Hard Light Productions Forums
Modding, Mission Design, and Coding => The FRED Workshop => Topic started by: Lorric on December 25, 2012, 11:40:34 pm
-
I've got a 36 message message chain and it stops at message 30. It should be easy enough to just start a new chain with the last 6 messages to finish it off, but I just wondered if that's the problem I ran into? Do you know?
-
You can have a max of 30 messages queued at one time. So basically unless they have already been sent even a second event won't do it for you. You need to delay the event until there is time for some of them being sent.
Note this is for all messages not just send-message-list so if you have that many queued and there are other things going on those messages may be lost as well based on their priority.
Also if you run debug you should be seeing a log message about the message queue being full.
-
You can have a max of 30 messages queued at one time. So basically unless they have already been sent even a second event won't do it for you. You need to delay the event until there is time for some of them being sent.
Note this is for all messages not just send-message-list so if you have that many queued and there are other things going on those messages may be lost as well based on their priority.
Also if you run debug you should be seeing a log message about the message queue being full.
Thanks. I thought it must have a 30 message limit per chain, but it was best to be sure if I could be sure in case it was something else.
I've already removed the excess messages from the chain, and made a second chain with the remaining 6 messages set to kick in after the first chain of 30 is complete, and it works perfectly.
Thanks :)
-
Don't use send-message-list, it makes adding dialogue skips and checkpoints to your missions a horrible pain in the ass
-
Don't use send-message-list, it makes adding dialogue skips and checkpoints to your missions a horrible pain in the ass
That shouldn't be a problem for me. I'm simply splitting my missions up that have a lot of talk in them. When the talking is done, you move on to the next mission for the action.
I would have no idea how to do something advanced like that anyway :D
-
Don't use send-message-list, it makes adding dialogue skips and checkpoints to your missions a horrible pain in the ass
That shouldn't be a problem for me. I'm simply splitting my missions up that have a lot of talk in them. When the talking is done, you move on to the next mission for the action.
I would have no idea how to do something advanced like that anyway :D
There are tutorials for it.
-
Sometimes I use send-message-list to reduce the number of events slightly. For example, you have an enemy ship that gets destroyed that has a directive associated with it. You want the directive to come complete as soon as the ship is destroyed, but you may want the message announcing its destruction to come a few seconds later. Rather than chaining (or is-event-true-delay) with a separate event, I just use a send-message-list instance with a 3000 millisecond pre-delay and add it to the main destruction event.
-
Is there any particular reason for limiting it to 30? If not, perhaps we could set it higher for the Inferno build?
-
Why would you want it to be higher? I think that's a reasoned way of FRED to tame sadistic fredders that want to spam innocent poor players.
Perhaps it should even be lower, like 20 or 10.
If I want to read literature I'll read a book, thank you very nice.
-
Ha. If you play my campaign if I finish it, you're going to suck my story up and you're going to like it, damn it! :lol:
Anyway, there will be no "Wing Commander Saga" style forced to sit through minutes of text issues in mine. Seperate story and combat missions and time compression if even that's not enough will be available.
-
But seriously though. Less is more, always. At the end when you have written the script, try to cut the dialogues in half. Then halve it again. Then see if you can cut some more.
There's always the tendency to over-dialogue something, perhaps spending 6 to 7 lines of dialogue to say something that could be just hinted at in an half-comment.
I'm no writer, but I really believe this stuff. It's amazingly similar to my own profession, where I get to one solution and then I try to simplify, then simplify some more and then simplify once again, until it's impossible to put it more simple than it already is. Iterative process and so on.
Just my two cents.
-
I'll simply go with what feels right.
I am aware of course that this is a game and not a book, but at the same time I do want a story, and not just a "functional" story, just there as an excuse to blast stuff and nothing more. It would be hollow for me without one. Having one also thus increases the odds that I'll complete the project too I feel. I could turn out the odd mission just for being a mission, but not a campaign without a story to string it together. I don't think it will be any more text heavy than your average campaign with a story, certainly not the big epic mods anyway. But if down the road I do feel the need to unload with a lot of text, then I will. The 36 message mission only takes 3mins 36secs to get through. And then it will be on to the "b" part of the mission - the combat. The "a" part will never be needed by the player again, unless they want to view it again.
-
You will be a better writer by learning to cut. There's no downside. Your story will be stronger.
-
You will be a better writer by learning to cut. There's no downside. Your story will be stronger.
