Will English's Blog, page 13
April 23, 2012
Doggy problems.
This will be one of the rare times I actually will talk about what's going on in my life on here.
I have three dogs in this house. Two are young mixed breeds, and the third and oldest, Jack, is a pure golden retriever...and he's in decline. We don't know what's wrong with him exactly. One of his eyes is swollen with Glaucoma or, worse, a tumor, and In all likelihood he has cancer in either his stomach or nether regions. The vet can't seem to figure it out either.
One of his legs has gone lame too, another thing we can't figure out the cause for.
The vet can't tell anything, that is anything definite, from the blood work he took. But what it comes down too is this....Jacks' not long for this world.
I can only hope I'm wrong.
Well I could go on with this downer but that would depress me as much as it would you. So I'll stop here. Next time I won't be so depressing.
See you guys later.
I have three dogs in this house. Two are young mixed breeds, and the third and oldest, Jack, is a pure golden retriever...and he's in decline. We don't know what's wrong with him exactly. One of his eyes is swollen with Glaucoma or, worse, a tumor, and In all likelihood he has cancer in either his stomach or nether regions. The vet can't seem to figure it out either.
One of his legs has gone lame too, another thing we can't figure out the cause for.
The vet can't tell anything, that is anything definite, from the blood work he took. But what it comes down too is this....Jacks' not long for this world.
I can only hope I'm wrong.
Well I could go on with this downer but that would depress me as much as it would you. So I'll stop here. Next time I won't be so depressing.
See you guys later.
April 15, 2012
Unconscious World Building and how "Growing with the telling" might work.
I think a few posts ago I said that I had a fantasy novel in the works, and I most certainly do. I even have a short story in Walking With Summer Dreams that is set in the world that the novel will take place in (so check that out if you haven't already). And while I won't go into much detail about it now, I will say that I've been working on this same book, with uncountable fits and false starts, ever since I started in this business in 1997. But I've yet to complete a draft of it. There are probably several thousand psychological reasons for...no, no those early attempts just sucked and I knew it. Even back then I tried to hold myself up to high standards. As to why they sucked, Well I guess I can narrow it down to two major reasons; the first being that, in the throngs of Middle School and High School age stupidity, I thought a good story involved less characterization and more gore, tits and explosions. A notion that was quickly squashed by my Uncle and mentor Lamar Herrin, A published mainstream author and retired professor of English at Cornell University.
The second and most important reason was simply that, when it came to the world I was trying to play with, I had no clue what I was doing. Like a lot of naive young writers I suspect, I was under the impression that "anything goes" in fantasy without a hint of critical thinking. Well to make a long story short, I learned the hard way the importance of logic and consistence within a story (lol).
Today I've gotten much better at it, and the novel is coming along nicely but slowly. But as with any aspect of this craft, nothing is ever set in stone. As the tale "grows in the telling" so dose the world it lives in. Scenes, concepts and even characters can change faster than I can blink and I don't even realize it until after I've written it. Like for example: my magic system. Originally I had planned for my magic to be a part of nature itself, something that can be used by everyone to some degree or another, depending on what species the character was, without harm. I kept the idea for a long time until I realized that it was pretty generic and boring. So I did what any good writer did, I revised it. I gave it flaws and limitations. I even made it deadly for humans who over use it. I showed my notes to a creative writing professor whose class I was in at the time, and he noticed that I kept using the word "Summon" to describe a person using magic (among other things), he asked me "Is your magic sentient (alive)? Why do they have to Summon it? What brings about its deadly effects for humans who over use it?"
I have to admit...I didn't have an answer for him, not really. I had just used the word "Summon" because it was the first word to popped into my head. But now that I was faced with these questions I started to ask myself "is it?" I went back over my notes and discovered, holy crap it is. How could I have done that and not known about it?!
Here's another example of what i'm getting at: I have this concept in the novel I call "The Songs on the Wind," a phrase I originally was going to use as the books title, even though at the time I had no clue what the phrase meant or what it had to do with my story. Anyway, the original concept was that they were just beautiful songs that my variation of Fairies sung and that they were source of powerful magic. While some of that original concept still survives in the current version of the book, I recently came to a part where a minor fairy character mentions the "Songs" to one of my POV characters...but not in the context that I had originally intended. The context the character was using had to do with the "voice of the earth." I planned that scene out, put my pen down, looked at what I had just done and thought "Where the hell did that come from?" I went back over my notes and other material I had written on the subject and then eventually I realized "ya know, I've had this concept in the back of my head unchanged for decades now....and I just realized that, on the whole, it doesn't make an ounce of sense to me." and that thought led too: "and its not like I know how this mess would fit into the story." And that lead too "and there are parts of it that are salvageable." and then finally that thought lead to one: "did I mean for the "Songs" to be a voice of the Earth and/or magic all along?" I've since answered that question, and I think my universe is better for it.
