Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ...
3
11
12
13
14
LastLast
  1. #241
    Quote Originally Posted by Raisei View Post
    @Aucald: That was one enjoyable read, but I have no clue where you find the patience for these fruitless discussions.
    If flawed comparisons, inserting words and strawmen into people's mouths, refusing to address what they actually wrote, zealous efforts to obfuscate via vocabulary, and finally being dismissed as hopelessly biased and petty in lieu of actual arguments are all enjoyable, knock yourself out and argue with him.

    These guys are determined that nothing could ever be as terrible as WoW
    Or maybe, just maybe, some of us think:
    - the writing has gone down in quality
    - the writing is not considered a corporate priority based on key employee statements
    - the writers have more than demonstrated poor ability and choices

    Nah, we're just haters, that's it. Only positivity allowed here in the echo chamber!

    that the writers are either incompetent or purposefully malevolent in their intent and basically want their product to fail.
    "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". Of course they don't want it to fail, they'd be out of a rather comfy job. There has been more than enough evidence including their public statements and opinions to conclude they are objectively of low quality.

    All because the narrative does not do what they want it to do.
    Ah yes, the current state is just dandy after all:
    - Factions have effectively swapped governing models

    - The Horde keeps going through idiotic civil wars, losing characters without meaningful replacement, and is routinely tarred as the villains

    - The Alliance is reduced to the non-human races either ignored or appearing only to make the humans look good, a Blue Warchief who's a sockpuppet for one writer's political ideas, and is completely bland, never allowed to be proactive or even strike back effectively

    - Both sides are lectured about morality lessons that are absurd in Warcraft's context, when you quite literally commit slaughters for cash and prizes

    - Lore that preexisted the current writing team is openly/publicly referred to as constraining, rather than a guideline for going forward. Bonus points for effectively rendering the marketing of Chronicles as fraudulent.

    - The Alliance playerbase is effectively ignored (the state of gameplay further argues this), and the Horde is divided between Thrall and Evil Horde factions. It's impossible to please even the majority in such a setup, as BfA just demonstrated.

    There are probably no words that will ever make them reconsider.
    Sure there are. "Folks, we know many feel the story has suffered, and we're committed to earning back the trust of the audience that made this franchise great, rather than blaming them for not liking the direction we took."

    Follow that with concrete actions, such as hiring at bare minimum William King as a typical writer.

    ----------
    As to this "rain on parade" nonsense over a few posts while I was composing this, I suppose it's easier to smear people than actually consider what they're saying. The idea that only Mary Sunshine positivity indicates liking something, that any negativity instantly renders you a "hater" and your thoughts invalid is simple minded nonsense.
    Last edited by Feanoro; 2020-09-10 at 02:34 PM.

  2. #242
    Moderator Aucald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA-US
    Posts
    32,071
    Quote Originally Posted by ClassicPeon View Post
    I know this is a bit unrelated but i think the whole George R. R. Martin situation is an extreme showcase that it goes both ways
    That's actually kind of interesting, because I'm not really a fan of GRRM's writing. I read A Game of Thrones back in 2002 when praise for the series was really ramping up in literary circles, and I found it rather dry and less than compelling - it was a plodding affair, and while I enjoyed the realistic violent and historical grittiness, it also felt vaguely nihilistic in a way that wasn't compelling for me. That wouldn't compel me to call GRRM a "hack fraud" or heap scorn on him, though; because that was just my personal takeaway and obviously I'm in the minority in terms of my opinion - not that that would matter, either. GRRM has pretty obvious objective talent when it comes to writing, it's just that what he writes is likely never going to be my cup o' tea, and that's okay. I'm a big fan of Frank Herbert's Dune series and I hear a lot of people the say same things about Herbert that I say about GRRM: that Dune is dry (no pun intended) and overblown with academic pretension, that it is both plodding and formulaic at its core. That's a fine criticism, too; and while I don't agree I think it's someone's right to feel that way, just like I do about GRRM's ASOIF series.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    As to this "rain on parade" nonsense over a few posts while I was composing this, I suppose it's easier to smear people than actually consider what they're saying. The idea that only Mary Sunshine positivity indicates liking something, that any negativity instantly renders you a "hater" and your thoughts invalid is simple minded nonsense.
    This is kind of funny, because I wasn't actually referring to you specifically with that post - although I'm sure you won't actually believe that claim. But the fact that you would take mild criticism of your argument as a "smear" is somewhat telling, and I think it goes toward demonstrating that my sketch of your motives is closer to correct than anything else. I've never really been accused of being "Mary Sunshine" either, so that's kind of a first for me; I'm actually kind of a down to Earth type of fellow when you get to know me. But yeah, I do think your hyperbolic criticism is more borne out of emotionalism than it is measured or quasi-objective analysis of the subject matter.

