320 réponses à ce sujet

[Arkitekt]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Arkitekt: Then you must know that every artist works his/her craft differently?

There are those who follow this structure of different levels of scale and there are those who are incompetents, so yeah.

[AndrewRogue]

Makes perfect sense to me as a writer as well. Often, even if I manage to plan things out thoroughly in advance, I find scenes, characters and concepts changing as I write anyway, since I'm realizing "Oh, wait, this would be better!"

[Darth Death]

Yeah, it's common that people do this, but is it necessarily the most productive thing to do, especially regarding that this is a trilogy? Well, that's a matter of different viewpoints on how a writer constructs a story. I can accept that many do it, but I personally don't favor this method particularly for many reasons... Reasons that I'm not going to go in-depth for fear of being attack. This statement is merely what I think.

[Aimi]

nelly21 wrote...

On normal circumstances I would agree with you, but in the case of Lucas I cannot. His fall from my graces began with changing Han Solo's cantina scene, worsened with the Phantom Menace and ended with NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

HAN SHOT FIRST DAMMIT!!!!!

Not to mention mitichlorians. FU MITICHLORIANS!!!!!

And the ****ing gungans. ok I'll stop now

And Hayden Christiansen. WERE YOU EVEN TRYING?!?!? ok ok I'll stop.

I will be the first person to agree with anybody who says that Star Wars is a flawed IP, and I will even agree on most of the specific flaws in it. I didn't like midi-chlorians, "Greedo shot first", or Gungans either. But I think that attributing all of these errors to Lucas himself - while at the same time denying that Lucas had anything to do with the things that many people like about the original trilogy - is simplistic and foolish.

For instance, the story of Attack of the Clones was not well fleshed out. There were too many annoying and badly-acted teen angst/romance scenes, and not nearly enough of Obi-Wan's detective work, for one thing. As it turns out, though, they filmed a great deal more of those "Dick Tracy" scenes, and it wasn't Lucas, but Rick McCallum (the producer) who had them pulled. They do a much better job of contextualizing the deduction, setting up who the Kaminoans are, and so forth, and were removed because - supposedly - they made the flow of the movie worse. Yeah, that's just one example, and yeah, you can point to stupid things Lucas put into the movies that were all his fault. I agree. Just...not everything, right?

What's even more bemusing is how Lucas-bashers assign all agency to Lucas for the errors made in the prequel trilogy, and deny him any whatsoever for the things done well in the original trilogy. All credit for Empire, which is a near-universally acclaimed film, is assigned to Irvin Kershner. Powerful scenes like the duel in Return of the Jedi, in which swordplay was specifically simplified in order to focus audience attention on the psychological aspect of Luke and Vader's fight, are generally ignored or subsumed into some generalized angst about Ewoks, or acknowledged but, like Empire, described as somebody else's doing.

I mean, I'm not saying that everything the man ever did was pure genius or something. Like I said, Star Wars is a flawed IP, mostly in terms of execution but also in terms of concept. Lucas has a lot to do with both of those things. But he's not some evil, malevolent monster who rode the backs of better men to fame and fortune, gained supreme creative power, and promptly wasted it by producing total dross for six years.

Anyway. I'll shut up now.

[spirosz]

That's how things usually work in the artistic world, since I'm coming from a musical background I'll give an example. I've written things that sounded wonderful at the time, but even the next day or a week later I'll listen to it and notice things I didn't before and basically say to myself "What was I thinking when I wrote this" or "Is this what I really want out of this".

I'm assuming for writing a story, there is always going to be a general outline of some sort, but they are always going to be tweaking, fixing, and adding new things to their story. You can't expect it to be perfect from the start, at least not the way I view it. Plus, the key thing is when to stop tweaking and just leave it be and hopefully they're fine with it.

[tetrisblock4x1]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@tetrisblack4x1: I don't agree with you that good writers make things up as they go along.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not talking about the small things in a story, or even a few major events, but I would argue that major story arcs are well laid out long before the story is ever written.

It has always seemed to me that ME's major storyline was also cobbled together in a rather hodgepodge fashion - this is probably due to trying to figure out if there would even be a 2 and 3.

If not - the war ends ominously with Sovereigns' defeat (which it should have anyway) - but because it was a success - 2 and 3 were born.

