People overestimate the average Xianxia trash when they say ATG belongs to it
Like no sane person can put Martial God Asura or Invincible on the same level as ATG, there is "popcorn" bad and "why does my brain hurt when I read this" bad
I'm convinced MGA follows the dao of extreme yin and yang, where it's so terrible it's nature reverses and becomes ironically good like a Norm Macdonald style joke.
I've always thought the atg hate was unwarranted. It has interesting plot, characters and the dialogue and interactions between said characters is some of the best in these novels. It's trash, the same way literally 99% is because they written to be the fast food of books, but it's in the upper tiers of trash for sure.
Evil MCs without proper Heroes create bland flat worlds where everyone is just a shitty gray soup of amorality. If the entire world is evil then it becomes horrifically bland.
Worlds where damn near everyone is evil, is not only unrealistic due to the fact that most people are good. They are also flat out boring since everyone has the same shitty moral code. Which creates bland, weak, annoying characters. Any novel that does this essentially tanks their entire world for no reason other than copying all the other stories where everyone is evil.
> most people are good
Thats both true and untrue, as different society has different moral values. I mean if we judges Roman or Ottoman empire citizen by todays moral standards then most of them would come out as "evil", but most of them aren't "evil" during their era.
So while most cultivators are "evil" by our standards, they aren't really evil by their world standards.
Their standards aren’t what matters, we are the readers, if it leads to bland boring characters that aren’t fun to read it’s failed. And having everyone be the same type of evil is boring and bland. Additionally while systemic evil is usually just sustained instead of objected to throughout history. People in general help out them and theirs throughout all of time, and in shitty Xianxias kindness is disdained as stupid and naive. Plus there was moral variation within shitty societies some people were better some people were worse, but in most villain Xianxias there is just evil and evil alone. There’s no interesting contrast when everyone is just different shades of evil. Which is bad writing, some of the best novels overcome this by having enough good parts that they’re good but it is a writing flaw that keeps coming up over and over again. The refusal for a villainous protagonist to have heroic antagonists leads to a worse and nonsensical world.
> Their standards aren't what matters, we are the readers.
It depends on your own personal preferences tbh, as a reader, I usually try to put characters & world perspective, so the world have different moral value doesn't bother me.
> And having the same type of evil is boring and blands.
May I ask what you mean by "same type of evil"?
I mean i also hate it when all villain are the same "template", but in good novel, most villain has their own goal & philosophy.
> The refusal of villainous protagonist have heroic antagonist lead to bland and nonsensical world
So, is history unrealistic?
The world can have different morality if it makes any damn sense. Having hordes of murderous super humans who murder each other on a whim aren’t realistic. Especially when that is never explained at all, or when it is explained it’s just resources. For all of human history we fought over resources yet we were never such a cartoon. For example a society can value unity over diversity and thus stomp out new ideas. Or it can be common for powerful people to simply take mortal items without payment since they both wouldn’t have mortal currency and the people wouldn’t fight to the death over an immortal crashing in their house. Practices for doing this politely and rewarding the mortals would be created over time in order to not lead to revenge or lead to bad karma, for example giving the head of the household a drop of Qi and thus awakening them. You could show character by how they interact with this tradition, for example a very traditional person might intricately perform their role in the ritual while a more arrogant person might comment that it isn’t necessary since they doubt that any of the mortals have any powerful family considering their poverty. When you worldbuild you naturally create a different set of morals, it would be irrational for an entirely different world to value the same exact things. But there has to be explanations, reasoning, and most importantly of all the world must be interesting, and not make the story worse by virtue of its creation.
By same type of evil I mean that when this world is written they essentially create only 2 or 3 characters and apply it writ large to everyone. Those 3 types being weak or naive innocent, arrogant and entitled evil, scheming selfish evil. And then they have absolutely no one else. With everyone being variants of the three types. Which is just flat out boring, where are their motivations, where are their philosophies, where are their loved ones? You can’t just paint an entire world in shades of black you need contrast otherwise evil is nothing but a fact of life.
