point, primarily and once more stated again because you’re not listening.

Again, my point exactly. If those are details to be ad-libbed it only reinforce what I’m saying that the story is not personal — since everything personal are ad-lib.

But . . . that’s almost always the case when you have a setup like this one. It’s always the case in Elder Scrolls that the character might make no sense for what role they need you to play (“A Khajit as the Nevarine? Why not?”). It’s always the case in most games where the role is not so tightly defined and the actions meticulously scripted to make sure there is no doubt about your character’s . . . character.

I’m not saying that ArenaNet should put them in — they don’t have to and I’m ok with the things are. However, don’t expect me to call it “personal story” after they leaving things out.

At the end of the day, I expect you to call it “Personal Story” (proper noun) because that’s what it’s called. Doesn’t make it so, but at the same time, your insistence doesn’t make it not personal 100% of the time.

Isn’t that what they’ve done to “personal” story — it’s about us telling the GM about our characters?

I think that’s the right approach — but don’t call it “personal” because it isn’t.

Well, from experience, it’s never personal, or all about one person at the gaming table. Or if it is, your GM has done something terribly wrong and needs to be flogged with gusto. The story of a tabletop RPG needs to be about the group as a whole, not a singular character.

It doesn’t matter.

It always matters.

~snip~
Similarly, ‘The Hobbit’ is never about Bilbo Baggins, it’s about the dwarves.

Actually is about the brewing evil and the dragon Smaug, but I digress.

Actually, no, it was a bedtime story which was adlibbed for a large part of it and it wasn’t until Lord of the Rings was started details needed to be added and retconned to make “There and Back Again” into something consistent in-universe.

I don’t see the GW2 story a problem at all. The problem lies on the notion that the “personal” is personal —which is not -- and the fact that players bought into the idea that GW2 is about the player — which is also not.

If we all accept this simple fact, and shatter the illusion concocted by the ArenaNet ad campaign, that it’s not about the player and their chracter, then we’ll see no problem with what they are doing at all. It will all make sense.

Oh, it’s all about the player. Not necessarily the character at all times. But it is about the player, outside the Personal Story, and what they do with Tyria as presented to them. Or don’t do, in the case of the people who largely play WvW.

Now, whether this is executed well . . .

Shriketalon.1937:

If it isn’t in the game, it doesn’t exist. If it never makes it from your head to the page, it is never written.

If that were the case, people would need to stop trying to make me eat crow for saying “Mordremoth doesn’t exist” when the only sign of it existing at all was the name of one skill on one enemy.

You cannot ask us to pretend that you wrote the missing chapter of your novel. If it isn’t in the game, it does not exist. If it never happened in game, it did not happen.

They really needed extra time to polish all these things before serving it to the players. I wish I could have played a game where they’d had specifically six more months just to sit down and run through dialogue and make sure this stuff flows well and makes sense.

Shriketalon.1937:

We never left the Pact. Anyone can claim we left to do our own thing, but there isn’t a single scene in the story that actually demonstrates this. It’s like leaving a gap between Chapter 8 and Chapter 10 and giving a brief synopsis of what was supposed to happen. That’s not storytelling, that’s telling that there should have been a story.

Yes, we never left, she didn’t say we left but “went off to do stuff”, which sounds a little non heroic but that’s pretty much what we did.

I agree with the rest, lot’s of information has been left out or was badly placed (outside of the game). Great read!
Not to mention the overall quality of the story or how it ended up in game.
Since LS1 is not yet in the journal they still have time to add and flesh out a lot of the story, which they hopefully will.
They reverted their way of story telling back to the personal story style minus the puppet shows. With this format there is plenty of opportunity to add one or the other green star (or orange or blue…) to flesh out missed stories. Add a toggle on/off, sweet.

Good to have people like you to remember stories we missed btw, interesting reads always, since I missed some of the temporary content.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

But it doesn’t mean the story wasn’t about my charr, just because they fumbled the persistence of that detail. It still was about the charr and finding the treasure, not anyone else.

That is my point, primarily and once more stated again because you’re not listening.

You just proved my point. It’s about “the charr” and not “your charr” or “my charr”. Generic vs specific and “personal” demands specifics.

Just like saying,

“By the way, I bought you a new personal toothbrush, but you’ll be sharing it with Larry, Curly, and Moe.”

Don’t call it “personal” when it’s not.

But . . . that’s almost always the case when you have a setup like this one. It’s always the case in Elder Scrolls that the character might make no sense for what role they need you to play (“A Khajit as the Nevarine? Why not?”). It’s always the case in most games where the role is not so tightly defined and the actions meticulously scripted to make sure there is no doubt about your character’s . . . character.

That’s not the issue here. The issue is the notion of “personal” story, about a game that is about “us”, that changes we made sticks, that the village we save remain save, etc.

