208 réponses à ce sujet

[VanguardCharge]

No. Differing opinions cannot rightly evaluate as equal. An opinion that bears great resemblance to the truth (the case) by complying with all known facts is greater than any opinion that does not, or that complies less with facts.

 

The hazard of art criticism is that the reviewer also discloses who they are. The hazard of tendering an opinion is that doing so may reveal ignorance.

 

Ugh, what? As usual, your second paragraph has nothing to do with the argument at hand. What does a reviewer revealing his opinion have to do with identity? Are you an IGN reviewer who is lurking in the shadows? 

 

But I totally agree with you that opinions are not equal. Sure, everyone has the right for an opinion, but not all of the are valid. You can't challenge the opinion of "I like Haven". You can, however challenge and prove wrong an opinion like "In Your Heart was good writing".

 

Hell, I'll list the reasons  why I think Haven was poor writing.

 

* You are introduced to the villain, a villain who proves to be a failure when you bury him and his dragon in snow while he's revealing his plans to you. A villain with Cory's power should be able to squash the PC, but he goes full retard. Thus, I'm not threatened by this villain who happens to be a walking cliche. Guess what, cliches in writing are bad. It's not an opinion. Its poor writing. 

 

* You never get a sense of loss due to the poor spacing. I'll go out on a limb and say that most people get 15-20 hours in before they get to "In Your Heart". You get a brief sense of loss while you're scaling the mountains alone and when you're awake in the camp. That lasts for good 2 minutes. After those two minutes, you get a promotion, a badass castle, a throne and a new companion. You feel rewarded. Rewarding the player at this extent while not taking anything from him, right after a mission where you are supposed to feel loss is poor writing. 

 

Hold on, let me do what you usually do at the end of your responses, but in simpler terms.

 

This is why organic products are vastly superior to the GMO foods of my local Walmart. 

[OriginalTibs]

What? I don't understand the difficulty here. Not all opinions are equal. An opinion that misunderstands, misinterprets and/of misrepresents the facts, is not equal to one that does not (or does to a lesser degree, anyway). Part of debate is determining which interpretation is more sound given the facts.

 

The criticism is aesthetic rather than factual. It is as much an oversimplification to say that 'There is no accounting for taste' as it is 'opinions are like a******s, everyone's got one'. Yet both are equally true. If the 'problem' with the quest is in the quality of the story then that is not a fact-filled inquiry it is an aesthetic inquiry and suffers the problem that a human being interprets according to who they are. It isn't even a matter of intelligence, I think. It is a matter of kinda-sorta emotion, a matter of the heart.

 

If, however, the problem of the quest, the thing to be 'fixed', is more material, factual, then that is a different matter entirely. Is it illogical? If illogical then howso? If the illogic is because 'I would do that' then we stray into the emoty thing again. But is there a step missing? Is there something specific that should be added or removed?

 

Basically if what needs to be fixed is a matter of taste, then it isn't a question of fixability. It is a matter of taste and that will vary from person to person. The problem becomes how to write something interesting that will also be to everyone's taste when the spectrum of tastes is endlessly variable. Not everyone will be thrilled, yet if there isn't anything controversial nobody will find it particularly tastier than gruel flavored with white paste.

[VanguardCharge]

The criticism is aesthetic rather than factual. It is as much an oversimplification to say that 'There is no accounting for taste' as it is 'opinions are like a******s, everyone's got one'. Yet both are equally true. If the 'problem' with the quest is in the quality of the story then that is not a fact-filled inquiry it is an aesthetic inquiry and suffers the problem that a human being interprets according to who they are. It isn't even a matter of intelligence, I think. It is a matter of kinda-sorta emotion, a matter of the heart.

 

If, however, the problem of the quest, the thing to be 'fixed', is more material, factual, then that is a different matter entirely. Is it illogical? If illogical then howso? If the illogic is because 'I would do that' then we stray into the emoty thing again. But is there a step missing? Is there something specific that should be added or removed?

 

Basically if what needs to be fixed is a matter of taste, then it isn't a question of fixability. It is a matter of taste and that will vary from person to person. The problem becomes how to write something interesting that will also be to everyone's taste when the spectrum of tastes is endlessly variable. Not everyone will be thrilled, yet if there isn't anything controversial nobody will find it particularly tastier than gruel flavored with white paste.

