141

And those with that label with be beta tested by everyone or had certain groups dedicated to it.

142

@Eiwynn I expect every game to be posted there, and it’ll be what I check from now on, baring special cases (e.g. authors that have proven themselves and that the ‘requirement’ is purely a formality). Whether or not it’s open and other details of the beta is still up to the author though.

@poison_mara I’m thinking your asking if the sub forum is restricted at all? If that’s the case, no, it’s functionally the same as the WiP forum, but specially dedicated to games that are completed, and being submitted while they complete a final beta.

4 Likes
143

I like the idea of using that “logjam” period in the queue to focus on the final beta testing. Very efficient.

3 Likes
144

Well, I hope that could helping authors. I really think maybe separated threads for game content and others for grammar edition. I mean It could be easy access for authors to see all grammar bugs and or bugs. I think separate threads would help the effectiveness.

145

I disagree, I think it’d be simpler to leave it as is, one thread per game the way current WIPs work. That would keep thread clutter low, and make it a lot easier for testers to know where to post. Plus it’d be easier for an author to communicate with their testers if they only need to keep track of one thread.

146

It depends the number of people who give feedback if you found you have 300 posts same day. People would not notice that the errors they spotted are already registered . So the effectiveness of the posts will drop. I think this is something fast and design to find bugs and other problems. So I think should be something to the point with no off topic stuff

1 Like
147

How big do betas usually get though? How big are the larger WIP threads? I’ll admit I don’t actually know, but it feels like even the quick ones would still be manageable under one thread. And especially if the betas are more selective, that sort of thing shouldn’t be an issue

148

Nope. Take example Children of gods . It has tons of post everyday. So much that people reply same errors Over and over and over. Author put in title that the errors are known still each day at least two people say those errors. The post is so crowded that author cannot track it all. It happens in most of popular wips

4 Likes
149

Yeah, but that game is still pretty far away from final beta testing.

How about we just wait and see how the new category will work out with one topic per game? We will see how well it works.

2 Likes
150

Just throwing this out there: my HGs, Trial of the Demon Hunter and Captive of Fortune, have soundtracks.

2 Likes
151

I would read this. It’s clearly an intentional stylization, and it has me intrigued. I want to know what happens next!

Anyway, interesting discussion. Very informative. I enjoyed reading the entirety of this thread. Thank you everyone for your input.

I have two things to say: 1) as a consumer, to me the CoG brand feels a bit formulaic and safe, whereas HG seems like the wild side, which I personally strongly prefer. 2) forming a “club” of dedicated testers for all and any authors, whilst a lovely ideal, would create false hopes and expectations, because not everyone wants to test everything. A volunteer is good for the job only as long as they’re motivated and enjoying what they’re doing, and therefore the initiative has to be the individual’s.

6 Likes
152

I’m still reading through the entire thread, but actually this is grammatically incorrect. A sentence should never begin with “and,” and “and then” is not proper :wink: I could also go on about how “went and got revenge” is a terribly informal way of speaking and should be relegated to informal texts and/or dialogue, but it’s technically not incorrect. #englishmajorstrikesagain

Anyway, I read the first 100 posts or so thoroughly, then gave up. I see a lot of people that are very upset with current standards of HG, with a lot of people firmly saying, “it’s too expensive to edit.” However, nobody is offering up real solutions, that I’ve seen.

I’m an English major, and I’ve seen plenty of people on this forum with a strong grasp of the English language and/or grammar. Perhaps we could set up a thread with a list of members who are at least relatively active, who would be willing to do in-depth grammar checking for a WIP. For instance, I know I’ve done so for @Lycoris’ WIP in past. I haven’t expected any form of payment, nor would I accept any. I’m sure there are others, like myself, willing to help out, just out of love for the community.

Now, obviously, this is no replacement for a full-on QC with copy-editing, but it would be a nice step. Rather than beta-testing, they’re grammar-/spell-testing. You don’t have to be working on your English degree/have an English degree to be able to point out flaws. And, of course, the volunteers would have all rights to refuse to beta-test, should they wish to. It could be sort of like the flair title of “Beta Tester Extraordinaire” – perhaps Grammar Extraordinaires, or something :stuck_out_tongue: (edit: not to suggest that this should exist. just being silly)

Another thing that might help would be to put a list of links that walk through basic grammatical errors that are repeated – such as using improper capitalization and punctuation with quotation marks. When I was in high school, I was an English tutor so widely sought-after that I created a blog in my third year with resources for other students. To this day, it gets about 700-1000 hits per month, and I haven’t updated it since 2013. I can go find those old resources and provide them, if anyone is curious.

We are a community – we should help ourselves before expecting starving artists to pay thousands of dollars for work we can easily do.

