|
Post by Samu-kun on May 20, 2016 0:28:55 GMT -8
Eh I dunno, I get the feeling Sharr's pretty much on the far edge of the general community consensus. I don't think very many people would be pleased if we retcon the main story.
|
|
|
Post by admiralcheese on May 20, 2016 2:42:17 GMT -8
Hey I don't mean to but in or anything but this has been bugging me for a while.
Sharr you should probably be using "Canon" with 1 n. Cannons are a form of artillery after all.
|
|
|
Post by truebeliever on May 20, 2016 5:49:17 GMT -8
Hey I don't mean to but in or anything but this has been bugging me for a while. Sharr you should probably be using "Canon" with 1 n. Cannons are a form of artillery after all. "Muphry's Law" can be a b*tch. Feel free to butt in any time!
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 20, 2016 10:51:54 GMT -8
Eh I dunno, I get the feeling Sharr's pretty much on the far edge of the general community consensus. I don't think very many people would be pleased if we retcon the main story. ... I'm sorry, but is that supposed to be a joke? Have you even LOOKED at the community consensus? If anything, what you're saying is pretty much the opposite - the people who thought it was fine were the ones on the "far edge of the general community consensus." Rude question here, but where are you even getting those numbers from? Besides, you misinterpreted my whole point - NOBODY was asking you to RETCON anything, Samu. They were asking you to LENGTHEN AND EXPAND it - to space it out with more build-up. What's in LibDay would have worked better had it been built up over a longer period. People wouldn't have hated the forced Chigara romance and everything else had it all been built up over an entire extra arc in-between launching from Helion and arriving at Cera - you tried to cram too much into too small a time frame.
|
|
|
Post by 白龍 on May 20, 2016 13:55:49 GMT -8
Now now, let's not get harsh with our words here.
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 20, 2016 14:36:19 GMT -8
Now now, let's not get harsh with our words here. I'm not being harsh. Trust me, this is actually pretty civil by the standards of debating I'm used to seeing on other forums
|
|
|
Post by Nemjen on May 20, 2016 15:07:04 GMT -8
The pending DLC and the future of the series are two separate things, I am not sure where this mentality that [Re]turn was going to be a magic wand for all people's criticisms came from. Granted if the series became all about releases set in their own universe through DLCs the two topics together might be worth considering but this is not the case at the current moment in time, I think some people are a bit delusional if they are expecting a story overhaul with the game already out and LiS preparing for their next project. Anyway the reality is that we will have to wait for the next Sunrider game before we see what feedback was taken into account - I am not really sure what some of these parties are actually gearing for if not this? In terms of just data, the game's pretty much gotten consistently positive reviews since V2.0 launched so I don't think it's really that bad. I'm sure people who enjoyed the game will be back to enjoy REturn. And the game's pretty damned long with the additional content, so that should make most people happy. Remember this is the internet, some people just cannot find happiness in the moment.
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 20, 2016 16:33:25 GMT -8
The pending DLC and the future of the series are two separate things, I am not sure where this mentality that [Re]turn was going to be a magic wand for all people's criticisms came from. Granted if the series became all about releases set in their own universe through DLCs the two topics together might be worth considering but this is not the case at the current moment in time, I think some people are a bit delusional if they are expecting a story overhaul with the game already out and LiS preparing for their next project. Anyway the reality is that we will have to wait for the next Sunrider game before we see what feedback was taken into account - I am not really sure what some of these parties are actually gearing for if not this? In terms of just data, the game's pretty much gotten consistently positive reviews since V2.0 launched so I don't think it's really that bad. I'm sure people who enjoyed the game will be back to enjoy REturn. And the game's pretty damned long with the additional content, so that should make most people happy. Remember this is the internet, some people just cannot find happiness in the moment.No, they're really not. In fact, saying that's probably the biggest misnomer possible - it sets the precedent that, if the things LibDay were criticized for carry over into the future games, Samu and co wouldn't do anything to actually fix the problems in the prior story/keep trying to push on atop a faulty foundation. If anything, given how much effort was ALREADY pumped into [RE]Turn thus far even though it doesn't impact the story at all, it'd actually be more accurate to say it's "delusional" for you to think otherwise - all the effort he's already done could have just gone into making a new mid-game arc. He's already stopped to keep adding onto LibDay - there really isn't anything that could have kept this from being a story overhaul aside from his own choice, nor was there anything that bred an expectation for it being beyond his power to do so. Also, to use one of Samu's own quotes; "Love in Space is excited to announce Sunrider Liberation Day: [RE]turn, the FREE DLC story expansion to Sunrider Liberation Day. " Note the bolded, underlined sentence; "story expansion". Ergo, people were naturally under the impression that, if you're going to create a story expansion, it's going to build on or have some impact on the story the way the 2.00 arguably had - not that it was an AU that is, for all intents and purposes, Academy 2.0 with no impact on anything whatsoever. If they wanted to avoid that kind of belief, they should have marketed [RE]Turn as a spin-off instead of a "story expansion", because that really doesn't seem to be what it is. Based on what Vaen and Samu say, that DOES look like the case - like they think just pumping out content until people shut up means they actually fixed any of the things people complained about. What they're "gearing for" is that LibDay be a bit more comprehensive - you don't have to change what's there; just execute it better. The story that's there isn't really horrendous - it's failures were because it was badly executed; it tried to cram too much into too small a timeframe instead of pacing it out over two or three "arcs" the way FA and MoA did (that and the sex-scene with Chigara - but making that optional wouldn't even require the romance be undone; just making the speed of it determinant).
|
|
|
Post by Nemjen on May 20, 2016 19:11:37 GMT -8
Well now I have had the chance to give [Re]turn a play through I would actually say in a way it does offer a story expansion, the arcs are spin offs true but the actual details and perspectives are accurate to the main game. It is certainly an interesting way to write the content, well played Samu - I will try and do some proper writing up in the feedback thread when I have had a chance to play a bit more. 'Samu and co wouldn't do anything to actually fix the problems in the prior story/keep trying to push on atop a faulty foundation':At the end of the day Sharr it is not because LiS are ignoring the player feedback as additional content has been added in the form of 2.00 and the DLC, the issue is very much you have made your opinion and you are adamant that your way is the fix to the problem when in reality that is not how real solutions happen. Writing a story is no easy feat especially when you have quite a large target audience, even a slight change means the rest of the content would have to be reviewed and sections re written to match the changes - sure it would be nice but is it viable when we do not yet have all the story pieces for Sunrider? Who knows, maybe while you feel the relationship with Chigara is forced it might stem into a bigger issue that shapes her personality as well as her allegiance in future games. It is a catch 22 where sure they can keep on revising content however there is always going to be something wrong no matter how many iterations are made and there are always going to be individuals who will point these out and call for change. LD is not perfect and while I agree that the pacing could have been taken down a couple of notches it is still far from being an unworkable plot line, it is just not yet completed. 'If anything, given how much effort was ALREADY pumped into [RE]Turn thus far even though it doesn't impact the story at all, it'd actually be more accurate to say it's "delusional" for you to think otherwise - all the effort he's already done could have just gone into making a new mid-game arc':Considering this is a free DLC I am pretty sure this entitles the writer to have fun and enjoy a set scenario if he so wishes, if I wanted to read crowd contributed content I would purchase a copy of 'Hypersphere - Anonymous' instead. [Re]turn was never marketed or promoted as an answer to story feedback, it was promoted as additional 'what if' for fans of the Sunrider cast narrative and this was what we were expecting following the announcement considering the whole 'no “canon” outcome'. 'Vaen and Samu say, that DOES look like the case - like they think just pumping out content until people shut up means they actually fixed any of the things people complained about':An extension on the ending and a multi route DLC and you are accusing them of pumping out content? Also fix is heavily subjective as it would assume that the complaints show something that is broken when in fact you are talking about plot points getting addressed which surprise, this is not yet the complete Sunrider. I have no problem saying a game should be able to stand on its own two feet outside of its complete arc but LD is far from not being able to do this. I also find it moderately funny that you quote yourself to Samu saying 'the people who thought it was fine were the ones on the "far edge of the general community consensus."' when if you use the Steam review data there is a correlation from the Steam reviews going from 'mixed' (mid 50%'s) during 1.00 to mostly positive (76% at this time) for 2.00, last time I checked 76% is greater than 24% unless you really think that double-barreled poll of yours is more significant than one of the platforms selling the game...
