![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
/-/S'pht-Translator-Active/-/ |
![]() | dissenting opinions, but flexible | |
![]() | Posted By: MrHen | Date: 10/17/06 3:49 p.m. |
![]() | In Response To: Re: on The Player (Document) : "The player" is a perfectly valid literary term, just as "the
While "the narrator" is an appropriate literary term, characters within the book would not (normally) refer to that character as "the narrator". The player is not a valid literary term. It is a gaming term. People generally do not play books and in a majority of the games out there, no one assumes the player to be a character in the game. The player controls a character in the game. Even most RPGs split the difference between character and player. Marathon pushes those lines as far as possible, but I figure we can avoid any ambiguities this way. In a strange sense, the player is more directly comparable to the author of a book than the narrator. They can be the same, but they do not have to be and the distinction is important. That being said, while I prefer to not use the Player, I do not care all that much. I just want it to be consistent so I can go through and propagate our decision. As of right now, things are a mess because I started cleaning it up with one assumption and then found out there was contention against the Marine and someone wanted it to be Security Officer and so I moved it and now the article for the Player is bad... I would just like a decision. Is there a way to take a vote? That would make things easier... : Almost any other name
As far as I know, it is the defining aspect of his character. There are no other defining aspects of his character, which is what makes it so cool (IMO). Unless we want a completely subjective title (such as the Marine), the Security Officer seems to be the best bet. : Part of my beef is that an article called "Security officer" sounds
Ah, that makes sense. The wiki has a way to handle collisions like that. The article currently is titled "Security Officer" anyway, so that helps note that this is a proper term. I would argue against adding "The" because it makes things messier, longer, and is a style change that will have to be kept through the life of the wiki. If we use "The Security Officer" we would have to use "The Player" as well, which does not transform well when discussing multiple players. (Actually, that is a good argument against that term. There can be more than one player, there is only ever one Security Officer.) If "Security Officer" was kept for the main character, "Security officer (BoB)" or "Security officer (human)" or "Security officer (something)" would denote the other one. I would guess most people would expect an article on the main character when looking up "Security officer". : * Did we ever decide whether the player had an official gender? That's
I like the ambiguities on things like that. It is one of the better advantages of the way Marathon tells a story. My preference would be that the article mention that there was no specific gender or race denoted for the main character. That is, unless we can find evidence for the gender. In all of this talking, I realized that the article could simply be called "Main character". That would solve all of the problems. In fact, that is my new favorite. Thoughts?
|
![]() | |
![]() | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() | |
![]() | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() | Replies: |
![]() | Terminology questions | MrHen | 10/16/06 6:40 a.m. |
![]() | Re: Terminology questions | Aaron Sikes | 10/16/06 7:01 a.m. |
![]() | Re: Terminology questions | Forrest of B.org | 10/16/06 7:28 a.m. |
![]() | accepted | MrHen | 10/16/06 8:16 a.m. |
![]() | Re: accepted | Document | 10/17/06 2:37 p.m. |
