|
Post by rep on Aug 10, 2009 17:08:20 GMT -5
Actually, Rep, it came up in the chat one night about the feasability of dropping a show. I think the vast majority of people were strongly against it. Anyways the way I see it, 4 segments is not the same as 4 RPs. I believe I was talking to Toast_err who said that one time he wrote something like an 8,000 word RP for a fed, because it was necessary for his storyline or something. I think that's ridiculous. I would have even split that up into 8 parts if it was here. But that's the thing. It's if I was here. I always felt that for ACW, there was no need to put a word limit on segments because there was never the need to grind out big segments all the time. Just do what's needed. We've seen large segments and small segments. Heck, I think combined my two solo segments today came up to about 700 words. But ACW has always been like this, particularly in the early days when most segments must have been written in about 10-15 minutes (no disrespect to anyone from that time). So I've always had the mentality that even if you write a 200 word segment, so long as it gets the point across, then you're doing okay. Of course this has its problems. I have never been successful in an RP-only fed because honestly, unless about 3 events occured in the RP I would struggle to think of material for anything beyond maybe 1,500 words at a stretch. But whatevers, ACW will always be the fed for me and I prefer the fact that you can just write a small amount if that's all that's needed. Obviously, if you were splitting a single pre-match interveiw into 3 segments then there'd be cause for concern, but there's never been anything stopping people splitting a story up into four segments across the course of a show (in fact I think a series I wrote for Winter Discontent 2005 was 7 segments). I think the point I'm trying to make is that you don't have to be writing 8,000 words a show to make up four large RPs for ACW. Just always do what's necessary in a segment. Sometimes not very much goes on in a segment at all but because you're writing four seperate segments, that's what has to be done and you end up writing 3000 words for four segments. Sometimes that's just the case. But nobody should feel obligated to write four segments and have them all be huge long RPs. But is there a reasonable point as to why a show shouldn't be dropped?
|
|
Jason Freeman
Competition Judge
Long Island Iced Free
Posts: 3,271
|
Post by Jason Freeman on Aug 10, 2009 17:11:27 GMT -5
Well, yeah, I think segments that are overly long are kinda tiring. Like, they aren't fun to read. Not that there aren't exceptions. For example the contract signing segment before OE with me and AK was extremely extremely long but at the same time I felt that was necessary to get the point across and made it a bit more "epic" and well paced. But for just regular segments I dont see the point. The big thing is though when segments are long but not for a storyline purpose. Storyline segments I think adds to the feud if they are long and well structured, but random segments such as (Sorry about this CP) Chris Phenomenal's radio interviews and stuff were WAY too long for the fact that they were above all kinda pointless.
Danny Mainer was also kind of guilty at doing segments that were at times a bit tiring to read. Same as the Second Coming. At times I think it works and at times I think it doesnt. Dan frequently writes short but sweet type segments and they are extremely effective. So does the Senator. Another thing, like Rep's segments (NO OFFENSE HERE THIS TIME IM NOT JUST TRYING TO MESS WITH YOU AS A JOKE) I feel personally that they are too long especially because it is a bunch of NPC's that really are just doing random things and doesnt have that much relevance. It gets tiring to read.
So yeah, I think the length of segments thing. Nobody should strive for a segment to be the longest thing ever. Some segments have the potential to be too short, and while I think important segments that are one of the centerpoints of a feud or something should be long and well written and etc, a normal promo or segment that really has nothing to do with storyline should be kept a bit shorter than some people tend to do it at (as I said, such as CP)
|
|
Jason Freeman
Competition Judge
Long Island Iced Free
Posts: 3,271
|
Post by Jason Freeman on Aug 10, 2009 17:15:37 GMT -5
And cmon, you seriously want EVERY feud to be three months? I think that's really stretching it, and would get extremely boring. Ive never done a three month feud, except for maybe the one with Dan White though it was broken up the last month by the IN title hell in a cell feud, though we did have our feud closing match after three months.
