Why do people hate the writing?

[Chocos Ramabotti]

In my opinion the first game played it safe, too save, most personalities were rather boring and pretty much on the nose. There was not much going on here.

When I look at the reviews I read more than one time that is has "reddit-writing" what is that even supposed to mean?

I dunno if I have bad taste, but I like the rats I think they are much more expressionate personality, most characters in the first game were pretty bland tbh, there is also now drama and a loooot of dialouges even meanwhile the missions. What does the first game actually better in this department?

[Gandorques Hikla]

I agree, the Characters have a lot more depth in WG2, old and new ones.
And the new Story builds upon and enriches the Lore of the first Game,
Like a good sequel should imo.
The cause of the conflicts is much more believable than the "Series of Misunderstandings" the first games Story consisted of.

[Tripas]

Honestly, don't worry about it. We're just going through an era where too many people with outrageous levels of media illiteracy think "bad writing" is whatever they've heard on crap like Cinema Sins, or one of the thousands of performative outrage Youtubers who make a living ranting about "pronouns" or whatever.

They might not know the first thing about story structure, emotional development, character growth, or anything like that... but if one bit of dialog kind of reminds them of something they heard in a Marvel movie or whatever, then and that makes it "bad writing".

Bottom line: unless they can justify why something is "bad writing" with some actual valid points, and not just some flimsy "they make jokes therefore it's bad", then their opinion belongs in the garbage.

[Cyrus罰]

Because nothing is explored, characters have PTSD and it's just very briefly touched upon. Characters straight up don't behave like they did, or should after the events they have gone through in the first game. And characters straight up change behaviour from scene to scene, like scenes are missing, and pacing is off: Nuru is the worst offender of this, especially at the end of the game.

[Neitsuke]

The problem is the dialogue went way overboard with the forced humor and this spills over onto the rest of the story, making the experience cringy for many

This also happened with the Heart of Thorns expansion for Guild Wars 2. Every character became comedic relief and the story suffered due to that, some backlash happened, the devs listened and the humor took a backseat for the later expansions

The humor should have remained within the cutscenes, best spot would be at the end of the combat to release the tension. It should not be happening constantly while you're fighting on the map

[Chocos Ramabotti]

Dunno I think the game alternates between more humorous passages and tragic when it needs to be. Just look at the end of the easy campaign for example, there was not out of place humor during the last mission and everything that came after.

[Echsrick]

i just hate how the pretty much villain of the story got away free....wich probably does something more in advance wars 3...like that ending would emplie

[Gandorques Hikla]

Originally posted by Echsrick:

i just hate how the pretty much villain of the story got away free....wich probably does something more in advance wars 3...like that ending would emplie

Yeah, Tenri got away too easy it seems.
But when you think about it,
it will probably lead to alienation from her son who is basically in exile which may cause a civil war, "pirates" trying to form their own nation while under attack, florans longing for revenge, felheim having to protect the fel gauntlet to protect the world from another undead apocalypse, fhaari being forced into servitude to the empire while toying with ancient artifacts and trying to be independent and cherrystone having the tough decision whos side they are on.
So there is probably much more coming up.
The conflicts that get set up by it are a good starting point for a Sequel DLC or full Game.
And I find the reasons for the conflicts pretty believable and well thought out, thats a huge thumbs up to the writing departement for me.
Especially when you remind yourself that the first game, as much as I love it, re-treads the same basic plotline Advance Wars 1 had, where a Nation under attack fights their neighbors through a series of misunderstandings and accusations only to ally with most of the former enemies because they find out that something more sinister caused the conflict.

I cant wait to see what comes up next for Wargroove.

I personally hope for a DLC. :-)

[ShayRey]

I'm more so just upset that we get nothing new about Sedge. Despite the last game having his bio talk up how bizarre his origins are.

Yes, he's apparently in conquest mode, but I don't think that mode has any particularly interesting writing to it. Not that I've tried it out yet anyway.

[ShayRey]

Anyway, to give my opinion on the problems with the writing:

The story tried too much, too fast, with too little payoff in what we currently have. This problem was there in the 1st game, but was not nearly as present as compared to this one. There are 3 separate campaigns going on simultaneously, and each one has a metric ton of stuff going on in it. And that's not a good thing necessarily.

For example, the Floran campaign feels frustratingly dense. Too much cramming with the new faction, mixing with cramming more about Caphony, and of course Nuru's personal arc with Greenfinger and her need to prove herself capable. Not to mention, the fact that the bell rings when they're not in danger during the tutorial cutscene. And yet in the Floran campaign, they're suddenly hunting something? It's inconsistent and annoying.

