#i dont think that is necessary for a satisfying resolution of their story

[caphayzardous]

arcane season 2 spoilers

anyway we all know I only care about viktor. I kinda feel like there were some major scenes missing there. like yeah i get what happened off-screen for all that, just that personally I am always interested in "watching someone become a cult leader" u know. or become a robot freaky guy. I think that a bit more of that corruption could have been shown because it's Interesting. and also because he ended up being kind of important to the Plot right but was not really.. Around. anyway large main cast and only 9 episodes I get it my fave will never have enough screentime etc etc.

and then also idk he had that happy cult where yes he could inhabit their bodies at will, but they did otherwise seeming to be thriving and having free will (I think?) and like. the turn from that to 'no I gotta take away the free will' is a bit like rushed LMAO. like yeah it was going to go that way but really, like that? sure he got exploded, plus it's da magic and stuff messing with him a bit, it's not just viktor-as-we-knew-him making that leap, but yeah man idk

all of this pairs alongside with my other complaint which is: Too Much of Jayce being Boring As Fuck again ! mans boring what can i say. whats up with that scene where he busts in and ruins like 4 different happy endings at once. I know that's ostensibly because some future viktor encouraged it, but then that act was also the turning point for vitkor fully 'evolving' people, so ? idk maybe he woulda got to that point anyway (you know what cults, literally all cults, are like)

Jinx was interesting, Vi and Jinx still have an interesting story together, the back and forth "one last betrayal, one last I've-always-got-your-back" maybe was a bit like drawn out right at the end but hey it suits 'em. I liked Jinx's arc w da kid. The entire time I was watching this season i was remembering someones commentary of s1 which was "damn this show really likes to kill children, huh" and uh well Yeah. rip but in terms of plot that one was real cheap and I think honestly boringly predictable to do the 'rip it all away again' thing for jinx. round 3!

A bit interesting watching Jinx go quiet depwession and Vi go rage depwession but perhaps also I just think after a whole season 1 of tragedy it was like man . . . can they catch a break though. and I dont think that having jinx do the sacrifice at the end was really necessary or satisfying. it was satisfying having those two unite. but I think jinx has actually died enough LMAO

Cait's arc. uhhh. like. man. woof. nah. pretty fucking egregious choices, words, and actions, there! she kinda fucked up a lot this season. I was vouchin for her and Vi in s1 but honestly by the end of this one I'm liek dude. like idk about that. I guess Vi already compromised or rewrote her morals when she agreed to uhh [checks notes] "Gas Civilians utilising Zaun's literal air ventilation systems" while hunting for her sister. so. sure. the cell makeout scene was so funny for how intensely censored it was.

Ekko was cool I liked His Episode w the parallel stuff that was interesting and also a bit sweet. he kinda faded into da background a bit all season and hten I thought he was going to come in clutch but he kinda didnt. I mean he did, in the way everyone did, but not for the actual resolution.

speaking of the resolution look idk space viktor scenes are ok they are like. ehh. ok. that imagery was all a bit wishy-washy 4 me. but it was alright. kinda sweet to have those two reunite sure but. idk their friendship breakup wasnt like...... I mean it was like a gradual falling out? sorta? 'jayce growing apart from viktor' and then 'viktor refusing to compromise his morals any further and deciding to leave' u know I think its nice they were partners at the end again but who am I kidding jayce is too boring for me to give a fuck his friendship (or... whatever we are calling it :) ) with viktor IS interesting but once its over im kinda like good riddance !

Mel is cool idk man I didnt expect her to disappear and come back a mage umm like she was a bit more interesting as a manipulator or even as A Person u know ? but good for her. As for Ambessa I will say she is. well. consistent. actually, until the robots thing - I know she's obsessed with obtaining A Weapon but that particular angle doesnt seem to align with her principles at all. but yknow. these things happen. still kind of tracks for obsession to win there.

Who else. uhh. why DID heimerdinger explode asfjsknd. did that serve any purpose. also Sevika had the MOST "this character will be killed off" energy for all of BOTH seasons I actually cant believe she lived to the end.

all in all. I liked season 1 more, I maaay have liked this one more if I had rewatched it beforehand, because I was playing a little bit of catch-up and the emotional points may have hit harder if I had rekindled my investment in the characters that s1 did stoke so well. I did like this one though. but. was not as moved by it and just kind of wanted to see how it all ended. and then it all ended and I was like ah ok. thats ok I guess.

in s1 I was all in for the tragedy and p sure I cried a bunch at various things lmao. in this one I felt like it was just hmm not cheap exactly but idk none of it really landed. maybe you can only watch vi scream and punch a wall so many times?

the animation still rocks though. (except why was one random guy in the last episode given normal eyes where everyone else is cartoon? it was so noticeable?) I like the sequences of Different Style as well. fun stuff.

did find it a bit funny how no one (of the main characters) is ever allowed to win in a one-on-one because they are all part of an equal and balanced Video Game its just kind of funny in the cooonstant match-ups in the show when you sort of pick that like. every fight is going to be interrupted, or made uneven by numbers, or etc etc for some reason and no one can ever appear to have too much of an advantage over anyone else, hahah.

