What's your favourite trope? And which one you can't stand?
Trope thread
Aaron Ramirez
Other urls found in this thread:
tvtropes.org
tvtropes.org
tvtropes.org
tvtropes.org
tvtropes.org
youtube.com
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
twitter.com
Lucas Hall
I can't stand a website that lets its users write any unverified shit they want and then presents it as authoritative knowledge.
Alexander Brooks
So what are you doing on Sup Forums?
Jose Barnes
Ouch. *I* felt that one.
Landon Cruz
I only come there for Nightmare Fuel pages which depending on the mood make me laugh or make me want to kill myself so I wouldn't have to share a plane of existence with pussies like that.
Chase Cooper
Honestly it's just misnamed. The lists are pretty good in and of themselves.
Carter Watson
>Nightmare Fuel page for a game
>"Upon losing, the villaingives the player a menacing, blood thirsty grin, which still gives this troper the creeps!"
>It's a NES/SNES game
Adrian Robinson
Absolute favorite:
>Sinister Silhouettes
>Where The Faceless meets Chekhov's Gunman. It comes in several different flavors, with a common theme. It is an abstract (i.e. not an actual scene) shot of one or more characters, who will eventually be revealed, with said character(s) shown as silhouettes. The background can be anything from bland to suitably ominous, but either way, the sinister silhouettes will typically be just standing there in a badass manner. The background music will most likely be ominous.
Charles Martinez
All of them. Tvtropes is nice if you wanna read trivia or to discover obscure pieces of media, but anything subjective like YMMV or Nightmare fuel is pure garbage. Also autism is fucking endemic to its user base, lest we forget Troper Tales.
Ayden Diaz
You must really hate Wikipedia then.
>but much cited sources
TV Tropes doesn't cite sources because the sources are the works THEMSELVES. If anything, it's much more reliable in that sense.
Gabriel Davis
>Page for a trope
>60% of the "examples" aren't examples at all, but rather "subversions" or "aversions"
Why have a wiki at all if a majority of it is just non-examples of tropes?
Caleb Watson
Not when they're talking about the fandom or other peoples' opinions, or making claims about what goes on behind the scenes.
For example, they can't accept the fact that some people don't like a certain horse show. It flat out states that anyone who doesn't like said show has never watched, because nobody who watched the show could POSSIBLY have a different opinion.
Zachary Cook
>It flat out states that anyone who doesn't like said show has never watched
[citation needed]
Ironic, isn't it?
Austin Mitchell
>check out an obscure or semi-obscure wikipedia page from years ago
>link rot
>link rot everywhere
>some pages have citations of entirely dead links
or
>wiki pages cite an article that cites another wikipedia page as its source
Wikipedia is a meme on its own. One of the best laughs I've had is reading the dumbest edit wars in wikipedia history page.
Joshua Collins
>the sources are the works THEMSELVES
If you say "this is a Jojo reference" the source isn't the work itself. You just made shit up. If the work says "this is a Jojo reference" then it's the source.
Sup Forums is a discussion forum, it doesn't present its posts as authoritative sources of knowledge. In fact posts are simply deleted after a few days.
Parker Fisher
To be fair, link rot is often easily remedied with archive.org, or otherwise Googling the title.
Sebastian Rodriguez
Because subversions and aversions are interesting to the reader, especially if they're learning to be writers themselves. Some of the best humor comes from taking common tropes and turning them on their head.
Charles Taylor
That's why most of that is on pages like Trivia, not the main work pages you dumbass. Just don't go to the other pages if you don't know how to have fun with this.
Levi Gray
>Crowning moment of funny
>Every single vaguely humorous moment of a show.
Samuel Hill
To make this thread more Sup Forums related, which is the most autistic Sup Forums wiki in your opinion?
Personally I think the KND fan wiki is some next level shit.
Nathan Jackson
>Sup Forums is a discussion forum, it doesn't present its posts as authoritative sources of knowledge.
You could have fooled me.
>In fact posts are simply deleted after a few days.
Fucking newfags, why are they even allowed on here?
Aaron Wright
>always read the Deader Than Disco articles out of amusement
>go there to find all the articles cut and deleted because they weren't neutral enough
Fucking TVTropes
Robert Jenkins
The difference is that this
>wiki pages cite an article that cites another wikipedia page as its source
is against Wikipedia's policies (Wikipedia cannot be used as a source)
And this
>some pages have citations of entirely dead links
simply means that whoever wrote that article or put in those citations used low-quality sources.