[ᵀᴴᴱ Uʟₜiᴹₐᵀᴱ ᴰᴱᴳᴱᴺᴱᴿᴬᵀᴱ]

You don’t expect Wargroove 2 having a depths like Lord of the Rings or Dungeon and dragons, You don’t expect Wargroove 2 having the same vocabulary as Tolstoi or Shakespeare

But people played Disco Elysium, watching two indie movies and red a book and felt blesh by "The good culture" and become really critical about everything.

Yes Wargroove 2 writing is simple but I don’t expect more from it. It’s enjoyable and better than Wargroove 1.

I’m pretty sure that a considerable part of people that blame writings are illettrates that are too lazy or dumb to read 2 minutes dialogues. Most of them just want voice acting.


PS: But maybe some translation are not that good, or maybe i’m biaised by my love about Wargroove 2

[Kim Wexler Enjoyer]

It's not my cup of tea at all and I skip most of the cutscenes. I do this in Advance Wars and most Fire Emblem's as well but still love those games.

[NVDragon]

Originally posted by Chocos Ramabotti:

When I look at the reviews I read more than one time that is has "reddit-writing" what is that even supposed to mean?

There seems to be a lot of effort to make characters fit archetypes that are maybe a step or two away from as-default-as-possible, but they also didn't do the important step of "give characters a second personality trait."

Let's look at Rhaum as an example. Rhaum is the Good General. He's very smart, he wins battles, but he's also compassionate toward both his allies and his enemies. They distinguished him from being a bland Good General by also making him the Incredible Hulk. But... every single interaction he has is still exactly the same. He hulks out to Protect People And Limit Harm. He encourages the Fresh-Faced Naive New Commander by asking for her opinion even when he doesn't really need it. He chastises the Mad Scientist because... because of course he does. He's objectively correct to.

Much like how you need to rotate a cube to see its other sides, character depth literally comes from revealing different perspectives. A poster earlier mentioned Disco Elysium; they did a great job of this by having the straight-laced supercop Kim Kitsuragi who quietly judges your character for his bizarre antics, but also hinting that Kim has a fascination with cars, and also having Kim reach his limit and get pissed off at you when you push him too far, and also letting him soften up and even be flexible once you get to know him. In Disco Elysium, characters are people, even if they initially seem to fit archetypes.

Every example of good writing does this. Astarion in Baldur's Gate 3 is an Effete Scoundrel, but he also has a self-serving streak, and he also feels guilty about that self-serving streak, and he also has trauma that led to that self-serving streak, and he also lashes out in anger when that trauma rears its head, etc. Even someone like Toriel from Undertale fits; she's a Doting Mom Figure, but she's willing to threaten violence to do what she thinks is best, and she's also pragmatic (she instantly pokes holes in Asgore's plan when she talks to him), and she's also whimsical despite having kind of a lame sense of humor.

Rhaum is a Good General, and is also a Good General, and is also a Good General. And going back to "reddit writing," I only just now remembered that Rhaum uses they/them pronouns, and it's in a setting where nonbinary characters aren't especially common, yet it never gets remarked on; it's an entire angle of the character that goes unexplored, thus it feels unnecessary, thus it feels more like it was tacked onto the character so the devs could say "Look, we have a nonbinary character!" than because the devs really wanted to explore what opportunities they could have with a nonbinary compassionate military genius in an invading force.

...This isn't the sort of game people tend to play for the writing, but they put so much emphasis on "hey look at all the story we have" that it feels gross for it to be this bland.

[Void]

Originally posted by NVDragon:

Originally posted by Chocos Ramabotti:

When I look at the reviews I read more than one time that is has "reddit-writing" what is that even supposed to mean?

There seems to be a lot of effort to make characters fit archetypes that are maybe a step or two away from as-default-as-possible, but they also didn't do the important step of "give characters a second personality trait."

Let's look at Rhaum as an example. Rhaum is the Good General. He's very smart, he wins battles, but he's also compassionate toward both his allies and his enemies. They distinguished him from being a bland Good General by also making him the Incredible Hulk. But... every single interaction he has is still exactly the same. He hulks out to Protect People And Limit Harm. He encourages the Fresh-Faced Naive New Commander by asking for her opinion even when he doesn't really need it. He chastises the Mad Scientist because... because of course he does. He's objectively correct to.

Much like how you need to rotate a cube to see its other sides, character depth literally comes from revealing different perspectives. A poster earlier mentioned Disco Elysium; they did a great job of this by having the straight-laced supercop Kim Kitsuragi who quietly judges your character for his bizarre antics, but also hinting that Kim has a fascination with cars, and also having Kim reach his limit and get pissed off at you when you push him too far, and also letting him soften up and even be flexible once you get to know him. In Disco Elysium, characters are people, even if they initially seem to fit archetypes.

