How does one be heroic? Is it strength? Rippling biceps? Or is the leaps of faith you take in your life, all the while praying to the gods that the chances you take flip heads and not tails. Recently, I've been thinking of this ... the real connection of the heroes I admired as a kid, and the reality of the struggles of everyday life. What is it?
Is it the honor as a friend? Justice against those that do wrong against my friends? A stalwart guardian against the opposite forces of my family taking each other to the boxing ring and duking it out?
Heroism, not unlike cowardice, is bred upon an idea of justice. It takes courage to go against the sedentary normality of your life and take a chance. We, as human beings, don't want to get hurt. We wallow along as best we can, making the best of the rocks that we stumble across along the road, all the while hoping against hope that all our desires and dreams will just stumble upon our path through sheer chance, and the resulting conflict breeds into happiness.
Kids should not read fantasy novels, at least the reclusive youths that have no basis for manly behavior other than the books they happen upon at the bookstore.
I wonder if it's strength that drives me to do the things I do, and the actions I take each day. Today's society is full of a million Tiger Woods and Jesse James'. "Do what you can, as long as you can get away with it," I've heard time and time again.
If you see someone drop a dollar bill, would you simply pocket it or would you tap that man on the shoulder, give him a courteous nod, and give him back what is rightly his?
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Saturday, June 14, 2008
The New Generation
I often wonder about what type of audience my writing may appeal to. They always say, “be cognizant of your audience,” and while may be a poignant fact, it doesn’t tell you exactly how your supposed to capture your audience. What that statement doesn’t say, but inherently infers, is that you should write for the audience that has traditionally sold. This means, feminine readers (a la Mercandes Lackey and Andre Norton), or the more traditional pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons. However, when you look at the fantasy market today, especially with the influx of Harry Potter fans, most have never even heard of these atypical authors. They’ve never read the works of Anne McCaffrey, or induged themselves in the long-chapters of Tad Williams. Hell, a couple of months ago, I caught a glimpse of an Age of Conan book. Not the traditional AoC books mind you, but one based around the, “just released,” MMORPG. Not that anyone bought it.
How about the average 14 year old kid? Lets face it, he doesn’t read. Back in the day, when people first fell in love with fantasy, they clung to it as a baby hatchling clings to a mother’s warmth, it was necessity. They didn’t fit into the normal crowd, or circumstances demanded that they lived a life secluded from normal friends, be it through constant moving or family issues that demanded one work all the time. Fantasy, at least in my mind, to the LOTR generation, was something that demanded one imagine a place far away. It was a mindset that you had to buy into, because there wasn’t fancy pictures or games to do it for you. When you pictured elves, it was your elves that stared back at you, not some guy’s creatures. When you pictured battles, it was the heroes of your own imagination.
But I digress, how is the new generation of fans any different? They’re different because World of Warcraft isn’t something you have to “buy” into, you just hop in. You don’t have to picture the trees in your mind, because they’re already there. Harry Potter is a simple book, you don’t need an intricate understanding of vocab to buy into that. Hell, lots of people just watch the movies. On the other hand, this might truly be the next wave the fantasy readers.
So, the question remains. How do you appeal to an audience which fell in love with fantasy via a visual medium? Or can you at all? I’ve played with dozens of teenagers online, male and female alike, that seem to crave the fantastical realm that fantasy provides, and while some may like to read and write stories, the vast majority don’t.
Would shorter chapters help? Or how about more distinct visuals and more action? Would fancy covers determine the sales of your novel? Or are we damned to make constant Harry Potter copies?
I know what you’d say, and that would be to write for yourself. And personally, I think that’s crap. Not that I’m saying you should totally sell out, but if no one appreciates what you craft, then what’s the point at all?
The Next Generation (Not startrek) is a generation that, to me at least, is an untapped well of readers. What pickles me is that, given the choice between playing an MMORPG like Warhammeronline and buying the next George R. R. Martin novel, your average male fantasy fan would buy the game 10 times out of 10.
-Longbow
How about the average 14 year old kid? Lets face it, he doesn’t read. Back in the day, when people first fell in love with fantasy, they clung to it as a baby hatchling clings to a mother’s warmth, it was necessity. They didn’t fit into the normal crowd, or circumstances demanded that they lived a life secluded from normal friends, be it through constant moving or family issues that demanded one work all the time. Fantasy, at least in my mind, to the LOTR generation, was something that demanded one imagine a place far away. It was a mindset that you had to buy into, because there wasn’t fancy pictures or games to do it for you. When you pictured elves, it was your elves that stared back at you, not some guy’s creatures. When you pictured battles, it was the heroes of your own imagination.
But I digress, how is the new generation of fans any different? They’re different because World of Warcraft isn’t something you have to “buy” into, you just hop in. You don’t have to picture the trees in your mind, because they’re already there. Harry Potter is a simple book, you don’t need an intricate understanding of vocab to buy into that. Hell, lots of people just watch the movies. On the other hand, this might truly be the next wave the fantasy readers.
So, the question remains. How do you appeal to an audience which fell in love with fantasy via a visual medium? Or can you at all? I’ve played with dozens of teenagers online, male and female alike, that seem to crave the fantastical realm that fantasy provides, and while some may like to read and write stories, the vast majority don’t.
Would shorter chapters help? Or how about more distinct visuals and more action? Would fancy covers determine the sales of your novel? Or are we damned to make constant Harry Potter copies?
I know what you’d say, and that would be to write for yourself. And personally, I think that’s crap. Not that I’m saying you should totally sell out, but if no one appreciates what you craft, then what’s the point at all?
The Next Generation (Not startrek) is a generation that, to me at least, is an untapped well of readers. What pickles me is that, given the choice between playing an MMORPG like Warhammeronline and buying the next George R. R. Martin novel, your average male fantasy fan would buy the game 10 times out of 10.
-Longbow
Saturday, May 03, 2008
Female Centric Audience
One point that’s always perplexed me is the incontrovertible fact, according to some, that the easiest way to gain an audience in fantasy, is appealing to the pseudo-intellectual sub-genre of feminine-entrenched plotlines. While I’ve nothing against authors like M. Lackey, J.V. Jones or even Jo Walton, it has always angered me that the majority of authors that I sift through are soap-opera fantasy, where the main plot takes a backseat to cutsie-type banter between characters who always seem witty, fun-loving and misplaced in world that treat death as a commonplace occurrence. For example, I once bought M. Lackey’s Owlknight trilogy of books, and while there did seem to be a central theme around the protagonist based around his own magic, the whole book almost seemed stuck in this love conquers all role that irked me a bit. Even after horrific battles with enemy mages, the protagonist always found time for, what was essentially, a high school romance.
So, if these types of books are true sellers, why are the so-called “Great” fantasy authors always based around more grand storylines? On the other hand though, one has to point out the male-centric fantasy that serves as the polar opposite of the feminine-fantasy types, namely, Dungeons and Dragons, R. A Salvadore and any fantasy associated with Diana Duane, where the book reads like a video game. I recall in one of R.A Salvadore’s books, he actually gave his main character a, and I quote, “quest”
I understand that the market for books has dropped with the onset of the technological evolution, but why is it that fantasy publishers who target young males continually think the only thing that appeals to them are, “World of Warcrap books” that are so superficial, you could cut them with a knife and nothing would come out except dog doo doo.
And is there even a market anymore for the feminist fantasy? I’m all for female characters and quest-like male books, but what happens when the D&D generation passes on?
I don’t really have an answer to this, but it is a point of interest that, as I read books on fantasy … they point out you need a certain type of dialogue and feeling if you want to easily get your book published.
So, if these types of books are true sellers, why are the so-called “Great” fantasy authors always based around more grand storylines? On the other hand though, one has to point out the male-centric fantasy that serves as the polar opposite of the feminine-fantasy types, namely, Dungeons and Dragons, R. A Salvadore and any fantasy associated with Diana Duane, where the book reads like a video game. I recall in one of R.A Salvadore’s books, he actually gave his main character a, and I quote, “quest”
I understand that the market for books has dropped with the onset of the technological evolution, but why is it that fantasy publishers who target young males continually think the only thing that appeals to them are, “World of Warcrap books” that are so superficial, you could cut them with a knife and nothing would come out except dog doo doo.
And is there even a market anymore for the feminist fantasy? I’m all for female characters and quest-like male books, but what happens when the D&D generation passes on?
I don’t really have an answer to this, but it is a point of interest that, as I read books on fantasy … they point out you need a certain type of dialogue and feeling if you want to easily get your book published.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
War. Is it necessary?
War, or Bush’s folly, is not a subject to be glib about. If we’ve learned anything from the, “Greatest Generation” it is the folly of lunging headlong into the so-called glories of life-and-death struggles. Bullets do not fade. Some wounds never heal. World War I was called the “War to end all wars,” yet in reality, that couldn’t be the farthest from the truth. Centuries of conflict, intertwined within the lives of the maimed, the slain and the paupers, have taught us the harsh reality of war. It is harsh. It is unforgiving.