[mousieta]

In and Wang have been kneeling in supplication at the altar of their Idol, Siam, for so long. Wang pleading for understanding and In for forgiveness.

Wang needs the truth of his father’s past, to reconcile that with his own understanding of himself, to put aside the darkened memory of Siam that has been filtered through his mother’s pain and the mechanism of Siam’s death. He knows there was another side to his father because he remembers bits of it but he’s been alone in that knowledge for so long.

In needs absolution for the ways - the so human and flawed ways - that he failed Siam.

Both of them are stuck here, and come in worship and agony, needing so much from the specter of a dead man. All they can find on this alter, however, is each other. All they can give each other is the possibility of healing from their past. And while this is essential for their ability to move forward, it is not a future in and of itself.

This time they’re spending at In’s refuge is a time for a reparation of their cracked foundations, it is a time of healing. Only after they’ve been through this can they begin to build a future - maybe together or maybe not. But this healing isn’t the future for either of them just a step that can give them the possibility of moving forward better than they’d come.

And as important as this time is, I don’t believe it is enough to build a romantic future for them. This time is about the past. I think they will need to move beyond this, heal apart, if they ever have a chance of successfully coming back together.

[formashimataichi]

Lot I agree with and yes his problem with loss and the way he was brought up is significant.

Here's where I'm coming from though. Karuta itself as a game doesn't reallly matter. What matters in any of these types of stories is not the sport itself, what matters and always will are the characters and their relationships. The sport and competition are useful insofar as they serve as a playground on which these characters develop and interact.

What makes Taichi so interesting as a character is that his relationship with Karuta exemplifies this principle the most. There are different levels of complexities through which it is expressed. First of all there's what we're talking about which is his inability, because of the way he brought up, to deal with loss in a healthy way. We see this in the flashbacks when he's praised and pushed to be the best at even Karuta and he stoops so low to maintain that as to steal Arata's glasses.

But there's also another dimension to it which is his feelings for Chihaya. Huge part (maybe the main reason) of why he worked hard to excell at it is to get noticed by her since it's the thing that has taken her whole focus. That's why he wanted to win against her that badly.

Thens theres another layer to it which is Arata. His inferiority complex with regards to Arata signifies both "struggles". Arata is someone that he (believes) he can't beat. He thinks they're not or can't be even on the same level. That highlights his problematic relationship with losing and not being the best at something as he was pushed since he was a kid. But not only that, Arata's excellence at Karuta grabs Chihaya's entire attention. Her passion for the sport starts with him and he continues to be someone she looks up to. (She later develops her own reasons for reaching the top that has more to do with her rivalry with shinobu)

Apologoies for the long introduction. But this kind of mishmash of struggles and renaltionships fueled by his anxities and insecuries manifesting in his relationship with Karuta is exactly why I don't think like you think, which is that his arc is about coping with loss and therefore losing was necessary. That's merely one aspect to the story. There are different lessons that can be learned and each could take his arc in a different direction. Just to give you an example I can totally see a conclusion where he ends up with Chihaya but ultimately loses to Arata. The arc could be him learning that not being the best at Karuta isn't the end of the world and that appreciation and self worth dont and shouldnt come from his skill at Karuta. That lesson can be validated by Chihaya for whome excellence at Karuta was not a deciding factor in seeing his worth and deciding to be with him.

I could imagine the opposite where he does beat Arata but doesn't win over chihaya. And the lesson can be that it was insane from the beginning to try to win a person over using Karuta and how that developed an unhealthy relation in which he tied his self worth and performance and enjoyment of Karuta to Chihaya(we see that clearly since its been pointed out several times that when she's there he underperforms) . So "losing chihaya" to Arata wasn't the end of the world and his enjoyment of Karuta shouldn't depend on his attempt to win over Chihaya and that he can find fulfillmemt in working hard at something and excelling at it against all odds but free of the insecurities he brought with him initially.

There are many ways through which he can find self worth be it within Karuta or outside it. My problem with your take is as I said the emphasis on one aspect which is the competitive loss. (Also I think it's kinda misleading to talk about loss. He loses a lot and keeps pushing himself all the time. Sense of cope with not being the best or at Arata's level is more accurate). But if you add the Chihaya dimension you could make a coherent but also satisfying conclusion in which he loses in both aspects but finds self worth.

Guess my point is everyone should stop dismissing others criticisms and for everyone to stop seeing their interpertation as the only valid one.

P.s. I still prefer my arc in which he loses in all aspects but doesn't find self fulfillment either inside or outside of Karuta.

Sorry for rambling for so long.

