Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
MOST MEMORABLE RM CHARACTERS [MAY INCLUDE SPOILERS!!!]
Posts
ShadowBlade
View playlists
CloseActually these two "schools" of yours are, to be bluntly honest, bullshit. I won't spend all day getting into it, but if you really feel that these are the two schools of thought for storytelling, then, I hate to sound harsh here, you have no idea what storytelling is.
By all means, feel free to elaborate. In my experience, the two schools I mentioned are certainly real, as is the quarrel between them.
if you just tell a story "you" want to tell, only people like "you" are going to read it/watch it/whatever.
That's kind of the point, though, isn't it? Let's say Bob has a story in mind, and Bob wants to share it with other people. Bob thinks his story is very good with deep thoughts on the Meaning Of Life Itself or whatever. However, Bob notices that not many people will like his story, because there's not enough action/romance or whatever it is that most people are supposed to like. Should Bob butcher his story to please an audience he doesn't care about, just to "please as many people as possible", or should he just tell his story as it is, and please people like him who think that there aren't enough stories like this?
And, of course, there's just plain bad choices one can make. Like making a character completely inconsequential to the audience's experience, yet having the narrative try to prop them up as if they actually meant anything.
Heh. You're talking about Marion again, aren't you? As I said before, I do believe the Govan are a very important part of iishenron's story, and I believe we will see them again. If we never see them again, then I'll agree with you : having every single Govan disappear from the story just because Fayette refused to be Queen would be queer. But I'm very confident that they're not going to give up so easily.
Your "schools" are little more than the extremes of two sides
I should have made that bit clearer - of course, School #1 authors will rarely write a story purely from inspiration without ever resorting to a tiny bit of crafting or asking themselves things like "let's see, should I make a cutscene that shows the player what his enemies are doing right now, or should I wait a bit more?"; just as even School #2 writers will usually not *completely* change their story to please people who are not part of their target audience : If a fantasy writer gets complaints that there aren't enough spaceships is his/her story, I doubt he/she is going to change this.
And of course, quite a few writers are a mix of both schools - still, generally, a writer will lean towards one of the two schools.
Also, don't try to peg my way of thinking like that. It's insulting.
That's not what I'm trying to do, I'm merely pointing out how writers seem to think.
I am pretty sure Shadowblade is just talking about the differences between creative and logical storytelling. You can mix and match, but at the end of the day, you probably display the traits of at least one of the 'two schools' he talks about.
I personally think its a bit silly to define or characterize people in such ways. Every time I design a story, I use a slightly different process.
I'm not sure why you're 'insulted', though. You don't need to invent controversy.
This is a tad cynical. If you're a good enough storyteller, this is generally something you don't need to worry about. Typically people that write 'self-insertion fanfiction' have a host of other writing skill issues to work on other than getting people to enjoy their crap.
And as far as TTHW's story is concerned, I've talked to Iish a fair bit about it. There is a good chance Iish has plans for Marion (I have personally forgotten about her) in the future, as I know he's got a good grasp on his world, and his characters.
I personally think its a bit silly to define or characterize people in such ways. Every time I design a story, I use a slightly different process.
I'm not sure why you're 'insulted', though. You don't need to invent controversy.
You have to tell a story that you want to tell, but you also have to let the audience enjoy it. if you just tell a story "you" want to tell, only people like "you" are going to read it/watch it/whatever. You need to tell the story you want to tell, then sell it. Otherwise, why should the audience give a damn?! And, why should they continue to give a damn as it progresses?! No matter how you're telling your story, at the end of the day, you're supplying entertainment to an audience, and you have to allow the audience to enjoy the ride. If you can't do that, you might as well be writing self-insertion fanfiction.
This is a tad cynical. If you're a good enough storyteller, this is generally something you don't need to worry about. Typically people that write 'self-insertion fanfiction' have a host of other writing skill issues to work on other than getting people to enjoy their crap.
And as far as TTHW's story is concerned, I've talked to Iish a fair bit about it. There is a good chance Iish has plans for Marion (I have personally forgotten about her) in the future, as I know he's got a good grasp on his world, and his characters.
I am pretty sure Shadowblade is just talking about the differences between creative and logical storytelling.
Yes. ;D
I personally think its a bit silly to define or characterize people in such ways.
I'll take back the school analogy if you don't like it - I'm certainly not trying to offend anyone or "peg" any way of thinking.
It's just that my rant came from the fact that there are just too many misunderstood authors, and too many players/readers who literally shoot you if you don't go with the majority, so I just kind of... snapped (which is why I said "thanks for giving me the opportunity to get all this off my chest"). A few of my favorite authors got bashed for making stories/characters/plot twists that were not "conventional", and I'm sick of it.
