Watch the Footage archive

Sicon112 wrote:

NeverSlender wrote:In one of Drunyas posts, I don't have time to find it atm, he basically said we were gonna go, "give us a happy ending or we're not playing anymore", which would be US throwing a temper tantrum.

Anyhow, I'm off out for a bit. Be back in a few hours.

We aren't going to just quit playing, and we have never suggested doing so. We have, however, said that we will do everything possible to force them into it, just because that is our will as players; to strive for the best possible ending. If they cannot compensate for that, too bad for them.

Just my personal feelings here, but in my mind the idea of 'the best possible ending' and 'happy ending' are not always the same thing. I'm sure a lot of people have similar feelings. Sometimes a story comes to a sad ending and yet in your mind how the story ended was somehow right, even if it wasn't happy. It's like how Grave of The Fireflies (which I personally think is a depressing and yet wonderful movie) or, indeed, Romeo and Juliet gain their power from how they played out and while we may long for a happier ending, we can still see the point in the bad one. To add a happy ending would be to cheapen the story. I can't remember where I read this (I suspect it was you-know-where), but there was some guy who made the point that you can do horrible things to characters, you may even permit your story to come to a bad end, but "if you offer no light along the way, no possible hope or chance for redemption, then your story will be eaten by the grue of indifference."

So of course we aren't going to throw tantrums or anything, it's just that we need SOME hope to aspire to, some light to fight for. And of course, here things are a bit different. Of real people are at stake here, with lives and choices. Romeo and Juliet aren't a message anymore, so why should they have to die to prove some law of pathos?

Scarab wrote:Just my personal feelings here, but in my mind the idea of 'the best possible ending' and 'happy ending' are not always the same thing. I'm sure a lot of people have similar feelings. Sometimes a story comes to a sad ending and yet in your mind how the story ended was somehow right, even if it wasn't happy. It's like how Grave of The Fireflies (which I personally think is a depressing and yet wonderful movie) or, indeed, Romeo and Juliet gain their power from how they played out and while we may long for a happier ending, we can still see the point in the bad one. To add a happy ending would be to cheapen the story. I can't remember where I read this (I suspect it was you-know-where), but there was some guy who made the point that you can do horrible things to characters, you may even permit your story to come to a bad end, but "if you offer no light along the way, no possible hope or chance for redemption, then your story will be eaten by the grue of indifference."

So of course we aren't going to throw tantrums or anything, it's just that we need SOME hope to aspire to, some light to fight for. And of course, here things are a bit different. Of real people are at stake here, with lives and choices. Romeo and Juliet aren't a message anymore, so why should they have to die to prove some law of pathos?

Because this is their story. Romeo and Juliet don't get a happy ending, or even much of a hopeful ending, but that's the way things are. There won't always be "light along the way," because the story simply wasn't written that way. Does it make Shakespeare a bad person for writing it? No. Does it make us bad people for sending them back to it? No. Why? Because no matter how funny Bromeo is or how awkward their relationship is now that they're here, at the end of the day, they are fictional characters who don't belong on this side of the Wall. That's flat.

IslaKariese wrote:

Scarab wrote:Just my personal feelings here, but in my mind the idea of 'the best possible ending' and 'happy ending' are not always the same thing. I'm sure a lot of people have similar feelings. Sometimes a story comes to a sad ending and yet in your mind how the story ended was somehow right, even if it wasn't happy. It's like how Grave of The Fireflies (which I personally think is a depressing and yet wonderful movie) or, indeed, Romeo and Juliet gain their power from how they played out and while we may long for a happier ending, we can still see the point in the bad one. To add a happy ending would be to cheapen the story. I can't remember where I read this (I suspect it was you-know-where), but there was some guy who made the point that you can do horrible things to characters, you may even permit your story to come to a bad end, but "if you offer no light along the way, no possible hope or chance for redemption, then your story will be eaten by the grue of indifference."

So of course we aren't going to throw tantrums or anything, it's just that we need SOME hope to aspire to, some light to fight for. And of course, here things are a bit different. Of real people are at stake here, with lives and choices. Romeo and Juliet aren't a message anymore, so why should they have to die to prove some law of pathos?

