|
King of Solomon posted:E: It's a shame there doesn't seem to be a translated transcript of that interview in this link, I'd love to see what he has to say. Just watched it and it's pretty much all there in the article. When asked about LiS and its success, he says he's extremely happy about it: it's an original game, different, with poetry and female teenagers as protagonists, dealing with issues many teenagers face when they reach adulthood. Some talk about the Paris Games Week convention, where LiS is playable. He says it's very interesting to see how players - and what kind of players - play the game, testing it in a real-life situation and getting to hear their feedback. He's vague about a mobile version: they're talking about it with Square Enix but that's about it for now. Regarding the 6 million budget, he doesn't actually answer, just nods when one of the other guests (CEO of Focus Home Interactive, Vampyr's publisher) says how impressive LiS is considering "its what, 5 or 6mil € budget?". No date for the soundtrack. Quick mention of an American screenwriter (no names) hired to get the West Coast teenage dialogue just right.
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 18:42 |
|
|
Mr. Belding posted:I think it's perfectly fine say that it's bad or lazy writing, but only in the same way that people call happy ever after romance novels bad or lazy writing. They are adhering to the tropes of their genre, and in this genre symbolism is specifically allowed to break the laws of reality and doesn't necessarily have to follow a coherent set of in-world rules. If the only purpose of the vortex is to force a specific choice on the player then it can do that. If time travel is a plot device it can exist without explanation. Basically being interesting, thematic, atmospheric, or symbolic is enough justification for anything. This sort of thing has a literary history including everything from Kurt Vonnegut to Tom Robbins and in television from things like Twin Peaks, Lost, and Carnivale, and in films like Jacob's Ladder and Lost Highway. It doesn't mean there can't be explanations but if you think those are what the works are about then you're bound to find the work disappointing. I think players, or readers, or viewers, or just consumers of fiction in general are more willing to accept scenes that stretch their disbelief if those scenes are enjoyable in some way. A lot will be forgiven as long as the end result is good. 'Good' not meaning happy flowery rainbows and unicorns forever, but something that the audience finds worth experiencing. I mean, no one is going to question where a flock of doves comes from when the kung-fu hero comes crashing through the window, because it looks pretty neat and that's all the justification it needs to exist. A lot can be ignored and glossed over if you're delivering a scene that people enjoy. But if people are not enjoying it, they're going to nit-pick. It's a natural human reaction. Just like when something bad happens in life, people look for a way out. So if someone shows up at the end of your story and says 'hey the only way to save the village is to feed the hero into this wood chipper', people are going to balk at that. Hopefully you've already got a back story in place to explain why suicide by wood chipper is a viable way to save villages. And it needs to be pretty iron-clad, because people are not going to like it and they're going to pick at any holes they find. And just writing a scene where the hero hops in and then all the bad guys melt away with no further explanation doesn't help anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
BobTheJanitor posted:So if someone shows up at the end of your story and says 'hey the only way to save the village is to feed the hero into this wood chipper', people are going to balk at that. Hopefully you've already got a back story in place to explain why suicide by wood chipper is a viable way to save villages. And it needs to be pretty iron-clad, because people are not going to like it and they're going to pick at any holes they find. And just writing a scene where the hero hops in and then all the bad guys melt away with no further explanation doesn't help anything. Eh, it's not about the destination, it's about how you get there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:Eh, it's not about the destination, it's about how you get there. Now this I agree with wholeheartedly. I may have problems with this game's ending, but the rest of the game was very, very good, and I'm glad I played it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
The end might not be the whole journey, but it's certainly part of it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
a kitten posted:The end might not be the whole journey, but it's certainly part of it. The ending helps contextualize the journey. And it's not just the ending by itself, it's that parts of the journey were dead ends. Episode 5 has quite a few weak spots, and by the time the finale rolled around I was already pretty removed from the narrative. The episode is like a tension-less vacuum funneling you to the ending. Maybe they were trying to maintain a sense of helplessness, but it doesn't hold. It was pretty fun to gawk at some of the crazy poo poo, though. Mr. Belding posted:It doesn't mean there can't be explanations but if you think those are what the works are about then you're bound to find the work disappointing. I didn't want an explanation. I wanted purpose. I wasn't expecting the characters to turn to the camera and babble all over the place (christ mr. jefferson's dialogue). But I did want there to feel like the plot had something driving it other than teens learning life lessons. BobTheJanitor posted:I think players, or readers, or viewers, or just consumers of fiction in general are more willing to accept scenes that stretch their disbelief if those scenes are enjoyable in some way. A lot will be forgiven as long as the end result is good. 'Good' not meaning happy flowery rainbows and unicorns forever, but something that the audience finds worth experiencing. I agree. When characters died in TWD S1 I was felt something. When characters died in S2, I just sighed and moved on. Yet S2 has some endings that feel kind of satisfying, even though what lead up to them felt relatively meaningless and silly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
