Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

The upgraded writing

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Gambler said:
Half of the time Feng blatantly lied, half of the time he seemed to know what very few people did.
You assume that those two actions are mutually exclusive. In fact, they are not. You can lie AND seem to have some rare knowledge.
Ok, fine. Remove "seemed".

Moreover, the notion of "the time" in this sentence is meaningless. Half of what time? Half of all the time he spoke? So, this sentence doesn't really make much sense.
Half of the time is a standard phrase, as far as I know, and it shouldn't be taken literally.

BTW, how can you talk you way out of assassination attempt? Hitmen don't usually chat with their victims.
Are you a hitman, by any chance? No? Anyway, I posted a dialogue sequence in the past featuring Feng talking his way out of such an attempt.

It was that his lies were indistinguishable from his truths.
Indistinguishable? From "his truths"?
That's the editor's version.

Anyway, both versions are not really impressive. I would probably use yours, because it's not much worse, it's more concise and, if I'm not mistaken, it's already done. Well, I realize this in not the most pleasant comment to read, but it's what I think.
Duly noted.
 

Pseudofool

Scholar
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
202
Location
Solipsism
Gambler said:
A good editor is the one that makes the final text to be up to the standards, whatever they are. Not the one who soothes author's vanity. In this particular case the editor was absolutely right to resort to heavy rewriting.
You're implying a false dilemma; a light-touch editor is NOT thinking of the author's vanity, but preserving the text, if the editor is willing to rewrite a text, said editor would write the damn text him/herself. And "standards" shift enormously given the audience, publishing house, magazine, and editor. In this case we're talking about an audience that is playing a game, not reading a book--the "standard" in video game writing (even crpg) is really not something VD should be going for.

If major rewrites are needed, and maybe they are, the editor should make recommendations, give a few examples, and ultimately let VD do the work so his voice/vision is kept intact. Editors and writers have A LOT of back and forth, and really the editor circles and the writer fixes.

Elwro said:
Pseudofool said:
I'm getting a Doctorate in English with Creative Writing...
But anyway, I agree with your view. Now that I look at the samples for the second time, I think that VD's style was "lost in translation".
Heck I'm surprised there weren't more mistakes. Anyways I'm a writer--spelling is what editors are for. :twisted:
 

MF

The Boar Studio
Patron
Developer
Joined
Dec 8, 2002
Messages
889
Location
Amsterdam
Pseudofool said:
Heck I'm surprised there weren't more mistakes. Anyways I'm a writer--spelling is what editors are for. :twisted:

Who the hell says 'anyways' with the trailing s, anyways? It kinda, you know, like, makes you sound like your teenage sister dismissing your carefully crafted arguments to pursue a course of discussion that suits her petty needs. As it were, you know what I'm saying?
 

Pseudofool

Scholar
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
202
Location
Solipsism
ichpokhudezh said:
Pseudofool said:
I'm surprised there weren't more mistakes. Anyways I'm a writer--spelling is what editors are for. :twisted:
BTW & OT, is 'solipism' one of the instances of what editors are for?
solipsism, oops, i've made that mistake for years.

Who the hell says 'anyways' with the trailing s, anyways? It kinda, you know, like, makes you sound like your teenage sister dismissing your carefully crafted arguments to pursue a course of discussion that suits her petty needs. As it were, you know what I'm saying?
I was being jokey you dork.[/quote]
 

John Yossarian

Magister
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
1,000
Location
Pianosa
This little interchange here is reminding me of the Steam account story. Pseudofool, I suggest you quit.
 

galsiah

Erudite
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Montreal
I agree with much of what has been said. The new versions flow more, but often lose the overall style.

I'm not sure the editor can be blamed for that if the plan was to have him "fix" it in one "edit" / re-write. As others have said, editing usually involves many iterations, with the editor pointing out problems and making suggestions, and the writer fixing things.