Because this is their story. Romeo and Juliet don't get a happy ending, or even much of a hopeful ending, but that's the way things are. There won't always be "light along the way," because the story simply wasn't written that way. Does it make Shakespeare a bad person for writing it? No. Does it make us bad people for sending them back to it? No. Why? Because no matter how funny Bromeo is or how awkward their relationship is now that they're here, at the end of the day, they are fictional characters who don't belong on this side of the Wall. That's flat.

I dunno, I'm not sure it's really that simple. Romeo and Juliet's story DID have 'moments of light' where you actually think 'hey maybe they can get through this' and in the end their deaths DID put an end to their family's pointless feuding, so there was light in that. The only difference between fiction and reality is that in fiction, everything happens for a reason.

I do agree with you on the fact that they probably can't stay here, though. They don't belong, they don't fit. There's really no getting around that at this point.

Sorry, I didn't mean to jump-start another argument! Scarab makes a good point about endings - we don't know what the best ending is at this point, so it's not really fair to talk about imposing "a better one." But at least I kind of understand where some of you were going with that.

I would just like to point out one more thing though. A lot of this discussion seems to be looking at the ARG as a piece of fiction from the outside. "Acknowledging it as such" and what not. While the premise of this game does seem to prompt such thinking, I'm pretty sure we only have power to influence the game from within the game. That is, assuming it is THE fourth wall that is breaking. Poking the rules of the game from the meta perspective sounds like cheating to me.

ToMorning wrote:Sorry, I didn't mean to jump-start another argument! Scarab makes a good point about endings - we don't know what the best ending is at this point, so it's not really fair to talk about imposing "a better one." But at least I kind of understand where some of you were going with that.

I would just like to point out one more thing though. A lot of this discussion seems to be looking at the ARG as a piece of fiction from the outside. "Acknowledging it as such" and what not. While the premise of this game does seem to prompt such thinking, I'm pretty sure we only have power to influence the game from within the game. That is, assuming it is THE fourth wall that is breaking. Poking the rules of the game from the meta perspective sounds like cheating to me.

it's cool we're not fighting or anything (we're not, are we, Isla? sorry, I didn't mean to be rude, if I was) We're just considering all possibilities.

This is a completely new type of game really, when you think about it, so why SHOULDN'T we be able to influence things from within? Either way it's stil learly days. A plan is coming togetehr for the future, but who knows, at this point, wheteher we'll follow through.

Scarab wrote:it's cool we're not fighting or anything (we're not, are we, Isla? sorry, I didn't mean to be rude, if I was) We're just considering all possibilities.

This is a completely new type of game really, when you think about it, so why SHOULDN'T we be able to influence things from within? Either way it's stil learly days. A plan is coming togetehr for the future, but who knows, at this point, wheteher we'll follow through.

Nah, we're not fighting! We're... debating! Yeah, that's it... *hides shovel behind her back*

But really, it's complicated. It's a game that addresses the breakage of the fourth wall while not trying to mention the breakages in any fictional setting due to the fear that that may increase the breakages, but at the same time there is no breakage in the fourth wall which makes the game itself fictional and everything just goes in a really big circle and I'm just going along for the ride.

IslaKariese wrote:

Scarab wrote:it's cool we're not fighting or anything (we're not, are we, Isla? sorry, I didn't mean to be rude, if I was) We're just considering all possibilities.

This is a completely new type of game really, when you think about it, so why SHOULDN'T we be able to influence things from within? Either way it's stil learly days. A plan is coming togetehr for the future, but who knows, at this point, wheteher we'll follow through.

Nah, we're not fighting! We're... debating! Yeah, that's it... *hides shovel behind her back*

But really, it's complicated. It's a game that addresses the breakage of the fourth wall while not trying to mention the breakages in any fictional setting due to the fear that that may increase the breakages, but at the same time there is no breakage in the fourth wall which makes the game itself fictional and everything just goes in a really big circle and I'm just going along for the ride.

I KNEW that was all it was *tactfully puts dynamite back in her pocket*

Yeah this kind of thing can make your brain hurt after a while.

I like how over half of the posts on this forum (and possibly every forum) first have something that is completely unrelated to the subject at hand, or a joke, and then people say something serious.

