T.V. Tropes?

[Froogleyboy]

What is everyones problem with TV tropes?

[GrandMasterMe]

What do you mean by problem?

[Froogleyboy]

Everyone seems to freak out when people link to that site

[SDF]

Is this one of those things where you want us to compile a list of what we don't like about TV Tropes, or is it more of an accusatory, "How DARE you not like TV Tropes!" topic?

[Myshlaevsky]

This (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TemptingFate). Why, Froogleyboy, why?!

[Dragonrider]

This (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TemptingFate).

Best. Answer. Ever. :smallbiggrin:

[Murska]

It's easiest if I just link this (http://xkcd.com/609/).

[Alteran]

One of the major reasons is how damn addicting it can be. It's easy to go to a linked page and then waste hours browsing the site.

[Weezer]

Or this (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LotusEaterMachine) It will never let you go!

[Bouregard]

You follow a link to T.V.Trophes and after a few hours of reading, wow it's that late allready? That site eats up too much valuable lifetime.

[Destro_Yersul]

It starts out innocently enough. Yes. You find a link, and the page amuses you. You click a few more links. The site seems interesting and fun. Before you know it you've got 20 tabs open, reading compulsively through each one before closing it. The site consumes your life. Productivity starts to suffer, because you just have to read up on your new favourite game. Or TV show. Or find spoilers on things you'll never watch. You're hooked, and you enjoy it.

In Short, TVTropes Will Ruin Your Life. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TVTropesWillRuinYourLife)

[GrandMasterMe]

And then you find yourself looking for tropes everywhere in life :smallbiggrin:

[Haven]

I think common complaints are that there are lots of anime examples, and some of the more disturbing Troper Tales (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TroperTales).

At least, that's what a Something Awful TVTropes-bashing thread I read said.

Also: there used to be a whole page that was basically just complaining about the portrayal of pedophiles as child molesters. Its title was "All Pedophiles Are Child Molesters", meant to be read in the same way as "All Germans Are Nazis" or "All Psychology is Freudian."

...Yeah. :smallyuk:

[Roland St. Jude]

And on the receiving end, you find responses start to be more trope links and less discussion. Suddenly instead of having a conversation, I'm being handed a reading assignment. Take this thread, for example. To make sense of it, one has to click on all the "this" links just to see what's being said. And even if you don't mind the reading assignments, discussing things in terms of tropes is very limiting on a discussion.

Once in a while they can be a concise, efficient way to further a discussion, but more often TV Tropes links are like a getting reading assignment from your conversation partner who wants to continue your discussion using only pseudo-literary jargon and pre-written idea summaries.

[thubby]

i went from cold sniper to time paradoxes

...yeah

[Coidzor]

I find most of the trope titles self explanatory. The ones that aren't, one just smacks the obfuscating party upside the head for not taking the time to write out an additional sentence.

[Morty]

And on the receiving end, you find responses start to be more trope links and less discussion. Suddenly instead of having a conversation, I'm being handed a reading assignment. Take this thread, for example. To make sense of it, one has to click on all the "this" links just to see what's being said. And even if you don't mind the reading assignments, discussing things in terms of tropes is very limiting on a discussion.

Once in a while they can be a concise, efficient way to further a discussion, but more often TV Tropes links are like a getting reading assignment from your conversation partner who wants to continue your discussion using only pseudo-literary jargon and pre-written idea summaries.

And that's when you're lucky. Very often, people use TVTropes links as a cheap way of "winning" an argument. As in, link to a trope and consider the discussion over, because all's obvious now.
I really, really don't like that site. I don't read it, don't link to it, and ignore posts that link to it. For more reasons than the one I just mentioned.

[Coidzor]

... I think I've just discovered how to become invisbile.

[Haven]

... I think I've just discovered how to become invisbile.

Put your pants back on.

Roland: I have noticed that happening here, but I think that's not a problem with TV Tropes itself. At least, I like to think that's not what's being promoted by the site.

[SDF]

And that's when you're lucky. Very often, people use TVTropes links as a cheap way of "winning" an argument. As in, link to a trope and consider the discussion over, because all's obvious now.

I think in addition to that and what Roland said, a lot of conversations that link tropes back and forward just turn the forum into a crappier version of said site.

[Myshlaevsky]

And on the receiving end, you find responses start to be more trope links and less discussion. Suddenly instead of having a conversation, I'm being handed a reading assignment. Take this thread, for example. To make sense of it, one has to click on all the "this" links just to see what's being said. And even if you don't mind the reading assignments, discussing things in terms of tropes is very limiting on a discussion.