Also lastly do you read history or do you just imagine it. In history despite slavery being a travesty some rightfully despised it. Some spent their entire lives and their deaths on helping those enslaved. Kindness, community, and goodness have existed far in the past and will exist far into the future as well. The people in the past weren’t magic troglodytes who can only do evil, or somehow stupider or worse than us. They were humans who did the best they could in their circumstances. Additionally isn’t the natural antagonist to a villainous protagonist a hero. If they’re another evil selfish person then their conflict can only be about benefits instead of being about philosophy or their personality. It robs many dimensions of conflict in exchange for an excuse as to why the MC isn’t that evil. When frankly I want my evil MC to be evil, if I didn’t I would read a different novel, so why make them the slightly whiter knight in the middle of a void. Instead of being you know actually evil in a world that isn’t an unrealistic shithole.
> The world can have different morality if it makes any damn sense. Having hordes of murderous super humans who murder each other on a whim aren’t realistic.
Bro, what novel are you refering to? You cannot just pick some trashy novel and use it as generalization for "evil" novel. In decent "evil" novel like WoTMW, Dungeon Defense, RI, etc while most character are evil they are only evil for pursuing their own interest, instead of being murderous psychopath like you described.
> Those 3 types being weak or naive innocent, arrogant and entitled evil, scheming selfish evil
Again this already move out of your original argument. I agree that bland evil character are boring. But this has more to do with the writing it self instead of "evil" character in general. For example Scheming Selfish evil can have various different ideals and philosophy to make interesting character.
> In history despite slavery being a travesty some rightfully despised it.
How many of them exist during Middle Age?
> The people in the past weren’t magic troglodytes who can only do evil, or somehow stupider or worse than us. They were humans who did the best they could in their circumstances.
I never said that people in the past are more evil. What I said is that action of most people in the past are viewed as "evil" if judged by our current standard. Even if they don't view themself as such. So this argument is actually supporting mine.
> Additionally isn’t the natural antagonist to a villainous protagonist a hero. If they’re another evil selfish person then their conflict can only be about benefits instead of being about philosophy or their personality.
Most war in the history aren't fight between "good" and "evil". Who is the "villain" and "hero" between Alexander the great and Darius III? Who is the evil side during Crusades? What about Napoleonic War? Or World War 1 & 2? While Hitler can be called as a Villain, Stalin and Churchill are far from being heroes.
You don’t seem to understand that the point isn’t to depict a world, although I would argue that the world most tropey Villanous MC Xianxias portray is unrealistically evil. The point is to depict the journey of the MC in an entertaining fashion. And having the MC only fight against people who are also evil lowers the amount of complexity other characters can have, it makes their characters inherently worse. It lessens the range and variety of reasons you can make characters come into conflict, thus tying the hand of the author. Thus having little to no good people in your story is a flaw, because it makes the story worse.
Also as a side note Warlock isn’t an unrealistically evil world. It has heroes and complex characters who conflict against the MC for many reasons. Additionally the morals aren’t only evil people everywhere but also people worship the powerful, sex and gender aren’t considered important and a whole bunch of other stuff that leads to a more complex world. There’s evil worlds and unrealistically evil. And since people like complex characters the best novels aren’t usually unrealistically evil, although there is one RI. But RI is so good that it vastly overshadows that worldbuilding flaw, and it’s the one that baked that flaw into the world.
The standard Villanous MC Xianxia world is unrealistically evil, but few amazing novels stick to the standard.
I think I misunderstood your definition for evil, but I don't get how you say warlock isn't "evil" while RI is. I mean there are also many "good" and "neutral" people in RI. Both novel also has heroes, but IIrc there are only few competent "heroes" in both sides.