BobTheJanitor posted:So if someone shows up at the end of your story and says 'hey the only way to save the village is to feed the hero into this wood chipper', people are going to balk at that. Hopefully you've already got a back story in place to explain why suicide by wood chipper is a viable way to save villages. And it needs to be pretty iron-clad, because people are not going to like it and they're going to pick at any holes they find. And just writing a scene where the hero hops in and then all the bad guys melt away with no further explanation doesn't help anything. Episode one's first scene introduced the tornado vision; episodes one and especially two presented the storm as something Max/the player would have agency to fight against or change. It's not something presented out of nowhere in the last act.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 03:15
|
|
|
YorexTheMad posted:Episode one's first scene introduced the tornado vision; episodes one and especially two presented the storm as something Max/the player would have agency to fight against or change. It's not something presented out of nowhere in the last act. Yes, and everything about the story felt like it was driving towards an ending where you would overcome it in some way and get your, maybe not happy, but at least bittersweet and hopeful ending. Introducing an antagonist early on isn't a license for that antagonist to win, obviously. The reason people are now looking back and saying 'hey, why didn't Max think to warn anyone or do anything at all about the tornado?' is because we were assuming all along that this was the type of story in which the big bad thing is introduced early on in order to start a slow build of tension which is rewardingly released when the heroes overcome it at the end. If it was supposed to be a hopeless scenario, those generally tend to follow a narrative arc in which the characters fight a constant losing battle against whatever the antagonist is, and we see it clearly spelled out how hard they're trying while still losing ground, until the crescendo in which someone or some thing of great value has to be sacrificed. By this point the audience is well aware of the power of the bad guy/force/thing and understands why the sacrifice is necessary and gets to share in the pathos of a dramatic moment without a lot of gnawing doubts that yank them out of the story. See the Walking Dead for the obvious example. This also goes back to what I was talking about earlier, that the audience is fine with ignoring little things that don't quite add up, as long as the payoff is good. We can ignore characters who seem oblivious to the impending doom that they should be aware of, if they end up dodging said doom in a heroic or funny or interesting way. But if they're just ignoring it until it suddenly drops on their head and kills off a sidekick, well then the story just seems like it was trolling us all along.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
Max and Chloe literally told David about the dark room on Thursday night and then hid out for a whole day doing nothing until they decided to go hang out at the beach and then walk to the lighthouse. Max knew about the storm hitting on Friday, knew it was going to destroy the town, but still didn't bother telling Chloe in the past to start warning people. Hell, knowing the trouble you had to go through to get the photo from the diner, tell Chloe to go run over and get it from Warren 10 feet away since they just took it so you have it as a backup. As for warning people to evacuate, you would be able to convince Warren, Joyce, and David at the very least. Part of the reason people are disappointed and feel the ending was unfulfilling is because throughout the game you've been presented with problems that you've been able to use your powers cleverly to overcome. But that agency is pretty much removed without any explanation. She obviously still has time powers, because she can go back to the butterfly photo. So instead of saying "hey maybe we can save SOMEBODY" it's just "oh ok, either Chloe dies or everyone dies, sure why not". It's completely disempowering and kind of counter to the rest of the game, where Max goes to great lengths to accomplish her goals, only to shrug her shoulders when it truly matters and lives are at stake. sighnoceros fucked around with this message at 06:17 on Oct 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 06:06
|
|
GOONS ARE MEAN
|
LoseHound posted:I didn't want an explanation. I wanted purpose. I wasn't expecting the characters to turn to the camera and babble all over the place (christ mr. jefferson's dialogue). But I did want there to feel like the plot had something driving it other than teens learning life lessons. This was most of the story, and I assumed what most people expected it was by the end of episode 4. I don't think Max's last name was a coincidence by any means (although I may have if the other references weren't layered on so thick).
