For example, let’s say we have two covers that use the world as a soccer ball. (The issue’s title is Americans Don’t Play Soccer, and the issue is about Darfurian genocide and other things very far removed from the typical American’s life.  For ideological balance, we might add a thinly veiled Obama vis-a-vis the Iranian democracy movement).

Cover #1:  On a soccer field, the villain is standing next to a globe.  In the background, the hero is the only thing between him and the net. The villain’s pose would probably look lifeless, like these.

Cover #2:  On a soccer field, the villain is doing an insane flip as he punts the world at the hero.  The cover would probably look a lot more energetic and stylish.  This is particularly important because the cover will probably show the villain from the back.  It’s quite hard to strike an immobile pose from behind.

It would probably also help if the hero/goalie had some action. Bracing himself for impact is a little bit banal, so I’d like something that’s striking and makes it clear that this comic isn’t really about soccer. So let’s say the hero is bracing himself behind a transparent SWAT shield.

For example, check out how a typical search for Superhero Nation appears on Google.  The site name plays more prominently than the name of the article does.

Since Friday the 13th is such an auspicious time to make big business decisions, I decided to test a new site title today.  Instead of “Superhero Nation: a superhero writing advice site,” it’s now “Superhero Nation: how to write superhero novels and comic books.”  Hopefully that will make us more competitive for Google searches related to comic books and superhero novels.  In a few weeks, I’ll release statistics about whether the tweak was successful or not.

1.  I agree that superhero stories are mainstream.  Many superhero movies and TV shows have been broadly successful.

2.  But comic books and graphic novels are not mainstream.  Primarily, that’s because they’re sold mostly in specialty stores rather than general-interest stores like supermarkets and newsstands.  These specialty stores usually strike me as kind of creepy and may well scare away low-interest fans.  Moving back into supermarkets probably isn’t feasible for the typical comic book series, but it encourages me that comic books are increasingly sold online.

[B. Mac adds: Is the endorsement of the NYT a good thing for comics?  The NYT has a soft spot for businesses that are not actually economically viable, such as solar power, US car companies, and itself.]

1. As far as I know, mutants and humans are sexually compatible.  If mutants and humans could produce sexually fertile offspring, by definition they would be part of the same species.  (So, umm, yeah… if the kid shown in Superman Returns grows up to be sexually fertile, that would mean that Superman and humans are also part of the same species).
2. Even if mutants were a distinct species, no self-respecting biologist would ever use such a loaded term for a phylum name.  Ok, Magneto uses the term because he’s a scientific racist.  But what’s Dr. Richards’ excuse?

You are pure evil, and hate personified. You don’t care anything about your fellow man, and are guided only by your desire to rule over your inferiors, i.e. everybody but you. ‘Mercy,’ you ask, prior to grinding an enemy beneath your mighty heel, ‘What is mercy?’

Take the quiz!

Our Approach to Editing Comments

We want to set a professional example by editing for grammar, spelling, punctuation and capitalization. In rare cases, we may also make changes to style and organization. When you edit comments, the main question is which changes are necessary to help the typical reader.

Please do not change the substance or ideas. The only time this is acceptable is when the detail is totally and obviously irrelevant. (For example, what color is Jihad Joe’s hair? Who cares?)

It’s ok for comments to veer off-topic, as long as the tangents are related to superheroes or writing or writing careers. We can find or add a more appropriate article for them later. If the tangents would interest only a very small amount of people, please delete them after a week or two. (That will give the recipients a chance to read the messages). Otherwise, our comments will get clogged with year-old discussions that no one cares about anymore.

Editing Comments on Review Forum

The purpose of review forums is to encourage authorial autonomy. So the editing rules are slightly different. When an author posts on his forum, please do not edit his posts except as he specifically requests. If his grammar and spelling are atrocious, he will only improve if his readers tell him that he needs to get better. However, please edit other comments on review forums.

Our Approach to Criticism

When writers post their work on SN, we want them to receive friendly but honest criticism. Please fix any reviews that are too personal, nasty and/or insulting.

For example, “the characters could use revision” is fine. “Your characters tend to be flat” is fine. “Your characters need a lot of work” is fine.

“Your characters suck” and “you’re awful” are not acceptable and need to be softened. If a commenter is repeatedly nasty, please point out to him that most of our writers are really young and everyone tends to suck when they’re inexperienced. You can point him to more-refined authors, either on our site or elsewhere. If he’s still a problem, please let me know and I may ban him.

EXCEPTIONS TO THE ABOVE PARAGRAPH: If someone wants to self-publish, let the mobs run loose with him. He needs to know what people really think about his writing. Also, don’t worry about any criticism directed at B. Mac or Cadet Davis. They’ve heard worse. (However, if the criticism is unduly profane, please tone it down for the benefit of our guests).

