Campaign Creations

Posted: **Sun Jul 01, 2012 5:49 pm**

There's no substitute for a well-written and well-executed story. Blizzard has failed on all three of their franchises.

Posted: **Mon Jul 02, 2012 11:24 am**

Krazy wrote:Leah suggests that demons are created "like a human leaves a footprint" so it's almost as though demons are created effortlessly by the lords of hell as they pass through. Although perhaps she's referring there to simply leaving them behind rather than creating them.

What bothers me more as I think about it is that Leah completely obsesses over finding her mother, yet she never makes any comment whatsoever on Leoric, who apparently is her grandfather, if Aiden is her father. It kind of feels like the writers didn't even map out her family tree, which makes no sense considering how much of the plot revolves around her and her family. And I completely agree that Leoric and The Butcher should have been switched. Almost every revelation about Leoric occurs after you kill him. The placement of the butcher at the end of act 1 is totally arbitrary. They could have put zombie andariel there instead and it would have made just as much sense.

To be fair, she's unaware that he is her father at the time, just that it was a "great warrior." Which was another error to state by Blizzard, since from my readings so far neither Cain or Gillian, nor anyone else for that matter, had any idea who had impregnated Adria, and only rumors ran that it might of been him, but considering everyone went their separate ways at one point, some figured it could of been anyone. Though I found it annoying that she had little to nothing to state about Leoric, when she just happens to live a few miles away from the ravaged lands.

Posted: **Mon Jul 02, 2012 6:13 pm**

"Great warrior" strikes me as something you tell an orphan so she has someone familial to feel proud about.

Posted: **Mon Jul 02, 2012 11:28 pm**

Lavarinth wrote:
Krazy wrote:Leah suggests that demons are created "like a human leaves a footprint" so it's almost as though demons are created effortlessly by the lords of hell as they pass through. Although perhaps she's referring there to simply leaving them behind rather than creating them.

What bothers me more as I think about it is that Leah completely obsesses over finding her mother, yet she never makes any comment whatsoever on Leoric, who apparently is her grandfather, if Aiden is her father. It kind of feels like the writers didn't even map out her family tree, which makes no sense considering how much of the plot revolves around her and her family. And I completely agree that Leoric and The Butcher should have been switched. Almost every revelation about Leoric occurs after you kill him. The placement of the butcher at the end of act 1 is totally arbitrary. They could have put zombie andariel there instead and it would have made just as much sense.
To be fair, she's unaware that he is her father at the time, just that it was a "great warrior." Which was another error to state by Blizzard, since from my readings so far neither Cain or Gillian, nor anyone else for that matter, had any idea who had impregnated Adria, and only rumors ran that it might of been him, but considering everyone went their separate ways at one point, some figured it could of been anyone. Though I found it annoying that she had little to nothing to state about Leoric, when she just happens to live a few miles away from the ravaged lands.

I'd also suspect that while Blizzard likely had the Warrior/Dark Wanderer planned as being Leah's father all along, the retcon to the Warrior being Aiden, King Leoric's eldest son, came late as an attempt to tie all of Diablo's hosts and attempted-hosts (Leoirc, Albrecht, Aiden, and Leah) together in one big happy family and make his plan look more plan-like.

Posted: **Tue Jul 03, 2012 10:25 am**

I recall reading about the Warrior being Leoric's son during Diablo 2's golden age, but it may of been speculation at the time.

Posted: **Tue Jul 03, 2012 10:57 am**

What grieves me bout the Aidan retcon is that it retcons entirely the warrior storyline. No one bothered to address the character as my liege nor shit like that, and when everyone has to explain to you who the King was (being him, you know, your father), kind of just drops everything into the toilet. It's totally unnecesary and contradictory in the end.

Meh.

Posted: **Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:10 pm**

Alevice wrote:It's totally unnecesary and contradictory in the end.

Most of Blizzard's retcons are.

Posted: **Tue Jul 03, 2012 2:51 pm**

I don't understand why companies are so retcon heavy. Do they hate their original writing that much? Why not just make a new franchise at that point? I'd love to see what the interns responsible for their dialogue would do with an entirely new world.

Posted: **Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:03 pm**

The old stories were made to a point where the series would have to be closed. The new Blizzard doesn't want to have any of that, wanting to ride on their past successes as long as they can, hoping to make either a Galaxy of StarCraft or Sanctuary of Diablo of sorts... Typical for me.

Posted: **Tue Jul 03, 2012 3:47 pm**

I mean in general, not just Blizzard. I think it's more a result of that X original team doesn't exist anymore and the interns aren't capable of writing anything new, nor do they understand the original game at all (lol 3 high templar for an archon etc), so they just flail around wildly until they end up with a release.

Posted: **Tue Jul 03, 2012 4:40 pm**

IskatuMesk wrote:I mean in general, not just Blizzard. I think it's more a result of that X original team doesn't exist anymore and the interns aren't capable of writing anything new, nor do they understand the original game at all (lol 3 high templar for an archon etc), so they just flail around wildly until they end up with a release.

If you want to reference C&C, my explanation above is useful as well. Despite the fact most here don't like C&C, I liked it to C&C: KW. Then came RA3 and C&C 4, which dragged BOTH stories to a point not even casuals could bear and only noobs loved the ruined gameplay in those two.

NOTE: I'm talking lore-wise, 'coz we all know gameplay is awful. Oh, yeah, it was gradually degraded by Westwood as well, reply me if you want the explanation.

Posted: **Tue Jul 03, 2012 6:52 pm**

IskatuMesk wrote:I don't understand why companies are so retcon heavy. Do they hate their original writing that much? Why not just make a new franchise at that point? I'd love to see what the interns responsible for their dialogue would do with an entirely new world.

Why make a new franchise when they already have a good cash cow in our hands to milk to the living shit out of it? This is the reason they makes sequels in the first place anyway...

Posted: **Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:38 am**

I guess I must be the minority of people who actually cares about writing. What a sad day we live in.

Posted: **Wed Jul 04, 2012 9:39 am**

IskatuMesk wrote:I guess I must be the minority of people who actually cares about writing. What a sad day we live in.

It's okay, Mesk. You're not alone; we'll be black together.

Posted: **Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:26 am**

IskatuMesk wrote:I guess I must be the minority of people who actually cares about writing. What a sad day we live in.

This is true, unfortunately, but I believe this is more of a situation where companies realize they can get away with shotty writing, so why pay the big bucks for great writers when a bunch of entry level writers can get the job done just as easily. The worst part is we, as players, can't do anything but complain after the purchase, which may be noted by some staff, but not by the big guys who call the shots.

Campaign Creations

Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta

Re: Diablo 3 beta