TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Ask The Tropers

Go To

Have a question about how the TVTropes wiki works? No one knows this community better than the people in it, so ask away! Ask the Tropers is the page you come to when you have a question burning in your brain and the support pages didn't help. It's not for everything, though. For a list of all the resources for your questions, click here. You can also go to this Directory thread for ongoing cleanup projects.

Ask the Tropers:

Trope Related Question:

Make Private (For security bugs or stuff only for moderators)

keyblade333 Since: Sep, 2013
2018-04-04 10:53:17

To be honest, I think the entry itself might not be too strong of a point. Evidence debates are an issue on this site since using outside the website sources is not considered valid by a lot of people. I've not heard of any issues with the designs at all, in fact I've heard not really anything on it. Maybe its just me, but the topic feels like it is a bit pointless. As for the troper, they do seem to be fairly hostile and that's not okay.

Muramasa got.
NubianSatyress Since: Mar, 2016
2018-04-04 11:15:52

To be totally honest with you, I think that's a prevailing problem in the wiki currently.

As I've mentioned in the past, it's often too easy to game the system by pushing a "both sides" false equivocation or a "that's not my experience" argument on any disagreement, and the only way those can be countered is with outside sources.

Edited by NubianSatyress
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
2018-04-04 12:27:20

My own experience with Another Duck has been in "Is this an example?" thread, where they generally display a solid knowledge of trope meanings and definitions. Apparent PM dickishness aside, and without having had the opportunity to look at this in depth firsthand, that leaves me biased in their favor on whether a given trope applies or not. My experience has been they typically know what they're talking about.

As far as the Laconic goes, the one for this trope reads "A problem with the franchise that was there in the beginning, but is now without what first balanced it out."

The main definition in the page seems in line with this. "A Franchise Original Sin is a flaw that in earlier, good installments was kept under control to the point of not really being a flaw, but goes out of hand and becomes apparent in later installments."

To my mind, the overshadowing is implied if not explicitly stated. My understanding of those definitions is that the franchise's flaw was there from day one, but whatever pros or restraint that made people ignore or otherwise not mind are not present later, which ends up making the flaw more prominent than it was in the past (overshadowing the good things from before if they're still there at all).

Edited by sgamer82
NubianSatyress Since: Mar, 2016
2018-04-04 12:36:58

Edit: Your edit answered my question.

For some people...yes? I mean, this is a very subjective trope to begin with. The quintessential example used in original trope, Star Wars, has a lot of overlapping complaints with differing degrees of weight for each person. Are the wooden acting, bad dialogue, incomprehensible plots, and other issues on their own too much for any given part of the fandom? Umm...maybe? But if you go to any given editorial or forum criticizing the prequels, someone is going to mention at least ONE of them.

It's sort of similar with FF. The character designs may or may not be THE thing that turns off parts of the fanbase, but there are LOTS of things that changed.

From my perspective, the trope does is not like Dethroning Moment where only ONE Sin can be mentioned.

If that's the case, then the subpages as a whole are counterproductive.

Edited by NubianSatyress
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
2018-04-04 12:41:13

I moved the edit into my response here

If you're asking my opinion? I can't really say I've thought about it enough. Which probably means my answer is no since, by my understanding of the trope, the modem character designs would have to actively detract from the games' positives and the only example of such a thing that sticks out in my mind is Lulu's big black tropical island dress.

Maybe the portion you initially quoted could go into more detail about why those redesigns are a big deal. As written it's almost a Zero Context Example.

All it really says is "He resigned characters and people got pissy". Doesn't seem like a good example of Franchise Original Sin as quoted.

Edited by sgamer82
NubianSatyress Since: Mar, 2016
2018-04-04 12:47:00

See above.

EDIT: Also, that's pretty much the context. If we're reducing it to one sentence, then "he redesigned some characters and people got pissy" would cover it.

But by that standard, "they changed X and people go pissy" would be accurate to every example of the trope.

Edited by NubianSatyress
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
2018-04-04 12:50:30

As written, that whole initial entry doesn't really say why that's bad, only "character designs in game began to match the concept art as hardware became able to show it".

Other than the word ridiculously, nothing even indicates why that's a sin at all, nevermind a Franchise Original.

