Saturday, April 27, 2019

On Foreshouting

You know the Red Lanterns planted a little hate seed in our planet? And that the hate seed is supposed to like turn our planet into Hell and make it the new Red Lantern base? I know you probably don’t read Green Lantern comics and so don’t care, but I’m just amazed that I’m only just now finding out about this. This should be big crossover material, and instead the last big crossover was about alternate evil versions of Batman coming in from the Multiverse’s dark side or something?

Don’t add up, is all I’m saying.

Also there are some SPOILERS for American Gods in this article. You’ve been warned.

---

On Foreshouting

You’re familiar with foreshadowing, yes? That wonderful literary tool your English teacher drilled into your brain, in which the author hints through symbolism or dialogue or narrative about what’s going to happen later on? Like when Luke’s uncle says he’s afraid Luke will turn out like his uncle in A New Hope, or when Norman says his mother is as harmless as the stuffed birds in Psycho. When it’s done well, it’s excellent, and you hardly notice it’s there. Even when you do, it’s vague enough that you don’t know for sure what it means.

Yeah, foreshouting is like that, but done terribly.

I’m not that good of a fiction writer, I’ll admit, so I don’t think I’m good at this at all. But foreshadowing takes a certain amount of skill. And some people can’t do it in a way that’s really subtle. And that’s fine! Really, it’s fine if you can’t do foreshadowing well. Nobody’s going to be a perfect writer in every aspect, so you can’t expect it out of everyone.

But foreshouting is worse than that. It’s when you practically scream to the rooftops what’s going to happen. Not in a ‘this is prophesied to happen’ sort of way, but in a ‘Did you get it? We need you to understand this? Please understand this! It’s going to be relevant later on!’

The second season of American Gods is stumbling in this regard. While the first season introduced Mr. Wednesday, the American incarnation of the Norse god Odin, and showed him as a wily conman and ruthless war god who nonetheless was trying to rally the Old Gods against the New Gods, and was somewhat sympathetic. Ish. Well not really, but you could get why Shadow might think so, yeah?

And then the second season has several storylines, of which Shadow is a part of, displaying that Wednesday is and has always been a violent, power-hungry, backstabbing douchebag, and he’s not telling Shadow very important information, and yet Shadow still goes on trusting him, willing to fight other people for him. And this doesn’t make any sense. The show is practically screaming “WEDNESDAY IS GOING TO BETRAY SHADOW!” And from reading the book this is given. But Shadow doesn’t work it out no matter how it’s spelled out, because narratively he needs to keep working with Wednesday.

It’s as if they want to make sure you know that Wednesday is shifty, but because they don’t do anything but tell us this you wonder why any sane person (or god) wants to work with him at all. We’re not given a satisfactory answer. Compare this to the book, which has several bits of his douchiness, but also sympathy, where we see him worn out and tired and (seemingly) honestly working his hardest to let the Old Gods team up to survive. We don’t always see him in control. We know that’s he’s a dick, but he’s on our side, so we let it slide. The greatest bit of foreshadowing we get is where Wednesday tells Shadow his favorite cons, and Shadow works out that they’re all two-man cons, and that he used to have a partner.

So when the show keeps throwing up flashing signs saying “WEDNESDAY CANNOT BE TRUSTED AND WILL ALWAYS BACKSTAB THOSE AROUND HIM” we’re going to come to the conclusion that hey, we shouldn’t trust this guy, so when that betrayal comes we’re not going to be surprised at all. Maybe we’ll be kind of bored. Which is a shame because it’s so great in the book.

Rick Riordan’s also not great at foreshadowing but really great at foreshouting. In Kane Chronicles, at least, it’s at his worst: the second and third books practically scream that Walt is going to be hosting Anubis. He gains new powers that no one else can explain, involving death and disintegration. He mentions he’s talking to Anubis. Anubis brings up not having a human host. It’s all there, and yet when it happens the characters act like it’s a massive shock.

