Stop bullying Fates. It doesn’t deserve it

[Sooks]

1 minute ago, Ottservia said:

Hyperbolic statement I don’t really mean at least  it’s not one to be taken literally 

Oh, right. I just noticed you said that, my bad.

Still though, it might be a little hypocritical of you to think people shouldn’t take things on Internet forums so seriously when this exists. Sometimes our emotions do get the best of us, Internet forum or no.

[Ottservia]

1 minute ago, lightcosmo said:

Well you stated to me before: "i didn't respond because you were right and i had nothing to say" correct? I'm assuming the rules don't change. 

 

Yeah that’s one reason but not all of them. Look you need to stop assuming things about me it’s not healthy. Look I’ll respond if I remember to alright. I have no obligation to respond to everyone either. It’s my life I can do what I want with it. 

 

3 minutes ago, lightcosmo said:

Also also: I'm not angry, far from it, actually. Annoyed, maybe, but not upset. You on the other hand, i'd argue you're angry, based on the topic.

I wouldn’t say I’m angry just a little annoyed at the current state of critical discourse in this fandom.

[Lightcosmo]

3 hours ago, Ottservia said:

Yeah that’s one reason but not all of them. Look you need to stop assuming things about me it’s not healthy. Look I’ll respond if I remember to alright. I have no obligation to respond to everyone either. It’s my life I can do what I want with it. 

That's true, you don't but if someone specifically asks for your personal opinion, when they went out of their way to respond to your feelings, it would be polite to at least acknowledge them.

Otherwise, why did you create the topic?

Edit cause i missed it:

  

3 hours ago, Ottservia said:

I wouldn’t say I’m angry just a little annoyed at the current state of critical discourse in this fandom.

All i can do is echo what @eclipse said and don't let it bother you. If i don't like Fate's it shouldn't stop you from liking it. If you like it's story, that's great. Alot of us might not share the same views on how it's handled. 

Edited November 22, 2020 by lightcosmo

[Ottservia]

Just now, lightcosmo said:

That's true, you don't but if someone specifically asks for your personal opinion, when they went out of their way to respond to your feelings, it would be polite to at least acknowledge them.

Otherwise, why did you create the topic?

Well yeah if someone asks I will respond, obviously but you can’t expect a response right away. I have things to do. Adhd to manage and all that. If I can get around to it I’ll do it but that is by no means a guarantee.

[Lightcosmo]

3 hours ago, Ottservia said:

Well yeah if someone asks I will respond, obviously but you can’t expect a response right away. I have things to do. Adhd to manage and all that. If I can get around to it I’ll do it but that is by no means a guarantee.

Fair enough, fair enough.

[vanguard333]

1 hour ago, lightcosmo said:

Seriously though, Fates has way to much "convenience" running its story, which is why I really dont like it. Things that happen just... happen. They feel forced, which is not how you write a good story. 

Yes you can say "but things have to happen somehow!" This is true, but not like that, and not all of the time.

1 hour ago, Sooks said:

I agree! Character driven stories >>>> whatever you would call a story strung together by coincidences because it’s kinda boring when everything happened just because.

I made this same point a long while back in the thread (though admittedly with a lot more words). 

 

1 hour ago, Ottservia said:

I mean if you wanna go that route. Every story in existence can be considered strung together by coincidences. Storytelling is contrived by its very definition. It’s an inevitability in stories. I mean hey 3H’s story is just a series of events held together by a string of coincidences and I’d argue it’s worse in 3H because 3H does not understand the first thing about how cause and effect works. 

Read what I said a while back: there's a difference between a story having coincidences and a story being driven by coincidences. Stories, ideally, are supposed to be driven by the actions the characters make because of who they are and the circumstances around them. A story using coincidences to prompt character decisions that drive the plot forward is fine; contrivances occur when the coincidence itself is the thing driving the plot, and that is a problem. So no, you cannot say that every story can be considered strung together by coincidences. For just one very quick example, my favourite novel of all time, The Hobbit:

Spoiler

Bilbo chooses to leave the Shire and go with the dwarves on an adventure. The group gets captured by goblins because they were too impatient to thoroughly inspect the cave. They get lost in Mirkwood because they choose to stray from the path, searching for food. Bilbo chooses to steal the Arkenstone and give it to the men of Lake-Town for bartering with Thorin. Etc. The story has coincidences, but it is driven by choices. 