I've often described writing as an undiscovered country, and that the writer or storyteller is the explorer, jotting things down as they see them, and that's certainly true. But I would also go further to say that the country of writing, like my magic system, is a living sentient creature that is consistently growing and changing on and on until it sails beyond the sunset and into the dark unknown. And that pretty much describes my world building, hell maybe my writing as a whole, experience: a half explored, sometimes nonsensical, and ever changing landscape that would make Dali proud.
I don't know if i'm making any sense here to anyone but me, because there are as many ways to world build (and write for that matter) as there are writers. But maybe that gave you faithful readers some insight into how my mind works. And if not...well, feel free to tell me how full of BS I am in the comments below.
See ya later.
The second and most important reason was simply that, when it came to the world I was trying to play with, I had no clue what I was doing. Like a lot of naive young writers I suspect, I was under the impression that "anything goes" in fantasy without a hint of critical thinking. Well to make a long story short, I learned the hard way the importance of logic and consistence within a story (lol).
Today I've gotten much better at it, and the novel is coming along nicely but slowly. But as with any aspect of this craft, nothing is ever set in stone. As the tale "grows in the telling" so dose the world it lives in. Scenes, concepts and even characters can change faster than I can blink and I don't even realize it until after I've written it. Like for example: my magic system. Originally I had planned for my magic to be a part of nature itself, something that can be used by everyone to some degree or another, depending on what species the character was, without harm. I kept the idea for a long time until I realized that it was pretty generic and boring. So I did what any good writer did, I revised it. I gave it flaws and limitations. I even made it deadly for humans who over use it. I showed my notes to a creative writing professor whose class I was in at the time, and he noticed that I kept using the word "Summon" to describe a person using magic (among other things), he asked me "Is your magic sentient (alive)? Why do they have to Summon it? What brings about its deadly effects for humans who over use it?"
I have to admit...I didn't have an answer for him, not really. I had just used the word "Summon" because it was the first word to popped into my head. But now that I was faced with these questions I started to ask myself "is it?" I went back over my notes and discovered, holy crap it is. How could I have done that and not known about it?!
Here's another example of what i'm getting at: I have this concept in the novel I call "The Songs on the Wind," a phrase I originally was going to use as the books title, even though at the time I had no clue what the phrase meant or what it had to do with my story. Anyway, the original concept was that they were just beautiful songs that my variation of Fairies sung and that they were source of powerful magic. While some of that original concept still survives in the current version of the book, I recently came to a part where a minor fairy character mentions the "Songs" to one of my POV characters...but not in the context that I had originally intended. The context the character was using had to do with the "voice of the earth." I planned that scene out, put my pen down, looked at what I had just done and thought "Where the hell did that come from?" I went back over my notes and other material I had written on the subject and then eventually I realized "ya know, I've had this concept in the back of my head unchanged for decades now....and I just realized that, on the whole, it doesn't make an ounce of sense to me." and that thought led too: "and its not like I know how this mess would fit into the story." And that lead too "and there are parts of it that are salvageable." and then finally that thought lead to one: "did I mean for the "Songs" to be a voice of the Earth and/or magic all along?" I've since answered that question, and I think my universe is better for it.
I've often described writing as an undiscovered country, and that the writer or storyteller is the explorer, jotting things down as they see them, and that's certainly true. But I would also go further to say that the country of writing, like my magic system, is a living sentient creature that is consistently growing and changing on and on until it sails beyond the sunset and into the dark unknown. And that pretty much describes my world building, hell maybe my writing as a whole, experience: a half explored, sometimes nonsensical, and ever changing landscape that would make Dali proud.
I don't know if i'm making any sense here to anyone but me, because there are as many ways to world build (and write for that matter) as there are writers. But maybe that gave you faithful readers some insight into how my mind works. And if not...well, feel free to tell me how full of BS I am in the comments below.
See ya later.
April 2, 2012
Hyped Games.
Bit of an announcement before we get started: The very talented Harrison Davies was kind enough to post a review of 'Walking With Summer Dreams' on Goodreads.com. So if you can check it out.
Anyway, a few weeks ago I went and saw the Hunger Games movie with my sister and her friend. I haven't read the book, so I only had the barest idea of what to expect. But while I was watching it my first thought was "tyrannical government drafting/kidnapping a bunch of kids? Taking said kids to a secluded location? Giving them weapons and forcing them to fight to the death? Dose this scream "Battle Royal" to anyone else? And for those who don't know, Battle Royal is a Japanese novel which was made into a movie in 2002 and basically has the same premise as The Hunger Games. No, I'm not going to sit here and bitch about how Mrs. Collins ripped off Battle Royal,because that's a waste of time. And, so far as I can tell, she didn't (at least not intentionally). I just want to establish that Battle Royal came first. But anyway, I came away from the movie underwhelmed. I'm sorry, but from where I am standing, 'The Hunger Games' is overrated. Why so is kinda hard to explain, so I'm either going to make a lot of sense by the time i'm done or I'm gonna end up looking like a complete jackass. Either way, please bare with me. And also remember that I'm talking about the movie, not the book (which I will remind you I haven't read).
First off, lets be honest, the premise of the story as a whole is pretty stupid. What sane government, tyrannical or otherwise, slaughters its youth population? And for what reason would you even think about turning it into a reality game show? I do remember the part in the movie where Donald Sutherland's character explains that the Hunger Games are a means to control the masses by giving each sector a certain amount of hope. Sounds like rooting for a sports team or something I dunno. But either way I don't buy it. Historically, successful authoritative regimes, if any can be called such, endure largely because two things: controlling the media/information output and brainwashing their population into believing that their way of thinking is correct. Hitler and the Nazi's were not able to stay in power for as long they did because they slaughtered million of people, they wanted power so they could do that. They remained in power because they stirred up long simmering hatred and fears that the German people, hell Europe as a whole, had been harboring for centuries and because they promised to turn the ruined economy around, which the regime before them really wasn't really doing. And once they came to power they controlled what the media reported, both within Germany and abroad, and they actively took steps to make sure that the younger generation would continue their ideas. I get that I'm suppose to "suspend my disbelief", but this is way to much of a stretch for me. If any country in the real world tried this, they would cease to exist within a few generations. And that's assuming that their population didn't rebel against it first. But now I'm reading to deeply into this topic so lets move on.
I was also bored to tears with the characters. Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mallark are as flat and uninteresting as Bella and Edward. Perhaps there is something I'm not seeing, but I didn't really see any real character development for these two. By the end of movie I didn't really feel like they had changed at all. Sure their is a romantic sub-plot which may or may not become anything if they decide to make squeals, but for the most part, I can't help but feel like Katniss's was just hamming it up for the audience and so that their sponsor would give her stuff she needed. That's what I feel like is part of the problem here, The sponsors are pretty much a magic umbrella that follow Katniss and company around and makes sure that nothing bad can really happen to her. Like for example the scene where Katniss gets burned and a sponsor sends her a salve to treat it, or when Peeta gets sick from an injury and a sponsor send her chicken soup and stuff to treat Peeta's wound. It kinda reminds me a lot of when Tuxedo Mask swoops down and saves Sailor Moon's ass in every episode of the anime, its just plain boring. And that's what I feel like is really stopping these characters from developing properly, there's too much of a safety net. Even before the titular games start the victims go through a few weeks worth of survival and weapons training like Roman Gladiators, all the while trying to impress the aforementioned sponsors. I felt it would have been infinitely more interesting if they had just thrown them out into the wild and let nature take its course. But as it is, there isn't really any real conflict to challenge the characters. And when I say conflict, I don't mean the fact they are all trying to kill each other. Violence for its own sake is not conflict, there has to be context within the story. And in this case, the context is survival. What I'm talking about is a little deeper. Instead of saying "wow shes killing people" I want to know how is forcing to kill affecting the characters? How is it changing them? And as I see it, The Hunger Games is extremely juvenile when it comes to this sort of thing. Katniss and the others might as well chiseled out of stone, they kill somebody and are effectively over it by the next scene.
By now some of you are wondering "What about the death of Rue? She died because she got trapped while helped Kitniss. She cried over it! That how its effecting her, she hates it." Well yeah your right. You know what else is true? After Katniss buries Rue, she effectively stops giving a shit. Even the romantic relationship, like I said before, felt like she was just hamming it up so people would feel sorry for her and Peeta. Although I will give Katniss credit for having the courage to give the metaphorical finger to the guys running the show by forcing them to declare both her and Peeta the winners.
Now look, I don't want to come off as if I'm hating on this movie or story because A) I don't by any means hate the story and B) I don't feel like I'm really qualified to judge it one way or the other. Because, like I've said before, I've only seen the movie and I haven't read the book. Sure they might share a common story and characters but they're still two entirely different things. And judging one based on the other is just stupid. That being said though, I will admit that the movie isn't exactly making me want to pick up the book. Don't get me wrong, I like reading YA books and watching YA movies as much as the next person. But if the Hunger Games is considered great storytelling, then I'm in real fear for the genre's future.Well that enough out of me. I'm out.
Anyway, a few weeks ago I went and saw the Hunger Games movie with my sister and her friend. I haven't read the book, so I only had the barest idea of what to expect. But while I was watching it my first thought was "tyrannical government drafting/kidnapping a bunch of kids? Taking said kids to a secluded location? Giving them weapons and forcing them to fight to the death? Dose this scream "Battle Royal" to anyone else? And for those who don't know, Battle Royal is a Japanese novel which was made into a movie in 2002 and basically has the same premise as The Hunger Games. No, I'm not going to sit here and bitch about how Mrs. Collins ripped off Battle Royal,because that's a waste of time. And, so far as I can tell, she didn't (at least not intentionally). I just want to establish that Battle Royal came first. But anyway, I came away from the movie underwhelmed. I'm sorry, but from where I am standing, 'The Hunger Games' is overrated. Why so is kinda hard to explain, so I'm either going to make a lot of sense by the time i'm done or I'm gonna end up looking like a complete jackass. Either way, please bare with me. And also remember that I'm talking about the movie, not the book (which I will remind you I haven't read).
First off, lets be honest, the premise of the story as a whole is pretty stupid. What sane government, tyrannical or otherwise, slaughters its youth population? And for what reason would you even think about turning it into a reality game show? I do remember the part in the movie where Donald Sutherland's character explains that the Hunger Games are a means to control the masses by giving each sector a certain amount of hope. Sounds like rooting for a sports team or something I dunno. But either way I don't buy it. Historically, successful authoritative regimes, if any can be called such, endure largely because two things: controlling the media/information output and brainwashing their population into believing that their way of thinking is correct. Hitler and the Nazi's were not able to stay in power for as long they did because they slaughtered million of people, they wanted power so they could do that. They remained in power because they stirred up long simmering hatred and fears that the German people, hell Europe as a whole, had been harboring for centuries and because they promised to turn the ruined economy around, which the regime before them really wasn't really doing. And once they came to power they controlled what the media reported, both within Germany and abroad, and they actively took steps to make sure that the younger generation would continue their ideas. I get that I'm suppose to "suspend my disbelief", but this is way to much of a stretch for me. If any country in the real world tried this, they would cease to exist within a few generations. And that's assuming that their population didn't rebel against it first. But now I'm reading to deeply into this topic so lets move on.
I was also bored to tears with the characters. Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mallark are as flat and uninteresting as Bella and Edward. Perhaps there is something I'm not seeing, but I didn't really see any real character development for these two. By the end of movie I didn't really feel like they had changed at all. Sure their is a romantic sub-plot which may or may not become anything if they decide to make squeals, but for the most part, I can't help but feel like Katniss's was just hamming it up for the audience and so that their sponsor would give her stuff she needed. That's what I feel like is part of the problem here, The sponsors are pretty much a magic umbrella that follow Katniss and company around and makes sure that nothing bad can really happen to her. Like for example the scene where Katniss gets burned and a sponsor sends her a salve to treat it, or when Peeta gets sick from an injury and a sponsor send her chicken soup and stuff to treat Peeta's wound. It kinda reminds me a lot of when Tuxedo Mask swoops down and saves Sailor Moon's ass in every episode of the anime, its just plain boring. And that's what I feel like is really stopping these characters from developing properly, there's too much of a safety net. Even before the titular games start the victims go through a few weeks worth of survival and weapons training like Roman Gladiators, all the while trying to impress the aforementioned sponsors. I felt it would have been infinitely more interesting if they had just thrown them out into the wild and let nature take its course. But as it is, there isn't really any real conflict to challenge the characters. And when I say conflict, I don't mean the fact they are all trying to kill each other. Violence for its own sake is not conflict, there has to be context within the story. And in this case, the context is survival. What I'm talking about is a little deeper. Instead of saying "wow shes killing people" I want to know how is forcing to kill affecting the characters? How is it changing them? And as I see it, The Hunger Games is extremely juvenile when it comes to this sort of thing. Katniss and the others might as well chiseled out of stone, they kill somebody and are effectively over it by the next scene.
By now some of you are wondering "What about the death of Rue? She died because she got trapped while helped Kitniss. She cried over it! That how its effecting her, she hates it." Well yeah your right. You know what else is true? After Katniss buries Rue, she effectively stops giving a shit. Even the romantic relationship, like I said before, felt like she was just hamming it up so people would feel sorry for her and Peeta. Although I will give Katniss credit for having the courage to give the metaphorical finger to the guys running the show by forcing them to declare both her and Peeta the winners.
Now look, I don't want to come off as if I'm hating on this movie or story because A) I don't by any means hate the story and B) I don't feel like I'm really qualified to judge it one way or the other. Because, like I've said before, I've only seen the movie and I haven't read the book. Sure they might share a common story and characters but they're still two entirely different things. And judging one based on the other is just stupid. That being said though, I will admit that the movie isn't exactly making me want to pick up the book. Don't get me wrong, I like reading YA books and watching YA movies as much as the next person. But if the Hunger Games is considered great storytelling, then I'm in real fear for the genre's future.Well that enough out of me. I'm out.
March 29, 2012
Novel in the game.
I must apologize for the lack of a post on Monday. I was sick with hay fever in the way that reminds you more of a bad cold than a stuffy nose. I'm feeling good enough to function but I'm still reeling a little. so I'll make this rant as short as possible. Oh one thing though: As part of the Magic Appreciation E-tour, the very talented Harrison Davies will be reviewing my book 'Walking with Summer Dreams' sometime in the near future. I will keep you all posted on that as soon as I learn more.
Anyway, this is something that's been kicking around in the back of my head for a while. How come there aren't many book to video game adaptions? No, no I don't mean novels that are based on video games, there are plenty of those (like the Gears of War novels, The Elder Scrolls novels, The Dragon Age novels Etc). And I don't mean novels based on Pen and Paper games like Forgotten Realms. I mean a novel (or series of novels) that have been adapted directly into interactive form. particularly in the fantasy in the sci-fi genre which in my opinion is just bursting at the seems for video game adaptions. Some of you will undoubtedly point to the never ending string of games based on The Lord of Rings, like the most recent example 'Lord of the Rings: War of the North' And Atlas' upcoming RPG based on George RR Martin's 'A Game of Thrones.'
"These games are based on books," some of you might say. Well yes and no. 'War in the North' is based on more on Peter Jackson's film versions of 'Lord of the Rings' and not so much the original books. Similarly, The Game of Thrones game is based on the TV series on HBO. And besides which, the two games in question are really spin-offs of their respective source material and not actual adaptions.
I've heard some people say that adapting a novel for an interactive format like video games isn't done normally because a novel doesn't really lend itself to an interactive medium without seriously butchering the story. I must disagree. Yes I will consed that changes will come into like they would with any adaption (video game, film or otherwise), but to say that these changes in of themselves is what's keeping the two mediums from coming into bed is just wrong in my estimation. Because, unlike a movie, a game can have the room to tell the full story with full character development. A case in point: Harlan Ellison's story 'I have no Mouth and I must Scream' which was adapted into a point and click adventure game for the PC in 1995. While Not a perfect adaption by any means, it still deviates from the plot and changes things around, but its still recognizable to anyone whose familiar with the story and at the same time it can be followed and understood by anyone who isn't.
Now, I can understand why some authors wouldn't want there work adapted for a video game, mostly because they probably don't want their work associated with a "kids toy." But I don't think that's really an issue anymore in this day and age. Video games are not strictly for kids anymore and they haven't been for a long time now, and since this relatively new medium is selling more than movies in some instances. I think its only a matter of time before we more novel to video game adaptions. Any thoughts on this fellow novelists?
Well I did say I'd keep this short. So I think this is as good a place as any to stop. Maybe one day I'll talk about this in more detail. And with that I'm out for now.
Anyway, this is something that's been kicking around in the back of my head for a while. How come there aren't many book to video game adaptions? No, no I don't mean novels that are based on video games, there are plenty of those (like the Gears of War novels, The Elder Scrolls novels, The Dragon Age novels Etc). And I don't mean novels based on Pen and Paper games like Forgotten Realms. I mean a novel (or series of novels) that have been adapted directly into interactive form. particularly in the fantasy in the sci-fi genre which in my opinion is just bursting at the seems for video game adaptions. Some of you will undoubtedly point to the never ending string of games based on The Lord of Rings, like the most recent example 'Lord of the Rings: War of the North' And Atlas' upcoming RPG based on George RR Martin's 'A Game of Thrones.'
"These games are based on books," some of you might say. Well yes and no. 'War in the North' is based on more on Peter Jackson's film versions of 'Lord of the Rings' and not so much the original books. Similarly, The Game of Thrones game is based on the TV series on HBO. And besides which, the two games in question are really spin-offs of their respective source material and not actual adaptions.
