You're a complete ass but I'm afraid you may be right. I think what an earlier summoner said rings true, I used to love the lore updates but now I dread them.
Also I forgot Kit was the one who told all the ME3 fans their opinions didn't matter. Some how I doubt her mind has changed while at Riot.
Mass Effect 3. No gameplay discussion, let's look purely at story. Compare 2 to 3, which had better story telling elements? You may say that Mass Effect 3 was an end to the series, ergo how much more development can you have?
How about looking at your options: Renegade and Paragon. I'd like to make specific examples, but for the sake of spoilers, I'll try to be a bit ambiguous about them. It doesn't matter if you're Paragon or Renegade, it really doesn't. It doesn't affect decisions on the larger scale, it doesn't affect your character per se really because you are still a hero. You are still Commander Shepard, the savior of the universe. You're space Jesus no matter what you do. And remember how it originally ended before the fans clamored for an actual ending to be implemented? Do I need to bring that up? Let's talk about characters then. Say you got in a relationship with Jack, what happens with her in ME 3? Is it really THAT big of a shock? Or let's say Legion was killed in 2 (through magical means that are not spoiled), what happens in ME 3 with him? Isn't that a huge copout and completely lazy writing to have HOLO LEGION KAY compared to having an actual consequence of letting him die? Should I get into the uselessness of having the Rachni or not having the Rachni? Gameplay wise, I love Legion and Garrus backing me up as I walk down the middle of the battlefield. Story wise, I wished he stayed dead and was gone and was dust. A thousand variables in a different ending my left butt cheek. Don't even get me started with how Fallout 3 promised 200 different endings and we got that instead.
You know what, that may be fine for some people, but I personally grew up with games like Fallout 1 and 2. How many endings did you have with that game, for choices you made? Even good choices could screw over people at the end.
Then there's Planescape Torment.
Planescape Torment is probably one of the best examples of a game with an amazing story and lore behind it, because your character develops due to YOUR actions which cannot be reversed. Like ME 3, though, the ending cannot change very much because of the cinematic. To get the second alternate cinematic you have to be creative and figure out how to kill you, an immortal, permanently. That's pretty intense. But even then, once you get all the niches and everything, you still get the subtle ending differences depending on which team mates you brought, which ones you cultivated relationships with, which ones you gave a **** about yet you still received the same ending cinematic.
That is because it is an incomplete game. That's the bottom line for a game like Planescape Torment, it was and is an incomplete game rushed out, and it still has some of the best narrative in a game I have seen. Layers upon layers, complexities, subtleties, humor, you name it its got it. So with Planescape Torment, a game 13 years old, you'd expect a rise in story telling. The ending of a book, of a movie, of anything, ANY form of entertainment can pontificate what it was telling, or sink it completely. The ending is probably one of, if not the absolute most important feature of a story. You could have a Pride and Prejudice story and the ending is the main character wears women's clothing and is shunned by everyone for no apparent reason. Or you can have a generally weak story, like a knight going on a quest to slay a dragon, but by having a strong ending such as the maiden being in love with the dragon and the knight goofed by killing him, you can create an interesting twist to a tired archetype.
Mass Effect 3 was fine with the ending it originally had, they believed THIS was enough to satisfy people for a 3 game long trilogy of you shooting aliens, saving the universe, talking to interesting races, making diplomatic connections, etc.
"We just want to release awesome stuff. Players please, give us a chance. Judge our games based on what they are. Judge the DLC based on what it is. Stop thinking you're a producer and telling us when and where we should be building our content."
That didn't work for fans. They judged. And having THAT ending, did not work for them, for the amount of hours and money we put into it. It wasn't sublime, it wasn't artistic, it was lazy. So please, do not use Mass Effect 3 as an example. You may bring this article up. How is it a piece of art when it feels rushed, it feels cheapened? How is it a piece of art when you have day one DLC and needs for extra beeps and boops to try and exemplify your view of it? But you know what, you're right. They made a trilogy, and they ended it there. Maybe the ending shouldn't have been ch-
Mass Effect 4.
Whoops. Doesn't matter. But maybe it won't have Shepard! Maybe it's just a game that takes place in the Mass Effect universe and the main character is YOU, and not Shepard! Why do I care? If they make four and show the effects of Shepard's choices, I am going to be upset because for the ending of a trilogy, that is what I would expect in terms of a story and an artistic piece. It makes its point and it shows you what your choices have done and how you benefited, or annihilated the galaxy. Oh wait is that an option even? I don't remember. Even if it is, how's that going to affect 4?
So with that long and maybe pointless speech because of this next point: LoL has no end. It really doesn't. There's no set plot for it, there's no "THIS IS WHERE IT WILL END STORY WISE BUT DON'T WORRY." It's really hard for that with this sort of game and with the sort of business plan Riot has, and that's understandable.
With that in mind, without any ending, that means how champions relate to one another and interact with one another because they're on the FoJ and their reasons for joining it *COUGH* SYNDRA *COUGH* are imperative to detailing what the characters are. You need to build up on that very strongly to have very strong characters and strong story telling potential.
