>uhhh did that just happened >A UHHHH HECKIN POOP RAPIST TRAIN JUST KILLED MY WEINER >heh did you know I don't like men? x100
get a real job homosexual
doesn't matter if he is a bad writer, doesn't make his tweet any less true
It sort of does though, he has a fundamental misunderstanding on how varied story telling can be, especially in an interactable medium.
There's value in telling a story in a way that suits the tone and message of your game. There's this permeating habit of modern writers to tell every story the same way as to be best understood, but it results in really clunky ass writing. People saying how they feel, people explaining why they're doing something, or people saying exactly why they are upset with another person are all examples of writing shortcuts which these people use because, rather than having characters be fully actialized characters, they more represent a check box that needs to be ticked.
Why show that a character doesn't trust people by having that always keep their back against a wall, having them forget names easily or that they can't make eye contact when you can just have the character say "eh, I'm way not into the trusting thing, I'm scarred, I have a history and I know trusting people is bad". I don't understand mocking creative story telling because obfuscated histories of a broken world are "confusing". Well no shit, that's the point. Dark Souls is a world where everything is destroyed, all the great events of history are so long gone that they're distant legends to the people that live in the world now.
You're entirely right, yet I still feel that you aren't going far enough in exploring the differences between BL and DS writing
If the BL writers took your advice, that would for example mean that maybe Handsome Jack just does villainous actions instead of constantly calling you to tell you what an evil cunt he is. It would still be an entirely character-driven story about you wanting to oppose him, joining up with the resistance, and wanting to stop him from accessing the vault
Meanwhile in DS, characters barely matter for the overarcing story. You just have the vague goal of killing some fuckheads and the characters are mostly along for the ride, progressing through the game (and inevitably hollowing out) alongside you
>uhhh did that just happened >A UHHHH HECKIN POOP RAPIST TRAIN JUST KILLED MY WEINER >heh did you know I don't like men? x100
get a real job homosexual
It's lazy, and means that you don't know how to construct an appealing narrative. >I'm an ideas guy >let's just put all my ideas on item descriptions >that way the player has to do all the work
the best stories are the ones who just dump you in the story and let you learn by cultural osmosis, you get the context from following along the world and discovering what is already in place. the worst ones are the ones that rely on characters monologuing to set everything up, even worse if they ignore their own in-universe rules and context for girlboss moments. DS games are like a Gene Wolfe novel and assorted Westslop is like JK Rowling.
>the best stories are the ones who just dump you in the story and let you learn by cultural osmosis
See:
[...] >lore channels
We're pretending that lore channels are a good thing now? Fuck, there's no hope for this medium.
[...]
Reading a hundred item descriptions and deciding the story for yourself is the most lazy shit ever.
>the best stories are the ones who just dump you in the story and let you learn by cultural osmosis
See:
[...] >lore channels
We're pretending that lore channels are a good thing now? Fuck, there's no hope for this medium.
[...]
Reading a hundred item descriptions and deciding the story for yourself is the most lazy shit ever.
You're all fucking morons and it shows
I really don't get why people find this shit so confusing, and why they want to complain so much
You're literally told EVERYTHING you need to know to understand the story through the opening cutscene and dialogue you get by advancing the story
Knowing why Myrmidon of Loss seeked forgivness means nothing to the story of the game
Why the fuck would I want a 10 hour fucking cutscene in a VIDEOGAME about why an enenmy wanted to fight me?
Why is that better than simply looking it up yourself by looking at his possessions?
Are you guys actually this fucking retarded, where you are both screaming "I want to know everything in the story without missing a single thing" and at the same time "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE I DON'T WANT TO READ THIS THING HIDDEN AWAY TO KNOW THE LAST TIME THIS SIDE ENEMY SHAT HIS PANTS REEEEEEEEEEEEE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"
1 month ago
Anonymous
>I really don't get why people find this shit so confusing
Never said it was confusing. I said it was lazy. The ability to think of a bunch of good ideas, and the ability to put them into a cohesive order to illicit the correct emotional response from the viewer is a skill.