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 20, 2016 20:05:49 GMT -8
Well now I have had the chance to give [Re]turn a play through I would actually say in a way it does offer a story expansion, the arcs are spin offs true but the actual details and perspectives are accurate to the main game. It is certainly an interesting way to write the content, well played Samu - I will try and do some proper writing up in the feedback thread when I have had a chance to play a bit more. 'Samu and co wouldn't do anything to actually fix the problems in the prior story/keep trying to push on atop a faulty foundation':At the end of the day Sharr it is not because LiS are ignoring the player feedback as additional content has been added in the form of 2.00 and the DLC, the issue is very much you have made your opinion and you are adamant that your way is the fix to the problem when in reality that is not how real solutions happen. Writing a story is no easy feat especially when you have quite a large target audience, even a slight change means the rest of the content would have to be reviewed and sections re written to match the changes - sure it would be nice but is it viable when we do not yet have all the story pieces for Sunrider? Who knows, maybe while you feel the relationship with Chigara is forced it might stem into a bigger issue that shapes her personality as well as her allegiance in future games. It is a catch 22 where sure they can keep on revising content however there is always going to be something wrong no matter how many iterations are made and there are always going to be individuals who will point these out and call for change. LD is not perfect and while I agree that the pacing could have been taken down a couple of notches it is still far from being an unworkable plot line, it is just not yet completed. 'If anything, given how much effort was ALREADY pumped into [RE]Turn thus far even though it doesn't impact the story at all, it'd actually be more accurate to say it's "delusional" for you to think otherwise - all the effort he's already done could have just gone into making a new mid-game arc':Considering this is a free DLC I am pretty sure this entitles the writer to have fun and enjoy a set scenario if he so wishes, if I wanted to read crowd contributed content I would purchase a copy of 'Hypersphere - Anonymous' instead. [Re]turn was never marketed or promoted as an answer to story feedback, it was promoted as additional 'what if' for fans of the Sunrider cast narrative and this was what we were expecting following the announcement considering the whole 'no “canon” outcome'. 'Vaen and Samu say, that DOES look like the case - like they think just pumping out content until people shut up means they actually fixed any of the things people complained about':An extension on the ending and a multi route DLC and you are accusing them of pumping out content? Also fix is heavily subjective as it would assume that the complaints show something that is broken when in fact you are talking about plot points getting addressed which surprise, this is not yet the complete Sunrider. I have no problem saying a game should be able to stand on its own two feet outside of its complete arc but LD is far from not being able to do this. I also find it moderately funny that you quote yourself to Samu saying 'the people who thought it was fine were the ones on the "far edge of the general community consensus."' when if you use the Steam review data there is a correlation from the Steam reviews going from 'mixed' (mid 50%'s) during 1.00 to mostly positive (76% at this time) for 2.00, last time I checked 76% is greater than 24% unless you really think that double-barreled poll of yours is more significant than one of the platforms selling the game... Again, they're not cannon to the main story - they have no actual impact on the timeline of Sunrider. Ergo, they are not a story expansion - they are a spin-off in the same vein as Academy was. 1) No - it very much does seem to be that case, because what they did wasn't what was asked. People wanted more MID-GAME agency and story - they wanted something that either gave them more options and control over the main story or, failing that, expansions that paced the pre-existing story to a better degree. Second - again, no; you literally WOULD NOT NEED TO EDIT ONE SINGLE THING. All you would have to do is create an extra arc to go between the start and the Battle of Cera - hell, it should actually be EASIER to do because it's working toward a solid end/a lead-up to what we see in the endgame (show Kayto having a date with Chigara, show Chigara breaking away from Asaga out of fear of what she is, ect) so it CANNOT deviate from the endgame and DOES NOT need changes to be made to anything at all. You're seriously overestimating how hard this would be and overlooking the fact that, even disregarding the prior point, it wouldn't be any more less time and effort then what was already put into both V2.00 and [RE]Turn. You'd only need to write a new arc to bridge between the start and end - nothing before or after would need any such revisions (take Mass Effect; the series had plenty of good DLC - with almost none of it requiring the entire series' script/parts of the rest of it be rewritten for it). And if a non-cannon spin-off like [RE]Turn is viable to Samu, why not a mid-game arc that would make LibDay's core story as a whole more appealing to the fans? In short... everything you said in that first paragraph amounts to semantics or ignores the fact that as much effort to make it work has already been put into [RE]Turn - hell, part of it even contradicts your own argument AND Samu's because, if your claims were true, there's be no such thing as bad writing by any standard at all. 2) I'd ask you not throw around words like "entitled" if you're going to try and lecture me on this stuff - because it's easy to turn around. Obligations are as much a part of writing as entitlements are - and if you're going to put that much free work into something that's not only bigger and better then what you were charging 25$ for, why not do it for something that would have made that price tag justifiable for the main series? It's not adding to LibDay's story - it's just making it a bundle-package that has a main-series game (LibDay) and a AU game ([RE]Turn). And I'm sorry, but that's where you're WRONG - again, look at the quote from before; it was marketed as a Story Expansion, not as an alternate-universe spin-off. And if the comments from Vaen are any indication, it WAS created toward rectifying complaints (lack of story, length, pacing, replay value, ect) - it was not marketed correctly otherwise - and your claims are another misnomer, because "no cannon outcome" is something applicable to EVERY CHOICE in the Sunrider series, so saying that didn't prove anything at the time. 3) "An extension on the ending and a multi-route (non-cannon) DLC" do not address what LibDay's actual problem was; the pacing and execution of the MAIN STORY. Yes I am accusing them of that because it equates to an "if we just keep pumping out more new content, we don't need to fix the stuff that people didn't like in the old content!" - or rather, a "forget/bury it, don't fix it" mentality. More content for your money isn't bad per-se, but it does not rectify the problems of the original game itself and in some cases just rubs it in. LibDay could not stand on it's own - the fact that it took more content to get a better reception seems to prove that. And while we're on this topic, take a look at yourself Magpie - at every turn you're going out of the way to try and level some self when the fact of the matter is I have NEVER once said this was anything but my own opinion. And at this point, I'd like to ask you stop with the broken-record "we can't judge an incomplete product" stuff - yes we can; a series is a combination of several complete products, each of which can be judged at any time and which opinions on tend to tell a developer what was best and least liked in their game. Each entry is "complete" in an individual sense, so it is viable to be judged. Saying otherwise is pretty much a fallacy. Likewise, I also find it funny that you're ignoring how many of these are UPDATED REVIEWS that were changed/reposted by previous reviewers to reflect an approval of the V2.00 alterations, as well as how most of those "positive" reviews criticize the game's "linear plot", "lack of choices", "short story", "cardbord-characters" and so-forth, and that the positive rating is simply because it's either better then it was at launch or not the worst game ever... you know, INSTEAD of your own double-barreled comment? Or the fact that whether or not LibDay itself was good or bad is SECONDARY to polling what it's big issue was (since all games good or bad have at least one big issue) or polling what people would most like to see done for it? Now, if you want to keep discussing this, could we take it to a different thread? I don't know what problem you have with me Magpie, but I think we've derailed this particular thread enough - I'm not against continuing but let's do it in a more appropriate venue, kay?
|
|
|
Post by admiralcheese on May 20, 2016 20:35:40 GMT -8
Sharr...
Canon.
Repeat after me. Canon.
There is no Canon.
Claude is the Canon Godfu.
The Sunrider has a Vanguard CANNON.
Edit: Besides the sheer insane level of foreshadowing and character goodness is a good addition to the setting as a whole.