My worry is that VD's occasional bad wording / grammar / phrasing... is something the player will come to ignore [so perhaps not a great problem], whereas the loss of style is not something the player can put back in [bigger problem].

The ideal course of action would be to get the editor to take a much lighter approach, and pass things back and forth three or four times. I don't know if you have time for that.


One small point:
ichpokhudezh said:
4th: Original is much better ("A bloody..." vs "Open him up...").
Punctuation is inconsistent in the rewrite (no "!" after "Look alive, boys", but shouting names?)
My guess was that the "!" after the names was to emphasize the fact that it's an imperative.

In the first version, this: "Dias, an Aurelian's envoy..." seems to be saying that Dias is an Aurelian's envoy. [as in "VD, the designer of AoD..."]
Putting the "!" makes it clear that Dias is the person being addressed, not described.

Perhaps that should be clear from the context anyway, but the edited version is clearer in this respect.

If this (i.e. a character talking to multiple characters one at a time) happens quite a few times, perhaps each separate statement could be in a new colour / bracketed somehow.

In any case, at least the editor was trying to clear things up with minimal changes in this instance (simply by changing punctuation). Maybe it's not the best solution, but it's simple, and does solve a problem (if there's any chance that the player won't have realized that Dias is being spoken to).
 

Cruces

Novice
Joined
Oct 13, 2006
Messages
13
please use
Feng's exact age was undeterminable. He could only be described as old, usually followed by "bastard".
I laughed my ass off, I dunno if you were intending to sound like that, but it sounded a lot like terry pratchet who is my favorite writter EVAH

also I noticed this generally , the original writting has the weird sense of humor terry pratchet has, the after writting is rather poetic

all things considered I think I'd prefer the original writting, but I guess that's just me
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Cruces said:
please use
Feng's exact age was undeterminable. He could only be described as old, usually followed by "bastard".
I laughed my ass off, I dunno if you were intending to sound like that, but it sounded a lot like terry pratchet who is my favorite writter EVAH.
No, my English isn't good enough to allow me to imitate different authors.
 

ichpokhudezh

Liturgist
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Messages
179
Location
germantown, md
galsiah said:
One small point:
ichpokhudezh said:
4th: Original is much better ("A bloody..." vs "Open him up...").
Punctuation is inconsistent in the rewrite (no "!" after "Look alive, boys", but shouting names?)
My guess was that the "!" after the names was to emphasize the fact that it's an imperative.
Look Ma, No Verb! :cool:
 

cutterjohn

Cipher
Joined
Sep 28, 2006
Messages
1,629
Location
Bloom County
Claw said:
Personally, sometimes the new, at other times the original text seems better. There was some odd worfing in the original, but at times the new is too longwinded for my taste, and sometimes the meaning is changed.

"Feng was old. None knew his exact age." is supposed to be better than "Feng's exact age was undeterminable."? I don't see it.


Oh whatever. As long as it makes the critics happy.

I agree to an extent... something like:
Feng was ageless. No one was exactly sure how long he had been around other than it seemed as if he had always been... etc.

But overall the new writing is technically superior to the original, which I feel is more important overall. It also has a nice rhythm to it, while some of the old felt disjointed and forced.
 

galsiah

Erudite
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Montreal
ichpokhudezh said:
Look Ma, No Verb! :cool:
Yeah - maybe "imperative" made little sense, but you know what I mean. He's getting their attention by using their names, rather than starting a descriptive sentence with a name. The "!" makes this clear.

The usage seemed to have some imperativishnessmentdom, so I called it imperative. Perhaps it's short for "Dias (pay attention)!" or "Dias (listen)!". Language games and all that.


cutterjohn said:
But overall the new writing is technically superior to the original, which I feel is more important overall.
Is it more important though? The player can get used to bad grammar etc., but he can't add style and content which isn't there.
I'm not sure what's more important, but I don't think bland-but-competent is something to aspire to.