The same goes with Zia and Ra. She’s put in stasis holding Ra’s symbols of power. She’s good with fire. Ra himself gives her a piece of his soul. And yet when she hosts Ra, Carter is blown away and stunned. Although he seems to see it coming a bit beforehand, so some credit is due I suppose.

Readers and viewers might be able to guess what’s going to happen, but it shouldn’t be because you straight-up told them when you were trying not to. If you want to tell them so badly that early, then just say it and move the Plot forward. Otherwise, keep your mouth shut and work on other parts of the story.


Saturday, April 20, 2019

On Religion

I finished 1633, which was… okay. I mean it was mostly good, but there’s this bit where everyone’s like, “Well, Oliver Cromwell wasn’t that bad of a guy, right? Let’s downplay that ‘Irish genocide’ thing!” And I’m not comfortable with that.

I’m also reading The Ables which is about a group of kids with superpowers who are also disabled. The cover totes that the author is one of the co-creators of Cinema Sins, so I was kind of expecting a subversive genre-busting piece, which it’s really not, but it is still a good take on a preteen superhero story.

Also, you know people on Quora are really stupid?

---

On Religion

On thinking about a particular religion and whether you should be a part of it, the first and foremost question on your mind must be “Is this religion true?” One would think this is common sense, but it seems as if we’ve generally forgotten it.

There is a lot of discussion about religion, about which religion one should be a part of. And a lot of those discussions seems to be ‘What can this religion do for me?’ It’s a conversation about what that religion preaches on certain issues, how its leaders have acted or reacted to the political climate, and how well they treat the people who are not in it. And these are not inconsequential issues, I think--I am not dismissing these concerns or trying to downplay that they are important. But they are not what is most important in the consideration process, and that is whether or not a religion is true.

There was an article on SyFy Wire, a publication that has recently gotten quite bad at doing anything other than publishing strange opinions pieces*, which was somehow about someone’s experience with Catholicism and then the movie Dogma, and ended arguing that Catholicism was bunk because Jesus would hate it because she liked the movie Dogma? Never mind that the film’s writer and director, though not really a model of the religion, considered himself Catholic for years after making the film, and that her argument mostly amounted to “I didn’t feel anything growing up in Catholic school, and I liked this movie even if traditional Catholics hated it.” There was no proof that God didn’t exist, there was no argument with theology, there was no citations of philosophy; it was this vague ‘gut feeling’ that because she didn’t feel magically special by anything in Catholic school that Catholicism must be false, and that she liked this one movie which satirized Catholicism so… there? I guess?

[For the atheist, this is easy. If one doesn’t believe in God, then Catholicism being bunk is the natural conclusion. But if you accept the notion that God exists, you have to do more work to prove that Catholicism is false. And people have done it (though not to my satisfaction, I’ll confess), hence the existence of the Orthodox Church, Protestantism, Judaism, Islam, Zoroastrianism, and other religions. The excuse of ‘Well I didn’t like what the people of this religion do’ is not a proof that a religion is false.]

When I was doing research for a project in one of my classes for grad school, I ended up researching several religious traditions from the Caribbean. And there was a small excerpt in which the author of one of the books said “It’s too bad that many adherents to other major religions don’t consider these to also be legitimate religious traditions!” And of course people in other religions don’t consider them to be legit; that’s the point. For many of the Abrahamic religions, which make up a good chunk of religious people in the world today, the basic guideline that the other religions are false is fundamental. Different groups of people calling themselves Christian can’t even agree if the other denominations are anywhere close to the mark.

This doesn’t mean that Christians cannot see wisdom in the philosophy of Muslims or Jews or pagans. But it means that while they may accept different parts of their arguments as true or inspired, they cannot accept the conclusion.

