Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
No description provided.
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
No description provided.
try the Source
I see what you’re saying, but it doesn’t make that much sense to me. You’re saying that you didn’t want confirmation of a bad end BEFORE the story ended, I get that. But you’re also saying that you didn’t want the bad end period, which contradicts the fact that you don’t like the fact that the good guys always win. I’m kinda confused as to what you’re trying to say here. (Not trying to come off as rude, sorry if I am)
Have you ever played an AA game before? Because when it comes to the AA series as a whole, you should keep the phrase, “Focus on the journey, not the destination” in mind. It’s the process of figuring the case out, seeing all of the funny/dramatic parts, and seeing the twists and turns in the story. That, and the fact is, almost all AA games have a bad ending, so it would make sense that this one has one too. And honestly, did you ever once think that the story would have a true bad end? Fact is, the AA games always start with the end, and even when the good guys win… They may not have completely won.
-Jen
“NeoArtimus”
Yes, that is pretty much it. I didn’t mean this to turn into a rant about this specific thing (Turnabout Storm), it’s just the topic of story telling, and specifically the Good Guys = Win thing, is kind of like a splinter under a nail for me.
I appreciate the guy is running a contest and is doing extra work to make the thing more interesting, but I really think this should’ve been left until the real story was over, or (and likely and as well) not had an example of what a “bad ending” would be.
Life’s a journey, not a destination
I think I understand your frustration at such a thing like this happening now. It’s kind of like on Full Metal Alchemist Brotherhood where everything is in its bleakest in the final battle and I have no idea on who will live and who will die. Not to mention I wonder how will everyone can beat the Big Bad. I suppose showing what happens after the bad guy wins and calling it a bad ending will just break all the tension that was build up, therefore making the show itself less interesting than it was before and there’s a chance that you’ll most likely be thinking about when it will end by now. Am I close?
@Spinach
Hey, you should at least try to take some time to understand TSP’s opinion rather than jumping in and insulting him like that. It’s like, while in a journey you don’t know which path you took is the right way then in the middle of the road you meet someone or see some sign posts that basically tells you what happens if you go on the other paths and the path you’re going is the right one. In a way, it’s another form of being spoiled.
Listen you little shit, I know it’s about the god damned journey. The point is that you’re not supposed to be so blatantly reminded about that before the story ends, because it breaks the fucking illusion. If the author is going to give up to the inevitability of Good Guys Always Win, they may as well do something interesting with it.
This is just getting to the last ten minutes of your average action show episode, when everything is at its bleakest, and being told “don’t worry, the heroes live, status quo will be intact for the next episode”. It’s bad.
I have a feeling that you’ve never played an Ace Attorney game in your life.
“Well what’s the point in playing the case if I know I’m gonna win?”
“What’s the point of watching The Hobbit if I know he’s gonna get the ring?”
That’s you. That’s how dumb you sound.
It’s the journey, Smiling, not the destination.
Well, yes, being able to lose is what we expect from a game. But I’ve yet to see a movie or book adaptation of a game that goes along as if the player had messed up in the end.
This is kind of a pointless rant, I’ll admit. I think the reason I really like stuff like The Walking Dead or Game of Thrones is because there are no true “good guys”, and absolute failure for a protagonist or “fan favourite” isn’t out of the question; for most stories the meat is in how we go from A to B, but what I find really interesting is in not even knowing if B is where we’ll end up.
I can’t really complain that “good guys always win” happens so often, as that is what most people want to see, especially for more light-hearted things like pony (or pony-based murder trials…). Hell, wouldn’t it be something if Rainbow Dash actually did it? That she’s a stone-cold killer or it was an accident and lucking out at having circumstance cover it up while she’s consuming herself in guilt and fear? But that’s impossible, Rainbow Dash is a Good Guy, her friends are all Good Guys. The main witness against her is Gilda, a Bad Guy, and the prosecution is Trixie, another Bad Guy; that alone (not to mention their presentation as utterly heartless sociopaths) makes the outcome clear. The outcry from having the good guys lose (or actually be bad) and the bad guys win would dwarf the nonsensical grumblings from a few bitter warts like me.
But the whole bad ending thing in the contest is basically a what if ending about what if Fluttershy never showed up to help them, what if Phoenix screws up his final cross-examination and Press Fluttershy at the wrong part of her testimony. Even though it never happens at THAT PART of the story, it’s not exactly saying that it’s not possible to get a bad ending in the cross-examination against Sonata’s testimony. If it’s anything like the game, then there will be plenty of ways Phoenix can fail and get a new bad ending against the true villian. Everything depends on not Phoenix making too many mistakes.
At the last part of the first game, the villian can trick you(Phoenix) into revealing the right evidence at the wrong time and make it null and void due to your impatience. It’s possible the same thing can happen with Sonata.
Also this isn’t something I personally have against this artist or series; regular
stalkersposters here have probably noticed I rant a lot on anything related to storytelling, in particular when related to infallible protagonists.After the story’s over really wouldn’t be much better. It’s still telling you “this can never happen, so we’re showing it to you because it’s too ridiculous to ever happen”. At least, though, it would be happening after everything’s already done for and can’t “interfere” with the story (unless someone goes all “alternate ending!” on you).
My opinion is pretty simple, I think. Showing the ending of a story with a known unavoidable outcome should not be done (because we already know it’s the unavoidable outcome), or be done at the very beginning (allowing for things like flashbacks or nonlinear storytelling, playing with known information, making it a sort of a puzzle, etc.).
Presenting something like this so late doesn’t serve to make the story more interesting. It’s destroying the already frail illusion about a possible “bad” outcome by already saying it won’t happen.
So part of what you’re saying is: that you would rather see this kind of thing after the story is over rather than before it?
I would if on the last commercial break they’d show the villain winning with a big “THIS IS NOT THE REAL ENDING” disclaimer.
I know the good guys always win, and the bad guys are always horrifically evil. It’s what people expect and want, and it’s the easiest to pull off with in a decent manner.
But shoving it in our faces just before the end is a bit much. That sort of thing should either be done at the very start or not at all.
Did you hate all the MLP two-parters because you knew the Mane Six would beat the villian?
Well yeah, no point in “not” making it since we know from the very beginning they will win. Now, what it IS interesting is seeing HOW they will achieve such thing, considering the odds are against them.