Again, maybe more context would help. A specific instance describing some mass outcry about a character design or redesign.

^ Not really? Not if there weren't any particular issues with the original design to begin with, since the trope is "minor bad thing that only became worse and/or more prominent' and nothing yet presented why it was a bad thing to begin with besides one adverb, whatever issues there may be now

Edited by sgamer82
NubianSatyress Since: Mar, 2016
2018-04-04 12:54:57

Sure. I'll link the same sources I did in my PM to Duck:

Here's the forum dedicated to this video highlighting the issue. Note that the majority of the responses agree with the argument.

An article which is overall positive about the artwork but still criticizes the design choices of later work. Again, note that the top comments agree with the criticism.

EDIT: But there IS issue with the original art. As Duck himself said at one point, even the original art was divisive. The difference is that the casual player didn't see it, or at least not beyond character profile pics (and very few characters had those). The in-game sprites looked TOTALLY different than the art.

Can we slow down a bit? I don't want to keep going back and forth, and I think we're arguing over a misunderstanding.

Edited by NubianSatyress
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
2018-04-04 12:59:14

I can't now because my break at work is over, but to be clear: you describe source two as something overall positive that criticizes later stuff, which seems to take the original out of original sin.

Also, whether it existed or not, the entry, as written, didn't really give the impression there was ever a problem to begin with. If it really applies maybe go for a rewrite of it to get the point across more

Edited by sgamer82
NubianSatyress Since: Mar, 2016
2018-04-04 13:07:33

See again, there's a misunderstanding here. I need to go over the entire context of the issue.

Early FF games used different in-game sprites and avatars than the original artwork. Most casual players either never saw said artwork at all, or only saw it in small amounts like in menus. FFVII is an exception to this that proves the rule; they changed artists specifically for the purpose of drawing simpler designs because of the technical limitations of the PSX.

Starting with FFX, they abandoned the simpler character designs and no longer had sprites that differed from the design work. From this point on, the design matched the game, and THAT is when the complaints started.

Again, the original problem of complex design was there from the beginning, but it was controlled. Following FFX, that control went out of the window. To quote the link regarding the second artist:

It's easy to get lost in these recent criticisms of Nomura and forget that, hey, this guy designed Cloud Strife. But that's what I love about Fine Art on Kotaku; as a retrospective, we're able to take in the entirety of an artist's work, not just their most recent, so even if there have been too many belts recently, Nomura's work has still been hugely influential, and is still deserving of much of the praise people still throw his way.

I can agree, though, that the original example could use work.

Edited by NubianSatyress
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
2018-04-04 13:11:48

The entire context of the issue is meaningless if the entry itself doesn't present it. The entry itself didn't give any of what you describe beyond "original designs were a bit silly, then artists became able to put them in-game" with no description of why this was causing problems.

The original entry was your last paragraph and none of the detail before it.

NubianSatyress Since: Mar, 2016
2018-04-04 13:15:16

Yes, I've acknowledged that the original example was flawed. And we've really spent too much time going back and forth about this. Again, can we slow down?

Edited by NubianSatyress
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
2018-04-04 15:55:15

I think that, at this point, we've established that the entry's deletion was valid based on the fact that the entry was Not An Example as-written. There may well be an entry for the trope there, but that wasn't it and fine tuning that may be a task better dealt with on the discussion page than here.

I suppose that means the main issue still unresolved is Another Duck's behavior over PM and whether it warrants any special attention.

NubianSatyress Since: Mar, 2016
2018-04-04 16:04:37

I'm not pressing charges, or anything.

I was just trying to prove that the example, in concept, was valid. In P Ms, it was clear we were going in circles, and it felt like my points weren't being heard.

I'm glad we could reach a compromise.

Edited by NubianSatyress
NubianSatyress Since: Mar, 2016
2018-04-04 18:54:31

Rewritten example posted on Discussion page for critique.

NubianSatyress Since: Mar, 2016
2018-04-05 12:59:28

So Another Duck has again weighed in and, at this point, it's becoming obvious that this is not debating for consensus or understanding. It's a debate to be RIGHT.

Edited by NubianSatyress
AegisP Since: Oct, 2014
2018-04-05 15:02:19

Man, that guy sure is stubborn.

As long as this flower is in my heart. My Strength will flow without end.
Top