ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/A Reason to Re-visit Previous Areas

No Point of No Return (Discussion)
In the Prophecies campaign, once you complete a mission or primary quest, there's no need or incentive to return to a previous area. Once you get out of Ascalon, you go to Kryta, then to Maguuma, then the Desert, then the Peaks, then Ring of Fire, and then only after all that you have the OPTION (although not a very good one because the rewards suck) to go back to other areas.

In the Factions campaign, you addressed this somewhat, but only as far as returning to areas on the mainland. Once you get off Shing Jea, there's no reason to go back. Unless there's a festival event going on, but those have little bearing (really no bearing at all) on the story.

In the Nightfall campaign, you got closer in that there were a couple of quests that took you back to Istan and Kourna, but they were over in a matter of minutes and there was no reason to stick around. You just moved on.

I suggest that in GW2, you design the stories of each mini-campaign (since it's kinda non-linear and a "sandbox" as you describe it), to give people reasons to return to old locations, and hang out for a while. This can be something as simple as making all missions and primary quests, maybe even a handful of sidequests, repeatable, and yielding a decreased reward (like the EotN system). But I'm thinking more along the lines of making actual story elements compel players to return to an area and even stay for a while before moving on. The best way to illustrate what I mean in detail is through a hypothetical. So here it goes.

I'll use the Prophecies campaign as the backdrop, since it was the most guilty of "hit-and-run storytelling".

The Fall of a Kingdom
After being exiled from Ascalon, Prince Rurik and the heroes along with the refugees make their way across the Shiverpeaks to implore the people of Kryta for help against the Charr. We all know what happens to Rurik. Upon arriving in Kryta, the heroes and refugees stumble onto an Undead army besieging Lion's Arch and lend aid, meeting a General of the White Mantle: Hablion. Hablion grants them access to LA where the refugees are allowed to take asylum, while he briefs them of an emergency at D'Alessio Seaboard. Before they can lend aid, they must repel the undead and ensure Confessor Dorian is safe and LA is secure. After the completion of D'Alessio Seaboard, Hablion tells the confessor of the Ascalonians' aid and their distress, as well as their heroic acts against the undead forces. To show his gratitude (and this is where I would deviate your story), Dorian agrees to dispatch a battallion of white mantle including Justicar Hablion to accompany them *BACK* to Ascalon to try and save their homeland. After all, they helped save LA...


 * So far we've seen an act of heroism be repayed and an alliance forged against a mutual enemy (Kryta has also fought the Charr)

The Mantle reinforcements and the Ascalonians travel across the shiverpeaks through a single mission, in which they crush a contingent of Stone Summit, thus demonstrating the might of your newfound Mantle allies. But in the end scene, the hero can see from afar the fallen gate and the avalanche sight from the Frost Gate mission. Hablion inquires "is something wrong?" and the hero replies in a quiet "No.", turning once more to look at the sight of the fallen, before rejoining the force en route to try and save Ascalon.

After arriving in Ascalon with the Mantle, the party discovers that it's in ruins. They are too late. The Charr have decimated the kingdom. A mission takes place in which the Mantle aid the hero in a search-and-rescue mission, where they discover a grim sight. King Adelbern, along with his royal garrisson, lay dead at the gates of Ascalon, as though they'd fallen in a last-ditch effort to defend the city. Along side them, is the corpse of Ambassador Zain (remember him?), who fought to aid the city until the very end. United in grief and outrage, some drama takes place between the hero and Hablion, in which the hero is persuaded that the cause to save ascalon is pointless...the Charr have one. The hero has now lost a King, a Prince, a Kingdom, and their home, but gained an ally...for now. Hablion assures the hero that "you have suffered much, but know that there will always be a place for you in Lion's Arch for what you did for us. I only regret we could not return the favor." Awww how nice. What a great guy, huh? The party is returned to Kryta where the story resumes. Safely. Now that this chapter is over. (you never really closed it in the original campaign)


 * So far we've now seen reiteration of dramatic elements such as loss, grief, displacement, and the forging of an alliance. Not to mention we've also developed the role of key players in the story much better by making their relationship more meaningful. This will add even MORE relevance should they betray the player or be betrayed by the player later in the game (you guys basically had a faction change every three missions through the rest of Prophecies, but no bond to the factions was ever really established so it became meaningless). But most importantly, we revisited an old location, which had an unfinished problem, and resolved the conflict (by losing to the Charr.) Now the player has no real reason to hold on to or return to the kingdom of Ascalon and can focus on moving forward through the rest of the campaign. Such wasn't the case before, at least not for me. Because as soon as I finished The Wilds mission for the first time, I remember throwing my hands in the air and yelling "What about the f***ing Charr? Whatever happened to trying to save my home? Who're these shining blade douschebags and why should I care about them?" I think if you'd closed the chapter of the whole conflict in Ascalon before moving on, it would've made the relationship (and the eventual severing of that relationship) with the Mantle much more significant and made for better storytelling.


 * We've also had the opportunity to take a trip down the visual memory lane. We had another quick romp through the shiverpeaks, and the shithole uhhhh I mean the 'ruins' of Ascalon as well. If upon completion of each mission we were then in the mission as an outpost with a handful of story-related sidequests, we could also explore around the area a bit and relive the scenery again before moving on. If these quests (and their rewards) were repeatable (but make the rewards less-so on repeat), we also would have a reason to come back and hang out even long after finishing the entire campaign...

Anyway. So that's my general idea. A lot of people can say stuff like "we want better story" or "deeper character development", but not a lot of them can say how to accomplish that. Most of them don't know. There's nothing wrong with that. They're gamers who want a better game experience. But they're not all writers. But if you're looking for a way to make the story more compelling and satisfying, consider this approach through a couple stages. At the very least it'll make for some extra filler :-P

As is the case in any story, one size doesn't fit all. So knowing when to use this isn't necessarily easy. But I will say that it will help to make relationships and alliances stronger if you spend more time with each faction and share some kind of character development with them. From watchtower coast on to the end of Prophecies it felt like you guys kinda made it up as you went along. Each time I moved on to a new area, I felt like there was unfinished business in the previous area. Backtracking to certain areas in the story and the game world will help defeat this I think.

Anyway. If you've read through this long-ass diatribe, reward yourself with some cookies accordingly. Perhaps a hot pocket. But do consider this as a tool for storytelling, although it's certainly not the only one at your disposal. Also remember that the game world is interactive, so the player gets to act out the story. Therefore making the story elements deeper and more interesting is greatly amplified since people get to play along intead of just watch.


 * Why this is a good idea
 * Provides a means to reinforce characters and alliances and their relationships, thus providing deeper story.
 * Allows players to revisit old areas and achieve a sort of 'case closed' feeling before moving on in the story.


 * Why it may not work out
 * If you make us go back to really ugly tilesets, we won't want to go back as much. This will also get repetitive after a while, but there's no real way to avoid that. May as well make the replayability more involved.
 * Players will eventually start skipping the storytelling scenes anyway, making all this effort seem unappreciated by older players, but still would be good for people on their first time through. And if you make the story good enough the first time, some people will actually WANT to go back and repeat it (especially if there's another reason to go back...like getting a reward over again)
 * Painted Bird 19:52, 22 August 2008 (UTC)