RPG Advocate is a very good example because he got labeled as "pretentious" due to the language and super-hard-to-master gameplay in Phylomortis, whereas the language was just here to make fun of politicians and give the game a unique humorous touch (let's face it, "I'm going to kill you" isn't nearly as funny as "I'm going to put an end to your little despotic microcosm by compressing your cranial cavity") and the difficulty was here to please the hardcore gamers and the masochists. I'd have been really upset had Advocate agreed to change the whole language thing.
(And I'm very sad that Advocate ended up leaving... I hope he'll come back someday.)
Also, as I said, I prefer writers who don't think in terms of archetypes. "Logical", "by-the-book" storytelling often feels more predictable, less original. Many times, I get the feeling that the author did not really care about his or her story. Again, that *does not* mean that I think logical storytelling is always bad, I've read good stories that were made this way. I just think that it *tends* to lead to annoying flaws.
These two schools are complete bullshit and I completely understand why Shmeckie reacted to them the way he did.
No offense but as someone who completed fully four years of college level education on this subject and currently holds a B.A. in Creative Writing, I am the only one here even remotely qualified for this discussion.
The super, super, super short version is that every remotely competent writer understands, instinctively or intellectually, that it is NECESSARY both to hone the technical aspects of your craft ("School #2") and be receptive to inspiration and riffing when the muse takes you ("School #1").
Writing is both a passionate keening explosion of raw emotional energy and it is also as technically precise as being a plumber, electrician, or carpenter. And just as much work. If you're having fun all the time and just breezing along, you're probably not doing it right- likewise, if writing makes you miserable, you're probably not doing it right.
In other words, as David Milch, the greatest writer EVER said...
"Visions come to a prepared spirit."
No offense but as someone who completed fully four years of college level education on this subject and currently holds a B.A. in Creative Writing, I am the only one here even remotely qualified for this discussion.
The super, super, super short version is that every remotely competent writer understands, instinctively or intellectually, that it is NECESSARY both to hone the technical aspects of your craft ("School #2") and be receptive to inspiration and riffing when the muse takes you ("School #1").
Writing is both a passionate keening explosion of raw emotional energy and it is also as technically precise as being a plumber, electrician, or carpenter. And just as much work. If you're having fun all the time and just breezing along, you're probably not doing it right- likewise, if writing makes you miserable, you're probably not doing it right.
In other words, as David Milch, the greatest writer EVER said...
"Visions come to a prepared spirit."
author=Max McGee link=topic=3590.msg74148#msg74148 date=1241891266
No offense but as someone who completed fully four years of college level education on this subject and currently holds a B.A. in Creative Writing, I am the only one here even remotely qualified for this discussion.
Eh, I thought the "two schools" were a way of making my thoughts on the matter easier to understand. They're having the exact opposite effect. I'll try one more time. :P
I fully completed three years of college level education... No B.A. in creative writing, but I did get the chance to talk to more than a few teachers and writers (I've yet to talk to a well-known professional writer "in the flesh", unfortunately, but I do like reading interviews of those writers).
So, uh... How do we disagree, again? When did I say you either had to write a story purely from inspiration or purely from a writer's manual?
Let's take some more examples - if you really have a lot of experience with the storytelling world, surely you've seen some exams where the teachers asked the students to write a short story within a set amount of time, say two hours. And surely you've noticed how there are people who don't mind, and others who really don't like it because they feel it's overly restricting. Some people can only write great stories when they've got one to tell and are incapable of writing a story "on demand". Other people have got no trouble with making stories on demand, but, sometimes (NOT ALWAYS - super extra emphasis on that), these people think so much in terms of crafting that they can have trouble making a story that they genuinely care about. How many times have we seen series with a good plot decay, simply because the editor kept pressuring the author to release his/her book sooner? Likewise, how many times have we seen movies/books/video games with scenes that bring nothing whatsoever to the plot and that were only added because "people are supposed to like that of stuff"?
There are writers who use "tricks" and pre-made story outlines that apply to every story they make but there are people who think that a story cannot be defined in mathematical terms.
Yeah, we agree, actually - I shouldn't have used the word "school". Maybe more something like "tendencies"? (And I do know that there are people who are right in the middle of those tendencies, and who will sometimes use a lot of "craft", and sometimes mostly inspiration. Still, in my experience, authors lean towards one of these two tendencies and stick to it. I could be wrong, but darn, that's just how it is with the people I've met.)
No offense but as someone who completed fully four years of college level education on this subject and currently holds a B.A. in Creative Writing, I am the only one here even remotely qualified for this discussion.
I fully completed three years of college level education... No B.A. in creative writing, but I did get the chance to talk to more than a few teachers and writers (I've yet to talk to a well-known professional writer "in the flesh", unfortunately, but I do like reading interviews of those writers).