Wikipedia, by policy, is against those two examples. It's like seeing someone use a pencil sharpener wrong so it ruins their pencil and go "See, pencil sharpeners suck because that guy did it wrong."
Jose Thompson
>Honestly it's just misnamed. The lists are pretty good in and of themselves.
Hudson Stewart
The "playing with a trope" pages always seemed especially autistic for reasons I can't quite put my finger on
Nathaniel Ramirez
Just because Wikipedia discourages it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
For example, you have to be at least 18 years old to post on Sup Forums, but 90% of its users are 10 years old.
Joshua Jenkins
>You could have fooled me.
Then you're a fool. Can you show me the Sup Forums article for Animaniacs, or any other cartoon? There ISN'T one? Oh I guess Sup Forums doesn't present itself as an authoritative source of information, as opposed to TVTropes that presents its ass-pulled articles as valid sources of information.
Grayson Ward
I hate that shit so much.
Brayden Johnson
Who are you quoting?
Angel Bailey
>he thinks only low-quality sources have link rot
You have to be 18 on Sup Forums, user. Unless you've been living in the woods without access to the Internet for many years, or something...
Luke Brooks
I feel like there's a strong Tumblr influence in the YMMV pages.
Jaxon Sullivan
There are no "Playing with a Trope pages". Do you mean the subpages? Because if so you're retarded, that's literally the core of the entire site.
Carter White
I actually sort of miss troper tales
Ian Robinson
>Just because Wikipedia discourages it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Yes but it DOES discourage it, as opposed to TVTropes where the mods actively encourage not to provide sources.
Traffic laws "discourage" going through a red light, but it still happens. That doesn't mean that places without traffic laws have less accidents.
In this analogy, wrong statements are "accidents" and traffic laws are policies that require citations. Wikipedia still has accidents, but it has traffic laws that seek to minimize them. TVTropes just lets people do whatever the fuck.
Guess which site is more reliable.
Camden Martinez
Your browser's text search function failed you? It's a post in this very topic, you dumbass.
MY post, in fact, but that's neither here nor there.
Thomas Peterson
I'm talking about these, you dumbass.
Kevin Miller
TVTropes discourages people from providing sources because that's only really possible when you're citing the work itself. In other cases, yes it's pretty much fan opinion AND THAT'S THE FUN PART you fucking dipshit.
Levi Jackson
>Those people who added themselves as an example to the Troper Tales of all the Woobie variations
Henry Wright
This.
Xavier Stewart
There are no specific pages linked to from there, nor even examples on that page. Are you retarded?
It's basically a TV Tropes how-to manual, that's it.
Jaxon Gutierrez
The most fun to go through, even if a bit autistic.
Aaron Wright
Did you not see the link at the bottom
tvtropes.org
It's full of these pages that obsessively try to find a way to find every possible way to change every single trope, even in ways that no work of fiction would ever do.
Carson Lopez
He probably means pages like this
tvtropes.org
Kayden Garcia
I can't quite remember, is that the "tryhard edgy" page, or the "tropers are complete pussies" page?
Caleb Fisher
>it's pretty much fan opinion
Presented as fact, which is the problem. If someone says "this is a Jojo reference", that's an opinion, but TVTropes presents it as fact. It doesn't go "DiaperSmear99 thinks this is a Jojo reference", it goes "This is a Jojo reference."
And factual mistakes (like wrong episode names, wrong character names, wrong cast member names etc etc) cannot be fixed because "it's your word against mine", even when you provide a citation.
Samuel Nguyen
>even in ways that no work of fiction would ever do
[citation needed]
Seriously, find an example.
Robert Baker
Foe Yay it's my favourite one, also Foe Romance Subtext. It's sad that there isn't more stuff like that.
Connor Russell
The vast majority of stuff like references is blatantly obvious, though. I think I've only seen a few here and there that were remotely questionable, and I'd personally err on the side of leaving them in. Plus you can always argue with it on the page itself and many have done that type of thing, though it's technically discouraged by the admittedly retarded policy of avoiding "conversation in the main page".
Factual mistakes can and have been fixed without any citation. This is an outright lie.
Nathan Powell
tvtropes.org
Here's an obvious one. Name one "inverted" "Shoo out the clowns" where the "plucky comic relief character" ONLY shows up during dramatic scenes. Not "he shows up in one scene", or "he shows up in one dramatic scene and one not-dramatic scene" or "he shows up in all scenes" etc etc. "INVERTED".
And there are countless examples like this, where Tropers convolute tropes in ways that are never used.
Jose Jones
Why not both?