 

[OriginalTibs]

Hell, I'll list the reasons  why I think Haven was poor writing.

 

* You are introduced to the villain, a villain who proves to be a failure when you bury him and his dragon in snow while he's revealing his plans to you. A villain with Cory's power should be able to squash the PC, but he goes full retard. Thus, I'm not threatened by this villain who happens to be a walking cliche. Guess what, cliches in writing are bad. It's not an opinion. Its poor writing. 

 

* You never get a sense of loss due to the poor spacing. I'll go out on a limb and say that most people get 15-20 hours in before they get to "In Your Heart". You get a brief sense of loss while you're scaling the mountains alone and when you're awake in the camp. That lasts for good 2 minutes. After those two minutes, you get a promotion, a badass castle, a throne and a new companion. You feel rewarded. Rewarding the player at this extent while not taking anything from him, right after a mission where you are supposed to feel loss is poor writing. 

Eliding the troll bait.

 

Cory was surprized he was unable to take back the anchor. That was his focus. Your failure to appreciate that displays the paucity of your vision. You beat him at the end because of all those side quests where you gained for the inquisition, all that Cory would have had had you failed. Zero sum: what you gained he lost. You eroded his powerbase with every gain you made, however few you actually bothered to do.

 

I certainly felt a sense of loss when I failed to rescue one of the people at Haven. Do not be so arrogant as to assume your play was the same as everyone else'.

 

Your presentation of why you thought it bad writing only displays that you were a poor reader.

[scribeman]

The only plot hole I would like to see fixed are the missing companions. I had 3 people with me, then suddenly they disappear.

 

With regards to Cassandra not being the leader of the Inquisition, I think a matter of perspective is needed. When you find your party again, Cassandra is as distraught and hopeless as everyone else. It is made clear then that the centerpiece to the Inquisition really revolves around the Herald.

 

I think Cassandra would have been the Inquisitor if the Herald really had died. In that world, it makes sense. Leliana is publically known as the Left Hand of the Divine-- no one is ever going to trust her. Cullen is an equally worth candidate, but you need him to actually manage your armies while you handle the responsibility of being head of state.

 

Overall it was very well done; I wouldn't complain about it.

[NM_Che56]

You beat him at the end because of all those side quests where you gained for the inquisition, all that Cory would have had had you failed. Zero sum: what you gained he lost. You eroded his powerbase with every gain you made, however few you actually bothered to do.

 

I certainly felt a sense of loss when I failed to rescue one of the people at Haven. Do not be so arrogant as to assume your play was the same as everyone else'.

 

1) I haven't played any other way, but is not doing enough side content detrimental to the end game?

2) I felt a sense of failure when I couldn't save EVERYONE.  Bioware LOVES to smack us in the face. LOL

[VanguardCharge]

Eliding the troll bait.

 

Cory was surprized he was unable to take back the anchor. That was his focus. Your failure to appreciate that displays the paucity of your vision. You beat him at the end because of all those side quests where you gained for the inquisition all that Cory would have had had you failed. Zero sum: what you gained he lost. You eroded his powerrbase with every gain you made, however few you actually bothered to do.

 

I certainly felt a sense of loss when I failed to rescue one of the people at Haven. Do not be so arrogant as to assume your play was the same as everyone else'.

No, I beat Cory because he was a moron and the plot demanded it. 

 

I'm just going to quote a blogger on Cory's failures and why he was a terrible villain.

 

 

 

• Went to the Golden City and fucked it up.
• Managed to kidnap the divine in the middle of the most heavily fortified place in Thedas…and then forgot to lock the door. 
• Manages to drop his god-orb just as his anchor is about to spawn, then stares at it like a confused kitten as it rolls away.
• Attacks a tiny little mountain hamlet with a huge army and a dragon… and somehow loses.
• Tries to corrupt the Grey Wardens, fails and loses his immensely power Fear Demon ally in the process.
• Marches into the Arbor Wilds where his army is immediately annihilated and he fails to drink water from a pond.
• Finally reopens the rift, laughs maniacally, and then promptly falls over dead.

 

(http://johnswritersblock.com/about/) 

 

Am I supposed to be threatened by this idiot villain? If you are, boy do you have low standards for fiction villains. 

And if you felt a sense of lose after an NPC with whom you had a minute of screen-time died, I think you'll have a sense of lose in every aspect of pretty much all stories out there. 

