9960 réponses à ce sujet

[lillitheris]

Qunari…quarian? Coincidence? I THINK NOT.

That’s why they wear the masks…

[Mr.BlazenGlazen]

lillitheris wrote...

Qunari…quarian? Coincidence? I THINK NOT.

That’s why they wear the masks…

A qunarian. One of Cerberus's finest experiments.

....

I think that may have given me an idea. 

[Drussius]

Oh... and the Volus!

Those suits are just hiding dwarves inside! Those sneaky Volus, masters of currency and leaders in manufacturing... or should I say smithing?!

[Drussius]

And they even refer to their own people and others as clans! The evidence mounts...

[fluffywalrus]

Mr.BlazenGlazen wrote...

Hey fluffywalrus. I'd like to apologize if I kind of came off as condescending or rude in my pms towards you. Just...like I said. I'm new to this whole author thing and I kind of sucked in English class during high school. On top of that, writing that chapter took much longer than I thought it would.

Oh hey, don't worry at all! You didn't come across as condescending.
If anything I was hoping I didn't come across as harsh.
You're right, my expectations are...generally pretty crazy when it comes to certain things. Like I've said before, I'm not the average reader(not insinuating I'm better or worse, just I have different preferences), and I have a thing about villains...and there's a reason most friends won;t watch certain types of films with me anymore, or recommend certain types of books to me. I'm not often very gentle when it comes to those(especially if I've paid money for them).

So far it seems as if the vast majority of your readers are super happy with your fic, and like I said, your writing is strong for the most part. My only qualms come with the villain, and that's certainly a touchy subject for me, and my own perspective tends to prevent me from just enjoying the story for what it is once a swich in my head is flicked on.

I think you've done quite well so far with your fic. It's improving from chapter to chapter. Don't let my hangups over your villain get into your head, I've ...again, I've been not so gentle with criticism before in some pen and paper campaigns, out of character discussions with DMs about it.

I think the main point I've tried to get across, which may certainly be uniquely my own opinion, is that as a reader, I'm a lot more comfortable stomaching events in a story if they are grounded in details you've laid down or something I'm familiar with. Much in the same way that breaking social norms can cause discomfort to people around the offending individual, breaking a lot of norms can cause distress...my expectations about character progression and specific areas of a narrative are triggered when my suspension of disbelief is broken(and it's pretty darn flimsy, I'll admit). Your fic doesn't need to be realistic to avoid clashing with such norms.expectations, it's just more effective, IMO, if the build up for major events is spread over some time, allowing the reader to acclimate themselves to the story and characters. This goes doubly for establishing OCs, because they often rely on an established character bridging their development to legitimize them.

I try to be as constructive as I can with things like this because I know how critical I can be.

[PMC65]

Drussius wrote...

I'd like to think that having the experience running tabletop gaming helps my writing. Right after I graduated high school, during the year I took off before college, I was running four different D&D campaigns simultaneously for various groups of people. And I agree with you 100% that a big part of the fun was the creating of the campaigns. I never used prewritten adventures, and 3 out of 4 campaigns were created from the ground up by me in exhaustive detail (the fourth was a Dragonlance campaign). But I truly hope you're right... that the experience with gaming will help me with writing fanfiction, assuming I ever get up the nerve to post something for the public eye.

I really want my first fanfiction to be something special, because ever since I was about 9 and I wrote my first "book" - a five page story written on looseleaf paper and stapled together - I've wanted to write professionally. If I can manage to write something that people truly like, maybe it will give me the courage I need to actually return to work on my novel, which I haven't touched in over two years now. Perhaps it will even push me to see about getting a publisher somewhere to look it over.

Of course, writing for ME will be a challenge for me, since my comfort zone has always been medieval-fantasy, but I am always up for a challenge.

Senior Writer of Dragon Age had this to say ... "If you don’t have a pressing need to make money, do a little time working for tabletop roleplaying games. It’s fairly easy to break in, because they pay peanuts, but you learn a ton about game design from working with dice systems. And since most videogame designers (certainly of RPGs) are huge tabletop game geeks, it’s a great credit to have when applying for jobs. Most people in the tabletop field end up drifting into videogames eventually, since you can live on what they pay you, so you’ll also make contacts who can end up being helpful down the line."

