My review of Radiant Historia is up. Looking back, I had a ton of fun with it, but I wish it finished stronger. When the going was good, and the game fired on all cylinders, it was an astounding experience. Everything it did just felt right. I never questioned the story, the pacing, or the locations. It all made sense in its own way.
Yet, as I mention in the review, the late game segments become a huge drag. This was bothersome not only because it lowers the game's overall quality, but also because it affected my review. I spent a lot of time trying to figure out why the game changed so suddenly, but no answer was satisfactory. The problem, in retrospect, was that I was analyzing the game in a bubble. I assumed that every decision, good or bad, was an intentional effort on the part of the developers.
My troubles came to an end after reading a few other amateur reviews, one of which pointed out how the game was affected by its low budget. There was the answer, or at least part of it. Budget, like so many other outside factors, can have a huge impact on how a game turns out, yet the thought never crossed my mind. I felt embarrassed, and frustrated, that such a simple explanation went over my head. It was a stark reminder of how much further I have to go as a critic.
It also reminded me of just how much the press has influenced my train of thought. On a podcast, I once talked about "developer intent", the idea that developers have a fondness of using interviews to inform gamers of what their game is all about. This can be done during the preview phase, but is also crops up after the game is out, at which point it becomes a defense of their work. I don't have a problem with this practice in principle. In fact, it should probably be encouraged, so that gamers have a better idea of what they might be getting into whenever they pick up a game. But sometimes, a developer's words serve to (intentionally?) warp reality. There's a difference between telling your audience what you are trying/tried to do, and making a qualitative statement about your product when it is out for all to judge.
I have two examples of what I'm thinking of. The first is Bioware. They consistently talk up the importance of storytelling in games, to the point where some remarks state that a game can't be good with a story. It's a bullshit premise, because we have plenty of evidence of classic games with little to no story. It's made slightly bullshittier when you consider that Bioware has relied on the same core plot for years, and finally, people are starting to take notice. Unfortunately, not quite enough people are noticing, so the developer can continue to parrot the same belief in good storytelling, and gamers continue to believe that Bioware are the ones responsible for said quality storytelling. It's a situation in which they can say one thing, and do another, and no one really gives a damn.
The second example is Harmonix. Ever since they split from Activision to work on Rock Band, they've been hell bent on fulfilling their specific vision of what music games should be like. This vision, in turn, led to some of my biggest gripes with the early iterations of Rock Band. The lack of control over your avatar, its relatively party-unfriendly design, and its disdain for single-player modes were atrocious. I never saw anything resembling an admittance from Harmonix about these flaws. On the contrary, they felt that they were good, necessary enhancements, and that we should like it this way. Plenty of their fans nodded their heads in agreement, but I couldn't. I don't care if developers make mistakes sometimes, but I appreciate when they can at least identify them. Harmonix instead chose to follow their path to its logical conclusion the result of which was Rock Band 3 dropping to $20 faster than games with half its notariety, and with the franchise dropping off the face of the earth at roughly the same time as the dreaded Guitar Hero. I'm not happy to see that happen, but I wonder if it could have fared better if the team (and the players) were a bit more honest with themselves about what the series needed to stay relevant.
To bring this back to Radiant Historia, when I read enough interviews with such bullheaded declarations, I start to forget that game development is so much more than a single talking head with a plan. And if things go great, or horribly, the reasons are going to extend far beyond that one person and that one plan. I know that people like auteur driven entertainment, but it isn't conducive to strong criticism. An important lesson learned, and one I hope not to forget.
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Thursday, May 12, 2011
Thoughts - 5/12/11
Apple's dominance in the market is due in part by their products, but I have to say, it's hard to argue that isn't also due to the terrible synergy between their practices and their user base. Apple doesn't want to talk about their inner workings? No problem; their users aren't interested in knowing. They managed to make a faulty product? Fire the bastards behind it, because every Tom, Dick and Harry wants top shelf gizmos, and in their minds, clearly those developers weren't top shelf enough. Apple is, in most ways, no better or worse than any other massive tech company, but they can get away with it all with much fewer stains on their reputation, and in some cases, their fans become so defensive that they're willing to go on the offensive in their efforts to trash other companies.