Marc Barnes had a point on one of his BadCatholic blog posts on Patheos in which he argued that the non-Catholic should be laughing at the Catholic for his or her belief in transubstantiation. Because in believing in the host and wine at Mass turning into the Body and Blood of Christ is a very bold claim about the nature of the universe. To paraphrase and misapply a quote by C.S. Lewis, if it is true, then it is of the utmost importance; but if it is not true, then it isn’t important at all. That being said, I take the point of view that different religious viewpoints should be respected and you shouldn’t go around laughing at people’s religious beliefs. But the point still stands that someone’s religious beliefs make a point about the universe, and it should be absurd for someone outside of that point of view to hear them and take them seriously. It’s sort of along the lines of telling people with a basic grasp of science that plants actually get energy from little gnomes in their leaves. The two contradictory beliefs cannot coexist in the same person’s mind.

I think this is the problem I have with the majority of people’s view of religion. Atheists don’t believe, and fine, you’re exempt from this. But I see people who act like their religion isn’t meant to be a part of who they are. The notion of “Everything is political” should be abhorrent to the religious person, or at least to one of the Abrahamic religions, because it means that one is viewing everything in the world--how to treat others, how to treat oneself, how to interact with nature--as being directly related to politics, instead of directly related to God. Yet instead it’s become a commonly-held mantra by the seemingly religious and non-religious alike.

No! Religion is meant to be a fundamental part of who you are. And hopefully, it is a religion that calls you to take care of your fellow human. Christians and Jews, for instance, are demanded by the tenants of their faiths to care for the less fortunate. But you do not worship politics, and you do not answer to politics. You answer to God. As Michael says in Dresden Files: this is not a democracy; we answer to a king.

“Thy will be done.” Anyone who says the Lord’s Prayer knows this line but seems to forget its relevance. I know I do sometimes. But we cannot let the matters of this world dictate our actions and our beliefs. If we are to call ourselves religious, we must recognize that there is more to the world than ourselves. Otherwise that label of ‘religious’ is disingenuous.

*No, for real. After the Detective Pikachu trailer was released, a SyFy Wire article was published with an opening line that read something like, “Well, I know we all hated that trailer but if they do all of what we’re suggesting here maybe the movie might not be so bad.” It was if someone didn’t receive the memo that the trailer was received very well upon release.

Saturday, April 13, 2019

Assassin's Creed: Unity Review

I think that Assassin’s Creed: Unity is quite frankly the most infuriating game I’ve played in years.

When I’d gotten a PS4 I decided I was going to get one of the AC games that was on PS4 that wasn’t Odyssey (because I already had obtained it and loved it). And I got Unity because I’d heard the free-running was better, and that when played well it was quite good. And while traversing Paris is fun, this game also sometimes plays as garbage and I’m kind of baffled about some of the decisions they’ve made designing it.

You see, this is my experience in playing just about every Assassin’s Creed game: try to be sneaky around the guards, but when that inevitably fails I kill them all. I was starting down this path in Unity when the game stopped me.

“Hang on a sec, you can’t do that,” the game said.

“Why not?” I asked.

“Because we’ve designed the combat to be utter garbage!” the game joyously exclaimed, laughing maniacally. And it wasn’t lying. The combat is utter garbage and I got killed pretty quickly. The parry is too clumsy for the careful timing it sometimes requires, you’re practically defenseless against guns, and counter kills have been removed. I get the point, of course: the game wants you to try more stealthy approaches, and so if you get detected you’ve got to retreat and rework your approach. But it was just completely at odds with how I played these games. I felt as if the previous games went out of their way to make you feel like a badass warrior and then Unity goes out of its way to make you feel as weak as possible. And for a game that makes you want to avoid combat like the plague, it keeps putting you in it.

“But stealth!” the game and its fans reply. Which doesn’t work for me, because the Batman: Arkham games had amazing stealth sections that rely on not getting caught, but the combat isn’t utter crap. If there’s a part of the game you’re hoping people will avoid, maybe you should realize that it’s because that part of the game is terrible and need reworking, not that you’re clever for designing it so.

