Charas-Project
Off-Topic => All of all! => Topic started by: Osmose on June 13, 2007, 02:02:48 AM
-
I'd like to say that I'm of the same mind as the author of this fine article, but he puts the point in much better language than I ever could.
Xavier is very, very, smart. Click here to read why he thinks we should embrace cliches. (http://toolkitzone.com/library.php?doc=299)
He makes a very good point. Nearly every thread in the games forum has at least someone saying, "That is so cliche." I'm hoping that we'll see less of that as more people read this great article. :)
-
Kinda like "If it isn't broken, don't fix it." Relativley of course.
-
There's a Good Cliche, and a Bad Cliche. Good ones is when a Cliche is twisted into... Something... Well, Original and Brilliant in itself. A Bad Cliche is when somebody just clearly has taken an idea from one thing he saw and then just copies it, or something else that lacks such inginuity.
And now I look back on what I have written and spread, and now I have to say this: A cliche is a cliche. It doesn't need to be eluded. If used correctly, your games idea will be much better off than if the cliche was not even included in the game at first.
-
I think the article is gay. Heres why:
“A cliché is a phrase, expression, or idea that has been overused to the point of losing its intended force or novelty...”
'overused to the point of LOSING its intended force or novelty'
Think of it this way. A cliche is kinda like something cool. While a few people use it, its great, but then when everyone uses it, it gets gay and people find something new. You see it all the time in the teen world with fads.
Surely the avoidance of overused ideas is a fair demand to make? In theory maybe, but getting caught up in theory is often what’s holding this community back.
And that statement right there contradicts itself. After all, using old ideas are whats holding someone back. Cuz if all there ideas have been used before, there not going anywhere.
Not all cliches are bad. But theres only so many ways to tell a story before that story will get old. And eventually, if you're game has basically the same story as all these other games just a little differant version of it, theres no point in playing it cuz you've already heard the story a ton of times. Its the same for graphics, if you see the same graphics in every game, eventually those graphics will get old and you'll get sick of seeing them.
Making a game or creating a story is about expressing yourself and YOUR ideas, not the ideas someone else came up with. Now sometimes you'll come up with a simular idea as someone else, and thats ok, but lets say you just play final fantasy, and you're like, hey, i'm gonna make a game about a bad guy trying to steal the power of 4 crystals and you need to try and stop him! Thats not ok cuz you basically just ripped the story from another game and thus its not really you're idea at all.
-
Gee Dragonium, I'm surprised you didn't focus on the
According to our good friend Wikipedia;
-
Originally posted by Razor
Gee Dragonium, I'm surprised you didn't focus on the According to our good friend Wikipedia;
ERROR ERROR
I also agree with DB in most respects. About the "overused to the point of losing its intended force or novelty" thing, the keyword is "intended". When a story point or something is used for the first time, its intended force is to drive the story forward. If someone rips off that story point, the context is different, and the audience has seen the same thing before, so its effect is different to its intended one.
-
Oh we all know you're the same person anyway
-
Shh, don't post it in All Of All!
-
Originally posted by Razor
Oh we all know you're the same person anyway
:hi:
-
My firm stance is that a "cliche", especially in characters, is a firm base that hasn't been expanded. You can strip anything down to its cliche roots. It's a matter of how much else there is besides that base.
For example:
Alucard is a vampire. He likes to drink blood and kill stuff. Killing stuff is fun.
That's the base. You've got your dorky typical vampire name and, er, hobbies. But what about this.....
Alucard is a vampire. His best friend is his pet duckie, Miriam. Miriam and Alucard live in Phlebotomy Town, where people like to have their blood consumed by vampires. This is good, because Alucard is a vampire who likes to drink blood. Of course, Alucard wasn't always a vampire. He became one to protect his duckie from......
and more silliness. I love cliches. And so do you. Admit it. If we didn't, they wouldn't be cliche, now, would they?
-
Well, honestly, I think quite a few cliches should be avoided. I mean, how many times have we seen:
*a mysterious girl with magic pendant key to saving the world.
*X many objects that, when combined, release/seal away the great evil. You must collect these.
*Dungeons collapsing for NO GOOD REASON when a boss is destroyed.
*Hero is a 15-18 year old kid whose parents were killed because of a prophecy/their high station/the villain is a bad guy/the hero's city and everyone in it were killed.
There are quite a few more that I'm personally sick of, but these are the worst. Ways you can get around them:
*Just don't do it. Simple as that.
