Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help
- - - - -

Is anyone else sick of Sylvari?


  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#31 Alexei Hart

Alexei Hart

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 71 posts
  • Location:New York
  • Profession:Mesmer
  • Guild Tag:[LONG]
  • Server:Henge of Denravi

Posted 18 July 2014 - 02:55 PM

View Posttypographie, on 17 July 2014 - 06:04 PM, said:

In my opinion, Arenanet have justified sufficiently the presence of ley lines in the world and made it unique enough to their lore that I'm fine with it.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions. I am just curious as to what makes you say that. Ley Lines came way out of left field, we were already a year into GW2 before they were even hinted at.

In Guild Wars we first learned that magic was a gift from the gods. We then learned that it was actually given to us by Abaddon, and that this was a sore spot among the god-race.

Then EOTN came along, and, as mentioned above, it was intended to introduce the lore of GW2 and kind of guide us into the mindset of understanding the broader world of Tyria, beyond the lands and cultures of the humans. We learned that Tyria existed before the god-race arrived from their extra-worldly planes in the Mists, and that magic existed at least in some form along with the dragons that fed on it. The data that was given to us at the time GW2 started indicated that the dragons are part of a sort of cycle of magical consumption and excretion, and that as they slept, the magic they had consumed was released back into the world for the races to use.

We have also been guided into understanding that magic is more complex than just the four schools that the humans believed the gods gave them. Asura make use of magic in several different forms. That being said, all the knowledge and research of the Asura never even hinted at the existence of ley lines. We are now being told to accept that, even though they realized that some waypoints worked better than others, they never bothered to figure out what was right beneath their little pink noses. This is the brainiac race that researches every little anomoly they encounter.

My guess is ley lines were not conceived of before launch, or even six months afterwards. It's not the only paradigm shift we've faced in understanding Tyria, but is a more abrupt shift with no transition into it. It also has a very different flavor from the prior understandings.

Getting back to the OP, the problem with the Sylvari is similar because it also represents a dramatic change of flavor. In EOTN, the advent of the Sylvari was totally incidental, with Ronan finding the seeds and bringing one to Arbor Bay. The Pale Tree was nothing but an oddly shaped sapling, so now making it the heart of the cosmos, when we know perfectly well that everything existed before the seed was even planted, makes utterly no sense whatsoever. This is an even bigger issue than the ley lines, because it is directly contradictory with the prior data that we had.

But whatever, I'm still enjoying the game, so let's see what they do with these new twists.

#32 Senatic

Senatic

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1902 posts

Posted 18 July 2014 - 03:32 PM

View PostKonzacelt, on 18 July 2014 - 12:59 PM, said:

Trivia question: why choose 250 years precisely?

It wasn't actually precisely 250 years.  

The Charr Invasion and The Searing of Ascalon happened in 1070 AE.

Events of the personal story take place 1325 AE.

It was closer to around 255 If you count from pre searing Ascalon, where the game did really start. The flight of the Ascalonian people, as well as the player character and Prince Rurik, over the Shiverpeaks happened 1072 A.E. The 250 years is usually preceded by a "around" or "circa". And for the purpose of advertising the game there's no need for new players to know that it was 255 years and not 250.

But of course we're in your head so I'm assuming you've decided the game started with Nightfall and Factions/Flame Seeker Prohpecies don't really count and so this factually indisputable evidence is probably just me being partial and completely dishonest.

If you wish you can review the time line of events at http://wiki.guildwar...m/wiki/Timeline

Edited by Senatic, 18 July 2014 - 03:37 PM.


#33 Konzacelt

Konzacelt

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 529 posts
  • Location:a prairie under a clear, blue sky
  • Guild Tag:[PD]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 18 July 2014 - 03:46 PM

View PostSenatic, on 18 July 2014 - 03:32 PM, said:

It wasn't actually precisely 250 years.  

The Charr Invasion and The Searing of Ascalon happened in 1070 AE.

Events of the personal story take place 1325 AE.