I'm not sure what there would be to cut. There won't be people using twice as many words to say half as much or engaging in small talk. And like I said, message chains are time consuming to create. There isn't going to be anything not worth the trouble of putting in there.
-
Once you delve into the craft of writing you'll find there's always something to cut. As a (professionaly published, fwiw) writer I can tell you that even when you finish a rough draft that you've buttoned down to the best of your ability, you have room to lose about a third of your word count.
-
Once you delve into the craft of writing you'll find there's always something to cut. As a (professionaly published, fwiw) writer I can tell you that even when you finish a rough draft that you've buttoned down to the best of your ability, you have room to lose about a third of your word count.
Well, I guess we'll just have to see. I will tailor the project to my target audience. And the target audience for this project... is me :D
However, at the same time, I will be trying to stay faithful to Spoon's WoD story too, which I am fond of. So others may also like it. Spoon himself made that I'm sure primarily for himself. Yet others liked it, and it inspired me.
-
I would NOT recommend using send-message-list, it tends to work in a different way of what you'd expect.
For example, any message you send with that sexp that includes a ship that was NOT in the mission when the sexp triggered, will display as an "outside" source, like command does.
Or worst, if your missions failed and your message-chain sexp already triggered, the dialogue will continue until it ends...
I cannot express the amount of frustration this provokes in me, I've seen several campaigns have this little annoying issue that for me, is an immersion breaker.
About dialogue lenght and all that, Luis and Battuta pretty much stated what I believe of this matter as well, dialogue (in missions) should stay as short and far away from combat as possible, I've found that this is a work to be done as Luis said, in an iterative way.
-
It has its uses, just not universal ones.
-
You will be a better writer by learning to cut. There's no downside. Your story will be stronger.
There's much truth to this. (Antoine de Saint Exupéry said, "It seems that perfection is attained not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing more to take away." -- which I'm sure you've heard before.) Think of how immersive the FS2 main campaign is, and then go look at how little text there actually is in the command briefings and debriefings.
In comparison with FS2, some of the ST:R command briefings are practically novellas. Sometimes I wonder whether that means there's unnecessary stuff there, or the story requires all that information, or I'm a naturally verbose storyteller. Though I did spend an inordinate amount of time rewriting, expanding, trimming, editing, and tweaking them ad nauseam (sometimes literally), so they've seen plenty of refinement.
-
BP is incredibly wordy compared to the :v: missions too. It's probably unnecessary.
-
Most of the verbiosity of BP happens in the debriefings, personal logs and so on, which are not that intrusive. Although there's a lot of dialogue as well in-game. I agree with Goober that FS2 is amazingly thin, with very small snippets of dialogue you get the gist of what is happening perfectly.
Although to be fair, there's next to zero character investment in FS2 apart from Snipes in-game (Command lol) and Petrarch in the briefings.
-
One of the reasons I admire FS2 so much is that it's precisely on target. It says exactly what it needs to say to accomplish its goal, and nothing more. Totally functional. And ironically, that plays back into the game's themes in a cool meta way.
-
BP is incredibly wordy compared to the :v: missions too. It's probably unnecessary.
I'd say that it's BP that's perfect in that regard. It's character-driven, so it needs more dialogue in order to make the characters actually visible. That's what I was missing the most in FS2. It had too few characters, in real military pilots from the same squadron more or less know each other. FS2, by giving you generic, nameless redshirts as wingmen, had a serious immersion problem in my eyes. I know the concept of the game and all that, but it's simply unrealistic. Not to mention that world beyond missions simply didn't seem to exist, unlike eg. in Wing Commander or X-W Alliance. Fiction viewer entries in BP pretty much fix this, filling pretty much the same role as cutscenes in other games.
-
I disagree pretty strongly with you about the writing in FS2. I think it's a much more successful story than Wing Commander or XWA - in fact I'd put it in an entirely separate league. Rather than being a fun pulpy space opera adventure, it has something to say about pulpy space opera adventures and science fiction and the human condition.
-
First time I played FS2 I had a sense of befuddlement at the ending, a complete wt****ism and became quite angry at it. That was 13 years ago. However I had to go back at the game, and when I did so (mere months later) I appreciated what the entire game was trying to convey.
The funny ironic twist happened later. The next game that I played with the same kind of enthusiasm that I had for FS was Mass Effect. The first answers to your questions with a big "**** you" and I loved it, while the other tried to mercifully and slowly answer me everything and I felt raped.
-
These comments are interesting.
I would NOT recommend using send-message-list, it tends to work in a different way of what you'd expec
For example, any message you send with that sexp that includes a ship that was NOT in the mission when the sexp triggered, will display as an "outside" source, like command does.