You can have ambiguous characters like the mystical Karthus going "ooooo I'm a liiiich", that works. He's a lich. He has a hidden agenda as to why he joined, mystique and so forth. Rengar joined the League because...he wanted to be stronger...and to be able to fight Kha'Zix. And Kha'Zix decides to join the League out of pure coincidence, they see each other and give one another the stink eye "Oooo you doity rat!"
Syndra, honestly, is a good character concept with no real reason to join the League. Look at her quotes, look at how she speaks, she has an entire @#!$ing castle floating in the sky. How many champs can compete with "Hey I can levitate a castle and the terrain around it, I can crush you like a grape"? It brings in too many discrepancies. Changing the lore so it's even simpler is a terrible idea when there's no continual plot to LoL which the JoJ had perfectly and down pat. It characterized champs, it helped show development. It had Taric being fabulous, it had Nidalee's relationship, it had Irelia without her cold persona, it had Shaco questioned, it was able to accomplish its point. It was able to give us lore and a story to follow with intrigue and mystery.
But now it's our own canon to choose with as we please.
Let me ask everyone here one, simple thing: Why do the lore rewrites, instead of looking at the simple, basic, building block of the story, and start from there? Make new champions, new lore for them, and concentrate your efforts on simple things like the timeline, when champs joined, how old some champs are and so forth. Is everyone 30+ years old? That's how it currently is with the current timeline. Irelia is described as a young girl in the Ionian war and then a young woman when she joins the League. How many years had it been?
Why REWRITEREWRITEREWRITE instead of looking at things like the timeline? Annie's a 8 year old for who knows how long. Morgana was added into the League but was around before Kayle, the Ionian war lasted how long? How old are Garen and Katarina? Is Garen looking into buying a bigger carriage for his midlife crisis while Kat is going through menopause?
I made this with Ryugi and Ceru's help a while ago, it's probably outdated now but it helped serve my story's purpose:
Current year:------------21 CLE
Ionia v Noxus ReM:---20 CLE
Ionia v Noxus M:-------13 CLE
Ionian War: -------------11 CLE
This was/is the timeline for my story to help justify the ages of the champions and because 10 years is much more flexible than 15 years for writing. Riven was...let's say 17, 18; now she's 27, 28. Irelia was 14 when she led the battle of Placidum, was 16 when the first match happened, 23 when the Rematch happened and is now 24. Riven is still older, I always planned her to be but now it's not like Irelia is 30 and Riven is 31-39 years of age.
(Only slightly adjusted from my personal notes)
That's not the best timeline, it certainly isn't, but when I looked at it I couldn't believe their ages and I decided to go and rewrite it.
And if the question of "What happens to the earlier champions who joined the League" pops up? That's quite simple: Nothing. Make them join the League, later. Have different champs, like the scrapped champs such as Rob Blackblade be some of the early representatives. It's sort of tongue in cheek humor while adding to the fact that the League has pre-established champions that retired from the League when others came in. Why is that such a bad thing? To have retired champs, maybe one of them became the trainer for the Dauntless Vanguard or some **** like that, you can do a lot of things with such an idea.
Why focus on the rewrites when the basic building blocks of lore need to be looked at? If they honestly cared about lore, why go back to retouch the old champs instead of focusing on the current champs they are releasing? (Diana is an example of a current champ whose lore is of good, if not great quality.)
Rengar's lore is boring. Kha'Zix's lore is boring. The only reason they have any lore relevance is because they have one another. That's it. Outside of that, there's no reason for them to be in the League. Rengar, maybe? He got his butt kicked so he wants to be better, sooo maybe? But have any of you ever looked at the other Void champs? Cho'Gath was "captured", Kog was lured in by food, Kha'Zix is just like "SURE THIS IS A GOOD IDEA."
Is Eserine being a bit aggressive in his stance and perhaps rude at times? Perhaps. Hell he may say I'm an idiot after this, but that doesn't make his points less valid. If he was here with cookies and milk and sunshine and puppies, then his point wouldn't be made because people with loud voices going "NO YOU ARE WRONG" would easily crush his voice and he'd scuff his feet and go, "Okay..."
Is he incorrect in his way of thinking, with the quality of lore we've been receiving? I don't think so. With the evidence we have, with what we have seen, praying and hoping can only get you so far.
Grand Viper: A well-appreciated post.
Eserine: I think you have some good points, but you have an annoying tendency to jump to conclusions, often absurd ones or ones that appear incredibly condescending. You could at least phrase your criticisms in a way that doesn't turn off people, most of all any Reds outside the Lore department who would sympathize with you and give the thread attention, and avoid logical leaps that point in an accusatory direction.
Even if you don't get any Red posts, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, and you could probably make more people sympathetic to your cause by being nicer and less prone to "REPORT RIOT LORE DEPARTMENT FOR FEEDING, THEY DIDN'T DO THIS OR THIS SO THEREFORE THEY ARE TOTAL INCOMPETENT" posts.
The above statement is made on a heuristic basis, and is meant to help you make more effective critical evaluations of Riot's lore department. There's too much here to comment on.
On the other hand, I do think you have a bit more of a point than most people here seem to think you do, although I would agree that the condescension pretty much makes you look like a troll.
© 2013 Riot Games, Inc. All rights reserved. Riot Games, League of Legends and PvP.net are trademarks, services marks, or registered trademarks of Riot Games, Inc.