RuneScape Forum Archive | ~~The Priceless~~

Venmi

Posts: 14,744 Opal Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

This story feels like it comes from the heart. It's a lot more emotionally gripping than Brotherly Love. Is this as well written as Brotherly Love? From a technical standpoint, no--as a writer, you grow. From a content perspective, however, it does. I definitely related to this story more than Brotherly Love.

22-Jun-2011 00:23:36

Azigarath

Posts: 9,271 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

But I liked Brotherly Love more than The Priceless. D=
anyways, what's all this discussion about how something is typed?
If you dont like the way something is typed, then imagine it is typed the way you want it to be, that's what I do :/
Actually, I might reread those two stories some time down the road, it looks like there's a lot of stuff I missed earlier.

22-Jun-2011 00:30:20

Dec

2014

Lokintr

Posts: 2,432 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Above I explained that by "infatuation" with the game I meant "obsession" and used the former to associate it more closely with his feelings for David - the quote still confirms that he developed an obsession with the game in his quest to be good enough for David.
Also, the concept itself is good - people do crazy things for love. I am not so cynical as to not believe in love at first sight or love so powerful so as to rule lives or any of the rest of it. What I regard as far-fetched is the way it is examined in this story.
Furthermore, after quickly re-reading the story again, I realise that you seem to be somewhat confused yourself as to how you're viewing David. Earlier you said that the narrator did not think him important enough a feature to be regarded with any depth, but you spend several posts describing the narrator's relationship ("best friend", no less) with him with a paragraph on just his eyes and how they affect the narrator? And in your last post, you describe him fleetingly as what seems to be a comment on the wasters of society. It doesn't really add up, does it?
As for the quotes, the only way to convince me that they are not intended as deceiving is to list all of the criticism alongside it. Or does it serve a purpose other than preparing new readers for what is alleged to be a 'brilliant' story and 'the most powerful piece of literature' on the forums?
Finally, English, difficulty does not dictate quality. The fact that the structure of Brotherly Love is a more challenging one does not necessarily make it the better story.

22-Jun-2011 00:37:58 - Last edited on 22-Jun-2011 00:40:19 by Lokintr

Englishkid62

Posts: 9,782 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

Mitch: “I definitely related to this story more than Brotherly Love.”
--Not much to debate on this then, I guess.
Lokintr: “Above I explained that by "infatuation" with the game I meant "obsession" and used the former to associate it more closely with his feelings for David - the quote still confirms that he developed an obsession with the game in his quest to be good enough for David.”
--Yes, because infatuation means a short-term passion, love, or admiration for something, which with the above quote I proved that he was not infatuated with the game. Even with the word obsession, I'd still disagree. It is a bit like saying that a mouse in captivity pressing continuously at a button for food, and saying that the mouse is obsessed with button-pressing and not the food.
”Also, the concept itself is good - people do crazy things for love. I am not so cynical as to not believe in love at first sight or love so powerful so as to rule lives or any of the rest of it. What I regard as far-fetched is the way it is examined in this story.”
--In what way do you think it was examined in this story?
”Furthermore, after quickly re-reading the story again, I realise that you seem to be somewhat confused yourself as to how you're viewing David. Earlier you said that the narrator did not think him important enough a feature to be regarded with any depth, but you spend several posts describing the narrator's relationship ("best friend", no less) with him with a paragraph on just his eyes and how they affect the narrator? And in your last post, you describe him fleetingly as what seems to be a comment on the wasters of society. It doesn't really add up, does it?”