Or worst, if your missions failed and your message-chain sexp already triggered, the dialogue will continue until it ends...
I cannot express the amount of frustration this provokes in me, I've seen several campaigns have this little annoying issue that for me, is an immersion breaker.
About dialogue lenght and all that, Luis and Battuta pretty much stated what I believe of this matter as well, dialogue (in missions) should stay as short and far away from combat as possible, I've found that this is a work to be done as Luis said, in an iterative way.
I have these things covered, but thanks for the advice. I figured this stuff out as I went by trial end error, but again I do appreciate the advice, especially as a beginner, and wouldn't want to discourage you or others from giving it. Initially I got around this with an arrival cue and a seperate chain. However, although there is some use of ships in my early missions, it shouldn't be a problem, because once I learned of the #name ability, that is what I will always use. Why take the risk, just for a little white box around a ship?
Mission failure I have scripted to cut immediately to the debrief.
I also believe in cutting dialogue in actual combat situations as much as possible, to leave the player free to get on with the fighting. I had plans for dialogue in a later mission which I have made, but it's a hard and fast mission, and it's simply not workable. The player (or at least me) needs all their focus on the mission. In the end, I deleted all the plans I had for talking in the combat section of the mission. From a storyteller point of view, I was disappointed. But I knew it was the correct decision. Most of my dialogue takes place before the enemy show up or when the mission is complete, and that is the plan for the whole campaign.
You will be a better writer by learning to cut. There's no downside. Your story will be stronger.
There's much truth to this. (Antoine de Saint Exupéry said, "It seems that perfection is attained not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing more to take away." -- which I'm sure you've heard before.) Think of how immersive the FS2 main campaign is, and then go look at how little text there actually is in the command briefings and debriefings.
In comparison with FS2, some of the ST:R command briefings are practically novellas. Sometimes I wonder whether that means there's unnecessary stuff there, or the story requires all that information, or I'm a naturally verbose storyteller. Though I did spend an inordinate amount of time rewriting, expanding, trimming, editing, and tweaking them ad nauseam (sometimes literally), so they've seen plenty of refinement.
I haven't heard that before. Not a bad saying I guess.
Freespace 2 however is an exception to me. It still provides you with a lot of information. But not the classic rich information dump you see in many a space opera. What it does do though is tease and tantalise. It succeeds by getting it’s hooks into you, and then letting your imagination do the rest. And giving you a little something called FRED to let that imagination go to work. The results of that are all over this site.
The Shivans in particular are examples of this. They make you ask the question “why?” a lot. You want to know more about them. Presumably they also wanted this to get their hooks into you so you’d buy a Freespace 3. After all, from that interview-thing, it was time to go to “Shivan-town” in Freespace 3. I’m sure we’d have picked that place apart and got the answers we were looking for in a Freespace 3. The story was not finished. It’s like getting a trilogy and not reading the third book.
While nothing like as much as you describe, there has been plenty of refining with what I’ve wrote. Lots of little changes.
I like a story to have depth. I want to present something here, for all of you. Though anyone who checks it out will need about 45-50mins of free time. Though not all at once necessarily but in total. They also must not care about having the game Star Control 2 spoiled for them.
Star Control 2 was a big inspiration for Spoon in making Wings of Dawn, which is what my campaign is built on. Star Control 2 is a game that is extremely heavy on dialogue, you can sit and chat with aliens for literally hours. And enjoy every second of it. Indeed, you even have to PAY to access much of the game’s back story. In-game, not real money of course.
Now I have two videos, each about the same length. The first is not some epic sequence, though it is important for the game. I chose it because it is something you could easily slash down by a large amount. The question is, do you think it should be? It easily could be, but in the end, I don’t think it needs to be at all. Here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_570751&feature=iv&src_vid=wKQWeMJe6-c&v=zEqvIZgt0jY
The second video is after the player has completed the game and shares his thoughts on it. He has been deeply moved by the experience, and just look at what he was driven to create after it. Because the game is so rich. I do not own Star Control 2, nor will I, but I LOVE the game’s story and universe, and this is the second time I’ve watched someone let’s play it from start to finish. Here’s the second video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYVaEoWHmPo
That video starts in the middle for me. If it does for you, put it to the beginning.
That could not have been achieved without the game being rich and dialogue heavy. I must show Spoon. I think he will like this.
