(I am dying from exhaustion. I've just completed a 6 page research paper on the boring element of krypton. Here there be spelling and grammatical errors.)
Hoho, okay. Research; my one hatred as well as my one love. A little to do on my free time, a little to pour over in the deepest part of my story and cry over the fact that I can't wrap my head around the vast amount of lore to cover.
To put it simply, research isn't fun, but at the same time it is. What separates one feeling from the other is the method in which you preform the researching as well as the time in which you're researching it.
There are two types of research methods: broad and in-depth. To research broadly is to cover much needed ground in lore for your fanfiction to reach at least a passable amount of understanding in the game/movie/book. This method is usually for casual writers who don't plan to rely so deeply on lore and to make the story their own. Doubtless they'll gather information for inspiration, but these casual researchers are more likely to dabble more in their own creative minds.
Then, there are in-depth researchers. Their passion is to form their story so deep set into the lore of the game, it could pass as a true story within the game should they contact the game developers and get a shot to thread it into the story. They show so much more appreciation that's frankly astounding for the lore, and they try to express their love of the game by remaining as true to the lore as possible. Not that they are less creative than the broad researchers, but they have a lot more work to do to make sure their story remains as lore-friendly as possible.
It seems to be to the writer's preference on how much research they do; I could say shortly that they should research as much as they wish until they feel comfortable with their gained knowledge.
This obviously works for original work as well. I'm in the process of writing a novel, and I've reached the point of tediously researching any and every aspect of medieval life so I can have a marginal concept of creating a more believable story; this research I'd rather label as in-depth, as blind as I may be blundering around in it, because I'm likely glancing over things only the professional historians understand. And it's fun. To a point.
Which raises the query: how much is too much?
Regardless of whether you like it or not, you must preform to a degree of competence in your story to pass by as a proper writer. But then again, there are times when the writer squeezes so much lore and information inside, it can exhaust the reader and they might skip over the parts because it's far too much research to read over. For writers, it can sometimes be hard to find this boundary. We all have our own interests, and some may be more interested in Argonians than others. Some may not CARE that so and so Shadowscale preformed such and such action within some other era. Some DO care. The problem is that you'll get caught with both of these types of readers for your story.
You can't please every writer. So my suggestion is you set the boundary. You, as the writer, will know when you reach your limit of research. When it becomes exasperating to the writer to research, it will likely become exasperating to the reader to read. Do what you're comfortable with, and then build off there.
To research effectively, I'd advise time. You need time to research. It doesn't take an hour to learn everything you need to know in a broad scale. My way of researching is to start broad, get the basic ideas set and in place, and then delve deeper. Ask basic questions on Google search. How did medieval people live in that era? Then, as you go deeper, you'll find information on what peasants ate at that time, and so you'd research diet for peasants. It gets deeper and deeper. It's up to you how deep you go.
(I am dying from exhaustion. I've just completed a 6 page research paper on the boring element of krypton. Here there be spelling and grammatical errors.)
Hoho, okay. Research; my one hatred as well as my one love. A little to do on my free time, a little to pour over in the deepest part of my story and cry over the fact that I can't wrap my head around the vast amount of lore to cover.
To put it simply, research isn't fun, but at the same time it is. What separates one feeling from the other is the method in which you preform the researching as well as the time in which you're researching it.
There are two types of research methods: broad and in-depth. To research broadly is to cover much needed ground in lore for your fanfiction to reach at least a passable amount of understanding in the game/movie/book. This method is usually for casual writers who don't plan to rely so deeply on lore and to make the story their own. Doubtless they'll gather information for inspiration, but these casual researchers are more likely to dabble more in their own creative minds.
Then, there are in-depth researchers. Their passion is to form their story so deep set into the lore of the game, it could pass as a true story within the game should they contact the game developers and get a shot to thread it into the story. They show so much more appreciation that's frankly astounding for the lore, and they try to express their love of the game by remaining as true to the lore as possible. Not that they are less creative than the broad researchers, but they have a lot more work to do to make sure their story remains as lore-friendly as possible.
It seems to be to the writer's preference on how much research they do; I could say shortly that they should research as much as they wish until they feel comfortable with their gained knowledge.
This obviously works for original work as well. I'm in the process of writing a novel, and I've reached the point of tediously researching any and every aspect of medieval life so I can have a marginal concept of creating a more believable story; this research I'd rather label as in-depth, as blind as I may be blundering around in it, because I'm likely glancing over things only the professional historians understand. And it's fun. To a point.
Which raises the query: how much is too much?
Regardless of whether you like it or not, you must preform to a degree of competence in your story to pass by as a proper writer. But then again, there are times when the writer squeezes so much lore and information inside, it can exhaust the reader and they might skip over the parts because it's far too much research to read over. For writers, it can sometimes be hard to find this boundary. We all have our own interests, and some may be more interested in Argonians than others. Some may not CARE that so and so Shadowscale preformed such and such action within some other era. Some DO care. The problem is that you'll get caught with both of these types of readers for your story.
You can't please every writer. So my suggestion is you set the boundary. You, as the writer, will know when you reach your limit of research. When it becomes exasperating to the writer to research, it will likely become exasperating to the reader to read. Do what you're comfortable with, and then build off there.
To research effectively, I'd advise time. You need time to research. It doesn't take an hour to learn everything you need to know in a broad scale. My way of researching is to start broad, get the basic ideas set and in place, and then delve deeper. Ask basic questions on Google search. How did medieval people live in that era? Then, as you go deeper, you'll find information on what peasants ate at that time, and so you'd research diet for peasants. It gets deeper and deeper. It's up to you how deep you go.
And your research shows in your stories. 
