People who talk about "pacing issues"

It's a very vague complaint to me. I almost never know what people mean. I feel like the kid from Whiplash, and JK Simmons is about to throw a chair at my head.

I sort of get it, but it's one of those things where I wish people went into more detail about what they mean. If I don't see any issue at all, I can't tell if they think scenes went on for too long, or there's not enough buildup or it feels like they're getting yanked around. It's a bad umbrella term to me.

It's the same as any other comment about a work. It needs something to back up the claim made because otherwise you can just say anything about any movie. "It wasn't funny" can be a scathing critique when directed towards a comedy, or absolutely toothless if said about a horror.

But for an example of pacing issues. The first (non Gunn) Suicide Squad is pretty famous. They do every single character's introductions three times over. Amanda Waller basically reading out each villains rap sheet to congress, there's intro scenes of them all in prison, and then another intro scene of their activities outside of prison (either in the lead-up to the operation or as a flashback to how they got in prison). Almost half the movie is spent doing this triple-layered cast introduction sequence.

This leads to an exceptionally rushed second half of the film, where plot points just kind of happen repeatedly with no real context or consequence, and every character is forced to state out loud what they're doing and why multiple times in order to keep the audience afloat. So the first half of the film is poorly paced because it's dragging its heel repeating information you already know over and over again. And the second half of the film is poorly paced because it's a constant barrage of new information that the film no longer has time to go over.

A more common example of pacing issues are comedies that tell jokes too often and too fast. Which don't let the audience catch all the jokes, or the jokes don't have enough build up to effectively land. The recent Demon Slayer movie also had pacing issues; where it would constantly jump from moment to moment without a whole lot of time to breath in between the scenes. It's true to the manga I suppose, but like. There's a reason that Ghibli films often dedicate several minutes of runtime to slow, pastoral scenes where nothing happens. The film needs to give you time to reflect on what's happened so far, so that you're prepared for how it's going to end. The one that gets talked about the most is the train scene in Spirited Away. It's an example of brilliant pacing specifically because it slows everything down and gives you time to process.

I get that it's vague and doesn't give much to argue against, but it's a general complaint that covers a complex topic. Compare Chrono Cross to Chrono Trigger. Compare Luke Cage S2 to Loki S1. Compare Hancock to Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.

Sometimes media is evenly paced and sometimes it's purposefully slow paced. But sometimes it drags too long unnecessarily or rushes when it shouldn't.

ChocoboMogALT posted...

I get that it's vague and doesn't give much to argue against, but it's a general complaint that covers a complex topic. Compare Chrono Cross to Chrono Trigger. Compare Luke Cage S2 to Loki S1. Compare Hancock to Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.

Sometimes media is evenly paced and sometimes it's purposefully slow paced. But sometimes it drags too long unnecessarily or rushes when it shouldn't.

Slow when the plot needs to be slow can work super well. Oyasumi Punpun and Dead Dead Demon's Dededede Destruction are both series that spend like, 10 volumes on incredibly slow buildup. Punpun is essentially a faithful play by play of a guy's life from childhood to his college years. D5D is about an alien invasion where...like. The alien mothership takes the form of a pressure cooker lid. It's such a blunt visual metaphor it really doesn't require any further unpacking than that. The story is about high school / college-aged girls trying to navigate their lives while the world ends around them and it's definitely not a metaphor for global warming or any other social issues. Promise.

Both stories work because the slow parts give you tons of material to get invested in these protagonists, so when it all starts to fall apart at the end you care about everything going on.

I think complaints about "the writing" are worse.

Mostly it's just a generic complaint trying to look like intelligent reasoning.

It is hard to describe exactly, but you do feel something is wrong.

Thats what I felt with Arcane S2. Shit went waay to fast and deserved one extra episode.

And I guess Transformers One also had a bit of this. I still think Megatron fall into villainy was rushed and needed some 15 minutes or more.

People commonly say Expedition 33 had pacing issues in its third act, what does that mean? I didnt have any major concerns plot wise from the third act from memory, even the final dungeon was not really long.

The best example in a game i can think of is FF16. You spend hours and hours doing mundane fetch quests, one hour of a cool dungeon and boss, then go right back to picking herbs for npcs again. Or Pokemon S,/M, where the game always stops you to tell you very basic info. Or Persona 5, where characters stop to text you about a thing they literally just showed you, and everybody has to chime and and give their thoughts on it (mostly just everyone saying yes you are right thank you.

a good example of good pacing is Chrono Trigger. Each event has a buildup, and a climax, and it happens swiftly with little downtime or POINTLESS things to add more game time. Another good example would be Mario Rpg, Claire Obscure, Astro Bot, Kirby games, or any game that doesnt add filler to fill up time.

