FO: NV (DLCS) Discussion

[Walsingham]

I'm not sure what you want from Chris, though. You want Eastenders in the ruins of a post-apocalyptic love dream? Sam Becket between two people with radioactive blood?

 

The whole point of sci fi is to be bigger than life so it can paint feelings and principles which are so faint that they drift by in normal life.

 

I've no doubt that other authors can and do communicate the same point in more finely nuanced ways. But who do they communicate WITH? A handful of arts majors? _If_ Avellone's writing is crude then it may cost him artistic kudos, but to my mind it gains him merit. Like playing jazz on an oppossum. He certainly speaks to me, and for that at least I am grateful.

Edited September 8, 2011 by Walsingham

[Gromnir]

I'm not sure what you want from Chris, though. You want Eastenders in the ruins of a post-apocalyptic love dream? Sam Becket between two people with radioactive blood?

 

The whole point of sci fi is to be bigger than life so it can paint feelings and principles which are so faint that they drift by in normal life.

 

I've no doubt that other authors can and do communicate the same point in more finely nuanced ways. But who do they communicate WITH? A handful of arts majors? _If_ Avellone's writing is crude then it may cost him artistic kudos, but to my mind it gains him merit. Like playing jazz on an oppossum. He certainly speaks to me, and for that at least I am grateful.

 

have no idea what eastenders is, but your beckett comment is childish straw-man. indulge in hyperbole much?

 

in any event, while the setting and situations in sci-fi and fantasy is frequent over-the-top, the characters need not be... and should not be. the more remote characters become from reality, the less a reader is able to empathize. phillip k. d1ck's Roy from blade runner is an android, but he is very human. what makes roy ultimately such a great character is not his super strength or his shortened life-span. is his humanity... and **** didn't have to spell that out, did he? give sci-fi characters wacky attributes is fine... is why we mentioned geek love's freaks. the problem with chrisA characters is that he stops at the wacky, and for gets to make genuine and human. no matter how unique or alien is the sci-fi character's attributes, if his/her humanity is clich

[pmp10]

not need beckett or proust or nabokov. *snort* that being said, chrisA frequent resorts to stuff that is not gonna past muster in a creative writing class at the local community college, and for good reason... but crpg fans, inexplicably, expect less.

I'm don't understand what is so surprising about it.

Standards of writing in video games are simply not very high and I think even for all his faults MCA still stands head and shoulders above competition.

And comparisons to non-interactive fiction are not always valid.

Especially to written works were the author can write anything without worrying about resource-cost of on-screen execution.

[Gorgon]

A story for a CRPG usually has too many restraints placed on it to be any good if viewed out of its specific context. It's never going to compete with any kind of 'proper' literature. I don't know why anyone would expect that.

[Gorgon]

Eastenders is a TV series about the East End. It went on forever, wasn't very good, but was supposedly realistic, or true to its subject or whatever.

[Guest Slinky]

I once watched a documentary about something, which said the energy output in UK must be bumped up every time eastenders ends because about five million brits put their kettle on.

 

[J.E. Sawyer]

I'd go so far as to say that gamers in general have pretty low standards when it comes to writing quality. Then again, we live in a world where Dan "Symbologist" Brown is a household name and Umberto Eco is, relatively speaking, a fringe figure, so I don't know that gamers are unique in setting the bar low.

[Oner]

I'd go so far as to say that gamers in general have pretty low standards when it comes to writing quality. Then again, we live in a world where Dan "Symbologist" Brown is a household name and Umberto Eco is, relatively speaking, a fringe figure, so I don't know that gamers are unique in setting the bar low.

Plus the writer's/game's name still has a bigger impact on the perceived quality than the actual writing. IMO.

[WDeranged]

I think people in general have low standards when it comes to writing, as for MCA's writing I loved PST, it honestly moved me, but Chris himself has said that the actual plot isn't anything special outside of the context of video games, I'd have to agree, it doesn't take anything away from the experience to admit that.

[Walsingham]

It's been a long time since I wrote any critical literary appraissals, so I'm not sure if this fair: can you actually point at some dialogue and explain why it's bad?

