Shawn FX
Banned
This post was spawned after a reaction to an advertisement to a new e-fed called "Just Wrestling". I addressed my issues with this new promotion's concept privately with Hyde and offered an alternative idea for him which I went ahead and shared with everyone else on the advertisement board on EWZine. So here's some cutting, pasting, and rewording of what was already said. Plus I'll insert some additional thoughts. Grab a soda and your favorite bag of chips. I'm in the mood to type tonight.
If matchwriting isn't a fed head's thing there are plenty of members who love to do just that. A "match writing" e-fed where each handler turns in their version of the upcoming match would work out much better. SCW has done this successfully in the past.
Add the idea of taking the best elements of each match version, grafting them together to make each handler's character look strong, and putting the desired moves and spots from each participant to play by play commentary would provide match content with a minimum amount of work for the fed head. Knowing who gets put over can still be a surprise until the show is released.
Competitive collaberation. Very doable.
I'm not a big fan of the "better match would win" idea. Then you end up having to supplement everyone's egos with point systems and pats on the back with the whole "Better luck next time kiddo" shtick to the loser of the match who had all of his ideas overshadowed. Putting together the best elements of each version of the same match is more of a three way collaberation with everyone having an opportunity to contribute. You also have the fed head deciding the best/most creative/logical outcome keeping that element of surprise and anticipation for the participants. Both participants/handlers are going to want to read the match to see what ideas submitted were used and which ones were not. Anything that isn't used by either handler could always be resubmitted or elaborated on to make that wrestler's next match better. Especially if it's those same two wrestlers going at it with a better understanding of each other next time around.
I personally have never understood why a better story determines a match outcome. It's really apples and oranges if you think about it. The best actor is the best athlete? I thought creatively we were NOT trying to be WWE here. Did I miss something? I think both roleplay e-feds and angle e-feds fall short in drawing the best creative ideas from its members. Yes, even so-called "hybrids" have this same problem too.
Ok a little tangent there... My apologies.
Back to creative team collaberation. It's the Think Tank concept: Three heads are always better than one. Disagree? Good. Now you have someone else interested in what's going on.
So there you go. It's my personal remedy for organizing chaos. Get as many people involved. The handlers, the fed head, the other members, and the fans. Everyone contributes.
On a side note: Roleplay vs Roleplay determines the winner of a wrestling match? I touched on this earlier. My remark was you are rewarding a better "actor" by illustrating they are a better "athlete"? That doesn't make any sense to me. Like I said, it is apples and oranges being put side by side to see which one looks more blue. Right? Come on!
We are all creative writers in the context of e-wrestling. Stories are being looked at over who can write a better match? Really? The fed head is on his own guessing who does what normally missing the mark. A move list submitted on an application form doesn't tell anyone the wrestlers in-ring psychology. It doesn't tell a fed head or match writer how a wrestler would counter a certain move. The fed head or assigned match writer again has to guess. This leaves the handlers either satisified or dissatisfied with the single perspective decided outcome. Where is the opportunity to say what you want to see happen? Oh right... a seperately sent in "Strategy" some e-feds have employed. Fair enough. Then the fed head has to read that and the opponent's sent in strategy and take everything into account and start from square one. It's two maybe even three weeks later and no card is posted. Everyone wonders why deadlines aren't ever met.
SURPRISE!
So for time conserving purposes let's see the written match and the strategy combined. If someone wants to interfere in the match and someone else wants to counter that interference, ok. An interference won't change the beginning and middle or even closing moments of the match. If the interference(s) makes sense it only alters the all important outcome. Everyone gets their idea in, everyone gets to participant, and now everyone has their personal stake in the outcome.
I'm not saying this idea of collaberative involvement is flawless. I have my theories though this is as close to the real thing behind the scenes of a pro wrestling organization as it gets. I can only imagine. Just add an entire creative team, road agents, acting coaches, camera men, stolen ideas from e-federations by those real pro wrestling federations, etc.