*Have them instead be something like the Sigil Stones from TES4: Oblivion in that they close/open the gate, but can be used for enchanting, making spells or potions, learning spells, or improving stats and the like.
*This one's also easy: if you want an escape scene that badly, have the boss send all his life force into collapsing the dungeon. Or just leave it out.
*Don't make the hero ridiculously young. It may make some sense, since fifteen was the age considered to be "adult" in the middle ages, but it's overused. Make the hero closer to about 20-25 if you want a younger hero. As for the family and village burning stuff, have the villain's army seize the town instead. I mean, why burn what you can convert into a garrison, right? And possibly have the parents be either not-so-mysterious or not-so-dead. Okay, there's my two cents.
~Deschain
-
I remember reading this article once before school got out. I started looking at that site when Osmose first mentioned it.
I honestly don't mind clichés at all. Whenever I read and review a storyline, I do not consider them at all. If you want your hero to go on a quest to save a damsel in distress, do it. What matters to me is if you steal the exact same idea as another game.
Look at the subject of my Avatar and Signature. I honestly think Shadow of the Colossus has one of the most beautiful and well written storylines I've ever experienced. Many can disagree, saying it is a rip-off of the original Legend of Zelda. While it is true that the game borrows many ideas, such as a wandering hero saving a maiden, it twisted this idea into something very unique and deep, despite having little to no real dialogue.
Most of you know that I am making a Final Fantasy fangame, and that it features four elemental crystals. However, I can acknowledge that they are banal. I've already taken the four crystal concept that was a staple in many of the Final Fantasy games, and turned it into something deep.
You shouldn't focus on eliminating every cliché, nor should you focus on character development. While changing a characters personality or creating clever loophole are nice, a storyline only has one job and that's to present a theme. What aspect on life do you get from the storyline after it is told?
-
Getting caught up in old ideas is not a big thing holding people back. (The community he refers to isn't Charas, though.)
So you have a story with four heros and some crystals. OMG CLICHE. Well, what if those crystals are fueled by evil energy? What if, as the game goes on, more and more people appear to be doing evil, and the heroes stop them, going on and on until they realize that what they see as reality is only an illusion put forth by the crystals, and all that time they've been terrorizing normal townsfolk?
The fact of the matter is, most people enjoy cliches when they're executed well. Morrowind and Oblivion can both be cut down into the cliche of a nameless soldier fulfilling a prophecy. And yet, because of the depth of the gameplay and lore, they still succeed. FF12 is cliche - a princess fights to win back her kingdom. FF10 - a tradition of summoners is broken in order to end a timeless cycle. Tales of Symphonia did that same cliche(Only instead of summoners it was the Chosen) better. Every single Castlevania game is about taking down Dracula (Except for, like, one or two). But they all expand upon that or execute it so well. Pokemon rarely ever gives a good reason as to why the main character feels like being the Pokemon Master, so why do we ask RPG Maker games for great detail before we've even played the game?
And, while we're on the subject, none of these games gave a huge amount of info beyond screenshots and cinematics before release, and yet you guys require screens, demos, detailed intros, etc. for fan made stuff. That's way too high of a standard. And it's not even a common standard! Outpost's story was given: "There was a war and these guys are outcasts starting a new colony. Fun!" AND NO ONE SAID A GOD DAMNED THING.
We as a community need to realize that until we lower the bar a bit, we're not going to see a good amount of games. We're not OCRemix - we don't need perfection.
-
Well, here's my vision.
A cliché is always needed. It's needed to make sure the "reader" actually can identify with the situation. Without this situation, people can't get out.
When you see a lot of boxes which are movable, you'd expect you need to use the boxes to solve a puzzle. In that same way when a guy meets a girl and needs to save this girl, you'd expect the guy to eventually hook up with this girl.
However, sometimes clichés need to be avoided. Sometimes you are even forced to not include this cliché plot, even if it were just because it would just make the rest of the story too forced.
For example, I'm currently writing this fan-fic. Instead of making these two characters fall in love with each other at the end of the story, I made them fall in love now. You'll find out later, but basically if I did it at the end, the falling in love thing would come over as "something that had to be done" or "something that kind of looks like forced love", something I've seen in High School Musical, at the end where the baking dude hooks up with Sharpay, just because he's such a good baker.
