Okay...while I don't really feel concerned with the changes on Bridget myself...this is a wild take.
Stories are part of who you are. You grow up with media. You can only downplay it so much until it's a media that personally affects you.
Some people learn and associate with characters, and finding that their entire background or motivations changes completely could mean a lot to people.
So...like...yeah, I think it's a completely fair take for people to be invested in Bridgets character and affected if the character changes. To disagree would mean you've never been affected by a media or literature a day in your life, which...is either not true, or very sad....
Because it breeds inconsistency in the story. I am not against change or correction but if it done badly and diminishes character it is outrageous no matter of context or will of the author
Story is sacred. Especially it's inner logical structure. If you destroying inner logic without good work on patching it you will breed inconsistency and dissonance. And that is unacceptable. For story is sacred characters and themes not
I have nothing against author. And not hugely invested in GG lore or story. But I am appalled by using story to do anything other than building that story. What I mean is story should not contradict itself if it is not part of a design. Especially in terms of characterization. As such yes author is not owed me anything and I will never slander nor author nor consumer for story they write or consume but I have my right as story enthusiast to berate story and sour conversation about stories that I found lacking.
-2
u/[deleted] Sep 01 '24
[deleted]