Which Rioters are members of the Narrative department?
What decisions led the the lore retcon?
What are they planning for the future of LoL?
Is it still too early for us to know that kinda stuff, or are you guys still figuring it out?
Pryotra5 votesIf they are still figuring it out, then it looks like they just kinda did something to do something without thinking first. If they do have it figured out, they don't want to hand out spoilers. So either way, you will get 0 information on that question.
As for the other two, they have been very keen on avoiding answering outright the second, and the first answer keeps changing after every lore event, as people either leave or get the axe.
Overall, the department is highly unstable and as a result will likely not answer you. But Good try! Hopefully they will give us a AMA or something before Christmas 2017, but don't hold your breath.
Dr Clueless PhD4 votesNo, they definitely answered in regards to what decisions led to the retcon. A number of people simply aren't happy with the answer.
They intentionally divorced the narrative from the gameplay. They believe that trying to keep the gameplay of LoL in-universe was restricting what they could do with story and character development. Strictly speaking, this is true. This is a restriction they had to deal with for a long time.
Riot believes that this restriction was too large to contend with anymore, and that the content they could make with it released would be far better than what they would make continuing to fight with it. This is the part people get hung up on. Lots of people REALLY want gameplay to still be canon, so they try and think of new ways to preserve it in the story. Ultimately, however, Riot simply doesn't want gameplay to be canon anymore. They believe they can put out better content without that restriction, and LoL's narrative will ultimately be better because of it.
Is that true? Can they put out better content without that restriction? I'm led to believe the answer is actually yes (though it certainly will take more time and more content to confirm it). They've put out quite a bit of high-quality material as of late, and there's no mention of the League or Institute anywhere. I think to do so would be forced, at best. Rather than trying to build a story to support a game, they're simply building a story. How many Champions in League were basically prisoners of the Institute, or otherwise forced into competing? Do we really need another (Rek'Sai) tacked onto that list with a line at the end of her story? How many characters did Riot make that were great in and of themselves, but their competing in the League simply didn't make sense or felt awkward? Kalista doesn't need to add to that list.
Pryotra6 votes[{quoted}](name=Dr Clueless PhD,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=in7PBMPP,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2014-12-17T14:50:17.533+0000)
No, they definitely answered in regards to what decisions led to the retcon. A number of people simply aren't happy with the answer.
Um, they kinda did, except they didn't fully answer it. They have dodged a majority of the question, and that is just as bad as dodging the whole question.
They intentionally divorced the narrative from the gameplay. They believe that trying to keep the gameplay of LoL in-universe was restricting what they could do with story and character development. Strictly speaking, this is true. This is a restriction they had to deal with for a long time.
Well, yeah, nobody disputes that is what they did. However, it doesn't explain "why retcon instead of just killing it off?" considering there was enough intrigue to disband the IoW in the old lore. They haven't answered that question, which is an important factor for "why retcon?"
Riot believes that this restriction was too large to contend with anymore, and that the content they could make with it released would be far better than what they would make continuing to fight with it. This is the part people get hung up on. Lots of people REALLY want gameplay to still be canon, so they try and think of new ways to preserve it in the story. Ultimately, however, Riot simply doesn't want gameplay to be canon anymore. They believe they can put out better content without that restriction, and LoL's narrative will ultimately be better because of it.
Whether or not that is true is beyond the point. They never explained why the straight retcon over other options like nerfing the summoners through lore or just killing off the IoW and saving themselves from having to rewrite every character that even for a moment used the IoW for anything. They could even have divorced gameplay and kept the IoW, so that isn't even an answer.
Is that true? Can they put out better content without that restriction? I'm led to believe the answer is actually yes (though it certainly will take more time and more content to confirm it). They've put out quite a bit of high-quality material as of late, and there's no mention of the League or Institute anywhere. I think to do so would be forced, at best. Rather than trying to build a story to support a game, they're simply building a story. How many Champions in League were basically prisoners of the Institute, or otherwise forced into competing? Do we really need another (Rek'Sai) tacked onto that list with a line at the end of her story? How many characters did Riot make that were great in and of themselves, but their competing in the League simply didn't make sense or felt awkward? Kalista doesn't need to add to that list.