I'd certainly prefer to have things flowing better, with perfect grammar etc., but not at the expense of the feel. I'd have thought it'd be possible to get the best of both worlds, but only if VD can spend the time to work closely with an editor over a few iterations.

That said, I don't find either version bad - just not ideal.
 

ichpokhudezh

Liturgist
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Messages
179
Location
germantown, md
galsiah said:
In the first version, this: "Dias, an Aurelian's envoy..." seems to be saying that Dias is an Aurelian's envoy. [as in "VD, the designer of AoD..."]
Putting the "!" makes it clear that Dias is the person being addressed, not described.
....
you know what I mean. He's getting their attention by using their names, rather than starting a descriptive sentence with a name. The "!" makes this clear.
Yes, I do know what you mean. The term you are looking for is "address" (or direct address). Excl. mark is applicable, of course, to convey emphasis/emotion.
BUT. Your original point is incorrect (the address in the quoted sentence cannot be misinterpreted neither spoken nor written), and even if it were, it still wouldn't refute that the punctuation of the rewrite is inconsistent (there are several instances of implied emphasis, one of those is not marked by "!").
Regardless, with so many punctuation marks available (comma, colon, excl. mark and my personal favorite for this particular example - period) why does it have to be the exclamation point every time?
 

mathboy

Liturgist
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Messages
666
cutterjohn said:
But overall the new writing is technically superior to the original, which I feel is more important overall. It also has a nice rhythm to it, while some of the old felt disjointed and forced.
That sounds a lot like making the graphics pretty to hide the fact that there is no content.
 

Relien

Scholar
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
380
Location
Tremere chantry
galsiah said:
imperativishnessmentdom
:) That would be vocative [case]. I'm not sure if this term is a part of English grammar, but in several languages it's used for what you meant.
 

galsiah

Erudite
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Montreal
ichpokhudezh said:
BUT. Your original point is incorrect (the address in the quoted sentence cannot be misinterpreted neither spoken nor written)...
True once you've read the whole sentence, but you need to think of our poor dear reader.

The player hasn't read the whole sentence when he reads: "Dias, an Aurelian's envoy...".

The first clue he gets that "Dias" is being used to address someone (other than the fact that Dias is standing in the room - presumably??), is the lack of a comma after "envoy". That's too late if you want things to flow.

Anyone who hasn't noticed Dias in the room will probably assume the other interpretation [i.e. "VD, the designer of AoD..."] until they find there's no comma after envoy. At that point they'll go back to the start of the sentence and re-read it with a different understanding. [I did this - I doubt I'm unique]
Jane Austin may be full of this kind of nonsense, but it's still best avoided if possible [at least where the writing is a means to convey information, not something to relish in itself].


and even if it were, it still wouldn't refute that the punctuation of the rewrite is inconsistent...Regardless, with so many punctuation marks available (comma, colon, excl. mark and my personal favorite for this particular example - period) why does it have to be the exclamation point every time?
I'd say that "!" is the clearest indicator of the sense here.

However, that doesn't make it the best way to do things. I wouldn't say any punctuation is best suited to indicate a change in the person being addressed. I'd go for something else - e.g. highlighting, a colour change, a new line...


Perhaps all this isn't necessary - if it really is very clear that Dias is standing right there, and couldn't be thought of for a second as "an Aurelian's envoy".
However, I'm not sure that such changes of address would always be so clear. I'd have thought that it'd be preferable to clarify them somehow.
 

ichpokhudezh

Liturgist
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Messages
179
Location
germantown, md
galsiah said:
The player hasn't read the whole sentence when he reads: "Dias, an Aurelian's envoy...".

The first clue he gets that "Dias" is being used to address someone (other than the fact that Dias is standing in the room - presumably??), is the lack of a comma after "envoy". That's too late if you want things to flow.

Galsiah, your argument is so off-the-wall that it almost makes sense - I would've understood where are you coming from in case of half-page sentences with convoluted grammar.