Trying to cut your work down for no other reason than thinking it needs to be cut down just feels like a lack of faith in your own abilities to me. If it feels right, and it’s big and bold, why not leave it that way? Star Control 2 is magnificent.
BP is incredibly wordy compared to the :v: missions too. It's probably unnecessary.
I think the story is Aquarius' strongest point. If you're talking past Aquarius and there's more words than Aquarius there, I wouldn't know. But I wouldn't want Aquarius' story neutered. Of course, voice acting does eliminate the frustrations with in-battle dialogue.
Most of the verbiosity of BP happens in the debriefings, personal logs and so on, which are not that intrusive. Although there's a lot of dialogue as well in-game. I agree with Goober that FS2 is amazingly thin, with very small snippets of dialogue you get the gist of what is happening perfectly.
Although to be fair, there's next to zero character investment in FS2 apart from Snipes in-game (Command lol) and Petrarch in the briefings.
Characters are something my campaign will have. And thus they can't be characters without them talking. Characters do however impose limitations on mission design. There are things I'd like to do, but can't now because I gave the player a set of character wingmen.
BP is incredibly wordy compared to the :v: missions too. It's probably unnecessary.
I'd say that it's BP that's perfect in that regard. It's character-driven, so it needs more dialogue in order to make the characters actually visible. That's what I was missing the most in FS2. It had too few characters, in real military pilots from the same squadron more or less know each other. FS2, by giving you generic, nameless redshirts as wingmen, had a serious immersion problem in my eyes. I know the concept of the game and all that, but it's simply unrealistic. Not to mention that world beyond missions simply didn't seem to exist, unlike eg. in Wing Commander or X-W Alliance. Fiction viewer entries in BP pretty much fix this, filling pretty much the same role as cutscenes in other games.
They can kind of get away with it, because people are dying in droves to the Shivans, and also because the player is on a rocket ship to the top, moving up in the World from squadron to squadron. Alpha 1 is never around long enough to establish relationships.
The "This is command, do this, do that, protect this, scan those, kill them" formula also allows things to be less complicated, as I stated above. Other games use it, while still holding a big picture storyline over a character based one, as Freespace does. Characters are great too, both types of games are. I enjoy both a lot. Freespace also gets a pass on not fleshing out the World, because the Shivans were just all consuming. There wouldn't even be a World if you couldn't stop them. Sure the gane would probably be better with these elements sure, but it doesn't suffer for not having them.
I disagree pretty strongly with you about the writing in FS2. I think it's a much more successful story than Wing Commander or XWA - in fact I'd put it in an entirely separate league. Rather than being a fun pulpy space opera adventure, it has something to say about pulpy space opera adventures and science fiction and the human condition.
I would agree that direct comparisons are wrong. I can't speak for XWA. Freespace and Wing Commander, both universes suck you in, but in a different way. I don't think one story or story style is any better than the other. Just different and tasty flavours of ice cream, if that makes sense :)
-
Wasn't Star Control 2 one of the main inspirations for Mass Effect? I think so.
-
I like a story to have depth. I want to present something here, for all of you. Though anyone who checks it out will need about 45-50mins of free time. Though not all at once necessarily but in total. They also must not care about having the game Star Control 2 spoiled for them.
You now have my full attention.
In regards to the writing though, if you feel you've already pared the dialogue down as far as you can and literally can't pare any further, then fine. But before releasing it, play through a few times pretending that you're new to it. With fresh eyes, look and see if anything stands out as unnecessary or too wordy. The more you look at a work of your own, the more you'll see that you can do better, and there's always room for improvement.
Surely you don't think that Star Control 2, with as much text as it had, didn't have far, far, far more in the rough drafts of the script. And remember that the most terrifying aliens in that game, were also the ones who told you the least about who they were...
It's the Orz, of course.
-
I like a story to have depth. I want to present something here, for all of you. Though anyone who checks it out will need about 45-50mins of free time. Though not all at once necessarily but in total. They also must not care about having the game Star Control 2 spoiled for them.
You now have my full attention.
In regards to the writing though, if you feel you've already pared the dialogue down as far as you can and literally can't pare any further, then fine. But before releasing it, play through a few times pretending that you're new to it. With fresh eyes, look and see if anything stands out as unnecessary or too wordy. The more you look at a work of your own, the more you'll see that you can do better, and there's always room for improvement.
Surely you don't think that Star Control 2, with as much text as it had, didn't have far, far, far more in the rough drafts of the script. And remember that the most terrifying aliens in that game, were also the ones who told you the least about who they were...
It's the Orz, of course.