Once in a while they can be a concise, efficient way to further a discussion, but more often TV Tropes links are like a getting reading assignment from your conversation partner who wants to continue your discussion using only pseudo-literary jargon and pre-written idea summaries.

I completely agree. I have never personally been drawn to tvtropes, I just posted to go along with the running joke - which I guess I shouldn't have. I usually abandon threads or discussions which involving into linking contests.

I can still spend hours trawling wikipedia, though.

[Mordokai]

Put your pants back on.

That made me smile :)

Well, I can say it really does suck time away. I opened one link and before I finally closed the damn thing I got sucked through at least 50 tropes, quite possibly more. It was fun, for sure, but damn, I didn't imagine it would be that addicting.

[Alteran]

Self-censored for off-topicness and possible rule issues.

[Evil DM Mark3]

TV tropes is a referancing tool and scource of common information and terminology. People often use it as the most holy bible of the interwebs or, as TV tropes might put it, it is Serious Business (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SeriousBusiness).

Seriously though guys, its a freaking wiki! It is editable! I love the website (I trope as Reg Shoe (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RegShoe) BTW) but it is not the be all and end all.

[Godskook]

That, uh, that sounds pretty much true. While I in no way condone pedophilia or consider it acceptable, one has the think that there are many pedophiles who are able to restrain their impulses. I mean, not everybody who is turned down by women becomes a rapist. So while complaining about the negative portrayal of pedophiles in media is probably pushing it, saying that all pedophiles by definition abuse children is not really true.

Actually, comparing pedophiles to child molesters is like comparing porn addicts who specifically watch bondage videos to rapists, not the rejected guy down the street.

[Evil DM Mark3]

GUYS! Posting guidlines! Spoiler boxes do not change the rules and we are getting VERY off topic.

[Roland St. Jude]

GUYS! Posting guidlines! Spoiler boxes do not change the rules and we are getting VERY off topic.

Indeed. I don't have time to review them right this minute, so you might want to...

[Coidzor]

I'd say the problems are with the abuse rather than the use of the site.

Sort of like, y'know, prescription or OTC medications which provide a benefit but can **** one up if one is an idiot about it.

And, sadly, there are always idiots. We just can't seem to breed them out of our gene pool... Lousy sabertooth tigers not doing their jobs.

apologists... ugh...

[Totally Guy]

I'd liken it to an anti-newspeak because rather than cutting out the language's words that relate to a concept to forget it's about finding a trope name to act as a shorthand for a concept. With all these extra "words" the concepts become far more accessible and easier to invoke. So whether you see something in media or real life that matches the concept there's a handy way to explain it.

Also when considered in this way it's one of those systems that becomes better as more people adopt it. Much like language the more people that speak it the more useful it is.

Of course I find myself of the opinion that trope names should be timeless... No one will know who The Libby is meant to be in 10 years. Needs to be more obvious.

[AstralFire]

I enjoy browsing the site, but I really hate the site's abuse when people don't use it as shorthand, but an excuse not to think. Or that anything that appears as a trope ever must be cliché and have no artistic merit.

[skywalker]

Actually, comparing pedophiles to child molesters is like comparing porn addicts who specifically watch bondage videos to rapists, not the rejected guy down the street.

Precisely. This is an important distinction to make.


apologists... ugh...

What's wrong with apologists?

Generally speaking, I appreciate the site. It was very useful to point to during the recent "Chekov's Gun" thread (altho really, that one is so simple to explain anyway).

I hate, along with most others, how it gets thrown around in arguments. I personally think there should be a TV Tropes "law" just Godwin's (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ptitle7vljslfu)...

[Coidzor]

^: Because of what the Right Honorable Roland St. Jude said.

Also, I find the word apologist objectionable as it just doesn't sound right when I think it or speak it.

I'd liken it to an anti-newspeak because rather than cutting out the language's words that relate to a concept to forget it's about finding a trope name to act as a shorthand for a concept. With all these extra "words" the concepts become far more accessible and easier to invoke. So whether you see something in media or real life that matches the concept there's a handy way to explain it.

Also when considered in this way it's one of those systems that becomes better as more people adopt it. Much like language the more people that speak it the more useful it is.