The super, super, super short version is that every remotely competent writer understands, instinctively or intellectually, that it is NECESSARY both to hone the technical aspects of your craft ("School #2") and be receptive to inspiration and riffing when the muse takes you ("School #1").
I should have made that bit clearer - of course, School #1 authors will rarely write a story purely from inspiration without ever resorting to a tiny bit of crafting
So, uh... How do we disagree, again? When did I say you either had to write a story purely from inspiration or purely from a writer's manual?
Let's take some more examples - if you really have a lot of experience with the storytelling world, surely you've seen some exams where the teachers asked the students to write a short story within a set amount of time, say two hours. And surely you've noticed how there are people who don't mind, and others who really don't like it because they feel it's overly restricting. Some people can only write great stories when they've got one to tell and are incapable of writing a story "on demand". Other people have got no trouble with making stories on demand, but, sometimes (NOT ALWAYS - super extra emphasis on that), these people think so much in terms of crafting that they can have trouble making a story that they genuinely care about. How many times have we seen series with a good plot decay, simply because the editor kept pressuring the author to release his/her book sooner? Likewise, how many times have we seen movies/books/video games with scenes that bring nothing whatsoever to the plot and that were only added because "people are supposed to like that of stuff"?
There are writers who use "tricks" and pre-made story outlines that apply to every story they make but there are people who think that a story cannot be defined in mathematical terms.
If you're having fun all the time and just breezing along, you're probably not doing it right- likewise, if writing makes you miserable, you're probably not doing it right.
Yeah, we agree, actually - I shouldn't have used the word "school". Maybe more something like "tendencies"? (And I do know that there are people who are right in the middle of those tendencies, and who will sometimes use a lot of "craft", and sometimes mostly inspiration. Still, in my experience, authors lean towards one of these two tendencies and stick to it. I could be wrong, but darn, that's just how it is with the people I've met.)
No offense but as someone who completed fully four years of college level education on this subject and currently holds a B.A. in Creative Writing, I am the only one here even remotely qualified for this discussion.
Whoa. Cool it with that ego, Max.
1) You are not the only person here that has a major relevant to this discussion.
2) This is a topic on making memorable characters for a game, not on creating memorable novels. Should I automatically be taking a game design major's opinion of my characters seriously?
3) NO ONE will listen to you with that attitude.
This is not to say degrees aren't important. They certainly are. But do not go around slandering others because you feel that you have the most important opinion or some shit like that.
There should be another point system at RMN besides post count and makerscore.
OPINION SCORE.
It measures the pecking order of opinions. That would be sweet. No more long, drawn-out arguments... the person with the highest Opinion Score wins.
OPINION SCORE.
It measures the pecking order of opinions. That would be sweet. No more long, drawn-out arguments... the person with the highest Opinion Score wins.
author=Karsuman link=topic=3590.msg74160#msg74160 date=1241895291
Whoa. Cool it with that ego, Max.
I don't know Max very well (I only read some of his posts and never talked to him directly before), but I'm not entirely sure the bit about how he's the only person qualified for this discussion was meant to be taken seriously. 8)
I majored in Creative Writing. That was my MAJOR. That is what I have a FOUR YEAR DEGREE IN. Note that I changed my wording from stating "the only one qualified to discuss this" to "the only one qualified for this discussion" so as NOT to exclude other people from the discussion or invalidate their opinions, and you guys did not notice the distinction, and still gave me shit.
By all means, I want to hear what you have to say. I just wanted to state that this is literally and exactly what I have a degree in.
But by all means if there's a discussion on animation let's go ahead and call Karsuman an egotistical douchebag for pointing out his training and/or expertise. See also Harmonic and music, etc. Except I wouldn't do this and in fact whenever discussing art, as a for-instance, I preface my thoughts with something like "I know nothing about this topic and hence my opinion has little value". No one complains about what I am doing there- pegging my experience on a topic. I am just doing the exact same thing here, only this is a topic I know.
NO ONE will listen to you with that attitude.
This is one of many reasons why the human race is in the toilet. "What, you have relevant expertise to this situation? Well fuck you, you arrogant bastard! STFU." I don't get it. If someone told me that they had a four year degree in something, I would be MORE inclined to listen to them on that topic, regardless of their tone or whatever, not less. Am I the only person here who respects experience as represented by degrees given out by accredited institutions?
(Speaking of which, who here has a four year degree in game design?
In short, I hate that mentioning that I have a degree that specifically qualifies me for this discussion results in any backlash at all. It's ridiculous!
Let's get this back on topic, please? Next post better be about a memorable character. If anyone is dying to reply to this, do so by PM.
-Max
P.S.
There should be another point system at RMN besides post count and makerscore.
