355 karma · joined August 13, 2023
I think we can both admit that I'm a sort of criminal here. Not one that goes to jail but one that is breaking the law and obviously doing something immoral.
To explain I only raised the temperature because you said what I said was silly and because you mocked me with the whole, "man" thing. Did not appreciate that all and I thought it was fucking rude. Wasn't that offended by it though, but I did raise the temperature in kind.
Just saying all this in case you're leaving because of that. I wanted to explain my side. If you're not leaving because of that please ignore. Good day to you too either way.
The anime is called Pokemon. This is the source material for which all the Pokemon games are derived from and strive to imitate in style.
Any writing in a video game on Pokemon is equivalent (or worse) in quality and style to the original anime which all Pokemon games are based on.
>Simple sentences are great for simple ideas. Most video games, including most RPGs, only have simple ideas.
Writing isn't only about ideas. That's what research is about. Presenting facts, figures, results and ideas. For stories there needs to more irrational fluff. The writing needs to be immersive, emotive and vivid, eloquent, etc. Most people would agree with me on this matter.
I would say you're the one who has a different preference here.
If there was some sort of writing Pulitzer prize just for world building, D&D would be up there.
Do not call me an ass hole. Do not say things to people you wouldn't say in real life. That's both offensive, rude, spineless and against the rules here.
It's not silly because there's no point in talking about writing quality if 100% of it was opinion based and wildly different among everyone. Obviously we're talking about a common shared opinion on what good writing is. What I'm saying, again, obviously, is that your opinion, is NOT part of the shared opinion. But do I really need to spell it out? No. This is pedantry. Details only alluded in response to your mechanical retorts. You're fully aware of what I'm saying here but likely were unaware of what you're doing. It's fine I'm redirecting the conversation back on course.
>That's effectively the same thing. One just feels more video-gamey, but the game's linearity
Of course it's effectively the same thing. It's like saying python is the same as rust if the program output is the same. As for the linearity, there's more branches in the BG3 version, but less branches in the fallout version. Generally though the branches for both games converge on a single ending. But even BG3 here as many many more permutations on that ending. It's uncountable I believe.
>That's just, like, your opinion man.
No it's the shared opinion. Which your opinion is not a part of. Man.
>Plot and choices are part of writing, no? This seems seriously nitpicky.
Nope it's not nitpicky. You can have good writing for a shit plot and bad writing for a great plot. Bad writing includes things like grammar, poor word choice, miss-spellings poor descriptions. Plots can be made without writing. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIPV1iwzrzg This is an example of a plot with no writing.
>Writing isn't just "the act of putting words into a sentence", it's all of the decisions that led to that sentence existing.
Those decisions don't have to lead to writing. See above. writing is about conveying the intent. The act of conveyance is complex and nuanced. It can mask and influence the intent. For example the English translation of popular wushu novels just don't carry the same weight in the US as they do in China.
>If I complained that the dialogue often sounded like it came from a high school student (Karlach doing fist pumps and shouting "Hell Yeah" whenever she likes something, for example) would you similarly complain that I'm not talking about the "writing" but the "prose"?
Prose is part of writing. But prose refers to like the "flavor" more. Writing in general also encompasses structure, detail, descriptions outside of the flavor. Like for example imagine you have chatGPT generate a picture of a flower. Then you have chatGPT generate the same picture of that flower but as a water color paining. Two different flavors. But the angle of the camera and the time of day of capture and the details in the foreground or the background would be the "writing". Plot requires a middle beginning and end which most pictures don't have but some pictures can have an aspect of it.
>By the way, I didn't disagree when Shadowheart seemed so easily swayed. I just thought she was a poorly written character to have her strong convictions overruled so easily.
It was probably by design. They wanted a feel good story where she ended up taking the redemption route. In that case I would say the plot was also excellently designed. I think although they allow for the existence of alternate paths, they have the choices designed in a way where you are a bit funneled down a most probable path. That path is shadowheart being redeemed. It just wasn't designed for the kind of high brow ultra realistic character studies you seem to like. If you want something catered to your tastes try Disco Elysium if you haven't already.
