Is it bad writing to include lore that can just be assumed by the audience and is only confirmed later on by said writers? Lots of vidya does this.
 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
|
Is it bad writing to include lore that can just be assumed by the audience and is only confirmed later on by said writers?
Anybody have that lotr guy stars tweet that was like
>how could i know
Why is this so funny
Because he could have rambled about why it was moronic, but he knew the stupidity was so obvious that he could just keep it succinct.
and also its elijah wood, if it was random anon 565 it would lose some punch
he was saying what we were all thinking but he managed to quell the many angry thoughts and distill it down to one simple takedown question
When will Westerners realize that the creators of Zelda and the Japanese audience do not give a shit about "lore" or how the series is "connected?" Make a flaming dick robot for social media and stop whining
And? Doesn't mean they get a free pass for being lazy
>Subsection of fans that is not the primary audience demands to know about shit you didn't really care about
>Actually throw them a bone when you didn't need to
>"REEEE LAZY"
this so much, i'm sure making the world a little more consitent will hurt the series, i love slop btw
>the series
what the frick are you talking about. why choose that word for your strawman?
>lazy
it's because worldbuilding isn't art, only autistic morons care about logistics. so long as a world's internal logic can seem sensible at a glance it's enough. this was common sense 20 years ago, everyone knew this because magical realism was all the rage and people realised things could be as soft or as hard as you wanted with regards to setting and it functionally had no impact on the artistic merit of the work. everything fell apart when people stopped saying art and started saying content.
I blame YouTube analysts who are desperate for things to make videos about and hate when something in a work of fiction "just is."
>so long as a world's internal logic can seem sensible at a glance it's enough
But that's the whole point moron. The sheikah technology was a huge deal in BotW, almost everything happens because of it yet in TotK it's hand waved away, as it has never existed. That's not even bad word building, that's just shitting on your own work and telling everyone it wasn't important anyway but that new game totally is of course so please invest yourself in it.
>calamity ganon leaks from ganondorf's seal
>the shiekah create the divine beasts and guardians to combat this, successfuly sealing calamity ganon
>calamity ganon strikes once more
>calamity ganon is sealed
>they disappear
>ganondorf is still underground
world building doesn't matter. world building isn't art. world building is something you're worried about for your dnd game, not when you're making art.
what happened to the shiekah slate?
world building matters because its cool, and is a part of creating convincing fiction
>is a part of creating convincing fiction.
it's really not. whether you use blinds or curtains only makes a small difference to the shade and heat in the room. it's not nothing but really not important.
but whether you use blinds or curtains affects the visuals and atmosphere of the room.
why did you use the word "but" as if you were contradicting my post. i didn't say it was 100% completely irrelevant. it's just insignificant, compared to say whether or not someone has taken a shit in the corner of the room, or whether the room is on fire, or what have you.
when the world building is done as poorly as it is in totk, it becomes a negative.
You really are moronic, world building is part of the world, it's always there. It's everything from locations, to characters to the fricking weather.
It's the accumulation of everything you try to achieve with the game, it's the sum that is larger than its parts and the lens you interpret the game through.
It doesn't have to be deep, it even doesn't have to make sense and it doesn't have to be serious. But then again it can't pretend to be deep or to make sense or to be serious. It's the same with every other art form as well.
this has nothing to do with how the series is connected, this is just about a story element not explained inside totk specifically. and yes, both the devs and players care about the story of a zelda game.
>both the devs
nope, Aonuma has said that the story is something they think about after the game is almost done.
OoT has changed many times, for example.
Agreed.
>"creators don't care"
>the director literally brought it up in an interview
Stupid illiterate moron
the post you're responding to obviously meant by "don't care" that it's not a significant priority, not that they literally don't care at all you autistic fricking moron. content isn't art. content is what's in your bowels.
>backtracking
I accept your concession moron
you are gay and stupid and i've known you 1000 times before.
Cope, seethe, dilate etc
if you're still using buzzwords that came about to laugh at how reductive arguing on this site can be over half a decade after they've grown tired, you just might be something less than a human being!
Why do you frickers always fail to cope with the fact Zelda games have always been connected?
Adventures of Link is explicitly a direct sequel to Legend of Zelda.
A Link to the Past was always a prequel to Legend of Zelda.
Link's Awakening is explicitly a sequel to A Link to the Past.
Ocarina of Time was always a prequel to A Link to the Past.
Majora's Mask is explicitly a direct sequel to Ocarina of Time in the pre-timeskip branch.
Wind Waker is explicitly a sequel to Ocarina of Time in the post-timeskip branch.
Twilight Princess explicitly takes place after Majora's Mask.
Phantom Hourglass is explicitly a direct sequel to Wind Waker.
Spirit Tracks is explicitly a sequel to Phantom Hourglass.
Skyward Sword always took place before all of the games released up to this point.