None of those exist in game. Those are nothing but an advertising hype.

At the end of the day, I expect you to call it “Personal Story” (proper noun) because that’s what it’s called. Doesn’t make it so, but at the same time, your insistence doesn’t make it not personal 100% of the time.

That’s the thing. It seems that they’ve started off making it a personal story, but along the way changed their mind due to undisclosed constraints.

Yes, at the end of the day I will still call my dog “Kitty” because that’s her name.

Well, from experience, it’s never personal, or all about one person at the gaming table. Or if it is, your GM has done something terribly wrong and needs to be flogged with gusto. The story of a tabletop RPG needs to be about the group as a whole, not a singular character.

We agree on that, that’s why it was a must see if ArenaNet can pull off this “personal story” hype — unfortunately, that’s all it was, hype.

It always matters.

In MMORPG it doesn’t matter.

Actually, no, it was a bedtime story which was adlibbed for a large part of it and it wasn’t until Lord of the Rings was started details needed to be added and retconned to make “There and Back Again” into something consistent in-universe.

Not getting into that. lol.

Oh, it’s all about the player. Not necessarily the character at all times. But it is about the player, outside the Personal Story, and what they do with Tyria as presented to them. Or don’t do, in the case of the people who largely play WvW.

Now, whether this is executed well . . .

That’s a weird interpretation of the campaign ad where the player become their character in game — specifically “Our Time is Now” ad campaign.

So when you say things like “it’s all about the player. Not necessarily the character” is weird and contradicting because the player and the character is advertised as one and the same.

Shriketalon.1937:

Ms. McCoy, there is something in your posts which I feel needs to be addressed.

Angel McCoy.1832:

The whole “Commander” topic is another discussion entirely.

Bottom line is that, at the beginning of the Pact (almost 2 years ago in-game time), you were “The Commander.” After Zhaitan was killed, the Pact continued on and you went off into the world to do stuff. At that point, other commanders were brought on, and you become “A Commander.”

This never happened.

You never told that story. You did not write those scenes. Nowhere in the entire game of Guild Wars 2 does this ever take place, and therefore it is not the story you told.

This has happened repeatedly throughout Season 1, you refer to events and information that never actually transpire in the game. There are forum posts that detail how the Flame Legion were just using Scarlet to get their way, but there is no evidence for this in the game. Other posts describe how the dredge were inspired by multiple victories and motivated to keep serving as shock troops, but there isn’t a single NPC who says anything remotely justifying this. The krait were described as bitter and resentful after the Tower fell and struck LA in pursuit of vengeance, but there isn’t a single scene where that idea is conveyed.

If it isn’t in the game, it doesn’t exist. If it never makes it from your head to the page, it is never written.

The storyteller is responsible for conveying the entire narrative, and any holes in the tapestry are theirs to mend. It does not matter if you have the answers. It does not matter if you have it all properly arranged in your mind. It does not matter that you are a smart and clever thinker. All that matters is what you actually create in your medium. Art is judged by its results, not its intentions.

We never left the Pact. Anyone can claim we left to do our own thing, but there isn’t a single scene in the story that actually demonstrates this. It’s like leaving a gap between Chapter 8 and Chapter 10 and giving a brief synopsis of what was supposed to happen. That’s not storytelling, that’s telling that there should have been a story. And it’s all well and good to claim that there were priorities and time constraints, but maybe we didn’t need one or two of the hundred of lines of Scarlet’s “Mwahahahaha, I’m evil” rants or a scene or two of Marjory and Kasmeer making kissy faces, or a random interlude of Braham being a stereotypical moron. Maybe one of those scenes could have been spent actually moving the plot for the Player Characters.

You cannot ask us to pretend that you wrote the missing chapter of your novel. If it isn’t in the game, it does not exist. If it never happened in game, it did not happen.

Thank you. You wrote what I feel. I’m too blunt and tactless.
And, for me at least, these later “explanations” come off too often as plot pothole repair, rather than an original part of the story.

SO MUCH +1’s to the OP. This has always bugged me and I never realized it till now.

So many times, when I went “lore exploring” through zones, I’m constantly finding myself saying “NO, —> I <-— made that happen. Not this stupid Kormir clone!!!”. It happens so often I’m starting to think that was EXACTLY the emotion they’re trying to evoke here all the time is to troll the player into yelling at their own Monitor (especially us Gw1 vets).

No little task was ever too Trivial for one of these Mary Sues to steal credit for.
As an Artist who’s had their work stolen/edited and reposted under a new name in obvious places I was obviously going to see it again, I think this is almost directly comparable.

I’m suddenly more annoyed by this nerf to the position of commander. People complained that Trahearne stole the spotlight and now the lore team is reducing our spotlight in The Pact solely because the overarcing teams are pushing away from a Pact centric storeline, this seems like a greater cop-out than the handling of mixing with the 2nd rate destiny edge which is likely limited in the choice of voice actors whereas the direction of the story, and as such our position in the pact, would and could still be directly affected by Anet’s choices- a shame they decided to downplay us in that regard once again.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

You just proved my point. It’s about “the charr” and not “your charr” or “my charr”. Generic vs specific and “personal” demands specifics.

Just like saying,

“By the way, I bought you a new personal toothbrush, but you’ll be sharing it with Larry, Curly, and Moe.”

Don’t call it “personal” when it’s not.

For the love of Dwayna, if you’re going to hang the neutral pronoun of “the charr” when I had been saying “my character” all this time, and suddenly declare it void then you are really not trying to listen.

You know darn well what I was talking about and this is incredibly low to try to step on that one pronoun for the sake of twisting the argument.

Oh, it’s all about the player. Not necessarily the character at all times. But it is about the player, outside the Personal Story, and what they do with Tyria as presented to them. Or don’t do, in the case of the people who largely play WvW.

Now, whether this is executed well . . .

That’s a weird interpretation of the campaign ad where the player become their character in game — specifically “Our Time is Now” ad campaign.

So when you say things like “it’s all about the player. Not necessarily the character” is weird and contradicting because the player and the character is advertised as one and the same.

Which it should always be clear to someone, anyone, everyone is impossible. Physically, literally, figuratively impossible to have “my character” and “me” be the same. Even if you make your character a dead ringer for your RL appearance, it’s not you. It’s never you. Therefore the distinction is necessary, and usually understood to exist at the bottom of the discussion.

I do apologize for assuming you understood that.

As to the thrust of the marketing campaign? I really wonder who didn’t know, and it wasn’t made abundantly clear at the first “one time event” of Lost Shores, this wasn’t going to fly exactly as the wording said. There was simply never going to be that option, because this game has been built in an inclusive spirit instead of exclusive. (Bypassing all the discussion of how it is really technically indefeasible to create something that way which isn’t run live and decided on-the-spot.)

And “well you did this event and now it’s forever locked into this result” runs that edge of exclusion. What about the people who couldn’t make it . . . such as those who come after? We got a taste of the outrage with the Ancient Karka Shell Chest, didn’t we, and the players said:

“Don’t do that crap again.”

So, if you want to talk about how the advertising hype failed? Think on that. The players decided they didn’t want that sort of thing. And they really decided they didn’t like missing bits of LS1 and losing out the chance to participate or get neat stuff. They had that starting way early on (two months post-release) and pretty much got beaten into backing off the mark.

One final minor tangent, and more of a personal reflection put here to be read.

There was another “living world” which existed about ten years ago, maybe fifteen. It had all kinds of the same problems of not being remotely “alive” and no single character had any individual impact on anything which happened unless it was all pre-planned and laid out in advance. It was even backed pretty decently . . . it was called “Living Greyhawk”. And that had the benefit of not being hamstrung by code, or game engines, or voice acting costs.

Why would I expect anything to succeed with those limits attached?

One point that seems to be getting “lost in translation”, so to speak, between the players and developers/designers/etc is the personal experience of playing the game. Aside from the issues of PC voicing, aside from the issues of first-person versus third-person (personal choice versus open world), aside from references to the player (or lack thereof), what pronouns are used, etc., etc., is the personal lack of significance or impact to the story.

Yes, it is true that all of the aforementioned points are factors in the creation of the personal sense of lack of involvement, lack of impact, but the sum is greater than the parts, and the experience I, and many others it seems, are getting is that we do not matter. It is a problem of alienation. It is a very visceral and somewhat demoralizing feeling, and it’s hard to convey here.

This, I think, sums it up very, very well:

Baltzenger.2467:

I don’t personally dislike any of our current protagonists, but I do feel distant from them, I don’t know why I’m supposed to run around with them, I don’t need them, I rather have my real friends join me on the adventures of Tyria, and we be the real group that saves the world. And of course, I am curious about their story, I wan’t to follow them, just, not pretending theirs is my story, because I don’t even decide where to go, I feel carried.

The solution is expressly not to actually have our friends be the protagonists instead of Rox et al. That would be missing the point. See below on my take on solutions (hint: I do not know what they are, only that they can be very simple, since the problem, though deep, is one of perception.)

It is this sense of feeling carried, of not knowing why the new characters are my friend, that contribute to the strong feeling of alienation. I believe part of the problem is that, as explained by Angel (IIRC), without race- or profession-specific choice points in the Living Story, there is less of involvement of the player’s particular idiosyncrasies of history to “hook onto” in the new Living Story. Of course, one aspect to a possible solution is to give player some (ultimately false, as always and as necessary for a game like this) sense of choice or personal control.