Are you familiar with the whataboutism fallacy (this time, it's not the official name for it, but I don't know the official name for it); when you respond to a criticism basically by saying, "What about this other thing? Isn't it also guilty?" Like when people try to defend Rey in the Star Wars sequels by pointing at child Anakin in The Phantom Menace and saying, "Isn't he also a mary sue?" The obvious problem is that precedence is not grounds for deflecting criticism, but there's another flaw that that example illustrates: even if making that comparison were a valid argument, it depends on people being fine with it in one case but not the other, and I'm pretty sure it's safe to say that a lot of people did not like child Anakin in The Phantom Menace. 

I kind-of had to talk about that before going in to your Three Houses comparison, not necessarily because it is a whataboutism, but because the comparison has some similar weaknesses. I've only played Crimson Flower and Verdant Wind so far, but I can say there are certainly moments of contrivance in Three Houses, and people have indeed criticized those moments. But the overarching plot is, for the most part, driven by character: for the biggest example in the game, Edelgard chooses to wage war on the church, and she makes that choice because of what she knows and who she is. Those moments of contrivance are blemishes in an ultimately character-driven story. Fates, meanwhile, depends on contrivances to keep the plot going; the characters don't move the plot forward, coincidences do. 

[Ottservia]

4 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

I kind-of had to talk about that before going in to your Three Houses comparison, not necessarily because it is a whataboutism, but because the comparison has some similar weaknesses. I've only played Crimson Flower and Verdant Wind so far, but I can say there are certainly moments of contrivance in Three Houses, and people have indeed criticized those moments. But the overarching plot is, for the most part, driven by character: for the biggest example in the game, Edelgard chooses to wage war on the church, and she makes that choice because of what she knows and who she is. Those moments of contrivance are blemishes in an ultimately character-driven story. Fates, meanwhile, depends on contrivances to keep the plot going; the characters don't move the plot forward, coincidences do. 

You misunderstand my problem with 3H’s story. Contrived isn’t the word I’d use to describe it far from it actually. Personally I think contrivance is a terrible criticism simply because storytelling is inherently contrived cause really all complaining about contrivance really does is criticize the story for being artificial which stories are inherently artificial that’s why it’s called fiction. My problem 3H is that does not have any idea about how cause and affect works. Every plot point and story beat feels so disconnected. One event happens and then the next happens when it should be one event happens but the next happens therefore the next even happens. I could go on but this is not the thread for that. Fates at least understands that much where each plot point and story beat naturally happens as a result of the previous plot point or the overarching plot point like trying to find Ryoma in birthright.

[Sooks]

Just now, Ottservia said:

really all complaining about contrivance really does is criticize the story for being artificial which stories are inherently artificial that’s why it’s called fiction.

Coming off as too artificial instead of letting you get immersed, leading to a hollow and unenjoyable experience*

Just now, Ottservia said:

Fates at least understands that much where each plot point and story beat naturally happens as a result of the previous plot point or the overarching plot point like trying to find Ryoma in birthright.

Three Houses unironically has more character driven moments than Fates Birthright (imo I guess).

[Ottservia]

1 minute ago, Sooks said:

Coming off as too artificial instead of letting you get immersed, leading to a hollow and unenjoyable experience*

Yes but suspension of disbelief is personal. It’s completely subjective. What will break one person’s suspension of disbelief will not break another’s. It can be used to measure personal enjoyment and nothing more. I am not talking about personal enjoyment. I am talking about the more reasoned standards in regards to critical analysis and understanding storytelling.

[Sooks]

4 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Yes but suspension of disbelief is personal. It’s completely subjective. What will break one person’s suspension of disbelief will not break another’s. It can be used to measure personal enjoyment and nothing more. I am not talking about personal enjoyment. I am talking about the more reasoned standards in regards to critical analysis and understanding storytelling.

What in enjoyment of art isn’t subjective?

[Ottservia]

7 minutes ago, Sooks said:

What in enjoyment of art isn’t subjective?

Y’see there’s the fundamental misunderstanding between you and me. I am not gonna get into the whole subjective vs objective argument again cause it’s messy but I will say I think it’s a bit rude to call something awful simply because it broke your personal suspension of disbelief. I could just as easily it did not break mine. There’s no discussion to be had there. You can’t prove breaking suspension of disbelief. It is impossible because of how personal it is. Personal enjoyment is personal. I am not talking about personal enjoyment because there’s no discussion there. It is useless in regards to critical discussion and I want a discussion. Discussions of personal taste don’t really go anywhere which is why I don’t focus on it.