You've been arguing the exact same points with the same half dozen people for months now. It might be time to let the matter rest then restart everything when there's another blip of Sunrider content.
|
|
|
Post by Nemjen on May 20, 2016 20:52:04 GMT -8
@sharr - Haha no thanks, I think we are done here.
Also please don't try and take a moral high ground with 'derailment' it just looks arrogant, this is a topic you have baited out and yet somehow you have demonstrated another situation of why people just do not bother engaging with you, I am personally going to follow that trend and get back to my weekend as it has been quite a long week and I need the detox.
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 20, 2016 21:08:48 GMT -8
Sharr... Canon. Repeat after me. Canon. There is no Canon. Claude is the Canon Godfu. The Sunrider has a Vanguard CANNON. Edit: Besides the sheer insane level of foreshadowing and character goodness is a good addition to the setting as a whole. You've been arguing the exact same points with the same half dozen people for months now. It might be time to let the matter rest then restart everything when there's another blip of Sunrider content. THAT's what you focus on? My grammar? Look, I rely on an auto-spellcheck on my macbook-pro - and it has an annoying habit of correcting words but not sentence-contexts. It's really not something I can help since I don't often pay that close attention to my spelling unless it's underlined in red and therefore something the spellcheck couldn't correct on it's own. So I ask you forgive me if errors like that persist. Edit: Yes, but Academy had all that too - and that didn't make any closer to being an addition that impacted the main story. Academy was a spin-off, and [RE]Turn pretty much is as well; it should have been marketed as such instead of being a supposed addition to the main game's story. And like Academy, nothing in it is anything we either didn't already know or was anything we couldn't have found out/will find out playing the main game's later entries. And the reason I "haven't let it rest" is because any future "blips" are going to have to make up for these same exact deficiencies anyway - they'll have to be addressed sooner or latter, so why not now in the full-priced game they were part of when the maker is putting this much extra work into said game post-release anyway? Plus, it takes two to tango - just pointing that out.
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 20, 2016 21:12:31 GMT -8
@sharr - Haha no thanks, I think we are done here. Also please don't try and take a moral high ground with 'derailment' it just looks arrogant, this is a topic you have baited out and yet somehow you have demonstrated another situation of why people just do not bother engaging with you, I am personally going to follow that trend and get back to my weekend as it has been quite a long week and I need the detox. But that's just it - YOU'VE been trying to take something of a moral high ground this whole argument, from trying to say "we can't judge it because it's incomplete" to "it's heavily subjective" to (of course), the "that's double-barreled" claim and quite a few other snide-sarcastic quips no different from me. My only issue is that I'm blunt - that doesn't make what I'm saying any less valid. If anything, it makes people (like you) who refuse to debate because of such a petty reason as how it's worded look... well, for lack of a better word, petty. I mean, it's the internet - people say what they think. If you can't handle that, how do you expect to hold a conversation - let alone a debate?
|
|
|
Post by longtimelurker on May 20, 2016 21:41:52 GMT -8
Damn how did a thread about an alternate take of an event in LD derail into a major discussion about the merits of the DLC??? Well, to put the thread (a little) back on track, it would be great if we could pool the collective knowledge together and make a guide/flowchart like Somasam suggested, perhaps in a spoiler-free fashion like "choice 1, choice 1, choice 2, etc.", getting 100% completion is tricky sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by 白龍 on May 21, 2016 8:25:25 GMT -8
@sharr - Haha no thanks, I think we are done here. Also please don't try and take a moral high ground with 'derailment' it just looks arrogant, this is a topic you have baited out and yet somehow you have demonstrated another situation of why people just do not bother engaging with you, I am personally going to follow that trend and get back to my weekend as it has been quite a long week and I need the detox. But that's just it - YOU'VE been trying to take something of a moral high ground this whole argument, from trying to say "we can't judge it because it's incomplete" to "it's heavily subjective" to (of course), the "that's double-barreled" claim and quite a few other snide-sarcastic quips no different from me. My only issue is that I'm blunt - that doesn't make what I'm saying any less valid. If anything, it makes people (like you) who refuse to debate because of such a petty reason as how it's worded look... well, for lack of a better word, petty. I mean, it's the internet - people say what they think. If you can't handle that, how do you expect to hold a conversation - let alone a debate? One who speaks for the status quo versus one who speaks for challenging the status quo. I don't know, I was raised with maintaining the status quo being the paramount moral high ground and challenging the status quo being something less so. But then again I was raised in an environment where self censorship both in speech and thought is implied as proper etiquette. Since it's the internet and it seems I am allowed to speak my view, I will do despite it being against my natural inclinations. The internet, indeed people say what they think. It's a frontier where the only rules and laws are set up by its users. You speak of debate and expecting to hold a proper conversation. It is to my view that this debate you bring up is no longer a major concern, the users do not wish to hold this conversation. It has been grounded and halted, yet you persist. Freedom of speech is a wonderful concept, but those who take it for granted do not realize it comes with a cost. A social cost. The cost of repeatedly stating the points you have made many times. Your posts here are not for debating, they are not for conversing. They are statements. They are statements which if lucky enough will be seen by the developers of the game. They are an opinion formulated by an individual, a proclamation expressing the views and wishes of an individual's rationale for the greater community. They have been heard, you need not state them again. It is not a necessity to pursue in spreading your point of view. I have no right to stop you, but remember the costs to your persistence.
|
|
|
Post by truebeliever on May 21, 2016 8:44:57 GMT -8
A good point, longtimelurker, but I hope you'll forgive me for keeping the thread off topic a bit longer.
Sharr, although I'm looking forward to [RE]turn, I sympathize with your viewpoint. That said, I think Magpie is correct. What appears to be an easy addition to a storyline may easily not be, particularly if a writer has a preexisting plan.
George R.R. Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" is remarkable because the first book is great, the second book even better, and the third book even better than that. But it was after the third book that the trouble started. Martin had planned to leave things on a cliffhanger, then pick up the story a number of years later in the fourth book, with a bunch of new characters.
The fans completely blew up, and understandably so, since they were very invested in the characters they'd read about up to that point and wanted to know what happened next. The thought of skipping over all that and maybe getting a little bit in flashbacks was unbearable. Martin's publisher, alarmed by the fan response, started putting pressure on him, and eventually Martin himself came around to the fans' way of thinking and picked up the fourth book where the third finished.
The series has drifted ever since and been plagued by numerous delays. Martin was clearly not planning on having to flesh out the intervening years, and as a result, the series has essentially expanded laterally instead of moving forward. New characters are constantly being introduced, making the storyline sprawl even wider, and yet there's very little progress to speak of. It's the curse of getting what you wished for: The fans succeeded in changing the writer's plans to suit their tastes -- but at what cost? It's one thing for a fan to say, "Just fill out the middle a bit," but how do you know if Love in Space is capable of doing that? And if they do botch it, then who's to blame at that point? LiS or the fans?
I've said this before, but Love in Space must ultimately rise or fall on their own merits. If they end up making a mess of the series, then so be it; don't give them the option of blaming the fans for how things turn out.
