The problem I have with the Living Story content is our character is a Mary Sue

[Knighthonor.4061]

Its hard to get attached to the story in this game since its mostly in these living Story instances that make our character the one and sole hero in the game that does everything from soloing armies to soloing gods. I mean come on now. The rest of the cast is no longer epic at all. There are no real epic legendary NPC figures in this game. Nobody stands out. Even the evil Lore NPCs dont seem as tough when they can be soloed by a player character. My character is some kind of Mary Sue. Who likes that long term? Its cool in short burst to be a hero that saved a village or something but all the time I am the one and only hero in all these major boss fights.

 

I believe the writing for the story need to move away from this model. its one of the things that make me avoid the living story instances, which is actually a feature that seems like an interesting concept on paper.

[Fenella.2634]

True. (Well, in general. We don't really solo armies and gods. But the PC is a total Sue, yes.)

But just look at what happens if any NPC even thinks of contributing: A very loud fraction of the fandom will get out the pitchforks immediately. It's pretty much the main reason for the hate for Trahearne and the death wishes for Taimi. And neither of them ever really "stole our spotlight".

 

I'm also not really into this superhero thing and I was quite alright with the PCs place within the Pact, contributing to the success, but not necessarily being the Chosen One.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Fenella.2634" said:

> But just look at what happens if any NPC even thinks of contributing: A very loud fraction of the fandom will get out the pitchforks immediately. It's pretty much the main reason for the hate for Trahearne and the death wishes for Taimi. And neither of them ever really "stole our spotlight".

Funny thing: isnt the living story *all* about the NPCs, friend and foe?

 

For the main story Trahearne did take credit for everything though. He's such a plant.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

First, try not to use the term "Mary Sue." That ends up turning the discussion into "what is a Mary Sue," for which there is no agreed-upon definition.

 

Second, how would you tell an MMO story? The options are:

* The PC is a cog in the wheel, a participant, not a mover of events.

* The PC is the only character that stands out.

* The PC is one of 3-8 main characters.

 

In the first case, the player has little influence on the story. That would be realistic, just as having to eat and use the restroom would be realistic, i.e. boring. In the third case, the allied NPCs would either perform great feats "off stage" (boring and unmemorable) or if they did them on screen, they'd be OP'd (memorable for the wrong reasons).

 

Pick any of the epic stories from GW2 and outline how you would have liked to see it work instead.

 

The reason that GW2 (and MMOs) use this particular model is that it's less bad than the rest, not because it's ideal for telling a story.

[anninke.7469]

Well, I'm not sure many players would be interested in a "reasonably skillful" character in a MMO game. And I think the PC gets a little too much help from others to be a proper Mary Sue, although they do have quite a lot of Sue-ish features.

[AlexxxDelta.1806]

There is reason the PC in most video games is the main hero of the story. Being a simple participant,cog in the wheel, sidekick, whatever you may call it, is extremely boring for most people who use games as a means of escapism. If one wants to be a simple participant/footsoldier in grand events then there is real life for that. Also I don't get the complaint about bosses being soloed by our commander. I'm playing mmo**RPGs** with the intention of playing through the story of my character in an online shared world, not the story of a goon among a kittenload of other goons doing the same thing. That's why there is a clear distinction between OW content and instanced story, not only in this MMO, but in most.

 

That said I'd like if the supporting cast got a bit of the spotlight at times. Most of the time they are there to create forced emotional tension or do off-screen feats that we never get to see. Kinda like how Aurene stepped in and got things done in this episode. Although judging by the overblown hate against Trahearne, that would be a cause for complaints too.

[Fenella.2634]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> For the main story Trahearne did take credit for everything though.

That is not true. He never took credit for anything we did, except maybe for the name of Fort Trinity. Wow. :lol:

Other than that, he went out of his way to thank the PC for every little thing and correct other people when they tried to give him false credit.

[Ashen.2907]

> @"Fenella.2634" said:

> True. (Well, in general. We don't really solo armies and gods. But the PC is a total Sue, yes.)

> But just look at what happens if any NPC even thinks of contributing: A very loud fraction of the fandom will get out the pitchforks immediately. It's pretty much the main reason for the hate for Trahearne and the death wishes for Taimi. And neither of them ever really "stole our spotlight".

>

> I'm also not really into this superhero thing and I was quite alright with the PCs place within the Pact, contributing to the success, but not necessarily being the Chosen One.