“I actually really liked the combat,” says Unity fanboy #463 on Reddit. Alright, but you do know you are admitting to enjoying something deliberately designed to be unpleasant? It’s a bit like telling everyone you enjoy the smell in gas station restrooms. It isn’t something you should really brag about.

Unity fanboy #149 scoffs haughtily. “Well I want my games to be challenging, unlike a casual gamer,” he says. Good for you. But that defense doesn’t work with this game because I’m not just being challenged by the game’s combat difficulty, which is aggravating by design, I’m being challenged by the fact that the game doesn’t work. What makes the stealth and combat so aggravating is how glitchy the game is. At one point in a story-scripted fight Arno wouldn’t attack, block, dodge or shoot, and the only actions he could perform were walking around and dropping smoke bombs. Sometimes Arno refuses to shoot when prompted, as if the targeted enemy was just too cool to die. Sometimes enemies aren’t hurt by being shot. Once Arno refused to start sneaking. I accidentally got into conflicts because I shot guards in the back of the head and instead of dying they turned around and saw me. Every so often, a civilian will walk in front of the barrel of your gun because he or she is suicidal I guess. I bumped into a guard on the other side of a wall. Guards spawned from nowhere to fight me and then when I hid they went back across the street on the other side of a wall. A guard with his back turned saw me on top of a rooftop. Sometimes when you’re detected you have to fight the one guy who saw you, and sometimes you have to fight all of his buddies who also apparently know where you are as they run from all over the block. And on some occasions the guards on the first floor won’t notice if you fire a gun on the second. At some points smoke bombs work to make your enemies lose track of you; at others they won’t. Frequently I’d aim to air assassinate a guard only for the game to switch which guard I was targeting as I’m pressing the button.

In short, even if the stealth and combat were fun, the fact is that when you begin either you never know what exactly you’re signing up for because it doesn’t work. And not in a good way, like the game surprising you with extra fun; it’s exactly the wrong sort of way, where you think your mission is to defend an army officer against royalists and because you make too much noise fighting the royalists then the army soldiers decide to kill you too.

[Also, you’re encouraged to use smoke bombs a lot. Which doesn’t really sound that stealthy, if you think about it, because a giant cloud of smoking spontaneously erupting around a group of guards is the exact opposite of stealthy.]

I’m sure some fanboy will try to assure me it’s my fault that the game doesn’t play well, and that it’s actually pretty well designed. To that, I answer: Cherry Bombs. See, the game gives you this stealth tool called the ‘Cherry Bomb’ which is essentially a firecracker that acts as a noisemaker--you throw it somewhere, it’ll make sparks and noise, and the guards will be distracted and go investigate. This replaces the ‘whistle’ function the past two games had to draw guards over to where you are. What the game doesn’t tell you is that the Cherry Bomb has to be within a guard’s line of sight. Which means if you’re hiding  in a hallway and are trying to lure a guard from an adjacent room into the hallway, then the Cherry Bomb won’t work unless the guard can turn around and see it from his position. Otherwise, they may turn around in the direction of the noise, but won’t move towards it. It doesn’t matter if it’s right behind them, or right around the corner; if they can’t see the Cherry Bomb, it won’t work.

Essentially, one of the key stealth tools you start out with is a noisemaker that only works if enemies can see it.

A noisemaker that works by line of sight! No one can tell me that a competently-designed game would include that!

What makes stealth and combat even more difficult is that the game has what it calls “Crowd Events,” which are things that happen in the streets of Paris that you can interfere with, like someone getting robbed, or mugged, or bullied, or whatever. But in crowded areas this happens every minute or so, and even if you don’t interfere in the Crowd Event then the surrounding guards might take notice of someone in the street getting run through, and then a fight will break out and your stealth will be ruined because if you go anywhere near it the guards will detect you and the game will act like it’s your fault for not being sneaky enough. During one stealth mission three or four Crowd Events occurred within seconds of each other, with two spawning at once. They’re optional yes, but call me a moron because I always try to help when someone’s getting gutted on the pavement, which often leads to me being gutted on the pavement.

