PDA

View Full Version : The (Constructive) Criticism Thread!



Pearl
2008-05-18, 10:52 AM
I know I am a new member. A pixie, if you will.

But I have been reading this comic since before there was really a plot, and I've spent a fair amount of time lurking here and elsewhere on the boards. So I hope this thread isn't terribly misinformed.

The forums here have a reputation as an amazingly open place, and even tolerate criticism of the central part of the site itself. Not every place (http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/) even allows that.

However, in reading the actual strip discussion threads, I have discovered that any sort of criticism; helpful, or just as often useless, is deluged in people affirming their own enjoyment and sometimes in rare cases, flaming a little.

It is to be expected, of course, as this is a popular webcomic with a dedicated base. This thread, then, will be a place where people who both love and hate the comic, read and used to read, so on and so on, can intermingle and trade ideas.

This is not a flame thread, and the best way to avoid that is for avid readers to post their own dislikes & concerns here. If you don't have any, they're just hiding from you. In the end, this is just a comic, and it is ultimately flawed, as is of course everything else.

Expect my own thoughts in due course. :smallsmile:

The Hop Goblin
2008-05-18, 02:20 PM
The problem is that it takes no skill, talent, or knowledge to be a critic. And most criticism is, and should be, disregarded because most people cannot seperate "It sucks, I don't like it" and "It sucks because I don't like it". People tend to think it means the same thing, it doesn't.

It's an old axom "Everyone's a critic," because, it takes no skill to be one. You can have the most perfect object/idea/thing in the world, and some yokel is going to go "Durrrrr, It's not red! Me no like!"

My problem stems from irritation that people with no aptitude for either storytelling nor art, tend to think that their opinion matters. It doesn't. Not in the realm of thousands upon thousands of audience members. Moreover, I stick to "If you don't like it - make something better" - because it shows more effort and energy than downing something/someone who is obviously better than you at sed subject.

Creative jealousy aside, it is 'trendy' to down popular things. If a (large) group of people like something, then someone *has to* stand out from the crowd and shoot it down, for no other reason than to just be "that guy."

Criticism may be important for those who A) want to hear it, B) who are open to it, and C) when it comes from a source that knows what it's talking about.

I stand by that Rich Burlew does something, essentially, for free. And "those guys" are obviously going to chime in saying "Nuh-uh, he getz payd!" Book sales aren't that much; vs web hosting, bandwidth, eating, living, medical expenses, etc. Moreover he delivers something for little cost to an oft-times overcritical audience who don't really have anything meaningful to say other than "remember the good ol' days of OOTS when I liked it? Well now I don't like it and I'm going to try to blackmail the artist/author by witholding my support! Hah, Take that!"

And I'm willing to bet that any one of "those people" who actually had the tamarity to start their own project (webcomic, online story, etc) for the same conditions - would not care to see dozens of people judging their vaunted works. He's an award winner, he has a big following; and the critics aren't/don't. It's hard work - harder work than most will imagine. I mean, getting up there to 600 pages - Most people lack the stick-to-it-iveness to pass even 20 (Hense so many failed webcomics out there).

But people don't want to work hard - yet still want to be important. Ergo - the critic.

Maybe I like X, Maybe I don't like Y. But unless I've done something more than "backseat drive", I don't really have the right nor position to squawk and have it mean anything other than an attempt to draw attention to myself.

As a completely unrelated side note - I really wish this forum would translate indentations.

Silfir
2008-05-18, 02:37 PM
Sounds pretty negative. What is wrong with giving your honest opinion about someone else's work?

"But unless I've done something more than "backseat drive", I don't really have the right nor position to squawk and have it mean anything other than an attempt to draw attention to myself."

What, I have to make webcomics before I can criticize one?

Querzis
2008-05-18, 02:55 PM
Sounds pretty negative. What is wrong with giving your honest opinion about someone else's work?

Well the Hop Goblin said many good reasons why its wrong but the main reason is still because your opinion really doesnt matter and does absolutely nothing more then insult the artist and the people who liked it. Every criticism I ever heard not only about this comic, but just criticism in general, were never constructive for the simple reason that while some people think 'X is bad because of Y' well there is about a hundred people who LIKED X because of Y. Those kind of things degenarate fast with the critic who cant understand why some people would like it and vice versa. Criticism is absolutely nothing more then putting oil on the fire. You can say that you didnt like something, I got no problem with that, but dont start listing reason or say that this thing suck because you dont like it (and many people do that as the Hop Goblin said).

