Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don't Run into the Woods

onwriting.games

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 70 posts

Re: Don't Run into the Woods

#51

Post by ncr100 »

ghodith wrote: post #46
ncr100 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That reduction in process is ineffective when participating in introspection. This is a blog about marrying creativity and technicality, guiding writers who are creating story content for video games. In this case the author appears to be attempting to help encourage the reader to be introspective and uncover their own feelings as their play testing in progress video games, as part of the development of story content…

Are you the author? Somewhat strange to so defensively respond to every critical comment in this thread in the same manner.

I'm not the author.

Yeah it is strange. I've been thinking about that too, while writing them. I believe that I'm using this opportunity to understand rejecting criticality, as it relates to intention.

To go deeper, I think I frankly am lonely, and also feel pain about the dissonance between the commentary .. talking on this thread about the style of the author and missing the point of the author. That touches me in a sensitive place, related to the loneliness, where in my personal life I sometimes don't feel like I'm being heard in spite of my best efforts. Also some abandonment history. :P

Recently I took a 16personalities.com test and it gave me infp, And you know those tests are just like a slice of inside into you, not the whole picture. But it gave me an opportunity to think about some of the difficulties that I've had throughout my life socializing and how I have adapted to them. Largely around where I have some visionary optimistic idea and the responses a bunch of "poo poo's" from those around me, if you know what I mean? Resulting in me feeling rejection, and throughout my life trying to make sense of why. So it's top of mind.

Does this make sense?

Re: Don't Run into the Woods

#52

Post by justinator »

ncr100 wrote: post #49
justinator wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One can do a lot of good in the World just by reading Strunk.

Cute and to reinforce my point I think the intention of the author was not to provide a technical treatise but instead to use whimsy to help story writers access their emotions, by invoking and emotional response in them. It is telling to be that this thread of commenters is focused on criticizing the style, here. That's kind of fascinating to me.

The style is getting in the way of the message. Did I finish the blog post? I did not. Will I read more from this author? Chances are very low.

Sometimes style is the message. I don't think this is a good example of that, as the author is trying communicate unrelated concepts. A better way to do that is, "clearly".

What the writing reminds me of is myself, when I was nineteen, in art school. That is not an association you want to have made, as I thought I knew everything when in fact I didn't even know who I was myself. Clever just gets you so far.

Show me that you are confident in your writing, rather than hiding behind a messy style that you so desperately want me to be impressed with.

Re: Don't Run into the Woods

#53

Post by frantufro »

kwertyoowiyop wrote: post #2

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?

Thanks for the feedback, we’re all learning in this world.

I’ll try to do better in the coming emails.

Cheers!

Re: Don't Run into the Woods

#54

Post by ncr100 »

jvanderbot wrote: post #50
ncr100 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow that's harsh. I don't understand why you're saying that, here. Is this a backhanded compliment? Do you think they're being particularly effective because they're trying to evoke crackheads? I don't think that piece of writing is intended to be a technical treatise on creative writing. Instead, it to me reads as a tool to help technical writers for games to elicit effective story content that has an impact on the…

> Wow that's harsh. Totally true. I downregulated the feedback to be a little more kind. My experience living in LA may have colored my response. To address the meat of your response > it to me reads as a tool to help ... I don't see why this even qualifies as tool. There's no summary, not flow of logic, no conclusion really, just some thing a former mentor used to call a "walk through the garden of thought". Sure, t…

Thank you for the frank sharing of where you are coming from and clarifying so richly your thinking, it's really valuable to me. It shows me again how we all are different and soothes me to a degree, reducing my expectations of myself around strangers.

I agree with you, given that context. This article is not an effective brief nugget on emotional introspection for videogame writers.

I see it intended to be something different in style. And the fact that I choose to see it differently is the fascinating part to me, than this whole thread here on hacker news. It's like everyone else on this thread is upset and throwing their systematized note cards up in the air due to the article being unoptimized for Google's search engine. It's frankly odd to me, this mob of judgment jumping down the throat of the author.

Re: Don't Run into the Woods

#55

Post by k_roy »

out of everything here, I think it's this line that bugged me the most:

"in a book (or movie or tv show) the reader can either keep reading, or stop. that's it. that's as far as their agency can go."

