Diablo® III

Aidan: Ruining previous storylines

SPOILER ALERT

For those of you who remember, at the end of D1, the hero takes diablo's soulstone and is slowly corrupted, becoming the "Dark Wanderer" In the second game.

The new 'writers' at blizzard apparently didn't realize this, but the people who wrote Diablo two called him/her "Dark Wanderer" for obvious reasons. Being that the dark wanderer IS the hero from D1, the player is able to maintain a sense of immersion in their own story line. The hero is never named, because in your head, its name is whatever you gave it in D1. The D2 writing staff expertly handles this situation, tip-toeing around the dark wanderer, so much that you never really see his/her face until its half demon, so for all you know it could have been the female rogue from D1.

Two games worth of subtlety is then thrown out the window in D3 when the dark wanderer is given a name: Aiden. Oh. Ok. I though we kinda had something going there blizzard. In D2 you were super careful making sure the storyline stayed in tact, for my sake, and I loved you for it, now you threw all that work out the window. Gee, I wonder if this has anything to do with the vast majority of current writing/development staff having NOTHING TO DO with D2...but I digress. Lets continue, it gets MUCH WORSE.

I could bear with a name being given to the D1 hero. I suppose its more convenient. Then my jaw dropped when at the end of Act 3 when Adria says "when Leoric's Eldest son, Aidan..."

Wait...WHAT?!?!?!?! You're just gonna throw that in there like that? That doesn't make any sense at all. I played through all of D1, and listened to all the dialogue (it was awesome) and I'm PRETTY SURE somewhere along the way, someone would have said 'hey, I know you, you're Leoric's son' if the hero from D1 was leoric's son. BUT HE/SHE WAS NOT. You just pulled that out of your asses.

Its bad enough that D3 contains nothing really new creatively at all (Oh hey we get to kill the skeleton king again?...pretty sure I did that in D1...Oh hey its the butcher....and the lesser evils that were mentioned in D1 but couldnt fit into D2...) but to go and take a piss on the storyline of the previous games is unforgivable.

I'm not one to nitpick inconsistencies (ie: the templar says 'it is likely you saw me at an inn, I have traveled far' and also 'I've never been to the desert, I don't travel much'...meh) but something this major needs to be addressed. No blizzard, its not ok to come out with a new game that completely ignores previous games in the series.
Reply Quote
It is silly and incorrect to accuse Blizzard of a retcon on this, when in fact they were careful to insert new information into places occupied only by assumptions and inferences. What they did with the hero/wanderer is little different from any surprise ending where you learn that the protagonist was actually the killer or what have you. It is rudimentary unreliable-narrator viewpoint noodling. It is not retcon and it is not a betrayal.

I'm baffled by how intense some of you guys get about this stuff despite seeming not to have paid very close attention. (Maybe you were already mad when you started playing?) Early in Act I, Deckard Cain says that Leoric "lost both of his sons." In the original Diablo you don't know he's Aidan because no one in Tristram knows he's Aidan, for the same reason Marius doesn't know he's Aidan: None of these people ever met him. Leoric moved in, was essentially sequestered by Lazarus, and something (we know not what) became of his sons. I gathered that Leoric ordered them executed along with his wife, Aidan escaped, and Lazarus kept this from Leoric for fear he would turn on him.

The wiki has this to say, but I don't know where it came from, so take from it what you will.

Realizing that he can never corrupt Leoric fully, he relinquishes his hold over the king. Leoric is left crazed, and when Lazarus secretly abducts his son and drags him into the catacombs beneath the cathedral, Leoric loses what grip of sanity he has left. He accuses the townspeople of conspiring against him and executes many of them, including his own wife.

When all is said and done, we will look back on this as a brilliant move. 15 years after killing Diablo, you learn that he was dear old Dad. (Oh yes, and that girl you've been wanting to make out with - who happens to be named Leah - is your sister.) This is classic Metzen and you should know it. Little different from turning our hero into the wanderer in the first place, and not terribly surprising if you bothered at all with World of Warcraft. And yes, he did write Diablo. If you think his involvement in that game was superficial, try reading the Hellgate: London quest text sometime, or making any sense whatever of Torchlight.
Reply Quote
If I remember correctly, Aidan, being the eldest son, left to fight against Westmarch with the rest of the army.