When real pro wrestling organizations take notice of the way a match is written in a fantasy e-federation you know you and your team are on to something.
<!-- / message --><!-- edit note -->
If matchwriting isn't a fed head's thing there are plenty of members who love to do just that. A "match writing" e-fed where each handler turns in their version of the upcoming match would work out much better. SCW has done this successfully in the past.
Add the idea of taking the best elements of each match version, grafting them together to make each handler's character look strong, and putting the desired moves and spots from each participant to play by play commentary would provide match content with a minimum amount of work for the fed head. Knowing who gets put over can still be a surprise until the show is released.
Competitive collaberation. Very doable.
I'm not a big fan of the "better match would win" idea. Then you end up having to supplement everyone's egos with point systems and pats on the back with the whole "Better luck next time kiddo" shtick to the loser of the match who had all of his ideas overshadowed. Putting together the best elements of each version of the same match is more of a three way collaberation with everyone having an opportunity to contribute. You also have the fed head deciding the best/most creative/logical outcome keeping that element of surprise and anticipation for the participants. Both participants/handlers are going to want to read the match to see what ideas submitted were used and which ones were not. Anything that isn't used by either handler could always be resubmitted or elaborated on to make that wrestler's next match better. Especially if it's those same two wrestlers going at it with a better understanding of each other next time around.
I personally have never understood why a better story determines a match outcome. It's really apples and oranges if you think about it. The best actor is the best athlete? I thought creatively we were NOT trying to be WWE here. Did I miss something? I think both roleplay e-feds and angle e-feds fall short in drawing the best creative ideas from its members. Yes, even so-called "hybrids" have this same problem too.
Ok a little tangent there... My apologies.
Back to creative team collaberation. It's the Think Tank concept: Three heads are always better than one. Disagree? Good. Now you have someone else interested in what's going on.
So there you go. It's my personal remedy for organizing chaos. Get as many people involved. The handlers, the fed head, the other members, and the fans. Everyone contributes.
On a side note: Roleplay vs Roleplay determines the winner of a wrestling match? I touched on this earlier. My remark was you are rewarding a better "actor" by illustrating they are a better "athlete"? That doesn't make any sense to me. Like I said, it is apples and oranges being put side by side to see which one looks more blue. Right? Come on!
We are all creative writers in the context of e-wrestling. Stories are being looked at over who can write a better match? Really? The fed head is on his own guessing who does what normally missing the mark. A move list submitted on an application form doesn't tell anyone the wrestlers in-ring psychology. It doesn't tell a fed head or match writer how a wrestler would counter a certain move. The fed head or assigned match writer again has to guess. This leaves the handlers either satisified or dissatisfied with the single perspective decided outcome. Where is the opportunity to say what you want to see happen? Oh right... a seperately sent in "Strategy" some e-feds have employed. Fair enough. Then the fed head has to read that and the opponent's sent in strategy and take everything into account and start from square one. It's two maybe even three weeks later and no card is posted. Everyone wonders why deadlines aren't ever met.
SURPRISE!
So for time conserving purposes let's see the written match and the strategy combined. If someone wants to interfere in the match and someone else wants to counter that interference, ok. An interference won't change the beginning and middle or even closing moments of the match. If the interference(s) makes sense it only alters the all important outcome. Everyone gets their idea in, everyone gets to participant, and now everyone has their personal stake in the outcome.
I'm not saying this idea of collaberative involvement is flawless. I have my theories though this is as close to the real thing behind the scenes of a pro wrestling organization as it gets. I can only imagine. Just add an entire creative team, road agents, acting coaches, camera men, stolen ideas from e-federations by those real pro wrestling federations, etc.
When real pro wrestling organizations take notice of the way a match is written in a fantasy e-federation you know you and your team are on to something.
<!-- / message --><!-- edit note -->
Last edited: