• A new LGBTQ+ forum is now being trialed and there have been changes made to the Support and Advice forum. To read more about these updates, click here.
  • Hey Trainers! Be sure to check out Corsola Beach, our newest section on the forums, in partnership with our friends at Corsola Cove! At the Beach, you can discuss the competitive side of the games, post your favorite Pokemon memes, and connect with other Pokemon creators!
  • Due to the recent changes with Twitter's API, it is no longer possible for Bulbagarden forum users to login via their Twitter account. If you signed up to Bulbagarden via Twitter and do not have another way to login, please contact us here with your Twitter username so that we can get you sorted.

Writers' Workshop General Chat Thread

AceTrainer14 pretty much summed up my thoughts on how one should review. But whenever I told people this, they always replied with "we're not gonna sugarcoat the truth!" and crap. Just because you're pointing out a few things you liked doesn't mean you're being too soft. Just like AT14 just said, pointing out only negative stuff gives the writer the thought that they aren't doing anything right and might as well give up. It's not encouraging at all.

If you want someone to listen to your critique, whether you're right about what you're saying or not, the person you're critiquing has to be willing to do so and not discouraged to do so. And they will be discouraged if the critiquer is entirely negative all the time.
 
I find positive reviews are useful too. Knowing what you're doing right is as helpful as knowing what you're doing wrong.

Besides, all authors could use some encouragement

Finally, about sugarcoating the truth. There's something to be said about being honest but at times, it seems that some critics use this as an excuse to be really nasty.
 
AT14 makes him sound like a robot

That's not a bad thing

+++AT14 ONLINE. JUDGING COMPLETE. SCANNING FOR ACADEMY LESSON. BEEP+++
Well he is, but that's beside the point. and what is this about "judging complete?" we all know that never happens.
 
A lot does depend on the personality of the author, imo. I find not getting any reviews at all to be the greatest discouragement; you've no idea if what you've written is good or bad, and you're left with the crushing thought that nobody even bothered to read. So bearing that mind, I usually don't mind what type of feedback I get, since even bad feedback suggests that they bothered reading what I've written. But there are authors who are more sensitive and uncertain, so they need more encouragement.

So usually I go with a balanced style of reviewing and let authors pick what they want from it. If they only want the criticism they can ignore the encouragement. If they only want the encouragement they can ignore the criticism. If they want both they can take both.
 
I agree. When it comes to writing reviews, balanced is the way to got, particularly if you're not sure how the author reacts to criticism. If you're one of those DON'T SUGARCOAT HERPDERP I'M A TOUGHGUY types, then the author might be offended and proceed to not listen to anything you have to say. That's not the point of reviewing. If you throw in some compliments, then the author is much more likely to look on your review with favor and take your criticisms into consideration. It's like our old constructive criticism vs flaming discussion. It doesn't matter that the reviewer doesn't think they're flaming, it's the author's opinion that matters (by the way, that thread should be required reading for all aspiring reviewers).

AT14 makes him sound like a robot

That's not a bad thing

+++AT14 ONLINE. JUDGING COMPLETE. SCANNING FOR ACADEMY LESSON. BEEP+++

I am laughing so hard right now.
 
You guys are just so right. Bulbagarden is the only place I like getting reviews at these days because you all have the right ideas about reviewing. Every now and then I will get a review I like on ff.net, but also every now and then, I get bullcrap like this (a recent review I got for A Drastic Change):

I don't think I liked this fic, sorry. It's evident that you have a better grasp on grammar and spelling and technical stuff than most other people on this site, but your content and characterization are lacking.

This story reads like one big Ike pity fest and trying to shove into everyone's faces that "Hey! We should all have been excited that Ike returned and screw all of you who said he wasn't returning!" No one likes a gloater (and even if other people do this, that doesn't mean you stoop to their level and do it too). Making Ike the "poor victim whom everyone forgot" and that he "deserved so much to return to Smash" is making your bias evident and not telling the story in an objective way, which kills stories especially if it's told in a third person objective narrator form.

Your Chrom bashing is really annoying, too. Yeah, it's quite clear that you hate him because you make all the Smashers DOUBT his story and Marth doesn't want him as a descendant and that he would "try to talk some sense into him" about not joining Smash. Because it's SO EFFING UNBELIEVABLE that the lord of the most recent and best sold FE game may get a spot in SSB, and that Marth can't have a descendant in a renamed Altea from the future? Seems selective considering all the "weird" universes the characters in Smash come from. Overall, it's your anti-Chrom bias speaking.

The way you feel that Ike is "entitled" is also annoying. Because there is absolutely no precedent for characters getting cut in Smash, right? (See: Roy, who ended up not making it into Brawl. I don't see why Ike is so "entitled" to return to SSB4 while people who want Roy back are apparently just "fanboys who never played his game". Bias much?) I like Ike as well, but you just REALLY seem to think the sun shines out of his arse. The amount of bias is just painful to read because you seem to believe that Ike is entitled to return when several other characters didn't, and a lot of this is just your opinion that you're shoving onto the lot of us.