Edited November 22, 2020 by Ottservia

[Sooks]

4 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Y’see there’s the fundamental misunderstanding between you and me. I am not gonna get into the whole subjective vs objective argument again cause it’s messy but I will say I think it’s a bit rude to call something awful simply because it broke your personal suspension of disbelief. I could just as easily it did not break mine. There’s no discussion to be had there. You can’t prove breaking suspension of disbelief. It is impossible because of how personal it is. Personal enjoyment is personal. I am not talking about personal enjoyment because there’s no discussion there. It is useless in regards to critical discussion and I want a discussion. Discussions of personal taste don’t really go anywhere which is why I don’t focus on it.

How do you discuss any form of art without discussing personal taste, though?

[Ottservia]

5 minutes ago, Sooks said:

How do you discuss any form of art without discussing personal taste, though?

It is totally possible to not like or care for something while also appreciating it for what it accomplishes and what it has to offer. Like I said before, like or dislike things on their own merits and for what they offer just don’t dismiss them for not mattering when you could instead aim to figure out why they do. As the original thread title suggests I don’t care much for fates. My personal opinion on the game is one of indifference. I like things about it but overall it’s not something that hits my personal preferences. Awakening is more of my kind of game. Even so, I can see value in what it sets out to accomplish and what it has to offer. I am not going to dismiss and call it terrible on account of my own personal tastes.

[Sooks]

2 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

It is totally possible to not like or care for something while also appreciating it for what it accomplishes and what it has to offer.

What something accomplished, within itself, is also subjective as it hinges on why you view art.

Of course without, somethings can be proven, like outselling every other game in the series or something, but I suppose that’s irrelevant.

4 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Like I said before, like or dislike things on their own merits and for what they offer just don’t dismiss them for not mattering when you could instead aim to figure out why they do. As the original thread title suggests I don’t care much for fates. My personal opinion on the game is one of indifference. I like things about it but overall it’s not something that hits my personal preferences. Awakening is more of my kind of game. Even so, I can see value in what it sets out to accomplish and what it has to offer. I am not going to dismiss and call it terrible on account of my own personal tastes.

All this sort of deviates from my point, I’m talking about what is there in artistic analysis that isn’t subjective, and this is more going off of the implication that there is objective.

[vanguard333]

34 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Personally I think contrivance is a terrible criticism simply because storytelling is inherently contrived cause really all complaining about contrivance really does is criticize the story for being artificial which stories are inherently artificial that’s why it’s called fiction.

I already explained why contrivance is a valid criticism while bringing up problems other than breaking immersion. Yes, stories are inherently artificial, but if a story is relying on coincidence rather than character decision to move the plot forward, then the story's far less meaningful. I've been in enough media discussions with you that I know how important you consider themes and their exploration to be in storytelling, so let me put it this way: every moment a story uses a contrivance rather than character decision & consequences is a moment that the themes aren't being expressed or explored, and at their worst, contrivances can actually damage of contradict a story's theme because the story is using coincidences to make things happen instead of the characters. 

 

42 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

You misunderstand my problem with 3H’s story. My problem 3H is that does not have any idea about how cause and affect works. Every plot point and story beat feels so disconnected. One event happens and then the next happens when it should be one event happens but the next happens therefore the next even happens. I could go on but this is not the thread for that. Fates at least understands that much where each plot point and story beat naturally happens as a result of the previous plot point or the overarching plot point like trying to find Ryoma in birthright.

I agree to an extent about Three Houses' plot points in White Clouds being a bit disconnected, and I have seen that criticism brought up before by others. To an extent, it is a consequence of the different structure. As for Fates, one can indeed argue that there is a genuine sequence of events; however, that sequence of events is kept going a lot of the time by contrivances rather than by character. 

[Ottservia]

27 minutes ago, Sooks said:

What something accomplished, within itself, is also subjective as it hinges on why you view art.

Of course without, somethings can be proven, like outselling every other game in the series or something, but I suppose that’s irrelevant.

All this sort of deviates from my point, I’m talking about what is there in artistic analysis that isn’t subjective, and this is more going off of the implication that there is objective.

I feel like you’re looking at this too much on a surface level. It isn’t that black and white. There’s more nuance to the discussion that you don’t seem to be seeing.

20 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

I already explained why contrivance is a valid criticism while bringing up problems other than breaking immersion. Yes, stories are inherently artificial, but if a story is relying on coincidence rather than character decision to move the plot forward, then the story's far less meaningful. I've been in enough media discussions with you that I know how important you consider themes and their exploration to be in storytelling, so let me put it this way: every moment a story uses a contrivance rather than character decision & consequences is a moment that the themes aren't being expressed or explored, and at their worst, contrivances can actually damage of contradict a story's theme because the story is using coincidences to make things happen instead of the characters. 

