At 7/17/10 12:33 PM, MindChamber wrote:
The amount of time a story took to make, or amount of words it took to create doesn't automaticly make it entaintaining.
I could name tons of million dollar blockbuster outshine by low budget films. Learn some sportsmanship.
I don't think Fro was commenting on the length or time invested, as we all know that longer flash animations, or those that may have taken years to make, aren't necessarily all that great. Where there are artists such as Luis who can spout top quality relatively rapidly.
The issue in this case is that most people have a set standard of quality when it comes to visual media because most people are inundated with it throughout their lives. In this situation, I agree with Fro in the sense that quality of the submissions were substandard in regard to those that placed. If the competition were meant for short, witty submissions, perhaps that should have been emphasized. Because there were no limits placed, writers took the liberty to expound on the story without any set expectations other than "there needs to be robots."
I will corroborate Fro's statement, and I will put my own experience and knowledge behind it. I'm sure others in the writing community will corroborate this. The quality of the submissions that won, from a writer's perspective, are sub-standard. Fro should have placed better, I agree.
For the future, it would be nice if writers were given a better set of criteria, because if all that was being sought was a cheap thrill, it should be made known. It's not fair to the writers who invested more thought into their work.
I understand this is a flash community, and writing expertise should not be expected, but I think if you support something (such as literature), it needs to be supported 100%. At the very least, in the future, make the requirements better known. For example, the MWC.