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 06:32
|
|
|
Mr. Belding posted:This was most of the story, and I assumed what most people expected it was by the end of episode 4. I don't think Max's last name was a coincidence by any means (although I may have if the other references weren't layered on so thick). I knew that the story was all about growing up, and it's not like I have a problem with character-driven material. I just think that doom prophecies and death omens building up to a teenage girl learning about life is underwhelming. Perhaps it's a metaphor for
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 11:33
|
|
|
Your character essentially gets the good ending in 10 minutes by doing nothing but waiting. Chloe's license plate should've read "FRCRY4".
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 13:59
|
|
|
Junkfist posted:Your character essentially gets the good ending in 10 minutes by doing nothing but waiting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 14:00
|
|
|
Yeah and Twin Peaks was good too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
seravid posted:Quick mention of an American screenwriter (no names) hired to get the West Coast teenage dialogue just right. Ahahahaha...money well spent?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
King of Solomon posted:Now this I agree with wholeheartedly. I may have problems with this game's ending, but the rest of the game was very, very good, and I'm glad I played it. I can definitely agree to this, but there's something to be said for retroactive tainting of an experience. If your enjoyment in LiS, for example, was in making choices and seeing the consequences, something that retroactively undoes/invalidates both is going to widdle on your chips somewhat. That sort of ending not only messes with your enjoyment of the finale, but your memory of the product as a whole. Still one of the best narratives I've enjoyed in a long time, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
Axelgear posted:I can definitely agree to this, but there's something to be said for retroactive tainting of an experience. If your enjoyment in LiS, for example, was in making choices and seeing the consequences, something that retroactively undoes/invalidates both is going to widdle on your chips somewhat. That sort of ending not only messes with your enjoyment of the finale, but your memory of the product as a whole. Mhm, I don't disagree. Hell, most of my time thinking about the game since I beat it has been about the ending and how much I dislike it. Still, this is all really fresh in my mind, so it's hard to say how I'll look back on the game in a few months, or whenever they get around to announcing a second season. It'll be interesting to think about, that's for sure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2015 18:22
|
|
|
If you like to sound deeep without having to think too critically about anything in particular it's tempting to just frame the whole game as one Maxine Caulfield dealing with seeing the bestie she abandoned five years ago bleed out on a toilet floor by escaping into an elaborate fantasy in which she has the power to fix such things. Complete with a full arrangement of trials to overcome in order to earn the right to forgive herself and eventually come to terms with Chloe's death. I mean, it's a copout but it's a very neat and tidy one. You could even say screw it and make it Chloe's elaborate dying fantasy of her absentee friend zooming back into her life as a messianic figure before accepting she ded which wouldn't survive the slightest scrutiny but is hilarious to try and kludge in there. Also in the final episode at the part where Max finds herself staring at a mirror in the dingy 2whalez bathroom the lighting was so grim that for a couple seconds I thought the game was about to go HA-HA MAX YOU WERE ON HEROIN ALL ALONG!.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 12:08
|
|
|
I stopped writing "It was all a dreeeeeeeam" stories when I was 12 and I expect professional writers to have done the same. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 14:55
|
|
|
Snackula posted:Also in the final episode at the part where Max finds herself staring at a mirror in the dingy 2whalez bathroom the lighting was so grim that for a couple seconds I thought the game was about to go HA-HA MAX YOU WERE ON HEROIN ALL ALONG!. Still would have been a more complete ending than saving Chloe. Are we past the need to mark spoilers yet? What's the typical grace period, because it's been almost two weeks now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2015 14:55
|
|
|
Just wanna drive by my two cents about a few pages back but that complaining about Blue is the Warmest color falling into popular culture lesbian stereotypes is particularly  and cringe worthy given that the graphic novelist is a loving lesbian. I mean there's certainly problems in the adaptation to film but Christ bitching about "tropes" is not the way to assess it.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-1CUBEEuIA
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 01:09
|
|
|
Dr. Killjoy posted:Just wanna drive by my two cents about a few pages back but that complaining about Blue is the Warmest color falling into popular culture lesbian stereotypes is particularly The trope itself isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it's an overplayed, overdone thing. THAT'S the complaint. And saying that just because a creator is a lesbian that the work couldn't possibly follow the same patterns as other lesbian fiction is...well, inaccurate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 01:19