 

I dislike Taimi and Trahearne because they are poorly implemented plot devices and rather annoying, nothing to do with any perceived spotlight.

[Telwyn.1630]

I do not have a problem soling all the enemies alone

I'm actually writing a fanfiction that my character Tarwin is often stuck fighting alone against powerful bosses cause it his destiny to do so, its not his intention to fight alone, but Tarwin comes from a long line of Ascaloian human heroes in his family tree who all had to fight powerful bosses, and villains alone even when they wanted to fight side by side with friends, and allies, and not fight alone. But a true hero of Tarwin's family line knows that even when they wanted help in facing powerful foes they always in the end are force to face it alone, and Tarwin is often the only one to know what happen when he clashed with powerful foes. No know one ever finds out how Tarwin defeated nearly unbeatable foes (accept the the undead elder dragon one of the few times people would ever see Tarwin bring down a powerful foe) as a result even if people want to recond and document Tarwin's great deeds Tarwin believes history will forget him, after all no one remebers Tarwins grandfather the hero of Ascalon from guild wars 1 200 years later, and Tarwin believes all he dose now will be forgotten too as well.

 

Tarwin is not fighting as a hero alone so he can be remembered but because he must because he is the only man who is able to stand up to face nealy unbeatable foes if he is forgotten like his grandfather was with only member's of Tarwin's family remember him so be it. A ture hero dose not bask in the praise of people he goes into the fight knowing he is doing whats right even if people won't remember him for it.

 

Tarwin sees time as his ally for he can never go back to right a mistake he makes he makes every moment he has count. .

 

Tarwin has made it known to everyone that he may be forgotten, you can imagine how the races of the world say they won't let Tarwin be forgotten, course Tarwin reminds everyone that his grandfather back 200 years early name has been forgotten by them all know on remembers all his grandfather did. No Norn sings tales how Tarwin's grandfather led them to victory against the destroyers, no charr tell tales to their cubs how Tarwin's grandfather gave the charr legions a reason to fight harder to free themselves from the flame legion, no human talks of Tarwin's grandfather by name cause its been erased, no one even documented Tarwin's grandfather's name and if they did its been lost to time somehow as if he never existed.

 

Will people remember Tarwin maybe the Priority could try and document his deeds, but more then likely somehow Tarwin name is doomed to be erased as Tarwins grandfathers name from guild wars 1 name was erased. Its seems cruel to a man who giving everything he has to save the world but history has the habit of somehow erasing important things.

[Trise.2865]

Really? The player-insert character is an author-insert character? Hm...

[otto.5684]

Games stories that have choices the main character becomes a vehicle for player choice. The only game that I have seen as an exception to that is the Witcher. But also many of Gerald characteristics are pre set and the choices are also within his character. This is impossible to do in a game like GW2 where even the main character race and gender are subject to player choice.

 

Having said that though, my experience is up to LWS3 the story maintained tension. With PoF all this tension is gone. Instead we have immortal characters and out of context comic relief. Main character agency has been mostly stopped away. The commander is nothing more than a goon that is extremely over powered at fighting that for the most part follows Taimi orders. If you think about it, most plans and strategy have been lead by Taimi.

[VDAC.2137]

I miss Trahearne. :'( Up through PoF our character has not really gone up against things alone but either helped or had significant help from the NPCs in both strategy and the fight itself.

 

I feel the main problem is that we don’t get any control over what our character says to the NPCs. It would be awesome if we got to choose between a few options.

[starlinvf.1358]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> First, try not to use the term "Mary Sue." That ends up turning the discussion into "what is a Mary Sue," for which there is no agreed-upon definition.

>

> Second, how would you tell an MMO story? The options are:

> * The PC is a cog in the wheel, a participant, not a mover of events.

> * The PC is the only character that stands out.

> * The PC is one of 3-8 main characters.

>

> In the first case, the player has little influence on the story. That would be realistic, just as having to eat and use the restroom would be realistic, i.e. boring. In the third case, the allied NPCs would either perform great feats "off stage" (boring and unmemorable) or if they did them on screen, they'd be OP'd (memorable for the wrong reasons).

>

> Pick any of the epic stories from GW2 and outline how you would have liked to see it work instead.

>

> The reason that GW2 (and MMOs) use this particular model is that it's less bad than the rest, not because it's ideal for telling a story.

 

Its starting to bug that in the wake of a few years of really good character dramas, people seem to understand the concept even less then they did before.