So, in the end, when you are forced to avoid clichés, avoid them, but only just then. Just try to fit some clichés in, to give the plot some logic and sense.
-
Originally Posted by Osmose
Getting caught up in old ideas is not a big thing holding people back. (The community he refers to isn't Charas, though.)
So you have a story with four heros and some crystals. OMG CLICHE. Well, what if those crystals are fueled by evil energy? What if, as the game goes on, more and more people appear to be doing evil, and the heroes stop them, going on and on until they realize that what they see as reality is only an illusion put forth by the crystals, and all that time they've been terrorizing normal townsfolk?
The fact of the matter is, most people enjoy cliches when they're executed well. Morrowind and Oblivion can both be cut down into the cliche of a nameless soldier fulfilling a prophecy. And yet, because of the depth of the gameplay and lore, they still succeed. FF12 is cliche - a princess fights to win back her kingdom. FF10 - a tradition of summoners is broken in order to end a timeless cycle. Tales of Symphonia did that same cliche(Only instead of summoners it was the Chosen) better. Every single Castlevania game is about taking down Dracula (Except for, like, one or two). But they all expand upon that or execute it so well. Pokemon rarely ever gives a good reason as to why the main character feels like being the Pokemon Master, so why do we ask RPG Maker games for great detail before we've even played the game?
For the most part, I completely agree with you.
You talk like Charas is still dying though. I'm pretty sure eight new games have sprung up in the Game Section. There's now Bluhman's brilliant game waiting to be downloaded. Linkforce is still working on his game, Saikar's game luckily wasn't deleted, and I can name a few others who are working on projects now. Why the sad tone? :(
-
'Cause he believes that everybody hates him, or something.
-
Originally posted by Osmose
Getting caught up in old ideas is not a big thing holding people back. (The community he refers to isn't Charas, though.)
So you have a story with four heros and some crystals. OMG CLICHE. Well, what if those crystals are fueled by evil energy? What if, as the game goes on, more and more people appear to be doing evil, and the heroes stop them, going on and on until they realize that what they see as reality is only an illusion put forth by the crystals, and all that time they've been terrorizing normal townsfolk?
The fact of the matter is, most people enjoy cliches when they're executed well. Morrowind and Oblivion can both be cut down into the cliche of a nameless soldier fulfilling a prophecy. And yet, because of the depth of the gameplay and lore, they still succeed. FF12 is cliche - a princess fights to win back her kingdom. FF10 - a tradition of summoners is broken in order to end a timeless cycle. Tales of Symphonia did that same cliche(Only instead of summoners it was the Chosen) better. Every single Castlevania game is about taking down Dracula (Except for, like, one or two). But they all expand upon that or execute it so well. Pokemon rarely ever gives a good reason as to why the main character feels like being the Pokemon Master, so why do we ask RPG Maker games for great detail before we've even played the game?
And, while we're on the subject, none of these games gave a huge amount of info beyond screenshots and cinematics before release, and yet you guys require screens, demos, detailed intros, etc. for fan made stuff. That's way too high of a standard. And it's not even a common standard! Outpost's story was given: "There was a war and these guys are outcasts starting a new colony. Fun!" AND NO ONE SAID A GOD DAMNED THING.
We as a community need to realize that until we lower the bar a bit, we're not going to see a good amount of games. We're not OCRemix - we don't need perfection.
While I understand what you and the article are saying, the cliches mentioned in a few lists, including my own, are usually not too bad, but when a game other than a fangame draws heavily from one source or the plot is predictable ("Wow, so Main Villain is Hero's father. I sure didn't see THAT coming... _sweat_ ) then some cleaning up is needed. I'm not overly adverse to cliches, my suggestions usually involve changing the norm to better suit your personal style, like Moose says here. Actually, the game example mentioned doesn't sound that bad......
~Deschain
-
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
You talk like Charas is still dying though. I'm pretty sure eight new games have sprung up in the Game Section. There's now Bluhman's brilliant game waiting to be downloaded. Linkforce is still working on his game, Saikar's game luckily wasn't deleted, and I can name a few others who are working on projects now. Why the sad tone? :(
Can't help it. It's my natural tone when trying to make a point. :P
-
Essentially, going up to somebody and saying "Your idea is more cliche than mine, you suck" is intensely snobby. And yeah, we've all done it. Although everything needs at least something fresh to make it worth bothering with, everything is, at its root, cliche.