There are many, many, many ways the IoW could have ended and left the universe intact. They chose the path that litterally forces an effective reboot of just about everything. That is a decision that everyone wants to understand, why that path over every other? And that is the question they keep avoiding. It's bad enough that content in this area still feels the need to follow champion releases, but to not even explain why they are just removing everything?
I think the worst part about all this is that most if not all of their stories so far fit into their old universe with very little if any modification. This shoots their own argument in the foot, as it disproves the idea that the IoW was infact holding back lore.
Gentleman Gaston6 votesActually they did answer this.
Hey guys,
Long time no see. First and foremost, I apologize for my own silence on the forums – we definitely owe you guys more interaction than we've given you, and we know we've messed up on that front. We'll try to do better.
Now, let's dig into this a bit.
Let's start with some of the old canon – something I contributed heavily to. I wrote, more or less, the latter half of the Journal of Justice (Kaldera Carnadine, here), and the presence of the Institute of War was something we wrangled with in telling that story over its entire course. In fact, the whole “conspiracy” angle arose entirely because we were digging for a way for our characters to encounter legitimate political conflict and war – without the IoW being able to step in and immediately diffuse it. What that led to, as you know, was “corruption” within the Institute itself, and champions working covertly together to counter the IoW's influence. It was a cool story (if told through a particularly clumsy medium) – but it wasn't exactly something we could pull again. With the Institute of War in place, we often found ourselves asking: just how can we work around this so the story we want to tell can take place?
Right there – exactly there – is where I see this idea come up. Why didn't we just continue the story line as it was unfolding, and why not let the Institute of War crumble? Why not “end” the League of Legends?
There are a lot of answers to this – answers we considered. One of them is actually an argument I see cropping up right now in favor of keeping the Institute: that it would destroy the framework of the video game League of Legends. Without the League, what is the game? The answer is really, really messy, but it's more or less the same place you get when you remove the LoL story from the game entirely. They become separate entities. We're actually okay with this, but we didn't want to leave a strange lingering tie that muddied the clarity there. The game is the game. LoL's story is its story.
Another part of the answer is that ending the League wouldn't fully remove our ties to it in terms of storytelling – characters will have still interacted with it in the past, the “fall” of the League would still be significant enough to deeply influence all of our champions' lives, and “summoners” would still be a dangling, confusing story piece we'd have to deal with somehow.
Now, I understand that a lot of this is ENTIRELY subjective. A lot of you will say, “that sounds like a cool story!” and you know what, it probably could be. But when we really thought about it and weighed the things we valued about our storytelling, we really came down to the characters being the most important piece. Focusing on them and asking ourselves the question, “what's the best story this champion could have?” often resulted in us acknowledging that the IoW actually played a very awkward and restricting role in our character's lives.
We believe in a philosophy in which story should spring from the characters naturally, not from a very arbitrary plot built around them. Character drives plot.
Secondly, while it hasn't been brought up in this thread directly, I want to talk about the “League of Legends” as a device in our narrative design. As we used to frame it, the player is literally a “summoner” controlling a champion on the Fields of Justice. I've read a lot of concerns that taking away this framework harms the game; it takes away the reason these characters have to fight.
This is going to get into pretty subjective territory again, but I have to say that I deeply do not believe that the League, summoners, and the Fields of Justice were ever a strong framing device if we're speaking strictly in terms of narrative game design. When I play League of Legends, I am not concerned with myself as a summoner – I connect more to the champion him or herself. I am not concerned with the “stakes” of every battle (such as whether or not taxes will be raised in a certain place, or political favor of a certain noble house in Noxus) – none of these things are built into the actual experience, they're more or less described OUTSIDE OF THE GAME entirely. This makes it a weak frame. Sure, we could have worked to strengthen it, but we didn't feel excited by the possibilities there.
