[002]
Khyron42_Prime
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
So the HollywoodHacking entry is really \
to:
So the HollywoodHacking entry is really \\\"A few liberties are unavoidable?\\\"
I\\\'m fine with liberties! But calling completely laughably fantastical impossible \\\"hacking\\\" literally \\\'\\\'every four feet\\\'\\\' \\\"a few liberties\\\" is just silly. Makes it sound like an Ubisoft exec wrote the example. HollywoodHacking is the basis of the entire game, just as it was the basis of movie \\\'\\\'Hackers\\\'\\\', or the book \\\'\\\'Neuromancer\\\'\\\'. Trying to downplay it is... goofy.
It has a ton of HollywoodHacking. That doesn\\\'t make it terrible, but it has a whole hell of a lot. It could be the TropeCodifier for it. You could explain the \\\'\\\'concept\\\'\\\' of HollywoodHacking simply by showing someone this game.
It could use at least a SLIGHT change to the wording, maybe? Like:
* HollywoodHacking: Being a major studio action game about \\\"hackers\\\", don\\\'t expect to see much actual hacking on display; [=ctOS=] runs purely on RuleOfCool.
I\\\'m fine with liberties! But calling completely laughably fantastical impossible \\\"hacking\\\" literally \\\'\\\'every four feet\\\'\\\' \\\"a few liberties\\\" is just silly. Makes it sound like an Ubisoft exec wrote the example. HollywoodHacking is the basis of the entire game, just as it was the basis of movie \\\'\\\'Hackers\\\'\\\', or the book \\\'\\\'Neuromancer\\\'\\\'. Trying to downplay it is... goofy.
It has a ton of HollywoodHacking. That doesn\\\'t make it terrible, but it has a whole hell of a lot. It could be the TropeCodifier for it. You could explain the \\\'\\\'concept\\\'\\\' of HollywoodHacking simply by showing someone this game.
It could use at least a SLIGHT change to the wording, maybe? Like:
* HollywoodHacking: Being a major studio action game about \\\"hackers\\\", don\\\'t expect to see much actual hacking on display; [=ctOS=] runs purely on RuleOfCool.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
There\'s no real aesop to break. You might be able to claim UnfortunateImplications if you can get a citation, but since they weren\'t really trying to push an aesop, BrokenAesop doesn\'t apply.
to:
There\\\'s no real aesop to break. You might be able to claim UnfortunateImplications if you can get a citation, but since they weren\\\'t really trying to push an aesop, BrokenAesop doesn\\\'t apply. Not to mention it\\\'s not YMMV.
Let me put it this way: What do you think is the aesop that they presented, then broke?
I think what the guy meant was FamilyUnfriendlyAesop... that the ending basically made it seem like a deep friendship will inevitably turn to romance. That might apply.
Let me put it this way: What do you think is the aesop that they presented, then broke?
I think what the guy meant was FamilyUnfriendlyAesop... that the ending basically made it seem like a deep friendship will inevitably turn to romance. That might apply.