I've been reading about the shutdown of iFlow Reader, the iOS ebook reader app who claims that the new rules in place for in app purchases have destroyed their business model. A lot of the responses from iOS users have been something along the lines of "They signed the contract, so they knew what they were getting into." This is the kind of ignorance that allows Apple to dick around in ways that Google or Microsoft would be slammed for. The iFlow folks certainly agreed to a set of rules when they first started; the problem is those rules are changing in such a way that pretty much every option I've seen these people recommend, are in fact going to be outlawed by Apple.
And those same new rules are going to affect google and Amazon in a short amount of time. All of this information is clear as day in many of the news pieces covering the shutdown, which of course means that people are willing to simply scream at Apple detractors without even bothering to read. Par for the course on the Internet, but it hurts to see it happen to a company who at the very least seemed to have a belief behind the app they were making. If I had to make a criticism against them, I would ask them whether they had to make their business rely on the sale of ebooks, and if they had to resort to an Adobe DRM scheme for said books. Looking at the current state of ebook sales, neither of those seem like good ideas for a small company. Still, that doesn't change the fact that Apple's new rules for ebook sales allow them to act as an extra middleman on top of the middlemen like iFlow, Amazon or Google, and I wouldn't be surprised if even a few tweaks to iFlow's business model wouldn't be enough to save them.
I don't expect any rapid change, but I wonder how long they can keep this increasing stranglehold without someone deciding it's worth looking into. Or maybe I shouldn't - if Apple were slammed with an antitrust case, the resulting apologist editorials might make me sick.
I've been reading about the shutdown of iFlow Reader, the iOS ebook reader app who claims that the new rules in place for in app purchases have destroyed their business model. A lot of the responses from iOS users have been something along the lines of "They signed the contract, so they knew what they were getting into." This is the kind of ignorance that allows Apple to dick around in ways that Google or Microsoft would be slammed for. The iFlow folks certainly agreed to a set of rules when they first started; the problem is those rules are changing in such a way that pretty much every option I've seen these people recommend, are in fact going to be outlawed by Apple.
And those same new rules are going to affect google and Amazon in a short amount of time. All of this information is clear as day in many of the news pieces covering the shutdown, which of course means that people are willing to simply scream at Apple detractors without even bothering to read. Par for the course on the Internet, but it hurts to see it happen to a company who at the very least seemed to have a belief behind the app they were making. If I had to make a criticism against them, I would ask them whether they had to make their business rely on the sale of ebooks, and if they had to resort to an Adobe DRM scheme for said books. Looking at the current state of ebook sales, neither of those seem like good ideas for a small company. Still, that doesn't change the fact that Apple's new rules for ebook sales allow them to act as an extra middleman on top of the middlemen like iFlow, Amazon or Google, and I wouldn't be surprised if even a few tweaks to iFlow's business model wouldn't be enough to save them.
I don't expect any rapid change, but I wonder how long they can keep this increasing stranglehold without someone deciding it's worth looking into. Or maybe I shouldn't - if Apple were slammed with an antitrust case, the resulting apologist editorials might make me sick.
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
Meet the Mets?
I know, I know - far too early in the season to make any judgements. Still, last night's win against the Phillies, in Philly? That felt good. Real good.
It had all the hallmarks of a feel good win. They beat the stuffing out of our rivals. in their stadium. And we did so by beating one of their "ace" pitchers, who at one point called the Mets "choke artists", which is one of the few things athletes tend not to gravitate towards during trash talk. Hell, They didn't just beat him - they took him out after less than three innings.
Again, none of this is a portent for the full season. But last night, in addition to the Marlins series, showed a much more fiery, much more aggressive Mets club. They're trying to steal, they're fighting at the plate, and for the most part, playing decent defense. Terry Collins has done something to remind these players of who they are, and what they can do, and it just feels good to see guys like David Wright hit the ball like he should, and to see someone like Chris Young or Willie Harris remind the league of how good they can be.
The Phillies (as well as their little minions on the Marlins) have been trash talking the Mets for so long, while the rest of the league has had no qualms with letting them be the butt of every joke. That's what pushed this latest win over the top. It won't silence anyone - we need at least a sweep for that- but it still looked amazing to me.