 

If GW2 were Game Of Thrones, the whole concept of the GOT characters could NOT function given the type of threat on hand. And if you think about it, the original set up is so close that its functionally similar. Even if we completely disregard the bad seasons, how do you address the problem of needing huge amounts of resources to combat literal/figurative forces of nature, and not end up cannibalizing your forces in the process of conquering "allied" forces.

 

This is where the perceptual problem of the whole story kind of pops up...... the Commander isn't really meant to be the main character in the Living world story arcs. But that mistake is often made due to how they're written, and how the game requires them to do activities in order to function as a game. The actual story arcs and character development is happening to the OTHER characters; but this is heavily obfuscated due to the Commander being the audience's point of view. They've tried to alternate view points in the past (via Fractal format for story mode)... and the back lash for it was pretty harsh. I still remember the amount of vitriol over Caithe's thing in S2, because people didn't like having their skills changed, and the rough pacing of a Stealth level. This was on top of few people liking Caithe to begin with, and had limited success in improving popularity through that insight.

 

Which brings us to the problem of classifying the Commander. Definitely not a Mary Sue, because that can be much more easily be qualified in Taimi Ex-machia. Not always the main character, but always the main focus of the player. And a story telling that deals with multiple characters and their problems, but only ever told from the perspective of a single character thats never them. Limited time to tell a story, so the arcs don't always have a chance to be properly fleshed out. And of course the problem of Players self inserting due to the nature of the rest of the game.

 

The main line story of the Expansions DO have the Commander squarely as the main character, but they have to be pitted against an antagonist that can't be easily be defused by the stories main pillars.... namely Cooperation, Diplomacy, Empathy, Humility, and Hope. Antithetical to these are Revenge, Greed, Mistrust, Malice and Arrogance...... IE all the things that are usually used to create conflict in the first place. Theres a reason people have noted that the Commander's behavior is randomly regressive between during HOT and S3, because the personal conflicts had been resolved at the end of the Personal story. All of Season 1 functioned on the other Characters- particularity the Villains. The Commander was just along for the Ride for most of them. Which also explains why S2 and HOT was told in a smaller scale, and S3 through POF and S4 having to keep the focus small, but expand the world around it.

 

The irony thickens when you look at how WoW tells a story in its expansions..... the player is "A Hero", but not "THE Hero". The players are important, only in that they are supporting characters. The NPCs are the real focus, the real story arcs, and the real conflict. by having the player never really being the focus of the story, consistency only needs to be maintained on OTHER characters. You can also used off-screen time to change them to fit future story needs, without ever breaking the stride of the players.

 

If you look back at GW1, you'll notice these same issues and successes, but not as easily recognizable because the same fallacies at play here as well.

[CJH.2879]

I'm still hoping for a major plot twist in the protagonists story, that it turns out your actually a half god. This would help explain not just how but why your main hero has always (with a little help along the way), triumphed in the end while others have fallen. ANET could have alot of fun with that storyline & theres many different directions they could go in from there. Just an idea. And yes I too miss Trahearne.... his character actually did help turn the tide in the end to help save mother tyria & everyone in it. =)

[Blur.3465]

I still dream of the moment where things will twist and turn a ton darker.

Call me crazy, but I find a lot more depth in stories like that, than where we constantly win.

Take that beautiful SWTOR story-twist where you lose everything.

[VDAC.2137]

> @"Blur.3465" said:

> I still dream of the moment where things will twist and turn a ton darker.

> Call me crazy, but I find a lot more depth in stories like that, than where we constantly win.

> Take that beautiful SWTOR story-twist where you lose everything.

 

SWTOR stories were also great in that it let you choose what to say, how to play your character and even influence outcomes within your personal story. I loved playing a noble Sith or a Jedi that was more gray. I enjoy playing a heroic character but only when that’s my choice and likewise I would be upset by a darker turn that made me pay the price for a “decision” that was never mine. SWTOR did great with this, especially the Imperial agent’s story, where several times you must choose between bad options — the fact that I did have choices made me much more invested in my character, story and outcomes.

[Cyninja.2954]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> First, try not to use the term "Mary Sue." That ends up turning the discussion into "what is a Mary Sue," for which there is no agreed-upon definition.

>

 

This.

 

People throw around this term way to often.