I've heard some people say that adapting a novel for an interactive format like video games isn't done normally because a novel doesn't really lend itself to an interactive medium without seriously butchering the story. I must disagree. Yes I will consed that changes will come into like they would with any adaption (video game, film or otherwise), but to say that these changes in of themselves is what's keeping the two mediums from coming into bed is just wrong in my estimation. Because, unlike a movie, a game can have the room to tell the full story with full character development. A case in point: Harlan Ellison's story 'I have no Mouth and I must Scream' which was adapted into a point and click adventure game for the PC in 1995. While Not a perfect adaption by any means, it still deviates from the plot and changes things around, but its still recognizable to anyone whose familiar with the story and at the same time it can be followed and understood by anyone who isn't.
Now, I can understand why some authors wouldn't want there work adapted for a video game, mostly because they probably don't want their work associated with a "kids toy." But I don't think that's really an issue anymore in this day and age. Video games are not strictly for kids anymore and they haven't been for a long time now, and since this relatively new medium is selling more than movies in some instances. I think its only a matter of time before we more novel to video game adaptions. Any thoughts on this fellow novelists?
Well I did say I'd keep this short. So I think this is as good a place as any to stop. Maybe one day I'll talk about this in more detail. And with that I'm out for now.
March 22, 2012
Interview is live
The interview I mentioned a few posts ago went live yesterday: Check it out ^_^. 
March 19, 2012
Personal rant: writing slow.
There are times when I hate writing. Because I get writers block like everyone else? Yes. Because I run out of ideas from time to time? Yes. Because I lose confidence in my skills as a writer from time to time? Yes. Because I have been known to start on something then stop because I'm afraid of what people will say when they read it... oh you get the idea. But mostly its because of two things: the first being my concentration is absolute garbage-I have ADHD like you wouldn't believe (and no, I'm not I'm not kidding)- but the other is simple: I'm a slow writer.
I know that that in of itself isn't bad, but there are times when I have a clear idea of what I want to write and then when I get started it takes me hours or even days to write one thing, even when it should take less than 15 mins. The why of this I only have a faint picture of. Some of it has to do with all the stuff I mentioned above. And the other part, I suppose, has to with to do with my weird sense of perfectionism. I write one sentence or a word, read over it, don't like it, and then try to go back and fix it. Same thing with grammar and spelling-something I've never been that great at to begin with. I go to fix it and then 7 times out of 10; I inadvertently end up making it worse. It gets even worse when I've already started a project and I start to feel as my middle isn't as good as the beginning. Most of time I plow a head and tell myself that I can go back and fix it later, but then there are times when my internal editor screams so loudly at me that it destroys any momentum I might have had. I just want to shoot that little bastard sometimes.
Now I don't want to sound like I'm complaining, but this has just been bothering me for a long while now and I have no idea how to fix it and make myself write faster, at least not without cutting corners and that I am not willing to do.
Maybe I'm just being neurotic here and all of this is just in my head and I'm worrying about nothing. But this sort of thing just comes with the territory I think. As Turman Capotie once said (at least I think it was him) "Show me a writer who isn't a little bit neurotic, and I'll show you a typist."
And with that, I'm gone.
I know that that in of itself isn't bad, but there are times when I have a clear idea of what I want to write and then when I get started it takes me hours or even days to write one thing, even when it should take less than 15 mins. The why of this I only have a faint picture of. Some of it has to do with all the stuff I mentioned above. And the other part, I suppose, has to with to do with my weird sense of perfectionism. I write one sentence or a word, read over it, don't like it, and then try to go back and fix it. Same thing with grammar and spelling-something I've never been that great at to begin with. I go to fix it and then 7 times out of 10; I inadvertently end up making it worse. It gets even worse when I've already started a project and I start to feel as my middle isn't as good as the beginning. Most of time I plow a head and tell myself that I can go back and fix it later, but then there are times when my internal editor screams so loudly at me that it destroys any momentum I might have had. I just want to shoot that little bastard sometimes.
Now I don't want to sound like I'm complaining, but this has just been bothering me for a long while now and I have no idea how to fix it and make myself write faster, at least not without cutting corners and that I am not willing to do.
Maybe I'm just being neurotic here and all of this is just in my head and I'm worrying about nothing. But this sort of thing just comes with the territory I think. As Turman Capotie once said (at least I think it was him) "Show me a writer who isn't a little bit neurotic, and I'll show you a typist."
And with that, I'm gone.
March 12, 2012
Things that drive me crazy: The great Role-Playing-Game war.
