|
Of course, the real problem is that it's too anime.
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 17:35 |
|
|
Torrannor posted:It's pretty infamous in that regard. He's set up his rules for how magic works in Stormlight here, and it's never again this video gamey in the rest of the books. I think he's even on record that he regrets writing it this way in what's basically the first real scene of the series. Rumda posted:yeah that scene isn't even representative of way of kings let alone any other book CharlestheHammer posted:I just thought you were baiting me really but this comparison is one a lot of people make and frankly it’s baffling. I guess nerds are gonna compare it to what they know but it always seemed a stretch to me. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:09
|
|
|
It’s really weird as you said a more coherent complaint in that it’s a little flat in the middle which is I think a more fair and coherent criticism.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:12
|
|
|
I don't think it can be that weird if even Sanderson fans repeatedly express the exact same issue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:14
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:I don't think it can be that weird if even Sanderson fans repeatedly express the exact same issue. I mean I think their wrong too. I also never said you were the only one. I also am not saying that fight is like faultless, like I said you did post some fair criticism of it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:16
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:I mean I think their wrong too. I also never said you were the only one. I also am not saying that fight is like faultless, like I said you did post some fair criticism of it. Dude it's the worst chapter in Stormlight you're literally the only one defending it
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:17
|
|
|
Rumda posted:Dude it's the worst chapter in Stormlight you're literally the only one defending it Neat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:20
|
|
|
mossyfisk posted:Of course, the real problem is that it's too anime.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:20
|
|
|
If Sanderson straight-up added a health bar into the scene, would it feel like a video game to you then? Or would he have to change anything about how he actually described it? How would he have to change the description for it to feel like a video game?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:22
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:If Sanderson straight-up added a health bar into the scene, would it feel like a video game to you then? Or would he have to change anything about how he actually described it? How would he have to change the description for it to feel like a video game? If he added health bars then yeah I could see it or like a literal meter for stormlight.I don’t think flat narration is enough. That’s just like bad writing. This could be considered nitpicking I guess but do think being accurate in criticism is better.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:26
|
|
|
All righty.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:26
|
|
|
Decius posted:Uh, what is happening above the debris field gets explained or at least shown in this book, you should read on if you haven't hit the part yet (which you obviously haven't). After anyone finishes Skyward its worth taking a look at one of his older short stories “Defending Elysium” on his website.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:31
|
|
|
Decius posted:Uh, what is happening above the debris field gets explained or at least shown in this book, you should read on if you haven't hit the part yet (which you obviously haven't). I meant while reading it. When you don't know what the Admiral is hiding. Some "the enemy is made up" theory was in my head before the truth about her father got revealed. The book comes with a lot of criticism for police states and an elite that tries to control the population.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 14:40
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:I do wonder why all of a sudden this thread is getting a lot of half assed trolls. My fault, sorry
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 15:00
|
|
|
StonecutterJoe posted:You literally asked "Like, how much did he reflect on a sentence before committing to it?" That's a quote, from you. I meant your mentality, not his
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 15:02
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:My fault, sorry Do they follow you around? Either way that ain’t on you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 15:28
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:lol You've had this explained before, but you never acknowledge when you've been taught something. Genre expectations = regularly used tropes. To subvert a trope, you employ it for a different than standard effect, turn it on its head. The kindly old wizard being the true bad guy is a subversion. Whether that makes it clever or not is subjective. Genre writing is hard work despite your lack of appreciation for it. If writing a bestseller was easy, everyone would do it. Literary criticism holds little merit. It's a tightrope. Can you grab a large fanbase by giving them what they want while twisting things enough that it leaves them hungry for more? You personally may not see the point, but your lack of respect for hard working people speaks to your immaturity. If you want to write an entertaining genre book, you have to be humble enough to recognize what others did before, identify what you personally can bring to the table. Harsh criticism is easy as knocking down card houses. Being a good critic means not acting in bad faith. If you say the entire genre is trash and approach your critiques without looking for what is new, fresh, different, then you are petty and small minded. To wit, gently caress you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 15:43
|
|
|
