Positive arc threads should be allowed!

[ QUOTE ]
One reason MMO's aren't literature and shouldn't really be looked at in exactly the same terms is because there can literally never be character growth, resolution, or any great meaning applied.

Given that an MMO adventure can (and likely does) have many more characters than the player,

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, but if any character other than the player is getting development, then that player is a filthy Mary Sue and must be purged for the good of all entertainment everywhere.

...say, I think I have an idea for an arc.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One reason MMO's aren't literature and shouldn't really be looked at in exactly the same terms is because there can literally never be character growth, resolution, or any great meaning applied.

Given that an MMO adventure can (and likely does) have many more characters than the player,

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, but if any character other than the player is getting development, then that player is a filthy Mary Sue and must be purged for the good of all entertainment everywhere.

[/ QUOTE ]There's a point on the spectrum between 'Venture is wrong' and 'Venture is a cartoony villain who holds unreasonable and ridiculous opinions,' you know.

Heroes, Villains ♦ Reviews ♦ Retrospect

[ QUOTE ]
One reason MMO's aren't literature and shouldn't really be looked at in exactly the same terms is because there can literally never be character growth, resolution, or any great meaning applied.

Given that an MMO adventure can (and likely does) have many more characters than the player, there is no reason for this to be any more true than it is of books, movies, or any other form of storytelling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Silver_Gale already pointed out where you're stepping on your own toes there, but I'll go a step further and remind you that I said "exactly the same terms."

You are always writing for an unknown protagonist. Always. You are one of the biggest proponents of this idea and constantly remind people that they can never dare make an assumption about the character that is actually performing the actions within the story being told.

So that's my line in the sand. Either you're bending that rule a bit to add depth or you're sticking to it like a zealot and killing any possibility of character growth, etc. Either way, someone will say you're committing a sin and will probably be right.

Whether you care that they're right or not is a totally separate issue, of course.

Also, what is probably the most important factor in a story set within an MMO is whether the player had a good time doing it. Honestly, if something is extremely well put together but boring to take my character through, it doesn't matter a hill of beans if it avoided every little foible on TV Tropes or not.

This is true of dev content, too.

At it's core, the story is an excuse to put the player in a situation where they enjoy playing their character so that they don't log out and go do something else. This is the primary reason for a story to exist in an MMO and should really be the main consideration in any review of a MA or dev created arc.

"Fun" is extremely hard to objectively quantify, though. It's much easier to fall back on old habits and cherry-pick ideas from reviews of other mediums, but that doesn't make it right.

Other aspects are important too, of course. God knows I'm never going to be able to get through some Naruto fanfic arc or anything, but dismissing something because it "breaks" a "rule" with no thought for whether it's fun to play, whether that "rule" made any sense in the first place, whether the breaking of that rule is what makes the story unique or interesting, etc is a tad myopic.

Geek_Boy is unanimously elected 'Chyll's Favorite Player of the Day'.

[ QUOTE ]
Geek_Boy is unanimously elected 'Chyll's Favorite Player of the Day'.

[/ QUOTE ]

play his 'speedung through time' arc, specifically mission 4 (i think thats THE mission), with the right attitude, and you'll appreciate him even more.



eco

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow [The Incarnate System is] Jack Emmert all over again, only this time it's not "1 hero = 3 white minions" it's "1 hero = 3 white rocks."

Silver_Gale already pointed out where you're stepping on your own toes there,

Well, no, she hasn't. If we were to accept that criterion then every protagonist in every story ever told is a Mary Sue because the character development happened to him and not the reader. Which is nonsense, of course. The fact that an NPC develops in some way as a character does not make that character a Mary Sue, not by any criteria I have ever seen and certainly not by the ones I've consistently applied in my reviews. In fact, I would argue that it is impossible for a Mary Sue to develop in any case, since they're already perfect.

You are always writing for an unknown protagonist. Always. You are one of the biggest proponents of this idea and constantly remind people that they can never dare make an assumption about the character that is actually performing the actions within the story being told.

Within some very broad limits, yes. You may, for instance, assume that the character is a hero in any arc labeled as "Heroic", or a villain for "Villainous". You may assume that heroes are registered FBSA heroes in Paragon City and villains are part of Operation Destiny in the Rogue Isle, because those are parameters for character generation in the game. (Anything written to the contrary in an /info box carries no weight.)