Having a bunch of good ideas, but not being able to craft it together, and instead just throwing them everywhere, and letting the viewer craft it, isn't a skill. >ad hominems and strawmans for the rest of the post
the joke itself is funny, but he didn't even come up with it and since he's the lead writer of a game that flopped and has insufferable writing he comes off as seething
Yes, game devs finally realised that less is more. Previously the boss would monologue for 7 minutes about his entire backstory, explaining to you in excruciating detail how he came to know zanzibart. Then, after you died, you would get to listen to it all over again in the unskippable cutscene. Is this new style good writing? Not really, but its closer to passable than the former.
<retard calling you a retard makes it extra sad
Ah but then the retard activates my trap card because I will become a bigger retard and call him a retard
>Hey man you know what you are, you're a slacker! >Hehe you're right I guess I am, lol Slacker 4 lyfe dude! >NO! Stop being happy, I pwned you with my wit! stop taking it in stride!
Games from 7th gen and onward started grooming players into not maintaining a long term memory. You only needed to keep the immediate gameplay loop in mind, objective markers and dialogue would string you along to wherever you needed to go next.
This was necessary because the games were boring and played themselves, but would frequently smash cut to setpieces that also played themselves to maintain excitement and wipe the slate clean.
Logically this means that if someone makes a statement that references other things without having immediately refreshed the player's memory on every single thing that they are referencing, the references would be lost.
If this were more in line with modern releases, then the entire sequence leading up to the line would be continuously reestablishing the entire backstory of the boss and Zanzibart, just so that the player knows what is happening in that moment.
While I agree with your assessment of the 7th gen, it still doesn't forgive a game that's basically "all lore light story". That's some Gankermblr wank.
Dark Souls revolutionized gaming by making games good again. No handholding, no bloated cringy leftoid writing, no quest markers, none of that homosexualry.
>No handholding, no bloated cringy leftoid writing, no quest markers, none of that homosexualry.
Elden ring literally brought all of thus back
It's like soulsfags never even played games they are defending...
everytime the person with no talent or any idea how to make games whines about someone making a good game? why are there so many cucks in the video game industry with college degrees on making literal trash?
Twitter revolutionized Ganker, in the sense that instead of making a original thread you can just post a twitter post from a random person and act like its the common consensus and add a "xxx in shambles", "xxx seething" or "how do you respond without sounding mad".
>nothing is wrong with this style of writing
I would go further and say it's (currently) the best way to present a story in a videogame. And I don't believe it's even close. Games are not movies.
Bro, but the Zanzibart lore goes so fucking deep.
The implication that the Myrmidon of Loss was Zanzibart's retainer means it's very likely that they're Oberon's son, thus making them part of the royal lineage and VERY likely to be related to Dandinella.
Media has done that sort of shit for decades and the difference between whether it's good or bad is how well everything around it is done
Also Demon's Souls is better than Dark Souls
it's weird because the only borderlands game with good writing is the first game, which had a very sparse story with limited character interaction not too different from dark souls.
it's cool, but it's a gimmick and shouldn't be overdone. the dark souls games are fun, but vagueness of the narrative and lore just becomes comedic after they do it time and time again like they expect people to still gasp at how mysterious the game is. I can't take it seriously.
it's funny because it's been shown that it's possible to put in coherent storytelling without compromising the soulslike principles. just look at Lies of P, or even FROM's own Sekiro.
that's my take at least, I know there's still people who dig it since VaatiVidya still exists.
Dark Souls is one of the most important games of all time simply for the fact that it mindbroke fags who hate videogames yet insist their takes on them are authoritative so much that they're still mad about it.
>bait bait bait
When I wake up and smell eggs in the morning, that's bait to make me go downstairs and eat breakfast. When the light turns green, I'm being baited into walking. The world is MANIPULATING my BEHAVIOUR by guessing my MOTIVATIONS and feeding them to me under FALSE PRETENSES!!!!!
Someone making a shitpost with the sole purpose of getting attention, does in fact want attention and you responding in any way provides it
But it's cool if that makes your dick hard, feeding the trolls has been the default ever since normalfags like you overran the internet
fundamental misunderstanding of storytelling , guy can't comprehend showing over telling lol. this is a huge embarrassment for him but he's too dumb to realize.
>showing over telling
What's not to love about the CIA's anti-Soviet propaganda? How effective it was? Or how it continued after the Soviets no longer exist?
You do realize that "show, don't tell" only exists as a concept, because the Soviets were creating very straight forward and literal art?