We're discussing here a phrase with less than 20 words, and you are pointing out that having a comma four words from the start is "too late ... to flow". Are you yanking my chain?

In any case, if a guy stops reading mid-sentence, fuck him if he doesn't get what that sentence meant (construct something for the prettier part of the humanity yourself).
 

galsiah

Erudite
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Montreal
DarkSign: Yes - if this were being done for all text in the game. Since it's only gauging reaction and commentry (perhaps in too much detail) on a small subset of game text, it's hardly design by commitee.
It's more a focus group used correctly (one hopes) - i.e. to give an idea of the best approaches to use for the rest of the text; not to write the text themselves.

Whatever comes of this, I think it'd be a mistake to involve more than two people in writing the majority of the text [perhaps excepting the possibility that different writers take individual characters]. I also think it'd be ideal if VD can re-write parts himself (perhaps a few times) with editor input. Perhaps there's not time, I'm not sure.

I also note occasional moments of Pratchettism VD. That's no bad thing, since he's easy to read, dry and funny IMO.
That's mostly lost in the change to the second version (though there are many improvements). A shame I think.

ichpokhudezh said:
We're discussing here a phrase with less than 20 words, and you are pointing out that having a comma four words from the start is "too late ... to flow". Are you yanking my chain?
No. Currently some readers would read some way into the sentence with the wrong interpretation, then going back and re-read to get the right one.

This gets in the way of flow since things don't flow when you need to re-read sentences. [the writing might "flow", but that's no great thing if it only flows on second reading]

I am absolutely not "yanking your chain". The fact that it's four words in is immaterial. If many readers end up reading something twice through misinterpretation, that's a bad thing (when the aim is to put over information smoothly). Four words is less important than twenty, but an issue nonetheless.

In any case, if a guy stops reading mid-sentence, fuck him if he doesn't get what that sentence meant.
Not the issue. Anyone who doesn't bother to go back and read the sentence again might not be worth bothering with (probably not in the target market for this game).

However, my complaint is against the need for people to read things twice (not because they want to, but because it's necessary due to imperfect presentation). This is less than ideal. Just because I'm willing to read sentences twice or three times, does not make it ok for a writer needlessly to write stuff I'll misinterpret half the time.

Sometimes it might be the lesser of two evils to leave many players needing (not wanting) to read something twice. It's never (almost never??) a good thing in itself. If it can be remedied, that helps the flow of the writing and the game.
This is a good thing.

If the aim is to have players focusing to a degree on sentence structure, and poring over text like literary scholars, then by all means have them need to read things three times.
If the aim is to put over ideas and information smoothly, then readers should rarely need to read anything more than once. If they want to read things more than once, that's great of course.
 

ichpokhudezh

Liturgist
Joined
Jul 9, 2004
Messages
179
Location
germantown, md
galsiah said:
Not the issue...my complaint is against the need for people to read things twice (not because they want to, but because it's necessary due to imperfect presentation).
Well, there is definitely an issue of reading something that wasn't there in the first place.
Let me tell you, Galsiah, you did a fine job representing your people here.
I can only suggest though that with a little practice these problems will go away and will seem insignificant to all of you.
 

galsiah

Erudite
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Montreal
So are you suggesting that you can predict the presence/absence of a comma which may occur late in a sentence before actually seeing it (or the fact that it isn't there)?

When two interpretations are possible until some point, "practice" doesn't get you anywhere. You need to pick one interpretation - either of which might be wrong - until it becomes clear which is the right one.
[[[Bear in mind also, that a significant number of players like to read (some) dialogue at the pace it would (or at least could) be spoken. Not because they can't read faster, but because they prefer to. Even brief ambiguity can be offputting for such people - since it either takes longer to put things right, or requires that they change pace to accomodate the text.
If you think such a thing stupid, you're welcome to. The fact is that people do it, and a good writer/designer should attempt to accomodate this where possible/practical]]]

Whilst in theory it would be possible to bear every interpretation in mind until hitting the branching point, that's hardly conducive to good flow. Whether it's conscious or subconscious, the more effort that goes into understanding the construction of a sentence, the less focus a player will have on its meaning (assuming a fixed time spent reading it).