Yet, despite it all, fantasy is rooted within this animalistic culture of violence. Look at Age of Conan, yet another game spawned from the primal need to inflict as much gore and hurt on your fellow opponent. Darkfall, one of the more anticipated MMORPGs, promotes their graphics engine by stating, “You can see the wounds on other’s faces,” as if seeing the blood seep from an open sore was a good thing.
In seeing this, there is only one truth. Fantasy and War are intertwined. Conflict, like any story worth telling, is delved into the complexities of nations doing combat on the fields. This is the answer to the question, the deprecating truth that our mother’s don’t want to admit. So far, war is necessary in any great imagery of fantasy. What would Modisett’s Recluse Saga been without the war between Order and Chaos? What would Tolkein’s masterpiece been without Sauron?
Cool for games, not so much for the variety of fantasy.
Yet, despite it all, fantasy is rooted within this animalistic culture of violence. Look at Age of Conan, yet another game spawned from the primal need to inflict as much gore and hurt on your fellow opponent. Darkfall, one of the more anticipated MMORPGs, promotes their graphics engine by stating, “You can see the wounds on other’s faces,” as if seeing the blood seep from an open sore was a good thing.
In seeing this, there is only one truth. Fantasy and War are intertwined. Conflict, like any story worth telling, is delved into the complexities of nations doing combat on the fields. This is the answer to the question, the deprecating truth that our mother’s don’t want to admit. So far, war is necessary in any great imagery of fantasy. What would Modisett’s Recluse Saga been without the war between Order and Chaos? What would Tolkein’s masterpiece been without Sauron?
Cool for games, not so much for the variety of fantasy.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Getting Away With It
I never read the whole Robert Jordan series. And, while this may not preclude others from berating me with, “Your not a real fantasy fan” hate mail, it doesn’t mean that I don’t respect what he meant to the fantasy genre as a whole. I have read parts of his series, hell I got the first novel in his “Wheel of time” epic FREE from a bookstore that was trying to promote his third novel. But what nags me about Robert Jordan was that languid, buildup style. You know the one, where it takes FOREVER to get to the point, but once you get to the point, it’s a GREAT point.
Sure, the first time you glossed over that kind of style, a la Tad Williams, it seemed like an immersive world … but after the 10th novel of that kind, it does seem to run a tad bit overdone. So, in memory of the late James Oliver Rigney, Jr., I picked up my old copy of “The Eye of the World,” in hopes of recapturing that old magic that, I confess, I had when I gave his world a try the first time around.
To fully express my experience, let me set the stage. There’s a term in the film industry that a friend shared with me once, telling me about the word, “Shoe Leather.” In this, it refers to the times when the camera will show a character walking into a scene, with no real dialogue, for a couple of seconds. The purpose, as my friend aptly explained, was to make running time flexible, so if they were short or long they could cut and add these scenes appropriately.
This is when I realized, especially with the fledgling authors of fantasy who sparked a legion of fantasy fans, that some of these authors were sooooooo long winded. I mean sure, lets get to know the world, but COME ON, I don’t need to know every freeking facet of the world.
Back in 2005 I bought L.E. Modesitt Jr.’s “The Wellspring of Chaos”. For those who aren’t aware of LEM, he is the KING of child-hero fantasy, and also shoe leather extraordinaire! His novels are the type of novels that are the staple (even over LOTR) in middle-school’s collection of fantasy novels. So, in this novel, which I foolishly bought in hardcover, the WHOLE novel is about one thing … and that’s KILLING TIME! Reading LEM was always a guilty pleasure of mine, but this novel went too far. This was literally a book of the main character going from port to port and trying different types of fowl, then at the end killing a wizard.
Maybe it’s just me, but like many creative aspects of our society, reader’s tastes have changed. I just can’t get through those longwinded dialogues anymore, or the blatant chapters in books where it’s ONLY info dumping. Not that I’m saying I could do better, but COME ON! Gives us a bone here! Gone with the Wind, however a classic, isn’t the type of acting we want in our modern day movie stars. Happy-go-lucky superheroes aren’t the type people will relate to in today’s information-driven society.
Yet .. I’m still hesitant to pull the trigger on these long-winded type of books … because the payoff is so good. When I picked up George R.R. Martin’s first novel for the first time, I only got past the first 20 pages then put the book down. It was only months later, when I gave the book another chance, that I got past the infodumping and fell in love with his prose and style, and, for the first time in years, end up actually being surprised by what his fantasy characters did.
Can epic fantasy still be “epic” even without the longwinded tangled web of buildup? Is there a line between epic fantasy and just another D&D novel? Maybe time has unraveled the cobwebs and facades, blown past all the word counts and leaflets and truly faced us in the mirror and revealed epic fantasy for what it really was. Perhaps fantasy was truly a one hit wonder and that these days, with the flouring information superhighway, mythology based stories are a thing of the past.
Perhaps we, as fantasy authors and fans, were just getting away with it – that all fantasy has to follow a certain pattern or else no one will buy into it. Here’s hoping someone comes out of the woodwork with that wild style, and then we can finally stand up and say, this is how new-age fantasy should be written.
Sure, the first time you glossed over that kind of style, a la Tad Williams, it seemed like an immersive world … but after the 10th novel of that kind, it does seem to run a tad bit overdone. So, in memory of the late James Oliver Rigney, Jr., I picked up my old copy of “The Eye of the World,” in hopes of recapturing that old magic that, I confess, I had when I gave his world a try the first time around.
To fully express my experience, let me set the stage. There’s a term in the film industry that a friend shared with me once, telling me about the word, “Shoe Leather.” In this, it refers to the times when the camera will show a character walking into a scene, with no real dialogue, for a couple of seconds. The purpose, as my friend aptly explained, was to make running time flexible, so if they were short or long they could cut and add these scenes appropriately.
This is when I realized, especially with the fledgling authors of fantasy who sparked a legion of fantasy fans, that some of these authors were sooooooo long winded. I mean sure, lets get to know the world, but COME ON, I don’t need to know every freeking facet of the world.
Back in 2005 I bought L.E. Modesitt Jr.’s “The Wellspring of Chaos”. For those who aren’t aware of LEM, he is the KING of child-hero fantasy, and also shoe leather extraordinaire! His novels are the type of novels that are the staple (even over LOTR) in middle-school’s collection of fantasy novels. So, in this novel, which I foolishly bought in hardcover, the WHOLE novel is about one thing … and that’s KILLING TIME! Reading LEM was always a guilty pleasure of mine, but this novel went too far. This was literally a book of the main character going from port to port and trying different types of fowl, then at the end killing a wizard.
Maybe it’s just me, but like many creative aspects of our society, reader’s tastes have changed. I just can’t get through those longwinded dialogues anymore, or the blatant chapters in books where it’s ONLY info dumping. Not that I’m saying I could do better, but COME ON! Gives us a bone here! Gone with the Wind, however a classic, isn’t the type of acting we want in our modern day movie stars. Happy-go-lucky superheroes aren’t the type people will relate to in today’s information-driven society.
Yet .. I’m still hesitant to pull the trigger on these long-winded type of books … because the payoff is so good. When I picked up George R.R. Martin’s first novel for the first time, I only got past the first 20 pages then put the book down. It was only months later, when I gave the book another chance, that I got past the infodumping and fell in love with his prose and style, and, for the first time in years, end up actually being surprised by what his fantasy characters did.
Can epic fantasy still be “epic” even without the longwinded tangled web of buildup? Is there a line between epic fantasy and just another D&D novel? Maybe time has unraveled the cobwebs and facades, blown past all the word counts and leaflets and truly faced us in the mirror and revealed epic fantasy for what it really was. Perhaps fantasy was truly a one hit wonder and that these days, with the flouring information superhighway, mythology based stories are a thing of the past.
Perhaps we, as fantasy authors and fans, were just getting away with it – that all fantasy has to follow a certain pattern or else no one will buy into it. Here’s hoping someone comes out of the woodwork with that wild style, and then we can finally stand up and say, this is how new-age fantasy should be written.
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
The Mechanics of Change
Let’s face it, fantasy is in the doldrums. And, as much as I’d like to believe that movies such as Prince Caspian will force epic fantasy to the forefront, the more I feel that the movie will take fantasy a step backwards. Not that it doesn’t look like a good movie, but I feel myself skeptical of how it will feed us anything but the usual hero-fantasy dribble we’ve been force fed over the past few years.
Rise-to-power fantasy has been following a particular trend that seems almost SCREAMING for change. What am I talking about? Let me lay it out for you.
Lord of the rings started, as many know, as a children’s storybook. It captured the imagination of Tolkein’s extensive mythology background, and played on that to create a quaint little story of overcoming monsters. Not that this is an overall bad premise, but in all respects it was a forgettable one. But, like all great fantasy that came after it, it grew darker and darker. With each telling, the world shaped into an unforgiving world … a world of dark desires where greed rules all and heroes are defined as men who define common logic. Men who’s morals, based on nothing really, drive them to uphold what we define as “good” and sane. So, as the story goes, the story went from childhood tale, to dark after it sucked you in.