The biggest contributor to a solution is to attack the problem directly – make the player matter. This does not mean that everyone has a say and of course it’s impossible to do that. What it means can be as simple as referring to the player more often, making the player more explicit. We simply seem to not really exist in this Living World as an independent entity – we are carried along, not talked to, not referred to (except in the vaguest and briefest ways).

Others have already made my point here but I wanted to re-iterate and +1 to the player experience of alienation.

The key is that this is a perception. The solution may therefore be very simple. I am not a game psychologist (though this would be an interesting issue to study) but feel that someone like this would be best suited to addressing the problem.

Corollary: I think all game studios should have a resident psychologist or role where the experience (in a subjective, experiential or psychological sense) of the player is considered. Important player-game dynamics might otherwise be missed; the forest may be ignored due to focussing on the trees of dialog, voice acting, etc.

Corollary #2: someone less involved in the development of the game would be ideal, since as we’ve seen (and has been pointed out), there is a lack of expressing certain things about the story that are “taken for granted” by the development team (such as the curious ‘fact’ that we are not “the” Commander, but “a” Commander – not anywhere mentioned in-game). Why is this? Anyone’s guess, but a strong contender in my view is that there is office talk, there is a cohesive sense of the story in the company and during meetings that is not 100% being translated outside of the meetings and of the company – i.e., to the players. So someone who is almost an outsider, would be best to spot these issues – of course, they’d have to play the game intensely as well. (Perhaps these forums can serve as a good substitute, though there is a lot of information and voices floating around and some important unifying messages or themes might be missed, hence part of the motivation of this post.)

A quick follow-up to give a particular in-game example, and to demonstrate that even when “trying” to give the player more control, the sense of personal involvement can actually diminish or fail:

When searching Scarlet’s quarters in Prosperity, the designers admirably try to make the player “matter” by having the PC interact with the other major characters in exploring the room, e.g., “have a look at this” and all. So in a sense, yes, “we” (the PC) are “involved”. But it doesn’t create actual involvement. I, as a PC, obtain an experiential sense of involvement only when I perform actions such as open the door, go inside, and read the notebooks, etc. Some can be examined without the prompting of the other characters. But these moves and actions are not “recognized”, and therefore, the player is strongly invalidated. It’s as if they didn’t happen – and therefore, as if we did not exist. The actions that do matter, and the only ones that matter, are the ones taken by the other characters. They notice the “actually” important elements in the room, like the ley line schematic, journal, etc. We are “carried along for the ride” by being asked “oh take a look at this” but have very tangential roles. In fact, if I recall correctly, we are not even asked by the characters directly. We are instructed to participate by the UI, quest indicator, etc. That makes the feeling of involvement even less. Finally, when it’s time to leave, or make decisions on what to do, the other characters do it, not us. They announce what is to be done, and we definitely do not feel at all like we are “the Commander” nor “a Commander” by any stretch, just a passive observer, in fact almost just a disembodied, third-person camera.

I hope that helps convey some of the experience of the player in the Living Story that makes us (at least myself) feel quite alienated, useless, and breaks the immersion of the game in a very big way.

It almost seems that, ironically, by trying to make the story work for everyone, any particular player (any one, and thus, everyone!) becomes, in fact, excluded.

EDIT: I apologize for the excessive use of bold and italics, I just am very excited about contributing to this very fascinating discussion and IRL would express it with facial expressions, hand gestures, etc., so can only approximate this using bold & italics.

One study I recall reading about came to mind as I was thinking about these issues. An fMRI study in Science recently showed that social exclusion and rejection activates the same brain regions that subserve experience of (physical) pain.

Ref is: Eisenberger NI, Lieberman MD, Williams KD (2003). Does rejection hurt? An FMRI study of social exclusion. Science 302(5643):290-2. Pubmed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=williams+eisenberger+rejection

Most interestingly, the behavioural paradigm used for eliciting these feelings was a “video game” type protocol where the player could pass a ball amongst him/herself and two computer players. The computer players ultimately stopped passing the ball to the subject, eliciting feelings of exclusion and therefore pain.

Note that this was due to being rejected or not socially included. We are social creatures, and therefore, not including us in the “choices” of the story (switching back to GW2) can thus create similar feelings of exclusion, alienation, and pain that I’m trying to refer to.

It isn’t even about being “the” hero. NPCs that should know you, regardless of heroics, simply don’t, and there are a lot of them.

Example. The first Vigil crusader I worked with is a recruiter for them in Hoelbrok. Now, in spite of what we did together, I’m an absolute stranger. This isn’t just about who the story should revolve around but a simple recognition of a simple fact. The guy should know me. Period.