[HoonDing]

When BioWare are widely considered as masters of storytelling, you know that the bar can't be very high.

 

Compare with the 80s, where Infocom held the crown or the 90s with all those excellent adventure games from Legend Entertainment, LucasArts and Sierra.

[Gromnir]

It's been a long time since I wrote any critical literary appraissals, so I'm not sure if this fair: can you actually point at some dialogue and explain why it's bad?

 

oh sure. let us get out our script o' fo:nv and dead money. shucks, we don't have no script, so a "critical literary appraisal" is gonna be somewhat problematic, eh?

 

*snort*

 

we already pointed out the fortune-cookie flow/be like water nonsense from dog/god, but the best examples o' problematic chrisA stuff is from motb. now, we has all witnessed the stereotypical and clich

Edited September 8, 2011 by Gromnir

[J.E. Sawyer]

The comparison was between Dan Brown and Eco, since Da Vinci Code is similar in a lot of ways to Foucault's Pendulum, but with things like "symbology" in place of "semiotics", but if you don't like Eco, feel free to insert any other contemporary author who is a better writer than Dan Brown but sells poorly/is not well-known!

[Gorgon]

It's all entertainment business. I'm sure the greater part of the consumers out there would find Eco a bit long winded compared to Brown.

[J.E. Sawyer]

I don't think you're going to find a universally-liked (or disliked) author, but the point is that the public at large does not have high standards for writing across a variety of media.

 

I am recalling something I recently read, an exchange of insults between Faulkner and Hemingway:

 

Faulkner: "He has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the dictionary."

Hemingway: "Poor Faulkner. Does he really think big emotions come from big words?"

 

EDIT: I also find Eco to be pretty long-winded. There are sections of Foucault's Pendulum that border on the unbearable for me. Baudolino has a similar problem, but was not interesting enough for me to push through.

[pmp10]

we already pointed out the fortune-cookie flow/be like water nonsense from dog/god

Actually that is not an uncommon technique of inducing hypnosis.

The game didn't make it all that clear but the 'I-use-speech' solutions are rarely given the lines to make them believable.

but the best examples o' problematic chrisA stuff is from motb. now, we has all witnessed the stereotypical and clich

[C2B]

The comparison was between Dan Brown and Eco, since Da Vinci Code is similar in a lot of ways to Foucault's Pendulum, but with things like "symbology" in place of "semiotics", but if you don't like Eco, feel free to insert any other contemporary author who is a better writer than Dan Brown but sells poorly/is not well-known!

 

I don't really think anyone can be named here. Brown is unique in the way how he basically perfected literary mediocrity.

Also, in general, people have terrible opinions about anything/anywhere.

 

 

 

As for the whole debate. Have quite different opinions. I just really don't have an interest to go into detail since the whole thing is basically a lot of whining from all sides.

Call me when its about brainstorming ideas on how to do interesting things narritivly with the capabilities of the medium.

Edited September 9, 2011 by C2B

[Gromnir]

I don't think you're going to find a universally-liked (or disliked) author, but the point is that the public at large does not have high standards for writing across a variety of media.

 

universal like? am not certain anybody has ever striven for such. am doubtful that any sane person ever considered such a benchmark to be a reasonable goal or measure. that being said, some authors is both popular and appreciated by the folks in the ivory towers. jack london made loads o' money as an author... which were pretty much unheard of til the mid 20th century. at the same time, london gots academic cred. cormac mccarthy is a more modern example o' an author who finds considerable commercial and academic appeal. mccarthy books almost invariably makes bestsellers lists, and has frequent been turned into movies. at the same time, mccarthy is gonna be on the short list o' greatest living authors cobbled together by most any critic or professor one cares to question. yeah, authors such as joyce or pynchon pretty much thumb their noses at the dirty, unwashed masses... dares the public to like their works. regardless, there is no insurmountable dichotomy o' popularity and quality, eh?