I got no problem with «I dont like it». But the whole point of critics is to actually rate something, as if they could do better and as if their opinion was more important then the opinion of the artist and his fans.

By the way the Hop Goblin, thats a great post.

Edit: And yes Silfir, you kinda have to make a webcomic before you have the right to criticize one and even then you absolutely have to avoid the words «it sucks». Thats kinda why only people who make webcomic can vote in the Webcomic choice award (http://ccawards.com/2008finalists.html).

Of course those sort of criticism are still just an interesting way to see an artist view on a different artist but even then, if its obvious he/she just hate said artist, its still worth nothing.

David Argall
2008-05-18, 03:11 PM
Any time you do something, or don't do it, you are rightly subject to criticism. You have absolutely no right not to be. The other guy has the full and complete right to say it stinks and as often and as loudly as he pleases.

"Criticism" and "constructive criticism" are identical, except for the press release. I/we give "constructive criticism". Those who criticize me/us don't. That is really the only difference. We can say that some criticism is more useful than others, but that gives us no grounds for denying the less useful from being heard.
All criticism is useful. It provides you information on what is going on. To refuse to listen to it is to condemn yourself to making refrigerator art. It is the criticism of each and every artist that has allowed them to improve. Artists have varied ability to make use of criticism, but without it, they would never produce anything worth our time.

Nerdanel
2008-05-18, 03:29 PM
Criticism is constructive when it's saying something is good BECAUSE of something or sucks BECAUSE of something.

The worst kind of art criticism (and I say this from a personal experience) is embodied by the following exchange:

:smallconfused: How was it?

:smallsmile: Great.

:smallconfused: What did you like about it in particular?

:smallsmile: I don't know. It was all good.

:smallconfused: What do you think could have been improved?

:smallsmile: I don't know. Nothing. It was perfect.

Actual helpful information content: zero.

(The loathed "YOU SUCK LOLOLOL!!11" is only the less polite negative version of this and just as useless.)

Pearl
2008-05-18, 03:33 PM
I think you've made some good points, Hop Goblin, especially since a lot of people do attack other people's work thoughtlessly and spout angry nonsense. But I cannot support what appears to be a condemnation of the entire profession of the critic. Like David Argall said, artists need to hear other's opinions of their work, professional or otherwise. It helps them, and that's all that matters, really.

These boards aren't called the praise/plot speculation of OOTS, it's the discussion board for OOTS. If I think it's a problem that he went with a more in-depth plot (I don't) or that said plot is rather fragile and needs to be quickly salvaged before slipping into something of lesser quality (That one's closer to my opinion) than those are helpful things to voice.

I don't want people to use this thread to post abuse on things about the comic that aren't in line with their taste, but rather their thoughts and opinions on the very real problems that all forms of media invariably have. I like this comic, and want to see it prosper.


So to (hopefully) steer this discussion away from the validity of critics/criticism, here's a largeish complaint of my own: The comic needs to pick a tone and stick with it for at least an arc. I enjoy the OOTS humor most of the time and I think the story we've seen so far works strongly as a parody. However, trying to mix rule jokes with plot, while serviceable, I feel could be strengthened by alternation.

The new island slash Pirates 2 plotline with Elan, for example, is strong so far because it's funny without trying to advance the plotline terribly quickly. However, when read as a scene break from the Azure City Escape plotline, which was more serious, it feels almost forced. Instead of dividing tone by location and switching back and forth, the 'storyline' for this book, as loose as it is, should for the most part just pick one. It's more effective for book format, which is why it's not quite as pronounced as when read on-line.

I expect being torn apart, which can hopefully assist my opinions on this to evolve and gain better articulation.

ShellBullet
2008-05-18, 03:39 PM
As it has been stated in previous posts, it’s usually hard to separate “critic” and “demand”. There is good load of people who thinks that demanding is criticizing, therefore gave critiquing a negative taste even if it’s not sometimes justified. That being said, there is actually surprisingly small amount of real criticizing.

SPoD
2008-05-19, 02:55 AM
The problem with any attempt at criticism here is that there is simply no way for Rich to separate the opinions that are worth listening to from those that are not, because every post made is simply the words of one fan. And Rich doesn't have the ability to verify that the person posting has any idea what they are talking about. For every person who says, "More silly comedy, less serious plot," there's a person saying, "Is this plot going anywhere? Can we drop the pointless filler?" It's nothing but hubris for anyone to think that Rich is going to single out their post from a sea of thousands of conflicting posts and give it his full consideration. There's too much noise.