    I also don't want to get the ball rolling on another multi-page exegesis of one another's critical motives, but I felt your charge above sort of required a response. So back to non-engagement for me.
    Last edited by Aucald; 2020-09-10 at 02:45 PM.
    "Here lies a toppled god.
    His fall was not a small one.
    We did but build his pedestal,
    A narrow and a tall one."

  3. #243
    Yes, the actual writters suck. It's like they don't care at all, it seens they just want to realize their fantasy of what would be cool, ignoring or destroying anything that came before. At this point it is a bad fanfiction in my eyes (although a fan would have more respect for the lore)

  4. #244
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    This is kind of funny, because I wasn't actually referring to you specifically with that post - although I'm sure you won't actually believe that claim.
    I can say the same, hence "over a few posts" indicating more than one person. I previously wrote that I'm not interested in further discussion with you after your insulting dismissal of me as some petty grudge bearer.

    But the fact that you would take mild criticism of your argument as a "smear" is somewhat telling, and I think it goes toward demonstrating that my sketch of your motives is closer to correct than anything else.
    I could note you completely dodged my reading of you, but I'll stick to this. You are far too eager to play armchair psychologist, as this is not the first time you have tried to tell me my intentions (a patently absurd exercise, especially in light of your admission of lack of psychic ability), nor am I the only one to receive such treatment. I suggest two things:

    1) After dismissing people as haters, however eloquently worded, don't be terribly surprised when they don't care to engage with you further or view you persisting as similarly insulting.

    2) Your manner is incredibly condescending in every post, as if your opinion is somehow more enlightened, reasoned, and considered than anyone else's. I suggest some serious self-examination into how you present yourself. I fully expect a "nuh-uh, you do it too!" response here based on past behavior, sadly.

    I've never really been accused of being "Mary Sunshine" either, so that's kind of a first for me; I'm actually kind of a down to Earth type of fellow when you get to know me.
    You decided that was directed at you. It wasn't. It was a general statement in response to multiple posts essentially accusing anyone with a negative opinion of the writers as acting in bad faith among other charges.

    But yeah, I do think your hyperbolic criticism is more borne out of emotionalism than it is measured or quasi-objective analysis of the subject matter.
    And I could comment about your pseudo-intellectualism as a means of compensating, then act surprised when you don't particularly enjoy such labels. That's exactly what you do to others.

    So back to non-engagement for me.
    I thought "Ignoring you" posts were against forum rules. Guess it's ok when you do it, much like how this entire debacle was a derailment.

  5. #245
    Moderator Aucald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA-US
    Posts
    32,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    I can say the same, hence "over a few posts" indicating more than one person. I previously wrote that I'm not interested in further discussion with you after your insulting dismissal of me as some petty grudge bearer.

    I could note you completely dodged my reading of you, but I'll stick to this. You are far too eager to play armchair psychologist, as this is not the first time you have tried to tell me my intentions (a patently absurd exercise, especially in light of your admission of lack of psychic ability), nor am I the only one to receive such treatment. I suggest two things:

    1) After dismissing people as haters, however eloquently worded, don't be terribly surprised when they don't care to engage with you further or view you persisting as similarly insulting.

    2) Your manner is incredibly condescending in every post, as if your opinion is somehow more enlightened, reasoned, and considered than anyone else's. I suggest some serious self-examination into how you present yourself.

    You decided that was directed at you. It wasn't. It was a general statement in response to multiple posts essentially accusing anyone with a negative opinion of the writers as acting in bad faith among other charges.

    And I could comment about your pseudo-intellectualism as a means of compensating, then act surprised when you don't particularly enjoy such labels. That's exactly what you do to others.

    I thought "Ignoring you" posts were against forum rules. Guess it's ok when you do it, much like how this entire debacle was a derailment.
    "I'm going to hurl a bunch of invective at you, like calling you a pseudo-intellectual and armchair psychologist, and then try to take the high road hoping no one will notice my massive hypocrisy."

    All I can say is "yikes." You're not making my argument look any less convincing, I can say that for you.
    "Here lies a toppled god.
    His fall was not a small one.
    We did but build his pedestal,
    A narrow and a tall one."