22-Jun-2011 16:12:01 - Last edited on 22-Jun-2011 16:14:48 by Englishkid62

Englishkid62

Posts: 9,782 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

--Describing him as a best friend, giving background information on which readers can build their own details, is not character depth. What makes the ‘depth’ I referred to are thoughts, subtle motives, ability to empathise with other characters, and certain emotions, or reactions to stimuli which may or may not based on his own personal traits or experiences. Where he comes from, what he looks like, and what he does for a living has nothing to do with depth at all. The eyes are important, as they probably had powers over Kipplin once, too.
”As for the quotes, the only way to convince me that they are not intended as deceiving is to list all of the criticism alongside it. Or does it serve a purpose other than preparing new readers for what is alleged to be a 'brilliant' story and 'the most powerful piece of literature' on the forums?”
--Sadly, I’m not here to convince you. How you treat comments on this story by other people is hardly my business. As I said, since this has nothing to do with the story itself, I will stop discussing this particular point which seems overly irrelevant to the rest of the constructive criticism.
”Finally, English, difficulty does not dictate quality. The fact that the structure of Brotherly Love is a more challenging one does not necessarily make it the better story.”
--The structure is one thing. There were many others I did not list. However, readers prefer different works for different reasons, and I do not wish to undermine anyone’s preference on this occasion.

22-Jun-2011 16:12:08

Dec

2014

Lokintr

Posts: 2,432 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

As for the first point I get the impression that you didn't really read what I said and this particular section of the discussion is just going to go round in circles, so we'll just break that one off here.
The way it is examined here, which I found too unrealistic, is the way that Kipplin uses RuneScape, a game, to prove himself worthy too David. It is not the love nor the way that he applies himself so fully to have it reciprocated that is the far-fetched thing. It is the fact that his medium was RuneScape. This, of course, being the RSF, is probably unavoidable, but it caused me to read the story with a somewhat incredulous air that Kipplin should be doing that.
David still requires depth. You gave us his description and background detail, and stated here that that is not character depth - fair enough. But, in fairness, you have three main characters - the narrator, Kipplin, and David himself. David needs to be more than just background detail, or "not regarded as important by the narrator" - he's a main character, he's a villain, he is the object of the two other main characters' affections. He is not something to be ignored, and I rather think the narrator would consider him worthy of more depth, even if he was more concerned with keeping the focus on Kipplin.
Finally, the quotes. No, of course, me reading them means nothing. I'm not going to argue against their opinions. What bothers me is that you have collected them and put them in prime position to be read before the story, neglecting any criticism you may have had. Had you left them where they were in the thread and I read them there, then fair enough, I accept that people enjoyed what I didn't, but you didn't do that. Therefore, it is a way of influencing new readers into a particular mindset - that the story they are about to read is "one of the best on the forums".

22-Jun-2011 16:29:00

Englishkid62

Posts: 9,782 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

“As for the first point I get the impression that you didn't really read what I said and this particular section of the discussion is just going to go round in circles, so we'll just break that one off here.”
--Your insistence on this point really is quite admirable. It is perfectly logical to strive to better oneself, or seek to become better than somebody who has called you a ‘noob’. It is not the medium through which this is achieved that is the obsession. It is the event that is at the back of Kipplin’s mind that will not go away – that is the obsession. And so is the obsession to redeem himself. But the game is just how this can be achieved. If he could think of any other way, he would have done that, and perhaps not the game.
”The way it is examined here, which I found too unrealistic, is the way that Kipplin uses RuneScape, a game, to prove himself worthy too David. It is not the love nor the way that he applies himself so fully to have it reciprocated that is the far-fetched thing. It is the fact that his medium was RuneScape. This, of course, being the RSF, is probably unavoidable, but it caused me to read the story with a somewhat incredulous air that Kipplin should be doing that.”
--Perhaps it may be unrealistic for you. Unfortunately, as RuneScape is also a part of the real life experiences that inspired me to write this, I cannot convey to you in any other form, or change this particular fact to make it ‘realistic’. I know that some people are harder to convince than others, be it utter lies or half-truths or facts. But then, I am not here to convince you.