Your dialogue also feels rather forced and unnatural, which is also not so pleasant to read. Can you imagine real people actually saying the things your character are in this manner? Because I really can't and it doesn't flow well.

tl;dr You REALLY need to work on being more objective in your writing and making your dialogue and characters sound natural. A story told in first person can be as subjective as it wants as long as it's good. Third person stories being subjective? Not on my watch.

You can't tell me that this is acceptable, whether this person made good points or not. I never see people behaving like this on Bulbagarden.
 
AT14 makes him sound like a robot

That's not a bad thing

+++AT14 ONLINE. JUDGING COMPLETE. SCANNING FOR ACADEMY LESSON. BEEP+++

Oh please, that is ridiculous! Such a hilarious, impossible idea - of course I am not a robot. It's not as though I was a machine programmed and built by WW mythical legend 'Gastly's Mama' in order to replace him, with the ability to endlessly plan events and conjure up rules at will... please, that would be silly.......



I think Aether and VTP make good points about the authors reaction coming into play. I don't think you should review based on what you find helpful: the most wonderful and insightful critiques in the world can came across douche-y if you just unleash criticism after criticism, no matter how well intentioned. Pointing out what you enjoyed can be a massive boost to any author, and if you didn't find something you liked, then chances are the story is not for you in the first place.
 
Oh please, that is ridiculous! Such a hilarious, impossible idea - of course I am not a robot. It's not as though I was a machine programmed and built by WW mythical legend 'Gastly's Mama' in order to replace him, with the ability to endlessly plan events and conjure up rules at will... please, that would be silly.......

Of course not... I'm the one who built you, Gama just programmed you.
 
AT14 makes him sound like a robot

That's not a bad thing

+++AT14 ONLINE. JUDGING COMPLETE. SCANNING FOR ACADEMY LESSON. BEEP+++

Yup you win the thread. And life. And stuff.

I don't think you should review based on what you find helpful: the most wonderful and insightful critiques in the world can came across douche-y if you just unleash criticism after criticism, no matter how well intentioned. Pointing out what you enjoyed can be a massive boost to any author, and if you didn't find something you liked, then chances are the story is not for you in the first place.

Yup yup shots fired I think I know who we're talking about sorry if I come across as a douche
 
Yup you win the thread. And life. And stuff.

I don't think you should review based on what you find helpful: the most wonderful and insightful critiques in the world can came across douche-y if you just unleash criticism after criticism, no matter how well intentioned. Pointing out what you enjoyed can be a massive boost to any author, and if you didn't find something you liked, then chances are the story is not for you in the first place.

Yup yup shots fired I think I know who we're talking about sorry if I come across as a douche

Nah, El, you're critical but you're not nasty about it. If you want me to cite my source I direct you the reviews you gave for Chapters Ten and Eleven of The Long Walk
 
I have no problem with brutally honest reviews. As writers, we are putting our works out there to be read, so for me, even the negative reviews are part of that. Authors need to accept that not everyone will love their stuff or take the time and trouble to word their criticisms in such a way that your feelings won't get hurt. If the criticism is constructive, why does it need to be all duckies and bunnies?
 
It doesn't. But just as praise can also be constructive criticism, deliberately nasty negative criticism isn't constructive. What I take issue with is reviewers pretending that their nastiness is somehow necessary, when all it serves is to stoke their own ego. It's the difference between saying: "I found this really difficult to read. You've got misspellings everywhere and the formatting is all over the place" and: "Oh god, this just makes my eyes bleed! Stop. Just stop. Graduate from elementary school, learn to spell, and then start writing"
 
There's a reviewer who needs to stop taking other people's work personally. I'm not sure what they think "objective" means, but it's got nothing to do with plotting

I know, right? I tried to tell him what he was doing wrong, but he only kept replying with insults and even calling me a whiny brat. I'm just not going to bother with him anymore.

@Beth Pavell;: Your first example right there is a good example of constructive critique that is blunt, but not rude or overly harsh and therefore acceptable. The second example is definitely insulting, however. You've got the right idea.
 
I don't think you should review based on what you find helpful: the most wonderful and insightful critiques in the world can came across douche-y if you just unleash criticism after criticism, no matter how well intentioned. Pointing out what you enjoyed can be a massive boost to any author, and if you didn't find something you liked, then chances are the story is not for you in the first place.

Yup yup shots fired I think I know who we're talking about sorry if I come across as a douche

That was not directly aimed at you or specifically about you. I have received a lot of purely negative reviews in my time, where the people have made points that may have been insightful but they were just written in a borderline abusive way that made it difficult to take it in when it just seemed like they hated the story. You did have some positive things to say, and your tone was not nasty compared to the worst I have gotten. I will say though that your 8ES was a bit negative in a lot of places :p
 
Back
Top Bottom