Shad, Why'd You Do This?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июл 2024
- This was a terrible idea.
Update
(apparently favourite is how non-Americans spell the word, so I retract my goofy pronunciation)
The video
• What people REALLY thi...
My review of the book
• He once ruled the worl...
Battle Games Promo Pinup Contest Video
• Battle Games Pinup Pro...
My work
www.amazon.com/T-Alex-Ratclif...
Twitter
/ talexratcliffe
Minds
www.minds.com/talexratcliffe/ 
Развлечения
Before you comment about my pronunciation of "favourite" please read the update in the the description.
Shad is the age old example of throwing stones while living in a glass house. Man can dish harsh critique and mockery to others work but cannot handle the same done to him.
Shad is one more right-wing-leaning cry-baby, as so much bullies are.
It's not just that, it's also making the same rookie mistakes that he criticizes for a living, but worse
I'm cool with artists hating critics as long as their art is GOOD, oh and they don't spend all their time talking about how they could do it better than everybody else
Yeah, I liked his style of critique.
Until I found out that he's not always as honest as he'd like us to beleive....
Is kinda like his character.
His hubris is hilarious at times:
When _"Shadow of the Conquerer"_ was still in the making I saw a video where he was talking about worldbuilding and tropes in fantasy writing going on and on about how bad or overdone this or that supposedly was and how a fantasy writer (passingly slipping in being a writer himself and best qualified so he had to know here) should approach the undertaking.
I legitimately got the impression he actually believed in soon having published a close to perfect fantasy novel based on his confidence in his thorough analysis of the genre and the high horse he sat on when talking about other works and tropes.
Shad himself is like an AI in some regards - both are proof that having accessed a vaste pool of data, learned some rules about the topic at hand and correctly having inferred some more doesn't necessarily have to produce a pleasant or even just coherent result.
However - the contrast between his video and the outcome of his own writing makes him look at least like a narcissist if not like suffering a full-blown delusion of grandeur.
If you notice most of his positive reviews were written the same day they bought the book.
Ok, but when I really like a Kindle book it isn't uncommon for me to read the entire book the same day I buy it.
He wrote a main character who has decades of experience that through story contrivance is in the body of a sexy young man, and whose main power is "I can imagine myself getting better at things" and somehow this is not a Mary Sue character?
It's literally not a Mary Sue, a Mary Sue isn't a character who is just powerful. They are specifically a character who hasn't earned said powers and is crazy strong, is always loved by everyone around them ect. Shads book isn't great, I read it. It's not a Mary Sue, his character would be killed immediately if anyone other then the black guy ever finds out who he is. His character has already lived like 120 years or something so is very poltical savy, and really good at fighting. His character isn't interesting because his story has been told, and the redemption story isn't worth being told because the guys ireemable. He's literally a child predator which I'm shocked you guys aren't focusing more on. This guy seems well honestly petty, like actual criticism could be made about the book, but isn't being made. He's making pho complaints which tells me this guy is either ideologically opposed to shad, or jealous of his success.
@@travissteffel7431he's a Mary sue
@@alexarviso6836 no he's not, it's a chosen one plot. His weaknesses is literally his past self, and now has to go correct wrongs he's done. The whole first book is about stopping a cult that worships him and his past actions.
@@travissteffel7431look up the definition
If the character was a girl you would call her Mary Sue. But misogyny.
Gary Sue* but yeah he is to perfect
Shad: "Objective quality exists."
Also Shad: "All opinions are subjective"
I mean, these are both true, but he's too proud to admit the implications.
"Your review is wrong because it is subjective. Here, I'll show you a bunch of other subjective reviews praising me to prove it." ~Shad
How is bro real lmaooooo
twilight currently has a 4.7 out of 5 stars in amazon. ratings don't mean sh*t anymore.
It's because ratings open to the public will always be weighted towards 5 and 1 star reviews because those are most of the people who care to comment. The fans in that case cared more about it than the haters did. Professional reviewers have their issues, but putting aside any corrupt practices, they're generally more reliable.
Ratings are fine as long as there is no foul play, like having a massive fanbase that doesn't rate the product, but the content creator they follow.
professional reviewers are often beholden to the industry (creators’) hegemonic views (depending on the specific medium), open ratings are beholden to the target audience’s hegemonic views. the vast majority of japanese light novels (LNs) are mid-at-best for me, but for the target audience of high school weebs, they hit the spot well enough; similarly for manga, almost nothing on mangadex gets below a 5/10 average score, and plenty of shit I feel is barely a 7 or 8 get 9.2 and above.
Amazon most people rate books over if it came in time and if it has no problems in the book itself, yes some people review the book there too but in the general Amazon reviews is more the book as an object instead of its contents.
I mean... I'm going to disagree with you. Twilight is effective fiction for the intended audience. I am a teacher. I have gotten several girls to read their first full novel because of Twilight. Does that mean it is peak fiction? No. But any book that gets a girl who has never read a full novel to read is a 5/5 to me.
I've read twilight. I'd five it a 2.5... on a generous day. But it is a book that is always, always in my classroom library.
I hate the whole school of thought that shad has adopted. When people like something he likes they are liking the objective qualities. But if people critique things he made or he likes, it is their subjective opinion, not a critique of the objective qualities.
This alone really betrays the subjective nature of those guys.
This is a very common flaw of perception, to pretend that Shad is one of a minority who suffer from it would be disingenuous.
You should see Shad stanning for AI Art... with his own bad art results that get worse the more you look at it.
@@TheSkyfolk Have we interacted with the same "human race"? For decades I thought it was common knowledge that the average person will double down and dig his heels in rather than admit wrongness in any way.
I misread "hate" as "have" and "has" as "was" in your first sentence and was like "ooh, spicy!"
Nvm, carry on
@@myboatforacar thatgave me a huge chuckle you made my day
If I ever become a published author, first thing I'm doing is making sure I never make a Twitter account because there is something about that platform that causes people to become their worst version of themselves.
I think it also depends on how you use Twitter. If you just let the reviews come and go, good or bad, you should be fine. But if you cry and whine, they'll come after you.
Can confirm
Getting banned was the best thing for me. Even if it took three times for me to figure it out x_x
Best move.
Funny enough that Shad's defense of Deylan not being a Mary Sue is basically one-to-one people's defense of Rey in Star Wars, who Shad has stated time and time again is a Mary Sue. Don't really have a horse in that race, but the double standard Shad displays for his own character is glaring.
And weirdly enough Rey is as much Mary Sue as Luke Skywalker is Gary Stu. Both are nobodies who excel in everything they do and do great heroic act in the end. Repeatedly. How does some farm boy from Planet Backwater know how to fly fighter plane (lacking better analogue) on level of veteran pilots?
@vksasdgaming9472 Luke has character flaws that affect the plot. He makes mistakes and isn't always right. Being skilled is not being a Mary Sue. A Mary Sue has no flaws that affect the plot, and has the world bend over backwards for them to be in the right. Usually they have superficial "weaknesses" that have no affect on the plot such as being clumsy, being too nice, being an asshole, and so on. These can be legitimate weaknesses or flaws for other characters, but the Mary Sue will never be punished or meaningfully affected by them in the plot.
If you still think Luke is one, that's fine. Just make sure you are using the correct definition
Wrong about luke but go off sis 😂😂😂😂@@vksasdgaming9472
@@bestaround3323 They both are of same type and bloody bland characters as well.
@@vksasdgaming9472 agree to disagree
If I ever get my book finished and published I'd be happy just to get reviews at all. I'd know someone actually read it.
Reviews are one of the hardest things about being an author.
what is your book about?
