naraku360

James

BotW has been a perpetual bucket list further hindered by my limited interest in Zelda. But I'm sure I'll play it some day. The world design is by Monolith Soft and that basically means I have to play it at some point.

Sort of, but I don't think the issue you had was necessarily with the content as much as how it was presented. 2011 doesn't really convey what Gon is like since they really ramp up the cheerful shonen vibe and cut down on characterization. It's all but the most recent 3 arcs. Glad it doesn't sound too severe. Those are world-ending powers that are visible to most people. It's not that people forgot. It's that most users keep it close to their chest since each ability is unique to the user and anyone knowing their ability is a serious risk. That's not a universal pretense, people outside the Hunter Organization can figure it out on their own and nobody is strictly barred from exposing it. It just isn't super common knowledge. A ton of them can't be seen without special training, either. Wouldn't say that. They're presented with more mature storytelling and better characterization, so their actions are more understandable. I'd say they're more likable and it's more neutral on how you're supposed to view them. Phantom Troupe and Chimera Ant tackle those kinds of aspects and are very critical of the cast. Though even in 2011, they actually do address stuff like that early. Everyone is caught of guard by Gon's bizarre sense of morality. '99 shows more of his upbringing with him basically running around the forrest all day, how Kite (the person that caused Gon to look for Ging) impacted Gon's morality, how Mito literally hid the existence of Hunters from Gon to prevent him from following his dad. Stuff that got removed from 2011. It's a case of 2011 making the wrong kind of changes in adaption. That stuff was in the manga. They're less "good guys" or "bad guys", and more somewhere in the middle. It's acknowledged much more thoroughly earlier in '99. I found it made them more likable despite being at core very similar. It's moodier without being overly edgy. Dark, perhaps, but handled maturely. There are women. Takes a while for any to be center stage, but there are quite a few major ones throughout. Most ensemble arcs like Phantom Troupe, Chimera Ant, and the Succession War have multiple main characters separate from the protagonist(s) that are women, and Biscuit Krueger is effectively a part of the main group for Greed Island. I should have time to watch some of Robotech in the near future. I got wrapped up in nigh nonstop Xeno series stuff that's been ongoing since Xenoblade 3 came out. Revisited 1, 2, and Xenosaga, finished Xenogears, and am mostly done with Xenoblade X outside post-game/side stories. I've watched maybe 2 or 3 things on my own since XC3 came out and both were sequels. 🙄

You didn't respond to, like, any question. How is asking to distinguish between two things that meet the criteria you're complaining about "whining"? You immediately went to calling me obtuse, refused to answer some basic questions, berated me for being "delusional," and can't even define the terms you used to make your claims. It isn't my fault your side is predicated on vague hyperbole you can't so much as be bothered to elaborate on. Gesturing loosely at wrongdoing amd calling it nonsense like "killing off useful parts of humanity," whatever that means, doesn’t say anything. I don't know what that means. I don't know what "replacing artists" means when it's technology that those same artists will, in the coming years, simply adapt to using new technology. Art is about creativity and if your opinion is that being creative is fundamentally bad because AI was involved, than I'm simply not going to agree unless you give me something more concrete to work with. Yes, automation means people lose jobs. That's inevitable. It was always going to happen. Artists adapt. It's technology those very people can use to make things they could not have dreamed of making before without support of multibillion dollar corporations. Do you like Disney having a monopoly on media? I certainly don't.

Cool, good to know. They dropped the announcement out of nowhere last week. Super weird.

You know, sorce, this is really disappointing. I assumed you were operating with some kind of argument in mind because I was working under the assumption that you're an intelligent person. You've repeatedly made it clear you do not have interest in treating others with the same dignity. It's classic egotism. You don't care about art as a concept. You care about people being blindly convinced your farts don't stink. You don't really believe what you're saying or you'd be able to defend it. This is a clearcut case of sorce doesn't want to be wrong and is too full over herself to own up to it.

@Ric Hey, I wanted apologize if I came off douchey with my XC2 takes. In retrospect I don’t think I put my words together very well and probably came off harsher than I meant to. It's mostly a weird personal thing that's muddied by complicated feelings on it, but I do hope I didn't make you feel bad for liking the game. I thought it would be an appropriate time to give that apology considering the DLC story expansion lands tomorrow. Speaking of which....