I feel like that depends on the story though. What I don’t like about contrivance is that it’s more or less a conversation ender. Like for example in MHA. Deku running into All might in the first episode can be considered a contrivance, no? Or if you want another example from later in the series take nighteye being able to locate overhaul’s base. Do those contrivances take away from the story’s overall themes, ideas, and messages? No, no they don’t. They don’t take away from anything. Most of the time it really doesn’t matter. Cause here’s my view. If you look hard enough at story you can call anything contrived. You can nitpick anything to pieces if you try hard enough and that’s really my problem with it. The only time “contrivance” is an issue on the rare occasion that it is is when it doesn’t make sense within the story’s own established rules. Case and point, the sao alfheim arc. Or if you want an actual example from fates then look no further than the crystal ball not being a thing in Rev when it was a clearly established plot device in both birthright and conquest

Edited November 22, 2020 by Ottservia

[Sooks]

9 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

I feel like you’re looking at this too much on a surface level. It isn’t that black and white. There’s more nuance to the discussion that you don’t seem to be seeing.

Then please explain to me what I’m missing.

[Ottservia]

2 minutes ago, Sooks said:

Then please explain to me what I’m missing.

I’ve already tried that multiple times.

[Sooks]

8 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

I’ve already tried that multiple times.

Really? All I remember is your Naruto v Sasuke example that only pertains to once specific scenario. That’s too bad.

[vanguard333]

1 minute ago, Ottservia said:

I feel like that depends on the story though. What I don’t like about contrivance is that it’s more or less a conversation ender. Like for example in MHA. Deku running into All might in the first episode can be considered a contrivance, no? Or if you want another example from later in the series take nighteye being able to locate overhaul’s base. Do those contrivances take away from the story’s overall themes, ideas, and messages? No, no they don’t. They don’t take away from anything. Most of the time it really doesn’t matter. Cause here’s my view. If you look hard enough at story you can call anything contrived. You can nitpick anything to pieces if you try hard enough and that’s really my problem with it. The only time “contrivance” is an issue on the rare occasion that it is is when it doesn’t make sense within the story’s own established rules. Case and point, the sao alfheim arc

I'm going to break this down into parts:

1. Deku happening to run into All Might is a coincidence; as I said before, coincidences are fine so long as they're only creating the circumstances for character decisions, and the character decisions drive the plot forward. Deku running into All Might itself does not drive the plot forward; what drives the plot forward is Deku asking All Might if he too can be a hero even without a quirk, and later on Deku trying to save Bakugo and unwittingly spurring All Might into action after seeing Deku trying to help Bakugo, leading All Might to choose Deku as his successor. Would that have happened if they hadn't run into each other? Obviously not, but what was truly important wasn't Deku and All Might running into each other; it was their decisions. I already gave two other examples of stories that, like this one, open with a coincidence but use that coincidence to prompt character choice.

2. The Nighteye example is interesting. One could argue it's not a coincidence but an example of setup and payoff: the audience already knows Nighteye's a collector and that the guy Overhaul assigned to watch Eri is buying a bunch of toys for her to try to keep her from running away again as he doesn't want Overhaul to kill him like the last guy who was assigned to watch Eri. These and the fact that Nighteye and the heroes are actively looking for the base take away a lot of the coincidence. It is still a coincidence that they happen to be in the store at the same time, but it is greatly mitigated by the surrounding factors. So this one is a bit hard for me, as I'm not sure if it really counts. I'd have to think about it more. 

If I recall correctly, you have a tendency to refer to a lot of criticisms you don't like as "conversation-enders"; it almost makes me wonder who is the one who ends the conversation. I've never seen "contrived" used to end a conversation; I've seen, "This is contrived", "How?", "Here's how: [lists how]", etc. 

[Ottservia]

6 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

If I recall correctly, you have a tendency to refer to a lot of criticisms you don't like as "conversation-enders"; it almost makes me wonder who is the one who ends the conversation. I've never seen "contrived" used to end a conversation; I've seen, "This is contrived", "How?", "Here's how: [lists how]", etc. 

