Narrative Designer at @SumoDigitalLtd Notts 
MCV 30 Under 30 2021 She/her. This is a personal account and views expressed are mine alone.
Możesz dodawać lokalizację do Twoich Tweetów, jak miasto czy konkretne miejsce, z sieci lub innych aplikacji. W każdej chwili możesz usunąć historię lokalizacji swoich Tweetów. Dowiedz się więcej
Hard worldbuilding which retains a degree of feasible real-world logic OR soft worldbuilding that trades feasible real-world logic for more symbolic aesthetics? Asking for a personal project.
Hard: normal world where all the cool environmental differences come from the magic system Soft: world tidally locked to the sun in addition to magic system effects, which wouldn’t be habitable IRL but has a cool eternal day/eternal night aspect eternal sunset around the middle
Basically what it comes down to is that I WANT to go soft but am afraid of pedantic internet nerds who would go ‘ummm EXCUSE ME but in the REAL WORLD this wouldn’t make any sense’ even though it’s a god damn fantasy, so thank you Twitter for the validation
Personally, soft! But in @gordoncalleja's words from his book In-Game: “The lack of a clearly defined primary goal in a game environment can be confusing for players, while the requirement of adhering to a system determined primary goal can feel restrictive.”
Balance seems key!
Big fan of an 80/20 s/h wb split! Pacing becomes a non-issue because soft wb as opposed to hard wb does not need direct exposition or a lot of exposition to make its story arcs understandable. It is a self-motivating, self-pacing environment for the player. If that makes sense 
Hard worldbuilding is only any good if it produces fun and interesting results, if it's getting in the way of good stuff, then it can get in the sea.
Here's my logic: we make art, not science.
I like both in different narrative contexts
Twitter jest przeciążony lub wystąpił chwilowy problem. Spróbuj ponownie lub sprawdź status Twittera, aby uzyskać więcej informacji.