But, really, that would get very tiring if every feud was the same for three months. Obviously you acnt do this with title feuds either, because then we'd get four challengers a year, not counting mid month stuff, and that would be rediculous. Though personally three month title feuds COULD be done amazingly (Punk/Hardy is one of my favorite feuds ever) but it would just not work for an Efed. Because nobody would want the same guy fighting for the title three times, not to mention the two shows a week thing causes you to have every opportunity to build up a good feud over one month. Two months is enough for a great epic feud. I think there should be a couple two month feuds, and maybe on a rare occasion a three monther if the situation calls for it. Youd have to be very good to pull it off however, one time I remember that working amazingly was BK/Flamingo which was even longer than three months but it was kept interesting through various methods and pulled off amasingly. But I personally would not want to see those all the time. I mean im
|
|
|
Post by xs3 on Aug 10, 2009 17:19:55 GMT -5
I dont dislike Rep I just think it's fun <_< THE REPROBATE SILENTLY WEEPS WHILE YOU CONTINUE WITH YOUR MOCKERIES.
|
|
|
Post by rep on Aug 10, 2009 17:40:55 GMT -5
My segments aren't long at all, Freeman. I also take issue with anyone who says that any of my characters are NPCs. They aren't jobbers, they're my characters, and I'm writing them in segments. Anyone who says that they are NPCs either misread the segments or don't even read them at all.
Nice to know that one of our main eventers have never even done a feud as short as three months. That's very pathetic, Freeman. I'm not taking a shot at you, I'm speaking the truth. Anyone who can't keep an angle fresh for more than three months isn't big time material.
You call having four challengers a year ridiculous? I agree... four is WAY too much. At most you should have two or three. I know that this all sounds mind blowing to you because you watch the WWE where title feuds go on for one week, but some of us like to actually write things of substance.
You don't have to be "amazingly good" to keep a three month feud fresh. Anyone should be able to do that. Anyone with a working mind and average writing skills can get the job done. If you can't plan out a feud for three months, what the hell are you doing?
|
|
Jason Freeman
Competition Judge
Long Island Iced Free
Posts: 3,271
|
Post by Jason Freeman on Aug 10, 2009 17:53:28 GMT -5
Yeah Rep because its fair to everybody else for two people to get title shots a year. So nobody else gets a chance, right? Thats ridiculous. The fact that I dont do three month feuds does not mean that I am not "big time" material. And I still say good luck getting every opponent you ever face to decide the match results with you
|
|
|
Post by rep on Aug 10, 2009 17:58:08 GMT -5
Thus far I've been doing it for the majority of my time fedding, so I don't need your petty luck. Immaturity rules now, I guess? If winning matches is your primary concern then you're in the wrong game.
Sorry to break it to you, but three month long main event feuds is a joke. If there are two or three people good enough to main event, they should be getting the title shots and the main event angles. It's that simple.
|
|
TJ
Experienced Member
I LOVE DAN WHITE
Good, you're working out Freeman....you're gonna need to
Posts: 848
|
Post by TJ on Aug 10, 2009 18:24:15 GMT -5
You call having four challengers a year ridiculous? I agree... four is WAY too much. At most you should have two or three. I know that this all sounds mind blowing to you because you watch the WWE where title feuds go on for one week, but some of us like to actually write things of substance. Ah, Randy and Triple H have owned WWE since January, variety is always a good thing. 4 is way too much? I say 3 month feuds are good but not ever feud be 3 months. Like what just happened to you, Rep, your feud partner dropped out, and you probably had those 3 months planned out, which now leaves your lost for 3 months. 2 month feuds are good for pretty much everyone, 3 month should be for titles and/or between Main Event writers because they are there for a reason. 1 months are good too for maybe boosting someone or just get someone from one feud to another.
|
|
|
Post by rep on Aug 10, 2009 18:29:23 GMT -5
Our feud was actually planned for five months with room to go for another seven. People dropping out wasn't a factor in my problem. People who intentionally set out to go less than two months is what I was referring to.