It was closer to around 255 If you count from pre searing Ascalon, where the game did really start. The flight of the Ascalonian people, as well as the player character and Prince Rurik, over the Shiverpeaks happened 1072 A.E. The 250 years is usually preceded by a "around" or "circa". And for the purpose of advertising the game there's no need for new players to know that it was 255 years and not 250.

But of course we're in your head so I'm assuming you've decided the game started with Nightfall and Factions/Flame Seeker Prohpecies don't really count and so this factually indisputable evidence is probably just me being partial and completely dishonest.

If you wish you can review the time line of events at http://wiki.guildwar...m/wiki/Timeline

Yeah...250 years from Kormir's ascension to the GW2 personal story.

At any rate, the reason for "250" is simple and has nothing to do with lore at all: it's just a quaint reference to the 250 stack limit of items in your inventory and bank.

#34 alccode

alccode

    Pale Tree Seedling

  • New Members
  • 8 posts
  • Location:Toronto, Canada
  • Profession:Thief
  • Guild Tag:[AB]
  • Server:Stormbluff Isle

Posted 18 July 2014 - 03:46 PM

View PostAlexei Hart, on 18 July 2014 - 02:55 PM, said:

*snip*

But whatever, I'm still enjoying the game, so let's see what they do with these new twists.

What you're saying is sensible and I agree with the logic there (good one on the Pale Tree in particular).

If we consider Tyria and Guild Wars 1/2 to be the only things in existence, then yes, there may be cause for concern and so on, it wouldn't make sense, we'd be tearing our hair out, and so on.

The issue is that these things do not exist in a vacuum. Guild Wars 1 was released in 2005, in a particular context. ArenaNet (itself comprised of several ex-Blizzard employees) was vying for a space in the market that was dominated by WoW and Diablo 2 (the latter still very much in its prime). They hashed together a game, albeit with very interesting (though patchwork) lore, and released it to compete with those titles, even though they claimed they did not intend to compete with WoW directly as GW1 was not strictly an MMORPG to the extent WoW was - though everyone could read between the lines and see that that's the direction ArenaNet was going in and was hungering for the MMORPG market.

Anyway, I am sure that ArenaNet knew there was no guarantee that GW1 would succeed, and so did not have initial plans to expand this. It is highly unlikely (in my opinion) that ArenaNet was looking that forward into the future when they were developing the lore for GW1. It was simply impossible both to foresee the future of GW1 and to plan for so much growth in the game series and universe. They probably did not even think of the Factions and Nightfall expansions of GW1 when GW1 was initially released.

The truth is that videogame companies work on tight schedules and rapid turnaround - they do not know what lies beyond the next hill, let alone across the valley. It is not realistic to expect 100% consistency in lore and especially across the 9 years that the Guild Wars universe has existed in.

There is a major difference between videogames and works of fantasy fiction, for example. In the latter, the authors can spend years refining and fine-tuning their universe and story (Tolkien took decades). Videogame companies do not have that luxury. They spin whatever yarn works for the next game, and let the chips fall where they may, leaving the job up to those working on the lore and story to patch together whatever makes sense for the next game, if there is a next game. So we shouldn't worry too much about these lore wrinkles. Try to close one eye, give them a break, and realize that what they've accomplished is still quite extraordinary given the constraints they have had to work with regarding the videogame industry (and don't forget the undoubted pressure from NCSoft to meet their particular criteria, such as for example banning them from exploring Cantha again and whatnot).

I, for one, don't mind (for example) that the Pale Tree is at the centre of the universe now (even though it's logically strange based on previous lore). One final thing - just because it doesn't make sense now, doesn't mean it won't make sense later, with more unfolding of the story. It might all click at one point. Who knows? And why not enjoy it in the meantime?

EDIT: the "you" implied in the last sentence is universal, speaking to all those who have expressed qualms about the lore, not to anyone in particular. :)

Edited by alccode, 18 July 2014 - 03:59 PM.