I agree that a lot of tiny attentions (dedicated dialogues according to the PS/LS achievement status, forking dialogues according to personal background, etc.) (even if carefully, scarcely and cleverly sprinkled on, as Angel McCoy says), would mend things quite a lot and enliven the player’s sentiment that he/she’s really role-playing a character, rather than a MOBA avatar (I use RP as in “being immersed in a fantasy world” here). I easily figure that this work but may be time-consuming. It’s simply to be considered in the grand schedule of what has to be done to improve the game experience.

What is sad (and worrying?), is that this non attention (or time constraint-induced limitation) has lasted since the very game’s beginning, well before the LW. Go talk to the first level PS characters you brought back to your home (charr character’s father, etc.) to convince yourself. My theory is that the PS was (at least at some time in the past years) seen only as a mean to go with the fast leveling-up, and indeed, this (sadly) reflects well the mindset of many players (not those complaining here!).

So yes, perhaps, it could be a good idea to temporary hire a recruit to play the PS in an excessively character-focused way (hard-core/vet/meta MMO players shouldn’t qualify for this role imho), so that the devs and story-tellers would have a genuinely fresh, outside sight on what it feels to play a given character combination the way it’s implemented in game.

This would be just another game polishing action, a bit like when the devs decide to focus on a given profession balance in PvP.

Teofa Tsavo.9863:

It isn’t even about being “the” hero. NPCs that should know you, regardless of heroics, simply don’t, and there are a lot of them.

Example. The first Vigil crusader I worked with is a recruiter for them in Hoelbrok. Now, in spite of what we did together, I’m an absolute stranger. This isn’t just about who the story should revolve around but a simple recognition of a simple fact. The guy should know me. Period.

Yet one more detail I really wished they’d gotten RIGHT – I really wanted Agent Ihan to be my mentor for my initiation, not Tybalt. I mean, he’s a fun character but he didn’t feel like the right type to be training my character.

And on the other hand, I didn’t mind my character being handed off to Forgal, because he was clearly an experienced and capable person. He knew what he was doing and he had the air of “just listen to me because you have a lot to learn”.

Lastly, Sieran . . . oh my god, Sieran . . . unless it comes out the Priory assigned my character to her in hopes of tempering her then I really don’t have faith in Steward Gixx to make good calls when it comes to decisions.

All this and more disconnected bits during the middle of the Personal Story drove me mildly nuts. In one instance, I’m supposed to be looking into a corrupt Krytan Minister, and my character should be well aware about the guy being investigated and not surprised. My charr warrior should know what the Renegades are and not have a dime-store explanation of them. My norn should know what the heck the Great Destroyer was.

alccode.1297:

~snip~

alccode.1297:

~snip~

alccode.1297:

~snip~

Very well written and you’ve touched on the issues I’ve been trying to convey. With that, I have nothing more to add.

Thank you.

Honestly I don’t feel that the PC is in the shadows of any of the story to date in the game. We are taking on enemies so epic and cunning or in numbers that merely our character alone is no capable of doing. So we are a group of heroes each having their moments. The PC is the leader of the group and so we see the story from the perspective of the leader. Much like if you were reading a book about a group of heroes told in the first person by the leader of that group. We are just as important a part as the rest of the group and so when you are witnessing these things you have to keep in mind when things like here are the heroes that saved the day are said for example, “YOU” are included in that. After all not only is the story told from the first person perspective it is also being seen from the first person perspective too. So you can’t view an event as the previous example of the hero congratulation encounter as if seeing from your characters view is somehow a third person view. Because then yes you will see things in the wrong and think your character is somehow in the shadows though it all. I hope think helps bring the story into perspective.

You changed VAs in GW1 and nobody cared much. In addition, it’s not as if only one actor ever can do a suitable impression of a specific voice.

I think it means “Game Master Player Character”, a reference to tabletop RPGs where a GM will sometimes have their own character in the party (usually because there’s a shortage of players to fill needed roles). The pitfall some bad/novice DMs do is giving their GMPC a prominent role in the story (e.g. they are the heir to the throne, the Chosen One destined to slay the Dragon) and basically treat them as a favoured child to the point where the other players feel overshadowed or sidelined.

Meanwhile some games (cough-Oblivion) get away with it.

Also, GMPCs aren’t automatically bad. Some GMs actually do operate with restraint. (See: “Lord British”)

I did say “bad/novice DMs”. I run a Rogue GMPC in my tabletop D&D game due to having only 3 players, and nobody wanted to be the trap monkey.

Zaxares.5419:

I did say “bad/novice DMs”. I run a Rogue GMPC in my tabletop D&D game due to having only 3 players, and nobody wanted to be the trap monkey.