Same! I'm writing a Fantasy Light Novel, trying to be careful not to lose a possible reader's interest with too much "Oh hey I think that's very unique and cool" world building. Can't really imagine anyone reading it in the end but a bunch of friends, almost impossible to get criticism when you're not a famous content creator.
@@bighatastreaAs long as you don’t lose sight of the fact that you’re trying to tell a story and not writing a fan wiki, I think you should be golden.
@@bighatastreado your best you can to write it. If you have friends who are willing to read segments, then let them read a couple chapters. Some you loved to write and some you don't.
Think of it like being a chef. You may think your dishes are boring. But then others go "no dude, those dishes are amazing. Why do you think I like them?
Shad explaining himself: ''He is a prodigy and incredibly skilled form a lifetime's of work, but that just feeds into his other flaws''
Shad came out and stated that there are negative reviews that outright misrepresent the book, and yet he NEVER pulls out his copy and reads from the book the part that is "misrepresented."
Part of the definition of a Mary Sue is that world bends around the character and that rules are not follow for the character. In the negative reviews it is mentioned that the power set is explained one way and then completely disregarded immediately. And he effectively has an instant win card in any circumstance. It doesn't matter if your character has flaws if the flaws do not impact their story in any meaningful way. Rey from the Sequel Trilogy is often mentioned as a Mary Sue, but she has flaws but her flaws play no part in the story. Having a meaningless flaw is effectively not having one. I don't care that his character is a terrible person, women still fawn over him and people stay around him. His flaws are meaningless, therefore he effectively has none.
Flaws need to have meaning to matter. Luke's flaw in the OT of Star Wars is that he is always looking towards the future and failing to live in the present. His mistakes are all tied to this fact. He wants to get off Tatooine to explore the galaxy, not focused on the farm. He finds out Leia is on the Death Star and goes to save her thinking about what the future could be if he succeeds and without a good plan. He sees his friends in danger and goes head first into a trap. When Vader threatens to harm Leia, he loses his composure and nearly falls to the dark side because he wants to prevent that future. Luke's flaw plays a role in all three of his movies. Does Shad's OC flaw actual play a role in anything he does? No, he is justified in his bloodthirst by the story. He is effectively rewarded for it. It's not a flaw.
And I am sorry for using Star Wars here, but it is just the easiest one I can pull from.
That was an interesting point! I've never thought about it, but it's obvious now that you mention it. If a flaw doesn't meaningfully impact the story and lead to some kind of trouble that must then be overcome, then it might as well not exist. To draw a couple of examples from Lord Of The Rings:
Gandalf has the flaw of trusting the wisdom of his old friend and Wizardly superior Saruman. He is imprisoned for it and just barely escapes in time to help the heroes.
Aragorn has the flaw of feeling unworthy to shoulder the responsibility of being king. The world of men almost falls because of his dereliction of duty.
Boromir has the flaw of seeking more power than he can handle. The ring almost finds its way back to Sauron for it.
These flaws endangered the world, and are therefore very meaningful to the story.
@@mikael.wilhelm And I am not saying every flaw needs to be related to the story. You can have flaws that aren't, but just because a character has a flaw doesn't remove them from being a Mary Sue.
At least with Rey it can be argued that her Mary Sue characterization is mostly a symptom and not isolated to her. It's simply the result of Abrams and Johnson either not knowing about pre-established Force rules and lore, or just ignoring them. So the Force becomes a deus ex machina instead of a learned skill. Rey unlocks the Jedi Mind Trick mere minutes after finding out she's Force sensitive because the writers couldn't come up with something more creative and in character it seems. That jailbreak scene broke all the rules of Star Wars lore. Why Finn couldn't rescue her I just don't understand.
Anyway, all Force users in the Sequels are quite Mary Sue-ish in that regard really. They just acquire Force skills whenever the plot needs them to. Astral projection, teleportation, healing, reanimation, anything goes. There is no real magic system in the Sequels. TRoS in particular felt like a videogame with Rey's stats maxxed out.
Shad does all the world and magic building _and_ breaking in the same book. That's next level frustration imho. Like all the lore breaking in the Sequels didn't "ruin" the Originals for me. They're seperate works. And I still maintain TFA is a pretty fun movie on its own despite its flaws.
And while Luke mourns his father's death the rest of the Galaxy is celebrating his demise. Party time everywhere. Anakin might find redemption within himself and Luke, but Vader will forever be remembered as the cruel, genocidal tyrant he was.
I actually think Star Wars is a pretty good example here because it's one of the most iconic stories in pop culture that revolves around a character who goes all out evil and finds redemption at the end. Comparing the two highlights everything Shad did wrong with Daylen.
This is a very good comment, very respectful, but also critical. I haven't read shads book, but I do agree what Rey is a mary sue character, while luke isn't. Not because Rey is female or anything, but because we never see her struggle with her flaws, and overcome them, like we see with Luke. Rey is a stronger *character* but she has a weaker characterization. I think they could have done a better job with her character by having her tempted by the dark side, or failing in some meaningful way, and then overcoming that failure, emerging stronger for it.
And there I was thinking that Luke's flaws were his irrationality under pressure and his rashness to action which often got exploited...
One of the many signs that a character might be a self-insert power fantasy Mary Sue is when the author feels personally attacked if someone dislikes the character.
Virgin "I dismiss negative reviews" Shad Vs the Chad "Negative reviews are often the most useful" Razorfist.
By that logic, all the preening from liberal or conservative groups on (insert topic) would stand to be the utmost valuable in critical theory rather than less ideological more idiotological whining.
@@custos3249 Yes, no, maybe.
@@custos3249 If you let your own political opinions rule you to write an unfair negative or positive review you’re a true NPC and we have those in spades nowadays.
@@custos3249 No, because they are rooted in ideology, their critique would be that the work doesn't comfort their vision.
??? Shad has plenty of screws loose, but he also has several children. Seriously, this is always a really dumb argument. Conservatives aren't usually playing the field, but they tend to have boatloads of children; they think it is a literal command from the lord of the universe to "be fruitful and multiply."
I have the power to have as many powers as I want
Pretty much how it goes.
Oddly enough I seen this done well at least once (or twice if I count a characeter who is a but more limited)
@@nobody4248 May I ask who these might be? Could be interesting to learn about
If shad really wanted to take the whole "video response" route he should have done a parody review mocking his own work using the bad reviews, admitting its faults, laughing at the characters and end it with something like "dont know who this Shad a*shole is but he cant write for sh*t" while having a massive picture of himself in the background (preferably in a comedic situation like slipping on a banana peel)
wont make the work itself better but it makes it a thousand times harder to mock him if he doesnt take backlash seriously
That would require a measure of humility he doesn't seem to have
I was deeply disappointed when this book came out. Here was a guy talking about rearming fantasty, castles, and swords, and it seemed like none of that made it into his book.
Then there was the world building, and everything that went with it. Generously this was far too much of a topic to take on as a first book
After seeing his behavior over the last year, my disappointment has only deepened.
One man can't have it all. Most would be content with a successful channel on weapons and armor.
He knows it's bad. I give zero slack on that point.
Between this and his reaction to people clowning him for his AI generations, I think we're getting a fuller picture of Shad's definitive character flaw.
He also went on an hours long rant crying about Princess Peach wearing pants in a children's film.
during a scene where she was riding a bike ..... dude seems to think women wear skirts and dresses when using motorcycles @@williampounds5191
His brother is literally artist
his brother also mocked him for his "art"
Jazza is a real artist while shad is a lazy wannabe that wants the cred but refuses to do the work @@realdragon
@@williampounds5191 Oh yeah, I forgot about that. Man really is a paragon of shittiness, isn't he?
