Apparently I need to clarify two things: my position on how long I think the show should run, and my position on predictability. Wall of text incoming.
First, I'm not talking about killing the show at any point. I want the show to come to a conclusion; I don't recall mentioning a specific length of time, but people apparently thought I meant it should end sooner rather than later. Far from it. I'd love if this show ran long enough for me to be able to share new episodes with my children, so I'd be fine if it could maintain it's current quality (or improve) for the next 7 to 10 years (maybe longer). That would be awesome. However, I don't want the show to run for, say, the next 50 years. You'd reach a point somewhere along the line where there would simply be too much content (both studio and fan produced) to keep up with, and newcomers would literally have to dedicate months to just to watching episodes to get caught up. And what I mean by "come to a conclusion" is that we should have closure to the stories of the mane 6 and probably some other characters we've met along the way. Even if it's just "and they all lived happily ever after," it'd be better than just leaving the end of the show dangling; for a good example of what I mean by that, imagine a world in which Firefly existed without Serenity, i.e. "Objects in Space" was the last we ever saw of our merry band.
As for predictability, I guess I should differentiate between "predictable storyline" and "predictable character actions." For the first, I said I didn't mind if the plots were predictable; is it a good thing? No, but it doesn't bother me personally. As I said, it's rare for me to come across a show or book whose plot I can't predict at least in part, and I don't typically read it as a failing of the writer if I can guess most of what's coming (Google "Chekov's gun" for an explanation as to one of the reasons why). For the second, I feel that being able to predict a character's actions with reasonable certainty shows that we've been given enough clues about their personality to guess how they would react in Situations X,Y and Z, which is just another way of saying that they're well-characterized. You know, one of those things that most folks would say is one of the major strengths of the show's writing? And it doesn't mean they're time-locked and unable to grow either. That would be to say that the characters were completely incapable of learning from past mistakes, which we've seen is 100% incorrect (watch "Applebuck Season" and "Super Speedy Cider Squeezy 6000" back-to-back to see what I mean). To summarize: predictable storylines aren't necessarily good, but I consider that less important than many other things and it therefore doesn't detract from my viewing experience; predictable character actions serve as evidence to me that our ponies are characterized to the point where we feel like we know them, just like we know people in our real lives.
p.s. That's why I don't like the OC concept very much. Most OCs are wish fulfillment and end up having atypical, OMG SO EDGY colour schemes, not to menton Mary Sueish tendencies. People tend not to design something they would be in pony form, but something they want to be.
I completely agree with you, Wicket. Most OCs are straight up horrible. The one I'm working on has had so many hours put into him to avoid these pitfalls. I'm going with a very basic colour scheme, ensuring that he has many character flaws, etc.
On April 04 2012 14:15 Combatflaps wrote: i wonder what percentage of people's personal oc ponies are NOT unicorns, 25-30% max
Well, the one OC I've made is a unicorn, but he's for my fic and there are actual good reasons for it that aren't simply "MUST MAKE COOL WIZARD CHARACTER".
Any thought i've put into an OC has been based upon an Earth pony, I just find them fascinating.
A good number of OC do make me cringe though, so many Shadowdash Awesomelords and Darklight Sorrowhearts (just made these up on the spot but its the general idea) I suppose its the pony equivalent of XxSnipermasterxX.
On April 04 2012 15:55 Gary Oak wrote: I completely agree with you, Wicket. Most OCs are straight up horrible. The one I'm working on has had so many hours put into him to avoid these pitfalls. I'm going with a very basic colour scheme, ensuring that he has many character flaws, etc.
On April 04 2012 14:15 Combatflaps wrote: i wonder what percentage of people's personal oc ponies are NOT unicorns, 25-30% max
Well, the one OC I've made is a unicorn, but he's for my fic and there are actual good reasons for it that aren't simply "MUST MAKE COOL WIZARD CHARACTER".
U hatin cool wizard characters? my OCs dont have personalities. \('u ' )/
Same thing with DotA 2. Lots of people I encounter in matchmaking have ponies as their avatar, if not their name. It's nice, because 90% of the time those people aren't douchebags, which is more than can be said for a lot of others.
I don't understand this fascination with calling OCs mary sue... I really don't think a single person who makes those OCs could care less about that. The stigma around OCs is probably the most annoying thing about this community for me. From my experience I think there are plenty of good OCs; I genuinely like every OC I've posted in my compilations, which is well over 100. Will they be masterful pieces of character building? Not all the time, but these ponies aren't in the show, why are they being criticized.
Much of the toxicity of OCs comes from the presence of the author. A great story can maintain the illusion that you're just following events as they happen. If the disproportionate influence of an OC breaks that illusion, it can easily make people feel like the author has something in it, and nothing kills one's interest like a salesman hanging over their shoulder. Suddenly they're no longer experiencing a work, but feeling pushed (even inadvertently) by a random stranger on the Internet into liking what they like.
The signal-to-noise ratio throughout the age of one-click publishing means people are by default wary of such potentially shady "goods", and an extraordinary OC (say, an alicorn), is like a Rolex. The more supposedly impressive, the less likely the people capable of crafting legitimate ones are shoving them in your face in street corners.
On April 04 2012 15:55 Gary Oak wrote: I completely agree with you, Wicket. Most OCs are straight up horrible. The one I'm working on has had so many hours put into him to avoid these pitfalls. I'm going with a very basic colour scheme, ensuring that he has many character flaws, etc.
Be careful with this. "Mary Sue" isn't a set of attributes. If a character still implausibly warps the flow and focus of the work, stuffing them with countermeasures for no reason but in an attempt to cover this up can make things worse. Even a fake Rolex is more convincing than one being marketed with a "sirtifikat of autentisiti".
my OC is a unicorn but that's because he's an astronomer struggling with a way to try and make a non unicorn friendly telescope. Large and powerful telescopes are tough for Earth Ponies and Pegasi to use to because of all of the adjustments you have to make at the same time. So he's trying to compact telescope technology into a simpler more usable form, or create a way for other ponies to be able to see the stars in the same way that he does.
He's ass at magic besides physical manipulation, and his non telekinesis spell is just simple altering of objects, being able to change their form slightly that he uses in creating lenses and mirrors for telescopes.
I think it's perfectly fine for an OC pony to be purely aesthetic, I do not believe there needs to be anything beyond good composition for me to like it. I really like all of Bamboodog's OCs he gets commissioned to do.
This probably has something to do with my vehement rejection of fan fiction, though. Because I find it easier to separate the ideas of OCs from characterization.
EPT![[image loading]](http://th07.deviantart.net/fs71/PRE/f/2012/093/e/a/after_the_migration_by_mettauro-d4uon58.png)