BananaNutkins posted:Genre expectations = regularly used tropes. To subvert a trope, you employ it for a different than standard effect, turn it on its head. The kindly old wizard being the true bad guy is a subversion. Whether that makes it clever or not is subjective. The kindly old wizard in Abercrombie turns out to be exactly what he appers to be. There's no "subversion" with Vulvei or whatever his name was. It's not even a particularly strong "trope". Merlin in Le Morte d'Arthur is a complete prick for example. BananaNutkins posted:Genre writing is hard work despite your lack of appreciation for it. If writing a bestseller was easy, everyone would do it. Literary criticism holds little merit. It's a tightrope. Can you grab a large fanbase by giving them what they want while twisting things enough that it leaves them hungry for more? You personally may not see the point, but your lack of respect for hard working people speaks to your immaturity. bold of you to equate profit with artistic success
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:28
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:bold of you to equate profit with artistic success Oh, for fucks sake. Here you are again. You are not a gatekeeper of what is and isn't art. Some people like Van Gogh and others like Keane or Velvet Elvises. gently caress off with your schtick of telling people what they can and cannot enjoy. You are such an insufferable prick. Go to your corner and huff your farts if that's what makes you happy. Write a blog on the decline of the art of the narrative. But you track your poo poo into genre threads and stink the place up instead. We get it you hate genre fiction. Message received, now gently caress off. I know I've broken my rule and actually responded to you, but god drat you cannot take a loving hint.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
Proteus Jones posted:You are not a gatekeeper of what is and isn't art. Some people like Van Gogh and others like Keane or Velvet Elvises.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:39
|
|
|
Proteus Jones posted:You are not a gatekeeper of what is and isn't art. Correction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msqUsa2I_OA (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:40
|
|
|
sorry guys I just wanted to know why big book was big 
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:44
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:sorry guys I just wanted to know why big book was big It's cool, Mel. I don't think you triggered this. It happens from time to time when people come charging into the thread and start going on about how genre fiction it ruining the world. I'll admit, I was side-eying your initial post because it seemed like such a weird thing to fixate on word count. But your subsequent posts clarified where you were coming from. E: and I'm sorry about my meltdown. I've let poo poo from outside the forums affect how I'm reading and reacting to things today. But I'm not deleting my post 
Proteus Jones fucked around with this message at 16:50 on Nov 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:46
|
|
|
Mel's being disingenuous anyway. CharlestheHammer already answered his question very succinctly:CharlestheHammer posted:Do you like world building that have really nothing to do with the narrative? Because Sanderson does.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 16:53
|
|
|
Is the Gatekeeper the next form of the Shardbearer?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 17:00
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:Mel's being disingenuous anyway. CharlestheHammer already answered his question very succinctly: Am not I mean, as I said in another thread, this thread has shown me that there is an idea of narrative in this kinds of novel that is so foreign to my understanding of narrative art that it might as well be alien
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 17:02
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:The kindly old wizard in Abercrombie turns out to be exactly what he appers to be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 17:19
|
|
|
As a game designer I do think Sanderson's book have a very videogamey foundation in their rule structure but the scenes don't necessarily read like one. If anything they feel a lot more like comic books or anime to me. When he made the comment about wanting a Mistborn videogame I tried to imagine how that would work out and I don't think it would be as simple as it may look. For example, pulling and pushing would obviously be key aspects but then if you actually get into the gritty details it becomes very complicated. How do the physics actually work? How do you control it? Is it even fun or is too cumbersome? Makes me think of the Spiderman games "swinging problem" where if they get it wrong it can kill the game. Then you have things like soothing which are more subtle and may not lend themselves to fun mechanics. I mean, I'm sure it could be done and be great too but what I'm saying is that it would require a lot of fine tuning and maybe a bit of creative license.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 17:30
|
|
|
Cicero posted:No. Bayaz definitely comes across as the trope of a benevolent but mysterious old wizard at the start of the book. It turns out later on that he's much less benevolent than he initially appeared. He's not, like, pure evil, but his alignment on that axis is neutral at best. That's not subversive. Thomas Malory beat Abercrombie to this half a millenium ago.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 17:42
|
|
|
It's subversive compared to the standard trope. It doesn't have to be totally unique or innovative to be subversive.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 17:50
|
|
|
You ingrates don't deserve BravestOfTheLamps.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 17:55
|
|
|
Chernabog posted:As a game designer I do think Sanderson's book have a very videogamey foundation in their rule structure but the scenes don't necessarily read like one. If anything they feel a lot more like comic books or anime to me. Not to mention maintaining the levels of 12+ different metals. I could see a game set in the Wax and Wayne era working well. Also, maybe I’m a broken person, but I live for world building. I want to know how a fantasy world’s systems work. How does magic get used for every day tasks? How are the world’s laws structured? I live for that stuff. And lastly, The Emperor’s Soul is art. Yes, it’s a craftsman upping his game to create art, but it’s still art. TheMadMilkman fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Nov 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 18:07