Like people have said, cliches are good. But like they've also said, if somebody wanted a simple game with nothing but a silly hero man, a princess, and a bunch of crystals to find, they'd want to play the originator of the concept, not some RM game with no new variations on the story.
-
You must remember that as soon as an idea, however broad, has been used just once, it becomes clichéd. You could magically come up with an idea that is not at all clichéd, even though the odds are against it, and use that in your game. However, if someone else uses the same idea, their game is clichéd.
This is why there is always an infinite number of clichés which people can accuse a game of.
Also, we really need more games. We're one of the strongest RPG Maker sites around, yet we have a scattering of (Admittedly very good) demos, and virtually crap in the way of actual games.
People try to make their games too epic. That's the main problem we face. Someone wants to make their first RPG Maker game, and they want it to be set in an enormous world and over 500 hours of gameplay. After about 2% of it is made, they get bored/run out of ideas.
Once we get more finished games, that is when Charas will pick up.
... Sorry to go off on a tangent there.
-
Like many people have said, there are good cliches and bad cliches.
"A very dark evil man was sealed away by many wise old man. 3 billion years later he escaped, but a prophecy says a 9-year old boy who lost his parents and a princess with healing powers will save the world".
^So, we're supposed to think the person who wrote that was a genius, simply because it's choke-full of cliches?
Good cliches are things that you simply can't avoid sometimes, or that sound better than a few original ideas.
Then there are, bad cliches, who can be avoided, and generally show the author just can't be arsed with developing his story/characters.
Examples? Villain who is evil for no reason, holier-than-thou main heroes, prophecies that ALWAYS come true, no matter how far-fetched.
-
Clichés can be altered, and in many cases can actually be really good.
I mean, take the example game_maniac gave of the "prophecy that applies to a 9-year old kid". In nigh on all cases, the person is completely unaware that the prophecy applies to them, or in many cases that it exists at all. It'd be pretty funky if the guy whom the prophecy applies to was well aware of the prophecy and that it applied to them, and was complacent and arrogant about it, instead of being meek and naive like most heroes are.
Bartender: You want beer, you gotta pay for it.
Guy: Hey screw you. I'm the Chosen One. One day soon some demon guy is gonna wake up and I'ma royally slaughter him. See, because I'm the Chosen One, and the Prophecy states that I'll pwn his demonic hide.
Bartender: Umm... ok.
I'm betting 50 Awesome Points that someone will post shortly afterwards telling me a game (Most likely an immensely well-known one that I've not played), where this exact thing has been used. Sigh.
-
In all honesty, some clichés are perfectly acceptable, but some are not. For instance, having an evil whatever that vies to either take control of or utterly destroy the world is used quite often. One should acknowledge that any protagonist should be offset with an antagonist, otherwise the story has no conflict. Also, as along as it's pulled off, epic games can be the most enjoyable, right? So, an epic antagonist fits perfectly.
However, there are clichés that have no need of being used again. For example, the only way said antagonist can be defeated is by collecting eight crystals, or some such other series of mystic objects. There are other, more creative ways to solve the conflict in a story.
Also, I'm fine with a "chosen one", as long as they are not called the Chosen One. That word, chosen, has been overused to a brutally painful death.
It does all come down if the maker can pass it off. As much as I love story in a game, if the game was awesome fun to play, a mediocre story wouldn't pull me away from it. The same goes for the other way around, a superb story is wasted in a game that is boring or looks like utter feces.
-
Osmose, that example you gave of the crystals being evil is a good example of something that isn't cliche. A cliche is something that has been used many many times, and that idea hasn't been used many many times. The moment you twist a cliche into an original idea (like you did) it becomes original, and not cliche.
If you STICK with the cliche as is, then its bad cuz its a cliche, if you modify the cliche into something original, yeah its kinda cliche, but on the other hand its original, so its not bad.
Of course every game is gonna have cliches, but as long as you turn those cliches into something original, then great, cuz there not really cliches anymore.
IF you stick with the cliche AS IS, then that same idea has been seen many times, and thats where the problem comes in. Take the hero's town burning down for example, its the start of almost every other game out there. The enemy burns the heros town down, then the hero seeks revenge, and that leads into the plot, thats a really cliche idea. The only differance in many games with this idea is the meathod, the villan, and the hero, the concept is the same. Its like, "hey, the hero's town is burning down, what a surprise!" Same with the crystal plots, sure, there are ways to make them original, however, in 99% of these games, you spend half the game trying to collect or defend, or destroy these crystals, and you know where the game is gonna go until you reach the final crystal. Cuz after you get one crystal, you KNOW you'll need to get the next. And in my opinion, if you can predict a lot of things that are gonna happen in a game, then its not a very good game.