(http://blog.bioware....ennifer-hepler/)

Also, go hear published author's speak ... Ask them questions. One thing that writer's love to do is talk about the craft ... and how crazy we writers really are. This past Saturday I spent another meet & greet at my local B&N with an author (Laurell K Hamilton) I've never read, but it doesn't matter to me if I've read their works since I'm looking for fellowship and tips.

[TheMarshal]

Drussius wrote...

dpMeggers wrote...

lillitheris wrote...
This is another area that I’d probably mostly ignore beyond this level of detail, unless you’re writing about some clever bank heist or whatever.

Mass Effect x Ocean's Eleven?

Mass Ocean's Effect?

No no no...  It's Shepard's Eleven!

Wait...



1... 2... 3... whoah...

Although, to be fair... Technically it's Shepard's Twelve, the weaker of the three stories...

Modifié par TheMarshal, 12 juin 2012 - 10:15 .

[Drussius]

fluffywalrus wrote...

...and I have a thing about villains...and there's a reason most friends won;t watch certain types of films with me anymore, or recommend certain types of books to me. I'm not often very gentle when it comes to those(especially if I've paid money for them).

I'm curous. What is the specific issue you have with villains? Not the villain in the fanfic you were giving a critique on specifically, but villains in general? What sort of issues most easily break your suspension of disbelief when it comes to the villain of a story. I know I myself can always use more information on the sorts of conventions that should be avoided in certain situations, and I'm sure other authors here would love to know too. Not that we may agree specifically, but hearing your thoughts certainly can't hurt. I have my own hangups about the "bad guys" in general, and in all fairness, since I'm asking about yours I'll share my biggest complaint about villains in many stories:

The villain in so many stories seems to have no redeeming features whatsoever. This is my biggest complaint about the bad guys. They're always one-dimensional, evil-all-the-time villains. I love the rare case when this pattern is broken, and you find out something redeeming about the villain... that he's a loving father.. or that his evil schemes are actually undertaken solely to fund his love of painting.. or that he draws the line at harming children. Just SOMETHING that shows he's not a one-dimensional, disaster-causing killer.

[fainmaca]

TheMarshal wrote...

Drussius wrote...

dpMeggers wrote...

lillitheris wrote...
This is another area that I’d probably mostly ignore beyond this level of detail, unless you’re writing about some clever bank heist or whatever.

Mass Effect x Ocean's Eleven?

Mass Ocean's Effect?

No no no...  It's Shepard's Eleven!

Wait...
1... 2... 3... whoah...

Shepard's Seventeen?

[lillitheris]

^ As a counter to the no-redeeming-qualities villains, mainstream is in progress of overcorrecting toward dumb ‘nuanced‘ villainy now.

[almondroy]

fluffywalrus wrote...

Obsidian Gryphon wrote...

dpMeggers wrote...

almondroy wrote...

Crazy idea...have you considered seeing if something like Paintball or Laser Tag is available in your area? It might be a useful learning tool, even if you just watch a game rather than playing.

I...never would have thought of that. Cool idea. May check youtube first. Ty.

I think games would help too. like Modern Warfare or COD. Pretty realistic. I always go "$#@!!!" when something shoot up my six, fly overhead or eating "dirt" in those games.   

I actually like Battlefield, ARMA and more team based games for combat, because of the variety found in them.
But COD is a fun jaunt, I suppose. Haven't really played it since the first Modern Warfare. Everything kind of got dumb after that IMO.

Mostly, when writing about combat, just focus on what's happening. Try to mentally see it. Usually, combat is chaotic, fast-paced(often in bursts between lulls). I'd say watching or playing paintball is one of the better things to do if you're having a hard time grasping combat. Watching more skilled paintball teams is usually a good option, if possible. Videogames can work too, though. I like the Battlefield series(BF2, mostly., though BF3 is very good as well) due to the variety of tactics you can often apply. In BF3, when I play, I'm basically Tali if she were also a medic. Coordination via communication is absolutely vital, so when writing combat, dialogue is usually a great idea, and is organic in both describing the scene and what the characters are doing.