#35 alccode

alccode

    Pale Tree Seedling

  • New Members
  • 8 posts
  • Location:Toronto, Canada
  • Profession:Thief
  • Guild Tag:[AB]
  • Server:Stormbluff Isle

Posted 18 July 2014 - 03:53 PM

View PostKonzacelt, on 18 July 2014 - 03:46 PM, said:

At any rate, the reason for "250" is simple and has nothing to do with lore at all: it's just a quaint reference to the 250 stack limit of items in your inventory and bank.

According to whom? Did you hear a developer make this point? Is there a reference? Or are you just confusing your opinion for facts (again)? Because it is far, far more likely that "250 years" was chosen for some other reason (even if just pulled out of a hat, 250 is a nice big rounded number cognitively speaking) than that it was deliberately made as a reference to the 250 stack limit. Of all things!!

Don't forget, also, that the former is an issue of lore, while the latter is an issue of user interfaces. They probably had different people working on these things, and it wouldn't make sense at all for there to be some kind of meaningful exchange at that level. What would they have to gain? Lore person: "psst, UI guy, make the stack limit 250 items so that Konzacelt in July 2014 can have the privilege of claiming genius at the expense of everyone else on the GWGuru forums!" UI guy: "Sure no problem!" Or vice versa? UI guy: "Hey, we decided to make 250 the stack limit for items. Can you also factor that into the core of the story someway, cause, uhh... just because?" Lore person: "Sure!!! Your whims totally override all my considerations for how to weave this epic story!"

Come on!

You really have no ground to stand on whatsoever. I truly hope you're trolling at this point.

Edited by alccode, 18 July 2014 - 03:57 PM.


#36 typographie

typographie

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1925 posts
  • Guild Tag:[LAW]

Posted 18 July 2014 - 03:59 PM

View PostAlexei Hart, on 18 July 2014 - 02:55 PM, said:

Everyone is entitled to their opinions. I am just curious as to what makes you say that. Ley Lines came way out of left field, we were already a year into GW2 before they were even hinted at.

It may just be because I don't play a lot of RPGs, and the iteration of one story over another isn't as glaringly obvious to me. The way the ley lines interact with the dragons and their life cycle of awakening, drawing magic back into themselves, falling asleep, seeping magic back out into the ley line structure seems fairly unique to me.

Additionally, I like how magic in general (and ley lines in particular) are treated in the narrative. Its a subject of scientific study for characters in the story, and the characters often know less about it than we do. That's an interesting take on it, that I don't really see done anywhere else.

Whether or not the ley line concept came about abruptly or not, I think they've done a reasonable job of tying it to the story. For instance, it fits quite nicely with the Thaumanova reactor, or as a speculated explanation for the unusual magic that was present in Varajar Fells. The Guild Wars series has a lot of gaping holes and mysteries in it, they'll never explain anything if they don't introduce some new concepts eventually.

#37 Konzacelt

Konzacelt

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 529 posts
  • Location:a prairie under a clear, blue sky
  • Guild Tag:[PD]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 18 July 2014 - 04:26 PM

View Postalccode, on 18 July 2014 - 03:46 PM, said:

What you're saying is sensible and I agree with the logic there (good one on the Pale Tree in particular).

If we consider Tyria and Guild Wars 1/2 to be the only things in existence, then yes, there may be cause for concern and so on, it wouldn't make sense, we'd be tearing our hair out, and so on.

The issue is that these things do not exist in a vacuum. Guild Wars 1 was released in 2005, in a particular context. ArenaNet (itself comprised of several ex-Blizzard employees) was vying for a space in the market that was dominated by WoW and Diablo 2 (the latter still very much in its prime). They hashed together a game, albeit with very interesting (though patchwork) lore, and released it to compete with those titles, even though they claimed they did not intend to compete with WoW directly as GW1 was not strictly an MMORPG to the extent WoW was - though everyone could read between the lines and see that that's the direction ArenaNet was going in and was hungering for the MMORPG market.

Anyway, I am sure that ArenaNet knew there was no guarantee that GW1 would succeed, and so did not have initial plans to expand this. It is highly unlikely (in my opinion) that ArenaNet was looking that forward into the future when they were developing the lore for GW1. It was simply impossible both to foresee the future of GW1 and to plan for so much growth in the game series and universe. They probably did not even think of the Factions and Nightfall expansions of GW1 when GW1 was initially released.