So that's my line in the sand. Either you're bending that rule a bit to add depth or you're sticking to it like a zealot and killing any possibility of character growth, etc.

I don't have to bend that rule at all to add depth to an NPC, and I don't have to make that NPC a Mary Sue to do it, either.

Whether or not the player's character experiences any personal growth or change is up to the player, just as it is up to the audience in any form of storytelling. What you take away from a story is up to you. Hopefully it will have some consonance with what the author was offering, i.e., the theme(s) of his work.

Also, what is probably the most important factor in a story set within an MMO is whether the player had a good time doing it.

"Fun" is almost completely unquantifiable. There are some game-mechanic related principles almost everyone will agree on but beyond that there's just no accounting for it.

Honestly, if something is extremely well put together but boring to take my character through, it doesn't matter a hill of beans if it avoided every little foible on TV Tropes or not.

If we are talking about gameplay, e.g., a mission filled with overpowered mobs that make the arc strongly resemble felling the mightiest tree in the forest with a herring, that's one thing, as noted above. But if you are talking about the story, how, exactly, do you intend to for the author to know in advance for every given player whether a story is "boring"? Even My Dinner With Andre has its advocates.

Other aspects are important too, of course. God knows I'm never going to be able to get through some Naruto fanfic arc or anything, but dismissing something because it "breaks" a "rule" with no thought for whether it's fun to play, whether that "rule" made any sense in the first place, whether the breaking of that rule is what makes the story unique or interesting, etc is a tad myopic.

The reason a principle comes to have the force of a rule is precisely because breaking it is overwhelmingly likely to result in a story that is not fun or unique or interesting. The device that precipitated this discussion is one of the most common in juvenille literature. It is trite, cliched and so often used because it is low-hanging fruit.

no u

This will be a bit quick and lazy since while I could comb through review threads to find specific examples, I didn't enjoy reading them the first time so I'm just not going to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Venture_NA Silver_Gale already pointed out where you're stepping on your own toes there, Well, no, she hasn't.

Yeah, she kinda has. Since accusations are made that a character is a Mary Sue if they're any higher than a LT (much less if the story tends to focus on them), I'd say her comment is perfectly valid and I agree 100%.

Quote:

You may, for instance, assume that the character is a hero in any arc labeled as "Heroic", or a villain for "Villainous". You may assume that heroes are registered FBSA heroes in Paragon City and villains are part of Operation Destiny in the Rogue Isle, because those are parameters for character generation in the game. (Anything written to the contrary in an /info box carries no weight.)

Ugh. So you're a valid roleplayer unless your bio contradicts some piece of established CoX lore? [censored], please.

That still isn't enough information to actually build a story or reliable character around. "From Ohio" doesn't actually tell you anything about my personality, my likes, my dislikes, my sex, my age, my religious beliefs, nothing. "Has driver's license" and "hasn't been to prison" don't tell you much either.

You're grasping for straws.

Quote:

I don't have to bend that rule at all to add depth to an NPC, and I don't have to make that NPC a Mary Sue to do it, either.

I agree with the second half, but I'd argue that you and some other reviewers don't seem to be able to accurately gauge this. You might like this in theory, but you don't seem to in practice.

Quote:

"Fun" is almost completely unquantifiable. There are some game-mechanic related principles almost everyone will agree on but beyond that there's just no accounting for it.

Isn't that quite the conundrum? Kinda why I pointed it out.

Since the story's primary focus in an MMO is to get you to keep playing, it's still the most important aspect of it. To paraphrase your own posts, "Just because it's hard doesn't mean it isn't right."

You have to take this into account or I don't think your review means much.

Quote:

But if you are talking about the story, how, exactly, do you intend to for the author to know in advance for every given player whether a story is "boring"? Even My Dinner With Andre has its advocates.

I'm sure you've seen plenty of lifeless movies, TV shows, etc. It might be hard to quantify, but even the most technically correct stories can be boring as hell not because of the subject matter, but because of the delivery. I thought that was clear, but apparently not crystal enough.