 

This is a video game, your character can not face death (as in deletion, though that would be a fascinating experiment). There have been numerous failures by both the main protagonist as well as the entire NPC party. It's very flawed to just look at everything from a future perspective and say: well we managed everything. Obviously you did since if your character was not deleted the moment you failed a mission, the outrage here would be huge.

 

We lost allies while fighting Mordremoth. We needed Traehearne to sacrifice himself to beat Mordremoth. We lost against Balthazar and actually died. The fact things need to get written that we eventually succeed is based on the medium this story is delivered on. There is tons of other situations where our character was not all powerful and was also never depicted as such.

 

The other disconnect is the game play versus story depiction. I doubt much of the story would be fun if the player character just got carried through the instance by the allied NPC. That's balance for game play reasons, but if people actually did their research, they'd know that quite a few of our close allies are powerful on their own.

 

Finally there is the open world outside the personal story instances where the player character for all intent and purposes is a simple member of the pact.

 

EDIT: added a not at a relevant point to make sense, minor clear up

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

They're intentionally designed to be blank slates. The reason for this is simple: the vast majority of the player base hates being second string. Pre-HoT we hated that we were the sidekick to whatever NPC came along. It was demanded that our toons were put first, and this has been the case since HoT launched.

[VDAC.2137]

> @"otto.5684" said:

>The commander is nothing more than a goon that is extremely over powered at fighting that for the most part follows Taimi orders. If you think about it, most plans and strategy have been lead by Taimi.

 

That’s true! She is the true protagonist while we are simply a variable in her equation... :lol: I say this without disliking her at all — I think she and Arkk are the only Asura that I do like, actually.

 

 

[Pifil.5193]

> @"VDAC.2137" said:

> > @"otto.5684" said:

> >The commander is nothing more than a goon that is extremely over powered at fighting that for the most part follows Taimi orders. If you think about it, most plans and strategy have been lead by Taimi.

>

> That’s true! She is the true protagonist while we are simply a variable in her equation... :lol: I say this without disliking her at all — I think she and Arkk are the only Asura that I do like, actually.

 

It is true, Taimi and Gorrik are the brains behind the operation a fact that I imagine irks my Asura thief no end. "I am a Snaff Savant and here I am fetching eggs like an... _intern_ ugh!"

[Vayne.8563]

See that's the issue right there. The Zhaitan fight was a big ship to ship battle with many ships and people complained they didn't feel like heroes. That Trahearne (who wasn't even there) stole there thunder, that they didn't feel involved. So Anet made changes based on the Skyrim crowd, who can do everything on one character.

 

I fought Mordremoth in Dragon Stand though and didn't feel I was doing it alone. And this entire zone that's been released has a huge open world meta that sets up the final instances anyway. So no, I don't feel like we're a huge Mary Sue because I don't only focus on the parts of the story that prove my point.

[MoriMoriMori.5349]

> @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

>That would be realistic, just as having to eat and use the restroom would be realistic, i.e. boring. In the third case, the allied NPCs would either perform great feats "off stage" (boring and unmemorable) or if they did them on screen, they'd be OP'd (memorable for the wrong reasons).

 

Was "Band of brothers" or "Pacific", or "Saving Private Ryan" boring? No, they weren't. Yet, they were pretty realistic. What exactly does back up this your statement, then? Badly written story is boring (as most of the current GW2 story is), good story isn't boring - that's as simple as this.

[Trise.2865]

> @"MoriMoriMori.5349" said:

> > @"Illconceived Was Na.9781" said:

> >That would be realistic, just as having to eat and use the restroom would be realistic, i.e. boring. In the third case, the allied NPCs would either perform great feats "off stage" (boring and unmemorable) or if they did them on screen, they'd be OP'd (memorable for the wrong reasons).

>

> Was "Band of brothers" or "Pacific", or "Saving Private Ryan" boring? No, they weren't. Yet, they were pretty realistic. What exactly does back up this your statement, then? Badly written story is boring (as most of the current GW2 story is), good story isn't boring - that's as simple as this.

 

Yes, they were. Extremely boring.

[coso.9173]

i agreee with the op in many things. but to make our character not a mary sue it would need to show some weaknesses or faults, and most people don't seem to react positively to faults on other npcs, like treharne or taimi or brahm.

i wish we could get some more interesting development in our characters but I'm not sure how to go around with it.

[Samnang.1879]

sis i agree with you but MMO is not a place for deep storytelling and the audience dont want it... even movies nowadays are cliched... i dont watch superhero movies for this reason. but many ppl love them.