Captain Drogan

"Drathuk916;c-2437092" wrote:
Got no real problem with those complaining about an original character assuming your issue starts and ends with original. I do find it a little surprising though because I doubt a significant majority would agree that any of the first 7 gls are both the correct version of the character and the character in general is worthy of gl status. The only possible one in my mind is kenobi.

SLKR is the wrong version? SEE is the wrong version? Jabba has different versions?

"DaarthBrewer;c-2437091" wrote:

"I_JnK_I;c-2437053" wrote:


There are so many worse characters i cant even think of a top 1 example

Bodhi, Jedi Knight Guardian, and Scion of Jango all jumped to mind.

Scion of Jango is a non-GL counter to LV in TW so I wouldn't consider him one of the worst

"LordDirt;c-2437104" wrote:

"Drathuk916;c-2437092" wrote:
Got no real problem with those complaining about an original character assuming your issue starts and ends with original. I do find it a little surprising though because I doubt a significant majority would agree that any of the first 7 gls are both the correct version of the character and the character in general is worthy of gl status. The only possible one in my mind is kenobi.

SLKR is the wrong version? SEE is the wrong version? Jabba has different versions?

I didn’t say they were my opinions but the collective opinion of the community. As for your specifically mentioned gls.

Jabba- imo yes obviously but more than a handful have suggested he is not worthy of the status.

SEE- no. Palp at any point between order 66 and rotj is more fitting to me

Slkr- sure only because he’s from the sequels and I don’t despise them as much as others.

It is true, that for obvious reasons (like characters already existing in the game) some GLs are the wrong version or are not really what I would consider a GL.

Disclaimer: This is just my personal, humble opinion and should be taken as only that. Others will have different views on this matter, which are just as legitimate. ?
Also as info beforehand: I am not a big Fan of the sequels.

SLKR - The right version but I am not sure about him actually being worthy to be considered a GL power/reputation wise.

SEE - The wrong version, I would have prefered the Episodes IV-VI version, definitely a GL lore wise.

Rey - The right version, definitely a GL lore wise because she is -all- the Jedi (lol), I just don't like the Mary Sue aspect at all so I don't really care about the character.

Kenobi - I am a bit torn about the version. On one hand this version is the one that is a great fighter and leader, on the other hand old Ben is the wise master. Definitely is a GL lore wise.

JML - Wrong version, JKL would be my preference (his first appearance in The Mandalorian and how his skills and fighting are portrayed there). Definitely a GL lore wise.

Vader - Absolutely the wrong version! It should have been Darth Vader. Definitely is a GL lore wise.

Jabba - The right version but I would not consider him a GL. Yes he was a well known syndicate boss but there were others just as known/powerful.

Leia - The wrong version. The princess we meet in Episode IV would be my favourite or maybe the later Jedi version at least (considering the Princess is already in the game). Definitely a GL lore wise.

Edit for clarification

"Sloth243;c-2437138" wrote:
So a thread devoted to negativity of a new character turned into negative thoughts about versions of GL characters and why they aren’t worthy…

It’s a game people. Overthinking this is just killing your own fun. But you do you. Let ‘em live

Who said they are negative thoughts about GLs or the character.
Just because people would have prefered something or someone else it does not automatically mean that they feel negative about or hate the character in question.

One can think that a GL might be the wrong version or not GL worthy without hating them or having negative thoughts about them... I for example might not think that SLKR or Jabba are GL worthy but I still think they are good GLs in the game and like them.

As for the new character this thread is about: I would have prefered an existing character, especially when it is meant to go with Leia, but that also doesn't mean I hate the character.

"Sloth243;c-2437142" wrote:
I never said the word hate. But many of the posts in *this* thread indicate such a sentiment

You are more than entitled to your opinion. I was simply stating how it amuses me how topics morph into other things over time. Keep it going. I’m enjoying it

And I said hate or negative thoughts.
Nuances matter and it's often not just either or.
Disliking one thing or aspect does not equal negative thoughts about it in general.

While I agree with you that -some- comments read very negative I do not agree that every comment that states an aspect someone dislikes about the character = negativity overall.

People can voice something they dislike without having negative views about the subject in general. Constructive criticism is actually a good thing - as long as it is constructive... then it is also not negative. In a game for example it helps developers to understand the players and their views.

it’s a good thing Drogan is a fictional character or else he’d be in tears over how much bullying people are doing to him for being different

"Ultra;c-2437146" wrote:
it’s a good thing Drogan is a fictional character or else he’d be in tears over how much bullying people are doing to him for being different

That’s a very serious accusation. Can you provide examples?
It was CG who said "hey look everybody, we've created a toon with a limb difference!"
Players mostly answer: "we already respect differences, the problem is you could have chosen hundreds of characters from the lore and instead you invented a new one".

"BubbaFett;c-2437160" wrote:

"dogwelder79;c-2437155" wrote:

"Ultra;c-2437146" wrote:
it’s a good thing Drogan is a fictional character or else he’d be in tears over how much bullying people are doing to him for being different

That’s a very serious accusation. Can you provide examples?
It was CG who said "hey look everybody, we've created a toon with a limb difference!"
Players mostly answer: "we already respect differences, the problem is you could have chosen hundreds of characters from the lore and instead you invented a new one".

Except CG never said that, in fact other than the brief blurb in the marquee event and a couple of sentences in the character announcement CG was pretty low key about it, which is more than I can say for some of the outraged players that posted vitriol in this thread that subsewuently had to be deleted....

If some players prefer lore and canon characters only, then that is their preference.... They aren't the only ones playing the game though.... That being said, specifically taking exemption to a character that was created to be inclusive of diabilities is pretty low...

I also dislike 50R-T. What’s the accusation now?
Also, something else I disagree with. I don't have a problem with Drogan having a limb difference. I have a problem with CG making it important. Inclusivity is not pointing it out, inclusivity would have been to invent that same toon without stressing his difference. They could have said "we needed a toon with these abilities for Leia and there is none in lore".

I take full responsibility for bringing in gls to this discussion.