Having played team video games and done simulated live combat, there's a much more visceral feel for the 'real' thing that can be lost behind a controller/keyboard and mouse. More senses are engaged than merely sight and that can be the extra bit of 'spice' that can liven up a scene. Video games will give you a sense of tactics and communications, but you won't get the feel of grit kicked up by large-scale munitions, or the smell of rock scorched by lasers, or other physical sensations.

[MrStoob]

I find it difficult in fast paced combat type situations not to just write like:

"this happens, then that happens, then the other happens in this way as something else happens", and so on, and so forth. Dunno if anyone read my Rachni tale, but the first combat section felt very much like that to me.

[Drussius]

Combat can be very difficult to write well. I've had some decent successes in short stories or descriptions during RPGs, and then I've had some that were just disastrous failures. But I honestly find that for me, it's easier to describe combat when you limit it to a single person's perspective, and don't overelaborate. You don't need to describe every single shot and blow, but rather try to give feeling to the experience overall, filling in the details that are most important.

It's hard to give specifics without hunting down and posting some old story or something, but if it makes any sense... rather than trying to say that this character did this, other character did that, meanwhile so-and-so did this other thing, it may flow better if you zero in on one person's perspective... "Guy crouched behind cover, popping up sporadically to fire his weapon in quick bursts, giving Girl and Krogan the chance to advance. An explosion from nearby rocked the ground under his feet, and dirt rained down over his head like hail..." Something like that.

Granted, this is only my personal perspective on the matter. Other people might have much better luck using other techniques. You have to go with what works for you.

[MrStoob]

Drussius wrote...

Combat can be very difficult to write well. I've had some decent successes in short stories or descriptions during RPGs, and then I've had some that were just disastrous failures. But I honestly find that for me, it's easier to describe combat when you limit it to a single person's perspective, and don't overelaborate. You don't need to describe every single shot and blow, but rather try to give feeling to the experience overall, filling in the details that are most important.

It's hard to give specifics without hunting down and posting some old story or something, but if it makes any sense... rather than trying to say that this character did this, other character did that, meanwhile so-and-so did this other thing, it may flow better if you zero in on one person's perspective... "Guy crouched behind cover, popping up sporadically to fire his weapon in quick bursts, giving Girl and Krogan the chance to advance. An explosion from nearby rocked the ground under his feet, and dirt rained down over his head like hail..." Something like that.

Granted, this is only my personal perspective on the matter. Other people might have much better luck using other techniques. You have to go with what works for you.

Cheers, good advice.  The way you described 'guy's experience is a bit more how I wrote a training combat exercise for Shep and Cadets and yea, I think that worked much better.

[fluffywalrus]

Drussius wrote...

fluffywalrus wrote...

...and I have a thing about villains...and there's a reason most friends won;t watch certain types of films with me anymore, or recommend certain types of books to me. I'm not often very gentle when it comes to those(especially if I've paid money for them).

I'm curous. What is the specific issue you have with villains? Not the villain in the fanfic you were giving a critique on specifically, but villains in general? What sort of issues most easily break your suspension of disbelief when it comes to the villain of a story. I know I myself can always use more information on the sorts of conventions that should be avoided in certain situations, and I'm sure other authors here would love to know too. Not that we may agree specifically, but hearing your thoughts certainly can't hurt. I have my own hangups about the "bad guys" in general, and in all fairness, since I'm asking about yours I'll share my biggest complaint about villains in many stories:

The villain in so many stories seems to have no redeeming features whatsoever. This is my biggest complaint about the bad guys. They're always one-dimensional, evil-all-the-time villains. I love the rare case when this pattern is broken, and you find out something redeeming about the villain... that he's a loving father.. or that his evil schemes are actually undertaken solely to fund his love of painting.. or that he draws the line at harming children. Just SOMETHING that shows he's not a one-dimensional, disaster-causing killer.