The first rule of being a professional writer: do not interact with the reviews. Do not interact with book reviewers, good or bad, beyond "hey, thanks for taking the time to review my book", and maybe sharing some of the better good reviews. Anything beyond that, think twice. Then think about it another few dozen times. Bad-faith non-reviews can be a different story, but it's usually best to avoid interacting with them too unless they're in such bad faith that they're going into full libel/defamation territory.
There's so many reasons, so many examples, but, man... Just don't. There are folks who'll thread the needle, but in nearly all cases it's like dancing drunk through a minefield. There's almost no chance you're going to make anything better by doing it, and the opportunity to make things catastrophically worse for yourself is immense.
Imagine if in The Hobbit, when Bilbo and his company find the Gondolinian swords Sting, Orcrist and Glamdring in the troll cave, there's a sudden break in the action for a ten-page info dump on Gondolin, how Turgon, son of Fingolfin, son of Finwe, founded the city in the first age following a dream given by Ulmo, Valar of the Seas and how the city was located in a hidden valley and how Morgoth, the fallen Valar, couldn't find it for centuries until it was betrayed to him. O yeah, and then also lengthy exposition of what construction methods were used to build the city.Tolkien is often criticised for digressing at inopportune moments but the only real info dumps happen when characters need to have stuff explained to them organically, like during the council of Elrond and it usually keeps to things that are relevant to the quest. For the people who want to know more, well, they can read the lengthy appendices or the Silmarillion for worldbuilding, but The Hobbit/LotR really contains enough info to make the world work even if you don't know 90% of its backstory.
I feel like Tolkien has a healthy amount of heavy info dumping here and there, for when you'll probably need it as a first time audience member who has no clue what's going on. Throwing in something only semi important to the moment like the whole airship thing is... Well... Silly.
@@uboa8060 Yeah, you can definetely see it with Eisengard's tower and Shelob, but at least it relates to the issue at hand. Like when Tolkien hypes up Shelob to make clear to the reader that shit really got real for Frodo and Sam right now. And when he describes Sam's futile attempts to slash Shelob with sting that "Not even Beren's hand could've pierced Shelob's skin", you don't even know who Beren is, but you realize that he probably is or was a big deal(and reading trough Silmarillion, yeah, he really was).
@@Ruosteinenknight There's a similar moment when Gandalf faces down the Balrog at the bridge, where he namedrops the Secret Fire and the flame of Anor, and calls the Balrog "Flame of Udun". Not only does Tolkien not interrupt the scene for a 5 page primer on Arda's creation myth to explain the references, but the lack of understanding a first time reader has connects them to the fellowship in a way. I doubt anyone but Gandalf, the Balrog and maybe Aragorn understood what all or even most of it meant. And that just adds to the moment, it's words spoken by a mysterious wizard to a giant burning shadow demon after all.
Commenting again so I'm actually engaging with the topic.
I find it frustrating that Shad goes on the attack. Dismissing the criticism with Argumentum Ad Populum (his book is popular therefore you're in the wrong) and then goes on to try and dismiss you based on what he thinks is an error on your part, thus it means your criticism cannot be valid if you're human and make a mistake. One or two people coming to him and saying they liked the long drawn out exposition of the math and all that doesn't mean that it isn't fundamentally a bad section. There is always going to be someone out there who will like something no matter how garbage it is. It doesn't help he has a fanbase, so therefore they'll view his work more often than not through rose-tinted glasses.
He also is the one who needs to actually do research on what a Mary Sue is, not just look up the most common definition that comes up on google. I've been in fandom for over 20 years. Sue is a critique on the flawed character writing and is a hint at the type of flaw the character has. It doesn't matter if the exact bullet points aren't one-to-one because those examples given are to point out the fundamental issues with writing a character of that sort. But there are subcategories of Sue that Deylan certainly falls into. You can have Sues that are just hated unreasonably because the author wants to write a wooby. He falls into both of these versions simultaneously.
The issues that make Deylan a bad character is that Shad doesn't go beyond the surface of what he's writing, doesn't delve into the themes and morality and consequences of the main character's actions, both past and present. But he doesn't understand that because he fundamentally does not understand art and what art means to the human condition and why it's written in a certain way. Shad is so concerned with the end product, he doesn't give a damn about what goes into the final product that makes it good or bad and that's his fatal flaw.
Thoughtful and well reasoned arguments. I appreciate you getting into the particulars.
I review based on how a book makes me feel, and the things I'm learning as I dive deeper into writing. I can't claim to be an authority in anything other than did it entertain me.
I do try to be entertaining as I do it.
@@talexratcliffe if I were to write that scene, I would go a bit bombastic go a little excessive .
Delving into the consequences of one's actions requires competent writing. It could have made for an interesting read but Shad cares only about cool powers and overly detailed worldbuilding. As far as character goes, feeling bad about committing terrible crimes doesn't justify it. Shad thinks it does and that tells me a lot about who he is as person
The fact that he replied to you despite all the other negative comments that he decided to ignore proves that he saw your review before and recognized you. He did it purely out of spite. The second-hand embarrassment is real
I could only hope.
If he sat through all 50 minutes of my review and didn't comment, I would be disappointed.
If he does, I'll frame it. It will make me laugh every day.
It's sort of natural that somebody like Shad would choose to more so worry about going after the people who seem to have a fairly high profile.
Minor point. "Favourite" is UK English spelling. Living in Australia, an ex British colony still under the British Monarchy, it is the correct spelling given his location.
I'm a little concerned that a book reviewer doesn't know how to pronounce "favourite".
I think it's an insincere method of argument, to purposefully emphasize grammatical errors, or in this case to not recognize the UK spelling.
I guess I prefer when someone looks past said errors or misunderstandings, and instead endeavors to accurately portray their opponents argument.
typical american ignorance
@@purplewine7362 That's a tautology.
Yeah as an American, that kinda surprised me that he seemed to think it was an error. Color and colour are the same word
Not sure what you expected from a guy who was upset that a video game character wore pants in a movie
I for one, support Shad’s quick migration into lolcow territory
Know what he's right he didn't wrote a Mary Sue he wrote an Ebony Dark'ness Dementia Ravenway
Ebony Dark'ness Dementia Ravenway...now that's a name I've not heard in a long time...
9:28 - This was a major problem for me- Shad clearly struggles with where to place the expositional content and doesn't seem to understand that stopping the action to world-build is not conducive to maintaining narrative momentum. If you have to constantly stop the story to clue people in, the story you're telling is too large, or you're being entirely too self-indulgent. Or both.
As far as the physics of a skyship- It's nice that he figured it out, but it's superfluous. If you tell me the ship flies against the backdrop of a fantasy world where people are constantly using magic, I believe you. If it's that important to you, put an appendix at the back of the book for this stuff.
Look at things like Star Wars or Star Trek. The movies/shows don't have to give us in-depth explanations of how they use FTL travel, how deflector shields work, how many weapons of which type are on a given ship, etc, etc. They make books that have that information - compilations of the different types of technology, behind-the-scenes material that includes comments from writers and directors about it, and so on - so that people who are interested in it can read up on the subject, but constantly throwing it into the narrative can really mess with the flow of the story.
I did a creative education, our teachers were brutal, really really brutal. They would tear your work apart, but always with constructive feedback, they wouldn't say "Your work sucks", they would point out why it wasn't good, what could be improved, etc. They did this so we would be prepared for the real world. When we would go out there and do creative things for a living. They prepared us. Sadly I see to many "creative" folks out there who can't handle any form of criticism and lose their sh#t when someone dares to say their work isn't a master piece. Like Shad did with the review. Prime example of someone who's mother always said how great he was, how he was the best thing since sliced bread. Someone who's ego is so fragile that even looking at him the wrong way will trigger PTSD for him cause he needs to be seen as the Royal King of Awesomeness that he has envisioned himself. People like how would not have survived my job as movie editor for a small media company were I stood very close to the customers who didn't always like things (and many times it wasn't my fault but hey they pay so It's not up to me to disagree). I got butchered by a customer who said I did worst job ever, that I didn't know what I was doing, blabla....untill the movies I made for them won the Best Educational movies of that year, so clearly I wasn't that bad and they never apologized. Think I was gonna rant at them for what they said, nope, I shut my mouth, cause they came back for a new job that brought money to the company. Thus I would get paid my monthly income, cause that is how the adult world works, you listen to what they say, and either you see things you could improve on, or fully disagree but won't say so cause you will think about the bigger picture, the financial picture and what opening your mouth could result into. Not that he will ever learn, his brain is wired to see himself like some sort of god. Has a real issue with his brother being a far more successful RUclipsr. Heck even his brother called him out on his AI "art" and he seriously was defending himself. Like wtf, that is like coloring a picture with numbers and then pretend you made a real Rembrandt and calling it art.
Guy has no skills beside knowing some stuff about history, stick with what you know.
this was one of the purest examples of copium i'd seen in a while
Shad is nothing if not defensive.
What gets me is his 3d modelling of castles is so good, and he can so thoroughly pick apart the elements of other castle designs, AND YET, when people who draw good do the same to the anatomy of his AI characters, all objectivity just gets vaporized in a hot flash of defensive nerd rage.
This is because Shad has a superiority complex and is incapable of seeing criticism, constructive or otherwise, as anything less than a personal attack. He’s right, and he’s always right no matter what.
He’s even clearly jealous of his own brother for being a successful artist while Shad has fallen off to the wayside, slowly becoming the poster child for what a lolcow is, much like Boogie2988 except without the depressing documentary.
He’s even alienated a lot of his old fan base, myself included, by basically letting the mask slip and going from a silly medieval enthusiast to a blatantly misogynistic and homo/transphobic far-right bigot. I mean, he recently came out in support of book burnings, and we all know of a certain group in the past that _loved_ burning books.
"When he broke in someone's home like the cool aid man and emasculated him."
The first notion that came into my mind when reading that abhorrent scene was the girl in tears screaming at Daylen: "WE WERE ROLEPLAYING."
Of course Shad lacks the self-awareness to write anything like that, god forbid post-rebirth Daylen being majorly in the wrong.
Like when he kills one of his sons while not thinking that he has any?
Shad is the biggest cry bully I’ve ever seen. I can’t ethically diagnose him, but his behavior does seem to indicate narcissistic tendencies.
Yeah, tendencies.
I think he's just fallen victim of the internet fame. Having people constantly agreeing with him. I don't think it's actually narcissism, but something very similar.
It's possible, but as i said, It wouldnt be ethical to diagnose. I have my DSM-5 on me and Im seeing similarities but I can't say for sure as I don't know him personally.@@shalonsmith1337
@@shalonsmith1337might wanna throw in some minor jealousy towards his brother given his ta,keys on ai art etc. but yes I think the internet fame inflated his ego way too much
Which makes him incredibly normal. I can't ethically call you retarded for failing to recognize basic defensiveness to save face, but I can professionally tell if you have an actual education, your alma mater printed your degree in crayon. Shad still could use a stiffer chin regardless.
after i watch his video about defending AI tools, i don't think it is just "tendency".
I am starting to think Shad is a narcissist.
I really don't like throwing that label around, but I'm starting to think that at the very least Shad has ego issues. Lately a lot of the videos where it's him and his brother half the time it devolves into Shad trying to be right about whatever they're talking about. The whole longsword vs katana debate got old fast because instead of making new points Shad's argument pretty much always boiled down to "I am more familiar with longswords, so obviously longswords are better." It sucks cus I really do enjoy his videos on medieval history, but I can see his attitude causing problems in the future.
@@benjaminotalora363 Yeah, I remember that one. I was left very confused by the video, because he thought that "katana's are good but overrated".....but then he struggled to come up with any tanglible point, beyond his personal preference and I was just left wondering why he did that video in the first place when he didn't seem to have anything to say.
I remember listening the audiobook of Shadow of the Conqueror about 2 years ago, and remember feeling that the book was very much carried by the narration of Michael Kramer and Kate Reating. Had I read the book traditionally, I honestly don't know if I would have enjoyed anything about the book. Props to the both of them for being absolute professionals and delivering the material to the best of their ability.
That being said, I honestly think Shad takes way, way too much credit for the positive reviews and (as you pointed out) fails to consider any factors that would contribute to his sales/reviews. It's easy to get a 4 star aggregate review when you literally have thousands of people willing to support your work. Having an established audience and being able to pay for professional voice actors to narrate your work is a privilege. It is a mark, not of one's skill, but of circumstance.
On another note, it is because of all this "non-sense", that I sat down and watched your review. And I must say, you tackled it well. Your credentials as a reviewer are solid, and I think you articulate your points in an understandable and logical way. I would be honored to have you tear my own book asunder whenever I get to releasing it.
You're too kind. All I'm doing is talking about what I liked, don't like, and what I think. It's all I can do.
I'm using my channel as a reason to continue learning, and share that with other new authors and readers.
I wish I could read and review every book, I simply don't have the time.
You're being generous because he knows fuck-all about swords and castles
it's a classic jerk sue. "this character can't be a sue because they are a massive jerk", the example of an excuse given in the OSP reds video on the mary sue, and the excuse given by shad. it's literally comical how the exact same they are.
a "prodigy" means skilled without needing experience, and yet Shad claims Daylen is both prodigy since birth but also learned to be a master over "a lifetime's work"
tbf, favourite is how it's spelt in Australia here. I won't judge his world building inherently, but if you want to expand and create a massive sprawling world with entries about the lore of the universe, make a lore book. You can just do that. I do it for all my DnD campaigns, it's a lot of fun, but as a reader idgaf, I'll google it another time if I can be bothered
I had to thumbs up for the favourite spelling. It's how we spell it in Canada too. In a video like this with so many things to comment on, mistakenly trying to represent the spelling of favourite as anything less than correct seems disruptively out of place.
"Favourite" is how it's spelt in the UK, too! I was going to mention this in the comments, but I had to check first whether anyone else had brought it up already.
its how its spelt in english. not in simplified american
Shad's book might be shit, but tbh I'm not sure how great of a literary critic this guy can be if he's never encountered British English.
"Shad, Why'd You Do This?"
Because he's a super ego-maniac. Shad ego blocks his ability to think clearly. Damn i'm like him in that way. Damn!!
And he fake-yells too much.
Honestly, that response explains a lot.
Do you know what his main criticism of the game Elden Ring was? That he wasn't told everything and had to figure stuff out instead. He would have liked a character to pop up and explain every new area he entered to him. Environmental storytelling and "show, don't tell" are completely foreign to this man. Not to mention things like nuance or ambiguity.
But he already demonstrated pretty clearly that he believes his view of the world to be the objectively correct one and definitely shared by the majority of society. On every single subject.
Elden Ring was really good. If I ever get time, I'm going to finish it.
That would make sense given Shad's full-time profession. (I think he's an engineer). Not trying to disparage something we share, but being around them all day makes a lot of that really clear.
@@talexratcliffe Honestly, I believe that a lot came from his upbringing. He comes from a family that is part of a rather extreme branch of mormonism. Let's just say that he might not have been confronted with different ideas very often.
Not to mention how he openly called self-sufficient women without male partners "deranged" and equated two men or two women raising a child to child abuse.
He became pretty much the platonic ideal of a reactionary.
@@Dhorannisthe worst about it where when peoples of is community actualy in a gentle en friendly way explained him why Souls game are this way. He did shit all over them because he knew better than them. He did put a good 3/5 of is viewership to leave.
@Dhorannis That’s a simplification of what he said about Elden Ring. He never said anything, like “there needs to be Npcs in every area possible to explain the area.” I believe what you’re referring to is what he said about item descriptions. The item descriptions are a boring way to explain something because it’s reading a Wikipedia page. Experiencing an Npc explaining something to you is better. Why? Npcs have mannerisms, emotions, and or history with the item.
Anyways, one of his main criticisms was how we have to go out of our way to find story, especially some parts of a story. Some things are hidden to a point that you wouldn’t basically ever find it, unless you knew ahead of time.
Another main criticism of his was criticizing the arbitrary stuff in the game, which would prevent you from getting some stories. You went to a specific location? One of the Npcs are gonna be dead now, even though there’s nothing indicating that etc.
@@Begbras Augments people made against him were bad and dishonest.
I remember when Shad moved from swords and history to critiquing popular media. It actually shocked me that someone could have such half-baked and bad faith opinions.
It feels like all of his opinions on media are based off whether or not he thinks the creators of that media share or differ from his own political beliefs.
I didn’t want to believe that his thought process would be so shallow, but otherwise, a lot of his videos just leave me scratching my head.
All this to say, It astounds me to see him be so thin-skinned. He’s never been afraid to be downright mean in his own criticisms, going as far as to insinuate that certain people are pushing a malicious agenda.
You were more than fair with your review, and your response was measured. This topic feels very personal to me because I respected this man so much as a teenager.
It happens to the best of us. I used to watch Shad often.
Thank you. I try to be honest about how I feel about a book.
Shad says he's working on another book. I look forward to seeing if he improves.
@@talexratcliffe seeing how he is handling this criticism, I don't think he will. I do hope he does, however. I hope he takes time tovsee what people say and grow
Shad is a guy who loves medieval weapons, and who made a RUclips channel to talk about it. He is very knowledgeable in this field, and lots of people find it interesting, so he got a lot of followers.
And so poor Shad found himself in possession of a *platform* .
When you have a platform, you need to live up to the responsibility. You need to keep churning out more *content* to satisfy your audience. And you need to monetize it, so that you can quit your day job and focus 100 % on giving your fans what they need. After a while your well of inspiration runs dry, and you need to branch out and touch on whatever is popular these days. Write a crappy novel and use your platform to promote it. Then ride the trends. Woke idiots are obnoxious and everyone hates them, so you start making anti-woke rants. And AI image generation is the latest thing, so you jump on the bandwagon, to drive more views to your channel.
Suddenly poor Shad found himself having lost his soul. He was no longer making heartfelt videos about the thing he loves, instead he was engaging in flame wars and making an absolute ass of himself to drive engagement and retention on his platform. Secretly he hated himself for what he had become, but he had no choice. This was his life now, and he had to keep doing it to keep his income stream flowing.
Watch out so your channel never takes off. It will kill you!
It's a shame to see him fall down yet another rabbit hole of ignorance, for real.
I stopped watching him at first when he started really pushing the whole HEMA vs TMA divide that was happening on RUclips (I'm a student of both, so I think it's a very dumb argument that gets perpetuated for no reason), and recently started going back to his channel because of his oversized sword test he was doing.
Aaaand then I noticed his content had changed. Plugging his second channel more, letting his political beliefs leak into his videos and topics, and before I knew it, the guy was mad about princess peach wearing pants lmfao
Always a shame to see passionate content creators trade-in their niche for lowest-common-denominator garbage like insecurity politics, crypto paraphernalia, and casual fascism. One minute they're reviewing video games or talking about history, the next they've devolved into robots of desperate reconciliation.
As someone who's very sensitive to criticism, I can empathize from where Shad is coming from. Nobody likes hearing their work criticized, and it can be the hardest thing to hear that what you've spent so much effort on is shit.
But as a writer, as an artist in general, I also know that _that's too bad._ That's one of the biggest parts of being an artist, ESPECIALLY if you're a writer. And in many, many ways, it will help you improve. It's not always easy, but taking criticism can seriously help you make your writing better.
There's also value in being able to critique yourself and realize what you need to do to improve. I've cut concepts I absolutely loved from my stories, because they just didn't work, and my writing is better for it. Shad seems to have a serious issue with not only taking criticism, but with being criticizing himself, and it's kind of depressing to see.
He needs to be *consistent* with his attitude to critcism though, if he doesn't want to look like a narcissist and an idiot -
SHAD WITH A POSITIVE REVIEW: "See, look at this, it's PROOF that my book is GREAT!"
SHAD WITH A NEGATIVE WORK: "Meh, that's just your opinion, so none of it is valid and it doesn't count!"
As far as your stuff being shit I would say that as long as you like your shit and or other people like your shit that's not necessarily or inherently the worst thing in the world and not everything has to amount to being able to accumulate a lot of money or being highly popular to be worth a lot and or mean alot to at least someone yet at the same time if you start acting like Shad when you're criticized and you've put your work out there for the entire world to see then that would be an extremely problematic way to be acting and it wouldn't exactly be something which indicate that you have great character in your personal life.
I am planing to do quite a big project, I want to make a story that I like but it might be really bad. So when I have an option do I make something what I would like to see or sacrifice some elements to make it better for wider audience
@@Maerahn stop calling him a narcissist like we need to stop throwing that term around, they make up less than 1% of the global population, he's just insecure, self centred and has an overinflated ego because he has a tonne of fans.
A friend once berated me for criticizing his artwork (or someone else's work, I can't remember). He then tried to prove his point that I was being a mean person by criticizing my artwork. I shut him up by basically agreeing with all of his criticisms, because I actually care about improving my artworks. Needless to say, with a personality like that I think I can see now why we are no longer friends.
Shad is the Tommy Tellorico of fantasy apparently
His book sold very well, I'm sure his mother is very proud!
He was the first australian to write Sonic or something
The whole "i saved her from a fate worse than death and she got mad at me" is such a corny trope. They use it over and over in bad novels and movies.
Reasonable video and you're honestly going pretty light on SotC. On the subject of authors handling criticism, I think it's pretty standard for authors to highlight good reviews. It's basic marketing for books. I do it whenever I can.
However, I also used my tiny channel to be honest about my books. My books have flaws that I identified (in part from reviews) after publication. I don't mean little typoes that I can just upload a new revision for, but structural failings that would require rewriting the book to fix. Rather than go rewrite them however, I acknowledge the shortcomings and carry the learning forward.
Hopefully my vids incentivize people to give me a try, rather than convince them I'm trash....
Thank you. I generally try not to make enemies, but I will discuss things as I see them. SotC is a bad book, but I have read far worse.
Shad needs some humility. My first book wasn't all I wanted it to be, but I'm not attacking people who don't like it.
Do you have a link for your books (I can't see a link on your about page) , I'll have a look.
@@ptonpc it should be in the description, and James's book should be in the description of my review of his work.
Favourite is spelled correctly. Canadians, Australians, British, any non-American will spell words with OU where Americans took out the U due to laziness and to be cheap with printing. Colour, Favourite, Saviour, most words like this are correct outside of America.
I appreciate the knowledge.
I'd never seen it spelled like that before, and it showed up as wrong in my script. I like to read things as I see them written, much to the bane of old girlfriends.
@@talexratcliffe I know that feeling. Canadians are often a mix between American and British spelling, and since there is no Canadian option, word processors always mark me as wrong no matter what! I have to be extra diligent with my spelling lol. I've gotten fed up and use the British dictionary and it's been a challenge to remember to use S instead of Z for words like Recognise/Recognize. Both are technically correct with Canadian spelling, I believe.
Spellcheckers on a lot of websites default to the US spelling, so as a Brit, I am constantly gaslit about my spelling of "favourite".
Well wasn't that spelling change bought about by Noah Webster not to save on printing but to highlight a difference in how the two groups pronounced things. Its also why a lot of British words end in re but American ones end in er
Sounds like a cope... maybe live in a country that doesn't suck.
"Even explains briefly a little bit" is such a funny sentence. The explanation must have been four paragraphs.
> a novel is not 300 pages of worldbuilding
God I wish someone told Melville that when he was writing Moby Dick.
We can borrow my time machine.
On the way we can tell Tolkien it's also not 600 pages of vistas.
It feels like Shad wanted to write a lore encyclopedia but wanted to make it an adventure story while still sticking to the encyclopedia idea.
Remember folks, if you’ve watched his content for many years, like him as a person, *and* enjoyed the book, then congrats, you’re part of the general audience, baybee!
But if you thought the book was mid or, heaven forbid, didn’t *like* it, you’re objectively false and maliciously misrepresenting his work in an effort to silence him for being a good Christian who’s chronically oppressed, or something.
Sorry you had to find out about your lack of credibility this way :/
I think my book is amazing but everyone else thinks it's bad...
Could I be a bad writer?...
No! It's the world that's wrong.
Im guessing this book is exactly what I would expect from a grown man who is afraid of princess peach.
I don't remember Shad saying that, I remember him saying that his DAUGHTER didn't like Princess Peach because she didn't "act princess-like" whatever that means to a little girl. Which was the target audiance of that movie.
@@mrsamaritan6881I could have sworn he said his daughter loved Peach and _he_ was the one distressed by that fact because of how “unladylike” she seemed (in the trailer).
@@mrsamaritan6881uh it’s kinda obvious what that means but you people are kinda really fucking obtuse so yeah
@@mrsamaritan6881 He said that his daughter was the only one that liked the movie
In order to not offend Shad, here is my objective review of his book:
Shadow of the Conqueror is a book. It consists of multiple pages. These pages have letters and punctuation, which form words and sentences, typeset as lines and paragraphs. Provisional information: a peer-reviewed linguistics paper needed to determine if the book is written in "English". [Citation and conclusions to be added once this is done.]
(Special thanks to Stephanie Sterling for the Objective Review methodology)
i have to remember this perfect lesson on objectively reviewing something. lol. thank you!
That quote is fitting. Given Sterling used it to defend poor journalism and lying about things. Like Shad is using objectively to defend poor writing and lying about things.
@@phangkuanhoong7967 To be serious. You can be objective. The op is just a gag. For being objective is basically akin to not being a lair. Don't make up stuff that didn't happen in a book. In the case of a video game like rome total war 2 on release. Oh yeah that was bad due to load of bugs and other issues negatively effecting the game play. that could be seen on youtube when it was originally released. Showing path finding issues, ai that had the brain of a peanut. All which could be objectively proven and back up with facts. Yeah the game is better now, after load of patches and bug fixing. That still doesn't change what the game was like on release. a bug ridden mess. With ign giving the game on release, a super high score after barely playing it at all. Going everything is fine. Which did not match reality.
@@upvoter8798 Sterling didn't use it to defend poor journalism, they used it to point out the ridiculousness of people disagreeing with them and demanding them to be "objective". (Which is exactly what Shad is doing.) Reviews are objective, to some extent or other. If you don't like that, you really should not read reviews and wait 25 years and read the peer reviewed literature analysis journals.
I really don't like Shad anymore. His ego will be his downfall.
It's like Eric July's comics where the author is blissfully ignorant about how bad their work is and the media almost works as an unintentional comedy
In his constant, full-throated defense of his book - assuming that the criticism is because of his stance on AI art - may very well damage interest in him and his works down the road.
I've heard excerpts of his work read online. All I can say is that I wouldn't write a book that way. Worldbuilding is a big part of Fantasy. It shouldn't eclipse the book itself, nor threaten to eclipse it. There are some people who really love it when writers go into full infodump mode. And there are a lot more than don't. What you include in a book is really a balance which you hope you get right for most people.
Getting upset when people felt you didn't achieve that balance? Pointless.
Agreed. The book was a slog and I honestly wouldn't want to read it again.
My rule for my own writing attempts is "Know 60% more about the world than the audience is told". That's what fantheory and the wikis are for
The irony of Shad of all people complaining that your summary of his novel was subjective, and therefore not valid as a review is astounding. Especially when you consider how often in his own pop culture reviews he claims he's being objective of everything he clearly hates in his review.
Just to go down a different rabbit hole regarding "favourite" my understanding is that Australians use British English spellings and pronunciations for the most part. There are some exceptions I knew about like saying "Dada" for "Data" and "Van Go" for "Van Gogh" instead of the Anglicization of "Van Goff". I didn't know Ozzies said "Math" rather than "Maths". Can any Ozzies clarify whats going on then?
The English speaking world is a shambles of correct spellings.
Aussies say maths, because of the US media influence some may use “ math”. However Shad’s use of it in his sentence is correct.
@@talexratcliffe Nah, it's just the murricans who refuse to use proper language. They don't use science either, which is super obvious with their use of the extremely confusing and never cohesive imperial measurement system.
I can’t believe shad pulled out the Eric July Handbook
Shad has only seen the internet view of what Mary Sue is, clearly he forgets what a Mary Sue truly is. It’s a singularity and the universe revolves around it and it has nothing to do with failures or struggles but how easy they solve them and overcome them or if people solve the things for them. How tf as an author do you not know about a Mary Sue at its core
Man... I used to really like his Shadiversity (sp?) channel, and I can remember when he first started mentioning he was writing a book. I was happy for him and I was super curious about the book. As he drip fed some details on it I actually got a bit excited even..
And then the reviews started rolling in lol....
And then I read a sample.
Friggen OOF bud
Seeing how committed he is to AI "art", I would not be shocked he wrote some of it with ChatGPT. I would never trust this guy in making an authentic piece of human art.
he published SotC back in 2018
@@metalsludge8205 I stand corrected. I still wouldn't trust him going forward.
CATS FOOT IRON CLAW
It would be written better if it was ai
@@SandandMetal The book is getting a "graphic novel adaptation." Prepare for nuclear drama.
You should see when he cried like a baby when his idol Matt Easton said the thing he did was not HEMA.😂😂😂
"Well my fans like it, so your criticism is wrong"
I must add that the video was originally called "Is my book actually terrible?!" with thumbnail of Shad pinching his nose. He changed it an hour after publication. It's as if he was trying to clickbait people who were hoping that he would actually address any good faith criticism of his work.
Daniel Greene approved of The Shadow of the Conquerer?
I knew I was right in unsubscribing from both of those two.
Notice people don´t shittalk All Tommorows and After Man for being exposition heavy despite both books being just exposition.
I haven't read them, but perhaps now I will.
Yeah there are a lot of people who like worldbuilding.
But stuff that focuses on exposition/worldbuildng (a series bible without a series as it were) tend to be advertised that way to people who like worldbuilding for the sake of worldbuilding, not necessarily as a novel (All Tomorrows can be called a story but it isn't a novel, It is is fictional historical/scientific text).
Rather than trying to put all the worldbuilding into what is supposed to be a narrative/character piece, which seems to be the issue with Shad's work.