  6. #246
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    I don't actually read what people say to me.
    So you can rudely dish out personal criticisms, but can't take it when someone returns the favor. Thought you were "back to non-engagement", but I can see you like having the last word.
    Last edited by Feanoro; 2020-09-10 at 03:30 PM.

  7. #247
    Herald of the Titans
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,545
    I thank goodness for the novels because frankly that's 98% of the lore now. Tides of War for example, the novel explained in great depth the reasoning behind Garrosh destroying Theramore and all the twists and turns that happened leading up to it and the event. In-game, the events in the novel were simply a quick scenario with a 3 second cutscene of Theramore blowing up. WoD barely even touched on Garrosh's trial in-game which was a huge event in the novels. Without the books there virtually is no lore, the quest text and cutscenes just don't come close to covering it. In fact I don't know how anyone can claim to understand wow lore if they haven't read the books. The in-game text and cutscenes are just a very (very) high level overview of the storyline, just enough to barely explain why certain things in-game are happening.

    Ed: Also just a suggestion. Even if you aren't typically a book reader, if you love wow you will gain a far greater appreciation for the game by reading the novels. At a minimum try to read the pre-expansion novels, which are amazing and will get you pumped for Shadowlands. They are great, especially the Christie Golden novels, and most of them also are available as audiobooks on Audible.
    Last edited by Auxora; 2020-09-10 at 03:35 PM.

  8. #248
    Quote Originally Posted by Tumaras View Post
    I thank goodness for the novels because frankly that's 98% of the lore now. Tides of War for example, the novel explained in great depth the reasoning behind Garrosh destroying Theramore and all the twists and turns that happened leading up to it and the event. In-game, the events in the novel were simply a quick scenario with a 3 second cutscene of Theramore blowing up. WoD barely even touched on Garrosh's trial in-game which was a huge event in the novels. Without the books there virtually is no lore, the quest text and cutscenes just don't come close to covering it. In fact I don't know how anyone can claim to understand wow lore if they haven't read the books. The in-game text and cutscenes are just a very (very) high level overview of the storyline, just enough to barely explain why certain things in-game are happening.

    Ed: Also just a suggestion. Even if you aren't typically a book reader, if you love wow you will gain a far greater appreciation for the game by reading the novels. At a minimum try to read the pre-expansion novels, which are amazing and will get you pumped for Shadowlands. They are great, especially the Christie Golden novels, and most of them also are available as audiobooks on Audible.
    Sadly, they've seemingly given up on presenting the story in game. It's a crying shame they don't call on William King more often, since they've chosen the external books route.

  9. #249
    Moderator Aucald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA-US
    Posts
    32,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Tumaras View Post
    I thank goodness for the novels because frankly that's 98% of the lore now. Tides of War for example, the novel explained in great depth the reasoning behind Garrosh destroying Theramore and all the twists and turns that happened leading up to it and the event. In-game, the events in the novel were simply a quick scenario with a 3 second cutscene of Theramore blowing up. WoD barely even touched on Garrosh's trial in-game which was a huge event in the novels. Without the books there virtually is no lore, the quest text and cutscenes just don't come close to covering it. In fact I don't know how anyone can claim to understand wow lore if they haven't read the books. The in-game text and cutscenes are just a very (very) high level overview of the storyline, just enough to barely explain why certain things in-game are happening.

    Ed: Also just a suggestion. Even if you aren't typically a book reader, if you love wow you will gain a far greater appreciation for the game by reading the novels. At a minimum try to read the pre-expansion novels, which are amazing and will get you pumped for Shadowlands. They are great, especially the Christie Golden novels, and most of them also are available as audiobooks on Audible.
    That's one area where I think WoW definitely gets it wrong from a storytelling capacity. While I really like the novels for the way they explore both the game world and the various characters on a level you just can't get in a game, it does a disservice to the story when a great deal of said narrative is "gated" behind a task a lot of people just don't want to be bothered with (e.g. reading 400+ page novels). I think it would be really cool if the books had these Afterlives type cinematics, or in-game cutscenes even, that sort of served as a quick "catch-up" on the events of any given novel to sort of let you know what had happened. Even better would be actual playable in-game content that touched on all the highlights, like a series of quests or a scenario or what-have-you.

    But yeah, large swathes of story ideally shouldn't go missed if you opt not to read all the novels.
    "Here lies a toppled god.
    His fall was not a small one.
    We did but build his pedestal,
    A narrow and a tall one."

