Good Character

Appreciate this getting reopened. It's difficult to talk about it without specifically listing information off the application, so hopefully I'll manage. For the backstory, as mj2002 mentioned, the question comes off as it being the character you intend to play. I feel it does matter to state this doesn't need to be the character you intend to play. As I touched on in my OP, it made me want to leave blanks (for a lack of a better word) in my character's story, so I could develop them IG. I still touched on strengths, weaknesses and hobbies, yet it wasn't good enough. As far as scenarios, aside from the ones literally asking you what rule is broken, I believe not necessarily the questions have to be totally revamped but rather how the answers are judged; they should be judged on how well the answer illustrates to the reviewer that the applicant can promote meaningful roleplay. While I'm sure that's being done to a degree, it seems there's only a few select "answers" that are expected.

I don't disagree with any of these points. For the first, and while I don't want to also go on a tangent where it seems like I'm venting about my own denial, doesn't hold true from my experience. I'm going to toot my own horn here and say I think my English is pretty well-versed, however I was still denied for poor English. I'm under the opinion that a "catch all" denial for that portion was used. I was also told to list "achievements" and a multitude were given as an example that could be established in-game, however they were expected in the backstory. For the second, while I agree that should be a challenging to really root out those who understand the rules versus just can regurgitate them, there's only one scenario that picks out an actual rule break. The rest touch on the "perspective of realism" I mentioned. For the third, I don't disagree. The application process will still require it with the criticisms I mentioned.

To preface this criticism I already spoke about this topic pre-application submission on Discord. Furthermore, this is not an insult to existing members of the server who have been accepted, but rather rectify issues IMO to allow future applicants to correctly identify what the application is asking for. I have been roleplaying through games for approximately 12-13 years. I initially started on GTA:SA as a good portion of you likely had. Some of you surely know me, but I'll remain anonymous for now. Since the birth of GTA roleplay there's always been a fixation on two ideas: that "perfect" English equals creative, good roleplay and the perceived idea of "realism". As I've branched out towards other mediums I've found first idea to not be true, and given my real life career as a big-city cop that the perceived idea of "realism" isn't realism at all. The first issue with the application: the character background. Long have GTA servers requiring applications expected you to detail your character's life story as if you're creating an autobiography from birth to death. However, this leads to stunted growth during your character's tenure while it exists on the server. Though, I do respect the drift towards also focusing on flaws and strengths in this portion. Still, there's an expectation to establish a character with great achievements (at least per my denial reason), rather than make those achievements in-game. -SNIPPED- tl;dr: Require specifically what points are expected out of the backstory, make the focus of the scenarios based on the idea of "does this further future roleplay?" and less about "how likely would this guy face negative consequences IC?", and don't complicate what doesn't need to be complicated. Dumb character =/= bad roleplay. Not accepting consequences = bad roleplay.