User blog comment:Epic~00/Total Drama Back in Action Edgic/@comment-24466939-20150326033417

found some nice explanation for each of the abbreviations meanings :)

INV - Invisible Definition: A character, within the episode, that is edited to be irrelevant or insignificant to any of the stories. In terms of story... they don't have one.

UTR - Under the Radar (Under Developed, Low-level Complexity) Definition: A character, within the episode, that is edited to be either under-utilized or deliberately hidden (the trick is figuring out which). In story terms, they may have a role in the story but are being kept out of focus. The character... receives little or no significant game relevant development. Zero to a few confessionals or TCQs. may have received significant screen time, but personal character development is of low quality and not particularly extreme. Isn't seen doing or saying anything special or of major significance; may receive UNUSUAL or extensive focus during group exchanges like pick'ems, intros, or (possibly) challenges (ie. where verbal exchanges are subtitled; actions are "replayed" for the audience; or the scene is overly-emphasized by Probst) may have had some sort of "role" or part in the episode, but will generally be void of direct conflicts and/or character insight. may have received SPV from another player(s). narrates the game (i.e., tells the audience about basic goings-on in the tribe). Narration is uncomplex and can be talking about camp life, things others are doing, upcoming game events like challenges, or even talking about the very basic plans of a larger group they are a part of (e.g., "our tribe wants to focus on beating the other one in challenges" or "our alliance wants to eliminate the people in the minority"). does not answer any questions of why or how (and rarely any of the other Ws for that matter). ie. Jim: I think Frank is in an alliance. MOR - Middle of the Road (Mid-level Complexity) Definition: A character, within the episode, that says and does more than a UTR edit, but is lacking in character development (ie. we still don't know anything about them or what makes them tick). MOR edits are not oversimplified into OTT nor are they well-rounded into CP. In terms of story, these characters tend towards being a supporting character. This edit may contain "very strategic" moments, but without the emotional and intellectual insights necessary for a complex edit. The character... receives moderate levels of game relevant development. Few to several confessionals and/or TCQs. They may speak about the game, alliances, plans, etc., but the statements appear incomplete or shallow. We are given a sense of where the character's mind is, but many elaborative questions are left unanswered. received low to significant screen time and may have done something notable, but overall, there was a lack in quality and depth. May receive any type of personal character development — from no personal development to very high personal development. will likely have had some sort of "role" or part in the episode, but it was as a secondary or supporting role. May have received UNUSUAL FOCUS during group encounters, BUT this focus was likely linked to someone else and was used as a tool to shine light elsewhere. may or may not have received SPV from another player(s). mid-level of complexity, CP-lite, When a character receives enough complexity that UTR seems inappropriate, but not enough complexity to warrant a full-blown CP. tells us his/her needs, wants, strategies but fails to tell us the whys and hows. (ie. Jim: I want to be in an alliance with Frank.) CP - Complex Personality (High-level Complexity) Definition: A character, within the episode, that emerges as a "personality" that is well-rounded and well-developed (intellectually, emotionally, personally and strategic/game-wise). The editing has depth, we see their strengths and weaknesses, and their choices are presented to the audience so that we get an insight into their thinking. In terms of story, these characters usually end up being major players in the story (game) and their choices end up shaping the overall, long-term story. The character... receives a high amount of game relevant complexity. Few-to-several QUALITY confessionals and/or TC questions and/or camp discussions. Their thoughts, motivations, and plans are laid out in detail. The viewer knows exactly what a character intends to do and why. received moderate to significant QUALITY screen/face time, does something notable or important, and was given the opportunity to talk about it. Receives any amount of personal development from very low to very high. (Strategy, game, and complex emotions like remorse, loneliness, guilt, etc or an internal conflict over a situation are shared with the audience. Their thinking process and how these feelings/thoughts/events are affecting them and their game are expressed intelligently and maturely). had a fairly significant "role" or part in the episode, and that role is part of the driving force of the story. The story for the episode "revolved" around this character, at least partially. may have received SPV from another player(s). Highly complex, may have moments of OTT (or even UTR) within a single episode since being well-rounded and complex would, by definition, include being obtuse, one-note or single-minded. answers the questions Why and How. (Jim: I want to be in an alliance with Frank because Frank is stronger than me and will take some of the attention from me come the merge) Note: Winners are usually portrayed as CP at several points in the overall story since the story needs to be about them. However, this may not be the case in the early episodes if the winner starts out with a purposeful strategy of UTR. CPs after the merge are common / expected for the winner. OTT - Over the Top Definition: A character, within the episode, that is over-simplified or presented as a one-dimensional, one-note caricature. In terms of story, these characters are usually used to create drama and to distract us from the winner. They are the ones we love to love (the hero, the sweetheart) or the ones we love to hate (the villain, the buffoon, the arrogant jerk, the right-royal-beyotch). The character... receives a very low amount of game-relevant footage, if any at all. Had a few-to-several confessionals and/or TC questions; confessionals and other discussions were generally one-sided, emotional and repetitive, without depth of thought or rationality expressed, lacked in strategy or strategy not expressed with much internal conflict (but probably had lots and lots of conflict with other people); OTT characters rarely, if ever, explain their motivations in the context of the game. received moderate to significant screen time; receives an extreme amount of personal character development. Their personality is highlighted strongly and is the central focus of their footage. Often they are a “caricature” of a real person. Confessionals were used to "paint" the character into a certain type of cartoon-like role (like the evil villain twirling their moustache, etc) or other extreme behaviour such as no remorse for hurtful actions, focusing only on loyalty or saving one's own skin, an absence of "evil" strategizing when there should be, etc. had a moderate to significant "role" or part in the episode. OTT characters are entertaining and are often the "scene-stealer" or the "drama-maker" for the episode. The story for the episode "revolved" around this character, at least partially. most likely received SPV from other players; SPV was used to reinforce the OTTness and the SPV was extreme or underscored the actions of the player in question. has very little complexity and will likely not have moments of depth or a "range of complexity" within a single episode. This is a one-dimension edit, and if the edit contains significant moments of "CP" then it is not OTT. If the edit is overwhelmingly OTT with only a few, minor moments of CP, and accompanied by OTT music, etc, then OTT may still be a better fit. may tell us about their wants and needs, but fails to tell us the hows and whys. In addition, will probably express those needs irrationally, and may blame or finger-point or display other extreme reactions to the situation. Note: OTT players are not exclusively the "in your face" high vis player. It is also possible for a minor character to receive footage that conveys an extreme amount of character development. An OTT edit can also be one where the focus of the screen-time was used to show the character repeating the same actions over and over (for example, someone who is being portrayed as a blabber mouth, will have several repeated scenes of them talking over and over, or close ups of their mouth talking, etc). OTT Characters rarely receive an opportunity to talk about a situation or to express themselves rationally about it. OTT characters often have tone, as well, because their antics are frequently spun a certain way for the audience. However, an OTT character does not require tone. A character can have a personality-defined, extreme edit without the edit taking a particular side on their behaviour. OTT could be thought of as a special case of UTR. While the character still receives low game complexity, their footage highlights their personality instead. OTT characters are often (but not always) the focal point of an episode and are often (but not always) polarizing forces within the game.