  10. #250
    I think the better term would be "hand tied", between the overall story arc of warcraft, and the needs of the gameplay. Doesn't leave much room to do much of anything.

  11. #251
    Herald of the Titans Vorkreist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Twitch chat
    Posts
    2,705
    Quote Originally Posted by TEHPALLYTANK View Post
    I did skip D1 and D2, but I played through the entirety of SC and Broodwar.

    I don't see much of a disconnect between the story of SC and SC2, do you have anything specific to cite as an example of where SC2 trampled over the original lore? (Excluding anything from LotV, because as I already said I think LotV took a strange turn for a reason that has literally nothing to do with the story).

    Anime Fairy Kerrigan seems in tune with SC to you ? Same thing with Sheablo.

  12. #252
    Legendary! TEHPALLYTANK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Texas(I wish it were CO)
    Posts
    6,884
    Quote Originally Posted by Vorkreist View Post
    Anime Fairy Kerrigan seems in tune with SC to you ? Same thing with Sheablo.
    I explicitly said "excluding anything from LotV" and you literally cite something from LotV. This is now the third time I've explicitly and specifically excluded the events from Legacy of the Void because I think the writing did take a nosedive there for reasons that were unrelated to the story itself.

    I don't see anything strange from a narrative perspective with Diablo taking on a more slender and feminine form for the Prime Evil Diablo. Baal and Mephisto were both much more slender than Diablo, and Leah (the vessel) is female.

    Your first point isn't something I ever argued against, and your second point has no apparent relevance to the writing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigbamboozal View Post
    Intelligence is like four wheel drive, it's not going to make you unstoppable, it just sort of tends to get you stuck in more remote places.
    Quote Originally Posted by MerinPally View Post
    If you want to be disgusted, next time you kiss someone remember you've got your mouth on the end of a tube which has shit at the other end, held back by a couple of valves.

  13. #253
    Quote Originally Posted by Tumaras View Post
    I thank goodness for the novels because frankly that's 98% of the lore now. Tides of War for example, the novel explained in great depth the reasoning behind Garrosh destroying Theramore and all the twists and turns that happened leading up to it and the event. In-game, the events in the novel were simply a quick scenario with a 3 second cutscene of Theramore blowing up. WoD barely even touched on Garrosh's trial in-game which was a huge event in the novels. Without the books there virtually is no lore, the quest text and cutscenes just don't come close to covering it. In fact I don't know how anyone can claim to understand wow lore if they haven't read the books. The in-game text and cutscenes are just a very (very) high level overview of the storyline, just enough to barely explain why certain things in-game are happening.

    Ed: Also just a suggestion. Even if you aren't typically a book reader, if you love wow you will gain a far greater appreciation for the game by reading the novels. At a minimum try to read the pre-expansion novels, which are amazing and will get you pumped for Shadowlands. They are great, especially the Christie Golden novels, and most of them also are available as audiobooks on Audible.
    What was Garrosh his reason in War Crimes? Was Theramore really neutral?

  14. #254
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    Or maybe, just maybe, some of us think:
    - the writing has gone down in quality
    You may believe that, but I think it is wrong. Story as a part of the game has only improved since WoD, with more clearly defined narratives that stretch over an entire expansion instead of short snipets that you sometimes find. Try playing the game as a new player and go do Wrath. You will have no clue what is happening, because the story does not explain a thing, hell there were not even clearly defined quest chains until Legion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    - the writing is not considered a corporate priority based on key employee statements
    As I pointed out in an earlier post. This is obvious. This game is about gameplay, it is not a BW game that focusses on story. If story is more important to you then getting a steady influx of playable content then you are definately in the wrong game. SWTOR does story better, but sacrifices playable content instead.
    When I moved here from SWTOR I was fully aware that I would not have a voiced PC with different dialogue options and branching story paths and was nicely surprised by how deep the story is despite that.
    How is it that people that play WoW much longer then me are surprised by this fact?

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    - the writers have more than demonstrated poor ability and choices
    I do disagree with some choices they made (mostly in regard to how Sylvanas suddenly became so powerful that she can beat the Lich King without a scratch and how the Horde is getting out of their newest genocide again), but that is the thing here: Just because I dislike the direction the writing team chose does NOT mean they are incompetent.
    Their job is not to fulfill my personal wishes but to tell a compelling narrative, which they are doing adequately for the level this game needs. Hell, I would even say they are doing a bang-up job, since their narrative made me really hate Sylvanas and actually WANT revenge on a personal level.

