1315 réponses à ce sujet

[Lady Artifice]

I think it's okay to judge them by the standards of BioWare's own writing, which is one of the reasons why people tend to do that.

 

 

When that comparison does get made, it often boils down to TW3 vs DA:I or something similar. Those comparisons may have value (I haven't played TW3) but they have also been problematic. At the end of the day, people criticizing the weaker romance storylines are comparing them to what we know - our experience of how those stories are depicted.

 

I tend to think they are poorly written across virtually all forms of entertainment. It is pretty rare that I see a romance story and think to myself, "that was realistic." But I am not suggesting that romance stories are inherently inferiour. I feel that most action stories are poorly written. I feel that most dramas and comedies are poorly written. Perhaps I have high standards, but I do tend to apply them fairly evenly to any form of entertainment.

 

I certainly don't expect good writing from video games. In my experience, it is one medium that has produced a consistently lower bar than others. It is probably a side effect of development priorities. Video games are 90% gameplay, and 10% everything else (there are exceptions like Life is Strange.) As a result, the writing tends not to receive the kind of attention that it would on an HBO drama. Which is fine. I don't need my video games to be like Shakespeare. I definitely stand by my broad position that BioWare's romance storylines have been done both well and poorly, by the standards of comparing them to themselves.

 

I don't disagree with any particular point you've made. When it comes to Bioware versus The Witcher romances, I understand why those comparisons are so frequent, and I happen to admire the Geralt/Yennefer storyline more than I admire several of the romance subplots that Bioware has written. I think it gets a little soap operesque at times ("Let's go on a dangerous magical quest for a vague reason, and then I'll reveal during the course of that story that it's because I want to risk our lives to--or even our very existence--to make certain that our feelings for each other are really real"), but both of the characters are engaging enough that it's still charming.

 

They are also based and built off of a literary source, which for all of the reasons you've mentioned regarding video game writing, gives them a distinct leg up in how much death they can build into a shorter period of story time. Geralt is nowhere near a blank slate, and they're dealing with two established characters with preset personalities and a prior history outside of the game's plot. 

 

I agree with your assessment of Biowaremances as a very mixed bag, but I also think your judgement is a particularly tempered and reasonable one, in comparison to the more strident dismissals that pepper this thread. 

 

Also, just to be clear, I would never claim that improvement can’t be made or that the romances can’t become more immersive and complex. I think we should be realistic about the additional challenges of this genre, but I don’t mean that weak writing should be excused or overlooked, just that it should be examined within context. 

[Lady Artifice]

They are not rare. Most just don´t seem to care anymore. Discussions often seem like a waste of time and breath.

 

And how, exactly, does one assess the quality of a thing accurately? And is this even possible?

 

It is. In any artistic medium, it’s possible to form both an objective and a subjective assessment. Subjective assessments have to do with how something makes you feel, and it can be associated with your own stigmas or preconceptions. Your objective assessment is about impartially determining the skill with which it is constructed. 

 

Example: A person can dislike Shakespeare, but still appreciate the quality of his sonnets. 

 

There is a blurry line in the middle, because most of us can’t completely turn off our emotional reactions. When I introduce someone to a wine at my work, the response will often be, “Oh, that’s good!” 

 

I know that a good portion of the time, that person isn’t actually analyzing the quality of the wine in their glass. They aren’t considering its trueness to varietal, the length of its finish, or whether it’s age worthy. They usually just mean that they find the wine to be pleasant, and in their mind, that personal sense of pleasantness has translated to “goodness.”  

 

This is normal, but not the approach to take when trying to assess the actual quality of something. When it comes to storytelling, there are a few examples of techniques and devices that are considered objectively contrived, like Deus ex machina, when the conflict is solved by the unexpected intervention of something never before implicated in the plot. 

 

In contrast, the rule of “Show, don’t tell (give us an example of the character displaying prowess at calculus rather than just informing us that they are mathematical genius),” is generally a rule to live by in writing. So, there are definitely ways to gauge the quality of a work of fiction outside of whether we personally like it, but it’s also important to do so within context. What is the genre, what is the work intended to be? If someone is comparing a mystery novel to a romance novel, are they accounting for the huge differences between what those stories are promising to deliver? One is focused on a cerebral type of narrative, and the other is about the emotional connection between two characters. If we refuse to take that into account, we can’t form an accurate assessment of whether that story does deliver on what it promises. 