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 21, 2016 11:13:54 GMT -8
But that's just it - YOU'VE been trying to take something of a moral high ground this whole argument, from trying to say "we can't judge it because it's incomplete" to "it's heavily subjective" to (of course), the "that's double-barreled" claim and quite a few other snide-sarcastic quips no different from me. My only issue is that I'm blunt - that doesn't make what I'm saying any less valid. If anything, it makes people (like you) who refuse to debate because of such a petty reason as how it's worded look... well, for lack of a better word, petty. I mean, it's the internet - people say what they think. If you can't handle that, how do you expect to hold a conversation - let alone a debate? One who speaks for the status quo versus one who speaks for challenging the status quo. I don't know, I was raised with maintaining the status quo being the paramount moral high ground and challenging the status quo being something less so. But then again I was raised in an environment where self censorship both in speech and thought is implied as proper etiquette. Since it's the internet and it seems I am allowed to speak my view, I will do despite it being against my natural inclinations. The internet, indeed people say what they think. It's a frontier where the only rules and laws are set up by its users. You speak of debate and expecting to hold a proper conversation. It is to my view that this debate you bring up is no longer a major concern, the users do not wish to hold this conversation. It has been grounded and halted, yet you persist. Freedom of speech is a wonderful concept, but those who take it for granted do not realize it comes with a cost. A social cost. The cost of repeatedly stating the points you have made many times. Your posts here are not for debating, they are not for conversing. They are statements. They are statements which if lucky enough will be seen by the developers of the game. They are an opinion formulated by an individual, a proclamation expressing the views and wishes of an individual's rationale for the greater community. They have been heard, you need not state them again. It is not a necessity to pursue in spreading your point of view. I have no right to stop you, but remember the costs to your persistence. Actually, since I never once claimed it to be anything but my opinions, they're not really statements. And in many cases the reason I state them is because someone else has started it up again stating their own beliefs - and there are other topics it ties into such as [RE]Turn, so it had relevance to bring up. Plus, repitition of that scale isn't exactly something anyone else here is innocent of it - Magpie's guilty of trying to repeatedly argue "cannot judge Sunrider because the series is incomplete" over and over. Plus it doesn't even seen like my reputation of it is the problem - it feels like Magpie has more issue with the way I say it rather then my saying it.
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 21, 2016 11:25:41 GMT -8
A good point, longtimelurker, but I hope you'll forgive me for keeping the thread off topic a bit longer. Sharr, although I'm looking forward to [RE]turn, I sympathize with your viewpoint. That said, I think Magpie is correct. What appears to be an easy addition to a storyline may easily not be, particularly if a writer has a preexisting plan. George R.R. Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" is remarkable because the first book is great, the second book even better, and the third book even better than that. But it was after the third book that the trouble started. Martin had planned to leave things on a cliffhanger, then pick up the story a number of years later in the fourth book, with a bunch of new characters. The fans completely blew up, and understandably so, since they were very invested in the characters they'd read about up to that point and wanted to know what happened next. The thought of skipping over all that and maybe getting a little bit in flashbacks was unbearable. Martin's publisher, alarmed by the fan response, started putting pressure on him, and eventually Martin himself came around to the fans' way of thinking and picked up the fourth book where the third finished. The series has drifted ever since and been plagued by numerous delays. Martin was clearly not planning on having to flesh out the intervening years, and as a result, the series has essentially expanded laterally instead of moving forward. New characters are constantly being introduced, making the storyline sprawl even wider, and yet there's very little progress to speak of. It's the curse of getting what you wished for: The fans succeeded in changing the writer's plans to suit their tastes -- but at what cost? It's one thing for a fan to say, "Just fill out the middle a bit," but how do you know if Love in Space is capable of doing that? And if they do botch it, then who's to blame at that point? LiS or the fans? I've said this before, but Love in Space must ultimately rise or fall on their own merits. If they end up making a mess of the series, then so be it; don't give them the option of blaming the fans for how things turn out. But the problem with that viewpoint is [RE]Turn itself - all the effort that's gone into making a non-cannon storyline with eighteen different endings and a script twice as big as LibDay's whole one, and you really expect me to believe that was any more or less easy then putting in a mid-game arc with two or three choices would have been? Particularly an arc that wouldn't have changed anything in the story - only expanded on it and reinforced said preexisting plan? That analogy's flawed to me - LibDay's actual release was what got flack for having flaws in it and it wasn't fan-pressure that did that; it was because he thought (and still does think apparently) it was fine as is. It was fan pressure that got V2.00 and [RE]Turn going in the first place, so in this case it arguably DID improve the game and force a forward development by pushing to build on what was taken as a very linear narrative - for stories, especially in games, you CAN'T move forward without moving laterally as well because if there's not enough character/plot-development to justify the move forward, it falls apart. What you're advocating is an opposite extreme - progress without build-up - and it's what made so many people upset with LibDay to begin with. Trying to levy blame on one "side" or the other is a semantical blame-game that solves nothing. Again, the issue with this claim is [RE]Turn itself. Far as I'm concerned, it's absolute proof that Love in Space is both fully capable of this and that they knew enough of what people wanted at this point not to botch it - all the effort and good writing in it could have been done for a mid-game storyline.
|
|
|
Post by truebeliever on May 21, 2016 14:20:58 GMT -8
That's where I think we'll have to agree to disagree, Sharr, because we're dealing with human beings and not automatons. I think a writer should write what he or she wants to write, not what someone tells him or her to write, because the alternative is very often an unhappy writer who can't work to his or her full potential. To go back to George R.R. Martin, I think the guy's a terrifically capable writer. If you'd asked me back in the day whether I thought he could fill out those missing years between Book 3 and Book 4, I'd have said, yes, absolutely. And the reality is that he's been having a terrible time. The problem is not one of raw talent. Pardon my armchair psychology, but I suspect the reality is that Martin never wanted to go that route and resents being forced that way, hence the numerous delays in writing the series since Book 3.
You can think of it this way. An overbearing parent may want his child to become a lawyer/doctor/engineer. He knows the child is smart enough to do those jobs successfully. But suppose the child wants to make video games instead? Yes, she's probably condemning herself to a lifetime of substandard earnings, but that's what she wants to do with her life. Should the parent get his way because he knows best? Sure, studying law is probably a better use of time and resources than making games, but is a miserable, unmotivated lawyer better off than a happy, motivated video game creator? And then consider that we are not LiS' parents, but merely a bunch of fans.
The other day, I read a story about Yoshiyuki Sadamoto, the character designer for Neon Genesis Evangelion. Apparently, he's super-sick of Evangelion and would rather do literally anything else, but is shackled to the series because that's what the fans want and that's what his bosses therefore are interested in making. "It's a franchise I don't really want to work on anymore at this point – but it's an important franchise in Japan and there are many fans, so I take it seriously," is what he said. "As an artist, the feeling that shakes me is 'why do we spend money on projects that aren't new ideas or new stories?' I know that's how the industry works, but I wonder."
I don't know how that line makes you feel, but it fills me with pity. The last thing I want to see is LiS eternally shackled to Liberation Day, endlessly revising. Fans have a right to criticize, but after a certain point, they'd probably be better off making their own game than trying to force LiS to match their ideals. [RE]turn, from what I understand, is something fun they decided to do on their own. It's not meant to appease fans dissatisfied with LibDay; it's a lark and a bit of lagniappe for players. And clearly they enjoyed making it, considering how much effort they put into it.
If LiS is having some much-needed fun with [RE]turn, then who am I to deny them that? The reality is that they've worked hard on three main Sunrider entries and a spinoff. They probably need some time off to let the well refill, hence their work on Starnova. Once they get that out of their system, they'll be back to work on a proper Sunrider sequel again, and they'll be in better shape to do a good job.