-
I never understood the whole "I'm gonna destroy the world" thing. I mean it seems pointless, considering how the person doing would also die. And it also seems odd that most villains aspiring for world destruction seem perfectly sane. It's also annoying that nigh on all people who use the world destruction concept give absolutely no reason for the villain doing so.
-
Originally posted by Dragonium
I never understood the whole "I'm gonna destroy the world" thing. I mean it seems pointless, considering how the person doing would also die. And it also seems odd that most villains aspiring for world destruction seem perfectly sane. It's also annoying that nigh on all people who use the world destruction concept give absolutely no reason for the villain doing so.
Exactly why people need to be creative on how they convey somethings. ALL antagonists need motives. A bad-guy who wants to destroy the world " 'cause he feels like it" destroys a story's plot in my opinion. No excuses.
-
Well in good games the destroying the world is for good reasons. Like..
***SPOILERS***
When kuja wanted to destroy everything in FF9 it was cuz he was gonna die and he wanted to take everyone down with him.
And when sepheroth wanted to destory the world it was cuz it'd basically make him a god and it was the will of jenova.
And when Kefka wanted to destory the world, he didn't really want to destory it, just take it over.
And in my future game, Seketh wants to destory the world, however seketh is just a manifest of something known as the 'plague' which has been going across the galaxy destorying everything cuz 1) thats how viruses work 2) its basically revenge and hatred 3) the plauge doesn't really 'destroy' anything, just corrupting it until it too becomes part of the plague. Err, I may have to think some of this through again.
*** End of Spoilers***
Long story short, there are many good reason for world destruction, though sometimes those ideas are hard to think of.
-
That's why FFX sucked. "I want to become Sin and destroy the world in order to free it from its pain". I mean what the hell. The idea is there, but it's like saying "Don't worry, I'll get rid of your headache by shooting your head off".
-
Personally I don't like a villian who wants to cause descruction to the world period. I prefer villians who seek political power with good intentions. That's just me.
I think the evil overlord idea comes from who you, the creator, wants as the Final Boss. It's hard to come up with one who isn't pure-evil yet who doesn't come out of nowhere (IX'S NECRON HINT HINT!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!!!!). Luckily, I've managed to come up with one.
-
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
Personally I don't like a villian who wants to cause descruction to the world period. I prefer villians who seek political power with good intentions. That's just me.
Quick, we gotta stop Senator Walton before he proposes his new children's hospital idea!
-
Originally posted by DragonBlaze
And when sepheroth wanted to destory the world it was cuz it'd basically make him a god and it was the will of jenova.
Wasn't it because he wanted to use the planet as a giant spaceship? At least, that's what I remember.
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
Personally I don't like a villian who wants to cause descruction to the world period. I prefer villians who seek political power with good intentions. That's just me.
I agree that the antagonist is often better if their goals are actually good ones. Whether they're just a different good that the protagonist, or they're being acted out in a bad way. Politics are good, even just as a stepping stone though.
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
I think the evil overlord idea comes from who you, the creator, wants as the Final Boss. It's hard to come up with one who isn't pure-evil yet who doesn't come out of nowhere (IX'S NECRON HINT HINT!!!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!!!!). Luckily, I've managed to come up with one.
I really hate those out-of-nowhere bosses. I mean, FF IX was really lame on that part. Necron even had a bit of that shoot your head off to stop the headache mentality.
-
Originally posted by Razor
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
Personally I don't like a villian who wants to cause descruction to the world period. I prefer villians who seek political power with good intentions. That's just me.
Quick, we gotta stop Senator Walton before he proposes his new children's hospital idea![/B]
LOL
Back on the villain subject, what about a villain out for revenge like the typical hero is, using generally evil ways to achieve it?(coughcoughSEPHIROTHcoughcough) Or a villain who's really just a general in command of an opposing army, thus may seem evil to you but you seem evil to him?
But, destroying the world: Laaaaaaaame. "I hate the hero, why don't I kill everyone, even me, to kill him? Yeah, that could work!"
~Deschain
-
Originally posted by Roland_Deschain
Originally posted by Razor
Originally posted by aboutasoandthis
Personally I don't like a villian who wants to cause descruction to the world period. I prefer villians who seek political power with good intentions. That's just me.