How about Harry Potter? Any fan will tell you, comparing the first book to the rest of the series will reveal that the first book is farrrrrrrr on the “light” side of the things that the books that preceeded it. So, in that respect, it followed the Tolkein template to perfection.
Now Prince Caspian comes along, apparently born of that same light, that same old adage. And, while I love that these classics are brought to the screne, I feel it may put the final nail in the fantasy coffin. That fantasy only falls into a neat little box, and can only draw in audiences by appealing to CHILDREN first and foremost, that fantasy in and of itself cannot appeal to the adult crowd. Sounds familiar? It should.
Margaret and Tracy Hickman reviewed their dragons of autumn twilight animated “movie” on their podcast a couple of months ago. In it, they describe their disappointment on how the producers dumbed the book down, focusing not as much on the characters and creating a tone that concentrated more on the aesthetics rather than appeals of emotion.
The problem, in my eyes, is that fantasy doesn’t have any real outlet to inspire change. Star Trek created fans, and challenged the normalcy of Science Fiction, breaking the common mold by inspiring those that came after it to appeal to a broader audience. No longer was Science Fiction a simple Saturday morning cartoon. The comic industry went through a similar change in the 50s, when there came a gradual transformation from goofy cartoons to sex-appealing, adult themed graphic novels such as “The Dark Knight Returns”, “Camelot 3000” and “The Watchmen”.
So, what does fantasy have? NOBODY! Did anyone watch that horror that was Eragon? How about that girl-infested girl with the bear movie that tanked? Or how about In the name of the King, featuring BURT REYNOLDS as a king! I mean GOOD GOD! Sure, its hard to change. Why would an executive fund a money based on a premise that has no real example in the fantasy realm to go on? We know HP made money, so why in the world would we do something else? Sure, LOTR was semi-adult theme, but it still had a child character in the center role. So, in this respects, I can’t entirely blame them.
Then again, outside the world of media, there is such a book that defines that fantasy needs. I’m sure you all know the author. Yes, friends, George R. R. Martain gives us hope. Let us pray that, someday, it might find itself on the silver screen.
Rise-to-power fantasy has been following a particular trend that seems almost SCREAMING for change. What am I talking about? Let me lay it out for you.
Lord of the rings started, as many know, as a children’s storybook. It captured the imagination of Tolkein’s extensive mythology background, and played on that to create a quaint little story of overcoming monsters. Not that this is an overall bad premise, but in all respects it was a forgettable one. But, like all great fantasy that came after it, it grew darker and darker. With each telling, the world shaped into an unforgiving world … a world of dark desires where greed rules all and heroes are defined as men who define common logic. Men who’s morals, based on nothing really, drive them to uphold what we define as “good” and sane. So, as the story goes, the story went from childhood tale, to dark after it sucked you in.
How about Harry Potter? Any fan will tell you, comparing the first book to the rest of the series will reveal that the first book is farrrrrrrr on the “light” side of the things that the books that preceeded it. So, in that respect, it followed the Tolkein template to perfection.
Now Prince Caspian comes along, apparently born of that same light, that same old adage. And, while I love that these classics are brought to the screne, I feel it may put the final nail in the fantasy coffin. That fantasy only falls into a neat little box, and can only draw in audiences by appealing to CHILDREN first and foremost, that fantasy in and of itself cannot appeal to the adult crowd. Sounds familiar? It should.
Margaret and Tracy Hickman reviewed their dragons of autumn twilight animated “movie” on their podcast a couple of months ago. In it, they describe their disappointment on how the producers dumbed the book down, focusing not as much on the characters and creating a tone that concentrated more on the aesthetics rather than appeals of emotion.
The problem, in my eyes, is that fantasy doesn’t have any real outlet to inspire change. Star Trek created fans, and challenged the normalcy of Science Fiction, breaking the common mold by inspiring those that came after it to appeal to a broader audience. No longer was Science Fiction a simple Saturday morning cartoon. The comic industry went through a similar change in the 50s, when there came a gradual transformation from goofy cartoons to sex-appealing, adult themed graphic novels such as “The Dark Knight Returns”, “Camelot 3000” and “The Watchmen”.
So, what does fantasy have? NOBODY! Did anyone watch that horror that was Eragon? How about that girl-infested girl with the bear movie that tanked? Or how about In the name of the King, featuring BURT REYNOLDS as a king! I mean GOOD GOD! Sure, its hard to change. Why would an executive fund a money based on a premise that has no real example in the fantasy realm to go on? We know HP made money, so why in the world would we do something else? Sure, LOTR was semi-adult theme, but it still had a child character in the center role. So, in this respects, I can’t entirely blame them.
Then again, outside the world of media, there is such a book that defines that fantasy needs. I’m sure you all know the author. Yes, friends, George R. R. Martain gives us hope. Let us pray that, someday, it might find itself on the silver screen.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Shadowbane Reboot
Shadowbane, the best MMO concept in the history of MMORPGS. Yeah, you heard me. Shadow FUCKING bane! Now, while this may pale in comparison to what the outside world has come to expect from mmos, SB at its purest was always the finest at it's core. No, i'm not talking about the PvP aspect of the game, but the immersiveness of it's world.
Lets face it, these days, MMOs are a dime a dozen. But, while the purists would want you to believe a fantasy mmo's sucess is based upon it's graphics, treadmill and quest number; the truth of the matter is that it is far from that. It is the immersiveness that truely defines a great mmo. This is why UO is still held, to this day, as the standard all mmo's a judged upon. To be fair however, UO's world was only big because of the lack of competition at the time, but that still doesn't detract from it's main selling point. It delved deep into your subconsious, creating a world you've never seen before and skills you've never touched. It was truely amazing to see the hand-held dice be replaced instead with buttons and characters that moved. Like Meridian 59, the world seemed limitless becuase you did not know what to expect and have not seen what had come before.
In leiu of this, Shadowbane was the next step. The world changed, as all great fantasy stories have done. It is not enough to put elves and trolls into a landscape, and hope one falls in love with the world, but one must capture one's mind.
Why is Shadowbane the greatest? Because of the human-player interactions that evolved out of a ruleset that, at it's heart, was limitless. Great kings were formed, holding rule over ENTIRE servers. (Server War) Rebellions formed within their own cadre of members, while factions fought to preserve what little they'd gained over the enormous empire. In other servers, greed populated some men's minds, creating towns who's sole purpose was money. (Money Tree) And still other servers seeded reigns of hope (KgB), desperatly trying to dicatate the rules of war against guilds who would have none of that.
This is the heart of why Shadowbane was the greatest, the fact that players were able to fall into the roles they've only dreamed of. While other games claimed, "You could be the hero", in Shadowbane you really could be. Hell, some guilds like Skyfang fell apart when their leader left for real life personal issues. THAT is a measure of power that other games could never acheive.
But, at the same time, this is also why Shadowbane failed. Faliure was too hard. Defeat was too big. In Shadowbane, if you said the wrong thing, to the wrong person, at the wrong time; (i.e. flaming on the fourms) you could find yourself at the end of a 100 character guild and blacklisted from any guild you tried to join. When you destroyed your enemies, your enemies were so decimated they tended to quit the game.
So, in retrospect, while Shadowbane was the greatest MMO, it was also a one time deal. It could have never survived at it's peak, even if it had fixed it's server-side and tower guard latency issues, it still would have died a premature death because of the toll inflicted on the losers.
Perhaps the Shadowbane Restart is a good thing, and while we may dream of a day when Darkfall becomes a reality, the truth is, whatever they do, it will be a shadow of what we experienced playing Shadowbane. Who know's how long it'll last this time? Is this a true reboot? No. Losses are still huge, and if a guild dominates the server, it's game over. But will that stop me from logging on? Probably not.
So, I guess, the time has come to log in once again, read up on those templates, and grease my axe.
I play to crush, let's hope that's enough for now.
Friday, March 07, 2008
10,000 B.C. and Fake Love
So one might chance upon this blog and say, "What does 10,000 B.C. the movie have to do with fantasy?" Well, my hapless friend, you are mistaken, because 10,000 B.C. IS fantasy. For one, it has no connection to reality. Two, it is hopelessly based on wish-fulfillment. And three, the hero saves the "princess" at the end.
For those of you that aren't aware, 10,000 B.C. is Ronald E's latest creation since movies like Id4, The Day after Tommorow and Stargate. I don't care what anyone says, ID4 was a very good movie. Not only did it have cool aliens, it also upheld that epic feel that's necessary for his type of movies. And, while some people may gawk at me saying this, the speech in the middle of the movie was great. I can't tell you how many times i would go over that, memorizing the words. (Yes, girls, I'm a geek) So what, may you ask, is the outcome of 10,000 B.C. ?
This movie was about 2 minutes away from being a good movie. HORRIBLE ENDING! I mean i know the american public won't readily accept a sad ending as, say the Asian market would, but COME ON! This may be a spoiler, but to kill off the female lead at the very end of the movie then bring her back to life FOR NO REASON OTHER THAN TO HAVE A KISS AT THE END is just plain crap.