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 21, 2016 15:08:47 GMT -8
That's where I think we'll have to agree to disagree, Sharr, because we're dealing with human beings and not automatons. I think a writer should write what he or she wants to write, not what someone tells him or her to write, because the alternative is very often an unhappy writer who can't work to his or her full potential. To go back to George R.R. Martin, I think the guy's a terrifically capable writer. If you'd asked me back in the day whether I thought he could fill out those missing years between Book 3 and Book 4, I'd have said, yes, absolutely. And the reality is that he's been having a terrible time. The problem is not one of raw talent. Pardon my armchair psychology, but I suspect the reality is that Martin never wanted to go that route and resents being forced that way, hence the numerous delays in writing the series since Book 3. You can think of it this way. An overbearing parent may want his child to become a lawyer/doctor/engineer. He knows the child is smart enough to do those jobs successfully. But suppose the child wants to make video games instead? Yes, she's probably condemning herself to a lifetime of substandard earnings, but that's what she wants to do with her life. Should the parent get his way because he knows best? Sure, studying law is probably a better use of time and resources than making games, but is a miserable, unmotivated lawyer better off than a happy, motivated video game creator? And then consider that we are not LiS' parents, but merely a bunch of fans. The other day, I read a story about Yoshiyuki Sadamoto, the character designer for Neon Genesis Evangelion. Apparently, he's super-sick of Evangelion and would rather do literally anything else, but is shackled to the series because that's what the fans want and that's what his bosses therefore are interested in making. "It's a franchise I don't really want to work on anymore at this point – but it's an important franchise in Japan and there are many fans, so I take it seriously," is what he said. "As an artist, the feeling that shakes me is 'why do we spend money on projects that aren't new ideas or new stories?' I know that's how the industry works, but I wonder." I don't know how that line makes you feel, but it fills me with pity. The last thing I want to see is LiS eternally shackled to Liberation Day, endlessly revising. Fans have a right to criticize, but after a certain point, they'd probably be better off making their own game than trying to force LiS to match their ideals. [RE]turn, from what I understand, is something fun they decided to do on their own. It's not meant to appease fans dissatisfied with LibDay; it's a lark and a bit of lagniappe for players. And clearly they enjoyed making it, considering how much effort they put into it. If LiS is having some much-needed fun with [RE]turn, then who am I to deny them that? The reality is that they've worked hard on three main Sunrider entries and a spinoff. They probably need some time off to let the well refill, hence their work on Starnova. Once they get that out of their system, they'll be back to work on a proper Sunrider sequel again, and they'll be in better shape to do a good job. But that in and of itself MAKES NO SENSE FOR YOU TO SAY - this is something we have already seen Samu is willing to do; he is already willing to put time and effort into this stuff and do so for something that is arguably twice as complicated and nuanced as making a mid-game arc would have been. Your saying "human beings and not automatons" is a misnomer - a writer publishing for their own sake is different from one running a game series; he has to strike a middle ground because once he has a fan-base, he DOES have an obligation to them just as much as he does to himself. Especially if it's got (J)RPG elements. If we were talking about a BOOK, you might have had a point and even then only from one perspective - but we're not. And that's not even counting if there is or isn't a clear-cut deficiency between current and prior works. But you know what the funny thing is? It's that EITEHR WAY this is invalid because nobody was asking Samu to change anything - only to ADD TO IT. And he's shown he's willing to do that - just that he hasn't done it in the way that people really wanted to see. That argument doesn't fly for me - this isn't a case of a parent and child. This is a case of game and it's community - if anything, Samu would be the PARENT in this comparison, not the child, and the community would be the "children", with the situation being a case of a parent not acknowledging concerns voiced about how he's doing things. And unless you take all factors into account and find a MIDDLE-ROAD, you would be unhappy no matter what path you pick. Consider that this situation is pretty much nothing like you're describing it - you're trying to make it seem like one side is claiming or forcing more obligation then the other when it's actually a case of EQUAL obligation. What you're saying comes across more like an attempt to say Samu's fans are supposed to be more obligated to him then he is to them (or at least that's how I see it), and that just does not fly when you're trying to make a game community. That next argument also doesn't fly for me - because once again, Samu's shown he's willing to do this. He's willing to keep expanding LibDay, but it's going to have friction anyway because it doesn't rectify the issues people had with LibDay in the first place - the core story. And nobody's even asking him to change it - just stretch it out to make the pacing flow better. But that's just it - pitiful or not, that's often the PRICE of being an artist or famous in any sense; once you get known for something, you can NEVER change that. Harrison Ford's always going to be famed as Han Solo even long after he hangs up the holster, Robert Downey .Jr's always going to be seen as Iron Man long after he retires the armor, Mark Hamill's always going to be seen as the Joker and Luke Skywaker even after he puts away the clown makeup and the lightsaber - eventually it gets old and you either move on or want to move on to different things, but it doesn't change the fact that they are part of who you are, and you have to address that. LibDay is brought up so much because it's considered the ONE BLOTCH on what's been a good series, and just one extra arc could have fixed all of that - one arc that wouldn't have taken any more or less effort then what was ALREADY done for [RE]Turn alone. You keep asking "why", but fail to look at what's already been done and say "why not?" It's not "endlessly revising" - it's one EXPANSION, and one that doesn't require changing how the game ends or the overall vision. It's nowhere near as complex as you're making it out to be, and I'd think they would have enjoyed the satisfaction of having to just get it over with and never need to worry about it again - saying "you can't please everyone" is a misnomer; you just have to please the core fans you inspired with this, and a mid-game arc would have done that. But likewise, if they're going to put that much work into an optional and therefore non-essential expansion, who are you to deny people asking they show the same care for their own main story that they do to "fanservice" or spin-offs or the like? "The reality" is that [RE]Turn is just another spin-off that, no matter how fun it might be on it's own, doesn't add or fix anything and if anything gives the impression he'd rather turn away from problems or create AU's then go back and fix their main product - and in LibDay's current state, whatever narrative issues don't get addressed now ("railroad-shotgun romance, Kayto suddenly not paying attention to any of the crew, Asaga's breakdowns, Sola's reversal to stoicism, ect) will plague the future entries - they won't be escaped no matter what, so clearing it now only makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by Samu-kun on May 21, 2016 15:47:51 GMT -8
I think Sharr's one of those people who just like arguing for the sake of arguing. All sizable science fiction fandoms draw out people like that. Fitting handle name too, perhaps he has awakened one too many times and ended up like this...
It's like George Lucas changing things. If the director tinkers with what's already out there, the changes aren't necessarily going to be for the better. I'm sure that when the next Sunrider rolls out, there'll be people swearing "I loved Liberation Day and this new installment just doesn't live up" too. Nostalgia makes everything better, and whether you like a story is really subjective.
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 21, 2016 16:09:11 GMT -8
I think Sharr's one of those people who just like arguing for the sake of arguing. All sizable science fiction fandoms draw out people like that. Fitting handle name too, perhaps he has awakened one too many times and ended up like this... It's like George Lucas changing things. If the director tinkers with what's already out there, the changes aren't necessarily going to be for the better. I'm sure that when the next Sunrider rolls out, there'll be people swearing "I loved Liberation Day and this new installment just doesn't live up" too. Nostalgia makes everything better, and whether you like a story is really subjective. All due respect, but no - I'm arguing because I actually believe it and, so far, haven't met anyone that's actually dissuaded me otherwise. Plus, I point out I'm actually echoing sentiments A LOT of people, including long-timers like Marx (what with his massive sub-analysis on what even he described as LibDay's deficiencies), had with LibDay - I'm just way more blunt then them. But the issue with that is that nobody WANTED you to "tinker" with anything - in film terms, it's basically just adding another act between the beginning and end. You don't have to change the ending or anything like people wanted with ME3 - they would have been satisfied simply by being made to feel what's there makes sense (biggest example - nobody would have called the Chigara stuff a "railroad romance" had it been drawn out with the same care that it had been set up with in MoA). Unlike ME3, the concepts you used for this aren't bad - just rushed, and an extra arc would have fixed that. And I must again disagree - that subjective stuff... well to be rude, at this point it sounds more like an excuse from you - if there was really such a thing, there's be no such thing as bad media at all, and you're never going to find a single person who'd believe that; not even you.