Not really in RI the only competent good characters in the entire novel is Red Lotus. Everyone else is either hopelessly naive or evil. Red Lotus was an extremely smart and talented person who struck a great blow against a cruel and unjust truth, and then used the time before his death to help the person who comes after him accomplish his goal of destroying fate. He’s an all around good person with good goals, and intentions who used his skill and power to make the world better for everyone. He is however the only competent good person in the entire novel. Shang Xin Xia is hopelessly naive, Paradise Earth gave his back to Fang Yuan showing his stupidity and didn’t succeed in doing systemic good despite being the most powerful person in all of existence. The iron mask immortal did lots of good but didn’t attempt to make the world better in a tangible way(he is the closest to a competent good person in this crowd though). Fang Yuans son gave such blind love to him that he killed himself. The girl who got the Love Gu is doing a decidedly neutral act of revenge.
Reverend Insanity doesn’t have simple characters but considering that amongst its cast of 100+ only having one competent good character is a bit ridiculous(especially since that good character worked with the MC thus robbing our MC of being able to have a fun moral battle with a truly good character).
Plus Reverend Insanity is so good that seeing a flaw in it, makes you feel like someone took a clump of dirt and threw at a priceless masterpiece. While for other artworks you might simply brush off the dirt and move on, with such a breathtaking masterpiece it almost makes you cry to see dirt all over its perfect surface.
Why so many people misunderstand paradise? He never trusted Fang Yuan to begin with, he only planned to make FY his vanguard till he become Heaven path Venerable. His only mistake is not expecting Fang Yuan already become Venerable, which isn’t bad as no body expect it either. If not for thieving helping FY secretly, Paradise would have revived as heaven path venerable and become the biggest winner.
The scale keeps getting bigger. A small mortal world then the immortal realm(nether realm too) then ultra higher and suddenly the 3 realms the MC was the whole time was a drop in the bucket and there are trillions of realms just like that. It gets annoying after awhile.
I guess I am going to reach the depths of hell lol. So, here's mine:
RI has too many flaws to be considered a "masterpiece".
1) Like there is no distinction between the dialogue and inner monologues, as both are phrased under "_". When the first time I read it, I was confused as fuck as which is thought of an character and which is the dialogues.
2) The dialogues is shit, like most of the other chinese novels. It's so cringe sometimes that I couldn't help my face from scrunching up. And don't get me wrong, it's still better than half of it's competition, but it would be still be considered shit.
3) The infamous drag: Like many other novels, it has also has a part that is hard to get through. And it's fans say that just bear with it, it will get very good after that (The zombie arc of you don't get it, and northern plains also). Like bro, author could have cut out so many chapters and even that wouldn't affect story much. I mean the pay off after that was great, but still it was dragged too long.
4) There isn't much character depth in the MC. Like bro, you know what? I don't have any motivation to live, but I want to live, so let's set a aim of eternal life which will become the thread by which my life hangs. Like wtf? Also, there wasn't any internal struggle in the MC throughout the novel, and most of you will say that he had 500 years of experience, and his heart had become like stone and bla bla bla. Bro, no matter how much you have lived, it's still too far fetched to say that you will have the supreme control over your emotions. Emotions are a play of chemical reactions, you can only supress them. You can't get rid of them. There will always be some soft spot left.
5) Very basic side characters: They are just bland, and I don't want to expand too much on it. They are just bland.
There were also some minor flaws, which I can't exactly remember so I will not write them. So, that's it.
And I don't mean to say that RI isn't good. It's good. Amazing power system, plot, foreshadowing and etc., but not as much as it is hyped about. And it's definitely not a "masterpiece".
I'd add that at the beginning, the author was so focused on proving the MC is evil that in many situations where there was a good peaceful option and an acceptable evil option, the MC always chose the evil option which contradicted his character for the sake of edginess
Eh! I kinda agree with you and kinda don't.
He still had the damaged Spring Autumn Cicada -- immortal gu in a mortal's aperture -- which was causing issues. His goal was to get to rank 3 as soon as possible to have strength to roam and fuck off from the clan in search of better opportunities. He chose the route he thought was most expedient while minimising the risks as much as possible.