>Same with Lae'zel when she turned on the Gith queen basically because I told her to.
It's done purposefully as I said. There's still randomness here. I only got all the characters to do what I want because I was save scumming like a mad man. The save scumming is permitted which is ALSO a design choice. The plot is engineered well, but likely not for you.
>Two characters that never once expressed any doubts about their divine missions, both turned away from them based on a single choice I made.
I believe most people were supposed to Fail that persuasion check with shadow heart. I saved scummed it like crazy so I got passed it like you did. But the algorithm wanted to bend the path in that direction anyway. You COULD convince her to kill, but you might have to save scum that too. It depends.
Fine maybe not the only one. But very very few are like it.
>I am skeptical that Baldur's Gate 3's scripting is actually this resilient. Regardless, games like Fallout had this sort of behavior two decades ago.
No fallout doesn't come close. Fallout is structured so you can't kill critical main characters until it's time. They structure the script in a way where it's impossible. This is way better than putting up invulnerability guards the way most games do.
Bg 3 solves the issue by using replacement characters. You kill off a critical person to early another person will take his place and fulfill his role.
I suspect the developers have some sort of plot hole static checker similar to type checkers that allow them to fill every possible hole.
> Vastly different experiences, one seems like good writing, one seems bad.
You are conflating bad writing with personal preference. Whether a character makes one choice or the other the writers narrate both options the quality of the narration is not what you're commenting on. You're commenting on your preferred choice. Not agreeing with a choice or even not agreeing with writing is not bad writing. For example, I wouldn't call the mien Kampf poorly written even though I disagree with it.
I mean read what you wrote. Where in any of your paragraphs was writing actually commented on? You are commenting more on plot and choices.
What is and isn't theft is 100% independent of how rich the person you steal from is. You and I are thieves. Plain and simple.
No I'm saying EVEN something as extreme as the holocaust can be rationalized. Thus even simple stuff like piracy can be too. It's comparatively easier and very possible.
If I was doing what you're implying, saying that piracy is comparable to the holocaust I would be doing the opposite of rationalization. What am I going to comfort myself after stealing something and say I did something so atrocious that it's equivalent to the holocaust? It's radically the opposite, such beliefs are more like phobias, if I held such false beliefs I would be LESS likely to pirate.
>If you can't understand why everyone is "deluded", maybe you should take a long hard look in the mirror and ask if maybe there's a possibility that you are in the wrong.
No. I'm pretty sure I'm not deluded given that my viewpoint isn't rosy or justifying anything. Delusions are usually used for self comfort, there's none of that going on here with me.
>Ask yourself what a "deluded" person would do and say to convince themselves and then take a look at what you've written here.
A deluded person wouldn't call himself a criminal. But that's exactly what I am. I'm self fish, I'm an ass hole, and I'm a criminal. But I'm also saying most people are like this. They just can't admit it. It's a dog eat dog world.
This isn't a mistake I'm making. Less writing isn't better writing and more writing isn't better writing either. I think you're one of those people who just likes things extremely plain. Basic text that's less wordy is usually an example of bad writing imo. This kind of writing is good for research papers but for stories it's not a good thing.
Anyway here's an example of the "good writing" you're talking about in pokemon:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxeU3WwbaqQ
Most people would disagree with you and agree with me. All the writing in there is pure garbage. I don't understand how you can call that "good" other then if you have a preference for simple sentences.
I guess my other question is why are we built to be delusional? Can't intelligent entities be designed to act exactly the same but with total self awareness without going insane? What's the benefit of an intelligence that must first lie to itself before making an action?
This is probably a biological question given that this behavior is so pervasive (as demonstrated in this thread). It's likely an innate result of evolution, but what could possibly be the selection pressure that enables this?
PS:T can win a Hugo. The Hugo award is something that gets it right. They can admit they're awarding stuff to a narrow genre while the Pulitzer is deceptive in the sense they don't ever admit to the narrowness of their decisions. I don't think a Sci Fi has ever won a Pulitzer.