Not only is 10,000 B.C. a corney wishfullfillment movie, it's a perfect representation of what's inherantly wrong with the fantasy genra. I mean what kind of 5 year old falls in love with the first chick he sees? I'm all for the, "we belong together" type storyline, but at least set it up. This movie has us believe that these two putzes are sooo destined to be together that they fall in love with each other for no other reason than they locked eyes when they were not even in puberty yet.
Sure, this worked during the infancy stages of speculative fiction but does it really still work? I mean come on. People aren't blown away by action comics number 1's storyline at first glance (unless they're comic fans) and they won't be amazed by such a lackluster storyline such as this. L.E. Modisett, Angus Wells, J.V. Jones and Mercedes Lackey are all victums of this type of storyline.
It's as if we dont even try anymore in these love stories. I may be blind, but trashy love novels should stay in their section. Is love so powerful if it's put on a platter then shoveled into our mouths in droves? Gahhh! 2 Minutes! That's all that it would of taken for it to be a decent fantasy flick.
For those of you that aren't aware, 10,000 B.C. is Ronald E's latest creation since movies like Id4, The Day after Tommorow and Stargate. I don't care what anyone says, ID4 was a very good movie. Not only did it have cool aliens, it also upheld that epic feel that's necessary for his type of movies. And, while some people may gawk at me saying this, the speech in the middle of the movie was great. I can't tell you how many times i would go over that, memorizing the words. (Yes, girls, I'm a geek) So what, may you ask, is the outcome of 10,000 B.C. ?
This movie was about 2 minutes away from being a good movie. HORRIBLE ENDING! I mean i know the american public won't readily accept a sad ending as, say the Asian market would, but COME ON! This may be a spoiler, but to kill off the female lead at the very end of the movie then bring her back to life FOR NO REASON OTHER THAN TO HAVE A KISS AT THE END is just plain crap.
Not only is 10,000 B.C. a corney wishfullfillment movie, it's a perfect representation of what's inherantly wrong with the fantasy genra. I mean what kind of 5 year old falls in love with the first chick he sees? I'm all for the, "we belong together" type storyline, but at least set it up. This movie has us believe that these two putzes are sooo destined to be together that they fall in love with each other for no other reason than they locked eyes when they were not even in puberty yet.
Sure, this worked during the infancy stages of speculative fiction but does it really still work? I mean come on. People aren't blown away by action comics number 1's storyline at first glance (unless they're comic fans) and they won't be amazed by such a lackluster storyline such as this. L.E. Modisett, Angus Wells, J.V. Jones and Mercedes Lackey are all victums of this type of storyline.
It's as if we dont even try anymore in these love stories. I may be blind, but trashy love novels should stay in their section. Is love so powerful if it's put on a platter then shoveled into our mouths in droves? Gahhh! 2 Minutes! That's all that it would of taken for it to be a decent fantasy flick.
From D&D to Fantasy Author
So a couple of months ago, I caught a podcast on the web, "The Secrets of Writing Podcast" which was a GREAT find for an aspiring speculative fiction writer like myself. He's a topselling NY Best Seller and he's a fantasy author, which are two things i can really admire in an author. While I really do care about the insight this man has for novice writers, I can't help but notice the trend when I did look into the man's history. Not unlike Ed Greenwood and R. A. Salvadore, Stackpole's inital thrust into the biz was through dungeons and dragons. He, no doubt, played it and eventually got around to designing it. From what i've read of his biography, it became a natural instinct to transfer his worlds onto paper. Thus I stumbled upon the aforementioned "trend". Fantasy authors whose only main thrust into the genra was through the table-top board game.
It got me to thinking. In a couple of years from now will there be a boost in the number of great fantasy authors out there? (besides me *blush*) The similarities are unmistable. D&D had heroic stories of saving the world and defeating the monsters. Diablo 2 had that. D&D had limitless worlds one could explores and live you could lose yourself in. MMORPGs have that. And while some may argue that it is not the same, graphic designers tell you otherwise. How many of us read through that World of Warcraft booklet? How many of us sifted through those game-inspired novelizations in the bookstore?
If you read through Stackpole's work, there's an undenyable feeling of the table-top board game. There's a quest, there's an exploration and there's confrontation. He's more of a plot-centric author, or so he says. His stories are based more on worlds than characters. (although he has great characterization) But does this really translate?
Unlike D&D, MMORPGs are not based on the imaginations of the player. Sure, games like Ultima Online were essentially D&D on the computer, but games have far surpassed that these days. These days, you can see the riffles of the leaves on the tree, every scale on that dragon and you can hear the foosteps of the incoming orge from the comfort of your own home. There's no dungeon master that's speaking in tongues, making the world alive, but RAM converting data into images. One could even say, epic fantasy is dead; that fantasy is left to Harry Potter and Eragon. The naysayers will tell you a plain and simple fact, that video games do not entice the player to interact with the world as much as D&D did.
I never did play the table-top game, despite numerous attempts to join a game. It felt too bland to me. And, in some ways, so does it feel to the reading public. There has to be a reason why G.R.R. Martain does so well or how authors tend to suceed more when writing outside the Forgotten Realms and so forth. Fantasy is still in its inception. Sure, LOTR's myths in itself, can define the genra, but even still ... there has to be more to it. The market is still there for great heroes with swords, of mages who cast spells and of monsters lurking in the darkness. I see it every time I logged (past tense HINT HINT) on World of Warcraft, I see it whenever I hear about the excitement around a new fantasy game and I feel it every time I discover that new author who breaks the boundries of what is and what is not fantasy.
I am not the D&D fantasy generation. I can only hope that I am the next.
-Longbow
------
R.I.P Gary Gygax
July 27, 1938 - March 4, 2008
It got me to thinking. In a couple of years from now will there be a boost in the number of great fantasy authors out there? (besides me *blush*) The similarities are unmistable. D&D had heroic stories of saving the world and defeating the monsters. Diablo 2 had that. D&D had limitless worlds one could explores and live you could lose yourself in. MMORPGs have that. And while some may argue that it is not the same, graphic designers tell you otherwise. How many of us read through that World of Warcraft booklet? How many of us sifted through those game-inspired novelizations in the bookstore?
If you read through Stackpole's work, there's an undenyable feeling of the table-top board game. There's a quest, there's an exploration and there's confrontation. He's more of a plot-centric author, or so he says. His stories are based more on worlds than characters. (although he has great characterization) But does this really translate?
Unlike D&D, MMORPGs are not based on the imaginations of the player. Sure, games like Ultima Online were essentially D&D on the computer, but games have far surpassed that these days. These days, you can see the riffles of the leaves on the tree, every scale on that dragon and you can hear the foosteps of the incoming orge from the comfort of your own home. There's no dungeon master that's speaking in tongues, making the world alive, but RAM converting data into images. One could even say, epic fantasy is dead; that fantasy is left to Harry Potter and Eragon. The naysayers will tell you a plain and simple fact, that video games do not entice the player to interact with the world as much as D&D did.
I never did play the table-top game, despite numerous attempts to join a game. It felt too bland to me. And, in some ways, so does it feel to the reading public. There has to be a reason why G.R.R. Martain does so well or how authors tend to suceed more when writing outside the Forgotten Realms and so forth. Fantasy is still in its inception. Sure, LOTR's myths in itself, can define the genra, but even still ... there has to be more to it. The market is still there for great heroes with swords, of mages who cast spells and of monsters lurking in the darkness. I see it every time I logged (past tense HINT HINT) on World of Warcraft, I see it whenever I hear about the excitement around a new fantasy game and I feel it every time I discover that new author who breaks the boundries of what is and what is not fantasy.
I am not the D&D fantasy generation. I can only hope that I am the next.
-Longbow
------
R.I.P Gary Gygax
July 27, 1938 - March 4, 2008
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
American Idol. What?
Ok, i'll admit that American Idol isn't the first thing you think about when you're trying to corral a blog about Fantasy, but hear me out here. I've always been compelled by the emotions that people have about songs that, to be frank, HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE BETTER! Not that i'm truely clueless, but really, what's the point?Take, for example, the fine performance of Jason Castro. Albeit a fine performance, but not Jeff Buckley for sure. Although, to be fair, no one can top what Buckley did. My whole point about that is the pain invovled with the song. Now i'm not going to claim to be an pseudo-typical white kid with a guitar, but even i've seen that legendary vid of Johnny Cash doing nine-inch nail's hurt. If you've seen that vid (hint, it's on youtube, hint) you know what i'm talking about. It's not the fact that the guy's singing about pain that brings people to tears, it's the fact that the guy lived through the damn thing. It's his hard voice, that old man pouring his heart out. Hell, when i first heard the song, i didn't even know it was johnny cash (cause i heard it through the radio) but i thought it was a BRILLANT piece of music.
