Call of Cthulhu has been released
View Single Post
Join Date: Dec 2007
04-26-2012, 11:18 AM
I'm pointing out typos and spelling errors to you in a desire to help. Please don't get defensive on me over those.
In fact, please don't get defensive at all. I am genuinely trying to help by pointing out what I feel are errors in the story and presentation. Like I said before, take them as you will, but please don't attack me for them.
We have tried what you suggested when the town was first laid out. The terrain there will not facilitate your one step solution. We thought it would be cool to have gray and beige tiles set at regular intervals. It also helps to measure out the town when standing on the set. Most other players did not feel this was a big issue.
Fair enough on that limitation. For me, it's a jarring annoyance and serve no aesthetic purpose.
This is a colloquial term used by people in that culture.
It's actually a back-formation, and I highly doubt that precise, logical Vulcans would use this dialect.
Yes, the candles were staged to be floating above the table. In Star Trek, the Vulcans have mastered the technology to defy gravity. Also, the candles are a chandelier.
Alright, but it's odd when they only hover about a foot off the table, and the wax puddles into the sky...
I do not need a first lesson.
it is not necessary for the player to interpret the imagery.
I thought you were telling a story with characterization. We are in a visual medium. the VISUAL aspect can't simply be ignored. We aren't stupid. The emotional choices of the contact list is VERY MUCH to display anger, sadness, and fear. They work passably well, and I can't think of a single time I've been confused on someone's emotion when those are used with the amount of dialogue that you have.
People have annoying habits. That is what Vulcans do.
He is in his moment of glory.
Please don't get condescending.
It's not so much him as how his character is written. You have, in action text, "He raises his glass for a toast" and then have him say "I raise my glass for a..." Most scripts don't have those kinds of stage actions, as the actors are clever enough to figure out that if you say you're doing something, you probably are going to be physically doing it.
I already explained why this occurs, but you need to let go of the idea that the story has to be all about you.
I've got no problem with it being about her. What I have a problem with is this half-hearted insistence that I am both supposed to be playing her, and watching her.
Also, I am not familiar with persistent tense, In writing you have present, past, imperfect past, perfect past, pluperfect, future, future perfect, infinitive, active voice, passive voice, perfect passive participles, present active participles...
Apparently not familiar with adjectives, however. In my sentence, both persistent and tense modify 'errors.' I mean that you have tense errors, which are persistent throughout the work.
And I am not arguing against dialect. However, you have cast a group of almost entirely Vulcans. They are expected to speak in correct, typically high-class and educated dialect. Grammatical errors like that are not typical.
Also, if we did that, then we would deny the players who like to go out and point out what is wrong with a script their fun. Mistakes are good, it is how we learn and grow as a society of writers.
...You're seriously saying that grammar, spelling, and script errors in a finished product are GOOD? Yes, making mistakes is a way to grow, but only when paired with acknowledging them and correcting them. There is a reason that newspapers publish retractions and corrections. They don't leave them in there to provide critics their 'fun.' In fact, as a critic, I find having to point out the simple grammar and spelling stuff rather tedious. I'd much rather address the important bits of a story than its means of conveyance.
No, in Enterprise and on Memory Alpha site, the town T’Pol was from was Capitol City.
Ahem... From Memory Alpha:
"Raised in a house
near the capital city
on Vulcan, young T'Pol had and cared for a pet Sehlat."
Emphasis mine. The capitol city refers to a city which is a capitol. It is NOT the name of the city itself. Besides, you also have 'near' in there. I live near Chicago. This does not mean I live IN Chicago, or that they have any right to claim me.
If this is true, then why did you comment about the emotion setting earlier?
Some dialog boxes in the show will have multiple people talking. When we played through the story, we read the script out loud it is helpful to the actors on stage to know when their lines are queued up. Also, when the actors play the show, they often just use the basic script as a starting point and most times change the dialog on stage to fit with their own personality. The identifying marker seems useful to the actors/roleplayers. So we put them in the show here.