I can imagine that upon hearing what had become of his father, he returned in secret to right the wrongs of his family. And, being the only one of his family not corrupted, decided to contain the evil in himself. The deepening tragedy being that he would follow suit of his cursed family, and be possessed by terror itself just as it had happened before.

I like that story better, it's very good writing if I do say myself.

Can't really complain about retconning your personal character, seeing as though people who played the Rogue and the Sorcerer were to find the Warrior had taken credit for all their work, and became corrupted and killed in different ways themselves in Diablo II.
Reply Quote
It is silly and incorrect to accuse Blizzard of a retcon on this, when in fact they were careful to insert new information into places occupied only by assumptions and inferences. What they did with the hero/wanderer is little different from any surprise ending where you learn that the protagonist was actually the killer or what have you. It is rudimentary unreliable-narrator viewpoint noodling. It is not retcon and it is not a betrayal.

I'm baffled by how intense some of you guys get about this stuff despite seeming not to have paid very close attention. (Maybe you were already mad when you started playing?) Early in Act I, Deckard Cain says that Leoric "lost both of his sons." In the original Diablo you don't know he's Aidan because no one in Tristram knows he's Aidan, for the same reason Marius doesn't know he's Aidan: None of these people ever met him. Leoric moved in, was essentially sequestered by Lazarus, and something (we know not what) became of his sons. I gathered that Leoric ordered them executed along with his wife, Aidan escaped, and Lazarus kept this from Leoric for fear he would turn on him.

The wiki has this to say, but I don't know where it came from, so take from it what you will.

Realizing that he can never corrupt Leoric fully, he relinquishes his hold over the king. Leoric is left crazed, and when Lazarus secretly abducts his son and drags him into the catacombs beneath the cathedral, Leoric loses what grip of sanity he has left. He accuses the townspeople of conspiring against him and executes many of them, including his own wife.

When all is said and done, we will look back on this as a brilliant move. 15 years after killing Diablo, you learn that he was dear old Dad. (Oh yes, and that girl you've been wanting to make out with - who happens to be named Leah - is your sister.) This is classic Metzen and you should know it. Little different from turning our hero into the wanderer in the first place, and not terribly surprising if you bothered at all with World of Warcraft. And yes, he did write Diablo. If you think his involvement in that game was superficial, try reading the Hellgate: London quest text sometime, or making any sense whatever of Torchlight.


You obviously weren't paying much attention in diablo 1. Oh wait, did you even play it?

When you slay the skeleton king in d1, the character says "Rest well, Leoric. I'll find your son.". Doesnt sound like something a son would say to a father after he slays him. Also, im pretty sure d1 referred to Albrecht as his ONLY son.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Rogue
11905
You obviously weren't paying much attention in diablo 1. Oh wait, did you even play it?

When you slay the skeleton king in d1, the character says "Rest well, Leoric. I'll find your son.". Doesnt sound like something a son would say to a father after he slays him. Also, im pretty sure d1 referred to Albrecht as his ONLY son.


And? Yes, it was a retcon. It was not a big one. Removing some mild flavor text from a character that was an empty shell is not a big deal. It doesn't open up gaping plot holes. People claim these to be massive plotholes as an overreaction.

Also, you're making that out because there are multiple characters who in canon take on the skeleton king at the same time. The Rogue, Warrior and Sorcerer all take on the minions of Diablo together. Does it make sense for the Mage to say that line? Or the Rogue?
Reply Quote
my opinion on this matter is i agree there could of been more clarification on blizzards and the writers side. If they wanted to hide and make it difficult to distinguish the hero's from the plot characters then they should of done it differently. D1 and D2 had a smoother transition from story lines, D2 to D3 did not, this is like a side story, how i see it.
Reply Quote
06/06/2012 02:00 AMPosted by Anima
The D2 writing staff expertly handles this situation, tip-toeing around the dark wanderer, so much that you never really see his/her face until its half demon, so for all you know it could have been the female rogue from D1.