Tieing this in, (this is the fantasy part of the blog, keep up!) this reminds me of series like Robin Hobb's The Farseers and even George R. R. Martin's current series, The Game of Thrones. There's pain there, especially in Hobb's work. If you've ever read those books, starting with the assasin's quest, you know what i'm talking about. I kept reading the book in teh vain hope that something, just something, might save the poor main character from painful after painful experience, but, as i didn't know, that point would never come. That's the thing about pain, it's more interesting than happy-go-lucky storylines *cough* Anne M *cough*
Ok, I lied about that last part. By the time Robin Hobb got to the last book, it had become so depressing that the pain she inflicted on the last character wasn't as driven as the earlier books. Not to mention her next novels blew ass, being as interesting as water evaporating.
Yet, more and more, I come to think about the translation of the feeling you achieve from a musical medium, and its translation to the page, especially fantasy. I've been on a tangent recently, picking book after book of new writers hopping that i'll find the next George R.R. M. and get swept up in a tale that i'll look forward to. (At least until GRRM releases his next book)Gail Z. Martain, One of the new L.E. Modiesett books and even picked up one of the earlier R. Jordan books i've never heard, and still it feels like the same old stuff. Not only that, its predictable.
I can remember the last time i read a book and was genuinely surprised, and that was GRRM's books. You'd be reading along, entranced by GRRM's sweeping landscapes and orantly flawed characters, then get caught up in the fantasy of it all and then start to think that the hero will defeat the villan ... then BOOM GRRM would kill off the very character you were rooting for. Caught off guard the first time, I honestly said, "Well that can't happen again, well done Mr. Martain" Then BOOM the next three chapters are of all of main characters dying, until "literally" one is left.
Does it have to be that drastic? Still, i'd settle for more emotion and less wishfulfillment authors in the market. Damn J.K. Damn Harry Potter. And damn the lemming publishers.
Tieing this in, (this is the fantasy part of the blog, keep up!) this reminds me of series like Robin Hobb's The Farseers and even George R. R. Martin's current series, The Game of Thrones. There's pain there, especially in Hobb's work. If you've ever read those books, starting with the assasin's quest, you know what i'm talking about. I kept reading the book in teh vain hope that something, just something, might save the poor main character from painful after painful experience, but, as i didn't know, that point would never come. That's the thing about pain, it's more interesting than happy-go-lucky storylines *cough* Anne M *cough*
Ok, I lied about that last part. By the time Robin Hobb got to the last book, it had become so depressing that the pain she inflicted on the last character wasn't as driven as the earlier books. Not to mention her next novels blew ass, being as interesting as water evaporating.
Yet, more and more, I come to think about the translation of the feeling you achieve from a musical medium, and its translation to the page, especially fantasy. I've been on a tangent recently, picking book after book of new writers hopping that i'll find the next George R.R. M. and get swept up in a tale that i'll look forward to. (At least until GRRM releases his next book)Gail Z. Martain, One of the new L.E. Modiesett books and even picked up one of the earlier R. Jordan books i've never heard, and still it feels like the same old stuff. Not only that, its predictable.
I can remember the last time i read a book and was genuinely surprised, and that was GRRM's books. You'd be reading along, entranced by GRRM's sweeping landscapes and orantly flawed characters, then get caught up in the fantasy of it all and then start to think that the hero will defeat the villan ... then BOOM GRRM would kill off the very character you were rooting for. Caught off guard the first time, I honestly said, "Well that can't happen again, well done Mr. Martain" Then BOOM the next three chapters are of all of main characters dying, until "literally" one is left.
Does it have to be that drastic? Still, i'd settle for more emotion and less wishfulfillment authors in the market. Damn J.K. Damn Harry Potter. And damn the lemming publishers.
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Starting anew ...
A year is a long time ...
Strike that, a year is a LONGGGGGGGG TIME for inactivity. Although I don't necessarily apoligze for the lack of content, writing and updates; I do regret I’ve been sorely lacking in what I envisioned was a blog I would keep up with.
But that’s neither here nor there …
A few couple snippets that’s been festering in my head the past year …
What HAPPENED to MMOS?
There’s nothing like sitting within the realm of heroes and villains, nothing like the feeling of completing that quest or killing that monster. Maybe I’m an addict, but MMOs are a gaming experience unbeknownst to those poor fools that think CS is the end all of the gaming world.
But what happened to the MMOs? There’s practically no MMOs out there … strike that … THERE ARE NO MMOs out there. World of Warcraft, for all its glory, is killing the genra. Sure, studios like Stray Bullet Games and Darkfall’s creators hold the torch for the innovative and fun, but even their promises feel more and more vaporous as the years pass by.
Vanguard? DDO? Guild Wars? Don’t make me laugh.
And, to top it all off, it seems like every few months Blizzard announces, “Congratulations on a new milestone, 10 billion subscribers plus we’ve taken over the world.”
WHAT HAS GAMING COME TO?
Now, in the self necrotic feces loving piece of crap that I am often does, I’ve looked past my hatred for WoW and looked deep within myself … asking the question i’ve avoided like a plague. Have I outgrown games?
Sure, who has the time these days. Ever since I’ve entered the workforce, time has come few and far between. Now, instead of time to kill, it seems like every time I turn on the computer, I’m forcing myself to play some pieceofcrap game that I don’t even enjoy.
Yet, when that nagging feeling of dread knocks at my door, good old shadowbane comes to the rescue. Couple months ago I reactivated my account for the 10th time (lost count really), then got into the sway of things. OOPS, can’t compete versus the Chinese nation, time to cancel and quit again.
Books
Now this, above all things, pisses me off the most. Fantasy Novels have become so drab since Harry Potter’s induction, that it makes me want to gag. Don’t get me wrong, I think the HP books aren’t too shabby, and are a good representation of what attracts people to the, “bow grows up to be a hero” storyline, but in its inception, a slew of Ender’s Game wannabes have come out of the woodwork. I mean what the hell was that aragon … ER I MEAN ERAGON piece of crap book/movie?!?!?! How about the seeker? Need I go on?
Why hasn’t George R. R. Martin’s books ever been adapted to live screen? Why hasn’t Robert Jordan’s movie planning ever pan out? (May he rest in peace) And why, for the love of god, has the Ender’s Game Movie ever finish a script? (Yes, it’s in the works)
Isn’t it Terry Brooks that said Fantasy defines the nature of the human spirit? Wasn’t fantasy not only an escape, but an adventure. As much as I appreciate my feminine colleagues, why is it that every new fantasy novelist I try seems to be 99% touchyfeely and only 1 % real plot? Why is it that every protagonist has to be the wittiest SOB you’ve ever heard of?
Now, as I pick up GRRM’s last novel tonight, I will skim the pages for a worthwhile sorrow and plot. I will forget that I know the ending, lose myself in the verbage, and hope … someday in the future, someone might be worthy enough to take Robert Jordan’s immortal throne atop modern fantasy.
-P. Loanzon
Strike that, a year is a LONGGGGGGGG TIME for inactivity. Although I don't necessarily apoligze for the lack of content, writing and updates; I do regret I’ve been sorely lacking in what I envisioned was a blog I would keep up with.
But that’s neither here nor there …
A few couple snippets that’s been festering in my head the past year …
What HAPPENED to MMOS?
There’s nothing like sitting within the realm of heroes and villains, nothing like the feeling of completing that quest or killing that monster. Maybe I’m an addict, but MMOs are a gaming experience unbeknownst to those poor fools that think CS is the end all of the gaming world.
But what happened to the MMOs? There’s practically no MMOs out there … strike that … THERE ARE NO MMOs out there. World of Warcraft, for all its glory, is killing the genra. Sure, studios like Stray Bullet Games and Darkfall’s creators hold the torch for the innovative and fun, but even their promises feel more and more vaporous as the years pass by.
Vanguard? DDO? Guild Wars? Don’t make me laugh.
And, to top it all off, it seems like every few months Blizzard announces, “Congratulations on a new milestone, 10 billion subscribers plus we’ve taken over the world.”
WHAT HAS GAMING COME TO?
Now, in the self necrotic feces loving piece of crap that I am often does, I’ve looked past my hatred for WoW and looked deep within myself … asking the question i’ve avoided like a plague. Have I outgrown games?
Sure, who has the time these days. Ever since I’ve entered the workforce, time has come few and far between. Now, instead of time to kill, it seems like every time I turn on the computer, I’m forcing myself to play some pieceofcrap game that I don’t even enjoy.
Yet, when that nagging feeling of dread knocks at my door, good old shadowbane comes to the rescue. Couple months ago I reactivated my account for the 10th time (lost count really), then got into the sway of things. OOPS, can’t compete versus the Chinese nation, time to cancel and quit again.
Books
Now this, above all things, pisses me off the most. Fantasy Novels have become so drab since Harry Potter’s induction, that it makes me want to gag. Don’t get me wrong, I think the HP books aren’t too shabby, and are a good representation of what attracts people to the, “bow grows up to be a hero” storyline, but in its inception, a slew of Ender’s Game wannabes have come out of the woodwork. I mean what the hell was that aragon … ER I MEAN ERAGON piece of crap book/movie?!?!?! How about the seeker? Need I go on?