The narcissistic public meltdown of Shad is something else. He was very good at his arms and armour and medieval history and fantasy videos. He always came across as somewhat arrogant, but nothing crazy. A few years of RUclips success and he just wont stop telling everyone what a creative genius he is, to the point of cringeworthy embarrassment. I wish he’d stop.
It's possible he's never had push back until recently. Having had success most of his life.
Be that as it may, he may be heading for the classic RUclipsr flame out.
@@talexratcliffe yeah. Did you see when he got the honour of hosting Brandon Sanderson for an interview on his channel, and then spent most of the episode telling Sanderson how to write good fantasy? That was pretty wild. It was an early sign of how his success was going to his head, which has only seemed to get more extreme in the following three years or so.
@@willmosse3684 The worst part of that is that he probably leveraged the fact that they were both mormon to swing that interview and Sanderson was too polite to refuse. It's notable that Shad consulted once on ONE scene of Rythm of War's technical sword details and on NOTHING else.
@@danielbroome5690 Really? One scene? Sheesh. Sanderson probably liked Shad’s ideas at first, but then found him too much to work with. Based on that interview that could easily have happened…
I felt the same way. He always came off as a bit cocky, but it wasn't really annoying because it had to do with things that he...you know...actually knew quite a bit about. He actually has a solid knowledge of arms and armor, so it came off more like pride in knowing about something he enjoyed rather than just being a cocky jackass because he thinks he's amazing at something that he can't really back up. When it started expanding to pretty much anything else he was interested in - he's a great fantasy writer, he's got a great eye for art, he's so amazing - but that he wasn't able to actually back up with what he produced, it started coming off way more as just plain arrogance.
That's not to say that you can't CRITICIZE something even if you're not good at it. You don't need to be a chef to be able to point out that it's not good when you find hair in your "medium well" burger that's pink and oozing. But there's a difference between just critiquing something and critiquing something while also talking yourself up as an expert in that same area. Shad, unfortunately, seems to have fallen into the latter.
Some might call him a Gary Stu. I prefer Marty Stu.
'favourite' is actually the spelling preferred by British people. I only know this because my version of google docs spellcheck is on British mode for whatever reason
Shad should have kept to his original focus of talking about medieval topics, and fantasy literature.
Dude's channel stopped being interesting when he decided to start doing a poor job of criticizing woke culture, and has now probably jumped the shark with this stuff. He drank his own hype and believes that he is a supreme arbiter of what is or is not good fictional media, and therefore he cannot create bad fictional media
I remember stumbling upon some video of Shad’s years and years ago. He was talking about all the math he did to make sure the physics of the floating continent in HIS FANTASY WORLD checked out. Like, you’re not writing the Expanse. The genre is called “fantasy.” I think your audience will be able to accept that floating continents are just a thing that exist in your world. Maybe you could spend that time you wasted trying to determine the physics of your world on constructing an interesting plot or characters. You know, the “story” part of telling a story.
Thinking about it it does really seem like he pulled up the definition of Mary Sue and set out to write a protagonist that tecnically cannot absolutely be qualified as one... while still writing the biggest power fantasy character he could think of
When you point at the moon, the idiot looks at your finger
or missing the forest for the trees you know
And still is, even then. Daylen still literally pulls powers out of his ass when he needs to for plot.
Just so you know, "favourite" is indeed the correct spelling of the word in the British commonwealth countries. Same with a lot of other words having a U in them aver an O which don't in America. It's not a spelling mistake on his part.
Thank you. I have been informed a few times.
I thought about fixing it, but it took so long to record. I think I'll just leave it.
Ironic that spelling comes from the influence of French on the English.
@@Zarastro54 the British's relationship with France has been middle school romance from the start. Always pulling France's hair because Britain doesn't know how express the confusing feelings it has any other way. Both smelly and the fanciest at the same time, somehow, Britain's a very confused country.
9:05 My biggest issue with Shad's world was how the continents and the greater world worked. He spent too much time on sussing out Daylen's powers and not enough on why and how the Day and Night cycles worked, and how the world could function in constant Daylight.
This book should never have been a novel. It was always meant to be a graphic novel. Without concrete imagry the world gets lost. Without that nothing else makes sense.
Character flaws don't prevent a character from being a mary sue. Having character flaws and not facing consequences for them is what makes them a mary sue.
If they're arrogant, they should over estimate their abilities and lose. If they're lazy, they should be defeated due to lack of discipline. If they're dumb they should be outsmarted. If they're naive and too trusting, they should be betrayed.
Daylen is a cruel murderer and no one stops him. Because hes too op to be defeated or slimely uses loopholes to get out of blame. And when he's finally put on trial for the worst crimes imaginable, he's let off.
I 110% agree with the notion that book reviews and spaces devoted to book reviews should remain primarily for readers and not for authors and that authors should not be butting there noses into the negative reviews of other people.
I find it deeply ironic that Shad, well-known for his anti-wokism, would stoop to the same levels as the people he condemns. He's certainly living up to the line, 'either you die a hero or live long enough to become the villain'.
"Anti-woke" types are famously fragile and guilty of exactly what they accuse others of. Sargon's law: every accusation is an admission in disguise.
I just assume Shad's never received much push back and doesn't know how to deal with it.
@@talexratcliffe Yes indeed.
He never really had a chance at normalcy considering he's a mormon who clearly bought 100% into it. It's frankly a sheer miracle his brother Jazza or the author Brandon Sanderson are as sane as they are. Sanderson sometimes seems just like the most lefty person trapped into an ultra-conservative religion he shares zero values with.
@TayTayMakesBeats so that would mean you are also fragile and guilty of what you accuse others of. Lol you got to love the big brain on centrist
I didn’t mind the expositions too much because I’m kind of used to that and i like reading world building stuff. I am a little more forgiving with over-explaining than under-explaining. What I did have problem with SoC was the trial and ending dragged on way too much. I’m like the book is over lets wrap it up already!
Actually, I'm still seeing Daniel Greene's video listed, maybe he took it down temporarily.
Yeaa, i discovered shad through the whole "peach wearing pants" incident and the ai art thing
I cannot take that man seriously
Lol pronouncing the non-US spelling of favourite as if its a typo was pretty funny
Given the flagrant amount of other typos, I think I can be forgiven.
I appreciate you going into detail about your gripes with the book and also the advice about how to handle criticism. I also appreciate you trying to not go all in on doing videos about the book. You don't want to become an anti-so and so channel. I remember when Shad announced this book, he was very emotional about the accomplishment. It was his dream to be a fantasy author. I can see why he's defensive about it. Like I said before though I think people who have success in other fields struggle with new areas as they fail to humble themselves. They don't want to start at the beginning again. Humility is essential to grow any skill.
Unfortunately we all start at the beginning on a new skill. Writing takes time and effort to master.
@@talexratcliffebut are your books any good? How would you rate your own writing? Not being inflammatory. I legitimately want to know how you’d rank yourself or what you struggle with. I was a fan of Shads critiques most of the time but found his book to be distastefully preachy so I didn’t bother finishing it. I’m mostly curious because I have vague intentions of writing myself
That's a hard question to answer. My first book Battle Games has weaker prose than I would like. I submitted it earlier this year to a live reading that was eye opening. I enjoy the story, but like Shad I fear I may have taken on too much for my first work. I'm love the story and still think it's enjoyable, but it's not what I'd hoped. It's one of the reasons there's such a gap between the first and second books. I've fixed a lot of the technical problems going into the second as I was finally able to get more constructive feedback.