Quote:

The reason a principle comes to have the force of a rule is precisely because breaking it is overwhelmingly likely to result in a story that is not fun or unique or interesting. The device that precipitated this discussion is one of the most common in juvenille literature. It is trite, cliched and so often used because it is low-hanging fruit.

Cheap shots at an arc that you didn't pay attention to don't prove you right. You were demonstrably wrong about a lot of your accusations, personal taste be damned. Not reading clues and then complaining that information wasn't made available to you doesn't help your case.

Look, I hate predictable crap as much as the next guy (probably more), but I will never be so egotistical as to think that my personal hangups have anything to do with whether a story, movie, etc is good or not.

Why don't I have my own review thread to show people how it's done? Because I am too busy to give it justice. Also, I tend to take the tact of Gene Kelly in "An American in Paris:"

(paraphrasing because I can't find the exact quote and don't feel like putting in the DVD and transcribing) "Either buy it or don't. I don't care if you don't like it and I'm not going to feel better about myself if you do."

Of course, I'm also fond of, "She's one of those third year girls who gripe my liver...You know, American college kids. They come over here to take their third year and lap up a little culture...They're officious and dull. They're always making profound observations they've overheard. "

pwnage

You're getting down to the "hurl insults and throw hyperbole" round of the argument. Before you Godwin yourself, I'm just going to bluntly say that I'm not going to show my work because I don't care enough about this subject to read any of your reviews a second time. I haven't read all of them, but I've cruised through all of your threads.

Reading your reviews is usually a pretty quick process for me because it never takes long before I roll my eyes and start counting the TV Tropes quotes that rarely actually apply to what you're describing and don't carry any actual weight in the first place.

You, of all people, don't get to play the "the character growth is shown through NPC's" card when you constantly complain when anyone does anything that takes the focus off of your grand character for half a picosecond.

I'm really not going to respond to most of your arguments not because I'm incapable of proving you wrong, but because I just don't care to spend the time to do it. You're never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever going to admit that you might possibly have been mistaken so there's just no point in it. I've said my piece and I'll just leave it at that.

You were shown to be wrong about some of your accusations about Blight so many times that it just baffles me that you can't see that. "You didn't tell me this" was often followed by "It was right here [insert complete quote copied and pasted from a clue]" which you would then retort with a "nuh uh you lie I read it all and it wasn't there you're making that up." Trying to show you you're wrong is like arguing that the sky is blue with someone who is color blind.

You have to admit, there is no point to arguing with certain people because they will never admit fault. Let's leave it at that.

People are allowed to post positive threads about arcs without asking for critiques. No one asked for the critique from what comes off as extremely harsh and highly delusional. Keep it in your own review threads unless asked for. At the least it avoids conflicts such as the demolishing of the blight thread. At most it is the polite thing to do.

"Freedom is the right to say things other people don't want to hear" -- G. Orwell

It is not the place of anyone on these forums, save the moderators, to tell users what or where they may or may not post.

You cross the line venture and the mods back that up with the mod 8 post that geek quoted:

That quote is an opinion from a particular person, unconnected to his/her capacity as a forum moderator. It is not a rule. You will not find anything in the forum rules that even remotely resemble "negative reviews are not allowed" or "all reviews must contain at least one compliment".

Furthemore, it doesn't support the "nobody should post anything negative in 'my' thread" notion on which your OP is based. We can criticize your arc all we want (not to be confused with criticizing you the author, and I suspect you're mistaking the former for the latter). And we can bloody well put that criticism in the threads you make about that arc. You, in turn, can respond to that criticism, we can rebut, and so on. It's only when someone decides to make it personal that the rules get broken. And when that happens, the infraction has everything to do with the personal insults and nothing whatsoever to do with the criticism of the arc.

I hate that this stupid thread is the most active one on the forum.

Reviewers: Snark is not automatically funny. Most of the time it just comes off as being petty and mean.

Writers: Get thicker skin. If you ask someone to review your stuff you can't complain if they don't like it.

Meant to reply to this earlier....

Quote:

As William Burroughs pointed out, anything "worth doing" is by definition worth doing no matter if you do it poorly or not.

Try and remember that when you're being anesthetized for surgery.

Nor are you supporting your insinuation that I haven't read it.