Unlikely. The female rogue from D1 shows up in D2. As Blood Raven. Not to mention, in one of the first D2 cinematics you hear Marius describe the Dark Wanderer as a broken man barely able to carry the weight of his own sword. I don't think sorcerers typically drag swords around. At least, not until D3 came out ;)
Reply Quote
06/06/2012 09:54 AMPosted by Melyria
Also, you're making that out because there are multiple characters who in canon take on the skeleton king at the same time. The Rogue, Warrior and Sorcerer all take on the minions of Diablo together. Does it make sense for the Mage to say that line? Or the Rogue?


Maybe instead of featuring Followers in single-player, an eventual Diablo sequel should allow the player to have access to ALL the characters at once. I haven't played Dungeon Siege, but I've heard it allows you to switch at any time between heroes, leaving the AI to take care of the others.
Edited by JohnnyZeWolf#1953 on 6/6/2012 11:19 AM PDT
Reply Quote
I was just mad they named Leoric's son "Aidan". Makes him sound like one of these post Generation Y "Millennal" kids, heh.
Edited by Snowhawk#1555 on 6/6/2012 11:24 AM PDT
Reply Quote
In French, "Aidant" (the "t" isn't pronounced though) roughly means "helper" or "ally". Since you spend your time helping other people in D1, the name - whether it is a coincidence or not - is kinda fitting. :)
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Rogue
11905
06/06/2012 11:24 AMPosted by Snowhawk
I was just mad they named Leoric's son "Aidan". Makes him sound like one of these post Generation Y "Millennal" kids, heh.


... Aiden is an old name dating back to ancient Celtic. It means "Fire".

Leoric (Technically Leofric) was originally Gaulish, meaning "Beloved". Albrecht means 'Noble'.
Reply Quote
It is silly and incorrect to accuse Blizzard of a retcon on this, when in fact they were careful to insert new information into places occupied only by assumptions and inferences. What they did with the hero/wanderer is little different from any surprise ending where you learn that the protagonist was actually the killer or what have you. It is rudimentary unreliable-narrator viewpoint noodling. It is not retcon and it is not a betrayal.

I'm baffled by how intense some of you guys get about this stuff despite seeming not to have paid very close attention. (Maybe you were already mad when you started playing?) Early in Act I, Deckard Cain says that Leoric "lost both of his sons." In the original Diablo you don't know he's Aidan because no one in Tristram knows he's Aidan, for the same reason Marius doesn't know he's Aidan: None of these people ever met him. Leoric moved in, was essentially sequestered by Lazarus, and something (we know not what) became of his sons. I gathered that Leoric ordered them executed along with his wife, Aidan escaped, and Lazarus kept this from Leoric for fear he would turn on him.

The wiki has this to say, but I don't know where it came from, so take from it what you will.

Realizing that he can never corrupt Leoric fully, he relinquishes his hold over the king. Leoric is left crazed, and when Lazarus secretly abducts his son and drags him into the catacombs beneath the cathedral, Leoric loses what grip of sanity he has left. He accuses the townspeople of conspiring against him and executes many of them, including his own wife.

When all is said and done, we will look back on this as a brilliant move. 15 years after killing Diablo, you learn that he was dear old Dad. (Oh yes, and that girl you've been wanting to make out with - who happens to be named Leah - is your sister.) This is classic Metzen and you should know it. Little different from turning our hero into the wanderer in the first place, and not terribly surprising if you bothered at all with World of Warcraft. And yes, he did write Diablo. If you think his involvement in that game was superficial, try reading the Hellgate: London quest text sometime, or making any sense whatever of Torchlight.

You're completely clueless for a lot of reasons.

1. It makes no sense that 'no one in the town knew aidan' when we're supposed to believe that he went down into the crypt to slay diablo, and the whole adria BS they threw in.