Anyways, I agree that thinking about this whole ARG and all the states it can be in can be mindblowing. But at the very same time, it is fascinating. I think that this type of ARG is a completely new idea, that also changes the way you look at yourself

Scarab wrote:I KNEW that was all it was *tactfully puts dynamite back in her pocket*

Yeah this kind of thing can make your brain hurt after a while.

Hell, it's not even a circle. It's a Mobius strip.

IslaKariese wrote:

Scarab wrote:I KNEW that was all it was *tactfully puts dynamite back in her pocket*

Yeah this kind of thing can make your brain hurt after a while.

Hell, it's not even a circle. It's a Mobius strip.

Yeah, that. And also a little like one of those Escher paintings...

Ok, I'll address what was said without Walls Of Text. I'm too tired for a new one.

1. About the disagreements on how do we fictionalize the ARG. They seem to exist and prosper, which is why I'll address it tomorrow in a separate thread (I should also update the model to include the actual top layer of reality). I think we should let everyone speak his mind and pick the most valid scenario.
2. About going against the GMs. As I said, Mr. A may or may not give in to our threats. We may choose not to play, but the canon is still under GMs control. As I said, though, GMs may like our scenario and incorporate it into the ending - I'm not saying that's bound to happen, but who knows.
3. About fictionalization being a temper tantrum on our part. Yes it is. As I said (I'm saying that too much, do I?), when I expanded the Pixelmage's scenario, I actually thought about it as an epic multilevel meta-concept, but in Layman's Terms... Yep, that's exactly trowing a tantrum . When I realized that, I've come to agree to it being a last resort scenario.

Scarab wrote:Just my personal feelings here, but in my mind the idea of 'the best possible ending' and 'happy ending' are not always the same thing.

I absolutely agree. We don't know what is in store for us, but having an alternative is still better than not. For all I know, the ARG may have Multiple Endings, and our failures IRL may get us the worst one - and in that case it will be our saving throw.

Dryunya wrote:Ok, I'll address what was said without Walls Of Text. I'm too tired for a new one.

1. About the disagreements on how do we fictionalize the ARG. They seem to exist and prosper, which is why I'll address it tomorrow in a separate thread (I should also update the model to include the actual top layer of reality). I think we should let everyone speak his mind and pick the most valid scenario.
2. About going against the GMs. As I said, Mr. A may or may not give in to our threats. We may choose not to play, but the canon is still under GMs control. As I said, though, GMs may like our scenario and incorporate it into the ending - I'm not saying that's bound to happen, but who knows.
3. About fictionalization being a temper tantrum on our part. Yes it is. As I said (I'm saying that too much, do I?), when I expanded the Pixelmage's scenario, I actually thought about it as an epic multilevel meta-concept, but in Layman's Terms... Yep, that's exactly trowing a tantrum . When I realized that, I've come to agree to it being a last resort scenario.

Scarab wrote:Just my personal feelings here, but in my mind the idea of 'the best possible ending' and 'happy ending' are not always the same thing.

I absolutely agree. We don't know what is in store for us, but having an alternative is still better than not. For all I know, the ARG may have Multiple Endings, and our failures IRL may get us the worst one - and in that case it will be our saving throw.

Looking forwards to the thread tomorrow then.

I guess we'll find out exactly how all this is going to play out as time goes on. However they may choose to end this, one things for sure, it's going to be fascinating to be invovled with

Dryunya wrote:Ok, I'll address what was said without Walls Of Text. I'm too tired for a new one.

1. About the disagreements on how do we fictionalize the ARG. They seem to exist and prosper, which is why I'll address it tomorrow in a separate thread (I should also update the model to include the actual top layer of reality). I think we should let everyone speak his mind and pick the most valid scenario.
2. About going against the GMs. As I said, Mr. A may or may not give in to our threats. We may choose not to play, but the canon is still under GMs control. As I said, though, GMs may like our scenario and incorporate it into the ending - I'm not saying that's bound to happen, but who knows.
3. About fictionalization being a temper tantrum on our part. Yes it is. As I said (I'm saying that too much, do I?), when I expanded the Pixelmage's scenario, I actually thought about it as an epic multilevel meta-concept, but in Layman's Terms... Yep, that's exactly trowing a tantrum . When I realized that, I've come to agree to it being a last resort scenario.

Scarab wrote:Just my personal feelings here, but in my mind the idea of 'the best possible ending' and 'happy ending' are not always the same thing.