I don't imagine that games can be invented as a trilogy (or a never ending series) - so I imagine it is a weakness of the medium.

However - I think it might behoove design staffs of future Bioware titles to develop a trilogy and prepare for the possibility of a one title IP.

Well that's kind of what they said? And this isn't like writing a book, or directing a movie... it's a collaboration, so it's just not comparable to any movies like starwars regardless of any similarities in narrative. You really need to factor in not only the story telling, but also gameplay and player agency. I can imagine that writers and directors are getting it pretty easy compared to what they'd have to deal with if they tried applying their experience to gaming. But the standards and expectations of game narrative isn't all that high, so they could be glad for that if they ever want to change careers.

Modifié par tetrisblock4x1, 26 janvier 2012 - 03:10 .

[Il Divo]

daqs wrote...

I will be the first person to agree with anybody who says that Star Wars is a flawed IP, and I will even agree on most of the specific flaws in it. I didn't like midi-chlorians, "Greedo shot first", or Gungans either. But I think that attributing all of these errors to Lucas himself - while at the same time denying that Lucas had anything to do with the things that many people like about the original trilogy - is simplistic and foolish.

Honestly, aside from Greedo shooting first, I liked the original special editions Lucas made for the VHS. Having never seen the original at the time, I had no idea that scenes like Han stepping on Jabba's tail, Vader force-throwing all those objects at Luke, etc, was added in later. I thought that kinda stuff worked really well for the original trilogy.

Modifié par Il Divo, 26 janvier 2012 - 03:09 .

[JakePT]

Meh, fits in pretty well with what we knew. I always assumed that the only thing they really planned was that game 3 would end with the Reaper attack on Earth.

[Arkitekt]

Most errors on SW are Lucas to blame, since he was the one that formed a team of "yes-men" around him who wouldn't challenge the stupidest ideas that came from him. And if you ever read his original SW script, you'd facepalm yourself at the dialogues, they are extremely funny in the worst possible way! (go search for some of them in youtube, when actors where still casting for their roles, there are very funny snippets hidden in YT).

[RainyDayLover]

I don't get it...

Did people really expect them to have every little detail about the characters and plot points planned out? Because that's just ridiculous .When I first heard Bioware had the trilogy planned out from the first game, I always assumed they meant planned out at the macro level...

Modifié par RainyDayLover, 26 janvier 2012 - 03:18 .

[FlyinElk212]

Overblown article title is overblown.

The fact of the matter is that Bioware had all the major points mapped out...they just didn't know the SPECIFICS of those points mapped out. Such is how any major story is written- you start off with a basic plotline and fill in the dots when you get to those points.

[Arkitekt]

RainyDayLover wrote...

I don't get it...

Did people really
expect them to have every little detail about the characters and plot
points planned out? Because that's just ridiculous.When I first heard Bioware had the trilogy planned out from the first game, I always assumed they meant planned out at the macro level...

Did you expect sanity and just a snippet of general knowledge of these things in BSN?

[RainyDayLover]

You know, the fact that they had all the characters and plot points conceptulized from the start of the trilogy says a lot. Especially for a video game series.

You have games like Uncharted (which is also renowned for storytelling btw) and they believe it or not, actually write the script based on their level design (i.e. they write everything after creating their set pieces)

[Mister Mida]

Medhia Nox wrote...

It has always seemed to me that ME's major storyline was also cobbled together in a rather hodgepodge fashion - this is probably due to trying to figure out if there would even be a 2 and 3.

If not - the war ends ominously with Sovereigns' defeat (which it should have anyway) - but because it was a success - 2 and 3 were born.

Bioware has always made it (publicly) clear that ME was intented as a trilogy. I can dig up footage going as far 2005 where they said this, including their intention (which they failed at) to release DLC that would link the acts together.

[OmegaBlue0231]

Here's my shocked face....






I think we all figured that much out by now.

Modifié par OmegaBlue0231, 26 janvier 2012 - 03:29 .

[Arkitekt]

Mister Mida wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

It has always seemed to me that ME's major storyline was also cobbled together in a rather hodgepodge fashion - this is probably due to trying to figure out if there would even be a 2 and 3.

If not - the war ends ominously with Sovereigns' defeat (which it should have anyway) - but because it was a success - 2 and 3 were born.

