Re: [bookclub] Prose style in 'Losing Your Grip'

[J.D. Berry <jdberry@my-deja.com>]

In article <87f3sp$gge$1@nnrp1.deja.com>,
  icallaci@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> Now *this* is something I'd like to know, since any little detail
> I mention in a description is probably going to end up as an object
> in the game. I have a terrible time writing descriptions for i-f,
> because in the back of my mind a little voice is always whispering,
> "Don't mention the cables or you'll have to CODE them!"
>

:-D

> The question is: do I write the description as best I can and get
> docked for not implementing every object mentioned in it, or do
> I limit the description to objects I can code and get docked for
> not providing rich descriptive text? It's very difficult to strike
> a balance between these two extremes, and I'm *very* interested in
> how other i-f authors handle it.
>

Well, there's the old "a list of things is mentioned, but
examining any particular one just prints out the overall description
again" trick.  The author knows those "things" by themselves aren't
pertinent to the story beyond setting the scene.  The player realizes
through the repeating nature, their relevance to the story.

This is fine until...

Out of frustration from lack of good ideas and solutions, I, the player,
start grasping at the straws of scenery.  "Maybe with I can make
a suit of armor out of the lint if it's the right KIND of lint!"

> x lint

"There's a lot of junk in the old pants pocket, lint, fuzz and of
course dirt."

> get lint

"You can't have the junk."

"Arggh!" says the player now out of even remotely possible ideas.

I think an author can get away with a "filler" trick like the above, if
there are many other "real" things to worry about.  Take the focus
off scenery via opportunities.

Just a thought,
Jim







Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.