We are talking to G'raha Tia in the gondola in living memory. He starts talking about loss, brings up ethical questions: “what would you have done, had you THIS?” I thought, this was a great start to bring up the ethics of this place and discuss them further in the process. Maybe this will even bring tention, if he disagrees with what we are about to do. Instead, the moment we step out the gondola the topic was dropped and never mentioned again. This breaks the basic rule of promise-progress-payoff. In this case, they promised the player something, but never followed up with progressing this arc in any way.
There is no way, a professional writer would've not noticed that. And even if, the editing would've fixed the mistake. It seems like they didn't have much freedom and they got clear instructions on how to handle major subjects like certain character arcs for example. There are several of those scenes. The whole story and the pacing feels all over the place and it feels not properly edited. We also have arcs that feel like something got cut out (Bakool Ja Ja – Valigarmanda arc) as well es several “big elephants” in the room (important topics that don't get addressed or even plot-holes). This also negates the argument that the writers would've needed more oversight, because basic mistakes like this shouldn't happen in the first place.
Then there was also Naoki Yoshida's comment at Fanfest (I think?) where he said (and I'm just paraphrasing here): We just put a lot of stuff together, and then we'll see what sticks and what the players like. That is NOT a good basis for an exciting story. That is actually the exact opposite.
Now if you put all of this in context, it could lead to one conclusion. And I wanna make very clear, that this is just an ASSUMPTION. I think, that (for whatever reason) there was a massive re-write of the MSQ happening, rather late in the process. Big parts got cut out, some got edited, others added. And the new team just wasn't experienced enough (and/or didn't have enough resources available) to put all the pieces back together in time, and as a consequence also could not properly edit the whole story again from scratch. I might be totally wrong, but so much points towards it.
To why Ishikawa did not step in at that point: again, just an assumption. But I think she either has the role of senior lead just on paper to keep her in the credits because of her reputation, and she is actually working on other projects, or even her experience just wasn't enough to save the project (which I find hard to believe).
So no, I don't think, the writers are bad. Or at least, I don't think they had a fair chance to proof that they are good. Of course you can always gain more experience and get better, but I don't think, replacing them would change anything, that is not the root of the problem. The problem seems to be that CBU3 just doesn't have a clear course and don't really know which direction they want to go, that they are too afraid of negative feedback (ironically) and this is the result.

Reply With Quote