Of course I find myself of the opinion that trope names should be timeless... No one will know who The Libby is meant to be in 10 years. Needs to be more obvious.
I agree there. The names in some cases really don't... seem as useful as they could be. I mean, the scrappy is a similar case, but Scrappy Doo is a far greater pop cultural meme(I think that's what it would be anyway) for various reasons...

But, then again, learning the definitions and the lingua tropica obviates a good bit of the obfuscation, but still doesn't excuse a lack of or obviate a need for streamlining.

[Lord Seth]

Well your usage of the word "apologist" was a bit confusing. It wasn't clear whether you meant someone being an apologist for TV Tropes (a defender of it), an apologist citing from TV Tropes (someone using it as a basis for their arguments for whatever they're being an apologist of), or an apologist putting their arguments on TV Tropes (using it as an excuse to preach whatever their message is). As an apologist is "a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial" it was extremely unclear what the apologists were apologists of.

[JonestheSpy]

I enjoy browsing the site, but I really hate the site's abuse when people don't use it as shorthand, but an excuse not to think. Or that anything that appears as a trope ever must be cliché and have no artistic merit.


Yeah there difeintely seems to be a habit out there of pointing to an entry on that site as just a "It's been done" put down.

And if you can tack a pithy little definition on something, it's much easier to dismiss/belittle/ignore/etc.

[Vmag]

I enjoy the site. It can be quite humorous at times, and it's a good way to while some time away if I've truly run out of anything else to do online.

However, as many have pointed out before me, the problem comes when people use it not just as discussion enhancements, but discussions in and of themselves, wherein you need to get the in-jokes behind Chekov's Gun and Drill Sergeant Nasty.

I come from a web community that partially encourages lengthy, thought-out posts for the better enhancement of overall discussion, so I'm a bit spoiled in that regard. Take a Noble Savagae (pandora.com) like that and expose him to a world where full-lengthed discussions can be summed up in a couple of links, and the culture shock can be quite discombobulating.

[Tengu_temp]

@Vmag - your links don't work. All of them lead to the main TV Tropes site.


I personally don't see anything wrong with linking to TV Tropes. Compare these two conversations:

A: "You shouldn't use Pun-Pun in a real game."
B: "What's a Pun-Pun?"
A: "Here: *gives a link to a Pun-Pun thread*"

and

A: "This character is such a woobie."
B: "What's a woobie?"
A: "Here: *gives a link to this (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheWoobie)*"

Why are some people perfectly okay with the first one, but react negatively to the second one?
I like TV Tropes. The site has its issues, some of which I mentioned in this old thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=100041), but it's still a wiki that is both entertaining and, to some extent, enlightening.

[xPANCAKEx]

i just find linking to TV tropes to be unoriginal and unfunny

its like this sites own version of a meme. A thread doesn't get a stamp of approval till someone posts a dull and predictable link/comment/cliche tv tropes link

if i want that sorta thing i go on 4chan (which i do). When im here i'd at least hope people have the intelligence and creativity to not resort to cliches

and thats what tv tropes is - a list of cliches

[Fiendish_Dire_Moose]

And on the receiving end, you find responses start to be more trope links and less discussion. Suddenly instead of having a conversation, I'm being handed a reading assignment. Take this thread, for example. To make sense of it, one has to click on all the "this" links just to see what's being said. And even if you don't mind the reading assignments, discussing things in terms of tropes is very limiting on a discussion.

Once in a while they can be a concise, efficient way to further a discussion, but more often TV Tropes links are like a getting reading assignment from your conversation partner who wants to continue your discussion using only pseudo-literary jargon and pre-written idea summaries.

This. T.V. tropes is what people use when they don't have anything clever to say. That, and linking it is pretty cliche now, to the point that linking to it could be a trope.

[Morty]

Or that anything that appears as a trope ever must be cliché and have no artistic merit.

And on the contrary, some people seem to think that no matter how cliched, overdone and unoriginal something is, it's cool and okay as long as it's a trope.

[Dallas-Dakota]

Once I shall break the world record of piece of literature having the most tropes! Bwahahahaha!

Ofcourse then it won't really literature, but whatever.:smalltongue:

[Faleldir]

What bothers me most about TVTropes is the lack of notability. Tropers are compelled to mention their favorite show on every page even if they have to stretch the definition of the trope or flat-out say it's not an example, so aversions, subversions and partial examples are considered legitimate. The page for Bald Black Leader Guy contains every example of every combination of bald and/or black and/or leader and/or guy in all of fiction, nonfiction and fanfiction. It's a mess!