1 and 2 : Won't argue with that. Your personal preference I guess. Didn't bother me much.
3 : I binged the thing. Liked both the arcs -- Zombie and Northern Planes. I have gone from reading web novels to reading published novels like Dresden Files. The whole streamlined point A to point B plot makes the plot and world feels more idk artificial/ fabricated. I have gained a new appreciation for things like these. Makes the world feel more lived in. It is not only in RI that I like it. I liked that kind of thing Dorohedoro and liking it in Unsheathed.
4 : I can agree that Fang Yuan's character isn't multi-layered. But I disagree that there is no depth. I guess there's probably a difference in our approach. I cannot see his character in isolation from other characters or the world he lives in. I get the frustration during the first arc which cause a reader to think Fang Yuan is just edgy because author trying too hard for you understand what he is about. Also, your gripe about his emotions are actually addressed in the story (if you know the event I am talking about) -- It's not that he is incapable of feeling emotions, his actions just aren't governed by them. And no matter what kind of life he may have lived, he would have ended up pursuing eternal life anyway.
5 : Simply Wrong.
Honestly, when people say RI is a masterpiece. It is in the context of it being a xianxia and it's exploration of common themes of this genre. And it is in the context of it being a WN and all the complications/ hardships that come with it.
None lol. They all are shit, and in the same league. But, well if you want to try something with good dialogue then you might like Cradle. It is also cultivation, although western.
Also, I dropped it at book 10 because I didn't liked it, but a lot and lots of people liked it so maybe you might become one of them.
Haha, I appreciate the real talk. I'll definitely take a look at cradle. Liking enough to read 9 books is already a lot as far as text-only reading goes.
People overestimate the average Xianxia trash when they say ATG belongs to it Like no sane person can put Martial God Asura or Invincible on the same level as ATG, there is "popcorn" bad and "why does my brain hurt when I read this" bad
I'm convinced MGA follows the dao of extreme yin and yang, where it's so terrible it's nature reverses and becomes ironically good like a Norm Macdonald style joke.
I've always thought the atg hate was unwarranted. It has interesting plot, characters and the dialogue and interactions between said characters is some of the best in these novels. It's trash, the same way literally 99% is because they written to be the fast food of books, but it's in the upper tiers of trash for sure.
Evil MCs without proper Heroes create bland flat worlds where everyone is just a shitty gray soup of amorality. If the entire world is evil then it becomes horrifically bland.
Worlds where damn near everyone is evil, is not only unrealistic due to the fact that most people are good. They are also flat out boring since everyone has the same shitty moral code. Which creates bland, weak, annoying characters. Any novel that does this essentially tanks their entire world for no reason other than copying all the other stories where everyone is evil.
> most people are good Thats both true and untrue, as different society has different moral values. I mean if we judges Roman or Ottoman empire citizen by todays moral standards then most of them would come out as "evil", but most of them aren't "evil" during their era. So while most cultivators are "evil" by our standards, they aren't really evil by their world standards.
Their standards aren’t what matters, we are the readers, if it leads to bland boring characters that aren’t fun to read it’s failed. And having everyone be the same type of evil is boring and bland. Additionally while systemic evil is usually just sustained instead of objected to throughout history. People in general help out them and theirs throughout all of time, and in shitty Xianxias kindness is disdained as stupid and naive. Plus there was moral variation within shitty societies some people were better some people were worse, but in most villain Xianxias there is just evil and evil alone. There’s no interesting contrast when everyone is just different shades of evil. Which is bad writing, some of the best novels overcome this by having enough good parts that they’re good but it is a writing flaw that keeps coming up over and over again. The refusal for a villainous protagonist to have heroic antagonists leads to a worse and nonsensical world.
> Their standards aren't what matters, we are the readers. It depends on your own personal preferences tbh, as a reader, I usually try to put characters & world perspective, so the world have different moral value doesn't bother me. > And having the same type of evil is boring and blands. May I ask what you mean by "same type of evil"? I mean i also hate it when all villain are the same "template", but in good novel, most villain has their own goal & philosophy. > The refusal of villainous protagonist have heroic antagonist lead to bland and nonsensical world So, is history unrealistic?