“But Ionia vs. Noxus” - yeah, that event was awesome. I wasn't even working at Riot at the time, but it certainly perked my interest. The thing is, though, this wasn't something that was going to work over and over again. The idea that players could influence the story was pretty misleading – at any “story match,” only ten players would legitimately get to fulfill the role of a summoner. In addition, story by vote or story by chance can often end with unsatisfying results (simply because of the random chance). Strong storytelling is deeply crafted.
“But a certain character's entire story focused on his or her connection to the Institute of War!” Yeah, I know these things are sticky; we wrestle with them internally, too. Our philosophy with these characters is that whatever we do to re-shape them should hold very tightly to the “soul” of what a character was in the old canon. Nobody should feel like an entirely new character – their spirit, the “feeling” you get from them, those things should feel true, even if details shift in how they came to be that person.
Orianna and her father, for example – they can still be who you know them to be. She can still be a girl with hopes and dreams that met a tragic end. Her father can still be a man driven to questionable means to bring her back and let her live those dreams. THOSE are story beats that are important to Orianna. The Institute of War is merely a detail, it doesn't define her.
AGAIN: a lot of these are philosophies myself and the narrative department hold, not necessarily things that apply to every player. Many DID believe that the frame story was satisfying, regardless of its objective strength. To those people, I'm sorry, our actions were absolutely not meant to “step on you” in any way – we are truly looking for the best way to tell you guys awesome stories, and we stand behind our decisions.
FINALLY, I know that “proof” of this new story direction has been slow coming. Before I worked in the industry, I would be upset, too – but these things take time. I know it's frustrating to ask for patience over and over again, but please stick with us! Thank you all for being so invested and taking the time to interact with us about this stuff. -RiotRunaan!
Dr Clueless PhD3 votesNice link.
Pryotra4 votes[{quoted}](name=Gentleman Gaston,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=in7PBMPP,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2014-12-17T20:47:28.798+0000)
This link I hadn't seen yet, and while very indepth, its rather... old.
Still, thanks for pointing it out to me. It still raises the issue that A) they haven't really improved in their communication, and B) how much time does it take? The only lore since shurima was, well, honestly Sion. I don't count new champions until they add to the overall world, otherwise they are like Rammus. Just kinda there.
I almost feel it would have been better to just leave up the old lore until they were ready, as now alot of things feel either rushed because lore finally did something(Azir), or the lore feels rushed because other teams are ready and waiting(Trundle). I hate that their systemic communication issues have even made this a thing (both Riot to Community and Riot to Riot needs help badly), but frankly Sion was the best lore out in quite sometime, and it's because they didn't really try to tell story with their game. They just told a story while the game happened to be doing something with a character in said story.
Until they can deliver on both sides completely, they really just should stick to the divorce of story and game, and not half ass it like they have been doing. Either commit to the divorce, or retcon the retcon, but don't half ass it and make both sides worse for it.
Gentleman Gaston2 votesIt's old (a couple months?), but I feel like it's still the sentiment that Narrative has on the subject.
I think what we've seen of Rek'sai has almost exclusively added to the world. She very much so has a place and defines that place just as much as she is defined by it.
As for what you said about divorcing lore and gameplay: yes. Although, it seems like Riot has committed to the divorce. Is there a recent example where they haven't?
Pryotra6 votes[{quoted}](name=Gentleman Gaston,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=in7PBMPP,comment-id=000000000000000000010000,timestamp=2014-12-17T22:32:10.674+0000) As for what you said about divorcing lore and gameplay: yes. Although, it seems like Riot has committed to the divorce. Is there a recent example where they haven't?
Ironically enough, Shurima, the very same event they were praising in that thread. Poorly written story (opinion) with large plot holes due only partially to deletion of old lore they never really rewrote, and very buggy additions to the game (Azir should be the only thing I need to mention here, but the game mode had it's share of bugs as well).
If they had truly had a divorce, why oh why do they have to retcon so many champions without adding more stories? I would believe the line of tech problems, except they never even posted the lore for most of the champions whose lore they deleted. Seeing as they have been quite able to post the other lores, where are these other pieces? Remember, we can't count things that may or may not exist in their servers unless they show and tell.
I think what we've seen of Rek'sai has almost exclusively added to the world. She very much so has a place and defines that place just as much as she is defined by it.