At best, this is overly naive. At worst, it feels like intellectual dishonesty.

I can start or I can stop. I can rewind a chapter, forget about it for a month, pass out listening to an audio book. Some times, depending on my mood, the book, and my interaction with that book can be dramatically different. And all these things are going to change my perception and interaction with that book.

Even if it's a book I've read before and know how it ends, there is a lot more that feed into "agency" than just 100% on or off.

Re: Don't Run into the Woods

#56

Post by ncr100 »

justinator wrote: post #52
ncr100 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cute and to reinforce my point I think the intention of the author was not to provide a technical treatise but instead to use whimsy to help story writers access their emotions, by invoking and emotional response in them. It is telling to be that this thread of commenters is focused on criticizing the style, here. That's kind of fascinating to me.

The style is getting in the way of the message. Did I finish the blog post? I did not. Will I read more from this author? Chances are very low. Sometimes style is the message. I don't think this is a good example of that, as the author is trying communicate unrelated concepts. A better way to do that is, "clearly". What the writing reminds me of is myself, when I was nineteen, in art school. That is not an associatio…

I agree to an extent.

I agree that for you style is getting in the way of the message.

I don't agree that it's clear from the writing that the author is desperate, or wants to impress you.

Instead I speculate that the author does not care what > you I mean that's the only kind of conclusion I can come up with reading the article because it is clearly non-strunk & white english. So that leads me to think okay this is probably poetry or prose of some kind of whimsical or rhyming form.

And then I reread it and I see the words are closer to a stream of consciousness, as is talked about in other comments here. They're a little bit more structured than a stream of consciousness, in my view because the words appear to evoke feelings like notes in music, to a degree.

The overall point of the article, as it appears to be overtly stated in the footer, to help writers to be effective at writing for video games. And this post specifically is about pulling emotions from the writer into the video game that are appropriate to the meandering experience of a player.

So I liken the presentation here to be less conventional technical structured writing and more a song or a tune. And that's how I find this article useful.

Re: Don't Run into the Woods

#57

Post by LegibleCrimson »

ncr100 wrote: post #48
LegibleCrimson wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the expectation. The expectation is that everybody's thinking is a stream of thoughts very specific to the person and context. It's not naturally conducive to another person's consumption, or to long-term or comprehensive understanding. My thinking is a disorganized mess because that's the nature of thought in the first place. Your thoughts are everything you are experiencing or considering as you experien…

Ahhh, I see where you are coming from. That you have less shame than I thought for yourself when you say "mess". Thanks for clarifying my perception. It looks like instead it's more appropriate to talk about synchronizing with the intention of the author? To back up for a second and provide context, I was keyed up after reading and really focusing in on the parent commenters criticality, mocking and shaming. I percei…

Yes. I also find the article's prose difficult, but I really am not the target audience.

I appreciate your consideration and thoughtfulness. You're not far off in your assessment. I was trying to bridge a gap between the top-level comment and the negative reaction to it by using my own perspective as an example of why the presentation might be difficult for some people. I also don't appreciate the tone of the original criticism, but I did share the same disconnect with the content due to the presentation.

Personally, I feel that people should be able to express themselves however works for them. The article's prose isn't for me, but it really doesn't have to be. On the other hand, I do also feel that there's nothing wrong with others sharing their critiques of written works. I don't like the common sentiment of negative reactions to any and all criticism of anything. We are not our creations, and a criticism of a written work shouldn't be treated as hostile. Again, the mocking tone of the original criticism was distasteful, but not enough so to disregard it entirely (unlike another "crackhead" comment that crosses the line).

Re: Don't Run into the Woods

#58

Post by frantufro »

k_roy wrote: post #55

out of everything here, I think it's this line that bugged me the most: "in a book (or movie or tv show) the reader can either keep reading, or stop. that's it. that's as far as their agency can go." At best, this is overly naive. At worst, it feels like intellectual dishonesty. I can start or I can stop. I can rewind a chapter, forget about it for a month, pass out listening to an audio book. Some times, depending o…

I like what you’re saying.

I’ll think a bit more about this and see if it changes the point I’m making in any significant way, otherwise I’ll correct the statement in a future email.

Is it ok if I mention your comment there?

Post reply on HN