It had all the hallmarks of a feel good win. They beat the stuffing out of our rivals. in their stadium. And we did so by beating one of their "ace" pitchers, who at one point called the Mets "choke artists", which is one of the few things athletes tend not to gravitate towards during trash talk. Hell, They didn't just beat him - they took him out after less than three innings.
Again, none of this is a portent for the full season. But last night, in addition to the Marlins series, showed a much more fiery, much more aggressive Mets club. They're trying to steal, they're fighting at the plate, and for the most part, playing decent defense. Terry Collins has done something to remind these players of who they are, and what they can do, and it just feels good to see guys like David Wright hit the ball like he should, and to see someone like Chris Young or Willie Harris remind the league of how good they can be.
The Phillies (as well as their little minions on the Marlins) have been trash talking the Mets for so long, while the rest of the league has had no qualms with letting them be the butt of every joke. That's what pushed this latest win over the top. It won't silence anyone - we need at least a sweep for that- but it still looked amazing to me.
Sunday, April 03, 2011
Funimation Channel
So I've been spending a week or so housesitting, at a place which has Verizon Fios cable, and thus gets the Funimation Channel. I've had it on for several chunks of the weekend, and the results haven't been convincing.
Now to be fair, I recognize that this is the very definition of a deep cable channel. In that regard, I think the station has some decent looking promotional ads and bumpers. However, they aren't used very well to inform you of what programming the channel has. Over the course of the two days, I saw the ads for Phantom and Oh Edo Rocket multiple times. In contrast, I saw exactly two ads for Hetalia, and zero for Sengoku Basara. If you want to know just what Funimation shows are on the station, you're not going to know without watching it for a full twelve or so hours. That's a bit problematic in my eyes.
Furthermore, the channel doesn't seem to have any themed programming blocks (or, if it does, they again aren't well promoted). It'd be easier if there were action or comedy blocks of some sort.
I'm also not sure why there was such an odd frequency of reruns. The episodes of Kenichi and Tsubasa showing on Saturday morning were the exact same ones showing on Sunday morning. It isn't uncommon for the day's episodes for a show to be repeated at night as an encore, but tow do so over the course of two days? It doesn't make sense. You'd think the shows would advance, especially considering that another show, Soul Eater, didn't repeat itself in the afternoon.
What I'm trying to figure out is how much Funimation cares about this effort. What they have made is undeniably slick, and yet the programming makes it look as if someone just threw shows on there so there would be something to show. If you wanted to use the Channel to actually watch a show through its entirety, I couldn't guess how long it would take you. I get the impression that Funi doesn't want fans to use it as a companion to DVD's and streaming. But if that is the case, then what the hell is the point? Near as I can tell, the company is still going strong, but they might not want to repeat the mistakes of ADV, which fucked around so much with The Anime Channel. Funimation Channel should be a great way to let people eat up the more stale shows, but right now, it doesn't make it easy.
Now to be fair, I recognize that this is the very definition of a deep cable channel. In that regard, I think the station has some decent looking promotional ads and bumpers. However, they aren't used very well to inform you of what programming the channel has. Over the course of the two days, I saw the ads for Phantom and Oh Edo Rocket multiple times. In contrast, I saw exactly two ads for Hetalia, and zero for Sengoku Basara. If you want to know just what Funimation shows are on the station, you're not going to know without watching it for a full twelve or so hours. That's a bit problematic in my eyes.
Furthermore, the channel doesn't seem to have any themed programming blocks (or, if it does, they again aren't well promoted). It'd be easier if there were action or comedy blocks of some sort.
I'm also not sure why there was such an odd frequency of reruns. The episodes of Kenichi and Tsubasa showing on Saturday morning were the exact same ones showing on Sunday morning. It isn't uncommon for the day's episodes for a show to be repeated at night as an encore, but tow do so over the course of two days? It doesn't make sense. You'd think the shows would advance, especially considering that another show, Soul Eater, didn't repeat itself in the afternoon.
What I'm trying to figure out is how much Funimation cares about this effort. What they have made is undeniably slick, and yet the programming makes it look as if someone just threw shows on there so there would be something to show. If you wanted to use the Channel to actually watch a show through its entirety, I couldn't guess how long it would take you. I get the impression that Funi doesn't want fans to use it as a companion to DVD's and streaming. But if that is the case, then what the hell is the point? Near as I can tell, the company is still going strong, but they might not want to repeat the mistakes of ADV, which fucked around so much with The Anime Channel. Funimation Channel should be a great way to let people eat up the more stale shows, but right now, it doesn't make it easy.