The truth is that videogame companies work on tight schedules and rapid turnaround - they do not know what lies beyond the next hill, let alone across the valley. It is not realistic to expect 100% consistency in lore and especially across the 9 years that the Guild Wars universe has existed in.

There is a major difference between videogames and works of fantasy fiction, for example. In the latter, the authors can spend years refining and fine-tuning their universe and story (Tolkien took decades). Videogame companies do not have that luxury. They spin whatever yarn works for the next game, and let the chips fall where they may, leaving the job up to those working on the lore and story to patch together whatever makes sense for the next game, if there is a next game. So we shouldn't worry too much about these lore wrinkles. Try to close one eye, give them a break, and realize that what they've accomplished is still quite extraordinary given the constraints they have had to work with regarding the videogame industry (and don't forget the undoubted pressure from NCSoft to meet their particular criteria, such as for example banning them from exploring Cantha again and whatnot).

I, for one, don't mind (for example) that the Pale Tree is at the centre of the universe now (even though it's logically strange based on previous lore). One final thing - just because it doesn't make sense now, doesn't mean it won't make sense later, with more unfolding of the story. It might all click at one point. Who knows? And why not enjoy it in the meantime?

EDIT: the "you" implied in the last sentence is universal, speaking to all those who have expressed qualms about the lore, not to anyone in particular. :)

This is a great explanation.

Most of the changes in lore have very little to do with some long-unfolding narrative that we can only now see, but rather because of real-life factors.  My only real beef with ANet is that they try to tell us it was always supposed to end up this way.  Why the charade?  I'd have a lot more respect for them if they simply said, "Yeah...we decided to take the lore in a different direction with GW2."  Instead they want you to believe all that old stuff was wrong all along.  It's disrespectful to those old writers.

#38 alccode

alccode

    Pale Tree Seedling

  • New Members
  • 8 posts
  • Location:Toronto, Canada
  • Profession:Thief
  • Guild Tag:[AB]
  • Server:Stormbluff Isle

Posted 18 July 2014 - 04:30 PM

View PostKonzacelt, on 18 July 2014 - 04:26 PM, said:

This is a great explanation.

Most of the changes in lore have very little to do with some long-unfolding narrative that we can only now see, but rather because of real-life factors.  My only real beef with ANet is that they try to tell us it was always supposed to end up this way.  Why the charade?  I'd have a lot more respect for them if they simply said, "Yeah...we decided to take the lore in a different direction with GW2."  Instead they want you to believe all that old stuff was wrong all along.  It's disrespectful to those old writers.

That's interesting. I don't know much about what the "story meta" is, i.e., what ArenaNet is saying about the story, but I'd definitely be a bit shocked if they were very explicit about forcing a pretend sense of perfect continuity onto us. I agree with you, it'd be disingenuous to us. I could see how they'd like to not seem like they fell on their faces (even though everyone in the industry has to suffer from it), though, so a bit of effort in trying to sweep it under the rug is ok with me, just not full-out "doublethink" type stuff.

#39 Konzacelt

Konzacelt

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 529 posts
  • Location:a prairie under a clear, blue sky
  • Guild Tag:[PD]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted 18 July 2014 - 04:53 PM

View Postalccode, on 18 July 2014 - 03:53 PM, said:

According to whom? Did you hear a developer make this point? Is there a reference? Or are you just confusing your opinion for facts (again)? Because it is far, far more likely that "250 years" was chosen for some other reason (even if just pulled out of a hat, 250 is a nice big rounded number cognitively speaking) than that it was deliberately made as a reference to the 250 stack limit. Of all things!!

Don't forget, also, that the former is an issue of lore, while the latter is an issue of user interfaces. They probably had different people working on these things, and it wouldn't make sense at all for there to be some kind of meaningful exchange at that level. What would they have to gain? Lore person: "psst, UI guy, make the stack limit 250 items so that Konzacelt in July 2014 can have the privilege of claiming genius at the expense of everyone else on the GWGuru forums!" UI guy: "Sure no problem!" Or vice versa? UI guy: "Hey, we decided to make 250 the stack limit for items. Can you also factor that into the core of the story someway, cause, uhh... just because?" Lore person: "Sure!!! Your whims totally override all my considerations for how to weave this epic story!"