There is another solution for “the need for a trap monkey”.

. . . it might cost some alignment hits though

Spoiler here:
In the new LS you’re actually the one who’ll see the Eternal Alchemy itself.
That makes you the most important characters of the whole plot.

Aomine.5012:

Spoiler here:
In the new LS you’re actually the one who’ll see the Eternal Alchemy itself.
That makes you the most important characters of the whole plot.

That still has to be seen in future chapters, but your character does say something along the lines of it came at me and that s/he is somehow tied in with everything. I’m curious to see how this gets played out.

I do hope that Angel Mccoy takes what Shriketalon said to heart. There are many important pieces of information missing from the story that need an explanation, an IN GAME explanation, like how scarlet somehow united races that would’ve had no place following her (the flame legion do not follow women) or how the krait, an extremely xenophobic race to the point where they slaughter or enslave anything that isn’t them would unite with a bunch of talking plants, or how she has an almost unlimited army of these troops. Saying that “x” or “y” happened on the forums only is not the correct way to write a story. You cannot separate a part of the story from the main focus of where the story draws from. It would be like writing a book, skipping ahead multiple chapters, and then explaining what happened in between those chapters to a random fan that emailed the writer and asked.

Not everyone is on these forums to read the writer’s headcanon.

In addition, I do not think I am the only one that was displeased with the behavior of your “comrades” after you step out of the machine that drove scarlet mad. Braham was the only person that asked if the player character was okay, and he is quickly shoehorned out of the picture (again) to make room for taimi and kasmeer…making fun of your hair. As opposed to being concerned about whether or not the player character is about to go mad and kill everyone in the room.

The last thing I had a problem with was that note on the wall saying that there was an alliance between the centaurs and the kournan’s, which is FLAT OUT WRONG. One of the main heroes from Guild Wars: Nightfall, Zhed shadowhoof, is not afraid of mentioning the atrocities that humanity committed against his people. This should be basic knowledge for someone writing for this game.

Outside of the story missions, the writing for the general NPC’s in the area can be enjoyable, and I do hope to see more of the trio consisting of the two humans and the hylek.

alccode.1297:

One study I recall reading about came to mind as I was thinking about these issues. An fMRI study in Science recently showed that social exclusion and rejection activates the same brain regions that subserve experience of (physical) pain.

Ref is: Eisenberger NI, Lieberman MD, Williams KD (2003). Does rejection hurt? An FMRI study of social exclusion. Science 302(5643):290-2. Pubmed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=williams+eisenberger+rejection

Most interestingly, the behavioural paradigm used for eliciting these feelings was a “video game” type protocol where the player could pass a ball amongst him/herself and two computer players. The computer players ultimately stopped passing the ball to the subject, eliciting feelings of exclusion and therefore pain.

Note that this was due to being rejected or not socially included. We are social creatures, and therefore, not including us in the “choices” of the story (switching back to GW2) can thus create similar feelings of exclusion, alienation, and pain that I’m trying to refer to.

That’s… actually kind of awesome to know, and it does go a long way towards explaining the problem.

I’ve never had that experience from a game. The only times I’ve felt painfully excluded occurred in active social situations. There’s not been a game that I’ve been invested that my character was the center or have had emotional pain if it was excluded.

I attribute it mostly to being in game development for about five years now at various places and states, but I never got that immersed in a game to that extent even before then. Movies or television I don’t get immersed in either, so take it as you will, usually I get bored with them pretty quick (movies and TV, not games). Books are about the only media I’ve ever gotten a deep emotional immersion in.

I’m not bragging, I’m just stating that I’ve never experienced that phenomenon personally. Anecdotally. It’s probably also due to the fact that in books I’m used to mostly being an observer.

Palador.2170:

alccode.1297:

One study I recall reading about came to mind as I was thinking about these issues. An fMRI study in Science recently showed that social exclusion and rejection activates the same brain regions that subserve experience of (physical) pain.

Ref is: Eisenberger NI, Lieberman MD, Williams KD (2003). Does rejection hurt? An FMRI study of social exclusion. Science 302(5643):290-2. Pubmed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=williams+eisenberger+rejection

Most interestingly, the behavioural paradigm used for eliciting these feelings was a “video game” type protocol where the player could pass a ball amongst him/herself and two computer players. The computer players ultimately stopped passing the ball to the subject, eliciting feelings of exclusion and therefore pain.

Note that this was due to being rejected or not socially included. We are social creatures, and therefore, not including us in the “choices” of the story (switching back to GW2) can thus create similar feelings of exclusion, alienation, and pain that I’m trying to refer to.

That’s… actually kind of awesome to know, and it does go a long way towards explaining the problem.