Friday, April 01, 2011
MLB At Bat '11
Another Year, another season of baseball. That means it is time for MLB At Bat, the handiest way to listen to live games.
I'll admit, by the end of last season I pretty much stopped using the app, partly because the Mets were awful, and partly because the both the app itself and my home internet connetion had troubles staying connected. This year, it seems that some work was done to help alleviate this problem. The connection has dropped occasionally, but each time the app managed to reestablish it on its own, within just a few seconds.
At Bat has a few new features as well. There is one feature which apparently can be used at ballparks, though I'm not sure what it does. It also doles out the occasional free video feed from mlb.tv.
In regards to video, technically this version of At Bat is improved, but it still lags behind the version made for iOS devices, which have full mlb.tv integration. I understand that the popularity of iOS means that it will be the premiere platform, but Android handsets have made huge strides since last spring, both in features and in sheer numbers. If the NFL and Verizon can whip up a decent Android app for free, then I hope that MLB is able to sneak in some more goodies during the season.
Overall, I'm happy with the improvements made, and I've already used the app more per day than I did last year. With some luck, we may get more updates as the season goes on.
Now let's go Mets!
I'll admit, by the end of last season I pretty much stopped using the app, partly because the Mets were awful, and partly because the both the app itself and my home internet connetion had troubles staying connected. This year, it seems that some work was done to help alleviate this problem. The connection has dropped occasionally, but each time the app managed to reestablish it on its own, within just a few seconds.
At Bat has a few new features as well. There is one feature which apparently can be used at ballparks, though I'm not sure what it does. It also doles out the occasional free video feed from mlb.tv.
In regards to video, technically this version of At Bat is improved, but it still lags behind the version made for iOS devices, which have full mlb.tv integration. I understand that the popularity of iOS means that it will be the premiere platform, but Android handsets have made huge strides since last spring, both in features and in sheer numbers. If the NFL and Verizon can whip up a decent Android app for free, then I hope that MLB is able to sneak in some more goodies during the season.
Overall, I'm happy with the improvements made, and I've already used the app more per day than I did last year. With some luck, we may get more updates as the season goes on.
Now let's go Mets!
Sunday, March 13, 2011
NFL Lockout
I became interested in baseball some time around 1996, meaning that as a fan, I am entirely a product of the post strike League. As a result, there were times when I struggled to understand why fans much older than me expressed such negative emotions when thinking about the strike, and I especially couldn't believe that it would sour some people on baseball entirely. As I grew older, I began to understand them a little more, at least on principle. Now, I know exactly how they feel. I'm not sure what will happen with the current NFL lockout fiasco, but it has already question whether I'll come back to the game.
The gut reaction among many is that there is no reason why a bunch of millionaires can't figure out how to share their millions (actually billions) at a time when many people's financial outlooks are grim. I understand this sentiment, and agree with it to a certain extent, though I think it is important to remember that not every player is making massive, multi-million dollar wages.
Personally, my gut anger stems from the same issue which bothered me all last season - that the NFL is devious and hypocritical in regards to its treatment of concussions and their concern for overall player health. There are a lot of measures the League could be taking to better protect players, and most of them are things which still aren't in effect. Not to mention that no matter how much marketing money they spend to promote their initiative, it is impossible to ignore just how much big hits are celebrated by commentators and fans (keep in mind that those commentators tend to tow the party line for the League, in case of any future coaching positions). I used to scoff at anyone who considered football to be a bloodsport, but it is getting harder to ignore not only how violent it is, but just how much that violence is celebrated. How many other sports leave former players with such a strong potential to be a husk of a body? The first one to come to my mind is boxing, and it too has been the subject of huge controversy over the decades. But unlike boxing, football is the nation's most popular sport. Any calls for real change will be drowned out by cheering spectators.