Hapless Homesteader my second series I feel I did better on. It was a weekly series that went on for half a year before I burned myself out between work and hobby. I revised, edited, and had professionally edited the first book worth of chapters and published it.
I'm pretty hard on myself as Battle Games won an award, but I feel the series can be better with a shift in perspective. Since two of the three books of the trilogy are done it would be both redundant and wasteful to spend more time than I have when I got other things I want to write.
In a lot of ways I'm doing for others what I wish had been done for me. As for myself I'm just diving in, brute forcing my way through, and learning and applying all I can.
It's why I say "I welcome all comments and criticisms" of my own work when I pitch them. Because the unaffiliated reader is the best test of your writing.
@@talexratcliffethanks for the answer
Yep, been an artist all my life and always _wanted_ to be an author. After several attempts I had to ask myself “are you willing to write ten pieces of trash before you can make something you’re proud of?”
The answer was “nah.”
I read the book and the world building was my favorite part that being said i still found the book pretty bad. Super Hitler gets super powers and joins the medieval avengers
You think he used AI to explain for him how an airship would work? No way he knows the math himself. Just suddenley explaining how that works with no background in it is the most "i just wikid quantum physics and i underdtand it" thing ever.
Shad doesn't really do humility
You realise, right, that American spelling is not the standard anywhere else outside of America?
"i suggest you look up the definition of what that means"
such prose
I've never written a novel (maybe by next year's end fingers crossed) but I have been making art of one variety or another for going on two decades. Sensitivity is fine. Many artists are sensitive by nature; if they weren't they probably would not be artists in the first place. But if you cannot manage that sensitivity, you are simply not fit to make art for consumption. The bare minimum is accepting that criticism will happen, that even the greatest masterworks have their honest, intelligent haters. Mozart, Da Vinci, Shakespeare; all of them have recieved some of the harshest critiques in history, and not just from bored students resentful about their place compulsory education.
No matter how smart you are, no matter your taste or field, no matter how precisely crafted your Magnum Opus, there is someone out there smarter than you whose tastes run opposite yours, and if they find your work they will tear it to shreds. If you can't live with that fact, then either quit or resign yourself to creating in private solely for your own satisfaction.
Shad has failed this test spectacularly. I haven't followed this saga but his petty response to this pretty gentle criticism, finding every excuse to throw it out without consideration, is damning enough on its own.
It comes off as a knee jerk defense, but even if his expositional onslaught and obsessive technical details were truly a stylistic choice he was unwilling to budge on, he should take the critique that these things are impediments to his success reaching a wider audience seriously.
Considerations on how can he make the exposition more engaging, how can these technical details be used to forward the plot, or even whether there's a literary medium where these things are more welcome than they are in novels would go a long way to making his next book better -hell he'd probably make for an above average writer of RPG sourcebooks without compromising or growing!
But all that would require introspection and respect for the craft; the former he seems completely incapable of and the latter he shows clear contempt for.
The scene where our "hero" rescues the girl sounds like the scene in Robocop but entirely stripped of satire.
I tend to like Shad, but have not read his book. I am sad to hear that he's apparently "cherry picking" positive comments (especially from someone who I see as a shill like Daniel Greene) and trying to do the same thing that "our sphere" criticizes big companies (or movie directors) of doing by blaming racist, sexist, review bombing, Russian bots, COVID, etc. If you're going to be in the public sphere and come out with product (like a book) you have to be ready for the criticism, and understand that while some of the criticism might have a deeper agenda, you shouldn''t assume that none of the criticism is valid or warranted. Writing a book is damn hard, and a bunch of terrible books are written every year. If you have a 4.6* rating, celebrate that instead of assuming it should be a 5* book and the only reason it isn't is "haters".
As a guy who writes for a hobby, I've been there with criticism. But that's because it's probably true!
I remember the first beta reading report I got back being: "it's got real potential, but your prose is purple, with too many adjectives and adverbs."
I was absolutely livid for a few days afterwards. Then, I slowed down, took a breathe and thought, "the professional editor might have a point." After doing another rewrite, my prose has improved dramatically, and I couldn't be happier.
I wanted to add: You're better off writing for yourself first rather than trying to reach for the stars. It drives you crazy, because you want to write that "perfect book", but in the end, you can only try your best.
Canadian English differs from American English.
The hilarious scene was breaking the wall like the Kool-aid Man. I can see why you opted for an audiobook.
Shad has the resources to get whst we dreamt of. Editor developer
(Wall Smash) "Oh Yeah! KOOL AID! I'm gonna rip off your !@#$!"
I remember that distinctly in the commercials.
Favourite can also be spelled as favorite it changes from UK and US spelling
I’m his target demo but I DNF:ed that book is quite horrid.
Edit: I’ll leave that attempt at English up as a lesson for me to not write while running in the future.
You know, as an author I’m something of a fellow scientist myself
The problem I'm seeing with the old guy turns young again thing is that there doesn't sound to have been any adjustment period between old codger and young pubescent adult. 1 of the shows I saw that did this right was from a kids show, Sonic X. The 12 year old kid in the group grew up into a 20's adult and learned lots of stuff like how to fight made a portal to go see his friends again. But when he did he was turned back into a kid again. So when monsters were messing with his friends he tried to punch them but he didn't land the punch. Because he was use to fighting with a longer arm, not a kid arm.
Going back to the book. since the guy was old for so long he would have had to get use to not slouching, or he realizes he can turn his upper body more because now it doesn't make that weird popping noise that would leave him limping for a week.
Thank you for adding your voice to this conversation! I'd rather give someone like you the views than Chad anyway. You earned a subscriber in me because you said a version of my favorite piece of writing advice: "Write like you won't be able to explain it to every reader personally." Some general misunderstandings or confusion is bound to happen on the reader's end now and then, and even so those typically aren't so bad that they ruin the story or muddle the whole thing. BUT when MULTIPLE people get/understand the same things from the work, and the author claims that wasn't intended, that's definitely on the author for how they presented their ideas. THANK YOU for saying that here!
I'm a freelance editor and I've written fiction in various forms, including fanfiction, for a very long time. While I have a lot of experience, I don't consider myself in a place of authority (pun intended?) except that I've been paid for my work and people hold my opinion and said work in high regard generally. People like Chad come across as and behave so arrogantly and dismissively that it's frustrating to watch. I love writing and I love helping others improve their writing (and doing research and getting feedback of all kinds to improve my own). Every time I see a person like Chad who seems to want to believe (and make others believe) that his writing and worlds are all that and a bag of chips... it's just mildly infuriating. Have fun with the review trolls, Chad... ya brought it on yourself at this point.
I appreciate the sub.
I'm not trying to be a review troll. I'm just reading books for my own amusement and hoping to improve my own writing. Making these reviews helps me put my thoughts into words, and identify areas I may also be weak. I wanted to point out to other authors who watch my channel not to make the same mistakes Shad is making.
I want to enjoy stories again, but since entering this realm I've noticed some really big problems. Hopefully what I do helps the art of storytelling and the people who look to get better at it.
I like Shad, but he is HORRIBLE when it comes to criticism. Remember the whole Elden Ring thing? He responded really bad to that as well
Humility is earned.
The later you learn it, the harder it is.
@@talexratcliffe Can't quite imagine how he'll feel about it later on with this much degree.
That is, if he decides to open his ears.
'Your opinion is subjective' is such a meaningless gotcha, when someone tries to use that as a defense it objectively means their position is dogshit
I admit that I am increasingly disliking the path Shad is currently on, but I read the book and genuinely liked it. I think that a lot of the people who criticize him do it in a very despicable manner and thus understand his reactions to them. But the fact that he is unable to take any honest criticism or different opinions into consideration is also not good manners.