Jump to content

A certain explorer and the Ancient Archives


Recommended Posts

Now, I understand I may get some hate for bringing up a certain removed character and I respect Klei's decision, but I just want to share my humble opinion.


...


I just think Warbucks could be a good addition for dst during an update like this. With the new lore it brings and new locations, his character would fit, since he's an explorer with geological/archeological knowledge (and if he would really be considered and reworked, it would be probably the best to focus on these aspects of his character and lesser his hunter side). I think he could have really interesting quotes and maybe could even be able to decipher a bit or read the Lunarune Glyphs. It at least fits for him that he would want to study it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warbucks is love. Warbucks is life. 

And perhaps... a missed potential, too. He deserved so much more! They could've just... removed the bad quotes, but... Well it's Klei's decision, in the end. But I feel like... he'd fit into DST's gameplay, they could sort it out, somehow. He was quite the interesting character as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I never understood why some people are so adamant about Warbucks being or not in DS/T. He was a blunt character imo, only thing consistent he got going for himself was sanity-plus when carrying Pigmen coins. Rest was pretty much Wilson with a lil hammer and compass.

I don't understand the argument for his removal neither (mostly being exaggerations, as always nowadays from the revisionists' side), but all-in-all wasn't a great addition to begin with, nor a great loss in the end.

Thus I for one don't see the need for his DST "resurrection" in any capacity, revised or otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, x0-VERSUS-1y said:

Personally I never understood why some people are so adamant about Warbucks being or not in DS/T. He was a blunt character imo, only thing consistent he got going for himself was sanity-plus when carrying Pigmen coins. Rest was pretty much Wilson with a lil hammer and compass.

I don't understand the argument for his removal neither (mostly being exaggerations, as always nowadays from the revisionists' side), but all-in-all wasn't a great addition to begin with, nor a great loss in the end.

Thus I for one don't see the need for his DST "resurrection" in any capacity, revised or otherwise.

I disagree make him the main bad guy.. and 

#FreeCharlie!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Charlie Dark said:

Warbucks is love. Warbucks is life. 

And perhaps... a missed potential, too. He deserved so much more! They could've just... removed the bad quotes, but... Well it's Klei's decision, in the end. But I feel like... he'd fit into DST's gameplay, they could sort it out, somehow. He was quite the interesting character as well.

They did remove the bad quotes at first, but some people on other platforms like Tumblr and such were still complaining about the character because those quotes existed at all in the first place. Nonetheless, I'd love to see Warbucks return with a complete revision as well. I loved the idea of an intrepid explorer/hunter character in DS/T, and would still like it to come to fruition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Chris1448 said:

They did remove the bad quotes at first, but some people on other platforms like Tumblr and such were still complaining about the character because those quotes existed at all in the first place. Nonetheless, I'd love to see Warbucks return with a complete revision as well. I loved the idea of an intrepid explorer/hunter character in DS/T, and would still like it to come to fruition.

Well... I still think it wasn't a good reason to completely remove a character just because of some quotes. Unfortunately, Klei does excellent work of making up character quotes and creating a personality that'd fit like a glove to that specific character... They took it a little too far, I guess... The quotes weren't even referring to "People" they were referring to humanoid in-game animals... (Except that Cargoboat one...)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were many weird interpretations about Warbucks, from his skin color to quotes to design, these are just people for you. To be frank, even if he was to return, this time wouldn't really make much sense, from both gameplay and lore stand points. Considering he was first in Hamlet, how the hell would he suddenly land in underground ancient archives, especially since this update chain is revolving around "Them", throwing Warbucks out of the blue would be REALLY out of the place in my opinion. Besides, i don't think we need a new/scrapped character right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree Warbucks could return (even funnier if he is "Them", would make "Return" of Them far more literal than expected, heh). But disagree on that Warbucks would add any lore. Anything you can do with Warbucks, you can do without him. The spoiler below is a bit of a rant though, so only read at your own risk:

Spoiler

I would love for Warbucks to return. But he would need some big changes to his perks.

He was not really that problematic as a character, specially after his quotes were changed (I mean, we have Suicide Squad Wendy and Dealing with the Devil Maxwell for goodness sake, not to mention Willow killed a few people). The biggest flaw he had as a character was that he was not what he appeared to be. He looked like a hunter/poacher, but was a grave robber, however, mid-development they changed his title from Gentleman Hunter to Affluent Explorer, and they even made an updated artwork with a shovel instead of a blunderbuss (however it was never officially revealed and only appeared during an art stream). This made him look like a rushed project.

Mechanically, his biggest flaw was that his perks were boring (think Wilson or Wes) and they made no sense with each other (think Walter or even Winona, those 2 have perks all over the place, but they at least have something interesting going on), not to mention his perks were quite weak. Even if people loved his personality, he was bound to be forgotten (or removed): he was just plain and simple a boring character to play.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Zeklo said:

I'd love to see a new character that's obsessed with the lore of the Ancients, just not Warbucks.

That way I can play as myself.

Wortox is similar. He isn't obsessed though, as he literally knows everything about them, if you examine these new moon murals, the last one will make him say "I dont want to spoil it" or smtg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sort of didn't want this to again make people fight over if Warbucks was good or bad. 

 

I liked the character and just wanted to share my idea. He's gone and theres nothing anyone, but Klei, can really do about it (and I understand bringing him back into the game now would be a little weird). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Zeklo said:

I'd love to see a new character that's obsessed with the lore of the Ancients, just not Warbucks.

Well it's a long shot, but Wagstaff seems kinda obsessive about learning stuff from the constant.

Also he is directly tied to at least 2 characters (Winona and WX)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I genuinely don't care about Warbucks and think it was right for him to be removed. From what I could tell, his mechanics didn't entirely mesh well, even with Hamlet.

You have mods for this sort of thing, mods which are usually updated to the beta branch by now. Alternatively, make your own mod. Hell if I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The opposite of what your post says. He's based off a very specific type of explorer of a time marked by its wild misinterpretations of archeological findings, terrible practices and lacking knowledge.

Edit: just to clarify, it's the type of explorer who dug up a ton of stuff, to their credit, but were bad at finding nuanced meaning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Sunset Skye said:
9 hours ago, x0-VERSUS-1y said:

as always nowadays from the revisionists' side

This is such a loaded political term to apply to people who simply pointed out that a character's quotes gave off horrible vibes.

And also revisionism is literally standard practice. Without it we would, for instance, still believe every word Ancient Roman historians have wirtten, ending up with a collection of contradictory ideas. Though they offer valuable insight, updating and adjusting for context and bias is fundamental. (Try seriously studying Celtic civilizations to get an idea of this. Lots of sources are from those historians, and you might often find their work as important as counter-productive)

I guess what they had in mind is revisionist ideas that over-shoot their mark, but taking a hard stance against some nebulous "revisionist's side", ironically, avoids the mark from ever being hit at all, vouching for static.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Sunset Skye said:

This is such a loaded political term to apply to people who simply pointed out that a character's quotes gave off horrible vibes.

Perhaps.

 

36 minutes ago, sinisterrkid said:

And also revisionism is literally standard practice. Without it we would, for instance, still believe every word Ancient Roman historians have wirtten, ending up with a collection of contradictory ideas. Though they offer valuable insight, updating and adjusting for context and bias is fundamental. (Try seriously studying Celtic civilizations to get an idea of this. Lots of sources are from those historians, and you might often find their work as important as counter-productive)

I guess what they had in mind is revisionist ideas that over-shoot their mark, but taking a hard stance against some nebulous "revisionist's side", ironically, avoids the mark from ever being hit at all, vouching for static.

If said revisionism follows the scientific method to the letter, without personal biases affecting quality of concerned study/-ies (aka maximum minimization of personal bias), studying multiple angles/sources, then of course. Yet we're not talking about scientists, but simple forum commentators from the "twitteraty" variety (you know what am writing about, it's a meme by this point); the ones considering "joking leads to violence" and "violence in video games leads to violence irl" - both statements being false. Also colonial empires (British, Spanish, Ottoman, Russian, Mongolian etc) weren't "evil" and "without merit" as such commentators try to make it look like. People can be (arguably) "evil". Likewise "winners write the history" (as you yourself underlined regarding Celtic-Roman interactions). And there are vast differences between cultures on the technological scale, which in turn dictates the civilizational scale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, x0-VERSUS-1y said:

[snip]

Okay, I think I see what you are getting at, but there are a lot of assumptions being made. I can't tell for certain if that's what you were indeed thinking, but Klei didn't remove Warbucks because of pressure from people on the forums concerned with violence portrayal in the game. I know that literally every time Warbucks comes up it follows that one comment will offer as truth that the reason was from community pressure, usually also describing the type of person they fantasized as the main or only cause. (In this thread's case, the chosen culprit was... complaints from tumblr!) But the truth is that we only saw Warbucks for a short period of the Beta version of Hamlet. Explaining the reasoning for his removal, Klei's statement focused on his uninteresting playability and that the character wasn't working out as they would like, with only one passing mention to it being culturally problematic. The character made to replace him was Wormwood. Remember Warbucks was available for a short time in beta. Many other characters have been scrapped and replaced before release, it's been common practice.

People did have problems with Warbucks, but it was not fundamented on him being "evil". We have a pyromaniac character, one that eats souls, one well-liked straight up evil robot. We also have an actress portraying a Viking warrior, which is another stereotype of violence. All well received. Where there were complaints about the character's background was basically that it was related to a not-fun type of stereotypical grim, since some of the issues where it is rooted (eurocentric imperialism, exploitation and racism), strongly reverberate today in a wide scale with still visible and felt consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SimasWat said:

Now, I understand I may get some hate for bringing up a certain removed character and I respect Klei's decision, but I just want to share my humble opinion.


...


I just think Warbucks could be a good addition for dst during an update like this. With the new lore it brings and new locations, his character would fit, since he's an explorer with geological/archeological knowledge (and if he would really be considered and reworked, it would be probably the best to focus on these aspects of his character and lesser his hunter side). I think he could have really interesting quotes and maybe could even be able to decipher a bit or read the Lunarune Glyphs. It at least fits for him that he would want to study it.

Dude, Wortox can read the runes without a problem

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given Warbucks' Jumanji Van Pelt vibes I don't think he would fit in too well. He was designed around Hamlet and it shows. I would much rather have just had his perks and whatnot revised there instead of axing him because he was boring. He won't fit into DST though, his character design is too specific.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Please be aware that the content of this thread may be outdated and no longer applicable.

×
×
  • Create New...