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:You ingrates don't deserve BravestOfTheLamps. I'm OK with that if that means he goes away.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 18:10
|
|
|
I'm the person that complains that a person writes too much but also reads half of one chapter and decides all of the work must be like that over decades and dozens of books.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 18:31
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:You ingrates don't deserve BravestOfTheLamps. No one deserves him, he is like a wildfire in that he just happens out of your control.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 18:32
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:I'm the person that complains that a person writes too much but also reads half of one chapter and decides all of the work must be like that over decades and dozens of books. ok if you can point out where in the 12,000 pages of text the writing really starts to click I will get right on that
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 18:33
|
|
|
Sham bam bamina! posted:Good to know! Maybe I'll give it a real shot sometime. Yeah, as others said it's never that stark later. Personally I didn't mind that scene that much, but I'm a huge dork who likes that kind of stuff. But I definitely see the validity of the criticism that it's too video gamey. But the intention with that scene is to not only introduce what the magic is, but also how it functions. As lots of people have talked about in this thread, the magic in TSA is very rules-based. For some people, that's tedious, but personally, I think it's fantastic. When the foundations are made clear and explained, then you really understand what characters are doing in some kind of action sequence, the outcomes are truly earned. It's far less mystical than Gandalf or Harry Potter, but it's also far more rewarding. The characters don't just suddenly cast a spell or whatever that you've never heard of and don't know how it works, but it magically solves whatever problem they were facing. That's not interesting or engaging. But yeah, later on in the book the "mechanics" of the magic are explored pretty thoroughly outside of action sequences. In later action sequences the video-gamey parts are far less explicit, because by then the reader has more knowledge of what is happening, so a specific lashing or whatever is not elaborated on. Though, that stuff does still get mentioned even in the subsequent books, so if that really bothers you then you won't like the action in the books. Completely separate from the magic though, what makes TSA so great isn't the magic at all, and definitely not how the magic is used in the fights. What makes it great is really interesting characters in an incredibly intricate world that's slowly expanded over the course of the books. And of course the larger plot that carries them through that world. The long, slow, deliberate buildups to big character and plot payoffs are what set the books apart. For example (spoilers ahead): The incredibly long buildup to Kaladin and Dalinar finally meeting (and the long expected betrayal by Sadeas). That whole section of the book centers around an action sequence, but the action sequence is the means, not the end. It's about a huge turning point in Kaladin's character that's been building up over the course of the book, and about what Kaladin and Dalinar can do together with the different things they know, or power that they have. The payoff of this scene and what it means for the characters and the larger plot is insanely satisfying. The action sequence is intense and well-written, IMO, but is just part of the more meaningful arcs. Anyway, the books are great and you should read them. Don't let the prologue set you off, it's not at all indicative of what the book is like. Besides a couple miniature interludes there are no sequences that even heavily engage in the magic system at all. Even the end of the book which is built up to barely touches it. And in so much as it does, it's faaaarrr less video gamey, and has the force of a ton of plot buildup behind it that make it intensely satisfying and meaningful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 18:37
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:ok if you can point out where in the 12,000 pages of text the writing really starts to click I will get right on that I mean that’s a personal question based on personal taste. No one clicks at the same point or they might not click at all. There is no way to say you will like this part to internet strangers particularly if it doesn’t seem like they are going in very impartial. If you don’t want to get invested in a lot of words fine but it’s rather upfront about what it is
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 18:43
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:I mean that’s a personal question based on personal taste. No one clicks at the same point or they might not click at all. There is no way to say you will like this part to internet strangers particularly if it doesn’t seem like they are going in very impartial. If you don’t want to get invested in a lot of words fine but it’s rather upfront about what it is I know, I was just being a bit pissy about "how dare you assume you won't like the writing of a book just because you read the first few chapters and didn't like the writing"
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 17:35 |
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:ok if you can point out where in the 12,000 pages of text the writing really starts to click I will get right on that I would if you were actually interested intead of just a group of you from the "real literature" thread coming in here to poo poo on people for daring to read a different genre .
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2018 18:47
|
|