Quick, we gotta stop Senator Walton before he proposes his new children's hospital idea![/B]
LOL
Back on the villain subject, what about a villain out for revenge like the typical hero is, using generally evil ways to achieve it?(coughcoughSEPHIROTHcoughcough) Or a villain who's really just a general in command of an opposing army, thus may seem evil to you but you seem evil to him?
But, destroying the world: Laaaaaaaame. "I hate the hero, why don't I kill everyone, even me, to kill him? Yeah, that could work!"
~Deschain[/B]
Hardly any of 'destroy the world' plots out there involve the bad guy dying.
-
Originally posted by DragonBlazeHardly any of 'destroy the world' plots out there involve the bad guy dying.[/B]
Actually, technically, they do since the hero kills him/her before they can accomplish it. Besides that, it's kind of an exaggeration on the usual reasons for destroying the world. And, it's simple logic: If you blow up the world you live in, won't you die too?
-
You guys act as if being suicidal or being willing to kill oneself for a greater cause is something unheard of. :P
-
I agree
-
Originally posted by Osmose
You guys act as if being suicidal or being willing to kill oneself for a greater cause is something unheard of. :P
Good point. But, the point I'm trying to make is....
uh..... Lost to eternity thanks to Dr Pepper. Um.... I suppose it had something to do with "Most suicidal terrorists and stuff, while willing to die, are doing so for the good of the world and not to blow it up," but that doesn't make sense at all.
-
Well no, I can think of a lot of games that involve destroying the world but the bad guy lives. Like in FF7, if sepheroth destroyed the world, he would be ok, just everyone else would be dead. And a lot of other times 'destroying' the world means breaking the world where its not blown up, but changed to something 'evil' where the bad guy is all powerfull *coughff6cough*
-
Originally posted by DragonBlaze
Well no, I can think of a lot of games that involve destroying the world but the bad guy lives. Like in FF7, if sepheroth destroyed the world, he would be ok, just everyone else would be dead. And a lot of other times 'destroying' the world means breaking the world where its not blown up, but changed to something 'evil' where the bad guy is all powerfull *coughff6cough*
Not quite destroying the world then, is it? Oh, and Sephiroth doesn't count. He was completely insane!
-
Hahaha, my first proper finished game was so cliche' it's unreal. Right at the end everyone went to' the tree of life' where the main bad guy was just sitting there and said something about becoming all powerful XD
Man though, I've devoted too many years of my life to rm2k3. I still have that game and it's sequel on my harddrive, that's like four or five years work.
-
Ugh, my first game was worse than that. I had this friggin Zelda rip-off talking tree, which made no sense in the game's storyline, that just happened to be the Insta-teleporter to the final boss room, where the main bad guy just stood around, waiting or you, the thirteen year old hero who could be mistaken for a porcupine with a greatsword....
It was a mess. I even used different style sprites and faces.
-
You guys do realize that Sephiroth did not want to destroy the world, only create a giant wound? Meteor would've killed millions, but a good part of the world would live. His plan was to create a gigantic wound that would take a humongous amount of Mako to heal. Then he would go to the center of that wound and absorb the Mako being sent there by the Planet to heal it (Technically it's the Lifestream and not Mako, but regardless) so that he would become a living god. I believe there might've been something about leaving into space with Jenova after that, but regardless, he didn't want the world to die, otherwise there'd be no Lifestream to absorb power from.
-
I think I've said it before, but cliches are all in the presentation. You could easily take the same bad guy with the plan for world conquest, and make one better than the other by using dialogue and imagery.
-
Originally posted by Osmose
You guys do realize that Sephiroth did not want to destroy the world, only create a giant wound? Meteor would've killed millions, but a good part of the world would live. His plan was to create a gigantic wound that would take a humongous amount of Mako to heal. Then he would go to the center of that wound and absorb the Mako being sent there by the Planet to heal it (Technically it's the Lifestream and not Mako, but regardless) so that he would become a living god. I believe there might've been something about leaving into space with Jenova after that, but regardless, he didn't want the world to die, otherwise there'd be no Lifestream to absorb power from.
Sephiroth was still crazy. But, yeah, i guess it's still a partially destroy the world goal. That's worth half credit, right?