Filler isnt necessarily bad pacing. FF7 has a lot of goofy stuff that is required and not related to the main plot, but it helps develop the characters and builds on lore. A bad example of this would be again, Ff16, where the missions dont tell you anything about the characters. There are some that do, but they can be counted on one hand. The majority are just you finding random junk and the character thanking you. And a lot of it is required. Like the Mid missions, which actually dont go anywhere.

The first time I really noticed weird pacing was the Mario Movie. We meet Mario and Luigi, we learn about their ordinary lives, they get isekai'd, and that's all fine. Mario bumbles around the Mushroom Kingdom for a bit, he meets Peach, and then things just start moving too quickly to have much emotional weight. After the training montage, Mario gets launched into a bunch of zany situations and it's too much in too little time to appreciate his struggle or growth.

It's been a long while since I watched it, so I don't remember all the details. But I remember thinking that even though I did enjoy the movie, it felt off with how much time it spent on different parts.

It means the work is moving too fast or too slow either in plot or just in general. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

HighSeraph posted...

It means the work is moving too fast or too slow either in plot or just in general. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

The hard-to-grasp part of it is when people say there's a problem, and whatever they're talking about seems fine to me.

Just look at One Piece

Great pacing is when each scene flows into the next. By the end of the film you feel like youve been on a ride the whole time. It doesnt just apply to action though.

It is definitely subjective to an extent. An example of disjointed pacing imo is the safe house scene in Avengers age of Ultron. We get introduced to Hawkeyes family and the whole film just kind of resets.

It's definitely subjective. I love the Persona series, but the first 4 or 5 hours can be a bit rough for me, while others love the slow build.

tripleh213 posted...

Just look at One Piece

One Piece is well paced in most arcs. Dressrosa and Wano being very notable exceptions. Maybe Skypeia and Long Ring Long Land too. Like yeah it's a long manga as a whole but most arcs are pretty short and relevant to the overall experience. And those that aren't are at least fun.

Pokemon XY is guilty of this.

Nice leisurely pace to the second Gym. Lots to explore and do, varied environments, long routes. Followed by a headlong rush to the end, with many thing clearly undeveloped or cut.

OniLink5000 posted...

The hard-to-grasp part of it is when people say there's a problem, and whatever they're talking about seems fine to me.

You can say that about literally any complaint or compliment. Enjoyment of anything is subjective.

Dragon Age: Origins had a part like that, where one of the biggest mods for the game was to skip that section entirely.

Its oftenbut certainly not alwaysa subjective statement; for example, the early portion of Okami is widely regarded to move at a snails pace because of its lengthy exposition dump. Id say thats a fairly objective conclusion to arrive at. In regards to subjective assertions, explanations should be given, otherwise the complaint comes across as just lazy and dismissive.

HighSeraph posted...

You can say that about literally any complaint or compliment. Enjoyment of anything is subjective.

alright thanks

I don't usually complain about pacing issues in games but one good example is in God of War: Ragnarok during that really long, boring section where you play as Atreus and explore with Angrboda

DuneMan posted...

Dragon Age: Origins had a part like that, where one of the biggest mods for the game was to skip that section entirely.

Orzammar really did suck.

You can say that about any criticism.

Not many people like DQ7's long ass intro and call it bad pacing. People also say puzzle breaks are bad.

Its kinda like how game critics love to use the word repetitive.

An example I can think of would be the novel vs the movie for Eragon. Novel: a large amount of time is spent with the boy and dragon growing up together, maturing over years, and developing a bond. In the movie the baby dragon is randomly struck by lightning and is suddenly an adult: the end.

Rika_Furude posted...

People commonly say Expedition 33 had pacing issues in its third act, what does that mean? I didnt have any major concerns plot wise from the third act from memory, even the final dungeon was not really long.

E33 act 3's a weird case for pacing because you kinda make it yourself, so it really depends from player to player

Uta posted...

One Piece is well paced in most arcs. Dressrosa and Wano being very notable exceptions. Maybe Skypeia and Long Ring Long Land too. Like yeah it's a long manga as a whole but most arcs are pretty short and relevant to the overall experience. And those that aren't are at least fun.

Egghead's an interesting case where it's not a short arc, but it's so packed that it never really feels long

Complaints about pacing can be perfectly valid but they need to be expanded upon when made.

For instance, Dragon Quest VII has pacing issues, there's a number of plot threads that are seemingly unrelated to the overarching story and some that are just largely unresolved and it's like this while the BBEG is woefully undeveloped.

When you make a complaint about pacing, you need to be ready to back it up because just saying "pacing issues" could mean damn near anything.

By the way, that Dragon Quest VII complaint? It's still probably my 2nd or maybe 3rd favourite in the series and I'm really excited for Dragon Quest VII Reimagined as it sounds like it's going to be trying to fix those very issues.

Sometimes pacing issues are evident but it doesn't really damage the media so much.

"Are they still on Namek" and yet Frieza Saga might be the best Dragon Ball arc.