The Capcom/Flagship-developed games (Oracle games, Four Swords, and Minish Cap) + Four Swords Adventures never had concrete relation to any of the other games, were just shoved into the timeline for lulz, and frankly should have been confined to their own separate continuity.
>"explicity" = confirmed by material within the game itself
>"was always" = implied by in-game material, and stated by devs in the years leading up to release
Zanzibart... Cleanse me...
I think the disappearance of all the shiekah stuff was done very poorly and the explanation we got was hilarious. I don’t know what this is about, but if it’s referencing some stuff you can find within the shrines that references real-world designs and other influences and it’s just the directors saying “we based the shrines on this mesoamerica religion” or whatever then idc.
>but if it’s referencing some stuff you can find within the shrines that references real-world designs and other influences and it’s just the directors saying “we based the shrines on this mesoamerica religion” or whatever then idc.
did you even play the game? how could you not know what it's talking about if you actually care about the botw stuff disappearing
the reason the shrines give you power is that they're clearing the darkness that ganon put in link in the opening sequence. the dead goat guy tells you that during the tutorial.
>take one of these
>shove it up Ganondorf's ass
>make it grow into a shrine inside him
>???
>PROFIT!
Meanwhile the same people/fans will complain about and make fun of all the lore in books in Morrowind because you have to read it
Just went to this guy’s (probably OP’s) account and it’s just a sea of thieves addict so idk he’d probably not complain about that.
Because Japan does mystery boxes correctly.
To call it bad writing would be to imply that it's writing at all.
That said, as a KHgay who dares to know the story, I cannot say anything bad about it when we always have to wait for the Ultimania to come out and explain half the plot in the game. Such is life.
Lore is set dressing for the real substance that's supposed to be character drama. If people like the lore more than the actual storyline of the game then its because it failed as a story
He did the exact same thing having to explain why all Sheikah technology is missing in TotK (which had a stupidly moronic explanation, mind you). There's a difference I think between leaving enough leeway in the game itself that you could realistically look at elements like armor or buildings design and come up with theories ala Souls the good ones and what Fujibayashi is doing here. ESPECIALLY when we're talking about an open world that could've had the benfit of hiding these lore tidbits in the most remote of places from a 1 in a 255 chance loading screen to an npc dialogue that only triggers if you speak with him three times after doing X quest.
btw you don't have to choose between gameplay, story and lore, you can have them all when the dev is competent
>you can have them all when the dev is competent
which explains why bore of the wild and botw 1.2 have none of these
Video game lore that isn't in the game is lore that doesn't exist.
Deal.
>it's fine when japs do it
the difference between OP and your picture is Pete Hines being a condescending prick about literal plot holes
but that was revealed in the game
Ok so when will they explain what happened to all the Sheikah technology?
it sensed its purpose was fulfilled and disappeared
He wishes he was joking
?t=694
The funny part is that this lore is in the game, you just have to actually do the stone tablet history quest to find it.
>start game with 20 hearts
>curse knocks you down to 3
>can be "cleansed" to the point of having 7-10 more hearts than that
original sin moron
>original sin
DEEPEST LORE
No one show that homosexual Nier/Drakengard series, would die of a stroke.
Hard to say. It probably depends on the circumstances.
Did Nintendo INTEND for those stones to ever have a meaning beyond behind the scenes? Did they INTEND to have their audience make assumptions and headcanons until they found one that they liked enough to have some corporate mouth online spout it back as official?
Humans tend to assume deeper meanings to small things that have zero meaning at all. For all we know it's probably just some glowing rock there to clean Link in the field instead of whatever the "official" place to go is (I don't play Zelda so I wouldn't know)
At the very least I could say it's lazy to have tack on lore after launch or confirm things. Some things are better left unknown and left to player speculation. Unless it's an ARG where that's alright because the whole point is the game as a vehicle to learn lore added by the dev post-launch.
Lore itself isn't bad, it's a medium of storytelling to set up a world and how it works. You guys only tend to whine about it because crappy devs don't know how to do lore, and they do one of two things instead
>A. No lore notes, so they just leave it very vague, or quietly wait for players to speculate good ideas to then steal and say it was part of the plan all along
or
>B. Lore Dump where notes, audiologs, events, background, foreground, underground, there's just endless world building or character notes. Which ends up spoiling all sense of mystery and intrigue.
But that’s the entirety of FNAF lore?
Not really, the entirety of FNAF lore is in the actual material, whether it's games or books. Scott doesn't give SHIT away in interviews.
I don’t get why they don’t just have a random NPC explain this.
>Is it bad writing
If it's important for the core narrative to function, yes. Otherwise it's bonus stuff that doesn't matter
Devil may cry falls into this trap hard come 4 and 5, important things needed to appreciate the characters or understand their motivations are barely alluded to in-game, but only explored/revealed in shitty japan-only novels, manga, artbooks. 3 had artbooks too, but the story was complete, rich with character, and well-told as a standalone.