MA cliches: What to avoid in your new Arc.
By
Aces_High,
Posted on: 2009-04-22 06:15 in Mission Architect
That would explain the massive thread with the big argument
...with what, two people? Because obviously if a small group of people make a big stink out of something on the internet they must be right.
Current Blog Post: "Why I am an Atheist..."
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days when Victoria reigned!" -- T. S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"
[ QUOTE ]
Look: people aren't having significant trouble understanding me. They're just not. I'm not going to change. Get over it already.
[/ QUOTE ]
Venture,
I've read some of your reviews. I've played some of the arcs you've recommended. In terms of what we want and don't want to see in an arc, we appear to be mostly on the same page. It's not complete agreement... but, as far as I can tell, it's close.
That said, I've found some of your reviews to be so laden with TVTropes lingo, they're pretty much impenetrable and... well... not fun to read.
I don't mind looking up one or two things, but I'm not going to do that a dozen times just to get through someone's post. I just skip over the ones in which you seem to expect that. And I kinda doubt I'm the only person who does it.
So, while I'm pretty much on your side regarding this particular Mary Sue issue, I have to disagree that 'people aren't having significant trouble understanding you'. Your review posts can get rather arcane, and I don't think it's my responsibility, as a reader, to decipher them. In composing them, I don't think you always--to reference Arcanaville's post above--meet the readers halfway.
Disregard this if you'd like. But, as the subject came up, I thought it best to share my own perspective as a reader of your reviews, and as someone who chooses what to play based, in large part, on the recommendations you and other reviewers make.
Thank you for doing that, by the way, it's much appreciated.
The Cape Radio: You're not super until you put on the Cape!
DJ Enigma's Puzzle Factory: Co* Parody Commercials
OK.
This is where the Narrator Breaks the Fourth Wall.
The fact that Venture uses TVTropes in his reviews is, A) they're amusing to him and others, and B) are an encyclopedia of sorts as to the plot elements that people use. He COULD just write up "I liked/hated/enjoyed/endured the Plot XYZ" and leave it at that, but he doesn't.
The fact that tropes are used do not make an arc bad. It's just his lingo. He'll TELL you what makes them bad (the tl;dr line at the top) and then go into detail later.
And, I was the one that threw the Xanatos Gilligan at him. Personally... I thought it worked out, even if he didn't... cos frankly, I took a gamble that a villain would probably enjoy smashing a vase more than simply reciting mumbo-jumbo over it. "Uh... oops?"
Besides, I needed a way to make things go south at the end of the first act.
I suppose I could have constructed it a la Midsummer Night's Dream... but then I'd be using THAT trope, and frankly I don't care for Shakespeare as a MA Arc. You can't put in Summer is a Comin' In, else Mod 08 sees it and bans it for people singing "cuckoo" too lewdly... and unless you put an EM Brute in as a boss the players get all the palpable hits.
And damned if I didn't channel Micheal Flanders and Donald Swann, there. Scaaaaary.
"City of Heroes. April 27, 2004 - August 31, 2012. Obliterated not with a weapon of mass destruction, not by an all-powerful supervillain... but by a cold-hearted and cowardly corporate suck-up."
[ QUOTE ]
That said, I've found some of your reviews to be so laden with TVTropes lingo, they're pretty much impenetrable and... well... not fun to read.
I don't mind looking up one or two things, but I'm not going to do that a dozen times just to get through someone's post. I just skip over the ones in which you seem to expect that. And I kinda doubt I'm the only person who does it.
So, while I'm pretty much on your side regarding this particular Mary Sue issue, I have to disagree that 'people aren't having significant trouble understanding you'. Your review posts can get rather arcane, and I don't think it's my responsibility, as a reader, to decipher them. In composing them, I don't think you always--to reference Arcanaville's post above--meet the readers halfway.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yep, yep ,yep.
I had fun reading Venture's reviews till they became too laden w/ arcane, jargony terms. As Hydro says, becoming "impenetrable." So I've stopped even looking at the thread.
I could care less what Mary Sue means or stands for. I tried to use it as an example of a term that is not self-evident. If you had to read any mainstream reviewer w/ a manual or dictionary open the whole time, (one or 2 terms would be ok, but a stream of them , NO), it quickly removes the fun factor from reading such reviews. End result, the reviewer is waving a flag of questionable expertise, ultimately alienating the reader. See John Clute as a prime example.
(Clute btw brought his tendencies to fiction writing of his own, when he wrote a SF novel so impenetrable, very few read it.)
So, Venture willfully misreads my statement about using my gf as a barometer. She was meant to be representative of the readers that found themselves bogged down by TVtrope jargon. There is a larger audience implied. So Vent Fails at Reading Comprehension For... now.
Maybe those people that dislike Ventures reviews should quit reading his reviews?