Western game writers mad people make videos with millions of views about throwable dung descriptions, when they themselves can't into nuance without beating the audience over the head with their self insert's political views, and corporate incentivize opinions on the diversity of their HR department.
657044490 >"show, don't tell" only exists as a concept, because the Soviets were creating very straight forward and literal art
you do not understand 1/10th of what you think you do about the visual rhetoric of propaganda but you still choose to post. no (You) this time.
I mean, he's half right in that "show don't tell" is only a very recent invention and plenty of god tier writers in the past had a lot of "telling" in their books (tolstoj choose to put entire chapters of seething at napoleon in w&p, for example)
Actually you can't "show" in any medium because the act of showing something to somebody logically necessitates your physical presence you sub-literate imbecile
much of this relies on what we mean by "show." to me, that is essentially asking something from the media enjoyer, reader, watcher, player etc. "showing over telling" means the story isn't simply there saying "here is the story," but rather showing you a world and characters that exist in their own continuity and context that you are left to discern and interpret as more context appears. i don't think it's wrong to say that this is relatively modern as a concept, but then again this style of storytelling is relatively modern as well. possibly something like gormenghast or the worm ouroboros might be an example of something old-ish that favors showing you a world vs carrying you along a beaten path of storytelling with context limited to what the author wants you to think of the characters and their interactions with the world.
Fucking nagger, it just means you read the event happening (told by whatever narrator the novel happens to use) rather than just having a character summarize it in words
>much of this relies on what we mean by "show."
it's basically a summary of Raimond Carver's style of storytelling where the author is supposed to be as "invisible" as possible as to leave the ultimate "meaning" of the story up to the reader. It became as well known as it is (I'm talking about the phrase "show don't tell") because, for some reason, it became the mantra of every creative writing school (which didn't really exist before the post-modern era) and then it got picked up by popular culture as large because it's a simple, easy to understand, easy to remember formula. That's it.
The other half is that I don't think it created as a CIA psyop but rather it became popular due to a complex combination of factors like the spread of creative writing schools, an all pervasive rejection of so-called "metanarratives" in higher culture during the period, the newfound interest in sensory experience at the time (drugs, hippies, free love and all that followed), the formula itself being easy to remember and understand etc etc etc
>I don't think it created as a CIA psyop
Guess who funded those things?
Next you'll say that feminism didn't spread because of CIA efforts and funding. And that it spread because "people just wanted men and women to be equal".
>Guess who funded those things?
It's anybody's guess. You say the CIA and I could say the URSS as a means to destabilize and demoralize the west, they're both equally as probable. Also not everything that happened in the past 80 or so years is due to influence from above, all that wealth that humans enjoyed for the first time after ww2 had to have some effect on culture on its own.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>It's anybody's guess
It's not a guess. >they're both equally as probable
Only if you're ignorant. >not everything that happened in the past 80 or so years is due to influence from above
Where did I say everything? I said "show, don't tell" and the spread of feminism. Both true, and most people think they're both more natural/grassroots.
Most women didn't even want voting rights or anything like that. We've just been surrounded by feminism for so long, that we've grown used to it. But women are finally realizing that it's a shit deal for them, so we'll see if it actually changes anything, or if they stay as wagies forever.
1 month ago
Anonymous
>It's not a guess.
Do you have any tangible proof that the CIA was behind "show don't tell" then? Or are you just speculating?
>"show don't tell" is only a very recent invention
I'm assuming it only became a thing after cinematography was invented. Because you know, it's a "rule" that basically only applies to visual media, thing that books and literature are not
Yes, and people don't know that it's incredibly new, because they don't watch older movies or read books. They just watch new movies/tv and play video games.
>can't even reply properly >doesn't show that there's 9/10s missing >just says I'm wrong
You're going to die, when you discover that every movie used to be a "talkie". Where they told you everything, and people loved those movies.
Then the CIA propaganda happened, and everyone got convinced that "show, don't tell" is the peak of storytelling.
Has western storytelling always been this kind of almost 4th wall breaking thing where they essentially have one character whose job it is to "look at the camera" (or reader, player, whatever) and just be like "this is [world], [important event] happened, i am [character] and she is [other character] and finally there's [third character], here is the nature of our conflict with [other characters]?"
>doesn't realize that Shakespeare had characters break the 4th wall for the audience >strawmanning everything anyway
There's a difference between 4th wall breaking and "telling".