I've played so many pen and paper campaigns (I'm nearly 26, been playing D&D and other tabletop campaigns since I was 12, around 2-3 active campaigns per year), and read so many books that I'm really critical when it comes to distinct villains. I've read or experienced almost everry flaw imaginable, every failed build-up and character progression in villains, every botched climax, every nonsensical set of motivations, every logic loop, etc. etc.
Most villains bug me to some degree, which is why I generally prefer less focus be placed on them and to have their appearances be few and far between. It also helps keep the intrigue and tension up as you're less aware of what the villain is directly doing at any given time. Direct interactions with villains IMO MUST have a purpose. Everything must have a purpose when interacting with them.
Villains aren't often villains in their own perspective. Usually, they have reasons of their own for doing what they do, and they feel justified. These reasons must make sense for their character, there must be roots for these reasons that are exposed to the characters at some point in the narrative, if you wish the villain to be in direct contact often.

Some villains are entities that simply are incomprehensible. See: The Reapers, most HP Lovecraft creations like Cthulhu, Shub-Niggurath, Yog Sothoth, etc.  Their purpose is to expose the deteriorating humanity and hope in the protagonists, to compell them to experience and know the depths of horrors just beyond their consciousness.

But more active villains, ones that are interacted with more frequently, they must have purpose. What is a villain if not a way to develop the cast of protagonists? Villains have so many functions, so much potential, and so often it's wasted for a cheap trick, or as a one-dimensional hackjob.

A good exercise, IMO is to read books that inadvertently place the main character as the villain in the end. Short stories such as I Am Legend(don't watch the film, ever, please). That story doesn't delve into much, but it really gets into the mythology of villains, and seeing how one's perspective can clash with another, can illuminate the consequences of actions quite well. There are many of these stories out there. Even some movies.

It's just, I'm incredibly sensitive to pretty much anything that "villains" do. I prefer abstract concepts to battle against rather than material beings because it means I don't need to gnash my teeth when watching a film. I scrutinize everything, and above all else, I value consistency in their character. Unless a story is very long, the villain must be consistent in order for the viewer/reader to be ableto truly recieve them as a legitimate character. They need to have flaws, virtues, and they need to be complex people. They can't be percieved as entirely unbeatable, or too weak...they must be strong, or smart. If both strong and smart, not too much of both, else the tension and suspense will quickly dissipate. They must be relentless, but not always visible. The promise of them is often just as potent (if not moreso at times) than them in person. They must have conviction if you want them to be strong.
But you can't assume the readers or viewers know everything about the villain, or that it's fine to leave all details until the end. Look atSaren, for instanmce. We don't see him often, but as we progress through the game, we begin to learn more about him and the Reapers. Each new detail is given in an important scene, each detail providing a purpose to help us understand him. He's not a perfect villain, I have qualms about how they presented him, but he was decently done. Not enough to feel sympathetic for, until the comics came out. Had some of that leaked into the game, it would have made a difference. Villains need to be built over time, not have the reader bombarded and overwhelmed by them from the get go. That's fine if there's a single occurance with a fairly impersonal plot attachment between the villain and protagonist, but if there's some intimacy between the two, it usually doesn't work. Making villains is tough business.

Anywho, I'm pretty critical when it comes to villains. There's no easy way to please me when it comes to them. I could go on and on about them but I'm pretty ure this entire post has been a terribly long ramble that likely doesn't get to any point.

[fluffywalrus]

lillitheris wrote...

^ As a counter to the no-redeeming-qualities villains, mainstream is in progress of overcorrecting toward dumb ‘nuanced‘ villainy now.

Nuanced villains open themselves up for so much scrutiny,because everything is exposed and needs to make sense. Too often they succumb to the obvious filmmaker/author's plot decisions that take them out of character, or outright change them in the final scenes/chapters.