I absolutely agree. We don't know what is in store for us, but having an alternative is still better than not. For all I know, the ARG may have Multiple Endings, and our failures IRL may get us the worst one - and in that case it will be our saving throw.

What you're saying makes sense. I guess I misinterpreted some of the posts in this thread - it sounded like some of you guys felt entitled to changing the rules if you weren't happy with the game. That's probably why I was confused. Thanks for clearing that up!

We can't change the rules because there aren't any rules yet.

NeverSlender wrote:We can't change the rules because there aren't any rules yet.

Or at least, if there are, we aren't fully sure what they are.

Sicon112 wrote:

NeverSlender wrote:We can't change the rules because there aren't any rules yet.

Or at least, if there are, we aren't fully sure what they are.

This is one of the main reasons I've been discussing things.

Is it just me, or has the overall plot of the ARG not actually progressed beyond "the fourth wall is breaking"?

NeverSlender wrote:

Sicon112 wrote:

NeverSlender wrote:We can't change the rules because there aren't any rules yet.

Or at least, if there are, we aren't fully sure what they are.

This is one of the main reasons I've been discussing things.
Is it just me, or has the overall plot of the ARG not actually progressed beyond "the fourth wall is breaking"?

It's definitely not just you. I presume we'll start seeing more developments in the coming weeks, though. Sooner or later SOMETHING gonna happen. When it does we'll all have to scramble to keep up, and will miss the relative calm we have now (I know we're crazy busy now too, but still, I have a feeling things will spiral out of control quite rapidly when the Wall finally falls.) This is like the calm before the storm in a way.

Will the next series of Echo Chamber be directly involved in with all this? I wasn't sure if it ever would at first...

Well the season 2 finale appears to be the launch pad, if you like, for the ARG. That episode was the first indication of problems. So I would assume the next season will have something to do with the ARG.

NeverSlender wrote:So I would assume the next season will have something to do with the ARG.

I don't think it will. No actual reasons, but Zack's connection was dismissed, which at least makes the beginning irrelevant. I'd say it's an actual spin-off, complete in itself. But, well, only time will tell.

Dryunya wrote:

NeverSlender wrote:So I would assume the next season will have something to do with the ARG.

I don't think it will. No actual reasons, but Zack's connection was dismissed, which at least makes the beginning irrelevant. I'd say it's an actual spin-off, complete in itself. But, well, only time will tell.

Yeah now that you mention it, I suspect there may at least be some kind of passing reference made to the forum and to the fictional characters, maybe, but it may not be indicative that this ARG and their series are directly inter-related. This whole ARG is quite experimental when you think about it, and it would be difficult to incorporate into a webseries.

Well, at least we now have the first step of sending the characters back 'cross the wall:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0J6AHT4u7H0&feature=plcp

Aaaaaaand looks like some more shadowy figures have stepped into the light, bringing this topic into relevance again.

We knew that some characters would be very, very relctant to return to the world from which they came. Looks like The Cabal are amongst them, and they don't seem like the nicest of all possible folks, however good their reasons may be.

The moral debate continues, and at this rate I fear Poor Communication really IS gonna get somebody killed.

There's another point that I have to bring into the light here: LAYAR.
We're already working on the sending back process. If we finish that before sealing The Wall, the endgame plan can't be taken into action. As we've already decided not to enforce it before it's time for the ending.

Pixelmage wrote:There's another point that I have to bring into the light here: LAYAR.
We're already working on the sending back process. If we finish that before sealing The Wall, the endgame plan can't be taken into action. As we've already decided not to enforce it before it's time for the ending.

I don't see the point in sending them back without fixing the wall. They could just come straight back.

NeverSlender wrote:

Pixelmage wrote:There's another point that I have to bring into the light here: LAYAR.
We're already working on the sending back process. If we finish that before sealing The Wall, the endgame plan can't be taken into action. As we've already decided not to enforce it before it's time for the ending.

I don't see the point in sending them back without fixing the wall. They could just come straight back.

Gurt.
So far only the Witch slipped through. If we send them and the wall is still broken, they'll have a hell of a harder time to come back. Meaning less pressure on our side, which translate into more workforce focused in sealing the wall. It's a very sensible plan, actually.