Hey, /co/. Quick question: Do the moral and political personal

>>94621283
Oh God, do I even want to know what Doug TenNapel/David Perry said? The short answer is yes. And sometimes it really messes me up, because for example, I was and still am a massive fan of Rob Paulsen's voice acting podcast, Talking Toons. But when he recently moved his show to Nerdist's video service, I didn't follow him there, because I hate Chris Hardwick with a passion and refuse to give him money in any way, however indirectly.

The moral of the story is, if you can be chill, be chill, and just don't give a shit about people's opinions.

>>94621359
Doug TenNapel is a conservative christian who opposes gay marriage, and recently pissed off people by referring to transwomen as males.

Small stuff in my opinion.

>>94621283
Only if it the opinion is radical.

>>94621409
Yeah, that's a bit different from a comedian or TV personality saying something that you personally find offensive/distasteful in their act or on TV. A video game designer like TenNapel is not just going to inject his views on transgenderism into his video games.

>>94621409

Specifically, a Trans game journalist started shit talking EarthWorm Jim as a game being full of "Mean spirited humour", bad level design and dated animation and was glad that the franchise was dead.

Doug's response was to ask for a proper interview about the game because he was never consulted about the hit piece, but during the conversation, he called the Trans game journalist a "he". Cue shitstorm.

>>94621482

And no, I don't think it was entirely by mistake. He's run into their ilk before. He worded his misgendering in such a way that normies can't tell that he's baiting transexuals.

Basically they baited him with a hit piece and he baited them by misgendering the journalist.

>>94621482
Well yeah Earthworm Jim 1 was chok full of garbage bag game design put off as 'quirky' or 'unique' for the time.

2 was much better.

No. The idea that you swear off of someone's work just because you found out something extracurricular about them which you find distasteful betrays a desire for validation in all things rather than an interest in being entertained. As OP hints at, it's when the work reflects the distastefulness that it becomes obnoxious. Most political humor falls into the second category.

>>94621592

That wasn't the main reason why the writer hated it though.

https://archive.fo/MPlyL

File: Capture+_2017-08-13-09-27-07.png (368KB, 1439x1304px) Image search: [Google]

368KB, 1439x1304px

No, but it will affect whether or not I follow them on Twitter. I can respect their opinions, but I use Twitter for memes and keeping up to date on series, so I'd rather not see stuff like pic related.

>>94621283
So you said the WORK and in that case the answer is always no, but like >>94621359 I will sometimes refuse to support particular creators.

The work itself should always (at least initially) be taken on its own merits IMO.

>>94621635
That seems pretty tame as far as these things go DESU. BTW I am the cancer for replying to you, but you are the cancer for posting specific screencaps. That's what causes these discussions to collapse into the arguments people are screencapping themselves rather than remaining an apolitical discussion of the topic itself.

>>94621612
>Earthworm Jim’s level design is a hostile jumble of platforms, spongy bosses, and unintuitive progression paths. The game is extremely vertical, asking players to weave strange movements throughout levels that are often hard to visualize. If Super Mario Bros is about reliably moving to the right, Earthworm Jim is about chaotically moving everywhere. The game’s first stage, “New Junk City,” is a maze of ziplines and difficult ledge grabs. “What the Heck?”’s landscape is full of high walls that create frustrating dead ends. In spite of various movement options such as high jumps and the ability to use Jim’s head as a whip to swing over gaps, Earthworm Jim is not fun to navigate.

>These levels are also frustrating, exaggerating the failures of prior games at the expense of the player. “Down the Tubes” might highlight how annoying water levels are but it does this by forcing to player to endure a terrible water level. “Andy Asteroids?” punishes the player with a boss fight should they fail. In seeking to satirize bad platformer design, Earthworm Jim creates a far worse game than the source material.

This is all correct. There were other platformers at the time that did netter satirization of the genre than Jim.

Unless Archive is loading poorly I've yet to see anything that doesn't deterr against my first statement. EWJ1 is fucking awful.

Excellent music though

>>94621635
So much this. I'm beginning to unfollow people from both sides of the political aisle who spam up my Facebook feed with garbage. Social media should be fun and stress-free, and there's only so pro and anti-Trump propaganda I can stand.

>>94621674

I wonder. Will something that's irreverent to both sides be prime meat for the outrage bandits or be beloved to those who are tired of this nonsense. Because I think the latter is a growing crowd.

>>94621711
That's true.

File: rednecks-and-blue.jpg (1MB, 2083x1756px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2083x1756px

>>94621283
He does put in some basic spiritual stuff (usually a quick parallelism) in most his comics, but it's never particularly on the nose. Earthworm Jim is canonically texan though, that could be triggering to some I guess

I share basically none of his more public views, but I love his stuff because it's always funny and creative

>>94621283
I am fine with creators believing whatever the fuck they like, provided their work isn't just propaganda for their beliefs, because being preached at is really not what I want from my entertainment.

As an example, I'm fine if you want to include a gay character or don't want to include a gay character in your story. But if the whole story is about telling everyone how you feel about gay people and trying to persuade other people to feel the same, then it's not going to be entertaining (except perhaps in a "laugh at this hamfisted moralising" kind of way).