There are times when the game doesn’t tell you what to do in specific situations and then acts like you should have known it all along. In Assassin’s Creed III it gives you specific instructions on what to do in combat when someone points a gun at you. Unity gives you no such help. I didn’t learn until I looked up combat tips for the game that you’re supposed to hit the dodge button at just the right second. Sometimes the game doesn’t give you enough time to realize that someone is shooting at you. If Arno is not in combat mode and someone’s aiming at you, you’re just out of luck, as the dodge button isn’t an option there. There’s an eye that appears next to the minimap, I think to tell you that you’re in a guard’s line of sight, but the game never tells me, so that’s just a guess on my part. The boss fight with Bellec has him disappear with a smoke bomb, and then he will try to jump on you and stab you, which the game doesn’t give any hint as to what you’re supposed to do about and it sucks because if he hits you then you die in one hit.

There are skills and abilities that you have to unlock that you really shouldn’t. Double assassination is an ability that takes much too long to unlock; wisely the following game made this unlockable in the tutorial section. Guns have to be unlocked with skill points, which is downright weird; no other game in the series gives that limit, except as being a point of story progression. That you have to spend skill points to use one of the game’s basic weapons is downright offensive.

The most infuriating thing is the admittedly rare occasion when the game punishes you for being smart. When you go to assassinate Marie Levesque, for instance, it took me a couple of tries, but I managed to sneak into the palace and take out key guards, noting the escape routes as I went. Only when I actually performed the assassination, all the open windows had been closed and all the guards I took out had respawned. Essentially, I had carefully planned an escape route and the game slammed that door in my face, saying, “Nope! For all our talk of doing it your own way, you have to get out of this situation the way we say you do, okay?” What kind of game punishes you for doing your homework? What is that supposed to teach me?

Customization is cool, in theory, but it’s also a major hassle. Because I just wanted to look cool, but instead I’m constantly juggling a bunch of statistics on how to be stealthy but also carry enough ammunition and supplies. It’s not helpful that if you want to be stealthy, the way the game wants you to play, the outfit most suited to that is the stupidest-looking one of the bunch.

I didn’t experience any of the horrifying glitches of people missing faces, the way a lot of people did at the game’s launch. However, NPC bystanders would often walk through cutscenes, including duels and chase scenes, leisurely waltzing right through running characters or in front of enemies as they’re getting shot. There were a couple of scenes where the camera is at an extremely odd angle of someone’s face, with the corner of someone else’s character model in the way.

Traversal is far better than previous games; at least, in theory. Most of the time it works, but when it doesn’t, it does so in the most rage-inducing way possible. Often Arno will climb up when you tell him to climb down. It’s not uncommon for Arno to refuse to climb up for no reason at all. If you’re running and you happen to dash past something that would realistically bump him in the shoulder, Arno will start climbing up it and refuse to get down, hopping from table to barrel to chair, including chairs that there are already people sitting in. More than once I was perched on a ledge and then Arno would just fall, arms flailing as he descended into a horde of angry enemies. When sneaking sometimes he just refused to take cover where I tell him to, and will instead just sort of rock back and forth on his heels like a moron or stick to a surface further away from him than the one I told him to take cover behind.

“Just wait ‘til you see what we did with Eagle Vision!” the game says, clapping like a madman.

I am very tired at this point. “How did you screw up Eagle Vision, that one button that makes it easier to see enemies and detect important elements around you?” I ask.

“It’s on a short timer!” Unity is cackling now as it practically explodes with malicious glee. “And it has a cooldown period!”

Yes, that staple of the series, Eagle Vision, is now only meant to last a few seconds. Certain types of gear will enable it to last longer and give it more range (WHY WOULD CHANGING YOUR CLOTHES ENHANCE YOUR SIXTH SENSE?!?), but it’s still on a timer, so in order to know where everyone is, you have to keep switching it on. You can see enemies through walls though, which is new and actually good.