Quick note before I get started on this weeks rant: As part of the Magical Appreciation e-tour, I signed up for to be interviewed by the very talented Mrs. Danik Dinsmore on the March 21st. Check it out on her blogAnyway like I said in my last post, I love video games. And one of my favorite genres is the RPG, The Role-playing-game. Final Fantasy, Shin Megami Tensei: Persona, Chrono Trigger, Fallout, Mass Effect. I could just talk about these things for hours, I love this stuff. Well, I'm not sure how this happened, but in today's gaming culture apparently the RPG fan base is now split into two warring factions: on the one side you have people who like Japanese developed RPGs (or JRPGs) and on the other you have people who like Western developed RPGs (or WRPGs). And while its easy to just file this under a matter of personal taste, the great mighty thinking tank that is the internet (sarcasm) has escalated it into the equivalent of the feud between the Hatfield and McCoys as lead by Ren and Stimpy.
WRPG fans and critics will tell you their Japanese counterparts are not really Role playing games at all because of their liner nature, telling their plots through scripted cut scenes and dialogue and by having defined player characters as opposed to having a blank slates. They also complain about the JRPGs overuse of turn based battle systems, saying that a player can win just by mashing buttons over and over again. Many see this as a sign that the genre is growing stagnant, and are calling for developers to "fix" the genre so that it will "fit in" with today's gaming culture.
Similarly, JRPG fans and critics will tell you that WRPGs are becoming less and less like RPGs and more like action games. And that WRPGs emphasis on customization comes with sacrificing story and character development (within the games narrative) and boring battle systems which in this day and age are molded after either first and third person shooters (as is the case with Fallout New Vegas, The Elder Scrolls Sereis, and Mass Effect) or massive online RPGs like World of WarCraft (as is the case with the Dragon Age series).
By now, some of you are probably wondering what side am I going to come down on, and if I am going to be joining my brothers and sisters in destroying the other side. Well sorry guys, I won't be joining in the slaughter. In fact, I'm going to be standing on the sidelines laughing at you . Here's the truth people: Neither side is inherently wrong, nor are they inherently right either. And the criticism of one side can just as easily applied to the other. For example: I won as many battles button mashing in a WRPG (I'm looking at you Mass Effect and Dragon Age) as I have in a Japanese one. And I've been just as bored with the story and characters of Radiata Stories as I have been with Dragon Age Origins.
With all of that being said: I feel like this debate is one in which we are asking ourselves the wrong questions. Instead of arguing to the point of stupidity about the superiority of one genre over the other, or how one genre needs to be "fixed" we should be asking ourselves how do the two genre's influence each other? and how, if at all, does the current popularity of one genre change the other?
I mean, do you honestly think its a coincidence that Squareenix decided to go with such a radically different approach to the gameplay of both Final Fantasy 12 and 13 (when compared to previous entries in the series) while Bioware and Bethesda were getting fat and happy on games that played like both genres of shooters and MMOs? Or that Squareenix's game Nier, has a 30 year old man as its main protagonist when Mass Effect and Dragon Age have main characters in their late 20s and early 30s? Gimme a break. Just to further illustrate the point: compare this demo of the battle system for Mistwalkers upcoming Wii game "The Last Story":
With this battle from Mass Effect 2:
Don't the way the battles flow kinda look familiar? Both take place in real time, involve taking cover and hitting them from afar with a ranged weapon before going in and overwhelming the enemy? Am I the only one who sees this? Yup, Mass Effect 2 must have had an influenced on The Last Story's battle system.
It also works the other way around. I mean, have you ever noticed how Bioware's recent successes-like Dragon Age and Mass Effect-seem to combine a JRPG's liner story structure with the non-linear, so-called "freedom of choice" of WRPGs? At least int the sense that there is a strong over-arching narrative tying the game together, while at the same time giving the player the freedom to tackle that story in anyway that the player sees fit. In other words, WRPG companies took what worked with JRPGs and made it there own. And that's what I'm seeing happening now in reverse, just probably not fast enough. Food for thought. Well I could talk about this for another hour, but I think I've made my point. And with that: I'm out.
WRPG fans and critics will tell you their Japanese counterparts are not really Role playing games at all because of their liner nature, telling their plots through scripted cut scenes and dialogue and by having defined player characters as opposed to having a blank slates. They also complain about the JRPGs overuse of turn based battle systems, saying that a player can win just by mashing buttons over and over again. Many see this as a sign that the genre is growing stagnant, and are calling for developers to "fix" the genre so that it will "fit in" with today's gaming culture.
Similarly, JRPG fans and critics will tell you that WRPGs are becoming less and less like RPGs and more like action games. And that WRPGs emphasis on customization comes with sacrificing story and character development (within the games narrative) and boring battle systems which in this day and age are molded after either first and third person shooters (as is the case with Fallout New Vegas, The Elder Scrolls Sereis, and Mass Effect) or massive online RPGs like World of WarCraft (as is the case with the Dragon Age series).