Well, I've had to read it through several times anyway in the course of testing. Both to weed out errors, and of course to see if it looks right off the A4 and into the game. The second part I do know what you mean, I've done that sort of thing before with long-term things. After having thought something was good. But it wouldn't involve cutting, it would either be additions or changes.
Oh sure. There's no way that you could produce something that damn good straight off the bat. The point I'm trying to make is something doesn't need to be shortened down to be good. Especially in a place like this, I am of course making a game for myself, so I'd plough on regardless even if I thought everyone here would think it sucked. But this debate also extends to the wider HLP, and I wouldn't want people thinking they had to slash their dialogue down drastically or people would dislike their creation. It should go double for HLP, HLP is not inhabited by the kind of ADD mainstream crowd that exists in gaming today who will just skip all text, cutscenes and the game manual ASAP to get to the blasting. The talk has been about cutting, not editing and refining.
-
The fact that you didn't understand the advice any of us gave you does not fill me with hope. Maybe you can go back, read it again, and figure out what we were saying.
-
The fact that you didn't understand the advice any of us gave you does not fill me with hope. Maybe you can go back, read it again, and figure out what we were saying.
You have spoken of cutting, and nothing else. That too many words = bad, no matter what those words are. If you're not talking about cutting, the fault is with you, not me.
-
You have spoken of cutting, and nothing else. That too many words = bad, no matter what those words are. If you're not talking about cutting, the fault is with you, not me.
It's not so much just cutting, it's more of refining. You cook the ore, and skim off the stuff you don't want, leaving only tasty, tasty metals. Batts and co are saying that even if you think you've already skimmed off everything you don't need, if you cook it a little more, you might be able to get a more effective and pure story out.
But like I said, if you're positive that you've already refined it absolutely as much as possible, we'll just have to play and see it ourselves.
-
You have spoken of cutting, and nothing else. That too many words = bad, no matter what those words are. If you're not talking about cutting, the fault is with you, not me.
It's not so much just cutting, it's more of refining. You cook the ore, and skim off the stuff you don't want, leaving only tasty, tasty metals. Batts and co are saying that even if you think you've already skimmed off everything you don't need, if you cook it a little more, you might be able to get a more effective and pure story out.
But like I said, if you're positive that you've already refined it absolutely as much as possible, we'll just have to play and see it ourselves.
It would not surprise me if if I finish the campaign it's my favourite and most powerful part story-wise. I must have watched it play through after finishing it about 10 times, I'm very happy with it.
The mission is ready to go, and believe me I'm tempted to release it into the thread, but it would be best not to as it has significant spoilers.
EDIT: I liked the likening of it to seperating the metal from the ore.
-
It's called cutting. That's the term professional writers use. It's a skill as basic as combining polygons into a mesh or putting events into a mission.
It doesn't mean making everything short and terse, like you seem to think. It means making everything tighter.
-
It's called cutting. That's the term professional writers use. It's a skill as basic as combining polygons into a mesh or putting events into a mission.
It doesn't mean making everything short and terse, like you seem to think. It means making everything tighter.
Well I've never heard of it. I checked my dictionary and it wasn't there, and googled it and looked at wikipedia's disambiguation for cutting. I almost missed it, but there is this from the disambiguation, which must be what you're thinking of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_editing
But even then, it's not in the title, and it's not about writing, and not really applicable I don't think. I don't know how widely this word is in people's vocabulary, but I would avoid using it. I certainly will. I would stick to words like editing or refining. It seems like an obscure reference to me, and easily mistaken for what I took it for.
-
Do you have any professional publication credits? Have you ever taught at a workshop, attended a literary conference, or worked alongside professional writers?
-
Are you a native English speaker?
"cutting" used in the way battuta used it is fairly common. At least I've heard it used that way many, many times.
Anyhow, it sounds to me like you are in a situation I find myself in very, very often. I cut together a video, I write some dialog, make a mission, whatever. By the time I get several hours into it, I like how it is exactly.. but if I'm honest, I like it because I've gotten used to it. I'm too familiar with it. That's when I have someone else take a look. I had to learn to hold my work to the side (as opposed to directly in front of my pride... you know how artist types are.) and accept feedback from trusted individuals because they are trying to help me make my work better, and frankly, I'm not perfect enough to know the best way every single time.
Most times when I do this.. I end up cutting/refining/editing (whatever you want to call it) things out, merging things, and/or changing things altogether. In the end my work ends up even better than what I already thought was good.
