204 replies to this topic

[Theodur]

Yes, I appreciate BG1 somewhat more, too, though it had some not-exactly-perfect moments, as well as BG2. (Larry, Deryl and Deryl come to mind.)

The great Fourth Wall Breakage Offence?

[Kulyok]

The great Fourth Wall Breakage Offence?

It is certainly not something I like to see in the series.

[Theodur]

Off-topic, I think I remember you saying that you like Pratchett, right?

[Kulyok]

Certainly. I trust you see the difference between reading books, and diving into the virtual world?

I would also point out that the quality of Larry\Bondari\similar BG content is much lower than that of Pratchett's writing. Thankfully, Terry Pratchett is much more subtle.

[Theodur]

Certainly. I trust you see the difference between reading books, and diving into the virtual world?

I'd be happy to hear you explain the difference. Both of the worlds feel rather vivid and real when I immerse in the setting, no matter if its reading or playing.

I would also point out that the quality of Larry\Bondari\similar BG content is much lower than that of Pratchett's writing. Thankfully, Terry Pratchett is much more subtle.

Oh yes. Right. The very numerous RL references in his works are so very subtle. I still remember laughing about those about the modern music industry, or the Swiss chalet. Funny they were, subtle they weren't.

I'm sorry, but I find your dismissive comments about the quality of Bioware writing regarding the references to be borne out of your personal distaste of them - but then again, plenty of people find them to be the most amusing moments in the game. So I am just wondering, what sort of credentials do you have that allow you to pass the judgement over the quality of writing - or rather, the lack of it.

[Delight]

Certainly. I trust you see the difference between reading books, and diving into the virtual world?

I'd be happy to hear you explain the difference. Both of the worlds feel rather vivid and real when I immerse in the setting, no matter if its reading or playing.

Terry Pratchett writes humorous books.
BG is an epic saga.
Terry Pratchett's books are full of RL referneces, because he writes about stuff that happens in RL.

Edited by Delight, 24 October 2005 - 12:58 PM.

[SimDing0]

I'm sorry, but I find your dismissive comments about the quality of Bioware writing regarding the references to be borne out of your personal distaste of them - but then again, plenty of people find them to be the most amusing moments in the game.

So you think that the popularity of a piece of literature is reflective of its quality?

So I am just wondering, what sort of credentials do you have that allow you to pass the judgement over the quality of writing - or rather, the lack of it.

I wasn't aware we were required to submit our CVs every time we comment on writing.

[Theodur]

Terry Pratchett's books are full of RL referneces, because he writes about stuff that happens in RL.

Erm, no? He writes about stuff that happens in the fantasy world of Discworld that is full of wizzards and witches and magic? It's a fantasy setting that is perfectly equal to that of Faerunian.

[SimDing0]

And yes, if you try to immerse yourself in the lore and background of Discworld, you're probably in for a comparatively bad time.

[Delight]

Terry Pratchett's books are full of RL referneces, because he writes about stuff that happens in RL.

Erm, no? He writes about stuff that happens in the fantasy world of Discworld that is full of wizzards and witches and magic? It's a fantasy setting that is perfectly equal to that of Faerunian.

He writes about stuff that hapens in RL, but he makes it happen in fantasy world.

[Ghreyfain]

Terry Pratchett writes humorous books.
BG is an epic saga.

Why shouldn't there be humor in an epic saga?

Depends what you mean. Should there be a joke where we find a demi-god chinchilla, and laugh because the developers are telling us (the players) a joke, or is one of the in-game characters telling our in-game PC a joke? I dislike the former, but the latter would work for me in a game like BG.

As for Pratchett, humour is sort of what one expects from his books, so you won't be miffed when he breaks the somber, serious mood by having one of his characters do something outrageously hilarious because there is no serious, somber mood.

[Theodur]

So you think that the popularity of a piece of literature is reflective of its quality?

Let me put it this way: I am not arrogant enough to declare Tolkien's writing to be of bad quality just because I don't particularly enjoy reading LotR.

I wasn't aware we were required to submit our CVs every time we comment on writing.

Well, as far as I'm concerned, it's perfectly fine to say you don't like a certain element in the game. I could make a long list of things I don't like - but I don't like them because I think they are badly written and of sub-par quality. However, to declare something as a piece of bad writing and something that should not have been in the game... smacks a little of arrogance.

[Kulyok]

But by this post, you are literally stating that while you are allowed to say that in your opinion something is badly written and of sub-par quality, others are not.

My direct answer to your question: "It is certainly not something I like to see in the series." Is this not a personal opinion to you?

I would not bother with "in my personal opinion, and it is my point of view only, please, do not take it as the one and only true version, since it is only just how I, personally, view things" in my answers to Sim and Domi, since they, I assume - and I am sorry if I assume wrongly - do not make a difference between "this is crap" and "in my opinion, this is crap."

[Theodur]

But by this post, you are literally stating that while you are allowed to say that in your opinion something is badly written and of sub-par quality, others are not.

Umm, sorry, I think I wasn't clear enough in my previous post, so you could have interpreted in a way it wasn't intended. My apologies!

I meant to say: "I could make a long list of things I don't like - but that is not because I think they are badly written and of sub-par quality, I don't like them because they do not appeal to my tastes."

I would not bother with "in my personal opinion, and it is my point of view only, please, do not take it as the one and only true version, since it is only just how I, personally, view things" in my answers to Sim and Domi, since they, I assume - and I am sorry if I assume wrongly - do not make a difference between "this is crap" and "in my opinion, this is crap."

Ah, I see! Well, to me, that difference is very important. I don't find RL references or breaking of the fourth wall to be a sign of having a bad taste, in fact I rather like them for the most part, so you'll have to pardon me if I'm not overjoyed with people stating that "this is crap, this is bad taste and this should have never been in the game". To me, the subject of references is clearly a matter of taste and shouldn't be subject to outright dismissal, just because someone personally doesn't like them.

I hope we can at least still agree to disagree on this.

Edited by Theodur, 24 October 2005 - 11:11 PM.

[SimDing0]

And yes, if you try to immerse yourself in the lore and background of Discworld, you're probably in for a comparatively bad time.

I disagree unless you mean something completely different with immersing than I do.

No, I mean exactly the same by immersing. Whether something *has* background and lore doesn't affect how horrible the experience of immersing oneself in it is likely to be.

So you think that the popularity of a piece of literature is reflective of its quality?

Let me put it this way: I am not arrogant enough to declare Tolkien's writing to be of bad quality just because I don't particularly enjoy reading LotR.

But that doesn't seem to be anything to do with what I asked. Your defence of BG2's comedy moments was "it's popular". And so, I'm still asking, do you think that serves as an adequate defence of writing quality?

I wasn't aware we were required to submit our CVs every time we comment on writing.

Well, as far as I'm concerned, it's perfectly fine to say you don't like a certain element in the game. I could make a long list of things I don't like - but I don't like them because I think they are badly written and of sub-par quality. However, to declare something as a piece of bad writing and something that should not have been in the game... smacks a little of arrogance.

You really think it's that arrogant to suggest that "Run, my furry brothers! RUN!!" isn't neccessarily a great part of literary history?