Optional objectives are back, and aren’t quite as bad as they were in previous games; they don’t have ridiculous conditions in order to get full credit, usually just things like “Do two double assassinations” or “Stun three enemies.” They’re still not great, because again, any idea of freedom is limited in that you won’t get 100% on a mission unless you do it a certain way. The worse is always “Don’t get detected” because this is always followed by throwing you into large spaces filled with half a dozen guards and no cover. You’re better off ignoring them.

Hey, did I mention that the game never shuts up? Notifications float up in your face on the right side of the screen, and there is no way to dismiss them; you must wait for them to go away. Black Flag had this too, but those were always small enough that they didn’t get in the way of gameplay, and you could check the past few messages in the pause menu. In this game they’re constantly popping up to tell you tips, location, and useless information, along with a quick sound that pings every time to make sure you stay pissed off. They’ll often pop up on top of each other, so if you’re working on one of the Murder Mysteries and you look at a clue, a notification will pop up on top of the clue information to tell you information you already know and you just have to wait for it to fade away. And when you break a lock in the lockpicking minigame, the popup will helpfully tell you that if you don’t want to break locks, press the button at the correct time. Or, in short, if you don’t want to mess up, then don’t mess up. Thanks, Unity.

Speaking of lockpicking, who’s bright idea was it to make it so that of the treasure chests littered across the map, two-thirds of them are locked? I get that in theory it means that there are collectables that you can’t unlock until you’ve progressed, but what it means is that not only do you have to wait to a certain part of the game where you can buy that skill, you have to do an annoying little minigame every time you just want some treasure. It turns the task of collecting into even more of a chore.

There are also collectables called “artifacts” which are coats of arms on the walls in random places. They’re not so bad, except in the Helix Rift sections, in which whether or not they show up in their place depends on the alignment of the stars or something. It makes it difficult to even care about trying to collect them all if the game sometimes refuses to let you do so.

“So you hated this game?” you, the reader, asks me.

That’s the thing though--I wanted very much to like it! There were parts I liked very much, in fact. When the game worked (and I must emphasize it wasn’t often), it was incredibly cool to feel like a stealth Assassin, taking out enemies and disappearing without a trace. This was utilized well in the missions that the game called Black Box missions. Basically, the developers realized that the assassination missions of the past games were too scripted, so they put in situations where you’re given a target and a location and you’re given much more freedom on how to take them out.

The Murder Mysteries were, for the most part, excellent and allowed you to use your deduction skillz to put together the clues you’d been given and point out which person was the murderer. They were stressful, but not in a ‘wow-this-sux’ kind of way, more like the rewarding sort of way when you got it right. I liked them a lot. But they were frustrating when popups kept getting in the way of the clues.

The Nostradamus Riddles were similarly excellent! They involved solving riddles by finding glyphs all over Paris, given clues that refer to the history of the places. The only criticism I had was that it would have been better if the in-game database had a search engine, sort of like the one in Carmen Sandiego: Treasure of Knowledge to make it easier to find what you’re looking for instead of scrolling through dozens of location entries.

But yes, I think I hated it, at least a lot of the time I was playing it. I never thought I’d say that about an Assassin’s Creed game, but I cannot in good conscience tell someone that I liked this game or recommend it to anyone. It was not fun to play. The more time I spent with the game the less I liked it. Often enough I’d have fun, but that would soon be dashed by something stupid like being spotted by a guard through a building or Arno falling off a ledge. This should have been one of the greatest games in the series, and instead it’s undeniably the worst. Do not play this game, do not spend money on this game; every other game in the series is a more rewarding experience than Assassin’s Creed: Unity. Maybe some morbid curiosity is driving you to picking it up, but I urge you: do not listen!