That doesn’t exactly explain the problem, rather the results of what the playerbase is subjected to with every living story update. It’s more of the end result of everything. The problem has always been the writing, but now they’re taking it to a new level by trampling on established lore from the previous games.

raahk.2786:

That doesn’t exactly explain the problem, rather the results of what the playerbase is subjected to with every living story update. It’s more of the end result of everything. The problem has always been the writing, but now they’re taking it to a new level by trampling on established lore from the previous games.

I was meaning in a more generic way, rather than focused on just GW2. You’re right, though.

OP: I do agree with your feelings on this subject – If there was a way for the developers to involve/acknowledge your character more, that would make it more enjoyable to play. However, even if they did that, I still wouldn’t feel entitled to play in any rush. Why? The “Superfriends” get on my nerves quite a lot with their stereotypical cliches/archetypes. I really don’t give a kitten about them at all. IMO, even Destiny’s Edge was more likable and each character felt far more unique and fleshed out than these guys.

Moyayuki.3619:

OP: I do agree with your feelings on this subject – If there was a way for the developers to involve/acknowledge your character more, that would make it more enjoyable to play. However, even if they did that, I still wouldn’t feel entitled to play in any rush. Why? The “Superfriends” get on my nerves quite a lot with their stereotypical cliches/archetypes. I really don’t give a kitten about them at all. IMO, even Destiny’s Edge was more likable and each character felt far more unique and fleshed out than these guys.

That’s probably because Destiny’s Edge wasn’t as forced, nor were they made to appeal to certain social justice warrior traits, which is a loud minority on the internet.

I’m finding a different problem, which led me to drift away from GW2, and that’s – alts. I don’t want to admit how many I’ve leveled to max & geared & worked on. I did it because I really enjoyed the starting levels. I liked the choices – I liked seeing my bulky norn guy (he’s pretty, though, which happens when a woman designs a male, I guess!) – go through the story, as opposed to my various Asura. Progressively, there were fewer & fewer choices, but hearing an Asura deal with Trahearne & company is very different from hearing my monosyllabic Norn. I felt most of the personal story lines (up to The Advent of Trahearne) were quite good. (some more than others, the Asura being my favorites) Even after, there were some side choice-stories that I found moving or exciting.

But now – I went through on my first character, my human Mesmer, & I could find absolutely no reason to do it on the others. It felt like labor, & I ended up doing other things (meaning, other games, work, just – not GW2) I lost interest. (I’m also not entirely wild about the combat changes, but if the story had been great, I’d have stuck with it.) I don’t honestly care that much about the game story if I’m just a red shirt. I found very few, if any, choices that required my character’s presence at all. At one point during the first part of this season, I thought I’d found a choice – something about a door, but it amounted to me waiting around, then smacking the door, then watching the biconics take over, again.

I could make myself go through on one character, just to see what’s new. But on the alts? I don’t see a reason, nor do I feel any call to do so. I did like Taimi, but I don’t feel I know her, because there’s no relationship with my character. I learn what she feels about her ‘sisters,’ and the other 2 (the fact I keep forgetting their names isn’t a great sign) – but with my characters? Nothing.

I don’t play a game to read someone else’s story, even if it’s a great story. Games are interactive, not sitting back & watching tv, not reading a novel. GW2 was appealing because it was supposedly interactive. (Ya. I remember the launch trailer.) Right now, it isn’t.

I appreciate that it’s possibly an interesting story, and that it seems quite positive. Arguably, it’s a little more woman-friendly than most games. (though I can’t help noticing that the women look like barbies, so they ring a bit closer to ‘male fantasy’ than ‘brave heroines,’ but ok…) I’d just like to feel a little more personally involved, as I did at the starting levels.

I don’t care a whole lot about an NPC praising me (in fact, 9 times out of 10, it feels cheap and forced because I know it’s just a computer program). But what can bother me in video games is when I don’t feel like I have agency; for me, this is why I’m really into games that have interesting choices affecting the direction of your story.

Although I understand the limitations of that design choice in an MMO and I think you guys have implemented some cool choices nonetheless, there are occasional moments when I feel like a silly little errand boy. One that comes to mind in the recent story quests was when I had to go gather stuff up for Taimi. I felt like my character should have had a talk with stubborn-asura-guy and just told him to chill the kitten out and/or bugger off until Taimi has finished (which sort of happened, but it felt weak and lacking in personality – like my character is a doormat).

Then Taimi could go with me and gather the stuff that’s for her pet project. Instead, I’m relegated to errand boy because of some silly made-up race politics that I don’t fully understand.

I feel like at this point, the MC should have more clout than that. Or at least be stubborn enough after facing down a dragon to put his/her foot down on some things. So yeah, my only real complaint is don’t go so far into streamlining the everyman/woman aspect that you make a cardboard MC. This is where dialogue options would be really cool.

Speaking of, what happened with the personality system?

Labjax.2465:

Although I understand the limitations of that design choice in an MMO and I think you guys have implemented some cool choices nonetheless, there are occasional moments when I feel like a silly little errand boy. One that comes to mind in the recent story quests was when I had to go gather stuff up for Taimi. I felt like my character should have had a talk with stubborn-asura-guy and just told him to chill the kitten out and/or bugger off until Taimi has finished (which sort of happened, but it felt weak and lacking in personality – like my character is a doormat).

I was hoping /threaten would work coming from a spike-armored Charr warrior with a very large Asura-smooshing hammer, but… Phlunt didn’t seem impressed. :\

Rauderi.8706

I was hoping /threaten would work coming from a spike-armored Charr warrior with a very large Asura-smooshing hammer, but… Phlunt didn’t seem impressed. :\

Haha, if only.

BobbyStein.2315:

Mister Midnight.9837:

Why does the game have to be open world at the expense of the PC? That’s a complete cop-out.

Actually, it’s the reality of game development. You have limited budget and time to work with, so scope must be adjusted to fit. Features must be prioritized, and sometimes that means cutting content or systems.

http://www.ambysoft.com/artwork/ironTriangle.jpg

This is entirely correct, the reality of the situation when it comes to mmos, is that developer teams have a budget they must work within while also continuously releasing content. In order to do this, funds must be divided into different projects or areas or work. This is why certain game modes/types may get more attention than others, not because developers are purposefully ignoring that area, but rather because that area may require more time and money to develop.

The topic of SWTOR and its voice system came up earlier. First off, no dev team is the same, what one dev team considers more important may take backseat to another team. Anet is not Bioware, and Bioware is not Anet. While TOR does have more fleshed out voiced content, that content is always released in long intervals. Imagine getting LS episodes 3-4 months apart instead of 2 weeks. Additionally, many of the voice actor NPCs in TOR are voiced by a small pool of people. One VA voices over 30 different NPCs in the present game.

Back on topic, I believe that the writing could have been done a bit better if the NPCs are to act and appear like sincere people. I also like how my character ISN’T the one always in the spotlight, it gets old always being the one to save the day.

TL;DR Due to real life limitations, the Devs use their resources in the most efficient manor in order to prioritize what they feel is important to the development of new content.

ShadowStep.3640:

The topic of SWTOR and its voice system came up earlier. First off, no dev team is the same, what one dev team considers more important may take backseat to another team. Anet is not Bioware, and Bioware is not Anet. While TOR does have more fleshed out voiced content, that content is always released in long intervals. Imagine getting LS episodes 3-4 months apart instead of 2 weeks. Additionally, many of the voice actor NPCs in TOR are voiced by a small pool of people. One VA voices over 30 different NPCs in the present game.

Right, TOR’s budget for V/O was insane (supposedly, they spent millions on it, though I don’t know if that’s accurate or not).

And TOR also suffered a lot because there was so much focus on the story content and so much pushing to get the game released. All over the beta forums, people were talking about how the game wasn’t ready to be released, but they had a release date to meet and so they met it.

The result was a game that felt like amazing potential without enough time for strong execution. That’s just my take anyway.

Point is, development is a game of tradeoffs. Every choice costs time and money at the expense of other options.

Labjax.2465:

ShadowStep.3640:

The topic of SWTOR and its voice system came up earlier. First off, no dev team is the same, what one dev team considers more important may take backseat to another team. Anet is not Bioware, and Bioware is not Anet. While TOR does have more fleshed out voiced content, that content is always released in long intervals. Imagine getting LS episodes 3-4 months apart instead of 2 weeks. Additionally, many of the voice actor NPCs in TOR are voiced by a small pool of people. One VA voices over 30 different NPCs in the present game.

Right, TOR’s budget for V/O was insane (supposedly, they spent millions on it, though I don’t know if that’s accurate or not).

And TOR also suffered a lot because there was so much focus on the story content and so much pushing to get the game released. All over the beta forums, people were talking about how the game wasn’t ready to be released, but they had a release date to meet and so they met it.

The result was a game that felt like amazing potential without enough time for strong execution. That’s just my take anyway.

Point is, development is a game of tradeoffs. Every choice costs time and money at the expense of other options.

The budget was indeed massive, also considering that everything in the personal stories of that game was cutscened instead of the PC and NPCs talking against a background. I’m not saying that GW2’s way of doing the story is inferior, simply that its different.

ShadowStep.3640:

The budget was indeed massive, also considering that everything in the personal stories of that game was cutscened instead of the PC and NPCs talking against a background. I’m not saying that GW2’s way of doing the story is inferior, simply that its different.

Right, exactly.