That attitude is representative of a lot of what's going on in this thread. This sort of snobbishness where people mistake good writing and bad writing for what is in actuality genre preferences.
I also wouldn't advertise the setting of PS:T too much. Yes it's unique, but that's only a small part of the reason why it's good. Torment's informal sequel: Tides of Numenera had the same unique setting but wasn't nearly as good because it lacked the core. Torment was good because it was compelling and haunting. The setting is just icing on the cake.
The writing is excellent. The plot is generic. A generic plot isn't necessarily a bad thing either. Some of the best movies follow a generic arc, Star wars the MCU are all good because of the genericness. A lot of people are just snobbish. Not you, but I feel that's where a lot of the judgement comes from.
Interesting. What games in your mind is a master class of game writing?
For a fantasy adventure story taking place in the setting of the forgotten realms the writing can't actually get better imo.
I guess your thinking of something like Last of us? Is last of us or last of us 2 truly better than BG3 in terms of writing? I would say it's equivalent. It's just a different genre. If you want deep compelling character studies with the backdrop of a typical YA setting then Last of us, Planescape torment or disco elysium is right up your alley.
These are just different genres. People often conflate good writing with the genre. It's why science fiction rarely if ever has won the pulitzer prize.
Most likely you have a genre preference in the same away the academy awards have a genre preference.
Torment can win a hugo if it was a book. It's that good. Better than a lot of hugo winners too.
I get where you're coming from though. Planescape has elements of a YA novel, it's designed to be a page turner and the like. The setting is also very unique and fantastical and that gives it a bit of a YA novel flavor because people conflate this for the reason for why it's good in their "rave reviews". Like "wow! such an imaginative setting for an adventure!" and that kind of thing.
But make no mistake the game is haunting. When you finish it you're different. It's def not just some typical adventure story in some wildly fantastical setting. Read this review, (the first part before she gets in to deep into the fantasy elements and side characters) she couldn't have put it better:
https://tap-repeatedly.com/2003/02/planescape-torment-review...
"If computer games developers ever hope to stake their claim in the mature artistic mainstream alongside painting, music and literature, it won’t happen by coming up with ever more capable engines, sweeter eye candy or addictive gameplay, though it won’t happen without them either. It will happen by drafting all of the above into the service of compelling characters such as these, characters who make you care about them, characters who send you pawing for the reload command because you simply cannot possibly conceive of moving another inch without them. Planescape Torment accomplishes all this and more, capturing the player’s heart and intellect, taking him on a long, fraught journey through one of the most unique settings I’ve experienced in any medium and wrapping it up in a stunning, jaw-dropping finale."
"Don’t approach this CRPG too lightly. It’s the gaming equivalent of War and Peace, slow to start, frustratingly obscure at times, yet once that great narrative engine finally revs up, it moves the player along with breathtaking authority. I’ve only played it once so far. Usually I play a game twice before sitting down to review it, but I’m not ready to reenter the world of Planescape Torment just yet. There’s something about this game. It’s disturbing, haunting and heavy. I’ve never seen anything quite like it."
Like her I was never able to play it twice. I was left in something of a state of awe when I finished the game, but not really... I can't describe it.. It's that same feeling when you finish a really good book.
It's unfortunate that it's wrapped up in the skin of a YA novel. But in actuality the skin only adds to it and makes it better, but at it's core it stands above that. Way above that.
Even Hitler had a rationalization for the Holocaust.
It's totally obvious piracy is theft. It doesn't matter if that product was an idea or a piece of art or something a person is not making money off of. If someone created something and they own it and you take it against his wishes you are a thief. You're the one trying to justify it with all this rationalization. But you and others are going off topic.
I'm saying your rationalization is normal. Everyone does it. My question is more why do you spend the effort to do it. Why do you lie to yourself?
Why do you have to scaffold illusions all around yourself to construct a lie that makes yourself a moral paragon. You are a human, humans are not morally perfect. It's normal to steal.
You're on HN and identities aren't really exposed so it's not some lie you're telling others. These are lies we tell ourselves.
