11–20 of 70 posts
there’s something about this writing style that really annoys me and detracts from the message. if you’re going to ignore the rules the payoff needs to be worth it otherwise you’re just being… self-indulgent?
there’s something about this writing style that really annoys me and detracts from the message. if you’re going to ignore the rules the payoff needs to be worth it otherwise you’re just being… self-indulgent?
I'm in the opposite boat. This style nicely mimics how I think. I find the types of fragment in the article align with the boundaries of each unit of thought in a manner that quite clearly approximates my internal dialog. I think your examples does a disservice, as your breaks do not follow such rules.
"Writing" is probably supposed to be general-audience presentation of information. By avoiding all rules of presentation, you invalidate everyone's ability to quickly digest the information. I tried to scan this as I usually do, and was forced to read each excruciating, disjointed, malformed line one by one to get to the point.
What a mess.
there’s something about this writing style that really annoys me and detracts from the message. if you’re going to ignore the rules the payoff needs to be worth it otherwise you’re just being… self-indulgent?
I won't speak to it's merits or problems, but just point out that I didn't find it hard to parse, perhaps because its familliar to me?
there’s something about this writing style that really annoys me and detracts from the message. if you’re going to ignore the rules the payoff needs to be worth it otherwise you’re just being… self-indulgent?
It's one thought per line. A few notes on a topic without the in between words. Works for me.
why not start with a linear narrative?
use all the techniques we already know and feel them in video game form?
have you heard of walking simulators? They're just that, with one or two
twists. Yet...
I'm not saying you should show it to anyone if you're not ready.
there’s something about this writing style that really annoys me and detracts from the message. if you’re going to ignore the rules the payoff needs to be worth it otherwise you’re just being… self-indulgent?
I grew up playing Pac-Man, Space Invaders, and the like. For me, the whole point of a video game is the gameplay, not some story that the creator wants to tell. I barely tolerate narrative in video games, and mercilessly skip cutscenes whenever possible. I have no interest in playing any of these so-called "walking simulators". But maybe that's just me.
there’s something about this writing style that really annoys me and detracts from the message. if you’re going to ignore the rules the payoff needs to be worth it otherwise you’re just being… self-indulgent?
So when they write, what they're doing is narrating the images and ideas playing out like a movie in their head. Unfortunately most narration needs pairing with an image to make sense.
I do appreciate though that this is written for a prospective author thinking of making the leap to writing for video games. They'd probably be interested more in the creation of narrative games. But maybe its worth considering how what I mentioned before can contribute to a narrative. An example that comes to mind is how in some simple games, items have a description that has some lore or a little joke. It reinforces the already existing player desire to explore and discover items, and makes it fun to see what each new one says. The key point here is that the descriptions don't even have to be good for this to work
there’s something about this writing style that really annoys me and detracts from the message. if you’re going to ignore the rules the payoff needs to be worth it otherwise you’re just being… self-indulgent?
I'm sure the author didn't intend that, it's just that how I read things being deeply incompatible with their style.
I do read some things "the normal way", but that requires either the text being densely packed, or a linear story.