Each of the games in the series is supposed to be a complete adventure, and they'll be released several years apart, so nothing would be diluted or overly repeated.
Individual seasons of "Supernatural" and "The 100" have their own individual throughlines yet still warrant harsh criticism when repackaging prior (superior) seasons' plot elements, regardless of being separated by several years.
A recent poorly received run on "Uncanny X-Men" repeated a threat-of-looming-extinction-for-mutantkind ongoing plot for the second time in four years. A seven-year storyline centered around it was resolved back in 2012, only for it to emerge again from 2015-2017, then pop up again early this year. And it warranted every bit of derision it received, both in conception and execution.
Let's get down to brass tacks. Some ideas don't receive a warm reception because people:
- Don't buy the premise
- Are tired of the premise
- Think the premise is crap in the first place
Even a good premise can wear out its welcome, and it isn't at all unreasonable for people to not be convinced that it's a good idea for a good premise to be recycled. Or for them to not be convinced by a particular approach to a good premise, if they don't buy that the scenario would occur to begin with.
That's not to say it can't be done successfully and surprise people, but there's no obligation on anyone's part to be hyped for something they aren't sold on. Especially if it's altogether hypothetical to begin with and they not only aren't sold on it but also don't have reason to expect it.
Add to that for this particular case the general toxicity of the love triangle within the fandom and how much it's despised, it's perfectly understandable that there are also people checking off the "Think the premise is crap in the first place" option. =P
If -- despite all of that -- an idea with so much going against it actually happens and is done well, it will be acknowledged as such.
Jairus said:
And what do you mean by fridged?
You know, the Girlfriends In Refrigerators trope -- killing off supporting female characters (usually romantic interests) for the purpose of Man Pain in a leading male character.
It's often an unfair and overblown charge leveled at works of fiction every time female characters die/are depowered/are on the receiving end of something traumatic, but it's valid just as often -- perhaps more often valid than not. To use "Supernatural" as an example once again, it earns this critique.
Jairus said:
You don't know that it couldn't enhance the narrative at large, either. It all depends on how it's implemented. You're just making an automatic assumption that it wouldn't.
"Automatic" and "assumption" entail a knee-jerk response without critical thought or literary analysis. Most folks who have responsed to you about this idea very clearly haven't been doing that.
Jairus said:
I'm sorry if I came off as pedantic, I wasn't trying to refer specifically to you, but in general. And I do know love and loss quite well, thank you. My girlfriend, the mother of my older son, died unexpectedly eight years ago from illness. We had been together almost seven years by then. I found her that morning, and trust me, it's not something you ever forget. I've been raising my two boys, one of which has special needs, basically on my own ever since, and I lost my dad just two years ago, so don't tell me I don't know what living, loving, and loss are. I know them better than you think.
I'm really sorry you have had these difficulties. There aren't really words for adequately capturing the essence of how any of it feels.
As someone who has such unenviably valuable perspective, though, you more than most should be mindful of the assumptions you remark upon over inconsequential disagreements like what we're discussing here.
We can leave this at that and move on. Life is too short to dwell on the hard feelings.
Jairus said:
I suppose I could have used a different word than "should". I didn't think about how that would be taken, and I'm sorry. ... Just because they both die doesn't mean the arc and the aftermath have to be done in the same way. It can work if they're handled differently, especially if he were farther along with Aerith when she dies than he'd been with Jess when she went. That does make a difference, I think. And it would add to the trauma of Aerith's loss because it would be a compounding of what came before. Also, it would be a clever way to throw off the newcomers. Because they'd assume after losing Jess that Aerith and Tifa would be safe from being lost, thus making the surprise of the moment for them even greater than it otherwise would have been when the rug gets pulled out from under them with Aerith.
It
could do that or it may have the opposite effect -- i.e. newcomers may then expect additional culling because we're down to two romantic interests after starting with three, and so it's a matter of time before we're down to the last woman standing.
And in the worst case scenario, it may make for Aerith's death being received with an "Of course" and an eyeroll when the time comes.
Jairus said:
NIbel, I appreciate the suggestion, but who would go there? Based on the responses I get here, it doesn't seem like anyone would be interested.
People's interest in pairings is not really limited to whether they think it should or even could happen.
Jairus said:
I'm not trying to prove anything, either, and I'm sorry if it came across that way. I guess I'm just trying to get people to look at things from angles they haven't before and not write something off just because they don't think it's feasible. But rather, to see that there may be ways that things like this could be done without harming Aerith's arc or the overall story and to not limit themselves to what they think they know, that it might not necessarily be the damaging thing they think it could be. To just be open to new possibilities is all, and not write them off because of concerns of what they might do but are not certain to do.
In fairness, that kind of runs both ways. "New possibilities" don't guarantee improvements.
And once again, we're not so much talking about a new thing as we are talking about repeating an old thing beyond the one time (Aerith) it would have been expected.