Another edit: I’m still catching up on the past 50 or so posts and do see that similar things have been suggested. I still think that it’s actually a very good idea. A pool of dedicated testers, who have all rights to say no to a project but have also proven themselves to be fantastic help. Readability testers, rather than playtesters, which really should be a distinction.

11 Likes
153

Who says? [character limit]

7 Likes
154

Sentences beginning with conjunctions are a no-go due more to stylistic preferences than to actual grammar rules, as, technically speaking, it has been okay to begin sentences with FANBOYS for as long as written English has been around. That being said, FANBOYS (for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so) tend to disjoint the meaning of the sentence slightly, as conjunctions are usually used inside the sentence, rather than at the beginning or the end. I, personally, find it to be informal and rather annoying to read in something professional, unless the tone is meant to be informal.

The real kicker is “and then.” This is always grammatically incorrect, because “and” is simultaneous and “then” is sequential. For instance, take the sentence: “She sat down and then flipped through the newspaper.” Is she sitting down AND reading the newspaper, or did she sit down first, then read the newspaper? It is gross and cringey, and I have always been taught, by a multitude of professors and teachers, that “and then” should never be used. Nor should “and yet” or “then yet”. You shouldn’t mix simultaneous and sequential transitional phrases. However, “and” is not ALWAYS simultaneous, as it is sometimes a conjunction, rather than a transitional phrase. It’s a bit of a sticky situation, really, that you only learn with experience.

There are some people, who have studied English Literature or English Writing, who argue that “and then” is perfectly acceptable, but I’ve noticed a trend in that those people also tend to misuse who/m, so take from that what you will.

I also think it’s really cool that you’re a professor of Renaissance literature and would love to dissect literature with you sometime! :slight_smile:

1 Like
155

I would argue that starting with a coordinating conjunction doesn’t do that at all.

Or, if you like, Lincoln.

“But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate – we can not consecrate – we can not hallow – this ground.”

I think it has a lovely sound. I can barely think of an author who doesn’t do it.

7 Likes
156

It’s totally fair to have your opinion :wink: And good on you for pointing out my use of FANBOYS myself. I’m personally not against it – I pointed the “And” out at the beginning of the sentence just to point out that many of my own teachers/professors have said it’s grammatically incorrect.

I will argue to the death that “and then” “and yet” “then yet”, etc. shouldn’t be used, though. There’s just something…off about phrases like that, and I thoroughly agree with the professors I’ve had who argue against their use :slight_smile:

edit: I’d like your comments, because I don’t disagree, however, I’m out of likes for the day :slight_smile:

2 Likes
157

You’ll have to argue with Shakespeare on “and then,” though. If it’s good enough for Shakespeare, it’s good enough for me. :wink: How fun to discuss conjunctions!

“First, give me trust, the count he is my husband,
And what to your sworn counsel I have spoken
Is so from word to word; and then you cannot,
By the good aid that I of you shall borrow,
Err in bestowing it.” - All’s Well III.vii

10 Likes
158

Well, honestly, I’m one of those silly conspiracy theorists, who isn’t quite certain that Shakespeare was only one person, so it’s entirely possible that one Shakespeare was a heathen, who felt the need to use “and then.” :laughing:

All that being said, I suppose it comes to personal preference, but it definitely just doesn’t sound quite…right. Sort of like when someone sings slightly off-pitch. It’s not bad enough to hate the entire song, but you get icky feelings from it. (edit: in my opinion, of course)

1 Like
159

Grammar exists as an explanation for why people use language the way they do. It is a useful tool for describing and teaching language. But one can derive grammar rules from people’s usage, rather than trying to pigeonhole usage into preconceived rules. People use “and then,” which conveys a clear meaning; this doesn’t confuse anyone. That means that it would serve us better to find the logic behind the expression rather than to dismiss it as not having logic at all. If people use “and” for meanings that are not purely simultaneous, but any other form of additive apposition, that indicates that “and” has more to its meaning than the reductive prescriptivist version would have it.

I do support proofreading, because sometimes people make typos, or express themselves unclearly, or are using a register than doesn’t fit the intended level of formality, and so forth. Nonetheless, I would not like to see this become a matter of gatekeeping. And there are also far too many “rules” that are born out of an attempt to impose “logic” that is contrary to the actual logic born from the language’s speakers themselves. (Complaints against singular “they,” criticism of split infinitives, prohibitions against prepositions at the end of sentences, etc… these have everything to do with certain grammarians’ notions and nothing to do with the way English actually developed.)

11 Likes
160

Oy vey, I didn’t intend to come off as gate-keeping lol. I was jokingly pointing out how what someone had posted as grammatically correct but poor writing is not entirely grammatically correct.

I’m firmly of the belief that as long as meaning can be derived from what someone is saying (without having to be completely reprocessed in the brain via re-wording), it should be acceptable. Minor mistakes happen.

I’m very sorry if it came off like I was gate-keeping.

3 Likes