Now, if someone is a respected reviewer of comics/webcomics/books/whatever, and they post a review of OOTS in their blog/website/magazine/whatever, that's different. That critic can have his current review compared to reviews of other work, and likely has credentials (or at least a reputation) that can be verified. If Eric Burns of Websnark writes a review of OOTS, Rich can at least say, "Well, Mr. Burns has a degree in Literature and is widely considered the leading critic of webcomics...his words are probably worth listening to." But us here, on the official forums? We have no weight behind our words. We're each only one fan among several hundred thousand, and we usually directly contradict one another.

You can write whatever criticism we want here, knock yourself out. I'm sure other posters are interested in reading it. But don't think for a moment that Rich will even open this thread and read it, much less change the comic based on what it says. Rich once said that every person who ever joined this forum still accounts for less than 10% of his current readership, so even if 20, 30, 40 people agree with someone's criticism, it means nothing.

Halvormerlinaky
2008-05-19, 02:59 AM
well though out stuff

I respectfully disagree. It's perfectly possible to criticize someone's work and contribute to it even if they're just one person.

Stating, "This sucks," is no different from writing, "This rocks".

It's what follows that matters. If anyone expands on their thoughts it is useful to an artist/creator. Look at all the Miko threads. Most people don't add anything to the arguments, but some say why they believe what they do. Rich, or anyone, can work from these comments on later additions. He can draw on the responses which praise the character as likable or inspiring for the ones he wants to be heroes or protagonists, and those who hate it for make villains or antagonists.

If done respectfully and thoughtfully, it all contributes to the greater good of the work.

Halvormerlinaky
2008-05-19, 03:24 AM
well though out stuff

I respectfully disagree. It's perfectly possible to criticize someone's work and contribute to it even if they're just one person.

Stating, "This sucks," is no different from writing, "This rocks".

It's what follows that matters. If anyone expands on their thoughts it is useful to an artist/creator. Look at all the Miko threads. Most people don't add anything to the arguments, but some say why they believe what they do. Rich, or anyone, can work from these comments on later additions. He can draw on the responses which praise the character as likable or inspiring for the ones he wants to be heroes or protagonists, and those who hate it for make villains or antagonists.

If done respectfully and thoughtfully, it all contributes to the greater good of the work.

Halvormerlinaky
2008-05-19, 04:21 AM
well though out stuff

I respectfully disagree. It's perfectly possible to criticize someone's work and contribute to it even if they're just one person.

Stating, "This sucks," is no different from writing, "This rocks".

It's what follows that matters. If anyone expands on their thoughts it is useful to an artist/creator. Look at all the Miko threads. Most people don't add anything to the arguments, but some say why they believe what they do. Rich, or anyone, can work from these comments on later additions. He can draw on the responses which praise the character as likable or inspiring for the ones he wants to be heroes or protagonists, and those who hate it for make villains or antagonists.

If done respectfully and thoughtfully, it all contributes to the greater good of the work.

SPoD
2008-05-19, 04:47 AM
I respectfully disagree. It's perfectly possible to criticize someone's work and contribute to it even if they're just one person.

But why should Rich care? Why should he, someone who has managed to create a story beloved by hundreds of thousands of people, follow what a handful of nameless people say on his message board? All evidence says that he should keep on doing whatever he thinks is best, because that's what got him here in the first place. This isn't a democratic process. Yes, he CAN listen to our input, but why ignore his own terribly successful instincts to do what we want? Where were we when he created these characters?


Stating, "This sucks," is no different from writing, "This rocks".

It's what follows that matters. If anyone expands on their thoughts it is useful to an artist/creator.

Two fans disagreeing is not simply, "That sucks!" and "That rocks!". For example, earlier in this thread, someone criticized Rich for varying between silly comedy and serious plot. They saw that as a negative. I see it as a positive; I like the contrast, and I enjoy both types of story equally. I think it helps lighten the atmosphere to intersperse crazy scenes like the current one into the drama, lest the comic become too far removed from its roots as a comedy. Now, given that on this thread two people have expressed and supported two diametrically opposed viewpoints...who should Rich listen to?

The only logical answer is, "No one; Rich shouldn't even be reading this thread."