By now, some of you are probably wondering what side am I going to come down on, and if I am going to be joining my brothers and sisters in destroying the other side. Well sorry guys, I won't be joining in the slaughter. In fact, I'm going to be standing on the sidelines laughing at you . Here's the truth people: Neither side is inherently wrong, nor are they inherently right either. And the criticism of one side can just as easily applied to the other. For example: I won as many battles button mashing in a WRPG (I'm looking at you Mass Effect and Dragon Age) as I have in a Japanese one. And I've been just as bored with the story and characters of Radiata Stories as I have been with Dragon Age Origins.
With all of that being said: I feel like this debate is one in which we are asking ourselves the wrong questions. Instead of arguing to the point of stupidity about the superiority of one genre over the other, or how one genre needs to be "fixed" we should be asking ourselves how do the two genre's influence each other? and how, if at all, does the current popularity of one genre change the other?
I mean, do you honestly think its a coincidence that Squareenix decided to go with such a radically different approach to the gameplay of both Final Fantasy 12 and 13 (when compared to previous entries in the series) while Bioware and Bethesda were getting fat and happy on games that played like both genres of shooters and MMOs? Or that Squareenix's game Nier, has a 30 year old man as its main protagonist when Mass Effect and Dragon Age have main characters in their late 20s and early 30s? Gimme a break. Just to further illustrate the point: compare this demo of the battle system for Mistwalkers upcoming Wii game "The Last Story":
With this battle from Mass Effect 2:
Don't the way the battles flow kinda look familiar? Both take place in real time, involve taking cover and hitting them from afar with a ranged weapon before going in and overwhelming the enemy? Am I the only one who sees this? Yup, Mass Effect 2 must have had an influenced on The Last Story's battle system.
It also works the other way around. I mean, have you ever noticed how Bioware's recent successes-like Dragon Age and Mass Effect-seem to combine a JRPG's liner story structure with the non-linear, so-called "freedom of choice" of WRPGs? At least int the sense that there is a strong over-arching narrative tying the game together, while at the same time giving the player the freedom to tackle that story in anyway that the player sees fit. In other words, WRPG companies took what worked with JRPGs and made it there own. And that's what I'm seeing happening now in reverse, just probably not fast enough. Food for thought. Well I could talk about this for another hour, but I think I've made my point. And with that: I'm out.
March 8, 2012
Intro/what the heck am I doing?
I really don't know where to start here. So I guess I'll just get things out of the way by saying that I'm still pretty new at this whole blogging thing and I can't really say that I'm that big on shouting my thoughts to the world. But I've started so I might as well continue to the end, right?
So about me: My name is Will. I'm a writer trying to get published, a (video) gamer, a fantasy/sci-fi geek and an overall nerd/Otaku who loves nerdy things. I first starting writing fiction in 1997 and I haven't stopped since then. I write mostly fantasy and Sci-fi but I will write horror and maybe some non-imaginative literature as well if the mood takes me. I published an E-book of short stories called 'Walking with Summer Dreams: Short Fiction' last year on both the Amazon Kindle and on Lulu.com seen here and here. The book is also part of the Magical Appreciation E-tour: seen here
I also have a proper fantasy novel in the works, but I won't talk much about that until I feel like its ready to be talked about in detail. So don't ask.
Anyway, I told myself I'd keep this short, but I suppose I'll use this blog to promote myself and just talk about whatever comes into my head and just hope that it will make senses. I'll try to update this thing regularly, but I won't say when. So yeah, I hope you all enjoy my rantings. I'll see you later.
So about me: My name is Will. I'm a writer trying to get published, a (video) gamer, a fantasy/sci-fi geek and an overall nerd/Otaku who loves nerdy things. I first starting writing fiction in 1997 and I haven't stopped since then. I write mostly fantasy and Sci-fi but I will write horror and maybe some non-imaginative literature as well if the mood takes me. I published an E-book of short stories called 'Walking with Summer Dreams: Short Fiction' last year on both the Amazon Kindle and on Lulu.com seen here and here. The book is also part of the Magical Appreciation E-tour: seen here
I also have a proper fantasy novel in the works, but I won't talk much about that until I feel like its ready to be talked about in detail. So don't ask.
Anyway, I told myself I'd keep this short, but I suppose I'll use this blog to promote myself and just talk about whatever comes into my head and just hope that it will make senses. I'll try to update this thing regularly, but I won't say when. So yeah, I hope you all enjoy my rantings. I'll see you later.