|
|
|
Eh sorry about the insults, I just misread you as blaming mass media at large rather than a generalized trend that lesbian writers and fiction tend to get fixated in. I uhhh might have been a little on edge earlier.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
It speaks volumes IMO that everyone here is convinced the main characters are lesbians even though it's optional, and unstated for the most part
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 09:46
|
|
|
I thought the prompts to move along that line were incredibly awkward and out of place but still went with them because the alternatives were boring.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 10:22
|
|
|
Plom Bar posted:I stopped writing "It was all a dreeeeeeeam" stories when I was 12 and I expect professional writers to have done the same. My wife tells me whenever there are kindle specials on the kind of books I like. In a recent 'Cthulhu and war' short story collection, I read a short story that literally ended in "and then I died". The difference between "and then I died" and "and then I woke up" is that at least if you woke up you're there to tell the story afterwards. If you died, how the gently caress did you tell the story? By which I mean, it could always be a lot worse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 11:04
|
|
|
kater posted:I thought the prompts to move along that line were incredibly awkward and out of place but still went with them because the alternatives were boring. If you don't do it they still replay the exciting audio clip of you not making out during the S5 freakout like drat remember that huge moment?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 12:41
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:It speaks volumes IMO that everyone here is convinced the main characters are lesbians even though it's optional, and unstated for the most part Bet you thought Thelma and Louise were just two gals being pals
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
Plom Bar posted:Bet you thought Thelma and Louise were just two gals being pals Lol, like women can be friends, right? If you see two women together being friendly, they either just tolerate each other and talk poo poo about the other one when they can't hear, or they are lesbians. That's just how it is with women. Another sign of a lesbian is when a woman is not interested in me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 14:42
|
|
|
Women can sometimes be friends and also sometimes be lesbians.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 14:46
|
|
|
Plom Bar posted:Bet you thought Thelma and Louise were just two gals being pals Did they start scissoring when they drove off that cliff or something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:Lol, like women can be friends, right? If you see two women together being friendly, they either just tolerate each other and talk poo poo about the other one when they can't hear, or they are lesbians. That's just how it is with women. Another sign of a lesbian is when a woman is not interested in me. There are plenty of movies about women being friends. Thelma and Louise ain't one of them. Sorry you had to find out this way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
Plom Bar posted:There are plenty of movies about women being friends. Thelma and Louise ain't one of them. Sorry you had to find out this way. you do realize women can be close and love one another in a platonic fashion without lesbianism being involved, right
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 15:07
|
|
|
poptart_fairy posted:you do realize women can be close and love one another in a platonic fashion without lesbianism being involved, right Of course I do. Doesn't change a thing here, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 15:10
|
|
|
Plom Bar posted:Of course I do. What, that the protagonists have a relationship that is either platonic or homosexual depending on how it develops, and is not explicitly one or the other? I mean dude, you're getting very angry that not everyone has chosen a particular path with the characters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
poptart_fairy posted:What, that the protagonists have a relationship that is either platonic or homosexual depending on how it develops, and is not explicitly one or the other? I'm really not, is the thing. I'm just saying that people who think that path was "forced" aren't very familiar with the coded ways we get portrayed in pop culture. Like, I didn't HAVE to find the lines of dialogue that confirm that Chloe hooked up with girls and loved Rachel Amber to know that she hooked up with girls and loved Rachel Amber. Neither did anyone who knows what's what.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 15:15
|
|
|
Women with blue hair are also lesbians.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 15:21
|
|
|
Everything you need to know about women with blue hair is in this incredibly insightful and totally valid/not moronic article here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 15:40
|
|
|
God, if only it were that easy to ensure men never talked to me again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 15:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 18:42 |
|
|
Socially retarded goons can't understand people being intimate without having sex. News at 11
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2015 15:44
|
|