[Zeful]

What bothers me most about TVTropes is the lack of notability. Tropers are compelled to mention their favorite show on every page even if they have to stretch the definition of the trope or flat-out say it's not an example, so aversions, subversions and partial examples are considered legitimate. The page for Bald Black Leader Guy contains every example of every combination of bald and/or black and/or leader and/or guy in all of fiction, nonfiction and fanfiction. It's a mess!

Then edit out the stupid examples. That's what "no notability" means. I've taken to editing out stupid time lord theories that consist of "Someone is a Time Lord" with no further explanation.

[Tengu_temp]

and thats what tv tropes is - a list of cliches

Wrong. All cliches are tropes, but not all tropes are cliches. A trope is a literary device that is used because it works. An overused trope becomes a cliche.


This. T.V. tropes is what people use when they don't have anything clever to say. That, and linking it is pretty cliche now, to the point that linking to it could be a trope.

I disagree with this. I've seen a lot of posts that were cleverly written, just used the names TV Tropes gives to various tropes as jargon, and linked to corresponding TV Tropes articles to ensure that people who are not familiar with the jargon in question will not feel totally lost. Why is using jargon wrong? We do it all the time in the Gaming forum.

[Tempest Fennac]

Answering the original question, I just find the website to be boring and uninformative due to it just listing cliches as though they are laws which have to be stuck to (I get that impression from the tone of the articles anyway).

[Evil DM Mark3]

First, those people who keep calling Tropes Cliches fail to understand one of the key words in litterary discussion. A Trope is a literary device. A Trope is an element of a story or narative. The word has been in use for (to my knowlage) at least 130 years. It has a very different meaning to Cliche. {Scrubbed}

Second
I disagree with this. I've seen a lot of posts that were cleverly written, just used the names TV Tropes gives to various tropes as jargon, and linked to corresponding TV Tropes articles to ensure that people who are not familiar with the jargon in question will not feel totally lost. Why is using jargon wrong? We do it all the time in the Gaming forum.this irritates me. Jargon is missused technical language (missused both in terms of defintion and timing). Gaming forums and TV tropes are both excelent examples of good, internaly deffined, technical language, applied correctly.

[Morty]

First, those people who keep calling Tropes Cliches fail to understand one of the key words in litterary discussion. A Trope is a literary device. A Trope is an element of a story or narative. {Scrubbed}


Yeah, yeah, Tropes Aren't Cliches and all that. We know it. The point is, people use Tropes in place of arguments to justify cliches. Someone says "I don't like it when a hero massacres hordes of skilled troops just like that" and people say "well duh, it's a {link to a trope}, so it's alright".

[Tengu_temp]

Answering the original question, I just find the website to be boring and uninformative due to it just listing cliches as though they are laws which have to be stuck to (I get that impression from the tone of the articles anyway).

I wonder how did you get such an impression? Nothing on TV Tropes even hints that you have to stick strictly to the formula of each trope. And once again, tropes are not cliches.


Yeah, yeah, Tropes Aren't Cliches and all that. We know it. The point is, people use Tropes in place of arguments to justify cliches. Someone says "I don't like it when a hero massacres hordes of skilled troops just like that" and people say "well duh, it's a {link to a trope}, so it's alright".

How is that answer different from "it's an action show where reality takes a backseat to cool, so it's alright"?

[Tempest Fennac]

I was thinking more of how other people use the contents of the site (I agree with M0rt's last comment). Also, what I've seen of the site appears to be full of cliches.

[Evil DM Mark3]

How is that answer different from "it's an action show where reality takes a backseat to cool, so it's alright"?Personaly I feel the differenace is that the former gives you a frame of referance for the argument, the latter does not.
Also, what I've seen of the site appears to be full of cliches.Of course it has a lot of cliches, cliches are tropes. But most tropes are not cliches and just because something is a cliche does not mean that its annalysis and discussion are unworthy or uninteresting.

[hamishspence]

And there is Subverted Trope, Dead Horse Trope, Undead Horse Trope, etc- some are encouraged, some not, since a lot of the older tropes have Unfortunate Implications :smallamused:

[potatocubed]

Why are some people perfectly okay with the first one, but react negatively to the second one?

I can't give a proper answer to this, but I think it's because TVtropes feels 'forced'.