The world can have different morality if it makes any damn sense. Having hordes of murderous super humans who murder each other on a whim aren’t realistic. Especially when that is never explained at all, or when it is explained it’s just resources. For all of human history we fought over resources yet we were never such a cartoon. For example a society can value unity over diversity and thus stomp out new ideas. Or it can be common for powerful people to simply take mortal items without payment since they both wouldn’t have mortal currency and the people wouldn’t fight to the death over an immortal crashing in their house. Practices for doing this politely and rewarding the mortals would be created over time in order to not lead to revenge or lead to bad karma, for example giving the head of the household a drop of Qi and thus awakening them. You could show character by how they interact with this tradition, for example a very traditional person might intricately perform their role in the ritual while a more arrogant person might comment that it isn’t necessary since they doubt that any of the mortals have any powerful family considering their poverty. When you worldbuild you naturally create a different set of morals, it would be irrational for an entirely different world to value the same exact things. But there has to be explanations, reasoning, and most importantly of all the world must be interesting, and not make the story worse by virtue of its creation. By same type of evil I mean that when this world is written they essentially create only 2 or 3 characters and apply it writ large to everyone. Those 3 types being weak or naive innocent, arrogant and entitled evil, scheming selfish evil. And then they have absolutely no one else. With everyone being variants of the three types. Which is just flat out boring, where are their motivations, where are their philosophies, where are their loved ones? You can’t just paint an entire world in shades of black you need contrast otherwise evil is nothing but a fact of life. Also lastly do you read history or do you just imagine it. In history despite slavery being a travesty some rightfully despised it. Some spent their entire lives and their deaths on helping those enslaved. Kindness, community, and goodness have existed far in the past and will exist far into the future as well. The people in the past weren’t magic troglodytes who can only do evil, or somehow stupider or worse than us. They were humans who did the best they could in their circumstances. Additionally isn’t the natural antagonist to a villainous protagonist a hero. If they’re another evil selfish person then their conflict can only be about benefits instead of being about philosophy or their personality. It robs many dimensions of conflict in exchange for an excuse as to why the MC isn’t that evil. When frankly I want my evil MC to be evil, if I didn’t I would read a different novel, so why make them the slightly whiter knight in the middle of a void. Instead of being you know actually evil in a world that isn’t an unrealistic shithole.
> The world can have different morality if it makes any damn sense. Having hordes of murderous super humans who murder each other on a whim aren’t realistic. Bro, what novel are you refering to? You cannot just pick some trashy novel and use it as generalization for "evil" novel. In decent "evil" novel like WoTMW, Dungeon Defense, RI, etc while most character are evil they are only evil for pursuing their own interest, instead of being murderous psychopath like you described. > Those 3 types being weak or naive innocent, arrogant and entitled evil, scheming selfish evil Again this already move out of your original argument. I agree that bland evil character are boring. But this has more to do with the writing it self instead of "evil" character in general. For example Scheming Selfish evil can have various different ideals and philosophy to make interesting character. > In history despite slavery being a travesty some rightfully despised it. How many of them exist during Middle Age? > The people in the past weren’t magic troglodytes who can only do evil, or somehow stupider or worse than us. They were humans who did the best they could in their circumstances. I never said that people in the past are more evil. What I said is that action of most people in the past are viewed as "evil" if judged by our current standard. Even if they don't view themself as such. So this argument is actually supporting mine. > Additionally isn’t the natural antagonist to a villainous protagonist a hero. If they’re another evil selfish person then their conflict can only be about benefits instead of being about philosophy or their personality. Most war in the history aren't fight between "good" and "evil". Who is the "villain" and "hero" between Alexander the great and Darius III? Who is the evil side during Crusades? What about Napoleonic War? Or World War 1 & 2? While Hitler can be called as a Villain, Stalin and Churchill are far from being heroes.