OPINION SCORE.
It measures the pecking order of opinions. That would be sweet. No more long, drawn-out arguments... the person with the highest Opinion Score wins.
I know you are being sarcastic, but seriously...I keep a mental tab of this in my head. Doesn't everyone?
Closer to on-topic:
Let's take some more examples - if you really have a lot of experience with the storytelling world, surely you've seen some exams where the teachers asked the students to write a short story within a set amount of time, say two hours. And surely you've noticed how there are people who don't mind, and others who really don't like it because they feel it's overly restricting. Some people can only write great stories when they've got one to tell and are incapable of writing a story "on demand". Other people have got no trouble with making stories on demand, but, sometimes (NOT ALWAYS - super extra emphasis on that), these people think so much in terms of crafting that they can have trouble making a story that they genuinely care about. How many times have we seen series with a good plot decay, simply because the editor kept pressuring the author to release his/her book sooner? Likewise, how many times have we seen movies/books/video games with scenes that bring nothing whatsoever to the plot and that were only added because "people are supposed to like that of stuff"?
Actually I would say this is the difference between a real writer and a hobbyist/dabbler. A real writer can write even when they are NOT inspired. Again, writing is not a high and lofty art form, it is more like working with brick and mortar, or laying pipe. Some days. And some days you get inspired and a story basically writes itself.
NicoB
3071
author=Max McGee link=topic=3590.msg74174#msg74174 date=1241899237
Note that I changed my wording from stating "the only one qualified to discuss this" to "the only one qualified for this discussion" so as NOT to exclude other people from the discussion or invalidate their opinions, and you guys did not notice the distinction, and still gave me shit.
In short, I hate that mentioning that I have a degree that specifically qualifies me for this discussion results in any backlash at all. It's ridiculous!
I think what is having people react that way is your use of being "the only one." Surely someone as "qualified" as yourself can see how horribly conceited that sounds.
And, however much you may hate it, the truth is
NO ONE will listen to you with that attitude.
You are misreading me.
It is not because you mentioned your major that I criticized you. If you had stopped at that, and said something like, "What I learned from my creative writing training..." or "What 'x' major has taught me," or something like that, I would would have said nothing. No, it is because you came off in an arrogant, condescending way that I called you on it. Your rewording helps little (none) in that regard, because it still suggests we have little right to disagree with you, and still reads like self-indulgent blather. In fact, if you had omitted that snippet I quoted, I would have simply agreed with you and went on. That is why I did not argue with you on those points.
I don't care if it's part of your personality or whatever. If you want people to be respectful, you must be respectful first.
I am done here.
It is not because you mentioned your major that I criticized you. If you had stopped at that, and said something like, "What I learned from my creative writing training..." or "What 'x' major has taught me," or something like that, I would would have said nothing. No, it is because you came off in an arrogant, condescending way that I called you on it. Your rewording helps little (none) in that regard, because it still suggests we have little right to disagree with you, and still reads like self-indulgent blather. In fact, if you had omitted that snippet I quoted, I would have simply agreed with you and went on. That is why I did not argue with you on those points.
I don't care if it's part of your personality or whatever. If you want people to be respectful, you must be respectful first.
I am done here.
Kef
0
No offense but as someone who completed fully four years of college level education on this subject and currently holds a B.A. in Creative Writing, I am the only one here even remotely qualified for this discussion.
aaaa oh my god
Legion: If you need a proofreader, and/or are serious about improving your work, I'd be happy to help! Just, uh, learn some humility, because it doesn't help your image.
For example:
Writing is both a passionate keening explosion of raw emotional energy and it is also as technically precise as being a plumber, electrician, or carpenter.
What you did here, while it still makes some sense, looks sloppy.
Being a writeris both a passionate keening explosion of raw emotional energy and it is also as technically precise as being a plumber, electrician, or carpenter.
or
Writing is both a passionate keening explosion of raw emotional energy and it is also as technically precise as plumbing or carpentry (electricianism is not a word!)
However, 'both ... precise as' is poor sentence structure. I won't rewrite that for you, but please take a close look at it.
Always happy to help a fellow writer! 'Word' up!
I am in complete agreement with "Max McGee". There is absolutely no replacement for the proper academic study, and each one of you should be elated to receive the insights of so trained an individual. After all, who but one with so distinguished a pedagogical histoire would be capable of crafting works of such concerted literary excellence?
There's nothing wrong with citing your real world expertise on a subject in my opinion. A lot of people think that alone is arrogant, but hey, our opinions should be listened to based on their own merits, right? Still, no need to completely exclude those without a bachelor's degree on the subject...
NicoB
3071
Seriously, let's go back to talking about how big a douchebag Strata was. Or why everyone loves Shadar with a manly love.