Nuanced villains are interesting, but they need to be kept simple at a foundational level. All of their nuanced behaviour, their complexity...it must be able to be filtered down into some basic themes/concepts/components, or else communication is often sacrificed in some form, lessening the impact of the villain or corrupting the effect of part of their behaviour/actions.

[Drussius]

fluffywalrus wrote...

Villains aren't often villains in their own perspective. Usually, they have reasons of their own for doing what they do, and they feel justified. These reasons must make sense for their character, there must be roots for these reasons that are exposed to the characters at some point in the narrative, if you wish the villain to be in direct contact often.

Agreed wholeheartedly on this point. Villains are never villains for the sake of mere villainy (well, they shouldn't often be, anyway. I suppose an occasional nutjob who does it just for fun is okay). They usually do what they do because they feel some sense of justification for the act. (entities are a whole other story. When something is completely inhuman, human issues don't really apply).

fluffywalrus wrote...

*snip* Short stories such as I Am Legend(don't watch the film, ever, please). *snip*

I saw the film and read the story. I liked the story a lot better. But the movie wasn't bad in my opinion. Then again, I seem to be a bit more lenient on movie plots than you imply you are. If I get what I expect out of a movie, even if all I expect is entertainment or lots of explosions, then I leave happy. I'm only let down by a movie when I expect something and don't get what I hoped for or something better out of it.

fluffywalrus wrote...

They need to have flaws, virtues, and they need to be complex people. They can't be percieved as entirely unbeatable, or too weak...they must be strong, or smart. If both strong and smart, not too much of both, else the tension and suspense will quickly dissipate. They must be relentless, but not always visible. The promise of them is often just as potent (if not moreso at times) than them in person. They must have conviction if you want them to be strong.

 
All pretty good points. There is definitely a recipe to a good villain. And honestly I can't think of any good villains who were not either strong or smart... or both. Mediocre villains just don't stand out as villains. They're just... bad guys.

fluffywalrus wrote...

Anywho, I'm pretty critical when it comes to villains. There's no easy way to please me when it comes to them. I could go on and on about them but I'm pretty ure this entire post has been a terribly long ramble that likely doesn't get to any point.

You answered the question I asked, and that's good enough. I always look forward to hearing other people's views, even if I don't agree with them. And I happen to agree with most of your points, though as with movies, I think you are a lot harder on villains than I am.

Villains are people too! Give them some love!

But seriously, everyone has something like this that gets on their nerves. I don't like heroes that are too heroic. And as I said, I don't like villains that are one-dimensional. Some people won't watch romance movies because they feel they're too cliched and sappy. Some people love them.

The old saying really works. You can't please all of the people all of the time. But I love to hear different perspectives, because considering things from new angles can foster new ideas. Thanks for the response!

[hot_heart]

OK, for some levity, try and come up with the best ME universe version of the following expression:

"You couldn't hit the broad side of a barn."

The winner's entry may feature in my fic and someone could be walking away with REAL INTERNET DOLLARS.

For the record, I've got 'elcor' replacing 'barn' but I don't think they're big enough...and also that's maybe kind of racist? I'd suggest a type of large ship but that sounds kinda boring. Probably the safest bet though.

Anyway, I'm interested to see what you guys come up with. Have at it!

[fainmaca]

You couldn't hit a Pyjak on Tuchanka.

[ElectricZ]

MrStoob wrote...

I find it difficult in fast paced combat type situations not to just write like:

"this
happens, then that happens, then the other happens in this way as
something else happens", and so on, and so forth. Dunno if anyone read
my Rachni tale, but the first combat section felt very much like that to
me.

You can approach combat (or any action scene) like conversation, really, with a couple of key exceptions.

If it goes on too long, or does not have a point, it's time to go back and rewrite the scene. There are also only a finite way to say someone fired, just like there are only a few ways to say Character XYZ said, "..." But you can be creative.

One thing that distracts me in an action scene is if an author gets too hung up on the technical details, as if the author wants to impress how much he or she knows about the game mechanics. It makes the story sound like an after action report from a game session rather than a story. A person in that situation wouldn't be reflecting on the specs of his gun, but rather than the situation he/she and the squad were facing.