Deep down inside, the NFL knows that people like the carnage. They know that the players have been trained to deliver it with greater and greater force over the years. They've gone down this path, and they know there's no chance of trying to reverse it. Players will get more and more protective gear, and rather than keeping them safe, it'll convince them that they can get away with more powerful hits. We have already seen many old players who, regardless of the money they made, are in shambles thanks to all the hits and concussions they suffered. We already know the League never gave two shits about their retirement, and I shudder to think as to how some of today's current stars might look in thirty years. Even with millions of dollars (which, again, they don't all have), there's only so much medicine can do to help a person with a broken body.
But it isn't just the players who are treated like garbage. Fans too have been slowly and systematically screwed over by the NFL. The blackout rules exist to try and get people to go to the stadium if they want to see the game. At the same time that ticket prices continue to rise, and homefield advantage dissolves as stadiums are instead filled with people who treat a football game as a place to be seen. If your team isn't blacked out, you might be able to see them on TV, but if all you have is basic cable, who knows what you'll get. Thanks to the League's TV deals, someone like me, just a 25 minute drive from the DC metro, can't be certain that the Redskins will be on TV (and as a Giants fan, I gave up on seeing the game every week). Of course, you could spring for a pricey NFL package, which can (and probably will) get even pricier over time. Or you could go to the bar, where you can't hear yourself think, let alone hear any of the calls on the field. With all of today's wonderful technology, I think it is actually getting harder to watch football. The League certainly wants my time money, but they also want to demand how I give it to them.
So if everyone is being treated like shit, when can we expect the tables to turn? I have no idea. Because despite everything the NFL has done, they still have everyone feeding out of their hand. They could screw over the next season royally, and people will still come back. Baseball didn't die from its strike, and I imagine that football will take little, if any, damage. And on top of all of this, I haven't forgotten that if the sport does go away, a lot more people are going to be jobless.
It really has become a fucking circus. I don't look forward to the end result.
To me, the lockout says so many things, not just about football, but the current cultural climate in general.
The gut reaction among many is that there is no reason why a bunch of millionaires can't figure out how to share their millions (actually billions) at a time when many people's financial outlooks are grim. I understand this sentiment, and agree with it to a certain extent, though I think it is important to remember that not every player is making massive, multi-million dollar wages.
Personally, my gut anger stems from the same issue which bothered me all last season - that the NFL is devious and hypocritical in regards to its treatment of concussions and their concern for overall player health. There are a lot of measures the League could be taking to better protect players, and most of them are things which still aren't in effect. Not to mention that no matter how much marketing money they spend to promote their initiative, it is impossible to ignore just how much big hits are celebrated by commentators and fans (keep in mind that those commentators tend to tow the party line for the League, in case of any future coaching positions). I used to scoff at anyone who considered football to be a bloodsport, but it is getting harder to ignore not only how violent it is, but just how much that violence is celebrated. How many other sports leave former players with such a strong potential to be a husk of a body? The first one to come to my mind is boxing, and it too has been the subject of huge controversy over the decades. But unlike boxing, football is the nation's most popular sport. Any calls for real change will be drowned out by cheering spectators.
Deep down inside, the NFL knows that people like the carnage. They know that the players have been trained to deliver it with greater and greater force over the years. They've gone down this path, and they know there's no chance of trying to reverse it. Players will get more and more protective gear, and rather than keeping them safe, it'll convince them that they can get away with more powerful hits. We have already seen many old players who, regardless of the money they made, are in shambles thanks to all the hits and concussions they suffered. We already know the League never gave two shits about their retirement, and I shudder to think as to how some of today's current stars might look in thirty years. Even with millions of dollars (which, again, they don't all have), there's only so much medicine can do to help a person with a broken body.
But it isn't just the players who are treated like garbage. Fans too have been slowly and systematically screwed over by the NFL. The blackout rules exist to try and get people to go to the stadium if they want to see the game. At the same time that ticket prices continue to rise, and homefield advantage dissolves as stadiums are instead filled with people who treat a football game as a place to be seen. If your team isn't blacked out, you might be able to see them on TV, but if all you have is basic cable, who knows what you'll get. Thanks to the League's TV deals, someone like me, just a 25 minute drive from the DC metro, can't be certain that the Redskins will be on TV (and as a Giants fan, I gave up on seeing the game every week). Of course, you could spring for a pricey NFL package, which can (and probably will) get even pricier over time. Or you could go to the bar, where you can't hear yourself think, let alone hear any of the calls on the field. With all of today's wonderful technology, I think it is actually getting harder to watch football. The League certainly wants my time money, but they also want to demand how I give it to them.