Originally posted by ZeroKirbyX
I think I've said it before, but cliches are all in the presentation. You could easily take the same bad guy with the plan for world conquest, and make one better than the other by using dialogue and imagery.
True, but what I think is being addressed here is presentation of cliches. What needs to be avoided is the villain who's evil because he can be.
EDIT: Thanks, Moose.
-
On a different note, when I first glanced at this topic title I thought it said "Avoiding chickens, and why you shouldn't" and I came here expecting an inane X marks the Ed thread XD
-
Originally posted by Moosetroop11
On a different note, when I first glanced at this topic title I thought it said "Avoiding chickens, and why you shouldn't" and I came here expecting an inane X marks the Ed thread XD
Ever tried glasses or contacts? Those might help.
I'ma go avoid some chickens now, even though I shouldn't.
-
Originally posted by Osmose
You guys do realize that Sephiroth did not want to destroy the world, only create a giant wound? Meteor would've killed millions, but a good part of the world would live. His plan was to create a gigantic wound that would take a humongous amount of Mako to heal. Then he would go to the center of that wound and absorb the Mako being sent there by the Planet to heal it (Technically it's the Lifestream and not Mako, but regardless) so that he would become a living god. I believe there might've been something about leaving into space with Jenova after that, but regardless, he didn't want the world to die, otherwise there'd be no Lifestream to absorb power from.
Really? Well any meateor the size of that one crashing into a planet would end all life anyway. I'm pretty sure that they said it would kill everyone. I could be wrong, its been years since I've played the game.
-
I agree with osmose almost completely, but I do think some stories posted here just make you go... ugh... I'm really tired of hearing about X number crystals and some kind of power hidden in them. So while I agree with osmose, I still strongly dislike some cliches. But I definitely think cliches can be taken and turned into something original and interesting. With work.
Hm... this is making me think about things. I really liked what Dragonium said about what Charas has to offer for games. Like, why don't we have more games to offer? I don't believe I've seen one finished game come out of Charas since I've joined. And when I say that I mean like a finished game from a long time member, not some random awesome German game maker or something like that come to promote his awesome, sadly in foreign language, RPG.
-
Originally Posted by drenrin2120
Hm... this is making me think about things. I really liked what Dragonium said about what Charas has to offer for games. Like, why don't we have more games to offer? I don't believe I've seen one finished game come out of Charas since I've joined. And when I say that I mean like a finished game from a long time member, not some random awesome German game maker or something like that come to promote his awesome, sadly in foreign language, RPG.
It's getting a translation. Celebrate.
-
On the subject about the villains...
The villain itself doesn't always need to "destroy the world" "kill all humanity" "become god/immortal" etc.. A villain could just simply be trying to accomplish something that is going against the protagonists beliefs. Such as saving a particular someone the protagonist believes doesn't need to be saved. Of course, leaving it like this makes the hero's seem evil so spice it up with these ingredients:
"The villain wants to resurrect his dead friend who he killed on accident because of his own recklessness of his extraordinary power. When his friend was alive he made a vow that as long as the villain never killed a single person, he/she would in turn protect him from the forces that seek control of his power.
During one of processes for resurrection, the villain accidentally kills the protagonist's leader whom the protagonist idled and came to known him for more then just leader (the hero is a girl). The antagonist again broke his promise to his late friend to which he apologized to the hero (heroine) from deep within his heart. The protagonist wanted to accept the antagonists apology, however she knew that the antagonists actions goes against the policies of life and soul (which her former leader sworn to protect.) In order to continue her former leader's legacy she vows to stop the antagonist's with any means necessary."
This was thought of right off the top of my head. The conflict is right there. Sure, there is obvious cliches here and there. You just need to know how to work with them in combination with your own story to make it appealing to the audience.
What a person SHOULD avoid doing is trying to take things WAY out of scale. For instance lets say the heroes successfully stop the villain from saving the life that shouldn't be saved, then the villain gets corrupted by despair/the forces of darkness/influences of evil and wants to destroy the world in revenge. Something like that would be an instant turn off to everyone.
Sorry about the long post :O!
-
While I agree that going from "revive friend" to "destroy the world" is a bit excessive for a turn, you still need to raise the stakes before the end. It's an old story-telling idea. At the beginning, you establish what will happen if the villain succeeds. Then, as the game goes on, things happen that could result in even worse consequences. Do this at various points (smoothly; don't make them sudden changes) until you have a lot at risk. A sort of "little to gain, a lot to lose" kind of idea.