Look at all the Miko threads. Most people don't add anything to the arguments, but some say why they believe what they do. Rich, or anyone, can work from these comments on later additions. He can draw on the responses which praise the character as likable or inspiring for the ones he wants to be heroes or protagonists, and those who hate it for make villains or antagonists.

If done respectfully and thoughtfully, it all contributes to the greater good of the work.

I generally think of that sort of behavior as pandering to the audience. Steering your comic whichever way the wind blows is a good way to end up with an unsalvageable mess; there's a reason that "written by committee" is a synonym for "crap". Again, this isn't a group process, this is a single-creator work of fiction. The only person who should dictate its content is Rich himself. He's done a pretty good job of building an audience so far, don't you think?

(Luckily for me, this is all theoretical, since it's well-known that Rich hardly ever reads anything on the forum, much less accepts fan input on the storyline.)

SPoD
2008-05-19, 04:51 AM
Just to be clear, I'm not saying OOTS is perfect.

I'm saying that Rich is going to (wisely) ignore any and all comments posted here anyway, and for good reasons that I have stated above. We know this because he's stated that he accepts the loss of any readers who don't like the comic anymore, for whatever reason.

Therefore, as long as we're all clear that we're only talking to one another and that the creator is NOT listening (much less acting on our suggestions), we can all go ahead and post whatever we want.

SteveMB
2008-05-19, 08:13 AM
Just to be clear, I'm not saying OOTS is perfect.

I'm saying that Rich is going to (wisely) ignore any and all comments posted here anyway, and for good reasons that I have stated above. We know this because he's stated that he accepts the loss of any readers who don't like the comic anymore, for whatever reason.

Therefore, as long as we're all clear that we're only talking to one another and that the creator is NOT listening (much less acting on our suggestions), we can all go ahead and post whatever we want.

Of course Rich will write as he thinks best, and people will read it, or not.

I gather from the original post that it expressed some frustration over the occasional tone of the back-and-forth between readers. Even when it doesn't rise to the level of infractions (which is an issue for the Mods to deal with), it sometimes tends to devolve into the same old debates between the same old factions, and can seem personal even when the posts are strictly directed to the issues.

That said, creating a thread and labeling it as especially for constructive criticism strikes me as a bit of empty symbolism.

Pearl
2008-05-20, 07:37 PM
You can write whatever criticism we want here, knock yourself out. I'm sure other posters are interested in reading it. But don't think for a moment that Rich will even open this thread and read it, much less change the comic based on what it says. Rich once said that every person who ever joined this forum still accounts for less than 10% of his current readership, so even if 20, 30, 40 people agree with someone's criticism, it means nothing.

I never meant this thread for Rich to see. I don't particularly care if he reads it, I meant it as a discussion thread. I want to see if as a community we can agree on those small imperfections in the comic, more or less for the sake of it. Like Halvormerlinaky said, 'it sucks' is as productive as 'it rocks', and helps stop blind praise for everything and ignorance, feigned or otherwise, of the strip's (mostly small) missteps.

Calinero
2008-05-20, 07:57 PM
I, for one, support the idea of a thread where people will voice their ideas and criticisms in literate form. I have had enough people who spout semi-literate rants against Miko because "she's an arrogant bitch" but aren't willing to provide anything to support their claims.

I also realize that almost nothing we say could possibly influence Rich, and that's a good thing. If he were subject to fan's opinions and used that to base him comic decisions, it would not end well at all. Because, in general, many fans are stupid. Please, no one take this as an insult, but there is a rule out there: 90% of everything is crap. The person who said it was talking about fanfiction, but it applies just as well to fans. For every literate, intelligent fan who is willing to express their opinions articulately, there are nine idiots who go "OMG I want MORE XyKON!!1!" (not intended as an insult towards Xykon)

Just as Rich has to operate independently of fan input, we ought to operate independently of what our effect on the author is going to be. We don't just critique out of hopes that the strip will change to what we want, we critique so we can understand the comic better and come across new ideas.

littlequietguy
2008-05-20, 09:38 PM
I love the strip but characters being important right after their introduced gets annoying.

plus right now I think roy should be revived soon.:smallwink:

littlequietguy
2008-05-20, 09:40 PM
I love the strip but characters being important right after their introduced gets annoying.

plus right now I think roy should be revived soon.:smallwink: by the orcs in return for being a banjo prophet.