So if everyone is being treated like shit, when can we expect the tables to turn? I have no idea. Because despite everything the NFL has done, they still have everyone feeding out of their hand. They could screw over the next season royally, and people will still come back. Baseball didn't die from its strike, and I imagine that football will take little, if any, damage. And on top of all of this, I haven't forgotten that if the sport does go away, a lot more people are going to be jobless.
It really has become a fucking circus. I don't look forward to the end result.
To me, the lockout says so many things, not just about football, but the current cultural climate in general.
Friday, March 04, 2011
In Media Res
(Note - this post was inspired by the latest anime news network podcast, and the responses it garnered in the ANN forums. Apologies on the lack of quality.)
In Media Res is a storytelling technique as old as storytelling itself. Such longetivity suggests that it is also an effective technique, which I would agree with. It also means that it can and will be used improperly.
I'm no literary scholar, but in my experience, the best stories which start In Media Res are the ones which aren't largely hindered by it. To put it another way, you shouldn't be confused as to what is happening now because you're missing out on events that happened before. A little bit of explanation, and you should be on your way. Later on, the story can fill in some of the gaps, to add more weight or depth to a character or conflict, but in the meantime it should still stand on its own two feet. If you ever read an excerpt from the Iliad or The Aenid back in high school, your textbook probably spent a few sentences explaining what you missed out on. With that alone, you can gleam a hell of a lot from the passages you're actually given to read. That, to me, is good use of In Media Res.
As for more modern examples, there are quite a few, but for the sake of this post's main topic I'm actually going to use a video game - Dragon Quest 8. When the game begins, the hero and his companion are escorting a goblin in a horse drawn cart. We quickly learn that the goblin is a king, and the horse his daughter, and that the hero is trying to help lift the curse which was placed on the two by a court jester in possession of a magic staff. It isn't until much later in the game that we discover how the curse was placed on them, or how the jester turned evil, but until that point, these details don't matter. The information we are given is more than enough to justify the quest, and the back story is filled in only after we've been with the characters long enough for those details to have any sort of impact. Dragon Quest 8 isn't a complex story, but in terms of using In Media Res, we don't lose anything by starting in the middle, and the flashbacks to the past actually sweeten the pot.
In contrast, I consider it bad use of the technique when the reader/viewer is ignorant of critical information as a result of starting in the middle. There will be references to events, characters, terminologies, or important events which the viewer has no clue about, even though they need to in order to comprehend the story. The viewer ends up having to wait for the flashbacks and exposition to kick in in order to piece it all together. A entire rereading/viewing may even be in order.
I'm not going to say that this latter method has no merit, but it isn't easy to do well. There's a difference between sprinkling in a little mystery to keep us on edge, and creating something purposefully obtuse. Unfortunately, this method is used extensively in anime (and anime inspired games), and while the fans on a whole have no problem with it, I think it leads to shitty storytelling more often than not. I know it is tacky to slam others, but I think that for a lot of anime fans, the appeal lies in the fact that they believe that if a show takes them a lot of time to decipher, then it must be complex and deep, and that their ability to decode it is an indicator of their intelligence. In other words, it is more proof that Western anime fandom is fuelled by ego more than anything. These people don't seem to comprehend the possibility that the confusion is the result of bad writing and plotting.
But allow me to turn away from attacks and focus on why I prefer the other, more clearer method of In Media Res. I don't think you can really analyze and appreciate the depth of a story until you understand, at the most basic level, what it is about. In order to really appreciate a dialogue exchange, you need to know why it is taking place. In order to be shocked at a character's actions, you need to know something about them. There's this pervading sensibility among otaku that a story is only good if you have to put it together like a puzzle. I think it is this same sensibility which causes them to assume that anyone who says they "simply want to be entertained" by media is a plebe looking for mindless distraction. To use another tired example (sorry), Shakespeare's plays aren't terribly confusing, but watching one of his plays being performed by skilled actors is still dammed entertaining, because they generate so much excitement and emotion. That's still entertainment, and it is far from mindless.