[OriginalTibs]

1) I haven't played any other way, but is not doing enough side content detrimental to the end game?

2) I felt a sense of failure when I couldn't save EVERYONE.  Bioware LOVES to smack us in the face. LOL

1) I think so. You miss out on potential agents for one.

2) Indeed they do, but maybe that smack in the face is part of the art of effective writing.

[OriginalTibs]

Am I supposed to be threatened by this idiot villain? If you are, boy do you have low standards for fiction villains. 

And if you felt a sense of lose after an NPC with whom you had a minute of screen-time died, I think you'll have a sense of lose in every aspect of pretty much all stories out there. 

So your reading is impoverished by your inability to suspend your disbelief. I don't have that failing, and apparently several if not many people also have a wealthier imagination than you have. Do you also blame the free market when your stocks fall?

[VanguardCharge]

1) I think so. You miss out on potential agents for one.

2) Indeed they do, but maybe that smack in the face is part of the art of effective writing.

Nothing you do in DA:I affects the end game. You beat Cory regardless of any choices. The only things you do that affect the end game are Divine choices. 

 

Agents impacting the game? lol

[OriginalTibs]

Nothing you do in DA:I affects the end game. You beat Cory regardless of any choices. The only things you do that affect the end game are Divine choices. 

 

Agents impacting the game? lol

You confuse the end game with the game itself. A game is a whole.

[VanguardCharge]

So your reading is impoverished by your inability to suspend your belief. I don't have that failing, and apparently several if not many people also have a wealthier imagination than you have. Do you also blame the free market when your s

 

 

A story that makes me conjure beliefs that the story overrides is a crap story. Thats like saying I should like  the ending of ME:3 because I need to play pretend and figure out wtf is going on. Seriously, you want me to conjure things in my head to make the story better? lol 

[OriginalTibs]

Yep. It is called imagination. If you don't have it I cannot describe it to you any better than I can describe green to the sightless.

[KaiserShep]

Nothing you do in DA:I affects the end game. You beat Cory regardless of any choices. The only things you do that affect the end game are Divine choices. 
 
Agents impacting the game? lol

Well at least it's following the basic pattern of its predecessors. The big bads or whatever always lose no matter what you did prior.

[VanguardCharge]

Yep. It is called imagination. If you don't have it I cannot describe it to you any better than I can describe green to the sightless.

 

That's stupid. We judge stories based on their writing and plots. A story that makes you conjure things is no longer the author's story. Seriously, by this silly logic,  plot holes CANNOT  exist because we can just imagine what "really" happened. And any piece of writing has the same value because we can just conjure things when the text lacks the things we want. 

[OriginalTibs]

That's stupid.

Do you do stand-up too?

[VanguardCharge]

Do you do stand-up too?

 

I have to admit that if your "just imagine it" logic of story telling is trolling, its better than my Littering thread. Otherwise, keep studying the  SATs vocabulary section and telling yourself how everyone's opinion has different value, except for your own superior one.  

[OriginalTibs]

That's stupid. We judge stories based on their writing and plots. A story that makes you conjure things is no longer the author's story. Seriously, by this silly logic,  plot holes CANNOT  exist because we can just imagine what "really" happened. And any piece of writing has the same value because we can just conjure things when the text lacks the things we want. 

Actually you and those who want to profess that they are worth their teaching salary would say so, but no, that is not how we judge good writing as people. Did the reader enjoy it? The plot is a necessary tool for the writer and for the critic but it is so much hogwash for the reader. Nobody reading for pleasure or entertainment reads it from such a professional perspective as you pretend and you, I suspect, well know it. They read. If it reads well they enjoy if not they don't. EVERY fiction novel worth its salt triggers the imagination of the reader to the point where they lose track of time and space around them. If that isn't how you read, then I am quite sorry for you as you are missing what reading is. Impoverished. Yes, there can indeed be plotholes, especially when they are intentionally left in the corpus of the text because the author intends them to lead into volume two. There are also events like, say, running out of time. If the author is up against a deadline that factors business over art the author can only clean up around the plot hole and hope to plug it later with... ohhh.. I dunno... DLC?

[OriginalTibs]

I have to admit that if your "just imagine it" logic of story telling is trolling, its better than my Littering thread. Otherwise, keep studying the  SATs vocabulary section and telling yourself how everyone's opinion has different value, except for your own superior one.  