Come on!

You really have no ground to stand on whatsoever. I truly hope you're trolling at this point.

Ummm...because some dev referenced to it a couple of years ago?  I can't remember the interviewer.  Besides, the reason behind 250 stack limit was debated on old GW forums from time to time.  Some thought it was because of some coding formulas.  /shrug

#40 Alexei Hart

Alexei Hart

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 71 posts
  • Location:New York
  • Profession:Mesmer
  • Guild Tag:[LONG]
  • Server:Henge of Denravi

Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:07 PM

View PostAlexei Hart, on 18 July 2014 - 02:55 PM, said:

Getting back to the OP, the problem with the Sylvari is similar because it also represents a dramatic change of flavor. In EOTN, the advent of the Sylvari was totally incidental, with Ronan finding the seeds and bringing one to Arbor Bay. The Pale Tree was nothing but an oddly shaped sapling, so now making it the heart of the cosmos, when we know perfectly well that everything existed before the seed was even planted, makes utterly no sense whatsoever. This is an even bigger issue than the ley lines, because it is directly contradictory with the prior data that we had.
Actually, looking back over this post from this morning, I just thought of a way that the writers could potentially reconcile the old lore and the new.

We know that the Pale Tree is not unique, as Ronan found multiple seeds in the cave, and Malyck is supposedly from a different tree. Various seeds mean that probably at least one tree existed before. So how about this: the parent tree of our current Pale Tree existed during the previous time that the dragons were awake, and in fact they were awake because of its existence.

Let's put the new lore of the Pale Tree and the ley lines into a package and say that the Pale Tree has the capacity to disturb or alter the flow of magic in the ley lines, and that the dragons have awoken now because the new Pale Tree disrupted the ley lines.

The Wyld Hunt Valiants fight the memory of a dragon before they awaken from the Dream, and are then told that their mission in life is to destroy the dragons. What if that is what the existence of these trees is all about: They are forces created by nature itself to counter the corruptive power of the dragons. They are able to manipulate the flow of magic in the ley lines and channel it into creating Sylvari, and thus the Sylvari cannot be corrupted because they are created with the same magic that the dragons need for sustenance.

Therefore the Pale Tree is not suddenly at the heart of the cosmos, but it is at the heart of this natural conflict with the dragons using the ley lines, and that is what we witness in Omadd's machine: The one large orb in conflict with the six smaller ones.

Obviously this still needs a little development, but it is just my idea for reconciling the lore.

#41 Skoigoth

Skoigoth

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 20 posts
  • Server:Drakkar Lake

Posted 20 July 2014 - 03:13 PM

To anyone who thinks that GW2´s story is disconnected from GW1 lore or even butchers it, I recommend watching the latest lore/speculation video WoodenPotatoes put out (link below). While I am not fully in line with him, I think some of his thoughts on the story are quite interesting and exciting and I really hope the LS will indeed progress in this direction.

https://www.youtube....h?v=6sxgwsq_G3g

#42 I post stuff

I post stuff

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 181 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 05:49 PM

I dunno about GW2 lore as a whole but so far I enjoy the new living story. It also let us have that amazing, though easy fight with Zhaitan.

#43 Phineas Poe

Phineas Poe

    Seraph Guardian

  • Members
  • 1160 posts
  • Location:Washington, DC
  • Profession:Engineer
  • Guild Tag:[EG]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted Yesterday, 07:15 AM

View PostI post stuff, on 20 July 2014 - 05:49 PM, said:

I dunno about GW2 lore as a whole but so far I enjoy the new living story. It also let us have that amazing, though easy fight with Zhaitan.