I guess, for me, there's a difference between a work that rewards you for paying attention, and one which plays games and rewards me for putting up with it. I like when a work makes me think, but a good one will make me want to think, because I am already interested in what I see, and want to dig deeper. It shouldn't make me have to think because that's the only way I'll get anything out of it. I don't need my ego stroked, nor do I want to stroke the author's.
TL:DR - I wish fucking anime fans would stop throwing around literary devices to excuse bad shows, and actually ponder whether the show used any of them effectively.
In Media Res is a storytelling technique as old as storytelling itself. Such longetivity suggests that it is also an effective technique, which I would agree with. It also means that it can and will be used improperly.
I'm no literary scholar, but in my experience, the best stories which start In Media Res are the ones which aren't largely hindered by it. To put it another way, you shouldn't be confused as to what is happening now because you're missing out on events that happened before. A little bit of explanation, and you should be on your way. Later on, the story can fill in some of the gaps, to add more weight or depth to a character or conflict, but in the meantime it should still stand on its own two feet. If you ever read an excerpt from the Iliad or The Aenid back in high school, your textbook probably spent a few sentences explaining what you missed out on. With that alone, you can gleam a hell of a lot from the passages you're actually given to read. That, to me, is good use of In Media Res.
As for more modern examples, there are quite a few, but for the sake of this post's main topic I'm actually going to use a video game - Dragon Quest 8. When the game begins, the hero and his companion are escorting a goblin in a horse drawn cart. We quickly learn that the goblin is a king, and the horse his daughter, and that the hero is trying to help lift the curse which was placed on the two by a court jester in possession of a magic staff. It isn't until much later in the game that we discover how the curse was placed on them, or how the jester turned evil, but until that point, these details don't matter. The information we are given is more than enough to justify the quest, and the back story is filled in only after we've been with the characters long enough for those details to have any sort of impact. Dragon Quest 8 isn't a complex story, but in terms of using In Media Res, we don't lose anything by starting in the middle, and the flashbacks to the past actually sweeten the pot.
In contrast, I consider it bad use of the technique when the reader/viewer is ignorant of critical information as a result of starting in the middle. There will be references to events, characters, terminologies, or important events which the viewer has no clue about, even though they need to in order to comprehend the story. The viewer ends up having to wait for the flashbacks and exposition to kick in in order to piece it all together. A entire rereading/viewing may even be in order.
I'm not going to say that this latter method has no merit, but it isn't easy to do well. There's a difference between sprinkling in a little mystery to keep us on edge, and creating something purposefully obtuse. Unfortunately, this method is used extensively in anime (and anime inspired games), and while the fans on a whole have no problem with it, I think it leads to shitty storytelling more often than not. I know it is tacky to slam others, but I think that for a lot of anime fans, the appeal lies in the fact that they believe that if a show takes them a lot of time to decipher, then it must be complex and deep, and that their ability to decode it is an indicator of their intelligence. In other words, it is more proof that Western anime fandom is fuelled by ego more than anything. These people don't seem to comprehend the possibility that the confusion is the result of bad writing and plotting.
But allow me to turn away from attacks and focus on why I prefer the other, more clearer method of In Media Res. I don't think you can really analyze and appreciate the depth of a story until you understand, at the most basic level, what it is about. In order to really appreciate a dialogue exchange, you need to know why it is taking place. In order to be shocked at a character's actions, you need to know something about them. There's this pervading sensibility among otaku that a story is only good if you have to put it together like a puzzle. I think it is this same sensibility which causes them to assume that anyone who says they "simply want to be entertained" by media is a plebe looking for mindless distraction. To use another tired example (sorry), Shakespeare's plays aren't terribly confusing, but watching one of his plays being performed by skilled actors is still dammed entertaining, because they generate so much excitement and emotion. That's still entertainment, and it is far from mindless.
I guess, for me, there's a difference between a work that rewards you for paying attention, and one which plays games and rewards me for putting up with it. I like when a work makes me think, but a good one will make me want to think, because I am already interested in what I see, and want to dig deeper. It shouldn't make me have to think because that's the only way I'll get anything out of it. I don't need my ego stroked, nor do I want to stroke the author's.
TL:DR - I wish fucking anime fans would stop throwing around literary devices to excuse bad shows, and actually ponder whether the show used any of them effectively.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)