Every example of good writing does this. Astarion in Baldur's Gate 3 is an Effete Scoundrel, but he also has a self-serving streak, and he also feels guilty about that self-serving streak, and he also has trauma that led to that self-serving streak, and he also lashes out in anger when that trauma rears its head, etc. Even someone like Toriel from Undertale fits; she's a Doting Mom Figure, but she's willing to threaten violence to do what she thinks is best, and she's also pragmatic (she instantly pokes holes in Asgore's plan when she talks to him), and she's also whimsical despite having kind of a lame sense of humor.

Rhaum is a Good General, and is also a Good General, and is also a Good General. And going back to "reddit writing," I only just now remembered that Rhaum uses they/them pronouns, and it's in a setting where nonbinary characters aren't especially common, yet it never gets remarked on; it's an entire angle of the character that goes unexplored, thus it feels unnecessary, thus it feels more like it was tacked onto the character so the devs could say "Look, we have a nonbinary character!" than because the devs really wanted to explore what opportunities they could have with a nonbinary compassionate military genius in an invading force.

...This isn't the sort of game people tend to play for the writing, but they put so much emphasis on "hey look at all the story we have" that it feels gross for it to be this bland.

Forgive me for playing devil's advocate for a moment, but I feel like a bit of Rhomb's character is being neglected here. In particular, during the mission where you're attempting to save Rhomb, he's tortured by the ghosts of his past, be them literal or metaphorical. He begs and speaks to his partners as if he believes they're still there, and almost lashes out at Lytra in desperation. Once he's out and witnesses the destruction of the forest, he has a silent, pained moment where he watches and lets his emotions stirr and settle, before painfully trying to reassure the naive and kindhearted girl. It may be a single note, as you say, but it's one that has a compelling motive behind it. I admit he doesn't have much beyond being a caring general who's only trying to help his country, but it'd be rude to deny that there isn't meaningful writing behind it.

Let's turn for a moment to Lytra. In the first two campaigns, she's meant to be the player's point of perspective, and because of this, she's written to be simple, naive, and kindhearted. She does her best no matter what, and tries to see the good in everyone, eventually going as far as siding with Pistil to the very end. A small detail introduced very early on is her humming during meditation, which shows a connection to music. This is further enriched by her opening of the bell, acquisition of the harp, and affinity for Cacophony technology. her sensitive hearing play alongside her musical potential, and her care for the single-note characters around her is developed in simple ways through the two campaigns she's in. As small as the writing is for it, they give you just enough time to care for her relationship with others, while also letting you play the game you wanted to.

Turning back at last to Pistil, she's your stereotypical 'mad scientist', yes, but there are layers beneath the surface if you look hard enough, which most people won't bother to do. Personally, when I was first introduced to her, she seemed like an eager researcher who's love for knowledge and curiosity was unrivaled. I couldn't tell she was cruel until Rhomb entered the picture. She's cunning and manipulative, saying whatever it is she needs to so people stay on her side and nothing more. But, the source of that selfishness and desire is something revealed in not only the final mission, but also a few codex entries. During the final battle, when she appears as an enemy, her cutscene shows a desperation to prove herself useful; to not be discarded after her mistakes, and be able to show her worth. When you look at the codex entry about the deceased leader of the faahri, his last name and Pistil's are the same. The leader's next of kin also went missing shortly after. Coincidentally enough, Pistil went missing for some time. By the looks of it, she looked up to her father and was desperate for her approval. But once eyes turned to her after his death, she got scared and fled, not wanting to be judged.

These three characters in particular have a clear intent in their writing that was properly executed. However, that intended outcome is easy to consider simple and monotonous. All three of them are held back by interacting with the same people in the same ways in almost every interaction they have. Whether or not you enjoy the notes they independently play or are irritated by their simplicity is up to you. They could have written them to be better characters. They could have given them more personality. They could have included more small interactions that show sweeter parts of them in subtle ways. But, at that point, the focus would be less about the conflicts and more about the characters within them. And yet, the conflicts themselves remain clear cut as well. They attempted a balance between the two the best they can, with the time the missions allow, and in the end, it caused both conflict and character to be as plain as can be. That isn't to say a simple story isn't a good one, of course. Some people just don't want one.

...Okay, I suck at being devil's advocate, but that's mostly because I have low standards.

[somethingoffensive]

The writing is awful. It's a mix of Saturday morning cartoon where the kids save the day and villains are dumb af and drama that is unearned and silly. They got way too cute with the campaign in this one trying to have variety. The problem is, the less advance-wars like the maps are, the worse they get. I hate the war if fun, children can fight with and better than adults BS. No political plots, no interconnected campaigns. I don't know how to unlock the final campaign, but I've beat all the others. I like Wargroove 1 much more.

[Kim Wexler Enjoyer]

Saturday morning cartoon really nails it. Just not my kind of thing at all.