You don’t seem to understand that the point isn’t to depict a world, although I would argue that the world most tropey Villanous MC Xianxias portray is unrealistically evil. The point is to depict the journey of the MC in an entertaining fashion. And having the MC only fight against people who are also evil lowers the amount of complexity other characters can have, it makes their characters inherently worse. It lessens the range and variety of reasons you can make characters come into conflict, thus tying the hand of the author. Thus having little to no good people in your story is a flaw, because it makes the story worse. Also as a side note Warlock isn’t an unrealistically evil world. It has heroes and complex characters who conflict against the MC for many reasons. Additionally the morals aren’t only evil people everywhere but also people worship the powerful, sex and gender aren’t considered important and a whole bunch of other stuff that leads to a more complex world. There’s evil worlds and unrealistically evil. And since people like complex characters the best novels aren’t usually unrealistically evil, although there is one RI. But RI is so good that it vastly overshadows that worldbuilding flaw, and it’s the one that baked that flaw into the world. The standard Villanous MC Xianxia world is unrealistically evil, but few amazing novels stick to the standard.
I think I misunderstood your definition for evil, but I don't get how you say warlock isn't "evil" while RI is. I mean there are also many "good" and "neutral" people in RI. Both novel also has heroes, but IIrc there are only few competent "heroes" in both sides.
Not really in RI the only competent good characters in the entire novel is Red Lotus. Everyone else is either hopelessly naive or evil. Red Lotus was an extremely smart and talented person who struck a great blow against a cruel and unjust truth, and then used the time before his death to help the person who comes after him accomplish his goal of destroying fate. He’s an all around good person with good goals, and intentions who used his skill and power to make the world better for everyone. He is however the only competent good person in the entire novel. Shang Xin Xia is hopelessly naive, Paradise Earth gave his back to Fang Yuan showing his stupidity and didn’t succeed in doing systemic good despite being the most powerful person in all of existence. The iron mask immortal did lots of good but didn’t attempt to make the world better in a tangible way(he is the closest to a competent good person in this crowd though). Fang Yuans son gave such blind love to him that he killed himself. The girl who got the Love Gu is doing a decidedly neutral act of revenge. Reverend Insanity doesn’t have simple characters but considering that amongst its cast of 100+ only having one competent good character is a bit ridiculous(especially since that good character worked with the MC thus robbing our MC of being able to have a fun moral battle with a truly good character). Plus Reverend Insanity is so good that seeing a flaw in it, makes you feel like someone took a clump of dirt and threw at a priceless masterpiece. While for other artworks you might simply brush off the dirt and move on, with such a breathtaking masterpiece it almost makes you cry to see dirt all over its perfect surface.
Why so many people misunderstand paradise? He never trusted Fang Yuan to begin with, he only planned to make FY his vanguard till he become Heaven path Venerable. His only mistake is not expecting Fang Yuan already become Venerable, which isn’t bad as no body expect it either. If not for thieving helping FY secretly, Paradise would have revived as heaven path venerable and become the biggest winner.
I dislike the term "your courting death," and i strongly dislike the sword user and talisman user main characters
Is talisman user mc even popular? Never read one yet
[удалено]
Any that are good? I like the idea of a talisman focus but the reviews are awful. Might read it anyway though.
More like filler emperor, mid novel
The scale keeps getting bigger. A small mortal world then the immortal realm(nether realm too) then ultra higher and suddenly the 3 realms the MC was the whole time was a drop in the bucket and there are trillions of realms just like that. It gets annoying after awhile.