|
|
|
Post by truebeliever on May 21, 2016 16:28:32 GMT -8
But that in and of itself MAKES NO SENSE FOR YOU TO SAY - this is something we have already seen Samu is willing to do; he is already willing to put time and effort into this stuff and do so for something that is arguably twice as complicated and nuanced as making a mid-game arc would have been. Your saying "human beings and not automatons" is a misnomer - a writer publishing for their own sake is different from one running a game series; he has to strike a middle ground because once he has a fan-base, he DOES have an obligation to them just as much as he does to himself. Especially if it's got (J)RPG elements. If we were talking about a BOOK, you might have had a point and even then only from one perspective - but we're not. And that's not even counting if there is or isn't a clear-cut deficiency between current and prior works. But you know what the funny thing is? It's that EITEHR WAY this is invalid because nobody was asking Samu to change anything - only to ADD TO IT. And he's shown he's willing to do that - just that he hasn't done it in the way that people really wanted to see. That argument doesn't fly for me - this isn't a case of a parent and child. This is a case of game and it's community - if anything, Samu would be the PARENT in this comparison, not the child, and the community would be the "children", with the situation being a case of a parent not acknowledging concerns voiced about how he's doing things. And unless you take all factors into account and find a MIDDLE-ROAD, you would be unhappy no matter what path you pick. Consider that this situation is pretty much nothing like you're describing it - you're trying to make it seem like one side is claiming or forcing more obligation then the other when it's actually a case of EQUAL obligation. What you're saying comes across more like an attempt to say Samu's fans are supposed to be more obligated to him then he is to them (or at least that's how I see it), and that just does not fly when you're trying to make a game community. That next argument also doesn't fly for me - because once again, Samu's shown he's willing to do this. He's willing to keep expanding LibDay, but it's going to have friction anyway because it doesn't rectify the issues people had with LibDay in the first place - the core story. And nobody's even asking him to change it - just stretch it out to make the pacing flow better. But that's just it - pitiful or not, that's often the PRICE of being an artist or famous in any sense; once you get known for something, you can NEVER change that. Harrison Ford's always going to be famed as Han Solo even long after he hangs up the holster, Robert Downey .Jr's always going to be seen as Iron Man long after he retires the armor, Mark Hamill's always going to be seen as the Joker and Luke Skywaker even after he puts away the clown makeup and the lightsaber - eventually it gets old and you either move on or want to move on to different things, but it doesn't change the fact that they are part of who you are, and you have to address that. LibDay is brought up so much because it's considered the ONE BLOTCH on what's been a good series, and just one extra arc could have fixed all of that - one arc that wouldn't have taken any more or less effort then what was ALREADY done for [RE]Turn alone. You keep asking "why", but fail to look at what's already been done and say "why not?" It's not "endlessly revising" - it's one EXPANSION, and one that doesn't require changing how the game ends or the overall vision. It's nowhere near as complex as you're making it out to be, and I'd think they would have enjoyed the satisfaction of having to just get it over with and never need to worry about it again - saying "you can't please everyone" is a misnomer; you just have to please the core fans you inspired with this, and a mid-game arc would have done that. But likewise, if they're going to put that much work into an optional and therefore non-essential expansion, who are you to deny people asking they show the same care for their own main story that they do to "fanservice" or spin-offs or the like? "The reality" is that [RE]Turn is just another spin-off that, no matter how fun it might be on it's own, doesn't add or fix anything and if anything gives the impression he'd rather turn away from problems or create AU's then go back and fix their main product - and in LibDay's current state, whatever narrative issues don't get addressed now ("railroad-shotgun romance, Kayto suddenly not paying attention to any of the crew, Asaga's breakdowns, Sola's reversal to stoicism, ect) will plague the future entries - they won't be escaped no matter what, so clearing it now only makes sense. This is probably at the crux of our disagreement, so let me do away with comparisons and state things as clearly as I can. I don't think a writer has an obligation to his or her fans other than to do an honest job. I think it's nice when a writer addresses fans' concerns, but I don't think that's required. Similarly, I think it's nice when fans show loyalty to a writer, but I don't think they're obligated to stick by one who's lazy or incompetent. More germane to this discussion, I don't think fans have a right to demand that a writer change his or her work simply by virtue of having paid money. We bought a game, not the right to dictate how LiS should use their time, and anyone who thinks they have that right is definitely beyond the pale. When LiS put out 2.0, that was a nice gesture. They would have been fully within their rights to keep the game as is. I had many complaints about LibDay's ending, and I would have been unhappier if they hadn't put out 2.0, but needless to say, I'd have survived. Granted, 2.0 was not a totally selfless gesture on LiS' part: As Magpie pointed out, the reviews were indeed bad, and it was in the series' interest to turn perceptions around. Things are different now; the reviews have improved, and as far as LiS is concerned, there is no compelling reason to tinker further with LibDay proper. Unless you can somehow change Samu's mind through eloquence and close reasoning, that's just how it is. Incidentally, I think 2.0 is a good example of why I think "endlessly revising" is the right phrase. As your poll shows, some players just wanted a better ending, and 2.0 satisfied them. Other players thought the midgame was faulty, and they're calling for more story arcs, as you're doing. Other people thought the entire setup was flawed and needed a complete rewrite. A 2.1 that adds midgame content will not satisfy the complete rewrite contingent, just as 2.0 didn't satisfy the midgamers. If you, hypothetically, are a midgamer, then you might argue that 2.1 would be enough and those calling for 2.2 are unreasonable, but of course, the 2.0 contingent would have choice words for you as well. And of course, there was a small but vocal contingent who thought the 1.0 version was a perfectly good game. It's a quagmire, and I understand LiS' desire to do 2.0 -- and no more. To get back on topic, you wrote that Samu was willing to add to LibDay, just not in the way that people really wanted to see. That's probably a fair assessment, but from my point of view, he's well within his rights to do what he likes. Here's an example of what I'm driving at: The Sunrider games are riddled with spelling and grammar errors and awkward phrasing. It's pretty undeniable that fixing those would improve players' perception of the series and lift it out of semi-amateur status. But LiS hasn't fixed them and never will; when they've made an effort to fix them, it's always been half-hearted and low-priority. That's their decision as a company, I assume based on their resources and obligations. I think it's misguided, but as a fan, I've made my peace with the fact that their games are always going to have typos. Similarly, while LiS is willing to make a kind of side story with [RE]turn, they're clearly not willing to look at a 2.1 or 2.2. You may think that's wrong; you may argue that LibDay's flaws will plague the series unless fixed now, and you may be right, but LiS doesn't have to fix them if it doesn't want to. Of course, there are consequences for actions, but if they're prepared for those consequences, then what can anyone else say? It's their life and their games. No one would be happier than me if Sunrider goes on to bigger and better things, but if it doesn't, I can live with that too.
|
|
|
Post by admiralcheese on May 21, 2016 16:37:40 GMT -8
I think Sharr's one of those people who just like arguing for the sake of arguing. All sizable science fiction fandoms draw out people like that. Fitting handle name too, perhaps he has awakened one too many times and ended up like this... It's like George Lucas changing things. If the director tinkers with what's already out there, the changes aren't necessarily going to be for the better. I'm sure that when the next Sunrider rolls out, there'll be people swearing "I loved Liberation Day and this new installment just doesn't live up" too. Nostalgia makes everything better, and whether you like a story is really subjective. I'm still waiting for the all Claude all the time special edition. You knooooow you waaaant to.................
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 21, 2016 19:10:17 GMT -8
This is probably at the crux of our disagreement, so let me do away with comparisons and state things as clearly as I can. I don't think a writer has an obligation to his or her fans other than to do an honest job. I think it's nice when a writer addresses fans' concerns, but I don't think that's required. Similarly, I think it's nice when fans show loyalty to a writer, but I don't think they're obligated to stick by one who's lazy or incompetent. More germane to this discussion, I don't think fans have a right to demand that a writer change his or her work simply by virtue of having paid money. We bought a game, not the right to dictate how LiS should use their time, and anyone who thinks they have that right is definitely beyond the pale. When LiS put out 2.0, that was a nice gesture. They would have been fully within their rights to keep the game as is. I had many complaints about LibDay's ending, and I would have been unhappier if they hadn't put out 2.0, but needless to say, I'd have survived. Granted, 2.0 was not a totally selfless gesture on LiS' part: As Magpie pointed out, the reviews were indeed bad, and it was in the series' interest to turn perceptions around. Things are different now; the reviews have improved, and as far as LiS is concerned, there is no compelling reason to tinker further with LibDay proper. Unless you can somehow change Samu's mind through eloquence and close reasoning, that's just how it is. Incidentally, I think 2.0 is a good example of why I think "endlessly revising" is the right phrase. As your poll shows, some players just wanted a better ending, and 2.0 satisfied them. Other players thought the midgame was faulty, and they're calling for more story arcs, as you're doing. Other people thought the entire setup was flawed and needed a complete rewrite. A 2.1 that adds midgame content will not satisfy the complete rewrite contingent, just as 2.0 didn't satisfy the midgamers. If you, hypothetically, are a midgamer, then you might argue that 2.1 would be enough and those calling for 2.2 are unreasonable, but of course, the 2.0 contingent would have choice words for you as well. And of course, there was a small but vocal contingent who thought the 1.0 version was a perfectly good game. It's a quagmire, and I understand LiS' desire to do 2.0 -- and no more. To get back on topic, you wrote that Samu was willing to add to LibDay, just not in the way that people really wanted to see. That's probably a fair assessment, but from my point of view, he's well within his rights to do what he likes. Here's an example of what I'm driving at: The Sunrider games are riddled with spelling and grammar errors and awkward phrasing. It's pretty undeniable that fixing those would improve players' perception of the series and lift it out of semi-amateur status. But LiS hasn't fixed them and never will; when they've made an effort to fix them, it's always been half-hearted and low-priority. That's their decision as a company, I assume based on their resources and obligations. I think it's misguided, but as a fan, I've made my peace with the fact that their games are always going to have typos. Similarly, while LiS is willing to make a kind of side story with [RE]turn, they're clearly not willing to look at a 2.1 or 2.2. You may think that's wrong; you may argue that LibDay's flaws will plague the series unless fixed now, and you may be right, but LiS doesn't have to fix them if it doesn't want to. Of course, there are consequences for actions, but if they're prepared for those consequences, then what can anyone else say? It's their life and their games. No one would be happier than me if Sunrider goes on to bigger and better things, but if it doesn't, I can live with that too. But that's just it - a writer, especially a game-maker, DOES have those obligations because that's one of the things that comes with having a fan-base; you have expectations and a community to support, and supporting it means taking them and their contributions, opinions and so-forth under consideration lest you just drive people away. Part of doing "an honest job" is to keep what the fans want in mind - that's the whole point of even making a fan-base in the first place, and it's as much a requirement of any writer who feels his job is worth a damn as it is for fans to be understanding of the dev himself. It is NOT as one-sided as you're trying to make it - obligations exist; nothing and I mean nothing can ever change that, but they are an equal two-way street. To "state things as clearly as I can", believing otherwise is (in my experience) wishful thinking at best and a fantasy at worst. You ARE obligated - it's "beyond the pale" to think otherwise because the issue is more balancing the two out. And actually, money's not germane to this because it's about the series in general; the price-tag doesn't change that. But that in and of itself is the issue - "I'd have survived." That's the same as saying you don't care that much - in fact, most of the argument feels more like you've said Samu shouldn't care about how his game is/turns out as much as his fans do. Moreover, the reviews only "improved" because they were re-reviews overlapped on top of those that were bad, Even more jarring is that most of them aren't even giving a thumbs-up because it's good - it's because it's better then it was. Worse still, I can only count on one hand how many of those reviews, positive or otherwise, didn't criticize the main story as being lackluster, linear, badly-executed or even botched - even people who said they loved it claimed the story was the WORST PART. It feels like Samu is letting the number of reviews influence his stance instead of what the actual reviews themselves are saying - like if there's more bad then good or vice-versa, he doesn't have to actually READ the feedback. The entire point of this was that I'm no longer sure "eloquence and reasoning" even matter to him anymore - just numbers. But again, that's NOT the case because V2.00 wasn't a revision - it was an expansion, which was closer to what people wanted for the MID-GAME, which makes "endlessly revising" the wrong phrase entirely. "Revising" is altering the path that's taken - changing the ending entirely or the like or replacing dialouge or changing the whole layout - which is arguably the TOTAL OPPOSITE of expanding. Look at the Mass Effect series' DLC - they added to the story but they didn't need to drastically change the main storyline or completely redo it's ending to do so (with 3 being the arguable exception). Also, for the record, only ONE person on that poll has actually called for a total rewrite - what's there is more then just salvageable; it just needs one extra arc to pad things out and not make the plot feel so rushed. The number of people who actually want a total rewrite is the minority - in fact, Marx is the only person I know who suggested it. Plus, you're making a pretty big assumption on whether or not it would satisfy the "rewrite contingent" in general if the story was proven salvageable, and any such "2.2" would already be satisfied by [RE]Turn. In short - your argument comes across as completely and utterly semantical, and dealing with a "2.1" would ensure the things people had issue with in LibDay don't have to dictate what the narrative of the next Sunrider game has to do to compensate for it. But counter to that, it almost feels like you're arguing Samu doesn't have a right to acknowledge what the feedback his fans are giving him actually is. Again, when you have a fanbase, you are in fact obligated to listen to them and take it under consideration - what you do with it and how it takes shape can vary, but that doesn't mean you can just do whatever anymore then they can demand whatever. Fanbases and creators share an EQUAL sense of obligation - neither side has more power then the other and both need to listen to each-other to create a successful community. Your arguing about grammar is another semantical example - it's something that isn't severe enough to be immersion-breaking like a story-narrative issue is; the scale of these issues is apples and oranges. You can claim otherwise all you want, but the fact of the matter is that sometimes what you want isn't always what's best - an issue that has plagued storywriters before because, just like any other human, they're not above reproach. Sometimes for the good of the story, you need to be able to step back and admit you made a wrong turn - something that not every writer can do if they're too close to the story in question. That's typically why big-name games nowadays have peer-review boards and assistant writers to offer input as well - and of course, why they even have COMMUNITIES in the first place. If they were "prepared for those consequences", the LibDay fiasco wouldn't have happened - nor would they have felt the need for V2.00 in response to the backlash. It may be their game, but it's no longer just their story - not once it gets a fanbase and community going. Like I said, that's part of what having fanbases is, and taking consideration of it is one of those "consequences."
|
|
|
Post by truebeliever on May 21, 2016 20:33:08 GMT -8
But that's just it - a writer, especially a game-maker, DOES have those obligations because that's one of the things that comes with having a fan-base; you have expectations and a community to support, and supporting it means taking them and their contributions, opinions and so-forth under consideration lest you just drive people away. Part of doing "an honest job" is to keep what the fans want in mind - that's the whole point of even making a fan-base in the first place, and it's as much a requirement of any writer who feels his job is worth a damn as it is for fans to be understanding of the dev himself. It is NOT as one-sided as you're trying to make it - obligations exist; nothing and I mean nothing can ever change that, but they are an equal two-way street. To "state things as clearly as I can", believing otherwise is (in my experience) wishful thinking at best and a fantasy at worst. You ARE obligated - it's "beyond the pale" to think otherwise because the issue is more balancing the two out. And actually, money's not germane to this because it's about the series in general; the price-tag doesn't change that. But that in and of itself is the issue - "I'd have survived." That's the same as saying you don't care that much - in fact, most of the argument feels more like you've said Samu shouldn't care about how his game is/turns out as much as his fans do. Moreover, the reviews only "improved" because they were re-reviews overlapped on top of those that were bad, Even more jarring is that most of them aren't even giving a thumbs-up because it's good - it's because it's better then it was. Worse still, I can only count on one hand how many of those reviews, positive or otherwise, didn't criticize the main story as being lackluster, linear, badly-executed or even botched - even people who said they loved it claimed the story was the WORST PART. It feels like Samu is letting the number of reviews influence his stance instead of what the actual reviews themselves are saying - like if there's more bad then good or vice-versa, he doesn't have to actually READ the feedback. The entire point of this was that I'm no longer sure "eloquence and reasoning" even matter to him anymore - just numbers. But again, that's NOT the case because V2.00 wasn't a revision - it was an expansion, which was closer to what people wanted for the MID-GAME, which makes "endlessly revising" the wrong phrase entirely. "Revising" is altering the path that's taken - changing the ending entirely or the like or replacing dialouge or changing the whole layout - which is arguably the TOTAL OPPOSITE of expanding. Look at the Mass Effect series' DLC - they added to the story but they didn't need to drastically change the main storyline or completely redo it's ending to do so (with 3 being the arguable exception). Also, for the record, only ONE person on that poll has actually called for a total rewrite - what's there is more then just salvageable; it just needs one extra arc to pad things out and not make the plot feel so rushed. The number of people who actually want a total rewrite is the minority - in fact, Marx is the only person I know who suggested it. Plus, you're making a pretty big assumption on whether or not it would satisfy the "rewrite contingent" in general if the story was proven salvageable, and any such "2.2" would already be satisfied by [RE]Turn. In short - your argument comes across as completely and utterly semantical, and dealing with a "2.1" would ensure the things people had issue with in LibDay don't have to dictate what the narrative of the next Sunrider game has to do to compensate for it. But counter to that, it almost feels like you're arguing Samu doesn't have a right to acknowledge what the feedback his fans are giving him actually is. Again, when you have a fanbase, you are in fact obligated to listen to them and take it under consideration - what you do with it and how it takes shape can vary, but that doesn't mean you can just do whatever anymore then they can demand whatever. Fanbases and creators share an EQUAL sense of obligation - neither side has more power then the other and both need to listen to each-other to create a successful community. Your arguing about grammar is another semantical example - it's something that isn't severe enough to be immersion-breaking like a story-narrative issue is; the scale of these issues is apples and oranges. You can claim otherwise all you want, but the fact of the matter is that sometimes what you want isn't always what's best - an issue that has plagued storywriters before because, just like any other human, they're not above reproach. Sometimes for the good of the story, you need to be able to step back and admit you made a wrong turn - something that not every writer can do if they're too close to the story in question. That's typically why big-name games nowadays have peer-review boards and assistant writers to offer input as well - and of course, why they even have COMMUNITIES in the first place. If they were "prepared for those consequences", the LibDay fiasco wouldn't have happened - nor would they have felt the need for V2.00 in response to the backlash. It may be their game, but it's no longer just their story - not once it gets a fanbase and community going. Like I said, that's part of what having fanbases is, and taking consideration of it is one of those "consequences." Again, I think we'll simply have to agree to disagree on this one. You seem to be envisioning the relationship between a writer and fans as being equal and collaborative, whereas I don't think there's anything written in stone that says it has to be that way. Actually, I think our exchange here points up how difficult it would be for fans to agree on how much revision -- or expansion as you put it -- would be adequate. Take your statement regarding typos, for example. To you, spelling and grammatical mistakes are irrelevant matters that aren't in the same league as storyline issues. In fact, I agree that storyline issues take precedence, but in my opinion, typos and awkward writing will undercut the immersive quality of any story, no matter how excellent. What may seem tolerable to you will not necessarily be so to another. If you want to argue that only those issues that are important to you are worth considering, be aware that other people are not obligated to agree with you. In fact, they probably won't, and the revisionary or expansionary quagmire I'm talking about would almost certainly come to pass. You and I both read Marx's criticism, for example; that thread, far from being united in opinion, was full of conflicting opinions. Will these vanish if LiS makes the additions you want and not others? Will the person who voted for a complete rewrite suddenly see the light and drop his objections? It seems I have less faith in the good sense and reason of fans than you do. As for whether saying, "I'd have survived," means I don't care, you're free to interpret that as you will. I do think it would have seemed overwrought and mentally unbalanced of me to have claimed that "I'd have died" if I didn't get my way.
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 21, 2016 21:17:12 GMT -8
But that's precisely my point as well - where exactly were you getting your own idea from? You were the one who came here impressing that idea - I'm pointing out though that (A) what you're saying pretty much defeats the purpose of even having a fanbase-community to begin with, (B) that marketet/publicly-released stories aren't exactly sovereign property of one person (especially not with video games/JRPG's/ect) since fans have a stake in it as well, and (C) that if any story was in fact such a sole property, it would make them all more fallible and prone to a degree of bias.
Again, not really - if anything, you and I aren't even in conflict on whether it would be for the best or not; we were fighting about "who's got the right to say what's right" or so-on. But contrasting that, when it comes to what we think would be best for the game's story, you yourself admitted you WOULD like said mid-game expansion to take place - your argument was more an attempt to say Samu shouldn't (need to) do so as opposed to whether or not you'd oppose it. Moreover, you doubly-agreed with me because you confessed that you'd prefer the story be added/expanded over the typos - you JUST ADMITTED it would be tolerable to you.
Also, I should point out that you're twisting my words rather badly - I never said what I alone found important was worth considering more. In fact, if comments on the forms and especially on Steam are any indication, I'm actually just echoing what most people ALREADY believe - that LibDay's mid-game was what needed attention the most. It's really not quite as tangled a web as you might think. Plus, what you're saying... really isn't anything he's not ALREADY dealing with even with [RE]Turn alone - not satisfying everyone who ever plays it is a norm for all games. The goal is to satisfy as much of it as possible - and from what I've seen, a mid-game arc that improves the flow, pacing and build-up of the story would have done that. Any complaints after that - THOSE are something the next game could deal with.
Also... I think you might want to re-read Marx's thread - because that seems to be the furthest thing from what I saw. If anything, the debates there (largely between me and him) were more about the merits of what LibDay's ending were/it's impact on the development. People had different beliefs, but there WAS a consensus - that LibDay's mid-game needed to have been longer and better expanded upon. What you're trying to say was "full of conflicting opinions" is, again, being semantical about it.
Not my point - more that you seemed to express apathy overall instead of really caring about the series enough to push for something. Again, you're taking it to a sharp extreme in contrast to my views.
|
|
|
Post by Marx-93 on May 22, 2016 1:16:44 GMT -8
Just to say, I wasn't the one who voted for a complete rewrite on that poll. I believe expanding the mid-game wouldn't work alone, and would need a complete rewrite to be somewhat effective (and by complete rewrite I don't mean changing the core concepts; simply rewriting the scenes), but I don't think that must or should be done. I didn't vote in the poll mostly because there was no "I'm not super-fine with it, but I just wish we would let it go and focus on the sequel/spin-off/whatever".
|
|
|
Post by SharrOfRyuvia on May 22, 2016 1:30:48 GMT -8
Just to say, I wasn't the one who voted for a complete rewrite on that poll. I believe expanding the mid-game wouldn't work alone, and would need a complete rewrite to be somewhat effective (and by complete rewrite I don't mean changing the core concepts; simply rewriting the scenes), but I don't think that must or should be done. I didn't vote in the poll mostly because there was no "I'm not super-fine with it, but I just wish we would let it go and focus on the sequel/spin-off/whatever". Likewise, I never said you were the one - just that (A) you were the only one (prior to Dextix) who said you felt a rewrite was for the best and (B) only one person had voted "complete rewrite" (though now that's changed). Never said you were the same as the voter, nor was it my intent to imply such. Likewise, I disagree that a complete rewrite is necessary - and ironically it was your own thread that convinced me of that; debating with you was what showed me LibDay's plot wasn't as horrible as my knee-jerk reaction made me think. In fact, the scenes themselves don't need heavy rewriting to work - if they were the closing moments of a longer narrative, they'd actually be passable. I wouldn't oppose such a thing, granted, but it wouldn't be required in my opinion. Also, the "fine as is" option is pretty much the one you're looking for in that case. But again, the issue with that is that future releases MUST focus on it - you yourself claimed games set precedents for their sequels, and by that logic LibDay set something of an inauspicious one that will make every single sequel/spin-off/whatever drag up questions of how, when and what form the criticisms of LibDay will be addressed. Or, to be more blunt, it's never going to be something that will be totally let go - especially not when (if Vaen is to be believed) the very things most criticized (Chigara's forced romance being a big one) are apparently "plot-essential" and therefore are so closely tied into the future plot that it'll be impossible to avoid them anyway.
|
|