22-Jun-2011 21:50:48 - Last edited on 22-Jun-2011 21:52:28 by Englishkid62

Englishkid62

Posts: 9,782 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

”David still requires depth. You gave us his description and background detail, and stated here that that is not character depth - fair enough. But, in fairness, you have three main characters - the narrator, Kipplin, and David himself. David needs to be more than just background detail, or "not regarded as important by the narrator" - he's a main character, he's a villain, he is the object of the two other main characters' affections. He is not something to be ignored, and I rather think the narrator would consider him worthy of more depth, even if he was more concerned with keeping the focus on Kipplin.”
--I see you have reverted back to your original point. While it may seem 'lacking’, please remember that the narrator is biased. Please also remember that he is an unreliable narrator, and will portray events in a different light when given the chance. To romanticize Kipplin’s ideals, to criticize David. This is part of the construct on the post-modernist level. On a practical level, any substantial depth would steal the sympathy that rightfully should be directed at Kipplin. Besides, I would argue that the lack of depth in David is in fact characteristic of him.
”Finally, the quotes. No, of course, me reading them means nothing. I'm not going to argue against their opinions. What bothers me is that you have collected them and put them in prime position to be read before the story, neglecting any criticism you may have had. Had you left them where they were in the thread and I read them there, then fair enough, I accept that people enjoyed what I didn't, but you didn't do that. Therefore, it is a way of influencing new readers into a particular mindset - that the story they are about to read is "one of the best on the forums".”

22-Jun-2011 21:50:57 - Last edited on 22-Jun-2011 21:52:50 by Englishkid62

Englishkid62

Posts: 9,782 Rune Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

--Not putting criticism on the front page (or the blurb of a book jacket) does not mean the author has neglected every criticism thrown at his way. Indeed, not all criticisms are helpful. Should I also put that ‘Puffters must die’ along with the others, on the front page as well? It seems that you have a problem with the layout of the thread now, as well. While I can't say that anyone has confronted me about the layout bothering them, it seems too minor an issue for you to be so insistent on this particular point. You seemed to have a personal agenda of where ideally to put your own readers’ comments and expect that everybody in the world follows the same code. However, it seems you are the only one bothered by this, and being the author of several stories that truly angered several of my readers, I’m quite used to receiving grievance for unreasonable things. Since I am by no means here to entertain you, if this layout bothers you, you can leave.
As I have already said in my last post, this point has nothing to do with constructive criticism or feedback for the story itself, and it astounds me how you have ignored my attempts to close this unproductive point being dragged on. Supposedly, it is not generally considered polite or courteous to press so tediously at the layout, particularly with the tone in your language. May I suggest you then, at least attempt to focus your criticisms on the story itself? Unless you want a fight of course, in which case, you will want to continue this point for longer than necessary.

22-Jun-2011 21:51:08 - Last edited on 22-Jun-2011 21:53:17 by Englishkid62

Dec

2014

Lokintr

Posts: 2,432 Mithril Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile

As for the obsession, I understand what you’re saying, but you can** say that he did not end up obsessed with the game. It was so much more than just a means to an end. You said it yourself: Kipplin was aiming for 99 Farming with just one farming patch? The “ultimate test of perseverance”? Obsession, no?
Also, I may have reverted back to my original argument, but you have adopted about three different stances throughout this discussion – David is not regarded as important, David is important but not regarded with any depth, David is simply a comment on real life apathy – and finally resorting to blaming the “narrator” for something that could be seen as the author’s oversight seems somewhat devious – it seems as though you are now just grasping for excuses to keep this particular part of the discussion going. As I said before, David is a main character and the object of the other main characters’ affections. He requires depth. Besides, giving him depth does not automatically give him “sympathy”, as you said earlier, but explains his motives, his reactions. If anything it would cause the reader to regard him with distaste that he could be so callous towards Kipplin.
And ... if I may abandon formality for a moment:
Please, save the passive aggression. I don't have a problem with the layout of your thread - there you go, missing my point yet again. I have a problem with you putting all of your praise on the first page and not mentioning reviews or other critiques of your writing at all. At least in my mind, it cast you in a rather pompous and conceited light. I told you that I thought it was pompous of you to list your praise on the first page. I didn't demand anything from you, but you must have a personal agenda since you appear to be putting my comment down and calling what I said unreasonable.

22-Jun-2011 23:24:13

Forums

~~The Priceless~~

The Priceless