Go watch a movie from the 1950s or 1960s. Most of it, is people standing around and talking. Including talking about what happened to other characters, and you're never shown those events. You're just told about them.
People never had a problem with this style of storytelling, until the anti-Soviet CIA propaganda.
Check western tv series and movies from the last decade and you will understand. Cucks, also know as white male/female western consumers, need to have exposition and "meaningful" dialogues (yes, they consider quips meaningful). If you want a gaming example, pillars of eternity 1/2 are perfect.
it's kino because it's true
kino
>Pic related, the Japanese man coder who created this boss
Borderlands writer throwing a wobbly is always a good thing, nothing wrong with it at all.
doesn't matter if he is a bad writer, doesn't make his tweet any less true
It does say a lot about him though, and contextualises the meme, so you know where the salt is coming from.
It sort of does though, he has a fundamental misunderstanding on how varied story telling can be, especially in an interactable medium.
There's value in telling a story in a way that suits the tone and message of your game. There's this permeating habit of modern writers to tell every story the same way as to be best understood, but it results in really clunky ass writing. People saying how they feel, people explaining why they're doing something, or people saying exactly why they are upset with another person are all examples of writing shortcuts which these people use because, rather than having characters be fully actialized characters, they more represent a check box that needs to be ticked.
Why show that a character doesn't trust people by having that always keep their back against a wall, having them forget names easily or that they can't make eye contact when you can just have the character say "eh, I'm way not into the trusting thing, I'm scarred, I have a history and I know trusting people is bad". I don't understand mocking creative story telling because obfuscated histories of a broken world are "confusing". Well no shit, that's the point. Dark Souls is a world where everything is destroyed, all the great events of history are so long gone that they're distant legends to the people that live in the world now.
You're entirely right, yet I still feel that you aren't going far enough in exploring the differences between BL and DS writing
If the BL writers took your advice, that would for example mean that maybe Handsome Jack just does villainous actions instead of constantly calling you to tell you what an evil cunt he is. It would still be an entirely character-driven story about you wanting to oppose him, joining up with the resistance, and wanting to stop him from accessing the vault
Meanwhile in DS, characters barely matter for the overarcing story. You just have the vague goal of killing some fuckheads and the characters are mostly along for the ride, progressing through the game (and inevitably hollowing out) alongside you
It's fucking cool and that's what really matters
>uhhh did that just happened
>A UHHHH HECKIN POOP RAPIST TRAIN JUST KILLED MY WEINER
>heh did you know I don't like men? x100
get a real job homosexual
Failed film producers are seething because normies are waking up
I don't mind dark souls lore. But anyone who thinks it's deep to have shitty story in item descriptions is retarded.
it's smart to push the story out of way and leave it in items descriptions instead of having players skip through hours of dialogue
It's lazy, and means that you don't know how to construct an appealing narrative.
>I'm an ideas guy
>let's just put all my ideas on item descriptions
>that way the player has to do all the work
the best stories are the ones who just dump you in the story and let you learn by cultural osmosis, you get the context from following along the world and discovering what is already in place. the worst ones are the ones that rely on characters monologuing to set everything up, even worse if they ignore their own in-universe rules and context for girlboss moments. DS games are like a Gene Wolfe novel and assorted Westslop is like JK Rowling.
Clicked the wrong button, meant for the top of
the appealing narrative is there because those lore channels exist,they just aren't forcefully shoving it in your face
You are fucking retarded
I am so tired of people like you, I really feel like you don't understand shit about anything
nice retort, retard
you sure showed him and proved to everyone how shoving garbage in item descriptions is a good way to present lore
You're all fucking morons and it shows
I really don't get why people find this shit so confusing, and why they want to complain so much
You're literally told EVERYTHING you need to know to understand the story through the opening cutscene and dialogue you get by advancing the story
Knowing why Myrmidon of Loss seeked forgivness means nothing to the story of the game
Why the fuck would I want a 10 hour fucking cutscene in a VIDEOGAME about why an enenmy wanted to fight me?
Why is that better than simply looking it up yourself by looking at his possessions?
