CyclonatorZ

See, I've pretty much decided that I'm never going to post another epic on this site until I've totally finished it and have made a thorough revision, because I've found that nothing ever comes out quite the way I'd like it when I complete the first draft. It doesn't sound like its that way with you though, otherwise you'd wait a lot longer to post any part of Endless Blue than you probably will. ~~END~~

Perhaps it's just me, but I'd rather play as a hero who actually has some basic concept of morality. ~~END~~

Eh, I'll probably see it on DVD one day, but the epitome of Sci-Fi 2009 for me was Star Trek, IMO. And that's from someone who dislikes the Star Trek franchise for the most part. ~~END~~

Eh, I think it's the brown staff and the silver feet that bother me the most, although admittedly the latter was also present on the original set. And really, I don't know how the visor doesn't count, as it's evident and distinct enough to hurt the color scheme somewhat IMO. I realize that you didn't have very many pieces to work with, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it better than the original set - though, that's just me. Also, I've never thought of Tarix's colors as hodgepodgy - the actual shades had a lot of potential. The problem was that the Mata blue was only used on the feet and hands, making it seem really out of place. That's why, as soon as I bought him, I added a lot more Mata blue on his torso and arms, which not only balanced out the colors but also bulked up the lacking body design. ~~EHD~~

Made him better. B) So you're saying you think the color scheme is better now as well? Cause I'm seeing no less than seven different colors on this MOC, aranged without any real sense or order. And, as the person who criticized Tarix for the exact same thing nearly a year ago, I'd think you'd be less inclined to like this guy's new colro arangement. ~~END~~

Well, looks like TLC did make a good decision to license Ben 10 - it seems that the brand name alone is propelling the sales, regardless of the actual quality of the sets. And when I mean "quality," I mean: what the heck has gotten into kids these days, that they'd want to buy something as bad as this? Same with the parents, only relating to the uber-expensive prices. ~~END~~

See, this is why I really resent TRU... or, I mean, the people way up top, because, well, I don't resent you, because that would be mean and uncalled for and... (pauses to take foot out of his mouth)... um, just forget I said anything, okay? ~~END~~

Oh, so true... especially when it comes to Bionicle. ... part of me just died when I read that. ~~END~~

Metroid Prime Trilogy = YES. B) ~~END~~

So does this mean people have already tried to break the rule? Gee, and I thought people might have finally learned their lesson this year. ~~END~~

Art Slot: Hand of Faith Logo Art Slot: Red Skull Logo Art Slot: Iron Hawk Logo Art Slot: Rockfoot Logo Art Slot: Shadow Honor Logo Art Slot: Brethren Logo Art Slot: Gemstones, Gems, Gemsand Art Topic ~~END~~

Like or hate the new line, you have to admit that the stop motion videos are really neat. ~~END~~

As long as Greg and the story team can manage to work out a half-decent storyline from the mess the Stars are obviously going to create for them, I couldn't care less about the accuracy of the commercials in relation to it. That... was both the most awesome and most disturbing reply to a blog entry I have ever read. Awesome, because it was so darn hilarious. Disturbing, because it's not that far from reality. ~~END~~