-
Do you have any professional publication credits? Have you ever taught at a workshop, attended a literary conference, or worked alongside professional writers?
No. But what are you getting at? If I need these for the word to fall into my vocabulary, you'd be better off not using it.
-
Are you a native English speaker?
"cutting" used in the way battuta used it is fairly common. At least I've heard it used that way many, many times.
Anyhow, it sounds to me like you are in a situation I find myself in very, very often. I cut together a video, I write some dialog, make a mission, whatever. By the time I get several hours into it, I like how it is exactly.. but if I'm honest, I like it because I've gotten used to it. I'm too familiar with it. That's when I have someone else take a look. I had to learn to hold my work to the side (as opposed to directly in front of my pride... you know how artist types are.) and accept feedback from trusted individuals because they are trying to help me make my work better, and frankly, I'm not perfect enough to know the best way every single time.
Most times when I do this.. I end up cutting/refining/editing (whatever you want to call it) things out, merging things, and/or changing things altogether. In the end my work ends up even better than what I already thought was good.
Yes, I am. I AM English in fact.
But why is it so hard for me to find the word used in the way it was then?
As for my stuff, it will be put to the playtesters before final release, if I get that far. Then we'll see what they have to say.
-
Do you have any professional publication credits? Have you ever taught at a workshop, attended a literary conference, or worked alongside professional writers?
No. But what are you getting at? If I need these for the word to fall into my vocabulary, you'd be better off not using it.
As someone with professional publication credits, someone who teaches writing, attends literary conferences, and has worked alongside professional writers, I know the technical language of writing. Just as mission designers, modelers, and coders have technical jargon which you need to learn how to understand to work in those fields, so do writers.
The reason you didn't know that word is because you haven't learned much about writing. This isn't anything to be ashamed of. But now's your chance to start.
-
Do you have any professional publication credits? Have you ever taught at a workshop, attended a literary conference, or worked alongside professional writers?
No. But what are you getting at? If I need these for the word to fall into my vocabulary, you'd be better off not using it.
As someone with professional publication credits, someone who teaches writing, attends literary conferences, and has worked alongside professional writers, I know the technical language of writing. Just as mission designers, modelers, and coders have technical jargon which you need to learn how to understand to work in those fields, so do writers.
The reason you didn't know that word is because you haven't learned much about writing. This isn't anything to be ashamed of. But now's your chance to start.
That's surely a mistake. You don't need jargon to understand things. Unless of course someone is throwing jargon at you. But a general rule in life I would think is to avoid jargon as much as possible, it just trips people up and impedes communication.
I keep typing up things from my past, it's about the third time I've done it, but ultimately I don't want to talk about my past so delete them. I just want you to know I had an exceptionally high literacy level at school, enough to amaze the teachers when I was very young.
I enjoyed creative writing more than just about everything else. So I don't want you to think me completely untalented or inexperienced with this kind of thing. There is however no formal training outside of school, and a creative writing class I took, but that didn't provide any kind of qualification. It was free and a chance to mix with others who were interested in such things.
-
Lorric, do you seriously believe you can learn to FRED without words like 'event'? That you can model without understanding what the word 'mesh' or 'smoothing' means?
All skills have words associated with them. 'Cutting' is a really common word that anyone who's been to college knows. I'm not implying you haven't been to college; I'm just surprised you didn't encounter it there.
-
Lorric, do you seriously believe you can learn to FRED without words like 'event'? That you can model without understanding what the word 'mesh' or 'smoothing' means?
All skills have words associated with them. 'Cutting' is a really common word that anyone who's been to college knows. I'm not implying you haven't been to college; I'm just surprised you didn't encounter it there.
It's a little different, isn't it? Creative writing, at least to me, seems like something that shouldn't really be bound by rules. Although I'm sure you think differently! :)
It just seems to me something that should flow naturally.
In secondary education, I stayed on at school, rather than leave at the earliest possibility. Though didn't attend anything further after that. Unfortunately for me, while I might have loved creative writing, English as an entire subject was actually my second favourite subject. And English, and my favourite subject, History, were both in the same "block" of subjects I could choose from. I couldn't attend both, I had to choose, which was genuinely upsetting. These two subjects I enjoyed far more than any other. English had to be sacrificed.
-
Creative writing isn't bound by rules any more than building 3D models is, Lorric. They're creative pursuits.
They still both have languages attached to them.
-
Creative writing isn't bound by rules any more than building 3D models is, Lorric. They're creative pursuits.
They still both have languages attached to them.
What do you mean by the second point?