>>94621673
I agree with the water level, but the rest of it was fine. "Being difficult to navigate" doesn't make it bad

>>94621840

And this is why I hate SJWs. When Doug TenApel does it (put their beliefs in their work), it's never on the nose and it ends up being relatable to everyone because of it (due to death of the authour). But when SJWs do it, they spell it out, telling you how exactly what to think and "death of the Authour" doesn't apply to them somehow.

>>94621711
The latter. It's what needs to happen. The problem is comedy (at least mainstream tv comedy) has itself become partisan and they probably wouldn't let someone who rips into both the dumb left and the dumb right on the air because the people in charge belong to the dumb left. At least we'll always have South Park.

>>94621914
Yeah, South Park is probably the closest thing to a nonpartisan animated comedy on TV. It's been said so many times that it's a well-worn cliche by now, but they really do make fun of everyone on that show.

File: Earthworm Jim Special Edition.gif (1MB, 320x224px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x224px

>>94621673 >>94621869

It's a bit puzzling why did he even care to address the piece at all; most of the article's narrative is based on massaged phrasing and very selective omissions. But this is Kotaku anyway; the material is targeted at a) people who will agree with whatever you'll say and b) idiots who will mirror back your tone and become obnoxiously vocal against you, therefore validating your opinion as relevant

On top of the nonsensical lowest-common-denominator name drops (Andy Asteroids as the Battletoads bike level, Tube Race as the TMNT dam level ), the article claims the game "failed" simply by using the game and the series as a whole as the same thing -worse yet, using the chief argument of the series "not being as popular as Mario" as the deal breaker

It's a very memorable and very flawed game at the same time, but non 100% polarized reviews are simply not popular or fun to write nowadays.

>>94622203
Wait, what? Does he/she literally compare Andy Asteroids to the Battletoads Bike Level? LOL! It's not even a fraction as difficult!

When I first found out the creator of Hellraiser was a drug addict who had orgy parties with hot twinks...... I'm not sure what to think. I still don't today

.... Hmmm

>>94622261

The only thing it should tell you is that Hellraiser is as fucked up as the guy who made it. So it's authentic.

>>94621409
>referring to transwomen as males
But he's right?

File: 1489560825501.jpg (281KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 1024x768px

>>94621612
Of course it's Kotaku, those rat fuckers exist only to start shit and shill shit, fuck them and the horse they rode in on

>>94621283
It doesn't bother me personally, but their beliefs affect my enjoyment in other ways. I've seen a couple of drawings or comics get pulled or shit themselves inside-out or get pulled down because of some political stuff the artist or writer got dragged into on some other site. It kinda annoys me when people say "the creator's politics are irrelevant to the work" as some sort of sage wisdom, because while that would be ideal, that's not totally how things work.

>>94621283
It's a mixed bag. Entire comics and cartoon have been created on a political or philosophical premise. I tend to read some of spiritualism heavy comics because they come with crazy art.

It can be good sometimes when they include little aesops. Little bits of wisdom learned from being part of that movement.
Honestly, the only time it gets really bad is when it gets preachy. It becomes the centerpiece of the work when the setting itself does not warrant it all. Suddenly you ose all immersion and realize that the artist has ulterior motives.


>>94621673
This was never a problem to me, if anything, levels in earth worm jim where pretty original. Even better with EJM2.

>>94622203
>Kotaku

Of course it had to be fucking Kotaku. Nothing to see here, TenNapel was baited, it worked and now they are getting views at his expense. Fucking leeches.

>>94621635
>keeping up to date on series
>Twitter
wut

>>94621283
Only if it reflects in the work itself.
I used to think otherwise, but I grew out of it. I might not patronize you if you're a piece of shit who thinks XYZ should be crucified, but your work is separate from that.

>>94621612
>that portrait
Is Kotaku hiring people based on how much of a stereotype they look like, now?

>Hey, /co/. Quick question:
>Do the moral and political personal beliefs of a creator disrupt or affect in any way your enjoyment of his/her work if the work itself doesn't (openly) conveys them?

No. A creator being an as objectively terrible person as possible wouldn't either.

If you're going to go Death of the Author, it's hypocritical to backtrack on it, just because you suddenly find religion on some issue that triggers you.

>>94621283
No, not really. Usually their work has nothing to do with politics.

Beliefs don't tend to bother me. I don't even think it's a big deal just being in the work if the story is still good. Like Fables got political but that didn't bother me at all but the plot got boring so I left.

But I guess behavior can matter sometimes though. I can't read Gerard Jones stuff anymore.

>>94621283
If the work doesn't convey those ideas then no. I can distance myself from the content and the creator

>>94621283
Yes, Frank Cho for me

>>94621592
>>94621673

But he wasn't the game designer no? He was the character and art designer.

>>94621674
More practically, you should read whatever the fuck you want to read. It's not as if you won't get plenty of that shit even without following people.

>>94621711
>both sides
are diverging on the information they're getting that it's becoming increasingly difficult to be meaningfully ireverent to both of them, as their fundamental POVs of the world are different.

>>94621668
Oh no, that was just the closest example I could find at the time, my bad. Besides, what's in the screencap seems pretty neutral to me, it's just not the kind of thing I want to see in my feed
>>94622921
Some people posts updates on when shit's coming out or how far along they are on their current projects.