Mordum wrote:Penguin God wrote:I still say this shift between internal and external logic is essentially just made up as an excuse to feel objective or correct about not liking something,
As usual, you're the smartest person in any given thread you post in. This is basically it.
It's funny how you guys are trying to twist this so you can feel justified in disagreeing with the analysis that your best supporting arguments to your own side is calling ours into question. ToaArcan did make the point before that nobody was writing glowing reviews for external logic, which was true, and hardly anyone has been doing so before then, as far as I've seen.
"Internal logic" as the baseline requirement for something being "good" and "objective" is incredibly silly when, as the thread's demonstrated, you don't actually have to have the characters you've followed be the ones with actual arcs, or who relate on a thematic or emotional level to the story.
Ye what have been the results of the polar opposite of this? Again, pointing to the problems external logic has produced.
Between someone earlier in the thread saying liking internal logic over external gave him "higher standards" while admitting the context of those internal logics didn't actually matter, and me just now seeing that someone literally thought that it didn't actually matter that the dramatic stories he said were superior to current comedy were stories that had literally NOTHING to do with the grand dramatic ideas and stakes proposed by the story. All of the arguments for internal logic, an argument that insists the necessity of context and grounding, are constantly argued from an anti-context perspective.
Because it's was going to the point of calling out flaws that mattered to you personally without actually explaining those point other then saying "well this didn't happen so the story isn't good", yet again, you've barely defended the latter of this argument, telling me the only way for you to any point in this argument is to, again, call out personal issues that weren't even biog issues from the get go. In SA2, characters still has more motivation from either their own character or other actions, rather then just "what we expect".
To the point that when confronted with the fact that "internal logic" has never adhered to the sort of higher contextual logic most good drama actually does, the conversation just got reset with him explaining the difference between internal and external, as if that was ever in question. Everyone in this thread who supports "internal" as somehow being objectively better seems to crumble under even the slightest requirement of abstract thought.
I've already gone through most of this in the last point, even if you can be right about us "crumbling under the slightest requirements", again, when have you supported the external logic as good? Your entire argument depends on you being able to say SA2 is flawed on a scale nobody would even care about because you still got a good story out of it in the first place. What's even funny about it is that you simply go and say not adhering to the requirements that's only important to 1 or 2 people makes the story bad, not exactly why internal logic is bad. I will admit to the fact that I'm no big story analysis kind of guy, I just want something enjoyable, like most people, and SA2 somehow did a better job of that then Sonic Colors, and many people have felt that way long before that video was ever made.
Oh, and about "resetting with him explaining the difference between internal and external, as if that was ever in question", I advise you watch the video over again, cause I was resetting the conversation to get more to the point of that video, and try to get away from that ridiculous argument about what ToaArcan said about genwunners and you saying it's false for no reason, and no, "it has nothing to do with anyone in the topic" is not a reason, that was an excuse you pulled out when you crumbled under many people in your position being called out for what it was. THAT was the other reason why I reset the topic. Case in point, you could right 5 legible paragraphs to the flaws of SA2, but when do you get to the point that adhering to internal logic is actually a bad thing, even if we were to say you were right about SA2 being a bad story, which it wasn't, because it provided for more entertainment and interest compared to what we got from external logic. That's the biggest thing that's gone on for years: Constant bashing of classic 3D games and people going out of their way to explain why it's bad, constant praise of modern 3D titles with people going out of their way just to tell you it's good, and reasons always stem from the statement you regarded as false for no real reason.
However, like I said before, try bringing up a point to why external logic is somehow a good thing, or your only argument is calling out the flaws of games under internal, not why the logic itself is actually a bad thing. When I say watch the video again, I mean form 0:32 to 1:58.