As far as Rek'sai, what exactly does she add? She is a void creature, but that is what she is, not what she adds. Her hunting grounds lie in shurima, but that is where she is, not what she adds. I don't really see anything that she adds to the story in any meaningful way. Contrast that with Sion, that not only added greatly to his own lore, but also expanded on the Black Rose, added something to the past of both Demacia & Noxus, as well as showed more of what Vlad can actually do.
While I am not expecting this much from every champion, it is undeniable that Sion adds more to the world than just himself. Without Kalista adding anything, whose lore is that she effectively enables suicide, we have Rek'sai. The first female void monster, so I guess you could claim she adds the fact that there are multiple genders in the void, but then again we had that with Kog'maw and his "daddy". You could claim that she helped tear down Shurima, but then again it was pretty much obliterated after the sabotaged ascension (another plot hole there mind you.). So what exactly did she add to the world? Well, I'm left with herself. And that isn't lore, that is adding a champion.
Gentleman Gaston3 votesLet's look at what Rek'sai has brought to the table so far:
And as far as Kalista is concerned, she doesn't expand the world so much as she deepens it. Kalista is the equivalent to the Bloody Mary legend and her story adds to the culture of the world and makes it seem like a more "lived in" place. Additionally her dialogue adds some pieces to the "Shadow Isles/Ruined King" puzzle, but that's somewhat weak to be the only world tie-in for an entire character.
Sneak Dog3 votesMost of that wasn't Rek'Sai but the amazing journal that was brought out and that happened to be tied to Rek'Sai. It could've been tied to some random void monster living in the Shuriman desert that wasn't a champion. We know there's monsters living in Runeterra that aren't champions, like the sea serpent that was called during the harrowing. Those open up the possibility of being used as an antagonist that can actually be defeated/killed.
What will Kalista bring for future stories set in the present though? Can she really be used in a story set in the present without being contrived? Or are all her stories going to be about the the fall of the Shadow Isles and once those are cleared up will she never be heard of again?
Pryotra3 votes[{quoted}](name=Gentleman Gaston,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=in7PBMPP,comment-id=00000000000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2014-12-17T23:36:05.183+0000)
Let's look at what Rek'sai has brought to the table so far:
- Expanded the knowledge of Shurima both in terms of it's geography and culture
- Introduced the idea of cross-nation intermingling, which has not yet existed in a post-retcon world
- Helped define what life looks like to Shuriman people
- Helped define Noxian customs
- Introduced the idea of Voidborn naming tendencies and the idea of Void "species"
Re-reading all that came from that, I see your points, as well as other little details, like currency and whatnot.
And as far as Kalista is concerned, she doesn't expand the world so much as she deepens it. Kalista is the equivalent to the Bloody Mary legend and her story adds to the culture of the world and makes it seem like a more "lived in" place. Additionally her dialogue adds some pieces to the "Shadow Isles/Ruined King" puzzle, but that's somewhat weak to be the only world tie-in for an entire character.
I would not count any dialogue in game as accurate, as frankly if they want to divorce the game then divorce it already. That said, even when examined it hardly adds much that we don't already have.
As for making the world feel "lived in", I disagree. Details of day to day life of the everyday man are depth giving. "GIVE ME YOUR SOUL AND KILL YOURSELF AND I HELP KILL SOMEONE ELSE FOR YOU!" not exactly depth providing, even if true.
If we are relating it to Bloody Mary, realize that legend comes from an actual historical figure that was so terrifying in real life that her legend lives on to this day. Akin to Dracula in it's own way. This is an actual spooky ghost that no one remembers where she came from. In other words, the exact opposite of our myths or legends.
She doesn't deepen or enlarge the world or those in it in any meaningful way, outside of adding herself to the pool. It's like when a new kid from down the street that just moves in comes to the neighborhood pool and jumps in. No one really is connected to them outside of proximity. If the new kid wants to be a part of the community, they need to interact with it.
Sneak Dog4 votesOur philosophy with these characters is that whatever we do to re-shape them should hold very tightly to the “soul” of what a character was in the old canon. Nobody should feel like an entirely new character – their spirit, the “feeling” you get from them, those things should feel true, even if details shift in how they came to be that person.