 

is actual kinda funny that josh brings up faulkner and hemingway in the present context. while faulkner novels may have frequent scared the faint o' heart, he were also quite successful as a writer o' popular and sucessful movie screenplays. is not as if faulkner dumbed down his writing for movies neither- he simply recognized the differences and limitations o' the respective medium he were working with. in point o' fact, faulkner wrote the screenplay for To Have, and Have Not, a movie based 'pon a hemingway novel. heck, feel free to mention this tidbit o' trivia when next you speak to the obsidian writers. if they ever adopt a "pearls before swine" mentality, kick 'em in the chops with faulkner's The Big Sleep or Gunga Din movie credits.

 

as for pmp comments...

 

is startling that we already addressed most o' your concerns earlier in this thread. wacky setting for sci-fi and fantasy IS almost a given, but that don't mean that the characters needs necessarily be wacky. regardless, no matter how wacky or alien a character is, the author needs make the character fundamentally human or the audience will not be able to empathize. no empathy = no emotion = fail. etc. if we repeats our self yet again, tale could chastise us for spam.

 

am not seeing a pmp issue we didn't already address.

 

*shrug*

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited September 9, 2011 by Gromnir

[Wombat]

I don't think you're going to find a universally-liked (or disliked) author, but the point is that the public at large does not have high standards for writing across a variety of media.

 

I am recalling something I recently read, an exchange of insults between Faulkner and Hemingway:

 

Faulkner: "He has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the dictionary."

Hemingway: "Poor Faulkner. Does he really think big emotions come from big words?"

 

EDIT: I also find Eco to be pretty long-winded. There are sections of Foucault's Pendulum that border on the unbearable for me. Baudolino has a similar problem, but was not interesting enough for me to push through.

It's about their styles...but, when we are talking of modern games, I think it would be wise to stick to Hemingway than Faulkner... Similarly, I'd recommend Orwell over Joyce for this purpose. If someone were to manage to make a best-seller game with their styles, I would be pleasantly surprised, though.

 

Modern histories are, too, written in a certain style but the "authors" are normally trained to get rid of emotional content, which may be good for realism/environmental story-telling. However, such style wouldn't be good if you'd like the players to emphasize with NPCs/protagonists. Although Hemingway is known for his hard-boiled style, it doesn't prevent the readers from emphasizing with his characters...well, at least, for the majority, considering his fame as a writer, at least.

 

Of course, as already mentioned, there are styles for suitable fantasy novels/visual novels/manga/cartoon even in modern writing and, yes, Obsidian are yet to be proven outside of these areas, I think.

 

That said, there can be a middle ground. Some PnP designers knew better about this. For example, Greg Stafford used very simple rule for combat of Pendragon, since it is designed for realizing the feel of the original legends/folklores, where description of combat is, kind of, pastoral...even compared with that of Heike. They are before modern concept of historical materialism and, thus, he consciously chose to use a suitable "style." Also, he focused on the theme where he can let the modern players emphasize with the characters. The theme he chose was dilemma in this romantic literature, where Lancelot got stuck between his royalty and love while Gawain did between his vengeance and friendship (And yea, he even exploited the "inconsistencies" of the "original works").

 

Also, I don't know some people mentioned this but, for example, in the Witcher's case, (here, I'm talking of the games since I haven't read any of Sapkowsky's works), normally, the players have relatively emotional response and more detached/sardonic ones. The setting provides a sort of a middle-ground for both romantic fantasy and hard-boiled modern writing. This is probably more digestible for mature people than simplistic good/evil choices while it won't totally close the door to some people who like romantic writing. Although it's a part fantasy world, it doesn't alienate modern mind. So, closing such a setting, itself, already offers a place where the designers are less likely to step on the feet of the players.

 

So, what do you say? The recipe for role-playing here seems to be about consistent worlds, which doesn't give the players the moments of disbelief by its own right, and empasizable activities which can be chosen by the players.

 

Just my two cent.

[J.E. Sawyer]

My point was that standards are low, not that there is no overlap between popular success and "elite" approval. It's true that McCarthy sells well and is generally well-regarded by critics. That still doesn't change the fact that the public at large has said with their wallets time and again that the bar set by Stephenie Meyer and Dan Brown is perfectly acceptable.

 

Going back to games, while many gamers may prefer higher quality writing, they certainly don't reject a ton of writing that's pretty awful. A lot of developers have a difficult time convincing publishers that writing is worth serious investment. It can be a hard argument to win when there's little evidence to suggest you need strong writing to sell and review well.

 

Can game writing be improved? By leaps and bounds. Could game writing be popular among the hoi polloi and critics alike? Why not? Are gamers really driving us to do this? I don't think so. Even the people who trash game writing apparently still buy the games with the writing they hate.

[Morgoth]

Professional voice acting can "conceil" mediocre writing very well. I mean just look at the latest Bioware games. Not exactly Shakespeare, but the characters are nonetheless very inconic and powerfully presented.

[Gromnir]

My point was that standards are low, not that there is no overlap between popular success and "elite" approval.

 

fair enough. your contrast 'tween the public awareness o' brown and eco were a bit misleading, but am comprehending and largely agreeing with your point. if the average gamer is not only satisfied, but happy with pap, then why invest in more substantial fare, yes? perhaps chrisA has stumbled onto a viable formula to meet low standard josh's attributes to the crpg gaming buyer. no doubt it is far more economic for obsidian writers to focus on character concept as 'posed to character development if concept alone suffice.

 

however, one wonders how developers and publishers measure the degree to which quality writing helped the sales o' a game. having observed some o' the bizarre conclusions bioware reached via their data mining efforts, we suspect that there is far more art than science involved in the measuring o' a game's attributes both fair and foul.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Flouride]

My point was that standards are low, not that there is no overlap between popular success and "elite" approval. It's true that McCarthy sells well and is generally well-regarded by critics. That still doesn't change the fact that the public at large has said with their wallets time and again that the bar set by Stephenie Meyer and Dan Brown is perfectly acceptable.

 

Going back to games, while many gamers may prefer higher quality writing, they certainly don't reject a ton of writing that's pretty awful. A lot of developers have a difficult time convincing publishers that writing is worth serious investment. It can be a hard argument to win when there's little evidence to suggest you need strong writing to sell and review well.

 

Can game writing be improved? By leaps and bounds. Could game writing be popular among the hoi polloi and critics alike? Why not? Are gamers really driving us to do this? I don't think so. Even the people who trash game writing apparently still buy the games with the writing they hate.

 

It's not just gamers that accept sloppy/bad writing. The fact that Fallout 3 won the Best Writing award at GDC? where the voters were developers is pretty sad.

[Wombat]

Probably, publishers don't like when they find too many writers...I remember Ziets complained of the decreased number of the writing team. If the developers pile successes in other areas, they may be able to get more control in writing areas but it's still a hypothesis.

 

There are games I couldn't finish due to the writing and I guess I need to convince myself that the Witcher 2 and DXHR team did a decent job considering the surroundings...

[Walsingham]

Your criticism then, is threefold:

 

1) You complain that the painting of light and dark in Mask of the Betrayer was simplistic. Then immediately recognise that this is a function of the setting. It was epic level characters in an epic setting, travelling between planes made from pure good and pure evil. Talking to a being infested with pretty much pure evil.

 

2) Your objection to Dog/God is that his style of exposition was weak. I ask again what you expect by way of dialogue with a schizophrenic super mutant?

 

3) You object to maudlin introspection. In my experience people who have been through a lot are quite given to introspection, once they open up. I doubt they'd do so while fending off scads of ghost people. But when else are they going to do it in a game?

 

~~

 

So far you're sole purpose appears to be to assert an intellectual superiority over both the writers and the people who enjoy the writing, simply because you feel a nebulous attachment to some other form of writing. You do so by exploiting the old lie that video games aren't art and can't be because gamers play them. AND you've done so in a style which only indicates more self-elevation above us hoi polloi who grub around in plain English.

 

I'm annoyed because it's insulting to people who are actually reading this thread, and whose work I respect. Which is merely rude. But the thought that you might actually convince them they're doing something wrong merely to serve your ego is completely appalling.