Why hasn’t George R. R. Martin’s books ever been adapted to live screen? Why hasn’t Robert Jordan’s movie planning ever pan out? (May he rest in peace) And why, for the love of god, has the Ender’s Game Movie ever finish a script? (Yes, it’s in the works)
Isn’t it Terry Brooks that said Fantasy defines the nature of the human spirit? Wasn’t fantasy not only an escape, but an adventure. As much as I appreciate my feminine colleagues, why is it that every new fantasy novelist I try seems to be 99% touchyfeely and only 1 % real plot? Why is it that every protagonist has to be the wittiest SOB you’ve ever heard of?
Now, as I pick up GRRM’s last novel tonight, I will skim the pages for a worthwhile sorrow and plot. I will forget that I know the ending, lose myself in the verbage, and hope … someday in the future, someone might be worthy enough to take Robert Jordan’s immortal throne atop modern fantasy.
-P. Loanzon
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
The "Trying to hard" Novel
I was in the bookstore the other day in one of my many attempts at finding a new author to follow. These days, I find myself in a rut. Often, the authors I have been following this past decade have emerged more decrepit and repetitive. They share the same plot lines from book to book, their novels spin into a carousel of long exposition that, to be honest, is hard to keep track of.
I digress.
I was in the book store, then I read the back of this novel. (Which I don't remember the name of) Then I read this fabulous storyline of a church centric fantasy and how the main character is recruited to be a soldier of faith, only to realize the lines become blurred as he learns more and more what it means to become a, "man of god."
Sounds cool right?
Then I flip over to the next page and, low and behold, I scurry the first few pages only to realize this guy writes like he's trying to impress someone. God, I swear this man would spout as many long-phrased adjectives in an attempt to sound smarter than the story would allow.
"The lavish, tepid cranium would saunter over to the verbose, staccato dank cherrywood “or other such nonsense that, obvious, cause this book to be published.
Is it absolutely necessary to pilfer one's novels with these ornate obscure words in a vain attempt to be seen as valid by your peers. I highly doubt the 15 year old who wrote Eragorn has some flaws, but look at the audience of his book.
I remember, WAYYY back in high school, my AP English teacher would advise to use as different adjectives as I could; almost echoing what, this man, obviously thought real writing is.
Needless to say, I put the book down, saddened that such an interesting storyline would be jacked by some inherent need to impress. I DON’T UNDERSTAND YOU! I want to scream at that man! Don’t listen to what other people are telling you! Keep it simple. Keep it brief!!!
What compels the literary world in this incessant need to for three pages of DESCRIBING a leaf? Look, I understand “Leaves of Grass.” It’s appeal is broadened by the fact it goes into the natural world… but FANTASY is different. Fantasy is a storyline, emotion. And, while I agree there must be good established depictions of the world he has created… why go overboard?
What is it about fantasy novels these days and being required to be a certain word length? Often the advice is, If it’s shorter than this, it probably isn’t good. But when, if anything, has length determined quality. I can point you to 500k fantasy stories on the net that are complete garbage but, at the same time, I can point you to 1k stories that far exceed anything that might be plastered across some bookshelf.
I get pressure, I really do. To produce a novel in a certain amount of time, to be of proper length. But it becomes harder to sift through the nonsense and sometimes… I wonder how many real fans these guys really have.
I digress.
I was in the book store, then I read the back of this novel. (Which I don't remember the name of) Then I read this fabulous storyline of a church centric fantasy and how the main character is recruited to be a soldier of faith, only to realize the lines become blurred as he learns more and more what it means to become a, "man of god."
Sounds cool right?
Then I flip over to the next page and, low and behold, I scurry the first few pages only to realize this guy writes like he's trying to impress someone. God, I swear this man would spout as many long-phrased adjectives in an attempt to sound smarter than the story would allow.
"The lavish, tepid cranium would saunter over to the verbose, staccato dank cherrywood “or other such nonsense that, obvious, cause this book to be published.
Is it absolutely necessary to pilfer one's novels with these ornate obscure words in a vain attempt to be seen as valid by your peers. I highly doubt the 15 year old who wrote Eragorn has some flaws, but look at the audience of his book.
I remember, WAYYY back in high school, my AP English teacher would advise to use as different adjectives as I could; almost echoing what, this man, obviously thought real writing is.
Needless to say, I put the book down, saddened that such an interesting storyline would be jacked by some inherent need to impress. I DON’T UNDERSTAND YOU! I want to scream at that man! Don’t listen to what other people are telling you! Keep it simple. Keep it brief!!!
What compels the literary world in this incessant need to for three pages of DESCRIBING a leaf? Look, I understand “Leaves of Grass.” It’s appeal is broadened by the fact it goes into the natural world… but FANTASY is different. Fantasy is a storyline, emotion. And, while I agree there must be good established depictions of the world he has created… why go overboard?
What is it about fantasy novels these days and being required to be a certain word length? Often the advice is, If it’s shorter than this, it probably isn’t good. But when, if anything, has length determined quality. I can point you to 500k fantasy stories on the net that are complete garbage but, at the same time, I can point you to 1k stories that far exceed anything that might be plastered across some bookshelf.
I get pressure, I really do. To produce a novel in a certain amount of time, to be of proper length. But it becomes harder to sift through the nonsense and sometimes… I wonder how many real fans these guys really have.
Saturday, November 11, 2006
Chapter Length
Among the many writing articles i've perused over the years, it seems the topic of chapter length is up in the air. The advice always seems to be, "What is comfortable with you."
One of my favorite authors, L.E. Modisett often takes this adage to the extreme, often having 1 page chapters if not 1 paragraph chapters. Although, this is true for one author, he seems to be the only one that does this. It almost seems like an unspoken bond between the novelist gods and those that scribe for them; that any less than a dozen pages is blasphemy. I digress, there's an aspect of writing that demands detail that, as an aftereffect, lengthens of the chapter.
On the other hand, I can't help but notice that often, some of these novels are TOO much. Is it excusable to just ramble on about idiosyncrasies if it lengthens your word count? Wouldn't it make the book better? The wall is red with blood, we get it. You don't have to explain the texture, smell and all 1000 bricks of it.
I once watched a history channel special that was commenting on the recent outsurge of internet stories that have proliferated over the last years. Sites like http://www.fanfiction.com/ and http://www.fictionpress.com/ have exposed amateur writing to the public and, sometimes, threatened the novelist themselves. One such novelist spoke on the program saying, "Anybody can scribble a few words and they think they are a real writer."
I admit, if you read what some of the writing is, it is not of top touch quality. Most of their descriptions are one liners and yet... i can't help think how increasingly popular it's becoming. If people prefer these dumbed down versions, who's to say it's not correct? Sure it might not have the ornate detail of a real book but people are reading it.... that has to count for something.
One of my favorite authors, L.E. Modisett often takes this adage to the extreme, often having 1 page chapters if not 1 paragraph chapters. Although, this is true for one author, he seems to be the only one that does this. It almost seems like an unspoken bond between the novelist gods and those that scribe for them; that any less than a dozen pages is blasphemy. I digress, there's an aspect of writing that demands detail that, as an aftereffect, lengthens of the chapter.
On the other hand, I can't help but notice that often, some of these novels are TOO much. Is it excusable to just ramble on about idiosyncrasies if it lengthens your word count? Wouldn't it make the book better? The wall is red with blood, we get it. You don't have to explain the texture, smell and all 1000 bricks of it.
I once watched a history channel special that was commenting on the recent outsurge of internet stories that have proliferated over the last years. Sites like http://www.fanfiction.com/ and http://www.fictionpress.com/ have exposed amateur writing to the public and, sometimes, threatened the novelist themselves. One such novelist spoke on the program saying, "Anybody can scribble a few words and they think they are a real writer."
I admit, if you read what some of the writing is, it is not of top touch quality. Most of their descriptions are one liners and yet... i can't help think how increasingly popular it's becoming. If people prefer these dumbed down versions, who's to say it's not correct? Sure it might not have the ornate detail of a real book but people are reading it.... that has to count for something.
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
Robin Hobb and the depressing storyline
I have to admit, just like some people that were drawn into Eragorn, I was drawn into Robin Hobb's breakthrough novel "Assassin's quest." Like a chump, I got he damn thing which, to those not exposed to that book, is not a bad series.
Here's an informal review. The main character, Fitz, is recruited as a young lad to secretly kill of "undead" like people that has been popping up in his residence. At least that's how it starts. It's been awhile but I think I remember how the rest of the story went and to sum it up, let me tell you how you can envision this epic tale by yourself...
Take your favorite childhood object, cherish it for... say 5 minutes... then go to your fireplace and chuck it in with about a gallon of gasoline and watching to burn into oblivion. This is what Robin Hobb's The Tawny Man Series is about. (Which started with Assassin's quest) It was 6 books of depressing lore that sucked you in word for word in the vain hope that, one day, the main character might get some small measure of justice for the atrocities he's life had brought him. And, like a chump, once you read the first book you can't put it down. It's so damn sad you find yourself hoping against hope... maybe the next chapter... maybe the next line...
"NO!" Robin Hobb recites, thumbing her fingers together in that Mr. Burnish kinda of way. "You shall have no pleasure while I scribe this tale."