Bioware has always made it (publicly) clear that ME was intented as a trilogy. I can dig up footage going as far 2005 where they said this, including their intention (which they failed at) to release DLC that would link the acts together.

Yes, and there's a good soundtrack of this DLC as well, that I usually hear in work:

 

Notice the background 

[naledgeborn]

So everybody that said "Liara becoming the Shadow Broker was planned all along" was wrong. They asspulled and character assassinated the socially awkward archaeologist into becoming a competent intelligence agent because they didn't know how to make her "cool" or keep her relevant.

I rest my case.

[jcolt]

besides if me1 tanked i doubt they would've made the rest the trilogy and that would've been alot of time and energy wasted.

[Sgt Stryker]

Why hello there, Star Wars, new Battlestar Galactica, and Lost.

[Arkitekt]

naledgeborn wrote...

So everybody that said "Liara becoming the Shadow Broker was planned all along" was wrong. They asspulled and character assassinated the socially awkward archaeologist into becoming a competent intelligence agent because they didn't know how to make her "cool" or keep her relevant.

I rest my case.

If that's your "case", you're in bad shape. There's nothing in the interview that admits as such. Casey states that they knew that certain characters had to be at certain spots at the end of the story, so they have to place them there, but the comment is so general that you won't get anything that particular.


Not that I care one way or the other, but I quite enjoy how BSN forumites get ahead of themselves and declare they have final evidence of the impossible.

[Tesla17]

Just so you all know, most writing occurs like this. People form a vague plotline and formulate the direction they want to take with a project and then it eddies as you write it. There is nothing wrong with this methodology and it allows for more creative freedom.

Any writer could tell you that.

[naledgeborn]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Why hello there, Star Wars, new Battlestar Galactica, and Lost.

Lost and BSG are long running tv series (100 + episodes). You HAVE to make it up as you go along. George Lucas is a terrible writer. And Mass Effect which is 3... 3 parts long. It should have been structured and organized better. It's called good writing.

If it weren't for the Genophage arc I'd say ME wasn't worth it. I mean, "I got better" is one of many examples of ME's lack of planning.

[naledgeborn]

Arkitekt wrote...

naledgeborn wrote...

So everybody that said "Liara becoming the Shadow Broker was planned all along" was wrong. They asspulled and character assassinated the socially awkward archaeologist into becoming a competent intelligence agent because they didn't know how to make her "cool" or keep her relevant.

I rest my case.

If that's your "case", you're in bad shape. There's nothing in the interview that admits as such. Casey states that they knew that certain characters had to be at certain spots at the end of the story, so they have to place them there, but the comment is so general that you won't get anything that particular.


Not that I care one way or the other, but I quite enjoy how BSN forumites get ahead of themselves and declare they have final evidence of the impossible.

Hey, it's all I need. Thread title is the smoking gun. I rest my case.

[Walker White]

Newsflash: All fiction is handled this way. The Wheel of Time was supposed to be a trilogy (pitched to publisher that way). Song of Ice and Fire was meant to be five books. Writers have very rough outlines of the overall plot, and a few major scenes. But everything else changes in the telling.

[Lucky Thirteen]

Oh dear, looks like someone discovered a dirty secret of story crafting. People don't have the complete story from start to finish in their heads, just the chunks of important stuff and make up the rest as they go along.

This is how I write my stories and this is how I know half my friends write their stories. You know you want to get to from point A to point B, so you write out point A and point B and then figure out how to connect them. Which means making it up as you go along. There are times that I just write out point B, long before I think of what point A be.

A lot of the time characters I think will be important fall to the side because they just aren't that important to the plot any more. In turn, another character thought to be very minor can become more important. That's what I think happened to Liara, however, they didn't want to let her fall to the side and tried to reinvent her. They just couldn't make good enough sense for it to really work. Meanwhile, a character like Tali who used to be this minor character in the basement that babbled about her people all the time, turned into someone who could be extremely important when it comes to issues of the geth and quarians. (Note, I'm not a big fan of either of these characters, this is just my honest observation of the two and how their stories have progressed. Please don't hate me fan boys.)

This is no big deal in my opinion. When you sit down to write a story, it's almost never a solid thing and you are almost always making it up as you go along.