The dialogue between members of Destiny's Child/Edge 2.0 is a little too sappy for my taste and is something I hope subsides over time, but overall it is remarkable how much better the second season of the Living Story is compared to season one and the Personal Story. The Aerin fight was a lot of fun, and the Modrem Thrasher fight was quite a breath of fresh air pushing you to run heal/control skills over raw DPS.

Considering season one started with fixing signposts and ended with the Scarlet fight ... the starting point of season two bodes very well for this game's future.

#44 _Stylus

_Stylus

    Pale Tree Seedling

  • New Members
  • 3 posts
  • Location:Portugal
  • Profession:Warrior
  • Guild Tag:[PT]
  • Server:Seafarer’s Rest

Posted Yesterday, 11:35 AM

View PostPhineas Poe, on 21 July 2014 - 07:15 AM, said:

The dialogue between members of Destiny's Child/Edge 2.0 is a little too sappy for my taste and is something I hope subsides over time, but overall it is remarkable how much better the second season of the Living Story is compared to season one and the Personal Story. The Aerin fight was a lot of fun, and the Modrem Thrasher fight was quite a breath of fresh air pushing you to run heal/control skills over raw DPS.

Considering season one started with fixing signposts and ended with the Scarlet fight ... the starting point of season two bodes very well for this game's future.
Yeah, actually the game is getting hard again. (except that stupid bug that them dont help us after we die at Modrem Thrasher fight).
Season 2 is getting REALLY better than the 1. And the videos, and the scenerios, and everything, looks awesome.

But continuing the thread: I don't think the game keep exploring the Pale Tree and the Sylvari like a bad thing. They're new, unexplored. Ofc I would like to explore more about the Charr's or Norn's for example. But I thing all will be explained at is own time. I trust ANET.

#45 MCBiohazard

MCBiohazard

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 188 posts

Posted Yesterday, 05:54 PM

I don't mind them revisiting the Sylvari either. Like I said earlier in the thread, if it leads to more activity and content development in the Maguuma jungle areas aside from Dry Top, I'm all for it. The trait unlock system pretty much ignores the Sylvari/Asuran starting areas completely whereas every other race has at least one trait unlock represented in their 15-25 zones and humans have the lion's share of the major trait unlocks in their mid range territories such as Harathi Hinterlands and Gendarren Fields. If they expand the system to provide more choice in the trait unlock requirements, Brisban Wildlands, Caledon Forest and Metrica Province would be prime zones to work them into.

#46 Rifky Rayn

Rifky Rayn

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 38 posts

Posted Yesterday, 09:56 PM

Mordremoth is a dragon related to the jungle and the Pale Tree. When (in some ~2016 perhaps) we get to fight Jormag, you'll see more of the norn, and during the Kralkatorrik arc we'll probably be visiting Ascalon more often, so some charr and human lore would be the focus. The only thing I can imagine one might be upset with is the order of this sequence ArenaNet decided to go with, but isn't such complaint a bit ridiculous?

#47 Konzacelt

Konzacelt

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 529 posts
  • Location:a prairie under a clear, blue sky
  • Guild Tag:[PD]
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted Today, 06:33 AM

View PostSkoigoth, on 20 July 2014 - 03:13 PM, said:

To anyone who thinks that GW2´s story is disconnected from GW1 lore or even butchers it, I recommend watching the latest lore/speculation video WoodenPotatoes put out (link below). While I am not fully in line with him, I think some of his thoughts on the story are quite interesting and exciting and I really hope the LS will indeed progress in this direction.

https://www.youtube....h?v=6sxgwsq_G3g

I like WoPo, he's a great narrator.  But he's known for not being accurate.  For instance, the Bloodstone in the Ring of Fire has never been said to be the keystone.  That's still speculation.

#48 Krazzar

Krazzar

    Legend of the Norn

  • Members
  • 7985 posts
  • Server:Sanctum of Rall

Posted Today, 04:36 PM

According to the new trailer Rytlock has something to do with the story now, as well as the other races to a seemingly smaller scale.

Best case scenario; they follow the ley line path and awaken the other dragons leading up to the announcement of a large expansion all over the Tyrian map.




9 user(s) are reading this topic

2 members, 7 guests, 0 anonymous users