As I said though, three months should be the MINIMUM.
|
|
|
Post by Dan White on Aug 10, 2009 18:34:23 GMT -5
Some of my best feuds have been short term deals. I loved the work Mark and I did for Ragnarok, and that was just a 1-month feud. I don't mind if people don't remember it, because I enjoyed it.
|
|
TJ
Experienced Member
I LOVE DAN WHITE
Good, you're working out Freeman....you're gonna need to
Posts: 848
|
Post by TJ on Aug 10, 2009 18:53:40 GMT -5
Our feud was actually planned for five months with room to go for another seven. People dropping out wasn't a factor in my problem. People who intentionally set out to go less than two months is what I was referring to. As I said though, three months should be the MINIMUM. No I knew what you were referring to, I was using that as an example why people don't need to have 3 months feuds. I think as long as you have something memorable happen, or notable happen in the feud, it doesn't matter how long.
|
|
VorteX
Experienced Member
Stay a while...and listen.
Posts: 723
|
Post by VorteX on Aug 10, 2009 19:00:10 GMT -5
Unless you are trying for something epic, I really feel three months should be a maximum. Case in point, while I enjoyed our feud Rep you personally felt 'pushed to the side' because I altered my focus from our three month feud to the Entertainment Title. I've said this before and I'll say it again, there is only so much material you can come up with for that amount of time. I've always been a fan of feuding more than once with a person instead of feuding once for a large time span. It just keeps things 'fresher' if you will.
As for two shows a week, sometimes it does get a bit tiring but then I write one segment instead of my usual two. I don't really know what people think about them but I try to stick to the 'less is more' formula that has been spoken of here. If I throw all of my creative ideas out there every week sooner or later I'm going to get tired of writing and you are going to get tired of reading. This is especially true with my type of writing style, I like the complexities but if you throw too much of that stuff out there people will lose interest no matter how great you are at describing a scene.
I think the point is to really find balance. At times I've went with the story when I could have potentially won a title, and other times I tried juggling more than once thing at once to keep everyone interested in what I have to write.
|
|
|
Post by rep on Aug 10, 2009 19:31:47 GMT -5
If three is seen as a maximum among people I don't even know what to think.
|
|
|
Post by Dan White on Aug 10, 2009 19:35:07 GMT -5
Shit happens, that's why. You cannot guarrantee that everything will go hunky dory. That's why I've never planned anything more than a three-month feud and even when I have (with Freeman), it becomes rather tiresome. I much prefer doing feuds you can always go back to, like Senator and I have.
|
|
|
Post by Yoko Satoshi on Aug 10, 2009 19:39:25 GMT -5
I want to point out that the system doesn't rate you show to show, it's over a period of time. And since there are multiple criteria, someone doing two excellent segments per show could just as easily beat someone doing four ok ones.
We set the cap at four to stop spammers from doing six, ten, sometimes more, not to mandate four per show.
It's also not necessary to do four just because you think you have to to stay competitive. There are several examples, recent ones, where Guy A has beaten Guy B with a massive overkill in that area of the math, and could have still won with that number cut in half, due to the rest of the equation. The criteria only matter once united, anyway.
If your story requires four per show, then go ahead. But remember this, inflating your numbers will not help you in any other area, and in fact may decrease other areas and lower your overall, because adding numbers for the sake of numbers usually brings down the quality of your work.
If you're having trouble with creativity, or time, or stress, or overload, cut back on the number. It may not affect you as much as you might assume, due to the wide range of criteria in use. You're more than the sum of your parts.
Write and have fun, don't kill your mental wellness trying to push yourself to win imaginary awards. If you aren't having fun, then you're doing it wrong. Just put your heart into a story that makes you happy, and it's bound to shine through your work to your score and to the readers.
|
|