FWIW I believe what I am telling you. I am not intentionally trolling you in this. You might want to leave off the insults, however. You should by now realize I am anything but inept.

[In Exile]

No, I beat Cory because he was a moron and the plot demanded it.

I'm just going to quote a blogger on Cory's failures and why he was a terrible villain.


(http://johnswritersblock.com/about/)

Am I supposed to be threatened by this idiot villain? If you are, boy do you have low standards for fiction villains.
And if you felt a sense of lose after an NPC with whom you had a minute of screen-time died, I think you'll have a sense of lose in every aspect of pretty much all stories out there.

How is this any different from the contrived scenario you're proposing, where you lose an NPC because the plot demanded it and the game refused to give you a boss fight, which you'd invariably win?

Your criticism is baseless not because fiction in games isn't rife with railroading, but because you're hypocritically critising a game for doing the very thing you want it to do.

[errantknight]

You're forgetting Chancellor Roderick.

 

I thought Chancellor Roderick's death was a very meaningful death. Someone who was fighting against you and then realizes they were wrong at the critical moment is a powerful character. He "saw the light" as it were, and his faith is restored and renewed in you when he remembered the path that would allow your escape. (When he tells you "perhaps I was shown this path to help you" is, to me, one of the most moving moments in the game). He succumbed to his injuries once people had fled to safety. His sacrifice was integral to the Inquisition.

 

I prefer that Cassandra survived so that we could experience more of her story. I think the writer's made the right call on that one.

 

I'm sorry you didn't like the song. I know some did, some didn't. I thought it was beautiful. In Your Heart Shall Burn is my favorite mission, hands down.

Yep, I loved everything about this mission. It and the Winter Palace were my favorites.

[VanguardCharge]

FWIW I believe what I am telling you. I am not intentionally trolling you in this. You might want to leave off the insults, however. You should by now realize I am anything but inept.

 

Actually you and those who want to profess that they are worth their teaching salary would say so, but no, that is not how we judge good writing as people. Did the reader enjoy it? The plot is a necessary tool for the writer and for the critic but it is so much hogwash for the reader. Nobody reading for pleasure or entertainment reads it from such a professional perspective as you pretend and you, I suspect, well know it. They read. If it reads well they enjoy if not they don't. EVERY fiction novel worth its salt triggers the imagination of the reader to the point where they lose track of time and space around them. If that isn't how you read, then I am quite sorry for you as you are missing what reading is. Impoverished. Yes, there can indeed be plotholes, especially when they are intentionally left in the corpus of the text because the author intends them to lead into volume two. There are also events like, say, running out of time. If the author is up against a deadline that factors business over art the author can only clean up around the plot hole and hope to plug it later with... ohhh.. I dunno... DLC?

Sure, you can enjoy bad writing. I' m not arguing it. I said it a page ago, one has the full right to like to dislike a work of fiction. Calling that work of fiction good or bad is debatable. Here's an example, I like the Wheel of Time series. Yeah, I get lost in it + whatever flowery language you want to use to describe it. Is it good writing? In my opinion, no. Its crap. I'm not going to argue that its good writing, but I still like it. "In Your Hearts" was an example of bad writing for me and I did not enjoy it. 

 

Besides DA:a what BioWare DLCs answered plot holes in the universe? They usually just open new ones. 

 

FWIW I believe what I am telling you. I am not intentionally trolling you in this. You might want to leave off the insults, however. You should by now realize I am anything but inept.

[VanguardCharge]

How is this any different from the contrived scenario you're proposing, where you lose an NPC because the plot demanded it and the game refused to give you a boss fight, which you'd invariably win?

Your criticism is baseless not because fiction in games isn't rife with railroading, but because you're hypocritically critising a game for doing the very thing you want it to do.

 

Because Cory is not the only problem with this quest. I felt rewarded when I finished "In Your Hearts" because I did not lose any resources and only gained more power. 

[KaiserShep]

Heh. Maybe Cory should've attacked all of our camps in the Hinterlands and reset us back a few power points. That'll teach us.

[VanguardCharge]

Heh. Maybe Cory should've attacked all of our camps in the Hinterlands and reset us back a few power points. That'll teach us.

 

That's actually not bad, considering that power points are the only things that matter in this game.