I don’t mind rambling! I ramble all the time, as I’m sure you’re already aware, lol. And I think I understand what the miscommunication between us is now. I don’t think at all that loss is the all-defining trait of his character arc or the only one by which his character resolutions will ultimately be made. It’s just the one I’ve focused on specifically in my posts since yesterday because of the issue I had with people’s interpretation of that depiction of loss to begin with. I wholeheartedly agree that Taichi’s arc conclusion is also definitely going to take into account his feelings regarding Chihaya and Arata respectively; those are also really important closures he has to reach in order to be able to move forward, and they tie in just as heavily to his issues with self-worth. I’ve discussed those in detail elsewhere, though, so I wanted to focus on the loss aspect specifically with that post I made yesterday, because the overwhelmingly negative reaction to it kind of baffles me. That’s not to say that I think people with other view points are outright wrong or that people don’t deserve their right to criticism. Any narrative is going to warrant that after all, and that’s the beauty of discourse! But I feel like a lot of people who are upset with where Taichi’s arc goes tend to feel like Suetsugu abruptly ended it with the Qualifiers and defined it by that loss—even the main translation team that had been handling scalantions for years quit after the Qualifiers were over, because they weren’t satisfied with the direction his story took—and to me at least, I don’t think that was the end of his story, and there’s still resolutions left to be made by him afterward. I can definitely understand people still being doubtful to a degree, of course, but I simply hope people can be patient enough to see Taichi’s ultimate endgame before they decide whether what everything he went through was worth it or not and if that loss was really the end for him. I have my own doubts about things, too, but I want to afford Suetsugu that chance to prove herself first, I guess. I know that’s not something everyone will feel about similarly, but maybe I feel about it that way because I’m a writer myself. 😂

[bombshellsandbluebells]

one of the things I really love about the writing of the first Pirates of the Caribbean film is the use of misunderstandings.

I think a lot of the times in writing misunderstandings are used as a cheap way to create unnecessary drama, and they’re usually more annoying than satisfying. I think that’s usually because the misunderstandings don’t do much for the story other than pushing back the resolution. They’re like an unnecessarily and usually easily avoidable (if people just talked to each other) stumbling block and not something that actually shakes the plot much. And typically the audience knows all the information and so the misunderstanding isn’t surprising in anyway.

And that’s where POTC1 is different.

When Elizabeth gets taken aboard the Black Pearl, she assumes that revealing she’s the governor’s daughter will put her in more danger because of what the maid told her. So she gives the false name Turner, not realizing that the child of Bootstrap Bill is exactly who the pirates are looking for and need. Her attempt to put herself in less danger ironically actually puts her in more danger.

And the misunderstanding drives the story. It’s because they think she’s Bootstrap’s daughter that they keep Elizabeth onboard, making it necessary for Will and Jack to chase them.

And the best part is that the audience isn’t in on the secret the whole time. We figure it out in time with Elizabeth. When she gives the name Turner, it feels like a perfectly reasonable decision. It isn’t until the pirates react to it that the audience realizes something is wrong. And we don’t fully understand why until later. Unraveling the misunderstanding adds a layer of mystery and complexity to the plot.

The misunderstanding isn’t just an easy writing gimmick to keep the story from arriving at the resolution too early and it isn’t something that the audience knows is coming. It also isn’t something that could have just been solved by having the characters talk to each other, because there was no way for Elizabeth to realize giving the name Turner would turn out worse for her.

It’s a brilliant example of a misunderstanding being used in a smart, nuanced way to drive the story and add complexity.

[danfanciesphil]

I disagree with you slightly. I do believe that tension is important to drive stories forward, but tension does not equal angst. You can have action and conflict without dipping into angst. And also, one example of angst-free multi chaptered fics are fics that explore the development of a relationship. Maybe not the longest out there, but friends-to-lovers and slow-burns are entire genres of fanfiction.

they all have angst! they do i promise!! friends to lovers will have a dip in the middle which is angsty, it makes the resolution sweeter. 

honestly, i would call the fic im writing now the closest i have ever gotten to non-angst lmao. it’s barely got any, it’s just the smidgen it needs to make it interesting. it just wouldn’t be a story without any worry for the characters. 

im gonna prove this to you with some technical stuff now because im a writing nerd and ive studied story-writing for years. 

I use the following two structures when planning my writing: 

or

Depending on the complexity of the story, and the direction I want to take it, I will pick the structure that fits best. In the first, you can see that the tension rises to a mid point, then hits an all time high, then falls back to a reasonable level. This is what I did with Birthday Sex (though in that fic the climax happens a little earlier on than pictured. Hint: the climax is dan’s dramatic hospitalisation). 

For L’Histoire Française, I used the second structure. 

In this one, there is virtually no tension, and instead there are ‘pinch points’ along the way which serve as things to keep the reader’s interest (Jonah, John interrupting them, Phil’s flirtatious comments). The climax comes near the very end in this structure. It serves a purpose to pull the rug out from under the reader’s comprehension of the story (briefly) in order to surprise them and draw them out of their complacency. if the story turns dramatically (good to bad) then the reader will pretty much always want to read on to see it resolve itself.  Pinch points and climaxes are different things. Pinch points are the little blips of excitement that keep the pages turning. The climax is a necessary focal point of the story, without which, it would have no narrative, no point, no satisfying conclusion. 

Let’s take a random example of a popular love story. I’m going to use Pride and Prejudice. 

It takes the first structure, but the point still applies. 