But I digress, it's not like she's the first one to do it. The now infamous George R. R. Martin takes this too. Hell by the end of his third book he's literally killed off 90% of the characters he started out with. He kills the mother the father the 3 boys and a daughter. (if memory serves) But unlike Robin Hobb, GRRM's appeal doesn't come from some forlorn hope of the chance of justice.
Let me take you down GRRM's way of thinking. Take the most cliche Fantasy line you can think of. Let's say, "You won't take me alive." Now stirr in some spilberg... then spill in the longevity of Dr. Who, and suddenly the cliche line of "You won't take me alive" is the culmination of a 300 page chapter that blows you're socks off! This is what GRRM excells at, making those moments in fantasy history alive again and making it, for some reason, work. And, while many others try to do this, he is the only one that TRULY excells at it.
I remember, in his recent novel, of this one chapter that has a knight valiently rushing a horde of angry mercenaries for the honor of his lady. Sound corny? Read his latest work, "A fest for Crows" and you'll find yourself leaning back in your chair, just like I did, wallowing in the expert writing you've just witnessed.
But maybe that's just me.
-Longbow
Here's an informal review. The main character, Fitz, is recruited as a young lad to secretly kill of "undead" like people that has been popping up in his residence. At least that's how it starts. It's been awhile but I think I remember how the rest of the story went and to sum it up, let me tell you how you can envision this epic tale by yourself...
Take your favorite childhood object, cherish it for... say 5 minutes... then go to your fireplace and chuck it in with about a gallon of gasoline and watching to burn into oblivion. This is what Robin Hobb's The Tawny Man Series is about. (Which started with Assassin's quest) It was 6 books of depressing lore that sucked you in word for word in the vain hope that, one day, the main character might get some small measure of justice for the atrocities he's life had brought him. And, like a chump, once you read the first book you can't put it down. It's so damn sad you find yourself hoping against hope... maybe the next chapter... maybe the next line...
"NO!" Robin Hobb recites, thumbing her fingers together in that Mr. Burnish kinda of way. "You shall have no pleasure while I scribe this tale."
But I digress, it's not like she's the first one to do it. The now infamous George R. R. Martin takes this too. Hell by the end of his third book he's literally killed off 90% of the characters he started out with. He kills the mother the father the 3 boys and a daughter. (if memory serves) But unlike Robin Hobb, GRRM's appeal doesn't come from some forlorn hope of the chance of justice.
Let me take you down GRRM's way of thinking. Take the most cliche Fantasy line you can think of. Let's say, "You won't take me alive." Now stirr in some spilberg... then spill in the longevity of Dr. Who, and suddenly the cliche line of "You won't take me alive" is the culmination of a 300 page chapter that blows you're socks off! This is what GRRM excells at, making those moments in fantasy history alive again and making it, for some reason, work. And, while many others try to do this, he is the only one that TRULY excells at it.
I remember, in his recent novel, of this one chapter that has a knight valiently rushing a horde of angry mercenaries for the honor of his lady. Sound corny? Read his latest work, "A fest for Crows" and you'll find yourself leaning back in your chair, just like I did, wallowing in the expert writing you've just witnessed.
But maybe that's just me.
-Longbow
TableTop D&D
Look, I get it. Getting together with friends... playing a game... escaping reality... I do. I get the appeal of table top D&D. And, while this may have been fun back in the days when color TV was for the alpha males of society, it made sense. But something about manually keeping track of stats, talking to a dungeon master that you know personally and casting a spell by saying, "I cast a spell" somewhat creeps me out.
I've tried it. Just once. And I felt dumb the entire time I was playing it. Not that I would ever tell my buds that but something about it felt a little too over the top. There's nothing wrong with spinning a good tale but arguments over +5 hammers that are written in a small little book, doesn't overplay the fact that i'm standing right next to you.
Maybe I'm a closet Fantasy Fan, afraid to admit that I love reading stories about honor, elves and magic. But I digress. It is said that the Elder Scroll series was conceptualized by a group a friends that created their own world for a table top D&D. I guess that makes sense. Having to create a world really fills out the details you would have not otherwise thought. Oblivion is the most intricate and well plotted RPGs on the market today, if not ever.
But that doesn't mean i'm rolling 1d10 hoping that my attack hits.
-Longbow
I've tried it. Just once. And I felt dumb the entire time I was playing it. Not that I would ever tell my buds that but something about it felt a little too over the top. There's nothing wrong with spinning a good tale but arguments over +5 hammers that are written in a small little book, doesn't overplay the fact that i'm standing right next to you.
Maybe I'm a closet Fantasy Fan, afraid to admit that I love reading stories about honor, elves and magic. But I digress. It is said that the Elder Scroll series was conceptualized by a group a friends that created their own world for a table top D&D. I guess that makes sense. Having to create a world really fills out the details you would have not otherwise thought. Oblivion is the most intricate and well plotted RPGs on the market today, if not ever.
But that doesn't mean i'm rolling 1d10 hoping that my attack hits.
-Longbow
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
The Carebear
For those to enumerated by their dice-rolling sessions in the basement, this passage is not for you. For those of us with a pulse, you have no doubt been flashed with what has been termed "Crap", also known as World of Warcraft.
My own reservations aside, the carebear seems an ample fit in this EQish mentality of playing what is essentially a single player game. I digress, but the importance of these people cannot be unmeasured. Games like Shadowbane and Darkfall, however player vs player oriented, seem to (or at least will) thrive on this carebear.
What is a carebear you ask? A carebear is the person (not limited to a particular sex) that plays the game to fight monsters. A carebear is more casually oriented, often new the genra of mmorpg gaming or was introducted to mmorpg via the Carebear mentality. This is the type of gamer that pays the 10 bucks a month for the "experience" more than the interactions with fellow players. While, this is not bad, this is the same type of person that's more inclined to spam "dying sucks" on the forums 24 hours a day.
And yet, as an avid Shadowbane Fan, I find without the carebears, a part of the community has died. You can no longer find that lost guy in Khar (a public town in Shadowbane) that's screaming for help or a better weapon. Gone is that guy who is farming 24/7 at that particular spot to get that particular sword, which you jack in the meanwhile. And gone are the days when there's a million merchant towns to ravage, or that guildmate you can go to because you know he has all the stuff.
We, as pvp addicts, would like to think that we don't need the carebear. "If you don't like pvp, don't play the game" was the common mantra that we repeated over and over again in our heads, as if repetition alone might suffice to stave off our burning desire for the carebear.
Because it is a need. A need for variety. We need that person in the game that's different from us and that seeks different goals. It makes the game feel epic, it makes the game come alive. If everyone was just like you, how boring would the world be? Even if you're all brown, you dont like the same things your neighbor likes. You're not him.
So stay Mr. Carebear. Stay and cultivate on our doorstep and hog that prime farming spot. We'll be waiting, with a sword in hand... and a rose hidden in our boot.
-Longbow
My own reservations aside, the carebear seems an ample fit in this EQish mentality of playing what is essentially a single player game. I digress, but the importance of these people cannot be unmeasured. Games like Shadowbane and Darkfall, however player vs player oriented, seem to (or at least will) thrive on this carebear.
What is a carebear you ask? A carebear is the person (not limited to a particular sex) that plays the game to fight monsters. A carebear is more casually oriented, often new the genra of mmorpg gaming or was introducted to mmorpg via the Carebear mentality. This is the type of gamer that pays the 10 bucks a month for the "experience" more than the interactions with fellow players. While, this is not bad, this is the same type of person that's more inclined to spam "dying sucks" on the forums 24 hours a day.
And yet, as an avid Shadowbane Fan, I find without the carebears, a part of the community has died. You can no longer find that lost guy in Khar (a public town in Shadowbane) that's screaming for help or a better weapon. Gone is that guy who is farming 24/7 at that particular spot to get that particular sword, which you jack in the meanwhile. And gone are the days when there's a million merchant towns to ravage, or that guildmate you can go to because you know he has all the stuff.
We, as pvp addicts, would like to think that we don't need the carebear. "If you don't like pvp, don't play the game" was the common mantra that we repeated over and over again in our heads, as if repetition alone might suffice to stave off our burning desire for the carebear.
Because it is a need. A need for variety. We need that person in the game that's different from us and that seeks different goals. It makes the game feel epic, it makes the game come alive. If everyone was just like you, how boring would the world be? Even if you're all brown, you dont like the same things your neighbor likes. You're not him.
So stay Mr. Carebear. Stay and cultivate on our doorstep and hog that prime farming spot. We'll be waiting, with a sword in hand... and a rose hidden in our boot.
-Longbow
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Dungeon Siege Movie
Uwe Boll, the director of the new upcoming Dungeon Siege Movie, was once quoted to saying that he wanted to make a movie as epic as Lord of the Rings. It was at that moment that the collective hope of fans, praying that the movie might be good, was destroyed. Already, since the release of the trailer, there has been huge outpourings of hate on what a disaster it will be. One fan on aintitcool.com's talkback feature said it was a bunch of LOTR scenes put together in one.