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    Nah, we're just haters, that's it. Only positivity allowed here in the echo chamber!
    If you cannot seperate your emotional dislike of the story direction to judge the quality of the story fairly then yes, that is exactly what you are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    Ah yes, the current state is just dandy after all:
    - Factions have effectively swapped governing models
    I must have missed the new governing style of the Alliance. Was there an 8.3.5. with a revolution? The Horde has changed, instead of completely disregarding the lessons that they should have learned in MoP already and did not, this time they actually implement change. A logical step, based on a logical path of the narrative. How is this bad story telling?

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    - The Horde keeps going through idiotic civil wars, losing characters without meaningful replacement, and is routinely tarred as the villains
    Which is what the Horde fans want. Well, not exactly. The fans want the Horde to go to war and destroy the Alliance for good and they disregard the impossibility of that scenario in a 2-faction game. It is not the writers fault that the fans do not understand the futility of the faction war and fight tooth and nail to keep it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    - The Alliance is reduced to the non-human races either ignored or appearing only to make the humans look good, a Blue Warchief who's a sockpuppet for one writer's political ideas, and is completely bland, never allowed to be proactive or even strike back effectively
    1) How is the friggin High King now a Blue Warchief? There was no change in the Alliance goverment style, except that there is a new king.
    2) Your hatred for Anduin does not count as qualified critique as I said above. He did not suddenly become a peace-loving person in the new expansion, he has been a proponent of peace since he could talk, how is this still so surprising?
    3) I have no idea which BFA you played but I saw many non-humans in important positions. Tyrande, Malfy, Mechatorque, Alleria. The expansion however was specifically about Anduin's ideals vs. Sylvanas (the loading screen kinda gave that away), so how is it a surprise that he is a central figure of the plot?
    And it is a fact that many of the Alliance's big lore characters are human, would you like to have Jaina become a gnome just to change things up a bit?

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    - Both sides are lectured about morality lessons that are absurd in Warcraft's context, when you quite literally commit slaughters for cash and prizes
    Exterminating barely self-aware creatures (like kobolds and gnolls) that attack you and everyone in their vicinity or raid settlements is quite different from commiting genocide on civilians and since you apparently cannot see the difference I'd say the lesson was needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    - Lore that preexisted the current writing team is openly/publicly referred to as constraining, rather than a guideline for going forward. Bonus points for effectively rendering the marketing of Chronicles as fraudulent.
    This whining about Chronicle is getting soooooo old. Get. Over. It.

    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    - The Alliance playerbase is effectively ignored (the state of gameplay further argues this), and the Horde is divided between Thrall and Evil Horde factions. It's impossible to please even the majority in such a setup, as BfA just demonstrated.
    I don't feel ignored, but I agree on the split of the Horde. Yet again I say it is the fanbase that caused this. Many vocal Hordes want to be evil so now and then they have to be indulged or they will leave. Their mistake is to believe it will stay that way and then complain when it is taken away.
    I did argue in another thread that the writers have to make up their mind about the Horde, decide if it is an evil faction or a good one, so the playerbase and the characters can decide if they want to stick around for it or leave.

  15. #255
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanoro View Post
    Or maybe, just maybe, some of us think:

    - the writing has gone down in quality

    - the writing is not considered a corporate priority based on key employee statements
    - the writers have more than demonstrated poor ability and choices
    I really don't think the writing was ever that good to begin with. It helps a lot that there's really awesome lore behind everything and that the quests put all over the world are not bad but the writing for the grand story of all the expansions isn't really that good, and imo it never has been.

    What happens in Classic? You are just put into the world and you go around dealing with problems, everything happens in quests you get from random npc's and there isn't any "cinematic experience" so to say. Same thing in TBC, except you deal with WC3 characters in the raids but still, nothing grand.

    Wrath changes that but slightly, you see Arthas a couple of times and there's also the Wrathgate cinematic, the Culling of Stratholme and a couple of quests in Icecrown.

    Cataclysm was disjointed to hell and back, Deathwing is mostly in the background until the final zone where he only comes to deal with Alexstrasza.

    MoP was the one time where it felt like you were following a story, because you just follow Anduin around for half the levelling experience but I think the lack of a final villain type of character didn't help with that.

    So yeah, it wasn't that great even before WoD imo.
    Last edited by Xilurm; 2020-09-11 at 08:19 AM.

  16. #256
    The evidence for the incompetence of the lead writers is overwhelming. The only thing at this point that ensures players are still engaged in the Lore of the franchise is the fact, that years of playing the game and following the lore means these kind of players are very invested already in this fantasy universe.

    And also expectations of course. In our mind the stuff that can happen in the future could be awesome. But the past showed in my opinion that the Blizzard authors don't really deliver at all, even if you have low expectations. I was pretty thrilled in the times of Classic, even in BC and WotlK still (although they kicked characters like Illidan, Kael, Vashj, Anubarak and of course Arthas into the retarded loot pinata grinder), for the events that could happen in Warcrafts future. The important characters who could show up, their plans, their interactions with eachother and the player characters. But Blizzards writers managed to waste most, if not all the potential there was.

    Since MoP up to Legion it became more and more awful than the earlier expansions from my point of view, but since BfA in my eyes its downright a pile of garbage and more or less unbearable. BfA definitely has removed all the investment i once had in this fantasy world. And i would say i was very invested in it. Until they hire proper writers i won't bother anymore. Of course i will check on the story on Youtube, but Shadowlands already shows me that it is more of the same crap that happened in BfA. I'll pass.

  17. #257
    Quote Originally Posted by Aucald View Post
    That's actually kind of interesting, because I'm not really a fan of GRRM's writing. I read A Game of Thrones back in 2002 when praise for the series was really ramping up in literary circles, and I found it rather dry and less than compelling - it was a plodding affair, and while I enjoyed the realistic violent and historical grittiness, it also felt vaguely nihilistic in a way that wasn't compelling for me. That wouldn't compel me to call GRRM a "hack fraud" or heap scorn on him, though; because that was just my personal takeaway and obviously I'm in the minority in terms of my opinion - not that that would matter, either. GRRM has pretty obvious objective talent when it comes to writing, it's just that what he writes is likely never going to be my cup o' tea, and that's okay. I'm a big fan of Frank Herbert's Dune series and I hear a lot of people the say same things about Herbert that I say about GRRM: that Dune is dry (no pun intended) and overblown with academic pretension, that it is both plodding and formulaic at its core. That's a fine criticism, too; and while I don't agree I think it's someone's right to feel that way, just like I do about GRRM's ASOIF series.

    - - - Updated - - -



    This is kind of funny, because I wasn't actually referring to you specifically with that post - although I'm sure you won't actually believe that claim. But the fact that you would take mild criticism of your argument as a "smear" is somewhat telling, and I think it goes toward demonstrating that my sketch of your motives is closer to correct than anything else. I've never really been accused of being "Mary Sunshine" either, so that's kind of a first for me; I'm actually kind of a down to Earth type of fellow when you get to know me. But yeah, I do think your hyperbolic criticism is more borne out of emotionalism than it is measured or quasi-objective analysis of the subject matter.

    I also don't want to get the ball rolling on another multi-page exegesis of one another's critical motives, but I felt your charge above sort of required a response. So back to non-engagement for me.
    I'm in much the same boat when it comes to GRRM. I actually love reading - something that not many of my friends do(as in fiction). I read the first two books and midway through the third it just died for me. I had trouble following characters because i genuinely didnt really care for them.

    I wasnt speaking about his talent though but more the relation he has with a portion of his followers that obviously loves his work but are really angry at his "lazy" approach to finnishing his books. Normally i would say fuck them - but i genuinely do think he is a lazy person who fell into a gold mine that he cant be bothered to finnish mining.

  18. #258
    I don't think they are all incompetent, that being said however, if Sylvanas gets a redemption arc this expansion then i will say that without a doubt they are all incompetent.

  19. #259
    I think Blizzard just needs to drop the whole novel thing.
    I hope not, I doubt I would ever sit down and read a Warcraft novel, however, as a audible or streaming book, they are entertaining for a few hours and help fill in some of the lore of this game I enjoy playing.

  20. #260
    Quote Originally Posted by adcesamo View Post
    Yes, the actual writters suck. It's like they don't care at all, it seens they just want to realize their fantasy of what would be cool, ignoring or destroying anything that came before. At this point it is a bad fanfiction in my eyes (although a fan would have more respect for the lore)
    I will shamelessly admit I write WoW fanfiction; every chapter I have thousands of Wowpedia tabs open to ensure I don't omit details, especially when I write events which dated before World of Warcraft. I try to respect the lore, but sometimes the lore is so silly I cannot fathom to mention it in my story. (e.g Warlords of Draenor)

    I do wonder how often the writing staff at Blizzard flip pages through the old novels, or even browse a swift wiki page because often, too often, it feels like they aren't even bothering. They just make up as they go.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •