Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@Madfox
I do it with comparison to another set. That is it is more helpful than the one writen for the author’s benefit. Of course it should be followed by details. The plain speak is something many readers can understand so “the characters are stupid” and its variation is far more helpful to readers than jargon filled “constructive criticism” most writers wanted. For most cases, potential readers actually is looking for opinions of the book. If it is a negative review then the reviewer saying that he hate certain character is enough. Further details is good if it is writen in entertaining way. Since constructive critism is rarely entertaining, writing such review would result into a TL;DR reaction from them. I know because it keep happening to me.
So a “the characters are stupid” will actually gain more weight to the readers than a bullet list of reason as to why the characters are stupid because it is more direct, colorful and emotional. The long constructive one is TL;DR, in most cases.
For that purpose, my examples is good enough.
Of course there are reviewers who are able to list down the faults or complaints without being a bore, reducing the TL;DR beaviour from other readers, but that require a great amount of writing skill and you can’t really expect readers to be that adept.
Also trying to illustrate that would make my post too long. It is too long already. I don’t want to post several paragraphs worth of someone’s review to make the point that is not what I’m essentially talking about.
And… Oh come one Madfox! Please read what I’m writing carefully.
I give the EA games as an example of fanatics outrage. That the worst form of hatred could come from the fans. Want bashing? Spiteful comments? Very, very unconstructive critism? Even death threats. Enrage the fans.
I don’t put it there to talk about the authors or the company. I was talking about the fans. I made it clear in the end of the pharagraph:
“Hatred from the fans might actually be more scathing than from the casual readers.”
And stating that the authors has nothing to do with the complaints is disingenuous. They are the one who write the story which is an essential part of an RPG and many of the complaints is about the story.
And the story of ME3? Horrible! Characters acting out of character. Plot holes to sink the Titanic. Extremely horrid use of Deus Ex Machina and a terrible ending. Way to end a trilogy. I actually think they had killed the franchise because of that ending.
Also is that what authors in the game industry really is like? Nasty.
@The Author Guy
Well, to tell the truth, I kinda agree about their reviews though I think to put way to little stars.
About Rupert. While I like his relationship with Tom, one thing I don’t like about him is that he is so exasperating. While I kinda like him when first introduced, he slowly show very annoying traits like his disrespect towards Jenn and his rather, unappealing dialogue. And such behaviour as when he run off from Tom’s cave and when he fly in the night into enemy’s teritory. He not actually irritating enough for me to hate him but I sort of symphatetic to their dislike of him.
About Rupert dragging down Tom. Most of the time it was Rupert who move the story along. Jenn’s rescue, attack on the ship, fight with Talarius. It is Rupert who make things go. He is essentially a Plot Device.
You are also a bit heavy handed on the drama in the ship with Tom and Rupert. I actually skip most of that part everytime I reread the book.
I also quite agree about Tom being passive. It was Rupert who make the plan to save Jenn. He is also just following other members (Jenn and Gastrope) around. He innitially did nothing in the ship when they are attacked. And he is essentially just loitering in Freehold. The reviewers seem to pin it down to Rupert.
And I also do find Talarius constant moaning about Melissance a tad annoying. While I can see that he was pained, I just can’t sympathize. We really know nothing about Melissance and we also doesn’t know Talarius very much. We don’t know their relationship and don’t know why it would pain him that much. As such, everytime Talarius mentions Melissance I just get annoyed. I only find him as an annoying whiner, crying for no apparent reason.
This though isn’t really a big enough problem for me to give such low scores.
As for longer constructive reviews, this is not really what would happen. Very few people could actually write a long detailed review successfully. I point out some reasons:
>Such things requires a lot of time and very few has that time to spare. A very detailed review could easily take an hour or more to write. When readers just wants to say their displeasure and doesn’t want to spend too much time, direct, short “the characters are stupid” kind of reviews is what they could come up with.
>It also requires lots of patience and dedications. To do such reveiws you actually hand to refer to the orinal literature a lot. Finding appropriate passages, recalling things you don’t like, pointing out plot holes, studying the structure, etc. That is not something many casual readers would do. This is especially difficult when you use mobile devices. As such reviewers would just give “the characters are stupid” review without backing it up because it is to tedious to do so.
>And the most important one, it requires a great deal of writing skill. Even if they have time, patience and dedication, its is very rare that they would actually be able to write it properly. For a review to be useful to other readers they must be able to read it. More often that not, people who write long reviews writes reviews that are: confusing, garbled, TL;DR, boring, awkward, unclear or hard to read. Those reviews are actually even less helpful.
And now my hand hurts for writing all of these. Hope your satisfied.
Did any TL;DRed?
@Anskier
Yes, this sort of thing is a problem. It is very difficult to be specific and detailed about your complaints becuase you had to put a spoiler in your review and I also hate spoilers. As such I rather avoid reviews that has the SPOILER warning on it.
TL;DR = Too Long; didn’t read. A term that is used others to denote that the post is too lengthly to bother reading. Similar to to Wall of Text.
I kinda understand that Tom is out of his element but there are instances that I would have liked him to be more active. For example I would like him to contribute more in the plan of saving Jenn and for him to fight back more sooner in the ship. He for now appears to be constantly dragged along by circumstances and other people. He did become more proactive in the end like when he studied magic but that might be a little too late for some… it seems.
I don’t mind his idealism because it add depth to the conflict, but it doesn’t seem that that is the cause as to why Tom is so laid back. For most circumstances, he appears too much like a deer caught in the headlights. A valid reason, but not satisfying.
As for Rupert, that maybe, but that still detracts alot from Tom whom I think many readers would be rooting for.
Also, it maybe true that kids nowdays are brats but these here aren’t modern children. Child rearing in early times is very different from child rearing now. Spare the rod spoil the child is an adage people follow, they literaly uses rods. Also, even in literature in modern setting, such characters aren’t well liked.
I can’t say if it needs to be changed because I still liked the book even with such ‘flaws’ that others deemed a deal breaker. This is still up to you.
Well, there is nothing in the book that I call a hero in any sense. Even Talarius who is the most heroic of all the people in there isn’t portrayed as a hero. I think the book has more in common with The Diskworld Series than The Lord of the Rings.
Also, just remember. I had said it before somewhere here: reality is boring. I think you shouldn’t put too much reality in your work. Work for complex and situational but never the banal.
Just think of the most timeless literature. Cinderella for example has an impossible rag to riches story but it resonates with other people. Sherlock Holmes is impossibly too observant and knowledgable which the people just loved. Romeo and Juliet are the most perfect of lovers that behave in the most unrealistic of ways that has people revited.
Your book, I think, isn’t meant to cater to the masses. That is risky. It might result to great success or obscurity.
Stilll. It is a great beginning. I hope you could gather more momentum with the second one.
Hmmm. So that is why there is so much mishmash of various fantasy stuff. There are a number of fantasy elements in the book, but Astlan.net list several more. I especially interested with the fantas characters. I’m looking forward for thier cameos.
Well, I was shooting your concept of what bards are. Many people give Bards too little credit thinking that they are just simple singers. Yours go over the top though. The job description is more than a Bard.
But then, Antefalken is a demon. Who says he just practice being a Bard? He might have practiced broader kinds of music and songs. Slow rock? Classical? Pop? Grunge? He is refered to as a bard but he could be actually more than one. That is actually more interesting than just a plain bard isn’t it not?
@Madfox
Well, that is not the same reaction the fanatics have. This is especially true in RPG. Mass Effect has one disappointing ending.
Yes. That is what I meant. I actually think that they just use sex for terror, like what Tizzy did with his accursed master, or gain favors.
Glad I could help… though I’m kinda worried as to why you have to track the number. Is something wrong?
Huh? Bards isn’t really much in history. They just often sing praises about their patrons.
What you are looking for might be a minstrel, especially a travelling minstrel.
A bard composing such ballad(?) as Battle of Vizenheim, I think, stretches the imagination too much. That is not the type of songs bards make.
But then, many people don’t know what bards really are. I have seen many wrong representation of them in TV, movies and literature.
Bards also seem to become a generic term for ancient composers even to those who are clearly aren’t bards.
I think you make a mistake. Bards songs are about certain person, their patrons. They make songs about their battles, their accomplishement, etc. Of course these can sources of historical information but that is not the intended purpose.
I also don’t realy remember that Bards are holders of oral history. Those are more of the jobs of storytellers which often are the troubadours or minstrels.
Shakespear is called The Bard for his poetic prowess and not for the subjects or genre of his works. Bards ARE poets in early times but their poetry are of specific kind. The meaning of the word become distorted in Shakespear’s time however and the title of Bard is given to great poets, whatever genre of poetry they are making. Robert Burns (Auld Land Syne) and Alexander Pope (translation of Iliad) are notable example of poets who are also given the title of The Bard.
Well, though poetry and songs are memorable and has such functions in early times; not all poets and singers are bards. I almost wince at movies where a person who is carying a harp is called a bard when he do not have an even tiny bit of anything bardic. Just being able to play on a harp and sing ballads doesn’t qualify them to being a bard.
You are right about culture though. The modern culture has very different idea of what a bard is, compared to what bards really are in medieval ages. The most common exposure that people get when talking about bards are humorous caricature and stereotypical depictions of bards in movies, games and cartoons.
And that last sentence of yours sounds like it comes from a video game and remind me of this series:
Wow! Your concept is quite exciting.
Its new though isn’t it? Not a shred of it is present in the first book. It would have been great though if it was given even just a passing nod in the first book.
“The thing you need to keep in mind, this book and Astlan is not based on the medieval world, it’s based on the stereotypical/idealized fantasy world.”
Well, that is kinda weird. With castles, keeps, knights, plate armor, Nobles (Barons), that psuedo latin, bards… I was quite sure that Astlan is heavily based on medieval world. Also stereotypical/idealized fantasy world is medieval fantasy. It is the one you see in most fantasy games and literature.
To give contrast, compare yours to Ancient Greek/Roman Mythology worlds. Or Arabian fantasy world. Or the Asian inspired world of Avatar: The Legend of Aang, the Last Air Bender.
Actually, Tizzy and I had already discussed this.
So, with all the excitement, we are going to have a Spell Singer as a character?
I kinda like the Spell Singer serries (well, the first few) and having a similar character in Astlan sounds so exciting! Lets see some Tom vs Spell Singer battle!For a Cover Art I prefer Scenes. It is because they are easy to understand and often is a very unified image. They are also closely resembling traditional artworks which is to my liking. The problem I had with this though is that many are overdone confusing mess, or halfhearted in boring, awkward or ugly picture.
I’m not so into Montages. One reason is that montages seem to be very inconsistent from cover to cover or too similar from cover to cover and I don’t like both cases. The first case makes the books seem unrelated, and the other is just plain lazy. Another reason is that they often seem slapdash. They often resemble some children poster project than professional cover art. Of course there are beautiful ones but my experience says that this is rare.
Figures. Another one that is easy to understand that has close tie to traditional artwork. This one has strong impact too becuase we are easily drawn to figures and faces. I think this one is the safest choice for cover art. But then this requires an artist that is really good at figures. I have seen book covers with figures that are unappealing, awkward, weak or stiff. There is also the “uncanny valley” that may 3D figures suffer from.
Symbol/Abstract. I’m really against this. First, this doesn’t reflect the rather fantasy medieval vibe and humour of the book. Second, unless your a wellknown author, such cover often isn’t really eye catching enough. I have seen this kind of covers and they tell almost nothing about the book to me. I had to really puzzle out the title, read the back, and read samples and other tedious stuff. I often judge these kind of covers on title. If the title doesn’t seem interesting… well…
Via internet? You’ll probably get trolls. Now an army of demon trolls might just make you lose your temper.
Still, what other things could you do with souls?
Scary, then I should stop posting right now. IN FACT I should bail out right now. How to unregister?
Who would sell their souls to the demons anyway.
And if you get me, be afraid. Be very afraid.
You mean those items are haunted? Time to call the Ghost Busters!
@Threefinger
Sounds awesome, you must go far beyond drawing though for it to be used as a book cover.
@lume
From what I can see, most fanfic reviews aren’t really harsh. Often the most devastating thing that happen is that you’ll get no reviews at all.
While at that topic, are you a fanfic writer? I have been reading fanfics recently and was even planning on writing one. Would like to read your writings if you have.
Where did that quote came from.
Goodreads, yes, more refined ways of giving feedback… but also for very harsh criticism. I have so much fun reading negative reviews there. There are many who are really serious in making reviews. The negative critism specially can be very entertaining.
As a Goodreads user (well, I haven’t use it for sometime now) and giving lot of negative reviews myself, I quite sorry for that kind of experience.
Though to balance:
These negative reviews is often a small number among the flood glowing reviews that only contains empthy praises. Though these negative reviews might be scathing, there are actually very few who have the courage or the dedication of writing such things. Most, as I often do, just not give a review when they find the book not to their liking.
Another point here is that these reviews is often for the other readers and not to the author. What you often see in the reviews are not about the reviewer talking to the author (which would have been more civil and boring) but a reader chatting to other readers. So, often, it would contain conversation that is typical of gossips.
The assumption that authors don’t read the reviews is not quite right. The more correct assumption that reviewers has is that the authors will not respond to you. That is what I assume when I write reviews, both positive and negative, on goodreads. Since this is the case, reviewers, like me, don’t want to write to the authors, who wont respond anyway; and instead write for other readers who do respond.
This assumption of no response is quite true, it seems, as you had pointed out. Author’s don’t respond to negative reviews, they also don’t respond to positive reviews. Essentially reviewers who write to the authors is writing into vacuum. That is quite discouraging. Writing with the author in mind is always received with silence; as the authors will never respond to it and other readers is unlikely to be aroused to respond to it. The reviewers then will often be forced to abandon being considerate to authors to be able to connect more with other readers. As you can see, this is quite effective, be it negative or positive, you’ll get more response if you write to other readers than to the authors.
If you really want to avoid a punch in the face when giving negative review, the only good way for that is to be impersonal and technical. I tried to do that with my negative reviews (which is plenty), but it is so boring to write in such manner and is not what readers are in this site for. After a few times of writing this way, I give give up. I had started writen in more unrestrained manner now and actually do give a “this suck” review at times, since that is actually what I feel.
Then there are those times when the reading material rubs you the wrong way, in that case, being considerate to author is the last thing in the reader’s mind. A heartfelt F**K Y** is actualy what such a person would actually say in the face.
Those rather inconsiderate reviews is not because readers think that authors are distant figures that will never see the reviews. Its because these readers (I’ve been guilty of this) don’t actually care. These people don’t write these reviews for the authors but to other readers. They did not like the book and writing to the authors is ultimately unsatisfying, so why would they write the reviews with the author’s in mind? These reviews are not a critisms for the author’s benefit but an almost personal talk to other readers, be it positive or negative.