Ehheheh
Yeah...
Earl Eulrich2 votesNow, I understand that a lot of this is ENTIRELY subjective. A lot of you will say, “that sounds like a cool story!” and you know what, it probably could be. But when we really thought about it and weighed the things we valued about our storytelling, we really came down to the characters being the most important piece. Focusing on them and asking ourselves the question, “what's the best story this champion could have?” often resulted in us acknowledging that the IoW actually played a very awkward and restricting role in our character's lives.
Just ironic that all of the last releases had been very shallow Characters, featuring stories that told more about the world than the Champions... For me it still only feels like a really lazy way out, and as they keep contradicting any reason they claim to be in their choice (aswell as they keep ignoring their own promises for "improving communication) - i still think they just want to wait it out and hope that in a few months the last remaining fan of the lore has vanished and the tiwtter-generation they apparently aim for takes over to just celebrate every multimedia-release of "lore" short-lived without really caring at all.
Sneak Dog5 votesHonestly, we don't have to, or even shouldn't, know who is a member of the narrative department. We only should know which Rioters are willing to represent it on the forums.
Also, personally, I'm not interested in the future lore unless it involves going back to retconned and replaced characters. Either somehow fix them or release the replaced ones as separate champions. Otherwise I just can't allow myself to care about the lore, my trust would just get betrayed again.
I'll be here. Waiting, discussing. Have had to do so for a year already anyway.
Dr Clueless PhD4 votesIf you're waiting for them to come back and remake the original Trundle, you're going to be waiting long after League of Legends is no more. A lot of people I've read from on the narrative team seem to be big into comic books, which means one thing: they're ready and willing to use retcons when they believe it is for the best, and they're not afraid of the backlash that comes with it. They'll defend the retcon forever, and they won't go back and undo it.
Sneak Dog6 votesI don't read comic books. Different medium.
It means that at any point in time my favorite character that I love and play every day could just be cut out of the lore and never be heard of again. That's what happened to Trundle. In five years, we could have an entirely new champion roster.
It's like a writer writing a series of books and decides to cancel his trilogy after book 2 because according to him it was going nowhere. Then he starts an entirely new trilogy in a similar setting, with a new plot, some of the same characters, but a different protagonist, and expects people to read book 1 before he's done writing books 2 and 3.
**I'm not going to care about characters if I have solid reason to believe they could be retconned out next week. **I'm amazed other people are willing to. I would've been fine with Trundle being an ice troll chieftain. He isn't though, someone else is.
Dr Clueless PhD4 votesThen I understand why you don't read comic books. :P
Retcons are a reality that comic readers accepted a LONG time ago. Authors come and go, stories start over, new editions get printed. That's not to say that it's a punch to the gut that we've just gotten used to. Not at all. It's that we finally understand why it's done and what it does for the story.
The first time I ran into it, I was livid. But, I eventually accepted it for what it is: the author wants to make the best story he can, regardless of what's come before. It's not so much a casual disregard of the past as it is a thought-out sacrifice. When an author retcons, they don't do so lightly (generally). They do it with full knowledge that they're paying a lot, but they firmly believe that it's a better story because of it. It's something that we've been able to see the intent behind (and results of, some good and some bad) after years of experience in comics, but it's certainly not standard practice elsewhere. So, when it happens somewhere like here, I would've expected all the hate they got for it. They're foreign.
It is interesting to see when an author does a retcon outside of comics. I've known of a couple novel authors who retconned their earlier books in a series. The fans were hostile beyond belief, saying the author betrayed them. They pretty much all took the same stance, though: "I'm making the best story I can, and that means doing this. I'm sorry that you feel this way. I hope you grow to like this one eventually." Most fans don't buy it, though, and continue to resent the changes.
Sneak Dog3 votesWell said.
Earl Eulrich6 votesthough there are deeper issues here beyond "just" the retcon.