Act One- Lizzie lives with her family in a poor-ish household- Inciting incident: she goes to a ball and meets mr darcy/thinks he’s handsome- Second thoughts: he’s a prick, calls her a name and she’s like... hell nah. - Climax of Act One: Jane gets sick at Mr Bingley’s house- Obstacle: Lizzie is forced to spend time with Mr Darcy- Obstacle: Mr Collins conundrumAct Two- Midpoint (big twist): Mr Bingley dumps Jane- Obstacle: Mr Collins marries Charlotte- Disaster: Kitty runs off with Mr Wickham- Crisis: Mr Darcy runs off to find themAct ThreeCLIMAX OF STORY- Mr Darcy fuckin proposes and Lizzie wrings him out to dry- She realises he broke up Mr Bingley and Jane out of concern & paid for Kitty’s wedding- She realises he’s a cool dude and falls in love- End: he re proposes, she says yes. 

Now, that’s simplified obvs, but without that motherfuckin proposal and rejection, do you see how tame the story would be? Nobody would consider a novel that was just about a headstrong woman and a grumpy dude falling for each other with a few bumps in the road as one of the greatest love stories of all time. Stories need the angst. 

Other examples: Cinderella (the angsty climax is her stepfolk locking her up after the ball so the prince wont find her). Snow White (she dies and the prince has to save her). Stardust (she thinks he leaves to go back to his original love and she almost dies as a result). 

I’m having a really hard time coming up with classic love stories that have happy endings to use as examples lol, but there are some. I dont mean to go on at anyone about this, i just feel very strongly haha. Anyway, that’s my opinion on it, and that’s what I’ve spent years learning and perfecting. 

[fandombead]

These aren’t bad tips, Id just like to add to a few. I’ve been writing a long time and would like to help~ this is all just my 2 cents and does not need to be taken at all, I just love saving these sorts of tips and things-

1. This is a good point! Lighter scenes in the middle of the angst help s lot. It doesn’t have to even be funny, like how, say, Guardians of the Galaxy does. But letting the characters breathe, give them some reprieve…I agree! And even if it doesn’t end happy, I’d say give them a satisfying resolution~

2. I used to also think about this a lot when I was starting out! It’s good to use the best word for the situation. You don’t want to have your readers constantly googling words you use that are uncommon or out of place~ there’s nothing wrong with using plain words! Big words are great, but not just because they’re uncommon or make it seem better. Readability is most important, and no one will think less of the writing. ^^ it’s handy to just have a thesaurus around! I’ve seen too many stories that were made worse by the unnecessary use of big words that ultimately made me not want to read. I don’t want that to happen to anyone’s works. This is great in moderation and amazing for titling your fics!

3. Love this one and am still working on improving this myself~ it’s great for dropping hints for your readers, and observant ones may pick up on them, hehe

4. Character descriptions are good! It truly depends on your writing style, but I think this is good advice for the beginning of a story: dont info dump things that aren’t necessary in the moment. But if you space the descriptions out, it’s not so bad. I think this is great advice for not needing to describe every detail of the character(s)’ design/physical appearance nor the setting. Just the important parts and the rest can come sprinkles later. (Illustrations can save time if you can embed them)

5. This one is said so well that I need not add anything! Well done here~!

Yeah writing is a skill you just adapt as you go. You find what works for you and that might be very different from someone else! The original post had a bunch of great insights and it’s neat to see you talked about ones I think more people should see~

Random tips to make your stories better!

Now I’m not saying I’m a pro at this; I’m still learning too. I’m just sharing stuff I’ve found makes my writing better.

1. Try to use humor to lighten up a dark mood. I understand that angst really doesn’t have humor in it, but if you’re doing a long piece of angst a little humor will keep the reader hooked and keep your writing from becoming too dark to see in.

2. Find words that not a lot of people know. This’ll make your writing more interesting to read.

Bad Ex: Hilda found the joke funny, even in the dire situation.

Good Ex: Hilda found the joke facetious, even in the dire situation.

3. If you want to make a point really clear, use the same or similar words in your passage. This’ll give the reader the hint that what you’re talking about is important.

4. Give minimal to no character descriptions. The reader shouldn’t have to sit through a long character description. If there’s an important detail about them, include it, but otherwise just keep it out.

5. Think about the style of your story! Some stories can make you feel like the author is talking to you even though the story is in 3rd person, while others can give you a bunch of different people points of view in one story. Just think about how you want your reader to feel after the story is done.