[Lady Artifice]

Eh, there are far less pretentious ways of saying "I'm so much more intelligent and rational than everybody else." I generally think you're a good poster and a nice person, but stuff like this really puts me off.

Acknowledging my propensity for vanity, interpreting my point as being that I think I'm more intelligent than "everyone else" implies that I don't consider myself subject to the same knee jerk, self absorbed instincts. At most, I think I spend more time dissecting fiction than the average person, but I don't think I'm particularly better at it than most people, and I think I think I'm much less skilled at it than any of the literary scholars I admire.

[karushna5]

I see a lot of people disliking romances Because so many people are into them, that is the position I don't quite understand.Not liking them for themselves? fine. But not liking something because other people are into it seems exclusionary and a bad business practice. If the fans don't want other fans to like something, it really feels like policing each other's emotions. Add on to that, ignoring those discussions is relatively easy to do.

 

Many people here are MLP fans and people started absolutely hating MLP and Bronies due to its popularity, despite its content.When Frozen came out not too long a wave of people hating the popularity of frozen appeared. I just don't understand how someone can hate something purely on it being enjoyed by others. Its okay for something to have multiple elements that each have different appeal for different people.

[Seraphim24]

It is. In any artistic medium, it’s possible to form both an objective and a subjective assessment. Subjective assessments have to do with how something makes you feel, and it can be associated with your own stigmas or preconceptions. Your objective assessment is about impartially determining the skill with which it is constructed. 

 

Example: A person can dislike Shakespeare, but still appreciate the quality of his sonnets. 

 

There is a blurry line in the middle, because most of us can’t completely turn off our emotional reactions. When I introduce someone to a wine at my work, the response will often be, “Oh, that’s good!” 

 

I know that a good portion of the time, that person isn’t actually analyzing the quality of the wine in their glass. They aren’t considering its trueness to varietal, the length of its finish, or whether it’s age worthy. They usually just mean that they find the wine to be pleasant, and in their mind, that personal sense of pleasantness has translated to “goodness.”  

 

This is normal, but not the approach to take when trying to assess the actual quality of something. When it comes to storytelling, there are a few examples of techniques and devices that are considered objectively contrived, like Deus ex machina, when the conflict is solved by the unexpected intervention of something never before implicated in the plot. 

 

In contrast, the rule of “Show, don’t tell (give us an example of the character displaying prowess at calculus rather than just informing us that they are mathematical genius),” is generally a rule to live by in writing. So, there are definitely ways to gauge the quality of a work of fiction outside of whether we personally like it, but it’s also important to do so within context. What is the genre, what is the work intended to be? If someone is comparing a mystery novel to a romance novel, are they accounting for the huge differences between what those stories are promising to deliver? One is focused on a cerebral type of narrative, and the other is about the emotional connection between two characters. If we refuse to take that into account, we can’t form an accurate assessment of whether that story does deliver on what it promises. 

 

And yet what does any of that have to do with Bioware romances, Bioware games, or just even gaming in general?

 

Have you even played all of them or half of them? Jade Empire? Or what about Bioware's other stuff like SWTOR?

 

I'm not questioning your place as grandmaster of the English literary canon, the girl that got all those questions right in class or whatever, I'm saying that the world is much, much, much bigger than England or the east coast of the United States (where that tradition hails from), and the doctors that founded Bioware, while they certainly themselves came from some of that mileu, understood that, that's precisely why they made games in the first place and not novels or treatises on Dickinson's poems.

 

And for many us, who tolerated so much of that crass provincialism in educational systems or wherever, finally reached those outer limits, it's just a little bit grating to witness those very same people come clawing back as if all they did was miss a spot.

 

There's a lot of spots missing in that canon, like for example how early Scottish history (the place of many supposed literary greats) was peppered with people (the Caledonians) who were completely illiterate.

 

That's not to make a statement about Scottish people in general or modern Scotland, but you know, the world didn't start in 1000 AD.

 

I don't dislike those people on principle, I dislike that they try to displace or re-write the history of those people that sacrificed no understanding of those traditions, and yet managed to envelop so much more. It's an example to follow, not something to sweep under the rug.