So you're going to ignore the valid questions? I see at least 2 images MB didn't create! Art theft! It's acceptable because it's transformative. How. Is. This. Different? Should we get rid of Fair Use because you're offended that the art is too shitty? Answer the question, sorce. What's different about it? It's okay for him to literally profit off other people's work but memes aren't okay. It's okay for people to make fan art of copyrighted works to sell, but watch out for the horrible memes! Fucking absurd. You won't even acknowledge the question. As for the disability thing, I have no idea what you're trying to say. I'm saying it's an art form that can help people, like myself, with severe disabilities.

When TV became a thing, did it replace authors? Did books replace spoken stories/plays? Do artists get "replaced" just because a new method of creation emerged? How much thought is required for art? Is there a metric? Is asking you questions to further understand your argument "being obtuse?" Or is that just what you think anyone who disagrees with you is doing? Again, this is a standard you would not place on any other medium. Is the Mother's Basement video that was posted in this thread which CLEARLY SHOWS ART HE DID NOT CREATE also "stealing art?" Why not? Perhaps the reason I'm defending it is because I would like to make art but I don't have good eyesight and have a busted back. Perhaps this is a means by which I can create what I want without destroying my body. Would it make me less of an artist purely because I don't make already difficult limitations worse?

That's not plagiarism, nor theft. If the image is being altered substantially, that would fall under Fair Use. If we are to maintain this stance, one would also have to oppose all use of copyrighted material in, for example, a Youtube video. For plagiarism or "art theft" to occur, you have to be claiming an unaltered original as your work. What prevents a Youtuber from being legally liable is the use of material in a transformative way. Whether or not Youtube adheres to that is another story. If this is acceptable, for what reason might a mixture of images - quite literally altering the work - be less so? Ironically, selling fanart is actually a real violation of copyright law.

I found the execution of '99 to be more in line with the tone and pace that was intended. There's a very uneven feel to 2011 in the story arcs you would've seen. It's more a problem of how the material was adapted than the content itself, since 2011 feels both rushed and slow for a big chunk of the early stuff. They actually left out some really important things in 2011, like the entire first chapter which is really important for getting Gon's character. 2011 is technically a more 'accurate' adaption but it takes more than accuracy to properly convey a scene well. From a critical standpoint, just about everything is done better in '99. Take this scene - it's one you also saw in 2011 which I'll drop in for comparison: You saw this: Neither is filler, but which is better is obvious. 2011 has less directorial creativity and the content suffers for it. The power system is basically kept secret to anybody that doesn't stumble on it. Which is kinda fair considering the world of HxH is a nightmare and would be one of the worst realities to be born into. The characters are pretty similar in terms of personality but it's much better in execution. There is more 'filler' and most of it is abnormally good filler, to the point that without someone pointing it out almost all of it is virtually indistinguishable. I don't think that makes a show inherently good or bad. There are some very memorable female characters later on. I'm down for the Macross Saga. It's pretty standalone I'm guessing?

So, you want people to not enjoy and share their art when it's the wrong kind of art? What makes it "shitty"? Headpats from whom? What "useful part" of humanity does this "kill off"? Does this not have "useful parts"?

Define "art theft." Is fan art "art theft"? At what point does something become theft rather than an inspiration or reference? If the argument is that using someone else's art to create your own is theft, does that mean all fan projects that use existing IPs should also be considered violations of fair use?

Depends on what celebrity.

Huh, I'd aways heard all versions were between bad and mediocre. I mean, Rowling is an awful person on the whole. Like opening a shelter for rape victims.... that rejects women for not looking womanly enough kind of awful person. So, I don't really think Radcliffe is in the wrong.

I thought nobody liked that one anyway.