I hope this helps! :3

[radpribadi]

The (necessary) illusion of Model United Nations

I have been doing MUN for the past 3 years almost on a non-stop basis. I used to be obsessed about it and what it can offer. Done those both nationally and internationally. Now as I slowly retire from the scene, I can say this with a fresher eye: MUN is an illusion, however, a necessary illusion for a period of time. I guess I would not introduce what MUN is (if you dont know, google it.) But what I really want to stress in here is the point that doing MUN is important, but not too much. I have met so many people around the world who seem to be addicted with MUN. Some nations are far more insane about it than others. Venezuelans go to international MUNs such as Harvard National MUN with its astronomical costs despite their economic crisis back home. Indians and South Asians in general could be crazier, a lot of MUN people I met from there did at least more than 50 (FIFTY) TO 60 (SIXTY) MUN conferences since their high school times (average Indonesian MUN delegates I observed participated in about 6-10 MUNs becausw it is indeed expensive). And man, they are ambitious as heck. The Dutch created United Netherlands, basically a "national team" dedicated to win international MUNs and the Peruvians created Peruvian Universities, a team of multiple universities in Peru that won many world-class awards. But what's the deal with it anyway? It has to do a lot with the idea that you simulate the process to world peace. In a way, yes MUN could be an embodiment of world peace itself. When you participate in international level MUNs like Harvard World MUN or The European International MUN, you do meet people from other countries. And they brought with them stories and cultures which would be great to be exchanged with ours. Meeting people of all races and kinds do give your eyes a great opening and instill that idea that "Man, I am in charge of making peace in this world now". You will be put around young "diplomats" from Africa, Europe, Asia, Latin America, Russia, and all corners of the world, and you are tasked to solve problems, complex and sophisticated problems like world hunger, refugee crisis in Europe, war in the Middle East, post-war state building in Western Sahara, or as one of my experiences would say, structural reform of the European Union. However, those are illusions. Yes, those topics seems to be complex and sophisticated, but I can tell from my experience, with young high school and college students that have no deep field experience about the problems they are tasked to solve, gathering and discussing to find a solution, they end up oversimplifying the problems at hand. Really. For example, in MUN, there is something I call the "standard package of solution" a.k.a. overused template of solution, a.k.a. fricking cliche bla-bla-blas. They are solutions that go around "regional cooperation, cooperation with media, long term education, creating a new UN body on X issue, financing assistance from developed countries to developing countries, campaign to promote X idea" and stuff. Man, you could go to MUN in Jakarta and then do one in Boston and you would find that package. Whether you discuss about refugee crisis, economic reform, or warfare in the Middle East, you will find that package. It is a sign of inexperienced students trying to solve deep and complex world problems. And that's what you get, the illusion of having big grand ideas that will change the world but untested on grounds, and unseen on the fields. Talking about changing the world, let us observe how MUN can change the world. Usually after passing a resolution that goes through tough political fight, you would feel accomplished, that there is something you contributed towards world peace. Again, this is an illusion. Most (and I think by "most" is 98% of the) resolutions do not even get any recognition from the real United Nations. They are usually just a .docx file gone minutes after the awarding session, losing all the importance after we found out who the Best Delegate is. (And with the current popular scoring system, ironically, the Best Delegate could be a delegate that actually lost in the draft resolution voting). The duration of the conferences also plays it part. Usually MUN lasts about 2 to 6 days. And then, that's it. Of course, it could seem to be grueling (trust me, a 6 days MUN conference will exhaust you) and it does give us a sense of accomplishment somehow, like after putting a long good fight. But hey, changes aren't made in 6 days. Real changes come after months or years of work. This will also serve for elite level meeting, say the Parliament. Passing a new law won't change things. But enforcing it, which of course could take years to accomplish, will change things. The danger of this world-problems-solver illusion is that it could create a kind of elitist bubble. Smart young students going to MUNs and glad that they solved problems yet do not realize that they are far off from the reality. And even more dangerous if they are satisfied with their MUN awards and accomplishment, perceiving that those are indeed achievements they can be proud of. Winning one or two Best Delegate awards, they are hungry for more and jump in to more conferences. It will seriously distract them from doing real work with longer time commitments to actually help people. The most terrifying possibility is that they will feel that their winning of MUN is enough to keep them satisfied, enough to make them a great person. Yet, with all of those dangers and illusions, I still however think that MUN is a necessary illusion. I would say that the importance of it lays in the divide between constructive imagination and destructive obsession. MUN indeed have strong benefits, and I have to credit my MUN experience for a lot of things that has made me who I am today. Negotiation, public speaking, persuasion, those are the qualities I learn from MUN, and without my MUN experience perhaps I would be less sharpened on them. It is indeed began from a constructive imagination, the way you imagine yourself as a diplomat tasked to solve complex problems ahead of you. And I personally think that the most valuable thing is friendship won. With MUN, you really meet people from all degrees and spectrum, and you really can see the world, although perhaps still superficially, but wide enough to humble your existence. Friendship, I think, is the most important benefit of doing Model United Nations. Just like gathering with people who have the same interest with you, MUN would be a great start for a long and lifetime friendship from the collective participation in an illusion. A necessary illusion, indeed. Nowadays, there are far more people doing MUN than when I began doing it three years ago. Yet I saw that some of them are going on the trajectory of destructive obsession part of the illusion. High schoolers are more than ever ambitious to win the Best Delegate awards, some even beat college-level experienced delegates. Now before they are trapped into the elitist bubble I have mentioned before, they have to learn when to finally stop doing MUN and start doing real work of change. If you are a seasoned MUN delegate and you start to keep thinking about "how could I win the next Best Delegate award", you have to stop. Because you already miss the point of MUN. The conferences itself should never be the end point of your achievements. In fact, I believe that it should be the beginning point of your real work for the society. I have many friends from MUN who are working on real work of changes like in climate and environmental issue, inter-religious relations, and others. I myself am working with my friends to build a filmmaking movement that focuses on social and political impact and to give voice to the voiceless, the Gerilya Film Mahasiswa. And I can say that this all began with my MUN experience, with the question on how can we all do something after passing a resolution. The "Best Delegate" award and certificate will blur itself to the background when the question "Okay, then what have you done to help the community around you?" arises. I believe that everyone could learn from MUN, and it is not and never about being the Best Delegate. It is about actually working and fighting for the values that we move forward on the resolutions. Yes, we could be illusioned on solving complex world problems, but without those illusion, we might never be initiated to dream big. The illusion of MUN is necessary to spark inspiration and imagination to solve world problems and therefore initiate action. We do not have to solve the refugee crisis or be the middle-person in a civil war somewhere now, but we can begin by little and small steps, going ahead. We should always ask ourselves this: "What is my resolution to help the people around me? And what have I done about it?" Because world peace and happiness is never about the United Nations fighting on it. World peace and happiness is about everyone, you and I, him and her, us and them, fighting on it. So, what is your resolution, delegate? #ModelUnitedNations

[viralhottopics]

‘Ghost Recon: Wildlands’ review: Ambitious but poorly executed

Ghost Recon: Wildlands isnt just an open world game its a daunting expanse of unrealized potential.

SEE ALSO: 5 tips you’ll want to know before you start ‘Ghost Recon: Wildlands’

At first blush, Ghost Recon: Wildlands is a mesmerizing experience. The rocky hills in Itacua, the first province in the game, create a beautiful, treacherous landscape that is glorious to behold. But Wildlands quickly reveals itself as a husk, devoid of any life or meaningful story, with more veneer than actual substance.

A good start to the story breaks bad quickly

Wildlands narrative starts off compellingly enough. You play as a Ghost Recon operator, call-sign Nomad, in the wild lands of Bolivia, under the CIAs Operation Kingslayer. Your mission is to clear out the Santa Blanca cartel and rid Bolivia of its narco-state ties. But it isnt long before you discover the myriad flaws and plotholes that run rampant throughout the games latter half.

Yuri and Polito, the first provinces buchones (minibosses), were a fascinating pair to track down. Their cringe-inducing talk of necrophilia was enough to motivate me along the missions that would lead to their inevitable execution. Unfortunately, Yuri and Politos end was one of the only satisfying story conclusions in the game.

Everything in Wildlands takes place in an open world, which means that the buchones can be taken down in any particular order. Which sounds great until youre stuck in choice paralysis. I got so overwhelmed by the sheer volume of provinces to explore and buchones to execute that I began to resent the cartel map and its execution targets. Ten hours after starting the game, its repetitive nature and tone deaf narrative caught up with me.

The deeper Wildlands thready narrative gets, the more stale the ideas feel. Its flaws start with inconsistencies in the story but completely unravels when yet another cinematic rewrites a major plot point. But it was the ending both of them that was the worst offense. Not only is Wildlands narrative conclusion a massive letdown in terms of tension and story resolution, its treatment of drug trafficking and cartels is appallingly ignorant and still somehow heavy-handed.

Theres a way to handle those themes that doesnt rely on stereotypes or tired tropes. The Mafia games, especially the most recent installment in the series, provides a far more nuanced perspective of what it means to run a large drug operation. Lincoln Clay, Mafia 3s protagonist, and his gang leaders feel tangible, believable. Wildlands couldnt decide whether to be serious or satirical, evident by its bombastic characters that felt too ridiculous to be taken seriously, even if that was the purpose. Wildlands is a poignant reminder that painting broad strokes on top of existing real world issues is not the way to tell a compelling story.

Sniping is everything and your drone is your only friend

Story isnt always necessary to enjoying a game but, sadly in this case, Wildlands misses the mark almostall the way across the board. Thankfully, between decent gunplay, enjoyable long-range combat, and a drone that has more personality than anyone else on your squad, it manages to claw its way back to mediocrity.

The gunplay is mediocre in comparison to any number of third person shooters, including Ubisofts own The Division, mostly because the contextual cover system is twelve ways to ridiculous. The cover system is unreliable, accounting for at least a third of my deaths it was hard to stay fully protected because there was little indication as to what was considered true cover and what was only a cosmetic hiding spot. The latter obscured my line of sight but didnt give me any protection from enemy fire. But in spite of the unintuitive cover system and the shrug-worthy gunplay, there were a handful of moments that made the game worth playing.

The long-range snipe is where Wildlands really shines. There isnt much to shooting from the hip, even after youve put points into that particular skill. But the shots I made with my eye down the barrel or through a high-powered rifle scope were often the most exhilarating they challenged me to think tactically, rather than just react to the environment. The quick audible feedback, followed by the target dropping out of his sniper tower when the shot struck true from 300 meters away (regardless of whether or not it alerted the enemy to my position) was often the best part of beginning an encounter.

The majority of the game is played at long range, so moments like this are fairly frequent, which means theres a lot of fist-pumping along the way.

Sadly, the only things that your AI squad is good for are fist-bumping one another in background chatter and soaking up sicario bullets. The background information on Holt, Midas, and Weaver indicates that they have special roles within the team. Unfortunately, those roles arent realized within gameplay. Youre still the one laying C4 charges and blowing up trucks full of coke, even though you have a demolitions expert in the squad. So, while its easier to play stealth-heavy missions with the AI (as their presence doesnt alert enemies), theyre little more than meat shields in the heat of battle.

Your drone, however, is your constant companion. In most altercations with either UNIDAD, the military police, or the cartel, the drone was the only way I stayed alive. Flying it (while safely in cover, of course) allowed me to mark targets, blow up a group of enemies, distract another group, and even revive a teammate remotely. My drone was my in-game bestie the only thing that kept us apart was a drone jammer and I always, always dealt with those first.

Vast spaces too empty for their own good

From breathtaking vistas to lush jungle rivers all the way to desolate salt flats, Wildlands has constructed a collection of incredible landscapes to explore. While Bolivias existence as a narco-state is a work of fiction, the environment is as close to real life as you can get without hopping on a plane (or three). Its a joy to ride a dirt bike around the early provinces, capturing shots of sunrises and twinkling stars, but the world is otherwise empty.

Strangely, the more you explore, the more overwhelming the world feels, in spite of the desolation in the environment. It takes a long time to travel from mission to mission the roads and mountains are unforgiving and expansive. As you uncover more intelligence within each province, the TACMAP becomes the most unsavory place in the game. Without a way to filter, it devolves into a lumbering beast with a plethora of icons obscuring the map and making navigation a chore.

Open world games shouldnt be daunting. Rockstar and 2K Games both managed to create open worlds that dont feel like youre drowning in them. So why didnt Ubisofts land?

Outside of the cartel hit list, Wildlands does very little to acknowledge progression. Theres the odd soundbite from DJ Perico, Santa Blancas propaganda-spouting mouthpiece, but there is nothing in the cinematics or the gameplay that recognizes the cartels destabilization. The videos from El Suenos perspective feel disjointed enough that its hard to believe that any part of the cartels operations are aware of one another. Story progression felt like a checklist of requirements rather than the interwoven narrative that it could have been.

Crackdown tackled a similar structure to Wildlands, but integrated the gang leaders executions into both the story and the gameplay. Each gang leader that you took out led to the decreased effectiveness of the gang itself. Taking out a particular leader could mean that enemies began to carry pistols instead of assault rifles; or typically well-defended hideouts would see their numbers drastically decreased. Sometimes, you had to fight certain leaders first before you could even think about tackling some of the games bigger fights.

Wildlands gives the player full reign of what to do and where to go next a true open world experience. But as I progressed through the game, it didnt feel like my actions impacted the game. It was a matter of finishing out a set of missions in order to get to the next set of missions, in order to maybe get the hint of a story. Crackdown, on the other hand, demonstrated through both gameplay and narrative how important it was to be tactical and strategic about the order of execution.

Huge, open world games need diverse soundscapes

Wildlands requires a lot of point A to point B travel but doesnt offer much in the way of companionship. Your options are either to listen to your squad mates drone on, or to endure the same two songs that play on the radio over and over again until youre fairly certain that you are, in fact, in hell. The combination of the two work to create an aggravating experience in between the major story beats.

Theres some satisfaction in looping through the terrain in order to pick up the plethora of meaningful collectibles, but even that wears thin.

Theres a hollowness to how your Ghost, call-sign Nomad, interacts with their squad mates. While Nomad perks up with comments about the mission every once in awhile, Midas, Weaver, and Holt are usually silent. The intermittent broisms including various musings about sex with twenty-two-year-olds and snorting coke to cope with altitude sickness cement how vacuous the game presents its operators. Granted, its a Tom Clancy game and exaggeration is usually the order of the day, but the dialogue writing feels downright lazy after more than a couple of hours with the squad.

There are only so many times a person can hear this medal has a coca leaf on it, thats kinda cool before they are driven to summoning an Elder God in order to end all existence.

Despite its best efforts, Wildlands can still be fun (with friends)

Somehow, out of the cocktail of mediocrity that the game serves up, Wildlands still manages to be kind of fun in partnered co-op. Hopping into a party, bantering with friends and taking down sicarios is pretty much the only way to enjoy playing the game.

With the exception of the day/night cycle, the entire multiplayer experience was disjointed. Weather conditions, radio audio, and incidental chatter was delivered locally, rather than synced across all players in a session. It could be a torrential downpour in my instance of the game while the sun was shining brightly in yours. But in spite of that, the multiplayer experience is what initially sold me on the game.

Cooperative play set a tactical atmosphere that solo play missed. While AI squad mates wandered around of their own accord, getting in the way of my tactical plans, real-life companions and I were able to coordinate our efforts more explicitly.

Everything except stealth missions were easier with human players because we had specialized our Ghosts skill trees. My co-op partners skillset was best suited for vehicle combat, so he often drove. My Ghost was far better at reconnaissance, so I would scout ahead with my drone, marking targets and blowing up small groups of sicarios along the way.

Were not booking a return trip to Bolivia anytime soon

Ghost Recon: Wildlands is an enormous departure from what makes Ghost Recon a reputable tactical squad-based shooter franchise. Beyond narrative fluff, the three AI Ghosts are indistinguishable from one another. Gone are the series staple of individual commands for squad members and the teams specialized skills in favor of a trite story with an empty, repetitive world. The mish-mash of ambitious, poorly executed ideas detract from what could have made the game truly great.

Sniping is a lot of fun. And roaming the gorgeous Bolivian landscape is absolutely breathtaking, no matter which province you find yourself in. But Wildlands myriad missteps are experiential landmines that blow up in your face in almost every province, with immersion and enjoyment suffering as collateral damage.

Amanda Farough has been writing about video and tabletop games for a number of years. Her tastes are eclectic and varied, with a love for strategy and action. You can find her on Twitter at @amandafarough, where she is likely shipping her Overwatch main, D. Va, and Lucio. You can also find her previous work at her personal site.

Read more: http://on.mash.to/2oysKUY

from ‘Ghost Recon: Wildlands’ review: Ambitious but poorly executed

[fuckblizzardbearlover]

Bold of u to think u know the character better than the ppl who wrote it. Especially since everything u like about her was written by them.

She isnt going to hell through no fault of her own. She is because shes an evil monster. Thats the whole point, they even wrote a short story about it.

She was killed by arthas and started to go to a good happy place, then he enslaved her. Shes been so focused on getting her revenge and maybe going back to heaven after she does that she enslaved ppl, tortured, did worse than arthas. There is a lobotomized woman slave in undercity, u tested weapons meant to wipe out all life on living ppl. She was so obsessed with hate and revenge she became a monster and thats why she went to the maw. Because she CHOSE to be evil.

I swear to god you ppl act like she is the only female character and only trauma survivor. Yall like to go "some ppl enslave and commit genocide to cope" and its frankly so ableist and disrespectful to trauma survivors. Trauma doesnt turn u evil. It can give u issues but "25 years isnt long to..". BULLSHIT . Most victims dont become murderers to cope. Using tousands of victims (the forsaken) as tools to get your revenge is not a coping mechanism.

Also havent you heard of the cycle of abuse? Frequently SOME survivors cope by becoming abusers themselvses.

And thats whag the writers have shown.

Sylvannas is an evil person, who was shown in her short story to have already accepted that "letting the ppl who trust you die, to win a war, is necessary", who cared only about her own anger and hurt 10s of thousands of ppl to satisfy herself.

Jaina on the other hand had a really dark moment and almost gave in. But she accepted her pain and steeling herself against further betrayal she tried to do something good. Heck she didnt even get through it without help. She needed friends to bring her out of her anger but when it came down to it she CHOSE to cry instead of rage. She chose to help ppl instead of hurt them. And when she felt betrayed again she even became suicidal. U can see in the way she takks to her mother she came to kul tiras knowing the penalty for treason is death, she didnt fight it. She wanted to die. But her mother came back for her and helped her through it. And resolute she was not only worthy of life but also she had the ability to help others she saved kul tiras and others.

What happened with sylvannas was TRAGIC bit jist cus tragic things happen to you doesnt mean you arent responsible for your own actions. Sylvannas lets her pain and fear rule her cus she doesnt want to heal, she wants to hurt ppl. U can see it in before the storm. She had a crisis of faith when she saw the humans and forsaken getting along. Because if the living do not hate the dead outright then that means her sisters rejected her because of who sylvannas was as a person, not cus she is forsaken.

And it makes me sad that you ppl cant see that amazing story. The tragic fall of a poor woman who refused to heal, refused to try to live, refused to feel anything but anger and rage, who let her trauma define her and hurt everyone with her selfishness. And juxtapose her story with jaina who was brutalized and betrayed, or alextrasza who was enslaved, alleria who lost everything, talia who grew strong despite being orphaned, moira who stood fast and refused to be defined by her father.

Warcraft is full of amazing women, their primary book writer is a woman, and there are many heroic women, and heroic trauma survivors.

But yall focus on the one who was always a villain (edge of night was written 9 years ago), ignore all the other amazing characters, because like sylvannas you dont want to make something good, you just want to use your anger to hurt ppl.

as much as i remain convinced blizzard doesnt know how to write their own characters, and certainly not the women- sylvanas was only killed and raised ~25 years prior to the events of battle for azeroth. that is not enough time for a lot of humans to work through trauma, let alone an elf who lived thousands of years prior to that. no wonder homegirl is snapping this hard, let alone the whole stave off the hell that awaits her through no fault of her own. arthas took cruel pleasure in making her undeath cruel and unbearable, and she didn’t even get the satisfaction of helping to kill him. and shes got to go to Hell™️ bc of him too? id be making deals with the devil too