Seperating Gameplay&Story in the one medium that (should) focuses on immersion more than any other medium is just sort of unbearable for me. It´s just somehow them giving up to try and expand/explore the possibilities of Mobas to really tell stories, instead aiming for something they can easily sell without fully commiting to it ever. It´s really a sad thing EA killed of Dawngate...maybe they would have been up for the task of making a Moba that actually aims to be story-driven.
Dr Clueless PhD1 votesI agree that video games have the potential for fantastic levels of immersion, and we should pursue it wherever possible. But, I don't agree that MOBA's are a genre where it works well.
I believe that story-driven immersion requires meaningful progression for it to be good. Otherwise, it gets stale really fast, and the immersion is broken. Characters die, situations change, the story is moving forward. This genre is more or less defined by a story that can't move forward meaningfully. Yes, we had progression with the JoJ and some events. But, that progression was mostly meaningless, because they have to keep the situation the same for the gameplay to stay unchanged. We can't have serious character conflict or death, we can't have strong progression of personal stories, we can't have world-altering events. The gameplay can't be sacrificed for the sake of the story, so all of these things are off the table. We can't see Malzahar or Kassadin kill the other. We can't see Vayne actually hunt down any evil mages (the whole purpose of her crusade). We can't even see Amumu make friends and stop being sad. These characters need to stay in their present state for the sake of the game, so the story is severely limited in what it can do and where it can go. Immersion is sacrificed as a result.
It's kinda like a long-running serial TV show. You can do almost whatever you want in a given episode, but everything has to be back to normal at the end, ready for the next show. Serious changes are always temporary, or fake, or whatever, because the status quo has to be preserved.
We had some big events happen in the old lore. We did. But, they were the biggest Riot could ever actually do, because any larger and gameplay would have to be sacrificed.
Earl Eulrich6 votesThe thing is though...is it really impossible to make story-telling work in a MOBA?
I think the answer is a clear no, Riot is just shy to give it a fair try and invest in it. Dawngate actually had their players influence the story regularly...and LoL could go way further. The featured gamemodes show that it´s absolutelly possible to create story-based battlegrounds/stages for a short amount of time to progress the story further (and the ascension mode had been quite close to that already), while keeping SR as sort of regular training-grounds for the Champions.
Dr Clueless PhD1 votesRiot did give it a fair try. They invested in it. They failed.
And we did influence LoL's story. Ionia broke Noxus' occupation of part of their territory because of players battling each other on the Rift, and Guardsman Bob's fantastic Udyr play.
But, it was hollow. Yes, we advanced the story. Yes, we made a difference in the world. But, it was an invisible difference. The way you approached the game was unchanged (except for the new item they added because of it). There wasn't any immersion to that advancement. The progress has to be invisible, because the gameplay can't change.
Earl Eulrich5 votesRiot did give it a fair try. They invested in it. They failed.
They did? From what i´ve seen there are lots of people that really liked the JoJ (the original Lore), many people that really wanted to know more about the world this game is set in. The failure had been to stop writting Lore all of a sudden for 2years straight, instead of consistently expanding it and exploring new ways to tell stories and interact with the game/players.
Dr Clueless PhD1 votesYeah, they did fail. I'll straight up say it, though it pains me. I loved the old lore. I loved the Journal of Justice. I loved the Noxus v Ionia match.
But, the old lore was ultimately a failure. You said earlier that you want video games to be immersive. I agree with you there. As I said, though, the LoL lore was not immersive. The nature of the gameplay kept that from happening. It was good for a period of time, but after a while, you need serious development. The kind that you can't have when the status quo must remain unchanged, like it does in a MOBA.
Earl Eulrich5 votesthough that´s not exactly the old lore´s fault. The setting had been working out...I merely saw the everyday-gameplay as sort of sparing/training for Champions and Summoners - so it´s pretty common that it doesn´t change many things, besides the summoners gaining some fame/influence in the institute (->IP) and steadily improving (->climbing the ladder or just getting better anyway). There´s no need for major changes to that to develope the actual storyline further in my humble opinion. Having featured matches/gamemodes that actually influence the greater Story would be a preferable way - unfortunately it seems to be to much hustle for Riot...so they just give up before they even try.
