-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Rewrites Lore-Inconsistent Scenario Descriptions #71726
Conversation
Aside from the pair of minor typos I found, looks great to me! |
Co-authored-by: Fris0uman <[email protected]>
I assumed |
I like the more verbose description for Low Profile. |
@Tranberry, fair observation with the crazy party scenario. I personally never looked at it that way, as if one considers that the evacuation order went out on the 15th, the government folded like a sandwich on the 25th, and game start is approximately the 30th, then it seems like quite the long party time for it to have lasted up until the 30th of the month. Plus, I found it kind of strange how, when it’s implied to have been a party, there’s no mention of how the building went from party mode to, “Oh good lord, everyone’s dead and killing each other.” I personally always thought that a resort would likely make for a good gathering place for evacuation, so personally, I’d just expand the profession pool to only include vacation and staff-related professions. That being said, if we want to preserve the party vibe, I could look at rewriting the description to reflect a final bash gone wrong. Perhaps I could rewrite it as follows: the resort was slated as an evacuation point; evac never came; to raise everybody’s mood while they waited; a blow-out party was arranged; the sound attracted zombies; and, thus, begins the game. |
Sounds good to me 💛 I imagine the resort instead a primary evacuation spot, just was listed as a possible one. The folks gathering and previous guests already at the resort, understanding that evacuation might never really come, decide to throw this party to lift their spirits. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Some typography suggestions
Co-authored-by: Antti Riikonen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Antti Riikonen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Antti Riikonen <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Antti Riikonen <[email protected]>
Spell checker encountered unrecognized words in the in-game text added in this pull request. See below for details. Click to expand
This alert is automatically generated. You can simply disregard if this is inaccurate, or (optionally) you can also add the new words to |
Summary
None
Purpose of change
As described within issue #71679, some scenario descriptions fail to take into account the gaps in events, the overall timeline, and the general buildup of global unrest present within the backstory of Cataclysm. Largely, most of these descriptions make it sound like the Cataclysm was a magnanimous, single event that happened over the course of minutes rather than weeks, as reported by our lore. Considering that lore is no good to anybody if in game UI sources not built to be unreliable narrators blatantly laugh in it’s face, I have taken the pen and a sheet of paper, ditched them because they’re useless for making a digital PR, and rewrote the descriptions for the scenarios pointed out in the linked issue.
Describe the solution
Thus far, I have rewritten:
I have elected to leave this PR on draft, as I’m still a tad unsure about some of the current descriptions and whether it would be wise to rewrite them as well, namely any description that mentions an “initial wave of panic,” such as the evacuee scenario. I’m also keeping an eye on some of the profession listings. Looking at you, crazy party. I’d appreciate it if lore-department people could roll into this PR and leave their thoughts over what, if anything else, should be changed while we’re playing around with scenarios, as I don’t want to throw the baby out with the “sewer water, dirty, x4.”
Describe alternatives you've considered
Doing a Normandy landings-style storming of the many, many, many, many profession descriptions. I need to pack in my fortitude before I step into that file.
Testing
I simply changed the description strings. I will award myself a medal if I manage to bug something by failing to just write between the pretty quotation marks.
Additional context
Consult #71679 for the original issue.