 

And it's not like you are on your own, every other person here desperately wants DA and ME (or often, DA2 and ME2) to represent all of Bioware, so this history that often overwhelms them won't envelop their attempts to be the moral highground. Or, perhaps that DA and ME don't meet this especial canon of "high literature." All I have to say is, great, they are much better for it.

[karushna5]

And yet what does any of that have to do with Bioware romances, Bioware games, or just even gaming in general?

 

Have you even played all of them or half of them? Jade Empire? Or what about Bioware's other stuff like SWTOR?

 

I'm not questioning your place as grandmaster of the English literary canon, the girl that got all those questions right in class or whatever, I'm saying that the world is much, much bigger than England or the east coast of the United States (where that tradition hails from), and the doctors that founded Bioware, while they certainly themselves came from some of that mileu, understood that, that's precisely why they made games in the first place and not novels or treatises on Dickinson's poems.

 

But that is not what she is doing? She is saying that there is an ability to judge artistic mediums, or are you saying all games you ever played were great? There are many games that people almost overwhelmingly agree are bad, they were made poorly, or had bad plots.

 

It has to do with Bioware because the conversation is whether we can judge the plots and more specifically the games as good or bad, and she is saying that there are go tos that generally show a good or bad plot or story. So yes it can be judged.

 

I think puting a marker on how many games she may or not have played is a poor representation of anything she is saying, and generally uncalled for. She isn't talking about dickison poems or any other thing but yes plots can be judged. If they tell me Mordin is smart but never show him being smart that is poorly done. If an god child comes in at the end and solves/makes up the entire conflict that is usually unfun.

 

And yeah the genre has a huge effect on content. No one is being oimperious, just saying things can be judged and then mentions a few ways you can (but by no means all, and many different places have other ideas on what makes bad stories and bad ones.

[agonis]

What did you all drink or how did it come that everything turned so very sophisticated in the last few hours? *chuckles*

[pdusen]

There is a whole lot of words being thrown around over what is really a very simple issue.

 

A lot of people like romances; they wouldn't discuss them so much or make so many suggestions as to how they can be improved if they didn't like them at their core. The fact that so many people like them is what makes them important.

 

Note that I'm only saying a lot of people like them, not that a majority feels any particular way about them. Anyone who claims that a majority of people feel any particular way about any particular thing without statistical evidence has no perspective whatsoever.

 

With that in mind, if your attitude is to come in here and say "Bioware shouldn't do romances anymore because they rarely live up to *my* exacting standards of what makes a good video game romance arc", despite knowing how many people like them, that is a selfish and elitist attitude.

[Lady Artifice]

And yet what does any of that have to do with Bioware romances, Bioware games, or just even gaming in general?
 
Have you even played all of them or half of them? Jade Empire? Or what about Bioware's other stuff like SWTOR?
 
I'm not questioning your place as grandmaster of the English literary canon, the girl that got all those questions right in class or whatever, I'm saying that the world is much, much, much bigger than England or the east coast of the United States (where that tradition hails from), and the doctors that founded Bioware, while they certainly themselves came from some of that mileu, understood that, that's precisely why they made games in the first place and not novels or treatises on Dickinson's poems.
 
And for many us, who tolerated so much of that crass provincialism in educational systems or wherever, finally reached those outer limits, it's just a little bit grating to witness those very same people come clawing back as if all they did was miss a spot.
 
There's a lot of spots missing in that canon, like for example how early Scottish history (the place of many supposed literary greats) was peppered with people (the Caledonians) who were completely illiterate.
 
That's not to make a statement about Scottish people in general or modern Scotland, but you know, the world didn't start in 1000 AD.
 
I don't dislike those people on principle, I dislike that they try to displace or re-write the history of those people that sacrificed no understanding of those traditions, and yet managed to envelop so much more. It's an example to follow, not something to sweep under the rug.
 
And it's not like you are on your own, every other person here desperately wants DA and ME (or often, DA2 and ME2) to represent all of Bioware, so this history that often overwhelms them won't envelop their attempts to be the moral highground. Or, perhaps that DA and ME don't meet this especial canon of "high literature." All I have to say is, great, they are much better for it.

Everything karushna said.

Also, everything pdusen said, including the hint that I'm over-complicating the issue. I'm going to take a break from this thread now.