No prob, man. I've been there, still am to a degree. It is dubbed but I can't attest to actual quality. It's an early 2000s dub, so take that for what you will. They did also have to continue some in OVAs that never got dubs (the last 8 episodes of Phantom Troupe and all of Greed Island). Chimera Ant is only 2011 and in the manga, but either version of that arc is worth checking out so long as you liked the stuff before it, which would bring the length up quite a bit. '99 is 62 epispdes, plus 30 OVAs. Chimera Ant, assuming there's interest, is 60 episodes and the arc after is only 11. Technically there's more after the anime, but you know, hiatuses and whatnot. So, with the OVAs it's a few episodes longer than Robotech (92 vs 85). Beyond that, I'd encourage giving later arcs a chance if you end up liking '99, however that is a lot more than Robotech and really comes down to if you even like '99. I've been much more open to new stuff these days. Like I've never been huge on superhero stuff and recently watched the DCAU Justice League and Unlimited with some friends, which were both very good. I'm also reading, and thoroughly enjoying, Animorphs. Never watched Robotech but I did like what little I've seen of Macross [I believe it was Macross Plus].

Mother's Basement kinda pisses me off, especially on this. The video is literally some guys making a video and having an algorithm rotoscope it. Is that not art? How much computer input is too much to qualify? If an AI obtains full sentience and wishes to express itself through art, is that art invalid? I'd go so far as to say MB goes beyond negligence in his video and the degree to which he misinforms his audience makes the video a downright bad one. I can't say for certain he's being dishonest or simply doesn't know what he's talking about, as I've learned thinking MB knows what he's talking about has often been in poor judgment. Since we're reposting anime folder links, a much better video on this was done by based af chad Adam Conover.

"AI art" is not only a misnomer but is following a predictable pattern of any new form of art. Firstly, no AI we have is actually intelligent. It's an unthinking machine that plays crosswords almost intelligibly sometimes. Secondly, 100 years ago, the concept of film as an art form was met with derision. It's just a fad, one day the youngins will learn that only my high brow BOOKS are the only way to tell compelling stories. 🧐 Yet, nobody can deny the amount of work, passion, and skill it takes to make a good film. We have films accepted nigh universally as deserving prestige. The talkies? Just a gimmick. TV? A fad. Color? Nobody can afford that. But alas, tell me how art is inherently worse because it's easier to make. How many years have video games existed and how many years have they been respected as an art form? It's just antiquated elitism that leaves people scoffing at this because oh no more accessible. It's going to bubble up with the most godawful shit imaginable, but more people being given technology to produce content that would previously take millions of dollars without corporate dumbasses working to actively suck all forms of creative integrity dry seems like a positive. You get passed the wtf is this phase and we'll be seeing some crazy good stuff soon enough. I always thought I was "lazy" for being unable to actually practice art to a level I found acceptable. But I've been cripplingly fatigued for over a decade without realizing it. I don't know if it's an injury or what, just that my back has been messed up since high school at latest. It's hard enough to film with legal blindness, and drawing has been infuriating when my hands had no grip. The animation AI thing actually gives me hope that I might be able to make things like one of you normal people.

They probably just bought rights to use the IP for the game. Same kind of thing you would get out of a video game slapped together to advertise a movie.

Okay, so, for what reason might a corporation fire people in favor of AI production? Because you need fewer resources and it's cheaper to make a product with it. Okay, okay. They can make it with fewer resources, you know who else can? That's right, the people who got fired! It's almost like this means a wider number of people can produce and sell their own art without needing the funding of monopolies. As a result, you get a new form of art unlike any we've seen before: high budget blockbusters made by whoever felt like making and/or selling it without having Disney to doublefist them at every opportunity. In turn, all the competent people now can make their own stuff their own way and the techbro dumbfucks you're talking about are left with lazy morons who think a fancy filter can do the job itself just because it's cheaper. AI art is the path to an art renaissance by way of stripping away the fabric of commodified art as it stands. Not to mention that, need I remind you, it's not artificial intelligence when it's not intelligent.

They're going to be so not racist that all memes of white people come with a "no blacks allowed" sign. You know, to stop racism.

I share gifs when they're contextually funny. I don't give a fuck who's in it.

I doubt Adult Swim wants him back. Maybe if it were just these allegations but the only way to save even a little face, considering the workplace behavioral issues, is to stick by the choice. It looks real bad that they only fired him after his awful behavior came out publicly rather than dealing with it while still entirely internal. Bringing him back now would be further doubling down on actions they're already under fire for. Regardless of abuse allegations, his actions behind the scenes sound like plenty of reason to have dropped him well before the allegations became public.