|
Post by Jaysnow on Sept 29, 2017 17:31:17 GMT -5
It's on Bookshout. It's going to be called The Exile's Journey.
On another note: Should I read this series? I tried book one and it just wasn't as good as the beginning of Warriors or Seekers.
|
|
Pixie
2024 is already bad; 2025 will be my year fr
|
Post by Pixie on Sept 29, 2017 18:49:41 GMT -5
Jaysnow The first series is really weird on pacing, but the characterization is worthwhile. Lucky's not a fam protagonist and could be better, but he's not unbearable. The second series evens things out and the quality goes up, but yes, I do recommend the first series despite it's flaws. It's more action-packed than Warriors. Interesting concepts and how every dog has a different structure pack-wise. The diversity is A-Okay. The true hero of this series doesn't get introduced until book 3, though c; Book 2, A Hidden Enemy, was better than book 1, but book 3 Darkness Falls makes everything go up by a lot. I also personally prefer Survivors over Warriors. I think the former has better characters. EDIT (contains spoilers): I wonder if this means Storm was kicked out? :/ That doesn't seem fair.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2017 17:23:26 GMT -5
Of course the first book isn't going to be good. It's always supposed to introduce you to the characters and the personalities. At least try 3 books. It is so much better and less fanfic-y, unlike Warriors. I'm actually rereading it right now.
|
|
|
Post by Lightflame on Oct 1, 2017 16:49:52 GMT -5
Of course the first book isn't going to be good. It's always supposed to introduce you to the characters and the personalities. At least try 3 books. It is so much better and less fanfic-y, unlike Warriors. I'm actually rereading it right now. What? That doesn't make any sense at all. I get that first books are supposed to introduce the characters, concept, and conflict, but that doesn't make them terrible by default. The Empty City has atrocious character building, worldbuilding, pacing, and plotting. Those aren't things that become terrible just because the first book is setting stuff up. Speaking of setup, the book doesn't setup any story threads for the series besides Sweet and Blade maybe returning, the possibility of a bunch of dogs fighting each other, and a vague cliffhanger. There's no goal for the story, and nowhere for the series to go other than "survive more". The second book is going to have to introduce the actual plot and conflict, which is lame. I don't see how you can say that first books aren't supposed to be good when many first books are good. Even The Empty City has a story concept that's perfectly fine. It's one that's been done many times in the past, and it's not that hard to write well. That it's unbearable seems to come down to atrocious writing from Gillian.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2017 18:00:41 GMT -5
Of course the first book isn't going to be good. It's always supposed to introduce you to the characters and the personalities. At least try 3 books. It is so much better and less fanfic-y, unlike Warriors. I'm actually rereading it right now. What? That doesn't make any sense at all. I get that first books are supposed to introduce the characters, concept, and conflict, but that doesn't make them terrible by default. The Empty City has atrocious character building, worldbuilding, pacing, and plotting. Those aren't things that become terrible just because the first book is setting stuff up. Speaking of setup, the book doesn't setup any story threads for the series besides Sweet and Blade maybe returning, the possibility of a bunch of dogs fighting each other, and a vague cliffhanger. There's no goal for the story, and nowhere for the series to go other than "survive more". The second book is going to have to introduce the actual plot and conflict, which is lame. I don't see how you can say that first books aren't supposed to be good when many first books are good. Even The Empty City has a story concept that's perfectly fine. It's one that's been done many times in the past, and it's not that hard to write well. That it's unbearable seems to come down to atrocious writing from Gillian. I guess I'm just kind of tired of people comparing Survivors to Warriors because it's not the same thing. The book has different characters and a different story. I'm not saying the first book isn't good, I'm saying OTHER people think it isn't good, so they give up and don't even try the other books. I actually liked it and I'm rereading it now, but I remember a lot of people giving Survivors backlash because it's not the same as Warriors. I'm not saying Jayfeather is doing this, but other people have, and I'm sick of this series being compared to that cat series. The animals are different, the stories are different, characters are different, and so on. It doesn't seem fair how people do this. Warriors is overrated, it's taken up so much spotlight that other people don't even try the other series. I'm glad some people are trying Bravelands and Seekers, but they both got a lot of backlash because it's not Warriors, which really peeved me off, cause they weren't even giving it a chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by *Faith* on Oct 7, 2017 19:06:03 GMT -5
I just hope we finally found out who the bad guy is in this book. I'm gonna take a wild guess and say it's someone who pretends to be kind.
Gillian said we find out the motive of our bad guy in book 6.
|
|