[Angry_Elcor]

I agree with your assessment of Biowaremances as a very mixed bag, but I also think your judgement is a particularly tempered and reasonable one, in comparison to the more strident dismissals that pepper this thread. 

 

Message received: I will try to make more strident dismissals!

[Angry_Elcor]

I'm going to take a break from this thread now.

 

It is unfortunate that you are the one who is going to say this once and then take a break from the thread. I would have preferred that had been the case with someone else. When you wend your way back, I'll leave this little nugget of advice with no snark, honestly meant and intended:

 

Balance the energy levels required to respond to what is happening. Discussing any contentious issue in a forum can be exhausting, and while I keep it light, you'll notice that I also wander off from the thread periodically, myself. It might not appear that way at first (I'm all over this thread, I think it's fair to say) but I'm even pretty selective about how much energy I spend on any one point or issue.

 

Long after my eyes glazed over with some of the more colourful walls of text and just gave up answering, you struggled through. That would have driven me nuts.

[agonis]

It is unfortunate that you are the one who is going to say this once and then take a break from the thread. I would have preferred that had been the case with someone else. When you wend your way back, I'll leave this little nugget of advice with no snark, honestly meant and intended:

 

Balance the energy levels required to respond to what is happening. Discussing any contentious issue in a forum can be exhausting, and while I keep it light, you'll notice that I also wander off from the thread periodically, myself. It might not appear that way at first (I'm all over this thread, I think it's fair to say) but I'm even pretty selective about how much energy I spend on any one point or issue.

 

Long after my eyes glazed over with some of the more colourful walls of text and just gave up answering, you struggled through. That would have driven me nuts.

 

Your words are inspiring, as always.

 

Your profile picture is frightening, as always.

 

*laughs*

[Seraphim24]

But that is not what she is doing? She is saying that there is an ability to judge artistic mediums, or are you saying all games you ever played were great? There are many games that people almost overwhelmingly agree are bad, they were made poorly, or had bad plots.

 

It has to do with Bioware because the conversation is whether we can judge the plots and more specifically the games as good or bad, and she is saying that there are go tos that generally show a good or bad plot or story. So yes it can be judged.

 

I think puting a marker on how many games she may or not have played is a poor representation of anything she is saying, and generally uncalled for. She isn't talking about dickison poems or any other thing but yes plots can be judged. If they tell me Mordin is smart but never show him being smart that is poorly done. If an god child comes in at the end and solves/makes up the entire conflict that is usually unfun.

 

And yeah the genre has a huge effect on content. No one is being oimperious, just saying things can be judged and then mentions a few ways you can (but by no means all, and many different places have other ideas on what makes bad stories and bad ones.

 

And I reserve the right to judge whether those conceptions of "plot" or "story" are even remotely related to the idea of entertainment or empowerment in general....

 

I think putting a marker on me saying whether she may or may not have played any of the games is precisely the point is a pretty poor representation of what I'm saying, that she and you have said literally nothing about video games, video game romances, or just anything about games. You guys keep trying to steer the conversation and everything back to the world you do understand when these things were purposely created outside of that sphere. I'm not on a forum for Shakespeare arguing about the need for a jump mechanic right? So why are you guys on a gaming forum arguing about Shakespeare?

[Seraphim24]

There is a whole lot of words being thrown around over what is really a very simple issue.

 

A lot of people like romances; they wouldn't discuss them so much or make so many suggestions as to how they can be improved if they didn't like them at their core. The fact that so many people like them is what makes them important.

 

Note that I'm only saying a lot of people like them, not that a majority feels any particular way about them. Anyone who claims that a majority of people feel any particular way about any particular thing without statistical evidence has no perspective whatsoever.

 

With that in mind, if your attitude is to come in here and say "Bioware shouldn't do romances anymore because they rarely live up to *my* exacting standards of what makes a good video game romance arc", despite knowing how many people like them, that is a selfish and elitist attitude.

 

Didn't say that, actually started a thread called "heterosexual romance companion for female protagonist" and was agreeing in the thread about the need for one. Someone else had the original idea and so I just started posting in that one.