I use the term a bit loosely, I’ll admit but what I mean by conversation ender is that whenever I usually see those kinds of criticisms used there’s usually not much of a discussion to be had beyond that. Or it results in people abscribing rules to stories that never intended to follow them in the first place. Like the world building example. Not every story needs world building to work. Not every story needs to be realistic. I just find it to be reductive to suggest all stories need to be the same. Every story, I feel, should be judged on a case by case basis. No story is the same meaning criticism that could pertain to one story may not pertain to another and that’s one of the main issues with contrivance. It’s treated as an absolute universal rule of storytelling when it isn’t. Again it should be judged on a case by case basis.

[Armagon]

3 hours ago, Ottservia said:

Every story in existence can be considered strung together by coincidences. Storytelling is contrived by its very definition. It’s an inevitability in stories.

While this is true, i feel like boiling down every story to just "coincidences" isn't really doing it justice. What sets apart the "coincidences" from the "not coincidences" is the rate of probability. The best examples here is superheroes, especially the ones who went from ordinary folks -> heroic life. I can believe Peter Parker got bitten by the one radioactive spider that got out of the lab. I can believe Barry Allen was in a chemical lab where lightning just happend to strike one day, giving his is superspeed.

You can have the odd coincidence of course but it shouldn't be making up the bulk of what happens. 

1 hour ago, Sooks said:

All this sort of deviates from my point, I’m talking about what is there in artistic analysis that isn’t subjective, and this is more going off of the implication that there is objective.

The only parts in analysis that can be objective is usually something that's just there. This artist has a particular style they like to paint, this director has a particular style they like to shoot their movies in. Stuff like that can be objective. Now whether it was gotten right is subjective. "This artist has a particular style they like to paint but i feel that they aren't doing a good job with it", that's subjective.

Objectivity in the arts is just the facts about something, subjectivity in the arts is how you feel about it. And no, the "rules" are not objective. To quote Captain Barbossa from Curse of the Black Pearl, "the code is simply more of a guideline than actual rules". Disregard the fact that At World's End completely contradicts that but you can apply that to the arts. The reason debates exist is because everyone can have different viewpoints on the same thing. If literally everybody agreed on something, then there wouldn't be discussion but the human mind does not work that way. To end it off, i will tie this to what i said in my reply to Otts above. I agree that stories shouldn't be relying on coincidences but it's not like that's a rule you have to follow. Whether or not you should is a different matter but some things did earn their cult classic status by not following the rules. Hell, some things straight-up earned prestige by not following the rules. Case in point: impressionist artists.

Edited November 22, 2020 by Armagon

[Sooks]

5 minutes ago, Armagon said:

The only parts in analysis that can be objective is usually something that's just there. This artist has a particular style they like to paint, this director has a particular style they like to shoot their movies in. Stuff like that can be objective. Now whether it was gotten right is subjective. "This artist has a particular style they like to paint but i feel that they aren't doing a good job with it", that's subjective.

Objectivity in the arts is just the facts about something, subjectivity in the arts is how you feel about it.

Right, exactly, I feel like it isn’t really possible to analyze or discuss without getting into subjectiveness territory is my point, because when one talks about the facts of the art in discussion or analysis it is usually to prove their point.

For an example from this thread, the Heirs of Fate DLC requires everyone to trust Kana before they can use the Yato (objective), therefore a theme of the game is trust (subjective)

Edited November 22, 2020 by Sooks

[Ottservia]

1 minute ago, Sooks said:

Right, exactly, I feel like it isn’t really possible to analyze or discuss without getting into subjectiveness territory is my point, because when one talks about the facts of the art in discussion or analysis it is usually to prove their point.

For an example from this thread, the Heirs of Fate DLC requires everyone to trust Kana before they can use the Yato (objective), therefore a theme of the game is trust (subjective)

And that is where I think you’re viewing it with a shallow mindset. That plot point in heirs of fate can be used as evidence to make the argument that Fates’s central theme is about trust. It is a far more informed opinion than simply saying “Well I just think fates is boring”. That statement does not lend itself to discussion where as the statement of “This story has x theme because of Y evidence” does lend itself to a more critical discussion. It isn’t about subjectivity vs objectivity. It is about using objective facts to create more informed opinions and perspectives.

[Sooks]

2 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

And that is where I think you’re viewing it with a shallow mindset. That plot point in heirs of fate can be used as evidence to make the argument that Fates’s central theme is about trust.

That’s exactly what I’m saying.

2 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

It isn’t about subjectivity vs objectivity. It is about using objective facts to create more informed opinions and perspectives.

What message did you garner from what you quoted?

This is what I’m saying.

Well minus that first part but it’s only saying that subjectivity exists and will exist, not that it varies or something.