With the Bilgewater event done and some actual lore back on the table, I feel this is a topic worth revisiting because of how unique it is to the type of game League (And MoBAs in general) is. During Burning Tides, one of the most common criticisms and player disappointments was that they didn't feel these characters would act this way or speak like this. These aren't comments I dredged up from somewhere, this is just an example of the stuff I might see:

"Why would Graves call him TF!? A guy like graves wouldn't use slang!"

"Ugh Gangplank's swearing all the time it's really bothering me. I don't think he'd do that."

I don't really feel criticisms like this hold weight, simply because of how games like League treat characterization. Now, while some people may delve deep into lore, there's no denying that the average player is more interested in playing the game itself than delving into the lore. As an average player, choosing a character is less about story or gameplay and more about who looks interesting to pick up. Now, building off of this, players pick a character and jump right into a game to get a feel for this guy or gal.

Here comes the first issue of comparing story to the actual game: Riot has to "design" a character personality with about 10 minutes of VO. With such a limited amount of lines, this means characters end up falling onto tropes and similar routes. Take Vi for example. Her quotes and lines are generally a tomboy girl with some nerdy euphemisms (Punch first, ask questions while punching). The only other part of her personality that we're given in-game is that she calls her partner and colleague Caitlyn "Cupcake"...which has basically set the internet alight with shipping but let's avoid that for now.

The core point I want to make with this is that Vi, in a void, is given 2 strong character traits and we're told to work with them. So writers, artists and other fan types do. Caitlyn and Vi art is all over the net. Shameless plug but I essentially wrote an entire book about what I imagine these characters and more to be. These characters are easy to grasp and give a new player just enough characterization to get attached.

Only recently have we been getting multi-layered character VOs (I'm talking 10+ unique taunts) but even then that doesn't alleviate the problem of characterization. For another example, lemme use another MoBA I played: DoTA2. Skywrath Mage was one of my favorite characters. For the unaware, his lore is about how he pledged himself to serve his kingdom but ended up having to serve someone he hated after a coup. This is a pretty simple conflict of interests and his quotes reflect that: He soars high and is a powerful caster but he still yearns for the love he lost.

So why am I bringing up this? Because, quote-wise, you wouldn't think much in-game even with the enormous VO skywrath has. He calls a character his secret love, he serves his court, that's about the sum of it. The deeper story and characterizations are left for the reader to interpret. Now, this is fine! There's nothing wrong with making up an imaginary story or ideal for a character and thinking about how they would act outside the game. Where there seems to be a problem is when players are given a lore event or an in-game story that evolves or changes the character.

This is where problem number two comes in: Everything we give a character outside of official Riot lore is headcanon or simple fan interpretation. Don't mistake my words, the inklings are there, but the issue is that when Riot will release an official lore story or a change? People will become angry because now that character isn't 1:1 how they act. Using the Vi/Cait example again, let's say Vi is literally only calling Cait cupcake because it pisses Caitlyn off and it's funny to her. No romantic subtext, no secret romance, just friends jabbing at each other.

Now comes the two-way street: One, players will begrudgingly accept this. Two, players will flame against Riot and outright ignore the real canon for the head canon. Either way, this is lore now. We've gotten a deeper look at characters that have previously only had very minimal character traits. What upsets players is that these characters aren't exactly how they imagined them to be in the official world. This part is why Burning Tides upset some people: They wanted TF, Graves, Gangplank or MF to act exactly as they would in your head and when it didn't, there was disappointment that the head canon wasn't right.

Is this always bad? No, it's quite possible for new lore to be better than one's headcanon could ever imagine. The issue comes when players get mad that their personal beliefs are exactly what they turn out to be: Personal. In fact it might even hinder one's ability to produce fan art or fan fiction. Maybe that character you really adored turned out not to be someone you liked as a person. Maybe you find yourself sympathizing with your character's rival more than the character you adore?

At most, we can't be TOO upset that lore doesn't fit with how we imagine it unless we're talking a grievous oversight. We're free to criticize and more but to outright say our pictured ideal of a character is better than anyone elses isn't fair. The only difference between a fan fic writer and a lore writer is that one of them is on a payroll. They still love these characters and they make worlds with these characters but to say with utmost certainty that your idea of a character is completely and utterly better than anyone elses can be quite arrogant.

What do you guys think? Did Burning Tides fit exactly how these characters are in your head? Did one or two stand out as false? More so, what do you think about this post? Was the key point hit or do you think there's a little more to characterization? Please, lemme know and feel free to discuss among each other.