 

There's definitely room for different parties to be happy here. It's completely within Bioware's wheelhouse to make a like I was saying there kind of female Sten sort of aggressive, wild kind of female character and a more submissive and doting male character and basically just be inverting gender stereotypes without necessarily striving for a whole different from of characterization. That could be pretty cool.

[Seraphim24]

It is unfortunate that you are the one who is going to say this once and then take a break from the thread. I would have preferred that had been the case with someone else.

 

Your wish, shall not be my command.

 

Maybe I'm being too cruel though, it's like in the middle of all that I gleaned "ME3 ending bad because of Starchild" and "Mordin needs to show he's smart"

 

I'd have to say I completely agree with that, perhaps in the sea of this commentary that dovetails far outside and inside the sphere of gaming, there are legitimate game criticisms on some level.

 

I will leave in though, that... just say that? It's a lot easier to digest than all these dovetails and steering across space and time, even Artifice seemed to get it with "over-complicate."

 

For my part, maybe it's just kind of odd to sift through these lengthy riffs to find only a few points, but then again, it was also very common on the WoW forums and there's nothing inherently wrong with it.

[Malthier]

Your wish, shall not be my command.

 

Maybe I'm being too cruel though, it's like in the middle of all that I gleaned "ME3 ending bad because of Starchild" and "Mordin needs to show he's smart"

 

I'd have to say I completely agree with that, perhaps in the sea of this commentary that dovetails far outside and inside the sphere of gaming, there are legitimate game criticisms on some level.

 

I will leave in though, that... just say that? It's a lot easier to digest than all these dovetails and steering across space and time, even Artifice seemed to get it with "over-complicate."

 

For my part, maybe it's just kind of odd to sift through these lengthy riffs to find only a few points, but then again, it was also very common on the WoW forums and there's nothing inherently wrong with it.

 

You shouldn't have changed this post. You calling Artifice ineloquent was too funny.

[Seraphim24]

You shouldn't have changed this post. You calling Artifice ineloquent was too funny.

 

No I should have changed, it wasn't nice, like I said, I'd rather just say that for my purposes it's kind of odd to steer through so many things to find the one things I understand. There is fundamentally no need to blame her for that, if she is trying to find her voice in gaming and it ends up in these massive interrelate with other media kind of things, well, to be honest, that's just fine and I can just kind of zero in on the things that may or may not interest me, having, I guess, gotten accustomed to it.

[KaiserShep]

What did you all drink or how did it come that everything turned so very sophisticated in the last few hours? *chuckles*

I feel so poorly dressed for this thread. The very text I use feels inadequate.

[Malthier]

No I should have changed, it wasn't nice, like I said, I'd rather just say that for my purposes it's kind of odd to steer through so many things to find the one things I understand. There is fundamentally no need to blame her for that, if she is trying to find her voice in gaming and it ends up in these massive interrelate with other media kind of things, well, to be honest, that's just fine and I can just kind of zero in on the things that may or may not interest me, having, I guess, gotten accustomed to it.

 

It was funny because it was so ridiculous considering the lack of coherency in your own posts.

[Seraphim24]

It was funny because it was so ridiculous considering the lack of coherency in your own posts.

 

Well, that was just plain impolite Mr. Malthier.

[Malthier]

Well, that was just plain impolite Mr. Malthier.

 

and I don't even feel sorry.

[Seraphim24]

and I don't even feel sorry.

 

I don't know what has  made you sad, but I hope you can find someway to be happier.

[karushna5]

And I reserve the right to judge whether those conceptions of "plot" or "story" are even remotely related to the idea of entertainment or empowerment in general....

 

I think putting a marker on me saying whether she may or may not have played any of the games is precisely the point is a pretty poor representation of what I'm saying, that she and you have said literally nothing about video games, video game romances, or just anything about games. You guys keep trying to steer the conversation and everything back to the world you do understand when these things were purposely created outside of that sphere. I'm not on a forum for Shakespeare arguing about the need for a jump mechanic right? So why are you guys on a gaming forum arguing about Shakespeare?

See that is why you are being insulting assuming we don't know games because we wonder if Video games are part of an artistic artform and general storytelling can be applied to it. The fact you ganged up on our replies to a specific query of whether games can be judged, and not what we have said about the romances (which we have said plenty) is just disingenuous.