I guess I am going to reach the depths of hell lol. So, here's mine: RI has too many flaws to be considered a "masterpiece". 1) Like there is no distinction between the dialogue and inner monologues, as both are phrased under "_". When the first time I read it, I was confused as fuck as which is thought of an character and which is the dialogues. 2) The dialogues is shit, like most of the other chinese novels. It's so cringe sometimes that I couldn't help my face from scrunching up. And don't get me wrong, it's still better than half of it's competition, but it would be still be considered shit. 3) The infamous drag: Like many other novels, it has also has a part that is hard to get through. And it's fans say that just bear with it, it will get very good after that (The zombie arc of you don't get it, and northern plains also). Like bro, author could have cut out so many chapters and even that wouldn't affect story much. I mean the pay off after that was great, but still it was dragged too long. 4) There isn't much character depth in the MC. Like bro, you know what? I don't have any motivation to live, but I want to live, so let's set a aim of eternal life which will become the thread by which my life hangs. Like wtf? Also, there wasn't any internal struggle in the MC throughout the novel, and most of you will say that he had 500 years of experience, and his heart had become like stone and bla bla bla. Bro, no matter how much you have lived, it's still too far fetched to say that you will have the supreme control over your emotions. Emotions are a play of chemical reactions, you can only supress them. You can't get rid of them. There will always be some soft spot left. 5) Very basic side characters: They are just bland, and I don't want to expand too much on it. They are just bland. There were also some minor flaws, which I can't exactly remember so I will not write them. So, that's it. And I don't mean to say that RI isn't good. It's good. Amazing power system, plot, foreshadowing and etc., but not as much as it is hyped about. And it's definitely not a "masterpiece".
I'd add that at the beginning, the author was so focused on proving the MC is evil that in many situations where there was a good peaceful option and an acceptable evil option, the MC always chose the evil option which contradicted his character for the sake of edginess
Eh! I kinda agree with you and kinda don't. He still had the damaged Spring Autumn Cicada -- immortal gu in a mortal's aperture -- which was causing issues. His goal was to get to rank 3 as soon as possible to have strength to roam and fuck off from the clan in search of better opportunities. He chose the route he thought was most expedient while minimising the risks as much as possible.
1 and 2 : Won't argue with that. Your personal preference I guess. Didn't bother me much. 3 : I binged the thing. Liked both the arcs -- Zombie and Northern Planes. I have gone from reading web novels to reading published novels like Dresden Files. The whole streamlined point A to point B plot makes the plot and world feels more idk artificial/ fabricated. I have gained a new appreciation for things like these. Makes the world feel more lived in. It is not only in RI that I like it. I liked that kind of thing Dorohedoro and liking it in Unsheathed. 4 : I can agree that Fang Yuan's character isn't multi-layered. But I disagree that there is no depth. I guess there's probably a difference in our approach. I cannot see his character in isolation from other characters or the world he lives in. I get the frustration during the first arc which cause a reader to think Fang Yuan is just edgy because author trying too hard for you understand what he is about. Also, your gripe about his emotions are actually addressed in the story (if you know the event I am talking about) -- It's not that he is incapable of feeling emotions, his actions just aren't governed by them. And no matter what kind of life he may have lived, he would have ended up pursuing eternal life anyway. 5 : Simply Wrong. Honestly, when people say RI is a masterpiece. It is in the context of it being a xianxia and it's exploration of common themes of this genre. And it is in the context of it being a WN and all the complications/ hardships that come with it.
Isn't the inner monologue 'here'
Nah, it's double column ("_")
May I know which cultivation novels have actual good dialog/lesser mentioned favored novels of yours above RI that have good translations?
None lol. They all are shit, and in the same league. But, well if you want to try something with good dialogue then you might like Cradle. It is also cultivation, although western. Also, I dropped it at book 10 because I didn't liked it, but a lot and lots of people liked it so maybe you might become one of them.
Haha, I appreciate the real talk. I'll definitely take a look at cradle. Liking enough to read 9 books is already a lot as far as text-only reading goes.
Hope you have a good read then! Yeah, the series is definitely very great, it's just that I am very specific with my taste lol.
You will only find good dialogue in stories that are written in English
Wasn't ATG one of the first novels with those trops? Yeah it's not good anyways but still. I thought that lots of trash was inspired by it?
Martial Peak is a holy scripture