They go towards the same thing, in that my opinion is that there should be less staging and non-speech directives in the text boxes.
And your comments are confusing me further. Should I be approaching this as a novel that I'm reading, a play that I'm acting in, a play that I am watching, or a traditional mission?
In regards to passion. I'm asking that the thing be playable for those of us who don't have our acting troupe in STO. If you want me to ignore the dialogue I don't like and mentally insert what I want... Why are you using this format at all?
I have no problems with the dream sequence, actually, except that it could be slightly more... dreamlike. I'm not a big fan of how Alan Hunt is introduced, as 'this character you should already know about.' I don't, and I have no way of knowing it. In a play, characters do not typically get their background and past interactions given to the audience, beyond a VERY basic role in the program, to allow a small bit of anchoring. They certainly don't dump entire past interactions. Instead, those are left for the actors to show via their actions and speech.
I didn't say anything about the difficulty. I found them actually difficult, considering I'm on Elite. Given their placements, there is also no path between your objectives available to not draw aggro. IN fact, given the revelation at the end of the dream, making clearing the station a requirement might not be a bad idea.
However, if you come away with this should be a holodeck-novel, and then you’re not taking the entire story in consideration in your analysis.
Enlighten me. In a short paragraph, what am I missing?
The player needs to know how to speak properly to the toilet.
Go to your room.
Go to your room!
Both are commands. One implies that you are shouting. After a string of them, I got the distinct impression that I was hollering at the toilet like it was hard of hearing. I also understand comic relief. But this small bit struck me as a bit too much of a mood whiplash.
....I fail to understand why an introduction doesn't need player interaction. In a novel, we interact via reading. In TV, we do it by watching. In games, we do it by DOING. There is very little interaction in the introduction.
See, in a story here we start from a traditional novel format and over time move to a traditional movie format or TV format and then into a Video game format (MMORPG).
There's a reason that Star Wars Episode I wasn't a novel, then episode II a TV series, episode III a play, and episode IV a video game. These mediums have very different tools at their disposal, very different audiences, and very different expectations and limitations by their format. Jumbling them together produces a hybrid.
What you have here, in fact anything you will do in the foundry, is going to be a video game hybridized with something else. As that, it will already be burdened by having to establish its own rules and style. Constantly shifting them is only going to make things worse.
I find it odd that you do not realize that your concerns of not being in control is now confounded when the story does that.
I'm nor confounded by having control, I'm confounded by who I'm put in control OF. Am I Kaliena, or am I my bridge officer? Am I both? Neither?
You've run over an hour of us as a standby observer. You have trained us to expect this. Of COURSE you're going to get confusion and annoyance when you decide to change that.
It isn’t a thin excuse.
If they reveal that to you in the first Act, there would be no point in playing the remaining 6 acts. It is called “a clue.”
Just because there is a reason doesn't mean that there can't be a thin excuse. It's the casual way he shrugs off the anomaly, on a planet that's been warp and transporter capable for centuries, that irks me. There is no 'it's unusual, and I've forwarded it to the Vulcan Science committee for investigation' or 'It always happens this time of year' or any other explanation given to us besides 'I don't know.' It doesn't have to be the real one, but it has to satisfy the question of 'Why this seemingly incongruous block?'
No, it is clearly stated in the beginning of the story that
you are Kaliena
. You are only an actor here.
Jake the Ferengi bartender who happens to go off on exploration missions to get dilithium crystals is not going to be able to step into the role.
You do realize these are contradictory, right? If you want us, the player, to be Kaliena, then you need to allow our avatar to stand in for that person. It's a game of pretend. We're suspending the fact that our avatar Jake the Bartender is not a pregnant half-vulcan woman for purposes of the story.
Having said pregnant half-vulcan woman standing right next to us makes that very difficult.
You also keep talking about playtesters. That's fine. But I am also a playtester. I am giving you this information to do with as you will, given my impressions and how I responded to the work. Don't tell me that I'm wrong when I give you my suggestions, whether you're going to use them or not. It smacks of arrogance and condescension.