Just a thought...
[ QUOTE ]
You can't mark an arc down for something that is so nebulous and confusing that nobody knows what the hell you're talking about. Hell, I could classify any character as a Mary Sue/Marty Stu.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes he can. He's reviewing it, not grading it.
What shall claim a Sky Kings' Ransom?
PPD & Resistance Epic Archetypes
[ QUOTE ]
That said, I've found some of your reviews to be so laden with TVTropes lingo, they're pretty much impenetrable and... well... not fun to read.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just to provide the other side of the coin, I find Venture's reviews far more entertaining than some of the others on this forum *because* of the use of TV Tropes. To each his own though.
Infatum on Virtueverse
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe those people that dislike Ventures reviews should quit reading his reviews?
Just a thought...
[/ QUOTE ]
Because it's not like there aren't other choices for reviews.
[ QUOTE ]
In a situation where one is putting oneself forward as an authority on writing it behests the individual to actually write well. As it stands, there is almost nothing one can glean from a venture review one could not glean better from simply going to TVTropes and researching for oneself.
[/ QUOTE ]
But Venture never did that. So far as I am aware, Venture never stated he was an "authority" on writing. Writing reviews does not do that implicitly, nor does writing harsh reviews do that implicitly.
If he *had* claimed his reviews to be authoritative, *I'd* probably rip him one myself. But he's only offering a specific perspective, in a field of other people offering perspectives, and in an environment where anyone can either attempt to supplant him or challenge him.
Now, as to the issue of researching for one's self, that's rather always true, except the one major flaw most people have is to train a critical eye on one's own work. Any outside perspective offers something the vast overwhelming majority of people, including the vast overwhelming majority of writers, cannot provide to themselves effectively. The only thing special about Venture in that regard is that he doesn't seem to pull his punches. That means its likely that his complaints are at least probably a superset of the ones an author ought to pay attention to.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
Just to provide the other side of the coin, I find Venture's reviews far more entertaining than some of the others on this forum *because* of the use of TV Tropes.
[/ QUOTE ]
Whoah, there. That's not really "the other side of the coin".
I often find Venture's reviews entertaining and useful. Sometimes, though, I think he goes overboard with the TVTropes references, and those posts are skipped over by me and probably others.
He may care about that, he may not, it's just something I thought should be mentioned, given the direction the dialogue took. He's not sending these reviews directly to the authors, he's writing for an audience. I'm part of that audience, and this is something I've occasionally run into while reading his reviews.
If I were in his position, it's something I'd like to know. So, I've put it out there in case he's of the same mind. If he isn't, whatever, everything remains the same. But if he takes it to heart, I'll be able to enjoy a larger degree of his offerings, and that's good for me.
The Cape Radio: You're not super until you put on the Cape!
DJ Enigma's Puzzle Factory: Co* Parody Commercials
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In a situation where one is putting oneself forward as an authority on writing it behests the individual to actually write well. As it stands, there is almost nothing one can glean from a venture review one could not glean better from simply going to TVTropes and researching for oneself.
[/ QUOTE ]
But Venture never did that. So far as I am aware, Venture never stated he was an "authority" on writing. Writing reviews does not do that implicitly, nor does writing harsh reviews do that implicitly.
[/ QUOTE ]If you set yourself up to provide a perspective on what someone else is doing wrong, you are in effect doing so with the implication that you know what is wrong. He doesn't have to be able to produce better work himself, but to be a good critic, I would expect it of him to actually criticize well. As it stands, a venture review is basically a bullet point rundown of the plot tied to whatever convenient Tvtropes comments support his perspective, good or ill.
As it stands, Venture is a mediocre critic who posts with a lot of venom and doesn't seem to actually want to help authors improve as much as he wants to act as an authority. From where I sit he's neither entertaining or useful, which would be why I offer advice on improving one or the other. As a reviewer I honestly can't work out what the fuss is about, what the incentive can be to have your work reviewed by him when you could just as easily go to a specific site and read for yourself.
I think the most telling element is just how well the critic has responded to criticism.
From where I sit he's neither entertaining or useful, which would be why I offer advice on improving one or the other.
Personally, I think it's hilarious that we just had everyone and his dog (including me) tell Captain Amazing that he shouldn't change the way he writes to suit me, and now we have you telling me I should change the way I write to suit you.
And, evidently, unable to take "no" for an answer.
Current Blog Post: "Why I am an Atheist..."
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days when Victoria reigned!" -- T. S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"
Oh, dang yo.
/e eatpopcorn
-STEELE =)
Allied to all sides so that no matter what, I'll come out on top!
Oh, and Crimson demands you play this arc-> Twisted Knives (MA Arc #397769)
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I think it's hilarious that we just had everyone and his dog (including me) tell Captain Amazing that he shouldn't change the way he writes to suit me, and now we have you telling me I should change the way I write to suit you.