I had this whole section planned to talk about the story too! I had a thesis that Assassin’s Creed: Unity is trying to tell the story of France! I was going to talk about character models and history and all! But it doesn’t matter because nothing I say will change the simple fact that this game is not fun to play. Not even in a ‘If you like a challenge’ sort of way. This game is a broken mess that doesn’t work as intended. No. Don’t play it.

Saturday, April 6, 2019

On Wasted Characters

I’m currently reading The Teutonic Knights by Henryk Sienkiewicz which is apparently like the Polish national epic novel or something? Yeah, I have some issues with it, like the main character being a moron, and also an eighteen-year-old who falls in love with a twelve-year-old. So, uh, what the fudge Poland?

---

On Wasted Characters

You know all those gods who appear at the end of The Red Pyramid? No? It’s this scene in which the Kane siblings are in the throne room of the gods, and looking out, they see hundreds upon hundreds of other Egyptian gods looking back at them. And if you’re like me, when you’re reading this you’re like, “Wow! There are so many gods in this setting! I imagine the next two books in the trilogy will involve dozens upon dozens of gods! And even if they don’t become main characters, there will be massive armies of gods ready for battle!”

Except that’s not what happens. The very next book tells us that in the spirit world there’s a nursing home for the gods who have been forgotten (i.e., most of them), holding thousands of gods who are losing their minds at lack of belief. They do get a battle scene in the final book, but it’s mostly played for laughs as geriatric Egyptian gods clobber a bunch of monsters.

Or using another god example: in the novel American Gods we’re told that the New Gods have pretty large numbers and power on their side. The three we mostly interact with are Mr. Town, a man in black type of god who doesn’t even realize he’s a mythical construct, Media and the Technical Boy, god of technology. Mr. World, who is in charge of the spookshow (the men in black organization), gets a couple of scenes too. But we’re told about oodles of New Gods: gods of train and railway, gods of automobiles who are covered in blood from all the sacrifices they’ve gotten, gods of psychology and cancer and telephone. I’m not annoyed that they didn’t get more screentime in the book--that’s a single novel that has a lot of things it’s got to convey, and the main character doesn’t spend too much time among the New Gods, so of course we don’t see that many.

The show doesn’t have that excuse. It gives plenty of subplots to characters who only had one or two scenes in the book, and there’s a specific subplot about Mr. World marshalling his forces. And yet we don’t see that many New Gods. In fact, quite a few of the gods on the side of the New Gods are just Old Gods taking different guises. Which has its place in the narrative, but there is a massive opportunity the show just isn’t taking. It seems as if there are only three New Gods and it’s underwhelming.

Or hopping to another series: The Chronicles of the Imaginarium Geographica books quickly set up the Archipelago of Dreams as the realms of imagination. Worlds out of myth and legend all take place there on different islands. Worlds upon worlds of fantasy are mentioned as co-existing having their own creatures and lifestyles. And yet while the sequels explore some of them, for the most part they’re concerned not with the multitudes of worlds but with time travel shenanigans.

I understand that authors won’t always have the chances to explore all the possibilities they lay out. But it’s a bit frustrating when a writer leaves things open like this, only to sort of shut down any possibilities of using the background characters they’ve already established as existing. It’s not just not using possibilities, it’s using those possibilities for show and then locking them up and never pulling them out again.

The excuse of ‘I didn’t have time’ doesn’t quite work in some of these. James A. Owen’s series has seven books. You would think that they’d have some room to explore the Archipelago. And yet books three, five, six and seven are about time travel shenanigans. In fact the Archipelago is destroyed for the last three books of the series. That’s… kind of a problem, guys.

If you’re not going to use these elements, then don’t introduce them to begin with! Or at the very least, don’t make them the centerpieces of the story. The American Gods show made a point of making a subplot in its second season about what the New Gods are doing. So not showing us any of the New Gods other than the ones we’ve already seen, is pretty darn egregious.

Introduce major elements only if you’re willing to use them. Don’t plot a series that involves oodles of cool new characters and worlds if you’re not going to bother with them.

---

-EAHC