 

Yes I have played Jade Empire, I like the twist and the pacing but the characters were very flat. I don't play online games, so no SWotor, KotOR was fun but Bastila was way more integrated than Carth and I hate that everyone feels Juhani counts when she is constantly "bugged" and just hinted at than stated outright. It has more interaction and I like the twist, but the plot is pretty lack luster besides that IMO.

 

So no, we are not moving away to something we understand more. Its true I didn't play Baldur's gate or their other older games, but I dislike the part of nerd culture that demands I know intricate elements to count. How many games do I have to play for you not to discount my opinions or be patronizing? Do I need to have played all the games that did major breakthroughs for you not to dissmiss me? Why do you assume because I am answering a specific question I am unknowledgeable about games? Sorry if you haven't played the original FF in Japanese you can have no opinion on RPGs? Gatekeeping and determining some people count and others don't is a toxic part of nerd culture in general.

 

She is on here discussing a favorite series and you are making assumptions and insultuing people based on nothing than trying to answer a question, a very specific question, which was can we judge video games objectively. If you want to dissagree with us, and say you feel things that judge stories in other mediums shouldn't count toward Video games, that is fine, respectful, and I may even agree with you. But instead you were underhanded and attacked someone's legitamacy to be part of the group, so basically, not cool.

[Natureguy85]

Video games are the bottom of the barrel of story telling mediums, and for more reasons than that. The only "advantage" it has over the others is interactivity, and it's a very dubious one at that. It causes huge problems of pacing due to story vs gameplay conflicts where a game story is telling us things are urgent/dire, but Link can proceed to dick around with fishing, Geralt with Gwent,etc. Despite the amount of hours can put into a particular game, there's ultimately very little story to them, as much of it consists of mundane things like walking around, killing things,etc(I recall one filmmaker discussing that's the biggest hurdle in adapting VGs into film.).

 

Then there's the issue of most video game "writers" are ultimately too crap to have made it in film,tv,books,etc,  which further contributes to most video game plots not being worth the toilet paper they're written on.

 

Even the most mediocre of books, TV shows or films usually have a more coherent story and better written characters and dialogue than the average video game. Seboist's post was on the money in saying that video games are the bottom of the barrel when it comes to storytelling. 

 

Well, there have been games with good stories. Are they on the level with great works of literature? Of course not. So maybe we're just looking for something good compared to other video games. True, while the most talented writers would probably write for books or movies, the big reason is that gameplay is first in this medium. Story is something that is increasing in popularity and importance, but it will always be second.

 

And I reserve the right to judge whether those conceptions of "plot" or "story" are even remotely related to the idea of entertainment or empowerment in general....

 

I think putting a marker on me saying whether she may or may not have played any of the games is precisely the point is a pretty poor representation of what I'm saying, that she and you have said literally nothing about video games, video game romances, or just anything about games. You guys keep trying to steer the conversation and everything back to the world you do understand when these things were purposely created outside of that sphere. I'm not on a forum for Shakespeare arguing about the need for a jump mechanic right? So why are you guys on a gaming forum arguing about Shakespeare?

 

Because having stories in games is becoming popular. People love stories. This is why books, tv, and movies are so popular. People want to experience that in their game as well. Yes, gameplay is most important but they are not mutually exclusive.

[Undead Han]

Well, there have been games with good stories. Are they on the level with great works of literature? Of course not. So maybe we're just looking for something good compared to other video games. True, while the most talented writers would probably write for books or movies, the big reason is that gameplay is first in this medium. Story is something that is increasing in popularity and importance, but it will always be second.

 

Of course as video games gameplay is always going to be a huge consideration, but should it always be the first priority? 

 

I'd argue that within the RPG genre at least, those priorities should be reversed. Or at least it should within RPGs that are more focused on story and the characters inhabiting the game world, than exploration of the game world. When gameplay is given a higher priority in story or character driven RPGs, it often creates problems within the story.

 

A good example of the above would be the outsized role Cerberus plays in Mass Effect 3, to the extent that they sometimes overshadowed the series' main antagonists. The decision to have Cerberus play so large a role was no doubt influenced at least in part by the desire to present the player with a variety of different enemies to fight. While it succeeded in providing the player with different gameplay challenges, it also created issues with the story that were largely unpopular. Was it really a worthwhile tradeoff? I'd argue no.