2. The son he dragged into the catecombs was albrecht, not aidan. Leah is WHOSE sister? what the hell are you smoking?

Sorry, you won't convince me that TURNS OUT YOU WERE HIS SON ALL ALONG DESPITE NO MENTION OF IT AT ALL was a 'brilliant move', no matter how much crap you make up.
Reply Quote
You obviously weren't paying much attention in diablo 1. Oh wait, did you even play it?

When you slay the skeleton king in d1, the character says "Rest well, Leoric. I'll find your son.". Doesnt sound like something a son would say to a father after he slays him. Also, im pretty sure d1 referred to Albrecht as his ONLY son.


And? Yes, it was a retcon. It was not a big one. Removing some mild flavor text from a character that was an empty shell is not a big deal. It doesn't open up gaping plot holes. People claim these to be massive plotholes as an overreaction.

Also, you're making that out because there are multiple characters who in canon take on the skeleton king at the same time. The Rogue, Warrior and Sorcerer all take on the minions of Diablo together. Does it make sense for the Mage to say that line? Or the Rogue?
Anyone who can see this as a 'minor retcon' is probably not worth talking to.

Blizzard bought the rights to LOTR and is writing the long awaited sequel. It turns out that gollum was frodo's father, and legolas and gimli are long lost brothers, and Sauron is actually the adopted son of frodo and sam who went back in time. Awesome!
Reply Quote
I don't think sorcerers typically drag swords around. At least, not until D3 came out ;)
Revealed yourself as someone who obviously didn't play D1. Thanks.
Edited by Anima#1725 on 6/6/2012 11:50 AM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Rogue
11905
You're completely clueless for a lot of reasons.

1. It makes no sense that 'no one in the town knew aidan' when we're supposed to believe that he went down into the crypt to slay diablo, and the whole adria BS they threw in.

2. The son he dragged into the catecombs was albrecht, not aidan. Leah is WHOSE sister? what the hell are you smoking?

Sorry, you won't convince me that TURNS OUT YOU WERE HIS SON ALL ALONG DESPITE NO MENTION OF IT AT ALL was a 'brilliant move', no matter how much crap you make up.


You're right in that it was a retcon. However, it was not that big of a deal, really.
Reply Quote
You're completely clueless for a lot of reasons.

1. It makes no sense that 'no one in the town knew aidan' when we're supposed to believe that he went down into the crypt to slay diablo, and the whole adria BS they threw in.

2. The son he dragged into the catecombs was albrecht, not aidan. Leah is WHOSE sister? what the hell are you smoking?

Sorry, you won't convince me that TURNS OUT YOU WERE HIS SON ALL ALONG DESPITE NO MENTION OF IT AT ALL was a 'brilliant move', no matter how much crap you make up.


You're right in that it was a retcon. However, it was not that big of a deal, really.

In diablo 1 it turns out that the character I was playing was leoric's son the whole time and no one said !@#$ about it. Not a big deal....right.

No matter how you spin it, these 'it turns out they were related all along' twists are always cheesy attempts to pull together an already limp story. It would have been BAD even if it hadn't invalidated D1 and D2 simultaneously, now its just disgraceful.
Reply Quote
How is having King Leoric's elder son kill Diablo instead of a random Mary Sue ruining the storyline?

Looks like a nitpick to me.
Reply Quote
31 Human Rogue
MIB
440
Retcons are for ailing franchises and mistakes. Diablo didn't fall into either of those categories. Therefore, it is a bad retcon. Period, the end.
Reply Quote
There was nothing wrong with WarCraft I's story, yet Blizzard retconned the crap out of it.
Reply Quote
06/06/2012 05:24 PMPosted by JohnnyZeWolf
There was nothing wrong with WarCraft I's story, yet Blizzard retconned the crap out of it.


In that case, as in this one, it was retconned to give it a whole lot more depth.

Like I said earlier, I think the new story is appropriately grimdark for the Diablo universe. Next time I play the first Diablo on my netbook, I might just make a warrior and call it Aidan :P
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]