The Original vs The Rewrite

Commonly, people write a first draft and proceed to iterate upon said draft. Whether it's a script, essay, or document. Personally? I understand the logic, but it's something I can't seem to follow through. I write and edit per-paragraph, and through frustration of this shockingly slow process, I'll speed up despite having a little voice in the back of my head going "this doesn't feel right."

That happened again with this most recent script.

To start, it was going to be about Need for Speed: Heat itself. Like a "So I've Finally Played..." but without the title for obvious reasons. This is because NFS: Heat does tell a kind of redemption tale. Ghost Games going from being relentlessly mocked to making one of the best games in this long-running series.

Thing is, I rarely feel confident about my review ability. Whenever I'm talking for too long about physics, stats, progression, etc. I can't help but feel like I'm just parroting everybody else, even though it needs to be discussed because that's what the game literally has. So I'll try to find an alternative angle, which in this case, became the topic of Roadblocking in Games. However, when tackling a subject that goes beyond one-game, there's about fifty forks in the road per-paragraph, and it's very easy to get lost as you push through.

In this case, I was pleased with the bulk of material, but upon reaching the ending... I realized it needed an example of the ideas raised.

What I thought to be the conclusion was actually setting up the true ending.

One last thing I'd like to show. 

That being caution.

For instance, in the original draft, I wrote....

"This is inarguable, but it's not indefensible."

Problem is, it doesn't take much for this to be misheard. When saying "this is inarguable" someone may believe this to relate to the very concept of Cosmetic Microtransactions in-general as a positive for games, and whatever I say next is going to be ignored, filtered by this outrage. 

However, the sentence doesn't need to be changed, just clarified.

"This being the case, is in arguable, but it's not indefensible." 

Just those extra words will tell more viewers, hopefully even those who disagree about its impact, understand that we're talking about what exists in Siege, not specifically whether it's good or bad for the game, that's not relevant to the video's main-point. 

That something overlooked in one game, can cripple another.

Youtube is like navigating a Minefield in-front of a crowd expecting you to dance. I know I'll never be able to address every counter someone may have to a point I raise, nor should that even be the case, as nobody is above criticism. As time's gone by though, I've certainly noticed myself being more careful in writing and spoken word, for there are so many ways even the simplest of sentences can be interpreted.

I'm no Comedian, but I do appreciate Jerry Seinfeld's line from HBO's "Talking Funny" about what makes jokes - which extends to writing - compelling, is watching someone verbally tap dance over six laser beams, and not touch a single one.

And when I touch one (and I will), I'll wake up to 100 comments pointing at the same error.

Accept it. Laugh at it. And hopefully, grow from it.

Hope you enjoyed the video, and this post!

Thank you!
Raycevick