In so far as a sentence is at all ambiguous (at any point), or requires significant effort to understand (for anyone), that's a bad thing - when you want to put something over smoothly and clearly (intentional ambiguity/obfuscation is fine, of course).
If it's a necessary evil to achieve something worthwhile, that's fair enough - if unfortunate. If it's like that because you can't be bothered to make it clearer, it's a mistake.

If there is a place for elaborate/ambiguous sentence structure, it's not in games - unless the aim is to focus the player on the text itself, rather than what it communicates.
Novels are clearly another matter, but VD is not writing a novel.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that the particular example we started on is that important in this regard. I am saying that the editor's change fixed this (small) problem.
 

Mulciber

Novice
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
87
Location
The Frozen Wastes (of Manitoba)
I'm the rewriter/editor that did the rewriting that was posted at the start of the thread. I appreciate the constructive criticism that the text has received, though the couple of horrible grammar mistakes that I didn't catch make me cringe. I have reworked some of the bits that everyone found problems with. The changes in characterization, especially with Neleos, bring the dialogue closer to the description of the character that was provided.
Thanks for the reminder about 'The Elements of Stlye'. I've picked it up from the library before, but now I have my own copy on order.
And I do agree about the verbosity of some descriptions. I promise to keep an eye on it.
 

RGE

Liturgist
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
773
Location
Karlstad, Sweden
StraitLacedDeviant said:
Before:
Look alive, boys. There are people in this fine town who need killing. Dias, an Aurelian's envoy is expected to arrive today and deliver an ultimatum to Lord Antidas. A bloody accident should befall him before he reaches Teron. Coltan, your expertise in poison is required in a delicate family situation. [charname], can you handle two people?

After:
Look alive boys. This is a business, not a social club. Dias! An Aurelian envoy is expected to arrive today to deliver an ultimatum to Lord Antidas. Open him up from ear to ear and destroy any missives he might be carrying. Make sure that you kill him before he makes it into town... We need to avoid any diplomatic incidents.

Coltan! There's a family in town that needs your delicate touch. Make it look like food poisoning or the flux, I don't care which. Just keep it quiet and natural-looking. The address and names are in this scroll. You remember how to read, right?

[charname]. I've got a treat in mind for you. Hah. Don't look so worried. I'm not going to gut you yet. Do you think you could handle two marks at the same time?

This alteration here seems to change the tone of the character. From the original I got the image of a gruff straight to business killer, which would fit. In the second paragraph he's a friendly kidder, joking with his men while instructing them on who to kill. I prefer the former, adds a darker tone. You might be trying to add complexity to the character but a happy-go-lucky knife you in the gut while singing a merry tune type character feels a bit too close to DnD high fantasy pulp to me.
I remember complaining about a line that the assassin PC can choose to try to get paid more for the job. Something like "200 gold or you can cut his throat yourself, if you still remember how." To me that sounded a lot like "please, leader of my assassin guild, slash my throat for daring to insult you like that", but unless I'm fabricating a memory VD claimed that the assassin leader and the PC were on a familiar enough terms that the PC could get away with joking around like that. Now, VDs original text doesn't portray that, but the rewrite does. Just a small point.

Paranoid Jack said:
What I meant by that is the way the editors version reads to me... well they come across with a bit too much flourish. Overly dramatic, which would fit better while playing a character build with high intellect. A fancy-pants Scholar or whatever.
Then shouldn't that be the text that less intelligent PCs would see, as they'd probably consider people to be talking too fancy more often than more intelligent people would? And then you could use the more concise and less grammatically correct text for the more intelligent PCs, as they'd quickly understand what people say and also be able to find errors in the way they talk? ;)
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom