I wouldn't say the writing is subpar, that would be unfair. I think the writing is convoluted due to the huge number of possible story permutations.
I am going to stop you right there. . .That is precisely what sub par means -below average standards of acceptability. If something is convoluted, it is sub par, no justification is sufficient to excuse it. The difference between good writing and poor writing isn't in the language used, the effectiveness with which it is employed, the breadth of vocabulary drawn from, the power of the imagery or the novelty of the concepts explored. That is what distinguishes good writing from excellent writing. What differentiates the good from the bad are two very simple criteria: Convenience and contrivance. Is the writing convincing and making something convincing is all about foundation. Bad writing is almost always the result of laziness. That is it. Allow me an example.
A man spends all of the wealth he possesses which he is not otherwise directing toward his own sustenance buying ice cream for children at the park on weekends.Now if you are reading a story about this man, and it is well composed, you might be able to conjure up some head canon or rationale to explain this and may enjoy the story having filled in some necessary logical requirements to make it work. But that does not pardon the work from being bad. lets try again.
A man spends all of the wealth he possesses which he is not otherwise directing toward his own sustenance buying ice cream for children at the park on weekends - because his daughter died This would appear to be an improvement, since a motivation is provided which did not exist previously, but it is actually equally poor if not worse because while the first example was unconvincing as it offered no explanation, this motivation calls everything into question for being implausible. It isn't that it is impossible for someone to respond to tragedy in this way, it is simply that we all know enough about human nature to know it isn't a typical or reasonable scenario. -This is where much of the game is now. Unconvincing. Sub par. Lets try one last time with something barely adequate.
A man spends all of the wealth he possesses which he is not otherwise directing toward his own sustenance buying ice cream for children at the park on weekends -because his daughter died in an auto accident. They had been arguing over ice cream while driving home and maybe if he not been fighting with her, if only he had stopped to buy her that sundae. . .With a little more context an implausible situation and a borderline uncomfortable character can become a sympathetic one with the potential of a compelling story. Something plausible and if you are lucky, something interesting. Good writing rewards you for the suspension of disbelief you lend it. Bad writing will not work without the suspension of disbelief. Anything specific one might criticize, from general unoriginality to Mary Sue characters and cliche, are all in essence accusations of laziness. It is the one thing which no writer which takes themselves seriously should ever be.
