Raben-AAS
Clansgründer
- Registriert
- 27. Juni 2005
- Beiträge
- 2.879
In den White Wolf Foren tauchte ein Thread auf, in dem eifrig die Gerüchteküche brodelte, ob es wohl in Zukunft irgendwann doch noch einen Metaplot in der NWoD und hier speziell bei Requiem geben könnte.
Ohne den Inhalt des (zumindest am Anfanng recht lesenwerten) Threads komplett zu benennen, wurden natürlich jede Menge Befindlichkeiten für und vor allem GEGEN den Metaplot geäußert.
Wie üblich war eines der Argumente der "Pro" Fraktion, dass man ja nicht mit dem Metaplot spielen müsse. Dem gegenüber äußerten Vertreter der "Contra" SEite das (für mich neue) Argument, dass Metaplot immer das Problem "toter Seiten" erzeugt und "Backlinks" erzeugt (also Referenzen auf frühere, möglicher Weise sogar vergriffene Bücher, die der Spieler/SL nicht besitzt).
Da ein Metaplot während der Publikation nneuer Bücher fortschreitet und der NNatur seiner Sache gemäß um neue Elemente erweitert wird, kauft jeder, der den Metaplot ignoriert, "tote Seiten", deren Inhalt er nicht gebrauchen kann.
Das erwähne ich nur, weil der Post unten auf den Punkt der "dead spaces" eingeht.
Will nämlich, Chefentwickler bei Requiem, stellt im WW Forum klar:
"Rumors. Where do they come from?
The phantom issue of metaplot is always a much bigger deal to rumormongers than it is to us.
Without going into a big analysis of what is or is not metaplot, I can say with confidence that we are not suddenly turning around an invoking a metaplot in the World of Darkness.
At least, not in our books. (Anm: Das dürfte sich auf die Online WoD beziehen (Multiuser Game))
In 2007, we have some pretty rad things developing for the World of Darkness, and some of this means expanding the ways we tell stories in our world and help you do the same. I imagine that some of our new plans will be labeled with the dreaded tag of "metaplot," but we'll see if that sticks.
For example, I'm currently doing research and development for next year's Rome book for Vampire. (I like to think of it as an expansion to the game, rather than just a supplement.) Some people will say that adding in new historical information and revealing some of the secrets of Camarilla will summon the dreaded shadow of metaplot, but I don't agree.
The clan books interrelate to one another. If you read the traditional Ventrue take on a vampire myth, you might think you've got it all explained to you. But then you read the Gangrel take on the same myth and you find that the space between the two stories reveals things you wouldn't have known before. That's not metaplot. Neither book invalidates the one that came before and they don't have to be read in any particular order -- but they do interact with each other, so some people will cry "Metaplot!" and spit fire.
Again, whatever.
My goal is to make the next volley of Vampire books as dramatic and compelling as they can be, and while I'm not willing to sacrifice the flexibility we've created in the game line to do it, neither am I going to avoid good ideas just because someone somewhere might accuse me of stepping too close to metaplot.
Good stuff is good stuff and crap is crap. Worrying too much about what's metaplot and what's not just gets in the way of recognizing the good stuff.
The simple truth is that we don't intend to produce books that make you sorry you bought an earlier one. We don't intend to produce books that our fans and customers will regard as "dead space." That's all there is to it.
Cheers,
Will Hindmarch
Vampire: the Requiem
Developer
White Wolf Game Studio "
Zwar spüre ich auch so ein Prickeln betreffs der "Clanbücher die den selben Mythos von verschiedenen Seiten aus beleuchten" (nicht wegen Metaplot, sondern wegen einer möglichen Erweiterung des Kanons, und too much Kanon bedeutet Korsett), aber well ...
Wenigstens wird es keinen voranschreitenden Metaplot geben.
Thumbs up!
Ohne den Inhalt des (zumindest am Anfanng recht lesenwerten) Threads komplett zu benennen, wurden natürlich jede Menge Befindlichkeiten für und vor allem GEGEN den Metaplot geäußert.
Wie üblich war eines der Argumente der "Pro" Fraktion, dass man ja nicht mit dem Metaplot spielen müsse. Dem gegenüber äußerten Vertreter der "Contra" SEite das (für mich neue) Argument, dass Metaplot immer das Problem "toter Seiten" erzeugt und "Backlinks" erzeugt (also Referenzen auf frühere, möglicher Weise sogar vergriffene Bücher, die der Spieler/SL nicht besitzt).
Da ein Metaplot während der Publikation nneuer Bücher fortschreitet und der NNatur seiner Sache gemäß um neue Elemente erweitert wird, kauft jeder, der den Metaplot ignoriert, "tote Seiten", deren Inhalt er nicht gebrauchen kann.
Das erwähne ich nur, weil der Post unten auf den Punkt der "dead spaces" eingeht.
Will nämlich, Chefentwickler bei Requiem, stellt im WW Forum klar:
"Rumors. Where do they come from?
The phantom issue of metaplot is always a much bigger deal to rumormongers than it is to us.
Without going into a big analysis of what is or is not metaplot, I can say with confidence that we are not suddenly turning around an invoking a metaplot in the World of Darkness.
At least, not in our books. (Anm: Das dürfte sich auf die Online WoD beziehen (Multiuser Game))
In 2007, we have some pretty rad things developing for the World of Darkness, and some of this means expanding the ways we tell stories in our world and help you do the same. I imagine that some of our new plans will be labeled with the dreaded tag of "metaplot," but we'll see if that sticks.
For example, I'm currently doing research and development for next year's Rome book for Vampire. (I like to think of it as an expansion to the game, rather than just a supplement.) Some people will say that adding in new historical information and revealing some of the secrets of Camarilla will summon the dreaded shadow of metaplot, but I don't agree.
The clan books interrelate to one another. If you read the traditional Ventrue take on a vampire myth, you might think you've got it all explained to you. But then you read the Gangrel take on the same myth and you find that the space between the two stories reveals things you wouldn't have known before. That's not metaplot. Neither book invalidates the one that came before and they don't have to be read in any particular order -- but they do interact with each other, so some people will cry "Metaplot!" and spit fire.
Again, whatever.
My goal is to make the next volley of Vampire books as dramatic and compelling as they can be, and while I'm not willing to sacrifice the flexibility we've created in the game line to do it, neither am I going to avoid good ideas just because someone somewhere might accuse me of stepping too close to metaplot.
Good stuff is good stuff and crap is crap. Worrying too much about what's metaplot and what's not just gets in the way of recognizing the good stuff.
The simple truth is that we don't intend to produce books that make you sorry you bought an earlier one. We don't intend to produce books that our fans and customers will regard as "dead space." That's all there is to it.
Cheers,
Will Hindmarch
Vampire: the Requiem
Developer
White Wolf Game Studio "
Zwar spüre ich auch so ein Prickeln betreffs der "Clanbücher die den selben Mythos von verschiedenen Seiten aus beleuchten" (nicht wegen Metaplot, sondern wegen einer möglichen Erweiterung des Kanons, und too much Kanon bedeutet Korsett), aber well ...
Wenigstens wird es keinen voranschreitenden Metaplot geben.
Thumbs up!