Are you guys actually this fucking retarded, where you are both screaming "I want to know everything in the story without missing a single thing" and at the same time "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE I DON'T WANT TO READ THIS THING HIDDEN AWAY TO KNOW THE LAST TIME THIS SIDE ENEMY SHAT HIS PANTS REEEEEEEEEEEEE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"
>I really don't get why people find this shit so confusing
Never said it was confusing. I said it was lazy. The ability to think of a bunch of good ideas, and the ability to put them into a cohesive order to illicit the correct emotional response from the viewer is a skill.
Having a bunch of good ideas, but not being able to craft it together, and instead just throwing them everywhere, and letting the viewer craft it, isn't a skill.
>ad hominems and strawmans for the rest of the post
He's right but I wouldn't have it any other way.
the joke itself is funny, but he didn't even come up with it and since he's the lead writer of a game that flopped and has insufferable writing he comes off as seething
Given the strange resurgence in this dumb meme my guess is that you're the homosexual writer trying to drum up interest for the next project you're on
Soultrannies have yet to recover from this
trannies dont have souls, nice try though
Yes, game devs finally realised that less is more. Previously the boss would monologue for 7 minutes about his entire backstory, explaining to you in excruciating detail how he came to know zanzibart. Then, after you died, you would get to listen to it all over again in the unskippable cutscene. Is this new style good writing? Not really, but its closer to passable than the former.
>h-he's a borderlands writer!
This just makes it more embarrassing for him to BTFO you.
Nah, it makes it embarrassing for him, poking fun at other things when his creation is garbage.
<retard calling you a retard makes it extra sad
Ah but then the retard activates my trap card because I will become a bigger retard and call him a retard
>Hey man you know what you are, you're a slacker!
>Hehe you're right I guess I am, lol Slacker 4 lyfe dude!
>NO! Stop being happy, I pwned you with my wit! stop taking it in stride!
Games from 7th gen and onward started grooming players into not maintaining a long term memory. You only needed to keep the immediate gameplay loop in mind, objective markers and dialogue would string you along to wherever you needed to go next.
This was necessary because the games were boring and played themselves, but would frequently smash cut to setpieces that also played themselves to maintain excitement and wipe the slate clean.
Logically this means that if someone makes a statement that references other things without having immediately refreshed the player's memory on every single thing that they are referencing, the references would be lost.
If this were more in line with modern releases, then the entire sequence leading up to the line would be continuously reestablishing the entire backstory of the boss and Zanzibart, just so that the player knows what is happening in that moment.
While I agree with your assessment of the 7th gen, it still doesn't forgive a game that's basically "all lore light story". That's some Gankermblr wank.
I don't give a shit about the writing
I'm beating bosses cause it's fun
We swear we aren't mad at ER's success, we just wanna poke fun at it haha
butthurt borderlands (muh social media villians) writer bitching about dark souls thead #9991238
Cope homosexual, people prefer souls like games to your ubislop
Dark Souls revolutionized gaming by making games good again. No handholding, no bloated cringy leftoid writing, no quest markers, none of that homosexualry.
>No handholding, no bloated cringy leftoid writing, no quest markers, none of that homosexualry.
Elden ring literally brought all of thus back
It's like soulsfags never even played games they are defending...
this dumb dumb thinks the meme ui edits are real lmao
That tweet ravaged so many gaymer bussies it's unreal
nothing. the truth hurts. it always has.
>borderlands writer criticizes Souls writing
>BF42 Ui designers criticizes Souls UI/UX
>Horizon quest designers criticizes Souls quests
I'm starting to notice a pattern here
everytime the person with no talent or any idea how to make games whines about someone making a good game? why are there so many cucks in the video game industry with college degrees on making literal trash?
Twitter revolutionized Ganker, in the sense that instead of making a original thread you can just post a twitter post from a random person and act like its the common consensus and add a "xxx in shambles", "xxx seething" or "how do you respond without sounding mad".
now we don’t even HAVE to play games! truly a revolution
>fromtroons desperately trying to ad hom their way out
Apex cringe, take the L ya fuckin losers
nothing is wrong with this style of writing. We can all agree that elden ring just handled npc quests poorly thats the problem
>nothing is wrong with this style of writing
I would go further and say it's (currently) the best way to present a story in a videogame. And I don't believe it's even close. Games are not movies.
filtered
dark souls 2 is the best in the series btw
From Software has to counteract the movie games that western developers are so obsessed with making.