What We’d Prefer to Avoid

Remember, we’re helping young adults learn how to write. People come to us for writing advice, particularly superhero-related writing advice. Accordingly, please be careful about comments that relate to politics, sex, psychological problems, and other touchy subjects. If any of these subjects would unsettle the typical reader, please place it in our moderation queue so that B.M. can look at it later. Also, please edit out heavy profanity on our posts. A lot of teachers use us as an academic resource, so we’d like to avoid anything that scares them away.

EXCEPTION TO THE ABOVE PARAGRAPH: If an author wants his review forum to be highly profane, mature or unusual, that’s fine. We will accept any kind of story that’s not rated R for sex. However, if a forum is very mature, let me know so that I can tag the forum for adult content and let readers know what they’re getting into.

You’d have to be crazy to blow $250 on a word processor that can only display 6 lines of text and has 512 kilobytes of storage capacity.  Dell laptops start at $350.  Admittedly, a $350 laptop only has a nine-inch screen, but even so, it’s far more useful than this.

We bumped “Top Categories” and cut a few of the less popular articles from “Improve Your Writing.”  We also revamped titles for a few of the IYW articles that we kept.  What do you think?

]]> http://www.superheronation.com/2008/11/19/weve-updated-our-sidebar/feed/ 2 http://www.superheronation.com/2008/11/12/fallout-3-was-disappointing/ http://www.superheronation.com/2008/11/12/fallout-3-was-disappointing/#comments Wed, 12 Nov 2008 23:16:19 +0000 J. Mallow http://www.superheronation.com/?p=1315 The controls worked pretty well, but the visuals and musics made this game a chore.

1.  The first-person perspective made this game look relentlessly grimy and depressing.  Over the 20 hours it took me to beat the game, the only remotely pleasant-looking location was Tenpenny Tower, which only had one quest.  Would it have killed them to add a city or two that looked clean?  For example, Fallout 2 had the New California Republic.  Nothing in the DC area has been cleaned up in the hundreds of years since the nuclear war?  Ick.  Not even Stalker looked this bleak.

2.  The writing was forgettable. Fallout 2 had extraordinary scenes.  For example, one quest had you play chess with a talking plant to learn how to outsmart a mutated radscorpion.  The closest that Fallout 3 got to that sort of zany brilliance was a quest that locks you in a demented computer simulation (Pleasantville meets The Matrix).  A sadistic scientist then sends you on a ridiculously perverse murder spree where you have to kill people in creative fashions.  (For example, you can place roller skates on the stairs or sabotage an oven, but you can’t enter combat).  But even the Pleasantville simulation looks mercilessly depressing. Eww.

3.  The combat system was a pleasant surprise. The first-person perspective was surprisingly smooth, even on my 2004 computer.  But there are far too few kinds of weapons and enemies.  Supermutants got boring very quickly, but they’re the main enemy for at least 75% of the game.

4.  The plot felt like a tired rehash of Fallout 2.

5.  The ending was superlatively awful. The concluding cinematic is so disappointing that it’s hard to believe.  Arcanum, for example, had a cinematic affected by each of 20+ quests.  For example, if you saved the Shrouded Hills silver mine, the cinematic showed the town flourishing; if you let the mine die, the town withered away.  Fallout 3 only had two possible outcomes based on how you completed the final quest.  Ick.

Even in the ending, the visuals are mercilessly bleak and grey.  My hero sacrificed his own life to restore clean water to Washington, but even then we don’t see any clean water. I would have closed the game’s closing cinematic with a cheerful shot of the sun rising over the immaculately gleaming reflecting pool, and the Potomac River, and finally the Atlantic Ocean.  After 20+ hours of unrelenting death and dirt, we’ve earned some pleasantness.

6. The use of Washington landmarks was entirely uninspired.  Only the museums were used well.  Other than that, it was pretty much like “we need to place the final battle somewhere, so why not the Jefferson Memorial?”

7.  The Vaults were grossly underused.

8.  Even though 1950s music is terrible, Fallout 3 offered only two radio stations: a Radio Free America that plays 1950s songs and a propaganda station for a military dictatorship.  I spent the game listening to the propaganda station because its patriotic tunes were at least remotely listenable.  Eww.  After twenty hours of Dixie and militaristic exhortations, I almost wanted to give 1950s music a try.  Almost.

9.  Fortunately, Fallout 3 mostly avoided caustic political sermons. Fallout 2′s preachiness annoyed me.

10. The plot had a lot of holes and inconsistencies. For example, Dr. Braun (the crazy doctor at Vault 112) was a Vault-Tek doctor before the war, right? So he would have been 200+ years old when the story transpires.

11.  I didn’t like the stat system very much.  Agility and perhaps Intelligence were too important relative to the other stats, particularly Charisma and Endurance.  (I also found strength useless, but there are a few types of character that could use it).

12.  The giant robot scene was pretty kickass. I won’t spoil it for you, but there’s a giant robot. And it’s pretty kickass.

Art taken from this artist at DA.