[/ QUOTE ]I think you should consider ways to write better. You seem to like the idea of avoiding improvement.
... Naah.
There's better writers out there. I mean, I could probably out-write Venture if there was money on the table, but that doesn't mean I'd be any good at all at writing reviews.
Philosophical essays? the odd story stuffed full of obscure archaic humor that no one in this day and age would 'get'? Maybe a technical instruction document in stilted telco jargon? Perhaps. 
"City of Heroes. April 27, 2004 - August 31, 2012. Obliterated not with a weapon of mass destruction, not by an all-powerful supervillain... but by a cold-hearted and cowardly corporate suck-up."
I don't see what all the fuss is about. Venture is merely one reviewer on an ever-expanding list. Like every other reviewer, he has a particular style and a specific viewpoint.
I don't have issues with everything he writes, nor do I hang on his every word. Sometimes I find Venture's comments very helpful, even though I've never been reviewed by him. And on other occasions, he strikes me as a blunt and tactless.
Well, rats. I can't seem to make up my mind about Venture. If only he weren't the only arc reviewer on the entire internet....
Rise of the Copper Legion (#60280; with soundtrack)
The Fractured Dreamer (#498588; with musical theme)
"Now Leaving: Paragon City": original composition for the end of CoH
[ QUOTE ]
As a reviewer I honestly can't work out what the fuss is about, what the incentive can be to have your work reviewed by him when you could just as easily go to a specific site and read for yourself.
[/ QUOTE ]
I suspect that if you can't work out why people either like to read his reviews or submit to them, the problem is not specifically that there is no reason, but that its one that isn't obvious to you.
Honestly I'm not 100% certain either, but the fact that people do is really more significant than whether they ought to.
To put it another way, if a better way of reviewing exists that people want to submit to and read it would be a trivial exercise to prove that fact by counterexample rather than logical persuasion.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
I think you should consider ways to write better. You seem to like the idea of avoiding improvement.
That begs the question that you actually know what "improvement" is, which would require setting yourself up as an authority.
Wasn't I just being accused of that?
Current Blog Post: "Why I am an Atheist..."
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days when Victoria reigned!" -- T. S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"
[ QUOTE ]
I think you should consider ways to write better. You seem to like the idea of avoiding improvement.
That begs the question that you actually know what "improvement" is, which would require setting yourself up as an authority.
Wasn't I just being accused of that?
[/ QUOTE ]
Technically speaking I can ask someone to speak Chinese better, even though I don't know how to do it. I wouldn't have any way to judge if they were, though, so its a slightly nonsensical request.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
Are you prepared to argue that it's acceptable to cast the player as a moron?
[/ QUOTE ]
I watched a movie the other night that in my opinion, does exactly that. The whole movie would fail to create its intended suspense and build-up in the viewer if the viewer was not taken as a moron and constantly lied to.
After the plot-twist has been unveiled, the only way I could reconcile myself with the events as they truly happened, was to say that since the story was told from the point of view of a flawed psyche, it was OK that I as a viewer was not shown the true version of events.
I dislike being lied to, but this movie was a lie only in the sense that there was no way that the Heroine could know the true nature of the events around her and since I was watching the movie from essentially her point of view, this had to be allowed for the movie to work.
I think the same suspension of disbelief has to be extended to Story Arcs as well. However, I duly recognize that this suspension of disbelief cannot be granted to every Story Arc that casts the Player as a moron, but only to those that make being a moron pleasant and entertaining in the service of a good story.
After all Venture, as far as I understand from our posts, you disliked my notions of giving players gameplay choices in Story Arcs, so how can you object to being cast as a moron in order to play through a Story Arc?
I believe that a Kheldian Gold Standard should be based on SO's, and for anything above that... there's Platinum!
Save Ms. Liberty (#5349) � Augmenting Peacebringers � The Umbra Illuminati
Save Ms. Liberty (#5349) � Augmenting Peacebringers � The Umbra Illuminati
[ QUOTE ]
Of course, you'd have to have played the damn arc first yourself, in which case why exactly do you need a review? Presumably after playing it yourself you've formed your own evaluation.
[/ QUOTE ]I mean the people who make the arcs. You're not being anything of particular use to them, which means your reviews are purely a place to provide people with the simple metric: Here's what I like, and if you like what I like, you'll like it. Which is fine, but it's also not particularly helpful in the long run to the betterment of the MA content.
[ QUOTE ]
Look: people aren't having significant trouble understanding me. They're just not. I'm not going to change. Get over it already.
[/ QUOTE ]That would explain the massive thread with the big argument over one of your terms where the people involved talk about it in the hopes they can avoid what you've made out to be quite a big problem. Clearly, there is no problem with the term as you choose to use it.