Pun-Pun - and other jargon, like the locate city bomb - pops up often enough in gaming threads that a) it's worth reading up on and b) even if you don't go and do the reading assignment, as Roland said, you can often work out what the hell is going on from multiple uses of context.

On the contrary, individual TVtropes pages don't crop up anywhere near often enough to be worth the reading involved. I don't know what a woobie is, I can't tell from the context, and I'm likely to never see the word again outside this discussion.

Another difference is that Pun-Pun is a concrete thing. It is, by definition, a particular broken build. You can point to a character and say 'this is Pun-Pun' and know whether you're right or wrong. A lot of TVtropes just feels very, very flimsy.

Or, better term, TVtropes is subjective. When I read through the examples on the fridge logic page some time ago the overwhelming feeling I had was that one person's 'fridge logic' is another person's "well, duh". Perhaps there's just a higher degree of resentment at being linked to something which is a glorified opinion than there is at being linked to something definite.

[Lord Seth]

Complaining that TV Tropes lists cliches seems to me like complaining that Order of the Stick has a lot of Dungeons & Dragons jokes.

My biggest problem with the site is how often people use it as a venue to mock or criticize things they don't like, be it real life or a fictional series.

[Tengu_temp]

Jargon is missused technical language (missused both in terms of defintion and timing). Gaming forums and TV tropes are both excelent examples of good, internaly deffined, technical language, applied correctly.

Misused? I disagree. As per Wiktionary:

Noun
jargon (countable and uncountable; plural jargons)

1. (uncountable) A technical terminology unique to a particular subject.
2. (countable) Language characteristic of a particular group.
3. (uncountable) Speech or language that is incomprehensible or unintelligible; gibberish.


I was thinking more of how other people use the contents of the site (I agree with M0rt's last comment). Also, what I've seen of the site appears to be full of cliches.

Let's go with a random example. Straight Gay (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StraightGay). A trope? Yeah, otherwise it wouldn't be listed on TV Tropes. A cliche? Not in the slightest.

[Morty]

How is that answer different from "it's an action show where reality takes a backseat to cool, so it's alright"?

The latter is an actual argument, albeit a lazy one. Linking to the Mook trope or something similiar implies that it's something patently obvious nobody should have any trouble with. Because regardless of what the guidelines and the like might be, people treat tropes as entirely objective. Especially when it comes to terms like "cool", "fun" or "awesome" - TVTropers seem to think they have a monopoly on using them.
Another thing is using tropes like "They changed it now it sucks" as a thinly-veiled ad hominem argument.

[Tempest Fennac]

I don't get how that isn't a cliche, Tengu (it looks a lot like one to me).

[Tengu_temp]

@potatocubed - Well, for me the less-used terms such as "Cindy" sound similar as various tropes to you - I don't know what that is, I can't tell from the context, and I'm likely to never see the word again outside the discussion where it pops up. But when someone gives me a link that explains what it is then I go and read it instead of demanding that people would stop using that word. I'd also like to point out that a lot of tropes on that site either have names that make their meaning obvious, or receive such names. On a side note, remember that TV Tropes didn't invent tropes - it's not an official catalogue. Listing and naming all tropes would be impossible.
Also, how often trope names are used depends on your circles - I'm mostly a Media Discussion guy and most of people I'm talking with use and know them.
Lastly, you say that tropes are subjective - and I must ask, are various RPG terms not subjective as well? The meaning of terms such as "broken", "DMPC" or "Monty Haul" changes from person to person.


The latter is an actual argument, albeit a lazy one. Linking to the Mook trope or something similiar implies that it's something patently obvious nobody should have any trouble with. Because regardless of what the guidelines and the like might be, people treat tropes as entirely objective.
Another thing is using tropes like "They changed it now it sucks" as a thinly-veiled ad hominem argument.

I see both of those as a rather lazy argument, to be honest. When someone links to TV Tropes, I never get a "this is how it should always look like!" vibe from them.
Agreed on the ad hominem part, though. But that's not the fault of the site, and not a lot of people do that.


I don't get how that isn't a cliche, Tengu (it looks a lot like one to me).

How is it cliche? Is it an overused character type? If you consider everything that appeared somewhere before to be a cliche then yes, TV Tropes lists cliches. But then you'd be wrong, because that's not what a cliche means. Once again, Wiktionary:

Noun
cliché (plural clichés)

1. Something, most often a phrase or expression, that is overused and has thus lost its original impact; a trite saying; a platitude.