Samuel Sanders
TV Tropes was never meant to be taken completely seriously to begin with.
They have a huge joke article about The Ugly Barnacle, for fuck's sake.
Or the articles where Doctor Doom, Lobo and Deadpool talk about themselves.
Charles Wright
You shouldn't take any tropes on that site 100% literally. If it's inverted 99% it counts for sure.
Also, your example is incorrect. Inverting that trope would be bringing the clowns back in, regardless of context.
Colton Mitchell
Probably "tryhard edgy."
Often misinterpretations of villainous characters, but pretty funny to read.
Charles Allen
a lot of the pages try way too hard to be funny
James Green
>The vast majority of stuff like references is blatantly obvious, though
No, it isn't. People see references EVERYWHERE. Hence why it's an opinion.
>I'd personally err on the side of leaving them in
Hence you're on the side of letting people spout unfounded bullshit as fact.
>Factual mistakes can and have been fixed without any citation. This is an outright lie.
Search through the "edit blocked but want to edit" thread for the countless people who were blocked because they wanted to fix a long-accepted factual on TVTropes and were told to cut it out because fixing errors is not what TVTropes is about.
How can you know ANYTHING on TVTropes is valid when you yourself simply accept bullshit people write up without question? "Oh he said it's a Jojo reference? Better leave that in, references are blatantly obvious."
>author later says in an interview it wasn't a Jojo reference
>newbie wants to fix page, cites the author
>mods ban the newbie, "we don't need citations here"
>It's a Jojo reference.
Logan Sanders
>You shouldn't take any tropes on that site 100% literally
You shouldn't take any of it literally because it's all bullshit that 12.9-year-olds made up.
>your example is incorrect
I didn't write that page.
Further evidence that TVTropes presents opinion as fact. You say if it's inverted, it's THIS. The person who wrote that page says that if it's inverted, it's THAT.
Both of it is bullshit you both pulled out of your asses.
Josiah Ramirez
Wikipedia sometimes bans truth too, even with citations (usually due to "edit warring", which is bullshit 99% of the time BTW). I've seen it myself.
Shit mods/admins are everywhere.
Jaxon Gutierrez
Mistakes happen. That's literally not what inverted means.
I'm right, they're wrong. End of discussion.
Brayden Rodriguez
>character that is a rapist and child abuser in canon
>gets his own article in tearjerker
fucking Lisa
Charles Walker
My favorite trope is when people call out Sup Forums tards and their ritualistic apophenia and OCD lazy-writing-glorifying bullshit instead of making 5 threads a day of them.
It's a pretty old trope, though. You don't see it much these days.
Isaac Anderson
I miss the wallbangers page.
Dylan Parker
What the fuck happened in the Simpsons since I stopped watching?
Nolan Mitchell
I think he meant the game Lisa
Brody Wood
Yes but not as policy. TVTropes literally has a "doesn't matter if it's a subjective opinion" policy, meaning anyone can write any old ass-pulled bullshit and it stays up there.
>tvtropes.org
James Fisher
>Mistakes happen
That's my point. On TVTropes, mistakes are perpetuated and presented as factual information, as a matter of policy. Their policy is to present subjective unsourced opinions as credible.
Thomas Wood
It's hilarious that one policy page says "tropes are subjective" and then the other policy page that is linked to says "no, tropes are objective."
Perfect example of presenting subjective opinion as objective fact.
That's a Jojo reference by the way. It's blatantly obvious.
Josiah White
>Favorite trope(s)
Superpowered evil side, any evil opposite trope (psycho rangers for example)
>Least favorite trope
Double standard abuse: female on male
Zachary Peterson
Any that have a timeline for something with very little continuity.
Angel Cox
hey that's my favorite one too
Brandon Miller
Tyler Wood
>No real life examples
>Examples include real-life serial rapist/killer Robert Hansen and Rwandan genocide instigator Georges Rutaganda
Okay, so I can kind of get someone not realizing that The Frozen Ground wasn't a complete work of fiction (even though it used real names and ended with a dedication to the victims and that) but Hotel Rwanda?
Brody Adams
>reading nightmare fuel for any page
>this troper
stopped reading right there
Carson Lee
They were great to laugh at. The amount of people that put themselves on "cool" tropes was hilarious.
Asher Harris
>Mostly manga and anime
Jayden Jenkins
>this guy defending tvtropes
Lelmao
Colton Thomas
Who's worse? Tropers or Redditors?
Juan Sanchez
>First this city
>THEN THE WORLD!