Edit: Hm, seems I didn't read the introduction as carefully as I thought, as I missed the part where you said this was more of a cliche and power test and less of a Mary Sue test. Heh, bonesiii would have a field day with this if he knew about it. FYI - the guy doesn't believe in Mary Sues - which is rather suprising, considering that he's also a very good writer. But, in all honesty, I'm not sure I really agree with the way this test is done. Perhaps its because it seems to confuse "mary sue" and "cliche," which I've always understood to be totally different things. While many of the questions relate to the former (especially the ones about powers and heroic deeds), the ones relating to the less extravagant details like motivations and relationships between other established don't seem to relate to the general idea of a Mary Sue as much. The term cliche would probably fit some characters that fail this test better, especially if their failure has nothing to do with their power or statue in life and more because their personality has been used so many times in various forms of media. But, then again, I wouldn't necessarily say that a character being cliche or even a Mary Sue is bad, just because they are one or the other. The reason why cliches are cliches are because the ideas behind them simply work well, not because they are bad and shouldn't have ever been used. And as for Mary Sues - well, I think part of their appeal (especially in sci-fi) is that if all characters in a story were average and nothing special, they wouldn't be really that interesting. Heck, most villians in media (including the likes of Darth Vader, Sauron, and other classics) are probably Mary Sues, but that does't stop them from being entertaining, as the entertainment comes from them being big and imposinng. I think the big problem is that the term Mary Sue has taken on a negative meaning due to the barrage of poorly written fanfiction that the internet has recieved, despite the fact that a Mary Sue can be enjoyable if written well. The big defining factor to me is less about the powers of the character and rather how they are used in the story. Just because a character has incredible powers and has done incredible deeds does't necessarily mean that they are as boring as watching grass grow - especially if they are coupled with an interesting personality and conflicts. The trick is that you have to give them realistic emotions and put them in situations that still pose a challenge to them. This is what bothered me most about the test, because my stories are both largely character driven and feature a large amount of characters. Factoring in the relationship section, I fear my characters would all come dangerously close to failing just because they live in the same village and know each other fairly well. ~~END~~

Eh, I personally like Metroid better, but maybe that's just the nintendo fanboy in me speaking. Or, perhaps it's because I'm getting Metroid Prime Trilogy in just a couple of days. Either way, Yoda rocks. That we can all agree on, even though all his good lines were in the original trilogy. ~~END~~

What in Makuta's dark tentacles of doom is that thing she's wearing on her head? ~~END~~

See, this is why I chose to set my current fanfiction story series in a Bionicle-like universe that is otherwise unrelated to the official Bionicle universe. Since plot revelations generally come very quickly, and since I like to have all my Bionicle fan-fiction line up with the official storyline, it was much easier for me just to create a brand new universe that borrows concepts from Bionicle rather than simply having it take place in the actual Bionicle universe. Anyway, great post as usual, Greg. ~~END~~

Okay, might as well use the old "quote and then add personal comments in bold" method, seeing as I have a lot to reply to.

So, just to make sure I'm understanding you correctly, are you basically saying that any crictical survey of any form of entertainment is in a sense already wrong, as by criticizing something you are claiming that it's not just an opinion that it's bad? And if so, does this mean that criticizing productions that are obviously shoddy and poorly made (technically speaking) is wrong as well? I'm just having a hard time trying figuring out what the extent of your beliefs are concerning this issue, as I don't know you personally and don't know what you feel. As an example, if a twelve year old girl went up to you and said "Hannah Montana is waaaay better than boring Lord of the Rings," what would your response be? Because I don't think you can really make a logical argument supporting that proverbial girl's statement unless you use the argument that "since it's her taste, it's not wrong or right." I think the reason I'm rather put off by this kind of extreme is because I fear that a widespread acceptance of it would encourage laziness and a lack of originality in all forms of media. That's not to say that's already a problem, but if no one even questioned the quality of any sort of production (under the belief that it's totally a matter of taste), then unoriginal, poorly produced media would run rampant, and quality works would be obscured. After all, if there's no clear definition on what is "high quality entertainment" and what is not, then the biggest factors in how a show or movie or whatever woud succeed is how much money and time the producers poured into advertising it to people and drowning out the competition. That, of course, is exactly the reason why fads like Hannah Montana are so popular - because the producers are so rich that they don't need to make a high quality product to succeed. By claiming that it's only an opinion as to whether things like this are good or not, are we only encouraging this kind of market behavior? Keep in mind, I'm still not sure whether this is your opinion or not, as I don't know how far you're taking this kind of view. Care to enlighten me? ~~END~~

Burn the heretic! :angry: ~~END~~

Dunno what game you're taking about here, but I do know that the video game industry generally has little to no respect for female characters. Since "mature" games are almost always targeted at young male adults, the software companies feel that they can get away with this, and it ends up being very annoying for the few males who don't approve of their treatment of female characters (including me). ~~END~~