>th-that might be true but LOOK AT THOSE RETARDS OVER THERE!!
>easy
Yeah right... I broke 3 controllers just going through blighttown... you're just a casual posing as a veteran for clout...
Bro, but the Zanzibart lore goes so fucking deep.
The implication that the Myrmidon of Loss was Zanzibart's retainer means it's very likely that they're Oberon's son, thus making them part of the royal lineage and VERY likely to be related to Dandinella.
Please explain to me why you said "son" but used "they're", because it looks like you got brainwashed by twitter pronouns
It's just Gwyndolin all over again
bro shut the fuck up
Media has done that sort of shit for decades and the difference between whether it's good or bad is how well everything around it is done
Also Demon's Souls is better than Dark Souls
Who cares, malenia's piss easy I beat her sl1 first try while fucking your fatass mother
it's weird because the only borderlands game with good writing is the first game, which had a very sparse story with limited character interaction not too different from dark souls.
it's cool, but it's a gimmick and shouldn't be overdone. the dark souls games are fun, but vagueness of the narrative and lore just becomes comedic after they do it time and time again like they expect people to still gasp at how mysterious the game is. I can't take it seriously.
it's funny because it's been shown that it's possible to put in coherent storytelling without compromising the soulslike principles. just look at Lies of P, or even FROM's own Sekiro.
that's my take at least, I know there's still people who dig it since VaatiVidya still exists.
Games should focus on gameplay not story
If i want a good story i'll read a fucking booka
Dark Souls is one of the most important games of all time simply for the fact that it mindbroke fags who hate videogames yet insist their takes on them are authoritative so much that they're still mad about it.
You have no friends and no life. I feel sorry for your parents and anyone else who has to tolerate your putrid presence.
Congratulations on giving attention to blatant bait
>bait bait bait
When I wake up and smell eggs in the morning, that's bait to make me go downstairs and eat breakfast. When the light turns green, I'm being baited into walking. The world is MANIPULATING my BEHAVIOUR by guessing my MOTIVATIONS and feeding them to me under FALSE PRETENSES!!!!!
Someone making a shitpost with the sole purpose of getting attention, does in fact want attention and you responding in any way provides it
But it's cool if that makes your dick hard, feeding the trolls has been the default ever since normalfags like you overran the internet
Maybe you should log off, touch grass, take your meds and have sex
>modern writing
in the original context that was a list of phrases writers should not use
I cant remember the last time I played a game with a story that was great, maybe it never even happened at all.
Some RPGs that everyone told you were bad, so you didn't play them.
quality of writing:
books > theater > movies > series > fan fiction > student assignment >>> games
>books
>quality writing
Have you read any book published in the last 20 years?
wouldn't buy your shit game to scrape shit off my shoe.
fundamental misunderstanding of storytelling , guy can't comprehend showing over telling lol. this is a huge embarrassment for him but he's too dumb to realize.
>showing over telling
What's not to love about the CIA's anti-Soviet propaganda? How effective it was? Or how it continued after the Soviets no longer exist?
You do realize that "show, don't tell" only exists as a concept, because the Soviets were creating very straight forward and literal art?
>the best stories are the ones who just dump you in the story and let you learn by cultural osmosis
See:
>lore channels
We're pretending that lore channels are a good thing now? Fuck, there's no hope for this medium.
Reading a hundred item descriptions and deciding the story for yourself is the most lazy shit ever.
Western game writers mad people make videos with millions of views about throwable dung descriptions, when they themselves can't into nuance without beating the audience over the head with their self insert's political views, and corporate incentivize opinions on the diversity of their HR department.
657044490
>"show, don't tell" only exists as a concept, because the Soviets were creating very straight forward and literal art
you do not understand 1/10th of what you think you do about the visual rhetoric of propaganda but you still choose to post. no (You) this time.