Now, i'm not one to always jump to conclusions but the resume of Uwe Boll does not favor well in his regard. BloodRayne and Alone in the dark are his creations. Need I say more?
He could have said a lot of things. "I just want to tell a good story," could have been one. "I want to give some quality Fantasy Tolkein would be proud of," is another one he could have shot at us. No, instead he wants to make another fast and the furious. He wants to make bad boys 2. Instead of giving us hope into good characters, he gives us Mortal Combat 5.
-Longbow
Now, i'm not one to always jump to conclusions but the resume of Uwe Boll does not favor well in his regard. BloodRayne and Alone in the dark are his creations. Need I say more?
He could have said a lot of things. "I just want to tell a good story," could have been one. "I want to give some quality Fantasy Tolkein would be proud of," is another one he could have shot at us. No, instead he wants to make another fast and the furious. He wants to make bad boys 2. Instead of giving us hope into good characters, he gives us Mortal Combat 5.
-Longbow
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Gaming and the big battles
If you've never delved into the obscene vice which is the MMORPG then you've been missing alot. MMORPG stands for Massive Multiplayer Onling Roleplaying Game, also known as sucking an obscene amount of money monthly while provides tiny bits of content to keep them hooked. And, while this appraisal may be unkind, I assure you it is not far from the truth. While the original MMORPG was Merdian 59, the first mainstream one was in the infamous EverQuest. You know the one. You heard the story of that kid who died, then the news agencies found he had like 6 Everquest accounts. BULLSHIT!
I digress, even before I go off on that tangent. The massive multiplayer has been the sucktube for all those Fantasy Fans who either didn't have to balls to rack up a D&D set or just couldn't find anyone interested. And, while the level-me-now and hunt-for-items have been the mainstay of the EverQuest clones, it has been a tad bit overdone. Don't know what I'm talking about? Sure you do.
Lets move on.
If anything Lord of the Rings have given us, it's the selfinduced coma we all achieve when we imagine that perfect massive battle with elves, dwarven Lords and kings. Dark Ages of Camelot tried to sate this innate desire so did games like Shadowbane. But it always lacked the technology component necessary to achieve such things. To dumb it down, for those not intune with the MMORPG landscape... Imagine Xbox online, where the games can span to 4v4 on most of their games. (with exceptions of course) Then imagine Counterstrike where you can have like 8v8 and still other PC games that can have like 16v16. Got the image? That's right. Now pound you head against the desk and imagine 300v300. That's what you'll get with games like Shadowbane and the upcoming Darkfall. Drooling yet? I thought so.
And yet, I find myself wonder how fast the server will crash when it happens. For those not following along, NO single game has been able to solve the "massive battle" crash. DAOC failed, Shadowbane Failed, World of Warcraft failed. And yet that massive battle is what we dream of; play endless hours for. Not the battle specifically but the dream that there's something bigger in that game, that there's a whole world you can be a part of, effect and change.
But maybe its just me. I still dream of that big battle. Here's hoping Darkfall won't be a bust as well.
-Long"Talking to those who already know what i'm talking about"bow
I digress, even before I go off on that tangent. The massive multiplayer has been the sucktube for all those Fantasy Fans who either didn't have to balls to rack up a D&D set or just couldn't find anyone interested. And, while the level-me-now and hunt-for-items have been the mainstay of the EverQuest clones, it has been a tad bit overdone. Don't know what I'm talking about? Sure you do.
Lets move on.
If anything Lord of the Rings have given us, it's the selfinduced coma we all achieve when we imagine that perfect massive battle with elves, dwarven Lords and kings. Dark Ages of Camelot tried to sate this innate desire so did games like Shadowbane. But it always lacked the technology component necessary to achieve such things. To dumb it down, for those not intune with the MMORPG landscape... Imagine Xbox online, where the games can span to 4v4 on most of their games. (with exceptions of course) Then imagine Counterstrike where you can have like 8v8 and still other PC games that can have like 16v16. Got the image? That's right. Now pound you head against the desk and imagine 300v300. That's what you'll get with games like Shadowbane and the upcoming Darkfall. Drooling yet? I thought so.
And yet, I find myself wonder how fast the server will crash when it happens. For those not following along, NO single game has been able to solve the "massive battle" crash. DAOC failed, Shadowbane Failed, World of Warcraft failed. And yet that massive battle is what we dream of; play endless hours for. Not the battle specifically but the dream that there's something bigger in that game, that there's a whole world you can be a part of, effect and change.
But maybe its just me. I still dream of that big battle. Here's hoping Darkfall won't be a bust as well.
-Long"Talking to those who already know what i'm talking about"bow
Sunday, September 24, 2006
What's with all the Dragons?
Dragon Sword, Dragon Quest, Dragon Heart, Dragon Slayer, Dungeons and Dragons and Dragonheart 2! What do all these have in common? They are all B movies and/or major motion pictures. In fact if you look at what percentage of fantasy movies being made, you'll find that 90%+ percent of those movies will be about dragons! Don't get me wrong, I love the Dragon. I loved the AM's Perm series as a kid and the DnD books always gave a decent viewing of those mythical creatures... BUT COME ON! How much more can we, as consumers, take? When did fantasy HAVE to be about dragons?
Look, I get it, I really do. If you consider from a "realistic" point of view, a movie about dragons does kinda make sense. It gives you that FX effect without having to create a whole battle full of different characters, it simplifies your stories being that you don't have to create intricate storylines around multiple plotlines and it gives you that "Epic" feel. BUT what it also does is instant portray it as a complete copout. I mean let's face it, the only reason Dragons are so cool is because their ABSENCE not their complete showing-every-scene-in-every-frame. What makes Dragons so unquie is that you hear about them in whispers, you hear about their feats from survivors from the latest attack and then when you finally see them, they are great! In this, Eragon does hold some small value (if i'm assuming that's how they wrote the book because i never got through the whole thing).
The Scifi "Dragon" movie of the week isn't the greatest of comparisons but it does parallel what is a misinterpretation of the Fantasy Genre. Then again, maybe the "Dragon" thing is Fantasy's version of the "Star Trek" cliche.
-Longbow
Look, I get it, I really do. If you consider from a "realistic" point of view, a movie about dragons does kinda make sense. It gives you that FX effect without having to create a whole battle full of different characters, it simplifies your stories being that you don't have to create intricate storylines around multiple plotlines and it gives you that "Epic" feel. BUT what it also does is instant portray it as a complete copout. I mean let's face it, the only reason Dragons are so cool is because their ABSENCE not their complete showing-every-scene-in-every-frame. What makes Dragons so unquie is that you hear about them in whispers, you hear about their feats from survivors from the latest attack and then when you finally see them, they are great! In this, Eragon does hold some small value (if i'm assuming that's how they wrote the book because i never got through the whole thing).
The Scifi "Dragon" movie of the week isn't the greatest of comparisons but it does parallel what is a misinterpretation of the Fantasy Genre. Then again, maybe the "Dragon" thing is Fantasy's version of the "Star Trek" cliche.
-Longbow
Friday, September 22, 2006
Orson Scott Card and Scifi
For those unfamilar with the work of OSC, he wrote Ender's Game. For those that have never heard of Ender's game, you should just kill yourself now. What is ender's game? Think of Harry Potter on Crack. But, the key is here, Ender's game was written like 20 years or so before HP ever even was thought up of. When you think, "Rise To power" You think Ender's game as a stepping stone to that cliche.
I digress, i'm not here to talk about the glory of Ender's Game. (Even though it rocks) I'm here to talk about what OSC said in one of his interviews. He said that, when he was starting out, he wrote this one short story about a boy liberating a town (or something like that) Preety standard stuff. Boy saves town yadda yadda yadda. But, when he submitted it to a publisher it got rejected on the grounds that it wasn't, "Scifi enough." What did they mean? OSC explains that even though he described, in ornate detail, the wierd planet this story was proposed on, it did not contain any Scifi qualities that made up something of Science Fiction.
In this, I kinda agree with OSC. While you don't need magic in EVERY Fantasy story, it cannot be just a story without a staple from the genra. It's not enough for a boy to save the day, he has to do it in the context of Fantasy, to distinguish it from a "present-day" story.
Ok, i'm ranting and this probably isn't making much sense. I'll stop now.
-Lonbow
I digress, i'm not here to talk about the glory of Ender's Game. (Even though it rocks) I'm here to talk about what OSC said in one of his interviews. He said that, when he was starting out, he wrote this one short story about a boy liberating a town (or something like that) Preety standard stuff. Boy saves town yadda yadda yadda. But, when he submitted it to a publisher it got rejected on the grounds that it wasn't, "Scifi enough." What did they mean? OSC explains that even though he described, in ornate detail, the wierd planet this story was proposed on, it did not contain any Scifi qualities that made up something of Science Fiction.
In this, I kinda agree with OSC. While you don't need magic in EVERY Fantasy story, it cannot be just a story without a staple from the genra. It's not enough for a boy to save the day, he has to do it in the context of Fantasy, to distinguish it from a "present-day" story.
Ok, i'm ranting and this probably isn't making much sense. I'll stop now.
-Lonbow
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)