![]() | My own terminology question | RyokoTK | 10/16/06 3:36 p.m. |
![]() | Re: My own terminology question | MrHen | 10/16/06 4:01 p.m. |
![]() | Re: My own terminology question | RyokoTK | 10/16/06 4:48 p.m. |
![]() | perhaps... | MrHen | 10/16/06 5:18 p.m. |
![]() | Re: My own terminology question | Document | 10/17/06 11:51 a.m. |
![]() | Like Halo? *NM* | MrHen | 10/17/06 3:30 p.m. |
![]() | Re: My own terminology question | Forrest of B.org | 10/16/06 6:19 p.m. |
![]() | on The Player | MrHen | 10/16/06 8:11 a.m. |
![]() | Re: on The Player | Document | 10/17/06 3:04 p.m. |
![]() | dissenting opinions, but flexible | MrHen | 10/17/06 3:49 p.m. |
![]() | Re: dissenting opinions, but flexible | Forrest of B.org | 10/18/06 7:07 a.m. |
![]() | Now we are getting somewhere | MrHen | 10/18/06 8:55 a.m. |
![]() | Re: Now we are getting somewhere | Aaron Sikes | 10/18/06 9:58 a.m. |
![]() | Re: Now we are getting somewhere | RyokoTK | 10/18/06 11:56 a.m. |
![]() | Re: Now we are getting somewhere | MrHen | 10/18/06 1:27 p.m. |
![]() | whoops, forgot a point | MrHen | 10/18/06 1:30 p.m. |
![]() | Re: whoops, forgot a point | Forrest of B.org | 10/18/06 2:13 p.m. |
![]() | That's what I'm saying. | RyokoTK | 10/18/06 2:39 p.m. |
![]() | I agree, but come to a different conclusion | MrHen | 10/18/06 3:41 p.m. |
![]() | Re: I agree, but come to a different conclusion | RyokoTK | 10/18/06 3:54 p.m. |
![]() | Re: I agree, but come to a different conclusion | Forrest of B.org | 10/18/06 4:05 p.m. |
![]() | this is getting more off-topic... | MrHen | 10/18/06 4:22 p.m. |
![]() | Re: this is getting more off-topic... | Forrest of B.org | 10/18/06 6:31 p.m. |
![]() | my bad... | MrHen | 10/19/06 4:48 a.m. |
![]() | Re: I agree, but come to a different conclusion | MrHen | 10/18/06 4:13 p.m. |
![]() | Re: whoops, forgot a point | MrHen | 10/18/06 3:26 p.m. |
![]() | Re: Now we are getting somewhere | Document | 10/19/06 8:52 a.m. |
![]() | Re: Now we are getting somewhere | Forrest of B.org | 10/19/06 6:52 p.m. |
![]() | Re: Now we are getting somewhere | Forrest of B.org | 10/18/06 2:01 p.m. |
![]() | Almost there... | MrHen | 10/18/06 3:50 p.m. |
![]() | Re: dissenting opinions, but flexible | Forrest of B.org | 10/18/06 2:22 p.m. |
![]() | now *that* makes sense (final draft?) | MrHen | 10/18/06 3:53 p.m. |
![]() | Final Draft? | Forrest of B.org | 10/18/06 4:13 p.m. |
![]() | Re: Final Draft? | Document | 10/18/06 4:27 p.m. |
![]() | Good. *shakes hands of everyone* | MrHen | 10/18/06 4:28 p.m. |
![]() | Re: Good. *shakes hands of everyone* | Document | 10/19/06 8:33 a.m. |
![]() | :) Go for it. *NM* | MrHen | 10/19/06 9:20 a.m. |
![]() | Re: Good. *shakes hands of everyone* | Forrest of B.org | 10/19/06 6:55 p.m. |
![]() | Re: now *that* makes sense (final draft?) | Document | 10/18/06 4:33 p.m. |
![]() | Agreed *NM* | Document | 10/18/06 3:55 p.m. |
![]() | Re: dissenting opinions, but flexible | Document | 10/24/06 1:47 p.m. |
![]() | in-universe or out-of-universe? | MrHen | 10/24/06 4:41 p.m. |
![]() | Re: on The Player | Document | 10/24/06 2:08 p.m. |
![]() | that solves that. ;) *NM* | MrHen | 10/24/06 4:33 p.m. |
![]() | Re: Terminology questions | treellama | 10/16/06 11:21 a.m. |
![]() | Or Jason Jones? *NM* | MrHen | 10/16/06 11:27 a.m. |
![]() | Re: Terminology questions | Document | 10/17/06 11:41 a.m. |
![]() | *exctend=extend *NM* | Document | 10/17/06 11:45 a.m. |
![]() | Re: Terminology questions | RyokoTK | 10/17/06 12:53 p.m. |
![]() | Re: Terminology questions | MrHen | 10/17/06 3:51 p.m. |
![]() | |
![]() | ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() | Problems? Suggestions? Comments? Email maintainer@bungie.org Marathon's Story Forum is maintained with WebBBS 5.12. |