I mean, he's half right in that "show don't tell" is only a very recent invention and plenty of god tier writers in the past had a lot of "telling" in their books (tolstoj choose to put entire chapters of seething at napoleon in w&p, for example)
You can't "show" in a book you fucking retard, it only applies to film and vidya
Actually you can't "show" in any medium because the act of showing something to somebody logically necessitates your physical presence you sub-literate imbecile
much of this relies on what we mean by "show." to me, that is essentially asking something from the media enjoyer, reader, watcher, player etc. "showing over telling" means the story isn't simply there saying "here is the story," but rather showing you a world and characters that exist in their own continuity and context that you are left to discern and interpret as more context appears. i don't think it's wrong to say that this is relatively modern as a concept, but then again this style of storytelling is relatively modern as well. possibly something like gormenghast or the worm ouroboros might be an example of something old-ish that favors showing you a world vs carrying you along a beaten path of storytelling with context limited to what the author wants you to think of the characters and their interactions with the world.
Fucking nagger, it just means you read the event happening (told by whatever narrator the novel happens to use) rather than just having a character summarize it in words
>much of this relies on what we mean by "show."
it's basically a summary of Raimond Carver's style of storytelling where the author is supposed to be as "invisible" as possible as to leave the ultimate "meaning" of the story up to the reader. It became as well known as it is (I'm talking about the phrase "show don't tell") because, for some reason, it became the mantra of every creative writing school (which didn't really exist before the post-modern era) and then it got picked up by popular culture as large because it's a simple, easy to understand, easy to remember formula. That's it.
What's the other half?
The other half is that I don't think it created as a CIA psyop but rather it became popular due to a complex combination of factors like the spread of creative writing schools, an all pervasive rejection of so-called "metanarratives" in higher culture during the period, the newfound interest in sensory experience at the time (drugs, hippies, free love and all that followed), the formula itself being easy to remember and understand etc etc etc
>I don't think it created as a CIA psyop
Guess who funded those things?
Next you'll say that feminism didn't spread because of CIA efforts and funding. And that it spread because "people just wanted men and women to be equal".
>Guess who funded those things?
It's anybody's guess. You say the CIA and I could say the URSS as a means to destabilize and demoralize the west, they're both equally as probable. Also not everything that happened in the past 80 or so years is due to influence from above, all that wealth that humans enjoyed for the first time after ww2 had to have some effect on culture on its own.
>It's anybody's guess
It's not a guess.
>they're both equally as probable
Only if you're ignorant.
>not everything that happened in the past 80 or so years is due to influence from above
Where did I say everything? I said "show, don't tell" and the spread of feminism. Both true, and most people think they're both more natural/grassroots.
Most women didn't even want voting rights or anything like that. We've just been surrounded by feminism for so long, that we've grown used to it. But women are finally realizing that it's a shit deal for them, so we'll see if it actually changes anything, or if they stay as wagies forever.
>It's not a guess.
Do you have any tangible proof that the CIA was behind "show don't tell" then? Or are you just speculating?
>"show don't tell" is only a very recent invention
I'm assuming it only became a thing after cinematography was invented. Because you know, it's a "rule" that basically only applies to visual media, thing that books and literature are not
Yes, and people don't know that it's incredibly new, because they don't watch older movies or read books. They just watch new movies/tv and play video games.
>can't even reply properly
>doesn't show that there's 9/10s missing
>just says I'm wrong
You're going to die, when you discover that every movie used to be a "talkie". Where they told you everything, and people loved those movies.
Then the CIA propaganda happened, and everyone got convinced that "show, don't tell" is the peak of storytelling.
Has western storytelling always been this kind of almost 4th wall breaking thing where they essentially have one character whose job it is to "look at the camera" (or reader, player, whatever) and just be like "this is [world], [important event] happened, i am [character] and she is [other character] and finally there's [third character], here is the nature of our conflict with [other characters]?"
>doesn't realize that Shakespeare had characters break the 4th wall for the audience
>strawmanning everything anyway
There's a difference between 4th wall breaking and "telling".
Go watch a movie from the 1950s or 1960s. Most of it, is people standing around and talking. Including talking about what happened to other characters, and you're never shown those events. You're just told about them.
People never had a problem with this style of storytelling, until the anti-Soviet CIA propaganda.
you're describing every JRPG
Check western tv series and movies from the last decade and you will understand. Cucks, also know as white male/female western consumers, need to have exposition and "meaningful" dialogues (yes, they consider quips meaningful). If you want a gaming example, pillars of eternity 1/2 are perfect.
657045581
wrong
I wish. Too bad games still barrage you with shitty dialogue and long winded cutscenes.
Film can pack more character building into a 2 minute scene than games can in their entire runtime. Yes there are about 10 exceptions to this.