Colton Robinson
I think the worst shit on Reddit is worse than the worst shit on TV Tropes, but the average level of quality on TV Tropes is worse than Reddit. Like, if you just hang out with the gardening enthusiasts on Reddit, you don't see the really autistic stuff, but you go pretty much anywhere on TV Tropes and you think "wow, this is autistic". On the other hand, TV Tropes never drove a man to suicide because they falsely assumed he was a terrorist - as far as we know. So it's up in the air, but I'd say Tropers are worse.
Caleb Reed
>On the other hand, TV Tropes never drove a man to suicide because they falsely assumed he was a terrorist - as far as we know
what
Matthew Stewart
>never drove a man to suicide because they falsely assumed he was a terrorist - as far as we know
are you talking about swartz? Because he had barely to do with reddit
Nathan Ward
>gardening enthusiasts
Fuck those people. Fuck them so much. Stupid bitch just kept leading me on.
Ayden Peterson
I like the Trivia section, but won't touch anything else with a 50 foot pole.
Mason Lee
Basically, a bunch of redditors playing faux-investigator after the boston bombings iirc.
Alexander Howard
You could just make thread about tropes and conventions in Sup Forums related works. Bringing TV Tropes will invite autists (who ironically will whine about TVT autism).
Thats just false, none of this stuff suposed to be authoritian and if its that way people will change it, even main page mention how tropes are not bad and good automatically. Also unverified shit is mostly about things what most poeple don't care about or don't know at all to bother and corect wrong entry.
Gabriel Lopez
It always annoys me when I see a trope listed in a page for something, but when I go to the trope's page and look at the examples the first thing isn't included. Why the hell not go the whole way with it if you're gonna bother adding it to the thing's page in the first place?
Anthony Walker
NF, Awesome, Funny etc pages are just excuses to shill for things people like.
At least most complain pages have some limits what troper can post or not.
Gabriel Smith
You could always add this yourself.
Caleb Mitchell
That sounds like a risky move that might suck me into the site's autism, I'd rather not try it.
Justin Thompson
If thats what you prefer, but don't expect that way lazyness of editors will be fixed.
Cameron Rivera
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
web.archive.org
Angel Allen
Anons from some boards and SJW tumbrlinas are much worse.
Hudson Cooper
This. Culture warriors are more disgusting than autists because culture warriors are autists with more conviction.
Charles Parker
>none of this stuff suposed to be authoritian
It's presented like a compendium of knowledge when it's just people's opinion. We've been through this on this thread.
>unverified shit is mostly about things what most poeple don't care about
There are plenty of very high-profile TVTropes pages that people DO care about that are filled with crap, and are kept that way through self-reference. Change it, provide a reference, get told you're wrong because there must be a reason TVTropes wrote it in the first place.
Evan Perez
Urban Legend of Zelda is great for "that kid" stories.
I also like "What could have been" because it's basically a big glossary of cut content and scrapped ideas.
Kevin Evans
>Naughty tentacles got deleted because of ad jewery
Cameron Cruz
Give the tropers a little bit of credit, Marty's framed as some penitent character who's apparently managed to stop touching little girls, and who just stumbled into the ass end of a game's shift into an edgy linear transformation narrative.
Jaxon King
The one trope that rustles my jimmies the most is the It Was All A Dream trope. So many good stories get rekt because of this.
Jackson Perry
>Examples include real-life serial rapist/killer Robert Hansen
>Between 1971 and 1983, Hansen abducted, raped and murdered at least 17, and possibly more than 30 women, in and around Anchorage, Alaska, hunting them down in the woods with a Ruger Mini-14 and other weapons.
Man, now I know why so many crime drama shows have episodes with a premise like that.
Levi Cook
>It's presented like a compendium of knowledge when it's just people's opinion.
It's lose and ever changing compedium filled with opinions but core, trope itself can't really be that opinioned and rest (subjective stuf) you can ignore
>We've been through this on this thread.
All you did is present your opinions on TV Tropes as facts withtous citing any evidence.
>There are plenty of very high-profile TVTropes pages that people DO care about that are filled with crap, and are kept that way through self-reference. Change it, provide a reference, get told you're wrong because there must be a reason TVTropes wrote it in the first place.
If there are plenty you would provide some example as basis to discuss about whatever your claim have any merit or not.
IMO they should keep those and sacrifice forums. Forum are pure garbage.
Lucas Jackson
I have yet to find a thing more autistic then the tv tropes pantheon. Shit's strange for how they try to paint Melkor as "Ultimate evil do not steal".