"Commander Shepard cradled his Elanus M-15 Vindicator, a model preferred by assassins and mercenaries, as he ducked behind a wall and cooly surveyed the battlefield. The assault rifle's ability to penetrate shields and armor was well known, and would serve him well as the enemy he faced were Blue Suns mercs."

vs.

"Shepard kicked up a cloud of dust as he dove headfirst into the dirt, coming to rest behind the blasted remains of a concrete wall barely a meter high. Whatever the building used to be, it was his only cover from the phasic slugs ripping through the air above him. He caught a flash of blue off of the armor of one of the assailents.. Blue Suns, he thought. This was going to be a lot easier when it was going to be just bandits. He flipped the selector on his Vindicator to armor-piercing and motioned to the rest of the squad to move up..."

So basically, the fundamental principles of writing still hold up. Show, don't tell, be mindful of how the action (or conversation) flows, and if I could give one other piece of advice:

Write your action scenes like your protagonist doesn't know it's a foregone conclusion she/he will win. Too much technobabble aside, what will kill any action scene dead is a lack of suspense. If your Shepard or squaddies are nigh invulnerable and there's absolutely no risk of something unexpected happening, or the fight turning into an absolute cluster,  your readers will see one starting and think "oh god, here we go again..."

If you need inspiration on how to make your action scenes less of a foregone conclusion, have a look at Murphy's Laws of Combat. Remember, If anything can go wrong, it will -- and that's the source of good suspense and drama. Try sprinkling a few into your fights and see what happens... and remember to describe how the characters experience it.

Modifié par ElectricZ, 12 juin 2012 - 11:50 .

[fluffywalrus]

hot_heart wrote...

OK, for some levity, try and come up with the best ME universe version of the following expression:

"You couldn't hit the broad side of a barn."

The winner's entry may feature in my fic and someone could be walking away with REAL INTERNET DOLLARS.

For the record, I've got 'elcor' replacing 'barn' but I don't think they're big enough...and also that's maybe kind of racist? I'd suggest a type of large ship but that sounds kinda boring. Probably the safest bet though.

Anyway, I'm interested to see what you guys come up with. Have at it!

With outraged frustration, we are not that large.

I'm going to have to go with that Pyjack/tuchanka line above. That fits well.

[Drussius]

I do like the Pyjack on Tuchanka line. Kudos. I was going to suggest "Couldn't hit an Ocean on Kahje."

[hot_heart]

Ha, nice work. Both are good but I think I prefer the 'ocean on Kahje' one. Meshes better with the original expression too.

[almondroy]

hot_heart wrote...

OK, for some levity, try and come up with the best ME universe version of the following expression:

"You couldn't hit the broad side of a barn."

The winner's entry may feature in my fic and someone could be walking away with REAL INTERNET DOLLARS.

For the record, I've got 'elcor' replacing 'barn' but I don't think they're big enough...and also that's maybe kind of racist? I'd suggest a type of large ship but that sounds kinda boring. Probably the safest bet though.

Anyway, I'm interested to see what you guys come up with. Have at it!

"You couldn't hit the ass end of a thresher maw"

If this is what I do for REAL INTERNET DOLLARS, you should see what I do for a Klondike bar :happy:

[Drussius]

Okay... First, let me ask in advance: Please don't let this turn into a "Bioware is lazy, that was a huge letdown" debate.

I am just wondering if my fellow writers here, having seen a supposed photo of Tali's face in the game, are using that image (at least roughly) as an idea of what Quarians look like under the mask, or if people are basically still imagining their own Quarian faces. I haven't actually seen the photo myself, as my playthrough with Tali as my LI in-game is next on my list, but I'm not there yet. But the ME wiki gave a bit of information about Quarian appearances that suggested they are very human-like, and I wondered if it came from one of the books or comics, or if it was based on the in-game pic.

Thoughts on Quarian appearance? And please, as little as possible given this subject on how Bioware handled it. I understand fully that many fans were somewhere on a scale from Disappointed to Outraged over this one...