Rpgs do not universally have good/bad writing. And FPSs like BioShock and soma don't all necessarily have less writing..
Personally I don't wait. I torrent the thing straight away because it's free and I'm a greedy human being. There's certain lines I won't cross but torrenting isn't one of them. Physically shoplifting something is just some weird thing I don't do because I'm an irrational human being. I torrent but I don't shoplift because I'm illogical, like the way many people are. But unlike most people, I don't have to make up some BS story about why one is more justified then the other. I can recognize my own inconsistency and I can live with it.
I wonder why people have to justify it for themselves. Like why do we have to make up stories?
Take for example global warming. I drive a car to work because I'm a self fish person and I care about my commute being convenient more then I care about the world. I'll just let the rest of the world take action to save it and I'll just drive a gas guzzler until it becomes inconvenient to do so.
The thing that gets me is I feel 99 percent of the world is like me. But They have to make up some flimsy story that justifies their imperfection to sort of morph themselves into human paragons.
If ifttt was free I would use it. If it's not there's no advantage to me at all and I won't. It's all about my advantage and I really don't care about the company. That's how it is for most people and that's why people on Reddit are angry. But I'm positive the people on Reddit have to spin some story to justify it for themselves.
A bit of topic here, maybe, but I'm curious as to why we have to spin it. Maybe it is relevant if there are tons of people on this thread trying to "moralize" the whole thing and justify their actions and viewpoints. But my question is essentially this: Why can't most people just tell it like it is? Why can't we be honest with ourselves?
It's like Trump. Is trump really a snake? depends on who you ask but there's controversy around trump and in direct parallel there's controversy about Sam as well.
Inflation going down and unemployment going down doesn't characterize the overall situation for the last year.
What your saying a month of the opposite trend indicates the US economy has no more problems? That china can't possibly ever have a month of upward ticks?
My statement is meaningless. That's the point of my statement. It's an example to show how meaningless the statement about China is.
I'm sick and tired of people who get emotional and are patriotic. Why can't people be level headed and just talk about facts rather then "defend" their stance or their own country.
Most companies aren't using SoCs here. They use Nvidia Xavier's and radar. Vision is for record keeping, it's mostly a joke to use it to trigger some counter uas thing. Its like a bird triggering a missile launch. Vision isn't reliable enough... Similar to how like an LLM isn't reliable enough.
All of these systems can easily be overwhelmed by a cheap small cluster of drones. No system will react fast enough to bring down say 10 drones.
A stealth drone will give a solved problem of getting past counter uas with an even cheaper solution. That's all I'm saying here.
Actually a phalanx might have a shot at bringing down 10 drones. But it won't do this consistently and each bullet costs probably around 20 drones.
It's just there's a lot of patriotism on HN if I say such inventions are useless for only a single military it's viewed as an attack.
He was fired from y combinator and the entire board wanted to fire his ass too.
Therefore by this logic he should have universal support for reinstatement and the entire board should be vilified? Makes no sense. But this is exactly the direction of the Mob and was the general reaction on HN.
It was ambigiuose whether Sam was a problem and that makes ambigiuose treatment and investigation warranted. The proper reaction is: "wtf is going on? Let's find out" Instead what he got was hero worship. The public was literally condemning the board and worshipping the guy with no evidence.
And now with even more ambiguous and suspicious facts everyone here is suddenly "level headed." Yeah that's bs. What's going on is mostly everyone here is just going with the flow and adopting the background trends and sentiments. Mob mentality all the way.
But to characterize it as something other then overwhelming support to reinstate Sam altman would be false.
Hence why I said most people (key word: most) are just flip flopping with the background trends. Mob mentality.
The percentage of impartiality among ethnic minorities born in the US like ABCs have a tendency to be much higher then normal. I wouldn't say it's the majority but it's definitely much higher then normal.
They'll never be using such a product. Russia is not a "big military" not when China spends 4x as much as them. And China is a small military too, they spend around 4x less then the next biggest military. You'll have to guess what I mean by "smaller militaries" from these details I've provided.