As usual, bones, you've created another thoughtful and fascinating article. However, I'm not exactly certain of what constitutes "setting your tastes to neutral" to you when it comes to media. You see, while I personally believe that the the quality factor of books, movies, etc is largely opinion related, I'm also under the opinion that there are certain cases where works are good or bad. That is, there are times when someone's taste is simply wrong - and all of these situations relate to one thing: an increasement in the level of morally objectional content. An example is the current array of comic books from Marvel and DC, the two major superhero comic makers in America. Although I haven't read nearly as many graphic novels as some, I have read enough to notice that there is a drastic difference in tone between the early comic books and the more recent ones. While comic books from the 60's and so forth are generally simpler and less multilayered, they also tend to rely far less on excessive violence and other negative things to tell their stories. In contrast, many modern comics use what is known as "shock value" to sell their stories. Basically, in order to attract readers, they rely on twisting the previously established characterizations of the heroes and other characters as much as possible, turning them into darker, grittier, and more "mature" versions of their original selves. In the process, they basically throw out decades of previously established content and rely totally on shocking and horrifying the audience into buying more comic books. This change in tone has made most comic books today extremely unpleasant to read IMO, and it also has the affect of making them inapropriate for younger people. Basically, what I'm trying to say is that, while setting our tastes to neutral is usually a good practice, there comes a time when we should draw the line at how our favorite characters and media forms are being changed by recent developments, especially if these developements negatively affect the product as a whole. I'm not saying we should react badly if a hero experiences a difficult period of his life in the story - I'm only suggesting that we should not just let it slide by if one of our favorite characters suddenly is turned into a sadistic murderer for the sole purpose of shocking the readers with graphic violence and over-the-top storylines. To me, making the tone of a story darker is only good if the writer is doing it for actual storyline purposes, rather than just for "shock value." Because seriously, a big problem with much of today's entertainment (particularly comic books and video games) is that "gorier and more explicit" = "more mature." And I sure don't think you'd agree with that, bones. ~~END~~

Well, I've only just begun to experiment with adding a romantic angle to my bionicle stories, so I'm probably not the best source for advice on how to write love scenes without sappiness. But, there are a couple things that would definitely help - namely making the characters awkward in the scene and adding a bit of humor. To me, the big reason why most bad love scenes are sappy is because they simply aren't natural. The characters exchange dialogue that is so contrived that it seems like they know they're in a movie, as real romance never plays out like in Hollywood. Instead, the characters should act like they would in real life - if they're new to the love game, then they should be nervous and show their axiety through their dialogue and their actions. In the same way, a character who has had failed relationships in the past shouldn't open up to a new lover unless that is true to their character, and their past relationships should influence the dialogue that they exchange between the other characters. No nervous lover is ever going to talk like in the movies, and no heart-broken lover should react to a new lover like their previous relationships never happened. It should be one of a writer's prime concerns to create scenes that deal with love in a way that is true to the character - as staying true to the personalities of your creations should be the prime concern no matter what you're writing. Secondly, humor also will help to eliminate some of the sappiness, and this also ties in perfectly with the aformentioned awkwardness that new lovers should experience. Odd but sincere reactions to love and other parts of life can often just as funny as purely comedic moments, and done right, they won't hurt the overall message or tone of the story at all. Things like having the characters trip as they walk together in the night or, in the case of Bionicle, having their masks clank together loudly as they try to kiss may seem rather silly, but in reality I'd say they add the needed realism to love scenes. Maybe not everyone feels this way, but you've got to admit that adding awkward moments like this would definitely be preferable to having the love play out like a cheesy Hollywood romance, with absolutely no mistakes and every scene playing out like it was washed of any imperfections. Anyway, that's all I realy have to say about this, and again, I probably wouldn't advise on using my advice over the advice of some of the more experienced writers here. All I know is that I share your want to not write love scenes that are incredibly sappy, and my advice probably isn't that original. I guess the best piece of advice is just to delve into the personalities of your characters and write the scenes from their prospectives, rather than filling them with dialogue and actions that don't line up with everything that you've previously established about them. Like I said, the biggest problem with bad romance is that it isn't natural and feels too polished over - and without realistic flaws and failure, no scene in a story can really be anything but cheesy. ~~END~~

Funny, I thought this was going to be about the Bionicle Stars sets, but I guess that was silly, because you've already said you can't talk about them. Oh well, this is still cool as well - although she looks a lot different in that picture than in the music videos. ~~END~~